Prostitution-arrests Web site draws fire from ACLU

The Asheville Police Department’s new online Police Blotter, which publicizes prostitution arrests, has come under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina.

The Raleigh-based group challenged the practice in a March 6 letter to Assistant City Attorney Curt Euler. “With regard to the posting of arrestees’ names and photos on the police blotter and on the government-access channel, it appears that this practice violates the arrestees’ right to be free from punishment prior to conviction,” Legal Director Katherine Parker wrote.

“Based on our discussion yesterday, it appears that the purpose is punitive and therefore unconstitutional,” the letter continues, referring to a phone conversation with Euler. The ACLU also takes issue with the Police Department’s practice of sending postcards to the owners of vehicles seen making the rounds in areas known for prostitution. “In addition to the concern that this program imposes punishment on these individuals … we have concerns that this practice violates individuals’ fundamental right to travel,” the letter notes.

The correspondence concludes with a word of advice: “We strongly recommend that you reconsider implementation of these programs.”

Click here to read the letter, which has just been added to The Xpress Files.

And see a more in-depth report in the March 19 issue of Xpress.

— Rebecca Bowe, contributing editor


Thanks for reading through to the end…

We share your inclination to get the whole story. For the past 25 years, Xpress has been committed to in-depth, balanced reporting about the greater Asheville area. We want everyone to have access to our stories. That’s a big part of why we've never charged for the paper or put up a paywall.

We’re pretty sure that you know journalism faces big challenges these days. Advertising no longer pays the whole cost. Media outlets around the country are asking their readers to chip in. Xpress needs help, too. We hope you’ll consider signing up to be a member of Xpress. For as little as $5 a month — the cost of a craft beer or kombucha — you can help keep local journalism strong. It only takes a moment.

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

86 thoughts on “Prostitution-arrests Web site draws fire from ACLU

  1. Rob Close

    Well done, ACLU! That letter was solid. I’d really like to hear an argument from the other side of this debate – because I just don’t understand how we allow this travesty to continue. Innocent until proven guilty people – and no punishment or deterrents until that guilt has been established by a court. It’s just that simple and obvious.

  2. Hurrah, ACLU! It might be legal to publish the names of those who’ve been arrested, but it is moral? These people are tried and convicted in the court of public opinion long before they ever see the inside of a courtroom.

  3. According to the premise that justifies publicizing prostitution arrests, ALL arrests for any alleged civil or criminal offense should be similarly publicized. No trial, no cross-examination, no right to confront the accuser, to right to defense, no presumption of innocence. Just publicize.

    This is how the government turns from protecting individual rights to becoming their chief violator.

  4. Johnny

    Thank goodness for the ACLU, always willing to march in and speak truth to nut-job ideas like this one.

    Selective publication of arrests for certain crimes (much like APD’s idea of notification to cars’ owners if their car was seen in a “bad neighborhood” — you naughty Tacoma!) is anathema to most American’s ideas about state power.

  5. Al

    I cringe when I see some of the practices of Police departments in this area. It seems like they try and recruit people with absolutely NO common sense. There is no grey area. Everything is black and white to them. Someone at the local Police academy needs to teach a course on “common sense when dealing with the public” Not only does this policy choose to punish someone arrested, it also opens up the PD to civil action. What if someones name is published and they are found not guilty?..The persons name is ruined in the community, and that can’t be erased. I’d get a lawyer if I were in that situation and sue the living heck out of the PD involved! Some of the things I’ve seen Policemen in this area do makes me shake my head, especially the Highway Patrol.

  6. lokel

    I can think of one potentially positive outcome of posting the girls photos online …. it’s sort of like advertising: now we can look on Hogans Heroes web page and see who the hookers are and that way we can recognize them when we drive through the south side seeking service!

  7. Actually, this has been done for decades in Asheville. I used to enjoy looking for the names of people I knew in the paper. Where was the ACLU then?

    And it’s effective, the shame factor… if anyone’s stupid enough to patronize street ladies (who are less than glowing examples of feminine glory), then it should be noted. As a friend of mine once succinctly put it as we passed a somewhat scuzzy professional lady on the street, “I wouldn’t touch her with yours.” … pretty well sums it up.

  8. Jimbo

    Why is it that the Raleigh based ACLU takes issue with the very same program in Asheville which is in place in the Raleigh area and has been for some time? And where is the ACLU when newspapers like this one, have printed news of arrests prior to conviction for years? Could it be that Asheville now has the unhappy reputation for being such a haven for pointless criticisms and whining that we’re shipping self serving idealogue chest thumpers from outside the region now? As if we didn’t have enough already.

  9. Rob Close

    regardless if it’s been done for a while…
    regardless of whether it’s effective…
    regardless of whether it’s fun to read..
    it’s still wrong to punish before conviction.

  10. Rebecca Bowe

    Hi Ralph and Jimbo: Not coming down on either side of the debate here, but I did want to point out (in case you hadn’t seen it) that in the ACLU letter, they do make a distinction between newspapers publishing arrest info and the police department doing so. According to their analysis, when the police department does it, it serves as a punitive measure, and that is why they take issue with the practice.

    Also, FYI all: There is a longer version of this story appearing in today’s Xpress, which also includes the reactions of the assistant city attorney and the spokeswoman for APD. This was just a quick blog post to announce that the letter had been sent.

  11. brebro

    But what if you are not breaking the law and you just seem to be?

    A friend of mine once spotted his former girlfriend who he had broken up with on account of her also being his maid but not cleaning up any longer and she was wearing a provocative getup when he drove up to her and she leaned in the car window because he wanted to make up by offering her the cash for maid service that she claimed he owed her and just then a police car pulled up behind and arrested him for soliciting prostitution when it was really all just a comical misinterpretation.

    Okay, that didn’t really happen to a friend, but I did see it on a Seinfeld episode. But one time this friend of mine was wearing a coat from a play and an old ladies hat that he found while walking with a cane and ….

  12. Aasvogel

    Rob Close,

    You say “it’s wrong to punish before conviction”.

    Do you believe that being held in a jail cell constitutes punishment?


  13. shadmarsh


    It is not the job of law enforcement to enforce morality…but perhaps Tim is correct in his above statement.

  14. Dionysis

    So, in the spirit animating this discussion, who would be in favor of publishing the names, addresses and badge numbers of police who violate citizen’s constitutional rights, or who apply their own brand of legal interpretation based upon their personal political, racial, etc. bias?
    While there are some out there that evidently feel the police should just be “left along to do their job,” without any oversight (much less ‘shame’), the fact is that people in law enforcement are no different than people in other jobs. Some are excellent, many or mediocre, some are bottom-of-the-barrell. If we’re going to use ‘shame’ as a public policy tool, let’s go all the way.

  15. “You’re missing the point of why this is done, Tim. … It’s not legality, it’s morality.”

    It is not immoral to be not guilty; as all those arrested are, by law, presumed to be.

  16. Jimbo

    I’ll be happy to accept all the unfair punitive exposure I’ve got coming to me if I should ever get arrested while I’m innocently trolling around at 2am asking “how much” to some unfortunate wretch with a history of arrests for prostitution. I’ll even accept the harsh treatment in the event I ask an undercover cop the same thing in the course of my unsanctioned socialogical experiments. What I won’t accept is the notion that civil liberty and freedom are synonymous with anarchy.

    True freedom and liberty require a responsible level of respect for the freedom and liberty of others. If in the course of expressing their freedom, some people feel they need to bring their filthy habits to our public streets and the very doorstep of some neighborhood residents, they don’t get to complain about their rights being deprived. If they can keep it in their own living room or hotel room, then knock yourself out. You make it someone else’s problem, then I’ve got a right to expect you to get pinched for it. It’s an often forgotten or avoided law of the universe. Stupid can be painful.

  17. Jimbo

    Oh, and by God I’ve got the right to public government information. I happen to want to see which sickos are getting arrested for these and other crimes. Are you so called civil libertarian chest thumpers suggesting I should be deprived of my right to view this information on the internet? I applaud the APD for making it more accessible.

  18. “If they can keep it in their own living room or hotel room, then knock yourself out.”

    I take it then that you support the legalization of nonviolent voluntary exchange between consenting adults?

  19. “Are you so called civil libertarian chest thumpers suggesting I should be deprived of my right to view this information on the internet?”

    Yes. You should be deprived of violating the individual rights of others.

  20. Shadmarsh, upholding laws is upholding morality… it is the job of the police to enforce the that part of morality which has been legislated into our codex of laws … the outing of johns has, traditionally, been done by the papers and not the police… I grant that the way it’s done now is new but it’s not necessarily wrong.

  21. Clocky

    What about locking people up before they’re convicted? It happens frequently (including for non-violent crimes).

    Is that an example of punishment before conviction?

    Would you do away with that as well?


    Perhaps the concept of innocent until proven guilty is a concept that the self-righteous neo con Mr. Roberts cannot grasp.
    Publishing the names of persons arrested pretrial, is repugnant to the entire foundation of the legal system as it was originally intended,
    The publishing of names pretrial has been the impetus for thousands of motions granted for a change in venue.
    If the accused is innocent , or possibly set up, publishing the name, damages an individuals rights and liberties immediately in addition to tainting a potential jury pool.

    Mr. Roberts is indicative of the vast number of self-appointed guardians of the race with egg upon their face.
    The very concept that the statutory fraud contained in the laws of the State promotes morality is ludicrous.
    Problem is, most of these corporate 501c3, pseudo Christians, fail to realize that THE LAW IS THE TEN COMMANDENTS and those laws that are delineated in Leviticus, not the corporate BY laws of the corporation of THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Inc, which are written to deceive those who do not understand legalese. God deceives no one

    If laws are written to deceive, THEY ARE NOT MORAL and are inheritably evil themselves. Heck THIS STATE will soon have laws regulating your water, is this moral? Perhaps the very self-righteous Mr. Roberts would like to read Matthew the 23 rd chapter as to how lawyers who are statutory creatures, IE trained statutory chimpanzees, use the vagueness and complexity of CODE TO DECIEVE AND BURDEN PEOPLE.
    Jesus says woe 17 times to lawyers, if Mr. Roberts thinks statutory law, which is made, by lawyers for lawyers is moral then he is 10 fries short of a happy meal, which is obvious.

    In short, the statues of North Carolina are based on deceit. Incidentally, the laws that the little people have access to on line, are mere evidence of the statutory law, the real law is kept in the State archives and in some case differs vastly from the true legislative intent of the law, which is being misapplied in this state. A prime example would be the Motor vehicle code

    Statutory law and code is inferior law to the common law, the common law being inferior to treaty law and treaty law being inferior to the laws of Yahweh

    People like MR Roberts are what I call Romans 13 corporate Christians They think the government is ordained of God. If they took the time to read the translation in Greek, they might know, this is not what the apostle Paul was saying.
    These morons cannot understand how Paul, who was jailed BY Rome. could never think the Roman government was ordained of God, as it killed thousands of Christians including him.
    These same morons point a finger at others whilst they have a fist full of fingers pointing back at them.
    The same ones who cant answer questions, they deal in heresay evidence and convict people before due process runs its course


    So I see you couldnt answer any of the points I made and either could your second Mr Elliot.
    Those who speak and accuse others without evidence bear false wittness.
    By the rule of law silence is equated with fraud> iI you cannot refute my contentions, then the prima facie evidence is that an unrebutted statement stands as the truth, so you by default agree to all I said, being the truth.
    Thank you Ralph

  24. Chris

    What is the difference between this and the police blotter report that appears daily in the ACT and other papers? Everyday you see in the paper that someone was arrested and charged. You hardly ever see the results of that persons trial posted in the paper. Why are you holding APD to a standard that is not required of the media? Arrests are public record. If you really want to know what happened to someones charge find out from Clerk of Court. It isn’t the responsibility of the city nor is it the responsibility of the media to post someones verdict or plea.

  25. Rob Close

    interesting questions. imho – we shouldn’t be locking anyone up before arrest unless they pose a clear and present danger to others. that’s the sort of society i’d like to live in. because keeping people locked up is a punishment, which should be minimized prior to conviction…does the law agree with me?

    well, for those of you who actually read the .pdf that this article linked to, i’m sorry for the repetition, but i’d think so, and because…”Under the Due Process Clause, a detainee may not be punished prior to an adjudication of guilt in accordance with due process of the law.” – U.S. Supreme Court.

    and yes, if you break the law, there should be consequences. but cops don’t make the final decision, judges do.

    and if that’s not enough – just re-read whatever tim wrote up there. excellent responses, i couldn’t agree more.

  26. “What about locking people up before they’re convicted? It happens frequently (including for non-violent crimes). Is that an example of punishment before conviction?”


    Yes, it is.

    1. The law requires a speedy trial because it recognizes that pre-trial detention is tantamount to punishment.

    2. The courts allow a defendant to post bail and be released from custody because it recognizes that pre-trial detention is tantamount to punishment.

    3. On occasion a defendant will be found guilty and sentenced to “time served.” This is a recognition on the part of the court that pre-trial detention is tantamount to punishment.


    Tim and Rob cogent points.
    However, let me issue a side bar here. There is no Federal writ of Hiatus corpus ad subjiciendumr, pre trial, which means the Federal government, can hold a defendant indefinitely while they await trial. The Federal Writ is only permitted post conviction which defeats the real purpose of the Great Writ, so essentially no due process remedy exists on the Federal Level, nor has existed since 1948 when all Article 3 courts in the United States were done away with by the creation of United States District Courts which essentially destroyed the real Federal Courts which were the District Courts of The Untied States.
    Research now proves it seems that the Great Writ is only available after you have played in the Administrative world with Motions to Dismiss prior to a trial (no Habeas Corpus), then the 2255 AFTER sentencing with one shot with the 2255 MOTION with second shots using 2255’s Motion extremely limited. THEN, and ONLY THEN with very extremely limited controlled situations after the 2255(s), you MIGHT get PERMISSION get to file a real Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum.
    This is beyond Treason by Congress and the President of the United States if true as I see now. Been testing and this follows unfortunately. This was implemented in 1948 with the new USDC that exercises no judicial Power of the United States and there is no provision in the Federal Constitution for any such court (USDC) in the several States.

    All State Habeas common law writs are converted to statutory motions to the court.
    Try and do a writ of Habeas on a friend and you might be charged with the unauthorized practice of law.
    In short, due process in this country is long gone, all the blind flag waving in the world can bring it back.
    Look how many people on this site didnt even know this information until I just posted it
    Again, U.S. citizens operate under delusions, which have nothing to do with real facts. Essentially due process in this country was done away with along time before Bush drove the final stake in the heart of freedom with the patriot acts
    I blame 501c3 churches and schools for encouraging blind nationalism, while for the last 70 years the republic has been destroyed systematically, and the American people are so dumb they have no idea that it has even happened.

    I also blame Lee Greenwood for that dumb song Im proud to be an American, which brings the morons out every Fourth of July and evokes false nationalism instead of responsible constitutional patriotism
    If people really loved America they would read the constitution and demand an immediate constitutional convention, and immediately file charges of treason on Congress, THE BAR association, as well as start impeachment proceedings.
    Don’t hold your breath it will never happen, 53% of registered U.S. voters don’t even know who the vice president is.
    Expecting the American people to wake up and take back the republic is like expecting Forrest Gump to do Brain surgery

  28. Jimbo

    “Should I be deprived of my right to view this information on the internet?

    Yes. You should be deprived of violating the individual rights of others.”

    Here is the unbalanced quasi civil libertarian argument again in all its glory. The rest of us are only entitled to the rights and liberties that you agree we’re entitled to. In what manner of logic is my right to view public information from the source rather than reading it in a for-profit newspaper violating the individual rights of anyone?

    Many of your posts that others may not agree with and may feel are completely ignorant can equally be considered a violation of our individual rights for having to view them in this forum. That doesn’t deprive you or the wordy individual who’s becoming tiresome to scroll past of the right to post them.

    Based on you’re position that incarceration before conviction is also a violation of rights, it does seem you are also at odds with our country’s constitution. This would suggest evidence that the hypocritical notion of protecting the individual rights of one at the expense of the rights of others is not so much a plead for anarchy, but a desire for some deranged dictatorship where there is no rule of law and individual rights are determined by the nearest mob.

    As for exchanges between consenting adults, this goes back to my earlier comment. If someone’s unlawful action truly never becomes someone else’s problem, then it’s not a violation of other’s rights. While the law may be broken, in those situations the law and others never know.

    Now I hope this doesn’t start the big brother conspiracy talk again or the bit about selective laws on drugs etc. As evidenced repeatedly, if someone can’t keep their unlawful acts entirely within their own sphere of influence alone, they’re going to get busted. Otherwise nobody would know or care about it. If you want to walk around half baked or drunk in public all the time that becomes someone else’s problem to deal with too doesn’t it.

  29. Rob Close

    “In what manner of logic is my right to view public information from the source rather than reading it in a for-profit newspaper violating the individual rights of anyone?”

    It’s a violation of their rights that you still have the right to see it. It’s legal, but that doesn’t make it right. You’d want to be able to see it – but do you want us all to see it the day you’re wrongfully arrested?

  30. Jimbo

    First, none of these people have been wrongfully arrested under the law. And the fact that people are arrested is public record under the law. This the what happens in an actual society with any kind of law and order. People that recognize what living in a society means also understand that what applies to one should apply to all. It’s only the irresponsible hypocrites in our society who believe the law should be selectively applied.

    Believe it or not, there still are a few people among us who expect the standards of law and order to apply to them as well as the other guy. It’s these people who quitely live among us and actually respect the rights of others without being forced to or having to get pats on the back for it who contribute to a society. Unfortunately many citizens of this country are more and more filled with some over inflated sense of entitlement and egotism that leads them to believe that the law applies to everyone but them. They find fault with our society’s established laws and law enforcement until the day when they need protection themselves.

    These are also the people who genuinely believe their ill conceived notions of law and rights are somehow treading new territory. They are often selfish, egotists, who have little appreciation for the society they live in because they have never genuinely contributed to the creation of the benefits they enjoy on a daily basis. They contribute little, leech resources, and thumb their nose at the system that grants them the ability and the right to do so.

  31. Johnny

    Jimbo, you wrote:

    “none of these people have been wrongfully arrested under the law.”

    And you know this how?

  32. Jimbo

    Because they can legally be arrested for engaging in the act of solicitation, and in the case of those arrests, they were nailed in the process. Under the law they can also be arrested with less evidence than that. If a court dismisses the charge or finds them not-guilty, that does not find them innocent or change the fact they were engaging in illegal activity at the time of arrest. If a cop storms into your home without a warrant and hauls you in, that’s another matter.

    The sentiment of some posters is rather scary in that they seem to suggest anyone, anywhere at anytime is not subject to arrest or any other law unless they are arrested with blood on one hand and a gun in the other in the middle of a crime, or if they’re captured in the act on hi-def video tape with a really good closeup and the whole scene is complete on one tape with good lighting. Of course then it’s camera trickery.

    The rule is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not presumed harassed and deprived of civil rights as long as anyone can say they might be innocent. I just hope those expectations are agreeable when the crime is in front of your house, or involving you or a member of your family. That’s the real test, the rest is just talk, posturing and hypocrisy.

  33. Johnny

    I agree with much of what you say, Jimbo, but this sentence here is a bit much:

    “If a court dismisses the charge or finds them not-guilty, that does not find them innocent or change the fact they were engaging in illegal activity at the time of arrest.”

    I’m fine with arresting people who are legitimately suspected of doing illegal things. Not a problem with that.

    Your confidence that all people arrested are arrested properly, and then further suggesting they were guilty even if innocent is what I was commenting on.

    The puritanical attitude that we should be focusing on this particular violation to be taking public with photos and such is what irks me.

    Why not focus on white collar crime, or those suspected and arrested for major violations of erosion control measures in developments?

  34. Jimbo

    I’d agree with you as well. I’m not at all suggesting that the innocent are never arrested, or that anyone is proven guilty by virtue of their arrest. I’m just bringing balance to the extreem other end of the spectrum.

    The law must be allowed to function in any society. And it’s a reality that those tried for a crime are never proven innocent under the law, only deemed not guilty by a preponderance of the evidence. The law assumes innocence until PROVEN guilty, but that does not grant immunity from arrest. If it did, nobody would ever be arrested, proven guilty and held accountable for anything. I suspect that’s the kind of ultra liberal anarchy many radicals think they want, though it couldn’t last more than a few days before complete collapse.

    While their may be puritanical undertones to these kind of crimes. That doesn’t change the facts that they are crimes, making the information of these arrests more readily available is a deterrent, and these particular arrests are hardly suspect in the wider scope of law enforcement.

    I think the same could be done with drug arrests and white collar crime if they are the result of sting operations/caught in the act as these are.

  35. Roger Chillingworth

    Why stop at publishing arrestees’ names and photos? Let’s lock them up in stocks in the town square so everybody can throw rotten vegetables at them.


    The majority of my post was concerning Habeas Corpus. If you knew anything about the constitution you would know Habeas is the ‘Great Writ and is inextricably linked to every individual’s right to Due Process..

    I am for returning this sick nation to the constitution Jimbo, which will restrict government to 17 functions.
    What about this concept I stated, smacks of anarchy?

    I apologize for the length of my posts, but legally documenting things like the loss of Habeas, is like writing a mini brief, perhaps you should titrate and increase your Ritalin dosage, which might lengthen your ability to concentrate.
    Perhaps you wish to reconsider your inane statements.

    This is the truth of the matter Jimbo ole boy ,virtually no sworn evidence exists in the majority of criminal cases; Pre Trial, certainly statutory criminal procedure is not being followed.

    1. When an individual is arrested, they must be taken before a magistrate immediately, this rarely happens. The officer then must file an affidavit of probable cause, or a criminal complaint. That affidavit must contain in the jurat the phrase Under Penalties of perjury, most complaints or affidavits, never have this, therefore,these affidavits, like in the Nesbitt case and the Popcorn Sutton case, are simply defective, pursuant to 389 F.3d 901UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-AppelleDante VARGAS-AMAYA, Defendant-Appellant No.50577UniteStates Court of Appeals, and Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted June 8, 2004.
    Filed November 22, 2004.

    2. The Vargus decision is landmark.Hitherto this case, law enforcement officers, have had a loophole in having any liability in the filing untruthful affidavits, with the Vargas case, this returns law back to the true intention of the fourth amendment.

    3. Both parties, the officer/ complainant and the accused, must appear at the same time before the magistrtare.The accused, then has a right to cross examine his accuser, know the nature and cause of the action against him and see the evidence against him, as well as, directly depute evidence before a magistrate, who then makes a judicial determination based on evidence, that probable cause exists, to the issue warrants, orders for arrest, orders of incarceration etc. Again, this never is allowed to happen, as I just delineated.

    4. The magistrate, is then required to seal the orders up and immediately send it to the Clerk of Court, so that the paperwork can be certified and a seal of the court then be affixed on it and that it may be clocked in properly and tagged, this again never happens, as the magistrate sends the paperwork directly to the DA.

    Essentially Due process has not existed in the nation in along time, as it has been replaced by policy and statutory schemes.

    I think the points Tim Peck made were spot on. I hope this post wasn’t too long for your attention span. I could sense you do not know what you are talking about like most here. Rob and Tim were spot on and I applaud them.
    You however are a different story; maybe you were drunk when you wrote your diatribe.

  37. shadmarsh

    You might want to reconsider your strategy of changing peoples opinions by telling them how stupid they are…just a thought.


    Shadmarsh Perhaps you are correct. I have a difficult time understanding how people can be so dense, I guess its not their fault, after all they are victims of mind control, via television and most have frontal lobe lobotomies because of fluoride ingestion.
    Let me run this past you If I might

    There are those who post here, who actually believe that State law is written to encourage moral and ethical behavior. How could anyone but a Romans 13 501c3 corporate Christian make such a ridiculous statement?
    Does THIS STATE care about your health and your well-being and that of your family?
    After all ShadMarsh THE STATE is involved in Gambling and the distribution of Drugs and alcohol. How moral can they and their puny little corporate By laws, which are repealed and revised annually when ever it suits their greedy little purposes, really be?

    Look at Popcorn Sutton under constitutional common law, he would be innocent, he has not harmed anyone except that he makes better LIKKER than most licensed distillers. His crime is he did not pay Homage to the evil I.R.S. by paying revenue tribute, Sutton’s crime is he is competing with the Fed.s cash cow IE monopoly. What is the difference between the government and the Mob, please tell me?

    If Chad Nesbitt wishes to gamble on his own private property, whom is he hurting? His crime is that the State has a monopoly on gambling, their State licensed casinos destroy the lives of far many people, then a little card game on a Sunday afternoon between a bunch of good ole boys in Leicester.

    If a man enters into an agreement with a woman for sex, what business is this of the States? The State is not concerned about morality or ethics in this situation, they merely use age-old human foibles to insert themselves as a third party intervener in a bilateral contract between a man and a woman. They do not care about either party, they simply see an opportunity to raise revenue, THE LOVE OF MONEY.

    If someone grows Marijuana for medicinal purposes or even recreational use who have they injured?
    Hemp, one of the most useful substances on the planet Earth, was outlawed by the States, because it interfered with corporations like DuPont who made synthetic rope, it also interferes with the states drug cash cow alcohol. Henry Ford made his first car entirely out of hemp products and it was indeed fueled by Hemp oil
    Actually Under the 1947 Marijuana act, it is not illegal to grow it, if you pay the tax on it and you have an affidavit in place stating you are the “intended user” of the substance. Hemp was outlawed not because the State is some benevolent enmity concerned with Public health and morality, it was outlawed because of greed and corporate lobbyists/.

    My question is Shadmarsh how is it that we have these Government loving idiots on this site who are a microcosm of a large numbers of self-righteous brain washed people, who see the state as an extension of the laws Of God.
    God did not outlaw Gambling, Hemp. Opium or even prostitution except in the case of adultery.
    Why is it that we have these Pseudo Christians moron Southern Baptists running around supporting a government that has placed its self above God and his laws?
    There are approximately 700 plus laws in the Bible in federal code alone we have over 50 million.
    These corporate Christians would do well to remember the Man said you could not serve two masters; most of these so-called corporate Christians serve two masters, which cannot be done.
    Most of these flag waving government-loving pseudo Christians would do well to read this Bible warning about government, which follows.

    1Sa 8:11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
    1Sa 8:12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
    1Sa 8:13 And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
    1Sa 8:14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
    1Sa 8:15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
    1Sa 8:16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
    1Sa 8:17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
    1Sa 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
    1Sa 8:19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

  39. shadmarsh

    To quote Alvy Singer, it’s been nice chatting with ya, but I’m due back on planet Earth now.


    Over your head I see.Sorry I wont affect your low level thought energy again

  41. Rob Close

    i think it’s worth noting that the police blotter was never updated after week 2. those people arrested on 1/22 and 1/29 have had their faces up there the whole time, and nobody else has been added. or am i missing something?

  42. Jimbo

    Does that mean he’s not going to continue spamming this topic and seek professional help? Good illustration of the point though. As annoying and disturbing as this guy is, his right to cut and paste lenghty gluts of internet spam into any discussion that exceeds 4 posts is protected. Lucky for these kind of people especially that they live in a country that grants them the rights to develop such inflated egos and imbalanced sense of superiority without being thrown in a looney bin.

    The constant irony is that while continually ranting against the law, these are often the very people that make courts react to quick and force the law to encroach on everyone’s rights in an effort to protect society as a whole from the radical behavior of mildly or severely imbalanced individuals who fancy themselves self appointed saviors of the human race.


    First I do not cut and paste, except to post law excerpts
    As far as me being antilaw, you have not got a clue. I contend that the law is NOT being followed, what about this picture do you not grasp,? This is what my posts are about. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? WHAT GRADE LEVEL DO YOU READ AT?

    People like yourself are dyslectic simpletons. You would not know the law, or your rights if they hit you over the head.
    You are too busy following your governmental programming to even see, when someone is telling you the truth about a matter.

    Ill again, make an attempt at reason, like I did with Ralph, who seems to be afflicted with the same ignorance factor as yourself, as he couldn’t dispute with facts or anything I said either

    What about my post concerning the loss of Heabus Corpus do you feel is incorrect? Do you even know what Habeas Corpus is? Do you even know what correct Due Process is, as delineated under the constitution? If you did, you would be agreeing with me, as my post on Due Process was taken directly from the constitution, and correct criminal statutory law.

    Unbelievable!! You and Ralph are a prime example of why this nation is going to be history, not only do you not know your rights and the law, you then malign others that do! Incredible! Only in the land of the fee and the home of the slave could such things happen.
    This is why little hope is left, pearls before swine

  44. Heh, heh… you know if a one word definition for “incredibly verbose pomposity bordering on the incoherent, sprinkled with pseudo legalities, and rife with unproved, unfounded, and downright silly conspiracy theories” is ever called for, it would be “Dr. Antineoconus.”

    Yes, I realize “Dr. Antineoconus” is actually two words, but I believe the immediate consensus among authorities would be to make an exception in this case because everything else so precisely fits.

    I believe you would also be awarded a gold star for straying off topic so consistently.


    Still cant address the issue with facts can you Ralph?
    Can you read?? this case proves all that i said.
    Ralph I really feel sorry for you, what an empty little man you are.
    Read the case if you can which i doubt
    I dont make case law the 9th circuit does maybe youd like to argue with them.
    Filed November 22, 2004.

  46. ah… and the concept of ‘civility’ appears to be foreign to your nature as well.

    THIS is what happens when one hides behind anonymous posting — ill-natured and generally illogical piddle and twaddle.

    Your anonymous, overly wordy posts, sir, are aptly described by Macbeth in Act V, Scene V of the play by the same name:

    “…it is a tale
    Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
    Signifying nothing. …”

    I leave those lines by the immortal Bard as saying it far better than ever I could.


    Letter from the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Foundation (ACLU-NCF) to Assistant City Attorney Curt Euler regarding the Asheville Police Department’s publicity of arrests for prostitution and solicitation and postcard notifications for vehicle owners. (March 6) (127 KB)

    Letter from the ACLU of NC to the Asheville City Attorney’s Office regarding posting photos of prostitution suspects online on an APD web page. (127 KB)


    The points you made in this blog were right on track, the price you paid for making constitutional sound statements, was criticism by the sheep people, the same as I received
    To use the words of Eli Cohen, this blog is a mote in the eye of God.

    You said the Police do not have the authority to act as judicial officers, therein, lies the rub Tim.
    Police are not judicial officers, they cannot summons anyone to court, least of all, make any legal determination about anything, including probable cause. Police under the fourth amendment deal in the concept of “reasonable suspicion”, probable cause, is a judicial determination made by a Magistrate at the primary level, the clerk of court, or a Judge.

    Most people think Police decide what probable cause is, THEY DO NOT, why is this?
    The answer is simple, the founding fathers set up a legal system, which corrected the abuses that had occurred in medevil England, in which the Police, played the role of accuser, judge, jury and executioner.

    The fathers wished to fix this usurpation of power, so they created the office of magistrate.
    The magistrate being a impartial judicial officer who literally made a determination of probable cause, based on the sworn evidence from the complainant, the magistrate, also allowed the accused, to present evidence and confront his accuser, in a mini pretrial evidence hearing. The system was designed specifically to prevent the Police from violating Due Process rights as we now see the Jack Boots in APD doing.

    They, the Police, have returned to medevil England where they play an increasing role in making legal determinations, which they cannot. Police cannot be called as legal witnesses in court or give a legal opinion’s about anything, why, because they are legal idioso’s , a legal term in Black’s law that applies to anyone untrained in the law.

    The role of the magistrate is being bypassed completely today, this why the case load is so heavy, as defective cases are being brought into court by moron cops and prosecuted. Incidentally Police cant bring tort actions into court, just like they cant summons anyone to court, they are members of the executive branch at best.

    The points you made were correct and of course the morons jumped on you for it
    These are the same morons who think Ron Paul is crazy, because he is a strict constitutionalist and points out things like the Federal Reserve is not Federal and the IRS does not exist in Federal law and that so called Federal income tax goes to pay the interest of the national debt, instead of funding government functions.

    You are in the Land of Oz here Tim, surrounded by idioso’s. I just wanted you to know that I appreciated you standing up for the constitution, against the herd of swine that criticized you.
    Forgive them they haven’t got a clue. Notice how, though, that those that want a Police State use the name of the Lord to justify it. Very interesting indeed

  49. Rather than fight this I’m for calling their bluff because any self respecting businesswoman can use free advertizing from the city and clients have nothing to hide either and might as well get tested since they are now published anyway. They went head over heals over advertizing of gangs but nobody ever thought that the city could be providing the whole community with something akin to a sexwork yellow pages? I’m all for the list so that sexworkers and clients can simply look each other up online as a city service!! It sure beats their harassing every female hitchiker in town and wasting gas in the process.

  50. Joe S.

    I live on South French Broad Avenue. I see people walking up and down the street all day that “could” be up to something. In reality not one individual has ever done or said anything out of line to me. I don’t care if the newspaper publishes this stuff; that’s their job. I do care that the government feels it can publish the names and pictures of these individuals without said individuals having their day in court. Find them guilty, then the government can do whatever it pleases with their identities. It’s the oldest proffesion in the world, it’s not going anywhere. Make it legal and make it safe….problem solved. I’m so fed up with people like our very own RALPH ROBERTS feeling that because they have a certain moral stance, everyone else should fall in line.

  51. The anti-prostitution laws that burden our community are bad laws. They prohibit peaceful, voluntary exchange, and cause most of the evils currently associated with prostitution. As with most of our bad laws, and we have many, the efforts of the APD to stamp out something that has been going on since the beginning of human society, and has been tolerated and even celebrated for long portions of it, is being handled in a way that violates civil liberties, and encourages the sadistic demonizing of their targets. If this city really wanted to stop the “prostitution problem”, if they wanted to really get these women off the streets so their precious snowflakes wouldn’t be traumatized be seeing them, they would legal it so that the workers, these entrepreneurs, could open brick-and-mortar places of business, out in the open, with full protection of the law. They won’t do this, of course, because our city, like most of human society, is run by a bunch of morally cretinous neurotics.


    Your points are well taken. Persons like MR. ROBERTS inc are hypocritical little gods who run around usurping the job of God, by passing moral judgments on people. Roberts and other pseudo, corporate, religious Pharisees, have been told by none other than Jesus , that “he who is without sin let him cast the first stone”.

    Either MR. ROBERTS is GOD or he is breaking a commandment of Jesus Christ himself, as most pious 501c3 corporate, religious, charlatans do. When these hypocrites cant Judge and throw stones personally, they then support a corporate Para military organization like the Police, who under the guise of statutory Roman civil law, use the complaints of government loving neocons, like ROBERTS, to engage in their own brand of prostitution.
    Let me give you an example of how the entire judicial system is one big WHORE HOUSE inc.

    The cops are the pimps, their job, is NOT to protect and serve anybody (except the State and the corporation they receive a paycheck from) their job, is to get as many coporate “PERSONS” into the WHORE HOUSE/COURT HOUSE as possible, through quotas and incentives and then, to get that person/ Defendant, to contract with a legal WHORE.
    Once the cop/ pimp gets the hapless RESI….DENT inc inside the walls of the Bordello, the Judge who then enters the court room, in a black dress, playing, the role of the Madam. The JUDGE / MADAM, then makes sure the hapless victim/ defendant gets a legal WHORE, who is played by an attorney. An attorney’s primary obligation, according to the Corpus Juris Secondum, is to the court and his fellow BAR card brothers. The interests of his client means nothing, he is simply an expeditor, whose job is to move his client (who is referred to by the BAR as a legal idiot) in and out of court as quickly as possible for the sake of money. Translation, an attorney is a WHORE, whose primary obligation is to the MADAM, the Judge, whose primary focus is then to collect as much revenue for the courts as possible, who are mere corporations listed on Dun and Bradstreet. This is corporate Justice, that people such as ROBERTS like.

    Incidentally Judges get 15 % of all citations, which go into their retirement fund, don’t believe me, ask them in court, they wont answer you.
    Mr. ROBERTS and people of his Ilk, by playing the judgmental role of GOD, simply use one whore to Judge another whore, when no criminal act has occurred.

    In order to have a criminal act you must have an injured party, this is the common law concept of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

    The entire judicial system, which resides in a COURT HOUSE, right down the street, in the case of Asheville, is indeed, a much bigger WHORE HOUSE, than anything found on French Broad or Lexington Ave’s. The Corporate WHORE HOUSE courts are then run by a bigger WHORE HOUSES inc called the church, which are then run, lock stock and barrel by the IRS, the biggest WHORE of them all!

    Translated, “he who is without sin let him cast the first stone”
    What about this does Roberts and the moral right, playing the role of God, NOT understand?.
    Or said better, they are, “blind dumb guides leading others into a ditch”. Self appointed guardians of the race with egg upon their face.

  53. gee, Joe … thanks for putting my name in all caps.

    I think you’re overreacting a bit here… of course we ALL fell everyone else should ‘fall in line’ with our particular beliefs … obviously this will not happen.

    However, it IS my right to point out when I see things moving in the wrong direction… and I do, I might add with a lot more humor and elegance than many.

    And I find myself also in agreement with Johnny Lemuria. The oldest profession is not going away any time soon. Still, if you go against the ‘morality’ of the community, people WILL note it, whether through the media, police reports or whatever. This, too, will not change any time soon.

  54. This bears repeating, Dr. A.:

    Your anonymous, overly wordy posts, sir, are aptly described by Macbeth in Act V, Scene V of the play by the same name:

    “…it is a tale
    Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
    Signifying nothing. …”

    I leave those lines by the immortal Bard as saying it far better than ever I could.

  55. “I leave those lines by the immortal Bard…”

    I disagree, as I expect most would, with your facile and oblique, schoolyard tit-for-tat third-party criticism. I think it is quite clear whose posts are more indicative of “nothing.”

  56. shadmarsh

    I think most people would probably agree with Ralph on this one.

    Dr.A just needs to mention the Masons, and he will have hit the loony trifecta. If he does (hint hint Dr. A) I think we should all chip in for some kind of award, something in the sandwich board variety would do quite nice I think.

  57. no, no Tim… Dr. Antineoconus is MUCH more verbose and vapid than your posts.

    At least you have the guts to include your name and photo. We can only surmise what the ‘Dr.’ looks like. I was, however, looking at an electron microscope scan of a virus the other day … put a mustache and scraggily sideburns on it and that might approximate Dr.A. … if he wants respect, let him post under his real name and –as both you and I know, Tim– even then, it’s not assured.

    I call for this board to ban anonymous postings… the real name boards I belong too are much less free of strife and much more informative since people don’t post just any kind of nebulous claptrap.




    This might be asking a little much of you but perhaps instead of snide juvenile ad- hominem attacks, you might like to specifically point out which statements about the legal system I made, that you do not agree, or you feel are factually incorrect
    I know it is easier for you to play in romper room with RALPH ROBERTS and use his infantile methodology, BUT BE NOTICED THAT WHEN YOU DO, YOU COME OFF AS PETTY AND DEVOID OF CONTENT AS HE.
    Easy to play the loony card and portray others as being OFF as a way of covering up your own ignorance on the subject matter

  60. shadmarsh

    All of them…I believe you are mistaking volume for content. Besides there is nothing I, or anyone, could say to you that would prove you wrong, as you are already convinced of your arguments infallibility.




    Im not surprised that the bloggers missed a key paragraph from the ACLU’s counsel in this matter about sending post cards, to the owners of vehicles that were seen in these “high Crime areas.

    Please notice how the ACLU counsel refers to the over 600 cases on the “Right to Travel” which is a RIGHT not a privilege.
    Once again the State has lied to the sheep people. Traveling upon the highways in ones private automobile is a fundamental right not a privilege, the ACLU is correct in this matter .
    Here is the quote by the ACLU.

    The ACLU also takes issue with the Police Department’s practice of sending postcards to the owners of vehicles seen making the rounds in areas known for prostitution. “In addition to the concern that this program imposes punishment on these individuals … we have concerns that this practice violates individuals’ fundamental right to travel,” the letter notes.

    The State does not want the sheep people to know they have the right to travel without a driver license in a non commercial capacity, this has been decided Res a juda cota by the Supreme court at least 300 times.
    Driving is not travel, driving is a commercial activity as defined in USC TITLE 49 and this excerpt from
    USC Title 18 section 31 (6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every
    description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn
    by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the
    highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and
    property, or property or cargo.
    (9) State. – The term “State” means a State of the United
    States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth,
    territory, or possession of the United States.

    (10) Used for commercial purposes. – The term “used for
    commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property
    for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or
    directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other
    undertaking intended for profit

    For those of you wishing to deal with your programming BY the State, when it lied and told you that driving is a privilege, here is an excellent legal article that cites the cases, proving the States have forced you into a commercial driver status, thus depriving you of the right of non-commercial travel.

    This is interesting when viewed in the context of the REAL NATIONAL ID CARD, which is your Federal Driver License. Click the link and catch the STATE in another lie. How are you people dealing with your programming thus far….. UMMM??
    Here is the proof you’ve been programmed and lied to once again

  63. The reason not to bother complaining about this on a civil rights basis is that postcards and websites are not punishments, just a waste of taxpayer dollars and paper, which is the basis on which it should be challenged, fiscal and environmental, dollars and paper. Prostitutes, and perhaps johns, ARE materially punished though, and that is the civil rights violation, not the cards and websites.
    Besides, the website will actually help prostitutes find more business.


    I was advised not to post this by a good friend , who simply thinks that people are too ignorant to understand the importance of this article.
    While I agree, there are still 13% of the population that have a brain, this is for them.

    Needeless to say not one Judge in the entire State of North Carolina has an Article 6 section 7 constitutinal oath of office, which means we have no judges in this State.

    Miami Attorney Jack Thompson Beaming over Quo Warranto lawsuit
    Seeks judgment of ouster against Judge Dava Tunis for bad loyalty oath

    Miami, Florida, 26 March 2008 – People oppressed by scoundrel judges who also do not have valid loyalty oaths on file, TAKE HEART. Miami Attorney Jack Thompson has just announced today’s filing of his Quo Warranto Petition with Chief Judge Farina of Florida’s 11th Judicial Circuit. The petition challenges the right of Judge Dava Tunis to use the title “Judge,” to sit on the bench, and to collect a paycheck.

    Thompson is well known for his campaigns to stop rap artists from purveying CDs with prurient lyrics to children. And now the big money of such wealthy opponents and the legal support they buy influence complaints about Thompson to the Florida Bar. That led to the efforts to disbar him. The Florida Supreme Court assigned Tunis as the referee assigned preside over Thompson’s disbarment proceedings. Thompson sought to have her disqualified because of her apparent prejudice against him.

    Thompson investigated and obtained an expert witness who will testify that Tunis allowed someone to forge her signature on the loyalty oath required by Florida Statute 876.05 and United States Code Title 4 sections 101 and 102.

    Thompson seeks a judgment of ouster in accordance with Chapter 80 of the Florida Statutes if the Tunis cannot prove her right to hold office and the Quo Warranto challenge succeeds.

    Additionally, Thompson discovered that Tunis did not have a valid oath on file at the beginning of her current term. The governor had appointed her, but failed to require her to swear the 876.05 and 105.031 oaths prior to allowing her to start performing duties or collecting pay.

    According to Clearwater, Florida legal researcher Bob Hurt, Thompson has used against Tunis most of the legal attacks consequent upon her failure to swear proper loyalty oaths. In the summer of 2006 Hurt unearthed a massive loyalty oath scam initiated by operatives of Governor Jeb Bush during his first term in the year 2000. Someone in the State Department at that time ordered the removal of the jurat from on-line election forms. That rendered the forms null and void because The US and Florida Constitutions require the oath, US and Florida laws require the jurat on the oath form. “Jurat” means the place where a notary or other acknowledging officer signs and seals the document.

    The jurat gives serious importance to the candidate and loyalty oaths required for appointment and election candidates by Florida Statutes 876.05, 99.021, and 105.031, and to the public officer’s oath for elected and appointed officers as required by Florida Constitution Article II Section 5 and U.S Code Title 4 Sections 101 and 102. Additionally, all elected and appointed officials must first become registered voters and swear the elector’s oath, and all judges must first swear the bar oath and become bar members for 5 years.

    Without the signed and sealed jurat, a person cannot prove having sworn the oath – it could have been signed by a spouse or friend for all anyone knows. So, the People of Florida, through the legislature, require the jurat. The missing jurat means none of the elected officials who swore the required oath between 2000 and summer 2007 can prove they swore it, and therefore, they did not qualify for office.

    Furthermore, AFTER the election and “swearing in,” or after hiring, all public employees in Florida must swear the 876.05 public employee’s loyalty oath again, this time as an employee rather than a candidate. The missing jurat at the beginning of the current term means elected and appointed employee cannot lawfully perform duties or accept pay.

    Thompson might become entitled to special compensation for blowing the whistle on Tunis. By accepting compensation while not qualified for office, Tunis owes all that money back to Florida’s Chief Financial Officer. Thompson has already asked Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum to file a Qui Tam action against Dava Tunis as authorized by Florida Statutes 68.081-68.090, known as the False Claims Act. McCollum will probably refuse to do it, and so Hurt expects Thompson will eventually file the Qui Tam lawsuit himself. The False Claims act entitles him to a 15% whistle blower reward.

    Thompson’s strategy could have prevented him from blowing the whistle on Tunis too extensively, according to Hurt. “Jack lucked out by obtaining the evidence that her oath is a forgery,” said Hurt. “This puts Dava Tunis in a unique category of people with invalid oaths. In reality, none of the officials elected or appointed since 2000 have a valid candidate oath. That includes the Governor, Attorney General, Supreme Court justices, legislators, State Attorneys, County Commissioners, Sheriffs, Tax Collectors – in short, everyone. Most of them probably signed their oath documents, even though a notary did not notarize them, and most likely no one forged their signatures. But because they are all culpable for their failure to have an executed jurat on the oath forms, they will be incriminating themselves by supporting Thompson’s effort to get Tunis tossed for not having a jurat on hers. However, the alleged forgery puts Tunis at serious risk of losing her job as a result of the Quo Warranto lawsuit against her,” Hurt added.

    Hurt claims that every elected and appointed official without a valid candidate oath, public officer’s oath, and public employee’s oath on file for the current term has guilt for violating three criminal statutes of Florida:

    876.10 and 837.012 – 1st degree misdemeanor – False swearing and perjury outside an official proceeding (for swearing they had qualified when they had not)
    839.18 – 2nd degree misdemeanor – Taking office before qualified
    843.0855 – 3rd degree felony – obstruction of justice by impersonating a public officer

    Hurt published his research and analysis of the issues to his Lawmen mailing list, and put documented the collection in an e-book entitled Loyalty Oaths in Florida. It reposes at the web site for all interested parties to read.

    Thompson faces an even more serious issue that came to light during Hurt’s research, and that others had complained about earlier. As a result, Hurt has encouraged Thompson to take the matters to federal court so as to challenge Florida’s form of government.

    Hurt believes the government of Florida does not constitute a republic as guaranteed to the people by Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution for the USA, for two reasons:

    The failure of Florida’s elected and appointed officers to have valid loyalty oaths on file serves as a fundamental destruction of the Florida Republic because Florida has no duly constituted government – every elected and appointed officer is an imposter; and
    The action Florida Supreme Court to make the Florida Bar part of the Judicial Branch of government.

    “In 1949 the Florida Supreme Court absorbed and integrated the Florida Bar with the court, making the Bar and all its members also members of the Florida judiciary,” Hurt claimed. Article II Section 3 of the Florida Constitution prohibits members of one branch of government from working in any other branch. “It makes exceptions of the Attorney General and State Attorneys, but it shouldn’t,” Hurt continued. “Furthermore, Bar members infest every branch of government. Assistant State Attorneys, General Counsel for agencies, other staff attorneys, and about a third of State Senators and State Representatives are lawyers who belong to the Florida Bar. That explains why Florida’s Bar and the Supreme Court have such immense power, and why they represent such a threat to good attorneys like Jack Thompson,” Hurt said.

    According to Hurt, the US Department of Justice should come down hard on the government of Florida for tolerating a judicial oligarchy and using it to abuse the people and minimize the other branches of government, and Thompson might function perfectly in bringing the issue to the DOJ and U.S. Supreme Court. “Jack has the motivation, the professional need, and the raw lawyering skills to push this issue all the way to the top,” Hurt said. “He won’t do it now because he first has to obliterate the efforts to disbar him. If and after he prevails, maybe he’ll accept the challenge,” Hurt added.

    Jack Thompson has complained about the irregularities of the Bar’s operation because it does not function as an actual part of government. It hires attorneys to persecute other attorneys instead of using the State Attorneys. It conducts secret meetings and its officers pretend that the public has no right to access its records. And it unduly influences lawyers in all branches of government by pushing political agendas, even to the legislators who are lawyers. Attorneys have complained that they do not want their Bar membership fees used to further a political agenda. Bottom line: since the Bar is part of government, it should behave that way, but it really should not comprise an official part of government because in doing so, it violates the Florida and US Constitutions.

  65. southern B

    hey the police academy is AB Tech talk with them, they break the rules there too.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.