The oath consists of “Under penalty of perjury, I declare
that the facts contained in … are, true, correct and complete.” I wonder what definitions they are
using. My definitions of “true” and “correct”
overlap considerably. As for “complete,”
the universe is complete but even it is evolving. The Courts seem to be stuck in the days of
William Blackstone:
“Blackstone had developed a great
interest in common law, and in 1753 he began to lecture
on that subject. These were the first lectures on English law ever delivered in
a university. His listeners were captivated by the lucidity and charm of his
style and by the simplicity with which he presented the subject. The latter
virtue, however, was attained in part because Blackstone blurred the
difficulties and contradictions of English law. He gave the whole subject an
air of completeness and mutual interdependence as if it were a uniform logical
system, and he suppressed or ignored its archaic aspects and instead acclaimed
English law as the embodiment of 18th-century wisdom. He stated his aims in a
notice of his lectures dated June 23, 1753:
“It is proposed to lay down a
general and comprehensive Plan of the Laws of England; to deduce their History;
to enforce and illustrate their leading Rules and fundamental Principles; and
to compare them with the Laws of Nature and of other Nations.
“In 1754 Blackstone published Analysis of
the Laws of England, a synopsis of his lectures for the guidance of
his pupils. In October 1758 he was elected the first holder of a chair (the
Vinerian professorship) of common law. His lectures formed the basis of his Commentaries,
which were published in four successive volumes between 1765 and 1769.”
For a continuation of the article in Britannica Online
see http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/68589/Sir-William-Blackstone/729/Assessment
The terminology is breathtaking: “an
air of completeness and mutual interdependence as if it were a uniform logical
system” and he “suppressed or ignored its archaic aspects”.
The 200+-year history of the United States of America
hadn’t even gotten started when Blackstone published his four volumes. The internet is introducing an interdependence that was unimaginable in Blackstone’s day. Only the web has potential for "completeness." No single node can be "complete."
In the Florida judicial system “complete” means that no
other factors or evidence need be considered.
Such completeness would allow the Judiciary decision making agent/node
to act as if they were a closed system.
For applicable definitions of Open System and Closed System, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_and_closed_systems_in_social_science.
The Florida Judicial Systems needs to look closely at
feedback loops. Circuit Court judges in
Family Law matters definitely need their findings of fact to be subject to
review/correction. If my personal experience is “typical,” we are in deep trouble.
My personal situation is an example of “The Road to Hell
is paved with Good Intentions.” My
ex-spouse is an entitled victim in the 47%.
She has two (2) Master’s degrees.
One is basically in getting free help to help her do good/well. She has a Director of Christian Education
(DCE) degree from Emory University.
She has utilized student loans, victim’s support
group(s), and extended unemployment.
(Her highest paying job was
with Volunteers of America - Florida
where she helped Vets with homelessness, alcohol, and drug problems.) She wants everything to which she is entitled. She got her second Master’s in Mental Health
counseling in 2003. Doesn’t she owe the
current veterans her services at a reasonable price? She is/was a licensed mental health counselor
in Florida. Would Florida license a person inappropriate for our Vets?
Should I pay alimony to keep her in the extremely comfortable
life style to which she wanted to become accustomed? Her two (2) real doctor brothers could afford
her desired lifestyle. With only a PhD
in experimental particle physics, I could not.
My ex-spouse was enabled by
various support groups. If not the Road
to Hell, then at least the Road to the Poor House for me is paved with the Good
Intentions of many (good intentioned) people.
Judge Charles J. Roberts, 18th Circuit, may be the only one to suffer any negative consequences
for his poorly directed good intentions.
