It was refreshing to have Dr. Lajos Korona as a guest lecturer because I liked his presentation. He introduced himself within the first ten minutes, but then wanted us to ask any questions we wanted. This helped me feel involved and it was interesting to hear everyone’s questions as the presentation grew. I was not as surprised by Dr. Lajos Korona’s answers to the questions as I was when we first learned of the Hungarian legal system with Dr. Hack, but I did learn some new information, specifically about the investigative aspect.
Throughout the presentation, I was continually remembering how much bias is present within a courtroom, as well as within the entire legal process in Hungary. Dr. Lajos Korona explained that the Prosecutor’s office is responsible for investigating many crimes, as well as bringing them to the courtroom and following them until the final conclusions of a case. They also set deadlines for the police investigations, as well as make sure that everyone involved within a case is following the penal code. This seems like a very specific job, and it seems unfair to me that a Prosecutor in a courtroom can be involved in all of these other parts of the legal process. In my opinion, the Prosecutor should only be representing his or her client, given an equal chance for success when compared to the defense. It frustrates me how Hungary’s legal process does not work like this, and that the Prosecutor actually has much more power. Dr. Lajos Korona did explain that at his level of prosecution, he is so busy with researching and investigating cases that he barely ever enters the courtroom. This is seemingly better in my opinion because he does not work with the case from beginning to end. Here, another Prosecutor takes the case to court and represents the client. At the local level, prosecution offices work with a case from the investigation to the indictment, therefore presenting unfairness. Adding to my point, Dr. Lajos Korona explained that there is a 95% guilty rate of all indictments in Hungary. If all of these people are actually guilty, than this is a great thing, but with the added levels of bias within the system, it seems hard to tell weather these trials or this type of system is actually fair.
Overall, I enjoyed yesterday’s presentation, but was discouraged by the Hungarian legal system again. Since they have a much lower rate of violent crimes, maybe it is a better way to approach law, but it seems unfair to me considering how much the prosecutors are involved within the whole process. I enjoyed the discussion rather than the lecture though, and Dr. Lajos Korona was a very wonderful and nice man. Great field studies!
(This is a quick website I found of a Prosecutor General's Conference, held in Budapest, including the European Council of the European Union)
 |
| I had trouble finding solid multimedia this week, so a few cartoons might be appropriate. This one fits Dr. Lajos Korona because I thought he was an average looking, yet very important and special Prosecutor within Budapest. |
 |
Dismissed Charges - Interesting |
Sarah, I agree that it's a little absurd to have a 95% conviction rate. How is there any semblance of justice in this figure? I understand that prosecutors will not take a case to trial if they feel like there is not enough evidence for indictment and to prove a suspect's guilt, but this to me shows that there is no faith in the system. If there was an investigation brought up against someone, and there is a certain amount of information, how do you not bring it to court to at least hash out the case? I understand that this happens in America as well but I think that to weed out so many cases that you're only bringing someone to trial if you have a good idea regarding the outcome of the trial, the system may need to be reevaluated.
ReplyDeleteHi Sar!
ReplyDeleteI love reading your posts about the reaction to the speakers we have from the legal systems because I know you want to be a lawyer so I like to see what you take from the speeches. I agree with you- this presentation was great because it was more involvement with the audience and him- we were able to ask questions instead of being lectured. I also agree with you on the entire bias situation- I wonder if they often run into problems with this. As you read/commented on my blog, you saw how I related it back to our discussion with Dr. Hack about the judge reviewing the case beforehand, I wonder if having two prosecutors involved actually eliminates bias? I also wonder what that 95% figure actually is saying. You are right, you have to wonder how fair this actually is. Great post babe!
Love,
Q