"Instead of removing the post, Dizon gave a media interview, where he threatened to sue the Court and demanded a public apology 'within 24 hours.' He also sent several emails to the SC’s Judiciary Public Assistance Section, claiming that the advisory had a chilling effect on him. He denied spreading misinformation and asked the Court to issue a statement correcting the advisory," the court recounted.
Dizon, a 2016 Bar passer, subsequently denied claiming that AI would check the examinations and argued that he used the words “TO HELP” in his post.
However, the SC was not convinced, stating that he "clearly and categorically mentioned that the AI will do the checking and sorting of the examinees' answers."
"Dizon expressed surprise that the matter regarding his posts has spiraled to this level. To the Court, this only shows that Dizon was totally oblivious of the consequences and gravity of his irresponsible acts," their decision read.
"He should have been aware that the examinees were all weary and stressed, that any news about the bar examinations, whether small or big, will definitely be received with alarm and apprehension," it added.
There is also "no question that the viral posts disrupted the bar operations," as it forced bar officials to divert their limited time and resources to tracing the source of the post, coordinating with government agencies, issuing clarifications, and responding to numerous inquiries.
Additionally, he was also found to have engaged in the...
HealthNow New York Inc. failed to show that a whistleblower’s False Claims Act suit alleging healthcare fraud violates Article II of the US Constitution, a federal district judge said, but an appe...