I feel that the Anglo-American law system is a humane trial. The jury decides whether the suspect is guilty or not. The jury is a human being. They are people from different industries, different ages, and skin colors. They have feelings, and they will follow the case. Circumstances to identify whether the suspect’s committing the crime was intentional or otherwise. We all say that the law should be objective and fair, but whether we have considered the actual situation when formulating the rules, we always stipulate that, "As long as you have more than 80 ml of alcohol while driving, you will go to jail. "This is similar to a mechanized regulation. But when a suspect did drank alcohol and passed 80ml, but he did not cause substantial harm, that is, he was caught by the police and went to jail because of this. What will his future be like? Should he be punished so severely for this? I think that under the European and American legal systems, under a humane legal system, perhaps this suspect will be forgiven by the society, but under a legal system that only knows the establishment of rules and does not have any dealings, it is estimated that it will not be so easy to get rid of Up. We always say that we want to build a diversified society, but have we done it? A diversified society needs a tolerant society that can tolerate mistakes caused by unintentional or reckless behavior. In our society, I can't see it, how about you?
View more about The Practice reviews
