Bar Exam EVERYWHERE
It's worth taking a moment to wander over to Prof. Kerr's latest post on the Volokh Conspiracy, as it shows just how crazy we bar exam folks have become. First Prof. Kopel proposed that the UN was an "accomplice" in the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. Prof. Kerr's rebuttal focused on the fact that the U.N. peacekeepers at issue didn't seem to have the required mental state for accomplice liability. And within a few hours, at least three bar takers had started in-depth review of whether the facts constituted accomplice liability, "accessory after the fact" liability, liability in Washington for official misconduct, or (my addition) whether the actions would rise to the level of criminal facilitation, which is a particular N.Y. crime not found on the multistate.
Funny quote from Prof. Kerr in the comments:
A cover up after the fact in order to hide your negligence does not make you an "accessory after the fact." . . . [S]ince you have the bar exam in a few days, note that the definition of "abet" is "to approve, urge, or encourage." That is, not just to objectively help, but to *intentionally* help. So feel free to say what you want on the Washington state bar exam, but if you pick David Kopel's answer you will just get that one wrong."
Thankfully, you can get quite a few wrong on the multistate and still be ok.
Comments
Quite odd that a bunch of law professors are arguing about UN complicity and then everyone falls back on American (or Angloamerican) substantive law for their arguments.
I realize that the relevant principles may be the same the world over but it would be nice to have some discussion of that.
Bar prep can be stressful. That's fo sure.
bjnsaiPosted by: BTD_Venkat | July 22, 2006 05:50 PM
The actual examination will be anticlimactic after all this fun. ;-)
Hope it goes well !
jsgzPosted by: Bateleur | July 23, 2006 03:29 AM