The Goodson Blogson

This guest post was written by Marguerite Most , Reference Librarian and Senior Lecturing Fellow. "Men think 'tis a disgrace to change their mind… But there is not a greater piece of folly than not to give place to right reason." Samuel Sewall, January 1689. Source: Salem Witch Judge: The Life and Repentance of Samuel Sewall , a 2007 biography about Sewall in the Goodson Law Library collection. Scholars of colonial history will know the name Samuel Sewall . He was one of nine judges who presided over the 1692 witchcraft trials in Salem, and the only one to publicly acknowledge and accept blame for the harm and horror of the trials. Sewall is almost as well-known as the author of the first abolitionist tract in colonial America. Portrait of Samuel Sewall by Nathaniel Emmons (1728). Massachusetts Historical Society . In May 1692, Samuel Sewall was appointed by Massachusetts Governor William Phips to sit on the Court of Oyer and Terminer, a court created specific

This guest post was written by Marguerite Most , Reference Librarian and Senior Lecturing Fellow. People were accused and executed for witchcraft throughout the colonies during the seventeenth century, but especially in Massachusetts. Today dressing in a witch's costume on Halloween is a way to make merry. But in the 17th-century Massachusetts Bay Colony, Puritans, who followed strict religious rules in their daily lives, lived in a pre-science era. Witches were real, and their doings explained what could not be otherwise explained. In the years preceding the Salem witchcraft trials Puritans ministers warned from the pulpit about demonic possessions and visits from Satan. Everyday reality mingled with an invisible world inhabited by these spirits, and religious values permeated every aspect of society. Satan was said to appear as a “black rogue,” or an Indian or an animal called a witch's familiar. For the Puritans, the devil and his witches affected the world in very serio

When the U.S. Congress needs a closer look at how federal funds are being spent, it calls upon the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) . Formerly known as the General Accounting Office from its creation in 1921 until its current name change in 2004, this non-partisan investigative office is nicknamed "the congressional watchdog" for its auditing responsibilities over federal agencies and programs. GAO investigations usually result in either congressional testimony or the publication of reports (or both). These reports are available online back to the agency's inception in the early 1920s, and are still commonly known as "blue books" after their former appearance in print, although they are now available only electronically. Reports & Testimony can be browsed or searched at the GAO website. The Advanced Search is recommended. U.S. GAO reports can only be updated at the request of a member of Congress, either through legislation or via a request

Students of evidence already know that hypnotism has a long history in our legal system (for example, a 1902 Yale Law Journal article explored " Legal Aspects of Hypnotism "). Hypnotically-refreshed testimony, highly controversial on the subject of its admissibility and reliability, has received the majority of scholarly attention over the years. But another, even older, twist on hypnotism and the law resurfaced this week – liability for harm to a hypnotist's subject . In an unusual case from Florida, a school board approved a $600,000 settlement agreement with the families of three high school students who died in 2011 after they were hypnotized by the school's former principal. During an investigation after the tragic suicide of the first student, the school discovered that then-Principal George Kenney had hypnotized as many as 75 students and staff members in the school, and also taught students self-hypnosis techniques as a method to improve concentration. (A

Monday, October 5 marks the start of the U.S. Supreme Court's October Term 2015. Since 1916, the " first Monday in October " has been the official kick-off of Supreme Court arguments for a particular term, as outlined in 28 U.S.C. § 2 . Although the last OT2014 opinions were handed down in late June, the Court doesn't exactly kick back for a lengthy summer vacation: justices have been hard at work behind the scenes this summer reviewing new petitions for certiorari . There are already forty cases on the docket for this term ( listed with brief descriptions at SCOTUSblog ); the Court continues to add new cases to the term, with thirteen petitions granted just today . The cases already scheduled for oral argument can be viewed at the Supreme Court's Argument Calendars page. First in line this year is OBB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs , concerning the definitions of "agent" of a "foreign state" under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. The SCOT