A FUNDAMENTAL FLAW – IT’S NEVER MY FAULT, IT’S ALWAYS THEIRS

Jurors, and perhaps people in general, are often poor at judging those whose lives and experiences differ from their own.  June’s BRAIN LESSONS wrote about one aspect of that inadequacy, what Grant told us is called “Conditional-Contrastive Inculpation”  [see https://law.temple.edu/aer/2022/06/17/brain-lessons-the-words-in-a-sentence-of-guilt/ ].  In its simplest words, we become judgmental by saying that “I wouldn’t have responded

Developing a Strong Law School Advocacy Program: Some Thoughts and Observations

David Raack[1]   Although some law schools have robust and well-developed advocacy programs, a significant number don’t.  Schools without a strong program may wish to develop one, and this article addresses that scenario. (The term “advocacy program” is used here to include mock trial, moot court, and ADR components.) The purpose of this discussion is

Are Verdicts About “The Truth?”

Which of these is “true?” “Veredictum, quasi dictum veritas; ut judicium quasi juris dictum. A verdict is, as it were, the saying of the truth, in the same manner that a judgment is the saying of the law.”  https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Veredictum (last visited March 17, 2022). The jury’s job is not to determine the truth of what