Should Have Known Better

Dawn Jones\u27s sorority sisters thought she made a big mistake marrying blue-collar Reginald. But thanks to hard work and belief in each other, Dawn and Reginald left the big city and made their own happiness, complete with a comfortable home and two lively children. Dawn can\u27t wait to show everyone just how perfect her choices were—especially when her mega-successful best friend, Sasha, shows up to visit. But she never expected Sasha would like Reginald so much she\u27d steal him for herself. . .or that Reginald would see Sasha as a second chance to pursue hopes he never fulfilled. With her perfect life now in shambles, Dawn will do whatever it takes to regain what she\u27s lost. But the road back will mean facing the hardest of truths, even tougher choices—and risking more than she ever imagined to discover what her life could really be

2 or 3 things I remember or should have known about him

Optic Antics celebrates the work of Film Artist Ken Jacobs’ substantial and ongoing materialist practice, straddling more than 50 years, complicit in the 60s explosion of experimental film and now witnessing and commenting on the digital onslaught. This practice includes 16mm films that are recognized as foundation works for an experimental artist based cinema, celebrated and ongoing film performances and a renewed digital practice that re-animates historic 3-D images in flicker form

What Cameron should have known: Q &A. CEPS Commentary, 4 November 2014

The surprise revelation that the UK would be paying a surcharge to the EU budget of €2.1 billion sent Prime Minister Cameron into a rampage. How could this misunderstanding have arisen, as the resources mechanism of the EU budget uses a rather rigid method of calculation agreed by all member states? In this Commentary, CEPS budget specialist Jorge Núñez Ferrer has adopted a Q&A format to provide a straightforward technical explanation of how the surcharge came about in an attempt to dispel the Machiavellian phantasies it has inspired in journalists and eurosceptics alike

"You should have known better:" The Social Implications of Victim-Focused Sexual Assault Prevention Tips

Common sexual assault prevention strategies emphasize potential victims’ responsibility to protect themselves. Using a feminist theoretical approach, the present research assesses the unintended, negative consequences that result from taking a victim-focused approach to sexual assault prevention. A between-participants experimental design was employed, whereby participants (N = 321) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 1) victim-focused prevention tips (n = 114); 2) perpetrator-focused prevention tips (n = 103); or 3) study tips (i.e., for control purposes; n = 104). Following prevention tip exposure, participants read a sexual assault vignette and completed measures of victim culpability, perpetrator culpability, and several related constructs. Results indicated that participants who received victim-focused prevention tips attributed significantly more blame to the victim based on the vignette than participants in the perpetrator-focused condition. Implications of the findings are discussed

Should Have Known Better? The Standard of Knowledge for Command Responsibility in International Criminal Law

The criminal doctrine of command responsibility has a rich legal history, which makes it a widely recognized, if unsettled, concept of international criminal law. This article focuses on a key element of command responsibility: the commander’s knowledge of a subordinate\u27s crimes. This article argues that current customary law instructs to apply a standard of actual knowledge of the commander, rather than the lower standard of constructive knowledge. The article reaches this conclusion by observing the primary shaping factor of international law—State behavior. Through the example of six diverse legal systems, the article demonstrates how the approach of legislative, executive, and judicial behavior of various States indicate that constructive knowledge is not a valid basis for incriminating commanders under international criminal law. Finally, the article contemplates some implications for future command responsibility cases. The article submits that multinational tribunals and States seeking to apply command responsibility should stick to the standard of actual knowledge, which reflects customary law as it currently stands, rather than aspirational law that lacks the necessary legal basis. This is particularly important not only for avoiding legal wrongdoing, but for maintaining the legitimacy and integrity of the criminal process that are crucial for promoting accountability

When You Should Have Known: Rethinking Constructive Knowledge in Tort Liability for Sexual Transmission of HIV

AIDS is a modern epidemic that has grabbed the forefront of this nation\u27s attention like no other disease in the twentieth century. Despite vigorous medical research and experimentation, the disease remains incurable and ultimately fatal. Protecting the health of the citizens has always been a strong policy of the law. Tort liability for the spread of contagious diseases dates back to the early nineteenth century. Tort liability for sexual transmission of AIDS began to appear in the late 1980s, not long after the appearance of the disease. Based as it was on the tort actions arising from other transmittable diseases, tort liability invariably required a showing that the defendant knew that he or she was infected with the disease before the sexual contact took place. AIDS is unlike other sexually transmitted diseases. It is stealthy, with a lengthy and symptom-free incubation period which may last for a decade or more. During this time, the infected individual could infect any number of persons, limited only by the number of sexual partners the infected party is able to contact. Although having sex with an HIV-infected individual does not guarantee that one will contract the virus, it is certainly a foreseeable consequence of such conduct. Under the current standards of tort liability, HIV-infected individuals will almost always plead a lack of knowledge defense. Unless the standards of when it is reasonable for a person to have constructive knowledge of his or her HIV infection are extended to persons who, for a variety of reasons, should have known that they were HIV-positive or at great risk to be HIV-positive, a plaintiff may not be able to successfully bring an action in tort. Tort law is intended to apportion responsibility to those who have committed a wrong. It goes against the great weight of tort law to allow HIV-infected individuals to escape tort liability due to the particular nature of this contagious disease. Persons who are infected with HIV or who, because of particular information known to them know that they are at high-risk for being infected with HIV, owe a duty to all future sexual partners to either disclose their serostatus, or to warn of the possible risk. Failing that, these individuals have a duty to abstain from sexual contact with unsuspecting partners until the partners have been informed. After disclosure, if a partner chooses to engage in sexual contact with the infected or at-risk individual, then that person has made an informed choice. If that party attempts a tort action later, arising from HIV-infection, then the defendant may raise a comparative or contributory negligence defense, or assumption of risk defense, depending on the jurisdiction. The risk of HIV infection and the consequences of the spread of this disease are just now becoming apparent eighteen years after the appearance of the disease. In the United States alone, the Center for Disease Control reported that 390,692 persons had died of AIDS as of December 1997. Another 665,397 Americans were living with AIDS as of June 30, 1998. Outside of the United States, the statistics are far worse. By extending tort liability to persons who should know that they are HIV-positive or to those who know that they are at high-risk for HIV infection, two purposes can be met. First, individuals who contract HIV through sexual contact may have legal remedies against the partners who infected them. The liability in these cases will be restricted to persons who had a duty to warn the plaintiff of the risk of HIV infection, but failed to do so. This liability will serve as an incentive to disclose one\u27s conditions and risk factors to one\u27s future sexual partners, thus probably limiting the spread of the disease. Second, extending tort liability will encourage HIV testing; more testing will foster improved treatment of HIV and further limit its spread through sexual transmission. This Comment focuses on the causes of action arising from the sexual transmission of AIDS

Knowledge and Blameworthiness

Blameworthiness of an agent or a coalition of agents is often defined in terms of the principle of alternative possibilities: for the coalition to be responsible for an outcome, the outcome must take place and the coalition should have had a strategy to prevent it. In this article we argue that in the settings with imperfect information, not only should the coalition have had a strategy, but it also should have known that it had a strategy, and it should have known what the strategy was. The main technical result of the article is a sound and complete bimodal logic that describes the interplay between knowledge and blameworthiness in strategic games with imperfect information