Texas State Bar / James Ehler / Marie Haspil Criminal Cover Up / Promotion of Child Theft / Promotion of False Criminal Accusations Austin, Texas

The Texas State Bar is a criminal enterprise when it comes to the theft of children and promotion of false accusations of sexual abuse of children. James Ehler is the head of this criminal enterprise in the South Texas region, and Marie Haspil is directly involved in the criminality.

The criminality goes to the top of the bar and permeates large portions of the judiciary. The Texas Supreme Court itself has been given the opportunity to address the issue and lied. Specifically, the law is very clear that the Texas Supreme Court has ultimate authority over the attorney discipline process. It refused to even file the document at issue falsely claiming that it had no jurisdiction. It does have jurisdiction. It buried its head in the sand. The attorney discipline process is the process by which the Texas State Bar commits its crimes at issue.  The Texas Supreme Court is derelict in its duties.

The criminality at issue extends over the course of well over a decade.  It is continuous, and it is shameless. Only a summary can be set forth here.  The full story will await a book. 

Most recently, there is the Judge William Adams case and the Larry adams case. 

In the Judge William Adams case, a child reported that he was told to lie by several lawyers and a judge. Specifically, he was told to lie that his mother had "touched" him and that he had seen his mother and lawyer in bed together. The bar commits its crimes in connection with lawyers most particularly William Dudley, Lanette Joubert, and William Kelly.

All these lawyers were present at the restaurant meeting where the child said these things happened. The child said where this happened (a particular restaurant), the day it happened, the general time it happened, and even the table where it happened. The waiters at the restaurant confirmed that the child and the father where at this restaurant when the child said and even at the table the child said even though the father denied being there. The waiters said there were the appropriate number of additional adults present in suits and ties. A restaurant ticket exists.

A child psychologist interviewed the child. The child told her the same thing. The child psychologist believed the child. The child's statements were recorded at least 3 to 4 times once with a child psychologist and once with a district judge present. 

The child's behavior was consistent with his statements in several ways, and he knew things he could not have otherwise known. Most particularly,  these lawyers had been lying for months about a supposed sexual relationship between mother and lawyer (a total lie not supported by any evidence just insinuation for innocent facts) which is something the child did not know (at least not from the mother) and yet the child recited that these lawyers asked him to lie in a way to support this lie. The child's statements clearly corresponded to the lies in progress.

This is a good time to note that the Bar particularly James Ehler is a promoter and protector of lies. Years earlier, one of these same lawyers got caught red handed lying to a tribunal.  James Ehler laughed and smirked clearly communicating to this lawyer that the State Bar supports his lying and even considers it funny.  A grievance was field against James Ehler because lawyers are supposed to report unethical conduct that they observe. James Ehler is in charge of ethics for the whole region. He would have a greater duty. The corrupt bar of course did nothing. This whole episode was recorded on videotape and there could be no evidentiary dispute at all. 

Of course, the corrupt Judge William Adams acted corruptly.  It was later learned that one of the lawyers at the restaurant meeting was his personal lawyer at the time. He was operating under a huge conflict of interest. He held that it is frivolous to believe children because children are fantasizers.  That of course is a total lie.  Texas Courts and probably all Courts believe children. There was nothing about this child that was unbelievable. Both parents testified that he was honest. The father testified that he would be worried if the child said the mother and her lawyer were doing these things (no kidding). People go to prison based on what children say (regularly). In fact, this mother could of gone to prison if the child had said what he was told to say. If the child had lied as requested, of course, the Courts would have believed him. Judge Adams was being dishonest and corrupt in favor of his personal lawyer, obviously.  There were open corrupt statements along the lines of it being improper to say such a thing relative to lawyers and a judge. Of course, the truth is that these lawyers and the judge should not have done such a thing. This child was entitled to be heard, and the hearing was totally corrupt. Actually, Judge  William Adams and the lawyers at issue committed a crime (conspiracy to conceal a crime). The lawyers and the judge at the restaurant meeting committed the crime of witness tampering. 

This is only a very small part of the corruption and criminality that occurred that day. The bar not only supported this fraud and criminality there is good reason to believe that it participated in the conspiracy to commit these crimes. There are text messages strongly suggesting that the bar was involved even before these crimes were committed conspiring with corrupt Judge Adams.

According to the corrupt criminal bar, not only was this child not entitled to belief in court but hsi mother was not either. The bar demanded to know 2 days before trial why the mother's lawyer believed her.  The mother was clearly telling the truth and later events proved that. The bar was actively involving itself in litigation corruptly taking the position that the child should not be believed and neither should the mother. Total corruption. It was totally in support of the corrupt Judge William Adams and the corrupt lawyers at issue.  Neither this mother nor her child was ever significantly impeached.  In contrast, the corrupt lawyers were repeatedly caught lying.  As just one example, Lanette Joubert took the position that the father's child care provider was perfectly OK. The truth as established by documents form MHMR she was homicidal, psychotic, suicidal, heavily druggeed, etc.  Incredibly, the corrupt Judge William Adams held that was irrelevant to the best interests of the child. The corrupt bar was not concerned of course with this verifiable instance (one of many) of Lanette Joubert's lack of honesty. The worked to protect her and her dishonesty and attacked the lawyer who presented the true evidence on the condition of the care provider.

The seriousness of this situation cannot be understated.  The bar is obviously corrupt and dishonest. No honest lawyer would say that children are entitled to belief in our courts. That clearly is not the law. These lawyers know it is not the law. Actually, Judge William Adams admitted that he puts children in jail based on what children say with high bonds (children he probably doesn't know and has never met). These lawyers regularly believe children.  Lanette Joubert destroyed parent child relationships in one instance based on supposed statements of a child still in diapers. This child was nearly 6 years old and very bright far different from a child still in diapers.

The fact is that Judge William Adams flat out lied when he said that it is frivolous to believe children. He knows that it is not true. He is a liar, and he is a criminal. His lie is a crime because he was working to cover up a crime by lawyers including his personal lawyer. He was comfortable in his corrupt and criminal behavior because the legal system particularly the bar and the Judicial Conduct Commission in Texas are thoroughly and systematically corrupt.

The bottom line is that in Texas preferred lawyers can tell the most heinous lies designed to destroy your relationship with your child and even put you in prison. You are not entitled to be heard in Court and neither are your witnesses (including your child).  You might get an honest judge there certainly are some but if you get a Judge like Judge William Adams there is no corrective mechanism. Actually, the bar will join in the abuse.  The bar supported the lawlessness that occurred. 

There was never any meaningful response to what the child said just conclusory denials.  What happened was corruption and criminality pure and simple and the bar was involved.

In the Larry Adams case, Larry Adams stole a child by drafting a corrupt order. The order was corrupt in the sense that it was different than what the judge ordered orally. None of the lawyers sent the order to the father despite his requests. By the time he got the order which took some time since he lived 2,000 miles from the courthouse, it was too late for him to comply with the corrupt order which Larry Adams had corruptly altered adding obligations and conditions not ever stated in the Courtroom by the judge.  You guessed it. The Bar supported this corruption.  The clear attitude of the bar as evidenced most directly by the unethical James Ehler who thinks that lying by lawyers is funny (particularly William Dudley lies) is to protect and promote lying, child theft, and false accusations of sexual abuse of children.  One case resulted in a suicide. Nearly all cases result in disruption of parent child relationships (e.g. child theft). 

In the Stanley Rains case, he was accused of sexual impropriety with his child for over a decade. There was never any real evidence. There hearsay often anonymous. There was insinuation. These lawyers are liars.  They take the smallest fact like a lawyer and client eating dinner together and all of a sudden they are filing motions repeatedly that lawyer and client are sexually involved. If a father takes his daughter to the park, well, he is molesting her because he has a smile on his face and he "just doesn't look right." They are sick abusive people and the Bar supports them. Stanley Rains never had consistent visitation with his child for her entire childhood. He was harassed continuously and he was even jailed on totally bogus charges (he was arrested for trying to see his child at school when the applicable order made clear he had that right; he was acquitted). 

In one instance, just one of many, these lawyers (William Dudley, Lanette Joubert, and William Kelly) together with the ad lidem (William Kelly's sister in law which was not disclosed at the time) got caught outright fabricating evidence. The ad litem wrote a report stating that witnesses in the park saw the child sitting on her father's lap steering the car in the parking lot. The ad litem added the remarkably offensive statement that Stan Rains' p***s was erect. Of course, it would be impossible to know that through a car door, clothing, etc. More importantly, though, these witnesses when asked denied ever saying such a thing in fact they denied ever even talking to the ad litem (until much later). It was a lie. The bar did nothing.  It didn't even investigate. 

The bar sent the corrupt message that fabrication of evidence is perfectly OK in its book. The allegation of fabrication of evidence did not even state a claim of misconduct.  You cannot make this kind of thing up.  It is unbelievably corrupt. The determination by the bar that it is perfectly OK to fabricate evidence was made by the utterly corrupt James Ehler. Of course, if he had been honorable in the Stan Rains case the restaurant meeting discussed above may never have occurred (they both involved the same lawyers). He sent the message as a person in charge of ethics that fabrication of evidence was OK by him.  He also sent the message that false accusations of crime were OK with him. In one instance, William Dudley and Judge Henry Schuble were making false criminal accusations in open Court (verifiable on the record).  Ehler thought that was OK also. Actually, he took up arms on behalf of the corrupt William Dudley and Henry Schuble.

Particularly, the Court would not set Stanley Rains' motions for hearing. He was not seeing his child continuously for months. The Court was ignoring him and his motions. Total corruption. Stan Rains got the Judge next door to sign an Order setting Hearing. This made the corrupt William  Dudley and the Corrupt Judge Henry Schuble mad.  The order setting hearing date disappeared from the file (documents were constantly disappearing and appearing out of nowhere in his file).  A certified copied of the order was produced. The corrupt William Dudley and the corrupt Judge Schuble started in unison claiming the order was "forged" which was a total lie. They were obviously as so often the case rehearsed (much like the rehearsed lie that it is frivolous to believe a child). They didn't stop until the District Clerk representative who was a retired Marine took charge demanding to know what the heck had happened to the missing order which clearly did exist. This is just one of many instances of corruption and false accusations of criminal conduct by this group of lawyers (always the same group). You guessed it. The totally unethical James Ehler saw no problem with the disappearing order,  the false accusation of forgery, or any of the other nearly infinite number of crimes and frauds committed by William Dudley and Judge Henry Schuble during just that sequence of events (not even counting the entire decade long duration of the abuse of Stanley Rains).

These things must be said. There is clearly systematic corruption and criminality. It feeds on itself. Again, if James Ehler had handled the Stanley Rains case even remotely ethically then the later cases probably never would have even occurred. He sends the message on the behalf of the bar that the bar supports and even promotes corruption and criminality (certainly protects it).  Marie Haspil in the most recent cases was acting under direction of the corrupt James Ehler.