Justice, at the flip of a switch

[Jon]

Justice is the application of the law, devoid of bias. At least that is what it should be. Yet endemic to what it is to be human, is irrationality. We are not machines. Just take the case of Hillary Clinton being let off the hook for email violations, amongst other things. Then consider Donald Trump being chased on a witch hunt for years. It's supposed to be all about Russian Collusion, but instead they are trying to trap him on side issues because they lack evidence on the reason for the initial investigation.

Is it time to bring in the silicon?

Instead of "Yes, m'lord." Should it instead be, "Of course, Mr IBM Watson."?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Just as a fine point, the statute of limitations on the law that covers Hillary's violations with the e-mail server has not run out.

But I get your point.

The problem, of course, is that humans would have to first be able to trust robotic judges enough to vote to change the law to allow such a concept. The USA concept of "due process" would be certainly be followed, but the difficulty of determining the truth is still going to be an issue. The delays are not due to the judge. They are due to the delays for gathering evidence to assure a fair trial. Robot forensic detectives would be more interesting since they could process evidence on-scene and print out / download / store reports with almost zero delays.

The only other issue is hacking. Would evidence of a hacked judge void a trial? Evidence of a corrupt judge can lead an appeals court to set aside a verdict, but usually that only works to set aside GUILTY verdict. It is not common in the USA to set aside a Not Guilty verdict. So that would lead to more upheaval.