<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Comfortably Numb</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/</link>
	<description>The ratio of people to cake is too big.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:22:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: xxxx Matthew</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-285</link>
		<dc:creator>xxxx Matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:12:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-285</guid>
		<description>I have written down 30 questions and answers which I remembered. Any one interested in them?  Here&#039;s an example:

1)	A sets up with B a fraudulent scheme at a county fair by setting up a booth and defrauds a number of people who approach the booth.  Another person, C, who notices this action sends a hated teacher of CÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s to the booth in order to be defrauded.  Also, a fourth person, D, merely sent another over to the booth and that person was defrauded for $50.  The call of the question stated the four A, B, C, D and what each is liable for.  
2)	Is D liable for fraud due to his sending a person over to the booth, even though he didnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know of the scheme?
a.	Accessory after the fact for C, because he had the intent and knew about the scheme.
b.	No accessory after the fact for D ( was a two part question)
3)	Julia is staying in a hotel as a guest. A Ã¢â‚¬ËœfederalÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ police officer determines that she is alleged to have participated in a bank robbery two weeks prior.  Without a warrant and without Ã¢â‚¬Ëœrequired probable causeÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ the officer uses the master key from the manager of the Hotel to enter JuliaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s room, where he finds nothing except a diary on the bed, which Officer reads and learns that it was in fact, according to the diary, Julia who committed the crime.  Question is whether this diary is admissible, or maybe whether her arrest based on the contents of the diary is permissible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have written down 30 questions and answers which I remembered. Any one interested in them?  Here&#8217;s an example:</p>
<p>1)	A sets up with B a fraudulent scheme at a county fair by setting up a booth and defrauds a number of people who approach the booth.  Another person, C, who notices this action sends a hated teacher of C&Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&acirc;„&cent;s to the booth in order to be defrauded.  Also, a fourth person, D, merely sent another over to the booth and that person was defrauded for $50.  The call of the question stated the four A, B, C, D and what each is liable for.  <br />
2)	Is D liable for fraud due to his sending a person over to the booth, even though he didn&Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&acirc;„&cent;t know of the scheme?<br />
a.	Accessory after the fact for C, because he had the intent and knew about the scheme.<br />
b.	No accessory after the fact for D ( was a two part question)<br />
3)	Julia is staying in a hotel as a guest. A &Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&Euml;œfederal&Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&acirc;„&cent; police officer determines that she is alleged to have participated in a bank robbery two weeks prior.  Without a warrant and without &Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&Euml;œrequired probable cause&Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&acirc;„&cent; the officer uses the master key from the manager of the Hotel to enter Julia&Atilde;&cent;&acirc;‚&not;&acirc;„&cent;s room, where he finds nothing except a diary on the bed, which Officer reads and learns that it was in fact, according to the diary, Julia who committed the crime.  Question is whether this diary is admissible, or maybe whether her arrest based on the contents of the diary is permissible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lisa</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-283</link>
		<dc:creator>lisa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Jul 2006 03:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-283</guid>
		<description>The &quot;coat&quot; question stumped me too. I don&#039;t remember the answer choice I put, but I remember the way I ended up concluding my analysis. The coat belonged to Girl (the only function of the &quot;secretive gift&quot; facts were to make Girl unaware the coat belonged to her, not to induce you to worry about whether the coat belonged to Girl); Girl could not be guilty of any property crime in relation to her own coat; Girl&#039;s friend could similarly not be guilty of any crime in relation to the coat, because she had the coat&#039;s owner&#039;s permission (therefore no wrongful taking, or trespass, or however you want to put it occured).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;coat&#8221; question stumped me too. I don&#8217;t remember the answer choice I put, but I remember the way I ended up concluding my analysis. The coat belonged to Girl (the only function of the &#8220;secretive gift&#8221; facts were to make Girl unaware the coat belonged to her, not to induce you to worry about whether the coat belonged to Girl); Girl could not be guilty of any property crime in relation to her own coat; Girl&#8217;s friend could similarly not be guilty of any crime in relation to the coat, because she had the coat&#8217;s owner&#8217;s permission (therefore no wrongful taking, or trespass, or however you want to put it occured).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Was it a Gift Yet?</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-282</link>
		<dc:creator>Was it a Gift Yet?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Jul 2006 02:50:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-282</guid>
		<description>The MBE was hard as HELLLL.  

As for the coat question, I recall that the boyfriend had given her a note that said &quot;look in the closet for your gift.&quot;  Which she did not read, thus the gift had not been &quot;accepted&quot; at the time she solicited her friend to steal the coat (i.e. it was still the boyfriend&#039;s coat).  However, the freind actually took the coat, thus the solicitation merged with the actual crime of larceny.  Therefore, she was guilty of conspiracy and larceny (at least that was my reasoning) On the other hand, was the note a constructive delivery with acceptance presumed?  In that case it was her coat, and she could not be guilty of stealing her own coat? but as you may recall there was no answer choice that said she was guilty of no crime.  Confused the hell out of me, like most the the questions on the afternoon exam.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <span class="caps">MBE </span>was hard as <span class="caps">HELLLL.  </span></p>
<p>As for the coat question, I recall that the boyfriend had given her a note that said &#8220;look in the closet for your gift.&#8221;  Which she did not read, thus the gift had not been &#8220;accepted&#8221; at the time she solicited her friend to steal the coat (i.e. it was still the boyfriend&#8217;s coat).  However, the freind actually took the coat, thus the solicitation merged with the actual crime of larceny.  Therefore, she was guilty of conspiracy and larceny (at least that was my reasoning) On the other hand, was the note a constructive delivery with acceptance presumed?  In that case it was her coat, and she could not be guilty of stealing her own coat? but as you may recall there was no answer choice that said she was guilty of no crime.  Confused the hell out of me, like most the the questions on the afternoon exam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cinnamon</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-280</link>
		<dc:creator>Cinnamon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Jul 2006 07:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-280</guid>
		<description>Congrats, Ambimb!!!  I was an early reader of your law school tribulations (and how they sometimes mirrored my own).  I slaved an entire extra day with the Cal Bar Exam after being reamed on the MBE. It actually made the essays on Day 3 seem so &quot;straightforward!&quot;

One question: Can you actually conspire to steal your own coat?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congrats, Ambimb!!!  I was an early reader of your law school tribulations (and how they sometimes mirrored my own).  I slaved an entire extra day with the Cal Bar Exam after being reamed on the <span class="caps">MBE.</span> It actually made the essays on Day 3 seem so &#8220;straightforward!&#8221;</p>
<p>One question: Can you actually conspire to steal your own coat?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: She says</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-279</link>
		<dc:creator>She says</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 03:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-279</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve passed through to the other side -- and there&#039;s light!  

Congrats on surviving... because we all know that the bar is not-so-much a competence exam as it is a hazing ritual.

Yay, it&#039;s over!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve passed through to the other side &#8212; and there&#8217;s light!  </p>
<p>Congrats on surviving&#8230; because we all know that the bar is not-so-much a competence exam as it is a hazing ritual.</p>
<p>Yay, it&#8217;s over!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amicus</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-278</link>
		<dc:creator>Amicus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:55:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-278</guid>
		<description>Yeah, that was no fun at all.  There were more than a few questions where all four answers seemed entirely plausible.  Worse yet, there a few where I tried to guess the answer before reading the answer choices, only to discover my answer was MIA.  Good times, that.  My dry account of the entire Utah bar is here: http://usdlaw.blogspot.com/2006/07/das-bar.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, that was no fun at all.  There were more than a few questions where all four answers seemed entirely plausible.  Worse yet, there a few where I tried to guess the answer before reading the answer choices, only to discover my answer was <span class="caps">MIA. </span> Good times, that.  My dry account of the entire Utah bar is here: <a href="http://usdlaw.blogspot.com/2006/07/das-bar.html" rel="nofollow">http://usdlaw.blogspot.com/2006/07/das-bar.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: washburn</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-277</link>
		<dc:creator>washburn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:38:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-277</guid>
		<description>Congratulations.  I&#039;m sure The Exam got the worse of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations.  I&#8217;m sure The Exam got the worse of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-276</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2006 20:41:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-276</guid>
		<description>Yep. Comfortably Numb is a Pink Floyd song.  Hey I gotta compensate since I didn&#039;t know squat on my MBE. Im just saying. ;)

I passed anyway.  Good times.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep. Comfortably Numb is a Pink Floyd song.  Hey I gotta compensate since I didn&#8217;t know squat on my <span class="caps">MBE.</span> Im just saying. ;)</p>
<p>I passed anyway.  Good times.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-275</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:41:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-275</guid>
		<description>Good job man. That was a very miserable three days indeed. Still in Missoula?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good job man. That was a very miserable three days indeed. Still in Missoula?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beanie</title>
		<link>http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/comment-page-1/#comment-274</link>
		<dc:creator>Beanie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theimbroglio.com/2006/07/26/comfortably-numb/#comment-274</guid>
		<description>Wow, so glad to see you made it through alive too...also glad to hear that I wasn&#039;t in some sort of catatonic state yesterday during the MBE, it was like that for everyone.  Enjoy your freedom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, so glad to see you made it through alive too&#8230;also glad to hear that I wasn&#8217;t in some sort of catatonic state yesterday during the <span class="caps">MBE, </span>it was like that for everyone.  Enjoy your freedom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
