Brenda v. Blog is once again front page news.

But the complaint, which was received by the Bar in October, 2018, has yet to be noticed as having been submitted to a Grievance Committee (GC). Similarly, the Motion To Quash Subpoena regarding the Bar’s fishing expedition for IP Addresses they have no legal right to, filed with bar prosecutor Frances Brown-Lewis on May 6, 2019, has yet to be noticed as addressed by the Bar through either a GC or a judge in open court. The Bar, of course, is the only entity that can forward it for public hearing, something pro bono warrior John Howes has been asking for for the longest time.

By comparison, nasty-tweeting, gas mask wearing Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, whose district is just a couple of hours from the Bar’s home base in Republican controlled Tallahassee, had his free speech bar complaint sent to a GC a mere 68 days after the file was opened, and it was dismissed with a finding of no probable cause after a grand total of 170 days.

Jay Spechler’s JAABLOG based complaint was opened on August 23, 2018, sent to a GC 191 days later, with the Bar approved consent judgement sent for Supreme Court approval roughly 501 days from the opening of the file.

As of today, Brenda v. Blog is 497 days old, with zero notice of any GC action!

Accordingly, the following PRR was sent to the Bar today, out of concerns the Bar is playing politics:

Is the Florida Bar specifically aiding and abetting Brenda Forman’s reelection campaign, or wishing not to impact said campaign pro or con, by not pursuing the JAABLOG case in normal course due to the fact it is a case of public interest, and will be litigated in open court with continued media coverage that will likely continue to put Forman in a bad light? 

 Is there any reason why the Motion to Quash Subpoena has not been addressed in open court?  Is the Bar going to sit on all pending matters until after the August election for Brenda Forman?

As you may be aware, the Forman/JAABLOG matters are today once again on the front page of the Sun Sentinel, and there are serious concerns the Bar, given the complaint is roughly seventeen months old and apparently not before a grievance committee or certainly a judge in open court, is purposely putting this off to not cause further adverse publicity for the complainant, who is seeking reelection.

The Bar declined comment, citing confidentiality rules found in section 3-7.1, which is why we’re asking for YOU TO MAKE THE CALL!

Is the Bar playing politics by sitting on Brenda v. Blog to preclude further negative media coverage for Brenda’s reelection campaign?

Should there be a speedy trial option in Bar matters?

Or is the Bar simply saving face by not acting given the strength of John Howes’ tutorial on first amendment law, and the Bar’s own precedents relating to JAABLOG?


COMING SOONWho was/is Brenda Jenkins?; Bill Scherer and Marni Bryson set for depo …