This incident was partly memorialized in Scott Turow's Personal Injuries, facts changed for reasons of the story, which was blended with a fictionalized account of Operation Greylord, the feds' early 80s attack on crooked judges in the Cook County Circuit Court, a prosecution in which Turow played an important supporting role as an ASUA.
Simply being the "wrong kind of person" to get into a "good law school" or a big firm of whatever is not crashing if you do finish law school and pass the bar. Then you are a lawyer and legally entitled to victimize the weak and helpless, oops, I didn't say that. But as a prof at 4th tier law school I am concerned to get the Wrong Kind of Students (who graduate law school and pass the bar) into those sorts of places.
Btw, I don't believe that giving right wing answers helps a bit. Associates and many partners at big firms, especially in Chicago, are more likely than not to be liberal Democrats. One May First some years go while working at Jones Day, I was riding the elevator up with a partner, and I said to her, Happy Law Day. Or, if you prefer, Happy May Day. I prefer May Day, she said.
And law professors DEFINITELY tend to be liberal to mildly leftish (not hard left, so I have to be well behaved -- I'm too left, or if I'm not I don't want to find out) as a group, unless you area applying to George Mason (yikes) Ave Maria or Regent's School of Law. Even at U of C law profs are reasonably likely to be liberals, and the conservatives are are too smart to be buffaloed by ideological smoke. I send Ian's post on a Marxist analysis of law firm life to a well known right wing instructor at U of C LS with whom I am friendly, and he said it was "spot on," totally persuasive.
I didn't see conservative bias in the LSATs, but it has been some time since I took them.
--- Andy F <andy274 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/26/07, Tayssir John Gabbour
> <tayssir.john at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Here are the examples of "crashers,"
> non-professionals who
> > successfully posed as having credentials:
>
> I haven't gotten back to the book yet, but at least
> from what you
> posted they sounded like people who just were
> skilled without having
> credentials. That doesn't prevent them from having
> the right
> professional attitude/ideology (maybe the ex-con
> lawyer was
> different). In fact, if they didn't exhibit that
> sort of outlook they
> probably would have had their credentials examined
> more closely and
> been uncovered sooner. People with faked
> credentials don't do well by
> sticking out.
>
> By comparison, consider the experience of my
> well-credentialed (AFAIK)
> environmental lawyer friend: for coaching for the
> LSATs he went to a
> fellow who specializes in getting the Wrong Kind of
> People into law
> school. He explained that one session went like,
> "NO! You're
> thinking like [some famous leftist attorney].
> Think! How would
> George Will answer that?" That's a crasher
> schooling crashers.
> (Apologies to Andie.)
>
>
> --
> Andy
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
____________________________________________________________________________________ 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news