Sheer Legal Brilliance: Jack Thompson Wants Judge to Also be Defendant
Sheer Legal Brilliance: Jack Thompson Wants Judge to Also be Defendant
October 3, 2007
Yesteday, GamePolitics reported that game-hatin' attorney Jack Thompson invoked Monica Lewinsky and Animal House in a claim that Judge Alberto Jordan was a big meanie for spanking Thompson over adding gay porn to the court docket.Thompson went as far as to request that Judge Jordan remove himself from the controversial attorney's lawsuit against the Florida Bar.
Jordan, apparently having reached his saturation point with Thompson's antics, responded with an order directing that Thompson be referred to the court's Ad Hoc Committee on Attorney Admissions, Peer Review, and Attorney Grievance. The Judge had previously given Thompson until Friday to show why he shouldn't be sent before the committee, but 14 increasingly bizarre filings from Thompson in less than a week apparently caused His Honor to rethink the deadline. From Judge Jordan's order:
Rather than accept responsibility for his actions, Mr. Thompson blames the court for failing to recognize that these [gay porn] materials were already available to children on the internet on other websites...
Thompson, of course, had an entertaining - if legally questionable - response handy: He wants to add Judge Jordan as a defendant in the case. Um, that would be the same case in which Judge Jordan is also the judge. Don't think about it too hard; your brain might explode. From Thompson's motion:
There is no question that this court, like any federal judge, enjoys immunity for the performance of its purely judicial duties... But what the court has foolishly, recklessly, tortiously, and illegally done in filing what amounts to an ethics complaint against Thompson, and fraudulently so, is expose itself to personal liability...
Therefore, since this court has now insinuated itself into an expanded use of “discipline” to try to silence and punish Thompson for clearly First Amendment speech... Thompson informs this court of his intent to include Adalberto Jordan as a named defendant herein...
GP: More than anything else, this sounds like an off-the-wall tactic designed to force Judge Jordan to recuse himself from the case, thereby delaying the inevitable showdown between Thompson and the Florida Bar. We asked Thompson about that via e-mail, but received no response.
UPDATE (Oct. 5): Judge Jordan has now issued a stay on his order that Thompson go straight to the ad hoc disciplinary committee. The judge wrote that he will decide following next Tuesday's show cause hearing.
Thompson sees this as a big win, although we're not sure why.
Comments
Other than the mime on which it fell?
1) Did he seriously just reference his relationship with the Bar to argue his skill in the practice of law.
2) "Good standing" just means he's paid his dues to the Bar.
3) He really did talk about the Bar as if he's considered an upstanding, professional with their support?
4) I think maybe he's considering his First Amendment right to mean he can say anything he feels supports his case, whether or not it would be protected saying it any other way.
5) I really think this is the straw. Hell, the camel has been in traction for the last few months.
Oh yeah, and did I mention I can't believe he's supporting himself by saying he has a good relationship with the bar?
-Mike Schwinger
Well done and well called. Often interesting when the higher authority one uses in vain comes back to bite them in the.... anyways
As the saying goes.
If you cannot dazzle them with brillance; baffle them with Bullshit. Jack is using an old highschool debate team delaying (and derailing) tact. Pitiful. This is what 31 years of law teaches?
Might I call for a show of support and respect for Judge Jordan? He has weathered Jacks storm of BS and came out this his robes nice and pressed :) I stand impressed. Salute
From lying to the nation about VT, to exploting his son with unlawful "stings", these recent incidents in this man's "career" has nothing do with law or First Amendment issues, he is merely trying to feed off of the nations fears and create an issue when there is none to begin with. It is despicable.
I encourage all Florida residents to write to their legislators about this man and how much money he is costing us, the tax payers, in frivilous lawsuits, motions, and general waste of Florida courts time that can be focused on real issues effecting the state and the nation.
He practically pioneered the practice of massacre-chasing, although that certainly isn't anything to be proud of.
But his days as an attorney are numbered. As a lawyer, he is the very epitome of FAILURE. His career should be used as an example in textbooks as what not to do.
Once he gets disbarred (it is a forgone conclusion at this point), he'll still be a massacre-chasing internet troll, but hopefully he'll be marginalized and ignored. The best way to get rid of a troll is not to feed it, after all.
Who in their right mind would represent him, he'd be a jinx on their career, and that's not to say Judges will just toss out his cases.
Sure if you are delusional or holier than thou. Which is pretty much Jack Thompson. Honestly I think it more trying to "muddy the water", a delaying tact. Desperate times call for desperate (and often silly) measures.
Actually Jack has does this before. Try to goad the judge then claim he is prejudiced. I wonder if JT has a master plan.... you know like a B movie villian. Have every Judge disqualified so there are none left to oppose his assession so he can make his own laws and all must obey him.
As to the nitwit above who asks about my running for judge (you seem a little obsessed with jack thompson), the election is in November 2008, moron.
So, are you going door to door now, bragging about distributing gay porn?
Or are you going to cry about a conspiracy of lesbians when you lose?
I totally get where you're coming from on this -- this won't be the cause of his disbarment. But at this point he has so many charges piling up against him I really think it's inevitable (and this isn't wishful thinking).
And you're right. A normal attorney would have taken a "Show Cause" and written a 3-page response. Maybe the judge doesn't agree with the reasoning and orders Jack not to do it again and that's the end of it. But Jack flies off the handle, insults the judge, insults the other attorney (again), compares himself to Paul Revere, calls himself a God warrior, and then throws a tantrum about how HIS First Amendment rights are being violated by the mean ol' judge. (And does this over the course of not one, but FOURTEEN filings.) Yep, that's a paddlin'.
Please, sue me! I don't even live in the US!
You have my support. :P
He kind of sees himself as a modern day Leonidas, believing that having a 'strong moral belief' and being outnumbered in opinion by hundreds to one is somehow more of a weapon than things like facts, common sense and intelligence. From a historical view. Jacks' belief tate 'right will win in the end' are honorable enough, the problem is that Jack's idea of what is 'right' is more about him than about the law or about the children, so right may well win in the end, the problem is that won't be as convenient for Thompson as he thinks it will be, because Right is not synonymous with 'What Jack Thompson thinks is right'.
While Jack retaining his license is a distinct possibility (to my knowledge, any given state Bar doesn't like disbarring member lawyers if it can be avoided with a lesser disciplinary action), the thing if it is that Jack's currently done enough that the Bar could likely disbar him if they wish to.
Given Jack's propensity for suing them every time they try to discipline him for his various misbehaviors, the Bar's likely considering ridding themselves of a lawyer that can't behave, and doesn't know when to accept a slap on the wrist.
Thanks for clearing that up, what I meant by "I'm no lawyer..." was that I wasn't willing to analyse the legalese you were willing to & just assume Jack knew something I didn't & that maybe there was a method to his [(libel lawyer's edit) - method]. I get the impression he has acted rashly here, his only out might be to back down & humbly admit he misunderstood, but I think that's as likely as Bill O'reilly doing same. Could this be the end for him?
Dennis, I've been wondering though. Have you ever thought about contacting the Florida Bar to get insight on their side of the Thompson story? I always wondered what were there thoughts, feelings, and reactions (particularly, how loud they groan) when the complaints about Thompson first started flooding in, ever since the "Hot Coffee" scandal.
But yeah, this seems like a tactic of 'gumming up' the legal process and retain his license just a little longer.
Is there any way the Florida Bar / the Courts could stop this? Isn't this what the main problem with our legal system? It's abused, bloated and such that getting anything meaningful done takes months, if not years?
GP: I believe that everyone there is wise to his tactics and that the legal community has had it with him. I anticipate that he will be disbarred by year's end.
Since when does free speech apply to court filings? Maybe I should post some gay porn on the servers at work and claim free speech when they fire me!
Sweetie, when you get your law degree and have practiced law for 31 continuous years in good standing with The Florida Bar, as I have, I 'll be interested in your legal opinions.
Jack Thompson, Attorney and You're Not
PS: Hooah!
GP: what are the odds of making it to 32 years of good standing?
Correct me if I am wrong but hasn't Jack always been one of those people who have said that Violent Video Games are a form of pornography and thus are not protected by free speech? So wouldn't that mean that by his thought process that those gay porn pics he gave to the judge are not protected by free speech? Or is this another case of "It is ok if I do it"?
I thought Jack was a lawyer? He should know the judge cannot be both the defendant and judge in this case. Yet I suspect he thinks this is another brilliant legal ploy of his to get the Judge thrown off the case for conflict of interest. Like I said yesterday, one more shovel full of dirt out of the hole that is already too deep to get out of. Anyone think he will lose his license before the year is done?
And you're saying WE'RE the ones who can't distinguish fantasy from reality?
Instead it's a litany of failure and childish temper tantrums.
This guy is self destructing faster than Britanny Spears.
I might not have a fancy lawyerin' degree like you got from that box of Cracker Jax, but I am able to read and comprehend the english language pretty well. From what the judge wrote, and from I do know about our legal system, I'd say you're screwed.
The strategy of "I'll sue anyone who doesn't agree with me on 1st Amendment grounds" strategy isn't going to work.
You're not going to be an attorney for much longer.
Oh, I'm in a position in which I'm pretty screwed. I do something even dumber that will ensure that I'm screwed.
It honestly defies all logic.
You know, I'm getting a little Thompson fatigue myself, but this... (words elude me)
I used to think this was funny. Now it's just pathetic and tedious.
That is the sound Jack will be making when that big ole dude in prison gets hold of him from behind.
I mean if everyone who opposed Jacko wasn't corrupt and inept that would mean that Jacko himself was. We all know that's umpossible!
Its the only way you'll retain the teaspoon full of dignity that you have left.
You've destroyed your career now. Give up. Its gone from funny to completely tragic.
So what is it, Jack? Are you the only one that has First Amendment rights? I notice that video game corporations can't advertise M rated games on shows with older audiences for fear that children can access them. Yet, you can submit gay porn to the public record (which is not protected by the First Amendment) and that's OK?
It almost sounds like Jack is doing our job for us. Think about it. IF he wins this struggle, we win. If you can submit gay porn to the public record, then nothing can stop you from advertising or selling violent video games. We can use this as evidence against anti-game laws (you know how people like to compare selling violent games to selling porn). Eventually, Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft will allow AO rated games on their consoles as public opinion and precedent has swung the other way.
Go, Jack, GO!
What an idiot, though. NOW he's attempting to have the Judge declared a defendant in the very case he’s presiding over? WTF, mate? It's obvious that he wants the Judge to recluse himself and this is just another means to that end. But, why? The only reason the Judge is angry at Jack is because he Jack has been making a mockery out of the court. Spamming the court with filings that are completely meaningless. Attempting to subpoena President Bush and his brother. Challenging the Judge. Can they submit events that happened during and in the trial as evidence against Thompson? If so, the grave for Thompson's career looks to be about 14 feet deep, now.
Okay... more that a little creeped out now.
"Sweetie, when you get your law degree and have practiced law for 31 continuous years in good standing with The Florida Bar, as I have, I ‘ll be interested in your legal opinions."
What's your idea of 'good standing'? Getting paid by your clients? Otherwise, you've been in deep shit for the past decade. I hardly call it 'good standing' when that same bar is calling you insane.
And for the love of God, quit calling Dennis 'sweetie.' What are you trying to do, make pedophiles come to your aid in court?
"Sweetie, when you get your law degree and have practiced law for 31 continuous years.."
Hey Jack? You'd think with all your practice you'd be GOOD at it by now. When a bunch of computer and gaming geeks can look at YOUR profession, which they admittedly know very little about and *KNOW* that you aren't professional, well recieved, or even the smallest bit GOOD at what you do?
What does that SAY about your skill or ability?
With your fanaticism, drama, and obvious lunatic paranoia, I'm sure whatever cult you start up to fill all the time you'll have because you no longer "practice" law with be enough to get you the media spotlight that you so badly crave.
Karma is a bitch. Enjoy the kool-aid.
Oh and Jack anyone can hold a job for 31yrs if they wanted to but it takes either someone really smart or incredibly stupid to stand out in the publics mind at anypoint in their time at work.
Did you just call another man.... "sweetie"? So.... now we know why you had gay porn on hand. Admit it, you had those pictures in your briefcase for your personal pleasure and they accidentally slipped in with that court filing.
And please define "Good Standing". I'm genuinely curious. After all, this isn't the first time you've come under fire from the bar. Nor is it the first time you've sued them. If that's good standing, OJ Simpson has good standing with the courts, too.
He's like a cockroach.
Did you just copy paste your comments from one article to the next? What, too busy looking up more gay porn to submit?
Are you coming on to Dennis?
to try to silence and punish Thompson for clearly First Amendment speech…
Ironic to the last. 1st Amendment applies 100% to him, and only partially applies to anyone else.
From the court order:
This is why Mr. Thompson is wrong in alluding to Judge Gonzalez’s 2 public filing of the sexually explicit lyrics from a 2 Live Crew album. In that case, the critical issue was whether the lyrics were obscene. The lyrics, therefore, were relevant to the litigation. This case is not about pornographic websites, no matter how much Mr. Thompson would like to make it so.
*spank*
Also of note is Mr. Thompson’s inaccurate characterization of the show cause order as a judicial determination of obscenity. The show cause order did not purport to be a ruling on whether the images have any First Amendment protection.
Denied!
Are you kidding me?!?!? JT is accusing someone else of taking cheap shots? Maybe it's the brain damage or the drugs that all of us gamers do, according to one of JT's "not-cheap shots" apparently, but that seems to me like the pot calling the kettle black.
"A finding of contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial."
Showing disrespect for the judge? Check. A look at JT's filings liken Judge to a "schoolyard bully"
Disruption of the proceedings through poor behaviour? Check. Spamming is certainly disruption.
Publication of material deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial? Check. Gay porn anybody? Sure, the publication may be against JT, but what the hell?
Wow... 3 for 4. I may not have a fancy plaque on the wall from fakelawdegreez.com, but I certainly know that, ahem, YOU ARE SCREWED JACK! GIVE UP NOW!
The most shocking thing? I spent 5 minutes at Wikipedia to find that out. Jack spent 31 years.
Perhaps you should sue him for sexual harassment and virtual stalking. I mean he's constantly coming here only to talk to you, like a stalker, and calls you "sweetie" all the time. Also, in light of the recent revelation of Jack Thompson's love for gay porn, well, I guess it's easy to put 2 and 2 together. Don't forget he's called you like six times in an hour's time before because he couldn't get a hold of you immediately because you were in a meeting.
Anyone with half a brain can tell you're flushing away your legal career. Oh. but that would require youto have at least half a functioning human brain, now wouldn't it, Jack? that tiny little requirement is prohibiting ou from self-restraint and common sense.
Even if gamers were as stupid as you would like to insinuate, we'd still have double the thinking capacity that you seem to have.
Remember Jack: "If at first you don't succeed, you fail."
I mean really calling the Judge down to be a defendant?
Whose next Jesus?
I for one think the Judge and the court system is completely justified in trying to bring him before the committee, Thompson's actions for too long have gone unopposed and now finally someone is seeing through his crazy antics and calling him out on his bluffs.
That's much funnier if you've read in the news that a senator attempted to sue God.
You obviously care about Dennis' legal opinion since not only do you regularly read it but continuously reply to it as well.
Pretty much my guess. Keep demanding that judges recuse themselves, and he gets another 6-12 month reprieve while they find someone else to take over... Just a sad hack trying desperately to avoid standing up for what he's done and accepting punishment. Then he could appeal to a higher court, and be 100% out of the reach of any judge who answers to the FlaBar's authority. But he won't do that, because then when he gets his ass handed to him, he can't claim it was a Bar conspiracy against him...
For someone who's so willing to go to jail (heh, try calling the first guy you meet 'sweetie' I dare ya), he's certainly squirming like a weasel when it comes to accepting his punishment like a man.
Real men take their medicine. Cowards use every trick in the book to delay the inevitable.
"I find no merit in Mr. Thompson’s attempt to equate his actions with the use of Nazi concentration camp photographs to challenge those who deny the atrocities of the Holocaust. On the same note, Mr. Thompson is not the modern-day version of Paul Revere, as he suggests."
Yeah, I know, the irony kills me every time I see that... ;)
Any one at all?
He's in GOOD standing with the bar, we don't understand legal proceedings, and the case is working in his FAVOR and everyone likes him, respects him, no one thinks that he is a HUGE media whoring horse's ass, none of his "collegues" every mock him or use his name as a joke when they do something stupid ala;
"Nice work Jack Thompson",
And no one who practices law has laughingly sent a friend gay porn and signed it Jack Thompson.
You folks just don't know how close to winning he REALLY is.
Plus, in his reality, he totally gets a pony.
Also, what happened with JT running for Judge? He used that tactic as a way to get the judge in the Bully case to recuse himself. Isn't that lying to the court if he never ran for that position as he said?
This is not lawyerese. It's obvious. Essentially, JT was treated like someone who decided to represent themselves who didn't file properly. I would think a Lawyer of the Bar would know the rules?
If it's pouring down rain on your head, you don't have to be a meteorologist to say "it's raining." The judges filings were clear enough for a neophyte, so you need not be a lawyer to understand them.
-Mike Schwinger
It's not a conflict of interest when it is an attempt to influence a judge. JT made the situation himself. It isn't a real conflict, it is artificial.
I... I get it now.
We ARE all wrong about this. See, when you become a lawyer you sign an agreement that forces you to think of everything backwards. To us, it seems like he's in trouble with a judge and about to lose his license, because we're not bound to the Bizarro World rules. From Jack's perspective, being due for a disciplinary hearing means everything's A-OK! I guess you can't blame Dennis for not understanding fancypants legal terms like "contempt of court", which secretly means either "standing ovation" or "cheerful happiness party!"
Judge: Stop it.
JT: Poke, poke, poke, poke, penis, are we done yet? Can you hear me now?
Judge: Mr. Thompson, stop it right now.
JT: Poke, poke, poke, poke, penis, are we done yet? Can you hear me now?
Judge: Stop it, or I'll make you stop.
JT: Poke, poke, poke, poke, penis, are we done yet? Can you hear me now?
Judge: Ok that's it, you're in trouble.
JT: WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Bias!
So... Jack is gonna fight Superman next?
('ware the sarcarm)
Obviously the court is out to get him, the (Florida) Bar is out to get him, various websites including this one are out to get him, and apparently everyone that posts here is out to get as well... Would seem to him that the more that hate him (I don't hate him, closer to annoyance and pity) the closer he is to carrying out his holy mission. Of course they only want to drag him down because they are jealous since he is spokesman for God (and always correct). Wait someone call the Pope, I smell infringment. (Ok time to play nice again)
A drowning man is said to grab onto anything available to save themselves (including pulling down his friends which JT has proven over and again). So I am wondering if there are any helpful souls here had a largeish brick to offer Jack to help him float or better yet someone with a needle poke in a hole in his over inflated ego. Either should help him sink all the faster. Heartless you say. No. Its just that am not so inhumane (even for a gamer) to watch anyone needlessly suffer. JT its time to rest.
BIZZARO JACK THOMPSON
Who has become a distributor of gay porn via the legal system.
If Jack wasn't such an egotist, I'm sure he could've taken his personal crusade to much greater strengths, but at the end of the day his own ego has let him down.
i dont know what it is about JT, but i must say, that some of the funniest comedy moments during my time reading news, comes from this website and its reporting on him.
keep going JT!
"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." -Romans 13:1-5
The judge is a person of authority here. An authority established BY GOD.
Wow... Just wow.. I am absolutely a free speech proponent. However, I would never have expected JT to claim that the distribution of gay porn falls under 1st Amendment protection. I'm sure he didn't intend to, but that seems to be what it amounts too. I wish him the best of luck getting the obscenity law stricken.. With that twisted bit of precedent gone, we shouldn't have any more worries about video game legislation.
I think Jack might be hot for you, Dennis...
"This career will self-destruct 5 seconds..."
4 for 4 actually, hes failed to obey the judges 'show cause' order on the gay porn filing, instead spouting all the crap we see now (not exactly showing cause).
If jordan doesnt find JT in contempt I'll be very surprised.
However, I would never have expected JT to claim that the distribution of gay porn falls under 1st Amendment protection.
The judge seems to have headed that one off at the pass, refusing to rule on whether it was obscene or not. So I doubt it.
Still it would have been funny.
THIS JUST IN! Noted anti-obscenity lawyer Jack Thompson has been credited with filing a Bar motion that inadvertently led to the abolishment of the government's ability to regulate the distribution of porn to minors! News @11 :P
Two problems with the UK system.
1) It carries the force of law. I'm sorry, but the government has no right to review my entertainment and tell me whether I can or can't partake in it.
2) It can outright ban certain material by refusing it a rating. One strength our system has is that the publisher pays a fee to have their game reviewed so the ESRB can not refuse a rating. Sure, AO is effectively a ban, but let's not blame the ESRB for that. That's the fault of retailers and console manufactures.
@ Thabor
My thoughts exactly. Check my previous post.
http://gamepolitics.com/2007/10/03/sheer-legal-brilliance-jack-thompson-...
- Wasting taxpayers' money
- Menace to society
- Damage to the people and business in the video game industry, including retailers
Someone find a lawyer to sue him :)
He used the Holocaust as a reason for posting Gay Porn? And he accuses others of losing perspective?
Finally someone's putting Jackie in his place!
I wish I was joking, but I'm not. I seriously got a headache now. I started as I as I was reading this article XD
My bet on disbarment is: January 12th 2008
He used the Holocaust as a reason for posting Gay Porn?
His argument was basically that pictures of the Holocaust were necessary evidence in the case against the camp staff, and so no judge would dream of saying that they were offensive and try to censor them or remove them from the docket.
The judge replied that it was JT on trial here, not Kent, so the images are 100% irrelevant to the case. If the case had been about Kent's behavior, then it would have been relevant. But Kent isn't on trial, no matter how much JT would like him to be.
That and JT filed them without notifying the court in advance. There are mechanisms to put "seals" on documents, usually used for stuff like sensitive information that is necessary for the case argument, but not intended for mass public viewing. Again, JT fails law class, he must have slept through the section on "how to file evidence to a docket"...
The judge also dismissed JT's argument that "because the porn is already publicly available elsewhere, it's ok". He stated that JT was a participant in the public distribution at that point, regardless of what it's current availability was. Just because some guys are handing out porn on the street doesn't mean you get to hand some out yourself...
Thanks for clearing it up. I thought he'd gone beserk on some mad power trip... oh, wait...
We can always dream. =)
@Gameboy
Dead on there. I think it is a testament to the effectiveness of existing rating system that practically every game and movie actually does have a rating. I generally prefer the unrated versions when they are available, but they are relatively rare. Clearly if the rating weren't effective or valuable nobody would bother having their content rated.
JT is nothing if not inconsistent. He gives his son explicit instructions (and permission) to buy mature games, then complains that his son was able to follow his wishes. By comparison he is almost lucid in this instance.
I definitely concede it being artificial. But I wonder where the burden of proof would lie there. Would Jack have to prove it was justified in adding the judge and the conflict is valid, or would the judge/court have to show it's a ploy? It pretty much boils down to a "he said, he said" kind of thing. I'm not saying anything is really right, just that the bag of tricks is so vast and annoying.
I was just wondering something too. In all seriousness, does anyone else get a flash of a kid saying "Nah nah nahnah naaaa" every time Jack says "Attorney and you're not?"
-Mike Schwinger
'Nah Nah NahNah naaaaa' is Jacks usual attitude to the entire planet, having conversations with him have always been like talking to a 6-year old because he only hears the parts of facts or sentences he wants to hear and ignores the rest if it doesn't suit him.
I imagine it would be up to JT to prove he was justified in adding the judge to the defendant list. The judge only has the power to grant/deny his motion, and JT could then appeal to a higher court presumably.
Seeing as how JT has yet to appear before a higher court, I'm willing to bet that either a) he hasn't bothered, this media circus suits him fine, or b) the higher courts have rejected him to date, telling him to hurry up and get disciplined by the bar before they can intervene.
Either way, he's just using this as one more stalling tactic in a long line of sad attempts to stall the inevitable.
I'm totally suing your ass, Dennis.
I find it ironic he's using the 1st amendment when he wants it to work, and then hates it immediately after his attempt. I don't think this applies though, its hard to argue first amendment speech by exposing yourself in public, even worse if you were touching yourself in the process.
Thompson has exposed some things, all while smiling with glee as if excited by the glaring eyes of the public at large. However, instead of expressing a message that was worth something or nothing, he exposed pictures of porno without a real purpose and trying to pass it off as evidence in a docket.
It may as well be obstruction for trying to impede the case.
31 years of practicing law and still screwing up this badly; It just shows he chose the wrong career, he'd have probably done better trying to start his own cult and attempting to get it tax exempted.
Jack go start your own cult, you may still have time before your body dies on you; it is too late for the damaged brain you have.
I believe the synopsis of the various J Thompson pleadings and court conduct should be required reading in Florida law schools. Perhaps even in the first week of Trial Advocacy.
It should be required reading for that class in all law schools.
My contract law teacher back in university could have spent spent several days on this. He spent a week teaching us the "do's" and "don'ts" of filing documents in dockets, for civil suits. This entire set would definitely have fallen under the "don't" section. ;)
I also love unedited entertainment. I've been picking up the DragonBall Z seasons that are being released and loving every minute of them. Something about Goku falling into "Hell" (not the HFIL), Vegeta having a short conversation with Guldo's severed head, and Recume flipping Goku off gives me pleasure.
As you might of guessed, I'm a big anime fan (as well as a gamer) and I love how much of today's anime is getting less censored. Bleach would be ruined without blood and character's attitudes would seem less real if they couldn't say certain words (one minor character is a lesbian). Even Naruto wouldn't have been released in its present form 10 years ago.
And I agree with your assessment of Jack's "stings". Effectively he is giving his son permission to purchase the games. No sales clerk/retailer could deny the sale to him because soon as the child has permission to purchase the game they are actually selling the game to the parent. And you wouldn't deny a sale to any consenting adult as that is bad business. And since we have no real evidence the sales happened (other than Jack's say so) we have no idea how they went down. For all we know, Jack was right there the whole time handing his son the game and money with which to make the purchase.
It's obvious that Jack is very sick and needs some serious psychological help. At this point, I'm not even mad. I just feel bad for his family.
Sweetie, when you get your HDTV and have been playing assorted violent games for 16 continuous years in good mental health, as I have, I'll be interested in your opinions on videogame violence.
Matthew, Gamer and You’re Not
PS: Headshot!
Excellent rebuttal in-kind. I've said it before, JT can in no way be considered a "video game violence expert" since he's never played them.
Sweetie, when you get your law degree and have practiced law for 31 continuous years in good standing with The Florida Bar, as I have, I ‘ll be interested in your legal opinions.
Jack Thompson, Attorney and You’re Not
PS: Hooah!
Well Jack, unless we're in bizarro world, you've practiced for 21 years of mediocre standing, and then you've spent the last 10 years being a laughingstock and going without victory.
Your statement also says that we should completely ignore your opinions on videogame violence, as we've all been playing longer than you.
You and I both know that you won't be a lawyer at the end of the year, so give it up. You're a terrible lawyer and a terrible human being.
You're a liar and a snake,
Austin Lewis
Dan, Video Gamer
Agreed. I think his WikiQuote page is one of the funniest things I've ever read.
@ Jabrwock
That makes sense.