This is a followup to my last post. Read that first if you haven't done so already.
As I mentioned, I'm not 100 percent convinced the J.D. need always be omitted when applying for non-legal positions.
Here's my current strategy:
Research and Writing Intensive Jobs: I think a law degree may be able to be properly spun when applying for jobs like these. We can legitimately claim that law school has exposed us to a considerable amount of research and writing. (Even more so if we were on journals or moot court.) Obviously, why we went to law school needs to be addressed, but it seems like it really should be an asset.
Analyst and Managerial (and other business positions) Positions: For the most part, the J.D. should probably be dumped when applying for these jobs. It confers no real benefit, and in addition to the "over qualification" problem, people plain don't like lawyers. I have the problem that I actually had a "managerial"/administrative role in law school that could benefit me. It's going to be hard to invoke this experience without referring to where I received it.
Skilled Labor: If you're planning on being a cake artisan, IT professional, or accountant, it's probably not even reasonable to acknowledge the J.D. unless you absolutely have to. It has absolutely nothing to do with the job. If you happened to acquire a practical skill set despite going to law school, just emphasize it and any experience you have in exercising it. Most other education is entirely superfluous. Your JD is just a distraction.
Unless there are any obviously transferable skills from law school, I'm going to try my best to conceal my J.D. If I go the IT route, I'm going to definitely do what I can achieve certifications and build up a portfolio and only emphasize those. I think the J.D. would just look silly.