Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

[Feba]

The Florida Bar asked for an "enhanced disbarment" in the disciplinary hearing of Jack Thompson, held earlier this afternoon. The recommendation means Thompson would be disbarred and prohibited from applying to practice law again for ten years, according to 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida spokesperson Eunice Sigler.

Thompson's disciplinary hearing apparently ended in the attorney walking out of the courtroom after saying the judge did not have the authority to hear his case, a reader who sat in on the hearing told us.

The case proceeded without Thompson's presence and the Florida Bar issued its recommendation for the enhanced disbarment. Judge Dava Tunis' specific recommendations for sanctions will be included in her official report, to be due to the Florida Supreme Court by September 2nd.

Before walking out of the courtroom, Thompson filed what he called "Thompson's Formal Objection to June 4 Sanctions Hearing." In the rambling, 4,500-word objection, Thompson questioned Tunis' ability to preside at his hearing, calling her incompetent and arrogant and threatening to have her removed from office "in the days and weeks ahead." He also went on to call the people run The Florida Bar fascists and denied that he was involved some sort of "petty culture war."

Thompson wrapped up his 14-page objection by quoting from the bible, and saying that he and Senators Clinton and Obama understand the dangers posed by the Grand Theft Auto games.

"I am “guilty” of being right and ahead of the curve when it came to Howard Stern and as to Grand Theft Auto. Because I took on Bar complainant, Al Cardenas, the Howard Stern Show is off terrestrial radio and his influence diminished.

Because I took on this cop-killing, woman-bashing video game, the Presidential race is now addressing the issue and this particular video game.

Try to get me disbarred. Go ahead, do your worst, Referee Tunis. I will continue to do my best. "

We've contacted Thompson for a reaction to the recommended disbarment recommendations and will update you if and when he responds. In the meantime, hit the jump for the full letter.

Full letter: Florida Bar V Thompson: Jack Thompson Walks Out On Hearing, Court Recommends Enhanced Disbarment


With any luck, he'll be muzzled soon enough.

[Kitalrez]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Yeah, that was smart. Verbally abusing everyone and calling into question the judge's ability to judge. This is a professional competency hearing, the last thing you want to do in one of these is call into question the system itself or the people involved in it. I don't start my legal studies until fall and even I realize this was a giant mistake.

{Edit} Ok, reading through this now. First point he makes is on the judge's competence to render judgment. He's got a possible point there about the oaths the judge has taken and the questionable legitimacy, but he's going to have trouble really getting that across with the "Samuel L. Jackson from Pulp Fiction" tone he's taking in the argument. Ok, taking this argument further, he calls into question the oaths of the entire Florida Supreme Court. From there, he mentions documents the judge leaked to the press that should call into question her impartiality. Very good argument here, probably the wrong way to make this.

English is the greatest of all languages. It allows its users to be very precise.

Um, no, it's useful for exactly the opposite reason. English differs from Latinate languages in that you don't have cases for familiarity in your pronouns. For instance, if I address someone in German or French, my pronoun usage varies based on how well I know the person or their social position to me. (Example, German "you" for someone you know is "du", for your boss or a complete stranger it's "Sie".) Anyone overhearing your conversation knows immediately how well you know the person you're addressing. English is useful because you can be precise about certain aspects, like science or the weather, but hide large portions of others. Case in point, I can make inside jokes and references on this board that all of you get or understand, but any outsider will be clueless on, when was the last conversation you had where you didn't cite at least one pop-culture reference? Japanese people listening in to your conversation might not get it all, and you designed it that way without thinking about it. Rest of the argument he follows this sentence with could have merit. If he truly hasn't been presented with a "statement of fact" relating to the rules he is accused of breaking, this is an argument worthy of appeal.

Moving on, we have him calling into question the state government itself, by citing Jeb Bush's failure to disclose his relationship with two of the law firms pressing for his disbarment. Might've been a good argument, but the more he expands the scope, the more it looks like paranoia.

Ok, fourth argument seems an awful lot like political grandstanding.

most of what I am charged with I did not do on behalf of any client but in pursuit of efforts to secure enforcement of laws for the common good.

Right, this is a problem because attorneys don't act in a vacuum, that's a job for politicians. You argue on behalf of clients, and proceed based on their wishes. That's the sole reason the profession exists. If people could make these kinds of arguments on their own, attorneys would be irrelevant. Crossing the line into politics in a court case does not strengthen your argument.

Ouch, sixth argument cites the previous experience of the judge in which case the preceding appellant shot himself mid-trial. I'm unfamiliar with this trial proceeding, is there a jury in this disbarment proceeding? Because you don't defame the dead in front of a jury, that's a great way to lose their favor. May be a good argument, the preceding case was canceled mid-trial because of the suicide, therefore the judge lacks the experience necessary to preside over this case. It's quibbling, though, 50/50 chance of succeeding at best.

You have been so cruel and at the same time so foolish as to call my pleadings herein “propaganda.” That word means something, given how propaganda was used in the last century by the Third Reich in Nazi Germany to justify the placement of people of faith in “relocation centers” where they were starved and gassed as the “final solution” to the problem they posed.

Ouch, if this letter were on a message board he would've just violated Godwin's law. In a court of law, he's kind of reaching by attaching a connotation to unrelated materials here. Propaganda does not automatically refer to the Nazis, it can refer to anything as simple as Public Relations work on up. This is kind of a stretch.

Right, moving on, we find him citing religion:

his Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which you arrogantly chose to pretend does not exist and on which you would not give me a hearing as to my defense thereunder, has been found to protect as a religious practice the consumption of peyote because there is a religious sect that makes doing so a sacrament. You cannot be serious, Referee Tunis, if you think that a jury will not look at what you have done to me for what I have done, in the name of Jesus Christ, and not be appalled at your discrimination against this uppity Christian “propagandist” whom you smear as a mere “culture warrior.”

Now, this is a problem because he's already cited religion elsewhere in the document on the other side. He's also quoted the bible and used it to make arguments further in the main 4000 page brief. He's invoking the "Establishment Clause" of the Constitution but trying to play both sides of the fence with it. What I mean is either you go with the idea that you're being religiously persecuted, or you try to use religious grounds to palliate your deeds. When you do both, your argument gets nowhere fast.

I can't read any more of this past halfway, he's gone off on some rant or other. He made some points which are defensible in the first section, but the tone and manner in which he made those points are entirely wrong for a legal setting. Somehow he's citing a vast left-wing conspiracy against him as the impetus for his disbarment. That's not going to hold any water. Any attorney who is not on painkillers that would make Rush Limbaugh blush would probably realize that by now. Since I'm not convinced he's drugged, that leads me to believe he's already written this case off. He seems like he knows he's going to lose. That makes me speculate that he's writing these statements in this form to reach a different audience than the court or the state bar association. I suspect he's making a political ploy to get himself either into politics in Florida, or on the staff at an Evangelical University like Oral Roberts. If he's disbarred, he couldn't teach most legal classes, and ethics would definitely be out. They might however be able to place someone like Jack Thompson in a political science position. I pity his student, but it would make more sense than this.

Yeah, this is a mess. I can't help thinking it's a calculated mess, though. Almost looks like he wants people to read this, which a legal brief and court document are not normally designed to be. Gotta be a political angle here, it's just too well suited to that direction not to be.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

I knew when people stopped worrying about this guy that he would somehow self-implode.

[Mhurron]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

This isn't the first time he's acted like this, so it's hard to argue that not paying attention had anything to do with it.

No one's paid attention because there hasn't been an event he can blame on GTA recently.

[Aksannyi]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

I thought he had been disbarred a while ago.

Oh, well, it hardly matters, everyone knows he's a nutjob anyway.

[Kitalrez]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Hmm, was going to edit in more to my reply, but people have posted since then. I just realized he's standing a pretty good chance of sitting in jail for contempt at this point. If you look at how he's organized his arguments, that'll make sense.

Biggest point, constantly calling the judge, "Referee". You could keep the argument that the judge is either not official or biased and should recuse herself, but you don't go this far. If you hold both his two arguments, I'd go maybe as far as referring to her as "Counsel", but that's pushing the envelope too. Whether she's legitimate or not, I wouldn't have gone as far as to stop referring to her as "Your Honor", she still outranks him in that courtroom. If she slaps him with contempt of court, there's not many judges who will argue with it. Think of it this way: Remember every single military crime drama you've seen. Now, you're in this situation. You've just walked out on deck, and the Captain of your ship staggers out drunk, accuses the XO of fomenting mutiny and pumps 10 rounds into him. You get to relieve him of command, because hopefully he just emptied the only weapon he has. How do you address him when you cite military code for removing a commanding officer pending charges? The answer is not "asshole", "shitbag", or "murdering cocksucker", it's "sir". He still outranks you. He may be busted down to private in a week's time and spend the rest of his life in Leavenworth, but he's still a Captain, and you don't have the authority to change that at the moment. He's "sir" all the way to the brig, "sir" the entire time he's in there, "sir" on the way to the MP's, and "sir" all throughout his courts martial proceeding. Same deal here, even if the judge is of questionable legitimacy, she's still recognized as a judge for now. You forget that, and you're spending time in the cooler.

Going back to my previous suspicion about his wanting to make a political scene out of this, I think this is calculated. He wants to go to jail. He wants to be a victim of the courts here. That gets him the publicity within the political circles he wants.

[Feba]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Kital, I wasn't going to bring it up because I had only skimmed the article, but:

The US Senate, Referee Tunis, has nothing on you and your high-tech lynching of the uppity Christian who stands before you.

Saying that the judge is lynching you is probably not the most respectful thing ever.

[Kitalrez]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

God, I completely ignored that line, didn't I? Could someone explain to me what part of a courtroom qualifies as "high-tech"? Is Iron Man going to come in and do the actual lynching? The recorder got a computer, and sometimes attorneys are allowed laptops. Other than that, the process is not much different that it was several hundred years ago. Sure, you call upon evidence that was gathered using high tech methods, (none of which appear to have been necessary in this case), but the method of calling upon that evidence isn't high tech. He's just grandstanding here, it's silly.

[Caspian]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Because I took on Bar complainant, Al Cardenas, the Howard Stern Show is off terrestrial radio and his influence diminished.

Is he so sure that was his doing? I tend to think it had more to do with using "The N-Word" on the air.
I fear someday his own ego will escape the bonds of his physical body and eat the world.

/nod Kitalrez, its political grandstanding. He'll probably make a play for a House or Senate run, maybe as soon as this next election.

[Feba]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

I don't think even american voters are stupid enough to elect him.


at least I hope not. The idea of just trying to set himself up for a position in some fundie institution seems far more likely.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Is he so sure that was his doing? I tend to think it had more to do with using "The N-Word" on the air.

Yeah, he broke safe harbor hour rules and he got hit with a ton of fines for it, not to mention his affliates as well. Jack Thompson had nothing to do with Howard Stern getting kicked off the air, if anyone gets credit, credit the guy who safe harbor hours were created because of: George Carlin.

[Taskmage]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Is Iron Man going to come in and do the actual lynching?

That sounds like a show I'd buy tickets for.

I've almost got to admire crazy old Jack at this point. I mean, I used to think this was all an elaborate act, but he really believes he's out there doing God's work, standing up to a corrupt system, taking an entire culture to task for its sins and winning, doesn't he? He must be a real legend in his own mind. It's kindof honorable in a "tilting at windmills" kind of way. Makes me wish there were more people out there with that kind of conviction that were not batshit insane.

[Lunaryn]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

I don't think even american voters are stupid enough to elect him.


at least I hope not. The idea of just trying to set himself up for a position in some fundie institution seems far more likely.

Depends on where he runs. Have you seen some of the house and senate (particularly house) members we have now? You've got some really solid, accomplished people, and some real nutcases. I've seen a few floor speeches that make this guy look rational and well-informed by comparison.

[Caspian]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

It's kindof honorable in a "tilting at windmills" kind of way.

Would you say that he's a Quixotic character?
/raise eyebrow

[Taskmage]

Re: Jack Thompson is apparently trying to get himself disbarred.

Quite.