Jack Thompson. Disbarment Permanent?

[Sabby]

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/09/we-have-judge039s-report-recommending-permanent-disbarment-jack-thompson

The recommendation was 10 years, but the Judge sees fit to pull his legal tongue right out of his mouth for good.

[Jefepato]

If the state bar follows through, I might be fortunate enough to never end up a member of the same profession as this man.

[Maeven]

The Florida Bar rarely, if ever, goes along with the referee's recommendation. This guy might very well start a new trend though. We can always hope.

[Avi]

I'd heard about this a while back, and I couldn't stop grinning. :D  Jack Thompson is a disgrace to the legal profession, I hope he does get disbarred for good.  What exactly is he charged with anyway?  Malicious practices?

[RubySlippers]

I hate to have to defend this man I think he is a nut and a bad lawyer but I'm ,as a Libertarian, opposed to monopolies and like the public schools are one with the teachers union and government effectively one- its the same here. The American Bar Association should have a say over members but I see no reason a general lawyer in no speciality practice needs to be a member, or they should have any say. If people want to sue him then fine they can and should but to strip his right to practice just because a monopolist says so I find offensive.

And if you do your checks he sured the Bar Association several times I hate to like him for that but he at least stands up for what he believes in.

[Jefepato]

I hate to have to defend this man I think he is a nut and a bad lawyer but I'm ,as a Libertarian, opposed to monopolies and like the public schools are one with the teachers union and government effectively one- its the same here. The American Bar Association should have a say over members but I see no reason a general lawyer in no speciality practice needs to be a member, or they should have any say. If people want to sue him then fine they can and should but to strip his right to practice just because a monopolist says so I find offensive.

And if you do your checks he sured the Bar Association several times I hate to like him for that but he at least stands up for what he believes in.

The American Bar Association is a voluntary association.  The lawyers I'm clerking for aren't members.  Their model rules have been adopted in most jurisdictions, but the ABA itself doesn't have any real authority there; it's the state bar that will be deciding Thompson's fate.

Besides, a lawyer can be a jackass and a half without ever risking disbarment.  If there's any abuse of authority going on, it's in Thompson's favor.

And "standing up for what you believe in" is only admirable if what you believe in is good.

[RubySlippers]

No it isn't can you practice law anywhere and not have the ABA in the process? Last time I looked you still had to pass THEIR bar exam to practice law in any State or Territory even if your not a member. As in its a legal monopoly and why do they need a bar exam anyway? I would think after going to a good law school you should know enough law to practice in a basic way.

And in any case isn't Thomson entitled to sue and be an ass for the Christians, most as I see it are asses anyway from my experience if you get to the more extreme side of the faith.

[Jefepato]

No it isn't can you practice law anywhere and not have the ABA in the process? Last time I looked you still had to pass THEIR bar exam to practice law in any State or Territory even if your not a member.

No, you have to pass your state's bar exam.  It's not the ABA's in any sense.

As in its a legal monopoly and why do they need a bar exam anyway? I would think after going to a good law school you should know enough law to practice in a basic way.

Sure, but lots of law schools aren't good, and even at Harvard someone graduated at the bottom.  The bar exam exists to make sure you know what you're doing before inflicting you on potential clients, since it's hard for the average person to figure out whether a lawyer is competent before hiring him.

Of course, I'm told the bar exam, in its current forms, is pretty useless (I'm still two years away from taking it myself, and I'm not looking forward to it).  But that's not a reason there shouldn't be a bar exam.

And in any case isn't Thomson entitled to sue and be an ass for the Christians, most as I see it are asses anyway from my experience if you get to the more extreme side of the faith.

He's entitled to sue if his suit is filed in good faith.  He's entitled to be an ass any time he likes, for whatever cause he chooses.

And frankly, most people on the extreme end of any belief are asses.

[Sabby]

Ok, I have read the trials report... 169 pages of it. I can say without a doubt that Jack should be disbarred. What he does is beyond professional misconduct. Its criminal. He's an emotional stalker, and if any civilian acted in the way he does, they would be behind bars. Theres way too many specifics to go into, but if you wanna read it for yourself, I highly recommend it. He's a sick man.

[Protocol]

I hate to have to defend this man I think he is a nut and a bad lawyer but I'm ,as a Libertarian, opposed to monopolies and like the public schools are one with the teachers union and government effectively one- its the same here. The American Bar Association should have a say over members but I see no reason a general lawyer in no speciality practice needs to be a member, or they should have any say. If people want to sue him then fine they can and should but to strip his right to practice just because a monopolist says so I find offensive.

And if you do your checks he sured the Bar Association several times I hate to like him for that but he at least stands up for what he believes in.

It really doesn't matter what the ABA is or does in the case of Jack Thompson. He's a liar and a hateful man that tries to ride the coat tails of cases he feels are related to violent video games. And he's extremely unprofessional. Being a frequent viewer of many different gaming web comics, I have seen many many conversations people have with this man, and honestly don't know why he's got away with his behavior this long.

[Maeven]

I hate to have to defend this man I think he is a nut and a bad lawyer but I'm ,as a Libertarian, opposed to monopolies and like the public schools are one with the teachers union and government effectively one- its the same here. The American Bar Association should have a say over members but I see no reason a general lawyer in no speciality practice needs to be a member, or they should have any say. If people want to sue him then fine they can and should but to strip his right to practice just because a monopolist says so I find offensive.

Bar exam's aren't a monopoly; they set a minimum standard.  And the minimum standard they set? Ain't all that damn high.  As exemplified by Jack Thompson. 

Where the problems with monopoly and the practice of law come in are more related to the fact that some states (like Florida) refuse to allow those who did not graduate from an "American Bar Association Accredited" school to take the state bar exam at all.  So, a brilliant lawyer from another country, who could pass the state bar with flying colors, is forced to spend the $100K plus and 3 years to go to a state law school just to be eligible to take the bar. 

[WyzardWhately]

I hate to have to defend this man I think he is a nut and a bad lawyer but I'm ,as a Libertarian, opposed to monopolies and like the public schools are one with the teachers union and government effectively one- its the same here. The American Bar Association should have a say over members but I see no reason a general lawyer in no speciality practice needs to be a member, or they should have any say. If people want to sue him then fine they can and should but to strip his right to practice just because a monopolist says so I find offensive.

And if you do your checks he sured the Bar Association several times I hate to like him for that but he at least stands up for what he believes in.

Yeah, he stood up for his beliefs.  And when the process of disbarment started (which is a slow process, in which he ABSOLUTELY gets to defend himself), he refused to moderate his behavior, and instead engaged in total mockery of the judges.  He disrespected them, the court, his profession, the process, and the very idea of professional accountability.  Now, in his capacity as a private citizen he is of course not bound to respect anyone, but in his capacity as a legal professional he does have to respect the judge presiding over his case.  He could not, or chose not, to do that.  He had full knowledge of the consequences of his actions, and did it anyway.  So, standing up for his beliefs, whatever they might be, cost him his license.  Doesn't it cheapen that stand if there couldn't be any consequences?

Incidentally, I recommend you look into what got him disbarred: the records of the proceeding against him are quite public.  The answer to the complaint that he filed via the online filing system is something you may find especially informative.  http://www.slate.com/id/2185966/  There is an article with a link to the document, to read it will require Microsoft Word.

Also:  I'm not sure the ABA, or even the various state bar associations, can be said to have a monopoly on the practice of law, since they aren't really monolithic market actors.  I'm not certain, because I'm not an economist and so the term may technically apply.  But would it then not apply to all regulatory bodies?  I don't think we necessarily want to take the axe to all regulatory/certification authorities.