All threads

All of the threads for this selected topic

Final Class Feedback [12-01-20]

24 replies | 24 unread

Of what is this 'evidence'?

2 replies | 2 unread

Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo

28 replies | 28 unread

Feedback [11-30-20]

44 replies | 44 unread

Thanksgiving Thread

19 replies | 19 unread

Peremptory Challenges [11-23-2020]

77 replies | 77 unread

Feedback [11-17-20]

57 replies | 57 unread

Your questions, doubts and concerns about confrontation and cross as core jury process.

22 replies | 22 unread

Feedback November 10

17 replies | 17 unread

Feedback [11-09-20]

24 replies | 24 unread

Discussion Group 2 [11-9-2020]

19 replies | 19 unread

Discussion Group 1 [11-9-2020]

28 replies | 28 unread

Election Night

25 replies | 25 unread

George Fisher Caves [11-03-2020]

29 replies | 29 unread

Group 1 [11-03-2020]

53 replies | 53 unread

Group 2 [11-03-2020]

49 replies | 49 unread

Group 3 [11-03-2020]

35 replies | 35 unread

Feedback 11-2-2020

34 replies | 34 unread

Feedback 10-27-2020

47 replies | 47 unread

Discussion 10-27-2020

59 replies | 59 unread

Feedback 10-26-2020

51 replies | 51 unread

Hypothetical 10-19-20

49 replies | 49 unread

Feedback 10-20-2020

15 replies | 15 unread

Feedback 10-19-20

22 replies | 22 unread

Surveillance 10-19-20

46 replies | 46 unread

Feedback October 13, 2020

20 replies | 20 unread


31 replies | 31 unread

REVIEW - October 13, 2020. Please offer questions and concerns.

3 replies | 3 unread

Feedback Oct 6, 2020 - violence of discussion for some

7 replies | 7 unread

Feedback October 6, 2020

67 replies

Feedback Oct 5, 2020 Fair

4 replies | 4 unread

Gatecrasher - Who Wins?

15 replies | 15 unread

Blue Bus

25 replies | 25 unread

Conjunction --In what order should we decide the elements of the alleged crime?

21 replies | 21 unread

Prison Yard - Can WE prosecute all of them?

38 replies | 38 unread

Feedback [09-29-20]

17 replies | 17 unread

Would you be interested in joining together in threads while watching the Trump-Biden debate?

20 replies | 20 unread

feedback sept 28

26 replies | 26 unread

What is your biggest fear going forward?

40 replies | 40 unread

BIAS (in judgmen)t

9 replies | 9 unread

Feedback #1

30 replies | 30 unread

racism - anti-racism

41 replies | 41 unread

what is your passion?

40 replies | 40 unread

What do you feel you have to learn about fair trial? Do you feel that fair trial matters?

9 replies | 9 unread

Give Thanks

0 replies

Active thread

Only the replies to the one thread you selected
DQar: Prof Nesson, my roommate says you sound like someone who reads audio books
Earth: He does have a great narrator voice ^^
Jedha: Good class! I enjoyed the discussion
Anchor: I appreciated the conversation today
Alderaan: hi everyone, great class
P3X-888: I liked the smaller groups again. And I think Anthony and Gaia are super helpful TAs!
Iapetus: this class should be renamed "as fair as possible trial" or "aspirations of fair trial" or something like that
Jedha: I don't think that we were given/assigned the crawford case that you mentioned
Hoags Object: Good class! I like when you take more time in the beginning talking and explaining things before breakout groups.
Schwemmland: I'm enjoying our discussions, but I'm also really confused about the main takeaways. I think I would benefit from a review session to synthesize the main points of the course up to now.
Procyon B: We love this class, don't we folks?
Aedd Gynvael: I liked that there was more lecture/conversation at the beginning of today's class
Earth: Would also like a review session @Schwemmland
Blackeye: yeah agree about taking time before breakout rooms to talk through the topic
Neunreuth: I thought the discussion of Raleigh, Mattox, and Pointer was helpful and interesting, as was the Canvas discussion. Great class!
DQar: 100% on Gaia & Anthony, y'all are crushing
Blackeye: we LOVE this class
Dione: I completely agree. I would really like a review session where we go over the main takeaways please.
Jedha: I would also really benefit from receiving the readings in advance. I am often unable to check canvas after 6 and miss readings posted later
Dagobah: More Sweet Pea on camera please
Death Star: love the class
Chulak: I enjoyed the discussion, too, although I have been thinking about how I can have these theoretical discussions about the ideals of our system, and see its advantages over other possible systems, but I am white and have that mental space to do so in the moment. I worry about my Black and Brown classmates for whom this is personal on a different level--how it might feel as though even calling anything about our system's foundation idealistic is problematic. That having a "logical" discussion about it could be violent in itself.
Mars: can we eat snacks during class
Anchor: ^ I agree with Sunflower
Jedha: yes more sweet pea!
Hyperion: Great class! I personally prefer discussion in threads over canvas but that's just a personal preference. Anthony and Gaia killing it
Celestis: The topics to be discussed in breakout rooms should be messaged to us in the chat before the breakout rooms break out. It can be awkward when we get to breakout rooms and don't know what to discuss.
Anchor: are we supposed to have our cameras turned off?
Death Star: threads>canvas for sure
Jedha: I also prefer threads discussions
Blackeye: much prefer threads over canvas
Dione: threads>canvas>break out rooms
Schwemmland: agreed on Threads over Canvas
Jedha: I would appreciate it if more people turned on their cameras once we are in the breakout rooms but understand that this isnt always possible
Chulak: I enjoy the class and do think Professor Nesson is much more open to genuine engagement and to learning than are a lot of professors at HLS. I just wanted to voice the concern I wrote out above, too.
Celestis: I also prefer threads over canvas
Novigrad: sweat pea >threads> canvas
Alderaan: i like today's class and nesson going over the cases and providing analysis on them. It would be great to start each class like this instead of going directly into breakout rooms
Mars: threads > discussions > break-out rooms
Dione: What concern Milky Way?
Triangulum: I enjoyed today's class and having the opportunity to discuss the assignment yesterday. I liked the Canvas posts. It seemed to create a sense of community.
Anchor: I agree with all of the above
Jedha: canvas seems to have much more pressure
P3X-888: breakout rooms > threads > canvas
DQar: Agree w/discussing readings first, then breakout rooms. But threads>breakout rooms
Triton: it just seems academically dishonest and cheap to consistently say "the entire system is broken therefore discussing things is a waste of time" everybody knows the system is completely broken, that is why we are in a class called Fair Trial where we discuss nothing but unfair trials. It is borderline insulting to Professor Nesson, a literal expert on the concept of trials, to consistently be saying the things he wants to discuss are pointless and that engaging in the material isn't useful
Chulak: Hengfors: it's posted above
Jedha: I really like threads but it is really difficult when it is running slowly and I cannot respond to points
Mars: Triton why u mad
Death Star: Triton, I don't think anyone is saying that the things we're discussing are pointless
Dione: I don't see it, Milky Way
Luyten 726-8B: great class - also appreciate Gaia & Anthony. I'd say we need to better address the concerns raised by Kiah - especially because I have a feeling that many of us are just completely disillusioned by the aspirational nature of these concepts / we know that in reality none of this is actually true (especially at this moment in time). Subjectivity is true - but veiled notions of logic, objectivity, and neutrality - are not. So we need to address how trials can better comport to human subjectivity - and whether these settings are an adequate space at all when we consider the risk a defendant takes in choosing to go to trial in the criminal context (i.e. facing the wrath of an angry prosecutor, more charges, less resourced, etc. etc.)
Chulak: Triton: I'm not sure anyone says it isn't useful. It'd the system we have, and we need to be able to understand it. But it can be harmful to engage without noting the ways in which members of our community (and all of us by extension) are impacted by the way our trials play out.
Hoags Object: Also shout out to Kiah for starting the Canvas discussion with such thoughtful insight and literally shaping our class today! agreed with the above threads>canvas
Chulak: Hengfors, I am reposting it here: I enjoyed the discussion, too, although I have been thinking about how I can have these theoretical discussions about the ideals of our system, and see its advantages over other possible systems, but I am white and have that mental space to do so in the moment. I worry about my Black and Brown classmates for whom this is personal on a different level--how it might feel as though even calling anything about our system's foundation idealistic is problematic. That having a "logical" discussion about it could be violent in itself.
Mygeeto: @Milky Way so what are you proposing?
Chulak: I'm honestly not even sure. Maybe at least the opportunity to (at some point) dig into alternatives activists have been promoting over the past decade or so? I also think threads and even posting on Canvas as an option is helpful because it allows us time to process before being asked to speak when some of what we discuss might hinder that in the moment for various reasons.
Chulak: And wanted to validate anyone who might be dealing with difficult residual feelings about the more theoretical parts of our discussion today.
Chulak: If it's not helpful, no need to pay attention to it.
Dagobah: @Triton, I don't think anyone is saying that his discussion points are pointless and what not, nor is anyone saying that discussing the system is a waste of time. Charles Nesson is a fantastic professor and he offers invaluable insight that are great jumping points for the rich discussions we have. I think it is too myopic to think that confirming the harms of this broken system is academically dishonest and cheap - if we're going to have a rich discussion, we have to apply what we hear from Professor Nesson to the existence of this broken system, and that will necessitate actively discussing the pervasiveness of that system. We won't be able to truly benefit from the course if we don't actively discuss ways to proactively address why there is so much futility embedded in our conceptualization of fair trial
Dagobah: Also +1 for Milky Way
Mygeeto: @milky way I am not making an evaluation of if it's helpful or not. Just you made an assertion of how Black and Brown student's ability to engage with the discussion, which may be too broad of a brush, so it raises a lot of questions of how we should engage with these conversations and if so, what we're actually trying to protect. and what you based that premis in.
Chulak: I think it was more of a reflection than anything and it certainly demonstrates the value of having multiple modes of participation (Threads, Canvas, etc.). I am not someone who experiences what I described in the same way, so I can't speak for what might be helpful in a very concrete way. My hope was that it might also open up the door to brainstorming some of that as a collective
Gulet: Agree that we all know "everything is unfair" and refusing to engage in any discussion by saying "the whole system is white supremacy so this isn't a conversation worth having" isn't actually trying to understand it. Also agree we want to note the ways in which members of our community are impacted by bias, racism, and injustice — even more reason to actually have these conversations and not shut them down at the outset