|
Volume 20, Issue 5 Diogenes  Spirits are high at Melbourne Law School this week. The LSS – champion of student rights – has declared triumph in its battle with the university’s cold-hearted bureaucracy.
It is said that students shall no longer have to slave away beneath the lash of online learning as it slowly yet endlessly deteriorates their grades. Indeed, the so-called ‘WAMnesty’ means that just like last year, students can opt to have this semester’s grades not affect their WAM in any way. For example, on one’s academic transcript a grade will look like this: ‘75^’ to indicate that it should not really be considered part of a student’s academic history. The celebration of students throughout Carlton and the wider world reached a fever pitch when the most prestigious top tiers agreed to keep WAMnesty in mind when assessing graduate applications. “Well, yes of course we won’t look at the grades students have elected not to affect their WAM,” a partner from one firm who asked not to be named told De Minimus. “To be honest, I just take a sharpie to the grades with little arrows next to them. Or if I’m feeling lazy I close my eyes and open them when I think I’ve skimmed past those subjects. By accident I saw that one student copped a 50 in Contract Law. But fear not! I made sure not to include that in my consideration when it came to rejecting his application,” the partner added. De Minimis should also report that the partner seemed to be suppressing a giggle throughout the interview, and may have burst into laughter on one or two occasions. Diogenes is a first year JD student. Volume 20, Issue 5 Matt Harper  Degrees by research are not something that most of us, especially in the law faculty, give much thought to unless we are directly considering doing one ourselves. But the importance of research to well-rounded universities, and indeed society as a whole, cannot be underestimated. It is for that reason that the government’s proposed changes to research funding should be criticised by all students no matter what we study.
The Department of Education, Skills and Employment is the body that oversees funding for research degrees (HDRs - Higher Degrees by research), and it has been tasked by the Government’s 2021-2022 budget to implement a new scheme ostensibly aimed at increasing researcher employability by increasing funding to universities whose research degrees incorporate industry internships. This initiative is part of the Research Training Program (RTP), which is the scheme under which the funding given to universities for their research degrees is determined. Currently, funding is determined according to three factors given different weight – 25% of funding per student is determined according to how much competitive income the University receives for that research, and another 25% is allocated on ‘Engagement’ income (essentially non-competitive income). The other 50% of funding per research student is determined by ‘completions’, or essentially how many students actually graduate with their research degrees. This is obviously problematic for many reasons beyond the scope of this discussion. These completions are, confusingly, further broken down and sorted according to various weightings (on a positive note, completions by indigenous students are weighted higher than non-indigenous in an effort to encourage a greater indigenous presence in research). It is through these weightings that the industry internships changes will take effect – once implemented, researchers who undertake an industry placement of at least 60 days over three months, within the first 18 months of their degree, will net their university a greater completions weighting than those who do not. For example, current low-cost research doctorates attract a weighting of 2.0, whereas the same doctorate with an industry internship will, under the new scheme, attract a weighting of 4.0, doubling the value of the 50% of research funding that graduations bring universities. Volume 20, Issue 4 Worth Director: Sara Colangelo Cast: Michael Keaton, Stanley Tucci, Amy Ryan, and Tate Donnovan Release Date: September 3, 2021 (on Netflix) Based on the true story, this film follows mediation and ADR specialist Kenneth Feinberg as he is appointed to administer the US government's Victim Compensation Fund. Created in the aftermath of 9/11, the fund provided varied levels of compensation to victims in exchange for an agreement that they could not sue the airlines involved. The film explores the ‘nuances of determining the value of a lost life’, which from both an ethical and legal perspective may be of great interest to us Law students. Michael Keaton and Stanley Tucci are greatly underappreciated actors that can be relied upon to deliver great performances, especially in a film such as this that provides them meaty material to sink their teeth into. It was not greatly rated out of Sundance, but it may be a rewarding watch. No Time To Die Director: Cary Joji Fukunaga (True Detective, Beasts of No Nation) Cast: Daniel Craig, Rami Malek, Lea Seydoux, Ana de Armas, and the rest of the usual Bond crew Release Date: October 8, 2021 (in Cinemas) Bond films are always exciting and worth viewing, and this one, Craig’s final outing as the character, has the added benefit of being able to provide a firm, conclusive ending to its narrative. Through Skyfall, Sam Mendes was not only able to create a good Bond film, but he was able to elevate the franchise by creating one of the better films of its year of release. The highs of Skyfall only made the lows of follow-up Spectre more disappointing, with that film returning to a more generic franchise style instalment. The reins of the franchise have since been handed over to Cary Joji Fukunaga, and it will be intriguing to see the direction in which he decides to take it. What may also garner attention is the unique combination of Fukunaga and Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag), who is credited as co-screenwriter after conducting rewrites on the high budget action film. Top Gun: Maverick Director: Joseph Kosinski Cast: Tom Cruise, Miles Teller, Val Kilmer, Ed Harris, Jon Hamm, and Glen Powell Release Date: 19 November (in Cinemas) It’s been thirty-five years since the release of the original Top Gun (1986), a film that is arguably the complete personification of toxic masculinity. Or, if you ask Quentin Tarantino, outrageously homoerotic. Does the original have… questionable elements, including being fundamentally military propaganda? Undoubtedly, but fuck it’s good. The premise of this sequel, the introduction of Miles Teller (Callsign: Rooster) as Goose’s son, and Maverick as an instructor, is enough to completely justify the decision to make this film. Korinski’s past projects include Oblivion and Tron: Legacy (not a great sign) but it does identify his strong skills with CGI. Take your dad along, guaranteed he’ll love it. Don’t Look Up Director & Writer: Adam McKay (Vice, The Big Short, the good Will Ferrell movies) Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Jennifer Lawrence, Jonah Hill, Cate Blanchett, Merryl, Chris Evans, Timothee Chalamet, Ariana Grande, and many others Release Date: Unconfirmed, late 2021 (on Netflix) Two low-level astronomers, DiCaprio and Lawrence, must convince the world that an approaching comet will destroy the earth. This plotline, from what I can understand, acts as an allegory for the climate change debate with much allegorical satirisation of climate change deniers. This likely explains why keen climate change activist DiCaprio agreed to do the film, and in particular play a comedic role that is somewhat unfamiliar terrain for him. McKay has described the film as in-between his films The Other Guys (which I consider better than even Step Brothers) and The Big Short, which means this film should be hilarious while also masterfully explaining concepts and ideas in a theatrical manner.
Volume 20, Issue 4  Dear Spiralling at Seven Seeds, While a judgemental shrew at times, I try my best not to be a hypocrite. Having also just thrown myself on the altar of the commercial firms, I’m not going to harp on about the ways in which the clerkship process is ‘fundamentally broken’, ‘based on nepotism’ or ‘entrenched in elitism’. It is, but that doesn’t mean the desire to succeed within, or even in spite of this system isn’t still there. So rather than taking a carton of eggs on my next daily walk past 101 Collins, I’m instead going to treat you to some of my favourite, frustratingly true cliches. “CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHEN YOU GET TO IT!” First and foremost, applications closed a few days ago. It will be a little while before those rejections start flowing, if that is even what’s headed your way. Short of some psychometric tests over the next few weeks, there’s nothing you can really do between now and then. Let’s pause the spiral until it’s at least warranted and try not to fail Corps in the meantime. If that rejection tap does start flowing, then it’s go-time on the spiralling. Feel like shit, have a cry, engage in some self-care. Now, self-care doesn’t necessarily mean spending $72 on bath bombs and doing pilates. Rather, do something that will actually feel good and help you unwind. Go scream in the park, drink wine in the shower, bleach your hair, text an ex or have a 17-hour depression nap. Whatever you need to do, get it done. Rejection stings, put on some ointment and once it stops hurting, take the bandage off. (If you find you’re feeling particularly low about the whole process, beyond normal disappointment and frustration, it may be time to reach out and have a chat with someone.**) “EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON!” At worst this is a speed bump on the road to becoming Harvey Specter, at best it’s a freeway exit to the right path. If you want to be a lawyer, and I mean really want to be a lawyer, you’ll find a way in. This doesn’t have to change your life plan if you don’t want it to. Will getting a grad offer at a T6 be significantly more difficult without clerking? Yes. Is your dream of being a lawyer now completely down the drain? No. Even commercial firms have alternate ways of getting in down the line, let alone the large volume of boutique firms or other practice areas you could apply to. If you were never that keen on commercial law, even better! This could be the kick you needed to do some soul searching and figure out that you’d rather get serious about your WAG career than wear ugly suits and practice law for the rest of your life. “[INSERT BILLIONAIRE] DROPPED OUT AND LOOK WHERE THEY ARE NOW!” Now I’m not advocating for dropping out, although it's definitely on the table. My main point, however, is that no one is too good to fail. The clerkship process is fickle and, after a certain point, largely luck based. Failing at it is not an indictment on you personally. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad law student or will make a bad lawyer. The Dissenter-in-Chief himself, the Hon Michael Kirby failed to get a single offer from any of the top Sydney firms back in the day. Now don’t let your ego get too inflated, getting rejected by 20 firms doesn’t mean you’re the next Kirby, it means you’re not special. Spend your time wallowing, dust yourself off, and keep it moving – you’re not out of the game yet.
Somewhat sincerely, Your Learned Friend ** The MLS is already a struggle without the added burden of COVID-19, and there is no shame in reaching out if the struggle is more intense than usual. If you or someone else needs support, contact Lifeline at 13 11 14, or Beyond Blue at 1300 224 636. Volume 20, Issue 4 Publius  Over the past month, the Taliban have launched a lightning advance across Afghanistan, culminating in the capture of Kabul on the 15th of August. It is yet to be seen whether the new regime will be able to keep hold of their prize, and put a stop to the civil wars which have consumed Afghanistan for two generations. At this early stage, however, they seem poised to do so. They seized control of the restive Northern provinces before an effective resistance could be organised, capturing or driving off several prominent anti-Taliban leaders. It seems likely the world will have to come to terms with a new Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan.
Over the coming months, a great deal of ink will be spilled regarding the fallout from the Taliban’s lightning takeover of Afghanistan. The broad trends, however, seem relatively apparent, and global actors are scrambling to reposition themselves. Pakistan: Perhaps the most keenly felt effects of the new Afghan government will be felt in neighbouring Pakistan. Despite being a military ally of the United States, Pakistan has been consistently implicated in funding and supporting the Afghan Taliban, and it is likely the two countries will enjoy friendly relations. The ascension of the Afghan Taliban will greatly assist Pakistan in their ongoing campaign against the Pakistani Taliban. Don’t let their names confuse you: the Pakistani Taliban and Afghan Taliban are no friends of one another. On the contrary, they have been involved in frequent armed clashes. Pakistan has been waging a campaign to suppress the Pakistani Taliban for years, and suddenly look a lot more likely to succeed, with the fall of the Afghan Government which had indulged the Pakistani Taliban operating on Afghan territory. Furthermore, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has the potential to be another much-needed ally in Pakistan’s bitter conflict with main regional antagonist India. Pakistan has long been accused of supporting Islamic extremist groups operating in Indian-controlled territory, particularly in the disputed Kashmir region. Now, thousands of hardened Taliban fighters find themselves without domestic enemies, and might be induced to travel to nearby Kashmir. Volume 20, Issue 3  We’re of course assuming that each sign is a barrister arguing as prosecution counsel for a vulnerable client before a jury in a criminal law case.
Most likely 1. Libra 2. Pisces 3. Aries The peacekeeping trend-wearing Libras don’t want to be lawyers in the first place, let alone remain composed while arguing with people who can’t even agree on the facts. This is their worst nightmare realised. Pisces come in at a close second because their romantic and fanciful outlook on the world makes them prone to forget which set of facts they’re actually arguing for. The whole situation is very overwhelming and they refuse to Handle It. Aries comes in third for the angry tears they’d shed thanks to their complete lack of emotional regulation and propensity to throw tantrums when they don’t get their own way. Might 4. Cancer 5. Leo 6. Sagittarius One might think Cancers would break down as soon as they set foot in a courthouse, but they are well practised at bottling up emotions so they remain composed just long enough to give the opening address. Leos would be relying quite heavily on their charisma over actual preparation, so once the defence counsel poke holes in their theory they’d lose all of their confidence. A fiery Sag can take the challenge of court in stride, but occasionally their impatience will get the better of them and they will need a brief recess. Probably not 7. Scorpio 8. Virgo 9. Aquarius Scorpios would take the intellectual challenge in stride, but after a particularly rough day a few tears may slip out on their way to the bathroom. Practical and precise, a well read Virgo may become very frustrated with a criminal case’s lack of respect for the truth, but will ultimately keep it together. While Aquarians deeply care for humanity, they aren’t so fussed with the well being of individual people, so their emotions are less likely to be involved no matter the outcome for their client. Least likely 10. Gemini 11. Taurus 12. Capricorn Taurus are too stubborn and set on winning to worry about feelings, while Geminis will mask any feelings they have about the case in a thick shell of sarcasm and “but what about______”. And of course, it should go without saying that Capricorns are so internally anguished and externally cold that a Judge will twerk on the bench before they cry in front of a jury. Floridanese Man Taking Constitutional Law Wondering Where We Put The Bit About Bearing Arms11/8/2021
Volume 20, Issue 3  Floridanese man Charles Adams was delighted to find that he would be studying Constitutional Law in his second semester at Melbourne Law School. His tutor, Dr Sven Stevekson, did not disappoint. The scholar’s enthusiasm for the subject glowed like fire. It quickly became clear that just like back home in the US, Australia’s legal system bound down tyranny through the chains of the Constitution. Democracy. Liberty. Freedom. Such words were etched into the very foundation of Australian law. Charles knew that he had made the right choice when he decided to study his JD Down Under; the land was free, and home to the brave. But there was just one problem. Charles could not seem to find the part about a well regulated militia and the right of the people to bear arms. This was an issue, because like any patriot, Charles knew that without a Second Amendment his Australian classmates were easy prey to be stripped of their rights. He felt his spine go cold as he flipped through his pocket edition of the Australian Constitution – surely, this could not be. But the words could not be found. He approached his tutor after class, sure that he had made some sort of mistake interpreting the text. But no. To his horror, Sven confirmed that after a tragic mass shooting in a place called Port Arthur many years ago, the Australian government had made the decision to strip citizens of their God-given right to own metal tubes capable of shooting down helicopters. “How could they do this!” Charles demanded. “It’s outrageous. It’s unfair,” he added when Sven only raised his eyebrows. His tutor just shrugged in reply. “I don’t know Charles. I suppose we like to be able to roam around outside our homes without fear of being gunned down by a complete stranger. Back in my uni days I worked at a cinema, mind you. I’m not sure how I’d have felt knowing a white male who’d spent too many hours on the dark web could just stroll in at any moment and open fire on the crowd for no reason. Probably not very good.” Sven did not seem to notice Charles quietly seething. As he packed up his books, the tutor said, “we have, however, seen a spike in sternly written letters. I guess this is just how some folk vent their frustration when their supermarkets don’t sell hunting rifles.” Red in the face but doing his best to maintain composure, Charles waited for Sven to leave the room. “Sitting ducks,” he whispered. Submitted by ‘please don’t sue me NRA’ The views in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of De Minimis or its Editors.
Volume 20, Issue 3
Publius As the Morrison Government has scrambled to fix its humiliating lethargy in securing a steady supply of vaccines, jab availability is rising steadily across every state. Since Delta variant outbreaks have shut down the East Coast, all adults have been granted access to the domestically manufactured AstraZeneca ‘Covishield’ vaccine. Therefore, the focus of many prominent voices in the media has moved from pressuring the government to make vaccines available, to pressuring the public to take them. Concurrently, the latent frustration of the Victorian community, from months of recurrent lockdowns, is no longer primarily vented at the government, but at the vaccine-hesitant within our communities. This developing impulse to blame outbreaks and restrictions on those reluctant to take the vaccine is problematic for a number of reasons. For one thing, we know that vaccine-hesitant people in Victoria are more likely to live in communities of colour. For another, we know that minority communities are likely to disproportionately bear the negative health consequences of the pandemic, as compared to White Australia. Qualitative Victorian data is hard to come by, but we know from comparable work undertaken in the US and UK that people of colour and immigrant communities report less trust in institutions, and public health messaging around vaccines may have less of an impact for that reason. Volume 20, Issue 2  Torts: Sagittarius
Sagittarius are the explorers of the zodiac and love to push the boundaries of what is possible or break out of the mould. They are best suited to tackle the balance of probabilities that plague many a tort issue and will get creative with the facts to construe the best interpretation of the situation for their client. Obligations: Capricorn Stubborn and rule-abiding, Capricorns love a checklist, and following the rules of contract formation are right up their alley. While able to think creatively in assessing the more fluid areas of law in the subject, they are much happier pointing out exactly how you managed to completely and utterly fail to specify the parties to the contract. Principles of Public Law: Gemini Able to blend into any area they please, Geminis are great at getting into the ‘vibe’ that is PPL. Their minds are constantly jumping from one idea to the next while maintaining a deeply intelligent inner world. They will never be bored of the complex possibilities this broad subject has to offer. Contracts: Aries Aries have their eyes on the prize, the true trailblazers of the zodiac. They’re quick, impulsive, and competitive to the max, perfect for settling disputes over who did what, in what order, and whether there is a breach they can demand a remedy for. They value honesty, and will be blunt about bringing forward evidence for those tricky repudiations. Disputes and Ethics: Libra The masters of harmony and diplomacy, Libras were born to mediate. Their ability to appreciate all points of view make them ideal for working through disagreements and helping parties resolve matters before anyone can so much as think ‘disagree to disagree’. Their love for others drives them towards near ethical perfection. Constitutional Law: Virgo Much like the Constitution, Virgos are big picture thinkers, but a little reserved upon first glance. You need to get to know them really well before they reveal all of their nuances. Virgos have exceptionally high standards and will hold all parties to the highest standard of the Commonwealth of Australia. Property: Scorpio Scorpios are one of the most passionate and independent signs and are not afraid to stir the pot, or take it with them if it is a chattel that is purposeless after a land transfer. Scorpios are intuitive, which serves them well in categorising the various property interests their clients can snag from their opponents. Administrative Law: Aquarius Much like the facts of an administrative law case, each Aquarian is enigmatic and unique. It’s actually the Aquarians' aversion to being boxed in and labelled that allow them to blitz through the giant list of grounds any admin case may be pursued under. They understand how their client’s individual circumstances best fit into the equation. Corporations Law: Leo The bold and self-assured Leos are naturals at untangling company directors from the sticky situations they get themselves into. Leos will absolutely put themselves first, which makes them excellent at understanding the priorities of a company from the richest of shareholders to the lowliest of creditors. Equity and Trusts: Pisces Pisces are the psychics of the zodiac, and have the most intuitive sense of good and bad and right and wrong. This strong gut instinct makes them skilled at identifying inequitable outcomes in what seem like sound legal judgments, and they will not rest until those injustices are addressed. You can count on a Pisces to look after your estate and affairs. Evidence and Criminal Law: Cancer Emotive and sentimental, Cancers hate white lies and small talk and will cut right to the core of any issue. They can sense when they aren’t being told the full picture and will search high and low to find out the truth. Much like criminal law, they value individuals and will give anyone a chance provided that that person gives them the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Legal Theory/Research: Taurus Represented by the bull, Taurus are known for being the hardest-working of all the signs and once set on an idea will not easily change their minds. It will take a lot of reading and talking and investigating into an idea or proposition before they so much as think about changing their perspective, but once they’ve got all their research in front of them, they’ll gladly present you with their conclusions. Volume 20, Issue 2  Dear Bland at Barkly Square,
The optimism of this cohort never fails to exhaust me. I’m not sure how your semester is shaping up, but personally I’m planning to carve out some time each week for fun pastimes like “showering” and d“getting dressed”. However, if you are feeling slightly more ambitious, I have you covered. A hobby is a low threshold – it merely needs to be off the clock and fun for fun’s sake. However, some people still struggle with this concept, trying to wrap up their free time in self-improvement. Not to turn this into an anti-hustle culture rant during clerkship season (the hypocrisy would be too much, even for me), but it’s worth having something you’d do no matter who was watching. However, if you want to pretend running marathons and helping the elderly is how you unwind, more power to you. Now I know what you’re thinking, “I’m a law student, I am but a vessel for dicter – no thoughts, head empty.” While that may be true, somewhere deep in there is someone that is interesting to talk to at parties. A good way to unleash them is to think about what you do when you procrastinate (besides that). If you’re anything like me, most free time is spent consuming content which is not much of a hobby. However, if you put your psychoanalysis cap on you may find there’s more going on than meets the eye. Are there any common threads in the content you’re taking in? Are you watching a lot of historical fashion YouYube videos? Maybe time to look into upcycling or knitting. Loving nature docs on Netflix? Maybe time to go out on some local walks in your area. Binging on travel vlogs? Maybe you want to up your language skills on Duolingo. Whatever it is, don’t try and pick up something that you think you should be interested in, like intellectual podcasts or yoga. Despite appearances, you already have a personality ready and waiting to be explored – no need to borrow anyone else’s. Somewhat sincerely, Your Learned Friend Volume 20, Issue 2 Tim Irving Coda Director: Sian Heder Release: August 13 (Apple TV) Set in Massachusetts, a family of Deaf fisherman rely on their hearing daughter to manage both their lives and their business. The daughter gets a passion, wants to move away, but as her family relies on her so dramatically it would hurt them. If that sounds particularly cliche you’d be right, but the thing about clichés is they work. Will you know the entire plot of the movie if you watch the trailer? Probably, but nonetheless it’ll be a likely effective and heart-warming film. That Coda is an American adaptation of a French film makes it feel eerily like the horrific The Upside, an American adaptation of The Intouchables. Considering the buzz and eventual streaming service bidding war for Coda out of Sundance Festival, there is hope that it is not another cash grab English adaptation. The Last Duel Director: Ridley Scott Cast: Matt Damon, Adam Driver, Jodie Comer, and Ben Affleck Writers: Damon, Affleck, and Nicole Holofcener Release Date: October 15 Brutal 14th century France with actors everyone loves? Check. Perhaps you also want Matt Damon with a mullet, and a blonde Ben Affleck? You’ve got that too. Damon’s wife (Comer) alleges that she was raped by her husband’s best friend (Driver), which culminates in the eponymous last sanctioned duel (with knights in armour!). The biggest potential issue is whether the premise can sustain a 140 minute film. Hopefully the writing reunification of Damon and Affleck (Good Will Hunting) alongside the addition of Holofcener provides enough nuance to make it entertaining. The French Dispatch Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcPk2p0Zaw4
Director: Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel, Isle of Dogs) Cast: Name any actor – they are probably in it. Release Date: October 22 Anderson’s films can be roughly divided into three categories of: early films, animated films, and later films. While the later films such as this are always extremely enjoyable, for mine they are not especially effective. The style arguably overwhelms them, and the endless supply of recognisable actors can make the films feel like a collection of cameos. That being said, Anderson has an undeniable filmmaking skill, and with this film being divided into three stories hopefully each actor will be able to contribute more than just a cameo. If you see it, you’ll enjoy it, however I question how seriously you can (or are meant to) take it. Volume 20, Issue 1  To get anywhere these days It seems a clerkship’s a necessity An expo here, a summit there It may well be the end of me I lied to the interviewers Said I’d like to help the poor I hope it isn’t obvious I’m here for corporate law Enough about me – how about you What can you do for me? I would like to discuss the culture here And of course, my salary On my way out of the top tier I shook the partner’s hand My grip was firm, I held his gaze Winked and said: “I think you know my dad” I’ll miss the oh-so-moral high ground Of the student society But these are just the things you do When you’re law school royalty. Byrion is a second year JD student The views in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of De Minimis or its Editors.
‘I feel like I can’t say anything anymore’, Says Conservative Man Stuck In The Don’t Breathe House29/7/2021
Volume 20, Issue 1 Winston Baker The world has come to a sad pass, a local man is convinced, on this dark winter’s evening. Jerry Peterson (22), laments the stifling atmosphere of fear created by PC culture, and the murderous denizen of this house. ‘I just feel like in the current climate [referring to the darkened home of a blind former soldier] I have to really watch my words in a way I didn’t before,’ Peterson told De Minimis. The R.M.-wearing member of the MLS Young Liberals has found himself in hot water recently, for airing some rather unvarnished views on cancel culture, in a place where even the slightest whisper could see him shot with improbable accuracy.  Volume 20, Issue 1 Gazza  As we all trudge back to another semester at the University of Zoom, it is okay to feel a little embittered.
The solemn email we all received last week from the Provost relayed his ‘extreme disappointment’ at the latest lockdown. The message, seeking to sympathise with both domestic and international audiences, assured us of the University’s commitment to its students. It was sent a couple of days after the notification about our student invoices. Well, Professor McCluskey, perhaps we might be forgiven for snarling at UniMelb’s professions of camaraderie. We are not all in this together. In fact, it’d be more apt to say that students and MLS have been pitted against each other by the pandemic. The University has flatly refused to cut fees, even for students who are literally not allowed into the country of their purported alma mater. What does it mean for your resume to proclaim ‘attended Melbourne Law School’? Frankly, a lot less than it used to, if attending Melbourne Law School means lying naked in your bed with undiagnosed depression, constantly checking that your camera is still off. Volume 19, Issue 12 Anonymous Week 12 can be a brutal time at the Melbourne Law School. Some lucky students begin their QUIET retreat to beach houses in Noosa, Portsea, or Byron Bay for “some quiet space.” But for the unwashed masses, it must suffice to allow the filth to pile up our living rooms and kitchens as we begin to bury ourselves in practice exams. Of course, De Minimis’ offices are no exception to this filth – and I am not talking about the stuff we publish on our website. Deep within our subterranean lair beneath the university, the palest and thinnest among us – starved from any sort of nutritious eating – have become near-indistinguishable from the white rats. But that’s okay. Unlike holding a position of leadership within a socially valuable enterprise – like the LSS – the best part about being a columnist is that one does not need to show one’s face. Come to think of it, even the term ‘columnist’ seems a bit far-fetched; a journalistic bid for respect from perhaps the least self-respecting writers within the student body. But alas, here we are. It is a cold Thursday morning. The law school edges towards exams. The city towards lockdown. And I have nothing else to write. See you on the other side, friends!  Source The views in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of De Minimis or its Editors.
Volume 19, Issue 12  Silent tears under a fitted mask Why don’t you become a pirate instead Or an Egyptologist, like you dreamed when you were nine? Though now you don’t even know who you are without the Vacant, purple-rimmed eyes After midnight, writing bad acrostic poems as therapy and Carving out alternate realities on the phone in the palm of your hand - Person X
Volume 19, Issue 12 A first year student, Daniel Kaffee, has experienced what he describes as a “moment of enlightenment” this week at the law building. Not usually known as an ideal place for meditative reflection and enlightenment, the rarity of such an event led De Minimis to immediately dispatch reporters to learn what happened.  Not having let the experience go to his head at all, Daniel described the phenomenon as “a conversation with God himself, like he was speaking directly to me. I totally understand what Moses must have felt, to have experienced such raw divinity and majesty.”
So, what was the revelation Daniel was selected to hear? Volume 19, Issue 11  Dear Regretful on Royal Parade,
In the words of our Lord and Saviour, DJ Khaled - Congratulations, you’ve played yourself. You’ve cooked this semester so brutally a college fresher is impressed. And to think if you’d just read my study tips in Week 4 this whole thing could’ve been avoided. Never fear though, I’ve always been attracted to hopeless cases so you’re in good hands. First things first, ‘work smart’ is going to become your life. You do not have time to panic. If you must, a quick cry while showering is allowed, but otherwise remain on task. No use beginning the readings and lectures from Week One and just plodding through as if you have 3 months, you don’t, you have less than 3 weeks. Some serious efficiency is required. What you’re going to do is set a timer for 2 hours. Right now – like your Year 9 English teacher, I’ll wait. Ok good. Now that the clock is running, open Canvas, the website you haven’t visited since March. For each of your subjects you’re going to get the subject outline with your list of topics to study and put them in some kind of word doc/table/list situation. Aesthetics are not important, as long it makes sense to you. Under each big topic you’re going to break it down even smaller. A simple example would be ‘Agreement’ in Obligations, split into Offer and Acceptance. Again, they’re your subjects so do it in a way that makes sense to you. Under each of those headings you’re going to list the cases and statute referenced as “required” on the reading list. Repeat for all subjects. Now you effectively have a one- or two-page to-do list for each subject, you need to work out when it's getting done. Sit down in front of a calendar, write in your exam and any other non-negotiable time sucks between now and then e.g. week 12 classes, work, etc. Look at the gaps and slot in your subjects in Morning and Afternoon sessions. For example, Obligations in the Morning one day, Torts in the afternoon with a break in the middle. Once that is all laid out, block out the last 2 slots of each subject to do practice papers. Whatever is left is your note-making time. Volume 19, Issue 11 Start at 1.01 It has come to my attention that this semester will be the first time the first and second year JD cohorts will be able to study for exams on campus. I’m sure many of us intend to take advantage of the law building to escape our freezing cold sharehouses or noisy younger siblings. I am also aware that a great many of us third years are wary of what this migration into the building entails. We feel it important to inform the younger cohorts of how things are done.
You see, prior to COVID there were many rules governing the study spaces at MLS, rules that I fear will be lost to history if left unaddressed. Level 1 and 2 seating is fair game for everyone, including other faculties. The Mezzanine is for social study, complete with frequent coffee runs and meal breaks. And then there is level 3. The law library is for silent study. The JD study space is for JD students to use for silent study. You can do as you wish in other parts of the building, but the JD space is our space, and we all need to be on the same page about how we’ll use it. I’m sure we’ve all heard the silence rule by now. The law library staff certainly noticed the shift in attitude towards, or perhaps lack of awareness of, this rule compared with March 2020. They kindly asked us in an email dated 11th May 2021 that “[we] respect this rule and ensure [we] do not have discussions (study-related or otherwise) in the [level 3] study space.” I am here to tell you that they have phrased this mildly. This is no joking matter. We must all be silent in the level 3 study space. It is a mandate. This rule is not limited to talking, it includes chip-munching, paper-rustling, drink-slurping, and especially the party-inducing volumes of Dua Lipa pumping through some students’ AirPods. One of my final memories of the law building before the world collapsed was of a girl sitting in the far back corner of the level 3 space. You know the one, that seat that that one guy, my dear friend, always sits in. She had her laptop open in full view of the rest of the room and we all stared at the powerhouse of the cell spliced open on her screen. We were mortified that some first year science student had been allowed into the space, but worse, we were furious with whoever had let her in. I cannot believe that this has to be said. The JD space is for JD students. If they can’t swipe in, they must stay out. Doesn’t get much clearer than that. “Rebecca, who cares? It’s not that deep, move on with your life.” Volume 19, Issue 11
The LSS Special General Meeting (SGM) was on the 5th of May. De Minimis has written this short account of what went down, if you couldn’t make it on the night. A number of proposals were voted on. A copy of all proposed changes will be appended to the end of this article. The meeting barely maintained quorum throughout, at one point having to be briefly paused when a poor internet connection saw attendance drop below the minimum-required thirty Members present. The motion to change membership requirements passed easily, despite it coming out that the Masters Last Students’ Association had not been consulted about the change. However, the proposal to merge the Environments portfolio with Equity and Social Justice (ESJ) failed to get up. It was obvious that the Leadership Team (LT) had thought carefully about the change, but it still faced significant questions regarding the effects it would have on service delivery, including from a current ESJ Director. Volume 19, Issue 10 Winston Baker In bad news for MLS parents, a young clerk’s existing family have been superseded this week, it can be confirmed. De Minimis has independently verified reports that Ray Goopta, the supervising partner of MLS student Virginia Hallifax, has informed the young woman that the firm is her family now. ‘We’re all a family here,’ Mr. Goopta is reported to have said, ‘so if you need anything at all, please just tap the call button on your electronic collar.’ He later added, ‘your appointed sleeping cell is on level B4.’ The celebrated commercial law firm had not previously released any indication that they intended to expand their business into fostering young lawyers, stealing a march on their competitors. Industry analysts say that taking in young students and graduates, and forcing them to sleep on premises as a legal ward of the firm, has the potential to increase productivity. ‘You know, I kind of figured Ray meant it as a figure of speech, at first,’ Ms. Hallifax told De Minimis, ‘but he’s just handed me these adoption papers…which have already been approved by the court.’ She seemed a little put out that the papers in question refer to her as ‘mentally incompetent’, insisting she had graduated third in her MLS corps class. Whatever her opinion on the matter, law firm Helter Smith Skelter is now the official legal guardian of Ms. Hallifax (26). The new direction of the commercial legal industry has come under fire from human rights lawyer and long-haired hippy Geoffrey Robertson, who has alleged the young lawyers in the Helter Smith Skelter (HSS) basement are housed in ‘inhumane, cramped conditions’.  Volume 19, Issue 10 Those who answer every single question in class have announced they will partner with those who stay silent and pretend to be writing notes to avoid answering to pressure lecturers to, “stop asking so many damn questions,” by the end of 2021. According to the answerers, this decision was motivated by, “just feeling bad for flexing my extensive legal knowledge,” and, “making those silent noobs look stupid every week.” A spokesperson for the borderline silent monks said that, “This really benefits everyone. I swear we know the answers every time, we just don’t feel the need to be so arrogant by answering every single question that’s asked like our more talkative friends.” The leader of the ‘How else can I prove I’m smart and not an imposter if I don’t answer every question’ party has expressed concern over this initiative, stating, “It’s just not fair. The whole class needs to know that I know the answer. They need to see me as smarter than them. Answering questions is what I live for.” Members of the ‘Wait, you guys actually go to class?’ party have shown overwhelming support for the initiative citing, “Well I mean, it’s not like I show up anyway. I already feel superior enough by not wasting my time in those classes,” as a key motivator. However, it is extremely unlikely the alternatively named ‘I can just get the notes from one of those stupid attenders’ party will be bothering to provide any meaningful support for the partnership. The impact of the partnership long-term is currently unknown, but as all parties are confident they are superior to the others, the viability of the partnership remains doubtful. More to come. Tim is a first-year student. This week's winner of De Minimis' 'Articles Against Real News' competition wins a $50 book voucher.
 As a law student, I have attended countless MLS events. Normally, they are enlightening and distinguished.
But, when I recently received an email promoting a conversation on sexual assault in the legal sector, I was shocked by the sole listed presenter – The Hon Kenneth Hayne AC QC. Hayne is a formidable judge, and I would not blink an eye if this event had him speaking to one of his areas of expertise – the Banking Royal Commission, for example. However, he is not someone who has demonstrated expertise or experience of sexual assault. Nor, is he someone that has been victimised by the glass ceiling, or boys’ club mentality rife in the legal profession. In fact, Hayne has explicitly benefitted from these things. His marriage to Michelle Gordon, whom he met when she was his instructing solicitor 20 years his junior, validates and encourages the culture of senior men making advances on young lawyers. It has clearly worked out for this so-called “power-couple”, but the vast majority of older men who hit on their younger female colleagues do so unwelcomed, and it turns into sexual harassment or assault far too often. Why did MLS think it was a good idea to have a conversation about sexual assault in the legal profession, but have the sole presenter be a man, and someone with the seniority and background of Kenneth Hayne at that? People with structural power should not be the voices we give a platform to when it comes to discussing issues which overwhelmingly affect those without structural power. Women make up the vast majority of sexual assault victims, and men make up the vast majority of offenders. This appointment reinforces the sexism in the legal profession that gives rise to sexual assault, while piggybacking off sexual assault victims’ trauma. It is virtue signalling at its most transparent. Volume 19, Issue 9 If you have a burning question you’d like our Learned Friend to answer, fill out the google form under the “Your Learned Friend” tab on the De Minimis website.  Dear Dripping in Distress
While there is nothing wrong with being proud to be an MLS student, wearing merch off campus is the uni equivalent of being the high school prefect who wore their badges off duty (you know who you are). It sends the message that you eat, sleep and breathe law school. Reading statute is your one true joy in life. You can name all High Court Justices 12 standards in on a Friday night. You are one set of Invisalign away from the veneer-like porcelains that will get you your own brochure feature on the JD handbook. If this is the image you wish to put out there, then by all means. If you’d like to cultivate a less MLS-centric personality though, maybe consider reaching for a different grey hoodie. I get it – it’s week 9, exams are looming and laundry baskets spilling. However, wearing MLS merch outside your own house is only going to make things worse. It’s one thing to feel like you’re on the verge of breaking down, it’s another to openly broadcast it. Wearing MLS merch at uni sends the message of “I’m hanging onto this degree by a thread, and that thread is mostly polyester.” Volume 19, Issue 9  Photo by Matthew Henry on Unsplash Gale Galderon is in a bit of trouble.
The self-described intellectual cowboy should have learnt his lesson on the last exam he failed, but Gale is quite sure that this time he has all the answers. Well, technically the answers are not his. He says that’s beside the point. “Tap tap tap. Scribble scribble scribble. That white noise you hear in every class of people taking notes. Don’t you just hate it? What’s the point when I can just use someone else’s notes for the exam? Half the effort for twice the reward. [REDACTED] made the best notes anyway. My classmates can keep their carpal tunnel, the suckers.” De Minimis writers, renowned for our faithfulness to high moral standards, made sure to warn the young student that his strategy was likely to put him in the Academic Misconduct Committee’s crosshairs – but he could not be deterred. |
Archives
October 2022
|
