All threads

All of the threads for this selected topic

Of what is this 'evidence'?

2 replies | 2 unread | updated about 13 hours ago

Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo

28 replies | 28 unread | updated about 13 hours ago

Feedback [11-30-20]

44 replies | 44 unread | updated about 15 hours ago

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

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

i&i

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 | 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
OP: Plus Feedback for11-16-2020.
Naboo: Would really love to talk about the final exam
Starkiller Base: Gaia said in our breakout room that under Nesson's rule, in Swan the daycare worker's testimony would be inadmissible. Why is that?
Cantonica: I found it helpful to go over the homework in class--sometimes it's hard to distill from the videos or readings exactly what the connections we should make are. Having the opportunity to establish that was really helpful.
Jupiter: My question / concern is that if a child is too young to testify and we don't consider their evaluator a live witness, then how do we prosecute these child molestation cases? What evidence would be sufficient enough?
Hoth: Professor Nesson, how would your sufficiency theory of the Confrontation Clause handle any child sex abuse case, where the child is the accuser? Would none of them be able to be prosecuted at all without putting a three-year-old child on the stand?
Starkiller Base: Also would really appreciate getting the assignments in advance. I prepared for this class yesterday and this morning there were new assignments
Luna: I agree with Mygeeto
Venus: i'd really like to hear more about nesson's thoughts on the swan case
Naboo: I agree with Mygeeto
Vega: Class today was excellent, I appreciated the longer introduction/overview before we started discussion.
Venus: i also loved the intro today! really made for a better discussion
Cantonica: I have been thinking about how maybe, for children under 6, for example, we modify cross in some way--to account for developmental barriers to consistent testimony and recall. But I am not sure how that looks. An advocate with the child? Like we might offer in a slightly different way for adult survivors of sexual abuse? A different kind of court all together like some of the alternatives created for children who are commercially sexually exploited, for example
Brenna: I am wondering to whether Nesson's interpretation of the confrontation clause sticks to what he views as the textualist and originalist interpretation because he thinks textualism and originalism are the proper modes of interpretation, or just because, in this particular case, he thinks that proper application of textualism and originalism leads to the policy that he likes?
Blackeye: Anyone else submitting comments and they aren't appearing in this thread?
Mirt: Love Gaia's description that these cases fall "between a rock and a hard place" - in your opinion Prof Nesson, what's the best compromise between your interpretation and Scalia's? Where do we actually go from here?
Mirt: and +1 on final exam discussion
Blackeye: @starkillerbase - I think it is because the entire conviction relied on hearsay. Even if it was admissible under Scalia, it wasn't sufficient under Nesson.
Europa: P3X-888: My question / concern is that if a child is too young to testify and we don't consider their evaluator a live witness, then how do we prosecute these child molestation cases? What evidence would be sufficient enough?
Europa: Maybe there will be cases where the evidence is not enough, but there will be cases with real live witnesses.