93. CONFIRMATION BY HIGH-TECH TELEPHONE :)

VIEWS @ 7471

I can hardly believe it! While having my 2 cups of organic - in response to my Canada-Post-sent letter with questions - I had a call from Ottawa Divisional court yesterday morning. Yes, Mr. Steen, except for the 150 page Exhibit Transcript 'hard-copy' + electronic CD *, all required documents have been filed! (I remind the reader again, early in proceedings, I was instructed NOT to email that department)

* I have just been informed by its transcriber, both Defense and Court have now been served the missing Exhibit. And, with a court date set for September 10, @ 2 pm, this now fully completes my end of this transaction. I cross my fingers...

So, as I can now afford to momentarily pull myself away from those highly-focused details of text, edit, print, serve, and file etc., my mind is taking me to review and mull over these last years - once again.

It takes me to revisit the OJ Simpson fiasco, the fitting of the gloves. I reminisce on the 2001 Odyssey film, with Hal the computer. That takes me to the Kasporov vs 'Deep Blue' Computer Chess battle of 1997, in which the computer won! Hold on, there's a method to this pattern...

Facts are - courts are overburdened. Fact is - Humanity is fickle. Even some who have sworn allegiance! So I'm thinking the following:

The Courts and its officers are there, on paper, to abide by the laws they have been licensed to uphold, within their jurisdictions!
These officers are bound to interpret the facts of a case. The relevancies of the facts as they relate to the issues at hand!

Doing this uninterrupted for many years, one can appreciate - being human - that over time, a certain je-ne-sais-quoi - vulnerability or looseness of adherence to the ipsos of the factos - could possibly creep in.

So, my recent musings took me to the following:

- Take a 'Contract' for example
(there are hundreds of thousands of contracts every year that run in to trouble).
- A Contract is a finite document; it says what it says - clearly. Good ones are plain and to the point; even the uninformed should be able to understand them.

A Contract's text would unlikely use phrases like "we do not make any promises" or, "you will be lucky if we have it done by the specified completion date." Be cautious when you read: "We tend to surpass our clients' expectations", or, "We guarantee our product 100%."

Contracts that read: "Furthermore to the aforesaid suggestions, whereby the unincorporated No-Name group you herewith contract, renders absolutely no assurances of any kind to which we are able to commit ourselves to. We will however try to do our very best within the circumstances we are presently working under, to fulfill our obligations." Blah, blah :)>

So, assuming you have an all parties signed contract, with a defined completion date, and a set of objectives clearly spelled out, with at the bottom paragraph stating: "Whereby the parties are legally bound hereby," why could a Computer program not decide the claim's outcome?

All you need is the 2 documents.
- The Claim states: "They didn't fulfill the contract."
- The Statement of Defense argues: "We did fulfill the contract."

It would neither require a 'Hal' or 'Deep Blue's' genius to figure it out! Presto. Judged by Computer!
Next Case. And if you did NOT like its verdict - Appeal in front of a human Judge.

I'm suggesting we put that thought in our pipe and chew on it...