×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Jack Thompson Disbarred

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the it-burns-it-burns dept.

The Courts 522

Sockatume writes "The Florida Supreme Court has approved Judge Dava Tunis' recommendations for the permanent disbarment of John B. "Jack" Thompson, with no leave to reapply and $43,675.35 in disciplinary costs. The ruling is a step up from the enhanced disbarment that had been suggested by the prosecution, which would have forbidden him from reapplying for ten years. Thompson has 30 days to appeal the ruling before the disbarment is permanent. Thompson responds to the ruling."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

522 comments

Hallelujah! (5, Insightful)

tergvelo (926069) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155075)

It's about damn time this poor excuse for a human being was disbarred.
Maybe now we won't have to hear about him all the damn time.
~t

Re:Hallelujah! (5, Insightful)

uberjack (1311219) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155615)

It's about damn time this poor excuse for a human being was disbarred. Maybe now we won't have to hear about him all the damn time. ~t

Fat chance. Now he'll have his own talk show on Fox

Re:Hallelujah! (4, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155617)

I hope he gets the help he needs. I think its getting obvious that his mental condition is far from normal and his obsession with finding wrongs in videogames has ruined his life.

Re:Hallelujah! (2, Interesting)

electrictroy (912290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155677)

Okay:

I'm no fan of this guy, but what exactly did he do that was worthy of debarment? I'm not aware of any illegal activities?

Re:Hallelujah! (1)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155651)

Maybe now we won't have to hear about him all the damn time.

Don't worry, just cause he's disbarred doesn't mean he can't annoy and corrupt people on TV.

Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (-1, Flamebait)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155085)

All it takes is pissing of the Bar and a few judges, and you've lost what you made with 12 years of college.

Why exactly DO we need professional associations that one is compelled to be in? The AMA shows their true colors every so often too...

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (4, Funny)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155109)

From the article:

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.

Different kind of bar?

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (-1, Troll)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155153)

I didnt even RTFA.

The Bar is the professional association of Lawyers. And you damn well know that. Psycho-boy :P

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155489)

Yeah, well it was a response that was meant to be tongue-in-cheeck. Thanks for the response though Creepy-boy :P

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (4, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155297)

"Sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes, well... he eats you."

That kind of bar. I think.

Seven Years is the Standard (1)

autocracy (192714) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155145)

Twelve years is a really long time to burn, eh? My biggest complaint is that I have to get a law degree to even sit for the bar. I suppose I have to grief over the ABA as well, now. They're the only ones I can think to blame for destroying the concept of "Reading the Law."

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Interesting)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155155)

He was disbarred in Florida. Doesn't this mean he can still take the exam and be re-barred (okay, probably not the word, although anything involving Thompson and rebar sounds like fun) in any other state?

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (2, Insightful)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155189)

How many states do you think let someone apply to the Bar if another state has this sort of ruling against the person.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (4, Informative)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155211)

From what I limitedly know about the Bar (in Indiana) is that once you've been disbarred in one state, you cant reapply in any other states.

Any lawyer types care to comment?

Same rule in health care (5, Insightful)

querist (97166) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155473)

I don't know about law, but in various health care professions (I keep my chiropractic license for pro bono patients) and licensed engineers (I know a few), one of the first questions they ask on any application for a license is something along the lines of

"Has your license to practice ever been suspended or revoked in this or any other jurisdiction, or has any [insert profession] board taken disciplinary action against you? If yes, please provide a detailed explaination."

That usually means that if you were booted in one jurisdiction, your chances of being licensed in another jurisdiction are sufficiently close to zero to be indistinguishable from zero for all practical purposes.

Oh, and if you are found out to have LIED on that question, your license is automatically revoked (at least in SC) and you're fined heavily. For some professions, that's even a felony and includes jail time.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Informative)

j0nb0y (107699) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155253)

Every state bar requires a background check before allowing anyone to sit for the bar exam. The background check of Jack Thompson would reveal the Florida disbarment, and there is approximately a zero percent chance that any state bar association would let him sit for the exam.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Insightful)

Hairy Heron (1296923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155173)

No, it takes filing tons and tons of frivolous lawsuits and wasting countless hours of court time and taxpayer money to get where he is at.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (4, Insightful)

Cerberus7 (66071) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155249)

Exactly. If all it took was pissing off some judges, he'd have been disbarred a long, long, LONG time ago. He demonstrated compete disregard for the legal system with meritless filings for YEARS, and as a result got exactly what he deserved.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (2, Insightful)

Hairy Heron (1296923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155275)

Yep, it's not as if judges and the Bar only recently got pissed at him. He's been the thorn in the side of the Florida legal system for years and years. He just got way too cocky and he finally is now paying for his years of shenanigans.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Funny)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155219)

All it takes is pissing of the Bar and a few judges, and you've lost what you made with 12 years of college.

To be fair, he did more than that, he did his darndest to further the stereotype of lawyers as being rabid, idiotic, greedy, power hungry attack dogs. More significantly, he was tying up a lot of time and wasting a lot of other people's money by using completely frivolous lawsuits as a soapbox. Then he was blatantly disrespectful to everyone else, even those who disagreed with him.

This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155321)

This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.

You sound like you've thought this through. ;-)

Cheers

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155351)

This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.

You mean, there is a law against that? If there is, it violates my first amendment right, I am suing you buddy.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

j0nb0y (107699) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155227)

12 years? Only takes 7 to become an attorney. Four years of undergrad + three of law school. Although to many students the three years of law school may *feel* like eight years, it is actually only three :]

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155231)

Are you DEFENDING Jack Thompson?

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (-1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155361)

Yes, I AM defending Jack.

I mean, what kind of power do we grant these professional associations that a suit can summarily take away their livelihood?

Teachers, who teach youth, are tenured in and about have to commit murder to even be fired. They can easily go work elsewhere. The same can be said about most bachelor degree types. There's really nothing that can take away their degrees. Now, if nobody will hire you is a different situation.

This situation is when a 3'rd party entity says "You cant practice your field again". Not cool.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (5, Informative)

The Only Druid (587299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155435)

I want to be really clear here: disbarrment is beyond uncommon. It's happened a handful of times, nation wide, in the last few years. Even suspensions are difficult to get. Most bar proceedings that go anywhere result in, at most, a public slap on the wrist and a note on your record.

Even suspensions are survivable.

Jack Thompson, among other things, submitted porn to the courts, accused multiple judges of bribery in open court and public filings, violated numerous ethical rules regarding practice without a license, good character, etc. He falsely represented himself as being the lawyer for criminal victims, profited off their suffering, and then lied in court about it. He accused other lawyers of just as bad offenses, without a shred of evidence. On a more personal level, I can confirm that years ago, he physically broke into at least one lawyer's office to drop of papers and "scare" them (I know the lawyer personally).

Jack Thompson is a festering boil on the hide of the law.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155477)

Would you defend a doctor that frequently kills his patients due to mistakes, or an engineer that signs off plans for buildings that fall down and kill everyone in them? Disbarring Jack is like this. He has, over and over and over, shown he is not willing to follow even minimal proffesional behaviour when practising law.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155593)

How many of those other bachelor degree types have jobs where they can easily cause completely innocent people to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending themselves or go to jail?

There are many, many professional fields where if you make potentially life-threatening decisions, you are expected to remain in good standing with some sort of professional society. Professional engineers and medical doctors, for example, can be permanently banned from practicing their profession if they prove that they're bad enough at it.

It may not be "cool", but our society has determined that it's better than leaving an incompetent individual with the power to destroy hundreds of other peoples' lives.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155601)

Like, say the medical field?

If you look over the history of Mr Thompson, you'd realize this was not the result of one incident. The Florida Bar gave him ample opprotunity to get back on the straight and narrow and he ignored it.

You need a licence to practice law. It demonstrates that you have an understanding of not just the knowledge, but also the principles and ethics of the profession. You need a licence to fly a plane. You need a licence to practice medicine.

If there's a pilot who habitually endangers the lives of passengers, I don't care how many hours he racked up flying, he has demonstrated he does not have the responsibility to be behind the wheel of hundreds of tons of steel hundreds of feet in the air. Does this mean he should be employable as something else? No. Just not as a pilot anymore.

If there's a doctor who consistantly endangers the lives of patients, I don't care if he practiced at Johns Hopkins, he's shown contempt for the responsibilities of his job and should have his licence revoked. Does this mean he's unemployable elsewhere? No, just the medical profession.

It's a GOOD thing these fields are able to police themselves; they know the most about their field. I wouldn't want 12 random people to judge the acts of a lawyer acting as a lawyer: I'd want OTHER lawyers, who know the details and intricacies of the profession, to determine if he's stepped out of bounds

Professional Iicensing boards (4, Informative)

querist (97166) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155703)

I am speaking from my understanding as a licensed chiropractor. (I don't practice any more except for pro bono cases. I much prefer my computer-related work now.)

The _theory_ behind a professional licensing board is that members of a profession that requires extensive and specialized education are the only ones qualified to make informed judgements regarding the practice of that profession. These judgements include, but are not limited to, appropriate standards of practice including what would be considered "unprofessional conduct".

This is intended to protect the public from unqualified and/or unscrupulous practitioners. Usually, this works well. However, it is possible for the boards to become "good ol' boys' clubs" in which they are more concerned for each other than the public. Fortunately, this is usually rare. Many licensing boards include a "member of the public" (that is, someone who is _not_ licensed in the professon) in order to help prevent such abuses.

Since the licensing board controls who is licensed and, thus, who is allowed to practice the profession, unless otherwise allowed by law the highest sanction that they can impose is to bar the offender from ever practicing that profession again. Lighter sanctions (again, unless also allowed monetary damanges by law) include temporary suspension of a license for various periods of time or other license-related sanctions. I have heard of chiropractors having their licenses revoked and being required to re-apply as if a new graduate, including needing to take all of the exams again. I have also heard of chiropractors being required to take and pass classes to demonstrate an understanding of the areas that resulted in the disciplinary actions. (Fortunately, I have never been subject to disciplinary action by any licensing board.)

So, the theory is that the licensing board can revoke a license in order to protect the public from someone who is deemed unfit to practice the profession. For lawyers, for historical reasons, that licensing board is usually called the "bar" or the "bar association".

And I would _hope_ they would do thorough background checks on school teachers.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155237)

All it takes is pissing of the Bar and a few judges, and you've lost what you made with 12 years of college.

Why exactly DO we need professional associations that one is compelled to be in? The AMA shows their true colors every so often too...

Or rather, it takes a complete and utter disregard for the rules and meaning of the law that he swore to uphold and a complete disrespect for the legal system bordering on psychotic.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

mkraft (200694) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155241)

I'm sure the number of frivolous law suits he filed had nothing to do with it.

He's basically been harassing a number of gaming companies, wasting the courts time and overall been abusing his position.

It's his own fault he was disbarred and frankly it's about time. Unfortunately, he'll probably just move to another state and take the bar exam there, pass it and start up his wild law suits again.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155247)

Most people in the US spend 7 years in college to get a law degree. 12 years and you are doing something wrong.

Sucks when actions have consequences (5, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155367)

Maybe you think everyone should be able to do whatever the hell they want whenever they want, and if people don't like it, they can piss off?

Actions have consequences. When you screw up, you have to pay the price. I know, making people pay for their mistakes is taking away their freedom to be douchebags. Obviously these professional associations, by holding their members to certain standards, must hate our freedoms.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

GogglesPisano (199483) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155421)

Jack Thompson has only himself and his repeated unethical behavior to blame for flushing 12 years of college down the drain. He is exactly the reason that we need associations such as the bar and the AMA.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (-1, Flamebait)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155533)

You are ALL trolled.

This fits my standard formula:

X is hated by community.
Person with power, P does something to X.
Slashdot cheers with P while laughing at X.

I, instead, Question P's motives, excess of power, and take opposite stance than community.

Well, look at how many of you idiots fall for it? This is almost as good as the crosspost on alt.os.windows and alt.os.mac and say Mac sucks.

Re:Hrmmm.. I dont like this. (1)

megamerican (1073936) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155607)

... and you've lost what you made with 12 years of college.

Fat, Drunk, and Stupid is no way to go through life, Son.

Sincerely,

Dean Vernon Wormer
Faber College

Bad news for GTA (5, Funny)

Gorm the DBA (581373) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155093)

In related news, sales of Grand Theft Auto took a nose dive, as the free publicity engine Mr. Thompson had given them no longer functions...

Not that I see that as a bad thing...

Re:Bad news for GTA (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155303)

His lawsuits weren't the only way he was making a fool of himself over those games. He can still offer publishers money he doesn't have to make videogames that are a parody of videogames, then refuse to pay up. You don't need to be a lawyer to make a confusing spectacle of yourself. And in recent years, he's gotten more press like this, videogamers talking about his latest ridiculousness. The only people who know the name "Jack Thompson" are people who don't agree with him, being disbarred just ensures that he won't ever break into mainstream consciousness again.

Re:Bad news for GTA (4, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155423)

Nonsense. He will simply, make the talk show circuit, get backing and funding by some "think of the children" and christian groups, and bam he is back in business using OTHER lawyers.

In fact, I can imagine that software makers are going to be paying him, via a proxy group, to sue them.

on the plus side (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155103)

this will give more time to sit around in front of the computer at home, playing video games

Re:on the plus side (3, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155209)

this will give more time to sit around in front of the computer at home, playing video games

Bad idea. Thanks to him, we all know that violent video games are a direct cause of violent behavior, and I don't think we need someone as dangerously imbalanced as him getting violent.

Well... (0)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155105)

At first i was liek: ...

and then I LOL'd!

And then I realized I might miss his special brand of crazy...

and then I feared someone would take up his cause who may be articulate and not so full of crazy and we will end up in a much worse situation...

Re:Well... (2, Funny)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155329)

And then I realized I might miss his special brand of crazy...

Don't worry, the world is full of crazy. When one falls, seven more rise up to take their place.

Middle name? (0, Redundant)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155123)

I always assumed his first name was Jack and his middle name was Ass. At least, that's how the voice in my head always said it.

Boy, I bet he's really frustrated by this (0)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155129)

I bet he could blow off some steam with a nice session of GTA4, plow into a crowd of pedestrians with a bus and pretend they're the bar.

Re:Boy, I bet he's really frustrated by this (1)

DrLang21 (900992) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155475)

well according to the article, "Thompson always wanted to own a Bar." Maybe they ment to say "p0wn".

What's next? (4, Interesting)

Robaato (958471) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155143)

Now that Jack is defying the court order requiring him to have another member in good standing of the Florida bar to submit motions for him, what other sanctions can be placed upon him? Is there a more extreme penalty for him beyond permanent disbarrment?

Contempt of court, I guess...

Re:What's next? (5, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155191)

Permanent Disbarment with Extreme Prejudice. It involves some sort of laser cannon.

Not Quite... (2, Informative)

Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155571)

Now that Jack is defying the court order requiring him to have another member in good standing of the Florida bar to submit motions for him,

From TFSCD, "The Court approves the corrected referee's report and John Bruce Thompson is permanently disbarred, effective thirty days from the date of this order so that respondent can close out his practice and protect the interests of existing clients. If respondent notifies the Court in writing that he is no longer practicing and does not need the thirty days to protect existing clients, this Court will enter an order making the permanent disbarment effective immediately. Respondent shall accept no new business from the date this order is filed."

It looks like he is disbarred 30 days from the date of notice, not immediately. They do graciously allow him to be disbarred sooner if he wishes.

Kind of a shitty link, sorry guys (5, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155161)

The Gamepolitics link is to the recommendation, not the approval. My bad. The correct link is this [kotaku.com] .

JT's emergency filing press release (3, Informative)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155167)

From Jack's press release regarding his filing of some kind of emergency injunction aggainst the bar:

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.

1. Doesn't he mean "pwn" that Bar?

2. Thompson knew this was going to happen, so last week he file an action against the bar; now he claims his disbarment was retaliation. Nice pre-emptive strike last week, Jack -- too bad it's as transparent as day that it's unrelated to the numerous reasons the Florida Bar Association decided you're unfit to practice law.

Holy cow (1)

gruntled (107194) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155183)

But now who will the teevee morons bring on to rant about how children who play videogames grow up to kill people? Well, maybe with the economy collapsing, they'll spend more time talking about stuff that matters...

Re:Holy cow (2, Insightful)

athdemo (1153305) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155281)

He'll still be on TV, he just won't be in the courtroom.

Re:Holy cow (1)

gruntled (107194) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155539)

Nah, without the "officer of the court" background, Jack is just another rabid loon. Television appearances are based on credentials, and Jack just got his yanked. As a former producer for CNN, I can state with some certainty that Jack's days as a talking -- OK, ranting -- head are over. He'll make a nice living on the lecture circuit though. Maybe start up his own church...

Re:Holy cow (1)

fastest fascist (1086001) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155551)

In fact, considering he's going to have to come up with a new source of income now, expect to see him on all kinds of shows and in the papers a lot more now.

There are easier ways to resolve this matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155265)

Why didn't they just steal a car and run him over?

Won't someone please think of the children? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155277)

Won't someone please think of the children? -- Helen Lovejoy

All it means... (2, Insightful)

jlindy (1028748) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155335)

Meh...All this means now is that he'll run for the senate. After all being a disbarred loon is a perfect qualification considering the company he'd be keeping.

This will be a day long remembered. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155341)

It has seen the end of Jack Thompson [kotaku.com] ,
It has seen the end of a RIAA lawsuit [zdnet.com] ,
The end of copyright cops [wired.com] ,
The end of Comcast's forging of RST packets [pcauthority.com.au] ,
It will soon see the end of the Empire itself!

Re:This will be a day long remembered. (1)

nebaz (453974) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155547)

This will be a day long remembered.

Just remember what happened the last time you said that.

Re:This will be a day long remembered. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155723)

Just remember what happened the last time you said that.

"I think you overestimate their chances!"

(A two-meter target at maximum speed? Impossible, even with goatseon torpedoes. :)

Re:This will be a day long remembered. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155579)

It will soon see the end of the Empire itself!

hmmm [cnn.com]

He doesn't know when to quit... (5, Informative)

Coopjust (872796) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155355)

In his response, he accuses the bar of acting against him to protect the "unethical" conduct of the State Attorney general against one of his clients. He goes on to insinuate that one of the justices didn't actually know anything about the case (scratch that, it's an outright accusation:

it is fascinating that Justice Cannady, who has undoubtedly reviewed absolutely nothing about this disciplinary case, has put his name to this disbarment order on the day that he was served with the federal civil rights action. What a coincidence.

Whatever will we do (1)

Steeltalon (734391) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155357)

Without his constant idiocy and paranoid delusions of grandeur?

Look to national politics? (1)

OmniGeek (72743) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155541)

Of course, no one would *ever* suggest that our national political environment is characterized by "constant idiocy and paranoid delusions of grandeur" - mainly because they'd be likely to wind up on the Terrorist Watch List if they did so. ;-)

April fools? (4, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155373)

I mean seriously - this is just too good to be true.

Jack Thompson disbarred. The RIAA loses its first court case on their "making available" theory.

I'm waiting for the OMG ponies to show up.

OMG PONIES! (3, Funny)

jaguth (1067484) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155505)

OMG PONIES!!!!!11!!!11

Re:OMG PONIES! (3, Insightful)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155621)

Ah! There they are. Thanks.

Now that that's out of the way, where's my copy of Duke Nukem forever? Or my notice of an auction at SCO so I can buy Darl McBride's desk?

BTW speaking of Slashdot on April Fools day - this would be a really excellent move on the part of the industry.

Everyone knows /. is completely useless on April 1. Wouldn't it be funny if the industry took use of that fact and posted an important story on April 1st specifically to take advantage of that?

"RIAA admits to wrongdoing in their ongoing lawsuit cash grab. Offers refund to everyone who contacts them today."

We'd all say, "Yeah right! OMG ponies." and not email them. They'd be in the clear.

Re:April fools? (4, Insightful)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155549)

I mean seriously - this is just too good to be true. Jack Thompson disbarred. The RIAA loses its first court case on their "making available" theory.

Wait till you get to the one about your government wanting $2000 of your money to bail out banks who apparently still thought that pyramid schemes were a good idea.

Re:April fools? (1)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155731)

Actually we are all patiently waiting for the release date of Duke Nukem Forever to pop up in the game section later today.

Nerd-vana (4, Funny)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155385)

So today we have stories in which the DOJ opposes becoming the Federal Copyright Cops, the RIAA loses a couple hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, and Jack Thompson gets disbarred. To quote Perfect Strangers: Now we are so happy, we do the Dance of Joy!

Time to change careers (2, Interesting)

al3 (1285708) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155393)

Great. Now that he doesn't have all that lawyer stuff taking up his time he'll be able to save the children full-time by being a consultant or lobbyist or something.

I feel like fry after discovering snu snu (0)

Caboosian (1096069) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155409)

Yes, I'm very happy at the news of Jack's disbarment, but at the same time, I fear he will find a new place to espouse his, err, "opinions" at fox news. They picked up Karl Rove, so Jackie boy seems like such a perfect fit.

Can somebody.... (4, Funny)

8127972 (73495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155413)

.... Please give him a cup of hot coffee to calm him down?

Re:Can somebody.... (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155679)

Please give him a cup of hot coffee to calm him down?

If Jack "Ass" Thompson were having hot coffee, he wouldn't have started all this in the first place.

IANAL (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155543)

and soon I won't be the only one who can say that.

Internet Joke. (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155603)

So a Rabbi and Priest and Jack Thompson walk into a bar.

The Rabbit goes, "oy what is this?"

The Priest Goes, "Ouch that hurt!"

Jack Thompson says, "I am going to sue the bar!"

Then he gets Disbarred.

The only way to win this game, is not to play. (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155629)

The only way to win this game, Mr Thompson, is not to play. -W.H.O.P.P.E.R.

Want to know why? He went after the judges. (1)

k1e0x (1040314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155635)

I believe I heard that Jack Thompson discovered that many of the judges in FL did not sign their oath of office.

Re:Want to know why? He went after the judges. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25155689)

Not even remotely accurate, and certainly not the reason he's been disbarred.

Re:Want to know why? He went after the judges. (1)

k1e0x (1040314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155729)

28 May 2008

Extracts from the Close-Out Memo
The signature on the loyalty oath taken by Judge Dava Tunis is a forgery. The judge recently recommended that anti-game crusader Jack Thompson be found guilty on several charges of professional misconduct.

According to a report in the Daily Business Review, with supporting material from the Florida legal blog, 'justicebuilding', "The state attorney's office has concluded the signatures of three Miami-Dade judges were forged on their 2000 loyalty oaths, but no criminal charges will be filed."

The reason for the lack of criminal charges is down to the statute of limitations - it's apparently nothing to do with the fact that Florida judges can rule in cases of law, despite forged signatures (which they had nothing to do with and no knowledge of at all).

The forgeries came to light due to Thompson himself requesting an enquiry into the situation.

The 'close-out memo' (a memo summarising the investigation) states that, "Judge Tunis stated to investigators that the signature on the Loyalty Oath document is clearly a forgery, and that she had no recollection of having signed the form."

However, the memo also states, "There is no conceivable criminal motive for a judge to have participated in a forgery of his or her own loyalty oath."

http://news.spong.com/article/15468/Jack_Thompsons_Judge_Signature_WAS_Forged?cb=842 [spong.com]

I don't know.. you make what you will of that..

Wah, we have no more straw man..... (1)

jameskojiro (705701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155663)

He was the perfect straw man to attack, he had no brain, and was easy to attack.

He will be missed.

Re:Wah, we have no more straw man..... (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25155721)

No he won't. Not by those of us who care about the subject, anyway. It should raise the level of debate from the gutter-level sniping between JT and internet users, which has dominated the headlines, to the serious research that is being done into the effects videogames and other media have on the mind.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...