Two Things:

As I'm using lunch to furiously skim for Evidence class (and I take full responsibility for having to use lunch to read; I regularly succumb to the influence of my slight academic arrogance, which always says "Don't worry about that, you can do it tomorrow."), I noticed two wonderful things. First, in one of the examples in the book, the girl is named Noe I. Dentity. That's like straight off The Simpson's! Wonderful.

The second thing that amused me was when I misread a hypothetical in the chapter on character evidence. It actually says "Toby Wyatt: Adulterer or Rapist?"

I read it as: "Toby Wyatt: Adulterer or Baptist?"

Class Number 3: Evidence

So far, I'm not enjoying Evidence. The professor came off as rigid and nervously pretentious. It's like he's not really arrogant, but it's a coping mechanism for his nervousness. Instead of letting his self-consciousness show, he's overcompensating by acting pretentious. That's unfortunate. Maybe -- hopefully -- he'll get more comfortable with us and drop the act.

I do like the fact that he uses PowerPoint. He's the first professor I've had in law school who uses it, and I like it because it makes clear the things that he thinks are important. He displayed those points prominently on the PowerPoint slides, so he must consider those things important. It also works the other way around: PowerPoint makes the important things clear. The things that he considers to be important are clarified because we can read the words on a screen, so there's no misunderstanding his words. I suppose writing can be unclear just as speech can, but when speech is supported by written words, miscommunication is less likely.