Was He Guilty as Charged? An Alternative Narrative Based on the Circumstantial Evidence from \u3cem\u3e12 Angry Men\u3c/em\u3e

This essay argues that while 12 Angry Men is typically viewed as a vindication of innocence, careful consideration of the evidence suggests that the jury probably reached the wrong verdict: the circumstantial evidence pointed to guilt! The authors use this insight to discuss the potential impact of circumstantial versus direct evidence on real juries and perhaps the ways that cases are litigated. The essay suggests a number of questions requiring empirical research

School Vouchers: Settled Questions, Continuing Disputes

Provides an assessment of the constitutional principles announced by the Court, following the June 2002 decision in the Cleveland school voucher case. Presents contrasting arguments on educational policy that address key issues about the decision

Was He Guilty as Charged? An Alternative Narrative Based on the Circumstantial Evidence from \u3cem\u3e12 Angry Men\u3c/em\u3e

This essay argues that while 12 Angry Men is typically viewed as a vindication of innocence, careful consideration of the evidence suggests that the jury probably reached the wrong verdict: the circumstantial evidence pointed to guilt! The authors use this insight to discuss the potential impact of circumstantial versus direct evidence on real juries and perhaps the ways that cases are litigated. The essay suggests a number of questions requiring empirical research

A Conversation: Living Through Lacrosse

Living through Lacrosse featured a panel of those involved directly with the Duke lacrosse incident, ranging from the senior vice president for public affairs and government relations of Duke University to a former Duke student who was serving as a staff member of the Duke Chronicle in 2007. Members of the panel assessed what happened during the course of the incident and then discussed what could be learned from this case and what might have been done differently. Questions/themes/discussion topics What were the individual roles of the panelists during the lacrosse incident? In hindsight, what would the panelists have done differently? What can be learned from the Duke lacrosse case for both similar and non-similar cases going forward

ERA Project OLC Letter

The Equal Rights Amendment Project at Columbia Law School (“ERA Project”) and the undersigned scholars submit this letter at the request of your office to provide legal analysis of the January 6, 2020 Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Memorandum to the National Archives and Records Administration on the Equal Rights Amendment (“2020 OLC Memo”)

In Tribute: M. Katherine B. Darmer

The editors of the Chapman Law Review respectfully dedicate this issue to Professor M. Katherine B. Darmer