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

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 | 67 unread

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
Oberon: what are we even talking about
Yavin 4: yeah i'm a little confused
Sunflower: I interpret I and I to mean basically truth is a subjective construct as much as it is objective
Tethys: Yuh cyaan carry two face undah one hat
Scarif: The message is clear and felt. We have the ability in this class to communicate ideas in the way we feel most comfortable and able. It may be through Zoom or threads or the discussion space in canvas. Similarly we can construct our own ideas as to the fairness of the jury as the jury is the one who interprets the fairness of the single trial that they engage.
Deimos: I'm not sure I get what it means to come to an "institutional understanding" - is it the public rationale that we ascribe to our institutions?
Rhea: did he ever really elaborate on I & I?
Rhea: maybe I missed it..
Proteus: I agree with Sunflower but am not positive
Blaviken: I don't understand what's going on at all, as usual
Yavin 4: i interpret it to mean that there's am internal version of ourselves and the version of ourselves influenced and reflected back by others
Abydos: Seems to be a version of metaphysical anti-realism where reality in part mind-dependent instead of mind-independent, which is the more traditional philosophical view. I agree, and think this realization should cause us to dramatically rethink our institutional understanding
Langara: I think, for example, that when we think about jury nullification, its easy to see the positive uses (in our minds) for it because it's how we would use it. However institutionally, there are certainly uses of nullification that are bad results. on the institutional level its less clear that its a good mechanism despite knowing that if we as individuals were on a jury we would want it at our disposal, and have a conception of what that looks like.
Polaris: The institutional way in which we come to determine truth seems to be constantly fighting the individual i&i truth that we all pursue. Through suppression of jury nullification, voir dire practices, jury instructions, etc., our system tries to curate a collective truth, rather than allowing for different individual truths in dispute resolution
Vizima: I'm not sure I understand the prompt.. On an individual level, I think its clear that our experiences shape our reality and perceptions of truth. On an institutional level, especially in the legal profession, I think we search/strive for a fabricated universal truth that we construct and call it "objective".
Cloud City: For me, the concept of I&I is oneness with one's self and one's brethren, meaning that to find truth is to find mutual understanding. I don't believe this translates well to our legal system because there, truth is adversarial and is focused on who's side "wins" the argument. Institutional understanding does not come from oneness, but preys on otherness.
Assengard: I&i's attempt at recognizing the more sensory part of us and the more rational part are not halves of the same whole, but interrelated wholes in and of themselves is key to understanding jury. The difficulty of deciding issues of fact on feeling and then applying those feelings to law is encapsulated by the concept. This struggle, this seeming contradiction, is best left to a group of people that do not have to put their judgment into writing and can instead simply deliver the final result of this complicated process in one or two words. Furthermore, this process, which is subjective, should only result in someone going to jail if the facts are such that twelve I&Is all think the defendant should go to jail. Hence the need for a unanimous verdict of 12.
Cintra: I & I, as i understand it, is that you're noting that you're speaking both for yourself and for your community--a conscious means of pointing out where you're coming from and who you're speaking for
Whirlpool: I interpret this class and the I&I concept as highlighting the interconnectedness of all beings. We discussed from the first day how juries and criminal law are responses to a disturbance in the community.
Io: i&i in my opinion seems to be an intentional spiritual practice of removing the large gap we create between self and other - as opposed to "You and me," "i&i"