Horrible conduct by deans at Penn State Dickenson Forum

[FutureSuperLawyer]

Think twice before you go here. This could happen to you.
This is from above the law. The story is also here:
http://abovethelaw.com/2014/09/cheating ... l-lawsuit/

Nicole Suissa is a rising 3L at Penn State Dickinson. Suissa is no stranger to the spotlight. While in college, CNN profiled Suissa in a piece about the rising price of education when the then 18-year-old struggled so much with the cost of school that she worried that her college career would be cut short after one year due to lack of funds. The story brought unexpected good news: a lawyer in South Carolina, J. Edward Bell III saw the piece and offered to help her pay for her education. With Bell’s help, Suissa graduated from college and took her talents to Penn State for law school. And Penn State touted Suissa’s success story. At least at first.

Things turned South when a student accused Suissa of cheating on an Evidence exam. According to the accusation, Suissa used her cell phone to look at websites about the Federal Rules of Evidence during the exam. Enter Carla Pratt, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. With an accusation of cheating, Pratt dutifully began an investigation. She questioned Suissa and her phone was inspected. Based on Suissa’s allegations, Pratt admitted that she failed to find any evidence on the phone suggesting that Suissa used it to look up answers during the exam, but Pratt nonetheless told Suissa to admit to cheating or face expulsion. Astoundingly, the Answer concedes this point. It’s one thing to keep digging, but another to beg for the confession immediately after admitting you’re at a loss for evidence. Bold. I suppose this is part of Penn State’s “practice-ready” approach for teaching lawyers how to deal with prosecutors.

Suissa brought in her own counsel, even though she claims the school told her that legal counsel in this matter “wasn’t necessary.” At least this is a shady allegation that Penn State denies.

To hear Suissa’s story, after Suissa refused to confess, Pratt relentlessly interviewed all manner of witnesses — some of which supposedly offered exculpatory evidence — and then either refused to turn over her notes, claiming that Suissa had no right to them, or claimed that no notes existed. Regardless of what Pratt said, if you’re conducting an investigation, keep a damn record and give it to the other side. It’s pretty straightforward. Again, this inquiry isn’t a real criminal prosecution, but Penn State — a law school, mind you — can learn a lot about maintaining the integrity of their procedures from the real-life courts. Brady is not the worst idea out there.

Pratt even questioned Suissa’s boyfriend and allegedly made him cry and threatened to expel him if he didn’t testify against Suissa. He testified about the Evidence exam issue and, according to Suissa’s account, on the stand he confessed that he felt coerced into his testimony. The Answer does not specifically refute this. See… this is what gets your investigation dragged into federal court. This affair prompted another university official, according to notes that Suissa saw, to question whether the investigation was pursued “too zealously.” Another allegation not specifically refuted in the Answer.

Over the course of the eventual Honor Board proceeding, Suissa pointed to security camera footage revealing that she’d already left the exam by the time Pratt alleges the cheating took place. The Answer contends that the security camera footage was wrong. Regardless of Pratt’s protests, the Honor Board dismissed the charges related to the Evidence exam.

So whether or not Suissa did anything wrong, this matter is closed, right?

Wrong. Way back before the Honor Board hearing, after confronting Suissa over the Evidence exam and failing to convince Suissa to confess despite the lack of evidence, Pratt started looking into Suissa’s Mediation exam, which was submitted electronically prior to the established deadline. Suissa then submitted a second version after the deadline and claimed there was an error message in the uploading process. Does Penn State use ExamSoft? Both sides disagree over whether the tests were identical. Ultimately, the professor only graded the first-submitted exam. No harm, no foul, right?

Besides, Pratt allegedly pursued this sideshow only to demonstrate a “larger pattern of dishonesty” when viewed in conjunction with the Evidence exam allegations. So this wasn’t even deemed worthy of an independent charge out of the gate? If the Evidence exam charges were dropped, is there really enough to this Mediation exam to warrant action? Especially when the Mediation professor showed up to testify on Suissa’s behalf, explaining that her review of the facts revealed that Suissa did not violate any rules (and, by the way, the parties dispute whether or not the administration tried to convince the Mediation professor not to testify).

The Honor Board decided there was, dismissing the professor’s testimony about the rules of her own exam as “merely her opinion.” Oh.

Suissa wasn’t expelled, but received a suspension and lost her good character standing, resulting in her losing her clinic job.

Suissa’s Complaint includes a number of other issues ranging from the school only providing her a couple years worth of Honor Board precedent as a guide (the written policy of the school requires publishing ten years) to preventing Suissa and her lawyer from copying evidence and requiring it be reviewed on Penn State premises to the Honor Board asking Pratt to guide them on mid-proceeding rulings.

And now the case is in federal court. Suissa’s lawyer? Her old friend J. Edward Bell III, fighting to keep her in school a second time.

It’s impossible to tell from this record what happened in either the Evidence or Mediation exams at Penn State. But a law school simply can’t afford the public portrayal of running an over-zealous, hide-the-ball, fly-by-night proceeding. While the school denies the core allegations of Suissa’s complaint, that the Answer conceded large swaths of the procedural complaints is embarrassing.

I mean, when has Penn State suffered such a high-profile black eye?

[McAvoy]

Think twice before you go here.

Well yeah think twice before diving into any dumpster fire

[jchiles]

I mean, when has Penn State suffered such a high-profile black eye?

Not sure if this a rhetorical question or not. But yeah there are other, better reasons to not go to PSU for law school.

[sideroxylon]

I mean, when has Penn State suffered such a high-profile black eye?

Not sure if this a rhetorical question or not. But yeah there are other, better reasons to not go to PSU for law school.

it was Joe Pa's comment in the original article

[jchiles]

Haha oh that makes sense, sorry thought OP was asking.

[NYCFAN1]

Sad story but no one should be attending Penn State Law under any circumstance anyway

[whitespider]

According to the accusation, Suissa used her cell phone to look at websites about the Federal Rules of Evidence during the exam.

...

Suissa then submitted a second version after the deadline and claimed there was an error message in the uploading process.

Sounds like she's terrible at cheating.

Maybe she should stop.

[FutureSuperLawyer]

The Honor Board acquitted her of the charge that she checked her cell phone during the exam, so I don't believe that accusation.

As for accusation that she submitted her exam late, the facts (which the law school did not contest in its answer) are that she submitted her exam on time, then submitted a second version a 7 minutes later claiming to have gotten an error message the first time. That sound likely a reasonable story to me. People get error messages all the time. The university did not provide any evidence that she never got an error message. She also explained what happened as she submitted the second version and, since the university got the first version, that's what they graded. This really doesn't sound like cheating to me.

[whitespider]

This really doesn't sound like cheating to me.

Except you're ignoring their claim that she added a bunch on extra content onto the second submission after receiving the mysterious error message.

That. Is. Cheating.

[whitespider]

Directly from the law school's answer to the complaint...

To the contrary, Evans reviewed and compared the two submissions and determined that the second, untimely submission contained additional content that had been added after the deadline for the submission of the exam answer, including an additional 129 words and an answer to a previously unanswered examination question

How do you not recognize that as cheating?

[glitter178]

Call me paranoid but I would have taken about 3,000 screenshots of an at-the-deadline error message...

[FutureSuperLawyer]

It might be cheating if she had never submitted the first version and just submitted the second, 7 minutes late. But here she submitted on time and, if the school had the first version they would clearly use it since it was the one submitted on time. The only way they would use the second version would be they didn't get the first one, which they did.

Its also worth noting the school did nothing to check her computer and the Professor for her course did not view what the student did as an honor code violation.

Finally, the school only got interested in this after they heard about the alleged cheating on the evidence exam. So it doesn't sound like the school even saw this as cheating until the incidence in the evidence exam made them want to find addition evidence she was a cheater.

[whitespider]

That's not what the answer says...

To the contrary, Pratt did receive a verbal report of an Honor Code violation relating to the Mediation exam, which Pratt properly investigated and pursued and which ultimately resulted in the Hearing Board concluding that violations of the Honor Code had, in fact, occurred.

Do you know this girl or something?

And YES, just because you suck at cheating and get caught, doesn't mean you didn't cheat. The second she tried to submit the molested exam, she CHEATED.

[SLS_AMG]

That's not what the answer says...

To the contrary, Pratt did receive a verbal report of an Honor Code violation relating to the Mediation exam, which Pratt properly investigated and pursued and which ultimately resulted in the Hearing Board concluding that violations of the Honor Code had, in fact, occurred.

Do you know this girl or something?

And YES, just because you suck at cheating and get caught, doesn't mean you didn't cheat. The second she tried to submit the molested exam, she CHEATED.

Calm down, Nancy.

[whitespider]

She got caught cheating and is now suing.

It's outrageous.

[FutureSuperLawyer]

If Penn State Dickinson can show they have sent similar cases to the Honor Court, I'm sure that will help them. But its hard to believe this is the first student who claimed to have received an error message and submitted a test a few minutes late. In fact most students in her position probably just don't submit the original test on time as she did.

Penn State Dickinson seemed eager in their Answer to provide all the helpful facts they could. Yet they said nothing about ever going after someone for submitting a test a few minutes late, particularly when an original version was submitted on time. They also never explained why they did not raise the issue with the student (which they are now arguing is so serious it deserves an extremely harsh punishment) until another allegation of misconduct surfaced.

And, I understand someone on this board thinks her conduct was cheating. But what is a jury going to think when her own professor says she doesn't regard it as an honor code violation.

If Penn State wasn't trying to ruin her career and she was just after a jackpot, I'd have less sympathy for her. But Penn State is trying to take away her ability to practice law. There is nothing outrageous about her going to court to get this judgment reversed.

[A. Nony Mouse]

OP, don't copy and paste (almost) full articles from elsewhere in the internet, we get sued for copyright violations when you do that.

[rinkrat19]

She got caught cheating and is now suing.

It's outrageous.

Your outrage seems disproportionate.

[whitespider]

She got caught cheating and is now suing.

It's outrageous.

Your outrage seems disproportionate.

Meh, it very well could be.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I mean, basically, we don't/can't know anything from the complaint and answer. The student alleges a lot of stuff, the school denies it. Pleadings aren't evidence, and ATL is just doing what it always does, which is raking up drama.

[McAvoy]

She got caught cheating and is now suing.

It's outrageous.

Your outrage seems disproportionate.

[Flips88]

Are you the bf that was coerced into narcing on your bae? Inquiring minds want to know why you're so huffy about this.

[FutureSuperLawyer]

We actually know a lot based on what Penn State chose not to deny. They did not deny that the dean 1) threatened to expel the student's boyfriend when he said the student was innocent, that the dean interrogated him for 2 hours and that after he did testify against his girlfriend he said he felt coerced to by the dean; 2) that the dean, incredibly, claimed not to have taken any notes in interviews (so she would not have to hand them over), 3) that the late submission of the exam was not pursued until the student refused to confess to another allegation, 4) that the school refused to turn over 10 years of honor court records and that, had they done so, a violation relating to the dean would have been revealed.

That's a lot of bad stuff the school is not denying and if they are not denying it, I think we can assume it true. They certainly seem to deny everything they can (as they should). So I think we have a pretty clear picture of a vindictive bully running amok. Doesn't sound like the kind of place I'd want to go to school even if it could get its students jobs.

[Rigo]

Are you the bf that was coerced into narcing on your bae? Inquiring minds want to know why you're so huffy about this.

Probably just putting off studying for his 5th LSAT or is on break at Starbucks.

I understand the legal job market is in trouble but, as a political science major with a 3.1 GPA, let's face it I'm not going to get a great job. I've spent months studying for the LSAT and taken it 4 times: 147, 152, 150, 149. I'm sick of living with my parents and, let's face it, the government will give me more money to go to law school, as living expenses, than I can make in any job I could get.

I'm currently trying to decide between SLU and Villanova. SLU is tops in health care law. For those who don't know that's one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. Its also in the middle of a terrific city, Saint Louis.

Villanova has a terrific tax program and, let's fact it, taxes are one of the things certain in life. I know tax sounds boring and I'll be all the Harvard kids avoid for that reason. But I'm willing to do it which I expect will set me apart all by itself.

Looking at medians, both SLU and Villanova are both reach schools for me, so I don't expect to get any scholarships. But, with the gov't willing to lend me every cent I need for school, and my living expenses too, I'm don't think I need scholarships. And with the PAYE program, the worst thing that can happen is that I end up paying 10% of my income to repay the loans. Heck, I work at Starbucks now part-time. If I end up back there after law school, I wouldn't have to pay anything since my income would be so low (I probably wouldn't go back to Starbucks though, I think I'd get an LLM and then maybe and MBA).

What a gem.

[McAvoy]

Are you the bf that was coerced into narcing on your bae? Inquiring minds want to know why you're so huffy about this.

Probably just putting off studying for his 5th LSAT or is on break at Starbucks.

I understand the legal job market is in trouble but, as a political science major with a 3.1 GPA, let's face it I'm not going to get a great job. I've spent months studying for the LSAT and taken it 4 times: 147, 152, 150, 149. I'm sick of living with my parents and, let's face it, the government will give me more money to go to law school, as living expenses, than I can make in any job I could get.

I'm currently trying to decide between SLU and Villanova. SLU is tops in health care law. For those who don't know that's one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. Its also in the middle of a terrific city, Saint Louis.

Villanova has a terrific tax program and, let's fact it, taxes are one of the things certain in life. I know tax sounds boring and I'll be all the Harvard kids avoid for that reason. But I'm willing to do it which I expect will set me apart all by itself.

Looking at medians, both SLU and Villanova are both reach schools for me, so I don't expect to get any scholarships. But, with the gov't willing to lend me every cent I need for school, and my living expenses too, I'm don't think I need scholarships. And with the PAYE program, the worst thing that can happen is that I end up paying 10% of my income to repay the loans. Heck, I work at Starbucks now part-time. If I end up back there after law school, I wouldn't have to pay anything since my income would be so low (I probably wouldn't go back to Starbucks though, I think I'd get an LLM and then maybe and MBA).

What a gem.

I thought that was confirmed flame?