Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2005-11-07 19:01:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
BREAKING NEWS: GTA Lawsuit Will Proceed Minus Jack Thompson

GamePolitics has confirmed a report that controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson has withdrawn from the Fayette County Alabama lawsuit Strickland vs. Sony.

GP spoke with Thompson this evening. The self-described "anti-game" crusader said that he had taken himself off the Strickland case today.

"The other side wants to make me the issue," he told GP. "The important thing is that the clients be served."

Thompson denied that he received pressure from Alabama Circuit Court Judge James Moore to withdraw.

"It was my idea," Thompson said, expressing confidence that the case would continue without him.

"There are three other lawyers working on it," he told GP. In addition to Alabama attorney Patrick Gray, Thompson's longtime colleague Ray Reiser of Florida will carry the plaintiffs' side forward.

"I got him (Reiser) to the edge of the Promised Land," Thompson joked. "We'll see if he goes in."

Thompson's flamboyant profile, take-no-prisoners style of communication, and frequent press releases and media appearances were the subject of a defense motion on behalf of video game industry clients to revoke his Pro Hac Vice (visiting) admission to the Alabama bar. The motion to remove Thompson from the case occupied much of last Thursday's hearing before Judge Moore in Fayette County. By day's end the judge asked both sides to submit opinions on the Pro Hac Vice revocation motion as well as another defense motion to dismiss the case on a summary judgment for lack of merit.

"If we won one motion or the other, we wanted to win (the summary judgment) by a factor of a million to one, Thompson said. Although Judge Moore has not yet ruled on the summary judgment motion, a decision for the video game industry would end the case before it begins. Thompson further indicated that his withdrawal was probably inevitable since he would likely need to take the stand as a witness in the case at some point.

UPDATE / Tuesday, 6:18 A.M. The Tuscaloosa News has more on Thompson's withdrawal in their Tuesday morning edition.




Page 1 of 4
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] >>

(Post a new comment)

wow
(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 12:04 am UTC (link)
to be totally honest even though i knew he wasnt going to be with the case long, it is shocking if he actually withdrew himself or he was kicked

(Reply to this)

wow
[info]sapper982
2005-11-08 12:04 am UTC (link)
to be totally honest even though i knew he wasnt going to be with the case long, it is shocking if he actually withdrew himself or he was kicked

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: wow
[info]turbinerocks
2005-11-08 12:14 am UTC (link)
Possibly he withdrew in anticipation of being disbarred from Alabama or removied from the case, and knew that it would hurt his career and the lawsuit if he was forced out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: wow - [info]apathyislife, 2005-11-08 12:40 am UTC
Re: wow - [info]jchaos, 2005-11-08 06:32 am UTC
Re: wow - [info]apathyislife, 2005-11-09 09:29 pm UTC
Re: wow - [info]soupcan58, 2005-11-08 01:02 am UTC

[info]featherspy
2005-11-08 12:04 am UTC (link)
WHOOP!

::dances::

(Reply to this)


[info]scazza
2005-11-08 12:05 am UTC (link)
Wonder whats up... on the edge of my seat...

(Reply to this)


[info]kawaiikingyo
2005-11-08 12:05 am UTC (link)
Rats! Here I was, hoping that we'd get to see him booted by the judge :-p

(Reply to this)


[info]theogal
2005-11-08 12:06 am UTC (link)
*does a little victory dance, and goes back to working on what he was working on before he saw the RSS feed update*

(Reply to this)


[info]scazza
2005-11-08 12:07 am UTC (link)
Actually, we prolly shouldn't be celebrating, for one, like everyone knows, he was helping us more then hurting us with those antics, and two, think of the families he convinced to let him be their representive... false hopes etc. Still, can't wait to see the offical "Why"

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]theogal
2005-11-08 12:14 am UTC (link)
It's probably the best case scenario for Jack in this situation. He can withdraw before he has the negative publicity of the judge forcibly removing him from the case. But I think that this does hurt the plaintiffs' case (after all, a new attorney has to pick up where Jack left off, and unless Jack had actual arguments they have to start all over) and it's a victory for the defense.

Besides, after everything Jack's done, I can't help but be happy that he's not in charge of his banner case anymore. It's not the most altruistic thing ever, but he wishes worse on us all the time.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]radixgames, 2005-11-08 12:38 am UTC

(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 12:07 am UTC (link)
What's his angle now?

(Reply to this)

Jacks finally seen he's lost
[info]yukimurasanada
2005-11-08 12:07 am UTC (link)
Either it's that, or he's found some other way to promote himself.

Thanks for the update dennis, first rate job as always.

(Reply to this)


[info]i_am_stillwater
2005-11-08 12:07 am UTC (link)
hmmm....

(Reply to this)


[info]l33tn1ckz0r
2005-11-08 12:12 am UTC (link)
I honestly can't believe he was removed. It's a serious thing to tell someone that they're not entitled to the attorney of their preference.

Still, I'm cheering on the inside. Jack sucks. Yay for this.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]justperverted
2005-11-08 06:19 pm UTC (link)
He wasn't removed, he withdrew. Nobody told them they couldn't have the lawyer of their preference except for Jack himself.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]l33tn1ckz0r, 2005-11-08 06:23 pm UTC
Huh?
[info]skemodan
2005-11-08 12:13 am UTC (link)
What?

(Reply to this)


[info]jindewinter
2005-11-08 12:15 am UTC (link)
Wait what, Jack backed down from a case like this? I don't know why he would do something like that after hyping it up so much. It doesn't seem like him to back down, wonder if there was something that caught his eye that would destory his credibility even more if he continued with the case. Now since Jack basically lead council where does that leave the case? Will the Alabama lawyer just throw in the towel or will he try and pick up the pieces? And what of the families Jack was representing, doesn't say too much for someone if they bail on their clients.

(Reply to this)

Woohoo!.....?
[info]markstandridge
2005-11-08 12:16 am UTC (link)
Bye Laddy Jack! Although it could be bad, in a way, to lose him on this case--it's so easy to vilify the other side with this clown at their helm. What happens when they actually get a competent lawyer running this litigation?

I wonder if he truly withdrew of his own volition...Perhaps this is like Nixon resigning the presidency before being convicted of anything?

Either way, I guess he has more time to troll this board now.

-MDS

(Reply to this)


[info]mandrakegeek
2005-11-08 12:17 am UTC (link)
I am rejoicing... and yet I'm kind of scared to see the reasoning behind him cropping out.

Well, this at least frees him up for his book tour... can't wait to stand in line for this one ^_~

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 06:58 pm UTC (link)
I can't wait either. I am so gonna get him to sign my copy of San Andreas.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Cue the Final Fantasy fanfare
[info]radblackrose
2005-11-08 12:20 am UTC (link)
Although it does make me wonder why he withdrew...

(Reply to this)


[info]toshirotzu
2005-11-08 12:21 am UTC (link)
Wow, JT DOES have some semblance of intelligence after all.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 12:24 am UTC (link)
Jack Thompson has shown, as far as I can see, NO lack of intellect. A skewed sense of morality, but it's obvious that the further he moves up the ladder of importance the more he behaves himself and acts with some semblence of common decency and sense.

-DKH

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]xiiiwulf
2005-11-08 12:23 am UTC (link)
Yeouch...

I wonder if he realized what a good idea it was to start taking his medicine again.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]xiiiwulf
2005-11-08 12:32 am UTC (link)
Oops. Guess not.

Crazy fucker.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]scrawnysquall
2005-11-08 12:26 am UTC (link)
that was the most logical move that Jack has ever made... I'm surprised.

(Reply to this)


[info]kajanga
2005-11-08 12:29 am UTC (link)
Wow. I'm very surprised, to say the least.

(Reply to this)

Good Day today
[info]hilaryduffgta
2005-11-08 12:34 am UTC (link)
Roflmao...He withdrew...guess the fight isnt that important to him...and he prolly figured out he couldnt win it anyways...Maybe he got that Job at Burger King...

(Reply to this)


[info]scazza
2005-11-08 12:36 am UTC (link)
He's alot smarter then you think... backing out before the heat got too much, and his credibility shattered, and also making himself look like the victim... the average dumb american will see this cold hearted republican as a kind and wonderful man... while people with a clue sit back unable to do anything... oh well... another waste of time

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]endless_day
2005-11-08 12:40 am UTC (link)
republican? He associates himself with Joe Lieberman and Hillary Clinton, republicans have other things to worry about besides videogames, like hating gays and minorities.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]scazza, 2005-11-08 12:41 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]endless_day, 2005-11-08 12:42 am UTC
Bill O'Reily - [info]sir_bissel, 2005-11-08 02:31 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - [info]jdmdsp911, 2005-11-08 05:42 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - [info]sir_bissel, 2005-11-08 05:45 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - [info]jdmdsp911, 2005-11-08 05:49 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - [info]toshirotzu, 2005-11-08 07:20 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 07:32 am UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 03:18 pm UTC
Re: Bill O'Reilly - [info]aniki21, 2005-11-08 03:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 06:08 pm UTC
crud!
(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 12:36 am UTC (link)
He woulda flopped if he was kept on the case.

"he would likely need to take the stand in the case."

What is he going to say? He doesn't know anything. If he's called to the stand, all he can either do is stay quiet the entire time or lie to everyone. There's nothing else he can do.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: crud!
[info]mr_paroxysm
2005-11-08 01:25 am UTC (link)
I was thinking the same thing. He'd probably go up and he'd be reffered to as some sort of video game expert. Then the defense would ask what training he has in the feildto which he would have to say none. Then they'd ask him to hold a videogame controller, watch him struggle and eventually suggest "You don't acutally know what you're doing do you?" at which point Thompson will start shooting lazer beams from his eyes.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: crud! - [info]jdmdsp911, 2005-11-08 05:51 am UTC
Re: crud! - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 10:21 pm UTC
This is probably a good thing for him...
[info]shadostahker
2005-11-08 12:36 am UTC (link)
Truthfully, he probably realised that whatever the outcome of the case, there would be so much mud throwing going around that even if he won it would tarnish his public image (mainstream public, not us), and this would hurt anything else he attempted after this.

In other words, the case was becoming about him, and this wasn't good. Whether he withdrew because of genuine concern for the families or because he wanted to protect future prospects is uncertain, but he's not quite as stupid as you think.

Beligerant and rude? Yes. Extremist? Quite so. Unresearched? On some topics.

But stupid? I wouldn't say so.

(Reply to this)


[info]schizmo
2005-11-08 12:39 am UTC (link)
Jack makes a good point. The defense was definately trying to sway the case towards Jack instead of the issue at hand. Instead of focusing on a solid argument, the defense attourney(s) focused too much on having Jack removed. And now that he's withdrawn himself, the defense has not only wasted hours upon hours, but they're going to go into the trial with an empty deck.

I think it was very classy of Jack to step down. Not that I like admitting it, but it was.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]darkmane
2005-11-08 02:04 am UTC (link)
Umm, since the case hasn't started, we don't know what the defenses plan is. They were right to object to a man who was using the case to get his face in the media and push his own agenda, rather than allow him to continue and potentially taint the jury pool (Assuming it is a jury trial).

It is in Sony et al's interest to get this case decided on the merits rather than thrown out on a technicality, otherwise they have to deal with the uncertainty keeping thier stock price low.

They may not have shown thier cards, but that doesn't mean they don't have a straight flush.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

classy? - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 02:38 am UTC
it would be nice if it was true - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 03:29 am UTC
Hey now!! - [info]jaimas, 2005-11-08 05:11 am UTC
Re: Hey now!! - [info]jdmdsp911, 2005-11-08 05:47 am UTC
Re: Hey now!! - (Anonymous), 2005-11-09 04:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]radblackrose, 2005-11-08 06:00 am UTC
Civil trial versus criminal ones - (Anonymous), 2005-11-08 06:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jchaos, 2005-11-08 06:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]toshirotzu, 2005-11-08 07:33 am UTC

Page 1 of 4
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…