What is the “Quack” Equivalent for Lawyers?

When a doctor is incompetent, we refer to him as a quack.  What’s the name for an incompetent lawyer?  Is it Imposter?  Swindler?  Con artist?  Grifter?  Charlatan?

Rebecca Bradley of Abernathy, Roeder, Boyd & Hullett was commissioned by FWISD Legal Services to investigate my Level 3 complaint.  On page 2 of her report, Ms. Bradley writes…

“The Complainants’ claims could be summarized as follows:
1. Did [coach] violate the rules established by the University Interscholastic League (“UIL”) regarding outside coaching and employment through the following conduct:
a. Performing recruiting services on behalf of the [club] organization and receiving additional compensation for each student recruited for the [club] organization;”

I am the Complainant. 

It’s me, hi.  I’m the problem.  It’s me.

Therefore, I can speak with definitive authority that I never made that claim.


It’s not even close.

It’s a red herring that either FWISD Legal Services or Ms. Bradley made up!

To clarify: I’m saying the foundational claim on page 2 paragraph 1a of Ms. Bradley’s report is fabricated.  Ms. Bradley attributed that fabricated claim to me – thus creating a red herring, and then she investigated the red herring as if it was the claim I made.

The FWISD taxpayers paid for what amounts to be either an outright  lie – or a level of incompetence that is mind-numbing.

I’m going to post this blog to my advocacy website at www.The325th.com.  Then I’m going to tag the lawyers and law firms involved.  This blog is an open invitation for Ms. Bradley and Abernathy et al to try to sue me for defamation.  The anti-SLAAP laws protecting free speech in the interest of the public matters are fairly strong in Texas.  Also, in order for the lawyers to claim defamation they are going to have to show where in MY grievance and in MY words I made the claim on page 2, 1a.  In other words, if they can’t point to exactly where I made the claim then the claim is fabricated by someone.  I am merely attributing the fabrication to the author of the document: Ms. Rebecca Bradley. 

Furthermore, I’m giving her some options.  I’m saying she either made it up intentionally (lied) or made it up because she lacks basic reading comprehension skills (incompetence).  If she says it’s for a different reason, she’s going to have to explain why in the paragraph at the bottom of page 5 she states the claim I actually made and passes it off as irrelevant and not part of the investigation.  I will not categorize the fabricated claim as a “misunderstanding” because a truly independent investigator would have gotten MY side of the story – FROM ME! 

Good luck.



Ed Note: I decided to remove the names of the coach and the club. I’m going after lawyers who misrepresent (i.e., lie) to parents about what they can do for the children of our community. I told FWISD that they never investigated MY complaint and they responded by having an outside lawyer NOT investigate MY complaint! Priceless.