Jack Thompson Disbarred

Sockatume writes "The Florida Supreme Court has approved Judge Dava Tunis' recommendations for the permanent disbarment of John B. "Jack" Thompson, with no leave to reapply and $43,675.35 in disciplinary costs. The ruling is a step up from the enhanced disbarment that had been suggested by the prosecution, which would have forbidden him from reapplying for ten years. Thompson has 30 days to appeal the ruling before the disbarment is permanent. Thompson responds to the ruling."

Comments

Kind of a shitty link, sorry guys

[Sockatume]

The Gamepolitics link is to the recommendation, not the approval. My bad. The correct link is this.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this.

[j0nb0y]

Every state bar requires a background check before allowing anyone to sit for the bar exam. The background check of Jack Thompson would reveal the Florida disbarment, and there is approximately a zero percent chance that any state bar association would let him sit for the exam.

He doesn't know when to quit...

[Coopjust]

In his response, he accuses the bar of acting against him to protect the "unethical" conduct of the State Attorney general against one of his clients. He goes on to insinuate that one of the justices didn't actually know anything about the case (scratch that, it's an outright accusation:

it is fascinating that Justice Cannady, who has undoubtedly reviewed absolutely nothing about this disciplinary case, has put his name to this disbarment order on the day that he was served with the federal civil rights action. What a coincidence.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this.

[The Only Druid]

I want to be really clear here: disbarrment is beyond uncommon. It's happened a handful of times, nation wide, in the last few years. Even suspensions are difficult to get. Most bar proceedings that go anywhere result in, at most, a public slap on the wrist and a note on your record.

Even suspensions are survivable.

Jack Thompson, among other things, submitted porn to the courts, accused multiple judges of bribery in open court and public filings, violated numerous ethical rules regarding practice without a license, good character, etc. He falsely represented himself as being the lawyer for criminal victims, profited off their suffering, and then lied in court about it. He accused other lawyers of just as bad offenses, without a shred of evidence. On a more personal level, I can confirm that years ago, he physically broke into at least one lawyer's office to drop of papers and "scare" them (I know the lawyer personally).

Jack Thompson is a festering boil on the hide of the law.

Re:Hallelujah!

[Hairy Heron]

Conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar.

Re:Hallelujah!

[Dorkmaster Flek]

You mean aside from recklessly ignoring court orders and abuse of his position as a lawyer? Perhaps you should read up on his activities.

Re:Hallelujah!

[KillerBob]

Read the Kotaku link on it... as of this writing, it's still up, while the other one is slashdotted...

http://kotaku.com/5054772/jack-thompson-disbarred

The document they posted is quite brief, but for those who don't feel like reading the whole thing, the paragraph that answers your question is paragraph 4:

Among the extensive findings of fact presented in the report, the Court takes particular note of the following which occurred during the three-year period at issue in five counts in these cases: (1) respondent made false statements of material fact to courts and repeatedly violated a court order; (2) respondent communicated the subject of representation directly with clients of opposing counsel; (3) respondent engaged in prohibited ex parte communications; (4) respondent publicized and sent hundreds of pages of vitriolic and disparaging missives, letters, faxes, and press releases, to the affected individuals; (5) respondent targeted an individual who was not involved with respondent in any way, merely due to "the position [the individual] holds in state and national politics;" (6) respondent falsely, recklessly, and publicly accused a judge as being amenable to the "fixing" of cases; (7) respondent sent courts inappropriate and offensive sexual materials; (8) respondent falsely and publicly accused various attorneys and their clients of engaging in a conspiracy/enterprise involving "the criminal distribution of sexual materials to minors" and attempted to get prosecuting authorities to charge these attorneys and their clients for racketeering and extortion; (9) respondent harassed the former client of an attorney in an effort to get the client to use its influence to persuade the attorney to withdraw a defamation suit filed by the attorney against respondent; and (10) respondent retaliated against attorneys who filed Bar complaints against him for his unethical conduct by asserting to their clients, government officials, politicians, the media, female lawyers in their law firm, employees, personal friends, acquaintances, and their wives, that the attorneys were criminal Case Nos. SC07-80 and SC07-354 Page Three pornographers who objectify women.

Quoted, unmodified. Every paragraph of the filing is pertinent... it's only about a page's worth of text, so well worth the read. And IMHO, it's well worth disbarring him. And the only way he's affected *me* personally was that, thanks to one of his initiatives, I had to ask the staff at EB Games to sell me a copy of Bully, because they didn't have it actually *on* the shelves.