CptStern
suckmonkey
- Joined
- May 5, 2004
- Messages
- 10,303
- Reaction score
- 62
Huzzah for small victories:
In a strange turn of events, Judge James Moore (no relation to the murderer) rejected Thompson's voluntary removal, only to kick him off the case and rescind Thompson's temporary license to practice law in Alabama (Thompson is a member of the Florida bar). He reported Thompson's conduct to the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama Bar, and issued a scathing 18-page beatdown. Writes the judge:
"Mr. Thompson's actions before this Court suggest that he is unable to conduct himself in a manner befitting practice in this state."
Thompson responded with:
"I have had the disturbing experience of appearing before the above jurist in a high-profile wrongful death action, Strickland v. Sony... In my opinion, Judge Moore has violated... the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics by his unfortunate, improper, and prejudicial acts in this case, at the expense of three bereaved Alabama families," he wrote.
He added, "Did this Court somehow, in the last three weeks, manage to repeal the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?"
"Further, the Court presided over a wholly unethical and fraudulent assault upon the character of John B. Thompson by opposing counsel, Blank Rome," he wrote. "The Court was made aware of total fabrications by Blank Rome in this assault. Thompson responded by aggressively telling the truth in response to those lies. What did this Court do? It punished Thompson for aggressively telling the truth yet looked the other way when Blank Rome elegantly told those lies. This is utter judicial nonsense. The Court is supposed to get at the truth, not deny clients their counsel of choice based upon his predilections as to style.
"Since when is it unethical to belligerently tell the truth but highly ethical to stylishly prevaricate? This Court has entered an Order that rewards an entire law firm and its entertainment industry clients for taking self-righteous offense at the telling of the truth. Blank Rome started the food fight, and this Court ultimately took offense at the undersigned's efforts to shovel the effluent out of the Fayette County Courthouse."
although this kinda on the money and very true:
"...although any student of Thompson's agenda would be correct to point out that for those on his side, this amounts more to a martyrdom than a state execution."
btw Thompson can still practice law in florida, he's not out for the count yet
In a strange turn of events, Judge James Moore (no relation to the murderer) rejected Thompson's voluntary removal, only to kick him off the case and rescind Thompson's temporary license to practice law in Alabama (Thompson is a member of the Florida bar). He reported Thompson's conduct to the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama Bar, and issued a scathing 18-page beatdown. Writes the judge:
"Mr. Thompson's actions before this Court suggest that he is unable to conduct himself in a manner befitting practice in this state."
Thompson responded with:
"I have had the disturbing experience of appearing before the above jurist in a high-profile wrongful death action, Strickland v. Sony... In my opinion, Judge Moore has violated... the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics by his unfortunate, improper, and prejudicial acts in this case, at the expense of three bereaved Alabama families," he wrote.
He added, "Did this Court somehow, in the last three weeks, manage to repeal the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?"
"Further, the Court presided over a wholly unethical and fraudulent assault upon the character of John B. Thompson by opposing counsel, Blank Rome," he wrote. "The Court was made aware of total fabrications by Blank Rome in this assault. Thompson responded by aggressively telling the truth in response to those lies. What did this Court do? It punished Thompson for aggressively telling the truth yet looked the other way when Blank Rome elegantly told those lies. This is utter judicial nonsense. The Court is supposed to get at the truth, not deny clients their counsel of choice based upon his predilections as to style.
"Since when is it unethical to belligerently tell the truth but highly ethical to stylishly prevaricate? This Court has entered an Order that rewards an entire law firm and its entertainment industry clients for taking self-righteous offense at the telling of the truth. Blank Rome started the food fight, and this Court ultimately took offense at the undersigned's efforts to shovel the effluent out of the Fayette County Courthouse."
although this kinda on the money and very true:
"...although any student of Thompson's agenda would be correct to point out that for those on his side, this amounts more to a martyrdom than a state execution."
btw Thompson can still practice law in florida, he's not out for the count yet
