Reporting Crockett to the Bar

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Locked
_GoodK

Reporting Crockett to the Bar

Post by _GoodK »

rcrocket wrote:
GoodK wrote:
If I hear you falsely accuse me of humiliating my little sister (whom you don't even know) again, either in print or in person, you will be very sorry. Consider yourself on notice. Shortstack.


Your post humiliated your family, your sister and your father. I only comment upon it because you keep attacking Dr. Peterson about it. Dr. Peterson is innocent in this entire affair. I urge you to be respectful in all your public discussions with people whose reputations have meaning.

I just wish you would have responded more appropriately to my advance warnings with you in private.


Since Bob won't stop this kind of antagonistic behavior, which has now become harassment, I am on my way to the post office to mail an official California Attorney Complaint Form to the State Bar of California.

I am not going to post the completed form here - if I did I would have to go home and scan it and I want to get it into the mail today.

The form can be found here: http://calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/DispComp.pdf and the answer to number 7 can be found on my blog (if I haven't granted you access to it, send me a PM)

It is my sincere hope that Mr. Crockett will cease to publicly say hurtful, untrue things about my family or myself or any other person who chooses to participate here.
Mr. Crockett clearly does not respect personal boundries. I hope that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel and the State Bar can persuade Mr. Crockett to do so in the future.


ETA: I don't desire/expect Mr. Crockett to be disciplined by the State Bar. I just hope he will think more carefully about what he says now that his peers have been made aware.
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

This whole episode has just been crazy. I'm glad I'm not anywhere in this thing, it just saddens me.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

I think this dispute should be dealt with in a more civilized fashion. I advise this guide to help: http://www.wikihow.com/Fight-a-Duel-%28 ... ern-Way%29

Throughout the centuries, gentlemen have resorted to duelling to settle accounts. A duel is a fight between two gentlemen which resolves an argument and restores honour. Although illegal to duel with pistols, swords and in any manner that results in death or physical injury to an opponent, it is still possible to duel with a fellow gentleman when disagreement arises. If you and a friend feel that the gentlemanly way to resolve a dispute is to have a good sense of humour, a willingness to be judged by others as to the outcome of the dispute and a sense of history, modern duelling may just be for you.

Steps

1. React with decorum to a perceived slight. A gentleman should never be drawn into a spur of the moment brawl or street fight. Perhaps you have misinterpreted a comment or simply got the wrong end of the stick? Think it over. But if the slight is too much to bear, as a modern day gentleman, you must find other means by which to resolve the anger from a simmering feud and perhaps a modern day duel is the answer for you.

2. Arrange for a neutral observer or more to aid your duelling. Select a friend or group of friends not party to the feud. Have the neutral friend(s) regulate the duel and to declare the winner.

3. Fight a duel in a gentlemanly fashion so that on both sides honour may be satisfied. Duelling with swords or pistols these days is neither practical nor efficacious. Instead, modern duelling calls for a makeover of the means by which the modern gentleman can settle disputes. For starters, a modern gentleman who feels slighted can demand satisfaction. Simply say "Sir, I demand satisfaction!" The acceptance to this should be "Then, you shall have it Sir!" Remember that the culture of duelling developed so that gentlemen could remain polite at all times. When demanding satisfaction, there is no reason to do so angrily or aggressively.

4. Try modern techniques for duelling. The modern gentleman can adapt modern pursuits for the purpose of duelling:

Thumb war: This simple game is an excellent modern alternative to traditional duelling, as there is no bloodshed. Both duellists curl the forefingers of their right hands, then grip each others' hand. The duellists look each other in the eye and recite "one, two, three, four, I declare thumb war." They then attempt to capture each other's thumb between their thumb and fist. The first to hold the other's thumb for a count of three is pronounced the winner of the duel and honour is satisfied.

Talent competition: Each duellist must pick a talent of their choice and perform it to the best of their ability. The winner of this talent duel is decided by friends or bystanders offering their scores or loudest cheers.

Challenge your rival to a computer game. Follow the rules of the game to determine who is the winner.

Play a board game. Choose one that challenges their vocabulary and intellect. That should decide the matter in question.

5. Pepper your language with well-mannered expletives during your duel. Phrases such as "Have at You!", "Damme!" and "En garde, good sir!" will add to the experience for both duellists and spectators.

6. Be satisfied that honour has been restored. Once the duel is completed, a gentleman moves on and forgets and forgives. Resume the friendship from where it left off and be glad that both of you have an enduring sense of humour and enjoyment of one another's company.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

I am used to these kind of off-line personal attacks from members of this Board. It does not concern me in the least. I am here for the fun and the challenge of exchanging views with persons who are unhappy with the faith of their fathers.

I should expect to be personally attacked off-line, and indeed, have been several times. It probably pales in comparison to what happens to Dr. Peterson.

GoodK has some challenges in life and I only wish him the best in the end.

But, really, when he posts private material (an email) and commentary deriding a close personal friend of mine (and, I might add for the first time here, a client where I have a duty to communicate with him negative and damaging material) and his daughter in a most sensitive area -- and where so many other people would likely pick up on it -- I feel it a duty to help and warn his dad. As well, to stick up for his dad and the daughter.

So, sue me. Oh, right, he has.
_GoodK

Post by _GoodK »

rcrocket wrote:
(and, I might add for the first time here, a client where I have a duty to communicate with him negative and damaging material)



For a Bishop you lie an awful lot.

You never represented my step-dad, my sister, or any member of my family in regards to this case.

Your close friend has confirmed that.

So, sue me. Oh, right, he has.


I didn't sue you, I am filing a formal complaint.
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

I have provided legal advice to your dad.

Hey, I find it amusing and funny -- proceed as you see fit. I only wish you the best and hope that you find what makes you happy! Just don't post mean stuff about your dad and expect me to be silent about it.
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

rcrocket wrote:I am here for the fun and the challenge of exchanging views with persons who are unhappy with the faith of their fathers.

If you find it "fun" to spew the venom that you do around here, then you are messed up more than I thought.

But, really, when he posts private material (an email) and commentary deriding a close personal friend of mine ....

Only you and DCP knew who GoodK's father was -- no one else! You should have left the issue between father and son, and steered clear of their relationship.

... (and, I might add for the first time here, a client where I have a duty to communicate with him negative and damaging material) ...

You had no "legal duty" in this context, and to suggest otherwise is blatantly dishonest. Face it, you were simply being a busybody.

I feel it a duty to help and warn his dad.

Are you still talking a "legal duty"?

As well, to stick up for his dad and the daughter.

You certainly could have done that on this bb without butting into their relationship.

So, sue me.

Enjoy yourself before the grievance committee, Bishop Bob.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

I find it a small price to pay for sticking up for my friends and my faith on this board. I use my own name and put up with repeated anonymous attacks challenging my integrity. Really fascinating, actually. I don't lose my cool, but I can see what so few faithful Saints are willing to come here to be traduced anonymously.

But, it will be great to see the bar complaint come over the transom; I'll get to take some discovery against GoodK and I'll post the results here!! I will post the progress of the complaint on my blog for all to see. It will be fun.
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

rcrocket wrote:I find it a small price to pay for sticking up for my friends and my faith on this board. I use my own name and put up with repeated anonymous attacks challenging my integrity. Really fascinating, actually.

The only thing you accomplished in this regard was to meddle in and harm the relationship between GoodK and his father. Don't confuse "sticking up for my friends" with inserting your busybody self into an already strained family relationship. Are you this cavalier with others' lives and families when serving as bishop?
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_GoodK

Post by _GoodK »

rcrocket wrote:I
GoodK has some challenges in life and I only wish him the best in the end.


Ah... subtly implying I am a sinner. Spoken like a true Mormon apologist.

If anything, this whole ordeal has taught me a valuable lesson.

Religion really does poison everything.
Last edited by _GoodK on Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Locked