Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About noredeisgnr

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Very possible but start studying for the LSAT NOW aim for mid 160's +
  2. Fair enough. If your top schools look at average LSAT scores and if your current CGPA means unlikely being accepted to anywhere you've applied then it may indeed be beneficial to cancel. To my knowledge cancelling an application won't have a negative affect on future applications. Good luck on your future LSAT testing.
  3. I believe most schools look at your best LSAT score rather than average them. If I were you, I'd rather stay put and take my chances for this years cycle. You've already sunk money, time and effort into your applications, I'm not a fan of the idea of going back on everything you've done so far just to have a better shot at schools that average LSAT scores. With that being said, you may find the alternative to be more appropriate depending on where you want to go (e.g your top choice/ only choice is a law school that averages LSAT). Principally tho, I'm not fond of cancelling for that purpose. As for significantly changing other aspects of your application, I'm not sure. Common sense however says theres no need to do that unless theres some mistake or you have something irreconcilably better. I can't imagine admissions expecting a batch of new sub par narratives for every rejection that later re applies. Short answer: if you think you've done good on your PS and others, then no.
  4. Don't cancel your score. Admissions aren't dumb, they're not going to assume a cancelled score was a score ranging 160-170. So in short, no one cares about a first take 154. On top of that, you've already applied and paid for applications; just use that 154 and see if you get anywhere. If not, then go ahead trying again for next cycle.
  5. Can't speak to your work, and that doesn't really sound like your primary concern anyway, but rather dealing with a lack of organization, concentration, motivation, and an overarching feeling of everything falling apart. I've seen a few replies and already can guess the rest of the replies follow suit in the fashion of "go easy on yourself" or something along those lines. Not to say these aren't helpful replies, although admittedly I've never really found them to connect or be helpful but thats probably just me seeing as everyone generally participates in sharing such sentiments. Instead I will offer some simple anecdote to tackle what I consider to be your primary concern as mentioned. Your day is only as good as your morning: Wake up early, head straight into the shower, get dressed (even if you're not leaving home), have breakfast, coffee, get to doing what needs to be done. All my good days begin with a strong morning that follow these steps. If you're not doing this, do it.
  6. Do not purposely misconstrue what I write and do not purposely pull out of context my previous writing. I'm not sure what you mean by "assist an unqualified person in practicing law". Where have I indicated that I am "practising law" ? It seems to be that reviewing disclosure as a volunteer is not unheard of. Enlighten me with these formal qualifications necessary in order to review disclosure. Additionally, to say that reviewing disclosure is "practicing law" seems to be something of an unimaginable stretch of the imagination. From this baseless assumption alone, the remainder of your rant can be dispensed with. Regardless, I will emphasize those related points: I am not working "on cases in some capacity"; my duties are strictly to undertake what is requested of me with respect to reviewing disclosure. No part of my task involves any kind considering or providing legal advice or anything along those lines. My tasks are subject to review, and as I've already said, are always independently and separately undertaken by my supervising lawyer. This was made pretty clear in response to your foolish and dangerous remark asserting that other lawyers are relying on myself. You say I shouldn't be doing what I'm doing (which is disclosure review) because I do not understand the appropriate boundaries concerning disclosure review. In this case, provide me the appropriate boundary of which I seemingly do not understand and then maybe we can further the conversation towards something productive. I am wanting resources to enhance my understanding of the material I come into contact with (disclosure). What you mean by self study is vague and the way you attempt to connect this to your incorrect categorization of my tasks as "working on cases" is just reckless. Rather, what a reasonable interpretation of this is: that I would like to know the meaning of that which I am necessitated to read in order to accomplish what I have been assigned to accomplish. I quote myself from my previous post you reference, and include my final reply to a separate poster from that thread that you have so conveniently left out, and that also addresses what you are now referencing, which was brought up more than a handful of times in the previous post. To add, that post was a little over a year ago. Yes at that time I overestimated greatly the importance of volunteering. Yet here I am, having already turned in my applications on November 1st, and yet I'm still volunteering. Who would have thought that engaging in volunteering could be more than just something to pretty-up your application with. I don't denigrate applicants mentioning their LSAT and GPA, I only humorously note the pretentious attention dedicated. I did this to make a personal separate point about the overall impression generated by the discussion amongst applicants in this forum, and implicitly, how something akin to your initial reply contributes to the prominence of such impressions. With all that being said your reply is a mixture of pathos, strawmanning, and referencing an unrelated post in an attempt to justify the former two. Really, you just sound like a bit of a drama queen. If you're really curious about what happened to my volunteering in PI. I left to give more time and attention towards beginning studying for the LSAT and improving my GPA. I didn't 'dodge' any questions relating to the two, I just didn't care to answer those questions because not only were they irrelevant to the conversation I was focused on, but I also did not have those two figures at the time to provide. You're searching for skeletons in an empty closet.
  7. Absolutely. This is the fundamental mutual understanding between myself and my supervisor. I don't know exactly what my limited value translates into for them, but I do know that this limited value nevertheless exists as taken from the fact that they open the door for me every morning I arrive. For that apparent limited value I do expect in return some sort of knowledge, exposure, or guidance - this they provide and I consider fair. The least I could do is upkeep my limited value: be prompt, give effort, ask questions, seek information etc.. all which continue to result in what is hopefully incremental increases in the limited value I provide. Through this process, I have landed at the point in which I would like to do some relevant reading on my own time - particularly, to better understand the advice, knowledge, and guidance they share as often times in explaining, say a complicated situation, I clearly sense that there is simply too much involved to communicate in simple terms without losing a significant portion of the intended meaning or accidentally providing incorrect/incomplete knowledge/advice. I can sense this frustration of communication and hope, through doing my own reading, to alleviate this and ultimately increase the quality of our interactions (or two way street). In short, I am just noting that I do indeed see mentorship as the greatest utility here. Which then brings me to @artsydork ; I have the book 'Learning Canadian Criminal Procedure' by Don Stuart and others. I asked my supervisor if he had such resources laying around and borrowed this book from him. It addresses many topics, including those you've mentioned such as bail hearings and sentencing and I exactly thought this as I was reading; that the topics discussed are done so in a more abstract fashion than what I had initially expected, and yes it has been incredibly helpful (and interesting might I add). I will explore all your suggestions as they seem to be very much inline with what I am looking for. Thanks for both your replies and help, I very much appreciate it.
  8. I put firm in quotation marks to avoid comments like this, as technically I volunteer under a supervising lawyer within a legal chamber or whatever it is actually called. As for this apparently sketchy arrangement; they don't rely on me. I merely and mainly review disclosure and make notes of any particulars that I am requested to make notes of. 95% of the time I come up short handed, and the task will always be undertaken again by an actual lawyer - Im surprised I'm even kept around, they do more for me by providing me the educational opportunity of observing and learning all things defence related. They explain certain criminal procedures when I ask, but there's only so much they can explain given they're busy. I have an interest in Criminal Defence, and my arrangements heavily lean on benefiting myself rather than the 'firm'. No ones got a gun to my head forcing me to read about criminal procedure. This is entirely out of my own ambition and interest in the field. Maybe your skepticism is justified, I can't really say since I'm just a lowly volunteer who knows nothing, but I take some offence to your jumping conclusions. The 'firm' goes above and beyond for me, maybe this is rare, but it warrants I correct what you're suspecting. Either way I appreciate your concern if intended in good nature but I assure you strongly that what you are suggesting is not the case. ----- I'd also just like to add as a part of my reply and for anyone else who intends to continue this unrelated topic of discussion. I emphasize my respect for the 'firm' that has permitted my volunteering. I'm glad I can speak on something other than a CGPA and LSAT score. Being a volunteer does not immediately translate to being an illegal office slave. Every time I browse this forum relating to law school applicants all I see are topics and conversations about grades and LSAT scores and it slightly pisses me off that this is the epitome concern in the life of the typical applicant, despite being rightly so, but it nevertheless is unsettling. So my opinionated two cents is, if you're getting 0L's asking a question that is something other than "4.0 CGPA + 180 LsaT ChANcE Me" or "My LiFE is OVEr UOfT JuST reJECted ME" perhaps relax with the hostility and skepticism. I add this because I asked for a book recommendation, and @CleanHands refuses to provide a beneficial resource that he presumably has, because of a concern, whether justified or unjustified, about some apparent sketchiness. I don't know about you, but If I was a practicing lawyer I think I'd be pretty ecstatic to engage in conversation or provide advice to an applicant about something other than admission chances and academic grades. Even if it was an arrangement as he's described, I'm not sure how the idea of omitting to provide a generally beneficial resource would be congruent with such concerns. I've mentioned I already have a book that happens to be outdated. Im just baffled is all. Anyway that is all.
  9. Law school applicant volunteering at Criminal defence 'firm'. Looking for a book recommendation on Canadian Criminal Procedure. I am currently reading one however it is outdated (2006).
  10. You are right, and I have conflated the two, administrative and legal into something more simpler than it actually is. I find myself questioning some of my prior presumptions. I will heed your criticism.
  11. This has been the overwhelming consensus of replies. I was under a false impression prior to making this thread. The replies have prompted me to re-evaluate my current perceptions and choices. This comment has pretty well summarized it, I will be requesting this thread to be closed. Thank you everyone for your input. I took something away from this post, something I did not know; precisely what I was looking for.
  12. Not legal advice, administrative. I can not make it any more clearer that I am not interested in the legal aspects other from an educational perspective.
  13. I suppose 'depth' was not the best word to use here, as it seems to be giving off a particular idea that is not what I intended to represent. What I mean by 'depth'; Is to be working on a PI case from beginning to end, in which I may understand the inner workings well enough so that I can act in a proactive fashion and provide input that may aid in efficiency and best-possible outcome of the case, all the whilst taking into account the constraints of my legality as a volunteer. To contrast this, I at the moment undertake the mentioned tasks within the original post at the discretion of my superior (a lawyer). 'In depth' refers to being able to undertake the tasks mentioned above and all those similarly administrative that I have not yet learned to complete, but at my own discretion via nature of being well versed enough to no longer require awaiting my superiors instructions.
  14. I don't understand. Do you believe my volunteering arrangements are counter intuitive ?
  • Create New...