Jack Thompson Quietly Bows Out of OTHER Bar Lawsuit
Jack Thompson Quietly Bows Out of OTHER Bar Lawsuit
October 4, 2007
In recent days we've been tracking Jack Thompson's legal antics in his lawsuit against the Florida Bar - the one presided over by Judge Adalberto Jordan.To keep things, um, straight, let's call this one the gay porn case, since Thompson's September 24th docket submission which feaured graphic pictures of men having sex has become a crucial, if bizarre, element.
But, until yesterday, there was another John Thompson vs. the Florida Bar case, also going on in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This one was presided over by Judge Paul Huck (left).
For clarity's sake, let's refer to this one as the Kotaku case, since Thompson at one point tried unsuccessfully to drag the popular game blog as well as its parent company, Gawker Media, into the case. Thompson sought to name Kotaku as a defendant along with the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court.
Judge Huck, by the way, also presided over a 2006 Thompson suit against the Florida Bar, before dismissing it late last year. In dismissing last year's case, Huck wrote:
Thompson submits nothing beyond wild accusations of a vast conspiracy against him…
As he has done recently in the gay porn case with Judge Adalberto Jordan, during the Kotaku case Thompson filed unsuccessful motions to remove Judge Huck from presiding.
On Monday of this week, Judge Huck scheduled oral arguments in the Kotaku case to begin today. Yesterday, however, Thompson abruptly - and voluntarily - withdrew the lawsuit. In answer to GP's request for comment, Thompson wrote:
The Huck case is superfluous, as the other case is the one that has the relief I want and need.
So this one's over and the spotlight will remain on Judge Jordan's handling of Thompson and the gay porn case.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGIN / REGISTER
Crispy Gamer
GamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 03/12/10 at 07:31pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Here is a trailer of Dead or Alive Paradise. It´s basically a summary of the game...
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Here is a trailer of Dead or Alive Paradise. It´s basically a summary of the game...
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:54pm
Valdearg: *sigh* I'm friends with some sad, sad people.. If they weren't such good drinking buddies.. Lmao.
Valdearg: *sigh* I'm friends with some sad, sad people.. If they weren't such good drinking buddies.. Lmao.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:54pm
DarkSaber: Pssssh, the answer is Populous.
DarkSaber: Pssssh, the answer is Populous.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:54pm
JDKJ: I'm still in the beavers. Any chance I get, I'm in the beavers. Nut-deep.
JDKJ: I'm still in the beavers. Any chance I get, I'm in the beavers. Nut-deep.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:54pm
Valdearg: Seriously? I mean.. Couldn't they have picked a different topic to argue about?
Valdearg: Seriously? I mean.. Couldn't they have picked a different topic to argue about?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:53pm
Valdearg: Wow. Two of my friends are arguing on my facebook about whether Age of Mythology or Black and White was the better God Game...
Valdearg: Wow. Two of my friends are arguing on my facebook about whether Age of Mythology or Black and White was the better God Game...
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:52pm
DarkSaber: I was having a shower. That time of the week again. Boys Brigade? Never heard of them, but I was in the Beavers.
DarkSaber: I was having a shower. That time of the week again. Boys Brigade? Never heard of them, but I was in the Beavers.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:44pm
JDKJ: Your deafening silence says it all, Saber.
JDKJ: Your deafening silence says it all, Saber.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:39pm
JDKJ: Be honest, Saber. You were in the Boys Brigade when you were a lad, weren't you?
JDKJ: Be honest, Saber. You were in the Boys Brigade when you were a lad, weren't you?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:39pm
DarkSaber: Also, had Schrodinger been hanging about?
DarkSaber: Also, had Schrodinger been hanging about?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:37pm
JDKJ: And did the mice then get to playing?
JDKJ: And did the mice then get to playing?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:35pm
DarkSaber: ah, but was it also out of the bag?
DarkSaber: ah, but was it also out of the bag?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:33pm
JDKJ: And didn't the cat have to be curious nine times before its curiosity got the better of it?
JDKJ: And didn't the cat have to be curious nine times before its curiosity got the better of it?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:30pm
JDKJ: Keep it real, Saber. You know your Christmas Day wouldn't be complete if you didn't have a listen to the Queen's Speech.
JDKJ: Keep it real, Saber. You know your Christmas Day wouldn't be complete if you didn't have a listen to the Queen's Speech.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:29pm
Andrew Eisen: "Curiosity killed the cat." Makes you wonder just what that cat was doing when that phrase was coined.
Andrew Eisen: "Curiosity killed the cat." Makes you wonder just what that cat was doing when that phrase was coined.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:28pm
chadachada321: And to really bring this full circle...tradition would have "Under God" omitted from the pledge, because it was only added in 54
chadachada321: And to really bring this full circle...tradition would have "Under God" omitted from the pledge, because it was only added in 54
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:27pm
Valdearg: I never understood humanity's insistence on adhering to tradition. But hey, as long as there's no harm done, I don't really care, Lol.. Like you guys are saying, sometimes it's downright entertaining.
Valdearg: I never understood humanity's insistence on adhering to tradition. But hey, as long as there's no harm done, I don't really care, Lol.. Like you guys are saying, sometimes it's downright entertaining.
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:23pm
DarkSaber: I know, makes you wonder how a practical joke becomes a centuries old tradition. I doubt when it first happened people looked at each other said "We should do this EVERY year!"
DarkSaber: I know, makes you wonder how a practical joke becomes a centuries old tradition. I doubt when it first happened people looked at each other said "We should do this EVERY year!"
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:21pm
JDKJ: That thing where the Commons slam the door in Black Rob's face and make him bang on it before they'll open up always makes me laugh. Who comes up with this shit?
JDKJ: That thing where the Commons slam the door in Black Rob's face and make him bang on it before they'll open up always makes me laugh. Who comes up with this shit?
Posted 03/12/10 at 01:21pm
Valdearg: @DS: Nice... That's better than in America, where 40% of Americans still think he was a tool of Satan.. Ugh..
Valdearg: @DS: Nice... That's better than in America, where 40% of Americans still think he was a tool of Satan.. Ugh..
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Or maybe my mind is just so twisted it sees sexual innuendo in everything nowadays...
Hey, maybe all this is just part of him getting ready to retire.
wow, is it just me or is JT sounding... weary?
CAN John Bruce constantly file, then after a time, withdraw from cases such as these, creating, in effect, a stall tactic? Or will someone, somewhere, in the legal system put their foot down and say "ENOUGH!" (or my more popular favorite Belushi quote from The Principal "NO MORE!")?
Just curious if the law sets a limit.
Nightwng2000
NW2K software
So how did he pass the sanity test? Isn't this the definition of paranoia?
i mean, this is like prank calling 911.
In March, long before the gay porn suit, he sues the Florida Bar and the entire Supreme Court of the State, and most of us laughed at as a foolhardy and ridiculous.
Then he gets into the suit, and asks the court to amend the suit not once, but twice.
Then he has to face numerous motions to dismiss by the Bar. so he pleads for a mediator, then he moves for clarification, then he moves for recusal of the judge, then he moves for disqualification of the judge, and then he moves for special hearings, all of which are denied, denied, and denied.
Then after he is bounced out of court once and again, he asks in August for more time to Amend his Complaint so he can perfect his claims, and guess what, he never does, announcing that the judge is too unfair to hear his case, and then finally, he gets what he always sought- a hearing, a forum, an opportunity to wax eloquently before the jurist about his cause of action- AND WHAT DOES HE DO ???
On the day of the hearing, he files a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of all his claims of action, the very claims he sent out in news releases last March were going to shake the foundations of the Florida Bar forever?????
The Court should fine him for filing a frivolous suit that wasted the time of the court and the Bar and they should move to tax costs against him, and continue to expose him for the nonsense he causes.
Of course, this shows that JT DOES have limits. The sheer volume of court documents and press releases he spits out is mind-boggling. I can't help but wonder how he juggles all his time and energy.
Folks, you can't make this stuff up.
Oh, my... beautiful pun, sir!
.
.
.
What I find odd is that several judges/blogs/even Thompson himself throws the 'conspiracy' word around so much I wonder why no one is snatching on that particular aspect of Jack and asking him to go quietly into the good night...
- Read: No leg to stand on.
The match is over! Due to surrender, the winner is...JUUUUDGE HUUUUUCK!!
*Punch-Out crowd cheer and camera flashes*
In other words, he couldn't bully the judge, so he ran away with his tail between his legs.
I think I'm just becoming confused. This is just so weird.
-Mike Schwinger
@ Iniquus & VioletSon
I'm not so sure. You maybe giving Jack too much credit. He did send a Judge gay porn after all. If that's all part of some "master plan", its gotta be a pretty screwed up plan.
"So bored of this man now. Why is this process taking so long anyway?"
I've been thinking that for awhile. It appalls me that it takes so long to just get RID of him.
Another idle thought...when JT does get disbarred later this year, do you think the response thread here at GP will reach 1k? =)
Well, Jack Thompson has lost the "Kotaku case" (as in he withdrew from the case). This is another defeat for Jack Thompson (although he will say that this is another "victory" for Jack Thompson). This is another victory for the gamers.
@ Jack Thompson
Jack, give up, you have no chance of winning. You may, as well, admit defeat, before it's too late. Also, you are on the verge of being defeated, even now you are facing your "last stand" in this so-called "war" of yours.
That's right, the other one's got gay porn in it.
His 15-year-long crusade against the Florida Bar will end soon. I doubt, however, that it will be the end of his other crusades.
With regard to Thompson's claims to run against a judge. A judge's duty is to impartially uphold the law; a suitable candidate is one who has repeatedly shown to be fair and evenhanded (my mother, incidentally, is a Court Referee - like a judge, but hired, not elected). Someone who has a 15+ year-long-crusade against things he personally objects to can not in any way be described as "fair" or "impartial," no matter how valid the crusade may be.
But, if I lived in or near Miami, FL, and I knew a radio station which John Bruce, Judge Jordan, and Norm Kent all listened to, I think I would make a dedication that would go something like this:
DJ: Andrew Rhodes, from Wilmington, NC, known in some online circles as Nightwng2000, called in for a dedication to Attorney John Bruce "Jack" Thompson. If any of you Miami folks aren't familiar with this individual, there are plenty of online sites, including Wikipedia, to look up his antics.
Andrew calls in regarding recent events pertaining to John Bruce, who has recently had several lawsuits against the Florida Bar, who also have several lawsuits/complaints against John Bruce. One of the most recent suits filed by Mr. Thompson included several rather graphic images filed with the court regarding gay porn and a complaint by Mr. Thompson against Attorny Norm Kent. Needless to say, there are plenty of ways to Google to find more info on this. But, Thompson ended up getting into trouble with the court over the filings of the actual images of gay sex porn.
John Bruce has now dropped one of his suits against the Florida Bar while continuing with this one. When asked why he kept this one by GamePolitics.com, Thompson responded in part "The Huck case is superfluous, as the other case is the one that has the relief I want and need." (The "Huck case" being the one he dropped.) As some posters on GamePolitics have pointed out, this is a rather hilarious (and we agree) comment considering it has to do with gay porn images.
As such, Andrew offers up this excellent choice of dedications to Thompson, with props to Norm Kent and Judge Jordan, the latter two working hard to keep the legal system we know and love from being further mutilated by dishonorable and unethical attorney's like John Bruce "Jack" Thompson and make certain that attorneys like Thompson...
CAN'T GET NO SATISFACTION!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3jxmWU5lFA
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
I'm not sure how it works legally, but it's something along the lines of denying voluntary dismissal, and instead invoking summary judgment instead.
I was just wondering about that. How can filing suits and then dismissing them when they don't look to be going your way be considered ethical? How can someone get away with that? In theory, you could just keep filing a claim and then dismissing it until things go your way. Sure, it would take a long time, but since Jack is a "ethical" "Warrior of God" who fights the good fight for the souls of teh childrens, he maybe willing to do that. Can Kotaku sue him for frivolous law suits in this case?
Ethical? No way. Legal? Technically yes, because he's the one who filed it, so he doesn't need the judge's permission to dismiss.
On the other hand, I believe the judge can force whether it was dismissed "with" or "without" prejudice. The judges in the RIAA cases have been forcing the "with prejudice" suit dismissals, so a) the RIAA can't just reopen the case later when conditions become favorable, and b) so the defendant can sue for legal fees, because "with prejudice" means that the plaintiff failed to prove their case, and admitted as much by withdrawing. Kind of a "you lose by default", but JT could still appeal to a higher court at that point.
Actually, this judge has has done just that. He gave Jack some leeway and Jack abused it. Even if the Judge didn't know Jack's legal history, he got tired very quickly of the inane babble that this Court Jester spewed and told him to 'shut up or put up'. Jack replied by trying to file to have the just made as a defendant to create a reason for the judge to have a conflict of interests, and the judge gave him a legal ruler across the knuckles and is getting ready to put him in the corner with the proverbial dunce cap on.
This judge is doing what so many other judges should have done in the past. They are making Jack act like an adult in the court room, or else they will send him to bed without his supper.
I guess he's just following the modern practice of pundits and flinging as much poo as possible until it starts to consistently stick. But he doesn't have nearly as much clout as BillO or Rush does, which is necessary to ensure you're never held accountable for any such statements or actions.
I guess he'll finally be able to focus on trolling the internet all day long once he doesn't have court to worry about.
What a great idea! Maybe I should start referring to those game-dropping jerks as "thompsons" from now on.
> CAN John Bruce constantly file, then after a time, withdraw from cases
Pretty much. But all it takes is one counterclaim and the case is still open, just with the shoe on the other foot. The defendant can also move to have the case dismissed with prejudice and put JT on the hook for legal fees.
No one is hiring Jack Thompson, no one is paying his bills. He's been finished as a lawyer for years now. Disbarring him is just a formality that will make it slightly more difficult for him to file, that's all.
/so, so sorry
He also seems fond of the "reach over and press buttons on the other player's controller" way of play.
i sure hope that somebody explained to jack what 'oral arguments' mean
But all it takes is one counterclaim and the case is still open, just with the shoe on the other foot. The defendant can also move to have the case dismissed with prejudice and put JT on the hook for legal fees.
Thanks for clearing that up. I was unclear how you got to dismiss with prejudice. So if a defendant in the case requests dismissal with prejudice, and JT tried to voluntarily withdraw his case before it's granted/denied, any idea what happens then? Do it trigger an immediate review of the motion to dismiss, or does JT still get off the hook?
Yeah, that's crossed my mind too. If he's putting so much time and effort into these "crusades", is he actually EARNING any money?
I mean, think about this:
If he's fined for ANYTHING, who's paying the bill? If John Bruce isn't actually working and earning money, then who's paying?
No, I'm not trying to bring "family" into this, GP. I AM, however, pointing out something that makes him look all that much more pathetic.
He runs around, firing off suits and filings (which COST), and facing many many fines, like he doesn't give a crap. Really, truly, he acts like he's got money to burn. BUT IT (most likely) ISN'T -HIS- EARNED MONEY!
And it's not like he isn't physically or mentally (questionable I know, but that's because of his own actions, not nature or accident) incapable of working and earning his OWN income. He SUPPOSEDLY has the education and the license to earn his own way. But what does he do? Doesn't really earn his part of the family income, and flitters away what income DOES come in on... what? His own irresponsibility?
And, certainly, his claim of not being afraid to go to jail is legit. HE WON'T LOOSE ANY INCOME BECAUSE HE ISN'T ACTUALLY WORKING! And the money being paid for his actions doesn't come from him, so apparently he doesn't care what he does.
Pathetic. Absolutely Pathetic.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
And insurance costs also tend to rise when you make a claim against that insurance (my homeowners insurance went up after a tree fell against the house and did $3500 in damage, for example).
I'm assuming he's getting some cash for appearing at debates and such. I can't imagine his book is bringing in a whole lot of money at this point. (And seeing as how the book was full of glaring spelling and grammatical errors, I wouldn't be surprised if Jack paid for the printing costs on it to begin with -- I forget the term for this type of publishing.)
I think it's called a 'Vanity Book' a book that you pay the costs for printing and publishing for, and recieve larger royalties from its' sale, hence why advertising the book is important, amazing how many copies have been flying around whilst subpoena-ing Bush and Co. Ulterior motives? You tell me ;)
/need more caffeine...
And yes, I'll admit to giggling at 'It has the relief I want and need' when talking about a hearing about Gay Porn.... So I can be childish sometimes :p
GP: wow, Jack is seeking a writ of mandamus... how many of those have you tried for or threatened since GP started in 2005? Have you ever succeeded with one? No...
Here's another question. You refer several times to "never in my thirty-one years of practicing law..." So, how many times during that period did you actually, you know, leave your house?
~Otaku-Man
And something else that crossed my mond regarding those 31 years:
He holds in low regard anyone who HASN'T been an attorney for 31 years as if they aren't respected or even intelligent.
Uh, HE'S worked as an attorney for 31 years... Just how many of HIS peers (attorneys/judges/etc) who've worked in the legal profession for half as long up to twice as long as he has holds HIM up with ANY regard? Maybe, just MAYBE, a couple or even a bare few. But any REAL significant number? Based on the negative law blogs that I've seen mentioned here and elsewhere, I doubt it very, very much.
So, he's one to be looking down on other people when so few look at him as equal, let alone in high regard.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
i think you need to add the word 'important' to your list of changing definitions. i think JT's current usage meaning 'meaningless fluff that i'm inundating the court with' goes against standard usage.
Of course it WASNT about gay porn, now it is thanks to your pathetic attention grabbing antics. You've turned your own suit against you by posting that garbage into a publically release document so of course it's about gay porn now as the judge descides to dismiss the case with prejudice thanks to your arrogant stupidity, or descides to slap you with a contempt of court.
"I love playing devil’s advocate, so let me throw this one out here: what if Jack really _is_ the smartest man in the legal system? Would any of his tactics seem relevant to us, the ignorant public? They laughed when Ford said people would love the Edsel, but now… uh… crud."
Interesting point, but the important thing to remember is that no one in the law field thinks much of his tactics either, whether they be other lawyers, judges, etc.
I believe there is footage of him taking time out to pass pieces of paper about like some lovestruck 10 year old to Janet Reno?
Seriously, how can we convince the average person to trust them to do their jobs with things like actual important rulings or catching the school shooting types before they blow when they can't even stop a man who's throwing his craziness out there for everyone to see (and shouting, "look, look at me make an idiot of myself!).
Mandamus is a judicial remedy which is in the form of an order from a superior court to any government, subordinate court, corporation or public authority to do or forbear from doing some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do or refrain from doing, as the case may be, and which is in the nature of public duty and in certain cases of a statutory duty.
So Jack's going to try to force his "gay porn" Bar suit judge to do what he wants him to do. Pardon me a moment.
*leaves the room*
*re-enters the room*
Ok, any bets on the outcome of this one? Jack, just because they're ruling against you... that's the court's perogative. There are rules and conventions, and your inability to follow them does not mean it is the fault of the court or the judge - it is your own fault. Bottom line, you're a hair's breadth from being held in contempt, and if you can't come up with a good reason why you put gay pornography in the public record... well, I guess that's your problem, isn't it?
Or, will he just cease to post here because he loses all relevance?
"There's too much confusion, I can't get no relief.
Businessmen, they drink my wine, plowmen dig my earth,
None of them along the line know what any of it is worth."
"No reason to get excited," the Judge, he kindly spoke,
"There are many here among us who feel that life is but a joke.
But you and I, we've been through that, and this is not our fate,
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late."
:)
It is well-settled federal law that a writ of mandamus is an "extraordinary" form of relief which should only issue in "extraordinary circumstances" and where the petitioner has "cleary and undisputably" carried the burden of demonstrating its righ to issuance of the writ. It's harder to get a writ of mandamus from a federal court than was the guy depicted in your most recent pornographic filing. I'd speculately estimate that 99.9% of all mandamus petitions are denied.
Why do keep filing petitions for mandamus?
He doesn't have relevance now and that doesn't stop him.
So hoist up the John B. (Thomspson)'s sail
See how the mainsail sets
Call for the captain ashore
Let me go home (let me go home)
I wanna go home (yeah, yeah)
Well I feel so broke up
I wanna go home