Survey says couples aren’t planning retirement details together, but SHOULD! Ban on affirmative action in Michigan struck down. Do NOT steal this book! Plus, the latest news.
DSK affair underscores ethical dilemma for prosecutors
The rape case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn hit a major snag last Friday. Prosecutors revealed flaws in the credibility of his accuser. The hotel maid is said to have lied on her immigration papers and about an earlier rape claim she’d made. The New York District Attorney's office said she also lied on her tax returns -- claiming to have more dependents than she truly does. And there are more imperfections and inconsistencies in the past and present of the accuser. But prosecutors say the charges against Strauss-Kahn still stand. In a sexual assault trial such as this, it can often be a case of "he said, she said" -- in the absence of clear evidence of what actually happened. A judge or jury must believe the word of the alleged victim. As one crime expert put it: "Her credibility is the entire case." So if the maid's character is in perilous doubt -- though it must be said DSK's credibility is nowhere near pristine -- should the case go forward? If a prosecution has a weak case, should a trial proceed on principle? The lead prosecutor of the Strauss-Kahn case said "We don't get paid by indictment. We don't get paid by convictions. We get paid to do the right thing." But if a trial costs hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, and a conviction is highly unlikely, does pursuing it still make sense?
Guest:
Laurie Levenson, Professor of Law, Loyola Law School; also William M. Rains Fellow and David W. Burcham Chair in Ethical Advocacy
Not enough couples talk finances – but they should!
A recent survey by Fidelity Investments reveals that less than half of all couples participate equally in planning for retirement. Just 41 percent of couples make investment decisions together; in the majority of families one spouse handles the finances. Further, less than twenty percent of couples say that either partner is prepared to assume responsibility of finances if need be. The trend is worrisome, say experts, especially since just 35 percent of wives – who are statistically more likely to survive their husbands -- say they have the confidence to manage money matters alone. How are retirement plans handled in your house? Do both you and your spouse know where critical documents are kept? Do you agree on savings goals, investment strategies, where – and when - you hope to retire? What are your plans and wishes should either of you become ill or incapacitated?
Guest:
Kathy Kristof, contributing editor with Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine and author of Investing 101
Ban on affirmative action in Michigan struck down
On Friday, a federal appeals court in Michigan struck down the state’s ban on the consideration of race and gender in college admissions. In a 2 -1 decision the court ruled that the ban, approved by voters in 2006, burdens minorities and violates the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. This ruling overturns a sweeping law that prohibited the University of Michigan and other public schools from taking race and gender into consideration when reviewing applications for acceptance into these institutions. Friday’s decision won't affect Arizona, California, Nebraska and Washington who have similar bans because the ruling is limited to states in the 6th Circuit, which includes Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee. Critics of the decision like Jennifer Gratz, a Michigan native who successfully sued the University of Michigan over racial preferences before the 2006 referendum, predicted Friday's decision eventually will be thrown out. Michigan pledged to appeal the court’s ruling.
Guests:
Erwin Chemerinsky, Founding Dean of the UCI Law School
John Eastman, Former Dean and Professor, Chapman University School of Law; Founding Director, Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Do NOT steal this book!
Have you ever shoplifted? If so, you’re one of approximately 27 million Americans who “boost” products from retail outlets every year. For such a rampant practice, it has traditionally been rejected by academia and the media as a legitimate topic of study and discussion. In The Steal: A Cultural History of Shoplifting, Rachel Shteir attempts to lend some weight to the issue and define the act of stealing as a reflection of our culture. She traces the evolution of shoplifting as it originated in Elizabethan England, was pathologized as kleptomania in nineteenth-century Paris and served as a symbolic act of protest in the 1960s. How has shoplifting become such a popular crime? What methods are being put in place to prevent theft? How are shoplifters punished? What is the ultimate cost to retailers and communities?
Guest
Rachel Shteir, author of The Steal: A Cultural History of Shoplifting; associate professor and the head of the BFA program in criticism and dramaturgy at the Theatre School at DePaul University