In Re Lawrence Connell - Affidavit of Danielle Oppenheim 2011-5-12

8/6/2019 In Re Lawrence Connell - Affidavit of Danielle Oppenheim 2011-5-12

1/11

WIDENER UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAWIN THE MATTER OFProfessor Lawrence J. Connell

AFFIDAVIT OF DANIELLE OPPENHEIMState of Delaware SSCounty of New Castle

I, Daniclle Oppenheim. having been duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows.t . This affidavit is based upon my personal knowledge. 1 am competent to testify.2. I am currently a fulltime student at the Widener University School of Law in

Wilmington, Delaware.3. I have been at Widener University School of Law since August 0[2009, when I

started my law school education.4. I have accumulated, over that time, forty-five (45) credit hours towards my degree

and have seen multiple classroom dynamics from multiple Widener Law professors.5. I have read the entire 39-page First Affidavit of Lawrence J. Connell (hereinafter

"LC's Affidavit").Witness Interviews of November 22. 2010

6. I was one of the students interviewed on November 22, 2010 by Assistant DeanKelly.

7. The interview took place in Kelly' s office in the dean suite at 10:30am.8. November 22. 2010 was a Monday and I was called the weekend prior on my cell

phone to schedule the interview. Before the end of the phone conversation. I was


2/11

asked to keep the conversation and the impending meeting confidential. I was not torepeat any of this to anyone.

9. On Monday morning I met with Kelly and he asked me to tell him about Connell andhis class. I told him that I really enjoyed Connell as a professor and that I also reallyenjoyed the Criminal Procedure class that I was in. I asked him ifhe could tell mewhat he was looking for so that we could just address that issue. He told me that therehad been complaints about Connell and allegations about him being racist and sexist.

10. I quickly told him that I thought these allegations were false and completelyridiculous. I told him that I purposefully took Connell for a second semester in a rowbecause of how much I learned from him and enjoyed him the previous semester inCriminal Law.

11.1 told him that throughout almost two full semesters ofConnell, I had yet to feeldiscriminated against because ofmy gender or difference ofopinion. I never once feltthat he was racist or sexist or that he brought up the sex or race of defendants orvictims based on improper reasons.

12 . I told Kelly that I felt !hat the students who complained about Connell either had toomuch time on their hands or were so na'ive that their opinions should not hold muchweight.

13. Professor Connell teaches courses that make sense, they are relatable. He teaches usabout the real world and not from some philosophical point of view. I also told Kellythat. 1 appreciated Connel l's real world views as they demonstrate what we will facewhen we are set loose on the legal community.

14. I told Kelly that the people who brought these complaints need to grow up and dealwith people they don't like in a professional manner. The complainants need to learn

2


3/11

that just because you may not agree with a professor on how they teach or even whatthey teach, this doesn't mean that the professor needs to get into trouble.

15. During the meeting with Kelly I even indicated that there was a female student in myCriminal Procedure class, who Connell loved to call on. He actually told her in thebeginning of the semester that she was incredibly smart and must really like criminallaw because she had great insight. Without identifying this student, the student is afemale with, what I perceive to be a Hispanic or Latina ethnicity. He would alwayscall on her in class and would treat her with respect, whether she agreed with him ornot.

16. I told Kelly that the complainants must have just disliked Connell and so they sawevil in everything that he said or did. But the reality of the situation was that Connellis a great professor and I would take him again iff could for Criminal Procedure II.

17. At the end of this meeting Kelly told me that he was happy to hear a differentperspective about Connell. He then reminded me to keep this meeting confidential.

18. Despite being asked to keep this meeting confidential, 1told Samuel Elbardissi. afellow student, about the meeting before I met with Kelly and then I also talked tohim about it after the meeting.

Criminal Law Spring 201019 . In the spring of201O, I was enrolled in Professor Lawrence Connell's Criminal Law

class.20. Regarding paragraph 16 ofLC's Affidavit, our class discussed the Apprendi case.

Connell discussed with us the different sentencing guidelines that were available tothe judge in this case. The judge was pennitted to sentence defendant to a certainamount of years in prison or if the judge found that defendant had racial malice in

3


4/11

committing the crime, an additional amount of years could be added to the sentence.21. Regarding paragraph 15 of LC' s Affidavit, 1 was in class that day. I have no

recollection of the alleged statement ever being made.22. Connell was simply telling us that using race as a basis for your crime extended your

sentence. He neither agreed nor disagreed with the possibility of time added to asentence.

23. Regarding paragraphs 23-32 in LC' s Affidavit, our class did discuss the Goetz case.Our text book did not include the races of any of the parties but Connell did includethat in his examination ofthe case. We used this case to talk about a reasonableperson standard in the context of self-defense and whether we were supposed to thinkabout an ordinary reasonable person or a reasonable person with Goetz's background.His background included multiple muggings which caused him to be fearful of otherpeople. Goetz was not convicted of any of the attempted murders that he was chargedwith, only the illegal possession of a firearm.

24. If we think about this case happening today, I would question how the jury could findGoetz not guilty regarding these crimes. But then we were reminded to think aboutwhen and where the incident actually happened. As I was not alive when this casewas before the courts, it was helpful to have Connell illustrate what was happening inNew York City at the time. He did slate that the crime rates were extremely high atthose times and that black youths were seen as being highly involved with thismcrease.

25. At no point did Connell make any statement about black youths being bad people orthat they are always the ones who committed these crimes, simply that at that time inhistory, this was the perception. This allowed us to get into the minds of the jury that

4


5/11

acquitted Goelz on most of the charges that were brought before him.26. It would not be reasonable for anyone, without a prior bias against Connell or a prior

bias about the mention of race, to take anything that Connell said to be racist oroffensive. He was simply giving a history lesson so we could understand thebackground of this case and try to understand what the jury was thinking.

27. To be frank, the fact that the complainant regarding this statement feels that race isirrelevant is naive. Unfortunately, race is a factor when discussing criminal matters.Connell has even expressed this v i e w ~ that race is an unfortunate clement that needsto be considered when talking about crime. As long as there arc people who arcprejudiced against other races or people that continually complain that others areracist, race will always be a factor.

28. Although I was in class that day, I was not involved in the discussion held after class.29. Regarding paragraph 33 of LC ' s Affidavit, Connell did use the word folks. He has

used Ihis word with the all types of classifications of people. I have heard him manytimes say white folks, black folks, innocent folks, guilty folks, stupid folks, rich folks,poor folks and many others. The complainant that was offended by the phrase "blackfolks" must have a bias against Connell that began well before he made thisstatement. If he is found to be racist for using this phrase then he must also be foundto discriminate against white people, rich people, poor people, stupid people, etc.Except that this argument makes absolutely no sense. While I have no knowledgeabout the identity ofthe complainant, it seems to me that either they paid no attentionto Connell all semester and missed his reference to all other types of people as folks,or they decided to only care about when he used the word folks with word black.

30. This allegation itself must show the complainant's own prejudice against Connell as5


6/11

well as their targeted effort to attack Connell.31. Regarding paragraph 34 from LC's Affidavit, I do remember Connell using this

phrase in relation to the adultery provocation in homicide but I have no recollectionof him ever using this phrase in regards to a particular student, even through ahYPOlhclical.

32. In class we were (alking about the adultery provocation, when it can be claimed andwhen it would be inappropriate. Connell was giving hypothetical situations about aman coming home, seeing his wife in bed with another man and then right awaygrabbing his gun and screaming "die, bitch," before he shoots her. He distinguishedthis hypothetical from one where the man comes home and sees his wife in bed withanother man hut instead of grabbing the gun right away, he has to go find somethingto kill her with, which takes a few minutes, and then comes back up and kills her. Thetime lapse was the main issue here, the "die, bitch," was more to keep the class'sattention and to give us a hook to remember this hypothetical for finals.

33. Regarding paragraph 42 in LC's Affidavit, I was in class when Connell used DeanAmmons as a hypothetical. I remember that he used her in multiple hypotheticalsabout attempted crimes, the issue of impossibility and how far along in the crime doyou have to he in order to be charged with an attempted crime. Connell used thehypotheticals about the pumpkins and Dick Tracey many times.

34. Connell would use the dean, the ridiculous pumpkins and Dick Tracey to get us tounderstand the subtle differences in the issues he was teaching us and also to give us ahook so that we would remember these differences for the final.

35. At no point did Connell ever say that he actually wanted to shoot the dean, that hewanted us to shoot the dean or that it would be good for the school that she was shot.

6


7/11

The fact that she is the dean and known by all students. if only by name and position.was the only reason that she was used in these hypotheticals. She was not targetedbecause she is a woman or because she is black. Neither her sex nor race were evermentioned in these hypotheticals nor were they ever pointed out as a factor ormaterial fact for the attempted crime.

36. Because Connell used the dean in his hypotheticals, I could quickly remember wherealong the line of committing the crime one would need to be in order to be legallyattempting the crime. These hypotheticals were extremely useful when I was studyingfor Connell's final and when I was actually taking the final.

37. Regarding paragraph 57 in LC ' s Affidavit . where he mentions the allegation that heuses "intimidating tactics to discourage other points of view particularly fromwomen." is completely false and the complainant of this allegation must have a priorbias against Connell.

38. I am a female student and never once did I feel intimidated by anything that Connelldid and I especially didn' t feel anything negative from Connell regarding my gender.Connell has a strong personality and sometimes if anyone, regardless of race or sex,would bring up a point that he didn't agree with or that was completely off the mark.he may cut them of f from their five minute rant, but he would not discriminate whohe did this to. He did not care who made these remarks, just whether there wasanything to be gained from the comments in class or whether they were a waste ofclass time. This is not a tactic solely employed by Connell and I have manyprofessors who will cut-off a student who just feels like talking in class withouthaving something worthwhile to say.

39. Regarding paragraph 59 in LC's Affidavit,. have no recollection ofConnell ever7


8/11

saying this in class. Despite these allegations, I have no recollection ofConnell eversaying anything in class about his opinion of black people or poor people. He mayhave made a statement about the disproportionate numbers of black people and poorpeople being arrested or in jail but at no point did he say that this was because thosepeople actually committed those crimes. He also never made any statement that blackandlor poor people deserved to be in jail more than other people. These allegationsare simply untrue.

40. Regarding paragraph 62 of LC's Affidavit, these allegations arc untrue. He nevermade any racist or sexist comments in the classroom. Ifhe ever said anything racist orsexist it was only to quote what a defendant said regarding the case or backgroundinfonnation regarding the case. There are racist and sexist people that ~ e r e referred toin our textbook and Connell cannot just skip those cases, notes after the cases,footnotes or articles just because they may offend someone. These were not hisopinions, they were part of the literature we needed to understand to fully grasp thepoint of taking a Criminal Law class.

41. Regarding paragraph 63 if LC's Affidavit, I agree in part and disagree in part withthis allegation. Connell did use profanity in class but I disagree and find it completelyoutrageous that someone would find this to be offensive.

42. Profanity is part of the English language and happens to be quoted in many of thecases that were in our textbook. These allegations came from a Criminal Law class,not a Civil Procedure or Contracts class. In Criminal Law, there is more ofa real-world feel than you have in Civil Procedure or Contracts. What I mean by that is, inCriminal Law you read cases about heinous crimes and the people that were accusedofcommitting those crimes. Using profanity is one way to get the class to really pay

8


9/11

attention to something that is important or to make us see the gravity ofwhateversubject is coming up. Also, he is not the only professor to use profanity and by nomeans did he use it more than my other professors.

43. Regarding paragraph 66 of LC's Affidavit, I find this allegation to be laughable. Thisallegation is a stretch and simply shows how badly the complainant is grasping atanything in order to target Conncll.

44. Regarding paragraph 67 of LC ' s Affidavit , this is not even an allegation againstConnell. The complainant does not state that Connell actually made this statement orthat this is his opinion, rather that this is what they understand when he uses thephrase 'black folks.' It would actually be more reasonable to turn this around on thecomplainant because many times our inferences from what other people say, indicatemore about our own prejudices than the speaker's.

45. Regarding paragraph 73 of LC's Affidavit, I remember talking about statutory rapeand whether knowledge on the part ofdefendant is necessary. I have no recollectionofConnell ever saying "dirty little whore" regarding this topic. I would venture toguess that this is completely fabricated as Connell has never indicated that it was thechild's fault that they were the victim of statutory rape. Even where the child lied andtold defendant that they were of legal age, he still maintained that defendant wascriminally liable here.

Criminal Procedure Section 8 Fall201046. In the fall semester 201 0, I was not enrolled Connell's Criminal Procedure Section B

class; however, I was in section A of this same class.47. As a second year student, we are permitted to pick our classes and therefore have

some say in who our teachers are.9


10/11

48. I mi ssed a couple of Criminal Procedure classes th at semester but during the classesthat I was prescnt, I nevcr once heard Connell say anything thaI would intimidate me,that would stop me from presenting my opinion to the class ifit differed from hi s, thatmade me feel di sc riminated against for my gender or that hit me as a racist comment.

49. Regarding part 4 of paragraph 72 of l C' s Affidavit , I remember th at he also usedDean AmJllons as:1hypothe tical when discuss ing search wanant s and contidentinlinfo rm ants. He used her in an example thnt den lt with a confidential infonnant tellingpeople that Ammons had drugs in her desk and whether th at was enough for a searehwarrant. He then added to thi s example by saying that th e confidential in formantcould tell you where in her desk the drugs were, whi ch drugs the dean was inpossession of and how she so ld those drugs. In no way did he tell us that thi s wasactua lly happeni ng or th at we were to infer that it was marc likely that thi s was truebecause she was black or that she was a woman. He just wanted us to pay attention toh is hypothetica ls and for us to have 11 menta l pi cture so that we could eas ilyremember th e di stinction he was trying to makc. Again th ese mental pictures helpcd

m, " "Omm ,,-",mm. ,""."iQ'(j21 e : " "Dallielle Oppenh eim

SWOR N TO AND SUBSCRI BED belore Ille on the__' f \ . . ,- = , - -~ " , ~ ____ day of-Mtty; 20 I I.

~ ~ ~ ~ - - - " ~ - - - - = ~ = . = ~ = : ' ; '- C < ' = 'l d " - - : ~ " " ~ 7 i 9 - ~ 1 ~ r THOMAS S.NEUBERGER,ESO.NOTARIALOFFICERSTATE OF DELAWARE

29 DEL.C.SEC. 4323(A) (3)L------- .10


11/11

, "

. . .

.....", '"

I .

, '

.

. .... ,"\

.oa3 . F 8 C l R 3 8 U 3 ~ ~ .2 2 A I - ' O P ~ I)=t301"O J,,\IRI\TOlti' . ,'r' : . I ~ ' N A J 3 0 ~ 0 3 T A T 2 1 . I I A , m ~ o ~ e ,0 ,J30 !lS_.J

"

, '

"

Documents

In Re Lawrence Connell - Affidavit of Danielle Oppenheim 2011-5-12