Important Notice Re: Building Security Starting July 23

I'd really like to address the contents of the email from CWSL that heavily inferred that there was a reason to believe I was about to commit a crime. It starts out saying I have contacted you and that it raised concerns. What are these concerns? Who has these concerns? They continue with stating how they haven't received any direct threats of violence (which, of course, infers that they've received indirect threats of violence), and they take safety concerns very seriously. That was the first paragraph of the email. Wrapping up that first paragraph, I understand it to say: My email to students has raised safety concerns with the school, even though I haven't made any direct threats to the school not did I send the email to the school. Well, let's see what this email said:

In analyzing this drunken email I sent (Jesus, look at those typos), all I see is asking students to click on a link to my blogs. No safety concerns there. Hm.

Assistant Dean Ponciano's email goes on and on about the rules regarding the lockdown and the extra security guards.

Finishing up with the final paragraph, Dean Ponciano states, "We realize that this email may cause some concern..." There is SO much concern in this letter . . . it's a shame the same concern wasn't issued to me when I emailed him regarding the dubious grading practices.

I have to hand it to them . . . the insidious way they worded the email. They've completely absolved themselves of any legal responsibility by stating I haven't directly threatened them, but then leaves it vague as to what, if anything, I have done, to make you think that I must've done something.

To be clear, I have been back to campus exactly once since my dismissal which I blogged about, but didn't get a chance to elaborate what happened. This incident happened on the 16th and so it is possible that the email sent by Ponciano on the 22nd was in reference to this event. Here's what I put in my blog:

I didn't go into that much detail because NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED!

But, to clarify....

This is exactly how far I got into campus. I was there with my process server to serve court papers. I was with him because he is a friend of mine and was not familiar with the layout of the 225 building. Keep in mind, I had not been asked to stay away from campus, I hadn't even served them papers yet.

So the guards apparently knew me by sight and name and I informed them we were there to serve a summons. After they confiscated my school I.D. they went up to the business office and one of the staff members came down and gave me the general counsel's phone number. I thanked her and then I left.

This is what triggered their "standard protocols for managing security concerns." To me, it seems a little heavy-handed - I wonder if this happened every time the school got sued by a student. I don't recall anything like this happening in November. . .

STUDENTS' RIGHTS TO FAIR GRADING PROCEDURES

I was privy to an exchange between a few students who completely missed the mark as to the point of my complaint. This is my fault, because (and I've said this before) I'm not very good at explaining my side of the thing. So, although the mathematics is still important, it's not the focus of my lawsuit. I decide to focus more upon the school's policy.

So once the instructor submits a grade to the Registrar's Office it can no longer be changed.

And yet, they are.

My score of 85 got changed into a 3.33.

-Oh, it's not considered a change, but a conversion?

-Are there any rules to this conversion? I mean, could the office convert my 85 into a 0.52?

Their attorney would likely say:

That is technically true. Nowhere does it say that law schools need to adopt a linear progression when doling out grades. But....

1. The Registrar's Office is not allowed to change instructor grades: Student Handbook

2. Fairness and transparency in grading procedures: ABA Law School Requirements

3. Students expect a linear progression as that is the norm: Implied Breach of Good Faith...

4. Unfairly hindering students from reaching a 2.0 GPA: Implied Breach of Good Faith...

So although there is nothing that explicitly states how a law school must convert their grades (if, at all), there is reasoning to infer that it must be done in a way that preserves the original, relative value of the grade, is done in a proportional manner where the values can be accurately estimated, and does not unfairly reduce the value of the grade.

Ultimately, of course I'll have to show that CWSL DOES change the grades when converting them arbitrarily - and so here you go.

the video shows the ranges of what the professors give as scores and what the Registrar's Office subsequently assigns students for GPAs. If a professor wanted to give a student a score right in the middle - they would receive a 75.0. But the halfway mark in the Registrar's grading is 2.165, the student handbook would say we'd would get a 2.12.

Because it's the intention of the professor to give that 2.165, the Registrar's office is not just converting the grades they are, in fact, changing them.

For those of you who think I'm out of my mind or just plain wrong, PLEASE prove me wrong! Go into the Registrar's Office or the Vice Dean of Academic Affairs and ask them HOW the professor's grades are converted into the GPA score. If they give you a method or formula, that satisfies the above, then great!

Personally, I DO think that I'm on to something here. I mean,

1. their attorney attempted to blackmail me, and

2. they tried to paint me in a manner that it was necessary to increase security around campus.

I mean, if you have nothing to worry about, let's debate this on the merits of the case. CWSL would rather prevent the court of law from ever seeing this, and prevent the court of public opinion (that's y'all) from taking my claims seriously by painting me as possibly dangerous and unhinged. Why go through all that trouble if you believed you were absolutely within your rights to set up grading policies like this?

When I first decided to go into law, I did it with some trepidation. I don't like lawyers, for this very reason. But our society is dictated by laws that affects every one of us. And although we are all subject to them, very few of us actually can understand them. Even fewer of us have the means to hire someone to navigate that system for us. This is terribly unfair, and I recognized that there are many people who are in desperate need when confronted with what they perceive as an insurmountable problem. I have been in that situation, and it feels unfair and hopeless. That's how I want to help. I thought that Cal Western was a place that would facilitate that. I believe it used to be. Now...I just am losing faith. If the institution that is supposed to be teaching you these skills turns on you, and begins shady tactics - how do you continue on?

P.S. At the risk of getting all mushy, thank you, thank you, thank you to everyone who dropped an encouraging comment to me. You don't know how much that means to me. I didn't make that many friends my short time at CWSL, and the ones I did - I don't want to drag them into this out of fear of retaliation by the school - so I don't have an objective opinion on what I'm doing. The first couple comments I've received were all critical, but admittedly constructive. And in one conversation, classmates were calling me a psychopath and that I had some serious anger issues. I'm not saying that their views are wrong (or right), everyone is entitled to their interpretation of things - but when you're taking on an entity that is so much bigger than you, one that used to be your mentor of sorts, you really begin doubting yourself. The funny thing is, even if all the people who left me those words of encouragement are wrong, and I'm way off base and don't have a case - it doesn't matter. I know I'm doing the right thing, and it might not benefit me anymore, it might help other students down the road who are in a similar predicament. Thanks guys, so much!