Jack Thompson vs. Bill Clinton
A battle for justice
March 30, 1999
In these days of fickle justice it seems that America has found few friends who are willing to put their personal and professional reputations on the line to protect our collective rights. John B. (Jack) Thompson is one such man. A political conservative, Mr. Thompson feels that his law practice is preparation for public spirited service. He was also the last Republican to run against Janet Reno for the office of State Attorney of Florida. Now he is taking on Bill Clinton.
Jack, a 1976 graduate of Vanderbilt University School of Law, has practiced in Miami Florida since 1977. His career in the public eye began in 1986 when he represented Ileana Fuster in her divorce form Frank Fuster. Mr. Fuster sexually abused dozens of children in the Country Walk Daycare tragedy. ABC made this story into a movie entitled "Unspeakable Acts" based on a book by the same name. This launched Mr. Thompson into litigating pornography and decency cases. His research in sexual abuse cases proved that sexually violent material helped to cause sexual abuse. To this end he was able to secure the first decency fines ever levied in this nation by the FCC in 1989, and the first verdict in the history of the world that a sound recording was obscene. This was the 2 Live Crew federal obscenity trial. Mr. Thompson also represented Lt. Col. Oliver North at Time Warner's shareholder's meeting. Lt. Col. North's intention was to see that rapper "Ice -T's" song "Cop Killer" did not inflame young listeners and spark the killing of Police Officers. The Wall Street Journal credited Mr. Thompson's legal argument that widows of officers killed as a result of the song would be able to sue Time Warner as a result of the content of "Cop Killer" . He has always sought to help protect women and families against those who would use the cloak of the First Amendment to do irreparable harm.
Most recently however, Mr. Thompson has begun an interesting legal journey in an attempt to seek justice for America and especially the women wronged by Mr. Clinton. While his involvement in other cases has made Mr. Thompson a public figure it is his knowledge of the laws of this nation that has moved him to take action against the President. The process Mr. Thompson has chosen is rather simple on its face. He has chosen to file a grievance with the Arkansas State Bar against Bill Clinton to have the President disbarred for his unethical conduct. As a matter of common practice an individual can file a grievance against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct. Then the appropriate agency of the various state bar associations will review the complaint and hold a trial. The accused is placed under oath and must answer questions but is also allowed to put on a defense. It is under these circumstances Mr. Thompson seeks relief for the many women and indeed Americans harmed by Mr. Clinton's personal behavior.
But how did Mr. Thompson come to the conclusion that he must pursue this legal remedy? In reading Judge Starr's report to Congress Mr. Thompson became aware that Mr. Clinton had indeed lied under oath, attacked and harmed various women, and obstructed the very process of law he put into motion. Jack then decided that he must as an Attorney seek a hearing through the Arkansas Bar. His feeling is that no lawyer no matter how powerful should be able thwart justice. So on August 5, 1998 Jack Thompson filed a grievance with the Committee on Professional Conduct of the Arkansas State Bar Association. But how did Mr. Thompson come to the conclusion that he must pursue this legal remedy? In reading Judge Starr's report to Congress Mr. Thompson became aware that Mr. Clinton had indeed lied under oath, attacked and harmed various women, and obstructed the very process of law he put into motion. Jack then decided that he must as an Attorney seek a hearing through the Arkansas Bar. His feeling is that no lawyer no matter how powerful should be able thwart justice. So on August 5, 1998 Jack Thompson filed a grievance with the Committee on Professional Conduct of the Arkansas State Bar Association. He sited as reasons for the grievance perjury, subornation of perjury, witness tampering, and obstruction of justice. Then on March 1, 1999 amended his action to include the Broaddrick rape charge. Mr. Thompson along with hundreds of others have filed similar grievances against Mr. Clinton.
According to the records of National Organization of Bar Counsel, an organization of law professionals who regulate the professional conduct of lawyers in 60 jurisdictions in North America and Australia, there were no less then 4 cases where lawyers were disbarred or disciplined for similar conduct to Mr. Clinton's in 1998. These lawyers were either disbarred or given suspensions for harassment or sexual relationships with employees or clients. National Organization of Bar Counsel
Mr. Thompson is currently in the process of pursuing these various avenues of justice. He has also sought to speak to the 1999 annual meeting of the Arkansas State Bar to address his grievance and the subsequent lack of action on the part of the Bar's Committee on Professional Conduct. As of the time this essay was written, there has been no satisfaction in these cases. To the writers knowledge there has been no response to the grievances filed.
Jack Thompson can be reached at Jackpeace@aol.com
This article copyright © 1999 by Lyn Wilson and may not be reproduced in any form without the express written consent of its author. All rights reserved.