Total Pageviews

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Vanessa Kachadurian the King of Smear takes on the King of Beer

It seems the shameful conduct of Bennet Kelley continues, he uses Huffington as his personal "BITCHfest" to rant about anything and everything.  Bennet Kelley slanders everyone and believes he does no wrong, but there he goes again abusing yet another branded logo. 
Bennet Kelley maybe careful to not get sanctioned or the California Bar Association on him but he does have a few people in the legal department of Budweiser concerned about their image being tarnished by Slander for Hire Bennet Kelley.  He will risk his Law License to harm someone and file fake lawsuits. 
The one that is really hurting is Bennet Kelley with a radio show HE pays for and a non existent law career, writing career, politics, or anything else. 
Huffington legal department has also been contacted how Kelley uses their blog as a hate campaign tagging people's names to articles (like mine) and lead SEO and brilliant computer image expert Pierre Zavorian of Reputation Stars.
If Bennet Kelley hates you (like the World Cup in Qatar) he will write about you and slander below the belt.  Pullng out all stops including jeopardizing his law career which is currently under the microscope in California Courts who are well aware of the serious abuse of court time to set people up and make them pay for exposing Kelley for what he is.
A horrible Attorney
No political Analyst or expert
A slanderer low life with a law license
Protects human traffickers
Represents Spam Marketers
Rants on a free Radio Blog
Rants on Huffington about nothing but stolen ideas and articles
No writing career
Comical Self-Marketing of himself
Overexposure of his big ugly mouth
Not a professional Speaker or expert on Internet Law
Not an advocate for Cyber Harassment (he is the one that harasses)
Abuses branded logos  illegally
Abuses government seals to appear "official"
Has over 6 Twitter accounts
Multiple online identities

Hopefully Budweiser and Huffington start holding Bennet Kelley accountable for his unprofessional behavior.  Ariana Huffington is friends of the Armenian community although she sold Huffington, there is little doubt she would like Bennet Kelley abusing her name with using Huffington to slander people.   Huffington needs to vet writers better - although they have thousands of contributors it's time to send the slander of Bennet Kelley packing. 

Bennet Kelley slanders the sponsors of the world cup to chase them away in shame. 
But Bennet Kelley doesn't understand or know just how high the stakes are for advertising the World Cup. 

Saturday, April 4, 2015

Vanessa Kachadurian Armenian Advocacy Day at the California State Senate, Join us April 20th

There are buses coming from Los Angeles, San Francisco
Please come to the state capital and meet members of the senate as well as
visit the rotunda with a display of patents

While in Sacramento go to the California Museum there is a 3 month display on

My friend Hratch is one of the top Armenian Rug and textile dealers helped to set it up.


Saturday, March 7, 2015

Vanessa Kachadurian and setting the record straight on Prosecutorial Misconduct LICENSED TO LIE Santa Monica

City of Santa Monica - City Attorney's office

Lawyers working for and with the Innocence Project across the country have freed more than 1,300 people, many of whom have been incarcerated for decades for crimes they did not commit. This publication and others, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, and the New York Observer, are trying to wake us up. The truth about victims of prosecutorial misconduct is that, but for the grace of God, there go any one of us. Prosecutorial misconduct in its worst forms is difficult to uncover.
 It can be as egregious as obstruction of justice and subornation of perjury. The defense doesn’t know what it doesn’t know. Judges want and expect to be able to trust the prosecutors, and judges have their own limitations and biases. Too few are willing to face how pernicious and pervasive this problem is. A prosecutor willing to lie or hide evidence to achieve a result has the ability to do so — with no ramifications. Prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity, and bar associations do little to nothing in most cases. Fortunately, most prosecutors strive to do their difficult jobs with honor, fairness, and integrity. They internalize and exemplify the Supreme Court’s mandate that the United States Attorney seek justice — not convictions.
Unfortunately, however, as the reversals, exonerations, and belated disclosures have begun to show, far too many prosecutors pursue their own personal agendas instead of justice. They see the high-profile cases as steppingstones to positions of power, wealth, and influence. For example, the Enron Task Force prosecutors about whom I wrote in my book Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice became President Obama’s longest-serving White House counsel (Kathryn Ruemmler); general counsel of the FBI (and now head of the Corporate Fraud section at the Department of Justice, Andrew Weissmann); the acting assistant attorney general for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, who then micromanaged the corrupted prosecution of former senator Ted Stevens, thereby changing the balance of power in the Senate (Matthew Friedrich); and our current assistant attorney general for the Criminal Division (Leslie Caldwell). Even though every case they took to trial was reversed in whole or in part for some form of prosecutorial overreaching, they skyrocketed to positions at the top of international law firms and in government.
Prosecutorial misconduct in its various forms accounts for more than half of wrongful convictions, yet prosecutors continue to enjoy absolute immunity, far too much judicial respect and deference, and no repercussions from their superiors or bar associations even when their violations are intentional. It’s time to consider some new remedies. Prosecutors, who should meet a higher standard, should meet at least the same standard to which defendants are held. It’s time for Congress to introduce open-file discovery legislation, which would compel prosecutors to disclose all evidence or information to a criminal defendant and stipulate serious penalties for their failure to do so. A criminal defendant has a constitutional right to any evidence that may be favorable to his defense, but neither prosecutors nor judges are equipped to make that determination. Only the defense can do that, as the Supreme Court said long ago, when it also told prosecutors that any doubt should be resolved in favor of disclosure. Unfortunately, many prosecutors turned their cases into a game they sought to win at any cost.
As Judge Kozinski recently noted from the bench in an oral argument, it’s time to consider perjury prosecutions for prosecutors who lie to courts — and obstruction-of-justice charges if they intentionally hide evidence. Citizen-influenced conviction-integrity units should be established to review questionable prosecutions and outrageous results. Prison should be reserved for people who are a danger to the community. Those who are not dangerous could be engaged in more-productive activities (at no or little cost to the taxpayers) while they pay restitution or their debt to society. We can and must do better. We owe it to ourselves and each other. We cannot afford and should not tolerate prosecutors who are licensed to lie. Both political parties should be able to recognize the problem and to agree on the solutions. Only fair trials serve justice; wrongful prosecutions hurt everyone. CPAC should lead the way for reform. —
Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor in three federal districts under nine United States Attorneys from both political parties, is the author of Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. Share article on Facebook Tweet article Plus one article on Google Plus Get NR Digital Free View Comments Read more at:

Read more at:

Salary in California for prosecutors exceeds $300K a year

City of Santa Monica doesn't employ Armenian Attorneys
Not like there is a shortage of them "Armenian Bar Association"

One interesting comment on this file is
 rings true in many incidences where prosecutors have acted unethically.
Why are they moved out on Mental Health stress or given a vacation then removed from the case



This tweet is from Attorney Bennet Kelley referring to "Armenian Mafia "

Bennet Kelley Cyber Squatted on Attorney Dan Balsams Web Site

Saturday, February 14, 2015

Vanessa Kachadurian and why there is prosecutorial misconduct Bennet Kelley who has mental issues

In short prosecutorial misconduct is done when there is no case think of it as Legal Bullying- like what Bennet Kelley performs and one of the City Attorney's in Santa Monica (out on a mental health issue)--> David Armstrong.  The City of Santa Monica City Manager has been made aware of the expenditures spent for a fishing expedition on an innocent 59 year old woman who has never had issues before. Side note here: Bennet Kelley applied to be on the City Planning of Santa Monica in 2012 but the City Manager was made aware of some of Bennet Kelley's unethical and illegal activities like cyber squatting on attorney Dan Baslam's web site. (he lost to Dan in the court room and is a sore loser) Bennet Kelley's application for city planning commission was shelved. I have it on good authority that Bennet Kelley will never hold office in California.  It must have something to do with referring to Armenians as "Mafia" (compliments of Armenian Bar Association)

Bennet Kelley (a very sad gentleman) and in my opinion suffering from noticeable mental issues like paranoia, egomanic depression (last time he appeared in court he was physically falling apart) and lack of stardom that he so craves. He admitted to the judge he has put a lot of lies online about me and she admonished him with a warning "Mr. Kelley do not provoke" - Kelly tried to exercise the right to a speedy trial but the City of Santa Monica isn't interested in this case like Bennet Kelley is. In fact they lost the file about 4 times. 

 Bennet Kelley is one of the 60 people over at Webmaster Radio that pay for an online radio show.  The owner of the webmaster radio Darrin Rabin is fully aware of Bennet Kelley's fabrication and has removed my name from Bennet's free radio show.  Here is a photo we found of poor Bennet Kelley (the REAL Bennet Kelley) online.  Evidently he has some people very angry with him over his stretching the truth in his court cases.  But I hear it's quiet over at the Internet Law Center, it's not a large office like Bennet Kelley wants you to believe it's only him sad little Bennet Kelley.
1)  Bennet Kelley lost the case against me, but received over $200,000 in legal fees from his baby snatching client Robin Sizemore of Hopscotch Adoptions.  (the failing adoption industry numbers speak for themselves)

2)  Bennet Kelley harassed my family members with paperwork and printed untrue things online about me, building a case where there wasn't one.  After 3 years and my iinsurance company from 2008 representing me (no I didn't pay 1 dime- in fact my expenses out of town were paid for)
Bennet Kelley has threatened me to Timothy Walton one of the longest practicing Internet Attorneys in the USA that "I will make sure that Vanessa Kachadurian is prosecuted and found guilty of anything"   Yes I have Timothy Walton as a witness to these threats.

3)  After the 3rd year and a very telling mediation report Robin Sizemore didn't want to go to trial in Fresno County and have the truth about her on public record.  They asked to settle out of court WITHOUT A JUDGMENT or anything they had asked for in their 4 time amended causes of action complaint that had no merits.   This was more about silencing me via legal bullying and my friends about us speaking up about child trafficking and trying to cost me financial harm (epic failed).  It would have cost my insurance company $150,000 in legal fees to represent me in a jury trial so they were happy to get this vexatious litigation settled for a fraction of the cost.
I can still maintain my freedom of speech and state that "Robin Sizemore is a scumbag who has purchased children from poor mothers in Armenia for her clients".  Those days are over now she has barely 9 adoptions a year out of Armenia and barely 2 are healthy infants the majority are limbs missing and down syndrome that they like to push off on Americans.
Robin made a wise choice to stop the 3 yr. law suit in mediation, Adoption Agencies are not very popular and in the USA - Armenians have a strong presence and the people there respect Armenians because we built the town, Robin would not have gotten a fair trial in Fresno. Robin lied to Bennet about a lot of things, she has no fan base in Armenia or the West Coast.  Yes a few families on the east coast she purchased babies for. She is a very sneaky compulsive liar who enjoys controlling families lives and appearing like she is a savior.

4)  Bennet Kelley proceeds to lie (once again- "Liar" is his middle name) that I or someone else tried to kill him or threatened to kill him.  This has never been substantiated and the City Attorney's office admitted they don't have any proof or information on this.   Bennet Kelley couldn't get a judgment on me (not even a summary judgment) he proceeded to try and harm my reputation, and file fake reports.  90% have been thrown out, There has yet to be any charges by the City of Santa Monica, my guess is they grow tired of Bennet Kelley's online rants and promoting of this case  as a way for him to make case law in California (will never happen)  He has also aligned himself with some unsavory people like members of an Islamic cult that operate charter schools who recently had 20 of their schools raided by the FBI and a nutty woman that harms everyone on the Internet by the name of Terrorist Barbie (seriously that is her name- but many people think it's Bennet Kelley)

5)  I have no probation or anything else on me, they all have been thrown of court for many reasons but mostly because of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of Santa Monica's troubled City Attorney's office.  They have lost the file a couple times and have been abusing city funds to scan hard drives to the tune of $40,000 (poor taxpayers of Santa Monica) Yes on Bennet's first accusation where I never responded to a police report from Bennet (taking care of elderly parents) so a bench warrant is automatically issued and that is why the SFPD (great guys) took me in and then threw the case over to Santa Monica.  I never spent the night in jail, I have way too many friends in California and a good record.  And no bail Bennet, so you have not cost me money except for the puny $1,000 for making the mediation record public after you lied with your fake PR campaign. A Small price to pay to not be silenced by Legal Bullies like you.
I didn't have time for a trial in Santa Monica taking care of my parents so I opted for a deal where I was found NOT GUILTY but a protective order would be in place for Bennet (there is a question of how Bennet got a protective order when he never proved I tried to kill him)  Part of that was I was to not have any issues in 18 months, and unfortunately I had a very bad incident happened at the California Armenian Home (my father built this Nursing facility) although it's not Armenian anymore my mother's care was very poor (all documented at the State of California) ., and one of the tattoo infested LVN's saw Bennet Kelley's fake rap sheet (or shit) online about me and called the police that I was threatening her.  The policeman was "Armenian" (Officer Greg Jouryan) and said he saw the protective order and it was a black mark that Bennet Kelley placing on me.   I thought he was kidding when he said Vanessa you have to come with me, I laughed and walked in my mother's room where he knocked me to the ground in front of my parents in my mother's room. 

Yes I took them to court and I still had visitation with my mother but I had to call ahead of time.  The District Attorney (also Armenian) Armen Israelyan threw the case out. He knows the reputation of the hospital and I had no priors. Foot note here: the Armenian Community of Fresno doesn't donate much to this nursing home. We have many small group homes that we use that are more suitable. Frankly, this doesn't concern you it's the business of MY community that will decide the fate of the Nursing home should it sell, close or if they end up filing bankruptcy. The same with your political career in Los Angeles WE decide who we want as our elected officials not you.

6)  Conclusion, Bennet Kelley is a sore loser and Legal Bully who cannot bare the thought of a pro se client getting the best of him and not costing financial or emotional harm. In fact, this has been entertaining watching Bennet Kelley slip further into a bad reputation which he has brought on himself for lying.  He has written countless articles about me online and is asking for potential clients to contact him.  Not sure why he is trying to capitalize on this case but the City Attorney's office has all of this. The Recipe for success is simple the more Bennet lies the more I tell the truth.

Bennet Kelley is trying to steer this entire case as he usually does with his comical writing skills (oh yes he wants to be a writer and politician) Just more of Bennet Kelley's wild claims. This is a personal matter and not of Public Interest to be burning public funds against someone who is a California Resident and native.  There is not blemishes on my record except for what Bennet Kelley has tried to imply online.  Lastly I don't have any mental disorders except I do get very angry when something is unfair.  But the Truth and Good will prevail, and Bennet Kelley will just continue to lie and Bully people.  It's not like anyone trusts Attorneys or Police anymore and they are notorious for misconduct.  We don't have to talk about the reputation of Adoption Agencies they are all closing, Robin is not welcome in Armenia because of her games. Edhuard Amalyan hasn't paid taxes on the cash that Robin wires him, that is going to be a problem for him. 
It's very sad that since 2009 Bennet Kelley is pursuing me, he just cannot accept defeat and wrote a comical press release after the meditation that he won a "significant victory" for his child stealing client, but never tells the entire truth how much Robin Sizemore paid him in legal fees (it's online-$209,000)  Bennet if you are reading it's been 6 years you really should move on and stop mentioning me all over the place no one listens to you.  This abnormal tweeting you do is very sad, you have tried to follow me on twitter you have some issues and I hope you can take care of them.  Read the article below about a famous attorney that is doing good, you will never be on this level of fame you simply are not in this league.  I pray that you get help soon.  I sympathize with your mental issues and the leukemia.  You actually should thank me I delayed the case enough so you could bill Robin $209,000.00 - But lying and saying you won a case is just a lie Remember what Judge Michael Seng told you "Mr. Kelley this case is closed"  

Bennet Kelley trying to follow my twitter account
I had to block him, I don't know how many accounts he has
but I am told it's a lot.

If Bennet Kelley the Internet Attorney, has harmed you or "legal bullied" you please don't hesitate to
contact the California Bar Association.  They are going through a shake up and will be taking complaints
 more serious.  If you are a Defendant in a case where he decides to go after you, know your rights and
 go to your local police department.  The one thing about "Legal Bullies" they are cowards and when someone stands
 up to them they cannot  believe they don't control the situation.  Bennet thought he could scare me, he was wrong I am not afraid of him.  
In jurisprudence, prosecutorial misconduct is "an illegal act or failing to act, on the part of a prosecutor, especially an attempt to sway the jury to wrongly convict a defendant or to impose a harsher than appropriate punishment."[1] It is similar to selective prosecution.

Types of misconduct[edit]

Abuses of discretion[edit]

Prosecutors are given discretion about how they conduct their business. However, while some practices are not illegal, they may be seen as abusive and in need of reform, particularly by defendants and criminal defense attorneys:
  • Selective prosecution by race, income, political affiliation, etc.
  • Capture of the grand jury, misusing it as a tool for inquisitorial abuse, or excluding citizen complaints from being heard.
  • Plea bargaining abuses, such as seeking testimony in exchange for leniency. This may solicit perjury or falsified evidence.
  • “Horsetrading”, the practice of colluding with defense attorneys to agree to get some of their clients to plead guilty in exchange for letting others off.
  • Threatening public officials, especially judges, with prosecution if they don't unduly support their cases.
  • Tainting of jury pools with public statements by prosecutors that are either inaccurate, exaggerated, unsupported by evidence or that could be inadmissible at trial, and such statements become widely promulgated by the media.
  • Prosecutors causing depositions in a related civil trial which were likely to yield exculpatory evidence, and then "staying" those statements so they cannot be used in a criminal trial.
  • Prosecutors naming a host of “unindicted co-conspirators” in conspiracy cases to intimidate potential defense witnesses with threats of retaliatory prosecution.
  • Prosecutors using their Peremptory Challenges to remove from the jury anyone with relevant experience in the complex subjects of a trial. Defense attorneys often use similar tactics. Both attempt to prevent a juror's technical knowledge from interfering with the credibility of their expert witnesses.
  • Prosecutors pursuing criminal penalties for selected industry practices in Corporate America when regulatory intervention would be more appropriate. For example, prosecuting a mechanic for minor violations of the Clean Water Act rather than affording the opportunity for the mechanic to correct his error and pay the appropriate fines.
  • Prosecutors using multidefendant trials to get defendants to turn on one another in the courtroom, as judges may be reluctant to allow separate trials in multi-defendant cases.

Examples and remedies[edit]

In late 1993, the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that John Demjanjuk had been a victim of prosecutorial misconduct during a 1986 trial in which federal prosecutors withheld evidence. Demjanjuk's sentence was overturned, but he lost when his case was retried.
In the 1995 murder trial of O. J. Simpson, the defense argued that Los Angeles Police Department detective Mark Fuhrman had planted evidence at the crime scene. Although Fuhrman denied the allegations, Simpson was found not guilty, although he was later held liable for the deaths in a civil suit filed by the families of the victims. In USA Today (August 24, 1995), Francis Fukuyama stated, "[Such defenses lead to] a distrust of government and the belief that public authorities are in a vast conspiracy to violate the rights of individuals." However, such misconduct may actually be widespread in the United States. "It’s a result-oriented process today, fairness be damned," Robert Merkle, former U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, said.[2] Prosecutors are protected from civil liability even when they knowingly and maliciously break the law in order to secure convictions***(untrue....see fraud upon the court), and the doctrine of harmless error is used by appellate courts to uphold convictions despite such illegal tactics, thus giving prosecutors few incentives to comply with the law.[3]
A more recent example of prosecutorial misconduct can be seen in the 2006 Duke lacrosse case. In that incident, members of the Duke University men's lacrosse team hired a female stripper for a team party. She went on to accuse three players of raping her at that party. Making the case even more volatile was the fact that the stripper was black and the three accused players were white. The actions of the prosecutor in this case, Mike Nifong, drew enormous criticism, as he proceeded with the case despite numerous inconsistencies in the accuser's story, a lack of DNA evidence conclusively linking any player to any sexual assault, and at least two of the accused having solid alibis. He also made numerous inflammatory statements to the media. The case against the players eventually collapsed; all charges were dropped, and the North Carolina Attorney General took the unusual step of declaring the players innocent. The North Carolina State Bar eventually disbarred Nifong for his actions during this case.
In 2011 Michael Morton was released from prison after serving nearly 25 years for the murder of his wife in 1987. He was released after DNA evidence pointed to another man as the killer.[4] The prosecutor, Ken Anderson later plead guilty to withholding evidence that could have helped Morton fight the murder charge. He was sentenced to spend 10 days in jail and was also disbarred.[5]
Despite such, the defense has been successful roughly 1 out of 6 times it has been used from 1970 to 2003. During that period, judges have cited misconduct by prosecutors as a reason to dismiss charges, reverse convictions, or reduce sentences in 2,012 cases, according to a study by the Center for Public Integrity released in 2003; the researchers looked at 11,452 cases in which misconduct was alleged.[6]
A debate persists over the meaning of the term. Prosecutors have asked judges to stop using the term to refer to an unintentional error, and to restrict its use to describe a breach of professional ethics. E. Norman Veasey, the chief justice of Delaware Supreme Court, answered one such request in 2003 by noting the term's extensive use in rulings over the past 60 years. "We believe it would be confusing to change the terminology in view of this history," he wrote in reply.

Saturday, January 31, 2015

Vanessa Kachadurian on Top Human Rights Attorney Amal Clooney representing Armenia and Genocidal intent SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

Amal Clooney to Set the Record Straight
Opening Statement at the European Court of Human Rights.

After playing the role of red-carpet date for her husband, George Clooney, at the Golden Globes, Amal Clooney is taking off the white gloves and getting down to business.

Her latest mission: representing Armenia's interests in a landmark trial before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, France, beginning Wednesday.

The case is an appeal of a 2013 ruling by the ECHR – described as the Supreme Court of Europe – in which the court decided that a Swiss law prohibiting the public denial of the Armenian genocide is a violation of freedom of speech.

Switzerland is now appealing the verdict, and the outcome of the trial could have ramifications for other European nations, such as France, which have also attempted to outlaw genocide denial. 

 For her part, Clooney, 36, will attempt to refute testimony from countries, like Turkey, which do not accept that the mass killing and forced deportation of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire from 1915-1923 was an act of genocide.

The appeal is Clooney's first big case of 2015. Last year, she represented Greece in the country's bid to have the Elgin Marbles returned from the British Museum.

More recently, she represented one of three Al Jazeera journalists imprisoned in Egypt.

Vanessa Kachadurian meet my friend and new judge Lisa Gamoian

Lisa Gamoian has handled many high profile criminal cases and was responsible for putting crazy child killer Marcus Wesson in jail with an impending DEATH sentence.   
The Superior Court of Fresno County has an excellent addition to insure laws are followed and no prosecutorial misconduct is allowed by local District Attorneys or private Attorneys.

Now about one of her most famous cases that landed in international news and soon to be film
Thank you Lisa Gamoian for being an outstanding Attorney and your years of service to the families of Central California.

Monday, December 8, 2014

Vanessa Kachadurian crackdown on the California Bar Association

No more cover ups at the State Bar Association.  It was revealed that there was a back log of complaints against Attorneys and no follow up via investigation. 
Attorneys like Bennet Kelley with numerous complaints filed for ethics and procedure violations won't be swept under the carpet any more.  Sharks DO feed on Sharks and there is no Attorney willing to defend Bennet Kelley.  Several other Attorneys have filed complaints against Bennet Kelley

Are you getting the message loud and clear?  Bennet Kelley has made threats behind my back to other attorneys.  Saying that "he is going to prosecute me to the fullest extent" Vanessa Kachadurian
knows that Bennet Kelley is jealous of famous attorneys and of her career as a journalist.  Vanessa Kachadurian won a case against Bennet Kelley and his human trafficking client Hopscotch Adoptions.   Look at the industry Kachadurian says" there is 80% reduction in adoptions, because of
fraud" Bennet Kelley has no judgment and cannot sue truth.  Robin Sizemore has Bennet Kelley to thank for destroying the adoption industry.  You tried to damage my reputation and it didn't work, as adoptions further decline and more countries close down on these human slime body brokers.  Neither Adoption Agencies or Attorney have credibility both are disliked. 

Even lie to the City of Santa Monica who is done with that little creep.
                                                                               The end of a sad little career                           

Accusations fly as State Bar of California leader Joe Dunn fights ouster

Joe Dunn
Trials and ArbitrationLegal Service

State Bar of California's fired executive director, Joe Dunn, isn't going quietly; he's hired his own lawyer
The State Bar of California 'is just further descending into a banana republic,' law professor says
The agency that regulates California's lawyers is once again beset with conflict, riddled by accusations involving expense accounts and ethics.
The turmoil became public last month when the board of the State Bar of California fired its executive director, Joe Dunn, a former state senator from Orange County.
Dunn did not go quietly.
He hired high-profile Los Angeles lawyer Mark J. Geragos and filed a lawsuit charging the bar with "egregious improprieties."
Dunn's critics fired back by revealing that a confidential report commissioned by the board found Dunn had spent $5,600 for a party at a Los Angeles restaurant and that a former bar president had filed an expense account report for $1,000 at Tiffany & Co.
The acrimony threatens to further diminish the reputation of the bar, an arm of the California Supreme Court that oversees nearly 250,000 lawyers and is charged with rooting out corrupt attorneys and upholding high moral standards.
Some lawyers and lawmakers have long criticized the bar as bloated, political and lenient on errant lawyers. Upheaval in the 1990s almost led to the organization's demise, and there have been various efforts to make it less a trade organization and more a regulatory agency.
"The bar is just further descending into a banana republic," said Golden Gate University law professor Peter Keane, who tried unsuccessfully decades ago to overhaul the association. "It is totally dysfunctional and should be unraveled."
Funded largely by mandatory lawyers' dues, the bar is a public corporation that regulates, disciplines and licenses attorneys, subject to the approval of the state high court. Becoming a bar leader is considered a steppingstone to a judgeship and a way to enhance a resume or attract clients.
Dunn, a former trial lawyer hired four years ago, was earning $259,000 a year when he lost his job, overseeing 500 employees and an organization with a $138.6-milllion budget.
Shortly before Dunn was fired, he filed an anonymous "whistle-blower" complaint alleging, among other things, that a bar official was manipulating records to hide a huge backlog in untended complaints against lawyers. Dunn later identified himself as the whistle-blower and said he was fired in retaliation for the complaint.
The bar suggested in a prepared statement that Dunn knew he was going to be fired before filing the complaint, a charge Geragos called "totally untrue." The statement said Dunn was being investigated because of a complaint by a high-level executive — the same bar official Dunn had accused of misconduct.
The highly public fight is expected to cost the bar hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and could lead to efforts to restructure the organization. The Legislature must pass bills each year authorizing the bar to collect dues, and two governors have vetoed such bills, calling the bar wasteful, partisan and racked by "chronic disharmony."
"I think there are going to have to be major changes," said Arthur L. Margolis, who defends lawyers before the bar and advises other attorneys on legal ethics, "to protect whatever credibility" the bar has left.
Dunn's lawsuit alleged "ethical breaches, prosecutorial lapses and fiscal improprieties" within the bar.
He accused the bar of paying a private law firm $300,000 — with three law partners each billing $800 an hour — to investigate him even though a former judge had offered to do it for free. The purported hourly fee galled many lawyers, who must pay bar dues. Most earn far less than $800 an hour. The bar has refused to confirm the amount spent on the investigation.

The target of Dunn's wrath was Craig Holden, a partner at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, one of L.A.'s largest law firms, who became bar president in September in an uncontested election. Dunn, who reported to the bar's board, accused Holden of orchestrating his ouster, possibly because Holden wanted the job himself.
Holden, whose bar position is volunteer, said he laughed at that charge. The bar said Dunn's lawsuit was "baseless."
After Dunn filed his lawsuit, details of the outside law firm's confidential investigation into Dunn became public. People with access to the report shared its contents with The Times and two legal newspapers.
The investigation, ordered by the bar's trustees, found that Dunn had submitted an expense report for $5,600 for an event in July at 10e, a Los Angeles restaurant owned by Geragos. Geragos said the expense was for a going-away event for former bar President Luis Rodriguez, a Los Angeles deputy public defender whose one-year term ended in September.
The report also said Rodriguez submitted an expense for $1,000 at Tiffany. Rodriguez, asked about the expense, said any suggestion of impropriety was "maddening."
Rodriguez said bar presidents are given $30,000 annual stipends, and he used part of that to buy gifts for the bar's trustees as a gesture of appreciation as he was leaving. He said the gift giving was a tradition.
"Every president before me has given a gift, and he or she is free to use that money," Rodriguez said.
Rodriguez presented the trustees with pens from Tiffany. He referred further questions to his lawyer.
A bar spokeswoman said presidents have been given up to $30,000 a year since 2006 for "secretarial assistance, miscellaneous expense and travel expense."
The money for the stipend and the going-away party came from mandatory bar dues, which this year cost most practicing lawyers $420 each.

Under a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, mandatory bar dues may be spent only on regulating the profession and improving legal services to the public. A spokeswoman for the bar said expenses such as gifts and dinners will be paid from other revenues in the future — a policy instigated by Holden when he became president.
Disclosures from the confidential report infuriated Dunn's supporters. Geragos described the ouster of Dunn as "a power play" and said Dunn was never allowed to hear or respond to the charges, which included cronyism and misleading the board.
Geragos blamed the bar board for revealing the contents of the report on Dunn to journalists, and warned that any lawyer who divulged the findings could face legal discipline.
The feud is drawing attention in legal circles in California and elsewhere.
"Lawyers in California and legal ethicists around the country are wondering if there is something systematically problematic with the state bar," said John Steele, who teaches legal ethics at UC Berkeley's law school.
Or, Steele added, the internal squabbling may amount to just another particularly bad bout of turbulence.