Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 12, 2015 at 19:16 comment added gracey209 Yes, right. And under the law, in that case only means that you can answer "lawfully" that it didn't happen-but institutions and professional associations can also require an answer because that is a contractual relationship.
Sep 12, 2015 at 18:05 comment added Steve Jessop I suppose that special case shows the logical impossibility of certain things the law might like to do. It it were really the case that "under the law it is as if it never happened", then "under the law" you're telling the truth by answering "no" to the question, and so "under the law" there's no moral turpitude. Meanwhile, back in the reality inhabited by the law school and the bar, you actually were arrested and prosecuted and actually didn't tell the truth about it, and the situation "under the law" (in court) is irrelevant.
Sep 11, 2015 at 17:29 comment added gracey209 I know! I thought the same things when I first saw those questions on the applications. And when I got to law school (granted that was a while ago), but I still remember asking that very question! However, if the conviction is such that it would prevent you from getting a license or would negatively impact the reputation of the school because the crime implied moral turpitude, then it sort of makes sense on the other hand.
Sep 11, 2015 at 16:59 comment added feetwet Don't law students and practitioners take any umbrage at the fact that schools and bars demand expunged information, given that the very institution they support has declared the information non-existent? Why do they tolerate such requests?
Sep 11, 2015 at 16:57 history edited feetwet CC BY-SA 3.0
Copy edited
Sep 11, 2015 at 16:27 history answered gracey209 CC BY-SA 3.0