Lawyer Salary

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.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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!

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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

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!

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

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

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

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.