fbpx

Laughable Luttrell Complains About Monmouth GOP Radio Ads and Robo Calls–Threatens Legal Action

Laugable Larry the Lunger

Laughable Larry the Lunger Luttrell

Monmouth County Democratic Freeholder Candidate Lawrence W. Luttrell, like all bullies, can dish it out but he can’t take it.

The litigious lunger has spent two years campaigning for Freeholder (he came in last in 2013 and is heading that way again this year) by lying and distorting the records of his opponents, particularly over the farmland preservation deal involving Andrew Lucas. Yet when the truth about his own inglorious past gets revealed, Luttrell threatens legal action.

At the candidates forum sponsored by Lincroft Village Green last week in Middletown, Freeholder Director Lillian Burry was so upset that Luttrell blamed her for Operation Bid Rig that she would not shake his hand after the debate.  “You’re taking this stuff too personally,” Burry reported Luttrell as saying.

Look in the mirror Larry.  As a great Democrat once said, “If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.”  You brought this on yourself with your lies and distortions.  You’re not dealing with tenants or advisories who can be easily bullied.

At issue are Monmouth GOP radio ads and robo calls that refer to Luttrell and his running mate, Giuseppe “Joe” Grillo, as “Lawbreakers” and announce that Luttrell’s law license was “suspended” and “taken away.”

Here’s one of the ads:

Luttrell hired another lawyer to write to Monmouth GOP Chairman Shaun Golden claiming that the ads are defamatory because Luttrell’s license was not “suspended” or “taken away” but that it he was “temporarily administratively ruled ineligible” to practice law.  Here’s a copy of the letter.

“Suspended,” “taken away” and “ruled ineligible” are distinctions only a lawyer can appreciate. The general public will not know the difference.

Luttrell’s lawyer threatened to take “all legal remedies” if the ads were not discontinued.

The lawyer complained that the “ruled ineligble” occurred 13 years ago because Luttrell was distracted by the terrorist attacks on 9-11 and did not pay a fee.

Evidently Luttrell did not tell his attorney the whole truth.

Luttrell’s license to practice law in Florida was suspended or revoked or ruled ineligible, whatever the difference is, for most of this year  The website lawyers.com listed Luttrell’s status as “Suspended” earlier this month.  The site said Luttrell could not practice law in Florida for failure to comply with a continuing education requirement.   His status on the site was recently updated to “In Good Standing.”  However, the cache in a google search still lists Luttrell’s status as “Suspended”:

Luttrell Suspended a

Screen shot of google search made this afternoon

I doubt Luttrell will file a lawsuit. He, not his attorney, personally emailed Golden this afternoon to ask if he received the letter and if he was going to discontinue the radio ads by the end of the day.  Then, after the close of business today….at the conclusion of the Monmouth County Freeholder meeting…an Asbury Park Press reporter told Freeholder Director Lillian Burry that Luttrell wants to know if the ads were going to be taken down.

The Monmouth GOP should change their ads, even if Luttrell does not file suit.  Have the narrator say, “Luttrell was ruled ineligible to practice law in TWO STATES, New Jersey and Florida.”

That would be a harder hitting ad and answer Luttrell’s lawyer’s objection.  The public won’t know the difference between “suspended” and “ruled ineligible.”  The Party won’t have to waste money on legal fees in the unlikely event that Luttrell does sue.

More from my site

Posted: October 30th, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Monmouth County, Monmouth Democrats | Tags: , , , , , | 59 Comments »

59 Comments on “Laughable Luttrell Complains About Monmouth GOP Radio Ads and Robo Calls–Threatens Legal Action”

  1. Steve Adams said at 5:43 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    Hey “Anonymous”-
    Is it safe to say Jim was given a “time out”?

    I guess Jim ws told not to answer the question, “Was Harry Larrison Corrupt?”

    And for the record, I did not post the bid rig link that makes Republicans look silly and inept. I’ve been trying to get them to address the issue and put it behind them by taking visible actions, because as Jim says “Actions speak louder than words”.

  2. Hey Stevarino said at 6:13 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    I guess you can’t read either because Mr. Granelli basically said he was done with you.

    He said you could have the last word. But you keep on trying to bait him. What, are you some kind of weird stalker?

  3. Steve Adams said at 6:34 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    Hey “Anonymous”-
    How long is a GOP timeout for a first offense?
    -Steverino

    PS- I wanted to thank you for the complement when you said “Go back to your day job because you sure ain’t good with politics.” I have never been a politician, and never will be. I have been elected to public office many times, to serve the public; but thats not the same as being a politician in your vocabulary.

  4. Sancho Panza said at 9:25 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    @”The State of PA. was unable to point to one case anytime/anywhere when they were trying to defend their voter photo id law.”

    That is a ridiculous assertion. According to slate. com, the state had a valid explanation:

    “The new law, passed by state Republican legislators last year, is backed by at least 58 percent of voters. That’s after months of gut-punch headlines—“Justice Department Investigates Pennsylvania Voter ID Law,” “Why Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Law Will Create Chaos on Election Day,” and “Pennsylvania Admits There’s No In-Person Voter Fraud.” And that last headline wasn’t even true. On July 25, the start of hearings on a possible injunction against the law, a lawyer from the attorney general’s office had to explain that the state had merely decided to bracket voter-fraud stories and leave them out of the trial.

    ” “That is not a concession … that voter fraud has not happened,” said Deputy Attorney General Patrick Cawley. “It is a recognition that the legal standard governing these proceedings simply does not require the legislature to have proof of such incidents in order to enact a voter ID law.” “

  5. Hey Stevarino said at 9:36 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    Obviously, you REALLY can’t read because you continue to ignore what I and Mr. Granelli said.

    He said quite clearly that “You can have the last word,” to wit I repeated it for you. Yet, you continue to carry on.

    Hee seems not to want to waste anymore time with you. So,why do you continue to play childish games with a childish attack saying he’s been given a time out?

    You better look in the mirror there young fella when you play games like that because maybe it’s you that needs the time out.

    Now, about this public office you ran for; what was it; for your home owner’s association?

  6. OMG! said at 10:34 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    To even waste our time with years-old drivel, shows how desperate this bunch is to “win at any cost”.. No matter how much you continue to misrepresent all Mr. Larrison did in his decades of public service with measurable, visible, enduring RESULTS, for this county, you will never win that argument.. And that dumb video shows just how successful it and those 3 were: zippo! Piece of advice: Better stock up on lots of beer and crying towels, you’ll be having a long and losing night, tomorrow!

  7. Steve Adams said at 11:02 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    However these anonymous posters are defending Harry Larrison… Has the Republican Party of Monmouth County set an acceptable amount of corruption? I doubt that the party would do that because it would be immoral.

    How do you justify as acceptable, the amount of corruption you accept? Is that immoral?

  8. Hey Stevarino said at 11:31 pm on November 3rd, 2014:

    I did a little research.

    There is only one Steve Adams registered to vote in Monmouth County, down in Cream Ridge.

    Now, I wonder what the odds are of you being the one and only Stevarino.

    Oh, before I forget. Back to that question I asked you since you seem to be unable to answer questions repeatedly on this thread.

    What public office did you serve in?

  9. Has the Democrat party said at 8:07 am on November 4th, 2014:

    ever run an issues-based, performance and experienced, positive campaign, free of personal attacks? Here in Monmouth, practically never! Hope after today,”Steve” starts coming to freeholder meetings, and sees how much the county really gets done, on a daily basis,in behalf of the taxpayers: and, that he signs up online to serve on a volunteer board, to commit some personal time and actually serve his county. Being a mouthpiece for a bunch of mean whiners is both boring and unproductive. If he has any evidence of unethical practice, he should call the prosecutor- he’s back now from serving our country in Afghanistan..