Compare an adversarial legal system such as exists in the U.S., where the role of the court is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecution and the defense with an inquisitorial legal system, such as exists in France, where the court is more actively involved in investigating the facts of the case. Which system do you think is better for getting to the best result? Please explain.

my classmates respond to this

1:I would believe that France has a much more effective adversarial legal system to getting the best results because they focus on what evidence is given and the facts of those evidences. They are actively involved with the facts rather than feelings. While yes, the United States having an impartial referee between the prosecution and defense and gives it an equal chance, I believe sometimes some can take advantage of the equal treatment. I think that it works but someone who isn't satisfied with how things are, are the ones who try twisting it and make something from nothing.

2:As stated before, there is not a perfect legal system. The two types of legal systems that will be analyzed are adversarial and inquisitorial. In an adversarial legal system, both sides present their clients' case to a group of unbiased people that will decide the case. A problem that is associated with this is the skill of each side. Sometimes if one lawyer is better that the other, he can help his party win a case that they otherwise shouldn't win. On the other hand, a lawyer can protect the innocent and help them win the case. Everyone in this legal system has a right to a lawyer. Unfortunately, if one cannot afford a lawyer, they will be provided a lawyer by the government. Usually, this lawyer is not as good because they already have a guaranteed salary, and they are not as incentivized to do well in a case like a private lawyer is. In a inquisitorial legal system, the facts are presented in court, and the outcome of the case is decided upon. The decision is decided upon by people who work in the courts, not layman people who decide verdicts in an adversarial legal system. Personally, I believe that the inquisitorial legal system is better than the adversarial legal system. There are many factors that can give a party a certain edge to win a case in court. These factors are nonexistent in an inquisitorial legal system because the facts are the only things that are analyzed, not the testimonies of lawyers which can persuade outcomes of cases. Although both legal systems are imperfect, they are still systems which typically generate equitable outcomes.

respond to these 2 Discussion Threads that my classmates wrote base on you opinion and your search . are you agree or not and what are you thinking ?