To be honest, I wonder how many partners or JP also cheat sia. This issue must have been cankering for very long. If 1 of them cheated and still managed to be a partner, and bullying the NQs some more, these people really have a place reserved in hell.

Another thing, i wonder how the jurisdiction might be if this happened in UK or US. Quite ashamed that this is how it ends in SG

CHT also said “They are loathe to shut the door on a wrongdoer with no prospects of redemption. But they also have a duty to prevent a repeat of the wrong, and to do so without breaking young backs in the process.”

“But second chances are for those who seize them. If ever they were to plead for a third, I wish them good luck.”

Can we also apply this to rapists, drug smugglers, kidnappers and murderers too, if they are young

:/straitstimes.com/singapore/5-other-trainee-lawyers-applying-to-be-called-to-the-bar-also-cheated-in-2020-exam-agc

Looks like therere more than 6. The 2020 bar exam cohort is tainted thanks to these losers. Everybody will always be wondering whether those who managed to get called had also cheated but escaped detection. Bozos

Will they also be given a soft rap on the knuckle too? Any of them in Big 4? tsk tsk.....

CHT said that he's giving the initial 6 a second chance but may not be so kind to others in future.

I think he spoke too soon lol. It's a total of 11 now with possibly more on the way.

Where's the line going to be drawn? What if even more cases surface? What if it transpires that there are a total of say 25 cases?

Are all of these guys going to be given second chances too?

Actually the only way to test people's integrity is to put them in a position of compromise. Do they then take advantage of the situation or not?

I believe that there are cheaters-at-heart in every batch, but this batch apparently took their exams remotely which created the chance to cheat via Whatsapp. For most batches in the past, the exams were held conventionally in exam halls. The opportunities to cheat (in such a manner at least) were close to zero and hence people rarely cheated.

Does this mean that those from previous batches had more integrity? Not necessarily. They simply were not tested on their integrity.

Out of the 6, I get the sense from news reports that the 5 who owned up quickly really just stumbled in a moment of weakness. But the one who denied her wrongdoing until the last minute seems like a pretty jialat character. At least she should be named for the sake of society.

Charles yeo kor kor know who the 6 are
CHT want play nice guy
Doesn’t mean we cannot name n shame them

No gag order and Choo j can't anyhow impose a gag order on this case. On what basis? Can name and shame them ah

U want people like them to settle your divorce case? Or to fight for Ur defamation case? Eh they may have taken bribe from the opposition and purposely makes u lose Ur case. Issit got white horse among these 6?

If a judge's verdict is not neutral, I think we shd get AI to help in judgment. Papa Choo too kind and loving liao.

Now news say got 11 liao. Not just 6.

Hope we can have another high court judge to look into this. Or are they just birds of the same feather ah?

More interested to see what Shanmugam, Adrian tan will say about this scandal. Those LinkedIn top voices suddenly so quiet, looking at you, Ms. TSMP. Even Lim Tean so quiet also

TC offer
 

Hi, I received a TC from A&G in their M&A department. Is this a good place to go to in terms of career progression/opportunities because a lot of my friends have been saying that it's a terrible place. If anyone has any insights, I'd appreciate it!

Haha what a troll. A&G hasn't even opened applications for TC this year.

I actually got it last year but the question is the same because I'm wondering if I should change department/firm lol.....

I actually got it last year but the question is the same because I'm wondering if I should change department/firm lol.....

Guy really just compared earning a professional license with rapists and murderers.

Those who cheated, by reason of case laws and statutory principles from the LPA, should be entirely barred from the legal profession.

Whilst it is recognised that the cheaters are not subject to the rules from LPA, they are entering a profession with the highest standard of integrity and thus the rules that apply to legal professionals should also apply to them.

There are also policy reasons for doing so - to uphold the public’s trust in our legal profession and to strongly discourage future candidates from doing so.

We should also maintain fairness to those who achieved the results through their sheer hard work. Those who tried to go through the easy path through blatantly and dishonestly disregarding the rules should be punished for their actions.

I hope the Court will do a thorough review on this and punish the wrongdoers fairly.

Who are the wrongdoers? Sic names

i disagree. why deprive them of chance to practise?
i mean lawyers are not known to be the most honest profession.

By admitting these six new lawyers to the bar, the law profession mediocre integrity will be truly and correctly reflected. This benefits the public actually. As the public is now reminded of the mediocre integrity, and may exercise due diligence.

Choo is smart. Why kill off the 6 by himself? The court of public opinion will kill them off later. Plus, he gets to look like a kind and loving papa.

Names are redacted. They will go on to be employed like nothing happened and proceed to continue this behaviour in practice.

Some people already know who they are.
SIC reveal.

How to find the SIC reveal?

Can trace their AAS numbers

From the written judgment
Lalita Chelliah for applicants in AAS 14, 22, 23, 29 and 30 of 2022;
Cheryl Ng for applicant in AAS 27 of 2022.

Better be careful. If they can cheat once, they can cheat twice, thrice. It gets worse when they have their own firms or join politics. Humans, in general, do no change easily.

I really don't see why we are being so lenient to these 6 (or 11) when it has been repeated ad nauseum that integrity is not to be compromised in this profession.

Just last week, a very respected family law senior practitioner was suspended for 3 years by the Court of 3 Judges for inter alia being dishonest to his client and the court in the conduct of a case. The court also found that the lawyer did not benefit from his dishonesty, nor did the dishonesty ultimately caused the client harm.

While involving different circumstances and fora, the juxtaposition of outcomes could not have been more stark.

If, as has repeatedly been emphasized, misconduct involving dishonesty will often lead to an order for striking of, the outcome in this cheating saga is seriously hard to rationalize.

These students also had the academic credentials to sign with the big firms. It really makes you wonder why they cheated. Hope AGC publishes their names for the world to see. They owe it to the public.

These trainees were effectively suspended for 6 months to a year due to their cheating. I think that is a proportionate penalty considering that (a) they were trainee lawyers and were not yet subject to the professional conduct rules; (b) their dishonesty was not directed at the courts or any client; and (c) they are relatively young and immature.

In contrast, the senior family lawyer had 20+ years of experience, should know better, his misconduct involved deceiving both his client and the courts, and when caught he fought the dishonesty charges for 7 years instead of coming clean quickly.

All cases of dishonesty ought to be punished, but it is right that there should be distinctions depending on the seriousness of the conduct and the circumstances also.

Dishonesty is dishonesty. Why must be directed at anyone. It’s an integrity issue, not competency issue. Are u also one of them ah

Where is Mr "If I am the King of Singapore"? No one told him about the students cheating? Where is the LinkedIn post?

how does the sealing order normally work?

i suppose minimally you wont be able to actually obtain inspection of any cause paper. but if you can still use the number to look up actual party names (as opposed to CTA or other code names), it seems to defeat the purpose of Choo J's order.

or is it the case that the actual names are supposed to be substituted with code names, but elit didnt have time to implement the order of court yet?

The cheating issue is very serious - how is this fair to those who have studied hard to pass? Let's work together to name these people.

Curious - is there a way for members of the law society to write a letter to the Court to express our opinions regarding how these people should not get called?

Law soc is now saying they will carefully review the applications.
But why makes things so difficult for our new colleagues???

Give them a chance. Twenties still young
Havent mature yet. Cheat a little bit is okie
Why so harsh

Charles Yeo is saying that some of the cheaters are from NUS and some are not? He also referred to their law firms in very cryptic terms? The suspense!

Give them a chance to mature their cheating skills. Bar exam cheating no kick. Let them become lawyers and do a David Rasif, that’s the gold standard!

David rasif is amateurish. A pitiful 4mil client monies
We need jho low - $10billion usd

I was one of the part b candidates who passed the exams through my own hard work without any help during the exam, like many others. We had the choice of communicating with each other during the exam, but chose not to because we held on to the integrity of the profession that we were about to join. I would also rather use any extra time to figure out my own answers rather than to seek answers from someone else.

I am naturally disheartened and find it extremely difficult to reconcile with the outcome, that the cheaters have been left unscathed by their dishonest mistakes. This is no way fair to candidates who respect and hold on to the integrity of the profession. If they can cheat and be left unscathed (delaying their call by 6-12 months is nothing), then what makes you think they will not do it again in future? They need to be held to the same standard as the standard which applies to the profession they are entering into. I am afraid those peers of mine, like myself, are mature and capable enough of making our own informed decisions of whether to cheat or to value integrity. I am afraid they are not young teens anymore. They are clearly not fit and proper for the legal profession.

My peers and I would gratefully appreciate any advice on how we can ensure that the cheaters, who clearly show signs of dishonest at such an early stage, are being disbarred from entering into the profession, or at least being named.

TLDR: I want to know which firms are going to have NQ vacancies.

all this talk about the "choice" of doing something dishonest ... reminds me of some of the points made in the COP proceedings.

File an affidavit objecting under rule 28. Practically though you would need to figure out when their applications are going to be re-heard. Perhaps you'd need a system to track when the AAS numbers are up for hearing.

From my admittedly unreasearched POV, I don't think it is in principle a barrier to object even without knowing the applicants' identities. The gist of the objection would be their conduct in cheating, as reported in the judgment and the news, in that they are not fit and proper persons. If anything, this shows that your objection is not driven by personal animus but by objective facts.