They would continually ask questions and give responses that the judge had to continually interject on. They had no understanding of what they were expected to do or what was explained to them meant. This went on for the longer part of almost two hours due to the continual need to intervene on the judge's behalf. After the trial was concluded and judgment was given in favor of the plaintiff, I noticed the look of confusion and disappointment on the defendants face. As the defendant walked out of the courtroom I recall him saying "I wish I knew that I could've brought emailed receipts". This statement struck a question in me that I pondered on for days, "How can someone represent themselves if they don't know or understand the process in which they are required to take"? I questioned if that if the defendant knew more or even understood the process better would he have gotten a different judgment in his favor? Had there been some form of pre-trail briefing or education to better prepare the defendant would he have in fact represented himself better? I then decided to attack this problem head on the best way I knew how to and was taught, through research.
Statement of the Problem.
I have search for literature addressing this issue and have found none addressing the topic directly. The issue of allowing an individual to waive their rights to be represented by legal counsel and represent themselves without proper understanding of what this means is unconstitutional.