Aristotle states that “laws are made long consideration, whereas decisions in the courts are given at short notice, which makes it hard for those who try the case to satisfy claims of justice and expediency (Mueller, 87). When we think about the justice system and the facilities that exist within it, could our adversary system be the biggest flaw of them all? The sixth amendment guarantees a fair and speedy trial, but could that expedited process strip us from getting to the truth? In theory, having a speedy trial allows for the process to not endure for a long period of time, but there are repercussions for a trial being hastily decided. When we are seeking truth--maybe a speedy trial is not the best route. The adversary system alone has incarcerated individuals that are innocent with the notion of a speedy trial, but could I justice system…show more content… If there wasn’t a postmark date on the times where a person was found guilty--could that help us achieve a stronger democracy? Aristotle makes a strong claim that “members of an assembly and the jury find it their duty to decide on definite cases brought before them” yet they are persuaded and make hasty decisions based on feelings, friendship, and hatred.
As a matter of fact, sometimes those individuals lose the notion of what is just or unjust solely because of their inability to block out these feelings. Aristotle’s analysis of our adversarial system may be the underlying root of what is wrong with our criminal justice system. We are humans so attempting to block out the thoughts of hatred, feelings, and friendship is virtually impossible. Hence, why does our criminal justice pretend to maintain this neutrality when it is impossible
