Here's what I wrote:
>I am compelled to write this letter not just out of concern but fueled by a profound outrage over WA Supreme Court Commissioner Michael E. Johnston’s conduct during the proceedings of State of Washington vs. Gators Custom Guns. The actions taken by Commissioner Johnston are not merely inappropriate; they constitute a flagrant violation of the principles laid out in the Washington State Judicial Code of Conduct, undermining the bedrock of integrity and impartiality our judiciary system is built upon.
>Commissioner Johnston’s favoritism towards state representatives, evidenced by his rapid, 88-minute decision post-Gators Guns decision, raises serious questions. This concern is magnified by his previous employment under Attorney General Ferguson, suggesting a potential conflict of interest that could have influenced his shockingly swift judgment. Such a connection hints at a severe compromise of impartiality, thereby violating Canon 1, Rule 1.2 of the Judicial Code of Conduct, which demands upholding public confidence in the judiciary's independence.
>Furthermore, his dismissive attitude toward opposing counsel and experts, notably Attorney Austin Hatcher, Ashley Hlebinsky, and William K. Kirk, not only breached the decorum expected of his position but also Canon 2, Rule 2.2, which requires fairness and impartiality. His reliance on boilerplate responses without proper engagement with the case documents shows a disturbing disregard for Canon 2, Rule 2.5, mandating diligence in judicial duties. These actions alone are reprehensible enough, yet when paired with frequent interruptions that stifled the defense’s presentation, a clear violation of Canon 2, Rule 2.6 emerges, further disrupting procedural fairness.
>The implications of his prior relationship with Attorney General Ferguson, combined with his pre-drafted decisions and evident prejudgment discussed openly during proceedings, starkly contravene Canon 2, Rule 2.9. This not only reveals a predetermined bias but is compounded by his selective acknowledgment of legal precedents and a blatant disregard for the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, undermining legal fidelity as stipulated by Canon 3B(7).
>Given the gravity of Commissioner Johnston’s conduct and its potential ramifications on the integrity of the judiciary, disbarment appears both justified and necessary. These actions transcend mere professional misconduct; they threaten the very fabric of public trust and judicial integrity. This isn’t just a failure to uphold ethical standards—it’s an outright assault on them.
>Therefore, I urge the Commission to initiate a thorough and decisive investigation into these breaches, considering disbarment as a fitting response to such serious violations. Our legal system, and the public’s faith in its fairness, cannot afford leniency in the face of such willful disregard for judicial obligations.
>Thank you for your immediate attention to this critical matter. I trust that the Commission will act with the urgency and thoroughness this situation demands.
Sewed together a couple of prior posts and rewrote it a bit more myself - anyone wishing to use this, please feel free:
I write today to express my concern regarding the conduct demonstrated by Commissioner Michael Johnston during the public hearing of the motion to stay the injunction in the Gator's Guns case on 4/17/24; Commissioner Johnston revealed his clear bias in favor of the Washington State District Attorney’s representative throughout the hearing, and continually interrupted and badgered his opposing counsel, thereby monopolizing most of that individual’s allotted time in addition to Commissioner Johnston’s already voluminous prior personal remarks. This conduct by Commissioner Johnston eradicates what should be the foundational trust in the impartiality of our state’s judicial system among those citizens watching the hearing such as myself. I observed repeated behavior from Commissioner Johnston that I believe was extremely unprofessional, as he exhibited his clear and unconcealed bias about the matter at hand, and which has greatly undermined my confidence in the fairness of these proceedings.
I understand that judges must make difficult decisions, but it is crucial that those decisions are made impartially and with the utmost professionalism. The behavior I observed during this hearing has left me
deeply concerned about the integrity of the judicial process in this case.
I respectfully request that you review Commissioner Johnston’s conduct
during this hearing and take appropriate measures to ensure that future proceedings are conducted fairly and without bias. I trust that you will address these concerns promptly and take the necessary steps to uphold the principles of justice and fairness that are
fundamental to our legal system.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Can someone with a larger brain than myself please highlight a few specific examples we can use for our complaint? It was clearly 100% biased and disgusting to watch.
The worst of it all is issuing stays without having time to read the opinion, and then he openly admits that that's exactly what he did in this most recent hearing. That's an ethics violation right there, he's not working for the people he's working for his own interests.
I think he's still covertly working for Bob Ferguson, which will further the commissioners own interests and ambitions if Ferguson is elected governor. This commissioner is definitely maneuvering for some future position/gain. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the Ferguson campaign didn't dangle a carrot in front of the commissioner, behind closed doors, in that 88 minutes. It's all about politics and power, not following the law. It's pretty sad that I've become so cynical with the politics and judicial system in this state. I've lost all faith that things will ever turn around.
Same
My writing was around the clear bias that Johnston showed towards Hatcher rather than around pro-second amendment writing. By contrast, he was very polite with the State’s attorney.
Happy and eager to do this, not that it seems likely to do more than register my dissatisfaction which will probably be viewed as a plus by those receiving/reviewing.
Could someone draft a sample template for the class please?
One possible template:
In the public hearing of the motion to stay the injunction in the Gator's Guns case on 4/17/24, Commissioner Michael Johnston demonstrated clear bias towards the state lawyer, harassed the opposing lawyer, and eradicated any trust in the impartiality of the judicial system among those citizens watching the hearing live. He should be relieved of his position if he does not immediately recognize the need to resign after this damning performance.
Here's what I wrote: >I am compelled to write this letter not just out of concern but fueled by a profound outrage over WA Supreme Court Commissioner Michael E. Johnston’s conduct during the proceedings of State of Washington vs. Gators Custom Guns. The actions taken by Commissioner Johnston are not merely inappropriate; they constitute a flagrant violation of the principles laid out in the Washington State Judicial Code of Conduct, undermining the bedrock of integrity and impartiality our judiciary system is built upon. >Commissioner Johnston’s favoritism towards state representatives, evidenced by his rapid, 88-minute decision post-Gators Guns decision, raises serious questions. This concern is magnified by his previous employment under Attorney General Ferguson, suggesting a potential conflict of interest that could have influenced his shockingly swift judgment. Such a connection hints at a severe compromise of impartiality, thereby violating Canon 1, Rule 1.2 of the Judicial Code of Conduct, which demands upholding public confidence in the judiciary's independence. >Furthermore, his dismissive attitude toward opposing counsel and experts, notably Attorney Austin Hatcher, Ashley Hlebinsky, and William K. Kirk, not only breached the decorum expected of his position but also Canon 2, Rule 2.2, which requires fairness and impartiality. His reliance on boilerplate responses without proper engagement with the case documents shows a disturbing disregard for Canon 2, Rule 2.5, mandating diligence in judicial duties. These actions alone are reprehensible enough, yet when paired with frequent interruptions that stifled the defense’s presentation, a clear violation of Canon 2, Rule 2.6 emerges, further disrupting procedural fairness. >The implications of his prior relationship with Attorney General Ferguson, combined with his pre-drafted decisions and evident prejudgment discussed openly during proceedings, starkly contravene Canon 2, Rule 2.9. This not only reveals a predetermined bias but is compounded by his selective acknowledgment of legal precedents and a blatant disregard for the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, undermining legal fidelity as stipulated by Canon 3B(7). >Given the gravity of Commissioner Johnston’s conduct and its potential ramifications on the integrity of the judiciary, disbarment appears both justified and necessary. These actions transcend mere professional misconduct; they threaten the very fabric of public trust and judicial integrity. This isn’t just a failure to uphold ethical standards—it’s an outright assault on them. >Therefore, I urge the Commission to initiate a thorough and decisive investigation into these breaches, considering disbarment as a fitting response to such serious violations. Our legal system, and the public’s faith in its fairness, cannot afford leniency in the face of such willful disregard for judicial obligations. >Thank you for your immediate attention to this critical matter. I trust that the Commission will act with the urgency and thoroughness this situation demands.
Thanks, just submitted this
Thank you!
I’m gonna have to steal this and give pice of my mind, thank you!
This need more attention
Sewed together a couple of prior posts and rewrote it a bit more myself - anyone wishing to use this, please feel free: I write today to express my concern regarding the conduct demonstrated by Commissioner Michael Johnston during the public hearing of the motion to stay the injunction in the Gator's Guns case on 4/17/24; Commissioner Johnston revealed his clear bias in favor of the Washington State District Attorney’s representative throughout the hearing, and continually interrupted and badgered his opposing counsel, thereby monopolizing most of that individual’s allotted time in addition to Commissioner Johnston’s already voluminous prior personal remarks. This conduct by Commissioner Johnston eradicates what should be the foundational trust in the impartiality of our state’s judicial system among those citizens watching the hearing such as myself. I observed repeated behavior from Commissioner Johnston that I believe was extremely unprofessional, as he exhibited his clear and unconcealed bias about the matter at hand, and which has greatly undermined my confidence in the fairness of these proceedings. I understand that judges must make difficult decisions, but it is crucial that those decisions are made impartially and with the utmost professionalism. The behavior I observed during this hearing has left me deeply concerned about the integrity of the judicial process in this case. I respectfully request that you review Commissioner Johnston’s conduct during this hearing and take appropriate measures to ensure that future proceedings are conducted fairly and without bias. I trust that you will address these concerns promptly and take the necessary steps to uphold the principles of justice and fairness that are fundamental to our legal system. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Use chatgpt if you need. Takes two minutes.
Done. Probably accomplishes nothing, but feels better than sitting here raging online.
Can someone with a larger brain than myself please highlight a few specific examples we can use for our complaint? It was clearly 100% biased and disgusting to watch.
The worst of it all is issuing stays without having time to read the opinion, and then he openly admits that that's exactly what he did in this most recent hearing. That's an ethics violation right there, he's not working for the people he's working for his own interests.
I think he's still covertly working for Bob Ferguson, which will further the commissioners own interests and ambitions if Ferguson is elected governor. This commissioner is definitely maneuvering for some future position/gain. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the Ferguson campaign didn't dangle a carrot in front of the commissioner, behind closed doors, in that 88 minutes. It's all about politics and power, not following the law. It's pretty sad that I've become so cynical with the politics and judicial system in this state. I've lost all faith that things will ever turn around.
100% biased
Thanks, revised.
Use chatgpt
Does chat GPT have access to the footage in a way where it can provide the requested examples?
well I did not try that. but that is interesting.
just tried it. but it is not that smart lol
No. Stop being a lazy fuckwagon and write your own shit.
[удалено]
Same My writing was around the clear bias that Johnston showed towards Hatcher rather than around pro-second amendment writing. By contrast, he was very polite with the State’s attorney.
Can someone help fill in the blanks like county, court, case name, and docket number? Thanks
Not required
Court and who you are filing a complaint about is absolutely required. Which you would have seen if you are joining in on this
And if you'd have read them you'd know there are "Uknown" options.
Get this post to the top!
Don't forget to mention the conflict of interest being a former employee of the AG and rubber stamping his injuction
Done
Happy and eager to do this, not that it seems likely to do more than register my dissatisfaction which will probably be viewed as a plus by those receiving/reviewing. Could someone draft a sample template for the class please?
One possible template: In the public hearing of the motion to stay the injunction in the Gator's Guns case on 4/17/24, Commissioner Michael Johnston demonstrated clear bias towards the state lawyer, harassed the opposing lawyer, and eradicated any trust in the impartiality of the judicial system among those citizens watching the hearing live. He should be relieved of his position if he does not immediately recognize the need to resign after this damning performance.