Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Judge Recommends Guilty Verdict for Jack Thompson

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Wed May 21, 2008 12:03 PM
from the pariahs-that-still-get-airtime dept.
GamePolitics is reporting that a Florida Judge has recommended that Jack Thompson be found guilty on 27 of 31 counts of misconduct and is awaiting a Florida Supreme Court verdict to back him up. Thompson is striking back with allegations against the Judge and others, complaining that loyalty oaths were never signed. "Tunis made 21 recommendations of guilt in relation to Thompson's participation in Strickland vs. Sony, an Alabama case in which the anti-game attorney represented the families of two police officers and a police dispatcher slain by 18-year-old Grand Theft Auto player Devin Moore. Tunis also recommended that Thompson be found guilty on four out of five counts relating to his 2006 attempt to have Rockstar's Bully declared a public nuisance in a case before Miami Judge Ronald Friedman. An additional two guilty counts stemmed from a non-video game matter."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Jack Thompson's Letter To Take-Two Exec's Mother 351 comments
debatem1 writes "Apparently, anti-violent-video-games crusader Jack Thompson is at it again, this time writing a letter to the mother of Strauss Zelnick, Chairman of Take-Two, the company that produces the GTA series of video games. In it he compares Zelnick to a member of the Hitler Youth, advocates beating the young Zelnick, and contemplates the existence of a Ted Bundy merit badge for boy scouts."
[+] Games: Referee Recommends Disbarment For Jack Thompson 280 comments
spielermacher writes "GamePolitics is reporting that Jack Thompson — the lawyer every gamer loves to hate — has apparently lost his court case and is facing disbarment. The Referee in the case has gone beyond the Florida Bar's request for a 10-year disbarment and is recommending a lifetime ban. From the Final Report issued by the court: '... the Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes. He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior ...' All I can say is that it's about time."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by jellomizer (103300) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:06PM (#23494592)
    Who is Jack Thompson?
    • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)

      by RandoX (828285) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:09PM (#23494622)
      You must be new here.
    • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)

      by moderatorrater (1095745) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:10PM (#23494636)
      He's a singer who really uses nothing but an acoustic guitar and his folk roots to make his music. Very popular, although I find his music repetitive at best.
    • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Informative)

      by wiggles (30088) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:11PM (#23494652)
      Here's the wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org].
    • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Informative)

      by corsec67 (627446) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:13PM (#23494700) Homepage Journal
      Jack Thompson [wikipedia.org] is a lawyer who has made a bunch of lawsuits against several game manufacturers.

      Basically, he hates the 1st Amendment, and isn't afraid to make a ridicules lawsuit to try and censor people.
      • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)

        by mortonda (5175) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:34PM (#23494956)

        make a ridicules lawsuit
        I'm trying not to be one of those ridiculous people who ridicules people for bad spelling... ;)
      • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by radarjd (931774) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:46PM (#23495108)

        Basically, he hates the 1st Amendment, and isn't afraid to make a ridicules lawsuit to try and censor people.

        That's sort of like saying "Al-Quaeda hates freedom" -- I don't think Thompson hates the first amendment, it is just (in his mind) trumped by other values. He has further picked a particularly poor method for promoting his values.

        To be more technically correct (and as this is slashdot, that's the best kind of correct), I'd say he believes that video games (and other media) containing sexual or violent content are the root of all evil, and that he'd rather have no video games (or other media) than the possibility that the games could contain sexual or violent content.

        This particular story relates to disbarment proceedings against the man for repeated poor (and illegal) conduct.

        • The man is a Fundamentalist Christian who believes he received guidance from God to eliminate video games.

          No, seriously.
            • Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Informative)

              by Kamots (321174) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @02:04PM (#23496110)
              "God is very powerful, and He's not real pleased with Rockstar right now, nor with those who defend it. Watch out. Fire and brimstone on the way."

              "Actually, the people who have cashed in on the deaths is Rockstar. That's why God and I are going to destroy them. Thanks for writing."

              "The 'video game community' surely seems exercised about someone who is a 'joke' and who is accomplishing nothing. You all seem rather bothered and worried about a nonentity. God is in this battle, and I am privileged to be a foot soldier. You all should be concerned, not about me, but about Him."

              Need I go on?
            • Check out this site [jackthompson.org], which has Thompson's own words. ALso note that Thompson's book Out of Harms Way is published by Tyndale House [wikipedia.org], which is publishing house well known for producing Fundamentalist Christian books such as Tim LaHaye's Left Behind.

              Trust me, I wouldn't make such a comment without knowing what I'm talking about.
    • Who is Jack Thompson?
      A man who knows no restraint to further a cause that has religious roots and backings by watchdog groups whose only goals are to overstep their bounds.

      A man who stood up on Fox news the day of the Virginia Tech shootings [cnet.com] (when the bodies of slain students were still warm) and told the nation that he was certain we would find video games in the shooter's bedroom. He then later turned one of the funerals into a media circus and photo op.

      A man who has overstepped laws designed to give Americans freedom and the right to enjoy entertainment in their homes. He has taken the The Bill of Rights into the restroom and wiped his ass with it.

      A man who, after overstepping his bounds an pushing extreme values of the political Right, asked for members of the Bush family (which he erroneously thought would be allies) to remove his disbarment [wikipedia.org] from the Florida courts. Name Jeb & George [slashdot.org] ... who ignored the tool that was merely carrying out their core values.

      You have a man who has tried to undo the separation of church and state. This same man has been operating in a court of law and using false correlations while pushing his own moral and religious beliefs. He is completely divorced from the sense of Justice and the American People. This same man will soon suffer under The Justice of The United States of America or my faith in it will soon falter ...
        • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:18PM (#23495466)
          From the Ars Technica article, citing GamePolitics:

          (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080520-judges-report-in-jack-thompson-case-guilty-on-27-charges.html)

          "GamePolitics was able to get Thompson's closing statement, and the man spoke like a captain straightening his coat as the ship goes down. "I'm simply making the argument, Judge, that my motivationsâ"which I have tried to make clear, maybe to the point of nauseaâ"are religious and that my efforts against the distribution of adult material, pornographic material, violent material, adult rated material to children is violative of the law as well as violative of Scripture. I quoted the biblical passage where Jesus says, reportedly: 'If any one of you should cause one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better that a millstone be tied around your neck and that you be cast in the uttermost depths of the sea.'"

          Maybe those religious roots?

          Remember: Wikipedia isn't the final authority.
        • by Mister Whirly (964219) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:51PM (#23495950) Homepage
          From an article at law.com [law.com] -

          "Thompson also has sued both the Alabama and Florida bar groups in Orange Circuit Court in Orlando, Fla., claiming the complaints violate state religious protections because his advocacy is motivated by his Christian faith.

          Thompson "seeks to be left alone to serve God in the fashion that God has chosen, not in the fashion that two liberal bars would choose," his pleadings state. "

          DISCLAIMER - I do hate religion in general. Well, maybe hate is a strong word, but "dislike and generally find useless in most cases" is an acceptable alternative.
  • by overshoot (39700) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:10PM (#23494640)
    We could keep him around for entertainment value alone, but best of all he's so freaking useful in totally discrediting the antigamers who don't froth at the mouth, chew carpets, and fling feces at the judge.
    • Re:Gotta love Jack (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:17PM (#23494732)
      Except he wastes court time, i.e. our tax money, on his self-promotion crap. Give him a blog and let him rant, fine. But it's time the legal profession was reigned in over their bogus lawsuits.
      • Re:Gotta love Jack (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TubeSteak (669689) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:26PM (#23495596) Journal

        But it's time the legal profession was reigned in over their bogus lawsuits.
        The legal profession has a perfectly functional (but slow) system of dealing with bogus lawsuits.

        The reason Jack Thompson has been allowed to get away with so much asshattery is because the justice system defaults to not disenfranchising people.

        This is a good thing.
        Keep it that way.
  • by idiotnot (302133) <sean@757.org> on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:11PM (#23494654) Journal
    Up in ur base, killin all ur d00dz, JT!
  • GTA Lawyers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dj245 (732906) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:21PM (#23494764) Homepage
    GTA4 has sold over 3.6 million copies [wikipedia.org]. Even if lawyers didn't like to brutally advance their careers through any means necessary, I would expect at least some of these sales to be to lawyers.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:22PM (#23494772)
    If the gay porn submitted for judicial review doesn't fit, you must acquit!
  • I just get a "Temporarily Closed" page when loading GamePolitics...great timing to move your host.

    Ars has a writeup that's a summary of GP's: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080520-judges-report-in-jack-thompson-case-guilty-on-27-charges.html [arstechnica.com]
  • by scorp1us (235526) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:33PM (#23494940) Journal
    What is the law, if not semantics? While I don't agree with Thompson, I do agree that until a loyalty oath is signed, no judge can ever issue a binding ruling.

    We as citizens must demand that our government dot it's 'i's and cross its 't's. Without these oaths, the judges are unaccountable. How hard is it to get a signature? How hard is it to take an oath? These oaths are required by the people and in them, the person taking the oath states they will follow whatever constitutions are relevant to the position.

    See http://www.jail4judges.org/ [jail4judges.org]
    • by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:51PM (#23495142) Journal
      The judges did sign their oaths. Jack alleges that Tunis forged her own signature, which is certainly a pretty novel theory, but if we decide to be more generous than the law even allows and take him at his intended meaning, that she had someone else sign for her, he doesn't have a single iota of supporting evidence, other than the worthless opinion of an utterly discredited "handwriting analyst" who made his opinion based on a whopping two samples.

      Accusing judges of malfeasance is just standard behavior for Jack Thompson. And his probable disbarment is just the start of his troubles -- there's one Cletus Junkin in Alabama (yeah I know ... I couldn't make these great names up) who may be going after him for libel next.
  • On the bright side: no job means more time to play GTAIV!
  • by Sloppy (14984) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:38PM (#23494998) Homepage Journal

    .. police dispatcher slain by 18-year-old Grand Theft Auto player Devin Moore.

    You could have also phrased that as, "..police dispatcher slain by 18-year-old fluoridated-water drinker Devin Moore."

  • by sm62704 (957197) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:49PM (#23495130) Journal
    So I'd like to thank GamePolitics, Scuttlemonkey, and especially the Florida judge for brightening up this bad bad Wednesday!

    Oh yea, and I want to thank Jack Thompson [uncyclopedia.org] too, since if he wasn't such a stupid, obnoxious, self-serving buffoon this story would have never made it to slashdot!

    My life is SO filled with coincidences. Last night at Felber's one of the ladies there called me a "fuckmonkey" (in regards to my bringing Amy there half an hour before taking Tami there), I just got back fro Top Cat's, where today's drink special is the "Drunk Monkey", and now the Jack Thompson story brought to us by Scuttlemonkey!

    Weird. But not as weird as Jack Thompson.
  • ...at Law.com (Score:5, Informative)

    by sillivalley (411349) <sillivalley.comcast@net> on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:04PM (#23495310)
    You can read a good summary at law.com:

    http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202421556225 [law.com]
  • Which game? (Score:5, Funny)

    by denttford (579202) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:51PM (#23495936) Homepage
    So what videogame was he playing that turned him into a criminal?
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Wednesday May 21 2008, @04:03PM (#23497598)
    Word is that he's planning to serve the local McDonalds with a cease-and-desist order and a job application.
    • by DustyShadow (691635) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:21PM (#23494766) Homepage
      I don't think putting pornography in court documents is normal strategy.
    • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @02:59PM (#23496830)

      I don't think the bar association had any major issues with the lawsuits themselves. There are all sorts of lawyers out there, but as a lawyer he has to follow the professional code of conduct. The things he accused of doing:

      1. making false statements to tribunals (perjury)
      2. disparaging and humiliating litigants and other lawyers (professional misconduct)
      3. improperly practicing law outside of Florida (professional misconduct)

      Each of these is a serious charge and the judge has determined that enough evidence exists. I don't know Jack Thompson but his actions suggest a man who doesn't think that any rules apply to him.

    • by Silentknyght (1042778) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:22PM (#23494780)
      10 seconds of searching in google turned up multiple results for this item. I'd try either Ars Technica [arstechnica.com] or Shacknews [shacknews.com]
      • Wow. Just... wow. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by sm62704 (957197) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:13PM (#23495414) Journal
        I always suspected that "Thompson" was the Russian word for "Golf" ("...you thought Golf was inwented in Scotland? No, it was a Russian inwention!" -Ensign Checkov) but the Ars story had me giggling.

        Thompson has included gay pornography in his court filings, causing the Judge presiding over the case to note that "Mr. Thompson made available for unlimited public viewing, on the court's docketing system, these graphic images." In this most recent case, Thompson created a picture book in reaction to "the court's inability to comprehend" what he was saying. The book contained pictures of swastikas, a copied dollar bill, monkeys, and, in a surreal touch, a handprint with the word "slap" written under it. That's leaving out the cartoon squirrels. Earlier this year, Thompson asked why another gaming writer doesn't "just molest children directly rather than through Rockstar. It would be more personal that way."

        Before the release of Grand Theft Auto IV, Jack Thompson wrote Ars Technica a letter that compared the game to polio.
    • by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @12:43PM (#23495066) Journal
      The way I heard it was:

      If facts aren't on your side, pound on the law. If the law isn't on your side, pound on the facts. If neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound on the table.

      That describes JT more accurately. Procedurally, he's a moron -- he's actually gotten himself barred from filing directly to the Florida Supreme Court. Then again he's not exactly that sharp when it comes to facts or law either.
    • Re:Just two counts? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cowscows (103644) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:08PM (#23495362) Journal
      Well what'd you expect? There is no body of video game related laws that for someone to violate. Much of the nonsense that he's perpetrated has been as a result of the bizarre war he's trying to wage against games.

      The issue isn't just that some guy doesn't like video games, it's that he's not only embarked on some sort of loony campaign against them, but he's also abused the legal system to harass video game developers and publishers. And he's also made sweeping, negative, and sometimes offensive generalizations about an entire branch of media and the millions of people who consume said media.

      Whether this guy is unethical enough to purposely crap all over the legal system over something like video games, or whether he's just plain insane, either way he should not be practicing law. And he certainly shouldn't be wasting tax dollars on his bizarre personal crusade against a bunch of gamers. The legal system is better off without him, regardless of his views on video games or anything else. He's pretty much proven that he has no respect for the proper functioning of the courts/etc.

      And third, this guy has managed to convince various media outlets that he is a credible expert on video games. Having an opinion on something does not make you a credible voice. We can only hope that whatever the end result of all this is, news programs will stop asking him to share his thoughts on video games or anything else.

    • by cowscows (103644) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:21PM (#23495522) Journal
      If the public wants to have a reasonable and adult discussion about violence in video games, I don't think that's something to be afraid of. Just as our culture went through similar grumblings about movies and television, and almost repeatedly about music, it's a valid conversation to have. There's a useful discussion to be had about the appropriateness of certain types of games for particular age groups, and the most effective ways to introduce children to various things they might experience through games. At the end of the day, we've still got the first amendment, and not a particularly realistic chance that video game violence will somehow end up banned.

      What's most likely going to happen is that a smattering of state laws will get passed and quickly be overturned because they're unconstitutional. Ten more years or so down the line, there will be enough people in positions of authority who grew up as gamers that the issue will mostly go away. There will still be the occasional whining and controversy, just like we've got with movies/tv/music today when a game really decides to push the envelope, but most people won't give it a second thought anymore.

    • Re:Loyalty Oath (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Hatta (162192) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @01:41PM (#23495810) Journal
      Frankly, I think it's appalling that McCarthy era loyalty oaths are still on the books. I hope the refusal to sign was intentional, and that this issue is persued to the point of being fired, which would then create an outcry in the judiciary leading to the legislature overturning this fascist act.

      What's wrong with a loyalty oath you ask? Take a look at what's happened to our government over the past few years, could you honestly swear loyalty to *this* government? What if it got worse?

      If you think about it, anyone who really meant their oath to "defend the Constitution of the United States... against all enemies, foreign and domestic" would have taken up arms against this government a long time ago. Ever since Wickard v. Filburn [wikipedia.org] it's been clear that even the SCOTUS is a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

      Dissent is an essential part of a democratic society. People who disagree with current policy should not be discriminated against, even if they are communists.
    • Re:No big deal (Score:5, Insightful)

      by johneee (626549) on Wednesday May 21 2008, @02:42PM (#23496592)
      Huge difference between labelling content (which is what Tipper was going for - dunno about Hillary) and censoring content (which is what Thompson wants).

      I'm all for labelling so that people can make informed choices. I'm way against censorship so that I'm allowed to make those informed choice.