May 7, 2007
Controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson's difficulties with the Florida Bar continue.On Friday the anti-game attorney e-mailed GamePolitics what appears to be a copy of a writ filed with the Florida Supreme Court. The document reads in part:
The Bar has now demanded in writing that respondent Thompson accede to a 91-day suspension from the practice of law on the basis of his alleged unethical conduct... in
a) claiming that three families who are his clients are in fact his clients and
b) preparing expert witnesses for their depositions.
...this demand that Thompson receive the vocational death penalty is based upon The Bar’s secret collaboration with Blank Rome lawyers who represent Take-Two, the makers of the Grand Theft Auto murder simulation games.
It's unconfirmed, but likely, that the the "three families" referred to would be the plaintiffs in Strickland vs. Sony, Thompson's $600 million lawsuit against Grand Theft Auto publisher Take Two Interactive and other game industry defendants. The suit alleges that an 18-year-old who killed two police officers and a police dispatcher did so because he played Grand Theft Auto. A judge revoked Thompson's visiting status to practice law in Alabama in late 2005.
GP requested clarification from Thompson, but the attorney's answers didn't shed much light on the issue:
GamePolitics: So this would be the Alabama police families? Am I correct that the Bar’s position is they are not your clients because you have no pro hac vice status in Alabama? What’s the part about the expert witnesses? What are they claiming there? If you agree to the 91-day suspension is everything else dropped, i.e. all of the other Bar complaints that are outstanding? Is that the deal? Do you plan to agree to the suspension?
Thompson: I'm not suspended from the practice of law and won't be. I have no idea what The Bar is claiming in this absurd regard. I have no complaint in that regard because there is no complaint. This is all an over-reaching contrivance by The Florida Bar.
As previously reported on GamePolitics, Thompson is suing the Florida Bar in federal court. Thompson amended that complaint to include the Florida Supreme Court as well.
We'll post more info as we learn of it.
Comments
Re: Florida Bar Seeks His Temporary Disbarment, Says Jack
This man is honestly an idiot. He blames video games for the problems of the American youth. Video games have a smaller effect then he thinks. Consider most kids consider it a game, and nothing more. It's not like the ooh and aah and go finally I can learn to kill somebody. A very small percentage of America's youth take these games to heart. I'm not stating these games are good or bad, just that most aren't taken literally. He's grabbing an excuse where the support to the conclusion is so thin it stinks. He shouldn't even be granted the right to practice law. According to him, if games are violent and obscene, freedom of speech becomes void. Honestly the man needs to reconsider his thought process.
Sincerely,
A 15 year old kid.
Thompson is, after all, the only certified sane lawyer in the state of Florida.
You think this is bad? Try watching SCO v. IBM. It's several years into court and there's still no sign of what SCO is actually suing over.
http://www.qj.net/Thompson-says-Florida-bar-wants-him-suspended/pg/49/ai...
'. This is the same Bar and the same Bar prosecutor that threatened Thompson with a psychiatric evaluation, just as it did fifteen years ago, with the result that The Bar’s insurer paid Thompson damages for that insanity, and Thompson was rendered the only officially Bar-certified sane lawyer in Florida.'
Simply because from the way it's worded it looks like Jack got compensation for being insane, and then once he was cured, he got a little certificate :)
Actually, I think it can be used against him. As I understand them, State Bars are essentially a club. The reason you take a Bar exam and join a State bar is to practice law in THAT state. You can't call yourself a lawyer nor represent clients if you haven't. The reason for this is to establish a level of professionalism.
Any actions you preform that discredit the bar or lawyers of the bar is grounds for disbarment. This primarily refers to actions in the courtroom. However, I can imagine them using his blatant and pathological unprofessionalism against him. If nothing else, it's a sign of how he may react in court.
I could be wrong, but calling a person who disagrees with you on national television, along with all the other events on national television, can't help his case. The claims of vast conspiracies against him should also be used against him.
All those childish asides and overblown, grandiose descriptions of everyone being against him -- seriously, I'm just waiting for an "LOL", "LMAO" or "OMFG". It's the next logical step.
Is this for real?
On the one hand, I hope it is because it stands as a shining monument of his instability.
On the other hand, the idea that anyone this totally bent could be licensed to practice law in America just terrifies the hell out of me. It is honestly disturbing to see any adult writing things like this.
I feel a bit ill.
I would say "I think we all know how that story ends", but I actually suspect there's quite a few people who don't know.
I'm not saying that it would amount to anything, legally. However, it could potentially do enough to discredit his stability if it were cited as acting in a manner unprofessional for a lawyer- not within the court, but as an example where the court can say to themselves "yeah, I saw him on t.v.- what an ass."
its not that simple. human nature can't stop chasing their enemy once its made.
moby dick for example.
JUST LEAVE US ALONE.
http://blogurself.com/blog/technology/ebay-xbox-360-issues/
But seriously though, I've said this before, but I'm kinda worried about him. It's fun to laugh at his gross incompetence and his cartoonish paranoia, but I think he might be well on his way to becoming a danger to himself and others. In all seriousness, when he gets disbarred, he might turn violent.
I'm sorry my comment has no actual content, I just really needed to get that out of my system. Preferably in public.
I find it disgraceful that he can still wriggle his way onto national television anymore actually.
I wonder when the baby in the sun will come out to laugh at us.
http://overlawyered.com/cgibin/mt/mtsearch.cgiIncludeBlogs=1&search=jack...
i did search for those of you who want to take look at jacks legal history
(overlawyered is a legal blog that talks basically about some of the insanity in our courts system
this link works lol
acting unprofessional on national TV by using the words “Idiot” and “Jackass"
I don't think that can count as anything against him (legally speaking) and if it does then it shouldn't. He was not practicing law when he made those statements, and the man is entitled to free speech.
But he hasn't filed it. If it don't have the court clerk's stamp on it, it basically don't exist. Jacko is just trolling GP.
"There are no tanks in Baghdad"
"I have no complaint in that regard because there is no complaint."
C'mon people, Jack said there are no claims.
I can't even begin to explain my feeling of disgust for this guy.
Honestly, even as a teenager, I can sense something is very wrong with Mr. Jack Thompson. I admit there is a certain amount of fear that I attain when I hear about him. The first question that pops in my mind, "What did he do this time?"
your right i made a mistake lol i dont know what i was thinking lol
Yeah, yeah, I know what you're thinking, but no. He's not crazy, or at least he didn't used to be. He's a *jerk*. You don't have to be clinically insane to ignore anything other people say if they disagree with you; that's an all too 'normal' human attribute.
But this... Jack *must* know that you can't write a legal document the same way you'd write a Livejournal rant. But for some reason, he can't help himself. I think, in all seriousness, Jack needs to see a counselor or psychiatrist to help work out some of his issues, because he's clearly losing it.