Tate Brothers Charged with Rape in the UK

[SpuriusMaximus]

Yes it's in the link to the 185pg pdf here

Well, I'm not paid as a judge, so I didn't read 185 pages myself. I usually wait for other people to do the analysis for me.

But yes, you did link it. Kudos for that.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

A whole speech!



Link

You have to wonder if McBride has a secret second paymaster giving how effectively he's destroying any criminal defence the Taints may have.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

You have to wonder if McBride has a secret second paymaster giving how effectively he's destroying any criminal defence the Taints may have.

I wondered that myself for a while. After all, if nothing else, his antics caused Romania to unpause the case. So even if they beat the extradition to the UK, then they're back in jail and facing extradition to Romania.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Joe McBride
@McBrideLawNYC

I just saw the Brothers.

Me: How you guys doing?

Tristan: "Joe, I feel eelectric!"

Link

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Yeah. I wonder whether someone could file a complaint with the NY State Bar Association, but I think you have to have standing.

To finally answer that too: no, under US bar rules, you don't actually need any standing to file a bar complaint. Any random civilian can file one. You only need standing for a lawsuit. Of course it must pass a screening before being actually reviewed by the disciplinary committee, but you can submit one. Any random US citizen can. Even someone who just watched a video of him on YouTube or X.

 

[SpitfireIX]

To finally answer that too: no, under US bar rules, you don't actually need any standing to file a bar complaint. Any random civilian can file one. You only need standing for a lawsuit. Of course it must pass a screening before being actually reviewed by the disciplinary committee, but you can submit one. Any random US citizen can. Even someone who just watched a video of him on YouTube or X.

The reason I said that is that my understanding was that a lot of professional societies require that an ethics complaint be brought either by a member of the society or a member of the public who's allegedly been directly harmed by the purported unethical conduct. However, upon investigation, I may have been mistaken. In any case, even if that's generally true, I could see where bar associations might be an exception to that.

 

[catsmate]

Well, I'm not paid as a judge, so I didn't read 185 pages myself. I usually wait for other people to do the analysis for me.

But yes, you did link it. Kudos for that.

It could be worse. Much worse......

After Reading 6,000 Pages of “Romantasy” Fiction, Judge McMahon Dismisses Suit Over Allegedly Copycat Book Series

In a decision Monday, Judge McMahon granted summary judgment in favor of the author of the Crave series of “romantasy” fiction in a suit accusing the

www.sdnyblog.com

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

The reason I said that is that my understanding was that a lot of professional societies require that an ethics complaint be brought either by a member of the society or a member of the public who's allegedly been directly harmed by the purported unethical conduct. However, upon investigation, I may have been mistaken. In any case, even if that's generally true, I could see where bar associations might be an exception to that.

I'm saying that they do, at least in the USA. Anyone can send a bar complaint.

 

[JayUtah]

I'm saying that they do, at least in the USA. Anyone can send a bar complaint.

The most common reason a lawyer is disbarred is defrauding a client or misappropriating a client's funds. Hence bar associations want it to be possible for nonmembers to file bar complaints.

 

[JayUtah]

He has history and that should been reached a long time ago.

That kind of misconduct or ineptitude is typically addressed by the court, not the bar association.

 

[jimbob]

That kind of misconduct or ineptitude is typically addressed by the court, not the bar association.

Sounds good to me

 

[theprestige]

Sounds good to me

Courts can only address matters that are specifically before them. Even then, introducing new facts to the court, about a matter already before it, is not as simple as saying, "your honor knows he has a history of X".

Counsel A files a written motion accusing Counsel B of procedural misconduct and requesting some action from the court on that basis. Dismissal, summary judgement, judicial sanction, whatever Counsel A thinks is appropriate.

Counsel B receives notice of the filing, and, files a rebuttal.

The court receives both filings, and may or may not review them. A hearing is scheduled to address the motion and rule on Counsel A's request for court action.

On the day of the hearing, Counsel A formally argues their motion, either via the text of the written filing, or verbally, or both. I'm not clear on the exact range of protocols available here.

Then Counsel B formally argues their rebuttal.

More than likely (in this scenario), the judge orders a correction to the error in the record, and makes some ruling on whether the procedural misconduct prejudices the due process of the case in some way. If the court finds that it does, it may make a further ruling about the case.

The chances of such a hearing leading to severe court sanction of Counsel B are probably pretty low, unless Counsel B has a long, documented history of this sort of thing, especially if in front of this particular judge or court.

Remember, this is the same system that would rather give a convicted criminal probation ten times, than give them prison time even once. They're not going to tar and feather one of their own unless they have no other choice at all.

 

[jimbob]

Courts can only address matters that are specifically before them. Even then, introducing new facts to the court, about a matter already before it, is not as simple as saying, "your honor knows he has a history of X".

Counsel A files a written motion accusing Counsel B of procedural misconduct and requesting some action from the court on that basis. Dismissal, summary judgement, judicial sanction, whatever Counsel A thinks is appropriate.

Counsel B receives notice of the filing, and, files a rebuttal.

The court receives both filings, and may or may not review them. A hearing is scheduled to address the motion and rule on Counsel A's request for court action.

On the day of the hearing, Counsel A formally argues their motion, either via the text of the written filing, or verbally, or both. I'm not clear on the exact range of protocols available here.

Then Counsel B formally argues their rebuttal.

More than likely (in this scenario), the judge orders a correction to the error in the record, and makes some ruling on whether the procedural misconduct prejudices the due process of the case in some way. If the court finds that it does, it may make a further ruling about the case.

The chances of such a hearing leading to severe court sanction of Counsel B are probably pretty low, unless Counsel B has a long, documented history of this sort of thing, especially if in front of this particular judge or court.

Remember, this is the same system that would rather give a convicted criminal probation ten times, than give them prison time even once. They're not going to tar and feather one of their own unless they have no other choice at all.

I was thinking he's been getting close to Contempt of Court

 

[jimbob]

Joe McBride
@McBrideLawNYC

I just saw the Brothers.

Me: How you guys doing?

Tristan: "Joe, I feel eelectric!"

Link

And that is his genuine account.

Not a parody.

FFS. I don't think they can appeal in future because they hired a clown, but maybe that's what he's suggested to them.

My actual thinking is that he knew that there was no chance of bail, and no legal reason for them to not get extradited, so he's decided to go for a Hail Mary of Marco Rubio blocking the extradition. But even that, he's going about stupidly given the not so veiled threats that Rubio has to be seen to be rejecting.

 

[LDE1976]

Joe McBride
@McBrideLawNYC

I just saw the Brothers.

Me: How you guys doing?

Tristan: "Joe, I feel eelectric!"

Link

Were they doing the Conger?

 

[JayUtah]

Courts can also issue sua sponte an Order to Show Cause on a matter of attorney misconduct that the court itself has noticed, without a motion by a party. Courts have inherent powers to regulate the conduct of their officers. Courts usually also have statutory authority (e.g., Fed R. Civ. P. 11(c)(3)) to issue such orders on their own.

Attorneys so ordered must show cause in writing why the court should not sanction their behavior, usually within 30 days of receiving the OSC. In most jurisdictions the attorney so ordered must explicitly request an oral hearing if one is desired. On a sua sponte OSC, the opposing party receives notice and filing, but is not directly involved in the disciplinary procedure except where called as a witness. The opposing party does not have standing in a sua sponte OSC.

 

[Thermal]

The most common reason a lawyer is disbarred is defrauding a client or misappropriating a client's funds. Hence bar associations want it to be possible for nonmembers to file bar complaints.

And the most common *reason* for filing is because a client is pissed that they lost and blames the lawyer. Actually happened to me. I got sued for all kinds of crazy claims that basically had nothing to do with me (I believe they were just trying to shake me down for a settlement check) but we went to the mat and I hit a home run, with the judge finding me zero percent responsible for the complaintants' damages. So they appealed, and were denied. Then they sued their lawyer for incompetence and filed a complaint with Div 1 ethics committee. Swell folks.

Eta: my SIL is also a lawyer, who has had complaints filed for similar reasons. They don't go far. The Bar Assn is well familiar with a disgruntled litigant looking for someone's ass on a platter.

 

[JayUtah]

Attorneys are generally bound to obey their clients' general instructions regarding the prosecution of their case. Obvious exceptions include fraudulent, unlawful, or unethical actions. Attorneys can be sanctioned for taking actions on behalf of their clients that they know to be frivolous, but the non-frivolity standard there is pretty low and the sanction standard is high. Suing your lawyer for "incompetence" because they lose a case on your behalf is certainly "swell," especially if you have instructed them to take the actions they failed at.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Were they doing the Conger?

Just horsing around.

 

[theprestige]

I was thinking he's been getting close to Contempt of Court

The judge can't go out and look for transgressions. They have to be brought to the court by someone with standing. And typically they have to constitute a positive violation of court orders. Mere procedural error or misconduct (like not reacting records) may not qualify. And even then, contempt sanctions are usually slaps on the wrist, even for convicts who are being openly and egregiously contemptuous.

I guess I just wish people would spend less time fantasizing about extraprocedural remedies, and more time taking a sober look at what the due process actually prescribes, what actually goes on during a court case, and how these things usually play out in practice.

Real court sanctions over lawyer misconduct or contemptuous behavior tend to be profoundly disappointimg, from a moral satisfaction perspective. Like, to the point not even being worth hoping for.

Tate's comeuppance, if it comes up at all, won't come from this. Tate's lawyer's comeuppance will probably never come.