Art History Mystery, Part 2

figure-2In the previous post, I detailed how the figure to the left of Moses must be Sir William Blackstone. I had thought that the figure to the right of Moses was King Solomon. The iconography of the throne, crown, royal purple, and scales all point to Solomon. However, this figure is beardless, and artists have traditionally depicted Solomon as a bearded, often old, king (see, e.g., a ninth-century German illuminated Bible, and Renaissance depictions such as the panel of Solomon meeting the Queen of Sheba panel from Ghiberti’s famed “Golden Doors” of the Florentine Baptistry, and also the fresco by Piero della Fransceca in Arezzo). On the other hand, artists from later centuries did portray the famous ruler as clean-shaven (see, e.g., this 18th-century Russian icon, and an engraving by the 19th-century master Gustav Doré).

However, noticeably absent from the stained glass was any iconography of a sword (cf. ‘splitting the baby’ from 1 Kings 3:16-28). A fellow law student held that the figure was really King David.

One authority, though, holds that the figure is neither David nor Solomon. During his spring 2008 visit to the law school, Judge Pryor of the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, who had identified Blackstone, offered Lady Justice as the likely candidate. This would account for the beardlessness, and the classic imagery of the scales is present. However, absent are the iconic sword and blindfold, and Lady Justice usually is not crowned. It’s a tough call. I welcome feedback to solve this art history mystery….

Continue ReadingArt History Mystery, Part 2

Art History Mystery, Part 1

blackstoneAs I have always loved stained glass windows, one of my favorite locations in the law school is Eisenberg Hall. However, the trio of figures in the north set of windows bear no label, so I was curious about their exact identity. The center figure holding the stone tablets of the Law is of course Moses. Following this Biblical theme of lawgivers, I surmised that the figure to the right (as one looks at Moses) seated on the throne was King Solomon (more on the next blog post).  I also guessed that the figure to the left, in the judicial wig, was likely the 18th century jurist Sir William Blackstone. I also considered Sir Isaac Newton, as some images of Newton depict him with the typical 18th-century long wig and cravat (see e.g., the 1-pound note from the Bank of England). However, in these depictions, Netwon lacks the black robes that the figure in the stained glass wears. And while he divined the Laws of Nature, Newton would not be the most obvious choice for a law school library reading room (unless perhaps the artists were commenting drolly on the gravity of legal tomes).

As stained glass was the Scripture for the (often illiterate) medieval masses, I wanted to know for certain who the two figures flanking Moses were. Accordingly, within the first few weeks of Law School (September 11, 2007, to be exact), at an evening social in Eisenberg, I asked Dean Kearney, and he enjoined me with the task to find out.

Continue ReadingArt History Mystery, Part 1

Seventh Circuit Criminal Case of the Week

seventh-circuit1With only one new opinion in a criminal case, there’s not much to choose from.  Unfortunately, United States v. Sainz-Preciado (No. 07-3706) was a fairly routine case that broke no new legal ground.  In its opinion, the Seventh Circuit (per Judge Tinder) affirmed the defendant’s 262-month sentence for cocaine trafficking over various objections to the way the guidelines sentence was calculated and imposed.

One aspect of the case merits at least brief comment.  The defendant was awarded only a two-point, not the possible three-point, reduction in offense level under the sentencing guidelines for “acceptance of responsibility.”  The third point requires a motion from the government, and the government did not make such a motion for Sainz-Preciado.  Normally, defendants who enter a timely guilty plea, as Sainz-Preciadio did, receive the full acceptance benefit.  However, Sainz-Preciado was penalized by the government for contesting his responsibility at the sentencing hearing for drug deals that he was not even charged with.  This is a nice reminder for defense counsel of the perils of challenging “relevant conduct” at sentencing — and, to invoke one of Justice Scalia’s favorite themes, of the extent to which the guidelines system has replaced the common-law values of adversarial testing of evidence with the bureaucratic values of efficient case-processing.

Continue ReadingSeventh Circuit Criminal Case of the Week