L1

Instructor Background and Professional Experience

  • Current Professional Role: The instructor is currently a partner at a law firm in Nashville, Tennessee, called Bassbury and Sims. He joined this firm in January of the current year.
  • Federal Prosecution Career:
    • He served as a federal prosecutor for approximately 1515 years.
    • His first tenure was with the US Attorney's Office in DC. This office is unique because it handles local crimes for the District of Columbia as well as federal crimes. His experience there ranged from simple assaults to homicide cases.
    • In 20152015, he joined the US Attorney's Office in Nashville. He served there for approximately 1010 years.
    • Leadership Role: Most recently, he served as the Chief of the Criminal Division, where he supervised all criminal prosecutors in the office.
  • Teaching Experience: This is the third time he has taught this specific course, which he identifies as his favorite to teach.

Participant Introductions and Academic Goals

  • Kanesha Jones: Located in Memphis, Tennessee. She plans to attend law school in the fall of 20272027. She is interested in employment law and HR. She is currently transitioning into an HR role.
  • Lisa Jagapo: Based in Connecticut and works in New York for The New York Times handling contracts. She is interested in the intersection of law, contracts, and AI.
  • John Cannon: A retired banker living in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts. This is his 33rd course. He intends to use the program as a foundation for future mediation work and is interested in the investigation and procedural aspects of criminal law.
  • Raven: Resides in Milton, Kentucky, but works in Indiana as the Director of Student Success at Ivy Tech Community College. She has an interest in legal procedures, contracts, and employment law.
  • Warren Tichner: Joining from the Mojave Desert in California, specifically inside Edwards Air Force Base. He is a test pilot for the Air Force and is interested in regulatory law, compliance, evidence, and the legal ramifications of engineering specifications.
  • Melissa Robach: Resides in Fayetteville, Tennessee, and works in Huntsville, Alabama. She is currently a bankruptcy paralegal. She has a strong interest in investigations and previously participated in a mock trial as a prosecutor during her bachelor's program.
  • Amber Kendall: Located in Nashville, Tennessee. Works in retail management with a goal of moving into corporate compliance or HR management.
  • Brennan Rojas: A healthcare compliance investigator for the state and federal government (CMS). He tracks regulatory compliance and investigative processes.
  • Yvonne Zukoski: Originally from Meridian, Mississippi, now living in Thompson Station, Tennessee. She works in research at Vanderbilt University and is in her 33rd year of the MLS program.
  • Matthew Madur: From the New Jersey shore, near New York City. This is his second course. He is interested in the global impact of the American legal system.
  • Camilla Ruiz: Located in North Georgia. Currently a retail manager transitioning into a legal assistant role with interests in healthcare compliance.
  • Jessica: Based in Atlanta, Georgia. A stay-at-home mother planning to return to work, specifically aiming for a position at the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI).

Course Structure and Administrative Details

  • Curriculum Overview: The course is structured as two components in one over an 88-week period:
    • Phase 1 (Traditional Criminal Law): Covers the elements of crime, defenses, and the purposes of punishment.
    • Phase 2 (Investigations and Comparative Law): Focuses on Fourth Amendment law, search and seizure, and a comparison between the American and international criminal systems.
  • Course Designer: The course was designed by Professor Chris Slabogan from Vanderbilt, who appears in the recorded lectures.
  • Grading Standards: The instructor is typically 11 week behind in grading. He emphasizes sticking closely to the discussion prompts and notes that grading is ultimately subjective.
  • Generative AI Policy: The use of generative AI (e.g., LLMs like ChatGPT) to generate answers is strictly prohibited. While tools like LexisNexis or Westlaw may use AI features (e.g., Co-Counsel), students must ensure all research is accurate and self-generated to facilitate true learning.

The Case of Bernie Getz (The Subway Vigilante)

  • Factual Background:
    • Bernie Getz, a white male who had been robbed previously, was approached by four African American males on a New York City subway.
    • The individuals asked him for $5\$5. Getz perceived them as a threat and shot all four, wounding one (Kaby) seriously.
    • Legal Charges: He was charged with attempted murder and assault but was only convicted of a firearms possession charge.
  • Actus Reus and Mens Rea Analysis:
    • Actus Reus: There was no dispute regarding the act of shooting or the possession of the firearm.
    • Mens Rea: The instructor highlighted Getz's statements as evidence of intent. Getz allegedly told one victim, "You're doing fine, here's another," before shooting again. He also stated after the fact that if he had more bullets, he would have kept shooting.
  • New York Penal Code on Attempt: A person is guilty of an attempt when "with intent to commit a crime, he engages in conduct which tends to affect the commission of such crime."
  • Self-Defense and Proportionality:
    • The group discussed whether a reasonable person (objective standard) would find the shooting of four people \proportionate\ to a request for $5\$5.
    • Subjective Standard: The defense focused on Getz's personal trauma from a prior robbery, though several students argued that trauma does not legally justify vigilante violence.
    • The Stand Your Ground Law: New York is not a "Stand Your Ground" state. In such states, there is no duty to retreat, and often a pre-trial hearing occurs to determine if the defense applies.
    • Relevant Evidence: Getz fled to Vermont for 99 days, burned his jacket, and dismantled his gun. The victims had criminal records and carried sharpened screwdrivers, though Getz was unaware of these facts at the time of the shooting.

The Case of Andrea Yates

  • Factual Background: Andrea Yates drowned all 55 of her children in a bathtub during a psychotic episode. She had a history of postpartum depression, suicidal ideation (two prior attempts), and was influenced by a "fire and brimstone" religious cult.
  • Trial Outcomes:
    • First Trial: Convicted of murder.
    • Appeal: Conviction overturned due to an evidentiary issue.
    • Second Trial: Found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI).
  • Insanity Defense (The McNaughton Test):
    • The test focuses on whether, due to a severe mental disease or defect, the defendant did not know the nature and quality of the act or did not know that the act was wrong.
    • Evidence of Knowledge of Wrongness: Yates waited until her husband left, she drowned the children when no one else was around, she called the police immediately after, and she covered the bodies.
    • Delusional Framework: Yates believed her children were being tormented by Satan and that killing them would save their souls from eternal damnation.
  • Policy and Ethics:
    • The class discussed the role of medication non-compliance. Yates had been on antipsychotic medication that improved her condition, but she had stopped taking it (or her doctors had reduced it) prior to the killings.
    • Civil Commitment: An NGRI verdict results in involuntary civil commitment, not freedom. Yates is currently committed to a low-security facility.
    • Purposes of Punishment: The instructor noted that punishing the insane is often viewed as ineffective because such individuals are "not deterable."

Questions & Discussion

  • John Cannon's Question on AI: John asked if using AI as a research tool to find case precedents was acceptable.
  • Instructor's Response: The instructor warned that while research via Google or Westlaw is becoming AI-integrated, the core work must be the student's. Directly dumping prompts into an LLM will prevent the student from actually learning the material. Every assignment can be completed using the provided course materials without external AI search.
  • Melissa Robach's Question on Prosecution vs. Defense: Melissa asked if the instructor's background as a prosecutor helped him as a defense attorney.
  • Instructor's Response: He agreed, noting that former prosecutors often understand the "tricks and trades" of the other side, which makes them effective defense attorneys.