Friday, June 22, 2012
The Madness Of Jill Clark, PART EIGHT, Clark Reads The Writing On The Wall, "We Are Seeking A Period Of Suspension"
Creative stock photo, taken somewhere in Afghanistan, blog post by John Hoff
A number of documents have come into my hands related to attorney Jill Clark's lawyer disciplinary proceeding and her unsuccessful attempts to get her case removed to federal court. One of those documents contained an interesting paragraph which might be considered "the writing on the wall" as far as what is likely to happen to Jill Clark...
In a filing with the federal court which Clark dated June 8, but which was not stamped "received" by the court until June 12, Clark attempted to remove her case from state court to federal court. This attempt was not successful, and thank goodness I had a creative stock photo of circus clowns to illustrate that particular blog post.
In the course of that June 12, 2012 filing, Clark cited the contents of an email between the Honorable Lloyd B. Zimmerman, and Cassie Hanson, who is the Assistant Director of the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Office. The email was in a file about a disciplinary hearing against Clark that started with a complaint filed in 2004 which was resolved a couple years later. This complaint resulted in a private "admonishment" by the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board. The fact this happened is just becoming public now in the course of these current proceedings against Clark. This blog will have more coverage on that issue, which centered around Clark's shockingly inadequate and "dilatory" actions in the course of defending a juvenile involved in a sex assault.
Clark states she only recently had an opportunity to review the file about the old disciplinary action and see the email. Maddeningly, Clark doesn't include a specific date on the email but it seems like it would be from 2004 or 2005.
Though its specific date is unknown, the email shows the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board was very focused on Clark during that period of time. In fact, there was a push for SUSPENSION of Clark, not a mere admonishment. The fact Clark was running for judge also was mentioned, though why that was relevant isn't exactly clear. The mention of her campaign seems innocent, however, something along the lines of "Clark must not be treated more special than other lawyers just because she's running for judge" or perhaps "We may have to make these matters public in response to inquiries caused by her campaign."
In other words...nothing improper, though Clark seems to think so.
Judge for yourself. Here's what Hanson wrote to Zimmerman.
Panel Chair is attorney Patrick McGuigan and the other board members are attorney David Sasseville and public member Wallace Neal. All three have served as long time members of the Lawyers Board and are well respected within the legal community. Again this is a probable cause hearing so the Director must only prove that the facts, more likely than not, occurred as charged.
(Paragraph break not in original)
If probable cause is established, then a petition for public discipline will be filed and a referee appointed by the Supreme Court for a hearing. We would then need your testimony again at that stage. Often our cares (sic) settle but I don't anticipate a settlement in this case given Ms. Clark's campaign for judicial election and the fact that we are seeking a period of suspension.
Finally, the disciplinary proceedings are at this stage private until probable cause is established, should there be any public inquiry or interest given Ms. Clark's campaign activities. Once probable cause is established notice of the disciplinary petition will be published.
So it appears Clark was "the one that got away" in a previous disciplinary hearing, and SUSPENSION was the solution being sought by, it appears, whoever Hanson included as "we" in that third sentence; presumably the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board.
While I've not seen it explicitly stated, it appears Clark's previous discipline is being taken into account in the current proceeding. Previously, there was a push to get her suspended but that didn't happen. Now it's time for the hardline faction to say, "We told you so, and let's not make the same mistake again."
As Clark's eyes saw this email for the first time, on or about June 7, she must have felt like Belshazzar hearing the prophet Daniel interpreting the writing on the wall.
Your days are numbered and coming to an end.
You've been weighed in the scales of justice and come up short.
Your kingdom is about to fall apart.