Jack Thompson Faces Trial Before the Florida Bar Today

November 26, 2007 -
Controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson faces the start of an ethics trial this morning which could see him disbarred.

The Florida Bar is pursuing several complaints concerning Thompson's professional conduct in court cases against the video game industry.

As reported by GamePolitics, Thompson's bid to block the trial failed last week when U.S. District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan dismissed his suit against the Florida Bar and Judge Dava Tunis, the referee appointed by the Florida Supreme Court to preside over the case.

Thompson's attempt to add myself and the Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) as co-defendants in that federal suit also failed.

Over the weekend, Thompson turned to the Florida Supreme Court in an apparent effort to block this morning's trial from moving forward. In one court filing Thompson asserted that he was willing to accept a 90-day suspension of his license to practice law. The embattled attorney claimed that such an offer had been on the table, but that the Florida Bar was now seeking his permanent disbarment.

A second document appeared to outline a lawsuit against the State of Florida, which has authority over the Florida Bar. Thompson claims that the Bar's pursuit of him is motivated by his Christian activism and is designed to silence his outspokenness.

UPDATE: GP called down to the Florida Bar this morning and learned that the entire week has been set aside to hear Thompson's case. Following arguments, referee Judge Tunis has until December 21st to issue a ruling. Extensions are possible, however, so the end result could come even later than that date.

GamePolitics Poll: Will Jack Thompson be disbarred? Or will he beat the Florida Bar's case against him? Be sure to vote. If you're getting your GP via RSS, jump over to the main page. The poll is located in the upper right sidebar.


Jade wanted to be suspended for 90 days and they said no he offered that cause he is worried and i say he should be hes gotten away with to many things in the past its time somthing bit him in the ass

I find it hilarious that anyone can claim christianity is somehow oppressed in THIS country. How many politicians wear their religion on their sleeve? If what JT says is true, then we would not have had G W Bush for 2 terms.

I THINK I recall someone saying that he can't be disbarred as long as he has an active case. He just needs to keep a bunch of stupid cases open, should that be the case.

Question: How long will a court case of this sort take to resolve? A week? more?

Also, I'd like to note that most court cases are settled through agreements. If there was an offer on the table, I think it's a virtual certainty that Thompson and the Bar will reach an agreement. I doubt he's going to get permanently disbarred, despite my hopes.

Sorry for double post...

Is there an online repository of all of Thompson's filings? I'd be interested in reading them myself, and I don't like having to rely on GP posting them in the news posts.

"Thompson claims that the Bar’s pursuit of him is motivated by his Christian activism"

I've never understood this. Being persecuted for being Christian in America, especially the south, is like being persecuted for being gay in San Francisco or being persecuted for being a geek at MIT.

Anyways, here's to the day we get trolled by "jack thompson, ex-attornery."

Heh, maybe they could call Dennis as a Character Witness, or whatever. (the grand totoal legal knowledge i have was gleaned from Law and Order and Matlock episodes :P )

I do not beleive Mr. Thompson will be disbarred, and I beleive that no matter the punishment it will be a "major win" over the bar and the industry.

(Kinda like Ralphie's father's Major Award in that Christmas Story movie)

Huzzah. Finally his tedious antics will fade from memory, god willing.

I'm bringing two things to this thread today.
#1 is a bag of marshmallows, to roast over the burning remains of Wacky Jacky's career.
#2 is a prediction: once the disbarment hits, Jacky will be on here soon afterwards, claiming that either
a) they are playing right into his hands, and they don't know how good this is for him,
b) the kid gloves are now off, as he is no longer bound by their code of conduct anymore (not that he followed it in the first place), or
c) he will be attempting to appeal or bring up charges against the Bar for their "unconstitutional actions" or some such, and has retained the services of some mom&pop law firm to sue R* for some random thing to lift his spirits

Bets on which is most likely? Or, for more entertainment value, add your own!


That all depends on how threatened JT feels. I'd bet good money he plans to use every loophole in the book to try to worm his way out of this, and when he's finally exhausted all other possibilities, he'll take what the Bar has to offer. My hope is that the Bar doesn't put up with it, and permanently disbars him.

I'm not going to try to call this ATM though, it's still way too early to predict anything.

I'm guessing all three will happen

Looks like JT is scared. Why all of the sudden would he accept the 90 day suspension otherwise? Hmm...

When I read this I started singing "Oh what a beautiful morning" :P

I look forward to seeing the results of this.

ooooooooooooh snaps, thompsons about to get served!

Thing is, I don't care if he's Christian, Islamic, Buddhist or Spaghetti Monesterist, I DO care if he is a rude, obnoxious panic-raiser who insults and misleads people to suit his own personal agenda.

And that is precisely what he is.

Has the bar stated anywhere (in writing) that they intend to disbar him, as JT claims?

They are trying to silence him because he's an idiot, not because he's a Christian (which he's not).

Unethical Lawyer? NO WAY!!


@ TheGreg:

1 A Christmas Story reference = 1 intertubes. You win!

@ Apokalypse:

Seriously, I think it's going to be all three of the above, if he gets disbarred. Just one of those things, y'know?

There's all kinds of different things to think about with this, though, that makes it really difficult to predict the outcome:

- Professional organizations really don't like to kick members out if they can simply discipline them,
- How the Bar will react to the swamps of filings Jack's made,
- How Jack will conduct himself in court,
- How Jack will conduct himself outside of court with respect to the trial,
- Whether or not Jack has some legal loophole up his sleeve,

Just to name a few. An awful lot of variables in this one.

I don't expect him to get disbarred, it seems too logical of an outcome for our court system to get right. But here's to hoping.

@ jdecamp

Looks like JT is scared. Why all of the sudden would he accept the 90 day suspension otherwise? Hmm…

That is a strong possibility. It would not surprise me if that is the case. This is probably a lot deeper than a couple of video game cases. He does have a medical malpractice job. There may be several complaints streaming from that as well.


That would be a Pastafarian.

Do we want him disbarred? Yes. Will he be disbarred? "Outlook is cloudy"

Papa Midnight

Outspokenness my wideload arse. Abusivness is more like it.

During the gay marriage debate, he said something like "We love you" as his supposedly placating remark to the opposition. My first thought:
Isn't that what family abusers do? Tell their victims (even in mental and verbal abuse situations) they are abusive because they love their victims? Even physical and sexual abusers tell their victims that they love them and are doing the abuse because they love them.

And that comment during the VGXPO debate where he makes the smart remark (not a compliment) about thinking it was supposedly a "friendly debate"? How many friends do you claim are on drugs? Or refer to with negative terms ("morons" being one of many)? Or try to create negative stereotypes about because you don't like something that your "friend" likes?

Classic acts of an abuser if ever there was one. And he calls THAT the act of a follower of a "good" religion of ANY kind?

NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Well, he filed the emergency measure last week, but I do not know if that will be enough to keep his head afloat. Since, technically, at the moment he doesn't have any legal cases on the docket. The last two he had were dismissed on Tuesday. Even with an emergency filing, a judge would have to give it a thumbs up to go back to the courts, and I, frankly, do not see that happening. Even if it does, considering that it is an appeal, basically, and there is no case currently pending, even if the ermegency motion goes through, it will have started AFTER the Bar hearings, therefore Mr. Thompson would need representation outside of himself, since, it would be sound logic to assume that the Bar has some rule about being the representative of a case when you are under a Bar investigation. Of course, if anyone has the link to the florida Bar's rules of conduct, and evaluation process, I would be appreciative. I am curious about how the code of conduct for lawyers is applied. I researched North Carolina's during the Duke fiasco, but I don't have the time to do the same thing now for Florida.


Hey, I'll bring the chocolate and ghram crackers...mmmm, s'mores of ruination.

@ Papa Midnight

I think I will go with:

"Ask Again Later"

Honestly, I really doubt he's going to get disbarred. Nothing ever really seem to go our way. I mean, when someone kills someone it's always blamed on games. But when a gamer does something heroic is it ever attributed to video games? No.

Anyway, I expect to see this case dismissed or at least end with Jack still able to call himself a lawyer. I also expect to see him on here later celebrating and mocking us. In situations like this I am definitely a "glass is half empty" kind of guy, sorry.

I'm guessing he will be given a short-term suspension of his license. Even considering all he has done to piss off the bar and abuse his profession, the legal community has a record of soft first-time sentences. Hence, the term, "slap on the wrist."

I just don't see him losing his license for good, regardless of how appropriate it would be...
. . Wisdom begins in wonder. - Socrates . .

Papa Midnight,
I'd say "no" to "will he be?" but probable that he'll only be suspended, if anything.

Does he DESERVE to be disbarred? Certainly. Dishonorable and unethical to the core is John Bruce. But he isn't the first such lawyer to be allowed to continue to practice. He also isn't the first to be disbarred either.

And, in the end, even if he is, his activism won't end. He'll just have another "conspiracy theory" to throw around as part of his activism.

NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

I think I figured it out. Jack Thompson has PURPOSELY been making EVERYONE in the Florida legal system mad at him so that if he DOES get disbarred, he can claim they were all out to get him.

Well, no matter the outcome, Thompson ought to get everything he wants out of it. Like that time Take Two got an order for him to hush up and stop hounding them. That was a huge victory for him.

...wait... so /that's/ why he says he has way more victories than losses...

Funny thing is, if he doesn't get disbarred, he will try to make that out as a victory. It's kind of like saying that the best he can do is screw up and not get fired...

"Thompson claims that the Bar’s pursuit of him is motivated by his Christian activism and is designed to silence his outspokenness."

The Bar's pursuit of him is in no way motivated by his activism. It is motivated by the nature of his activism. He has ignored and broken rules, insulted people, lied and brought false allegations against people. He has attempted to use the law as a crude club, and whenever he fails he proceeds to hurl more insults and allegations. These are what have motivated this trial, but for some reason he is absolutely blind to any wrongdoing on his part. Apparently, as long as it is the Lord's work, then the ends justify the means according to him.

Rules are rules, the law is the law, your beliefs do not affect them. Should extremist Islamic terrorists be arrested, or let to go about their business because that would that be motivated by their religious activism? Should Warren Jeffs have been allowed to continue to arrange sex between minors and older men because of his religion? You are free to believe and act in any way you wish, up until you break laws or rules. That's where Jack Thompson falls down. Just because he believes he is right, that none of the rules apply to him.

@ GoodRobotUs

It will be a victory if he is not disbarred. If he is disbarred, it will be bad news for the Floriqa ( ;) ) bar and he will become the "martyr" he has always wanted to be.

Thompson claims that the Bar’s pursuit of him is motivated by his Christian activism and is designed to silence his outspokenness.

For being a Christian, he sure doesn't act like one. Vengeful, spiteful, hateful little man. Jesus would be ashamed to have him as a follower...
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

In response to the last paragraph...

"Find out all this and more in the next exciting episode of DRAGON BALL ZEEEEEEE!!!"

Sorry. It just had to be done. Yes, i am a gigantic nerd. XD

@ghost coins

Ruination s'mores, eh? I'm down.

@ HandofCrom
"Anyways, here’s to the day we get trolled by “jack thompson, ex-attornery.”

ex-attornery == ornery ex-attorney? :D

Sounds about right!

I laugh every time I hear about how Thompson claims that his rights to speech are being impeded.

It proves yet again that Thompson slept through law class.

By becoming licensed, he agrees to abide by the rules of conduct attached to that license. If he want to run his mouth off, he's allowed, but he's not allowed to keep his bar license at the same time. These complaints are not to "shut him up", but to "shut him up in his capacity as a licensed Bar member".

Tear up your bar license, and these lawsuits/disciplinary hearings will disappear. Well, until you commit slander or libel... but that's another matter...
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Hopefully this is the end of his rants... it's too early to predict anything, but if i "know" Jack-o, he's gonna be acting just as retarded as he have this far.


The beer! WHY has no one mentioned beer?! I'll bring!


I don't want to, but I am obliged by internet law....

Is his power level over...*snicker* 9000?

Personally, I don't think he's going to lose his license. He's always been able to weasel his way out of any predicament he brought on himself. Remember that 2 months ago, he attached gay porn to a legal filing without permission and presented it to (the same) Judge Jordan, and he didn't get as much as a slap on the wrist for that.

Jack will most likely turn the charm on full force, act like a decent human being long enough to survive, and get to keep his license. Then he'll come back here with a new IP and scream "Another victory against the video game industry and your Censor in Chief! Hooah!" or something to that effect.

Don't hold your breath for a win on our behalf.

@ ghost coins

Nah, it's 0.001.


There is a possibility on that as well. If Judge Jordan had dropped the hammer on that one, then it would be one more case in the docket that Mr. Thompson would have to play off. By letting it go, and letting it go in the manner that Judge Jordan did, he effectively exonerated himself from any 'bias' he might have against Mr. Thompson, and, at the same time, prevented one more legal case fro Mr. Thompson to ride on before he had to face the Bar. The Judge, to my understanding, was furious at first, but perhaps realized that everything Mr. Thompson does will come to light during the meeting with the Bar. So, why go at him head on, when you can hit him from the side with his own steaming pile bad conduct.

Sure jack willl have some legal shenanigins up his sleeve, but if youve payed attention you know the entent of jack thompon's legal brilliance is nothing more than some courch potato who watches too much law and order.

He'll pull some crap, and it will get dismissed quickly and the slippery slope to oblivion for his career will be one entertaining struggle to watch.

Bye jack, I wish I could say its been a good fight but youve alienated too many people with yuor hatred for this to be anything more than justice.

@Quad9Damage: That scenario is likely but depends on how much goodwill he has left. By now JT's antics are become more well-documented and widely known, and the hearing judges aren't going to forget all about those antics because JT smiles and plays nice for one day. If he does decide to be nice he'll probably avoid a permanent disbarment but it might not be enough to save him completely.
I'm also willing to wager that, if JT walks away from this with his license intact, he won't be completely in the clear. The collective crosshairs of the FL law community may well be set upon him, and if he doesn't clean up his act in the future he may be dragged in front of the disciplinary board a second time, and the second time around they'll likely be much less forgiving.

Even if he is disembarred, it's unlikely that he will stop. He will just continue his crusade, suing everything that is in his way. Although there is one good thing. If he is dissembarred, it's unlikley that Fox and CNN will call him an expert anymore.

@ Sidewinder

Not only has that already stopped happening on Fox (as i personally noted in his last two appearances on the network) but i doubt he'll get much success with what he's doing without his lisence.

I mean, come on, who takes the word of a lawyer that is no longer a lawyer? (Besides the attorneys of Boston Legal, lol)

To those who say Jack's not going to be disbarred, I'm sorry but he is. If this was all about his actions against the video game industry, then maybe I'd be more inclined to agree, but it isn't just about that. It's also about Howard Stern, Norm Kent and a whole mess of other things we don't know about. A lot of the stuff in this trial stems from things going back 20 years, and in that time there has been established a clear pattern of unethical conduct. I'd say the Bar's case against him is pretty ironclad and I doubt he'd get a slap on the wrist or even a suspension for things that went back that far.

@ Quad9damage
The only reason he got off for that is because of this very trial. I wouldn't be surprised if that little stunt got mentioned in the laundry list of other violations he's committed. And considering Judge Jordan oversaw that case as well as this one, I have a feeling he's going to mete out the harshest punishment possbile, as he's clearly shown that he is unwilling to put up with JT's crap no matter how charming JT is.

And to to those who say he'll be an even bigger threat once he's disbarred, why? How will that make him any more effective (or ineffective) than he was before? Like someone here once said, a disbarred lawyer is equivalent to a defrocked priest. No one, especially the media, will go near him after this, and they were already starting to sour on him after V-Tech.

The only thing he could do after being disbarred would be to start a movement or a cult of some kind like Jim Jones, Fred Phelps or David Koresh, but I don't see that because who would follow him? He doesn't really have the kind of seductive charisma that Jones or Koresh had. Also, his ego's just too big and everything else I've observed of his behavior suggests to me that he fancies himself more of a lone wolf type, preferring to act on his own rather than have any allies or followers around him as he probably believes they would just weigh him down.

I really am hoping he does get disbarred, because then it would be both an eye-opener and a valuable lesson to his son about what being an asshole will get you.
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Papa MidnightIn case anyone is interested, there is a clause written into Section 10 of Windows 10's EULA that provides for a Class Action Waiver, and restricts the user to Binding Arbitration.07/29/2015 - 11:15am
TechnogeekNo, that folder is what gets used for the upgrade process. I already had the upgrade go through on my notebook.07/29/2015 - 10:35am
Andrew EisenMatt - And AGAIN, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published? How is it not accountable to its readership (which, AGAIN, is primarily game industry folk, not gamers)?07/29/2015 - 10:10am
james_fudgeThat's the clean install, for anyone asking07/29/2015 - 9:23am
TechnogeekAlso, it's the upgrade that's available for installation now. You might need to forcibly initiate the Windows Update process before it'll start downloading, though. (If there's a C:\$Windows.~BT folder on your computer, then you're in luck.)07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekAdmittedly there's more room to push for an advertiser boycott when you get into opinion content versus pure news, but keep in mind that reviews are opinion content as well.07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekMatts: There's a difference between "this person regularly says extremely terrible stuff" and "I don't like the phrasing used in this one specific editorial".07/29/2015 - 8:45am
MattsworknameWait, is that for the upgrade or the clean install only? cause I was gonna do the upgrade07/29/2015 - 8:32am
james_fudgehttps://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows1007/29/2015 - 8:30am
PHX Corp@Wilson, I'm still waiting for My upgrade notice aswell07/29/2015 - 7:57am
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician