The State Bar of Arizona released testimony from their disbarment case against congressional candidate Jeffrey Moffatt, who was disbarred following an allegation he solicited a nude photo for services from a client.

Moffatt acknowledged Monday soliciting a nude photo from a woman over Facebook; however, he said there was no proffer of legal services, and that New Mexico investigators cleared him of wrongdoing.

When asked about the claim Tuesday, Rick DeBruhl, State Bar of Arizona spokesman, released testimony from the woman whom he allegedly solicited, which details a conversation the two had over Facebook Messenger.

“Our primary responsibility is to protect the public,” DeBruhl said, “and in this case, the best way for this to be done, is for him to be disbarred. Mr. Moffatt was disbarred because the concern over his actions were so great that the public is in harm.”

Related story: Congressional Candidate Appeals Disbarment Over Nude Photo Allegation

Moffatt said Wednesday the woman who filed the complaint was trying to extort him, and that the judge who headed his disbarment panel was targeting him as retribution for interfering with land deals for developers in Victorville.

“A copy of the transcript shows differently from facebook,” Moffatt said. “The Trump organizations that are supporting me, are continuing to support me through this.”

Click here for the Arizona Supreme Court decision. Click here for Moffatt’s response.

Moffatt also claimed the state of New Mexico found no wrongdoing in his

Jeffrey Moffatt, courtesy of JeffreyMoffatt4Congress

action. New Mexico Chief Disciplinary Counsel Bill Slease said the state is prohibited from releasing any information regarding an investigation or complaint, unless charges are filed or an executive waiver is signed. No charges were brought forth in New Mexico.

The State Bar of Arizona made two attempts to have Moffatt sign an executive waiver that would enable the agency to verify his claims, but he refused twice.

“The staff investigator revised the waiver, narrowing its scope, but Mr. Moffatt again refused to sign the waiver. We find there is no evidence there was any ‘vindication’ of Mr. Moffatt as alleged by him,” according to documents provided by the State Bar of Arizona.

An abbreviated version of the transcript of testimony reveals the following (The full version may be found in the link to the decision.):

Lisa Childers, the complainant, a grandmother who resides in New Mexico where she runs a daycare, sought Moffatt’s help resolving a tax debt, via Facebook on Oct. 11, 2013, according to the documents provided by the State Bar.

Childers indicated she would hope to have his $75 consultant fee to him by next week, when she contacted him for legal services.

Moffatt: “I take all sorts of things as trade fyi. C.A.P. Cash, Assets. . . .”

Childers:  “I’ve pretty much sold everything I have of value[.] . . . So. . . . I will get it[,] it will just take [the] weekend.”

In response to a request from Moffatt for a picture, Childers sent him a picture with herself and her grandson. Moffatt responded by requesting one without the child, and less clothing.

“Childers did not respond to the question about ‘removing something,’” the document states, “and, therefore, Mr. Moffatt again messaged Childers: ‘[A]re you going to give me the pic with less as well. Lets just call it what I want. Yes I want a nude.’”

Moffatt then reasons that “a surrogate,” or another woman in place of Childers would do, to which Childers asked, “[h]ow much in services will that cover[?]”

Mr. Moffatt responded: “‘Pics buys time. Physical attention will be bartered. I could collect the physical when I am in town later in year.’ Childers did not respond, and Mr. Moffatt followed up with Childers by writing: “[W]hich way are we going, pic, cash, physical?’” according to the documents.

Childers didn’t respond, and instead filed a charge against Moffatt with the State Bar of California; however, the case was referred to the State Bar of Arizona because that is the only state where Moffatt is licensed to practice law.

From his Antelope Valley office, Moffatt practices federal law, which is apparently the reasoning behind his appeal to a federal appellate court.

However, the federal court lacks jurisdiction in the matter, DeBruhl said. In order to practice federal law, one must be licensed in at least one state. Since Arizona is the lone state of licensure in the matter, it would have sole discretion. A disbarment in one state is generally recognized by others, he added.

Moffatt stated he had a hearing for an appeal in front of the Arizona Supreme Court, which previously issued a default ruling against. DeBruhl confirmed the hearing date.

In a lengthy Facebook response to Childers’ testimony, Moffatt compared himself to a past president who was allegedly involved in scandalous behavior.

“Let’s not forget history,” Moffatt stated. “John F. Kennedy, ran our country and his desire did not just  stop at a nude photo. According to many sources Marilyn Monroe, was one of many situations past a nude photo. John F. Kennedy change [sic] history and so will I, regardless of a nude photo.”