Evidence

From CyberOne Wiki
Revision as of 09:31, 21 October 2009 by Eon (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Nesson's Evidence 2009 Evidence C January 5-24, 2009 M,T,W,Th,F 9:00 AM - 12:00 PM

Professor Charles R. Nesson

---

Friendly.jpg

Charlie7.jpg [1]


Liberty: the Original Position

EVIDENCE: The Law of Trial By Jury

Conceptualizing the "original position"

Imagine a land of heroes and heroines each upstanding, each one with a personal sense of civil liberty and civic responsibility. Call this group WE THE PEOPLE. Count yourself among the group. WE constituted a government and seek to preserve it so that we may share the benefit, even the necessity of governing ourselves.

The American Jury: Bulwark of Liberty

Process of Law

Breyer.jpgOconnor1.jpgScalia.jpg

Breyer, Active Liberty pp. 15-34
Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation pp. 3-48
"jury" - a noun derived from juris - law
Protection of Liberty Built into Process and Privilege
the problem of pockets of resistance to the common good
peers of the viscinage, peers of the district
trial by jury in the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights
trial by jury in the Constitution of the United States of America
trial by jury in the early courts of the Massachusetts and the Nation
Akil Amar, The Bill of Rights and our Posterity
Chief Justice John Jay's Instruction to the Jury in Georgia v. Brailsford

VERDICT

The General Verdict: Jury Role as Check to Legislative and Executive Power

Guilt of What?
factual guilt of violation of statutory law
moral guilt: judge of the whole case, fact and "law" in its original meaning
Trial by Jury Constrained by Judges: The Jury's role with respect to Law, Fact and Justice
Judicial transformation of the meaning of "law"
Response of judicial conception of law and structure of process to Slave-Holding Textile_Manufacturing Capital
Corporate Fear of Civil Juries in the Rise of Negligence and Unions
Racism
Robert Morris, Lemuel Shaw and Fugitive Slaves
Emmett Till
Swain v. Alabama
White v. Crook


Privileges of Citizens and Their Lawyers
the privilege of privacy
fifth amendment privilege
the responsibility of lawyers

It was not at the time of our founding but has since become law that lawyers may not argue the injustice or stupidity of a law to an American jury nor inform jurors of their power to acquit notwithstanding their conclusion that the defendant has violated the letter of the law as given them by the judge. Judges prevent lawyers from doing so by holding them in contempt of court. This threat to their physical liberty constrains the freedom of lawyers to speak on behalf of the defendant to the jury.

assume the role of advocate for a client asserting a liberty interest which is fundamental to him. What constrains you in carrying out your role?
ethics, the domain between what you know to be true and what can be proved against you, personal code, inner sense of constraint on how to act and be true
contempt of court, the judge's weapons for enforcement against a lawyer who acts against the judge's order
what are the contemnor's rights when held in contempt by a judge?


My Cousin Vinny: Lawyer Meets Client

Factual GUILT Beyond Reasonable Doubt

The Ambiguity of Truth

necker cube

NeckerCube 01.jpg

riddle of three hats
the inference of self and perception of self by other
Daniel Gilbert, He Who Cast the First Stone Probably Didn’t
truth as correspondence asserted from coherence
the blue bus
Nesson, "The Evidence or the Event? On Judicial Proof and the Acceptability of Verdicts"

Unanimous General Verdict of Empowered Citizens

My Cousin Vinny: The Arraignment

Client's Truth

Meet my Clients:three live cases to think through. In each case we will consider what evidence and argument to offer in support of our claim or defense in the various judicial contexts in which issues of proof arise.

Gpsts logo round sm.jpg

The Case of the Non-Existent Crime: Potential Prosecution by the United States Government of Russ DeLeon '91 and Ruth Parasol, founders of PartyGaming, for violation of the Wire Act.

PartyGaming founder admits breaking US law
PartyGaming founder tells US court of regret
the Federal Wire Act


Veritas.jpg

RIAA v. Joel Tenenbaum
field trip tuesday afternoon january 6 to providence rhode island to hear riaa's motion to compel joels mother to allow her computer hard drive to be imaged

Norml.jpg

Commonwealth v. Cusick
on appeal in massachusetts from conviction for marijuana possession, awaiting the commonwealth's brief on our constitutional challenges
Marijuana on Boston Common
The Client's Account

Trial as a Constructed Drama of Evidence Offered and Tested to Prove Tort or Crime

Danielellsbergtime.jpgA Civil Action.jpg

A Showing of A Civil Action, with pizza

Jonathan Haar, A Civil Action
Anderson v. Beatrice

The Judge's Roles; Director of Order, Protector of Liberty and Justice

Solomon
Judge Lemuel Shaw
Judge Matthew Byrne - The Pentagon Papers Case
Judge Walter Skinner
Judge Chamberlain Haller
Judge Julius Hoffman
judge's rules
what moves are you allowed to make, and when
what rules can you break, and when
what are your powers of enforcement
whom or what do you serve
lawyer's roles
John Doar - video
Bill Kuntsler (Contempt Specification #3)
Leonard Boudin
Jan Schlichtmann
Jerry Facher
lawyer's rules
what moves are you allowed to make, and when
what rules can you break, and when
what are your powers of enforcement


My Cousin Vinny: Probable Cause

SPOLIATION -- Cheating

Spitzer.jpg

Absolute.jpg
Madoff.jpg


Deception and Cheating in Law and Poker

Cheating in Prosecution

criminal
outright framing
prosecutorial abuse of discretion
civil
Anne Anderson v. Beatrice Foods

Cheating in Defense

the case of the energetic investigator
D.C.Bar on Ethics of Evidence Destruction
Smoking Gun
Nesson, Incentives to Spoliate Evidence in Civil Litigation, 13 Cardozo L. Rev. 793 (1991)


It was long a practice in our courts to permit lawyers to vet jurors peremptorily, to a certain number without need to have or state a reason.

  • What is the lawyer's responsibility to constitution, client and self with respect to race and gender in jury selection.
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)
J.E.B. v.Alabama, 511 U.S. 127(1994)
  • private v. public
ken stalter: masks
Mike Caro, Tells from Actors
cheating online - AbsolutePoker

My Cousin Vinny: Public Defender

the Point - Credibility and Confrontation

Omar.jpg

How do you introduce evidence to prove or refute a charge

How do you Object! How does the Judge Decide

The Rim
Commonwealth v. Edelin
The Wire

Prejudical to the Point

How may evidence of character be used?
as direct affirmative proof of an issue in contest
as inferential affirmative proof
as attack on credibility


Credibility:

What and why do we believe
Direct Examination
leading questions
scope of examination
strategy
Cross-Examination
the testimonial capacities
limitations
strategy
Witness Preparation
Dr. Carol Leicher

Confronting Ones Accusers

From the Trial of Sir Walter Raleigh to Where WE are now</b>
U.S. Constitution
hearsay
The Treason Trial of Walter Raleigh
Washington v. Swan
Mattox v. United States (1895)
Crawford v. Washington (2004)
Davis and Hammon


My Cousin Vinny: Cross Examination

Scientific Truth in Court

Mycousinvinny42a.JPG

Wells v. Ortho
Agent Orange
Daubert v. Merrell Dow 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993)
General Electric Co. v. Joiner,522 U.S. 136 (1997)
Kumho Tire Company v. Carmichael, 119 S.Ct. 1167 (1999)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow (on remand),43 F.3d 1311 (9th Cir. 1995)
My Cousin Vinny: Expert Voir Dire


Poker Teaches Legal Thinking

Poker Teaches Strategic Thinking: Learn to Play One Card War
introduction to poker as a game and as a metaphor
play one card war
a lesson from the professor- - Howard Lederer: Poker is a Strategic Betting Game
analyze the final hand in The Cincinnati Kid: What was the kid's mistake?
analyze in the final hand in Rounders: What hand can Teddy possibly have been playing? What was his tell?
hold'em
Crandell Addington can tell you a history of hold'em
A. Alvarez, The Biggest Game in Town
A Big Deal, The Economist
read and absorb at least the method and purpose of programming no-limit hold'em.
Strategic Thinking
articulate metaphors for each of the parameters of the program.
Sjoerd Henstra & Robin van der Zwan, Artificial intelligence and data mining applied to no-limit Texas Hold’em
skim for flavor, or dig deeper if you wish
Binmore, Game Theory: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2007)
Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation ?, (Chap.1)
Grossman, New Tack Wins Prisoners Dilemma
Francis Beer, Games and Metaphors
Baird, Game Theory and Law (1994)(Chap.1)
Poker Teaches (Google Video)

Jury Nullification

Preliminary Jury Instructions

The Rules in Play

FredFriendly3.jpg

[2]


fred friendly

Charlie.cbs1.jpg

the kerosene burner

socratic inquiry - poker thinking

willingness and ability to see from the other side

rodney king




how do you feel about lisa and vinny having pulled off a successful fraud upon the court

the verdict

exam

evaluation

class online poker tournament

Attorney Client Privilege

Presumed Guilty

Bentham, Rationale of Judicial Evidence
The Eavesdropper
The Energetic Investigator


My Cousin Vinny: Resolution


2008 Exam

exam

2008 Media Editing Project

here are videos of the class...:


Lecture 1 - 2008/01/02
Lecture 2 - 2008/01/03
Lecture 3 - 2008/01/04
Lecture 4 - 2008/01/07
Lecture 5 - 2008/01/08
Lecture 6 - 2008/01/09
Lecture 7 - 2008/01/10
Lecture 8 - 2008/01/11
Lecture 9 - 2008/01/14
Lecture 10 - 2008/01/15
Lecture 11 - 2008/01/16
Lecture 12 - 2008/01/17
Lecture 13 - 2008/01/18


Can't edit the wiki? create an account and email your username to mharding@law.harvard.edu. I'll reply to your message when your editing priviledges have been activated.

To select a segment from any of the above lectures that you'd like to appear as a separate link, click on the lecture you're looking for and copy and paste the file path that appears in editing mode. Add the parameters (the start time and the end time) at the end in the following format:

?start=00/00/00&end=00/00/00

e.g., hour/minute/second.


Lecture 1 clips:

Poker as a metaphor for the Federal Rules of Evidence

RIAA lawsuit against music downloading

Incompetent, Irrelevant, Immaterial!

Historical logic behind the idea of a jury of peers

Checks and Balances in our Due Process system


Lecutre 3 clips:

Arraignment - differances between civil and criminal cases

Symbolic trial over a hidden object

Archibald Cox

Credibility of jury's verdict

Direct v. circumstantial evidence and the role of the jury

Is reasonable doubt a probabilistic concept?

The Blue Bus Case - standard of proof in the civil case


Lecture 4 clips:

How to keep the judge happy

Using the probable cause hearing to pin down a witness's testimony

Scope of probable cause hearings

Disturbing a verdict

Destruction of evidence as obstruction of justice

The attorney-client privilege under moral and ethical questioning

Preserving the record

Spoliation of incriminating evidence


Lecture 7 clips:

The importance of relevance

Limiting propensity evidence

Character evidence on cross-examination

Using extrinsic evidence

How the rape shield law came about

Why evidence of prior sexual acts with the Defendant is admissible even under the rape shield law

Rule 412 eliminates introduction of evidence of the victim's promiscuity

The Four Testimonial Capacities

Why leading questions are not allowed on direct examination (poor sound quality)


Lecture 8 clips:

Example of jury localization

Limiting the power of juries

King Solomon's evidence


Lecture 9 clips

Legalism = Interpretation of the Word

Hearsay

Hearsay Exceptions

Legalism continued

Murder in the Ajax Building Hypo

Belief of Impending Death

The Case of the Forgetful Witness Hypo

Negligent Entrustment and Window Washers Hypo

Legalism and Hearsay


Lecture 10 clips:

Constructing witness testimony

Witness testimony and preperation: Dr. Carol Leicher talks about a malpractice suit against her (long clip)


Lecture 13 clips

Comments on Socratic Method

Skill of Being Able to See From the Other Side's Point of View

Original v. Duplicate Document

Comments on the Closing Argument in the Verdict

Feedback Memos/By e-mail

Feedback Memos/By e-mail including charlie's response

hilarious and informative Rhode Island Blogs

Rhode_Island_Court_Hearing_Blogs

Groups

Please fill in your group's roster before class on 8 January 2009. (Just hit the "edit" link adjacent to the heading and put your names underneath the appropriate group.) If you are having trouble remembering everyone's name, need to have contact details fleshed out, or can't figure out how to edit the wiki, e-mail Isaac.

Feminine Legal BrillianceLaw LordsLigerPirates
  • Lakeisha Caton
  • Michelle Chun
  • Morgan Hill
  • Nicole Jackson
  • Carmel Shachar
  • Jay Gill
  • Brandon Halter
  • Eric Herrmann
  • Justin Olsson
  • Nick Perros
  • Jimmy Richardson
  • Emily Wack
  • Evie Breithaupt
  • Nathan Floyd
  • Ana Montoya
  • John Ohlendorf
  • Joel Peters-Fransen
  • Debbie Rosenbaum
  • Jessica Vu
  • Brian Wessel
  • Kyle Tucker
  • Josh Deutsch
  • Silvia Martinez
  • Ray Bilderbeck
  • Melissa Causey
  • Kyle Poe
  • Jonathan Montgomery
S1/Eon's PeonsTeam ATeam B
  • Alison Welcher
  • Rob Williams
  • Jonathan Menitove
  • Rob Ellis
  • Nick Morales
  • Tobias Loss-Eaton
  • Pete Ostrovski
  • Jared Jamesson
  • Mike Posner
  • Dan Silverman
  • Sarah Solomon
  • Liz Kim
  • Ilan Goldbard
  • Andrew Midgett
  • Kristin Kramer
  • Frank Manley
  • Phillip Stadermann
  • Mitchell Griffith
  • Devin Sullivan
  • Mark Cianci
  • Brandon Buchanan
  • Allison Hunter
  • Loni Edwards
  • Justin Liu
  • Matthew Collin
  • SeonJoo Yoon
  • Saied Pinto
  • John Gulliver


Exam

DIRECTIONS: This exam is a take-home exam returnable by e-mail. Include your name and Harvard ID number; when it is completed, e-mail it to Moira Harding (mharding@law.harvard.edu). Your personal information will be redacted. Do NOT e-mail the exam to Prof. Nesson. The exam is limited to 1500 words, to be allocated over the two questions in any way you choose. Include in the subject line to Moira a statement indicating "SHARE" or "DO NOT SHARE". All exams will remain anonymous.


Question 1

The question: Of what is this evidence?

Question 2

What is the RIAA's best case against Joel? Engage and embrace, if you can, Joel's strongest case.

Useful Links

Evidence the way i learned it.

evidence is object in context from which another draws meaning. that's you. i am here to teach you how to make and understand evidence, to think with you about how we make and understand meaning from evidence.

process is substance. we consider relationships among

We focus on two games: the game of Trial By Jury and the game of Poker. By jury i mean an American Jury; this is at base a course in american law. By poker i mean no limit tournament texas hold'em.

We seek to demonstrate:

  • critical strategic algorithmic thinking
for use in and beyond the classroom in law and the business and pleasure of life;
  • how to choose and better frame a question;
for use in all forms of discourse, the "question" being the most incisive way in which penetrating insight is expressed
  • how to better understand and play the game, win and have fun
  • how to put thought to action as a clinical way of learning and teaching