Thursday, August 22, 2013

War Chests and About Faces

LSAC reports another drop in law applications
Money Quote: Applicants are down 12.3% and applications are down 17.9% from 2012.

33rd student gets into Indiana Tech the day before the school opens
Money Quote: "We’ll take him."

Case Western curriculum undergoes sweeping changes
Months after his shameful New York Times editorial, Lawrence Mitchell is boasting of "radical" changes in the curriculum.
Money Quote: "I have to admit I stole shamelessly..." Oh wait, that whole quote is "“I have to admit I stole shamelessly from the medical school because it puts students in the role as soon as they can." So close, Larry.


  1. did you miss this paragraph at the bottom of the story?

    "The second thing is you have to have a thick skin. There are people in the blogosphere who are vicious with their comments. It allows them to be anonymous and it shows the darker side of our profession. I use them as Exhibit A for the need for more professionalism and ethics training. There’s no doubt that it’s hurtful to read things that suggest the faculty members are just trying to steal student’s money and that the school has no soul. In one case, we had a blogger who took off after one of our students and commented about the student for making this choice. You just have to have a thick skin because, unfortunately, there are people out there who do not have all the facts and have not done their homework but have very strong opinions."


    Oh, they will take him, all right. Take him for everything he's got.

    1. While making that comment about "taking him", Peter Alexander was reaching into his desk drawer for the Astroglide. He's going to take him, alright - up the asshole for three years, just like law school did to me.

      Man, he even looks like a rapist with that 'stache.

    2. I love the "didn't do their homework" part.

      Aside from the fact that I'm pretty sure we all went to real law schools (such as they are) for three years, which is about all the homework you need to know that the law school model is broken, it's the ultimate nerve coming from someone touting a need for another law school, especially in Indiana. I mean, for people whose LSAT scores can't even prove literacy but who nonetheless wish to waste their lives and taxpayer money by pursuing a dubious JD, Valaparaiso already exists.

      I Am willing, Indiana Tech will close before these unfortunate 33 graduate and they'll be able to discharge their loans.

  2. Intro to Public Relations 101: Never, never repeat your adversary's claims. It gives anyone who has not heard heard it a reason to think that those claims may have merit if someone is getting all cranked up about them.

    Eh, what do I care? Indiana Tech's experiment in vacuuming as much student loan money as it can will come to a quick end if more bodies don't show up. Remember, Indiana Tech sounds like a state school name, but it is not. It's a private school with a tiny endowment, so there is no state legislature writing the checks. Sink or swim, baby.

  3. "NLJ: How many students will arrive for orientation tomorrow?

    Alexander: I still don’t know. Thirty-two have paid both the deposits that were required to hold their seats, so we know we have 32. As I walked into my office this afternoon, I received notice from the admissions office that there is another student whose application is complete and who expects to start tomorrow if we admit him today. We’ll take him."

    That was the money quote, from Pig Peter Alexander. That statement truly shows you how selective these bastards are, people. He finished his application, and wanted to start the next day - if the rats accepted him the same day. Yes, these dogs truly care about their students, right?!?!

  4. "...our median age will be 33, which is significantly higher than most law schools..."

    Short story, Indiana Tech is signing up non-trads for an unaccredited JD program. It's essentially a brick-and-mortar version of "Solo Practice University." Hanging a shingle is the only option these students will have (assuming the school manages to keep its doors open).

  5. The new scam dean excels in phony outrage and pretend-sensitivity. I found this exchange from last year between Alexander and Paul Campos to be very funny, though it wasn't funny that Alexander cc'd his "complaint" to Campos's dean.

    Campos: "Chutzpah has been defined as murdering your parents and then pleading for mercy because you're an orphan....How about setting up another legal diploma mill in a hyper-saturated market, while claiming that what will set your school apart is its emphasis on 'ethics' and 'professionalism'?"

    Alexander: "[T]o equate the opening of a law school with murdering one’s parents is reprehensible."

    1. Peter Alexander is a douchebag.

    2. if you expect to be taken seriously you need to sound like adults. name calling is not going to convince any judges or people in power.

      its a good cause and a worthy battle. childish name calling turns a lot of people off.

      reading some of these childish comments I think I can understand why some people are in the state they are in.

    3. @10:10:

      You are a fool. This is not litigation or legislation. This is gutter public relations warfare, and the gloves came off a long, long time ago. The enemies have used the battlefield for acts of moral reprehensibility, to wit, fraudulent conduct and highway robbery, while calling out the people who dare challenge them as rude and uncivil. I refuse to respect such an opponent by affording them the courtesy and dignity that I do to the ambulance chasers and Penney-suit boomers I deal with in practice. These liars are worse than leaches covered in pond scum, and I will call them exactly what they are:

      -crusty purple vaginas
      -poo-poo heads
      -snake-oil salesmen
      -used car salesman
      -door to door used condom salesman
      -grave robbers with a time machine
      -syphilis-eared monkey turds

  6. I urge everyone to read the interview with "Dean" Alexander (2nd story listed in the main post.) It's a master class in why you should not attend this law school.

    My favorite quote: "You just have to have a thick skin because, unfortunately, there are people out there who do not have all the facts and have not done their homework but have very strong opinions."

    Sadly, he thinks he's talking about the scambloggers when he refers to those who don't have all the facts and who have strong opinions. But in reality, the true morons with their heads in the sand and strong opinions of how smart and successful they will be are the students attending his new law "school". They are the ones who have not got all the facts and who have not done their homework and who have very strong opinions. How else can someone explain why thirty two (or three) people have made such a screwed-up life choice? What facts are they listening to when they decided to attend this TTTTTTT? I'll tell you what facts - those shat out of the anus of "Dean" Alexander, the lies he has been spreading about how his school is different and better and a great opportunity and how it's not a scam.


    Indiana Tech School of Law: "The neck tattoo for your resume!"

    What a piece of crap. We have a great opportunity here, and that is to build negative publicity around this school far faster than it can generate good publicity. Our goal should be for this school to receive fewer applications next year than this year. It will not survive if it continues with thirty students each year.

    Keep up the articles and the comments. Keep up the pressure elsewhere on the internet. This school, its faculty and its students are all fair game. They knew what they were getting themselves into, and they should now all be used as examples to help others make better choices with their lives.

    I don't mean to sound harsh, but this is reality. This school is the nadir of the entire scam, worse even than Cooley at this point.


    1. I'm not sure. Do we normally blame the victims of scams? These are apparently some somewhat vulnerable individuals who have fallen victim to some slick hucksters. Not that slick really, but to people who are unfamiliar with how rotten the whole legal industry has become, slick enough.

      But read the evil bullshit peddled by Dean Alexander. Yes, evil. He will steal years of their lives that they are saddled with this monstrous debt, just to make a quick buck. Only I don't think this school is actually going to make any money. But the dean and his associates have all been paid in advance with debt that can be discharged in bankruptcy - unlike the debt they are saddling their victims with.

    2. Yes, in this case we do blame the victims. Because they have been told time and time and time and time and time again that they are making the worst mistake of their lives, yet they are stupid - nay, stubborn - enough to make it anyway.

      So let them.

      Thirty-three victims. Thirty-three examples that might help the next class from making the same retarded decision. Perhaps we can use their lost souls to save the next group.

      An open invitation to all scam victims from Indiana Tech - spill your details here, and you'll be doing us all a favor. Anonymity is the hallmark of this site, and I'm sure the writers here can't tell who you are even if they tried.

      Trust them. Spill the beans. Or the can of shit that Peter "Scam King and Pervert" Alexander is feeding you.

  7. Wow!

    Making "sweeping changes to cirriculum" in order to make sure students get some "practical experience" while in law school so they can get law jobs when they get out.

    Isn't this missing the issue? The present crisis is that there are insufficient jobs/positions to absorb an ever- increasing percentage of the schools' ever-growing output. If the problem were that law students were insufficiently trained to step into waiting positions, this glitch would have been corrected long ago.

    Certainly, the school must know today's market has long been flooded --in fact, overflooded-- with a legion of very experienced, seasoned lawyers who are desperate for paying jobs? And by 'experienced', I mean lawyers with 8+ years of quality practice under their belts. Certainly, the law school must be aware that semester-long externships or observational sessions are not the actual practice of law nor actual responsibility for a client?

    The law school cirriculum has no relationship to the health of the legal jobs market.

    Perhaps the school is simply talking about making grads ready for a solo practice. But going solo straight out of law school is a highly dubious proposition ... most of all for the newbie's clients. A large part of a lawyer's value to her client is her experience. While it's a free country and one is certainly free to 'hang a shingle' the day of bar passage, going solo on Day 1 isn't a highly desirable outcome from a public policy perspective. And from the newbie's perspective, there are 1000s of existing solos and the public has acted against what they perceive to be abusive lawsuits through many forms of tort reform.

    The statement that students need to come out with an understanding that law is a business and part of the responsibility is obtaining clients, raises some very interesting issues from an ethics and professional responsbility point of view, when viewed through the prism of a new solo.

    Business/market analysis is performed BEFORE one invests the time and money to open a new venture. Going to law school commits one to the venture years before these considerations can be made.

    If the school's target audience is the person destined to be the next solo, the ramifications of the 'business' aspect are most intriguing. Will lawyer advertising be taught in depth? Will the legal ramifications of running cases be stressed? Will the financial realities of providing your own insurance, office space, and computer research costs be addressed? The bounds of lawful competition? How to ensure your clients pay you?

    If the school's goal is to create an army of new solos, it appears the goal is at odds with both the market and sound public policy.

    Would not schools would do the profession and this country a far greater service by simply reducing their output by factor of half?

    1. All extremely reasonable questions. But I guarantee you that you will hear no real answers.

      I'm sure they will give us all plenty of rainbows and unicorns, though.

    2. Yeah, Peter Alexander will be doing his impression of a unicorn - single "horn" cock mightily erect, ready to impale each and every student in that class.

    3. Case Western deserves some credit. Moving on from the dean's disgusting commentary in the New York Times, they've reduced their admissions by 55% in three years, which shows some heart and conscience on their part.

      And this new "practice-ready" program, even though inadequate, requires the profs to spend more time teaching!! They're making history!!

  8. how are the professors at ind tech? are they full time academics? do they work elsewhere? do their employers want their name associated with this school and the scam?

    1. They don't work anywhere, and never have.

      How else would someone whiter than me become a rap law superstar?

      The faculty - take a look on the website - is a collection of absolute underachieving turds.

    2. ADPC just brought the hip to the hop to the Fort, y'all. Represent, dawg. He gonna lay down the letter about the po-lice.

      Rollin' through the corn, readin' Twombly, writin' an unread book. Laid back. (with my mind on loan money and loan money on my mind)

      (andre douglas pond cummings was a corporate law associate in Chicago BigLaw prior to finding his true calling being the law school scam's biggest wigger.)

  9. Indiana Tech Law will let its students know the rules when they make them up:

    "All Indiana Tech Law Students will be subject to an Honor Code that will set forth the rules that govern law student conduct. The faculty is in the process of drafting that Code and, upon adoption, it will be posted here."

    1. I bet huge money that one of those rules is that if they disparage the school, they will be guilty of some honor code violation for professional misconduct or something.



      2 - THE SCHOOL IS MAKING UP THE RULES AS IT GOES ALONG. Fuck, are they so dumb and pathetic that they can't at least use a standard template for an Honor Code? Jeezus retards, take one from any other school in the entire nation and you're good.

      These clowns couldn't organize a fuck session in a whorehouse.

      You need to leave now. This school is the punchline to every law school joke past and present. And you're paying 100K to be the guy or girl who is laughed at.

  10. So Case is "taking the lead" from medical schools and medical internships?

    Isn't that a false equivalency?

    Doctor-training and lawyer-training are far different. Physicians have far more prescribed and regulated prerequisites for Med School. The number of matriculants is relatively matched to the expected demand for practitioners. By contrast, Law School's a "Come one, Come all: Then see if there's work for you" proposition.

    The law schools' role in creating the current professional crisis was their overproduction of attorneys. The schools' admittedly odd teaching methods, calcified cirriculum, and less-than-helpful case books are all deserving of reform... but none of those features created the crisis.

    If the law schools want to be the vanguard of reform, they must stop milling students.

    If you must have a medical comparison, the Patient now weighs 450 lbs. He desperately needs to restrict his caloric intake.
    Proposing that he substitute pepperoni pizzas for cheeseburgers isn't a sensible solution.

  11. smarmy, self-satisfied shill here:

    1. Kevin needs to suck the cock of truth and get a mouthful of fact jism.

      Here's how he's showing that we've won the debate. Dumbass articles like his purile shit are now looked on as trash, whereas a few years ago scamblogs were looked on as trash.

      His pro-law filth is now viewed by most people as lies and unresearched dogshit.

      We've already won the intellectual debate here. We just have to win the minds of the countless fools who refuse to believe us simply because someone else (Peter Alexander, I'm looking at you!) fraudulently dangles $150K starting salaries in front of their greedy little faces.

      Why don't we counteract the whole shitmess? Here's the new rankings. #1 - Nando's TTR, where if you read for three years and don't go to law school you get a fake starting salary of $1,000,000. #2 - OutsideTheLawSchoolScam, where if you read for three years and don't go to law school you get a fake starting salary of $850,000.

      There, law school morons. How's about them fake employment stats. And when Nando's $1MM salary doesn't come true - just like your 90% employed with a median of $90K DOESN'T EVER FUCKING COME TRUE - then the courts will tell us that it's cool and nobody should have believed us in the first place?

      My fucking god, what a rancid toilet law school is these days, with Peter "Pedophile" Alexander and Andre "Actual-Real-Life-Rapist" (ask his prior school for details of what happened between him and one of his students, which might explain why he's moving to this Indiana toilet) Pond Cummings as turds in chief.

      LOL at those 33 miniturds, like the fart-separated balls of shit emitted like a machine gun after a fibrous meal and a ten hour road trip. They deserve every ass raping they get from Pervy Pete.


    2. Is Peter anywhere near being a pedo? Is there a basis in fact, or even in metaphor, for using that word?