The first thing I would think if I was brought into court like that would be: why are we even here? What is the purpose of this exercise? So three individuals can do some bizarre ritual dance of logic, rhetoric, and blind willful emotion, and the conclusion of this dance decides a man's life? A family's life?

A rational person might judge the situation and see that, yes, it's not fair for this man to commit a crime that could put other's lives at stake. But that he also has a family to care for, and that we might solve the problem by simply taking away his right to drive, as well as simultaneously giving him the support he needs (transportation so he doesn't need to drive and get DUIs, as well as psychological support). But that's not what we give him. We either give him a slap on the wrist, or deport him.

We all know that there has to be a better way, but as far as I can tell, nothing is being done about it. It's like with software design. We just have these shitty tools, that have to work in these shitty ways, and we all know there must be a better way, but inertia and cargo cult and incumbency keeps us stuck in a rut. If there is progress, it's unacceptably slow and disorganized.