|
I'm pretty sure they would have to actually kill someone in front of the judge to get fully disbarred.
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
A suspension means you stop ALL legal activity, including current cases. Your clients have to find new representation because by definition you're no longer qualified to handle their affairs, no matter how small. You may have to return retainers or refund fees as well for work you're no longer able to perform or have to abruptly leave uncompleted. For a solo practitioner it's a huge deal, it's like saying you have to stop breathing for a bit. And it's not like you go back to work at the stroke of midnight after a few months, unless you have incredibly loyal clients (which is possible!), because you'll have scared off a ton of people due to your suspension. Edit: I'm not sure if Pattis or Reynal are principally barred in Connecticut, if they aren't then it's not as big a deal, though there may be a referral to other states who make take it up there. Edit 2: vv No, I don't think they've got the recognition that Wood et al. have. It's one thing to push the election fraud lies because a substantial portion of the US believes it, but there's really not much of a market for losers who get whacked for a billion and a half. Outside a rabid core cult, Jones isn't on the same level as Trump's grift. kw0134 fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Nov 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
Pattis / Raynal will just go the grift route like Habba / Powell / Wood. If they were small time it would matter much more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Is Pattis on the Pozner case? This is like benching Jordan in game 7.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:13
|
|
|
BigHead posted:tl;dr is the disciplinary attorney recommends Pattis suspended from the practice of law for six months, Reynal suspended for three months. He found that both lawyers acted intentionally in violating the protective order, and that they caused actual and potential harm. The disciplinary attorney found that Reynal admitted his fault, and was sincere in apologizing. Pattis, on the other hand, "has failed to acknowledge wrongful nature of his conduct in this disciplinary proceeding." Honestly, it seems light when you consider the phone records include things they were required to produce in discovery and that the contents of what they shared included medical records for people who were not their client. If that's the punishment for improperly passing the files to an unauthorized source, that's one thing, but there's so much more going on here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:A suspension means you stop ALL legal activity, including current cases. ... goatface posted:3 and 6 months though, that's just a nice career break. Word gets around the legal community. This will have long & subtle impact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:21
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:Word gets around the legal community. This will have long & subtle impact. I’m thinking like if a doctor had their license to practice medicine revoked, and I’m guessing these two are going to carry “guess who just got reinstated 😃” energy for a long while.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:26
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:How bad is that in terms of being a lawyer? It's bad. A lawyer in town stole $2m from his client and gambled it away on penny stocks. He spent time in federal prison for the theft, then when he got out he was only suspended for a year. With that perspective on proportionality, six months is a long time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
My initial assumption is that 3 months for someone like Reynal is a big deal, but 6 months for someone like Pattis is nothing. At least Norm has his stand-up career. kw0134 posted:A suspension means you stop ALL legal activity, including current cases. What about being a "constitutional expert" during a live global transmission?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
 This seems like it went well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 20:25
|
|
|
EorayMel posted:I didn't know Alex Jones was a goon That's just Greg. He's a dipshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:Edit: I'm not sure if Pattis or Reynal are principally barred in Connecticut, if they aren't then it's not as big a deal, though there may be a referral to other states who make take it up there. My understanding was that Reynal is mainly a Texas lawyer, while Pattis is mainly a Connecticut lawyer, so this will affect Pattis much more than Reynal. I don’t recall if Reynal was also going to face scrutiny and possible sanction in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 00:37
|
|
|
At this point the suspensions are only a recommendation, and the start date can be negotiated. Ultimate responsibility rests with the Bar Association, whose authority is directly granted from the Supreme Court. So the Bar will decide, and will also decide the start date of the suspension (in the example I gave earlier, for instance, the suspension started the day after dude got out of jail). Pattis and Reynal have a right to appeal that decision.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Even without a suspension being the lawyer behind history's biggest judgement can't be great for business. I guess he can try to survive on the clients even the Lionel Hutz level lawyers won't even touch, or his standup and podcasting careers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 01:28
|
|
|
I kind of feel like he's going to be the go-to lawyer for Jones' listeners, like they'll fight for him to cover their lawsuit against their children for not letting them see their grandchildren.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 01:30
|
|
|
mojo1701a posted:What about being a "constitutional expert" during a live global transmission?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 01:54
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:Edit: I'm not sure if Pattis or Reynal are principally barred in Connecticut, if they aren't then it's not as big a deal, though there may be a referral to other states who make take it up there.  Aside from that, one of the wonks on the KF reddit has been scouring the Connecticut court records, and he found a doozy. https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=21789095 This is the deposition of Rob Jacobson. I had better stuff to do, but I was glued to it for hours yesterday. Really made me angry, quite sympathetic to Jacobson, and there are some real quotes in there that are worth finding. Especially towards the end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
Yeah, Pattis was in way over his head here and the consequences of his pugilistic stance is gonna make him extremely unpopular with his partner(s).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:Yeah, Pattis was in way over his head here and the consequences of his pugilistic stance is gonna make him extremely unpopular with his partner(s). I believe you'll find he is being railroaded by an woke judge https://twitter.com/PattisNorm/status/1593032021387149313
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:I kind of feel like he's going to be the go-to lawyer for Jones' listeners, like they'll fight for him to cover their lawsuit against their children for not letting them see their grandchildren. Next Trump Lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
I dunno, he lost big and publicly. Trump likes winners.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
At this point I assume he likes anyone who is stupid enough to not be paid in advance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 19:54
|
|
|
Lol https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1593681389937102851 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 20:10
|
|
|
Jones is too toxic even for Tire Fire Twitter 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 20:14
|
|
|
Piell posted:I believe you'll find he is being railroaded by an woke judge He should keep posting about it, I feel like the Bar would love that
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 20:43
|
|
|
Troubadour posted:
Incredible. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
This thread is a blessing. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:Incredible. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
Lol are these for real
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 23:13
|
|
Glory to Italia!
|
Oh my yes. There's a whole section about how Jones spent years calling this guy "beefcake" because he accidentally showed Alex Jones some beefcake porn, and this guy has thus made the accusation that Jones was grooming him for gay sex.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
What is an objection in the context of a deposition like this? It doesn't seem to stop the guy from answering questions, nor is there any third party that sustains said objections?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:What is an objection in the context of a deposition like this? It doesn't seem to stop the guy from answering questions, nor is there any third party that sustains said objections? The judge reviews it later and rules on the objections. The jury is only allowed to see what the judge thinks is appropriate. Everyone that isn't the jury can review everything because we don't matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 23:51
|
|
|
Tree Dude posted:The judge reviews it later and rules on the objections. The jury is only allowed to see what the judge thinks is appropriate. Everyone that isn't the jury can review everything because we don't matter. Got it. So you basically just object to every question from opposing counsel on the off chance that the question will be tossed?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2022 23:59
|
|
|
No, you'll get ripped by the judge afterwards and being a dick during discovery is how, you know, gestures broadly to Jone's default
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
Y'all should really, really read that deposition. It's a former employee and video editor for Jones who worked for him for something like 13 years, and was mostly a true believer. He was a fan of Jones when he first met him in the early 2000s. This is a guy who happily edited videos for Jones about 9/11 being a conspiracy, about the atrocities Obama was going to commit, all that jazz. This guy was looking for embarrassing photos of Hilary to add to the video they were doing about her, and was excited he found one they didn't already have when it turned out it was actually a link to a gay porn website, and only clicked on it the exact moment he excitedly called his boss, Alex Jones, over to see. Okay, that's pretty embarrassing and yes, it's hilarious. Jones then proceeded to call this guy Beefcake for years because of this. He and a buddy went into this guy's office and put gay porn on his monitors as a prank. The deposed video editor believes earnestly that this means Jones was grooming him for a relationship. Later Jones' lawyer asks him about an accusation that he "screamed that [another employee] was a lizard monster in disguise" and the guy they deposed denies that he yelled at this guy, but not that he believes in lizard monsters. Anyway even this psycho had limits, and got fired after raising concerns that their reporting on Sandy Hook was improper and that David Duke wasn't being challenged by anyone else in the office. So this guy's a nut, but somehow less of a nut than Jones, right? Jones' attorney takes the tactic of calling out inconsistencies in his linkedin profile as evidence that he doesn't have a photographic memory and thus that nothing he says can be trusted, and by demanding that he search his phone email in front of them (on zoom) for random things because he thinks that by this guy bringing his phone which could hypothetically access files he has thus physically brought files with him and they're all fair game for the deposition. They get the judge on the line and the transcript does not include what that sounded like, but when they come back Jones' lawyer continues to ask the deposed to search his phone for stuff while saying "I mean I guess you don't have to, although you are under oath, but I suppose you technically could not do that, I mean if you're not an honest person" while Mattei is screaming in the background "the Judge JUST TOLD YOU you can't do that!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 00:45
|
|
|
  I'll just say whole story he recounts regarding "Dr." Duke does not resound to AJ's credit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
I also like the part where the deponent refers to Mr. Wolman as Mr. Wolfman.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:No, you'll get ripped by the judge afterwards and being a dick during discovery is how, you know, gestures broadly to Jone's default You mean stuff like this might get you in trouble?  (this was the way the entire first part of the interview went, by the way) Baron von Eevl posted:I also like the part where the deponent refers to Mr. Wolman as Mr. Wolfman. That was great and it went on for a little bit! Troubadour fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Nov 19, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 01:16
|
|
|
Aren’t the constant baseless objections like that why the KF duo calls their deposition episodes Formulaic Objections episodes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:Aren’t the constant baseless objections like that why the KF duo calls their deposition episodes Formulaic Objections episodes? Yes specifically the objections to "form"
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2022 01:46
|
|