Another LSAT "Cheating" Story Forum

[rpupkin]

Also, there are rumors of a Saul Goodman cameo as OP's lawyer.

Ha! This is more accurate than you know. The lawyer my dad knows definitely has some Saul-like qualities. I ended up talking to him earlier this week but it just confirmed my hunch that he would not strike the right tone given the circumstances. He said—and, yes, this is an actual quote—"we should go nuclear on those LSAT bastards." If I ever do let him represent me, you guys won't have to tune in to this thread anymore; there will likely be plenty of coverage on ATL. But, unfortunately for those of you who are finding this all so entertaining, I'm not going to use this lawyer's services.

Actually, the lawyer did have some advice that I think is worth following: he suggested that I ask for a copy of the SMIR. If I have a copy of the proctor's report, I'll be in a better position to understand what they're investigating. He said they'll have to disclose it to me at some point, and the sooner I get it the better. I asked for it yesterday. But like almost everything else with LSAC, my requests seem to go into a blackhole. I usually end up talking to someone who won't comment on anything and/or doesn't know anything.

[PepperJack]

The gun in the courtroom hypo is the cell phone in OP's scenario, the courtroom is the classroom, the trial is the LSAT, the friend is the friend, and so on.

The circumstances are exactly alike!

The reasoning in the argument above is vulnerable to criticism, because the analogous scenario differs from the actual scenario in a critical respect. Discarding a firearm in the bushes is negligent and in itself constitutes criminal behavior, regardless of intention. On the other hand, discarding a cellphone in the bushes is merely asinine.

Wrong! "Illegal", is defined in each circumstance as violating a rule. Whether one is both criminal and civil while the other is theoretically civil, is irrelevant.

The flaw in YOUR REASONING, is that you presume, without justification, that two scenarios are wholly different because they differ in one respect.

Do you have autism?

[midwest17]

The 0L legal analysis in this thread has really delivered.

[Bikeflip]

Pretty damn good trolling in this thread. Plausible story. Then slowly ratcheting up the stakes. 170

0L's stop giving legal analysis.

Underappreciated poast.

[PDaddy]

Do you have autism?

Do you have a 130 on your LSAT? It appears that you don't understand how parallel reasoning works. Pay attention to structure (or form) of the arguments and scenarios, not the content.

Your argument is completely content-based, which means that if OP's story was the stimulus in a parallel reasoning question and my fact pattern was one of the answers you would choose the wrong answer.

You might as well be arguing the following:

"The patterns are not 'similar' because the content elements don't match and a gun kills people whereas a cell phone does not. Moreover, carrying a gun into a courtroom violates a criminal law, whereas carrying a cell phone into an LSAC testing site violates a civil one (attempted fraud)."

None of what you argue is even relevant, and you clearly miss the point. Here's some safe advice for you: go back to your PowerScore LR Bible and re-read the Parallel Reasoning section. Note the force with which the chapter emphasizes that parallel reasoning is about STRUCTURE!!!!!

You obviously need the help.

[dosto]

.

[northwood]

The 0L legal analysis in this thread has really delivered.

[sighsigh]

I thought this was all quite plausible until he started talking about how the same friend who he was discussing cheating with on the LSAT on g-chat was the same friend who he was arrested with for "cheating in a casino." Hmmm...

[PepperJack]

e

[redsox]

Can someone please ban PDaddy and PepperJack for fucking up this potentially hilarious flame of a thread?

[rftdd888]

you could've just turned your phone off and kept it in your pants pocket.

if your phone is turned off and you know it won't make noise, why not just pocket it and take it out when you leave the test building?

[rpupkin]

Major update: After hearing nothing for nearly two weeks, I just got a letter in the mail from LSAC. They have decided not to take action regarding the violation! They specifically noted that they will not inform law schools of the misconduct warning!!

Best. Christmas. Ever.

[Nova]

Major update: After hearing nothing for nearly two weeks, I just got a letter in the mail from LSAC. They have decided not to take action regarding the violation! They specifically noted that they will not inform law schools of the misconduct warning!!

Best. Christmas. Ever.

Happy for you bro

[inlovewithpiper]

Plot twist: PDaddy is actually "the girlfriend."

Major update: After hearing nothing for nearly two weeks, I just got a letter in the mail from LSAC. They have decided not to take action regarding the violation! They specifically noted that they will not inform law schools of the misconduct warning!!

Best. Christmas. Ever.

LSAC still sends letters? Sounds a little old-school. But if this casino-cheating ring, cell phone bush-hiding, bitter (PDaddy) rat-of-a-girlfriend story was true, then congrats. Merry Christmas.

[PepperJack]

I stand behind my argument that if they are so serious about the phones, they should also check them at the door and have someone watch them. Making everyone keep them in their cars is so dumb. Would LSAC pay people back if the cars were broken into, and the phones were stolen?

[JustHawkin]

I stand behind my argument that if they are so serious about the phones, they should also check them at the door and have someone watch them. Making everyone keep them in their cars is so dumb. Would LSAC pay people back if the cars were broken into, and the phones were stolen?

No.

[midwest17]

I stand behind my argument that if they are so serious about the phones, they should also check them at the door and have someone watch them. Making everyone keep them in their cars is so dumb. Would LSAC pay people back if the cars were broken into, and the phones were stolen?

Are you serious?

[redsox]

I stand behind my argument that if they are so serious about the phones, they should also check them at the door and have someone watch them. Making everyone keep them in their cars is so dumb. Would LSAC pay people back if the cars were broken into, and the phones were stolen?

Go away.

[inlovewithpiper]

I stand behind my argument that if they are so serious about the phones, they should also check them at the door and have someone watch them. Making everyone keep them in their cars is so dumb. Would LSAC pay people back if the cars were broken into, and the phones were stolen?

You could leave it at home. Or at work. Or with a trusted friend. Or in a bank safe-deposit box.

LSAC doesn't care where your phone is, so long as it's not on your person or otherwise in the testing center.

[ManoftheHour]

Major update: After hearing nothing for nearly two weeks, I just got a letter in the mail from LSAC. They have decided not to take action regarding the violation! They specifically noted that they will not inform law schools of the misconduct warning!!

Best. Christmas. Ever.

Wtf. They had the time to send that letter but didn't give us (including you) our scores?!

But I'm happy for you bro.

[retaking23]

Major update: After hearing nothing for nearly two weeks, I just got a letter in the mail from LSAC. They have decided not to take action regarding the violation! They specifically noted that they will not inform law schools of the misconduct warning!!

Best. Christmas. Ever.

I just read your initial post OP. Now, having read this latest update I feel totally cool with telling you my immediate reaction after reading your first post: ROFL. I honestly did not think you cheated at all but the fact that your friend's gf apparently ratted on you and caused the proctor to take action (and swift and dramatic action she did take) just made your entire post seem like a flaming SNL skit.

[MAcc2007]

"and then she told me that another test taker had reported that I had used a cell phone during the first half of the test."

To do what! Text your grandparents?

Seems like a horrible thing to snitch on someone for...Unless there's some sort of app that scans your test, then produces answers.

Yeah, I agree. I can't think of a mechanism by which one could effectively cheat during the test using a cell phone. "So I'm reading this passage women's rights in the 19th century. Anyone have idea why the author wrote the word 'incredulous' in paragraph two."

My guess is that the real purpose for not having cell phones in the testing center is that there are too many stupid people who would otherwise get a call during the test, have the ringer on, and then take the phone call.

[unodostres]

lol at 0l's giving legal analysis.

[Kevinlomax]

"and then she told me that another test taker had reported that I had used a cell phone during the first half of the test."

To do what! Text your grandparents?

Seems like a horrible thing to snitch on someone for...Unless there's some sort of app that scans your test, then produces answers.

Yeah, I agree. I can't think of a mechanism by which one could effectively cheat during the test using a cell phone. "So I'm reading this passage women's rights in the 19th century. Anyone have idea why the author wrote the word 'incredulous' in paragraph two."

My guess is that the real purpose for not having cell phones in the testing center is that there are too many stupid people who would otherwise get a call during the test, have the ringer on, and then take the phone call.

You could easily cheat with a cell phone.. steal test in NY, send answers to person taking them a few hours later in Hawaii. ITs been done before but with Pagers

[LexLeon]

In theory, wouldn't the phone show that it hadn't been used during the testing period? Wouldn't that be fairly good evidence that no cheating occurred?

Solid, solid point.

[Wondering why no one has quoted it.]