Reforming The FLorida Bar by David Arthur Walters

Florida State Senator Dave Aronberg
February 12, 2010
SENATOR DAVE ARONBERG

405 Senate Office Bldg.
404 S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
Fax (850) 487-5496
aronberg.dave.web@flsenate.gov
In Re REFORMING THE FLORIDA BAR
Dear Senator Aronberg:
I have sent along to your aide certain information about my

experience with The Florida Bar, and I am delighted to hear from her
that you may take up the issue after another important project is
completed.
The Florida Bar, an integrated bar, is in need of considerable

improvement, and should be ultimately "disintegrated" - as has been
done in the English Law's mother country - because of the inherent
conflict of interest cloaked by the judiciary’s self-declared "inherent
power" to absolutely control the legal profession. The very integration
of the integrated bar creates an appearance of impropriety. The fact
that The Florida Bar as an arm of the Florida Supreme Court is an
absolute power not subject to external regulation by the legislative and
executive powers is a constant danger to our democratic-republican
way of life. The legislative and executive branches are largely
controlled by lawyers, most of whom are not wont to confront the
judiciary power that controls their livelihood, leaving the way clear for
the collusion of the power elite against the public interest and general
will. As for the fourth branch, the Press, it does little more than
ingratiate itself with the integrated bar, publishing its press releases as
news.
Nor is the integrated bench-bar directly responsible to the public.

When I questioned the Bar as to why a public official without a license
to practice law had in fact practiced law, ostensibly on behalf of the
State but really for Allen Stanford, setting up flimsy legal grounds
disavowed by licensed attorneys for the establishment of the notorious
Stanford Trust aka the Stanford Laundry Ticket, i.e. the unique entity
that allowed Mr. Stanford to use our State to bilk hundreds of millions
of dollars out of investors and most likely to launder ill-gotten gains of
others, the Bar responded that it could not look into such a matter
because the gentleman was not a licensed attorney and it could only
inquire into attorney-specific matters.
As for my request for information about the law firm on the other side
of the apparent collusion, Greenberg Traurig, a firm that in fact
represents The Florida Bar, I was informed by the Bar that it could not
look into that matter because the Bar does not regulate law firms.
When I complained about the Bar's obtuseness in response to my

public information requests, and said I thought criminal charges should
be brought against any recalcitrant individuals who must know what
was going on, I was informed by Kenneth L. Marvin, the Bar's head of
lawyer regulation, who apparently does not read newspapers or watch
television news, that he could not imagine why I mistrusted the Bar,
and that he had never heard of the Stanford Trust until he read my
articles about it.
And neither were Mr. Marvin nor the Chief Justice of the Florida
Supreme Court interested in my constructive suggestion for improving
the transparency of the Bar. Its current policy allows it to keep the fact
of pending actions under wrap, then dismiss them at its discretion, and
destroy all records, including the record that there even was a record,
without the public being made aware of what transpired – thus the Bar
is unaccountable for its own behavior. This was my suggestion:
"I respectfully suggest that a list of Pending Complaints and Open

Disciplinary Cases be maintained on the website and regularly updated
until disposed of. Thereafter the initial and dispositive information
would be maintained for 10 years on the respective website-available
files of the attorneys involved. By ‘Pending Complaints’ I mean each
and every complaint received, and by ‘Open Disciplinary Cases’ I mean
each and every complaint that Bar counsel decides to pursue. The
information available would of course include the name of the
attorney, the date and nature of the complaint and the current status
of the investigation. If a case is not opened or an investigation not
conducted on the complaint, the disposition then posted to the
attorney’s website-available file would state the specific reason for not
investigating the complaint. When an open case is closed, the specific
reason for disposition would likewise be posted to the attorney’s
website-available file. As for the confidentiality of open files, Rule 3-
7.1 (e) allows for the disclosure of the status of specific cases under
investigation. The specification under my suggestion would be any and
all open files.”
The public interest in the Stanford Fraud was soon overshadowed by

breaking news on the Rothstein Fraud. I told Mr. Marvin that I had a
constructive suggestion that would prevent a great deal of
embarrassment to the profession in the future. He wanted to know
what it was, but did not respond when I laid it out for him: that the
accounts of law firms over a certain size be regularly examined for
evidence of fraud. In fact, I would like to help set up such a process.
Accountants can be trained by Certified Fraud Examiners to conduct
simple fraudits™. The independent frauditing™ organization would also
receive information from whistleblowers in confidence and conduct
spot fraudits™ based on the information received. Furthermore, I
believe that if the bookkeeping and accounting systems of law firms
are examined it will be discovered that many of them need to install
an adequate uniform accounting system.
Just today the Miami Herald published an article on the Rothstein

Scandal entitled 'Movement of firms funds questioned.'
"Clearly, movement of funds under these circumstances raises

suspicion to a trained observer as to at least the possibility of
structuring transactions to launder funds," said former chief assistance
U.S. attorney Myles Malman, a white-collar criminal defense lawyer in
Fort Lauderdale.
Senator, I am looking forward to your further investigation into this

important matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need
copies of my records.
Best Regards,
David Arthur Walters
cc Kristen Pesicek
Legislative Aide

Reforming The FLorida Bar by David Arthur Walters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reforming The FLorida Bar by David Arthur Walters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reforming The FLorida Bar by David Arthur Walters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Florida State Senator Dave Aronberg

February 12, 2010

SENATOR DAVE ARONBERG

In Re REFORMING THE FLORIDA BAR

Dear Senator Aronberg:

I have sent along to your aide certain information about my

The Florida Bar, an integrated bar, is in need of considerable

Nor is the integrated bench-bar directly responsible to the public.

When I complained about the Bar's obtuseness in response to my

"I respectfully suggest that a list of Pending Complaints and Open

The public interest in the Stanford Fraud was soon overshadowed by

Just today the Miami Herald published an article on the Rothstein

"Clearly, movement of funds under these circumstances raises

Senator, I am looking forward to your further investigation into this

David Arthur Walters

You might also like