1L grade waiting thread Forum

[kaiser]

EDIT: Everything just changed completely. I was half-sulking a minute ago. My freakin section's curve was so weird that my supposed top 25% is EXACTLY the top 10% cutoff GPA. I'm amazed, confused, and ecstatic right now.

[Cupidity]

10% = 3.72
<-- = 3.70

Oh well.

Do you guys preselect where the differential will make a substantive difference?

That is an interesting question that I do not know the answer to. They only created the cutoffs this year (used to be top 50%, 10% #5) so I can't imagine they'd retool OCI.

[Cupidity]

EDIT: Everything just changed completely. I was half-sulking a minute ago. My freakin section's curve was so weird that my supposed top 25% is EXACTLY the top 10% cutoff GPA. I'm amazed, confused, and ecstatic right now.

Haha, and my 3.7 didn't. Screw you section B.

[09042014]

My crim law exam had attempted statutory rape via complicity. It was mother fucking nested mens rea analysis.

Mens rea as to what?

I only learned crim for about 3 days before I forgot it again. But the tricky part was combining the loose mens rea for statory rape (ie usually none) with the mens rea for attempt and complicity.

So you had to basically do mens rea as to conduct and circumstance. And for complicity there are differing standards.

[starchinkilt]

My crim exam was based on this

[Cupidity]

My crim exam was based on this

Mine was harry potter. I'll trade you.

[kaiser]

EDIT: Everything just changed completely. I was half-sulking a minute ago. My freakin section's curve was so weird that my supposed top 25% is EXACTLY the top 10% cutoff GPA. I'm amazed, confused, and ecstatic right now.

Haha, and my 3.7 didn't. Screw you section B.

I have no clue how my section's curve was that different from the other 2

[bjsesq]

A bunch of people traveling towards a certain intersection after having committed variouos forms of crimes or assisting in them, one of the vehicles has kidnapped baby, BOOM massive car accident. Baby dies. Have fun sorting the shit out.

[D-hops]

10% = 3.72
<-- = 3.70

Oh well.

Do you guys preselect where the differential will make a substantive difference?

That is an interesting question that I do not know the answer to. They only created the cutoffs this year (used to be top 50%, 10% #5) so I can't imagine they'd retool OCI.

Well, even if it does you can probably meet with the employers at Lavender Law (if you are going).

[jsarna1]

Still no grades. Getting REALLY mad, especially since today is supposed to be the deadline and they pushed it back to next week.

Our grade deadline isn't until the 21st, but every other section has at least one grade back. It's also been 73 days since the brief was turned in and no LRW grade.

I'm in section 2 and I don't have any grades yet.

[Cupidity]

10% = 3.72
<-- = 3.70

Oh well.

Do you guys preselect where the differential will make a substantive difference?

That is an interesting question that I do not know the answer to. They only created the cutoffs this year (used to be top 50%, 10% #5) so I can't imagine they'd retool OCI.

Well, even if it does you can probably meet with the employers at Lavender Law (if you are going).

Been considering it, you think its worth it?

[D-hops]

Been considering it, you think its worth it?

Depends, I am going because NU reimburses us for registration and I can get a plane ticket for free. The hotel is still expensive though. That being said, I've heard a lot of people getting additional interviews from the career fair there.

[D-hops]

lol, DF, I saw that

[09042014]

lol, DF, I saw that

How many do I have to suck to get a free plane ticket?

Under three is probably a fair trade.

[D-hops]

lol, DF, I saw that

How many do I have to suck to get a free plane ticket?

Under three is probably a fair trade.

I'm getting mine through frequent flyer miles. But really you just need to date someone who works for an airline and get on their buddy pass.

[bjsesq]

lol, DF, I saw that

How many do I have to suck to get a free plane ticket?

Under three is probably a fair trade.

I'm getting mine through frequent flyer miles. But really you just need to date someone who works for an airline and get on their buddy pass.

Who's the hangar and who's the 747?

[09042014]

lol, DF, I saw that

How many do I have to suck to get a free plane ticket?

Under three is probably a fair trade.

I'm getting mine through frequent flyer miles. But really you just need to date someone who works for an airline and get on their buddy pass.

I'm not pretty enough to get a stewardess gay.

Maybe a baggage haler gay?

[quakeroats]

My crim law exam had attempted statutory rape via complicity. It was mother fucking nested mens rea analysis.

Mens rea as to what?

I only learned crim for about 3 days before I forgot it again. But the tricky part was combining the loose mens rea for statory rape (ie usually none) with the mens rea for attempt and complicity.

So you had to basically do mens rea as to conduct and circumstance. And for complicity there are differing standards.

The reason I ask is that statutory rape generally has no MR as to the only thing that usually matters (age). Attempted statutory rape with no MR as to age is usually fine, but taking an inchoate crime with no MR that matters (i.e., the crime is attempting to to have sex with a person with purpose only as to the sex not the age) and trying to broaden the net even further to an accomplice is probably going to be a bridge too far. Accomplices have to have intent, but whether they have to have intent as to the age of the victim is the question here. The MPC leaves this to judicial resolution, for good reason. Complicity for inchoate offenses strains our notions of justice, but it's allowed in theory. Complicity (which requires purpose) for an inchoate offense that by definition doesn't have MR where it matters is beyond the pale. Any prosecutor who walks into court with this turd runs the risk of being laughed at. This is only slightly less problematic than trying to find someone guilty as an accomplice to an attempted felony murder.

[goodolgil]

My crim law exam had attempted statutory rape via complicity. It was mother fucking nested mens rea analysis.

Mens rea as to what?

I only learned crim for about 3 days before I forgot it again. But the tricky part was combining the loose mens rea for statory rape (ie usually none) with the mens rea for attempt and complicity.

So you had to basically do mens rea as to conduct and circumstance. And for complicity there are differing standards.

The reason I ask is that statutory rape generally has no MR as to the only thing that usually matters (age). Attempted statutory rape with no MR as to age is usually fine, but taking an inchoate crime with no MR that matters (i.e., the crime is attempting to to have sex with a person with purpose only as to the sex not the age) and trying to broaden the net even further to an accomplice is probably going to be a bridge too far. Accomplices have to have intent, but whether they have to have intent as to the age of the victim is the question here. The MPC leaves this to judicial resolution, for good reason. Complicity for inchoate offenses strains our notions of justice, but it's allowed in theory. Complicity (which requires purpose) for an inchoate offense that by definition doesn't have MR where it matters is beyond the pale. Any prosecutor who walks into court with this turd runs the risk of being laughed at. This is only slightly less problematic than trying to find someone guilty as an accomplice to an attempted felony murder.

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

[D-hops]

lol, DF, I saw that

How many do I have to suck to get a free plane ticket?

Under three is probably a fair trade.

I'm getting mine through frequent flyer miles. But really you just need to date someone who works for an airline and get on their buddy pass.

I'm not pretty enough to get a stewardess gay.

Maybe a baggage haler gay?

Yeah, not sure that is going to work either. You don't really fit into a stereotype yet. Need more hair and either more or less weight. You are in the twilight zone right now.

[bjsesq]

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

He stops talking about law school sometimes. He never stops trying to prove how smart he is.

[D-hops]

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

He stops talking about law school sometimes. He never stops trying to prove how smart he is.

LTK alt?

[bjsesq]

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

He stops talking about law school sometimes. He never stops trying to prove how smart he is.

LTK alt?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Touche, man.

[quakeroats]

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

He stops talking about law school sometimes. He never stops trying to prove how smart he is.

I don't post a lot on law--as opposed to law school. Mostly I just try to keep things interesting.

[pleasetryagain]

You must be that guy in law school who is always talking about law/law school no matter what the situation is. I have met many of your kindred spirits.

He stops talking about law school sometimes. He never stops trying to prove how smart he is.

I don't post a lot on law--as opposed to law school. Mostly I just try to keep things interesting.

you have failed at keeping things interesting.