In the legal arena there is no right or wrong, truth or lie and certainly no Justice or Bias just the perception of the relevant facts. The legal system freed itself of these restricting concepts to allow a more compatible set of rules to meet their political ends. When the absolutes of Truth and Justice are eliminated, the only thing left is the agenda of political correctness. These statements seem rather cynical at first, however, it is actions not words that demonstrate reality. It is not until one experiences the legal system first hand as a litigant does one truly begin to understand the gross disconnect between what we were lead to believe and hope about our legal system in contrast to other countries. How often have we heard the statements from judicial and political officials that our legal system is the best in the world?

One of the first causalities in the legal process are the complete set of facts involved in the case. In the process of relevance to simplify the input in order to make the decision between parties, judges and lawyers exclude facts that are not compatible to their legal arguments. The Truth as defined by the Courts is the perception of the relevant facts and therefore lying becomes misrepresentation. Perception is determined by the world view of the judge. Who determines relevant facts, of course the judges do. What determines relevance? We contend that judges determine relevance by the outcome they deem to be the politically acceptable or desired.

We contend that the legal system chooses a different standard of relevance based on the gender or color of the litigants and therefore there is no wrong or miscarriage of Justice. How can we say this? The outcome of the Court’s rulings is the only real standard to determine the intent of the process as a whole. Intent is always measured by outcome. The outcome of the Family Law Courts record in Divorce, Child Custody and Domestic Violence primarily favor only one group with minor exceptions for political purposes so as not to upset the public. The outcome in criminal cases follows a similar path with both gender and color. African Americans are convicted at twice the rate of their representation of the general population. Women are the least likely to be charged with a crime, therefore not convicted and as a result men make up 90% of the prison population.

We dispute the contention of those who insist that outcome represents the results of a fair and just process and as such justifies their world view that men and blacks as a group are more likely to be unfit for parenthood or perpetrators of violence or other criminal behavior. We contend the opposite, the legal system has administered the law in such a way as to be consistent with their world view. "You shall know them by their fruit."

So my question is this, how is our legal system any different than the system under Communism? We heard of the show trials to legitimize the forgone conclusion of the party line. How is what we do any different? Justification based on politically correct agenda does not bring about Truth or Justice.