Misconduct

The US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction to impose Reciprocal Discipline when the original entity imposing discipline lacked subject matter jurisdiction to impose discipline on an attorney practicing law in the Commonwealth of Virginia, USA.

The paper deals with the increasing phenomenon of sexual harassment
in the academic environment, according to the figures of The Guardian
investigation concerning sexual misconduct in UK Universities. In particular, Cambridge University recorded the highest number of incidents, after introducing a new reporting system. Thanks to its communicative impact, The Guardian investigation allows a further analysis into the reasons why universities failed to tackle sexual misconduct and did not succeed in enacting reforms to support and protect victims. This could be one of the most significant aspects
of post-modern universities, partly enhanced by the perception of danger, both psychological and physical. Thanks to The Guardian’s investigation, and media emphasis on those figures, it is possible to interpret universities as places of risk in an era marked both by connected knowledge and relationships and by mass slaughters and the collective risks sometimes stemming from the involvement in research activities in unsafe countries. Sexual harassment in universities –
perpetrated especially by students, as The Guardian inquiry emphasizes – sheds a light on the silent but painfully awkward situation of victims, usually unable to denounce the misconduct perpetrated by both students and staff.

Lawyers participating in legal malpractice litigation sometimes encounter evidence of serious disciplinary rule violations.  Whether, and how soon, those lawyers are required to report this information to grievance authorities is a question that has received little attention from courts and scholars, despite the fact that most states have mandatory reporting rules.  The dilemma for lawyers serving as testifying experts is particularly troublesome because nonreporting may result not only in discipline, but testimonial impeachment.  The better view is that an expert in a pending case ordinarily has no mandatory obligation to report misconduct.  This conclusion is supported by an analysis of the narrowness of the reporting obligation, the exceptions to the rule, public policy considerations related to malpractice litigation and grievance procedures, and customary professional practices.  However, after litigation ends, an expert (and other lawyers) may have a duty to call evidence of serious misconduct to the attention of disciplinary authorities.

A decade ago, a wave of corporate scandals involving reprehensible behavior but stunning examples of lawyer passivity motivated me to write about the role of inside lawyers. In a series of articles, beginning in 2005 with The Banality of Fraud: Re-Situating the Inside Counsel As Gatekeeper, I suggested that it was improper for lawyers to be mere bystanders while their client representatives violated their legal obligations, especially when such violations were directly responsible for gross harm inflicted on shareholders, employees, or third parties. In The Banality of Fraud, I presented a diagnosis of the problem of inside lawyer acquiescence in corporate fraud, criticized the reforms ostensibly enacted to address the problem, and offered an alternative reform, which I believed squarely addressed the structural deficiencies identified in my diagnosis.

In making my arguments, I invoked the notion of a “gatekeeper,” which in the capital markets context I defined as a “private intermediar[y] who can prevent harm to the securities markets by disrupting the misconduct of [his or her] client representatives.” At the time, it was widely recognized that outside professional services providers, such as investment bankers, auditors, securities analysts, outside securities attorneys, and credit rating agencies, could perform gatekeeping functions that would benefit the securities markets. Less acknowledged and examined was the fact that inside lawyers could act as gatekeepers and possessed the capacity to stop corporate misconduct in its tracks, as Ronald Gilson first observed in his seminal article.

Using the GM ignition switch scandal as a point of departure, in this Article, I answer some of the complaints and criticisms that have been lodged against my proposal. In particular, I address the complaint that, under my proposed reform, “general counsel would lose the benefit of the informal communications from senior managers that invariably emerge in the context of a relationship of trust and confidence.” I argue that the empirical assumptions underlying this complaint are not only unsupported and speculative but also reflect a poor understanding of corporate environments. And even if we assume that such a prediction about general counsel’s access to information bears out, it is unlikely that the predicted costs would offset all other benefits to be gained from my reform, in particular, the enhanced willingness of inside counsel to interdict wrongdoing in serious cases. In addition, I criticize the repeated reference to the “lawyer as friend” analogy as a model for inside lawyers’ relationships with senior managers. I argue that the notion of friendship elides the gravity of the relevant factual context and thus cannot provide useful guidance for how inside counsel should conduct themselves in the face of serious corporate wrongdoing. “Friendship” also mischaracterizes how employees ordinarily interact with one another in organizational settings and grossly misrepresents how some general counsel perceive their relations with senior managers and understand their fiduciary obligations to the corporate client. I conclude that as a model for inside counsel, the friendship analogy is strained, inapt, and should be avoided.

The goal of the present investigation was to assess whether the Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy) add significantly to the prediction of misconduct and the propensity to engage in high-stakes deception. Self-report scores were collected (n = 464) via the Short-D3 assessing the Dark Triad traits, the Comprehensive Misconduct Inventory measuring misconduct, and the Propensity to Lie Questionnaire investigating lying tendencies. Significant correlations were observed between nearly all variables, but in a multiple regression only psychopathy added significantly to the prediction of the misconduct factors. Further, only Machiavellianism was a significant predictor of high-stakes deception over and above the other predictors in the model.

Academic integrity is an age-long practice and the ethical policy of educational institution. It has been methodically investigated. In prior researches, the investigations focus largely on students’ nature of conducts regarding academic and school activities in general after the admissions, while being so limited in their acumens about paramount causality. This study has theoretical and practical contributions to the literature and the real world by uncovering the negativity associated with the age-limit criterion in scholarship admissions and how it jeopardizes the stability of integrity within and outside institutions. A total of 82 participants from 11 countries across 2 continents of Africa and Asia were interviewed at five selected countries. Age restriction in scholarship admission was reported to deprive and discriminate against aged competent and qualified scholarship applicants. Thus, adjustment of age to meet the required age in the scholarship has been considered as a defense mechanism overtime. Implications of this misconduct are discussed, and recommendations are provided.

Most American are rightly enraged when police shoot unarmed civilians, use excessive force, or engage in unethical practices like planting evidence. However, there is little popular understanding and scholarly attention as to why prosecutors fail to charge or otherwise hold officers accountable. This Article offers a novel contribution to the study of police misconduct by examining how prosecutors nationwide enable police misconduct on an institutional level. Through both social-scientific and legal analysis, we consider the codependent relationship between prosecutors and police that prevents accountability for police violence and misconduct against the public. Specifically, we analyze (1) the cultural norms created between police and prosecutors that allow police to influence prosecutorial discretion over police accountability and (2) the legal and extralegal tools that prosecutors wield to protect their police benefactors—and themselves in the process. In contrast to other schola...

The research study was conducted to deliver on idea into visualization content platform. Which is information can be disseminate in easy way to understand about misconduct phising and fraud of sale. Misconduct is the wrong behaviour activity that is illegal or morally wrong, while phising is a form of fraud in which an attacker masquaerades as reputable entity or person in email or other communication channels.  The meaning of fraud is wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. This research was made to state the issue among the consumer that buying items using internet online and use media as a platform to deliver information about as know as public services announcement.  By using animated video motion as a easy explanation and appropriate .

Over the last several decades, the issue of academic integrity has emerged as one of the major concerns of higher education institutions throughout the world. Amongst different strategies for combating academic dishonesty, educational interventions in the form of online tutorials are becoming increasingly popular. In this paper, we empirically examine, using a sample of Montenegrin students and the matching method, the relation between online tutorials and four forms of student misconduct, namely cheating, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, and aiding and abetting academic dishonesty. In addition, we examine whether students that received the certificate after passing an academic integrity test in online tutorial perceived different forms of academic misconduct more seriously than students who participated in the online tutorial but did not receive the certificate. Our results indicate that online tutorial can be useful for enhancing students’ awareness of certain types of ac...

El criterio de calidad de las revistas  que se  debe  respetar es  el  grado  de  endogamia  editorial, además del grado de endogamia autoral(1). Definimos endogamia editorial como la pertenencia a una  institución u organización que se encuentra estrechamente relacionada con una editorial(2) y además que pueda generar conflictos de interés, en cuanto a la endogamia autoral nos referimos a los autores que  contribuyen con manuscritos que pertenecen al comité editorial o están estrechamente relacionados con el mismo; últimamente la ciencia abierta y las políticas de transparencia en los procesos editoriales pone en descubierto el grado de endogamia de las revistas científicas que no escapan a la observación de los  autores para decidir publicar en una revista en específico(3). Muchas organizaciones ponen sus reglas según los organismos a los cuales representan ya sean universidades, hospitales o institutos de investigación; la Revista Científica Ciencia Médica de manera general tiene la misión de evitar ambos tipos de endogamia. La editorial se basa en diversas guías como la de el Committe on publication ethics (COPE)(4)  y  la International committe of medical journal editors (ICMJE) haciendo hincapié en el código ético referente a endogamia; los editores evalúan los manuscritos enviados para su posible publicación solo sobre la base del mérito científico del contenido de los mismos. Para cumplir este objetivo los editores y los revisores o miembros del comité editorial como autores no deben estar envueltos en el proceso editorial y quedan excluidos de las decisiones acerca de manuscritos en los que sean autores corresponsales o  que  contribuyan como autores. La Revista Científica Ciencia Médica establece este mecanismo que está claramente definido en nuestras políticas editoriales acerca del envió de manuscritos, estas decisiones priorizan la calidad científica de los manuscritos enviados la revista en cuanto a la endogamia autoral. La  política editorial de la Revista Científica Ciencia Médica trata de combatir contra la endogamia autoral mediante la publicación de nuestros artículos en revistas externas. Al ser una revista conformada por un comité de estudiantes de medicina y otras áreas de la salud contamos con una red de docentes formados en diversas áreas para la revisión de manuscritos, además contamos con una red de médicos tanto del interior del país  como del exterior que cumplen la función de revisores externos, quienes realizan la revisión por pares a doble  ciego, se realiza también la invitación de revisores externos a nuestra institución con trayectoria científica alejándonos cada vez más de la endogamia editorial; la idea principal acerca de evitar la endogamia es brindar calidad a las revisiones realizadas para su publicación, el porcentaje de endogamia que se permite en las diversas revistas científicas en promedio no supera el 25%(5) y esta es la meta, conseguir un porcentaje de endogamia autoral menor al 25%,  restringiendo la publicación solamente de los mejores artículos que se presentan de parte del comité editorial, de manera que más del 75% de los autores serán externos al Comité Editorial y virtualmente ajenos a la organización editorial de la revista que es la Sociedad Científica de Estudiantes de Medicina de la Universidad Mayor de San Simón (SCEM-UMSS); el único problema que se observa en nuestro medio es la baja cantidad de artículos producidos por estudiantes del área de la salud, muchas veces por falta de conocimiento acerca de la publicación, infravaloración de los estudiantes de parte de los asesores de investigación o por falta de tiempo sumado a las prácticas médicas que realizan(6); además es importante recalcar el papel de las revistas depredadoras que dañan la credibilidad de las revistas estudiantiles en general(7), esto sumado a que en muchos casos se subestima el papel de los estudiantes sobre el manejo y edición de una revista científica comparándolos con revistas depredadora que desprestigia la ciencia en pregrado(8). En conclusión el valor del escrito científico solamente puede ser medido por la calidad de sus revisiones resultado de la internacionalización de comités editoriales y “escapando” a la endogamia. Como miembros de la comunidad científica tenemos que ser objetivos con los procesos de edición y publicación de revistas sin menospreciar el rol que realizan las revistas estudiantiles en todas las partes del mundo, dicho esto invito al lector a revisar nuestras nuevas normas de publicación en las cuales añadimos aclaraciones para algunos puntos.