Look on the bright side, Jack. Take it from Chris Titus. You're not failing, you're just really, really good at finding out what doesn't work.

It's like he has a quota he needs to maintain, you know?

I'm sure his arguments are perfectly reasoned and backed up by cited laws and past court decisions.

/no, I couldn't keep a straight face while typing that

"THE FLORIDA BAR IS FORCING THEIR IDEOLOGY ON ME!"

"THEY CAN'T DO THAT, FORCING IDEOLOGY IS MY JOB"

"THE'YRE STEALING MY WORK"

"STEALING IS A CRIME!"

"THE FLORIDA BAR IS CRIMINALS"

ah......seriously though...

I know it's a tad evil of me, but I would enjoy the irony if he got disbarred and took a job as a checker at Best Buy. Especially after he got that one person fired. Ah well, at least we know the bar's defense attorneys are probably used to it by now.

I wonder how long it's going to be before we forget about the 'Pictures Attached' escapade..

At first I was disappointed I didn't see a story like this earlier on GP, but sure enough, he doesn't fail to disappoint (he just fails in everything else. :P)

Sweet Zombie Christ. *reads document* The man's done for.

I wonder how long it is going to take for the Federal Judges to complain about him and send him up for Federal Disciplinary action? The Federal Courts can ban him from filing suits in Federal Court if he abuses the system, ask Fred Phelps.

Jack was supposed to show cause today, instead he's sueing the Florida Bar. You have to admire his stupidity.

You know, Mr. Thompson, you are not a very hard man to parody.

"The new complaint, filed yesterday, doesn’t specifically address Thompson’s own issues, but claims in a more global fashion that the Bar forces its own ideological agenda on Florida attorneys."

Uh, you mean the Bar's attempt at having their lawyers act with some form of dignity and/or semblence of normality is an ideological agenda? I did not know that.

Seriously JT, the Bar is giving you a bit of "tough love". They want to take away your right to be a lawyer because its for your own good (and for the sanity of everyone you're around).

In short, stop doing what we're trying to stop you from doing, like filing stupid lawsuits that you're going to lose because you're an idiot.

@Benji: You ever play any of the Phoenix Wright games for the DS? Plenty of over the top laywers there. Hell, one even uses a whip. I for once, am glad JT isn't THAT over the top. ;)

So you get the basic gist of what he is going for within the first couple of pages. Basically he is trying to state that the Florida Bar is pushing ideologies outside the narrow scope of the law, and that they are in violation of the first and fourteenth amendment. Based on past cases. So the idea is that he knows the bar is about to boot him, but this is a motion to state the bar is violating laws, so that way he can continue to practice law in Florida without having to be a member of the bar.

@valthun:

I think the only 'law' they're violating is the made-up one where JT can do whatever the f*** he wants.

It's fine by me. The more JT pulls these stupid little stunts the worse it gets for him. At first I was willing to bet that he'd only get a slap on the wrist but still keep his license, but with the way he's been going lately I'm more expecting his license to be pulled.

Sorry, I have to stick up for Jackey boy here. I think he has filed his show cause quite quickly. Today was the deadline but he met in Feb.

He filed his preliminary response on the 21th and then four more suplemental responses on the 26th.

Check out this site for a list of filings related to that case. Most of it appears as a lot of legal mumbo jumbo to me, but it communicates the drift.
http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket?p_caseyear=2007&p_casenumb...

Actually, Thompson's lawsuit is only 20 pages long. The other 50 or so are two entire Supreme Court decisions.

Let me reiterate:

Rather than just citing two cases, Thompson attached two entire Supreme Court decisions, in full, to his lawsuit.

Hey, maybe that's standard practice but it seems like a cumbersome waste to me.


Andrew Eisen

there should still be something from today when they make the decision on if his response is good enough right?

Retire. Please just retire.

@GoodRobotUs

Are you refering to the document just posted, because thats a whole new document for a new legal case. I wasn't aware his Show Order response(s) have been made avaliable yet? Got a link? If i'm mistaken I apologise.

I think GoodRobotUs is talking about the response Jack sent gamepolitics a while ago:

"This court’s panicked threat against Thompson… has wonderfully proven not just that Thompson has no “adequate state remedy” but that he has no state remedy at all. This court threatens Thompson if he even files this pleading.

This is a brazen attempt by this court to repeal the absolute right of every citizen, under the First Amendment, to “petition the government for a redress” of grievances…

The [Florida] Bar threatens a whistleblower with retribution because he dares to keep blowing the whistle? This court has threatened Thompson. He does not threaten back. He hereby informs this court that he will see it in federal court. This court has just thrown Brer Rabbit into the briar patch."


I can't believe he ACTUALLY filled that as his Just Cause.

Well to be fair that is the standard posturing we expect from him when he makes public comments but it doesn't neccessarily reflect what he would have written in his response. It may be possible he uses the same rhetoric in those responses but it is premature to critise him for not addressing any points when we haven't seen his legal answer.

why can't he just disappear

I wonder why the Supreme Court hasn't responded.

When Jack submitted the gay porn and was asked for a Show Cause, he filled a similar vitrolic response. A day after he filled it, the Florida Bar forced him in front of the ad hoc comittee

Thanks for cleaning that up :)

I think this series has been going downhill since last season. This new one is still funny but its getting repetitive, I think they need to add a new character to spice it up, what do you guys think of giving him a crimefighting monkey ninja as a sidekick?

Looks like Jack's going to have a lot of time to become acquainted with his new best friend now that his career in law is now grinding to a halt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straitjacket

I've got a picture book of my own that I would like to share, can anyone tell me the best way to share this treasure with the rest of the world? It's about 2.8MB Word Document.

I suppose part of the thing that he doesn't seem to understand is that this isn't, and never has been about what he thinks, it's always been about what he does. Never once has the Bar told him he isn't allowed to pursue what he feels to be right, they've simply told him to temper the methods he uses to do so, as was said earlier in the thread, had he simply toned down his behaviour a bit, and stopped trying to leap onto a soap-box to attack anyone who dared to disagree with his point of view, he wouldn't be in this situation, and would probably still have the respect of several individuals who would now no longer go near the man.

Jack actually did have influence in some quite major circles for a time, but he threw it all away by not learning how to behave like an adult.

It's kind of ironic that someone who claims that games pollute youth still hasn't grown out of calling people 'Retards' when annoyed at them....

Jack had until today to give the Supreme Court a reason not to. It wouldn't surpise me if the SC start proceeding towards that tomorrow.

He spent $350 to file that 20 some page ramble of a court filing, with the rest of the 74 pages either court paperwork, or info about other court cases.

@Andrew Eisen:

How many of those pages are dedicated to his new line of toilet pape--er I mean his book?

@Oz:

Well seeing as he's about as powerful as the village idiot (any wonder FAUX NOISE is the only outlet he has left) he's nothing more than a sad, sorry, pathetic punchline, and to quote David "10th doctor" Tennant, "A footnote to a footnote!" :P

Wasn't today the day Jack was supposed to show cause for his picture-book filing? Is this some kind of stalling tactic?

Isn't this the point at which said lunatic is supposed to be found dead in his apartment, wearing bondage gear, among a mountain of gay porn and with an anal intruder lodged in his rectum?

I got up to page 3 and determined Jack is about to get destroyed in federal court again. Basically, for those who don't wish to read it, he's saying that because the Bar is picking on him, that the Bar is thereby supporting gay rights, distribution of porn to minors and various other things that Jack opposes. He also says that they're not allowed to collect membership fees (which he's strangely had no problem paying since 1977). Thus, he's saying his First Amendment rights are being discriminated against.

Again, the federal court is not going to get involved with this because the action of the State Bar is still ongoing. This will get denied on the same grounds as his previous suit.

Isn't it creepy how he talks in the third person sometimes? Or how he sometimes calls people sweetie or darling like a creepy old pedophile?

This is so ridculously bad that I can't look away. XD

Yes, they're forcing their ideologies onto lawyers by refusing to allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. HOW DARE THEY? SUE SUE SUE!!!

@anon

Well, I mean, yeah, obviously it's a stalling tactic- my question was more along the lines of "Can it actually work in delaying his requirement to show cause?" (Which, incidentally, it appears he hasn't, unless Dennis is holding out on us...)


BTW, Anon, love the work you're doing with Scientology. Good luck on the 15th! ;)

(www.enturbulation.org if anyone's curious...)

Poor old Jack. I think I've finally figured out what his problem is. Pride.

I don't think I've ever seen a person so capable of detaching themselves from reality and refusing to see reason, all caused by their pride. I think that most sane people by this stage would have owned up and taken responsibility for their wrong-doings, but not Jack. He would rather make himself look completely ridiculous and risk further sanctions rather than admit he was wrong.

If he had gone about his business according to the rules of his profession and it's governing body, none of this would have happened. The problem started when he lost his court cases and his arguments were found to be without merit. This dented his pride, which seems to have had a massive psychological effect on the man.

Having been proven wrong, his pride caused him to cross the lines of professional conduct and good taste, because there was NO WAY that he could be wrong! There was NO WAY that his opinion and beliefs should be disregarded! Thereafter, his pride caused him to become bitter, full of hatred and anger as he insulted his opponents, hurled baseless accusations at those who disagreed with him, and threatened fruitless legal action on pretty much every single party that he saw as enemies. His pride pushed him even further then to delusion as he saw the rejecting of his beliefs as a vast conspiracy, a co-ordinated effort by every party that disagreed with him.

It's terrifying that pride can do such a thing to a man, especially one who claims to be a simple, HUMBLE christian. Can anyone remind what it is that pride goeth before?...

@ BearDogg

Swiped the words right from my keyboard.

JT appears to not use spell check. There's a blatant error on pages 17 and 18. Hint, it's in all caps.

He likes his smilies and metaphors though. I think every paragraph has at
least 3.

"The Bar tail is wagging the Supreme Court dog, and leading that dog, by a leash, is an ideological fever swap that very few among the Bar's rank and file inhibit"

I get knocked down!

But I get up again!

You're never gonna get me down!

Ah, but still. You've got to give him some credit for perseverance.

J@C|

Page 1 declearations under Parties:
"Thompson is [...] a lawyer in continuous good standing with The Bar since 1977."

Well that's wrong right there isn't it? Do I need to continue beyond this point, because that's the ultimate mis-representation.

Well I will anyway...

Thompson has an observable habit of using a slanted editorial style in his writing that renders his derision extremely palpable. This vitriolic rendition method also begins on the first page under the VENUE section:

"One of the more celebrated and notorious abuses by The Bar that give rise to this cause of action is occurring in Broward County, Florida."

One has to ask - why is the implied fanfare added?
One has to ask - "celebrated" by whom?
One has to ask - "notorious" to whom?

Is he talking about US? The online community? His "fan-base"?
Would anyone seriously care what happened to him if he hadn't been such a persistent nuisance?

I see it as a pattern of behavior that is self-aggrandizing and constantly self-publicizing. Clearly this is a very insecure man who continuously attempts to leverage his infamy for profit.

As much fun as it is to lampoon this man (as he indeed invites it) - a loose cannon practicing law is a dangerous thing. He has convinced many poor family members who survive the victems of horrible crimes that video games or rap music are to blame for the death of their loved ones. Recently even the Prime Minister of England couldn't console the mother of a lost child because her reasoning had been poisoned by the vitriolic rhetoric of an openly racist religious zealot and in her grief and denial could not open her eyes to the actual facts. It is truly horrible.

I don't believe that he ever had the interests of his clients at heart but instead sought out and cherry-picked their cases in order to further his open personal crusade that he has dubbed a "Culture War". I find anyone who declares open war on the Culture of Society as it stands to be a justifiable target for suppression. I am glad that the Florida Bar is now distancing themselves from him in a way similar to that of the rest of his associates. One by one he has been abandoned by them because of the wanton political dammage left in his wake. One by one he has turned on them and attacked them for not blindly following his lead and ultimately has accused each and every one of them of being guilty of whatever it was they were originally working together to fight against.

This "With Us or Against Us" approach has in effect alientated every political ally he ever had. One would assume that his anti-Islamic statements also led to The Fall.

He seems to have no problem whatsoever in deriding segments of the population based on labels like 'Homosexual' or 'Muslim'. IMHO openly and repeatedly making statements that effect should itself be a basis for dis-barment since you demonstrate that you cannot equally apply the law to all American citizens. It is an ouvert admission of guilt and IMHO he should account for it.

I find it interesting that his most recent filing against the Florida Bar takes issue with and the form of "Culture War" topics. In the same "with us or against us" attitude he has accused the Florida Bar association of promoting everything that he disagrees with because they have issues with his conduct.

I see this action as the last action of a desperate man who wants to have his words heard at whatever cost - even that of his own legal career - so that these Issues that are so dear to him will be the basis for his Martyrdom. Alas, there will be none left to mourn him as everyone has already been alienated or distanced themselves from him.

I think he's right on the mark.  The Florida Bar protects corrupt attorneys rather than protecting the public from illegal and fraudulent practices of corrupt attorneys.  Everyone who believes in justice should stand up and applaud Thompson.  But I'm sure they'll take away his license and thus silence him.