- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Here's what LSU law professor said to get suspended
Posted on 2/12/25 at 6:33 pm to Hold That Tiger 10
Posted on 2/12/25 at 6:33 pm to Hold That Tiger 10
This guy sounds like a jerk, but in all fairness, I don't think that quite crosses the line to justify firing a tenured professor. He stopped short of having political opinions affect student grades. I think the school loses this one.
0
Posted on 2/12/25 at 6:37 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
LSU lawyers weren't able to prove that any students felt threatened by the remarks:
A totally irrelevant consideration. The question is whether profanity in the classroom is constitutionally protected speech. It’s not. The school is well within its rights to place the prof on leave.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 7:21 pm to Riverside
quote:
A totally irrelevant consideration. The question is whether profanity in the classroom is constitutionally protected speech. It’s not. The school is well within its rights to place the prof on leave.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 7:44 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
The only person who’s ever sat for a criminal law exam in law school and thinks that hypo is abnormal is Jeff Landry.
But why put in there that he thought he was above the law because he was a powerful Republican? And that he had never been investigated before because he was a Republican?
This post was edited on 2/12/25 at 7:47 pm
Posted on 2/12/25 at 7:54 pm to spslayto
quote:
But why put in there that he thought he was above the law because he was a powerful Republican? And that he had never been investigated before because he was a Republican?
I can't read his mind as to why he did that, but note that the question at the end asks to discuss all potential crimes- and doesn't limit by whom. If I had to guess, he threw in that last paragraph to see if students could find a theory about the cops committing crimes like malfeasance in office. Or since the guy talked about how rich he was and the cops then left him alone, was that some kind of implied bribery attempt, or extortion. The reference to a political affiliation as a reason to tank the investigation, might be something similar. In a class of 100 students, a few of them might miss these angles, and a few might think of some potential crimes worth discussing from that interaction, that most others and even the professor might not have thought about at first.
Just a thought but that could be it.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:01 pm to ExtraGravy
Here is the latest on Levy. Read his test scenario in the link. Is his scenario personal experience?
LINK
LINK
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:01 pm to ExtraGravy
quote:
I can't read his mind as to why he did that, but note that the question at the end asks to discuss all potential crimes- and doesn't limit by whom. If I had to guess, he threw in that last paragraph to see if students could find a theory about the cops committing crimes like malfeasance in office. Or since the guy talked about how rich he was and the cops then left him alone, was that some kind of implied bribery attempt, or extortion. The reference to a political affiliation as a reason to tank the investigation, might be something similar. In a class of 100 students, a few of them might miss these angles, and a few might think of some potential crimes worth discussing from that interaction, that most others and even the professor might not have thought about at first.
Just a thought but that could be it.
Spoken like a true lawyer. Sure thats what he was angling for. Lol
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:02 pm to boosiebadazz
I sat in a few exams. I think the pumpkin hypo is a bit out there and the childish political swipe is just that…immature, childish, indicative of an insecure personality (likely for good reason).
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:02 pm to spslayto
Because the law student is supposed to identify the crime he could be committing. Identify it, explain its elements, and analyze whether the facts give rise to the crime.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:03 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Because the law student is supposed to identify the crime he could be committing. Identify it, explain its elements, and analyze whether the facts give rise to the crime.
I know
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:08 pm to spslayto
quote:
Spoken like a true lawyer. Sure thats what he was angling for. Lol
it literally might be it. No doubt a student would get a few points discussing those issues. I certainly don't doubt he included "Republican" because of his own political leanings. He sounds like a guy sort of on the spectrum- in his mind, this passes for "humor." 'Oh ha ha, we're all in the club here, all of you know how I feel about this, this is a joke I make' and they're all expected to "laugh" along. It's like some guy you don't know well and he sees you once with your hair out of place and he makes a "joke" about it, and then for 3 years every time you see him he makes some "joking" reference. "Oh, your hair's combed this time! Haha!"
Anyway what I suggested, would be just as valid whether you said "Republican" or "Democratic" or "Green Party" or whatever. Like you, I find his choice annoying. It may or may not have been right or legal to kick him out of class for the way he acted. But he didn't end up in this situation by being a normal person.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:10 pm to ExtraGravy
quote:
Anyway what I suggested, would be just as valid whether you said "Republican" or "Democratic" or "Green Party" or whatever. Like you, I find his choice annoying. It may or may not have been right or legal to kick him out of class for the way he acted. But he didn't end up in this situation by being a normal person.
Or how about politician? Simple solution. With todays climate i dont understand why he would include any partys affiliation. I agree with you.
This post was edited on 2/12/25 at 8:13 pm
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:13 pm to RPC4LSU
quote:
Read his test scenario in the link.
Really gross, man. Yeah the guy is not normal. Not that that means he should be fired for this, and I don't think the exam is why they removed him.
I will say I chuckled a little bit at Landry's tweet, "imagine sending your child to college" and this is the exam they see . . . College students may have to read a lot worse than this. But these are law students who have already graduated from college, I bet half of them are 25 or older. Some of them will graduate and handle criminal cases with facts that will give you nightmares for years, a lot worse than this test. I'm not sure the parent's concern about sending a "child" to school is really the way to frame what goes on in a law school, any more than an engineering PhD program. But Landry's a politician, he doesn't care about making sense here I guess, if he can appeal to the PTA mom types of the world, he's winning.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:20 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
The only person who’s ever sat for a criminal law exam in law school and thinks that hypo is abnormal is Jeff Landry.
I never once had a criminal law hypo that referenced a Republican pedophile.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:33 pm to spslayto
The real answer? He probably included it to throw a dig at conservatives. The legal answer? Because it doesn't matter if your feelings are hurt and you should answer to the best of your abilities.
The same way he shouldn't be reprimanded if someone was offended about a hypothetical about a Muslim terrorist or a Catholic priest molesting children or a Democratic senator having sex with someone for political advancement. Toughen up, shite happens in real life. Do we want future lawyers to tiptoe around stuff because someone might get offended now? Just a few years ago we were calling people snowflakes for getting worked up about this stuff.
The same way he shouldn't be reprimanded if someone was offended about a hypothetical about a Muslim terrorist or a Catholic priest molesting children or a Democratic senator having sex with someone for political advancement. Toughen up, shite happens in real life. Do we want future lawyers to tiptoe around stuff because someone might get offended now? Just a few years ago we were calling people snowflakes for getting worked up about this stuff.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:36 pm to Hold That Tiger 10
When I was taking melatonin, I kept having nightmares about law school.
Some of it was a nightmare. I was near the Mendoza grade point average line after my first 2L semester.
Some of it was a nightmare. I was near the Mendoza grade point average line after my first 2L semester.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:40 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
The same way he shouldn't be reprimanded if someone was offended about a hypothetical about a Muslim terrorist or a Catholic priest molesting children or a Democratic senator having sex with someone for political advancement. Toughen up, shite happens in real life. Do we want future lawyers to tiptoe around stuff because someone might get offended now? Just a few years ago we were calling people snowflakes for getting worked up about this stuff.
Find where i said he should be reprimanded for his bad judgment writing the crazy hypothetical. But this goes to show how some professors think and teach. And it's just horrible judgment on his part. Period!!!
This post was edited on 2/12/25 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:45 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:Wow dude. You've really lost it.
The only person who’s ever sat for a criminal law exam in law school and thinks that hypo is abnormal is Jeff Landry.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:48 pm to ExtraGravy
quote:
if "middle aged", what's the gameplan for the rest of life, after taking 3/4 years of intensive study and a couple hundred grand to get a JD? And recouping the cost of the degree as well as enough money on top of that to make the switch worthwhile?
I am actually 52 so back end of middle aged. Just something I have always wanted to do and I am an empty nester now so I have the time to do it. I go part time in the evening JD program. No way it would be worth it at this point in my life plus I would take a major paycut but I have a full ride from my company so just costing me time and effort.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:52 pm to AlxTgr
The republicans shite is dumb but sex crimes are crimes too? Is he not supposed to test kids to spot sex crimes?
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News