Computers Should Replace all Prosecutors, Judges, and Jurors in a Trial

Prosecutorial discretion is a  euphemism for total lawyer personal bias, incompetence, and idiocy. There is no group in our nation that is stupider than the lawyer profession. Students in Life Skills class, learning to eat with utensils, and to put on shirts on their own, would represent a marked upgrade in decision making if placed on the Supreme Court. They would have 10 times the common sense than the mentally crippled lawyers now controlling it.

Robots running legislative enacted algorithms should be making all prosecutorial decisions. Death penalty, even in absentia, to anyone trying to hack one. As usual, only technology will rescue us from the plague of lawyers besieging this nation. Lawyer prosecutors can be re-hired to roll one into court.

Chess has 37 possible moves. Computers beat all humans long ago. Go, the Chinese board game, has a billion possible moves. Recently, a computer beat the best human Go player. It made a move the champion said no human could have thought of.

Legal decisions are far closer to the limited game of chess, than to the vast game of Go. A computer should even be able to look 10 moves ahead.

If people do not like the outcomes of computerized legal decisions, they have the recourse of electing legislators who will change the algorithms.

Computers making errors should be liable in torts, as should their programmers, as should the legislatures causing damages by their carelessness in writing the algorithm. Due to the nature of sentencing decisions, and the far higher standards of performance of a sentencing computer, the wrongful decisions should be subject to strict liability.