Professor Lawrence Connell's Hypotheticals

ICYMI, be sure to read my earlier entry, "Charlotte Allen: 'The Mess at Widener Law School."



I've been thinking about the case and will have more later. Mostly, I'm trying to figure out Deans Ammons' animosity toward Professor Connell. Charlotte Allen notes:

Connell’s most egregious offense ... and probably the offense that brought down the full-bore wrath of Ammons upon him, was a series of classroom hypotheticals. The scenarios involved Ammons herself and Connell’s efforts to kill her (hypothetically) after she threatened to fire him (hypothetically) for parking his car in her parking space. In one of the hypotheticals Connell rushed into Ammons’ office with his .357 magnum and shot her in the head—except that the “head” turned out to a pumpkin artfully painted to look just like the dean. The idea was to ask the class whether under prevailing legal rules he should be tried for attempted murder—or not, since no harm actually befell her. Imaginative and macabrely humorous hypotheticals, often pitting professors against deans and other campus authority figures, are a standard feature of Old Law School pedagogy. The idea is that the students will absorb and remember the underlying legal principles better in a context of humorous narrative. Hypotheticals show up not just in law school classrooms but in exam questions and moot-court competitions. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was repeatedly murdered in classroom hypotheticals when she was dean of Harvard Law School.

Indeed, as Professor Jonathan Turley indicates, "Widener Law Professor Suspended For Using Dean In Hypotheticals":

I must confess that I routinely incorporate the Dean at our school in the same type of hypotheticals as well as any contract professors. Indeed, my final every year involves some struggle between myself and the Dean and contracts professors. Absent something more, I fail to see the basis for such disciplinary action. Other professors have raises objections to the case on sites like Volokh.



In his letter, [Widener Vice Dean J. Patrick] Kelly accuses Connell of an “outgoing pattern” of misconduct, and cites his use of such hypotheticals, including “cursing and coarse behavior, “racist and sexist statements” and “violent, personal scenarios that demean and threaten your colleagues.” Without more, the allegations raise serious concerns over academic freedom and privilege.



I am most disturbed by the statement of Gregory F. Scholtz, associate secretary and director of the American Association of University Professors. AAUP is organization that is expected to defend academic freedom. Yet, Scholtz is quoted as saying “Education is all about pushing the boundaries, and it’s all about controversial ideas, but the question always is when does it cross the line. Given our modern culture and the violence that exists, you’re really asking for trouble when you talk about killing people.” Really? That is news to those of us who teach torts and criminal law. It is common for faculty to incorporate colleagues into hypotheticals as good-humored jokes. At my school, contracts professors respond by incorporating me into their own hypotheticals. I have never found it even remotely bothersome or insulting. It keeps the attention of students and adds a needed element of levity in lectures.

It's routine. And Turley has more on how chilling the Lawrence case is for academic freedom.



Also, at Volokh, "Interview With Lawrence Connell, the Criminal Law Professor Suspended for His Hypotheticals":

Q: Can you give me an example of a hypothetical you might have used in class, to which the students who complained might have been referring? Can you describe the context in which you would have used it?



A: Yes, here is one: The Dean has threatened to fire me if she comes to school one more time and finds that I have parked in her designated parking space. Upset about the possibility of losing both my job and the parking space, I bring my .357 to school, get out of my car, put the .357 into my waistband, walk to the top floor where her office is located, open the door to her office, see her seated at her desk, draw my weapon, aim my weapon, and fire my weapon directly into what I believe to be her head. To my surprise, it’s not the Dean at all, but an ingeniously painted pumpkin — a pumpkin that has been intricately painted to look like the Dean. Dick Tracy rushes in and immediately wrestles me to the ground. I am charged with the attempted murder of the Dean.



The hypothetical raises various issues about attempted crimes that might entail discussion that spans more than one class. Some of the classroom discussion in the first, for example, will address the two basic philosophical problems of why we punish attempts, which are failed efforts at crime, and why we punish attempts less than successfully completed crimes.



A retributive argument, on the one hand, is that the attemptor has demonstrated his moral culpability by his bad conduct, and the degree of his punishment should not depend on a fortuitous turn of luck. On the other hand, a retributivist might argue that punishment in the absence of harm is unjust. For retributive purposes, has Connell demonstrated his moral culpability by shooting what he believes to be the Dean? Or does the fact that he merely destroyed a pumpkin suggest that his punishment would be unjust?

It's obviously a powerful heuristic.



More on this tonight. I'm checking around for more on Deans Ammons' motivations to persecute Professor Connell.

The New Britannia

From Mark Steyn, at National Review:

The trick in this business is not to be right too early. A week ago I released my new book — the usual doom’n’gloom stuff — and, just as the sensible prudent moderate chaps were about to dismiss it as hysterical and alarmist, Standard & Poor’s went and downgraded the United States from its AAA rating for the first time in history. Obligingly enough they downgraded it to AA+, which happens to be the initials of my book: After America. Okay, there’s not a lot of “+” in that, but you can’t have everything.



But the news cycle moves on, and a day or two later, the news shows were filled with scenes of London ablaze, as gangs of feral youths trashed and looted their own neighborhoods. Several readers wrote to taunt me for not having anything to say on the London riots. As it happens, Chapter Five of my book is called “The New Britannia: The Depraved City.” You have to get up pretty early in the morning to beat me to Western civilization’s descent into barbarism. Anyone who’s read it will fully understand what’s happening on the streets of London. The downgrade and the riots are part of the same story: Big Government debauches not only a nation’s finances but its human capital, too.

Keep reading.



It's really astounding, the prophecy in that book. Don't miss it.

Charlotte Allen: 'The Mess at Widener Law School'

At Minding the Campus (via Glenn Reynolds):

Old Law School culture revolves around a traditional curriculum—those torts and contracts courses—and the Socratic method of instruction, with its pointed and rigorous give-and-take between professors and students. Old Law School assumes that the process of training lawyers is training them to a centuries-old Anglo-American tradition of lawyerly thought, which rests on the careful crafting of legal arguments and the relentless challenging of those arguments, often by the professor in the classroom. Old precedent-setting cases may be supplanted by newer cases, and legal principles may shift, but the underlying methodology of close analysis of written court opinions and the arguments on which they rest, along with certain assumptions underlying the American legal systems—that human beings are generally capable of exercising reason and free will and thus should be held responsible for their actions—are Old Law School constants.



New Law School culture, growing out of the Critical Legal Studies movement that first surfaced in law schools during the 1980s, is quite different. In New Law School thinking, the law does not embody a rational system of justice—or even strivings toward such a system—but is essentially a political construct that has historically operated to keep the rich and powerful in their places of wealth and power and other groups—women, racial minorities, the disabled, and the poor—in their socially subordinate places. If this characterization sounds Marxist, that is because Critical Legal Studies—and its intellectual progeny, Critical Race Theory and Feminist Legal Theory—grew out of the New Left radicalism of the 1960s, which viewed American governmental and social structures as systems of oppression. It has also been influenced by postmodernist literary theory, with its assumptions that there is no objective truth or reality. In New Law School thinking, reason, free will, and personal responsibility are illusions, for all legal battles are actually struggles of race, class, and gender, in which power, not justice, is the ultimate goal. In New Law School scholarly writing, rigorous analysis of court opinions and the drawing of fine distinctions underlying legal arguments have been supplanted by “story telling": personal narratives typically involving the law professors’ own experiences as members of an oppressed group with the race-gender-class matrix that is the source of their oppression. Since a shift in the power structure, not justice, is the goal, any tactic that coerces the recalcitrant into conforming to the new power regime is permissible in New Law School thinking.

Continue reading. Especially good is Allen's discussion of Linda Ammons. I wrote briefly along the same lines here, "Widener's Dean Linda Ammons Goes After Law School Professor Lawrence Connell."



And from Allen's conclusion, she notes that Professor Lawrence Connell was exonerated of the allegations against him, yet Ammons still prevailed on her preposterous charge that Connell "retaliated":

What is appalling is that, despite both exonerations, Ammons appears to have gotten her way in the end after all, exacting sanctions against a tenured professor that are not only costly but humiliating (he is supposed to apologize to the complaining students. The charge of retaliation, based on a vague prohibition in the faculty handbook, seem especially flimsy. Connell’s e-mail to his students in December neither named his accusers nor referred to them in any way. As for the lawsuit, Connell never waived his right to seek redress in court against individuals whose false accusations have already cost him quite a bit of money and promise to cost much more. But that is the way of New Law School. It is perhaps only Old Law School, with its emphasis on fairness, reasonableness, and color-and gender-blind justice, that would find something totalitarian in Widener’s treatment of Connell and accordingly demand Linda Ammons’ resignation. In New Law School thinking, where power is everything, and the claims of grievance-bearing identity groups will always prevail over fairness, it is perfectly fine to strip your perceived opponent of his livelihood and to consign him to the ministrations of your own Nurse Ratched—and there is no such thing as abuse of power.

Anne Wilderspin, Sister of Murder Victim Richard Bowes: 'It is sad these rioters have not found a purpose in life'

Richard Mannington Bowes was murdered in Ealing as he confronted mob youths set to burn down the town.

Richard Bowes died from head injuries days after the attack in Ealing on Monday night.



He was pictured lying face down in a pool of blood after being assaulted while trying to stop youths setting fire to large rubbish bins across the green from the flat where he lived alone.



His sister said, "I feel sad that these rioters haven't found another purpose in life rather than just destructive violence."

Check the Independent UK as well, "Ealing reflects on the death of a 'shy, quiet, quirky-looking' man," and "Man arrested following Ealing riots death."



And since I've mentioned Irish commie Henry "erect cocks" Farrell, check the thread at Crooked Timber, where the commenters are fully down with the rioting hooligans: "London."

African Indigents with Massive Erect Cocks?

Hey, that's not me, sheesh!



It's freak Irish commie Henry Farrell, at Crooked Timber, '“The Duty of Journalists is to Tell The Truth”.'



Henry "erect cocks" is alleging that the Irish Independent's Kevin Myers is --- wait for it! --- racist. See, "Feral rioters all have one thing in common -- a lack of father figures." (It's a good piece, but no talking honestly with the left's "elite" opinion police.)



Anyway, I left a comment for Henry "erect cocks," which is probably not likely to make it out of the moderation queue, naturally:

Oh, bugger off, Henry. You’ll change your commie leftist beliefs about as fast as Michael Moore trims down to a slim 180 pounds American.



And “African indigents with massive erect cocks”?



Quite a racist flourish there yourself. Sure would look great in the pages of, say, Foreign Affairs, eh?

RELATED: Melanie Phillips has some updates, thank goodness.

Looter Alexis Bailey Walks Into Lamppost While Fleeing Paparazzi in Shame

And the dude's a teacher!



Full details at London's Daily Mail, "A primary school worker, postman, a young dad, a boy, 11, ... all among the first looters fast-tracked through the courts."

Norway, Free Speech, and the Counter-Jihad

From Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, at American Thinker.

And fro Pamela's introduction at Atlas Shrugs:

Please read the rebuttal that Robert Spencer and I wrote in response to the scurrilous Norway blood libel made against us by media shills and Islamic supremacists. We submitted our piece to publications that damned us and others -- the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the New York Post, National Review, the American Spectator, the London Spectator, the Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal. Nyet. The notorious Guardian, the New York Times, and the Washington Post have published any number of articles smearing us, but would sooner strap on a homicide bomb than let us challenge their lies.



Allow me to extend my deep thanks to the one fine and decent editor who had the integrity to run it, Thomas Lifson of the singular American Thinker.

Britain Descends to Hell

I'll tell you this: If it's coming to America, I will never be forced to strip down to my underwear upon threats from possessed underclass ruffians. I will fight these people to the death. When society has lost its collective mind, and when authorities are helpless to do the thing that they are established to do --- keep order and decency --- then you have to protect yourself and your family. I will not have my wife and children stripped and humiliated and robbed of their clothing on the freakin' streets. And I would help anyone facing such raw brutality if I see it happening to them in person. It can happen here. See London's Daily Mail, "Forced to strip naked in the street: Shocking scenes as rioters steal clothes and rifle through bags as people make their way home." I'll have more on this. The British government clearly isn't up to the task of defending against lawlessness, and things aren't nearly as bad as they could be. God help us:

Police Overwhelmed in London Riots

See London's Daily Mail, "Scotland Yard braced for backlash over 'lack of police on streets' and London Fire Brigade criticised for 'not tackling blazes'."



And at Telegraph UK, "London riots: why did the police lose control":

The police have become so sensitive to the issue of race that it is impairing their ability to do the job.

See also Lonely Conservative, "Riots Rattle London."

PREVIOUSLY: "London Riots Continue for Third Day."

Widener's Dean Linda Ammons Goes After Law School Professor Lawrence Connell

I read about this a couple of times earlier this year, and William Jacobson has an update: "Widener Law School goes Soviet, demands law professor undergo psychiatric evaluation."

Professor Connell was exonerated in a university disciplinary hearing, and William notes:

The faculty committee which heard the evidence found that Connell did not violate any university policy with regard to the allegations of racist and sexist conduct. The committee report, available exclusively here, while it ultimately vindicates Connell, is a depressing narrative of the sorry state of political correctness and race/sex politics on campus, in which the feelings and reaction of accusers carries as much weight as the objective reality of the statements made. While Connell was vindicated on a wide range of charges, this case surely will have a chilling effect on academic freedom on campuses as professors now know that regardless of the context, they are at risk of the subjective feelings of those with an agenda.

Read the whole thing. And background at Frontpage Magazine, "The Persecution of a Professor."

What's interesting to me is that, from what I can see, the attacks against Professor Connell were launched almost exclusively by Widener's Law School Dean, Linda Ammons. Checking her bio at the university's website, it turns out, no surprise, she's a "critical race feminist." And she's black, of course, a fact that in a rational world wouldn't matter a bit, but here in fact serves as the key variable doing most of the explanatory work. Connell mentioned the term "black folks" during classes, and was attacked as "racist." He'd also used Ammons as the subject of his classroom hypotheticals, which is apparently a completely harmless tradition going way back in the profession. After the university panel urged the administration to drop the charges against Connell, Ammons (or others in the administration) recruited students to make new charges, which allowed the witch hunt to continue. What William's talking about at his post is the requirement that Connell undergo a psychiatric evaluation as part of his reinstatement --- after he was already cleared of wrongdoing. The university, driven no doubt by Ammons, dug deep into campus regulations to find something, anything, with which they could convict Connell. They're alleging that his defense of himself, which included an explanatory e-mail to the university, was an act of "retaliation" in violation of college codes and his faculty contract, and that he should be suspended for a year. The university agreed with Dean Ammons' recommendation. It's perverse and pure evil. One must logically surmise that Dean Ammons' mind has been literally poisoned by years of progressive legal and ideology training in victimology and recrimination. Professor Connell is a middle-aged white man who has allegedly deviated from the accepted narrative. And for that, nothing less than complete professional destruction is pursued by his enemies. I'm reminded of Ann Althouse's quote, "'Isn't it funny the way lefties are, at bottom, puritanical about sex?'," because the same kind of insane, politically correct fanaticism has been driving the libelous allegations of sexual harassment that I've been defending against.

It's unreal.

Read the comments about this at Volokh, especially this one from "Blue":

Dean Ammons has now comprehensively crossed the line into Evil.

Word.

Reactions to Fjordman's Coming Out

Peder Jensen, a.k.a., Fjordman, is covered at New York Times, "Blogger Cited by Norway Killer Comes Forward to Denounce Him."

Folks might want to read Gates of Vienna, "The Forced Resignation of Fjordman."

Also, Andrew Bostom, at Big Peace, "Fjordman, Fairness, And The Brevik Mass Murderer."

Added: At Blazing Cat Fur, "Breaking! Fjordman A Jew...or at least part Jew... or he looks kinda Jew..."

Ezra Levant Interviews Mark Steyn

Mark Steyn's new book, After America, is out Monday. Pundette already has her copy.

And Blazing Cat Fur has the interview, "Video: Ezra Levant Interviews Mark Steyn on SunTV's 'The Source'."

New York Times Downplays Muslim Fort Hood Terror Plotter

Well that's a surprise.

At Fox Nation (via Memorandum).

I checked the Times' homepage Friday morning, and there was no mention of Naser Abdo on the front page. In hard-copy, the paper's report appeared on Page A11, "Soldier Held Amid Claim of Terror Plot at Fort Hood." Had Private Abdo successfully carried out an attack, the Democrat-Media-Complex would have provided cover, minimizing Islamist influence and attacking counter-jihad bloggers as bigots.

Note: The Times has a report in its Saturday hard-copy edition on Page A15, "Soldier Arrested in Suspected Bomb Plot Had Series of Disputes With Army." I just caught this linked prominently at the homepage, so I guess that's progress.

Army Private Naser Jason Abdo, in Court Appearance, Shouts Name of Fort Hood Shooter Major Nidal Hasan

At LAT, "Accused plotter shouts out name of Ft. Hood killer at hearing."

See also Right Truth, "Naser Jason Abdo." And Ironic Surrealism," and Ironic Surrealism, "Muslim Soldier Turned Jihadist Naser Abdo Part II: Yelled “Nidal Hasan Fort Hood 2009″ In Courtroom -Under Investigation For Making Anti-American Comments While on Duty [Updated]."

RELATED: at Christian Science Monitor, "Accused Fort Hood plotter got bombmaking recipe from Al Qaeda."

PFC Nasser Abdo and Iraq Veterans Against the War

Hmm, the antiwar left's got some splainin' to do, and here's the hot-under-the-collar denial of ties to Private Naser Jason Abdo: "IVAW STATEMENT ON NASER ABDO ARREST":

Abdo is not now and has never been a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War.

Shoot, he didn't need to be. The folks at IVAW were happy to set up Abdo as another Bradley Manning, and now they're throwing him under the bus. See Weasel Zippers, "Anti-War Group Scrubs Website of Involvement With Muslim Soldier ."Arrested For Plotting Second Ft. Hood Terror Attack…"

See also Alana Goodman, "Fort Hood Suspect Had Left-Wing Fan Base."

And the main reporting on this is at This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here. See, "IVAW and Abdo," "IVAW release, and Mother Jones," and "Abdo’s accomplices." (Via Memeorandum.)

Anderson Cooper's CNN Hit Piece Smears Geller/Spencer Counter Jihad

I've written about this at length, so folks know where I stand. And it's obviously not in my power to shift media opinion, or in the power of a handful of fighters for truth. Folks have to keep on plugging away and making a difference where they can. As always, I know inside that good prevails over evil, but it can take time. Pamela reports on this Anderson Cooper segment that's just utterly pathetic. She urges readers to contact CNN, and I might add, if they're going after Pamela and Robert Spencer, why is Charles Johnson getting a pass? Scroll forward to about 3:30 minutes:

And at Pamela's, "MEDIA FREAKSHOW: CNN SMEARS, DEFAMES HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS, CHRISTIANS AND PATRIOTS FOR NORWAY SHOOTING."

Ezra Levant Discusses Massacre in Norway

Via Blazing Cat Fur, who has lots more video at the link:

And from the comments at Small Dead Animals (via Celestial Junk):

From today's Toronto Red Star editorial:

"The best catharsis Norway can have is to expose a mass murderer for what he is, to publicly refute his twisted ideology and to bring him to justice. The light and air of a public courtroom are the best disinfectants. This case matters to other European countries as well. Rightwing nationalism is a growing scourge that can inspire a lunatic fringe. "

Can you imagine them writing the following?

"The best catharsis America can have is to expose mass murderer Nidal Hasan for what he is, to publicly refute his twisted ideology and to bring him to justice. The light and air of a public courtroom are the best disinfectants. This case matters to European countries as well. Islam is a growing scourge that can inspire a lunatic fringe."

Nope. Me neither.

Lawyer Says Anders Behring Breivik 'Insane'

At Telegraph UK, "Norway killer: Anders Behring Breivik 'insane'."

Anders Behring Breivik was “surprised” he was able to carry on shooting students on Utoya island for 90 minutes before police eventually caught up with him, his solicitor said, as he made clear he regarded his client as “insane”.

Anders Behring Breivik Closely Linked to English Defence League, Telegraph Reports

Well, Telegraph UK is reporting Breivik's ties to EDL. Given Gates of Vienna's aggressive defense of English Defence League, and of course the massive citiations to Fjordman, etc., at the Breivik manifesto, it'd be interesting to see GOV's response.

Not to put too much emphasis on this (since I consider Breivik a lone actor and crazed criminal sociopath), it's nevertheless interesting --- amid all the blame shifting to Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer --- that Atlas Shrugs and SIOA explicitly distanced themselves from EDL last month. See Pamela's report, "EDL SHAKE-UP." Pamela indicated that while she once supported EDL, the group had become infiltrated with crackpots and racists, and that she could no longer support the group if it continued its path to extremism. Her comments stirred up a hornet's nest of resentment at Gates of Vienna, and Pamela updated at Atlas Shrugs, "LORD OF THE FLIES: MACHIAVELLI COMES TO THE BLOGOSPHERE," and "THE EVIL THAT MEN DO."

Again, the point here is more to how Gates of Vienna would like to respond to news from Telegraph UK. Comments remain closed at the blog, which is exactly opposite to how Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have responded to allegations. Moreover, others are pointing out Pamela's rejection of EDL as well. See The Right Perspective, "Pam Geller Shrugged Off EDL Before Attack."

ADDENDUM: I'll have more on this, but to be clear. Counter-jihad bloggers are not responsible for the unfathomable evil of Anders Behring Breivik. Indeed, Jason Papas provides an important analysis indicating that left-wing progressive ideologies of "identity politics" provide a key explanation to the killer's motives. That is:

His [Breivik's] politics is what the left commonly calls “Identity Politics”. It has little grounding in the [classical] liberal thought which is common in the anti-jihadi writers that he cites. They are first and foremost alarmed by the illiberal nature of Islam. Breivik agrees with the problem but has adapted a collectivist solution that is obviously his own. He has stepped off into an imagined war of all against all. He is alone in this war as he deserves to be.

Given that, one might think that Gates of Vienna would emerge from their medieval dungeons and join the debate. We need more discussion on this, and the new information on Breivik and EDL provides a new area of investigation.

Added: Kathy Shaidle sends this along: "Norway: EDL leader Tommy Robinson holds his own against old pansy on BBC TV."

Update 3:30pm PST: Stogie comments: "Norway Shooter and the English Defence League."

And see Exposing the English Defence League, "English Defence League in denial. In more ways than one."

How The New York Times Spins the Norway Horror

From Ron Radosh, at Pajamas Media (via Glenn Reynolds):

Leave it to today’s New York Times to run a front- page story about the murders perpetrated by the crazed right-wing fanatic, Anders Behring Breivik, that is more accurately described as a not-so veiled editorial. Written by Scott Shane, the article begins by proclaiming that Breivik “was deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the threat from Islam, lacing his 1,500-page manifesto with quotations from them, as well as copying multiple passages from the tract of the Unabomber.”

The implication that he develops is that Breivik’s actions can be attributed to those who for years have been trying to educate the public in the West bout the threat posted to our values and way of life by the forces of radical Islam. In particular, Shane singles out- by virtue of Breivik having cited his writing 64 times in his manifesto- the writings of Robert Spencer at the website Jihad Watch, part of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, as well, he writes, of “other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture.”

That sentence says it all: those who correctly point out that dangers of sectarian enclaves of unassimilated Muslim immigrants in Europe, of people who do not accept the laws and standards of the nations to which they have immigrated, and who consider themselves proponents of both jihad and sharia law, are not a danger. Instead, the danger comes from those who point out the uncomfortable truths that many dare not face.

Continue reading.

That's a phenomenal, and brutally honest, essay.