Former federal prosecutor and ex-Polsinelli shareholder, George Jackson III, has seen his privileges as a legal professional placed into serious jeopardy. Reprimanded for a string of violations during his brother’s legal defense, Jackson has not only been temporarily prohibited from entering a Chicago criminal courthouse independently, but he’s also facing the likelihood of professional suspension. Details indicate the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission’s recommendation for the lawyer involves a three-year suspension from the profession until further notice.
An examination of Jackson’s professional status, viewable on his LinkedIn profile, reveals that he presently identifies as the managing partner of the Dred Scott law firm. All these troubles brewed during his representation of his brother, Anthony Jackson, in a murder trial. Anthony claimed his actions were conducted in self-defense, after battling a stranger on a train platform but was eventually found guilty. Throughout this rigorous legal process, George Jackson’s behavior turned increasingly aggressive and inappropriate.
Ironically, a highlight of Jackson’s dubious actions during his brother’s case includes securing a retrial following an initial conviction. However, Jackson’s court filings during this phase were filled with sexually explicit tangents, unprovoked hostility towards Jewish individuals, and accusations aimed at judges and prosecutors alleging conspiracy against his brother.
The ABA Journal provides a detailed summary of Jackson’s inappropriate conduct, which is as shocking as it is professionally unacceptable:
- Accusing the first judge overseeing the case of bias and criticizing in-chambers meetings with a prosecutor;
- Describing the judge as “forever foreclosed his ability to be a fair judge” in matters involving Cook County prosecutors;
- Propagating a graphic depiction of the kidnap of two “Jewish females” and the sexual abuse of one of such victims;
- Conveying a problematic narrative involving racial and religious dynamics in the judiciary process;
- Describing judges as demonstrating “extremely diabolical prejudice” against him;
- Accusing a judge of being “woefully intellectually challenged.”
The hearing board has described Jackson’s behavior as “egregious,” emphasizing that comments about the opposition and judges “were reprehensible and have no place in the practice of law.” Notably, there’s no evidence of any recognition or remorse for the inflammatory effects his derogatory remarks stirred.
Albert Einstein once said, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Without a doubt, this quote rings true in George Jackson III’s circumstance. His actions present a critical reminder for all legally trained professionals about the importance of upholding law-sanctioned decorum at all times.
Mr. Jackson, amid his predicament, has yet to comment on the board’s recommendation.
Read more about this incident on Above The Law.