The Bar and JQC have much in common ...Laura Watson, Pro Se litigant - despite the negatives we've heard concerning her demeanor on the bench, we've taken a liking to Laura Watson.
For starters, she's representing herself before the JQC. Whatever they say about having a fool for a client may sometimes be true, but just as often can produce surprisingly good results at both the trial and appellate court levels. It's also pretty much a given that such proceedings are a hoot to watch, as the prosecution and tribunal often end up losing their collective cools before such cases limp across the finish line.
This one has all the earmarks of a good old fashioned slugfest. Watson has already called into question the cozy relationships between JQC members, and by extension the motivations behind the prosecution. Apparently, many of the members are former Florida Bar honchos who may also share business interests, and Watson wants to know just how tangled up everyone is in order to file Affidavits To Disqualify against her inquisitors.
From the Motion Re Rule 25 Affidavits:
Without a disclosure of the relationships between the members of the Hearing Panel, the Investigative Panel, the Special Counsel, and the potential witnesses and interested parties, a financial or regulatory nexus between the JQC and the private persons acting on the Commission's behalf cannot be determined ...
There's also a Gardiner& Scheinberg reference found later on, just in case anyone up north can't figure out which way this one is headed. Additionally, the plucky Watson has demanded that the JQC come to her via this filing, the aptly titled Demand That All Hearings Be Held In Broward County - TheCounty Of The Judge's Residence.
It's going to be a bumpy ride, and another fascinating glimpse behind the curtain of JQC secrecy, already badly ripped and tattered following the very public Bar v. Gardiner fiasco ...
55 Days And Counting ... - Wednesday marks the 55th day since our response to the Bar. Thus far, not a peep has been heard back from the lawyer police. They still haven't cited a single rule that's been violated, noted a single repugnant word, phrase or photograph, or said who made the complaints.
As everyone knows, Bar questions are focused on reports concerning Marni Bryson and Bobby Diaz. But is it safe to assume they actually are the ones who complained? Despite Diaz's refusal to answer Bob Norman's questions, we have to believe it wasn't a judge after all.
Why?
Because the Bar's own guidelines on judicial referrals say so. Those rules are found in Standing Board Policy 15.91 - Policy on Judicial Referrals and Complaints, published in their very own training manual, starting on page 57.
From Standing Board Policy 15.91:
Regardless of how judicial referrals come to the attention of the bar, this policy codifies how the information should be handled ... Standing Board Policy 15.91 requires bar counsel to communicate with Judicial officers when they refer matters to the Bar. The initial communication should include whether the Judge wishes to be the named complainant or whether the Judge wishes to remain anonymous. If the choice is anonymous, then the file is opened with TFB as the complainant. This will require some tailoring of the 15 day letter since the respondent will not be receiving the referral letter. Instead, the 15 day letter will contain a recitation of the facts as alleged in the referral, and will require respondent to respond to those allegations. (Emphasis Added)
Of course, to this day, the Bar has not recited any facts or allegations, and as previously mentioned, they haven't bothered to cite any broken Bar rules. The "15 day letters" went out January 30th (Bryson), and February 13th (Diaz). Accordingly, the complaints couldn't have come from a judge, unless the Bar violated their very own codified rules. And that just couldn't be possible ... right?
Hold on!- Ilona Holmesgot bashed by the Fourth DCA last week, after refusing to allow an IC Defendant to wear street clothes during trial. One thing that wasn't reported however, was the State's main evidence, recorded JAIL CALLS, which reportedly found him confessing to a bunch of messed up things from the Broward County Jail. Sure, the guy should have been allowed to don one of the wrinkled, ratty, ill-fitting, non-matching relics from the PD's donated thrift rack, but it's not like the jurors still couldn't have figured out his home address all by themselves after hearing the calls. In any event, you can be sure the Defendant will be well dressed at his upcoming new trial, unless he can convince a judge to allow him to appear in his birthday suit, which just might lead to a third reversal ...
Gomez v. Milian - Al Milian has a fight on his hands. Mary Gomez, a family law practitioner, has filed in the 11th Circuit open seat which Al had previously filed for. Now it's a two person race. Additionally, you can add Donnie Goodwin to the list of Broward lawyers mulling a run in 2014. It's too early to tell whether he's going for an open seat or against a sitting judge, so stay tuned ...
Coming Soon - Catching up with the Bar's Lorraine Hoffman.
BBeat: Lawmakers Will Get A Pass On Lying About Residency
"I don’t mince words: State Reps. Joe Gibbons, Jared Moskowitz, Hazelle Rogers, Perry Thurston and state Sen. Maria Sachs are liars."
Herald: Florida Bar won’t file ethics charges against Lewis & Tein