Free Speech? ... Or Bar Complaint?
"Sometimes, words are all we have, for f’s sake!…."
November, 2007, Roscoe J. Freespeecherman
Mr. Roscoe J. Freespeecherman here.
I overheard an update as to what’s going on with the Bar complaint concerning mean things written about Cheryl Aleman on this blog.
Some have expressed concern, not for the particular attorney under attack from the Bar, of course, but mostly for their own hides. See, most post anonymously here and resist calls to ‘grow a sack’ (as evidenced, apparently, by writing a person’s name after a post?) because the Bar will ‘mess’ with that person. Many thought the Bar complaint was dismissed after that Federal case came out in September declaring unconstitutional Michigan’s rules against attorney speech where that lawyer, Nels Fieger, had called a group of judges "Nazi’s" on a radio program. [a special thanks to Norm Kent for bringing that case to everyone’s attention. Here’s a link to the opinion for those interested]:
http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/Opinions/tarnowpdf/06-11684AJT.pdf
An odd practice of Cheryl Aleman’s was exposed here on the blog – it could have been presented many different ways. One is the dry, legal-analysis style, that lawyers apparently are not allowed to veer from. But how would that capture the public’s attention? And then, there’s the approach that was used here … that resulted in a Bar complaint 6 mos. later.
At a time when this blog was starting out, and not as well known as it is today, someone described the actions of this ELECTED political figure as those of an "evil, unfair witch"! Claims were made of "illegal behavior!" That the behavior "seemed mentally ill"! It even went so far as to use the terrible word….."malcontent"! ouch! (here’s the actual story itself:
http://jaablog.jaablaw.com/2006/10/30/judge-alemans-new-illegal-oneweek-to-prepare-policy.aspx)
Through the use of words alone, the writer got the message out to the public through this blog. Of course, immediately, Cheryl Aleman changed her policy to a normal one which fit within the Rules of Criminal Procedure.
6 months later, all is not going well for the clowns in power (or "used to be" in power) and they REALLY want to shut this blog up! One clown arranges to have some local Bar representatives attend a regular meeting. Shortly thereafter, the Bar files its ‘own’ complaint, saying a printout of the blog article arrived at their office ‘anonymously’ (but a lot of people know how it really got there).
In any event, Mr. Freespeecherman has found out that the Bar, after leaving this on the back burner for almost 7 months, now wants ‘final documents to be submitted’, and quick. Oddly, now that Cheryl is on trial, the Bar finally gave a late November deadline to ‘submit all items for consideration’. I heard Fred submitted that Federal opinion for the Bar to review. Mr. Freespeecherman is glad that speech was used to protect the right to a speedy trial, but I ponder deeper questions: What IS a witch? What IS evil? Can a Judge ‘break’ the Rules of Criminal Procedure? ETC. Why is the Bar even pursuing an outdated agenda when everyone knows the changes brought about by this blog are going to keep happening.
I, Mr. Freespeecherman, just an observer of course, but advocate for the right to speak freely, ESPECIALLY AGAINST ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (for f’s sake!) suggest you all down in Florida consider dropping the complaint. Doesn’t that judge have enough problems - with a JQC trial coming up for "impatient, hostile" behavior? And why give that attorney all that free publicity during the appeals for another thing? And, if he wins on appeal, doesn’t the Florida Bar have to pay his legal fees?
I’ll let you know more as soon as I find it out,
Mr. Freespeecherman,
Davenport, Iowa (Ron Paul ’08 !!!)
From the Michigan opinion: Quoting former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black,
the U.S. District Court noted:
"the assumption that respect for the judiciary can be won by shielding judges from
published criticism wrongly appraises the character of American public opinion. For it
is a prized American privilege to speak one’s mind, although not always with perfect good
taste, on all public institutions. And an enforced silence, however limited, solely in the
name of preserving the dignity of the bench, would probably engender resentment,
suspicion, and contempt much more than it would enhance respect." 314 U.S. 252 (1941)
Many good points ruined by a Ron Paul '08 mention at the end. Other than his position on the Iraq war (a good position for the wrong reasons), the guy is a reactionary nut with "medieval views" on a woman's right to choose and homosexuality (see Matt Tiabi's pieces in Rolling Stone for more info).
And again, why the secrecy and innuendo about who actually delivered the blog entry to the bar. There is no need to post your name to "grow a sack" -- just don't beat around the bush. If you "know" who submitted the materials to the bar, just say it.
Funny how judges rise to Aleman's defense but none rally behind Conway. Many of them know she was out of control, yet they circle the wagons behind her instead of behind the brave lawyer who called her out and is now targeted for using his free speech rights. SHAME ON THE JUDGES.
Simple equation even for Broward County Judges: You need to figure out that you must earn the respect of those appearing before you. It is not your God given right to serve as judge being paid by tax payer's hard "earned", there's that word again, dollars without understanding this fundamental rule. These positions are not yours to do with as you wish for life. You would do well to commit this to memory for the tide of change is enevitable and those that continue to act with what they feel is imunity are going to feel the consequences of public backlash. You are erroding the confidence the public has in our system of Justice through you arrogance and stubborness. Wake up to the future. Do your job well and dump all the personality disorders before beginning your job. Our courtrooms belong to the people of this state. This is America and you are a public servant. You are important to the system only insofar as the quality of your performance is concerned.
I am currently on trial before Circuit Court Judge Dava Tunis in courtroom 6-3. The Bar is seeking permanent disbarment in large part because I was critical of an Alabama Judge and a Miami-Dade Judge, the latter being Ron Friedman. Since my criticism of Ron Friedman, he has been whacked by the Third District for doing the same thing he did to me to another litigant.
The only purpose of the Bar in going after me in these regards is to punish me for my truthful, First Amendment protected speech about two questionable judges.
This blog has known about this Bar assault upon my and your First Amendment rights for quite sometime. Why the person who runs this blog here couldn't care less is beyond me, in that most of the criticism of judges here that is posted anonymously eclipses anything I have said about these two judges.
The recent decision by the federal court in Fieger v. Michigan Supreme Court exonerated Jeff Fieger and it exonerates me. I am going to gut The Florida Bar's speech codes which prohibit truthful speech about judicial corruption, and you all here need to get your heads out of the sand and care about this. Jack Thompson
I agree. It is one of the most important issues to be addressed. Judges can not be allowed to establish a tyranny over those wishing to express their opinions. We lambaste other countries and their leaders for attempting to stem free speech and the rights of their citizens, and what we see here is worse because judges feel like they can quash any criticism. It is wrong.
freespeechman rules
It could have been worse, it could have said Hillary Clinton at the end
As to the comments of wake up call at 9:12..... Bravo ! Eloquent, articulate and right on the mark. Could not have said it better myself. THAT is what this blog is all about.
Aleman should be removed. The only pattern that matters is cruelty. Taking kids from parents due to bus schedules, the aids guy, and 60 days for a atty.
Clowns to the left of me jokers to the right. Watch the JQC make this one go away toot sweet and then the civil boys will have their way and she's back to criminal
So reading the desciption of events it sounds like Brian Simon had nothing to do with the Bar Complaint. If true, then Sean be a man and say you were wrong for wrongfully accusing him. What was done to you was wrong but so was falsely accusing someone when you had no proof and not owning up to the mistake now that you know he had nothing to do with it.
little orphan annie should have to go to jail if she's found guilty. maybe then she might appreciate the egregious and immature nature of her actions.
Whoever the attorney is that is being hectored by The Bar in this regard, please call me asap at 305-666-4366. I have information for you as to the gross misconduct of the Bar in this regard that will be very helpful to you. Hang in there. By the way, see Justice Douglas' words in Lathrop v. Donohue. He predicts that integrated bars will eventually become "goose-stepping brigades" in pursuit of ideological agendas. "Judicial independence" is the biggest load of hooey ever. The Bar seeks to insulate the judiciary from all criticism in order to make sure it is "independent" from any responsibility, any democratic impulse.
Mindy please help. I just downloaded solitaire to my handheld. It is very difficult to win. Is there a way to make it easier like on a desktop? Thanks boss.
Brian, still making excuses? Give it up. No one believes you. Me thinks you protests toooooo much!
Sorry not Bri. This blog is supposed to be about opening things up and telling the truth. It is quite clear from the description given above by Sean that Brian had nothing to do with it. If I am wrong then Sean should come on here and clear it up
What description by Sean?
""Judicial independence" is the biggest load of hooey ever."
Couldn't agree more: notice how it only ever seems to cut one way?
Are any of the judges who are testifying for Aleman Ross people? Was there a deal in place for Aleman's vote? Is this why Seidamn is a character witness for Aleman?
I hereby relinquish the crown of the Barbecue King. I will not accept your nomination to be the next Barbecue King. Even though I just ran for Barbecue King in February, and it is only a few months into the 2 year term, and even though I still make the most succulent and tasty ribs, steaks, and loins in all of Broward (you are all weak, bush league wimps), I must step down due to health reasons. I don't want to be the Barbecue King anymore. Really. Honest. Ok. Maybe a little. But I can't. I love to watch you eat what I cook, but I have given too much of myself already. You don't know the sacrifices I have to make. The hours spent, late into the night, perfecting my secret sauce. The responsibility. And this has nothing to do with the twerps at Barbecue Sauce Magazine who say I have lost my touch. Absolutely nothing. You hear me? Nothing!
Seidman heard that Aleman was close with someone named Jesus so he figured it would help him gain favor with hispanics. Sadly he didnt know that Aleman's friend was called Jesus (Jee-sus) not (Hay Zeus).
lol!
yea go to jail--sure.u know how many rapes and murders a judge has to do before jail time.
the system is a joke and ross is the king
uh, correction. Aleman is on trial not for "impatient, hostile" conduct, but, rather, the formal JQC charges are for her "arrogant, discourteous and impatient" conduct.
And where does Conway write anything above? I see a speech from an Iowa patriot, and even that says "we know how the paper arrived at the Bar anonymously" - isn't that a reference to the fetus's handiwork himself?
to think Dave I thought you were clueless but you are correct Ross is still king. How is that sit in coming along. Still trying to attack the guy on here when rumor is that he doesnt even own a computer. You get em tough guy.
as an aside - if the Bar dropped the complaint, their rule could 'live on' and possibly fight another day.
As it stands now, however, that Michigan Federal case puts rule's life in jeopardy.... Lawyers Have Free Speech Rights too (for f's sake)