Implications of a misconduct warning?

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby MC Southstar » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:10 pm

Pearalegal wrote:
shadowfrost000 wrote:A lot of bitter words.


Also, please explain.

Dwaterman86 wrote:Quit trying to one up him.


Apparently its transparent.


I never argued about disclosure. Claiming that the DUI helps to determine that person's level of maturity or ability to assume responsibility after the incident is just something that I do not agree with. That is it, it's just a matter of opinion. Most of the time it's just up to the guy reading the record when he's deciding whether or not to hire someone, that's why I mentioned an interview process.

In MY opinion, I just think that it is too common an occurrence to really ostracize otherwise responsible people for a mistake that almost everyone makes in their adolescence. In YOUR opinion, maybe it is better to really frown on people that much just to get the point across and stop the idea that it's an acceptable mistake.

Look back and look at all the emotion you poured out over these last few pages. I don't have a problem with having a debate if you're going to keep it civil and objective, but you have not. From the very outset you made personal attacks on others and that is my grievance with you. You would not have said those things if you weren't so personally invested in the topic.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby D. H2Oman » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:19 pm

shadowfrost000 wrote:
Pearalegal wrote:
shadowfrost000 wrote:A lot of bitter words.


Also, please explain.

Dwaterman86 wrote:Quit trying to one up him.


Apparently its transparent.


I never argued about disclosure. Claiming that the DUI helps to determine that person's level of maturity or ability to assume responsibility after the incident is just something that I do not agree with. That is it, it's just a matter of opinion. Most of the time it's just up to the guy reading the record when he's deciding whether or not to hire someone, that's why I mentioned an interview process.

In MY opinion, I just think that it is too common an occurrence to really ostracize otherwise responsible people for a mistake that almost everyone makes in their adolescence. In YOUR opinion, maybe it is better to really frown on people that much just to get the point across and stop the idea that it's an acceptable mistake.

Look back and look at all the emotion you poured out over these last few pages. I don't have a problem with having a debate if you're going to keep it civil and objective, but you have not. From the very outset you made personal attacks on others and that is my grievance with you. You would not have said those things if you weren't so personally invested in the topic.


lol what?


Dude, I think I've figured it out, you have a DUI, don't you?

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby MC Southstar » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:19 pm

Dwaterman86 wrote:lol what?


Dude, I think I've figured it out, you have a DUI, don't you?


Lol, not at all, man. Scout's honor.

Oh wait, I'm not a scout. Well just trust me? :P

If anything, I guess I know a lot of people who have made mistakes in their lives and while they will get a chance to prove that they are better than those strikes on their record, I really find it unfair for them to be at a disadvantage when they have truly repented.

Pearalegal
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:50 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Pearalegal » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:26 pm

shadowfrost000 wrote:
Look back and look at all the emotion you poured out over these last few pages. I don't have a problem with having a debate if you're going to keep it civil and objective, but you have not. From the very outset you made personal attacks on others and that is my grievance with you. You would not have said those things if you weren't so personally invested in the topic.


I'm not sure when I did. The only time I said anything is when I called tali's opinion immature. His opinion.

To be completely honest, I don't really understand what level of emotion I've been putting out there you're getting and I think you might be seeing something that isn't there. Yes, I've had family members very adversely affected by a DUI, and my boyfriend, who I love, has a DUI himself. But....

I don't really know someone who doesn't know someone whose gotten a DUI or know someone affected by one. They are quite common, which is why I was so puzzled by your argument re: stigma and criminal. I never once talked about ostracizing a person for a DUI, ever. I would think that saying my boyfriend has a DUI would sort of demonstrate that I obviously don't believe that. You've completely misrepresented and distorted MY opinion.

But drunk drivers kill a lot of people. Thats a fact. I don't see why people shouldn't frown on drunk driving "so much." Apart from when I was talking to tali, all I have been saying in my posts to you in our discussion is that a person with a DUI should have to face the consequences of those decisions. All of that has been objective and civil. You're the one who keeps saying I have a personal bias, and you might not care that much until you've known someone affected by a DUI. I think thats pretty messed up, by the way.

I guess what you're saying is that a DUI itself is not enough to determine someone's maturity level. Obviously I agree with that, and as I've said...thats why I believe the entire record should be looked at. Who put in the community service, how they speak about the incident. I think I said no less than three times that someone can move on and learn a lot from a DUI (and most stupid mistakes, for that matter).

Pearalegal
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:50 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Pearalegal » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm

Also, if you don't think someone should be judged on the base of a DUI, are you arguing that a person's record should always be expunged at a certain time? You used the word relic earlier...at what point is an infraction a relic? What if someone got a DUI, and then demonstrated a lot of stupid behavior after? Then is the DUI fair game? How can a DUI be looked at in one case, but not in another?

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby MC Southstar » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:40 pm

Pearalegal wrote:
shadowfrost000 wrote:
Look back and look at all the emotion you poured out over these last few pages. I don't have a problem with having a debate if you're going to keep it civil and objective, but you have not. From the very outset you made personal attacks on others and that is my grievance with you. You would not have said those things if you weren't so personally invested in the topic.


I'm not sure when I did. The only time I said anything is when I called tali's opinion immature. His opinion.

To be completely honest, I don't really understand what level of emotion I've been putting out there you're getting and I think you might be seeing something that isn't there. Yes, I've had family members very adversely affected by a DUI, and my boyfriend, who I love, has a DUI himself. But....

I don't really know someone who doesn't know someone whose gotten a DUI or know someone affected by one. They are quite common, which is why I was so puzzled by your argument re: stigma and criminal. I never once talked about ostracizing a person for a DUI, ever. I would think that saying my boyfriend has a DUI would sort of demonstrate that I obviously don't believe that. You've completely misrepresented and distorted MY opinion.

But drunk drivers kill a lot of people. Thats a fact. I don't see why people shouldn't frown on drunk driving "so much." Apart from when I was talking to tali, all I have been saying in my posts to you in our discussion is that a person with a DUI should have to face the consequences of those decisions. All of that has been objective and civil. You're the one who keeps saying I have a personal bias, and you might not care that much until you've known someone affected by a DUI. I think thats pretty messed up, by the way.

I guess what you're saying is that a DUI itself is not enough to determine someone's maturity level. Obviously I agree with that, and as I've said...thats why I believe the entire record should be looked at. Who put in the community service, how they speak about the incident. I think I said no less than three times that someone can move on and learn a lot from a DUI (and most stupid mistakes, for that matter).


Eh, I think we're in agreement then. You're right in that I inferred something from your points that wasn't really there. In fact, looking back, you did a lot less of what I accused you of than some of the other posters.

Anyway, drunk driving = bad. That was never the point in question, so don't confuse me for an advocate for it. To me, this was more about the concept of criminalization than drunk driving itself. I'm still pretty young and carefree myself. I'm sure when I become a parent, I'll feel a lot different.

I didn't really mean expungement or nondisclosure as an option. I was just startled at how vicious the accusations were toward people with DUI offenses, and really did not think it should say THAT much about a person's character.

I really tried to leave this debate a number of times, but you always challenged me for more and in a really forceful way, so I couldn't help but defend my position. In reality, I was not trying to polarize this issue.

*shrug* I'm not really trying to paint them as parallel examples. Obviously, driving drunk increases your risk for having an accident. I agree that it's against my personal morals. I'm just annoyed that people are making such emotional appeals to make personal attacks on talibkweli when it isn't necessary. Alcohol inhibits your GABA receptors and slows overall activity in the brain, therefore, you should not drive when you are drunk. However, it is also true that many people who drive drunk do so while they believe they are otherwise capable of driving. This is an alcohol induced decision, not a calculated one. Then what you should be stigmatizing is the act of drinking altogether, not the act of driving. It is hypocritical to call drunk driving bad while our culture glorifies the use of alcohol for just about every occasion when everyone knows that people are overconfident and stupid when they are drunk and more likely to make bad decisions.

On the other hand, the rising incidence of drunk driving related vehicle deaths in China, for example, proves that strict enforcement and social stigma against drunk driving is necessary to reduce transportation hazards (China has no stigma or laws against it and their traffic and drinking habits are much worse). It should be a stain on someone's integrity because if we don't take it seriously enough, then it will continue to be a problem.

I have a habit of defending views that are not my own, so don't confuse my arguments with my personal feelings. My personal feelings are that the existing laws and enforcement against drunk driving are sufficient. If anything, people just need to take a more active role in being responsible with their friends.


This post from earlier on is probably more reflective of how I felt before this got really personal.

Pearalegal
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:50 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Pearalegal » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:49 pm

shadowfrost000 wrote:This post from earlier on is probably more reflective of how I felt before this got really personal.


Okie doke. I really don't see how this got personal, but time to let it die.

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby MC Southstar » Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:53 pm

Pearalegal wrote:
shadowfrost000 wrote:This post from earlier on is probably more reflective of how I felt before this got really personal.


Okie doke. I really don't see how this got personal, but time to let it die.


TLS threads have the weirdest tangents, I swear.

User avatar
rGsgbJsl1
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:47 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby rGsgbJsl1 » Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:32 am

ha
I drive drunk all the time, cross-bubbled on the LSAT God knows how many times and looked ahead to figure out which one was the experimental; didn't get caught. Take that OP!
Last edited by rGsgbJsl1 on Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
superserial
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:57 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby superserial » Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:47 am

rGsgbJsl1 wrote:ha
I drive drunk all the time, cross-bobbled on the LSAT God knows how many times and looked ahead to figure out which one was the experimental; didn't get caught. Take that OP!


cross-bobbling? sounds dangerous.

User avatar
rGsgbJsl1
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:47 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby rGsgbJsl1 » Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:49 am

superserial wrote:
rGsgbJsl1 wrote:ha
I drive drunk all the time, cross-bubbled on the LSAT God knows how many times and looked ahead to figure out which one was the experimental; didn't get caught. Take that OP!


cross-bobbling? sounds dangerous.


yeah I was bobbling my head across seats.

democrattotheend
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:04 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby democrattotheend » Sun Dec 20, 2009 2:21 pm

Just out of curiosity, if this OP is still here, what ended up happening with this?

yubs
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:47 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby yubs » Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:28 pm

Hey, yes, OP here. I got a letter from LSAC a few days ago saying that they'd dropped the misconduct, weren't going to pursue the case further, and law schools I've applied to aren't going to hear about it. Whew.

democrattotheend
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:04 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby democrattotheend » Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:44 pm

yubs wrote:Hey, yes, OP here. I got a letter from LSAC a few days ago saying that they'd dropped the misconduct, weren't going to pursue the case further, and law schools I've applied to aren't going to hear about it. Whew.


That's great, congratulations. You must have been even more stressed waiting than I was.

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Mr. Matlock » Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:05 pm

yubs wrote:Hey, yes, OP here. I got a letter from LSAC a few days ago saying that they'd dropped the misconduct, weren't going to pursue the case further, and law schools I've applied to aren't going to hear about it. Whew.

:shock:

Congratulations.... but this makes me even more pissed over my situation. I had a proctor fuck me over by calling 5 minute warning at the 25 minute mark. Sent in a formal complaint that Monday and received a confirmation on it the next day, but since then... NOT A GOD DAMNED WORD FROM THEM!!!

End rant. FML.

McGillRedManSam
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:51 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby McGillRedManSam » Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:51 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
ntzsch wrote:so you feel that an enfraction of this sort is not as forgivable as an applicant with a view substance violations (dui's, pot, whatever)?

general consensus is these things are forgivable, no? but filling in a bubble on I when testing in II means auto-WL/Reject?


Trying to remain in "dispassionate lawyer" speak... It doesn't really matter what I believe, I'm merely trying to express what I believe the actual outcome will be. I do believe that (especially since strict liability is applied to these violations) there is an obviously strong desire for deterrence against cheating by both LSAC and the law schools that rely on the test results, and that desire for deterrence means a strong and blunt response to people who are perceived to violate that standard.

The other difference between what OP did and situations like DUIs or pot possessions is those are usually forgivable because they're usually portrayed as things you did before you decided to try to become a lawyer, and you've grown and matured since that offense. The more time and maturity between your prior criminal offense and your application to law school, the more they're going to be willing to overlook it. Taking the LSAT is always going to be something you do after you've made a decision to go to law school.

What schools are looking for is not necessarily a clean criminal/ethical history but evidence that you are currently mature and prepared to take on the responsibilities of the legal profession. Misconduct after you've decided to pursue a legal obligation and accept its moral and ethical obligations is probably about the worst thing you can do given that.


Very well said, +1.

lawschoolhopeful123
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby lawschoolhopeful123 » Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:45 pm

I took the LSAT today and since I walked in, the proctor was giving me the evil eye (I guess it's like that with most proctors). (...edit for anonymity...) But like I said, I am paranoid and have a high sense of conscience. Do I need to lose sleep over this? Cancel my score? This is my first time taking the LSAT but I do not want to cancel unless I have to. Sorry if this sounds trivial but I would like to know. :|
Last edited by lawschoolhopeful123 on Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

tomwatts
Posts: 1551
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby tomwatts » Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:52 pm

I believe you would be told if you were going to be written up. Don't cancel if you didn't do anything wrong.

lawschoolhopeful123
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby lawschoolhopeful123 » Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:59 pm

tomwatts wrote:I believe you would be told if you were going to be written up. Don't cancel if you didn't do anything wrong.


Oh great, you make me feel much better. (edit for anonymity) I am just scared of proctors in general - I literally gave a little jump when the proctor called time :( ..)
Last edited by lawschoolhopeful123 on Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

woodstocker
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:14 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby woodstocker » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:07 am

You must be verbally notified to receive a misconduct/irregularity. If you left the test center without a misconduct slip then you are good to go.

User avatar
Tanicius
Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:54 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Tanicius » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:09 am

I can't see how this won't result in a written-up report and an automatic cancellation of your score. I'm pretty sure proctors are required to write up any warnings they give. And if the warning specifies at all that you filled in the wrong section, your test will undoubtedly not be scored.

User avatar
monkeyboy
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:11 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby monkeyboy » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:11 am

Tanicius wrote:I can't see how this won't result in a written-up report and an automatic cancellation of your score. I'm pretty sure proctors are required to write up any warnings they give. And if the warning specifies at all that you filled in the wrong section, your test will undoubtedly not be scored.


I don't think that's what the guy said happened. Are you responding to the OP from December or the guy from today?

lawschoolhopeful123
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby lawschoolhopeful123 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:10 pm

monkeyboy wrote:
Tanicius wrote:I can't see how this won't result in a written-up report and an automatic cancellation of your score. I'm pretty sure proctors are required to write up any warnings they give. And if the warning specifies at all that you filled in the wrong section, your test will undoubtedly not be scored.


I don't think that's what the guy said happened. Are you responding to the OP from December or the guy from today?


I think Tani was referring to the OP, since nothing like that happened in my case. I am just paranoid by nature and I thought that a scary stare from a proctor could mean that they could single anyone out for nothing. (plus the fact that the proctor kicked a guy out when he asked if he could go to the bathroom) I went to talk to my pre-law advisor this morning and she laughed it off :oops: saying that I was way too stressed about nothing. Then I told her I cancelled since I predict a very low score, she gave me lots of tips about how to be less stressed in June (but I know she still thinks I am so paranoid and lack confidence). Anyways, go talk to your prelaw advisors if you have any questions! I am out of college but she was still so helpful.

User avatar
Tanicius
Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:54 am

Re: Implications of a misconduct warning?

Postby Tanicius » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:34 pm

lawschoolhopeful123 wrote:
monkeyboy wrote:
Tanicius wrote:I can't see how this won't result in a written-up report and an automatic cancellation of your score. I'm pretty sure proctors are required to write up any warnings they give. And if the warning specifies at all that you filled in the wrong section, your test will undoubtedly not be scored.


I don't think that's what the guy said happened. Are you responding to the OP from December or the guy from today?


I think Tani was referring to the OP, since nothing like that happened in my case. I am just paranoid by nature and I thought that a scary stare from a proctor could mean that they could single anyone out for nothing. (plus the fact that the proctor kicked a guy out when he asked if he could go to the bathroom) I went to talk to my pre-law advisor this morning and she laughed it off :oops: saying that I was way too stressed about nothing. Then I told her I cancelled since I predict a very low score, she gave me lots of tips about how to be less stressed in June (but I know she still thinks I am so paranoid and lack confidence). Anyways, go talk to your prelaw advisors if you have any questions! I am out of college but she was still so helpful.


Yeah, didn't notice the thread was much older.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Baidu [Spider], somedeadman and 13 guests