Its amazing how one-sided the public nature of prosecutions are in the sense that they are entitled to everything that is advantageous to the government/harmful to the defendant in the name of the public but they can't quite extend that to ensuring the public has the necesary tools to understand, interpret and successfully operate within the domain of, and sometimes (God forbid) "against" (in an adversarial, not contravening sense) the law itself by playing within its rules to their own benefit or advantage as they should arguably be fully entitled and empowered to.

Assuming its consistent with fundamental justice and precedant (which shouldn't really necessarily require an advanced legal education to competently analyse and resynthesize into a case that integrates the facts of the case in question), we should value the abillity of the citizenry and all litigants in general to quickly and easily present an informed meritorious case and not rely on obfuscation or access issues rooted in technology and deficiencies of any given education system to limit participants' capabillities unduly.