The 2019 Temple Student Symposium will be held on March 20, 2019 from 4 to 5:30 p.m. in the Moot Court Room in Klein Hall, 1719 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa. 19122. The symposium will feature presentations by three members of both Temple Law Review and Temple International and Comparative Law Journal.
The following students will present on behalf of Temple Law Review:
Owen Healy, Research Editor
Group Liability and Riot Acts: Can a Non-Opponent Wield a Heckler’s Veto?
When protests turn violent, who is responsible? Can marchers keep marching knowing people around them are breaking windows, or must they walk away? Does your right to protest depend on the people around you? Two years ago, federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., tried to hold an entire city block responsible for the acts of a handful of vandals. They failed, but their year-and-a-half-long attempt still threatens to put a chill on protests in the capital and raises questions about free speech and assembly. Law-abiding protesters should not have their own voices silenced by the acts of others who only happen to be on the same street.
Peter Hyndman, Executive Editor
“Body Cameras Won’t Bring Justice” Why Pennsylvania’s Chapter 67A Does Not Promise Police Accountability
Pennsylvania’s Chapter 67A paved the way for the use of police body-worn cameras (BWCs) and created a public-disclosure process for BWC footage. The law was passed in 2017 in an effort to improve transparency and accountability in instances of police misconduct, but it misses the mark in two important ways. First, Chapter 67A actually restricts access to BWC footage as compared to Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law, which would otherwise apply. Second, Chapter 67A tries to solve a systemic problem with an evidentiary solution, which recent history and research show to be inadequate. Because of these shortcomings, Chapter 67A does not promise police transparency and accountability.
Alisha Kinlaw, Note/Comment Editor
A Snapshot of Justice: Carving Out a Space for Revenge Porn Victims Within the Criminal Justice System
Victims of revenge porn, intimate images or videos of a person shared without their consent, come from all genders, races, ages, and occupations. Tendencies to stereotype victims disadvantage traditionally marginalized groups and establish power dynamics against victims that undermine their value and autonomy. Victim blaming is particularly common. Society must deconstruct preconceptions of who is to be believed and put aside notions of an “ideal victim” in order to allow all to claim their victimhood.