I wholeheartedly agree H4M regarding Karen Clark & these absurd charges against Juan.
And what really gets my goat as well is that all juror names from the guilt phase were posted on JAII soon after the guilty verdict and no one ever mentions how that may have happened. That was truly despicable.
How ridiculous of Tammy Rose, another “fame wh*#e” like the killer. She is still a “has been” reporting traffic from a helicopter in another city.
What the heck, right?
Apparently Clark took the time (after the complaint was dismissed? Before it was?) to independently investigate her allegations against JM, including interviewing (at the very least) Tammy Rose, Juror #3 from PP2, and the blogger's ex-husband.
In her 37 page objection to the Bar's dismissal, Clark apparently also included workplace complaints of "inappropriate" or "unprofessional" behavior towards secretaries by JM that were put on his record in 1990 and 1991.
How in the world did Clark get access JM's personnel record? More to the point, how in the world is his alleged workplace conduct decades ago possibly relevant to a 2017 bar complaint about his alleged ethical violations during trial in 2013-2015?
And about charge #4 in the original bar complaint: unethical contact between JM and dismissed juror #3, as part of a pattern by JM of using sex & flirtation to obtain & disseminate information.
Juror #3 was kicked off the PP2 jury in late November or early December, IIRC, after she was arrested the day after Thanksgiving for passing one or more bad checks.
According to Clark:
** The blogger (not JM) approached #3.
** #3 told the blogger she wanted to speak to JM. (weird)
** The blogger gave #3 JM's cellphone number (with friends like that....)
** JM admitted to the Bar that he did speak with #3. (pass)
** #3 told Clark she had " 4-5 conversations" with JM. (this is supposed to represent extensive contact between JM and 3).
** #3 told Clark that JM flirted with her, and at some point said " I'm a breast man myself." (really?)
** #3 told Clark she texted JM nude photos of herself (of her *advertiser censored*). (seriously really? who does that?! especially in the middle of a DP trial in which sex, not murder, is the primary theme? thank goodness this one was booted from the jury, eh?)
#3 told Clark that both the blogger and JM repeatedly tried to get information from her about the remaining sitting jurors (Keiffer-twit says and about jury deliberations as well).
**Clark obtained texts that were sent between the blogger and good 'ole Tammy Rose (or was it the blogger's extremely bitter ex-partner? either way). The blogger says in those texts that she's worried #3 might blab about her contact with JM, but JM told her he wasn't worried.
Also in those texts, the blogger says JM isn't returning #3's calls to him.
---
How high school-y, style, sex-lies-exaggerations drama it all sounds.
The bottom line is that the second party texts Clark has aren't proof of anything; she couldn't produce texts between 3 and JM; whatever was allegedly said in phone conversations can't be proven or used against JM; JM didn't lie to the Bar about being in contact with 3; and, JM said he quickly terminated contact with 3 (no doubt when she sent him frikking pics of her *advertiser censored*, fgs.
Last, but the only thing that matters in terms of an ethics complaint..