ILNews

PBS to show terrorism simulation documentary

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A documentary of a simulated terrorist attack that took place at Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis in October will premiere on Indianapolis PBS affiliate WFYI, Channel 20, Jan. 21 at 7:30 p.m. There will also be a private reception and screening of the film Jan. 20.

"Tough Decisions: Defending the Homeland" will offer an inside look at the Oct. 23 simulation that engaged approximately 50 students of the law school and the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis.

Students were in separate rooms that represented various locales, including Indianapolis, Washington, D.C., and Tel Aviv. Participants were told what their roles would be in the simulation ahead of time and were given time for outside research on what someone in their role could or would do, including what they had learned in professor Shawn Boyne's comparative national security law course.

Boyne, along with other experts and professors, helped coordinate the event and was on hand as the students dealt with an "attack" on Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis. Part of the simulation was that the stadium was a gathering place for a national conference of high school students who belonged to Future Farmers of America. There was an actual FFA national conference in Indianapolis the weekend of the simulation, but no actual terror attack.

Among the issues students addressed were the legal implications of their decisions, what would happen if there were problems with technology for communications, and other questions someone in their position would have to answer in a real terrorism situation.

The documentary was filmed by students from professor Michael R. Maitzen's video production class in IUPUI's School of Liberal Arts, and a professional documentary team from WFYI Productions.

Indiana Lawyer reported on the event in the Nov. 11-24, 2009, edition, "Students simulate attacks."

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT