Law School Discussion

A was charged with rape of B: A said he thought B was consenting; A contends that he honestly but unreasonably believed that B was consenting.

since rape is a general intent crime, this mistake of fact (A thinking B was consenting was mistake of fact. right?) wouldn't be a valid defense, right? cuz mistake of fact can be a defense only if it is reasonable, and A's mitake was unreasonable. so A should still be guilty of rape.

but there are bunch of cases that says if A honestly but unreasonably believed B was consenting, he's off the hook.

Which one should I follow?
is this something to do with MPC (no general or specific intent distinction) and common law rape difference?

what's the mens rea of rape? is it reckless?

I got 3 of my first semester grades, they are A(research and writing), B+(civ pro), B+(torts).
I'm in Tier 2 (lower) school and I don't think it's too competitive to get good grades here.
I studied everyday for 8 freaking hours
I read all the cases, briefed, took tons of notes from every class, used all suppelements that were recommended, didn't sleep much, didn't do anything but studying on fridays and weekends.

when the final came, I locked up myself in the library and studied like crazy..
I still don't know why I got 2 B+. I wouldn't feel this way if I had at least one A-, instead of 2 B+.
Unless I get A for COn law, my current grades will put me at top 25%, which isn't that great considering the rank of my school.

what have I done wrong? Am I just not smart enough? I studied my A$$ off last semester.

Any advice?



_----------------------------------------------------------



I just got my last grade for con law
I got A!
whoo
I feel a little better now!
thanks for all the helpful advices!!

what's concurrent cause?
I know the definition that "2 or more independent defendants release forces which later join together and bring about the harm together. Here, use substantial factor test. Ask if D’s negligence was substantial to bring about the harm. If so, every D is held liable and they’ll be jointly and severally liable."

however, seriously how do you spot it from the fact pattern?

I have this fact pattern that says there are 3 defendants and the plaintiff sustained injury of drawning from the pool. 1st defendant(doctor) failed to warn about his heart condition, 2nd defendant(pool owner) failed to provide a life guard, and 3rd defendant(friend) failed to stop him from diving even though he knew about danger of diving. are these concurrent causes? so are we supposed to apply 'substantial factor' test here? how do we determine if each defendant's act was a substantial factor? how do you define substantial?

So, here's the deal.
I've got tons of outlines from 2L,3Ls who took the same class with exact same professor last year.
I've look at all their outlines and compared them with class lectures, and so far they'll all identical materials.
These outlines are pretty good ones too.
Shall I bother writing my own outline even though these are pretty good?
I've been incorporating my own notes to these outlines for past few weeks but I'm not sure what to do when October comes and everyone starts making outlines.

Any advices?

what's so special about Rutgers-camden?
I've been accepted there but I'm not sure if I really wanna go.
I heard the neighborhood is really dangerous.

what's so good about it?