No misconduct write up

[s0ph1e2007]

Can I be ruled to have committed a misconduct without having been written up for a misconduct?? Or do i have some leeway here to say that there is a violation of general LSAC due process?

[pppokerface]

What happened?

[James Bond]

ya seriously do tell!

[s0ph1e2007]

sorry, felt the need to get rid of the details probably paranoid lol but why not

[s0ph1e2007]

summary: I gave my music player to the proctor before the test ever was handed out.
proctor was like no worries you're good
someone complained that noise was caused by a phone (not me) but somehow I'm being investigated for bringing electronics into the room

[AverageTutoring]

summary: I gave my music player to the proctor before the test ever was handed out.
proctor was like no worries you're good
someone complained that noise was caused by a phone (not me) but somehow I'm being investigated for bringing electronics into the room

Proctor fucked up not you, you're good to go. I dont think you can expediate the investigation though. But you can certainly appeal the result if they dont rule in your favour.

[incompetentia]

Worst case scenario I believe is an appealable decision.

By the book though it's a thing...then again I'm no expert on things.

[MysticalWheel]

summary: I gave my music player to the proctor before the test ever was handed out.
proctor was like no worries you're good
someone complained that noise was caused by a phone (not me) but somehow I'm being investigated for bringing electronics into the room

My guess is that this will probably blow over, given what you've stated above.

MW

[s0ph1e2007]

You are my FAVORITE PEOPLE IN THE WHOLE WORLD!
Imagine a college girl crying and sitting up anxiously in her bed asking why why why this backfired to herself every night.

Honestly I'm just going to follow you around on the boards now predicting YHS for all of you
anybody want a peer recommendation? hahah jk

[James Bond]

Imagine a college girl crying and sitting up anxiously in her bed asking why why why this backfired to herself every night.

I mean...if you need "comforted"...

[s0ph1e2007]

Imagine a college girl crying and sitting up anxiously in her bed asking why why why this backfired to herself every night.

I mean...if you need "comforted"...

haha If this all works out I'll give you a TLS kiss... which is an emoticon haha

[James Bond]

Imagine a college girl crying and sitting up anxiously in her bed asking why why why this backfired to herself every night.

I mean...if you need "comforted"...

haha If this all works out I'll give you a TLS kiss... which is an emoticon haha

its the little things in life that matter

[KevinP]

Don't worry about it because LSAC screwed this up not you.

But that's what you get for retaking a 173

[lakers3peat]

you are going to get a letter in the mail informing you of your misconduct in 1-2 weeks.

you are likely not to get into any law schools.

nice to know ya. cya later.

[KevinP]

you are going to get a letter in the mail informing you of your misconduct in 1-2 weeks.

you are likely not to get into any law schools.

nice to know ya. cya later. I'm an idiot.

Fixed.

[MysticalWheel]

you are going to get a letter in the mail informing you of your misconduct in 1-2 weeks.

you are likely not to get into any law schools.

nice to know ya. cya later.

The bitch in me wanted to say that. Thanks.

MW

P.S. To the OP: For the record, it's BS. Like I said before, you should be fine.

[Jeffort]

Since the OP gutted the details I'm not positive about the circumstances so correct me if I'm wrong.

Here's what I got out of it:
OP brought a prohibited electronic item into the test room and got caught with it by a proctor and now the score is on hold due to a misconduct investigation.
OP wants to play lawyer and argue due process to shift blame to LSAC for the way the proctor handled it because a misconduct write up notice was not handed to her by the proctor in the test center.

Am I missing anything pertinent?

If that is accurate, tough luck OP. You broke the rules you knew about, got caught, and should suffer the consequences for doing so. Most of the ~60,000 people that took the October test walked into the test centers holding only their ziplock bags filled with allowed items. If you didn't obey that protocol, why should they cut you a break?

[AverageTutoring]

Since the OP gutted the details I'm not positive about the circumstances so correct me if I'm wrong.

Here's what I got out of it:
OP brought a prohibited electronic item into the test room and got caught with it by a proctor and now the score is on hold due to a misconduct investigation.
OP wants to play lawyer and argue due process to shift blame to LSAC for the way the proctor handled it because a misconduct write up notice was not handed to her by the proctor in the test center.

Am I missing anything pertinent?

If that is accurate, tough luck OP. You broke the rules you knew about, got caught, and should suffer the consequences for doing so. Most of the ~60,000 people that took the October test walked into the test centers holding only their ziplock bags filled with allowed items. If you didn't obey that protocol, why should they cut you a break?

Yes, yes you are missing something important. She was not "caught" with an item. She disclosed the item to the Proctor before the start of the exam, and the proctor was in possession of it during the exam.

She was neither "caught" nor found "in possession of" a prohibited device during the exam, and thus, will have no problem.

[WilliamDeWrites]

Since the OP gutted the details I'm not positive about the circumstances so correct me if I'm wrong.

Here's what I got out of it:
OP brought a prohibited electronic item into the test room and got caught with it by a proctor and now the score is on hold due to a misconduct investigation.
OP wants to play lawyer and argue due process to shift blame to LSAC for the way the proctor handled it because a misconduct write up notice was not handed to her by the proctor in the test center.

Am I missing anything pertinent?

If that is accurate, tough luck OP. You broke the rules you knew about, got caught, and should suffer the consequences for doing so. Most of the ~60,000 people that took the October test walked into the test centers holding only their ziplock bags filled with allowed items. If you didn't obey that protocol, why should they cut you a break?

Yes, yes you are missing something important. She was not "caught" with an item. She disclosed the item to the Proctor before the start of the exam, and the proctor was in possession of it during the exam.

She was neither "caught" nor found "in possession of" a prohibited device during the exam, and thus, will have no problem.

Merely having an electronic item in the testing room is a misconduct, I believe. Sorry OP. Hope nothing comes of it.

[CanadianWolf]

In answer to the questions posed in the original post: Yes & depends upon the facts & your arguments.

[Jeffort]

Since the OP gutted the details I'm not positive about the circumstances so correct me if I'm wrong.

Here's what I got out of it:
OP brought a prohibited electronic item into the test room and got caught with it by a proctor and now the score is on hold due to a misconduct investigation.
OP wants to play lawyer and argue due process to shift blame to LSAC for the way the proctor handled it because a misconduct write up notice was not handed to her by the proctor in the test center.

Am I missing anything pertinent?

If that is accurate, tough luck OP. You broke the rules you knew about, got caught, and should suffer the consequences for doing so. Most of the ~60,000 people that took the October test walked into the test centers holding only their ziplock bags filled with allowed items. If you didn't obey that protocol, why should they cut you a break?

Yes, yes you are missing something important. She was not "caught" with an item. She disclosed the item to the Proctor before the start of the exam, and the proctor was in possession of it during the exam.

She was neither "caught" nor found "in possession of" a prohibited device during the exam, and thus, will have no problem.

Oh, ok. So it's like one of those situations when somebody walks into a police station carrying a bag of weed or coke, discloses that fact, shows it to and hands it over to the desk sergeant before getting the forms to fill out for the report they want to make.

Those stories always crack me up, especially when it is some dude wanting to file a stolen property report because somebody they had over took some of their stash. Those dudes still get charged and prosecuted. Confessing up front to a crime does not negate the crime, but it sometimes generates sentencing leniency and lots of laughs from the officers on duty at the time.

[fosterp]

Lets ignore the fact that lsac is not a government agency and such things as "due process" does not exist.

If lsac wanted to ban you from ever taking the test and hence never going to law school because you wear a purple hat they could.

[s0ph1e2007]

okie dokie kiddos

[Jeffort]

Lets ignore the fact that lsac is not a government agency and such things as "due process" does not exist.

If lsac wanted to ban you from ever taking the test and hence never going to law school because you wear a purple hat they could.

Good point but I think it will fly way over the heads of most of the people reading this thread. They are still wanna be lawyers and have not even been accepted into LS yet. It'll be a few years until those that make it have the education to really understand what you said and why it is true.

Along the lines of legally naive people/students seeking LS that think they know the law and try to argue it (AKA gunners), lets delve into the right to freedom of speech and see where people land on that issue with their conceptions/misconceptions of it. Get that discussion going and we have a party!

[s0ph1e2007]

doo ahhh ahhh my name is angela and you are nannette maniore