OFF THE HOOK?

Laura Watson's bar complaint is kaput.  Yes, a finding of probable cause was made on October 22nd, found here, however that's as far as it's going to go.  According to Ken Marvin, Director of Lawyer Regulation for the Florida Bar, no formal complaint will be drafted, because a prosecution cannot be concluded before Watson dons her robe.  Come January, when Watson takes the oath, the Bar loses jurisdiction, well before the standard six months usually allowed for discovery and hearings in bar proceedings.  If Watson ever becomes a lawyer again the Bar could then proceed with the complaint, but at this point in time Watson is free and clear.

The next obvious question concerns JQC jurisdiction.  Marvin didn't know the answer, and we don't know yet either.  In the interim however, please enjoy David Crow's Final Judgment, the document that started all the fuss in the first place ...

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
Page: 1 of 3
  • 11/15/2012 6:12 PM Skip wrote:
    I find all of this really disgusting. There were people in the Broward legal world who knew a probable cause finding had been made against Watson. Yet, the info was not released. That is either because some law, statute, rule, whatever prevented dissemination of the information, or because someone made a judgment call (excuse the pun) to not release the info. I'd like to know which occurred, because this whole thing has a very suspicious odor around it. But before I say anything more, I'd like to know more about why the probable cause finding was not made public until after the election.
    Reply to this
  • 11/15/2012 9:26 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Skip

    Call judy stern she was the brilliant campaign strategist for julio. Interesting that lots of dirt got out about julio yet his campaign couldn't get one media outlet to write about the judgment and bar complaint on Watson.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 9:09 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Let me get this straight. All a lawyer has to do to evade a slew of ethical allegations is become a Judge? Sounds fishy to me.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 9:18 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Seriously, how could Julio not have addressed this information in his campaign? There are facts here, this is not a smear since it is all true.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 10:34 AM Ask Julio wrote:
    Or his campaign manager why they didn't bring any of this out in the campaign.

    I got mail from Julio during the August election but nothing in the general (although I voted absentee both times).

    Given how close the race wound up being, how does Julio not at least spend some small $$ on getting out the facts on this -- Robocalls for a few weeks (cheap), or emails (cheap). Or if the group that did the newspaper ads for him had the money for a big front pager in the Sun Sentinel, how do they not have some space in the ad about his opponent's supposed ethical lapses.

    Given the larger than usual hispanic turnout in Broward (the Obama folks really did some good work there, especially in SW Broward), how could Julio not get 50%+1 with this huge albatross for Watson.

    What a joke of a campaign.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 12:05 PM Fish wrote:
    Nah, if that were true then Bobby Nickols would have gotten in as one. Too bad Bobby, don't cry Bobby, theres plenty more clients that will rub you in lieu of payment.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 1:11 PM RRA wrote:
    Maybe Julio didnt bring it out because by doing so it would shed light on some issues he didnt wants attention drawn too, i.e. Rothstien.

    Before people whine, Julio did nothing wrong at RRA, not saying he did. As we saw with Lamberti, being associated with Rothstien, even if you didnt do anything, was not good this election cycle.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 1:12 PM TAKE THE TIME TO READ IT wrote:
    I took the time to read Judge Crow's opinion which is thorough and well reasoned. The opinion undeniably paints Laura Watson as a knowing participant in clearly unethical and reprehensible conduct as an attorney involving breaches as to her clients and to co-counsel.

    So now Laura Watson is a Broward judge. Aint that just too perfect to be true? The Bar no longer has jurisdiction? The JQC likely will not because the conduct occurred before she took the bench?

    I really encourage you to read Judge Crow's full opinion. Un-freakin' believable as to what she is getting away with. Nauseating.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 1:19 PM AND BY THE WAY .... wrote:
    Judge Crow referred this matter to the Bar in 2008. The date of the probable cause finding is October 2012. Four years ????????
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 2:04 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Does Nichols work for Watson? He and his secretary are listed as attorneys on her web page.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 2:05 PM Gonzalez wrote:
    Initially I supported Gonzalez, but then I found out he was a huge Allen West supporter. As a woman I had concerns that he liked that whack job West. I think Watson was the lesser of two evils, but now regret voting for her. WEst is what did Julio in
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 2:05 PM Gonzalez wrote:
    Initially I supported Gonzalez, but then I found out he was a huge Allen West supporter. As a woman I had concerns that he liked that whack job West. I think Watson was the lesser of two evils, but now regret voting for her. WEst is what did Julio in
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 2:07 PM Wholeeoh wrote:
    I have more dirt on me, thats why.

    http://redbroward.com/2012/10/15/why-is-a-republican-judicial-candidate-paying-judy-stern-chris-smiths-mom-joe-eggelletions-brother/
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 4:40 PM Judge Rothstein wrote:
    Scotty was stupid.
    He should have run for Judge when things got too hot. The black robe is the ultimate protection.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 5:01 PM In re inquiry Speezer wrote:
    http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=1984788445So2d343_1778.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 6:43 PM just starting just wait wrote:
    First, the Bar put it's investigation on hold until the civil case was decided by WPB circuit and the 4th DCA. That is why so much time has elapsed from the initial complaint to the prob. cause finding.
    Obviously, the JQC can and undoubtedly will assume jurisdiction for the pending Bar violations. If, by becoming a judge all Bar violations were forgiven upon being sworn-in then any judge-elect could commit aggregious Bar violations from November 7 through December 31 and all would be forgiven on Jan.1st at the swearing in? Be serious.
    I give her until late summer or fall at best when the Supremes say adios.
    If one needs any more enlightenment on the powers of the JQC regarding judges who violated bar rules then took the bench, see JQC v. Irwin Berkowitz.
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 8:59 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Speculate all you want, but when you see her, remember its Judge Watson to you.

    No matter what, Julio will never be a Judge. Have no fear, stop by traffic court or the elevators on the 3rd floor to join the Julio pity party.

    I wonder why Nevins and others in the press focused mostly on Julio's problems while little or nothing was discussed about Watson's alleged judgment problems?
    Reply to this
  • 11/16/2012 9:48 PM SpeezertheGeezer wrote:
    Speiser has been a crook for a long-time now. Always greasing the palms of his supporters, friends, and psychiatrist girlfriend. He is the Mental Health Judge? What a laugh! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Geez Speez! What a total loser!
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 12:58 AM Anonymous wrote:
    If the BORG/BAR/JQCNOEVIL let Speiser rat out clients and still become Fudge Speiser, Watson is safe. Reading the complaint all she did was scam a bunch of lawyers. They weren't even clients. Know what I mean?
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 1:15 AM Hail Hairy wrote:
    Cardinal Gibbons himself couldn't fix this mess.
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 11:11 AM Skip wrote:
    I have yet to receive any information on how "public" Watson's probable cause order became. Did Julio, et. al. Know about it? Did anyone here know about it? What is the process by which such an order becomes public information? E.g., is it posted on the Florida Bar site?
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 12:51 PM Overheard wrote:
    Beller talking to friend about running against Singhal ala Carlos Rodriquez. What is wrong with this guy? Doesn't he have better things to worry about
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 6:09 PM Rumor Has It wrote:
    Laura Watson has a lot in common with Lisa Trachman. What or who do you suppose that is??? Something tells me it will all come out soon...
    Reply to this
  • 11/17/2012 11:18 PM dear skip wrote:
    Everything is a public record, the hearing date, the pc ruling. It is not Julio's fault, he needed to be focused on campaigning, its the fault of Judy Stern his campaign manager. Stern knew how to find the bank to cash Julio's checks, too bad she couldnt do a basic public record request to the Florida Bar.
    Reply to this
  • 11/18/2012 12:52 AM Julio wrote:
    Julio living the life of a Rothstein ex pat
    Reply to this
  • 11/18/2012 1:03 AM Why wrote:
    Did Julio spend all his$
    Reply to this
  • 11/18/2012 11:43 AM hokeysmokey wrote:
    I thought one had to be a lawyer to BE a judge and if at the time of the complaint she got convicted and lost her card then he judgeship would simply be voided.
    Reply to this
  • 11/18/2012 2:26 PM Anonymous wrote:
    Now that the election is over how many of the candidates (winners and losers) helped supply turkeys to feed the hungry?
    Reply to this
  • 11/18/2012 10:21 PM Give a Turkey please wrote:
    2:26 pm:
    I was wondering the same thing during this election. How many of these candidates will give turkeys to the poor?
    When someone runs for judge they should publicly state how many turkeys they will give to the poor. Also, they should state whether the turkeys are fresh or frozen, and whether they are providing stuffing. I think that judge candidates should hold turley dinners for the poor at their own homes. They should have those fresh yeast rolls too.
    Candidates should not just think of themselves, they should think of turkey.
    Reply to this
  • 11/19/2012 11:32 AM Anonymous wrote:
    @ 10:21 why did you bring up judges? Did you get the big GOOSE again on election day?
    Reply to this
  • 11/20/2012 6:04 PM Not so fast Ms. Watson... wrote:
    Bob Norman did a very revealing report on Channel 10 last night about Laura Watson's problems with the Fla Bar. More to come he says... It is far from over. Here is the link on the internet. http://www.local10.com/news/blogs/bobnorman/Is-Judge-Elect-Laura-Marie-Watson-fit-for-the-bench/-/3223354/17484684/-/nwx6b1/-/index.html
    Reply to this
  • 11/20/2012 7:11 PM emuna wrote:
    You should only know what the bar had to say about the nova law students (now lawyers -- including those who work for the state, like berki alvarez and carrie sarver) who put hidden webcams in someone's room and bathroom, broke into cars, bugged cell phone calls, and even had a teacher wired and bugged. (a lot of it is on the website www.soundclick.com/hewantstobealawyerwhenhegrowsup .)
    Reply to this
  • 11/26/2012 11:04 PM Jack Thompson wrote:
    Apparently you haven't read the JQC v. Berkowitz opinion very carefully. The JQC takes a look in that case at misconduct by Berkowitz as an attorney only because it provides the context for his misconduct in running for judge and in misrepresenting certain matters to the JQC. It's clear, if you took the time to read the opinion, that they would not have acted if this had just been about what he did as a lawyer. Duh.
    Reply to this
  • 4/8/2013 8:43 PM Anonymous wrote:
    How can you say Lamberti didn't do anything. He will be arrested for all the things he didn't do.
    Reply to this

Page: 1 of 3
Leave a comment

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.