Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson To Face Contempt Charge
Gamasutra has the story (by way of the currently-down GamePolitics) that Jack Thompson could be facing a contempt charge over his antics during the Bully fiasco. From the article: "According to the report, the contempt of court request could find Thompson facing jail time, though it is more likely that 'fines, judicial admonishment or censure' would result from this most recent turn of events. The report also notes that attorneys representing the Philadelphia law firm Blank-Rome have filed a 'Petition for Order to Show Cause,' which requires Thompson to illustrate to a judge why he should not be held in contempt."
I know people have the right to freedom of speech, but I wish he'd use his right to remain silent for once!
This guy has some issues. Problably from playing too many games as a kid.
"The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
In an email to GamePolitics, Thompson has responded to this request, writing, "You want to play hardball...? You want to try to throw me in jail? You have no idea what you are unleashing in doing this. You're at the brink..."
Jesus.
Huzzah for the overcrowded US Prison System! JT is certain to have his hoop stretched to an uncomfortable size 9 by someone who was imprisoned for Grand Theft Auto!
You see 'em? They're EVERYWHERE!
Not a lawyer (won't use the abbreviation, because it's gross), but a "contempt finding" is a separate matter from a criminal conviction. Basically, as a means to allow courts to "take care of their business", judges are given wide lattitude in punishments they can use to keep people in line while they're in the courtroom. All that is necessary is that a judge issue a finding of "contempt of court" and he can issue a variety of usually-lower-grade (compared to criminal convictions) punishments. Now, you can certainly say it's wrong that judges should have this power, but as it stands, most contempt findings don't need a jury trial, so to ask that, he'd be asking to overturn quite a bit of tradition.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
"You don't know the history of barratry! I do! You're just being glib!"
Since "jump the couch" is taken by Hollywood UFO-cultists, I hereby declare that Jack Thompson has officially "thrown the chair".
My legal education is a bit fuzzy but your last sentence hits the nail on the head. The petition does exactly what the article states: Thompson has to tell the judge why he shouldn't be held in contempt for doing whatever it is the court told him not to do.
I haven't read the details but for the sake of argument let's say that the judge told both parties they couldn't do media interviews. Jack then turns around and does an interview with a family-friendly web site. That would be a contempt of court issue. The law firm is now trying to force Jack to explain why he shouldn't face whatever penalty the court said it would impose if either party talked to the media.
This is different from whether Jack has been shown to be guilty. In essence, the law firm is telling the court, "Jack did what you told him not to do. I want you to force him to tell you why he shouldn't suffer the penalty."
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Never before have I advocated a severe beating for another person until I discovered who Jack Thompson was.
Can you imagine Pesci saying, "You want to play hardball...? You want to try to throw me in jail? You have no idea what you are unleashing in doing this. You're at the brink..."
You have no chance to survive make your time.
From Wikipedia:
"In sending documents to opponents, Thompson would frequently attach a photocopy of his driver's license, with a photo of Batman pasted over his own, just to make sure they knew who they were dealing with."
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
Now that I think about it, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case. Take a controversial public figure, pay him to do what he's famous for, and set up a false conflict. Gamers will flock to your product out of spite for your 'enemy', and anyone who's convinced by his rhetoric wouldn't be buying your games in the first place. Genius!
Well, except for the judicial system wanting your head on a pike after they find out you've been using the courtroom as a PR outlet. Nothing a few campaign contributions wouldn't fix, though...