3.92 GPA/175 LSAT/some character & fitness issues from my teenage years Forum

[lshopeful9]

Going to go into my senior year. These are my stats:
3.94 LSAC GPA
175 LSAT
OK-ish softs— chair/president of two student organizations (nothing major, both service-based clubs), independent research experience (which has resulted in publication/conference presentations), decent internships
I don’t know if law schools care about this at all but I have had to work a significant amount throughout my undergrad career— like 25-35 hours on top of full time classes each semester.

I know that my numbers alone give me pretty good chances but I’m concerned about my C&F. In short, I had a pretty rocky high school career due to my abusive home life, and I have gone to court for truancy.

I also didn’t exactly have my stuff together my very first year of college (at a community college) and I got into an intense verbal argument with some other kids (no excuses for this, I was just an immature, stupid 17-year-old) that resulted in me being charged with harassment.

I’ve matured a lot since these years and I think my resume/grades show that I really have my stuff together now. However, I’m worried that the above-mentioned incidents will result in law schools tossing my application aside. Does anyone have any perspective on this?

Also, if it matters, I won’t be a K-JD as I am planning on working for a year or two after graduation. Just trying to figure out now if I should look into a different career trajectory.

[cavalier1138]

I don't think harassment or truancy charges are likely to have a significant effect on your chances. You'll need to explain them in an addendum, but they're not going to prevent you from getting into law school or being admitted to the bar.

[LSATWiz.com]

I may just add a bit of detail to make it clear that the verbal argument was with other boys/men and not towards a woman or race/religion/etc. based. That's really the only way I think that would be a significant red flag. The truancy won't matter as your numbers subsequent to that speak for themselves.

[Lawman1865]

Sounds like you'll be fine, especially if you take a year or two off to work, in which case you are even more far-removed from any actions you committed as a teenager. As others have said, you might want to fill out a quick addendum but you should be fine. People with a lot more baggage than you have gotten into fine schools, as long as your up-front/honest about it.

You have a great score and GPA. Add a year or two of work experience in there, especially if law related in some way, and you'll be a strong candidate for most/all of the T13 schools.

Good luck

[miskellyjohnson]

Just wanted to add that Harvard -- which should definitely be in your wheelhouse-- is very lenient on what you need to disclose. You do not need to disclose to Harvard:

• an arrest or other detention that did not result in a conviction, or in which a conviction was vacated;
• a first conviction for any of the following misdemeanors: drunkenness, simple assault, speeding, minor traffic violations, affray
or disturbance of the peace; or
• any misdemeanor conviction that occurred more than five years before your application for admission, unless you were also
sentenced to imprisonment, or were convicted of any additional offense within the five year period.
• any adjudication or conviction that has been expunged, sealed, annulled, pardoned, destroyed, erased, impounded, or otherwise ordered by a court to be kept confidential.

Given this, read over them and there is a chance you do not even need to disclose to Harvard (although, even if you do its probably not going to be that detrimental).

[tinman]

Miss Kelly’s advice in on point. You could be an autoadmit at Harvard with those numbers. My first thought is that you should get a legal opinion on which top schools to disclose this to, to protect you if you fail to disclose. I’ve been a lawyer too long!!

[nixy]

It’s been a while since I applied but the questions are usually relatively clear. I don’t think the OP needs a lawyer at all. Read the questions, disclose if the question requires disclosure, and they’ll be fine - I can’t imagine either of these things will pose a significant problem for applications.

[lshopeful9]

Thank you all for the responses! I’m glad to hear that I’ll probably still be in the running for top schools.

I actually did not know how lenient Harvard (which is definitely close to, if not my top choice) is with disclosures. So that gives me some peace of mind.

And sounds like it doesn’t matter too much, but I am actually a woman, and the verbal harassment incident happened with other girls. I don’t think woman-to-woman harassment is gonna look any worse than man-to-man harassment but just as a side note, if it’s applicable.

[Dcc617]

Remember that the point is to disclose and then briefly explain why it's not an issue. It won't help to go into a lot of depth or try to rationalize or whatever. Generally, the shorter the better.

[QContinuum]

And sounds like it doesn’t matter too much, but I am actually a woman, and the verbal harassment incident happened with other girls. I don’t think woman-to-woman harassment is gonna look any worse than man-to-man harassment but just as a side note, if it’s applicable.

I think that poster's main concern was whether the incident might (appear to) involve any shades of sexual harassment or sexism. That would be viewed as much more severe. I don't think the genders involved matter (obviously, men can sexually harass men, and women can sexually harass women); it's more the nature of the harassment.

[Arbinshire]

Working: Working 25 hours during undergrad? Must be nice. I worked 40-50. Law schools didn't care.

C&F: If they ask, disclose. If they don't ask, disclose anyway. Frame it as a growth/upward trajectory.

[hatelawandgoinghome]

Working: Working 25 hours during undergrad? Must be nice. I worked 40-50. Law schools didn't care.

C&F: If they ask, disclose. If they don't ask, disclose anyway. Frame it as a growth/upward trajectory.

Did you have to make such a snarky remark?