Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government News Entertainment Games

Jack Thompson Walks Out On Hearing 522

Posted by samzenpus
from the please-let-this-be-the-end dept.
Erik J writes "Apparently Jack had heard enough. The Florida Bar asked for an 'enhanced disbarment' in the disciplinary hearing of Jack Thompson, held earlier this afternoon. The recommendation means Thompson would be disbarred and prohibited from applying to practice law again for ten years, according to 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida spokesperson Eunice Sigler. Thompson's disciplinary hearing apparently ended in the attorney walking out of the courtroom after saying the judge did not have the authority to hear his case."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jack Thompson Walks Out On Hearing

Comments Filter:
  • Good riddance. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HermMunster (972336) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @08:12PM (#23661619)
    One has to understand that this man is most likely very unstable but has a loud voice. He knows a squeeky wheel gets the grease.

    A friend of mine, when I asked him why he was yelling to the crowd of students (in the cafeteria) instead of just speaking to them told me someone told him that if you want to get elected, then speak real loud. He was elected to the student board.

    Jack Thompson has his followers but obviously this man is a kook. I can't imagine anyone getting away with the bullshit he has and not be punished. So now, he's saying they have no authority over him? He'll be surprised when he's arrested for practicing law after he's been disbarred.

    Good riddance to him.
  • Re:Good ridance (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chaboud (231590) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @08:16PM (#23661657) Homepage Journal
    Oh, there's some optimism. Has the lack of a license to practice stopped Dr. Phil from being a pain? (Answer: no [wikipedia.org]).

    The worst thing that Jack could do is stop talking, though. He's like PETA. Some people could agree with his points, but he makes it very hard to espouse those positions without being lumped in with the loonies.

    Quiet censorship is far more nefarious.
  • by arth1 (260657) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @08:24PM (#23661743) Homepage Journal
    It's no big secret that Hilary Clinton and Joseph Liebermann both have consulted with Jack Thompson. Don't expect either of them to say "oops, sorry".
  • Re:Bababooey! (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @08:34PM (#23661879)
    People have to listen to Stern. How many headlines has Stern made since jumping ship to Sirius? What? None?
    If Stern really thought his 'battle' against the FCC had some worth then surely he'd remain a thorn in the FCC's hide until things change because he's louder and squeakier than Jack Thompson. Now Stern has a captive yet adoring audience who will laugh at anything he says like little Robin Quiverses who won't have an iota of criticism, constructive or otherwise.
    Pretty much Stern's getting a paid retirement before he bids farewell to broadcast media. All those Sirius receivers were being pre-installed in new vehicles which bumped up Sirius's subscriptions and that tactic has been criticised a lot on Slashdot when it comes to computers, operating systems and proprietary web browsers.
    Let's not even get into the whole Stern taking off on Fridays and making people suffer through Ralph and re-runs. He's old, he's played out, the Sybian was old after Buck Angel rode it.
  • Re:Hasn't he... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew&gmail,com> on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @08:45PM (#23661987) Homepage Journal
    In 1990, the Florida Supreme Court wanted his sanity checked.

    "In 1992, Thompson asked a Florida judge to declare the Florida Bar Association unconstitutional. He said that the bar was engaged in a vendetta against him because of his religious beliefs, which he said conflict with what he called the bar's pro-gay, humanist, liberal agenda."

    I'm not seeing it on Wikipedia, but I've read that he has filed suit against George Bush as well. He repeatedly files ridiculous law suits that demonstrate he has little working knowledge of how the judicial system is supposed to operate, and abuses his power as an attourney.

    He should have been disbarred years and years ago for his tactics. He filed a lawsuit here in Omaha against the police chief for not handing over evidence on a sealed, active investigation on Robert Hawkins. He sues people for not pressing video game angles in criminal investigations, even before any evidence presents itself to suggest it a factor.

    He "predicts" people's guilt ahead of time based on video games, and then uses legal threats to enforce those predictions that repeatedly turn out to be false.

    He isn't just a nut-job, he is a bully who violates court orders and makes fairly serious threats. I'm shocked Florida has let this guy practice law for decades now.
  • by Animats (122034) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @09:03PM (#23662201) Homepage

    Thompson started his career as a loudmouth by complaining about some rap from "2 Live Crew" back in the early 1990s. I bought the 2 Live Crew CD to see what all the fuss was about. They were a terrible rap group, at the low end of the garage-band level. My comment at the time was that "this group would never have gotten off the South Florida club circuit without the censorship attempt".

  • Re:Good ridance (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @09:05PM (#23662217)
    He may not be very likable, in and out of the courtroom, but he's correct as it concerns grand theft auto, howard stern, hip hop music and the like. In fact, if you look at political history you can trace the political health of a regime through the music that is popular at the time. All the above is helping to undermine (though maybe subtly) the order of the regime, respect for good authority, parents, women, virtue and morals in general.

    All forms of entertainment are educating, for good or bad, our society.
  • by v1 (525388) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @09:10PM (#23662285) Homepage Journal
    was he representing himself at the disbarment hearing?

    Thompson's disciplinary hearing apparently ended in the attorney walking out of the courtroom after saying the judge did not have the authority to hear his case.

    I recall a saying, "A lawyer that represents himself has a fool for a client." Sounds like he was representing himself?
  • Re:Hasn't he... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by scubamage (727538) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @09:15PM (#23662321)
    Not to mention if you read his response, he attacks the florida supreme court, and claims he will get them all removed from office.
    His career = over.
  • Re:Good ridance (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mr2001 (90979) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @10:42PM (#23663081) Homepage Journal

    With XP Home, you've got to find a way to install the game "for this user only"
    AFAIK that only affects where the Start Menu shortcuts are created, not the file system permissions.

    Also, if the kid has access to the computer, he's likely to have access to the installation media too, so he can just reinstall. I guess you could put the disc in a safe... or, like I said, don't buy it in the first place if you don't want your kids to play it.
  • Re:Good ridance (Score:3, Interesting)

    by syousef (465911) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @11:07PM (#23663289) Journal
    In particular, what if games came with an age group flag when they were installed, and operating system users could also have an age limit specified, so that applications with a "18+" flag would not launch of a user configured as "13."

    DRM for minors. Love it. That could never be abused could it?...and no child could possibly work out how to get past DRM, right?

    Why not put a padlock on your cutlery draw too? After all a minor (under 18) might hurt themself with a steak knife.

    Or, and it's just a thought, EDUCATE your child to help protect themselves. Give them the knowledge and tools AND sense of responsibility to live in the real world instead of mollycoddling them and wondering why they go wild when they hit 18 and/or go to uni.

  • Re:Judge's oath (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @11:15PM (#23663361)
    Why yes. It's an extremely serious problem.

    According to Florida legal researcher Bob Hurt who has studied the issue and even written a book that helped draw attention to the problem, someone in the State Department ordered the notarization requirement removed during Jeb Bushâ(TM)s first term as governor. That omission rendered the forms null and void because the U.S. and Florida Constitutions require the oath, and the law requires that it be properly notarized. source [libertysentinel.org]

    This could be serious enough to launch someone's political career

    Hurt is hoping the US Department of Justice will âoecome down hard on the government of Florida for tolerating a judicial oligarchy and using it to abuse the people and minimize the other branches of government,â he said. Thompson might function perfectly in bringing the issue to the DOJ and U.S. Supreme Court.

    âoeJack has the motivation, the professional need, and the raw lawyering skills to push this issue all the way to the top,â he said. âoeHe wonâ(TM)t do it now because he first has to obliterate the efforts to disbar him. If and after he prevails, maybe heâ(TM)ll accept the challenge.â


    Go Jack Go!
  • Re:Good ridance (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Hao Wu (652581) on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @11:28PM (#23663447) Homepage
    There is no shortage of proposed solutions.

    The issue is whether the government should enforce them, and if suing in court should be allowed when you don't happen to like how others exercise their right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

  • by Lord Kano (13027) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @12:14AM (#23663717) Homepage Journal
    I don't celebrate his disbarrment because of his opinions. I celebrate it because he tries to subver the legal process to push his own agenda. He abuses the process for his own ends. He demeans the practice of law. He's an example of a sheister lawyer.

    Beyond all of that, he's an asshole. I have engaged him in debate. When he was on Mike Reagan's radio show about 4-5 years ago I called in and cleaned his clock. There's a way to present an unpopular opinion without being abrasive. Jack Thompson doesn't do that. He intentionally draws the ire of others so that he can claim to be aggrieved.

    So I'm quite happy that some asshole is getting what he's been begging for. I have no sympathy for Jack Thompson. Fuck him. Fuck him with red hot wire brush.

    LK
  • Re:fp (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pseudonym (62607) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @12:45AM (#23663909)

    You must be thinking of a different Jack Thompson.

    I always get a kick out of these stories, because Jack Thompson is the name of a famous Australian actor. You might have seen him in a movie [padawansguide.com].

  • by XDirtypunkX (1290358) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @01:00AM (#23664007)
    ... in the form of a GTA style car-jacking by two teenagers just after the game was released... I still am happy to see this happen. Those 17 year old kids whacked out of their heads on speed were going to commit a crime either way. They probably would've just beat someone to death. It wasn't the game that caused the crime, it was two kids from broken homes with easy access to amphetamines that caused the crime.
  • Re:fp (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Skrapion (955066) <`skorpion' `at' `firefang.com'> on Thursday June 05, 2008 @02:14AM (#23664403) Homepage
    It's funny to hear these stories, but this isn't the end of Jack. He makes $3000 or more just for participating in a college debate [realitypanic.com], and he doesn't need a license to practise law to do that.

    Since he's clearly in this for the money ("Sorry. Have to pay the bills." is his exact quote) I'm sure he makes sure he gets paid whenever he appears on TV as well.
  • Re:Good ridance (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Samah (729132) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @03:01AM (#23664645)
    And I live in Adelaide...
    Perhaps an *accident* could be arranged >:D
  • Re:fp (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mabhatter654 (561290) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @03:12AM (#23664721)
    he (and Regan & Bush 1) broke the law and got off on a technicality just like Clinton and OJ.
  • by Jesrad (716567) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @06:40AM (#23665789) Journal
    Correlation is a situation where two things happen with statistically significant coincidence. Simply said, if there are effect A and effect B, and if you have significantly more occurences of A and B happening together and of neither happening together, than occurences of A happening without B or B without A, then there is a correlation between A and B.

    If A is "the person played violent videogames" and B is "the person murdered someone", then every case where someone played violent videogames and soon before or afterwards murdered someone is a statistical point in favor of the correlation between the two, but only if there also are cases where someone did not play violent videogames and did not murder someone soon before or after: unfortunately for Jack Thompson, the latter is becoming extremely rare, which reduces the significance of the former. Also, every case where someone plays violent videogames and does not murder someone is a statistical point against the correlation. Similarly, every case where someone did not play violent videogames yet did murder someone goes against the correlation. So far, evidence shows that any correlation between the two is extremely improbable.

    Illusory correlation, like that inferred by Jack Thompson repeatedly between violent videogames and crime, is the situation where someone insists on considering two events to be related despite being not significantly correlated. Despite popular belief to the contrary, such illusory correlation behaviour is not correlated to schizophrenia (paranoid or non-paranoid, delusional disorder), nor with depression [inist.fr]. So Jack Thompson is probably not technically insane on such grounds.

    However, illusory causation, where the person infers causality between two supposedly correlated events, is a trait of paranoid disorders [mayoclinic.com]. Jack Thompson goes as far as making public claims (and suing according to those claims) that a causation exists between people playing violent videogames and murders despite the absence of even mild correlation between the two, and even interprets much of what happens to him in his professional life as having a causal link to this illusory causation in the first place (as evidenced by his claims of collusion between the Florida Bar or Supreme Court and the videogame industry). When his interpretations are rejected by the public (like when he unsuccessfully sued Janet Reno and RockStar), he rejects the result of the scrutiny instead of questioning those interpretations: that's a symptom of paranoid schizophrenia. At one point he even fantasized himself as being Batman, FFS ! It makes him a very dangerous man in my book, because the paranoids are often capable of nurturing delusory fantasies of persecution and injustice that can push them to commit serious crimes.

    Given some of his more religious statements I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn that he has auditory hallucinations which he attributes to God... The other symptoms (disorganized thinking, absent or inappropriate emotional behaviour, etc.) are easier to hide and less prominent in paranoid schizophrenia.

    Even if the guy is disbarred for ten years, if he really has paranoid schizophrenia, I would only consider the general public to be safe when he is committed to a mental institution.
  • by WarPresident (754535) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @10:18AM (#23667773) Homepage Journal
    ...if he managed to pull down the Florida Supreme Court before he got disbarred? Yeah, he's bat-shit crazy, but you gotta admire the rabid determination to always be right. He's damn-near presidential material (vice presidential at the very least!).

    I object, strenuously, as I have in the past on the record, to the very notion that this proceeding can even occur, on various grounds any single one of which is fatal to its legitimacy, including but not limited to the following grounds:
    You, the referee, are not even a judge. The law in Florida on that is clear, and it is found in Florida's Loyalty Oath Statute 876.05, et sequitur, held constitutional and binding by the United States Supreme Court in Connell v. Higginbotham.

    We know now from a recently concluded State Attorney's investigation and Report that your first state loyalty oath was forged. We also know that your next two oaths, which you signed, did not conform to that statute in that the language deviated from what is required and they were not even notarized. A number of formal opinions by Florida's Attorney General state that such flaws are fatal regardless of intent.

    The statute itself states that if any state official, including a judge, fails to comply strictly with the loyalty oath statute, then that judge is without legal authority to serve and must immediately be removed from office. I will accomplish your removal from office in the days and weeks ahead, as the litigation that will achieve that has already been filed by me in Miami-Dade Circuit Court. The Supreme Court of Florida, which you, the referee think is your ally in what you are doing here has ruled that your loyalty oath screw-up is fatal.
    ...

    Secondly, we know now that six of the seven Florida Supreme Court Justices never executed valid state loyalty oaths. I have proven that, as has Florida and Washington, D.C. lawyer Montgomery Blair Sibley, whose own Bar referee, Judge Prescott, had his oath forged by the same person, Sayed A. Shah, who forged yours. What a coincidence.
  • Re:Bollocks. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday June 05, 2008 @10:24AM (#23667835)

    I would think he would quickly alienate his supporters if they ever met him. It seemed every time a judge or legal authority disagreed with him legally or procedurally he would quickly deem them as enemies.

    Janet Reno did not prosecute radio personality Neil Rogers for harassing him on the air by mentioning his name. While the actions of Rogers were in bad taste, they were covered by 1st Amendment rights and she declined. He then demanded that she indicate whether she was homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. According to Thompson Reno put her hand on his should and said, "I'm only interested in virile men. That's why I'm not attracted to you." He then wanted the DA to file battery charges against her.

    Thompson asked to file a amicus curae brief on behalf of Dustin Lynch in Feb 2003. The judge sat on the request for two months and Thompson wanted the judge to remove himself. It's not like a judge has nothing better to do than to answer a request by lawyer not involved in a case.

    Thompson filed a lawsuit in Alabama on behalf of families of police killed by Devin Moore. The problem is that Thompson is not licensed to practice law in Alabama and he did not file for temporary admission (pro hac vice). Eventually he applied. Also the judge in the case placed a gag order over all parties. Thompson being who he is could not keep quiet to the media. The judge revoked his temporary admission for this and other behaviors. Thompson complained about the judge's ethics.

    Thompson sent to U.S. District Judge Moreno documents that contained homosexual pornography in his case against the Florida bar. The Judge referred Thompson to U.S. Judge Jordan for disciplinary actions but Thompson agreed not to send any more. Thompson then complained U.S. Attorney General Peter Keisler and U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter that Jordan should be removed because Jordan did not prosecute one of Thompson's enemies.

    In his disbarment hearings, Thompson wanted to remove Judge Tunis as he claimed she was biased against him.

    I can see him now at some fund raiser.

    Jack Thompson: Pretty good wine tonight for a fund raiser.
    Wealthy supporter: I'm not really into red wine. I'm more of whiskey man myself.
    Jack Thompson: You degenerate. How does it feel to rape children?
    Wealthy supporter:????

Byte your tongue.

Working...