Anyone interested in this area check out Ted Chiang's short story It's 2059, and the Rich Kids are Still Winning.

Premise: In the future, scientists conduct an experiment to genetically modify poor children to improve their intelligence, so they have a better chance to succeed in life. While the experiment proves to be successful, and the children's IQ increases, they still fail to achieve social progress, because the entire state system favors the rich only.

Justice is a luxury the poor can’t afford because the rich pay to evade.

Where I come from, there's a saying that goes something like this: 'There are only two kinds of people in jail: the very stupid and the very poor.'

As a lawyer with over 20 years of experience I can tell with confidence that there is justice in between the same social groups such as lower class vs lower class and middle class vs middle class. Upper class vs upper class is much more unpredictable, depends on many elements and it can go both ways unless one side is coming from old money, has politicians in the family etc... Unfortunately the illusion of justice, freedom and equality ends when you face someone outside your class.

The cost of justice is too damn high!

That's why you all should know that Epstein didn't kill himself.

Justice is a spider web.
It's made to catch small bugs.
Bigger animals just trample the damn thing.

Totally.

Also, it’s kinda funny to strictly follow this logic, because it means that the rich still struggle to get justice if the criminals are the rich.

What autocracy and plutocracy are: functions of government are only the province of the privileged capable of cruel manipulation.

if injustice exists for anyone, no one has justice, just temporary repreve from injustice. further, justice requires peace. "justice" without peace is how the people are subjagated. "peace" without justice is how the people who have been subjagated are exploited

In other news: fire is hot.

What do the police do with it then ?

Yep 100%

This is the endgame of uncapped lawyer fees.

Any law that is solely enforced by a fine is simply a pay-to-do activity for the rich.

If there are reforms, I think that one of them is access to lawyers. Rich or poor, you shouldn't pay for lawyers. Instead, they are all placed into a common pool, where each side picks their representatives. If both sides happen to pick the same lawyers, they roll a dice in front of the court until someone has the higher number. That person gets the lawyer, and the other side draws someone else of choice from the pool.

I also think that lawyers should rotate in the role they may serve after every case. Prosecution -> Defense -> Prosecution -> Defense, for their entire career as courtroom representatives. If a lawyer refuses to represent, they are barred from serving as a lawyer for four months, and their refusal goes onto a common dossier that anyone can see.

This encourages the whole profession of lawyers to ensure that the courtroom is fair to both defense and prosecution, and that both roles are equally valid when it comes to reputation.

Pretty much sums it up

Hello, I'm not sober and can't figure out what this means. How do the rich "pay to evade" juice?

Hypothetically, how much wealthier do I need to be in order to pay to lock up a racist white dude?