I thought perhaps it would be a good idea to start a break out thread where we could keep Orly's ethical violations all in one spot.

We all know that's she's threatened criminal prosecution in order to obtain an advantage in a civil matter. On numerous occasions. But, since CA has no functioning State Bar Disciplinary Committee, she has never been sanctioned, and so she keeps doing it.

Now, in the otherwise despised State of Texas, at least our State Bar functions (even if it's not as quickly or thoroughly as it always should). I came across this the other day while reading the glossy of the Texas Bar Journal:



http://mydigimag.rrd.com/article/Discip ... ticle.html

Why bother, she has the same chance of getting disbarred as mittwitt has of starting at QB for Chicago Cardinals.

FWIW, I think this thread is an excellent idea. Like everyone else, I've long since become jaded about the prospects of the CA Bar suddenly leaping into action. Nevertheless, I do believe that Teflon Orly will eventually find herself on the wrong side of a disciplinary action -- if not in California, then somewhere else. If that ever happens, it could prove very useful to have a documented history or episodes ready made for "leaking" to whoever is driving the process.

^^^^^ I agree. Orly has been at this for more than 4 years now. Her violations are so numerous that if we don't keep a list, we will lose track of the violations.

A few violations that I remember:

1) "Asking" that her FM call every court clerk and Judge's office in the country.
2) "Asking" her FM to write to Judges directly in the hopes of influencing decisions.
3) Encouraging public protests while her cases are being heard before a Judge.
4) Trying to sue Judge Land and demanding information about his personal property and finances. IIRC, she also demanded his SS#.
5) Publishing SS#s all over the intertube an in court pleadings for 4+ years.
6) Violating client confidentiality.
7) Adding defense lawyers to lawsuits.

There are so many more.

• Abandoning clients.
• Bringing suit for clients who did not give her permission to do so.
• Routinely misrepresenting what exhibits attached to her pleadings say.
• Constantly misrepresenting law and fact in court proceedings.
• Exhorting the armed overthrow of the United States government.
• Demeaning judges and making false statements about why judges decided as they did.
• Bringing the legal profession into disrepute.
• Taking on cases in areas where she did not have any competence and where she did not attempt to become competent.
• Defaming opposing counsel and their clients without legal justification.
• Practicing law with a disbarred attorney.
• Persistently failing to serve process on defendants.
• Abusing process by serving documents not permitted by court rules or the law.
• Entering into sham agreements with her clients to represent them in states where she was or would be admitted and as "co-plaintiff" in other states.
• Practicing law in courts and jurisdictions where she was not admitted to do so.
• Entering into engagements with clients and requiring them to waive any claims they might have against her for malpractice prospectively.

This, plus what's above, is only a partial list.

One of my pet peeves, always overlooked I guess because U.S. Supreme Court justices are such high-profile public figures:

Intentionally making personal, ex parte contacts and communications with judges while her matters are actively pending before them. For God's sake she confronted Chief Justice Roberts in person on video for the specific, express purpose of demanding he act on a court filing she was trying to get before him:

This list doesn't include her conduct relating to her "foundation" or relating to campaign laws and the reporting requirements of such laws.

Hmmm. Sounds like someone's given this a little thought!

It seems to me that the usefulness of this thread would depend on its documentation of specifics: dates, details and reference to pleadings, statements and/or website location.

I believe what this thread should do is, perhaps, generate a block of text concerning Orly's patterns of illegal behavior. For example, in a case where she is already facing sanctions, Orly does this. Again.



I think the document should have sections for particular kinds of misconduct, like not redacting, and lists of all the occasions in which she has broken this rule, as well as all the times she has been told by the court to quit violating this rule.

It should be easy to establish that Orly's lawbreaking is deliberate, not the inadvertent act of an incompetent lunatic. While Orly Taitz is, in fact, an incompetent lunatic, her lawbreaking is not the result solely of incompetence but malice and a deliberate intent to break the law.

The text should be of the quality of legal writing, with citations and exhibits if possible, so that the text itself can simply be dropped in a block into the proper section of a motion for sanctions, and the exhibits should be sufficient that a competent attorney could easily obtain certified copies of them.

She do the same thing with Scalia ... she attended a book signing in LA and confronted him during a Q & A and again when he was signing her book.

Earlier this week, Orly requested that her FM to start stalking Judges and to confront those Judges in public.



http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=364438




http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=21860




http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=18351




http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=18336




http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=15779





From Rhodes v MacDonald but never docketed?



http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=12440

http://www.scribd.com/doc/34041283/ORLY ... -SANCTIONS




http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=12426

Should this be included? http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=364956

BREAKING NEWS! COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY DEFAULTS IN A RICO CASE INVOLVING OBAMA’S USE OF A STOLEN CT SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER REDACTED
Posted on | December 11, 2012
NOTICE OF DEFAULT BY DEFENDANT MICHAEL ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND POST DEFAULT DISCOVERY

...snip

11. Without a motion to compel Taitz would not be able to obtain necessary information. Additionally, now there is evidence of defendants and their accomplices spoliating, destroying evidence.Recently some of the RICO co-conspirators took down a website “Fogbow” with a clear intent to destroy evidence. Similarly, Affidavits of Investigator Zullo (Exhibit 4) and Expert Irey (Exhibit 5 ) show a pattern of obstruction of Justice, evasion of law enforcement, tampering with evidence.

BINGO! Loh's proposition is very close to what I had in mind and I'd been mulling over an example to post for discussion.

I'm so sorry about your sister.

I'm sorry about your sister, Piffle!!

If a few of our lawyers would like to put together a list of cases that we should evaluate, a gang of volunteers could choose threads from the list and then scan those threads for ethical violations. I have a break from school and would have time to help with such a project; I could scan one of the larger lawsuit threads. Our expert legal team has always done a great job of pointing out Orly's unethical behavior, which would make this project less daunting for volunteers. Once the relevant threads are searched, those with legal superpowers can review the relevant motions per violation.

Would this be an adequate method for linking the dates of violations with the subject matter? Threads would also mention related ethical violations stemming from Orly's webpage.

The Orly's Poopies thread should be scanned.

Thoughts? Is there a better method?

For Piffle =

I think you're on the right road here.































Honestly, if we were to document every ethical violation by Orly, it should be part of the Home Page Project or the Wiki, not part of the forum. The forum is for informal discussions and bringing the news to each other. If we're going to provide a resource in a format that's useful to anyone but ourselves, we need to take a more formal approach.

YMMV, of course.

Here's a document (PDF) which did a really good job of documenting her ethical transgressions, prepared by some Fogbow members.

... it was written in April 2009. It was 30 pages long.

... if that kind of approach was taken today, the thing would be hundreds and hundreds of pages in length.

... but that's the only kind of approach that has any real value. And even that did not spur the California State Bar (hahahaha) to action.

Just sayin'.

Yes me too Piffle

I'm also very sad to hear about your sister, Piffle. Take care of her, and don't worry about us.

Just think of all the follow up entries since April 2009.

The harassment of law clerks since then would take up another ten pages.

Oh, goodie! We got Part 1 finished already! Thanks for bringing it back, Foogy!

This is precisely what I had in mind. There have been hundreds of violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct by Taitz. And, since she continues to "litigate", there will be more. I thought it would be a good idea to have a placeholder thread to specifically enumerate them, as they occur. Right now, they are buried in threads sometimes hundreds of pages long on a particular case, or the catchall Poopies thread. This was not intended to be a White Paper that is due next week, but rather a place to put actual ethical violations. For lawyers and laymen alike, the current California Rules Of Professional Conduct can be found here. It would be preferable if folks would box in the offensive writing or action, and then cite to a particular rule.

I think I'll give the redacting thing a shot. It is perhaps not as serious as some of her ethical violations, but it is clearly willful and a deliberate violation of the rules. Taken over the years she has done it, it is clearly lawless action by someone with a criminal mentality.

I will focus, though, on the Model Rules. Most of Orly's misconduct is not in California, and California appears not to care in the least about the constant flouting of their alleged rules.

That's fine too. I gave the link so folks would have a handy citation guide.