Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Note warns of 'Jewish attorneys'
By Mike McPhee
Denver Post Staff Writer
Oct. 30 - A Christian lawyer who had represented a student seriously hurt in the Columbine High shootings has sent a letter to the boy's family warning them against hiring "Jewish attorneys.''
The Oct. 14 letter by Denver lawyer Anthony Sturniolo has raised serious concerns in the legal community.
"I'm not saying he did, but there certainly is a question that he has overstepped his bounds,'' attorney Ben Aisenberg, former president of the Colorado Bar Association and a 15-year member of the ethics committee, said Friday.
But Sturniolo said his letter is being misinterpreted as anti-Semitic.
Sturniolo, a devout Christian, volunteered his legal services to a fundamentalist Christian family whose son was wounded April 20. The family released Sturniolo on Oct. 11 with no explanation, just a simple thank you, he said.
The family, Sturniolo said, had already signed a fee agreement with Michigan attorney Geoffrey Fieger and local co-counsel Howard Zucker. Zucker agreed to comment about the letter only if his clients were not identified in this story.
Fieger is part Jewish but was raised in the Unitarian Church. Zucker is Jewish by birth and by practicing faith. Zucker called the letter repugnant, and Fieger said he has been warned that the "Bar (Association) of Colorado is infected with a seething hatred.''
In his letter, Sturniolo wrote: "You have hired two Jewish attorneys, and Mr. Fieger in the past has been quoted openly ridiculing anyone who believed in Jesus. I know that you are committed Christians and I do not want you to be led astray to a position that might be a poor witness to our Lord.''
Sturniolo said he made the Jewish reference not as a criticism of Jews but only to emphasize to his former clients that the lawyers are not Christians.
"They could be Muslims, Buddhists or anything,'' Sturniolo said.
"It was a shock to me that this has become a Jewish issue. I never intended it to be antiSemitic. My Jesus was a Jewish man. I have a high, high regard for the Jewish people, particularly for the Messianic Jews who value tradition so highly.''
He said it's important for a Christian lawyer to represent Christian families.
"This family is fundamentalist Christian. They are very nice people who financially have been devastated. I am a believer in Christ. I doubt I could be considered the same as they are, but I offered my legal services, pro bono, because they wanted to make sure that everything they did in the legal system was biblical. If it was not biblical to sue, they didn't want to sue. They didn't want to be inconsistent with the Bible.''
But the explanations fell flat with the legal community. The Colorado Supreme Court's rules of ethics state that "a lawyer shall not engage in conduct that exhibits or is intended to appeal to or engender a bias against a person on account of that person's race, gender, religion.''
"I'm not telling you that his words intended to engender a bias against Fieger. But it certainly raises an inference, the specter that he's intending to do it,'' Aisenberg said.
Zucker said that "considering the circumstances surrounding the case, such things as Hitler's birthday, swastikas, Naziism, this is particularly obnoxious.''
Fieger also represents the family of slain student Isaiah Shoels in a wrongful-death case against the parents of Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. He and his new clients are expected to file some sort of negligence lawsuit against many of the same defendants. Fieger met with the family and the Shoelses in September in Michigan.
"I try cases in scores of states and no one has made personal attacks against me,'' Fieger said. "Of all the personal attacks I've heard, nobody has ever engaged in this type of blatant religious bigotry.
"The state bar should do something, a complaint should be filed,'' he said.
Ridiculous. Like vultures on a carcass.
Boy, what an interesting situation to have Fieger complaining of religious bigotry.
But the explanations fell flat with the legal community. The Colorado Supreme Court's rules of ethics state that "a lawyer shall not engage in conduct that exhibits or is intended to appeal to or engender a bias against a person on account of that person's race, gender, religion.''
This is a very interesting point, but what does it have to do with making money off of someone else's misery?
I might put this quote up on the wall. I expect it will be decades before I can make any sense out of it.
Nah, on second thought, lawyer ethics are an oxymoron anyways. It will never make any sense at all.
Whether Sturniolo is anti-Semitic or not I'm not sure. He might be but he is at least a lawyer, almost as bad. In any case he is a dirtbag.
How incredibly stupid!
Its well known that Fieger is an anti-Christian bigot. I think his most famous quote was "Jesus was just some goofball nailed to a cross". Where is the outrage for that statement?
Really.. How is it that Colorado has so many stupid lawyers?
Really.. How is it that Colorado has so many stupid lawyers?
I trust that would include the whole Jon Benet Ramsey crew. Remember, this is the state that gave us Pasty Schroder.
If Colorado has so many stupid lawyers, why are they importing more from Michigan. BTW, Geoffrey Fieger seeths with hatred constantly.
Would everyone's opinions here be different if a Jewish lawyer said to them to not hire a Christian lawyer? Would you find that any more offensive? A bigger deal? Honestly?
Somehow I knew you would slither in to this discussion.
The parents hired this man to be their LAWYER, not their minister!
The Christian lawyer could have easily made the pro-bono offer and addressed these points (adhering to biblical guidelines) WITHOUT bringing the other lawyer's religion into the discussion. After doing so, the decision is STILL up to the parents.
Further, if the Jewish lawyer was so vehemently anti-Christian, why did he accept Christian clients? Just for the money? BS!
This IS ridiculous. When my mom was hospitalized several years ago, I wanted the BEST doctors to look after her. I didn't demand the intimate details of their personal life, I wanted their MEDICAL CREDENTIALS. As it turns out, they were all JEWISH and it didn't make one miniscule bit of difference to me...I appreciated the EXCELLENT care they gave her!
So, in addition to giving up certain rights upon being a convicted felon or upon entering into the military, there are professions one could join, where one's freedom of speech is necessarily abridged?
I don't think so.
It seems some have engorged their desires beyond that which can be extrapolated from the Scopes trial. I understand some are attempting to use the legal system to reinforce the spectrum (to allow for further extrapolatory gymnastics) which would preclude (Christian) judges and teachers from expressing their beliefs in their respective workplaces.
Sorry. I don't think so.
This affirmative action for challenged ethical concepts has well overstepped its own raison d'etre. We must not allow such constructs to obliterate Constitutional guarantees. Opportunistic, hate-filled challenges to Free Speech (or other explicitly-stated Rights), such as advocated by the likes of Fieger, must be struck down in the courts. Of course, now that the courts have been stuffed with liberal activist judges while so many were sleeping, this will be a very difficult process for our country. Supreme Court nominations need to be in the hands of conservative presidents.
This final thought should translate to extreme self-discipline for any conservative who would waste his or her vote for truly unelectable challengers in upcoming presidential elections.
HF
Your bias is showing. Both of these lawyers are too stupid... Christian or Jew. They ought to be ashamed, but clearly they aren't bright enough to get it.
Point taken. LOL
"Would everyone's opinions here be different if a Jewish lawyer said to them to not hire a Christian lawyer?"
Yes. Point well taken. Although I doubt if the story would gain much traction in the media. By the way, Sakic, I think that you do an admirable job of debating. I don't agree with the poster who accuses you of "slithering" into the conversation. Rather you more or less define the curve. Long live open debate.
In this case I am in complete agreement with you. In the past I have not always been so.
I am a Christian. I am also a lawyer. I have seen "so-called" Christian lawyers in operation. These are ones that can barely speak without making a pious utterance. Meanwhile, they would do anything they could to hussle a good case away from another lawyer--usually a better lawyer.
No lawyer should be guilty of writing a letter trying to hussle a case from another lawyer. Indeed, using the other lawyer's religion as a reference point is outrageous. It also violates the oath that the lawyer has made when he was licensed. In that oath the lawyers covenants to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution provides for freedom of religion. Hence, encouraging a client to fire another lawyer based upon that lawyer's religious beliefs is violative of that covenant.
Now, before this descends into another "dumping on the lawyers" session, let's recognize that in this case the so-called Christian is dead wrong.
Somehow I knew you would slither in to this discussion.
Guess what? Somehow I knew you would not be able to answer the question. You never can so you always resort to attacking the messenger. Why deal with facts when you can splatter your usual trivial trash? Let me know when you have the balls to deal with the facts instead of hiding behind your own personal animosities.
Your bias is showing. Both of these lawyers are too stupid
Interesting that when I comment it is bias and those blasting the Jewish side of the equation are merely expressing their opinion or stating facts. Let's not forget the original posting of this. What was its point and intention? Was there a bias?
For someone who usually takes the high road and the religious road I think you are acting unlike that in this case.
I think that you do an admirable job of debating. I don't agree with the poster who accuses you of "slithering" into the conversation. Rather you more or less define the curve. Long live open debate.
Thank you for having the dignity to stand by your convictions. We may not always agree but that isn't the point. If we are acting honestly it is as good as it is going to get.
In this case I am in complete agreement with you. In the past I have not always been so.
Thank you too for being able to separate our interactions from the truth as you see it. I have denounced Jews or Israelis who I feel are on the wrong side (not often enough for some because of my annoyingly incessant participation in Jewish related threads) and I appreciate people who can recognize the mistakes on their side too. It's discussions like these that make me feel better about FR and people in general.
Aren't we talking about Kervorkian's attorney, Feiger? That ought to be plenty of reason to exclude him.
well of course no one complained in this way when cochran became lead attorney for the murderer and for the same reasons.
I would say to be on guard of ANY lawyer, jewish or otherwise. The lawyers religion shoud have nothing to do with it.
Having said that, I will predict this thread will probably get pulled anyway. It's OK to lambast Christians, but any post remotely critical of jews winds up getting yanked.
I am no fan of Fieger. However, Fieger was not attacked for defending the Dr. of Death or for prosecuting the Jenny Jones case. He is attacked for his religious heretage--as if that would preclude him from being an able and effective tort law attorney.
I have represented many Jewish clients. Never did any Jewish lawyer encourage the client to fire me and hire a brother Jew. This is exactly what the lawyer in the article has done.
You still don't get it, do you?
I absolutely don't care about your religious beliefs or anyone else's.. The conduct of these lawyers is shabby and unethical.
I don't care if they were both from Borneo. Hindu, Catholic, Jew or Mooney... it makes no difference to me.
I know you consider me anti-Semitic. Your perception is way off base, but you'll figure that out in your own time.
Why don't we focus on the conduct of the lawyers not their particular faith or whether they are stellar examples of their particular faith... or lack of faith altogether..
Considering the context is Columbine, everything that comes up is a big deal.
"I would say to be on guard of ANY lawyer. . ."
Oh no, here we go. All lawyers are bad. They are evil. They rob the dead, rape babies, steal silverware, blow-up bridges and have thrown the Western hemisphere into moral decay. Yadda Yadda Yadda. . .
You still don't get it, do you?
This time it's you that does not get it. For the record, I do not consider you anti-Semitic. I feel that you are missing the big picture in this posting and thread however. Would the discussion be the same if we switched the word Jewish to Christian at the beginning of this thread?
LOL... Lawyers are such a pain, unless you need one. :) Freegards,
I also find it odd that I compliment you and you follow by casting aspersions on my character.
Lawyers steal silverware?
Having said that, I will predict this thread will probably get pulled anyway. It's OK to lambast Christians, but any post remotely critical of jews winds up getting yanked.
I thought you looked down at people portraying themselves as victims.
Absolutely, Sakic!
These guys have a "fiduciary" obligation to their respective clients. Were either of these idiots hired to "witness" their religious convictions, or were they hired as lawyers?
Talk about a pack of wannabees looking for 10 minutes on a talk show. Sickens me.
Actually, law is very different from medicine, in that it often involves politics, while medicine seldom involves politics . . . yet. (Exception: sometimes people need to contact their Senator or Congressman to get the FDA to approve some new trail procedure. Give us socialized health care, and your life may depend on good connections to politicians.)
You often fare differently based on your lawyers' ability to get along with particular judges and court clerks, clerks. The prospective jurors' perception of your lawyer's personality, ethnicity, hair style, accent, whatever, could impact on the outcome of the case as well. We all know that a lawyer who looked and talked like Asa Hutchinson or Trent Lott would not be able to accomplish for OJ Simpson what Mr. Cochrane was able to accomplish. (Whether any of that should have happened is another matter, but things like that happen on a smaller scale and in less overt ways every day, and a lot of it does not involve anything that we would call racism. It may be simply a matter of rapport.)
I am sure that there are a few courtrooms and particular juries in America where a white lawyer will be at a distinct disadvantage based primarily on the color of his skin. Would it be "unethical" for a black attorney who practiced everyday in one of those places to say to a client who was thinking of hiring a white attorney from elsewhere something like what the attorney in this case said?
Yea, according to past threads we would have to deduce that they steal silverware, rape babies. . .just about everything evil lawyers do. Haven't you been reading the Free Republic long enought to "dip stick" the recurrent anti-lawyer diatribe?
Don't get wrong, I recognize that there are bad attorneys, just like there are bad doctors and bad plumbers. But the obligatory attack on attorneys made by some conservatives grows a little disgusting to me after a while. We have attorneys because we have rights. Randy Weaver didn't get his rights vindicated until he got an attorney. Whether you like or hate attorneys, your rights don't get extended sometimes without them.
If you are looking for an attorney free society and believe it would be Utopia, you will find your Utopia in Bangladesh, Iraq, Iran, or Communist China.
Saki, accept my apology. I am a little edgy. Just had two carloads of bad mannered JW's show up here at this tiny apartment complex. The dogs got loose, the neighbors who work nights were jolted out of bed. They were pushy. Their kids were rude. The whole crowd behaved like they had been born in a barn without a clue about courtesy, privacy or property. Bad as those two crazy lawyers.
So you hate lawyers, Jehovah's Witnesses and who else?
"Further, if the Jewish lawyer was so vehemently anti-Christian, why did he accept Christian clients? Just for the money? BS!"
Of course they're doing it for the money, they're opportunistic lawyers. Are you telling me that the likes of Fieger do anything on principle? Fieger is anti-Christian, but it would be unprofitable for him to reject Christian clients. Come on, don't make it so easy.
Boy, what an interesting situation to have Fieger complaining of religious bigotry
Especially when you consider that he'd be right.
S A V A L O O O! Save America Vote A Lawyer Out Of Office!
Hey man, when doctors were putting leaches on George Washington, Lawyers were writing the Constitution.
Fieger is anti-Christian
He isn't. This issue came from a campaign speech to religious leaders, when he referred to Jesus as "some goofball." Everyone got bent out of shape, and totally missed the context of what Fieger was saying.
What Fieger SAID was that that Jesus was a threat to the political powers of his day, and misunderstood - regarded as "some goofball." The Detroit News picked up on part of the quote, but didn't explain the context. The headline was, "Fieger calls Jesus 'Goofball'". And that was the end of the story for Geoffrey Fieger.
Montfort, yours was a thoughtful post. A few years ago I needed a lawyer. The lawyer I chose suggested bringing in a younger attorney from his firm to assist in the case and handle some of the more routine tasks. He said clearly there would be two benefits: one, she was less expensive per hour and two, because she was a female she would have a good understanding of the nature of the case. Well I don't know if he would ever put that in writing but he certainly said it. I don't think a story about that would get more than 1 or 2 replies here on Free Republic...but post a thread about lawyers, christianity and antisemitism and the thread will go on and on...
LOL.. bad hair day. I was teasing about the lawyers, but JWs get on my last nerve.
Would everyone's opinions here be different if a Jewish lawyer said to them to not hire a Christian lawyer?
One should be able to exercise the same discrimination that they use to select a hairdresser.
It is not necessary to interpret this in the worst light. It may well be that a Hindu couple may want an attorney of that faith.
Should we be reflexive? It is just a pity that the selection process became public.
Hey man, when doctors were putting leaches on George Washington, Lawyers were writing the Constitution.
On a lighter note, leeches are back in style medicinally.
great post
This thread still exists
But a haiku thread was pulled
That is very strange
Posted this story
To show how ridiculous
Columbine things are
I had no intent
To engage in Jew-bashing
That is so stupid
I trust that would include the whole Jon Benet Ramsey crew. Remember, this is the state that gave us Pasty Schroder.
Speaking of Pasty Schroder. I saw a picture of her and Gary Hart when Hart was the leader in the polls for President.
She looked at him in exactly the same way Monica looked at Bill in that video clip.
I would bet you Pasty took Gary really to Heart... in the Monica way. I think Ross Perot needs a hearing aid. There is a great sucking sound... but it ain't comin from Mexico.
Thank you for the scariest thought this Halloween...
I think Ross Perot needs a hearing aid. There is a great sucking sound... but it ain't comin from Mexico.
LOL. . ya, its coming from under the desk in the White House.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |