WIGHTMAN CONFESSES: "I DID INTENTIONALLY AND KNOWINGLY" BREAK THE LAW AND PRACTICED LAW WITHOUT A LICENSE

(There is a saying in Spanish that says "la defensa es permitida," which translates roughly to self defense is permissible. After having watched our friends and community mauled by rogue blogger Robert Wightman – a disbarred attorney from Dallas – we have decided that perhaps our fellow residents may want to know a little more about this actor. Toward that end we have started an informational blog that you can access by simply clicking on the graphic at top right (The Wightman Contra-Intelligence Files). We will periodically add more info as time goes on. The first installment is below. Happy reading!)  

By Juan Montoya
Last Thursday morning, when one Josephina Canales (Fisher?) who is charged with harassing Yolanda Begum through electronic messages appeared at Judge Art McDonald's County Court-at-Law #1,  she was accompanied by none other than a disbarred lawyer from Dallas who immediately screamed that his First Amendment rights had been violated because he had been asked – as others were – to wait outside the room if he did not have a case to be heard.
The disbarred attorney, one Robert Wightman, was accompanied into the courtroom by a television crew from Channel 4 who he had brought along to record the staged encounter.
According to Wightman:  "Judge Art McDonald facing both possible federal criminal charges, and disciplinary action by the Commission on Judicial Conduct, recused himself citing the possible charges and disciplinary action."
Of course, McDonald did no such thing.
He merely mentioned the fact that someone (Wightman, who else?) had filed a complaint with the U.S. Dept. of Justice, as he is wont to do, claiming both McDonald and Saenz had violated Canales' rights (unspecified). He has also threatened to file a federal lawsuit against Sanez for – ready? – performing his job as a county prosecutor and addressing a criminal complaint.
Wightman has already posted that he is going to bring down Saenz at all costs. In fact, he makes no bones about his threats of "going before a federal judge for injunctive relief. My only hesitancy is it is bad form to seek any type civil relief while pursuing criminal charges. To my advantage is I am not seeking monetary damages."
In fact, her former attorney, none other than Ed Cyganowicz, had been excused by the court from representing her because, among other things, he felt she was not keeping up her end of attorney-client privilege. She was apparently discussing what they talked about in relation to her case with someone else. Care to guess who?
Can you believe this guy?
This is the same guy who, after it was proven in District Court in Dallas, Texas, April 19, 2004, said in a judicial confession on a charge of Practicing Law Without a License (Cause: F-0301282):
"I judicially confess to the following facts and agree and stipulate that these facts are true and correct and constitute the evidence in this case:
On the 9th of June A.D., 2003, in Dallas County, Texas., I did intentionally and knowingly then and there, while not licensed to practice law in this state, another state, or a foreign county, and with the intent to obtain an economic benefit for myself, advise Dr. Dan Leong as to the rights of the said Dr. Dan Leong and the advisability of making a claim for property damages, in a legal dispute with Dr. David Stones." 
Eventually, despite innumerable unsuccessful attempts to regain his law license in state and federal courts, Wightman had to spend 14 days in jail for the offense. He was able to plea down a felony to a misdemeanor and avoid a felony conviction. As originally charged, Falsely Holding Oneself Out As a Lawyer, a third-degree felony offense, he could have received 2-10 years confinement in the Texas Corrections System and an optional fine not to exceed $10,000.
Will the local DA be as charitable if he can prove – through  Wigthman's website or through witnesses – that Wightman is up to his old ticks again?

After all, you can only push your luck for so long, can't you?