prior probability

If we were Miss Colombia (the beautiful and talented Ariadna Gutierrez), we would consider consulting with a reputable attorney right now. You see, in our view, there is a high probability that the Miss Universe Organization, and maybe even FOX TV, might be vicariously liable for Steve Harvey’s egregious gaffe when he mistakenly crowned Ms Gutierrez the winner of the Miss Universe pageant, depending on whether the host is classified as an “employee” or an “independent contractor” of the pageant. One possible legal theory of liability might be the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress. Even if Mr Harvey’s mistake was an honest one (and even if he is deemed to be a contractor and not an employee), we could still argue that the person who designed the card announcing the winners did so in a negligent manner–that is, in a manner likely to result in error. At the same time, however, Miss Colombia’s legal options might be severely limited if she agreed in advance to waive the legal liability of the Miss Universe Organization or of FOX TV … As such, we would want to know what type of agreements the contestants of Miss Universe are required to sign in order to participate in the pageant and whether these contracts contain a forum selection clause, an arbitration clause, or a limitation of liability clause. If so, she should consider suing in her native Colombia …

… which brings us to our last (but most important) point, a point of civil procedure: choice of forum, or where should Miss Colombia sue? Since the Miss Universe pageant was broadcast nationwide (and presumably around the world), Miss Universe might have a great deal of flexibility in deciding where to bring her lawsuit under the minimum contacts test (again, we would need to see the contestants’ contracts to know for sure). But if she is going to sue, she better hurry. Cases based on a tort theory of liability (like negligent infliction of emotional distress) generally must be brought within one or two years of the date of injury, depending on which State the tort occurred in; otherwise, they are barred by the statute of limitations.

Sue me!

This “fractal puzzle” would make a great gift for our good friend, colleague, and co-author Orlando I. Martinez-Garcia, who introduced us to fractals many moons ago.

We explain our novel solution to the problem of hung juries in this paper (“Why don’t juries try range voting?“), which was published in the Criminal Law Bulletin (vol. 51, no. 3) earlier this year. (In criminal cases, the jury’s verdict must be unanimous, so a hung jury occurs if just one juror disagrees with the remaining jurors about the outcome.) Bayesian voting, however, could solve this problem. In summary, rather than voting “guilty” or “not guilty,” jurors would instead keep a scorecard and score the evidence presented by the prosecutor at trial. Each juror’s scorecard could be based on a ten-point scale, with 10 being the highest possible score (an open and shut case) and 0 being the lowest score (no evidence in support of the prosecution’s case). So, for example, if a juror believes that the prosecution has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the juror would assign a high score, such as a 9 or a 10, or if the juror thinks the case is too close to call, he or she could assign a 5. Accordingly, the jury’s “verdict” would consist of a numerical value–either the average value or the sum total of all their individual scores (I refer to this collective score as the “range verdict.”) Under this system, the prosecution would win a conviction only if the average value or sum total of the jury’s collective score exceeded some critical threshold value.

Via kottke, we discovered the Free Universal Construction Kit, a set of 80 two-way adapters that allows kids to connect Legos and Tinkertoys together: “By allowing any piece to join to any other, the Kit encourages totally new forms of intercourse between otherwise closed systems—enabling radically hybrid constructive play, the creation of previously impossible designs, and ultimately, more creative opportunities for kids. As with other grassroots interoperability remedies, the Free Universal Construction Kit implements proprietary protocols in order to provide a public service unmet—or unmeetable—by corporate interests” (emphasis in original).