Only One War Left

Justinian News

Time's Up for Naughty Nathan ... Recommendation that horrible NSW solicitor be derolled ... Misuse of online funding campaigns ... Spraying ripe and abusive language ... Trolling Robert Beech-Jones ... So unfit and improper as to be beyond reeducation ... Anthony Kanaan reports ... Read more >>

Politics Media Law Society


Sex, Bribes, and Club Fed ... Ms Maxwell comes out … Sex offender gets Bryan … The merry-go-round of sleaze … Protection rackets and shake-downs … Flashing orange light for Moloch … Thank God for rigged figures … Morpheus awake ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Act of gracelessness ... Kathleen Folbigg's miserable ex gratia payout ... Comparable awards in other miscarriage cases ... Weasel words from the NSW Premier ... Need for a proper system of compensation assessment ... Procrustes in a lather ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


 

Fifty-six general members of ART rolled over for another three years ... AG's announcement >>

Justinian's Bloggers

Postcard from London ... Summertime - And the living' is easy ... Votes for 16-year olds ... Paralegal's theft by pen ... Spy helping British intelligence from his job at Border Force ... Super-injunction comes out of the shadows ... Feed them strawberries and cream ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files from Blighty ... Read more >> 

Justice Wigney: So let’s put aside the calling of other further witnesses – how could [Lehrmann] have conducted his case differently?”

Zali Burrows [for Lehrmann]: Let's just say there was a version of what happened that there was loud music playing and screaming or something else happening ... 

Justice Wigney (interrupting): That seems to be entirely hypothetical, because no one was suggesting that version of events, so let's focus on how you say Mr Lehrmann would have conducted his case differently.

Ms Burrows: It’s difficult to know, not being his lawyer at that time.

Justice Wigney: Well, you’re making the submission.

Lehrmann v Network Ten. Full Federal Court appeal ... August 21, 2015  ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Schmoozing and Betrayal ... Judge Water Softener rides into Integrityville mounted high on his horse ... Judicial review of corruption finding ... Unprecedented assistance to morals monitor ... Plenty to think about ... Court reporter Ginger Snatch files ... Read more >> 

 

 

Justinian's archive

The Tamil Times ... The corruption wars ... Blitzkrieg from The Australian's legal affairs man ... Campaigns to sink ICAC and 18C ... Battles lost in the trenches ... Where are they now? ... Extravagant fulminations ... From Justinian's Archive, April 8, 2017 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« A ray of sunshine for the Sunshine State | Main | Gagging the lawyers »
Monday
Feb022015

The Clash

Fighting tooth and nail in the law school trenches ... Ruinous timetables ... JD student Barely Legal asks, "why am I here?" 

Why am I here?

I'M hunched over a law library desk on a glorious summer's day. My summer Evidence exam is due in three days, and I'm procrastinating. My eyes dart to the top right of the dim screen, a little red number has appeared in my Facebook notifications panel. It's from my Juris Doctor Facebook "support" group - "New timetable is out! There is a clash! Corps and Admin!" - zero likes. 

Facebook "support" groups, set-up by law student cohorts, are now the standard forum for communication among the legal studentry (thank you Strunk & White). 

Official university communication systems are notoriously antiquated and impractical; they are shunned as a matter of Gen Y principle. Social media, particularly Facebook, are essential coping mechanisms for the modern law student. 

All members of the JD Facebook group join the thread and we proclaim our collective intention to lobby the Dean to make a change to the timetable, to avoid the clash. Why should we pay for two subjects and only get to attend one? - Why aren't they recorded? - Who does this "Dean" guy think he is? 

Our year begins as it always ends, in the law school trenches, fighting tooth and nail. Law students are enduring more grenades than usual, what with dim job prospects upon graduation, vicious competition among peers for volunteer legal positions, and Christopher (Lone) Pyne's pending neo-liberal tertiary dystopia just around the corner. 

Should I stay or should I go? 

The administrative shrapnel that comes with a new timetable marks the beginning of a fresh university year. The trepidation expressed by my Juris Doctor support group is common among law students. Clash? Overload? What will I do? In this timetable lies ruin! 

Timetable panic (it's probably a medical term) represents an existential crisis for law students and brings on a flurry of pressing questions: why am I doing this ... why am I here ... why am I spending all of this money? As Mr Mick Jones wisely asked, "Should I stay or should I go?" 

To be a Juris Doctor student is to have the experience of another degree in my bindle, and so this existential crisis is somewhat dulled, through repeat trauma or through experience. 

As graduate students surrounded by young wide-eyed LLB babies, JDs hold a more acute sense of the future. We await the whistle to charge into the year and the workforce more keenly than our LLB counterparts. 

We are older, our legal qualification arrives two years earlier, and we are spending far more money doing this thing called "law". 

We understand that real life is just over the mound, and it scares us, it begets anxiety every time we see our year planned out before us in timetable form. 

Like Sisyphus and his rock, JD students start each year with the conviction that it will be easier, only to realise that the law has no particular end point, it is by nature repetitive.  

JD student - on the way up

So too in practice, it is not possible to "complete" the administration of justice. As Sisyphus and Drake did, we must again start at the bottom, and work our way up. 

The timetable is the first step. But, how do we convince ourselves to keep going, to keep pushing, to keep trying, without turning to the tired cliché, I'm a law student therefore I'm a masochist

If there is no end, how to begin?

And I heard him say …

The answer presented itself to me at the beginning of my Evidence summer intensive. I found myself enclosed by three tope coloured walls facing the rapid flicker of a projector screen. 

Below the screen my lecturer waves her arms around, explaining to the theatre the 30,000th layer of hearsay in our Evidence problem scenario. 

"But it's an admission!" yelps one young man, head in hands, his brain on the verge of leaking onto the floor. He could not have been older than nineteen, an LLB student. 

"Ahh, no …" retorts our lecturer. "Admissions only affect first hand hearsay statements made by the D." 

Undeterred she pushes on, her enthusiasm for pedantry is astounding. 

After the lecture I approach the young man, and ask if he'd like to grab a coffee and work on hearsay. We sit down for our fix and I ask him what brought on his yelp and subsequent mini-meltdown. 

Coffee cup raised to his lips, he says: "I can't handle this intensive, it's driving me insane ... I think I'm going to quit law." 

Why, I ask, did he chose to do the Evidence intensive and not the standard unit. "It was a timetabling issue," he said. 

The law school trenches are a deep and often thankless place. But, we contain our crises and drink coffee and diarise our diaries. 

How do Juris Doctor students begin their new year? We tame our timetables. 

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Member Account Required
You must have a member account on this website in order to post comments. Log in to your account to enable posting.