Report comment

I'm with you, David. I studied French and Spanish at uni here and in those countries and Italian in Italy. The literature, esp Fr 19th century, had lots of court cases and of course I was amazed to find how utterly different it was to here - I'd always been interested in law and started off with 'John Citizen and the Law' and 'Technique of Persuasion'; don't know if the names mean anything to you.
As you may imagine, I'm not at all inclined to national prejudice in choosing what I think is best but I think it unlikely that if I had the same knowledge of the French or another (is it Civil or Roman?) legal system as I do of ours, and had to choose which I would prefer to be tried under (and I understand that the other side does do some things better), I would choose here. And I mean the system working honestly, and am not thinking of comparative chances of corrupt practices. Also of course, I'm talking Criminal - it's impossible for a lay person to make judgements on Civil jurisdiction, and I've just realised there must be two uses of 'civil' here. What on earth can we possibly make of the Kercher case? (I know such cases are not the yardstick to measure by - we'd come out pretty badly on some of the miscarriages I, and I guess you, have lived through.

I've looked from time to time to see if anyone has written a book comparing the systems, not from the point of view of a lawyer comparing whatever it is they might see as important, but from that of an ordinary citizen, who would want it not to waste his money and to rule both him and the State on an equal footing, with a socially accepted view of justice and as little delay as possible, topped by an effective appeal system. Does such exist? Look at the topics on which we have excellent TV series examining science, medicine, history, sociology: why is there almost nothing on the Law we are so proud of?