Bar's website claim anonymous complaints are acceptable but renders this complaint a nullity, as they refuse to provide status or identify the assigned file number. After spending a few hours on the phone to (800)826-8625, I have heard from multiple underlings on the authority of Althea K. Welsh, Esquire, that the “bar” refuses to identify the file number or name of the attorney assigned to the Barack Hussien Obama complaint unless the complainant reveals their identity. In other words while they allow for anonymous complaints they won’t provide any information on the results of a complaint filed in that manner. Obviously, this is an illogical policy as it renders anonymous complaints of no effect, if they are not accountable to give the status of the complaint they could just as well have put the complaint in the garbage. Therefore, I need someone to volunteer to provide their name to the bar and/or refile the complaint in their name. Please feel free to use any of the material I have developed. Also, additional charges should be added as identified below.
New violations:
1a. For attempting to raise money online by offering the chance at something of value(plane travel package) Obama's fundraiser, distributed via Internet inside Colorado, said, "If you make a donation of $5 or more between now and midnight on July 31st, you could be one of 10 supporters chosen to fly to Denver and spend two days and nights at the convention, meet Barack backstage, and watch his acceptance speech in person. Each of the ten supporters who are selected will be able to bring one guest to join them." State law violation Illinois:
(720 ILCS 5/28-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 28-1)
Sec. 28-1. Gambling.
(a) A person commits gambling when he:
(1) Plays a game of chance or skill for money or other thing of value, unless excepted in subsection (b) of this Section.
1b. Federal Violation
Title 39, United States Code
Section 3005. False representations; lotteries
(a) Upon evidence satisfactory to the Postal Service that any person is engaged in conducting a scheme or device for obtaining money or property through the mail by means of false representations, including the mailing of matter that is nonmailable under Section 3001(d), (h), or (i) of this title, or is engaged in conducting a lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme for the distribution of money or of real or personal property, by lottery, chance, or drawing of any kind, the Postal Service may issue an order that --
(1) directs the postmaster of the post office at which mail arrives, addressed to such a person or representative, to return such mail to the sender appropriately marked as in violation of this section, if the person or the representative is first notified and given reasonable opportunity to be present at the receiving post office to survey the mail before the postmaster returns the mail to the sender;
(2) forbids the payment by a postmaster to the person or representative of any money order or postal note drawn to the order of either and provides for the return to the remitter of the sum named in the money order or postal note; and
(3) requires the person or representative to cease and desist from engaging in any such scheme, device, lottery, or gift enterprise.
2a. Posting a copy of his alleged Birth Certificate on his campaign website, when in reality it is a computer graphically altered image of Maya Kassandra Soetoro, his half-sisters’ authentic birth certificate.
720 ILCS 5/17-3(a)(2) provides, in part:
A person commits forgery when, with intent to defraud, he knowingly makes or alters any document apparently capable of defrauding another in such manner that it purports to have been made by another or at another time, or with different provisions, or by the authority or one who did not give such authority.
2b. Engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Brainstorming needed
We may suspend/withdraw the current Bar complaint then resubmit with additional charges if anyone can post here or email me any known additional charges, so the bar investigates all of them at once. Please state any additional basis for an investigation so that we can advise the bar of and cite the factual basis and sources if possible. Thanks.
Need volunteer to be spokesman/PR guy
Please email me your email address and facts about your "street cred" ie how do I know your not unable to pursue this matter to conclusion, an obama supporter ect.
email facts1ste@gmail.com
email facts1ste@gmail.com
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Verified delivered
If there are images in this attachment, they will not be displayed. Download the original attachment
Page 1
Date: 07/23/2008
don brown:
The following is in response to your 07/23/2008 request for delivery information on your
Certified item number 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708. The delivery record shows that this item
was delivered on 07/23/2008 at 02:32 PM in CHICAGO, IL 60601. The scanned image of the
recipient information is provided below.
Signature of Recipient: (T. Butler)
Address of Recipient: (130 Randolph)
Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional
assistance, please contact your local Post Office or postal representative.
Sincerely,
United States Postal Service
Page 1
Date: 07/23/2008
don brown:
The following is in response to your 07/23/2008 request for delivery information on your
Certified item number 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708. The delivery record shows that this item
was delivered on 07/23/2008 at 02:32 PM in CHICAGO, IL 60601. The scanned image of the
recipient information is provided below.
Signature of Recipient: (T. Butler)
Address of Recipient: (130 Randolph)
Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional
assistance, please contact your local Post Office or postal representative.
Sincerely,
United States Postal Service
Letter to Illinois State Bar Association
facts1st@gmail.com
July 15, 2008
Kenneth G. Jablonski, Clerk
Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission
One Prudential Plaza, 130 East Randolph Drive, Suite 1100
Chicago, Illinois 60601-6219
RE: Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire
Admitted December 17, 1991
Rec # 358694732
Dear Mr. Jablonski:
Please accept the enclosed documents as our official complaint
against Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire. I would appreciate the
Commission contacting me at a phone number or email address which I
will provide you with at a later date. In order to preserve
confidentiality, I propose using the code of [redacted], so that the
Commission may notify me in writing of its decision whether to
investigate. That way I could use the code to secure the file number
in case I needed to direct any questions to the Commission lawyer who
handled my request.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
Sent 7/18/2008, via us mail electronic certified label # 70062150000225270708
CONFIRMED SENT and DELIVERED
Search Results Label/Receipt Number: 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 2:32 PM on July 23, 2008 in CHICAGO, IL 60601.
July 15, 2008
Kenneth G. Jablonski, Clerk
Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission
One Prudential Plaza, 130 East Randolph Drive, Suite 1100
Chicago, Illinois 60601-6219
RE: Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire
Admitted December 17, 1991
Rec # 358694732
Dear Mr. Jablonski:
Please accept the enclosed documents as our official complaint
against Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire. I would appreciate the
Commission contacting me at a phone number or email address which I
will provide you with at a later date. In order to preserve
confidentiality, I propose using the code of [redacted], so that the
Commission may notify me in writing of its decision whether to
investigate. That way I could use the code to secure the file number
in case I needed to direct any questions to the Commission lawyer who
handled my request.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
Sent 7/18/2008, via us mail electronic certified label # 70062150000225270708
CONFIRMED SENT and DELIVERED
Search Results Label/Receipt Number: 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 2:32 PM on July 23, 2008 in CHICAGO, IL 60601.
Actual Bar Complaint, as filed
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke
BAR COMPLAINT
1. Please note below what Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire admitted to
and why any reasonable person would conclude that what he did or
failed to do was improper according to the rules and ethical standards
established by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary
Commission.
Filed July 22, 2008
In re Barak Hussein Obama
Commission No. ___ CH __
Synopsis Of Complaint and Recommended Report
NATURE OF THE CASE: a) making a statement of material fact in
connection with a bar application that the applicant knows to be
false; b) committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the
lawyer's fitness to practice law; c) engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; d) engaging in conduct
prejudicial to the administration of justice; and e) engaging in
conduct which brings the courts or the legal profession into
disrepute.
RULES DISCUSSED: Rules 8.1; Rule 8.4(a)(3); 8.4(a)(4); 8.4(a)(5) of
the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct and Supreme Court Rule 771
SANCTION: Disbarment
Filed July 22, 2008
BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD
OF THE
ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION
AND
DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION
In the Matter of:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA,
Attorney-Respondent,
No. ________.
Commission No. ___ CH _____
EVIDENCE
The Respondent first admitted illegal drug use by disclosing it in his
book, Dreams from My Father. Obama, Barack. Dreams from My Father: A
Story of Race and Inheritance. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1995. In
that book he admitted, "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow
when you could afford it. Not smack, though." pp. 93–94. The
Respondent knew that his activities were illegal. The drug use
occurred from as early as high school at least until he completed his
bachelors degree in New York City. He entered law school in 1988,
living in and traveling in Somerville and Cambridge. He graduated
from law school in 1991.
In about early 1991, Respondent submitted his application to take the
Illinois bar exam, in which he attested that his answers to the
questions were true and correct. In the Character and Fitness section,
questions 18 and 19 included the following statement:
NOTE. In connection with your answer to questions 18 and 19, you are
advised that no statute, court order, or legal proceeding withholding
adjudication, expunging information from any record, sealing any
record, or purporting to authorize any person to deny the existence of
occurrence of any information or matter shall excuse less than full
disclosure of any information or matter otherwise required to be
disclosed herein. You must answer questions 18 and 19; the attachment
of letters from law enforcement agencies in lieu of an answer is not
acceptable. Information provided in response to one of the two
questions need not be reported in response to the other.
18. Have you ever, either as an adult or juvenile, been cited,
arrested, accused, formally or informally, or convicted of any
violation of any law other than moving traffic violations.
In response to question 18, it is understood the Respondent answered
"no." The Respondent did not disclose his multiple drug use occurring
through his time in high school and college.
By this time in his life he was very mature and sophisticated person
that he either did or should have given a great deal of consideration
to his response to question 18 a great deal of consideration. He has
not disclosed if he consulted with anyone, such as Illinois attorney
Michelle Robinson(later his wife) before answering the question.
On December 17, 1991, Respondent was admitted to the practice of law
in Illinois. At no time prior to his admission to the Illinois bar,
did Respondent apprise the Illinois Character and Fitness Committee of
his involvement in illegal drug activity. If he had been caught he
likely would have been charged with criminal possession of a
controlled substance in the fifth degree which is a class D felony.
New York Penal Law Sec. 220.06 (McKinney).
The following individuals have personal knowledge of, or access to
documentation of these facts:
William Shaheen, Esquire
Shaheen & Gordon, P.A.
P.O. Box 977
140 Washington Street, 2nd Floor
Dover, NH 03821-0977
(603) 749-1838 fax
(603) 749-5000 phone
wshaheen@shaheengordon.com
Also see: 1.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/observations
2. http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/latoyakidd/gGCJhC/
In about early 1991, Respondent submitted his application to take the
Illinois bar exam, in which he attested that his answers to the
questions were true and correct. In the Character and Fitness section,
question 49 included the following statement:
NOTE: In connection with your answers to questions 47, 48, and 49,
you are advised that no advice of counsel, statute, court order, or
legal proceeding withholding adjudication, expunging information from
any record, sealing any record, or purporting to authorize any person
to deny the existence or occurrence of any information or matter shall
excuse less than full disclosure of any information or matter
otherwise required to be disclosed herein. You must answer questions
47, 48, and 49; the submission of letters from law enforcement
agencies in lieu of an answer is not acceptable. If you are required
to report an incident in response to more than one of the three
questions, you are required to complete only one explanatory form
regarding that incident.
49. Have you ever been charged with a traffic violation involving
felonious conduct or the use or possession of alcohol or drugs or
which resulted in time spent in custody, a fine of $200 or more, or
the revocation or suspension of your driver's license?
51. Do you have any outstanding parking violations?
In response to question 49 & 51, the Respondent answered "no."
On December 17, 1991, Respondent was admitted to the practice of law
in Illinois. At no time prior to his admission to the Illinois bar,
did Respondent apprise the Illinois Character and Fitness Committee of
his multiple civil citations or his concealment of them on his bar
application.
The Respondent knew that he had incurred multiple violations. These
fines exceeded the $200.00 reporting threshold for a total of $400.00.
Between October 5, 1988 and January 12 1990, violations included
failing to put money in meters, parking in a resident-only area,
blocking a bus stop, and multiple tickets in the same day for
exceeding the time limit at a meter. At this time he was living at
365 Broadway, Somerville, Massacustts, 02144. The substance and
frequency of his disregard for legally valid rules demonstrate a
contempt for the rules. He obviously felt he was above the rules that
"the common folk" were expected to follow. All the time that he was
supposed to be attending to learning the law, he contemptuously
thumbed his nose even at simple parking rules. Do as I say, not as I
do! The fines and penalties went unpaid for almost two decades. He
asks others to obey the law yet he is too good and it is beneath him
to pay lowly parking fines. Its all about expediency, parking rules
don't apply to the "important people" and its too inconvenient and
time consuming to bother with finding a legal parking space. He is so
smart and virtuous that merely electing him will end the illegal war
in Iraq but finding a legal parking space near the elitist law school
it too taxing for him.
The following individuals have personal knowledge of, or access to
documentation of these facts:
Mrs. Susan Clippinger, Director Mr. Tom Champion, Spokesman
Cambridge Traffic, Parking & City of Somerville
Transportation Department Somerville, MA 02144
Cambridge, MA 02139 traffic@ci.somerville.ma.us
(617)349-4747 fax
Also see: 1. http://somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html
2. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/08/obama_paid_late_parking_tickets/
Evidence Offered in Mitigation
None. The Respondent does not have a good reputation for truthfulness
and veracity but continues even to this day to shade the truth and
mislead. The Respondent has never expressed remorse for his
intentional misleading and dishonesty.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
In attorney disciplinary proceedings, the Administrator must establish
charges of lawyer misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. In re
Ingersoll, 186 Ill. 2d 163, 168, 710 N.E.2d 390 (1999). It is the
responsibility of the Hearing Panel to determine the credibility and
believability of the witnesses, weigh the conflicting testimony, draw
reasonable inferences, and make factual findings based upon all the
evidence. In re Timpone, 157 Ill. 2d 178, 196, 623 N.E.2d 300, 308
(1993). In this case, there is no dispute as to facts as the
Respondent readily admits them. With the above principles in mind and
after careful consideration of the evidence and exhibits, I ask the
Hearing Panel to make the following findings.
The Respondent should be charged with:
1.
making a statement of material fact in connection with a
bar application that the applicant knows to be false in violation of
Rule 8.1 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct ("Rules");
2.
committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the
lawyer's fitness to practice law in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the
Rules;
3.
engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit
or misrepresentation in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the Rules;
4.
engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of
justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Rules; and
5.
engaging in conduct which brings the courts or the legal
profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771.
It is undisputed that the Respondent consumed illegal drugs and failed
to disclose that when completing his bar application. The Respondent
subsequently disclosed these actions in his own published writings.
Furthermore, he committed multiple criminal traffic violations which
he deceptively and intentionally failed to report them as required to
on his bar application. Of the 17 violations, cumulatively they
exceeded $350.00. By his own admission by his use of drugs he was
therefore in possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree
which is a class D felony. As a result, we find clear and convincing
evidence that the Respondent violated Rules 8.4(a)(3) and 8.4(a)(4).
It follows that such misconduct was prejudicial to the administration
of justice and brought the legal profession into disrepute.
In analyzing whether the attorney engaged in misconduct, we request
that the Hearing Board adopt the Administrator's previous suggestions
to employ a two-step process. First, the Hearing Board ascertained
whether in that particular case, appellate opinions were of a nature
to be properly identified in response to the question on the
application. If they were, the Hearing Board then examined the
attorney's state of mind to determine whether his failure to disclose
the information was purposeful.
The Hearing Board concluded that the appellate decisions were directed
at the trial court's actions, not the attorney's actions or
professional conduct and therefore found that the attorney responded
appropriately. In so finding, the Hearing Board did not reach the
second step of the analysis, but noted the attorney's candor and
credibility.
In applying the two-step analysis in this matter, we must first
determine whether the Respondent's conduct as a serial violator of the
criminal traffic laws was of a nature to be properly identified in
response to question 49 of the bar application. Question 49 asks,
"Have you ever been charged with a traffic violation involving
felonious conduct or the use or possession of alcohol or drugs or
which resulted in time spent in custody, a fine of $200 or more, or
the revocation or suspension of your driver's license?" It is known
that prior to the time the Respondent submitted his bar application
the record irrefutable proves that he his multiple citations
represented fines in excess of $200.00. As a result, we find the
Respondent's payment of the fines without objection in this case is
sufficient nature to be properly identified in response to question 49
on the bar application. Knowledge of his repeated violations when
understood in conjunction with the plain language of question 49, we
find the Respondent answered deceptively and that he therefore engaged
in intentional misconduct.
RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of the disciplinary system is to protect the public,
maintain the integrity of the legal system and safeguard the
administration of justice. In re Howard, 188 Ill. 2d 423, 434, 721
N.E.2d 1126 (1999). In determining the proper sanction, I ask that the
Hearing Board give deliberative consideration to the proven
misconduct. In re Witt, 145 Ill. 2d 380, 398, 583 N.E.2d 526 (1991).
In this matter the evidence demonstrates that the Respondent consumed
illegal drugs that should have resulted in felony charges and a felony
criminal conviction. The Respondent can be sanctioned under the Rules
of Professional Conduct for a criminal conviction even though he
committed such acts before he was admitted to the bar. See In re
Chandler, 161 Ill. 2d 459, 641 N.E.2d 473 (1994).
The Respondent has not cooperated fully with questions into his
illegal drug use and possible sale or distribution of drugs. While he
has no publicly known prior bar discipline we find multiple
aggravating factors. He has consistently denied his misconduct as it
relates to his bar application, failed to take genuine responsibility
for his actions, and demonstrated no remorse.
Based upon the well settled case law discussed above and the
considerable evidence in mitigation I believe disbarment is the
appropriate sanction.
CONCLUSION
Considering the nature of the Respondent's misconduct, the lack of
significant evidence in mitigation and the numerous instances of
aggravating factors, the movant recommends that the Respondent be
disbarred.
Search Results Label/Receipt Number: 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 2:32 PM on July 23, 2008 in CHICAGO, IL 60601.
Edmund Burke
BAR COMPLAINT
1. Please note below what Barack Hussein Obama, Esquire admitted to
and why any reasonable person would conclude that what he did or
failed to do was improper according to the rules and ethical standards
established by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary
Commission.
Filed July 22, 2008
In re Barak Hussein Obama
Commission No. ___ CH __
Synopsis Of Complaint and Recommended Report
NATURE OF THE CASE: a) making a statement of material fact in
connection with a bar application that the applicant knows to be
false; b) committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the
lawyer's fitness to practice law; c) engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; d) engaging in conduct
prejudicial to the administration of justice; and e) engaging in
conduct which brings the courts or the legal profession into
disrepute.
RULES DISCUSSED: Rules 8.1; Rule 8.4(a)(3); 8.4(a)(4); 8.4(a)(5) of
the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct and Supreme Court Rule 771
SANCTION: Disbarment
Filed July 22, 2008
BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD
OF THE
ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION
AND
DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION
In the Matter of:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA,
Attorney-Respondent,
No. ________.
Commission No. ___ CH _____
EVIDENCE
The Respondent first admitted illegal drug use by disclosing it in his
book, Dreams from My Father. Obama, Barack. Dreams from My Father: A
Story of Race and Inheritance. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1995. In
that book he admitted, "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow
when you could afford it. Not smack, though." pp. 93–94. The
Respondent knew that his activities were illegal. The drug use
occurred from as early as high school at least until he completed his
bachelors degree in New York City. He entered law school in 1988,
living in and traveling in Somerville and Cambridge. He graduated
from law school in 1991.
In about early 1991, Respondent submitted his application to take the
Illinois bar exam, in which he attested that his answers to the
questions were true and correct. In the Character and Fitness section,
questions 18 and 19 included the following statement:
NOTE. In connection with your answer to questions 18 and 19, you are
advised that no statute, court order, or legal proceeding withholding
adjudication, expunging information from any record, sealing any
record, or purporting to authorize any person to deny the existence of
occurrence of any information or matter shall excuse less than full
disclosure of any information or matter otherwise required to be
disclosed herein. You must answer questions 18 and 19; the attachment
of letters from law enforcement agencies in lieu of an answer is not
acceptable. Information provided in response to one of the two
questions need not be reported in response to the other.
18. Have you ever, either as an adult or juvenile, been cited,
arrested, accused, formally or informally, or convicted of any
violation of any law other than moving traffic violations.
In response to question 18, it is understood the Respondent answered
"no." The Respondent did not disclose his multiple drug use occurring
through his time in high school and college.
By this time in his life he was very mature and sophisticated person
that he either did or should have given a great deal of consideration
to his response to question 18 a great deal of consideration. He has
not disclosed if he consulted with anyone, such as Illinois attorney
Michelle Robinson(later his wife) before answering the question.
On December 17, 1991, Respondent was admitted to the practice of law
in Illinois. At no time prior to his admission to the Illinois bar,
did Respondent apprise the Illinois Character and Fitness Committee of
his involvement in illegal drug activity. If he had been caught he
likely would have been charged with criminal possession of a
controlled substance in the fifth degree which is a class D felony.
New York Penal Law Sec. 220.06 (McKinney).
The following individuals have personal knowledge of, or access to
documentation of these facts:
William Shaheen, Esquire
Shaheen & Gordon, P.A.
P.O. Box 977
140 Washington Street, 2nd Floor
Dover, NH 03821-0977
(603) 749-1838 fax
(603) 749-5000 phone
wshaheen@shaheengordon.com
Also see: 1.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/observations
2. http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/latoyakidd/gGCJhC/
In about early 1991, Respondent submitted his application to take the
Illinois bar exam, in which he attested that his answers to the
questions were true and correct. In the Character and Fitness section,
question 49 included the following statement:
NOTE: In connection with your answers to questions 47, 48, and 49,
you are advised that no advice of counsel, statute, court order, or
legal proceeding withholding adjudication, expunging information from
any record, sealing any record, or purporting to authorize any person
to deny the existence or occurrence of any information or matter shall
excuse less than full disclosure of any information or matter
otherwise required to be disclosed herein. You must answer questions
47, 48, and 49; the submission of letters from law enforcement
agencies in lieu of an answer is not acceptable. If you are required
to report an incident in response to more than one of the three
questions, you are required to complete only one explanatory form
regarding that incident.
49. Have you ever been charged with a traffic violation involving
felonious conduct or the use or possession of alcohol or drugs or
which resulted in time spent in custody, a fine of $200 or more, or
the revocation or suspension of your driver's license?
51. Do you have any outstanding parking violations?
In response to question 49 & 51, the Respondent answered "no."
On December 17, 1991, Respondent was admitted to the practice of law
in Illinois. At no time prior to his admission to the Illinois bar,
did Respondent apprise the Illinois Character and Fitness Committee of
his multiple civil citations or his concealment of them on his bar
application.
The Respondent knew that he had incurred multiple violations. These
fines exceeded the $200.00 reporting threshold for a total of $400.00.
Between October 5, 1988 and January 12 1990, violations included
failing to put money in meters, parking in a resident-only area,
blocking a bus stop, and multiple tickets in the same day for
exceeding the time limit at a meter. At this time he was living at
365 Broadway, Somerville, Massacustts, 02144. The substance and
frequency of his disregard for legally valid rules demonstrate a
contempt for the rules. He obviously felt he was above the rules that
"the common folk" were expected to follow. All the time that he was
supposed to be attending to learning the law, he contemptuously
thumbed his nose even at simple parking rules. Do as I say, not as I
do! The fines and penalties went unpaid for almost two decades. He
asks others to obey the law yet he is too good and it is beneath him
to pay lowly parking fines. Its all about expediency, parking rules
don't apply to the "important people" and its too inconvenient and
time consuming to bother with finding a legal parking space. He is so
smart and virtuous that merely electing him will end the illegal war
in Iraq but finding a legal parking space near the elitist law school
it too taxing for him.
The following individuals have personal knowledge of, or access to
documentation of these facts:
Mrs. Susan Clippinger, Director Mr. Tom Champion, Spokesman
Cambridge Traffic, Parking & City of Somerville
Transportation Department Somerville, MA 02144
Cambridge, MA 02139 traffic@ci.somerville.ma.us
(617)349-4747 fax
Also see: 1. http://somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html
2. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/08/obama_paid_late_parking_tickets/
Evidence Offered in Mitigation
None. The Respondent does not have a good reputation for truthfulness
and veracity but continues even to this day to shade the truth and
mislead. The Respondent has never expressed remorse for his
intentional misleading and dishonesty.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
In attorney disciplinary proceedings, the Administrator must establish
charges of lawyer misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. In re
Ingersoll, 186 Ill. 2d 163, 168, 710 N.E.2d 390 (1999). It is the
responsibility of the Hearing Panel to determine the credibility and
believability of the witnesses, weigh the conflicting testimony, draw
reasonable inferences, and make factual findings based upon all the
evidence. In re Timpone, 157 Ill. 2d 178, 196, 623 N.E.2d 300, 308
(1993). In this case, there is no dispute as to facts as the
Respondent readily admits them. With the above principles in mind and
after careful consideration of the evidence and exhibits, I ask the
Hearing Panel to make the following findings.
The Respondent should be charged with:
1.
making a statement of material fact in connection with a
bar application that the applicant knows to be false in violation of
Rule 8.1 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct ("Rules");
2.
committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the
lawyer's fitness to practice law in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the
Rules;
3.
engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit
or misrepresentation in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the Rules;
4.
engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of
justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Rules; and
5.
engaging in conduct which brings the courts or the legal
profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771.
It is undisputed that the Respondent consumed illegal drugs and failed
to disclose that when completing his bar application. The Respondent
subsequently disclosed these actions in his own published writings.
Furthermore, he committed multiple criminal traffic violations which
he deceptively and intentionally failed to report them as required to
on his bar application. Of the 17 violations, cumulatively they
exceeded $350.00. By his own admission by his use of drugs he was
therefore in possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree
which is a class D felony. As a result, we find clear and convincing
evidence that the Respondent violated Rules 8.4(a)(3) and 8.4(a)(4).
It follows that such misconduct was prejudicial to the administration
of justice and brought the legal profession into disrepute.
In analyzing whether the attorney engaged in misconduct, we request
that the Hearing Board adopt the Administrator's previous suggestions
to employ a two-step process. First, the Hearing Board ascertained
whether in that particular case, appellate opinions were of a nature
to be properly identified in response to the question on the
application. If they were, the Hearing Board then examined the
attorney's state of mind to determine whether his failure to disclose
the information was purposeful.
The Hearing Board concluded that the appellate decisions were directed
at the trial court's actions, not the attorney's actions or
professional conduct and therefore found that the attorney responded
appropriately. In so finding, the Hearing Board did not reach the
second step of the analysis, but noted the attorney's candor and
credibility.
In applying the two-step analysis in this matter, we must first
determine whether the Respondent's conduct as a serial violator of the
criminal traffic laws was of a nature to be properly identified in
response to question 49 of the bar application. Question 49 asks,
"Have you ever been charged with a traffic violation involving
felonious conduct or the use or possession of alcohol or drugs or
which resulted in time spent in custody, a fine of $200 or more, or
the revocation or suspension of your driver's license?" It is known
that prior to the time the Respondent submitted his bar application
the record irrefutable proves that he his multiple citations
represented fines in excess of $200.00. As a result, we find the
Respondent's payment of the fines without objection in this case is
sufficient nature to be properly identified in response to question 49
on the bar application. Knowledge of his repeated violations when
understood in conjunction with the plain language of question 49, we
find the Respondent answered deceptively and that he therefore engaged
in intentional misconduct.
RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of the disciplinary system is to protect the public,
maintain the integrity of the legal system and safeguard the
administration of justice. In re Howard, 188 Ill. 2d 423, 434, 721
N.E.2d 1126 (1999). In determining the proper sanction, I ask that the
Hearing Board give deliberative consideration to the proven
misconduct. In re Witt, 145 Ill. 2d 380, 398, 583 N.E.2d 526 (1991).
In this matter the evidence demonstrates that the Respondent consumed
illegal drugs that should have resulted in felony charges and a felony
criminal conviction. The Respondent can be sanctioned under the Rules
of Professional Conduct for a criminal conviction even though he
committed such acts before he was admitted to the bar. See In re
Chandler, 161 Ill. 2d 459, 641 N.E.2d 473 (1994).
The Respondent has not cooperated fully with questions into his
illegal drug use and possible sale or distribution of drugs. While he
has no publicly known prior bar discipline we find multiple
aggravating factors. He has consistently denied his misconduct as it
relates to his bar application, failed to take genuine responsibility
for his actions, and demonstrated no remorse.
Based upon the well settled case law discussed above and the
considerable evidence in mitigation I believe disbarment is the
appropriate sanction.
CONCLUSION
Considering the nature of the Respondent's misconduct, the lack of
significant evidence in mitigation and the numerous instances of
aggravating factors, the movant recommends that the Respondent be
disbarred.
Search Results Label/Receipt Number: 7006 2150 0002 2527 0708
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 2:32 PM on July 23, 2008 in CHICAGO, IL 60601.
PRESS RELEASE
Internet Group Anonymous Files Bar Complaint Against Barack Hussein Obama
Issued By: Anonymous
Jul 23, 2008 08:11:12
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Press Release) – Jul 23, 2008 – CHICAGO, Illinois - Anonymous
announced that they have filed a complaint with the Illinois Attorney
Registration and Disciplinary Commission requesting an investigation
into false statements and misrepresentations Barack Hussein Obama made
on his own bar application. The group cited information, which if
true, would be grounds for disbarment. Anonymous accuses Mr. Obama of
using illegal drugs and then concealing his drug use by lying about it
on his bar application. Either action could be an independent basis
for disciplinary action against the Presidential nominee. The group
claims that an investigation would identify facts that demonstrate
Obama has engaged in conduct which brings the courts or the legal
profession into disrepute, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice, and engaged in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Anonymous' complaint alleges that by consuming illegal drugs Obama was
violating New York Penal Law Sec. 220.06, which criminalizes cocaine
use.[1] If proven, that level of drug use is a felony. Commission of
such a criminal act is ethically prohibited as it reflects adversely
on the lawyer's fitness to practice law. See Rule 8.4(a)(3). The
complaint further alleges that Obama engaged in multiple violations of
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct ("Rules"), including Rule 8.1
which prohibits lawyers from making a statement of material fact in
connection with a bar application that the applicant knows to be
false; Rule 8.4(a)(4) which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; Rule
8.4(a)(5) which bars lawyers from participating in conduct prejudicial
to the administration of justice; and Supreme Court Rule 771 which
prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct which brings the courts or
the legal profession into disrepute.
The complaint also alleges that Obama had an obligation to report
unpaid criminal citations, including parking violations where the
fines totaled more than $200.00 or remained unpaid.[2][3] Anonymous
stated, "Instead of accepting responsibility and paying them off at
the time he was asking to be a lawyer, he failed to disclose a single
civil citation and or pay a penny in fines. About a decade later he
finally paid, but only after adverse media reports forced his hand."
If the factual allegations are determined to be true, then knowledge
of his repeated violations when understood in conjunction with the
plain language his bar application requesting disclosure of such
violations would be a basis for the bar to find that Mr. Obama
answered deceptively. This conduct would therefore constitute
intentional misconduct.
Anonymous stated, "Obama himself has admitted illegal drug use prior
to his bar application. Failing to disclose that on his bar
application is enough to require the Illinois State Bar to investigate
this matter." Anonymous continued, "Violations of the bar rules can
lead to disbarment. The Illinois State Bar Association should
investigate the matter without delay, as the American people are
entitled to know if Obama, who promises to act ethically as President,
has in fact acted unethically as a lawyer." "No further evidence is
needed to prove a presidential candidate unfit for office than for
Obama to lose his bar license."
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/us/politics/09obama.html
[2] http://www.somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html
[3] http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/08/obama_paid_late_parking_tickets/
# # #
About Anonymous:
The self-styled Anonymous (used as a mass noun) is a name adopted
within various quarters of internet culture to represent the actions
of internet users acting anonymously toward a given agenda. In this
sense, Anonymous is "all of us, yet none of us". Anonymous is a
collective composed of many Internet users, combined under one name.
# # #
Issued By: Anonymous
Jul 23, 2008 08:11:12
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Press Release) – Jul 23, 2008 – CHICAGO, Illinois - Anonymous
announced that they have filed a complaint with the Illinois Attorney
Registration and Disciplinary Commission requesting an investigation
into false statements and misrepresentations Barack Hussein Obama made
on his own bar application. The group cited information, which if
true, would be grounds for disbarment. Anonymous accuses Mr. Obama of
using illegal drugs and then concealing his drug use by lying about it
on his bar application. Either action could be an independent basis
for disciplinary action against the Presidential nominee. The group
claims that an investigation would identify facts that demonstrate
Obama has engaged in conduct which brings the courts or the legal
profession into disrepute, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice, and engaged in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Anonymous' complaint alleges that by consuming illegal drugs Obama was
violating New York Penal Law Sec. 220.06, which criminalizes cocaine
use.[1] If proven, that level of drug use is a felony. Commission of
such a criminal act is ethically prohibited as it reflects adversely
on the lawyer's fitness to practice law. See Rule 8.4(a)(3). The
complaint further alleges that Obama engaged in multiple violations of
Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct ("Rules"), including Rule 8.1
which prohibits lawyers from making a statement of material fact in
connection with a bar application that the applicant knows to be
false; Rule 8.4(a)(4) which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; Rule
8.4(a)(5) which bars lawyers from participating in conduct prejudicial
to the administration of justice; and Supreme Court Rule 771 which
prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct which brings the courts or
the legal profession into disrepute.
The complaint also alleges that Obama had an obligation to report
unpaid criminal citations, including parking violations where the
fines totaled more than $200.00 or remained unpaid.[2][3] Anonymous
stated, "Instead of accepting responsibility and paying them off at
the time he was asking to be a lawyer, he failed to disclose a single
civil citation and or pay a penny in fines. About a decade later he
finally paid, but only after adverse media reports forced his hand."
If the factual allegations are determined to be true, then knowledge
of his repeated violations when understood in conjunction with the
plain language his bar application requesting disclosure of such
violations would be a basis for the bar to find that Mr. Obama
answered deceptively. This conduct would therefore constitute
intentional misconduct.
Anonymous stated, "Obama himself has admitted illegal drug use prior
to his bar application. Failing to disclose that on his bar
application is enough to require the Illinois State Bar to investigate
this matter." Anonymous continued, "Violations of the bar rules can
lead to disbarment. The Illinois State Bar Association should
investigate the matter without delay, as the American people are
entitled to know if Obama, who promises to act ethically as President,
has in fact acted unethically as a lawyer." "No further evidence is
needed to prove a presidential candidate unfit for office than for
Obama to lose his bar license."
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/us/politics/09obama.html
[2] http://www.somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2007/03/obama_finally_p.html
[3] http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/03/08/obama_paid_late_parking_tickets/
# # #
About Anonymous:
The self-styled Anonymous (used as a mass noun) is a name adopted
within various quarters of internet culture to represent the actions
of internet users acting anonymously toward a given agenda. In this
sense, Anonymous is "all of us, yet none of us". Anonymous is a
collective composed of many Internet users, combined under one name.
# # #
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)