Judge Bans Thompson from LA Videogame Case

BluePariah writes "The ever-vigilant folks at Game Politics are reporting that Federal District Court Judge James Brady has refused Jack Thompson's request to file an amicus curiae brief in the lawsuit over Louisiana's videogame law." From the article: "Thompson, of course, was heavily involved in the Louisiana statute, helping Rep. Roy Burrell (D) draft the underlying legislation, HB 1381. The anti-game attorney claimed in his request to the court that Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti, a named defendant in the case, approved of Thompson's amicus motion. As previously reported here on GamePolitics, Thompson's request to file an amicus brief - if granted - would have permitted the long-time video game industry nemesis to provide information to the court even though he is not a party to the lawsuit."

Comments

Re:Jack Thompson is not our friend

[nuzak]

> Apparently the courts have decided that he doesn't know Jack.

Doesn't seem to know Jack about law either. He signed the brief as a, get this, Defendant, and Co-Counsel. So either he's too incompetent to practice law, or he fraudulently misrepresents himself on legal briefs. But his practice is in Florida, where it seems it's virtually impossible to get disbarred.

Why is Jack even wasting LA state resources

[antifoidulus]

in case he didn't notice, violent video games really aren't Louisiana's #1 priority right now....

And I betI know what his reaction will be

[91degrees]

I haven't read the article or read any comment from Jack yet, but I'll bet I can guess his spin on this will be something along the lines of "The Games industry his clearly absolutely terrified of me. This is why they went to so much effort to have me barred from this case. This is proof that I'm winning."

Anyone want to take me up on this bet?