Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government Entertainment Games News

Jack Thompson's Past Legal Failures Resurrected 43

Posted by Zonk
from the keep-your-nose-clean-jack dept.
Yesterday we discussed Jack Thompson's upcoming legal hearing. Brian Crecente, over at Kotaku, has put up some documents related to (surprise, surprise) past run-ins Jack has had with the Florida Bar. The two (closed) cases dealt with past games-related cases the lawyer has tried to 'help' with, one being the much-discussed Alabama trial, and the other the Ohio trial that Thompson tried to interfere with. Also included are all 40 pages of the most recent scrape that has Thompson in front of the Bar again.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jack Thompson's Past Legal Failures Resurrected

Comments Filter:
  • by GuyverDH (232921) on Monday February 05, 2007 @05:29PM (#17895474)
    Jack Thompson is overly opinionated, overly impressed with himself, and doesn't know when to STFU.

    So it's no wonder that he has gotten (and continues to get) himself in legal troubles.
  • by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Monday February 05, 2007 @05:34PM (#17895584) Homepage Journal
    it's to change the way people think. In particular, it's to change the people who have *no* opinion into followers of his "there's certain levels of decency" dogma. As much as we think people like Jack Thompson only want to force their opinions on others, it's not true.. He truly believes he is right and wants others to agree with him. The publicity is what makes this possible, not winning or losing.
    • To be honest it doesn't seem like JT is pursuing this career path solely because he hates violent video games, but rather that his vitriol allows him to garner a lot of publicity.
    • by tbannist (230135)
      Actually, I don't believe that at all. Jack only seems believes what he says because it's convenient to do so. He's out there to make himself rich and famous, first and foremost. He knows there's a big demographic who love anybody who's a champion for children and decency regardless of what they actually do or say. All he needs to do is denounce things for the sake of the children to get a couple more minutes of fame.

      You'll notice as soon as his current "cause celebre" falls out of favour he's on to som
  • by Gerocrack (979018) on Monday February 05, 2007 @05:55PM (#17895914)
    When Jack Thompson gets disbarred, what will be his next profession?
    • by Mister Transistor (259842) on Monday February 05, 2007 @06:03PM (#17896036) Journal
      Slashdot Poll:

      Jack Thompson's Next Career?

      1) TV Evangelist

      2) Lobbyist

      3) Car Thief

      4) Insurance Salesman

      5) Politician

      6) Cowboy Neal's Personal Trainer

      [Vote]
    • by Zadaz (950521) on Monday February 05, 2007 @06:05PM (#17896058)
      Seems most of his public work has almost nothing to do with being a lawyer, and everything to do with hating video games. Don't think getting disbarred will have much impact.

      There's always some anti-game lobby he could be the front for.

      As an aside, I think this whole "hating the hater" is sad. He's that flaming bag of dog shit outside your front door. Stepping on it doesn't help the bag or your shoes.
      • by nuzak (959558)
        > There's always some anti-game lobby he could be the front for.

        Right on. "Parents for Videogame Decency, led by disbarred lawyer Jack Thompson".

        Fact is, he could lead such an outfit right now. Disbarring him would at least stick the label on him.
        • Internet Society for Utilitarian Choices for Kids: I.S.U.C.K.
          Nothing Our Group of American Mothers Envision Sacred: N.O.G.A.M.E.S.
          Thompson's Internet Mothers for the Eradication Of Unreal Tournament: T.I.M.E.O.U.T.
      • by Migraineman (632203) on Monday February 05, 2007 @06:18PM (#17896310)
        Ignoring the burning bag-o-poo doesn't make it magically go away either. While stomping on it is probably the wrong solution, it does warrant an appropriate response. Extinguishing it and burying it in the back yard is a good start ...

        If left unattended, the burning bag-o-poo will set your front porch on fire.
      • Responding to Jack's inflammatory opinions gives him exactly what he wants, attention/publicity. However, it is easy to say, "just ignore him", but when he begins to attack what you see as your way of life, his "opinions" becomes much more difficult to ignore. As the average age of gamers increases and more gamers hold positions of power and status (and everything else) how long do you think that it will take for even anti-game lobbies to turn their back on Jack?
    • by 91degrees (207121)
      When?

      They haven't even analysed the evidence yet. Obce they do, they have to decide whether to punish him, and if they do, they have to decide what the punishment should be, and whether his conduct justifies complete remopval of his livelyhood.
    • by taustin (171655)
      "What are you going to do when you get out of the Marine Corps, son?"

      "Well, sir, I thought I'd go to San Francisco, and lie in the gutter, and suck elephant dick for a nickel a herd, until I regain my self respect."
  • by IgLou (732042) on Monday February 05, 2007 @06:17PM (#17896286)
    If you have no idea what this subject is about then read the article. Just do it.

    His rants are priceless. My 4 yo makes more sense then this guy.

    "Maybe he can conjure up some kind of cause of action against Ohio-based Bob Evans Farm Sausage for my illicit use of ham on my fists. This is the first time I can recall a Bar complaint that brings pigs into the discussion."

    Maybe I'm not being fair though, maybe I'm just taking it out of context or he could be loon. I'm still debating it.
    • by Jim Hall (2985) on Monday February 05, 2007 @07:01PM (#17897062) Homepage

      Maybe I'm not being fair though, maybe I'm just taking it out of context or he could be loon. I'm still debating it.

      Here's the context: In an April 25, 2005 letter to the Chief Branch Discipline Council, Florida Bar, Jack writes: (emphasis & reference added by me)

      The reason I have repeatedly written the U.S. Attorney about the conduct of Mr. Kelley and Mr. Landes is that together they have, in my opinion, violated 18 USC 241 [usdoj.gov], which is a criminal statute that prohibits the chilling of someone's constitutional rights. Mr. Landes says in his April 1, 2005, letter to you that such complaints to the federal prosecutor are "retaliation" and "ham-fisted."

      Fine. If Mr. Landes thinks so then he can bring a malicious prosecution action against me. Maybe he can conjure up some kind of cause of action against Ohio-based Bob Evans Farm Sausage for my illicit use of ham on my fists. This is the first time I can recall a Bar complaint that brings pigs into the discussion.

      I mean, wow...

      • by IgLou (732042)
        Thanks for that! I tried finding the source but had to give up. Now it goes without saying that after reading that, I'm now deeply distrurbed though... *shudder*

        Oh and this completes my internal debate. Loon he is!
      • by unbind (1060402)
        Long time reader, none time poster

        This may be totally unrelated but hey nevermind...

        I was listening to the radio in the car today and there was a discussion about publishing soliciters names (lawyers - any difference?) that have had complaints brought against them. Granted - as the discussion progressed it appeared to me that the complaints would generally consist of a financial nature - where the soliciter in question was struggling for cash and was dragging the case along. Other arguments for compla
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 05, 2007 @07:09PM (#17897190)
    'nuff said.

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Working...