Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
By
I once heard a psychologist argue that in order to practice law, one had to be
“Judicially Competent to Stand Trial.” I have also heard psychiatric social workers
argue that one who is not “Judicially Competent to Stand Trial” cannot own property, or
contract. I would like to argue that these persons are mistaken, in part, because the type
of intent required for a particular type of activity parallels the burden of which is required
tells us that we live in a world and universe of moderate relativism. There is no absolute
certainty in this world or universe, only probable knowledge. Thus, in relation to law,
and what is required to prove a fact, or reality, using a legal proceeding, there are three
1. Civil Case- property, contracts, tort, constitutional rights at law without equity
Now, my point is that in each of the three different proceedings discussed above,
the standard for “reality” is different, and thus, the type of intent required to intend reality
In order to be judicially incompetent to contract or own property one must not be able
to know reality at a percentage of 55% or better. Now, some type of test is required, I
suppose, but it should generally say that if the person is 55% accurate in the person’s
reality perceptions, then that person is judicially competent to stand trial to own property
dementia, such that the person cannot form contractual intent or ownership intent,then it
must be proved that the person’s intent is less accurate than 55% or better.
incompetent to practice law (hold a license), one must not be able to know reality at a
hallucinatory, or have dementia, such that the person cannot form regulatory intent, then
it must be proved that the person’s intent/reality perception is less accurate than 85% or
better. Thus, logically, one could have the judicial intent necessary to own property or
contract, but not have the judicial intent necessary to practice law or take care of one’s
own affairs without supervision. Of course, it would also have to proven that the
proposed guardian was more competent in this respect than the proposed ward.