We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
I feel it's the hoarders who are to blame. Black marketing runs rampant
Article link: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/judge-investigated-charlotte-proudman-social-media-3c5jvmv07?
Article text:
Judge investigated over X account that ‘targeted female barrister’
==================================================================
Daniel Sawyer was accused of breaching judicial guidance on social media and abusing his position by attacking the feminist academic Charlotte Proudman online
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Proudman, a women's rights campaigner and family law specialist, stands before bookshelves filled with red books.
Charlotte Proudman
LUCY YOUNG FOR THE TIMES
Ben Ellery, Deputy Chief Reporter
Friday March 13 2026, 8.40pm, The Times
A crown court judge was accused of using an anonymous social media account to conduct a campaign of online harassment against a female barrister and feminist campaigner.
Judge Daniel Sawyer, who sits in Portsmouth, stood accused of breaching judicial guidance on social media and abusing his position by targeting Charlotte Proudman on X, according to a complaint submitted to the judicial watchdog.
The account presented itself as an anonymous criminal barrister commenting on legal issues and court practice. The complaint alleges that Sawyer used it to criticise Proudman’s views on rape prosecutions while concealing his identity.
Daniel Sawyer wearing a white polo shirt with a medal and carrying a bow, standing in a field.
Daniel Sawyer
The submission claimed that Sawyer used a the account, “Yet Another Tweeting Barrister”, to repeatedly post, like and reply to hostile commentary about Proudman, including criticism of her views on rape law and the criminal justice system.
The Times understands that posts relating to horseback archery, a niche sport in which Sawyer is heavily involved, formed part of the material used to identify him as the operator of the account.
The complaint alleged his online activity included tweets accusing Proudman of knowing “nothing” about the criminal courts and suggesting her commentary could discourage victims from reporting crimes. Screenshots attached to the complaint showed posts urging readers not to let Proudman’s comments “put you off reporting crime” and criticising her understanding of how sexual offence cases are handled in court.
The complaint also highlighted an adapted lyric referencing the phrase “99 problems but a bitch ain’t one”, which the document said some followers interpreted as referring to Proudman. In a subsequent tweet, the account said it did not know the phrase “99 problems” was a reference to the word “bitch”.
It further alleged that Sawyer encouraged other users to report Proudman to the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and contact her chambers, which the complaint said prompted abusive replies from members of the public, including misogynistic insults.
The tweets were mostly written in 2022, when Sawyer was a recorder or part-time judge. He was appointed a circuit judge for the western circuit in 2024. The submission alleged that such conduct risked undermining public confidence in the judiciary and breached guidance warning judges not to assume social media activity was private or free from scrutiny.
Judicial guidance circulated to members of the bench warned that judges should “pause before you post” and remember that liking or interacting with posts can be perceived as endorsement of their content.
The complaint also criticised Sawyer for filing a complaint to the BSB about Proudman’s social media posts, which triggered a lengthy investigation that was ultimately dropped. According to documents referenced in the complaint, Proudman was investigated for several months before the allegations were discontinued without explanation or apology.
The submission asked the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) to investigate whether Sawyer’s conduct amounted to misconduct under judicial conduct rules, alleging that his actions constituted “public harassment, gender-based bullying and misuse of his judicial office”.
On Friday the JCIO told the complainant it would not proceed further with the complaint because it had been made outside the three-month time limit set out in the rules, adding that even if it had been admitted it would not have warranted disciplinary action.
Proudman said she believed the posts formed part of a sustained campaign against her. She told The Times: “Daniel Sawyer targeted me with a public campaign of harassment and misogyny. This behaviour is utterly incompatible with the standards expected of those entrusted with judicial power.”
A spokesperson for the JCIO said: “The [office] has responsibility for the investigation of conduct and discipline of judges. [We] cannot comment on individual complaints, investigations or legal proceedings.”
Sawyer was approached for comment.
Also the 3-year LLB program has only recently started and the first batch will pass out in 2026 so right now we can only make assumptions. The real picture will become clear once the first batch pass
And yes DU is definitely good no doubt about that . But an NLU is also an NLU. I know the 3-year LLB there has just started and it is new, but because of the NLU brand and the high fees they charge, I believe they will try to provide good placement opportunities as well. In the end, if you work hard and build your skills, you can benefit from those opportunities.
I completed my callback in Disputes at SAM Delhi back in February. During the internship, I had received positive feedback from the team members I worked with. At one point, I was even told that they might consider recommending me for a General PPO if there was an issue with vacancies in the team. However, after the internship ended, I mailed the HR and received a brief reply stating that I have not been recommended by my team for a PPO. When I followed up, I was told that the decision was based on my feedback not being positive.
I’m honestly not sure how to process this, especially since the feedback during the internship was positive. Is this something that happens often? Is there still any hope with the firm? And how should I proceed from here? Would really appreciate any insights.
Thanks a lot!
Stop imposing your pathetic hostel Life style on people who have a family to feed.
Panic is not setting in some countries since they do not have a huge population like ours where shortage is imminent. And for those that are populated as much as ours, there definitely is panic, you just don't read the news well.
Also, instead of us sacrificing, why not put the blame on the real people for once. Stop supporting PDO elites and stand with the common person for once.
Do you see such panic being spread in other countries?
▮▮▮
There is a freaking war going on in the Middle East. What do you people expect? How is Modi to be blamed for this???
To be honest, even if you had a valid argument, it's really hard to read through to sloppy part and style to figure out whether you're just a lazy troll or a lazy writer with something substantive to say.
I guess the original query wanted to probe whether CM (now as the state law minister) will attend EC or make a big announcement and whether it will involve some trade off, for example a North Bengal campus etc
https://www.freepressjournal.in/amp/education/student-continues-eating-shawarma-as-ugly-girl-fight-erupts-out-in-op-jindal-university-canteen-video-viral
3-4 lakh less krdo but please give jobs to peeps
To firstly introduce myself, I am born and raised in a tier-3 city where speaking English wasn't modus operandi, growing around with people that had little to no exposure to english as a language wasn't uncommon. This environment has plagued me to the point that I lag behind my peers when it comes to my communication skills. I in my first year believed this issue to be trivial in nature but interning at big law firms has revealed to me the damage it has done to my job prospects or my carrier in corporate law itself. The reason why I am writing this post here at LI is to welcome any advice from people who have went through this and have rose above it or any advice from people who have seen their loved ones go through it. Please no trolls as it is matter of my entry into the corporate world. We already know how tough is to get into the legal corporate considering the huge competition but limited jobs. Thank you
But I have always wanted to intern at Trilegal and I have been constantly applying but I have not received any response..
What could be the reason ??
In first year currently, did not join anything and don't plan to in the future. Can I still land good internships and eventually a PPO or placement?
Any tips. Any particulars to cover?
I think he fell victim to Cal HC lawyers and those who are known to be mostly "district court" folks lobbies. Sort of the NLU vs TLC stuff.
NKC appointees got eased out by AG bfr OVN took over. Now it's all OVN till Brutus happens.
MPS did bypass EC and not always for right reasons. But he finally got felled by the EC. Same with NKC. EC is never bypassed. It supports the frontman as long certain equations run smoothly.
I am a 4th year student from a Tier-3 NLU (Bordering Tier-1). I had an upcoming assessment internship in june/july that fell through, and since those are the two most crowded months of the year, almost all the good places are packed already.
I have previously interned with several Tier-1 and Dispute-resolution centric law firms, as well as in some of the most intense contemporary chambers. I have several personalised letters of recommendations, and I recently published a book on securities regulation in India.
This is a long shot, but if any recruiters happen to see this, if you can help me out that would be wonderful!! reach out to me at lawyerinthemaking2027@gmail.com
This is not about rejection disappointment. The HRs don't have proper processes. They aren't up to scratch. First have a Linklaters/Freshfields-style graduate recruitment office, then come here giving big big lectures to students. Do you hear students complaining about HRs when they get rejected from Hogan Lovells or A&O Shearman? Of HRs never responding to emails or phone calls or just ghosting after a point? Do you even hear of this cold-mailing kind of practice going on in such environments? Do you hear about complaints re: Reed Smith HR going to a university and commenting on the physical looks of female students or how their looks seem to indicate that they aren't from the type of background suitable at a law firm? (Talking about stuff coming to mind from what I've read on LI re: behaviour of Indian law firm HRs.) Or to take an even more concrete example, of any reputable global law firm's HR shouting at a university's representatives because they presented them with a disabled student telling them that said disabled person would be the best candidate? (This latter, apparently, did happen with a visually impaired student at one of the older NLus, whose RCC presented said VI student to a law firm's HR, who exactly behaved in the way I described.) Why do you hear more of that in our setup than in the globally reputed setups? Please go on LinkedIn for five minutes and look at the "I am pleased to announce" type of posts about people being offered vac scheme places in the current cycle, or TC places in earlier cycles. You will see them actually thanking the HR for actually making the process one that gets students to believe they are actually doing something meaningful.
Sure the students complain, even in those setups, but that's usually about how devilishly hard it is to get into a top-class law firm. And as re: my other question, please go on TCLA and other forums and find me one person who has tried anything like this and boasted about getting a vac scheme or TC. You know the contrast between how those folks are talking and how our people are talking? It's not because our folks are lower quality or have fewer scruples than those guys - just the opposite, in fact. It's because your side haven't fixed your recruitment processes. Before writing such patronising and insulting nonsense in the future, please look in a mirror, first. Before doing that, have one last spot of enjoyment by reading the below, because not only is it one of those classics people will be talking about for years, but because it's actually a much more useful and hard-hitting cautionary tale than the unreflective tripe you have wasted our time with:
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/firm-cancels-students-interview-after-hearing-deez-nutz-voicemail
The college is run by politically affiliated principal (just google her name, you'll find tons of complaints), professors who are admitted via quota (prof. GDP will make you make videos of yourself and edit them in Capcut as part of assessment while he himself looks like a joker and has no knowledge of his subjects)
Placement is negligible, all the college placement is done smaller firms or in-house companies. T1 or T2 are usually PPOs through student's own hardwork in internship, except 2-3 campus hires.
I believe you would need to score above 99 percentile in order to aim for GLC, even higher if you're OMS I guess.
A month or so would suffice for preparation probably.
All the best!
I force my juniors to stay in office, even if there is no work because one must not leave before their seniors.
I will sit on an email that was sent to me on Monday, and will only allocate it to my junior on a Friday night, with a due date of Saturday morning (even if it is only due on the coming Wednesday). Thereafter, I will sit on the work product only on Tuesday evening and then chide my junior for not following instructions that I never gave. Instructions are something I never give; or if I give, they are too vague, something which an A0 won't have any context on. I will also tell my junior that "this was not done" when the junior has not received any instructions to that effect!
On Wednesday mid day the work would be due, so the entire night of the junior will be eaten by me and of course, I will create chaos, confusion and anxiety on Wednesday morning. I will make my junior take prints for something (that should have otherwise been done by the office boy). I will then go on to hog credit for the entire work in front of the partner. Ofcourse, if there is a fuck up, that would be blamed on the junior.
I will often shout at the junior for no other reason than to show that I am very "senior" (all this while nobody outside the firm knows me).
I am an SA/PA at a law firm. I am very senior.
It’s bad news for some of his minions in the EC. But the real event to watch out for will be the upcoming elections. If President’s rule is imposed because the SIR cannot be completed by early May, anything can happen. Still 50 lakh cases are left and then there will be an appeal stage.
If you receive partnership distributions of 30 crores a year for 10 years, you would receive 300 crores (mostly after tax, since the partnership pays a significant portion of the tax before distributions). You would have had 10 years’ worth of living expense (say 10 to 15 crores in total at that income level), leaving you with a balance of 285 to 290 crores. And then you have investment returns on that money as well.
Top non-founder equity partners (not average or every equity partner) in T1s with 200 crores+ net worth is eminently possible (even probable).