WIDENER UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

IN THE MATTER OF

Professor Lawrence J. Connell

AFFIDAVIT OF DANIELLE OPPENHEIM

State of Delaware
SS
County of New Castle

I, Daniclle Oppenheim. having been duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows.

t. This affidavit is based upon my personal knowledge. 1 am competent to testify.

2. I am currently a fulltime student at the Widener University School of Law in

Wilmington, Delaware.

3. I have been at Widener University School of Law since August 0[2009, when I

started my law school education.

4. I have accumulated, over that time, fort y-five (45) credit hours towards my degree

and have seen multiple classroom dynamics from multiple Widener Law professors.

5. I have read the entire 39-page First Affidavit of Lawrence J. Connell (hereinafter

"LC's Affidavit").

Witness Interviews of November 22. 2010

6. I was one of the students interviewed on November 22, 2010 by Assistant Dean

Kelly.

7. The interview took place in Kelly' s office in the dean suite at 10:30am.

8. November 22. 2010 was a Monday and I was called the weekend prior on my cell

phone to schedule the interview. Before the end of the phone conversation. I was
 asked to keep the conversation and the impending meeting confidential. I was not to

repeat any of this to anyone.

9. On Monday morning I met with Kelly and he asked me to tell him about Connell and

his class. I told him that I really enjoyed Connell as a professor and that I also really

enjoyed the Criminal Procedure class that I was in. I asked him ifhe could tell me

what he was looking for so that we could just address that issue. He told me that there

had been complaints about Connell and allegations about him being racist and sexist.

10. I quickly told him that I thought these allegations were false and completely

ridiculous. I told him that I purposefully took Connell for a second semester in a row

because of how much I learned from him and enjoyed him the previous semester in

Criminal Law.

11.1 told him that throughout almost two full semesters of Connell, I had yet to feel

discriminated against because of my gender or difference of opinion. I never once felt

that he was racist or sexist or that he brought up the sex or race of defendants or

victims based on improper reasons.

12. I told Kelly that I felt !hat the students who complained about Connell either had too

much time on their hands or were so na'ive that their opinions should not hold much

weight.

13. Professor Connell teaches courses that make sense, they are relatable. He teaches us

about the real world and not from some philosophical point of view. I also told Kelly

that. 1 appreciated Connell's real world views as they demonstrate what we will face

when we are set loose on the legal community.

14. I told Kelly that the people who brought these complaints need to grow up and deal

with people they don't like in a professional manner. The complainants need to learn

2
 that just because you may not agree with a professor on how they teach or even what

they teach, this doesn't mean that the professor needs to get into trouble.

15. During the meeting with Kelly I even indicated that there was a female student in my

Criminal Procedure class, who Connell loved to call on. He actually told her in the

beginning of the semester that she was incredibly smart and must really like criminal

law because she had great insight. Without identifying this student, the student is a

female with, what I perceive to be a Hispanic or Latina ethnicity. He would always

call on her in class and would treat her with respect, whether she agreed with him or

not.

16. I told Kelly that the complainants must have just disliked Connell and so they saw

evil in everything that he said or did. But the reality of the situation was that Connell

is a great professor and I would take him again iff could for Criminal Procedure II.

17. At the end of this meeting Kelly told me that he was happy to hear a different

perspective about Connell. He then reminded me to keep this meeting confidential.

18. Despite being asked to keep this meeting confidential, 1 told Samuel Elbardissi. a

fellow student, about the meeting before I met with Kelly and then I also talked to

him about it after the meeting.

Criminal Law Spring 2010

19. In the spring of201O, I was enrolled in Professor Lawrence Connell's Criminal Law

class.

20. Regarding paragraph 16 ofLC's Affidavit, our class discussed the Apprendi case.

Connell discussed with us the different sentencing guidelines that were available to

the judge in this case. The judge was pennitted to sentence defendant to a certain

amount of years in prison or if the judge found that defendant had racial malice in

3
 committing the crime, an additional amount of years could be added to the sentence.

21. Regarding paragraph 15 of LC' s Affidavit, 1 was in class that day. I have no

recollection of the alleged statement ever being made.

22. Connell was simply telling us that using race as a basis for your crime extended your

sentence. He neither agreed nor disagreed with the possibility of time added to a

sentence.

23. Regarding paragraphs 23-32 in LC ' s Affidavit, our class did discuss the Goetz case.

Our text book did not include the races of any of the parties but Connell did include

that in his examination ofthe case. We used this case to talk about a reasonable

person standard in the context of self-defense and whether we were supposed to think

about an ordinary reasonable person or a reasonable person with Goetz's background.

His background included multiple muggings which caused him to be fearful of other

people. Goetz was not convicted of any of the attempted murders that he was charged

with, only the illegal possession of a firearm.

24. If we think about this case happening today, I would question how the jury could find

Goetz not guilty regarding these crimes. But then we were reminded to think about

when and where the incident actually happened. As I was not alive when this case

was before the courts, it was helpful to have Connell illustrate what was happening in

New York City at the time. He did slate that the crime rates were extremely high at

those times and that black youths were seen as being highly involved with this

mcrease.

25. At no point did Connell make any statement about black youths being bad people or

that they are always the ones who committed these crimes, simply that at that time in

history, this was the perception. This allowed us to get into the minds of the jury that

4
 acquitted Goelz on most of the charges that were brought before him.

26. It would not be reasonable for anyone, without a prior bias against Connell or a prior

bias about the mention of race, to take anything that Connell said to be racist or

offensive. He was simply giving a history lesson so we could understand the

background of this case and try to understand what the jury was thinking.

27. To be frank, the fact that the complainant regarding this statement feels that race is

irrelevant is naive. Unfortunately, race is a factor when discussing criminal matters.

Connell has even expressed this view~ that race is an unfortunate clement that needs

to be considered when talking about crime. As long as there arc people who arc

prejudiced against other races or people that continually complain that others are

racist, race will always be a factor.

28. Although I was in class that day, I was not involved in the discussion held after class.

29. Regarding paragraph 33 of LC' s Affidavit, Connell did use the word folks. He has

used Ihis word with the all types of classifications of people. I have heard him many

times say white folks, black folks, innocent folks, guilty folks, stupid folks, rich folks,

poor folks and many others. The complainant that was offended by the phrase "black

folks" must have a bias against Connell that began well before he made this

statement. If he is found to be racist for using this phrase then he must also be found

to discriminate against white people, rich people, poor people, stupid people, etc.

Except that this argument makes absolutely no sense. While I have no knowledge

about the identity ofthe complainant, it seems to me that either they paid no attention

to Connell all semester and missed his reference to all other types of people as folks,

or they decided to only care about when he used the word folks with word black.

30. This allegation itself must show the complainant's own prejudice against Connell as

5
 well as their targeted effort to attack Connell.

31. Regarding paragraph 34 from LC's Affidavit, I do remember Connell using this

phrase in relation to the adultery provocation in homicide but I have no recollection

of him ever using this phrase in regards to a particular student, even through a

hYPOlhclical.

32. In class we were (alking about the adultery provocation, when it can be claimed and

when it would be inappropriate. Connell was giving hypothetical situations about a

man coming home, seeing his wife in bed with another man and then right away

grabbing his gun and screaming "die, bitch," before he shoots her. He distinguished

this hypothetical from one where the man comes home and sees his wife in bed with

another man hut instead of grabbing the gun right away, he has to go find something

to kill her with, which takes a few minutes, and then comes back up and kills her. The

time lapse was the main issue here, the "die, bitch," was more to keep the class's

attention and to give us a hook to remember this hypothetical for finals.

33. Regarding paragraph 42 in LC' s Affidavit, I was in class when Connell used Dean

Ammons as a hypothetical. I remember that he used her in multiple hypotheticals

about attempted crimes, the issue of impossibility and how far along in the crime do

you have to he in order to be charged with an attempted crime. Connell used the

hypotheticals about the pumpkins and Dick Tracey many times.

34. Connell would use the dean, the ridiculous pumpkins and Dick Tracey to get us to

understand the subtle differences in the issues he was teaching us and also to give us a

hook so that we would remember these differences for the final.

35. At no point did Connell ever say that he actually wanted to shoot the dean, that he

wanted us to shoot the dean or that it would be good for the school that she was shot.

6
 The fact that she is the dean and known by all students. if only by name and position.

was the only reason that she was used in these hypotheticals. She was not targeted

because she is a woman or because she is black. Neither her sex nor race were ever

mentioned in these hypotheticals nor were they ever pointed out as a factor or

material fact for the attempted crime.

36. Because Connell used the dean in his hypotheticals, I could quickly remember where

along the line of committing the crime one would need to be in order to be legally

attempting the crime. These hypotheticals were extremely useful when I was studying

for Connell's final and when I was actually taking the final.

37. Regarding paragraph 57 in LC' s Affidavit. where he mentions the allegation that he

uses "intimidating tactics to discourage other points of view particularly from

women." is completely false and the complainant of this allegation must have a prior

bias against Connell.

38. I am a female student and never once did I feel intimidated by anything that Connell

did and I especially didn' t feel anything negative from Connell regarding my gender.

Connell has a strong personality and sometimes if anyone, regardless of race or sex,

would bring up a point that he didn't agree with or that was completely off the mark.

he may cut them off from their five minute rant, but he would not discriminate who

he did this to. He did not care who made these remarks, just whether there was

anything to be gained from the comments in class or whether they were a waste of

class time. This is not a tactic solely employed by Connell and I have many

professors who will cut-off a student who just feels like talking in class without

having something worthwhile to say.

39. Regarding paragraph 59 in LC's Affidavit,. have no recollection of Connell ever

7
 saying this in class. Despite these allegations, I have no recollection of Connell ever

saying anything in class about his opinion of black people or poor people. He may

have made a statement about the disproportionate numbers of black people and poor

people being arrested or in jail but at no point did he say that this was because those

people actually committed those crimes. He also never made any statement that black

andlor poor people deserved to be in jail more than other people. These allegations

are simply untrue.

40. Regarding paragraph 62 of LC's Affidavit, these allegations arc untrue. He never

made any racist or sexist comments in the classroom. Ifhe ever said anything racist or

sexist it was only to quote what a defendant said regarding the case or background

infonnation regarding the case. There are racist and sexist people that ~ere referred to

in our textbook and Connell cannot just skip those cases, notes after the cases,

footnotes or articles just because they may offend someone. These were not his

opinions, they were part of the literature we needed to understand to fully grasp the

point of taking a Criminal Law class.

41. Regarding paragraph 63 if LC's Affidavit, I agree in part and disagree in part with

this allegation. Connell did use profanity in class but I disagree and find it completely

outrageous that someone would find this to be offensive.

42. Profanity is part of the English language and happens to be quoted in many of the

cases that were in our textbook. These allegations came from a Criminal Law class,

not a Civil Procedure or Contracts class. In Criminal Law, there is more ofa real-

world feel than you have in Civil Procedure or Contracts. What I mean by that is, in

Criminal Law you read cases about heinous crimes and the people that were accused

of committing those crimes. Using profanity is one way to get the class to really pay

8
 attention to something that is important or to make us see the gravity of whatever

subject is coming up. Also, he is not the only professor to use profanity and by no

means did he use it more than my other professors.

43. Regarding paragraph 66 of LC' s Affidavit, I find this allegation to be laughable. This

allegation is a stretch and simply shows how badly the complainant is grasping at

anything in order to target Conncll.

44. Regarding paragraph 67 of LC' s Affidavit, this is not even an allegation against

Connell. The complainant does not state that Connell actually made this statement or

that this is his opinion, rather that this is what they understand when he uses the

phrase 'black folks.' It would actually be more reasonable to turn this around on the

complainant because many times our inferences from what other people say, indicate

more about our own prejudices than the speaker' s.

45. Regarding paragraph 73 of LC's Affidavit, I remember talking about statutory rape

and whether knowledge on the part of defendant is necessary. I have no recollection

of Connell ever saying "dirty little whore" regarding this topic. I would venture to

guess that this is completely fabricated as Connell has never indicated that it was the

child's fault that they were the victim of statutory rape. Even where the child lied and

told defendant that they were of legal age, he still maintained that defendant was

criminally liable here.

Criminal Procedure Section 8 Fall2010

46. In the fall semester 201 0, I was not enrolled Connell's Criminal Procedure Section B

class; however, I was in section A of this same class.

47. As a second year student, we are permitted to pick our classes and therefore have

some say in who our teachers are.

9
 48. I mi ssed a coupl e of Crimin al Procedure classes th at semester but durin g the classes

that I was prescnt, I nevcr once heard Connell say anything thaI wo uld intimidat e me,

that wou ld stop me from presenting my opinion to the class ifit differed from hi s, that

mad e me feel di scriminat ed against for my gender or that hit me as a racist comment.

49. Regardin g part 4 of paragraph 72 ofl C's Affidavit , I rememb er th at he al so used

Dean AmJllons as:1 hypotheti ca l when d iscuss ing search wan·ants and contidentinl

info rm ant s. He used her in an example thnt den lt with a confi dential info nnant telling

people that Ammon s had drugs in her desk and whether th at was enough for a seareh

warrant. He then add ed to thi s ex ampl e by sayin g that th e confidential informant

co uld tell you where in her desk the drugs were, whi ch drugs the dean was in

possession of and how she so ld those drugs. In no way d id he tell us that thi s was

actua ll y happeni ng or th at we were to infer that it was marc lik ely that thi s was true

becau se she was black o r that she was a woman. He just wanted us to pay att enti o n to

his hypotheti ca ls and for us to have 11 menta l pi cture so that we could eas ily

""iQ'(j21
remember th e di stincti on he was tryin g to makc. Again th ese mental pictures helpcd

m, " "Omem ,,- ",m'm. ,"". e:""~

Dalliell e Oppenh eim

SWORN TO AN D SUBSCRI BE D belo re Ille on the _ _ 'f\..,

-=,--~",~
_____ day of
-Mtty; 20 I I.

~~~~ ---"~----=~=.=~=:';'-C-O~
<'='ld:"--:I;O~~
'" 'CI". ~7i9-~1~r
""
THOMAS S. NEUBERGER, ESO.
NOTARIAL OFFICER
STATE OF DELAWARE
29 DEL. C. SEC. 4323(A) (3)
L - - - ----.
10
 , "

, ' "

. . .;
, '

"

.
'

..... . ....

",
,
'" "
•\

• I . • ' :~ •

.oa3 .F8ClR38U3~~ .2 2AI-'OP~ I

)=t301"O J,,\IRI\TOlti' .,
'r' :.I~'NAJ30~03TAT2
1.IIA,m~ , o~e ,0 ,J30 !lS
_.J