Slashdot Mirror
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."
It's about damn time this poor excuse for a human being was disbarred.
Maybe now we won't have to hear about him all the damn time.
~t
Not that I see that as a bad thing...
this will give more time to sit around in front of the computer at home, playing video games
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Thompson always wanted to own a Bar. Now, armed with multiple US Supreme Court rulings that no state bar can do what it has done to Thompson, he is set to own that Bar.
Different kind of bar?
Now that Jack is defying the court order requiring him to have another member in good standing of the Florida bar to submit motions for him, what other sanctions can be placed upon him? Is there a more extreme penalty for him beyond permanent disbarrment?
Contempt of court, I guess...
He was disbarred in Florida. Doesn't this mean he can still take the exam and be re-barred (okay, probably not the word, although anything involving Thompson and rebar sounds like fun) in any other state?
The Gamepolitics link is to the recommendation, not the approval. My bad. The correct link is this.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
1. Doesn't he mean "pwn" that Bar?
2. Thompson knew this was going to happen, so last week he file an action against the bar; now he claims his disbarment was retaliation. Nice pre-emptive strike last week, Jack -- too bad it's as transparent as day that it's unrelated to the numerous reasons the Florida Bar Association decided you're unfit to practice law.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
No, it takes filing tons and tons of frivolous lawsuits and wasting countless hours of court time and taxpayer money to get where he is at.
From what I limitedly know about the Bar (in Indiana) is that once you've been disbarred in one state, you cant reapply in any other states.
Any lawyer types care to comment?
All it takes is pissing of the Bar and a few judges, and you've lost what you made with 12 years of college.
To be fair, he did more than that, he did his darndest to further the stereotype of lawyers as being rabid, idiotic, greedy, power hungry attack dogs. More significantly, he was tying up a lot of time and wasting a lot of other people's money by using completely frivolous lawsuits as a soapbox. Then he was blatantly disrespectful to everyone else, even those who disagreed with him.
This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.
Exactly. If all it took was pissing off some judges, he'd have been disbarred a long, long, LONG time ago. He demonstrated compete disregard for the legal system with meritless filings for YEARS, and as a result got exactly what he deserved.
I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
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.
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
He did what with the piss of some judges?
"There can be little doubt that union activities lead to continuous and progressive inflation." F. A. Hayek
"Sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes, well... he eats you."
That kind of bar. I think.
...the system actually works on occasion.
You sound like you've thought this through. ;-)
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
It has seen the end of Jack Thompson,
It has seen the end of a RIAA lawsuit,
The end of copyright cops,
The end of Comcast's forging of RST packets,
It will soon see the end of the Empire itself!
Maybe you think everyone should be able to do whatever the hell they want whenever they want, and if people don't like it, they can piss off?
Actions have consequences. When you screw up, you have to pay the price. I know, making people pay for their mistakes is taking away their freedom to be douchebags. Obviously these professional associations, by holding their members to certain standards, must hate our freedoms.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I mean seriously - this is just too good to be true.
Jack Thompson disbarred. The RIAA loses its first court case on their "making available" theory.
I'm waiting for the OMG ponies to show up.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
So today we have stories in which the DOJ opposes becoming the Federal Copyright Cops, the RIAA loses a couple hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, and Jack Thompson gets disbarred. To quote Perfect Strangers: Now we are so happy, we do the Dance of Joy!
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
.... Please give him a cup of hot coffee to calm him down?
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
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.
"Stumble before you crawl"
I don't know about law, but in various health care professions (I keep my chiropractic license for pro bono patients) and licensed engineers (I know a few), one of the first questions they ask on any application for a license is something along the lines of
"Has your license to practice ever been suspended or revoked in this or any other jurisdiction, or has any [insert profession] board taken disciplinary action against you? If yes, please provide a detailed explaination."
That usually means that if you were booted in one jurisdiction, your chances of being licensed in another jurisdiction are sufficiently close to zero to be indistinguishable from zero for all practical purposes.
Oh, and if you are found out to have LIED on that question, your license is automatically revoked (at least in SC) and you're fined heavily. For some professions, that's even a felony and includes jail time.
Ah! There they are. Thanks.
Now that that's out of the way, where's my copy of Duke Nukem forever? Or my notice of an auction at SCO so I can buy Darl McBride's desk?
BTW speaking of Slashdot on April Fools day - this would be a really excellent move on the part of the industry.
Everyone knows /. is completely useless on April 1. Wouldn't it be funny if the industry took use of that fact and posted an important story on April 1st specifically to take advantage of that?
"RIAA admits to wrongdoing in their ongoing lawsuit cash grab. Offers refund to everyone who contacts them today."
We'd all say, "Yeah right! OMG ponies." and not email them. They'd be in the clear.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I am speaking from my understanding as a licensed chiropractor. (I don't practice any more except for pro bono cases. I much prefer my computer-related work now.)
The _theory_ behind a professional licensing board is that members of a profession that requires extensive and specialized education are the only ones qualified to make informed judgements regarding the practice of that profession. These judgements include, but are not limited to, appropriate standards of practice including what would be considered "unprofessional conduct".
This is intended to protect the public from unqualified and/or unscrupulous practitioners. Usually, this works well. However, it is possible for the boards to become "good ol' boys' clubs" in which they are more concerned for each other than the public. Fortunately, this is usually rare. Many licensing boards include a "member of the public" (that is, someone who is _not_ licensed in the professon) in order to help prevent such abuses.
Since the licensing board controls who is licensed and, thus, who is allowed to practice the profession, unless otherwise allowed by law the highest sanction that they can impose is to bar the offender from ever practicing that profession again. Lighter sanctions (again, unless also allowed monetary damanges by law) include temporary suspension of a license for various periods of time or other license-related sanctions. I have heard of chiropractors having their licenses revoked and being required to re-apply as if a new graduate, including needing to take all of the exams again. I have also heard of chiropractors being required to take and pass classes to demonstrate an understanding of the areas that resulted in the disciplinary actions. (Fortunately, I have never been subject to disciplinary action by any licensing board.)
So, the theory is that the licensing board can revoke a license in order to protect the public from someone who is deemed unfit to practice the profession. For lawyers, for historical reasons, that licensing board is usually called the "bar" or the "bar association".
And I would _hope_ they would do thorough background checks on school teachers.
Not gonna happen. You quote people in stories to give arguments authority (again, not to toot my own horn, but I was a journalist for two decades). The only thing Jack is good for going forward is as an example of how the people who think videogames make children commit murder are themselves crazy. How hard is it to get disbarred? John Yoo, the lawyer who wrote the opinion saying it was fine for the United States for disregard 100 years of treaties, international law, and the Geneva Convention and torture people, *he* hasn't been disbarred. Getting disbarred is really highly unusual, absent some kind of criminal conviction (like President Clinton's perjury charges). Jack's credibility is gone forever. I predict a new standard bearer against video game violence will arise: Female, mother with young children, probably calling herself doctor but with a PhD in education. You heard it here first...
Have a Bar called "Jack's Bar" and as you walk in there is a white haired lawyer that the bouncer is int he process of throwing out.
Bouncer: Sir you are being a nuisance to the customers please leave.
Lawyer: But.... I am a prominent lawyer in the community, I was on nationwide TV for crying out loud!
Bouncer: Shutup and get out, NOW!!!
Bouncer then throws the lawyer out on his his ass, get it, "Dis-Bar-ed" LOLZ!
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Admission to the bar is the term commonly used in the United States to indicate that a person is licensed to practice law as an attorney at law.
Being disbarred is a gramatically correct term referring to the act of revocation of a licence to practice law.
Basically this decision means Jack Thompson is unable to earn his living as an attorney (at least in Florida) any more.
From his 'response':
With enemies this foolish, Thompson needs only the loyal friends he has.
I have some bad news for you, Jack: Your Mom and Dad don't count as 'friends'... and they can't stand you anymore either.
Jack Thompson disbarred. On my birthday.
Happy birthday to me, happy birthday to me...
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
Have you actually been following the cases? Thompson has done more than just to piss off some judges. In many cases, he crossed the line of professionalism. The problem with Thompson is that you are his personal enemy if you oppose him in anyway whether it was your job or whether you simply ruled against him. If you read the judge's opinion against Thompson, you would see that. And the ABA (not AMA) had nothing to do with this: The Florida Bar has disbarred Thompson. Other states will not accept you as an attorney once one state disbars you.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Not to defend Thompson, consider the following charges:
Doesn't this list make him sound like a pretty typical Slashdotter?
To rephrase the judge's decision:
<singing>Hit the road, Jack, and don't you come back no more no more no more no more, hit the road, Jack, and don't you come back no more!</singing>
Actually, I don't think they're seen as representative by anyone in, say, Western Europe. If you started foaming at the mouth about how "teaching the controversy" (about evolution,) or putting bible studies back into secular schools, or persecuting homosexuals because "God" told you so, here in Germany (and, I _think_, at least in France too) everyone would look funnily at you and wonder what mental institution did you escape from. The impression even among relatively religious people about the lunacies coming from America in the name of religion, isn't as much, "man, those are real christians, we should be like them", but rather along the lines of, "where did America go wrong?"
The last time any kind of fundamentalist bible thumping had any kind of street cred in Europe was during the Counter-Enlightenment of the late 18'th and early 19'th century.
The funny thing is that even, say, the Catholic Church, much as a lot of Americans like to think it must be like their own born-again zealots, actually went a very long time ago through what was called the "counter-reformation" to try to stop the tide of protestantism. They learned to be a lot more laissez-faire about, say, science and even sponsored such orders as the Jesuits. Which were and still are primarily an academic order within the church. Those guys actually run universities and research labs. From the very start, Ignatius de Loyola insisted on an academic education to high standards before one could join the order, in a stark contrast to the stereotype of ignorant and poorly educated clergy of the time.
At any rate, positions like ID or young earth are as foreign to catholicism as it gets. And that's just one of the denominations which, by and large, just looks funny at the bible-thumping puritans from across the oceans and think at best, "Lord, what have we done to you, to be lumped into the same category as _those_?" ;)
So, no, the USA fundamentalists aren't seen as representative by any christian except themselves. Just as they're not representative for the larger and more moderate mass of US citizens, I think. (Or hope.) Just because a group is loud and vocal, doesn't mean they represent anyone else but themselves.
And if anyone else decides to judge, say, the largely secular Europe by what the bible-thumpers in America say or do... well, I guess some things can't be helped. Some people are ignorant and ill educated everywhere, and if they want to believe something that hasn't been true for two centuries, it's not my problem.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.