Yeah, his attorney was spot on respectful of the facts. Didnt throw in "buts" all over the place when asked about findings negative to his client in first part of video. Smart of him to start on point 5.
I just want to know why there are 100's of videos of attorneys and Judges being in front of this very court for reprimand..what the hell is going on in Florida??!!
Sunshine laws make it so a lot of things are easily accessible to the public. Every state likely has just as much stuff going on… just not done as openly.
I would hate to face the lady who is calling for his head, if karma comes back around I can't wait for her to get hers, but these days there is very little forgiveness and a heck of a lot of back bitting. There is no compassion
He's a great lawyer. I was a little disappointed seeing the referers talking. It seemed like they couldn't put together a sentence and one asking a rhetorical question lol.
Chief Justice Labarga hit the nail on the head, the defendant had the ethical duty as a officer of the court to suspend all activities related to the act of conspiracy against another attorney for the sole purpose of disrupting a ongoing lawsuit and damaging the career of said attorney, they tried to hide behind the idea of a citizen informer reporting the crime of DUI but they set the crime in motion by entrapment, they were directly involved in "seducing" the attorney into the bar and used a female associate to do so, despicable behaviour and at the least it shows a contempt for the ethics code. I actually remember this case when the story broke about the practice and it's conduct, permanent disbarment is the only recourse in this matter.
@@juliodyarzagaray Slick argument and great execution. Expert presentation and soft skillset. Just too big a lift in the end. Credit to the justices to seeing through it though.
This O'Brien guy is just doing his job trying to keep his client from getting his head chopped off, but they ALL knew what the consequences of their actions would be, and chose to disregard them, and moved forward. He should lose his license.
The reason it is so rampant now and sociopaths infest everything is because of decades of "it's not that bad" following with decades of "it won't get any worse" following with decades of "Not my problem, get someone else to deal with it" following with decades of "there's just so many of them so what's the point of even trying".
I’m so impressed with Mr O’Brien. He was concise, respectful and knew his case to the detail. He never backed down from evidence against his client. He represented his client to the best of his ability and did an excellent job. I hope to see him in doing big things in the future
Imagine your career or life being on the line, your attorney has an argument prepared, he gets halfway through his first sentence and is interrupted with a question, then another, and another, and never really gets to make his argument, he used up all of his time answering questions. Just seems inappropriate for a legal proceeding and rude if nothing else. I watch these vids all the time because i find them very interesting, but it almost seems like the justices feel obligated to interrupt the attorneys constantly. Idk if my life or career was on the line this would bother me
This is a rare and interesting video of a procedure rarely seen in public. Fantastic upload, thank you! Guiliani's final hearing should be amazing too, you should get in on that.
@@jenniferwong4530 Google the affidavit from his initial suspension detailing how "Nebulous claims of 'proof' that you have neither produced nor identified will not be accepted as proof that you actually believed such things to be true in rendering our final decision." It's great
In a fair democratic judiciary system! And that exactly why so many deceitful characters are trying to destroy the very foundation of democracy. Laws for thee, and not for me!
Imagine somebody was involved in killing two people but there was someone else involved in the same circumstances who killed five people. They're both being sentenced. The person who killed five people gets life in prison. The lawyer for the person that killed two says his client shouldn't get life because the guy who did worse got life. Someone who did worse got life so therefore the person who did less shouldn't get life. Very creative but completely flawed. Imagine it turns out someone else was later discovered to have been there when the murders were committed and that person killed ten people. Now the lawyer of the guy who killed five says his client shouldn't get life either because he didn't act as badly as the guy who killed ten. Justice Canady pretty much makes the same point. Just because one person gets the highest penalty doesn't mean people who did less (and not stated here but the person who did less might on his or her own qualify for the highest penalty) shouldn't. It might actually mean we should have a more severe penalty for the people who do worse. Like others have said, though, I guess you try to make the best of what you've got.
What about the decision the court made? Can‘t that be written in the description or if the judges presents the verdict, having that at the end of every video? Is it really necessary that everyone who watches this videos has to google that?
I just goggle the article on this and it’s absolutely appalling what these 3 lawyers did. This lawyer deserves permanent disbarment for his role in this. It’s pretty bad
@Jon Doe Filthaut manipulated events so that opposing council received a DUI. You don’t see a problem in that? There were at least 4 people who orchestrated events so that he was pulled over. That’s unethical in terms of being a lawyer and very unprofessional.
Ah the joy of oral arguments, you say 5 words of your script and get immediately derailed by the judge… and i have to admire the attorney, he has horrible facts but doesnt try to argue them, its a good tactic given hes going for diminished responsibility, he has to try and get the judges on his side, so admit the bad and move on.
I've been watching a lot of these types of proceedings including other sanction proceedings where a lawyer forgot to respond to a court order or motion. The pattern I'm seeing is that in most cases, officers of the court, whether they're lawyers or police officers, are childish. Who the f u ck hires a police officer to follow an opponent to catch him driving drunk??? Indeed, what hope is there for the average citizen? Someday, AI will replace most of this silly business. And bring court costs and costs to society at large way down.
I agree with justice Canady , Mr O'brien's contention that his client should face a lower penalty than the orchestrators of the scheme , because he played a lesser part , studiously ignores the idea that in isolation from all else his actions had reached the bar for permanent disbarment. As the chief justice pointed out, his actions should be viewed in isolation as he was free to refuse to take part in the scheme and simply walk away , which he failed to do so , twice .
Any lawyer who decides not to take the stand deserves to be disbarred. Swing the bat instead of sitting in the dugout. Dugouts are for losers and drug addicts.
Nobody saw him when he deleted the messages, so he is as innocent as a newborn baby bunny. I think they were deleted is evidence, not proof, that he deleted the messages. To say there is no evidence is a lie that any lawyer could be proud of. Lawyers are many times more responsible for any crime they commit than others because few people can understand the consequences of their actions more than lawyers, and they did it anyway. Then this was a conspiracy, and that makes it worse, not less than other crimes.
They set him up but he did still drive while intoxicated. You couldn't persuade me to drive a car after I have been drinking because I'm responsible for my own actions. That being said, I believe that the judiciary did its job.
Sadly this is basically like "qualified immunity" meaning, it's not supposed to protect you when you break the law or do intentional acts that brings that into question. it's like he's asking for leniency with using the "sorry I wasn't cheating/raping, I just tripped and my dick just slipped in."
Im more upset that I just watched closing arguments thinking it was sentencing because of the semi-misleading title (disbarment). My assumption though. Won't happen again DNR
This seems like a scene from Better Call Saul. You can get disbarred for ratting on someone who might break the law and eventually does break the law? I’m baffled.
Lol. I think he just chose a bad client. If he got up to the political level lawsuits, his horrible and corrupt nature would be something certain judges with motivations will happily defend… Law as we know it died… I actually don’t think there is any accountability. I’m not alone. I was abused by police and paid them extortion. They made me strip naked and dance “to loosen anything” I’m a white dude in Georgia… this shit isn’t ok for anyone. Now somehow I have black folks saying I’m screwing them… I would invite them home, but it’s cheap and rough. I live outside on purpose.
Lots of bad facts this counsel is having to go against to argue to save this persons license. Stand in front of the facts, be respectful, argue what you can
IN MY VIEW It breaks my heart when I hear of attorney disbarment from any source. The reality is there is no profession immune from employees with bad ethics, morals or conscience. The good news is, statistically speaking, these bad characters are only a few and the other employees are GOOD people.
@@bookemdanno5596 ooh, some one no longer has red white and blue in their veins but Trump yellow. By the way, I’m Native American, hope that helps with your next comment.
He wasn't punished, but if someone invokes the fifth the justices are well within their rights to infer unethical behavior. That's the concept of adverse inferance, which they mentioned. Tao didn't get disbarred, yet had more evidence, but because he invoked the 5th he actually got away with more than Filthout. So if anything, this could be perceived as rewarding Tao instead of punishing him.
“If all the lawyers were hanged tomorrow, and their bones were sold to a mah jong factory, we’d all be freer and safer, and our taxes would be reduced by almost a half.” - H. L. Mencken
Question is was he over the limit for a dui ??? As how it came to be he was court. Oh mind you we need to remember who he was and his position don’t we
so what was the outcome from this? Permanent disbarment? Anyone have any other disbarment session that is a bit more juicy? I've never seen these kinds of hearings before, but I would imagine there has to be law workes accused of much worse things than this which resulted in a see worthy disbarment hearing or sentencing or whatever they call it?
Even when crimes are committed by just average citizens, aren't all who took part equally guilty as member of that group? If he didn't want to be a lawyer, this is how it's done?
You want to know what he actually here it is. This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
is there an update vid?? I've seen vids where the Court has publicly reprimanded and publicly vetted out their discipline.. or should I say their conniving ways
the country i live in police, accountants and lawyers in general unfortunately are not highly thought of as trustworthy but nurses, firefighters and education teachers are. greetings from New Zealand.
Not a single Justice in that room left thinking permanent disbarment with no opportunity to reinstate wasn't the right fit. Justice Canady won the day.
That is not the way hearings like this work. The attorneys are there to present their case in explanation of the situation AND to answer questions from the justices. This isn't the same as a standard court case where the judge only responds to objections or talks when needed. There are time limits, etc.
@@connix69Then the practice should change, for the sake of justice. In English, ideas are represented by sentences. If a sentence cannot be finished, then ideas cannot be communicated. If ideas cannot be communicated, then defendants are not able to mount defenses. If defendants are not about to mount defenses, then justice is abrogated.
Just the only state where they let the public know about it in fact they have less corrupition than the other state because they don't want to be publically be fired they cannot be a lawyer in any state/country after this public trial.
Is it just me…or does it feel to anyone else that every time the defense attorney opens his mouth it’s like you see him digging a grave deeper and deeper and deeper….maybe it’s just me….
The hole was already 6 feet deep for this defense attorney trying to represent his client, they were already going to ger disbarred. This is a hail mary
I found it interesting that the lawyer at the beginning of this video ( I have only watched 7 minutes) is able to speak clearly and none of the Florida Supreme Court Justices can enunciate a sentence without correcting themselves.
That’s because he got paid a hefty sum to practice until his speech was perfect, and then practice a few more times. Once they stop his speech, rightly so, he’s not as proficient.
@@Bouzsi I think the Supreme Court Justices get paid more and did not do the job they have been doing for longer, as well. And I disagree. He was still better spoken after being interrupted .
A accomplice to any major crime is still culpable as the person who committed the crime like the woman said he was in compliance with what the other people were doing he should get the same penalty that they get. if I’m in a car and somebody in the car shoot somebody that person is going to be charged with murder along with everybody else in the car because you got in the car knowing what was going to happen a murder
The defense's argument in plain English: "Our client is innocent because he was only helping his buddy and in the buddy buddy system you have to help your buddies or when you do your crime who will help you? So according to the code of Ethics of the Buddy Buddy System(trademark) of which my client and his buddy participated in, my client was obligated to break the law to help him. Also, according to the principles and practices of modern US law, we know the US law only applies to the poors of which my client is not part of. And lets be honest your honor, if we start eating our own who will stop the poors from taking over and destroying us all? Be rational your honor, do the right thing!"
If I were the judge here, I wouldn't allow the lawyer to keep on referring to "zero evidence". There is "no evidence" or, intensified, "not a shred of evidence", but, elegantly at least, a number, which is what zxero is, should not be used with a countable noun. This abuse took away much of the pleasure of listening to this case.
If these justices had any ability to listen…you know the one thing they are supposed to do…since they are supposed to be the wise and precise mages of the court…you’d think they’d have heard the numerous times that the man’s last name is said correctly by his attorney, and would not misstate it a dozen different ways. If they can’t grasp that little detail then how can you trust them to scrutinize the little details presented in this case? It sounds to me like they enjoy trying to talk the way that the US Supreme Court sounds when they have a hearing. It’s cringe.
Most of us already learn this in elementary school "We let others finish speaking". These judges appear to be lacking in the basics of conduct. Bad, considering that they are highest judges in the Florida.
@@SciDOCMBC completely normal Supreme Court hearing. They force the attorneys to narrow their case argument and get to the point. They judge according law, case precedent, and the facts. They have read the brief already. They already have read the attorney’s speech. All that is left is their questions about the brief.
FYI: this is the way it goes in almost any appellate court in the USA . Justice Thomas claims his opposition to this "tradition" is the reason he does not ask questions during oral argument.
If a person murders ten people and is sentenced to death, Would it mean if another person only murders two people should the sentence be less? ... Of course not. Justice has to be seen to be done.
Gotta love it. Guy with an unfortunate last name FILTHaut come before the court. As if everyone looking at the name doesn't get the issue with the pronunciation of the name, his attorney stands up, pronounces the name and then announces "the H is silent". Really, counsel? You've just emphasized your client's problem with his name - was that really necessary?
@@yayayaokoksure Not so weak that you're still taking pot shots at me. Why not STFU - you made you point, it didn't stick so go trash someone else's comment. Better yet, make an original one of your own. Nah, too stupid for that
For those looking for the FL Supreme Court opinion, here is a link to the document, which includes the referral. This case is from 2016. www.floridasupremecourt.org/content/download/322919/opinion/sc14-1054_%2520sc14-1056.pdf In short, Mr. Filthaut was permanently disbarred.
![NOSFERATU - Official Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters December 25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nulvWqYUM8k/mqdefault.jpg)
Mr O’Brien deserves credit for doing the best he can with what he’s got, which doesn’t appear to be much.
Yeah, his attorney was spot on respectful of the facts. Didnt throw in "buts" all over the place when asked about findings negative to his client in first part of video. Smart of him to start on point 5.
Totally agree. He kept his cool, was respectful, and did everything he could to represent his client to the best of his ability. Props to him
I just want to know why there are 100's of videos of attorneys and Judges being in front of this very court for reprimand..what the hell is going on in Florida??!!
Corruption!
I think every state has this it’s just that in Florida they choose to stream it
Sunshine laws make it so a lot of things are easily accessible to the public. Every state likely has just as much stuff going on… just not done as openly.
@@pitolove3846 🦅🦅🦅🦅
@@pitolove3846 Actually, you are misinformed. Liberal states have similar laws and policies for government officials.
I would hate to face the lady who is calling for his head, if karma comes back around I can't wait for her to get hers, but these days there is very little forgiveness and a heck of a lot of back bitting. There is no compassion
It’s terrific Florida makes these available. Very informative for the public and other attorneys
So does Massachusetts
They conspired to ruin a life, I have no confidence that it wouldn't happen again.
Stuck with a complete no-hoper, I thought Mr O'Brien defended his client's corner with remarkable skill.
He's a great lawyer. I was a little disappointed seeing the referers talking. It seemed like they couldn't put together a sentence and one asking a rhetorical question lol.
If Congress behaved more like this and less like a barroom brawl, this country would be a much better place.
Right now is a brothel.
Congress should all be shot. Period
Congress behaves like it does because the public votes for people whose terrible behaviour is never punished.
Yea because the senate is full of angels stfu
Chief Justice Labarga hit the nail on the head, the defendant had the ethical duty as a officer of the court to suspend all activities related to the act of conspiracy against another attorney for the sole purpose of disrupting a ongoing lawsuit and damaging the career of said attorney, they tried to hide behind the idea of a citizen informer reporting the crime of DUI but they set the crime in motion by entrapment, they were directly involved in "seducing" the attorney into the bar and used a female associate to do so, despicable behaviour and at the least it shows a contempt for the ethics code. I actually remember this case when the story broke about the practice and it's conduct, permanent disbarment is the only recourse in this matter.
Holy run-on sentence Batman.
the attorney for the defendant is VERY good!
Not so good as to best Justice Canady in a logic exercise.
@@victoriapollard6995 You don't pick your clients.
@@juliodyarzagaray Slick argument and great execution. Expert presentation and soft skillset. Just too big a lift in the end. Credit to the justices to seeing through it though.
@@victoriapollard6995 My guess is that the Justice had already made up his mind.
@@victoriapollard6995 well said
This O'Brien guy is just doing his job trying to keep his client from getting his head chopped off, but they ALL knew what the consequences of their actions would be, and chose to disregard them, and moved forward. He should lose his license.
The reason it is so rampant now and sociopaths infest everything is because of decades of "it's not that bad" following with decades of "it won't get any worse" following with decades of "Not my problem, get someone else to deal with it" following with decades of "there's just so many of them so what's the point of even trying".
Very well said, awesome. It's embarrassing to be an American now.
I’m so impressed with Mr O’Brien. He was concise, respectful and knew his case to the detail. He never backed down from evidence against his client. He represented his client to the best of his ability and did an excellent job. I hope to see him in doing big things in the future
Touch day for Mr O Brien but he did his best and kept his cool
Imagine your career or life being on the line, your attorney has an argument prepared, he gets halfway through his first sentence and is interrupted with a question, then another, and another, and never really gets to make his argument, he used up all of his time answering questions. Just seems inappropriate for a legal proceeding and rude if nothing else. I watch these vids all the time because i find them very interesting, but it almost seems like the justices feel obligated to interrupt the attorneys constantly. Idk if my life or career was on the line this would bother me
This is a rare and interesting video of a procedure rarely seen in public. Fantastic upload, thank you! Guiliani's final hearing should be amazing too, you should get in on that.
I would love to see the Guilliani hearing!
@@jenniferwong4530 Google the affidavit from his initial suspension detailing how "Nebulous claims of 'proof' that you have neither produced nor identified will not be accepted as proof that you actually believed such things to be true in rendering our final decision." It's great
@@ethanboyd7843 I will for sure! Thanks!
There would be zero candor in Guilliani’s hearing!
In a fair democratic judiciary system, everyone is treated equally.
So yes everyone should get the same punishment when they do wrong.
In a fair democratic judiciary system! And that exactly why so many deceitful characters are trying to destroy the very foundation of democracy. Laws for thee, and not for me!
😂😂😂 "It's Filt-Aut...the H is silent." Naw he seems pretty filthy to me.
Imagine somebody was involved in killing two people but there was someone else involved in the same circumstances who killed five people. They're both being sentenced. The person who killed five people gets life in prison. The lawyer for the person that killed two says his client shouldn't get life because the guy who did worse got life. Someone who did worse got life so therefore the person who did less shouldn't get life.
Very creative but completely flawed.
Imagine it turns out someone else was later discovered to have been there when the murders were committed and that person killed ten people. Now the lawyer of the guy who killed five says his client shouldn't get life either because he didn't act as badly as the guy who killed ten.
Justice Canady pretty much makes the same point. Just because one person gets the highest penalty doesn't mean people who did less (and not stated here but the person who did less might on his or her own qualify for the highest penalty) shouldn't. It might actually mean we should have a more severe penalty for the people who do worse.
Like others have said, though, I guess you try to make the best of what you've got.
What about the decision the court made? Can‘t that be written in the description or if the judges presents the verdict, having that at the end of every video?
Is it really necessary that everyone who watches this videos has to google that?
You're thinking about stuff and that's just something we don't do here 🤪
i totally agree but as it is only a lawyers life in the balance im ok with not googling the answer.
Atty O'Brien did his respectable best but you just can't do things like this. I don't even know what a DUI would have helped their case/.
I just goggle the article on this and it’s absolutely appalling what these 3 lawyers did. This lawyer deserves permanent disbarment for his role in this. It’s pretty bad
He was permanently disbarred
I read it as well. I’ve never read anything like it. He definitely deserves full disbarment.
@Jon Doe Filthaut manipulated events so that opposing council received a DUI. You don’t see a problem in that? There were at least 4 people who orchestrated events so that he was pulled over. That’s unethical in terms of being a lawyer and very unprofessional.
Thank you SO much for providing the link to the article!
@Jon Doe That's not what anyone is arguing here.
Ah the joy of oral arguments, you say 5 words of your script and get immediately derailed by the judge… and i have to admire the attorney, he has horrible facts but doesnt try to argue them, its a good tactic given hes going for diminished responsibility, he has to try and get the judges on his side, so admit the bad and move on.
I've been watching a lot of these types of proceedings including other sanction proceedings where a lawyer forgot to respond to a court order or motion.
The pattern I'm seeing is that in most cases, officers of the court, whether they're lawyers or police officers, are childish.
Who the f u ck hires a police officer to follow an opponent to catch him driving drunk???
Indeed, what hope is there for the average citizen?
Someday, AI will replace most of this silly business. And bring court costs and costs to society at large way down.
I like your comment. It is a cluster f*+k of BS & I'm exhausted.
I agree with justice Canady , Mr O'brien's contention that his client should face a lower penalty than the orchestrators of the scheme , because he played a lesser part , studiously ignores the idea that in isolation from all else his actions had reached the bar for permanent disbarment. As the chief justice pointed out, his actions should be viewed in isolation as he was free to refuse to take part in the scheme and simply walk away , which he failed to do so , twice .
Any lawyer who decides not to take the stand deserves to be disbarred. Swing the bat instead of sitting in the dugout. Dugouts are for losers and drug addicts.
These clowns tried to frame this guy for political advantage? Well, the cop is done, so now it's time to dump the dishonest lawyer.
Nobody saw him when he deleted the messages, so he is as innocent as a newborn baby bunny. I think they were deleted is evidence, not proof, that he deleted the messages. To say there is no evidence is a lie that any lawyer could be proud of.
Lawyers are many times more responsible for any crime they commit than others because few people can understand the consequences of their actions more than lawyers, and they did it anyway. Then this was a conspiracy, and that makes it worse, not less than other crimes.
The amount of texts is really kind of irrelevant.
Do they ever post the outcomes from these videos?
Saul Goodman coulda saved him
They set him up but he did still drive while intoxicated. You couldn't persuade me to drive a car after I have been drinking because I'm responsible for my own actions. That being said, I believe that the judiciary did its job.
Sadly this is basically like "qualified immunity" meaning, it's not supposed to protect you when you break the law or do intentional acts that brings that into question. it's like he's asking for leniency with using the "sorry I wasn't cheating/raping, I just tripped and my dick just slipped in."
So true, appreciate the sarcasm as well.
Well done friend .
Trump 2020!
the finding by the trial judge IS THE EVIDENCE at this point. he has negative inferences when it comes to what was on his phone.
Im more upset that I just watched closing arguments thinking it was sentencing because of the semi-misleading title (disbarment).
My assumption though. Won't happen again DNR
Nice try mr. Obrien
Horrible deed.... All should face perm disbar probably.
fred lewis!? more like red lewis ammiright??
🤣😂🤣😂🤣👍✌️
This seems like a scene from Better Call Saul.
You can get disbarred for ratting on someone who might break the law and eventually does break the law? I’m baffled.
Pretty certain that if a bank robber kills the bank teller the get away driver gets charged with the murder also, the felony during a felony
@jim Oneill and
@jim Oneill Indeed, I learnt this only recently. Rekieta taught me a lot.
Lol. I think he just chose a bad client. If he got up to the political level lawsuits, his horrible and corrupt nature would be something certain judges with motivations will happily defend…
Law as we know it died… I actually don’t think there is any accountability.
I’m not alone.
I was abused by police and paid them extortion. They made me strip naked and dance “to loosen anything”
I’m a white dude in Georgia… this shit isn’t ok for anyone. Now somehow I have black folks saying I’m screwing them… I would invite them home, but it’s cheap and rough. I live outside on purpose.
The h isn’t silent, he just doesn’t like his own name.
How are there any judges or attorneys left in Florida? There are hundreds of these uploads from this state.
Mr. O'Brien is going places. Take notes.
Entrap him- what? Reporting on someones actions is not entrapment!
Lots of bad facts this counsel is having to go against to argue to save this persons license. Stand in front of the facts, be respectful, argue what you can
IN MY VIEW
It breaks my heart when I hear of attorney disbarment from any source. The reality is there is no profession immune from employees with bad ethics, morals or conscience. The good news is, statistically speaking, these bad characters are only a few and the other employees are GOOD people.
Why does it break your heart?
Imagine these judges asking questions to Trump’s lawyers of Trump’s actions while Trump is sitting there.
Right, because that has anything whatsoever in common with, or what to do with, what is going on here. Stick to cat videos and let the adults talk.
@@bookemdanno5596 ooh, some one no longer has red white and blue in their veins but Trump yellow. By the way, I’m Native American, hope that helps with your next comment.
So what was the outcome of this case? Was he disbarred?
No one should ever be punished for invoking their 5th amendment.
He wasn't punished, but if someone invokes the fifth the justices are well within their rights to infer unethical behavior. That's the concept of adverse inferance, which they mentioned. Tao didn't get disbarred, yet had more evidence, but because he invoked the 5th he actually got away with more than Filthout. So if anything, this could be perceived as rewarding Tao instead of punishing him.
@@isaacnewtonstolemyjoy Was there no Punishment?
@@isaacnewtonstolemyjoy It is unequal treatment under the law. Giving someone rewards for not invoking rights is a punishment.
And wasn't convicted of anything. At the very least he should have been given limited immunity. He would have been required to testify.
@@Veevslav1 guess we should do away with plea deals then
What did he do wrong?
I've been both a private attorney and a public defender. I'm currently a Public Defender.
I have NO desire to return to private practice.
“If all the lawyers were hanged tomorrow, and their bones were sold to a mah jong factory, we’d all be freer and safer, and our taxes would be reduced by almost a half.”
- H. L. Mencken
Question is was he over the limit for a dui ??? As how it came to be he was court. Oh mind you we need to remember who he was and his position don’t we
Filth-out
Amazing hearing.. agree with the court and am impressed with the counsel doing the arguments
so what was the outcome from this? Permanent disbarment? Anyone have any other disbarment session that is a bit more juicy? I've never seen these kinds of hearings before, but I would imagine there has to be law workes accused of much worse things than this which resulted in a see worthy disbarment hearing or sentencing or whatever they call it?
Even when crimes are committed by just average citizens, aren't all who took part equally guilty as member of that group? If he didn't want to be a lawyer, this is how it's done?
You want to know what he actually here it is. This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
is there an update vid?? I've seen vids where the Court has publicly reprimanded and publicly vetted out their discipline.. or should I say their conniving ways
Unanimous votes for disbarment. And thus the attorney who represented Bubba the Love Sponge loses his license to practice law in Florida.
@@RJStockton serious stuff what a waste 😑
the country i live in police, accountants and lawyers in general unfortunately are not highly thought of as trustworthy but nurses, firefighters and education teachers are. greetings from New Zealand.
Whatever happened to the paralegal/honeytrap? Could she have gone back to her birth name? Did she get a big bonus?
I would suggest Again, a Leopard does not change his spots. Get it !
What a big waste of court time they all should be disbarred for what they are trying to do.
"It was only one little phone call", and "but what about the behaviour of others"......... sounds kinda familiar, doesn't it.
Ah, but was it a PERFECT call?
So, what punishment did he get?
The “H” is silent loooool
Do we have a followup to this?
I remember this. What a mess.
Gotta love it people.
So? What did the court conclude? 🤷🏻♂️ Now we’re left in the dark…
Not a single Justice in that room left thinking permanent disbarment with no opportunity to reinstate wasn't the right fit. Justice Canady won the day.
No verdict?????
I wish the Justices would let the attorney finish a sentence.
That is not the way hearings like this work. The attorneys are there to present their case in explanation of the situation AND to answer questions from the justices. This isn't the same as a standard court case where the judge only responds to objections or talks when needed. There are time limits, etc.
@@connix69Then the practice should change, for the sake of justice. In English, ideas are represented by sentences. If a sentence cannot be finished, then ideas cannot be communicated. If ideas cannot be communicated, then defendants are not able to mount defenses. If defendants are not about to mount defenses, then justice is abrogated.
I love the names in the transcript it's almost a good skit. I'm laughing at the variety of misspellings.
I'm sad you keep an account.
What did they decide?
That lawyers suck and they should be moved to a deserted island.
Is there something in the water in florida where lawyers have become mentally incompitant?
Just the only state where they let the public know about it in fact they have less corrupition than the other state because they don't want to be publically be fired they cannot be a lawyer in any state/country after this public trial.
This level of transparency is to be commended
Not just the lawyers.
Lawyers thinking they are the FBI
Hard to present an argument when you're interrupted after every sentence.
And you have to shut your mouth like you interrupted them hahaha
Is it just me…or does it feel to anyone else that every time the defense attorney opens his mouth it’s like you see him digging a grave deeper and deeper and deeper….maybe it’s just me….
The hole was already 6 feet deep for this defense attorney trying to represent his client, they were already going to ger disbarred. This is a hail mary
It was already over before the hearing started. The lawyer did his best with what he had to work with (which was nothing).
In summary... it's just you.
@@ShainAndrews LOL! I agree counselor. Completely just me!
I found it interesting that the lawyer at the beginning of this video ( I have only watched 7 minutes) is able to speak clearly and none of the Florida Supreme Court Justices can enunciate a sentence without correcting themselves.
That’s because he got paid a hefty sum to practice until his speech was perfect, and then practice a few more times. Once they stop his speech, rightly so, he’s not as proficient.
@@Bouzsi I think the Supreme Court Justices get paid more and did not do the job they have been doing for longer, as well. And I disagree. He was still better spoken after being interrupted
.
That's because he's had months of prep work. The judges don't
@@sdevane75 I think they have acquired over 40 years of prep work. Your standards seem low.
@@josephkramer932 he’s referring to prep work on _this_ case, which you had to have known… unless you’re just thick.
A accomplice to any major crime is still culpable as the person who committed the crime like the woman said he was in compliance with what the other people were doing he should get the same penalty that they get. if I’m in a car and somebody in the car shoot somebody that person is going to be charged with murder along with everybody else in the car because you got in the car knowing what was going to happen a murder
The defense's argument in plain English: "Our client is innocent because he was only helping his buddy and in the buddy buddy system you have to help your buddies or when you do your crime who will help you? So according to the code of Ethics of the Buddy Buddy System(trademark) of which my client and his buddy participated in, my client was obligated to break the law to help him. Also, according to the principles and practices of modern US law, we know the US law only applies to the poors of which my client is not part of. And lets be honest your honor, if we start eating our own who will stop the poors from taking over and destroying us all? Be rational your honor, do the right thing!"
If I were the judge here, I wouldn't allow the lawyer to keep on referring to "zero evidence". There is "no evidence" or, intensified, "not a shred of evidence", but, elegantly at least, a number, which is what zxero is, should not be used with a countable noun. This abuse took away much of the pleasure of listening to this case.
If these justices had any ability to listen…you know the one thing they are supposed to do…since they are supposed to be the wise and precise mages of the court…you’d think they’d have heard the numerous times that the man’s last name is said correctly by his attorney, and would not misstate it a dozen different ways. If they can’t grasp that little detail then how can you trust them to scrutinize the little details presented in this case? It sounds to me like they enjoy trying to talk the way that the US Supreme Court sounds when they have a hearing. It’s cringe.
Lots of attorneys participate in this play to get paid from the suffering of others behavior
those justices seem incapable of eloquent forming opinions based on law and facts. did they won those seat in the county fair?
I wish the judges would let the attorney speak they are constantly interrupting him.
Most of us already learn this in elementary school "We let others finish speaking". These judges appear to be lacking in the basics of conduct. Bad, considering that they are highest judges in the Florida.
@@SciDOCMBC agreed
@@SciDOCMBC completely normal Supreme Court hearing. They force the attorneys to narrow their case argument and get to the point. They judge according law, case precedent, and the facts. They have read the brief already. They already have read the attorney’s speech. All that is left is their questions about the brief.
@@theargonauts8490 agree
FYI: this is the way it goes in almost any appellate court in the USA . Justice Thomas claims his opposition to this "tradition" is the reason he does not ask questions during oral argument.
If a person murders ten people and is sentenced to death, Would it mean if another person only murders two people should the sentence be less? ... Of course not. Justice has to be seen to be done.
They are charged differently. Time usually given in years. Theoretically you can outlive your sentence.
has to be seen?
Someone needs to tell Peggy how to use a mic!
Only a judge is vacant enough to say "I don't know what the testimony was but OBVIOUSLY "
Why is this on youtube?
It's interesting...
Why not?
Gotta love it. Guy with an unfortunate last name FILTHaut come before the court. As if everyone looking at the name doesn't get
the issue with the pronunciation of the name, his attorney stands up, pronounces the name and then announces "the H is silent".
Really, counsel? You've just emphasized your client's problem with his name - was that really necessary?
Yes, it's necessary for him to clarify the pronunciation for the court. Pretty minor part of the trial.
Haha!
@@yayayaokoksure No it wasn't and YOU missed the point entirely
@@clambroth1923 nah. Your opinion is weak. Dude just clarified a name.
@@yayayaokoksure Not so weak that you're still taking pot shots at me. Why not STFU - you made you point, it didn't stick so go trash someone else's comment. Better yet, make an original one of your own. Nah, too stupid for that
Lawyers defending other lawyers. You can't write this stuff.
I'd love to spend nearly a half hour watching this, but it's RUclips. Condense it.
If you would really "love" to, I'm sure you can work it so that you can do it.
No, no I don’t think I will.
Then, i don't think you would "love" to. ;)
He made the decision and chose to do it. He is guilty and needs permanent dis barment
For those looking for the FL Supreme Court opinion, here is a link to the document, which includes the referral. This case is from 2016.
www.floridasupremecourt.org/content/download/322919/opinion/sc14-1054_%2520sc14-1056.pdf
In short, Mr. Filthaut was permanently disbarred.
He made the contact that made the whole conspiracy possible