This whole statement reads like someone who is trying to describe their love of justice after watching the Law and Order marathon on USA with a side of "young white female as the underestimated underdog".
You need someone to heavily proof your grammar, style, and word usage (hello, comma splice), but before we can even get to that there are a LOT of other changes that need to be made. I don't want to be harsh, but this hands down one of the most cringe-worthy personal statements I've ever read. In my opinion, personal statements should show character, maturity, and in some way demonstrate (convincingly and coherently, though not always explicitly) why you want to go to law school.
Your essay does none of the above.
I'll break it down for you.
KMD2695 wrote:I took a deep breath as I felt my heart begin to pound. The adrenaline rush came with mixed emotions of panic, excitement, and fear. “Are you sure you’re ready for this?” the detective asked me one last time. He could tell by the instant lack of color in my face that I had not done this before. I replied with a smile, “Of course I am,” I secretly lied. I had been begging for the opportunity to shadow him at a murder scene, so I needed to prove I could handle anything the men could.
Being a young white woman, in a male dominated field, I didn’t exactly fit in with the Detroit Homicide Department. The detectives were older, tough, and predominately men, all equipped with a gun that I had no idea how to use. They seemed so fearless. Their faces were extremely intimidating, and I could feel their eyes staring me up and down, immediately doubting my capabilities. I felt uncomfortable, but it was a very familiar feeling. Being a petite female, I had grown accustomed to this type of reaction. I knew I had to prove myself, my passion, and my commitment. It was going to be very difficult to earn respect with this crowd, but this was my dream job, and I was not going to allow anyone to deter me.
-The opening sentence was my first clue that this was not going to go well. You might as well have led with "It was a dark and stormy night." You have an overwhelming number of cliches in this essay, and I get that it's hard to write an essay completely devoid of any, but please don't lead with one.
- "Being a young white woman, in a male dominated field, I didn’t exactly fit in with the Detroit Homicide Department. The detectives were older, tough, and predominately men..."
1) Redundancy, a common theme in your writing. If you say you're in a male-dominated field, it's probably safe to assume that most of the people there are...predominantly male.
2) Would you fit in better if you were a young blue woman?
- This whole second paragraph, gah. I can't tell what it is that causes you so much distress. Are their eyes, staring up and down, checking you out? Are you accustomed to intimidating gazes being a petite female because you're small and you think there is some belief that small people are incapable? I think I know what you *might* be trying to get across with this paragraph, but you honestly come off sounding a bit judgmental and naive, and possibly a little self involved.
- If the detective scene is your dream job, why are you going to law school?
KMD2695 wrote:As I inched toward the murder scene, the knot in my stomach tripled in size. Beads of sweat started to form on my forehead. Quickly wiping them away, I tried to maintain my composure before anybody could notice. I closely followed the detective, trying not to miss a thing. A young man, in his twenties, had been shot numerous times. His lifeless body lie before me on the street, blood was splattered everywhere. I felt angered and sympathetic, but to my surprise, I wasn’t nauseous. I was amazed at how each detective quickly went to work, securing the crime scene and gathering data. Pictures were snapped from every angle, ensuring that no evidence was overlooked. Plastic bags were used to gather any incriminating evidence, which would be needed in court to later obtain any conviction. In great detail, they explained to me what evidence was critical to gather, and how even the most seemingly meaningless detail, could help them solve the case.
The entire ride home, I drilled the detectives with questions. He was very impressed with the detail I had noticed and my extreme interest in his line of work. A rush of excitement overcame me like I had never experienced before. But I still could not comprehend why anybody would commit such a heinous crime? The detective looked very calm, with lack of any emotion. For a moment, I doubted that he saw everything I did. “Welcome to Wayne County,” he blurted. “This happens here at least once a day. It’s normal.” He explained. The words “normal” haunted me all night long. This should not be a “normal” way of life in any city.
Argh, more cliches. You waste a lot of valuable time describing what anyone who has watched CSI/any crime show out there would know. There is no value added, because this does not tell me anything about *you* except that you are angered and sympathetic when you see a murdered corpse. Am I supposed to expect otherwise?
You have a terrible problem with telling, not showing. Why did a rush of excitement overcome you? Why did you feel angered and sympathetic? And really, you are stunned by the heinousness of someone getting shot? This implies to me an extreme lack of life experience (or, at the very least, that you've never picked up a history book/newspaper). It's not just Wayne County. People get shot all the time, all around the world.
KMD2695 wrote:
This scene stayed fresh in my mind for many months to follow. I was overwhelmed with wanting the person responsible for this crime to be identified and put behind bars. I had the opportunity to meet with the victim’s family members and it became very clear to me how this incident had changed their lives forever. I wanted so badly to help ease their pain. I wanted to do everything in my power to help them find justice.
I spent the next year, following every possible headline on this case. Relief filed my entire body when it finally made it to trial. There was an abundance of evidence, so I knew the offender did not have a chance of getting away. Day after day, I spent in the courtroom, patiently waiting for the jury to reach a guilty verdict. The prosecutor’s demeanor was so intriguing. She played such a crucial role in the entire process, giving me goose bumps with each point that she made. That offender’s future was going to be determined by how well she presented her case.
Again, more telling, more cliches, more terrible language - and a lot of unsubstantiated claims.
KMD2695 wrote:
The jury did not take long to deliberate. A guilty verdict was soon reached, and this worthless man was placed behind bars. While I was satisfied with the outcome, it didn’t change what happened to the innocent young victim who had his life unjustifiably stolen from him. It didn’t erase the images I saw, nor did it take away the heartache that family would forever feel.
This experience substantially increased my passion for justice. I learned that the crime scene was not necessarily the place I belonged, but that my true interest was in the courtroom. I realized the vital importance of a prosecutor and could not help but to think of how differently things could have turned out, had she preformed another way. This opportunity has motivated me even more to attend law school. It has sparked a flame of desire within me that will never burn out.
Ah, and now you make the link about how your dream job goes has shifted from the crime scene to the courtroom. So...why did you spend the majority of your essay describing the crime scene? You literally dedicate one sentence to describing the courtroom via the prosecutor's demeanor: it was
intriguing.
Your entire case for why you now want to become a lawyer is because of this interesting prosecutor, since, like you say, things may have turned out differently with a 'different performance'. But then you say that you weren't worried about a conviction because there was an abundance of evidence. So which one is it? The evidence spoke for itself, or the prosecutor won the day? What exactly did the prosecutor even do, aside from giving you goosebumps?
This whole conclusion just validates every half-opinion I was beginning to form throughout your essay. You don't even describe anything about this case except that it resulted in a man getting shot and killed. Do you know the circumstances? If it was a crime of passion or if it was premeditated? Did you care? Who are you to decide that this man is worthless? Most of all, are you seriously trying to describe your passion for justice through an open-and-shut case?
