Tuesday October 02, 2007

Here’s the situation. A man shoots a policeman and injures him so severely that the policeman is paralyzed. The man is convicted of aggravated assault and serves a long prison sentence. He gets out on parole, decides he wants to move his life in a positive direction, and even speaks to college students about his efforts to turn his life around. Over four decades after the shooting, the policeman gets an infection and dies. Doctors conclude that the infection would not have happened if not for the shooting many years before. The district attorney charges the man who shot the policeman with murder. What do you think? Can the district attorney do that? Should he do that?

Some of you may recognize this fact pattern, as it reflects recent events in Philadelphia in relation to William J. Barnes who shot Officer Walter T. Barclay, Jr. back in 1966. (For a fuller discussion of this case, see the article in The New York Times by Ian Urbina, “New Murder Charge in ’66 Shooting,” from September 19, 2007.) It was this general issue which was the topic of discussion at the first meeting this year of the Dean’s Honor Society at University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. Students who do particularly well academically after their first year of law school are invited to join the DHS. This year’s membership is about 60 students. As members they meet regularly with me as Dean , as well as with various faculty members, to discuss interesting legal issues in an informal setting. We will also be getting together for various social events, such as plays, concerts, etc.

During our first meeting, the students and I were joined by Assistant Dean Cara Cunningham as well as Prof. Richard Krisciunas, who spent about twenty years as one of the leading prosecutors for Wayne County. I very much enjoyed the free-flowing discussion, as we all grappled with the issues that this scenario raises. Based on the conversation, there seemed to be a good deal of disagreement about whether the district attorney should re-charge the defendant with murder so many years after the crime. But I think everyone’s minds were opened a little bit as they listened to the arguments from different perspectives.

In fact, that kind of listening to different arguments and trying to think through their repercussions is, I think, an important part of the law school experience. And, to be frank, engaging in these kinds of discussions with UDM law students certainly brings a lot of pleasure to the Dean! For those of you thinking about coming to UDM next year, feel free to e-mail me with your thoughts about this case as well.