Unknown 1

Why So Mad, BRO?

Dear Readers:

In keeping with my pledge not to name my Biggest Fan on my blog, I herewith submit to you a redacted version of what I just emailed to the Oregon State Bar in response to the complaint filed against me by Basic Rights Oregon.

For those of you annoyed that this is what you are being served this morning in lieu of advice, I apologize.  However, I spent the better part of the weekend honing this document and as a result I am behind on something else much more important.

I’m not letting all that time go to waste.  Plus, as you can probably predict, it’s pretty damn good.

As you also probably guessed, my response is not exactly succinct.  Such serious, defamatory, and baseless allegations deserve the full Robin treatment.  You can read this work of genius in its entirety by clicking here:

DesCamp Final Response to BRO

As you will see when you read the document linked above, I have asked for both a retraction and an apology.  I intend to follow up later with their response.  My hope is that the entirety of the organization, including their Board of Directors, will see that this filing was a huge mistake.  

If they do not, and if they ignore the incontrovertible proof that is contained within my response to their complaint, I will be left to conclude that this is an organization that believes so long as you enjoy a certain “status,” you can never be criticized or held accountable for ANYTHING in your life. 

All criticism must be based in bigotry and hatred, right?  It couldn’t possibly be true that someone can be transgendered, gay, female, black, Muslim, handicapped, etc. AND still be an asshole?

Please leave a comment and if you are so inclined, contact Basic Rights Oregon

Let them know your thoughts on their resources and name being used in such a reckless manner to help someone settle a personal score that has absolutely nothing to do with the advancement of their cause, but more to do with Stockholm Syndrome, narcissism, and a dying law firm desperate to remain relevant.

desc_logo

 

 

This Post Has 47 Comments

  1. TLM

    Basic Rights Oregon needs to issue you an apology. What they have done is wrong on so many levels. You are not, nor have you ever been bigoted against the LGBTQ community, or anyone else. You promote equality and you promote taking responsibility for your actions. You strongly promote how to get a divorce without ripping a family to shreds. The only “class” of people I’ve ever seen you really have problems with are “entitled” princess wives who want alimony for the rest of their lives so they never have to work or take responsibility for themselves. I don’t think that’s a “protected minority”, so you’re safe. The firm you have exposed for their actions is famous for this type of perverse representation. There have been articles in the Oregonian on them, and elsewhere. You are justified in your attempt to expose them for what they are.

    BRO has absolutely no excuse for doing what they’ve done. Just because someone is a gay, muslim, black, disabled, transgender does not give them the right to be a complete jerk. And just because someone calls them out as being a complete jerk doesn’t mean that it’s because of whatever their status is. It means they’re a complete jerk.

    I hope BRO comes to their senses and if this nonsense continues, they need to be called out for what they are. Inept and not deserving of whatever contributions they have received.

  2. PGW

    You correctly pointed out the statements against you, as well as Mr. Engel, are defamatory. I’ve read the original complaint and your response and the original one contained many defamatory accusations as well. So why don’t you sue them both? Why don’t you at least request an apology and retraction from Complainant too?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      PGW: thank you for your comment. I have studied defamation laws quite carefully over the past 2.5 years and I know them backward and forward. While I have never written anything actionable under those laws, much to the chagrin of some folks, these two complaints do, in my opinion, rise to the level of defamation. As for lawsuits:
      1. I expect Basic Rights Oregon will reconsider this complaint after they read the response and the proof that disproves their allegations. If they do not, I am loathe to sue them because 1) I don’t sue organizations that I support, even when they do something rash, and 2) Litigation is ugly and would subject the ex-wife and children to mainstream publicity.
      2. I would never sue “Samantha” because the idea of interacting further with her in any way gives me hives. Most important, like a suit against BRO, the collateral damage would be suffered by the mother and kids, and I do believe they have suffered and will continue to suffer quite enough, thank you very much. Say I sued her and won (and was able to do so pro se with no legal fees because I’m smart as fuck). She would have to spend tens of thousands in legal fees plus any judgment against her. How does that help her ex-wife and kids? It doesn’t. So once again, I am the one trying to save Samantha money on legal fees. Yeah, I’m a terrible person who is out to get her.
      3. An apology will emerge from Samantha’s mouth at the exact same moment a baby tiger flies out of my ass and makes love to Archie, my Drunken Chihuahua. I swear upon all that is good and real in this life: I could show Samantha proof of her fleecing and her mistreatment at the hands of her counsel and she would not believe it. She will ALWAYS blame other people because once you realize a person or people in whom you put so much trust fucked you so completely, your entire world collapses. I could show her a crystal ball that plays the “Could Have Been” movie: the one in which these two people came to me at the beginning of their divorce and I helped them through it with the main focus being the preservation of their relationship, their relationships with the kids, and the family finances. It would never change her opinion. Never. She is totally vested in it because if she accepts what really happened, her brain will explode.

      1. Isaac Laquedem

        Another reason not to sue Basic Rights Oregon or Samantha over the bar complaints is that ORS 9.371 grants complete immunity from civil liability for filing a bar complaint to persons who complain to the bar about the conduct of a lawyer.

        1. Robin DesCamp

          Damn your facts.

          1. Isaac Laquedem

            Space and ORS: The FInal Fact-Based Frontiers.

        2. read the statute

          ORS 9.537

  3. Dave Reed

    Wow!! Just wow. How could there be such disconnect?
    Robin DesCamp I have never seen a hint of what is being suggested by BRO.
    Matter of fact I wonder where you find the patience and strength to seriously address so many issues laid at your feet. Yet you do it in a way that is considerate (stern when needed) and often with humor which is priceless.
    I know from personal experience you are a gem as you have provided needed guidance and perspective to a very dear friend.
    I thank you from the bottom of my heart!

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Thank you. You’ve never seen it because not only does it not exist, it’s the opposite of who I am. And they know it.

  4. Robin DesCamp

    Just received via email: Hi there! I’ve been following you from Charleston for about a year. I was very disappointed when you stopped writing the series and I still don’t understand what the problem was with it. I can see why Samantha didn’t want anyone to hear someone else’s side of the story but you didn’t use her name so WTF? And where exactly did you say anything bad about her being transgender? I know the new complaint didn’t provide any proof of that but did Samantha’s? When will the series start again and can you at least give us an update on mom and the kids?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      To which I just replied:
      Thank you. To your question regarding proof: Samantha’s complaint provided only “proof” that proved everything she alleged was a lie at worst and demonstrably 100% false at best. I cannot comment on your question about the series because as you know, it remains paused during this latest round of litigation. Mom and kids are doing as well as can be expected in these trying circumstances, I suppose. I cannot speak for the family and since I know the kids have no idea of my blog, I don’t think they will be leaving a comment here.

  5. SLMLWYR

    I made this comment late on Saturday, but I’ll say it again.

    That’s what I don’t understand–why a well-respected advocacy group would not respond to your email. Let’s hypothesize: a largish contributor (in one sense or another) calls a BRO board member and says, “You need to know about the terrible wrong being done to one of my favorite clients–a sweet transgender woman who has been abused by a vicious blogger for no reason other than her gender identity. The blogger–a lawyer–even conspired with the former wife’s lawyer during the trial! She must be stopped. My client has complained to the bar, and the blogger only made fun of her in her response. Something has to be done! Oh, whatever can we do?”

    So, swallowing that story wholesale (for whatever reason–the cult, youth, drugs, laziness), the bar complaint was filed. Oops. But now, having received your email, I do not understand the refusal to talk with you.

    The complaint was filed on behalf of an organization? I wonder how many members of the organization would be in agreement with the decision to refuse to investigate, to refuse to do further due diligence? Intentionally blinding oneself to new information is not the same as mistakenly acting on less than all the facts.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Here’s what is most striking about the BRO complaint:

      They purport to base it upon my blog series, and yet they cannot come up with one offensive comment towards Samantha’s status made by me. They accuse me of “contacting” Samantha even though my bar response to her complaint clearly shows that contact never happened.

      Now, that bar complaint response did not handle Samantha with kid gloves. I have fairly thick skin, but I will not stand by and let someone falsely accuse me of unethical and felonious behavior. There are some jokes within the bar complaint that BRO may have found offensive, assuming they believe that wide swaths of people should be immune from comedic material.

      So there’s the rub, right? Even though you’d have to be a humorless dick/DICK to not see why I responded the way I did, we are talking about the first bar complaint response, NOT the blog. And the bar complaint response was only available to BRO if they requested it or it was shared with them.

      Not only that, but as I mentioned that response included proof that all the allegations against me were false. Still, they filed against me. That is a clear “reckless disregard for the truth.” I have received no answer from BRO whatsoever and as I ponder this matter further and see the supportive comments here, I cannot believe they have yet to reach out to me. I publish ALL comments here and yet not one person has left words in support of the BRO complaint or the Samantha complaint.

      So, BRO and Samantha supporters, please leave a comment with SPECIFIC EXAMPLES of how I violated ethics rules in my writing or conduct. I’d seriously love to hear from you.

      1. Robin DesCamp

        I’m replying to my own comment to admit that even though I’ve no interest in suing BRO or Samantha, my potential defamation claim would be difficult not because of the contents of the complaints, but the “publication” issue. The complaints may be a matter of public record but whether that constitutes “publication” as required under defamation laws is unlikely. This is especially true since I am the one who published them on a larger scale when I responded. Again, not interested, but I admit I took leave of my senses and knowlege of defamation laws briefly, probably because I was so steamed. Now that I let this balloon filled with methane fly up into the air, my wits are back. So, Samantha, this is how you do it: if you say or do something wrong or stupid, you think about it, you admit your error, and you pivot. That will be five dollars, please.

  6. Equality Promoter

    I have been a consistent donor to Basic Rights Oregon, usually in the “Equality Circle” amounts. I did not realize I was donating to a group that could be so easily manipulated for what appear to be personal and political reasons. I have a list of many donors’ email addresses. Would you like me to send it to you so you can reach out to them?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      A political action group is typically manipulated by political reasons, just not completely wrong ones as in this case. Personal reasons? Oh, yeah. Feel free to email the list to robin@robindescamp.com, but only if it is not a proprietary one. Not sure? Don’t send it.

  7. thingsthatmakemedrink

    I find it disappointing, to say the least, that an organization I admire would file something so baseless with the Bar Association. Is BRO so reliant on the “support” from that firm that they do whatever that firm asks? So much so that even a basic web search too much to ask? Both Google and Bing do a pretty good job at finding results. Perhaps BRO needs a lesson in how to use the Interwebs?

    BRO’s charter is important and necessary. But filings like the one against you cause me to question the leadership.

    Bravo for your thoughtful response. I beg them to publically apologize to you.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Don’t you DARE beg them to apologize to me. Nobody should be begging here, at least not from my side of the street. In addition, I will not accept any apology that isn’t heartfelt and made with pure intentions. I’m not interested in some bullshit apology that most groups demand, receive due to public pressure, and later wonder why it gave them no satisfaction. But thank you for your comment.

  8. Voltaire for President 2016

    (Yes, I know he’s dead).

    First, thank you for the thinly veiled shoutout to Richard Sherman, even if unintentional.

    This whole thing shows something I’ve struggled with for years. If you are a minority or in a traditionally marginalized group, you get free reign to be an asshole, narcissist, sociopath, etc. I’m not saying everyone is like that, but the few that capitalize on it really are. However, when you call someone out for their behavior (read: BEHAVIOR…not race, gender, sexual orientation, sexual identification, etc) and they happen to belong to a minority group, YOU are the asshole and MUST be bigoted because how dare you speak out about the behavior of someone who can’t possibly be an asshole because they MIGHT have been persecuted during their life for who they are. Sorry, world salad. But you get my drift.

    I’m an asshole all the time and my mom, sister, best friend, and some co-workers call me out on it. And then I say “thank you for calling me out on my BEHAVIOR” and go reflect on how to change it. I don’t then attack them for basically hurting my feelings nor do I have a dog and pony show behind me to come marching in to “have my back” when I can’t stick up for myself on the playground.

    Keep on keepin’ on. #voltaire2016

    1. Robin DesCamp

      The shoutout was intentional, and I see you are a Seahawks fan! I bet Sherman would agree with me. The fact is what happened to him was an actual example of what looked a hell of a lot like marginalization and criticism based upon status. In other words, the opposite of my writings on Anatomy of a Disaster. The Voltaire campaign committee just called and ask if I’d consider the VP slot, but I told them I bow to no man, living or dead. I suggested they consider Samantha and the signatories to the BRO complaint for cabinet positions as co-Secretaries of the Thought Police Department which will be created under President Trump.

  9. NYC

    I am still trying to wrap my head around BRO filing such a baseless complaint. Just what does Samantha put in her kool aid? I will be sure to express my disappointment with this complaint to BRO directly.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Thank you. I appreciate your support and ability to understand the difference between the actual meaning of words and the kool-aide meaning.

  10. Friends on Facebook

    “Samantha” wanted to publish her story using her own name and including you and your blog on Huffington Post. What’s that she says about privacy?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Are you joking? Please send me verification if you have any. I was offered a gig writing for them which sounded great until I found out it was unpaid. I do enough of that as it is. Am I to assume they rejected her because everything she says is untrue and deflective? If she’s up for it I’d do a series with her. “She Said/She Said: Reflections on a Truncated Blog Series, Several Bar Complaints, and the Law of Unintended Consequences.” This would be like a Buckley/Vidal thing. OMG – this could actually be brilliant. I’m not joking.

  11. Something is Rotten

    Have you sent a copy of the complaint and your response to every member of the BRO board?

    I really doubt that the bar complaint was an action sanctioned by the entire board–to file a complaint without doing any investigation? And even if filing the complaint was done with board approval, do you think that the entire board was notified of your request to meet with them?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      I have not yet done that. I’m waiting for an intrepid reader to send me all the Board email addresses. I highly doubt any of them knew about my request to meet or about the complaint itself. If they did and they did nothing to insist BRO do some fact-checking, that’s pretty poor performance.

  12. JVS

    Dear robin,
    This complaint is baseless and ludicrous.
    You have been concise, fair and brutally honest in telling this story and I applaud you time and time again.
    The rejection of facts, the rejection of reason and science- that is the path to decline.
    Samantha has gone so far down the wrong path that there is no turning back at this point.
    *She plays the victim so well I’m surprised she doesn’t carry around her own body chalk.

  13. Markus

    For BRO to file this complaint without researching any of these false allegations against you is very disturbing! Apparently since you’re not a part of the LGBTQ community, you don’t have the basic right of being innocent until proven guilty. They were so excited to get this information (albeit completely false and without specific examples) that they didn’t give you the decent courtesy to check the facts. I can assure you that won’t be getting any more donations from this household! Shame on them!

    1. Robin DesCamp

      I think everyone should enjoy the basic right in Oregon to have honorable and ethical representation in their divorce, regardless of their status. I also wonder how Basic Rights Oregon feels about the comment I wrote last week, sharing the story of my bi-sexual friend and what happened to him in his divorce? Their “hero” threatened to out him if he didn’t do what she demanded in the divorce in which the hero represented his wife. This is something we lawyers call “extortion,” a term I understand and Samantha does not. What a beacon of LGBTQ ideals, no? ANd he would be willing to swear it to them, as he was to one of their most visible members who said he didn’t care. WOW.

  14. A Loyal Fan

    Robin – Keep fighting this utter fabrication and never give up. At the end of the day, no matter how long a day it may be, Truth always wins. I hope Basic Rights Oregon is truly as open minded as they proclaim.

  15. You're the Boss

    I just sent you as many of the board’s email addresses as I could locate in a hour or so’s Googling. There is nothing on BRO’s Facebook page yet about this–which is consistent with not making a media circus, but if emailing the board doesn’t get you the opportunity to discuss the complaint with some rational people, maybe some more public pressure would do so. Or is that gasoline on a fire that we wish would just die down?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Thank you!!!

    2. Robin DesCamp

      I am reticent to enact much public pressure for the same reasons I stated above about lawsuits: I do not want this to seep into the mainstream media. That would end the anonymity I provided to the family and impact the kids. I imagine they would be terribly embarrassed at what their father has done and retreat even further, so I intend to keep this at its current level. I will email the Board Members today if I can find the time – right now I am very angry that I had to take time out of my important projects answering this bar complaint, which was as “obscene” as Captain Hook’s billing in a recent divorce case that is never-ending.

  16. SMH

    Samantha continues to bring negative attention to herself and her family by filing these baseless claims, and now she enlists the backing of a powerful Portland support group?!? This BRO has blindly pledged their allegiance to a hot mess without looking into her craziness? They have thrown their lot in with a over-entitled, narcissist that doesn’t believe in EQUAL rights, but in SUPERIOR rights! You can’t make false allegations and come out unscathed, and then blame your downfall on everyone around you. Period. I suggest Samantha move away…far, far away…and find a job to help support the family she helped create that saw her for the egomaniac she truly is.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      It is my hope Samatha can find another job and work with her kids towards reunification without force brought about by litigation, but rather by asking them the simple question: what do you need from me? If she cannot do that, I have a hard time imagining what benefit she offers her kids. Samantha wants them to be her audience, while the kids just need their other parent.

  17. Former In-Laws

    This is a personal plea to Samantha from your former family. Please, please, please just stop. This litigation has now cost the two of you well over $200,000 and there is no winner and no end in sight. Both your savings and Sarah’s are gone. There is no reason to continue to drag each other through the courts any longer. Your children dig their heels in more and more each time you take their mother to court. Just stop! This is not the way to convince them to see you.

    They realize their college funds are gone; spent by you trying to to get what you want. Now you’ve lost your job and their home is in jeopardy. When will you stop?

    Their therapist and their doctor have said it isn’t in their best interest to continue to force reunification. Will you finally listen? Probably not, because you want what you want when you want it.

    It never had to be this way.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Abandon all hope, Ye who enter here. That should be carved into their reception desk. Don’t waste your breath. Until Samantha either goes through successful deprogramming or has a sudden attack of common sense, the litigation will continue. I wonder: how DOES one force kids this age to spend time with a parent? Assuming mom continues to do everything required of her and they still refuse: explain to me how enforcement of the Squishy Hopes Put to Paper (aspirational parenting plan) works? Physical restraint?

    2. Robin DesCamp

      $200,000 is just the beginning, apparently. I hope Sarah’s lawyers will be requesting copies of Samantha’s legal bills in this new modification matter. Specifically, I’d be interested in how much money she is shelling out to her lawyers to ghost-write bar complaints. Of course, they probably coded it this way: “advise client re: stuff – 56,726 hours.” That’s about as specific as they get.

  18. Pingback: Found Daughter’s Birth Control: Part II | RobinDesCamp.com

  19. Samantha is Wrong

    I read everything you post pretty much and was following the series and sorry to see it stop. I didn’t see anything in it that called for all this bother. I didn’t see anything in it or anything else you’ve written that is discriminatory. I find it disturbing that Samantha can blame you for everything including not having a job and what’s going on with the kids. You are right about the personal responsibility thing – she doesn’t get it. Is that new with her or has that been a lifetime thing?

    Basic Rights Oregon owes you an apology. I hope you get it because if you don’t that means a group I’ve supported for years isn’t made up of the leaders I thought it was. Any thoughts on other LGBT organizations I should donate to?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      One can easily imagine that Samantha thinks the blog series was paused because she filed a complaint against me. She is just that narcissistic and delusional. The reason I paused it is because her litigation continued and she filed another motion on top of the one that was already ongoing. After seeing how she and her DICKs made me the subject of the fee petition matter, I was unwilling to be the scapegoat and smoke in mirrors in the new motions. If I kept writing during the litigation they would continue to focus on me and that is not helpful to the mom, NOR is it helpful to Samantha because it drags the case out even longer as it spins out into areas irrelevant to the pending issues. You would think she’d realize that. How many thousands in fees were paid by her on matters relating to me?

      She can blame me all she wants for her employment status and her relationship with her kids. I didn’t care because I think she’s a fucking loon. But getting BRO involved was quite another matter. I am shocked they filed the complaint without reaching out to me. I could have emailed them documents that disproved everything they claimed. This is a big deal and as the days go by with no apology or response to my very respectful request for a meeting, I grow more angry.

      I left a post on my FB page about alternative groups. I am late for a long run to clear my head so I’ll check there later and get back to you.

  20. Isaac Laquedem

    I didn’t see anything on your blog that suggests that you’re bigoted or prejudiced in the least against transgendered persons. I did, however, see in the court filings (most of which I have read) evidence indicating that Samantha hid assets from the court and has wasted her children’s college fund on stupid litigation.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      There you go again with your “facts” and your “logic,” Isaac. Go away with that or someone will accuse you of being a bigot!

  21. Theo

    I make this comment as a significant donor to Basic Rights Oregon, a gay man, an avid reader of the series “Anatomy of a Disaster,” a reader of the Samantha complaint and the Basic Rights complaint, a reader of Robin’s responses, and a decades-long friend of the woman herself. Have I established myself to have enough “status” for anyone reading this?

    BRO got this one wrong and if you won’t demand an apology from them, I will. You have asked for one but I am demanding it. This is insanity and why it is difficult to have more regular and open discussions about equality for the LGBT community. When our valid issues are hijacked by people like Samantha who use status to evade responsibility for their own decisions, the LGBT community pays the price. Basic Rights, by filing this complaint, lowers its standing in the community to an organization that will take on problems that do not exist in the name of our cause, even when our cause is not at issue.

    I’m embarrassed for BRO, and for my community. I like to think that most of us are not so hyper- focused on who we love or what gender we consider ourselves that we would excuse a selfish transgendered woman from acting terribly towards her family and blaming a writer for her problems.

    My donations will be redirected to HRC, which already enjoys my support but will now enjoy my support in double the amount it did before.

    1. Robin DesCamp

      Thank you for your comment, which I’ve decided will fall upon completely deaf ears. I just did a little over 6 miles and as I pounded the pavement sweating out a good deal of frustration over this issue, the simple fact came to me: none of this matters.

      I’ve got a book going to press in the next few weeks that will educate everyone who reads it how to
      1. avoid being treated like Samantha was by her attorneys;
      2. understand and manage attorney behavior and fees as she did not do;
      3. avoid family resources being wasted to nothing as they have been in this case;
      4. create a positive relationship between divorcing parties that will last a lifetime, unlike this case;
      5. deal with unreasonable and intransigent spouses like Samantha, who make positive relationships very difficult (although from what I hear about the person she used to be, if we had met before she hired her lawyers, I bet I could have preserved all the relationships in this case)
      6. prevent emotional damage to the children, the opposite of which is highlighted by this case;
      7. preserve and further good mental health for each partner in a divorce, which was again the opposite here; and
      8. keep litigation limited and settle problems quickly, unlike this case.

      That’s just the beginning of what my book will deliver. So guess what this bullshit is doing? Distracting me. While I know Samantha’s counsel is not looking forward to my book’s publication, nor should they be, I won’t let them further distract me.

      BRO won’t issue an apology. They won’t consider the facts because I don’t think they care. There are relationships going on that require certain forms of “payback,” this complaint being one of them. BRO has a history of working behind the scenes for political reasons (as they did with BOLI in the Sweet Cakes case) and more power to ’em. If they hate and attack someone who supports them simply because a friend of theirs is threatened by the truth I’ve written – who cares? Seriously, fuck it.

      I expect this to be the last comment I write on this matter. When both bar complaints are either dismissed or referred to disciplinary counsel (which would require the OSB completely disregard their own rules and all the facts in evidence) I will report upon that and not give the matter any further attention. Of course, at that point Samantha will file an appeal to the bar, but I’ll let my current defenses stand for themselves.

      To everyone who has commented in support of me, I say: thank you. I apologize for your wasted time because after being ignored by BRO in my request to discuss this with them and after being ignored by a member of their Board of Directors who serves on their legal advisory committee, I know that BRO is choosing to take a position they know to be false and thus cannot be swayed by anything they read here.

      So fuck it. Send your money to them if you like because everything I’ve ever known about them until this bullshit indicates they are a good organization. HRC (Human Rights Counsel) is a good one as well, and I believe they partner with BRO on various issues.

      It’s amazing what 6 miles can squeeze out of you: the desire for explanations, apologies, revenge, or validation. It’s amazing what 6 miles can infuse you with: the knowledge that all of this is silly and stupid noise being promoted by people (not BRO, but the others) who aren’t fit to pick up Archie’s shit, stinky and runny from his near-daily hangover. So too am I infused with the knowledge that despite efforts to have me blackballed on the radio and by certain local “celebrities,” once the book comes out my status as an expert in helping people avoid becoming Samantha, Sarah, and their kids will be well-established.

      I will enjoy success, I will be on-air, and my mediation business will continue its climb, taking people away from monsters such as those that bill excessively at that firm.

      So, again, fuck it. Unlike Samantha, I have really exciting things happening in my life. My son loves me and loves hanging out with me. I am in a very happy and fulfilling relationship with Mr. Patience and Understanding. My finances are good and getting better every day. I live in a beautiful home. I do fulfilling work and I help people. I don’t consider myself a victim when things go wrong in my life: I own my shit and fix things.

      I just don’t care anymore. I know she doesn’t believe this but I want her to have good things in her life and I want her to reconcile with her kids but on their terms. My history with being separated from a parent has formed my opinions and I would tell her that things will get better if she changes her approach. This estrangement is not good for those kids. Dad may look different now but she’s still their dad and in most circumstances kids need and damn well deserve both parents in their lives.

      I believe I could have helped this family enormously because I would have knocked sense into both the parents before one of them was seduced by a lawyer that would feed into creating anger and litigation. If anyone reading this is interested in speaking with me about my creative and unique approach to mediation, email me at robin@robindescamp.com.

      So, on this matter, Robin “out.” My time is precious and will not be further wasted on this.

  22. PdXATTY

    I’ve been practicing law for 16 years and I’ve dealt specifically with RPC 4.2 in a recent case in which the other side attempted to contact my client. I’m very familiar with this rule. I read your complaint response and the text message between Complainant and her ex-wife clearly show that Complainant asked her ex to have you call her. It’s right there in black and white in the texts that all occurred on 10/11/2015.

    1:48 PM
    Complainant:
    “Please forward the information you brought up this morning. Please forward me the contact information as well.”

    Ex-wife:
    “I have. Robindescamp@yahoo.com. Emailing Robin now to let her know I shared her contact info with you.”

    2:03 PM
    Ex-wife
    “From Robin: I am more than happy to speak with (her). A quick perusal of her bills would tell me a great deal on whether they utilized their usual tricks to overbill. I would suggest she not pay whatever she owes not until she and I talk. I may be able to help her refute the fees.”

    (Immediate response from Complainant)
    “Have her contact me directly. For obvious reasons, you cannot be involved in this further.”

    (Immediate response from Ex-Wife)
    “You can contact her. I have no need to have further contact with her and won’t.”

    (Immediate response from Complainant)
    “Thank you.”

    (Immediate response from Ex-Wife)
    “You are welcome.”

    2:47 PM
    Ex-Wife
    There may be a conflict of interest for Robin to tt (talk to) you when you are Hook’s client. They hate her and that would put her in a bad position. I’ll get back to you about what you can do. I know you don’t trust me, but I have no skin in this game other than to help protect your funds.”

    If I understand correctly, that was it. So the Oregon State Bar required you to respond to a complaint that included documentation showing the Complainant was ordering the ex to have you contact her? What the actual fuck? If we suspend disbelief and agree you were an attorney in this case (I know you were not, I’m just playing devil’s advocate) one can clearly see the Complainant trying to contact you, not the other way around. We can see you told the Complainant’s ex you would not speak with her while she was still represented by Hook.

    (side bar: Hook’s Diversion Agreement was sent to me last week by a colleague. Apparently it started making the rounds in the legal community not long ago. I wrote back and said, “where have you been? Descamp has been all over this since last year!”

    The Oregon State Bar has some explaining to do. This is one of many reasons our bar has such a terrible reputation – they seem unable to separate the wheat from the chaff when dealing with ethics complaints.

    When do you expect to wrap this up?

    1. Robin DesCamp

      16 years? I have another commenter with your name or one similar but different years of practice. You people keep me on my toes. Why don’t you simply comment using your own name? Arg.

      See my long comment above where I note I’m walking away from this noise? I want to contradict myself for just a moment. You put some time into your response by assembling and quoting from the text exchange offered as “proof” of contact and I just want to say thank you.

      I’ve received a lot of great feedback on this continuing drama and it’s nice to see my readership supporting me. I’ve asked for those who think I am in the wrong to chime in but so far, nobody has. I think that says a lot.

      I have no idea when this will wrap up. I’ve asked the OSB to ask Complainant directly whether I actually ever contacted her by any means (besides the fantasy you’ve quoted in the text exchange which shows the opposite of what she alleges). I do not know if they will do that, but I certainly hope so. Either she will tell the truth or she will not, and if she does not, she will be utterly unable to offer any proof that I contacted her. It doesn’t exist because it never happened.

      You had no way of knowing because it wasn’t in my response, but the final words from Complainant after being told I would not contact her were these: “yes and understood.” Meaning, she knew I would NOT be contacting her.

      The OSB told me the only matter they were considering from Complainant’s 7-page complaint against me was the 4.2 rule – Contact with a Represented Party. Complainant very thoughtfully blew her own charge out of the water for me with her “proof.” It would have been nice if the OSB threw the complaint out at that point. However, I’m pretty sure I’ve proved my case.

      Thanks again for your time and now I’m back to the real work at hand. It’s funny that when I make promises to ignore the DICKs and this particular victim, er, client, they instigate more trouble. It’s almost as if they simply cannot stand not having my light shone upon them.

Comments are closed.