am glad our research has helped Jack,

Please return the favor with the following;

Remember your path and mine are not so different. I turned in the power elite in 2004 for mass foreclosure fraud against FHA borrowers (the least of our brothers) and the system turned on me. Now look at our state, number 2 for foreclosures and mortgage fraud.

Use what you have to serve all. Don't make this Jack Thompson's war. You need to be a General not the front line . Case in point Montgomery Sibley used what Bob Hurt learned from us to serve himself only, focus on how to help the troops and your troops shall mount behind you. Then you will be vindicated.

For The Republic,

Bill

Bill, I am filing my federal lawsuit against the Supreme Court of Florida clerk hall for denying me my right to have him file my quo warranto action based upon their oath problem. I will send it to you shortly. You have helped me so much, you can't imagine!

----- Original Message -----

Subject: if you liked Holloway see the enclosed

Jack since it appears you properly and timely took issue with Judge Tunis' oath along with the Supreme Courts before final rendering , these case should void there findings against you, and clear the way for redress.

Good Luck,

Bill Trudelle

Roy v. Tomlinson, 639 So.2d 1112 (Fla. App. 1 Dist., 1994) Once petitioner challenged Judge Pierce's authority to act on the pending pleading, Judge Pierce no longer "peaceably" held de facto office, as found in the order denying the motion to disqualify. These facts distinguish this case from Stein v. Foster, where the challenge to the county judge's authority was not made until after a final order had been entered. Absent a valid designation for Judge Pierce to act as a circuit judge, the motion for his disqualification should have been granted. Also see Pierre v. State, 2002 FL 2794 (FLCA, 2002), Stein v. Foster, 557 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 1990). Loffler v. Loffler, 620 So.2d 1048 (Fla. App. 1 Dist., 1993) stating: A timely objection to a de facto judge's authority is necessary to void his or her acts .



From: Jack Thompson [mailto:

To: Bill Trudelle

Subject: Re: Holloway V State -----Original Message-----Jack Thompson [mailto: amendmentone@comcast. net Bill TrudelleRe: Holloway V State Wow, how the Hell did you find this???

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146



___



---- Original Message ----- From: Bill Trudelle To: amendmentone@comcast.net Subject: Holloway V State Jack attached is Holloway V State see its citings , it is a dead on case by the Supreme Court regarding the Oath and defacto officer issue it fits perfect with your issues and serves the greater good. Please review as it applies to your case. Jack Thompson, Attorney5721 Riviera DriveCoral Gables, Florida 33146___



___





___JACK THOMPSON v. TOM HALL, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CLERK OF THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT, and THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA + JACK THOMPSON v. FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

Jack wrote this before filing his federal lawsuit against Supreme Court Clerk Tom Hall.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Subject: Meeting with Chief Justice Quince





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 28, 2008

The Honorable Peggy Quince

Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court

500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Via Fax to 850-487-4696

Re: Face-to-Face Meeting with the Chief Justice

Dear Chief Justice Quince:

This letter confirms that at 9:30 am today I spoke with your cordial assistant and requested telephonically that we have a meeting, with Florida Bar Counsel Paul Hill present if he wants to be, regarding the illegal act of your Clerk Tom Hall in refusing to accept for filing a $300 filing fee check and a Petition for Writ of Quo Warranto. His bizarre letter in that regard is attached.

The Petition deals with the fact that six of the seven Florida Supreme Court Justices do not have valid state loyalty oaths, as mandated by the US Constitution and by FS 876.05.

As a result of this illegal act by your Clerk, I have filed a declaratory judgment action in federal court against your court and against your Clerk, Tom Hall, Case No. 08-22378, Southern District of Florida.

Since your kind assistant promised me that she would email you my request for a meeting, please advise of same at your earliest convenience. I trust she will email you tis as well.

I grew up in a day and in a country in which difficult problems were best resolved and more likely to be resolved in face-to-face meetings. That is the way it has been; that is the way it will always be.

Please advise, as this treatment of me by the Court and by your Clerk as if I were some criminal has got to stop. I'm a citizen of the United States with a right of access to our courts for the purpose of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.

Regards, Jack Thompson

___

I like this letter. Jack explains how the bar ruins good lawyers through the judicial oligarchy known as an "integrated bar." See the integration documents in the files section of the Lawmen group (see link to Free Downloads in my signature below).

Bob

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 1:28 PM

Subject: Jack Thompson Writes the ACLU





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 27, 2008

Howard Simon

Executive Director

ACLU of Florida

4500 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 340

Miami, Florida 33137

Re: The Florida Bar's Assault Upon Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion,

and Freedom to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances

Dear Mr. Simon:

I am a member of the ACLU, and thus I commend and thank your Maria Kayanan for her excellent amicus brief filed on behalf of attorney Sean Conway's free speech rights in Florida Bar v. Conway. I moved the court to allow me to serve as amicus in the Conway case as well because of my previous experience as an amicus in a renowned First Amendment case in which the ACLU was also an amicus but more importantly because I have been a victim of an even more egregious infringement of the First Amendment by The Florida Bar than has been Mr. Conway.

The fact that the Florida Supreme Court, without explanation because there was no basis for doing so, denied me amicus status speaks volumes about a) how keen The Florida Bar has been to deny me my First Amendment rights of speech, religion, and to petition the government, and b) how thoroughly The Bar has deluded the Florida Supreme Court in this regard.

The Bar now seeks disbarment of me in large part for my fact-based criticism of two judges. Unlike Mr. Conway, I did not engage in opinionated hyperbole. I stated facts. An Alabama judge by the name of James Moore deprived a black teen of a fair trial by an all-white jury in a murder trial by denying him any semblance of a "video game defense" about which I was interviewed on CBS' 60 Minutes by Ed Bradley. This Judge Moore has used The Florida Bar to keep this young man on Death Row and also to punish me for alerting the public and the Alabama State Bar that a lawyer friend of this Judge Moore claimed he could fix the case. The Bar believes it was a violation of ethics for me to accept Mr. Bradley's invitation to appear on 60 Minutes at the behest of Mr. Bradley, six years after I had first appeared.

It is unconscionable that The Bar would think let along act upon such a belief. I was fully within Bar Rules to warn Americans of a public safety hazard.

The other judge using The Florida Bar to harass me with a SLAPP Bar complaint is Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Ron Friedman, who announced his ruling in my case before he had the evidentiary hearing in it, which he then refused to convene. When I complained about this, he filed a Bar complaint against me which he refused to swear to. The Bar then processed it as its own. Friedman has now been reversed twice by the Third District Court of Appeals for doing to other litigants exactly what he did to me. Judge Friedman is the kind of judge who cannot abide fact-based criticism, so he wants The Bar to punish me for my truthful whistle blowing about his illegal antics. His actions clearly violate 18 USC 242.

Because I complained about this Bar-based assault upon my First Amendment rights, the Florida Supreme Court entered a "sanction" against me that prohibits me even from responding to the Referee's Final Report. This denial of my right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is one of the most ridiculous decisions made in recent memory by an appellate court in America. The only other court in Anglo-American jurisprudence to deny a citizen the right to appear on his own behalf is England's notorious Star Chamber, as the US Supreme Court pointed out in Faretta. Florida Statute 454.18 of course grants every Florida resident the right to represent himself in any civil proceeding. This law means nothing to the Florida Supreme Court.

I have this week filed a federal declaratory judgment action challenging the Florida Supreme Court's utter refusal to accept for filing a stand-alone quo warranto action. The Bar and the Court have this bizarre notion that they can refuse even to docket a lawsuit they do not like. This utterly guts the First Amendment petition right.

I had the pleasure of meeting, for the first time, the national ACLU's President Nadine Strossen in July 1990 when the two of us were guests on ABC's Nightline, hosted by Ted Koppel. Subsequent to that, Nadine and I debated one another on close to 20 college campuses. I have the highest regard for her and her love of the Constitution. When I wrote her about this situation with The Bar, she encouraged me to write you regarding possible help from you all for me. You can contact Nadine to verify that.

I would respectfully ask for your help, then, in any form and to whatever extent, to convince the Florida Supreme Court that The Florida Bar should not be the Thought Police when it comes to fact-based criticism of reckless or corrupt judges.

The Alabama judge I have come up against is doing anything he can to keep a black man on Death Row. The Florida judge I have criticized will do anything to punish any lawyer who factually criticizes him. These two judges have stood "judicial independence" on its head to mean that anyone who disagrees with them must be punished. This is nonsense.

Justice Douglas predicted in his dissent in Lathrop v. Donohue that eventually integrated state bars would become "goose-stepping brigades." Well, those fascistic Bar brigades are here in Florida. Mr. Conway has been a victim, and I have been much more of a victim.

Please help. There is a good reason I fashioned the below quotation, which graces all of my e-mails. It happens to be true:

"If a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, as Mayor Koch once said, then a civil libertarian is a Republican who has been indicted."

The great enemy of liberty is the state, and on that conservatives and all members of the ACLU should agree.

Regards, Jack Thompson

Copy: Florida Bar Governors

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Subject: Notice





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 22, 2008

John G. White, III

President, The Florida Bar

250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1504

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Chief Justice Peggy Quince

Florida Supreme Court

500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Attorney General Bill McCollum

State of Florida

The Capitol PL-01

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dava J. Tunis

1351 NW 12th Street

Gerstein Justice Bldg., Sixth Floor

Miami, Florida 33125

Re: Notice of Intent to Sue for Damages

Gentlemen and Lady:

I hereby provide you formal notice of my intent to sue the State of Florida for damages arising out of your conspiracy, with others within and outside the state government, interfere with my civil rights, pursuant to 42 USC 1985 and other federal and state legal authority.

I shall secure the internal documents, including emails, denied me illegally in my "disciplinary" proceedings in this litigation and in other litigation leading up to it.

Regards, Jack Thompson

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 5:41 PM

Subject: Florida Bar to be sued Monday





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 22, 2008

Mary Ellen Bateman

The Florida Bar

Tallahassee, Florida Via e-mail to mbateman@flabar.org

Dear Ms. Bateman:

Because you, as records custodian refuse to provide me access the Bar's various records pertaining to me, including emails, to which I am entitled full discovery as a party in my disciplinary matters without being charged a fee (since I am a party), I shall name you as an individual defendant in a federal lawsuit I am filing Monday. I shall secure an injunction commanding you to turn these records over.

This is what the Rules of Civil Procedure provide, and I shall have them. The Bar provided them free of charge the last time it tried to mess with me years ago, and I shall have them. The smoking guns I found ended the nonsense then, and they will end it again.

Regards, Jack Thompson



Jack Thompson, Attorney

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366, cell 305-588-3005

"Vice is a matter of so frightful mien,

As to be hated needs but to be seen.

Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,

We first endure, then pity, then embrace." Alexander Pope

"If a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, as Mayor Koch once said, then a civil libertarian is a Republican who has been indicted." Jack Thompson

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:43 PM







John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 22, 2008

The Honorable Peggy Quince

Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court

500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Via Fax and Mail

Re: 42 USC 1983, Florida Bar By-Law 2-9.7

Dear Chief Justice Quince:

A couple of things if I may:

I sent to the court this week a quo warranto petition which your clerk has no choice but to docket as a new action separate and apart from my disciplinary case. If he does not do so by the middle of next week, then I shall file a federal action against you under 42 USC 1983 for injunctive relief.

Secondly, Florida Bar By-Law 2-9.7 mandates that The Bar maintain liability insurance, and I have found that they have waived their policy coverage as to me and decided to self insure. This decision violates 2-9.7.

I have filed a petition for writ of mandamus to address this problem, and that had better be filed by Wednesday of next week as well.

Have a good weekend.

Regards, Jack Thompson

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Subject: I'm Sure One of You Bar Governors Will Volunteer for This, Right?





IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

THE FLORIDA BAR,

Complainant,

v. Case Numbers SC 07 - 80 and 07- 354

JOHN B. THOMPSON,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR THIS COURT TO APPOINT COUNSEL

COMES NOW respondent Thompson, and moves this Supreme Court as follows:

This court has entered a "sanction" order improperly and illegally stripping him, despite the guarantees of the Sixth Amendment and of FS 454.18, of his right to represent himself herein.

This court has bound and gagged respondent despite the fact that Thompson is a lawyer in continuous good standing with The Florida Bar for 31 years who has achieved a number of successes as a lawyer in the face of the chronic opposition of both The Florida Bar and the porn-to-kids molestation industry. In fact, it is because of Thompson's successes that this court has lurched into the Star Chamber practice of gagging Thompson. After all, it was this same court that years ago entered a bizarre order seeking to pathologize Thompson's Christian faith-based activism.

The excuse that this court has given to deny him his right of self-representation is that Thompson's filings are "without merit," and yet this court has never reached the merits of his pleadings. The disingenuousness of this court is thus patent.

Since this court has "sanctioned" him by depriving him of his most fundamental right—the right to advocate for all rights—then this court has an absolute obligation to provide him replacement counsel to undertake that advocacy. This court and our entire Florida judicial system, as a matter of law, provides court-appointed counsel to convicted murderers. Thompson understands that this court considers him below murderers and rapists on the societal evolutionary ladder—given the fact that he manages to annoy Florida Bar presidents on a routine basis—but the principle of a court's provision of counsel to someone who cannot otherwise secure counsel is deeply embedded in the Sixth Amendment and in the US Supreme Court's Gideon line of cases. Relatedly, Ted Bundy was allowed to represent himself in his murder trials. Maybe Thompson's mistake was that he has not bitten his opponents as Mr. Bundy bit his victims. Maybe then a dentist could represent Thompson in these proceedings without fear of retribution.

WHEREFORE, since this court professes that it wants "justice" in this case, since we lawyers all understand that justice in our system depends upon zealous adversarial advocacy, and since The Bar has been actively extorting lawyers not to represent Thompson, this court should and in fact must appoint an attorney to represent him herein, and respondent Thompson moves this court to do so.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have provided this to The Florida Bar, 1200 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida, August 22, 2008.

John B. Thompson, Attorney/Respondent

Florida Bar #231665

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

Phone, 305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Subject: The Florida Bar's Extortion Machine Strikes Again





IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

THE FLORIDA BAR,

Complainant,

v. Case Numbers SC 07 - 80 and 07- 354

JOHN B. THOMPSON,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S NOTICE TO SUPREME COURT RE HIS COUNSEL

COMES NOW respondent Thompson, and provides notice to the Supreme Court of the following:

Thompson extensively interviewed a Florida attorney, well known to this court and to The Florida Bar's officers and Governors, for the purpose of Thompson's retaining this lawyer to represent him in this "disciplinary" action. This lawyer was prepared to file a petition for review of the referee's report, a motion for stay of these proceedings in light of this court's attempt to determine if the First Amendment protects Sean Conway and other Florida lawyers in their criticisms of judges, and to otherwise fully represent Thompson in this "disciplinary" matter.

Despite the fact that this lawyer, expert in disciplinary matters, believes that Thompson's legal position has merit, this lawyer ultimately expressed fear that his mere representation of Thompson would harm his career. Pressure was brought to bear upon him.

Thompson has repeatedly asserted to this court's "sanction" that prevents Thompson from handling his own defense violates the Sixth Amendment and FS 454.18. It does. This court doesn't want a fair result in this case. It wants a predetermined result.

Thompson has said, correctly, that no lawyer in his or her right mind would represent Thompson in this matter, given The Bar's proven record of extorting his two prior counsel out of their representation of Thompson. Indeed, as soon as The Bar's Ken Marvin and Sheila Tuma heard that this lawyer whom they knew well would likely be representing Thompson, the pressure began. The pressure was successful.

This court's clerk Tom Hall can send the undersigned even more letters informing Thompson that these pleadings are being placed in a "Miscellaneous File" rather than in the court file where Thompson has a right for them to appear. The truth is these pleadings have been sent to this court and the court is thus fully on notice as to their existence and what is contained therein, and this court ignores them, including this pleading, at its own grave risk in subsequent litigation.

This court, collaborating with The Bar and the latter's extortion machine, has effectively and by design closed the Supreme Court to Thompson and thus illegally denied him his absolute right to respond to the fraudulent Referee's Report. This Supreme Court is not a court of law. It is a Star Chamber, as only the notorious Star Chamber ever denied a citizen the right to represent himself.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have provided this to The Florida Bar, 1200 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida, August 22, 2008.

John B. Thompson, Attorney/Respondent

Florida Bar #231665

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

Phone, 305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net



Jack Thompson, Attorney

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366, cell 305-588-3005

"Vice is a matter of so frightful mien,

As to be hated needs but to be seen.

Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,

We first endure, then pity, then embrace." Alexander Pope

"If a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, as Mayor Koch once said, then a civil libertarian is a Republican who has been indicted." Jack Thompson

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:15 PM

Subject: Screw the Bar. Here I come. And I'm going to win this, and you're going to lose.





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 20, 2008

Ms. Linell Raulerson

Nationwide Insurance Company

Claims Department

Gainesville, Florida Via e-mail to raulerl@nationwide.com

Re: Conspiracy by The Florida Bar to Deprive Bar Member of Civil Rights, Claim Number 77 09 PR 335767 0824200451

Dear Ms. Raulerson:

Because of your insured's decision to try to "waive coverage" and its right to a defense, both to be provided by Nationwide, what The Bar has inadvertently accomplished is a) proven its utter recklessness in tortiously depriving me of my rights and b) breached its fiduciary duties to all of its Bar members by exposing its and their assets.

As a result of this mistake by The Bar, I shall have to subpoena you for the purpose of taking your sworn testimony in these regards, and so I write to ask you if you have in-house or outside counsel you would like to direct me to in order to make this as pleasant as possible.

Please let me know. Thanks for your help.

Regards, Jack Thompson

Copy: The Florida Bar

___

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Subject: Jack to Florida Supreme Court: Go ahead, make my day. Put up or shut up.





IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

THE FLORIDA BAR,

Complainant,

v. Case Numbers SC 07 - 80 and 07- 354

JOHN B. THOMPSON,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR THIS COURT TO ENTER SHOW CAUSE ORDER WHY RESPONDENT SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CRIMINAL CONTEMPT OF THIS COURT

COMES NOW respondent Thompson, and moves this Supreme Court as follows:

This court violated the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution and Florida Statute 454.18 when it "sanctioned" him by denying him his right to respond to the Referee's Report in this "disciplinary" matter. Be that as it may, this court's sanction order threatened Thompson with criminal contempt if he continued to file pleadings in this case. Thompson has continued to filed pleadings for two reasons a) somebody on this court might recognize its error, and b) to build the record of judicial malfeasance that will come back to bite this court in a federal civil rights action.

Regardless of Thompson's motives, which are purer than this court's, he has arguably violated the court's gag order. What is the court going to do about it?

If this court does nothing, then it becomes REALLY clear that this court's order was simply an idle, extortionate, bullying threat to intimidate Thompson in violation of 18 USC 241.

However, if this court was serious and not frivolous, then it should enter an order directing Thompson to show cause why he should not be held in criminal contempt of this court for violating its order not to file pleadings herein. Thompson looks forward to the trial on that.

Put another way, as Ronald Reagan and Harry Callahan used to say:

"Go ahead, make my day."

Thompson knows this court is offended by helpful pictures, but there they are.

Wherefore, Thompson moves this court for the entry of the hereinabove requested show cause order.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have provided this to The Florida Bar, 1200 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida, August 22, 2008.

John B. Thompson, Attorney/Respondent

Florida Bar #231665

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

Phone, 305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

___

Jack explains why the bar dropped insurance coverage against tort claims. He creamed them back in 1992 and they didn't like having to pay his claim. So now they really "Jack"ed the premiums.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:02 AM

Subject: Breach of Fiduciary Duty by The Bar's Officers to Its 88,000 Members





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 20, 2008

John G. White, III

President, The Florida Bar

250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1504

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Re: Exposure of All Florida Bar Members to a Special Assessment

Dear Mr. White:

I have just learned from Nationwide, which provides coverage to The Bar for torts such as the ones that The Bar has committed against me, that three years ago The Bar waived its right to coverage and the right to a defense by Nationwide as to my claim #7709PR3377670824200451.

This is remarkable news, and I am certain it will be startling for all of our fellow Bar members to hear of it when I e-mail them shortly, as I had already indicated I would do before I knew of this development.

The Bar has opted out of coverage here because, as you know, it was The Bar's insurance carrier that shut down The Bar's criminal efforts against me back in 1992. What The Bar has done, per the information I have just received from Nationwide, is make it very clear that it wants no impediment, either from its carrier or from the Constitution, in its latest criminal assault upon my rights.

This decision by The Bar to tell Nationwide to get lost is a clear breach of fiduciary duty by The Bar, and I intend now to inform the Florida Supreme Court of just that.

Regards, Jack Thompson



Jack Thompson, Attorney

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366, cell 305-588-3005

"Vice is a matter of so frightful mien,

As to be hated needs but to be seen.

Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,

We first endure, then pity, then embrace." Alexander Pope

"If a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, as Mayor Koch once said, then a civil libertarian is a Republican who has been indicted." Jack Thompson

___

___

Florida, Thompson: Jack Hammers Chief Justice Quince over Kangaroo nature of Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jack Thompson <amendmentone@comcast.net>

Date: Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:21 PM

Subject: Two movies Chief Justice Quince Needs to See...





John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law

5721 Riviera Drive

Coral Gables, Florida 33146

305-666-4366

amendmentone@comcast.net

August 18, 2008

The Honorable Peggy Quince

Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court

500 South Duval Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Via Fax and Mail

Re: Kangaroo Courts

Dear Chief Justice Quince:

Today my son, along with all his classmates, missed the first day of this year's academic term because of meteorological event named Fay. So I took two hours off from battling with your court's official arm, The Bar, to watch with him the wonderful movie Breaker Morant, which I had first seen in 1980 when it was released. This was my 15-year-old son's first time viewing this true account of the unfair trial and conviction of three Australian soldiers who fought in the Second Boer War in South Africa around the turn of the last century.

The star of the film was a bloke by the name of Jack Thompson (what an odd name), who played the lawyer pressed into service to defend these three Australian soldiers. It is ironic that this particular kangaroo court was used by the British to unfairly convict three men from the kangaroo continent.

The only real difference between what was done to me by your Bar Referee Dava Tunis and what was done to these three soldiers in Breaker Morant is that the soldiers were allowed to introduce evidence and witnesses at trial—a right denied me after I alerted you and the other Justices to this due process deprivation. You did nothing about it.

I heartily recommend Breaker Morant to you, although I would think an African American woman, of all Americans, should not have to be reminded that certain courts in the South get it wrong some of the time.

Ever see To Kill a Mockingbird, Chief Justice Quince? Maybe it's time for you to take in a double feature?

Regards, Jack Thompson

Copy: Board of Governors of the Court's "Official Arm"