I am experimenting with making short videos that express hopefully challenging ideas about access to justice transformation.
In the first one, made for the SRLN Pre-Conference held as part of this years Equal Justice Conference, I discuss some approaches to ensuring that the voices of litigants are truely heard as we redesign the system around goals of 100% access.
I would very much appreciate comments, both on the content, but also whether these are good to watch, and more importantly, whether you find that they are an effective tool to stimulate discussion in meetings. After all, there has to be an affirmative reason to make a video, when people can always read more quickly than they can listen. Do let me know what you think, in the comments, or directly.
Taking the stick and beating the dead horse…so painfully.reiterating. RESPECT, Respect, respect.for the Constitutional Rights of every single American Citizen, rich or poor, colorful or bland, religious or not, etc. etc. etc. which are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States – regardless of whether an “attorney” is present or not.
It is my sincere belief that every litigant who appears in court without an attorney to represent them should not be referred to as pro se or self-represented, but respected as a Citizen. If one chooses to have an attorney, then the only distinction which should be made is that they are being represented by an attorney. The roles need to be reversed. The terminology that is currently used (pro se, self-represented) creates a prejudice at the outset and more often than not, the imbalance of justice begins.
Incidentally, I have recently observed the United States Tax Court. The Washington Clerk’s Office has trained their employees well. The respect that is shown and the care provided to litigants is excellent and should be used as a model for many Court houses. How that all trickles into the administration of justice, only time will tell.
Peace, you look GREAT and the message was clear. The other decorum around you brought intimacy and humanity into focus rather than the superficial that too many get lost in. So, thank you for keeping the light burning.
Great idea, Richard. Ideas for improvement: the beginning needs to have you better provide the title/framework for the concept/content being presented ( i.e., what’s today’s subject?); then, the ending needs a better summation (think that you are doing a video essay). Also, the lighting was too contrasty/face washed out, and positioning your camera/laptop a bit higher on the table so we aren’t looking up into your face would be better. Keep at it, and I’m sure your videos will be a great way to present your points of view.
Richard, The content is right on and it was good to see your face at the SRLN meeting yesterday. I think the video format is good to inject a more personal connection into meetings than a written piece would have. The problem lies in the AV capacity of the meeting space where the video is being viewed. In this case it was not good and many in the room could not hear the video, which detracted from its effectiveness as a conversation starter. Would have been good if we had the chance to view them ahead of time on our phones. keep experimenting with them!