OPINION AND EDITORIAL
Larry Klayman, esq. is a very colorful social media public figure. Not only is his name on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s extremist watch, but he is rumored to have sued his own mother. Add to that a rather messy divorce in Cleveland, Ohio (hometown of “Dr.” Jerome Corsi, a Klayman client) that included allegations of “inappropriate contact” between Klayman and his children. He is infamous for organizing “Citizen Grand Juries” to indict public officials. This only scratches the surface.
ENTER LARRY KLAYMAN
Above: Larry Klayman, esq., attorney for Joe Arpaio and sidekick of “Hollywood film maker” Jason Goodman
LATEST: MOTION FOR VEXATIOUS LITIGANT
U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:19-cv-02793-TSC
|KLAYMAN v. FITTON et al
Assigned to: Judge Tanya S. Chutkan
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
|Date Filed: 09/18/2019
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 320 Assault Libel & Slander
|represented by||Larry E. Klayman
KLAYMAN LAW GROUP, P.A.
2020 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Fax: (202) 379-9289
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
KLAYMAN SUES TOM FITTON (AGAIN) THIS TIME IN VIRGINIA
U.S. District Court
Eastern District of Virginia – (Alexandria)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:20-cv-00135-LMB-IDD
|Klayman v. Fitton
Assigned to: District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Libel, Assault, Slander
|Date Filed: 02/06/2020
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 320 Assault Libel & Slander
|Larry Klayman||represented by||Larry Klayman
7050 W. Palmetto Park Road #15-287
Boca Raton, FL 33433
JOE ARPAIO AND LARRY KLAYMAN
Joe Arpaio’s lawyer is in hot water over ethics allegations
Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s lawyer is facing possible suspension over allegations of inappropriate behavior related to a former female client.
Larry Klayman appeared in federal court Wednesday with Arpaio. Arpaio is suing several national media outlets, alleging they defamed him and impacted his attempt to win a U.S. Senate seat.
Klayman also has lawsuits against Roger Stone and Infowars founder Alex Jones, according to the Washington Post.
According to a report from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility Ad Hoc Hearing Committee, Klayman sought a romantic relationship with a female client and when feelings were not reciprocated, he raised his attorney fees and took other actions without the woman’s permission.
LARRY KLAYMAN’S MISCONDUCT REPORT7-24-19-Klayman-Hearing-Committee-Report
Larry Klayman Sues New Times, Is Really WeirdMARCH 25, 2013 | 4:03PM|
“Birther” attorney and Sheriff Joe Arpaio fan Larry Klayman has filed a federal lawsuit against New Times and our Minneapolis sister paper, City Pages, claiming “defamation.”
Klayman’s lawsuit points to New Times and City Pages blog posts that cite an appellate court ruling from Ohio, a public record, affirming a magistrate judge’s finding that Klayman “inappropriately touched” his own children.
The issues raised by Klayman involve credibility assessments made by the magistrate. Klayman challenges these findings. The magistrate heard evidence from the children’s pediatrician who reported allegations of sexual abuse to children services, and from a social worker at children services who found that sexual abuse was “indicated.” Although the social worker’s finding was later changed to “unsubstantiated” when Klayman appealed, the magistrate explained that the supervisor who changed the social worker’s finding did not testify. The magistrate pointed out that he was obligated to make his own independent analysis based upon the parties and the evidence before him. In doing so, the magistrate found on more than one occasion [Klayman] act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children. His conduct may not have been sexual in the sense that he intended to or did derive any sexual pleasure from it or that he intended his children would. That, however, does not mean that he did not engage in those acts or that his behavior was proper.
The magistrate further found it significant that although Klayman denied any allegations of sexual abuse, he never denied that he did not engage in inappropriate behavior with the children. The magistrate further found it notable that Klayman, “for all his breast beating about his innocence * * * [he] scrupulously avoided being questioned by anyone from [children services] or from the Sheriff’s Department about the allegations,” and that he refused to answer any questions, repeatedly invoking his Fifth Amendment rights, about whether he inappropriately touched the children. “Even more disturbing” to the magistrate was the fact that Klayman would not even answer the simple question regarding what he thought inappropriate touching was. The magistrate stated that he could draw an adverse inference from Klayman’s decision not to testify to these matters because it was a civil proceeding, not criminal.
After reviewing the record, we find no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in overruling Klayman’s objections regarding the magistrate’s finding that Klayman inappropriately touched the children.
MORE BACKGROUND ON KLAYMAN
LARRY KLAYMAN’S ROMAN HOLIDAY
Above: Alleged play actors Larry Klayman, esq, “Dr.” Jerome Corsi (screen) and Jason Goodman frolic in their moot court called a “Citizens Grand Jury”
WASHINGTON, June 27, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — Today, Larry Klayman, a former federal prosecutor and the founder of Freedom Watch (www.freedomwatchusa.org) announced the criminal indictment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller by a citizens grand jury for the alleged crimes of witness tampering, obstruction of justice, attempting to suborn perjury and other illegalities. A copy of the indictment, jury instructions, verdict form and related documents can be found on Freedom Watch’s website along with a video of the grand jury proceedings. Filming the proceedings as well as offering testimony about Mueller’s alleged illegal grand jury leaks was Jason Goodman, CEO of Crowdsource the truth. The video of the proceedings can also be found at the links below:
“Now that Mueller had been indicted, he will be tried, a conviction will be sought before a people’s court, and if convicted a suitable sentence meted out.1 There is no other alternative to restore the rule of law to the nation, as our system of justice has been compromised and corrupted by the establishments of both political parties, who circle the wagons and in the end protect themselves at the expense of the American people.”
Freedom Watch YouTube Channel
Crowdsource the Truth Channel
Above: Larry Klayman, esq. discusses moot court with Jason Goodman
WHAT IS MOOT COURT?
ASK LARRY KLAYMAN, ESQ.
Moot court is an extracurricular activity at many law schools in which participants take part in simulated court or arbitration proceedings, usually involving drafting memorials or memoranda and participating in oral argument. In most countries, the phrase “moot court” may be shortened to simply “moot” or “mooting”. Participants are either referred to as “mooters” or, less conventionally, “mooties”.
Moot court involves a simulated appellate court (appellate advocacy) or arbitral case, which is different from a mock trial that involves a simulated jury trial or bench trial (trial advocacy). Moot court does not involve actual testimony by witnesses, cross-examination, or the presentation of evidence, but is focused solely on the application of the law to a common set of evidentiary assumptions, facts, and clarifications/corrections to which the competitors are introduced. Though not a moot in the traditional sense, alternative dispute resolution competitions focusing on mediation and negotiation have also branded themselves as moot competitions in recent times, as had role-playing competitions in the past.
To be continued…
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of criminal justice, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.