The game press had a schizoid relationship with Thompson. He was the person they loved to vilify and the person they could not get enough of. Time and again, the game press — and mainstream press — would ask ESA to engage with, or respond to Thompson’s latest excess. The media knew well that he was a charlatan who wholly lacked credibility. But hey, they said, he was news and could not be ignored. That was a cop out. It gave Thompson a platform he might not have had for as long as he did. - Doug Lowenstein

Read Mr. Lowenstein’s full letter here

Miami attorney Jack Thompson, nationally and internationally known by virtue of his effective and successful opposition over the last 20 years to the broadcast, marketing, and sale of adult-rated entertainment to children, has just been informed by the Florida Supreme Court that he has been disbarred from the practice of law today.

This disbarment is in retaliation, among other things, for Thompson’s Tyndale House book Out of Harm’s Way, published in 2005, which blew the whistle on the Florida Supreme Court’s earlier efforts in the 1990’s to literally pathologize his faith-based and successful activism against the American entertainment industry. The Florida Bar’s insurance carrier was forced to pay Thompson money damages for that earlier assault upon his First Amendment rights, which is the only known payment of damages by any state bar to any lawyer for improper disciplinary efforts. It appears that the State of Florida will be paying Thompson more damages this time around for its illegal, now repeated, use of “discipline” to punish a Christian lawyer for his activism in the public square.

(more…)

The Florida Bar has finally had enough of Jack Thompson’s antics in and out of court. The Florida Supreme Court has affirmed the Bar’s recommendation to have him permanently disbarred from practicing law in Florida, effective in 30 days. The according to GamePolitics, the June, 2008 report of Judge Dava Tunis was heavily referenced in the four page document issued by the court.

“In her report, the referee states: Over a very extended period of time involving a number of totally unrelated cases and individuals, [r]espondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes.

He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior, but rather uses other means available to intimidate, harass, or bring public disrepute to those whom he perceives oppose him.”

Never one to accept the rulings of any authority other than himself, Thompson is fighting back with a law suit of his own. Kotaku has more on his conspiracy theory response to the court’s ruling.

“Miami attorney Jack Thompson, nationally and internationally known by virtue of his effective and successful opposition over the last 20 years to the broadcast, marketing, and sale of adult-rated entertainment to children, has just been informed by the Florida Supreme Court that he has been disbarred from the practice of law today.

…It appears that the State of Florida will be paying Thompson more damages this time around for its illegal, now repeated, use of “discipline” to punish a Christian lawyer for his activism in the public square.

The timing of this disbarment transparently reveals its motivation: This past Friday Thompson filed a federal civil rights action against The Bar, the Supreme Court, and all seven of its Justices. This rush to disbarment is in retribution for the filing of that federal suit. With enemies this foolish, Thompson needs only the loyal friends he has.

Thompson looks forward to successfully litigating his federal claims, now before US District Court Judge Marcia Cooke in the Southern District of Florida.

Thompson always wanted to own a Bar. Now, armed with multiple US Supreme Court rulings that no state bar can do what it has done to Thompson, he is set to own that Bar.”

Did anyone not see this coming? Given Thompson’s track record as a plague on the games industry with a penchant for frivolous lawsuits it was inevitable. It’s also highly entertaining.

---
Related Articles at Gaming Today:

• Jack Fires Back… but with What?
• Florida Bar Official Proposes Jack Thompson Take Mental Eval
• Thompson Suit Dismissed, Surprise
• Florida Bar Recommends 10-year Disbarment for Jack Thompson; Don't Start Dancing in the Streets Just Yet
• Jack Thompson Facing Disbarment For Life

In handing down its decision, the Florida Supreme Court cited Thompson's extensive history of public misconduct, along with recommendations from Judge Dava Tunis, the official who presided over Thompson's 2007 ethics trial.

Along with disbarring Thompson, the official court order (pdf) also demands monetary restitution of $43,675.

In response, Thompson has filed a request with the U.S. District Court seeking an emergency stay of the Florida Supreme Court's decision, as well as publishing a press release that claims the Court's decision is "in retaliation for Thompson’s Tyndale House book Out of Harm’s Way, published in 2005, which blew the whistle on the Florida Supreme Court’s earlier efforts in the 1990’s to literally pathologize his faith-based and successful activism against the American entertainment industry."

Image: Brymo/Flickr

DISBARRED! [GamePolitics]

See Also:

• Jack Thompson Reaches Out To Take-Two Exec's Mother
• Jack Thompson Punished By Florida Supremes
• Jack Thompson Versus Gamers

During an interview TVGB did with Mr. Halpin, we questioned him on the most important issues facing gamers. After replying that free speech was still the foremost issue, he went on to say that “the same battles that we’ve been up against for the last few years, and the industry has been up against for a long time, will continue.”

Concerned, we followed up by asking if he saw this trend ending any time soon to which he responded with a laugh, “No, no. You know, I get questions from members and consumers about what will happen with Jack Thompson’s role being diminished because of his issues with the bar, and really it’s not a matter of one individual and one individual’s ability to affect an entire sector, although he certainly does. Even if he is disbarred, that certainly doesn’t stop him from having a voice and being in the media and being passionate about his beliefs. And the same thing is true for lots of anti-games advocates and special interest groups. There will still be that counterbalance on both sides for now, and the good news is that we’re sort of winning the war on attrition because there is more of us everyday, and the more we can educate the more of us will come along and we can impact that change.”

Thank goodness he ended on a high note. So change is coming, but we’re all going to have to be patient because people like Jack Thompson will always have a voice and always have a right to speak it. The difference is, one day our voice is going to be much, much louder than theirs.

Check back tomorrow for our full interview with Mr. Halpin.

The Florida Bar has recommended disbarment for a period of ten (10) years. This Court respectfully declines to follow the Bar’s recommendation… This case involves factual findings of cumulative misconduct, a repeated pattern of behavior relentlessly forced upon numerous unconnected individuals, a total lack of remorse or even slight acknowledgement of inappropriate conduct…

Additionally, the Court is taking into consideration a review of the Respondent’s conduct not only as proven by the evidence, but by what this Court has witnessed of the Respondent’s behavior throughout the eighteen (18) months of litigation. The undersigned finds no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the Respondent is amenable to rehabilitation, or even remotely appreciates the basis upon which a need or purpose for such rehabilitation is warranted…

Over a very extended period of time involving a number of totally unrelated cases and individuals, the Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes. He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior, but rather uses other means available to intimidate, harass, or bring public disrepute to those whom he perceives oppose him.

Thus, after careful consideration of the underlying facts in the instant cases, together with the Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, the applicable aggravating and mitigating factors and the precedent case law, this Court makes the following recommendations for John Bruce Thompson:

A. Permanent disbarment, with no leave to reapply for admission.
B. Disciplinary costs currently totaling $43,675.35.

It seems that Judge Tunis has come to know Thompson quite well. Thompson first attempted to have the Florida Bar Association declared unconstitutional in 1992. This confrontation has been a long time coming. Thanks to GamePolitics for keeping us up to date.

---
Related Articles at Gaming Today:

• Jack Fires Back… but with What?
• Florida Bar Recommends 10-year Disbarment for Jack Thompson; Don't Start Dancing in the Streets Just Yet
• Take Two and Jack Thompson Settle Their Lawsuit
• EA Tells Jack Thompson To "Take A Hike" In A Kind Way
• Jack Thompson Offers To Help EA…

Today, thanks to the wonderful folks over at GamePolitics, we are able to read the full court transcript which provides us with an inside look at this jester’s antics. I have posted the entire part where Jack is present until he walks out - it is a bit long compared to most of our posts, but it is necessary.

Have a look:

JUDGE = Judge Dava Tunis

JT = Jack Thompson

TUMA = Florida Bar prosecutor Sheila Tuma

JUDGE: Good afternoon, everybody… I trust everyone has some water at their table?… so, for the record, we are here on the matter of the Florida Bar versus John Bruce Thompson… If all the lawyers would like to announce their presence for the record.

TUMA: Sheila Tuma, counsel for the Florida Bar

JT: Jack Thompson, presently a lawyer.

JUDGE: …Miss Tuma, my understanding would be that, pursuant to the rules, you would be going first?

JT: Your Honor, may I please–

TUMA: Yes.

JT: — so that I can state at the appropriate time, which would be now, my objections to this proceeding on the record?

JUDGE: And you have done so through writing –

JT: No. I have to do it here, Judge.

JUDGE: Go right ahead.

JT: May I move the podium?

JUDGE: No. Just everybody leave it in one spot. That’s the way we usually do it in the courtroom.

JT: Can we change that one spot? No?

JUDGE: I’d prefer that you leave it right there.

JT: Nice. Can I pivot it?

JUDGE: Is that what you’d like, sir?

JT: I’m asking you.

JUDGE: Okay. That’s fine.

JT: I was allowed to move it before. I object strenuously, as I have in the past, to the very notion that this proceeding can even occur on various grounds, any single one of which is fatal –

JUDGE: I’m going to interrupt you. Excuse me one moment. Mr. Thompson, this Court has been in receipt of many, many motions which this Court has already ruled on. So this would not be a time for you to simply make a statement.

JT: No, I’m not.

JUDGE: If you wish to state an objection, I will be more than happy to take from you any written motion and then rely upon it. But what I do not want is for you to be making a speech at the beginning of what is essentially a disciplinary hearing where I’m supposed to hear aggravating and mitigating factors. I have addressed numerous motions of your objection. If you have something in writing, I will gladly accept it from you now.

JT: First of all, Judge, so the record is clear — and I heard what you just said and I’m going to abide by it even though it’s in error — you don’t know what I’m going to say, number one. Number two, I have a right to make here today my objection to this proceeding on the record with the additional things I want to say.

JUDGE: And I will be giving you the opportunity –

JT: Excuse me Judge. Just to state my objection to your preventing me from doing what I have a right to do here today, note my objection to your ruling in that regard. Note my objection to the fact that you don’t want to hear my objection, which I have a right to put on the record orally and heaving heard yet another erroneous ruling from you which simply digs your hole deeper — with all respect for at least this Court — let me then give you what I have in writing. May I approach?

JUDGE: Absolutely. Miss Tuma, do you have a copy?

TUMA: No, I don’t.

JT: Let me give it to you. One for the court reporter (handing), one for Miss Tuma (handing), one for the Daily Business Review (handing). Ms. Roberts, try to get the story right this time [GP: Thompson made this remark to DBR reporter Alana Roberts]. Mr. Min, you’re not supposed to be here, but here’s your copy (handing)–

[GP: Barnaby Min is an attorney with the Florida Bar; Thompson has been highly critical of Min in the past.]

JUDGE: Let me just stop you right there. This is going to be a professionally conducted hearing. Whoever is in this courtroom has a right to be here because it’s a public courtroom. I saw you basically throw onto Mr. Min’s lap a motion –

JT: You saw me drop it on his lap because he wouldn’t take it.

JUDGE: Mr. Thompson, he has no requirement to take anything from you. He’s here as a person watching the proceedings… So I’d like us all to take a step back and to conduct ourselves professionally. Having said that, I have now received–

JT: Your Honor–

JUDGE: I have now received a motion entitled “Thompson’s Formal Objection to June 4th Sanctions Hearing” and–

JT: It’s not–

JUDGE: I will read it and when I receive a reply by the Bar, I will rule accordingly; but it’s not going to stop this hearing from going forward.

JT: Nobody wanted to stop the hearing from going forward. Secondly, it’s not a motion, It’s an objection.

JUDGE: Okay.

JT: Thirdly, I’m entitled to give this to Mr. Min, if I feel like it. He wouldn’t take it, so I gently dropped it on his lap. You can mischaracterize what I did if you want to, as you have before. Having stated my objection, Judge, which I wanted to do on the record orally, which I have a right to do, I want to wish you a very good day because I’m done here. Because I want you to understand that I cannot, Judge — Referee, whatever — object to the legitimacy of these proceedings and at the same time participate in them. I understand that. Others understand that. I don’t know whether you understand it or not, but I’m done. I’ll see you.

JUDGE: Are you choosing to walk out of the courtroom?

JT: Absolutely, Judge, because that’s what I should do. If you will read the objections, you’ll see why. You may not understand it, you may never understand it, but that’s what I have to do because of the fact that you don’t even have the authority to sit there. Thank you, Judge.

JUDGE: Have a pleasant day… Alright. Let the record reflect that Mr. Thompson has chosen to voluntarily absent himself from these proceedings and, according to the case law, they are going forward. Miss Tuma, go right ahead…

These are the classic antics of a “man-child” if I ever saw one. To read the rest of this great transcript, hit the link below.

Thanks for Making Our Day: GamePolitics

---
Related Articles at Gaming Today:

• Jack Fires Back… but with What?
• Jack Thompson v. GamePolitics
• California Lawsuit Banning Sale of Video Games to Minors Is Declared Unconstitutional
• Industry Figures Wish Gamers Happy Holidays on GamePolitics Holiday Podcast
• The First Game For The Microsoft Surface