Hillary Clinton is starting to look more and more like a loser -- and a desperate one at that. Obama has the cool look of a winner.
Good riddance to Elliott Spitzer and his shiksa wife, Silda Wall Spitzer. The hell with them both.
Throw in the towel. You're finished. Don't embarass you and your husband any further. Obama's got the nomination. You can't beat him.
Heath Ledger really did have a smorgasbord of drugs in his bodily fluids when he died just over two weeks ago in a New York apartment. Shortly after the news broke, several science bloggers launched into rather macabre speculation about how the young actor died. Kyle Finchsigmate's assessment was spot on: So, this is The Chem Blog and not Variety and I don’t care too much about Ledger’s death, but it’s curious that people jumped to drug overdose without asking anyone if it was really easy to OD on any of these drugs. The answer is that no, it’s painfully difficult to have a fatal OD on any of those drugs. According to a story by the Associated Press: The cause of death was “acute intoxication by the combined effects of oxycodone, hydrocodone, diazepam, temazepam, alprazolam and doxylamine,” spokeswoman Ellen Borakove said in a statement. How does the New York City medical examiner know that? They probably used gas or liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. In other words, they took samples of Ledger's blood, urine, and maybe even his vitreous humour, and injected them into a machine which separates out each chemical and identifies them individually.
"I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them," Caroline Kennedy wrote in an op-ed posted Saturday on the Web site of The New York Times. "But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president - not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans."
Kennedy, who was four days shy of her 6th birthday when her father was assassinated, wrote that Obama "has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things."
And she appealed to other parents to pick a candidate who she said could invigorate a younger generation that is too often "hopeless, defeated and disengaged."
Kennedy wrote that she wants a president "who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved."
Roe should be overturned because it's bad law. A fundamental right or liberty should be grounded in something more substantial than a chimerical "penumbra of rights" flowing from a prior court decision (Griswold). Basically, what the court did in Roe was to say that women have a fundamental right to abortion "because we say so," that is because we said in Griswold that reproductive rights fall under a right to privacy that we "discovered." The constitution can be pulled and stretched only so far before it becomes a sham, a house of cards created by the Court. That's not constitutional law, that's "Alice in Wonderland."
Women should, however, have access to abortion. But the legal basis needs to be found in some other legal principles or be created by the legislature. Perhaps a constitutional amendment needs to be passed. But, of course, that probably will not happen. Yet, if women want a secure right to abortion they may well have to fight for a constitutional amendment, as they did early in the last century to obtain the right to vote under the 19th amendment.
There's a tangential issue relating to the abortion debate that has always intrigued me, though I have never heard any discussion of it. There is an interesting symbolic relationship between a pregnant woman and a federal republic such as the US. That is to say, a symbolic relationship between the state of pregnancy and the issue of states rights versus federal supremacy.
The pregnant woman is symbolically analogous to the federal government, which has supremacy over and a duty of protection to the individual states. The pregnant woman harbors and protects the fetus. Put another way, the mother stands in symbolic relation to the federal government, just as the fetus (or fetuses) stands in symbolic relation to the individual, subservient states.
Conservatives typically champion the power of the states against the encroachment of the federal government. While liberals typically espouse the supremacy of the federal government over the states. In parallel fashion, conservatives typically oppose abortion, promoting the unborn fetus's right to life. While liberals typically favor abortion, espousing the power of the mother over any supposed rights of the fetus.
Federal supremacy = a mother's right to choose
States rights = the unborn fetus's right to life
I wonder to what extent this symbolism is an unconscious factor in the passions and occasional irrationality that the abortion issue arouses in people.
As the obituaries roll out, the film most often invoked as a measure of Heath Ledger's skills as an actor is Brokeback Mountain (2005). And certainly Ang Lee's movie about a couple of ill-starred gay ranch-hands brought him deserved worldwide acclaim and an Oscar nomination.
But when I think of how good he was, and how good he might have been, I think of a lesser-known work, Candy, which was released a year later. It was a small, independent film made by a relative unknown called Neil Armfield and starred Abbie Cornish and Ledger as a pair of besotted heroin addicts whose love affair proves as destructive and tragic as the drug on which they are hooked.
The resonance with the reports swirling around Ledger's final hours is all too melancholic and clear. The trajectory of the film is numbingly predictable, but the graphic chemistry is terrifically sensual. For Ledger it was a joy and a relief to be able to do this tough role in his native Australian accent, despite the fact that his paycheque could be counted in beans. Few of his far-flung fans appreciate how isolated prolific actors sometimes feel when they are forced to part from their native drawl.
Cornish was one of the very few actresses to work with Ledger on such a psychologically demanding project. “He isn't just another actor. He has always been a very specific and creative artist,” she told me. “As draining as this film was, it was easy walking into the make-up bus knowing I was going to spend the entire day with him. Working with Heath pushed me to new places.” Candy revealed a taste for the dark side that many of Ledger's professional admirers may not have credited him with before.
His sudden death is a profound shock, one of those rare aberrations in Hollywood in which a bright young actor's life (James Dean, River Phoenix) is stubbed out far too early. Rock stars have precarious lifestyles and exotic addictions, sure. It's in their DNA. But how does a tragedy such as this befall a supposedly healthy workaholic with a number of prolific films in the pipeline? Reports suggest he had suffered a substance abuse problem, but the manner of his death still seems utterly out of sync with what we know of Ledger's personality.
Hollywood has lost him at the moment he was, if not at the peak of his powers, then certainly way into the ascent. How the studios intend to market his last, as yet unreleased, screen performances will be a source of heated debate. One of the films at stake is the new multimillion-pound Batman instalment, The Dark Knight , in which Ledger plays the Joker opposite Christian Bale's caped crusader. Christopher Nolan's film is now finished and is due to dazzle the world in the summer. Yesterday Warner Brothers said the release date (July 25) was still in place; how they will market the movie (early reports say Ledger's Joker is definitive) is another matter.
Last week Ledger was in London working on Terry Gilliam's The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. At the time of writing, representatives for Gilliam said they had no comment to make on the film's release, or Gilliam's feelings at the loss of Ledger.
He was last seen in Todd Haynes's extraordinary homage to Bob Dylan, I'm Not There. Ledger played one of the seven incarnations of Dylan: a butch motorcycling troubadour who has his hands full trying to keep Charlotte Gainsbourg happy.
How to give an inkling of the loss? His solid commitment to films and scripts that he believed in gave him kudos among his peers. He was also a humble heart-throb, managing to defy the poster-boy image that first dogged him.
The 28-year-old was born in Perth, Western Australia. He left school at 17, hitched to Sydney with barely a dollar in loose change in his pocket and got his first real break in a low-budget film called Blackrock (1997). A part in 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) put him on the map. He won plaudits for a cameo in Monster's Ball (2001), and revealed an unexpected talent for comedy in A Knight's Tale (2001).
He could have played the beefcake, the heart-throb, over and over again: he was startlingly handsome with playful eyes and a broad-shouldered swagger. But he didn't.
Reviewing his CV you realise it is littered with curios, parts he obviously took on for love or just the challenge, perhaps most notably his turn as Jacob Grimm in Gilliam's wonderfully bizarre homage to The Brothers Grimm.
Gilliam, who turned out to be his last director, recognised instantly that he had a singular talent in his grasp. Unfortunately that precious talent has been extinguished far, far too early. The frustration is that he would have gone so much farther in roles we will now never see.
HOW I GOT SCREWED BY A MAJOR LAW FIRM
The Honorable Robert J. Spagnoletti
Office of the Attorney General
Government of the District of Columbia
Dear Mr. Spagnoletti:
The following letter refers to evidence that Dennis M. Race, Esq. of the Washington, DC law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld offered false or perjured sworn statements in a document production dated May 22, 1992 that Mr. Race and Laurence J. Hoffman, Esq. filed with the D.C. Department of Human Rights and Minority Business Development concerning my job termination by the firm on October 29, 1991. See Freedman v. D.C. Dept. of Human Rights, DCCA 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (appeal of agency final determination).
The Social Security Administration determined that I became disabled and unsuitable for employment as of October 29, 1991 based on Mr. Race's false or perjured statements. I have been continuously disabled and unemployed since the termination in 1991. My continued belief that I was a victim of employment discrimination and harassment during my tenure at Akin Gump has been diagnosed as paranoid by my current psychiatrist (Henry Barbot, M.D.) and psychotherapist (Israella Y. Bash, Ph.D.), both of whom are employees of the D.C. Dept. of Mental Health. To date I have received in excess of $120,000 in SSA disability payments (claim no. xxx xx xxxx). I also receive food stamps issued by the D.C. Income Maintenance Administration (case no. xxxxxx). Pending with the D.C. Income Maintenance Administration is my application for Medical Assistance (Medicaid).
I understand that if the OAG believes that any crimes have been committed that your office will make a referral to the Office of the U.S. Attorney.
GARY FREEDMAN
_______________________________________________________
________________
November 2, 2004
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Charles Ramsey
Chief of Police
300 Indiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC
RE: Mental Disability -- Discrimination -- Police/FBI
Dear Chief Ramsey:
I am writing to you, Chief Ramsey, to apprise the Office of Chief of Police of a serious police matter that arose in the second district on October 12, 2004. Underlying the police matter is an issue of discrimination involving the DC Office of Corporation Counsel.
I forwarded a letter to the Washington Field Office of the FBI concerning the following matter on October 23, 2004.
I have been unemployed and disabled under U.S. Social Security Administration eligibility rules since October 29, 1991. My Social Security no. is xxx xx xxxx.
I am a patient of the DC Department of Mental Health (Patient no. xxxxxx). I receive psychotropic medications from the DC Department of Mental Health.
I was employed as a paralegal at the Washington, DC law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld until October 29, 1991. Dennis M. Race, Esq. (202 887 4028), a senior management partner, terminated my employment upon determining in consultation with a psychiatrist (who did not examine me personally) that there were reasonable concerns about my mental health and stability that rendered me unsuitable for employment.
Freedman v. DC Dept. of Human Rights, 96-CV-961 (DCCA, Sept. 1998). The fact that I had received "above average or outstanding" job performance ratings during my three-and-one-half-year tenure was not disputed; also undisputed was the fact that my personnel file contained no record of reprimands, oral or written.
SSA granted my claim for benefits (in August 1993) in part based on Mr. Race's sworn interrogatory responses filed with the DC Dept. of Human Rights (in May 1992); SSA's disability determination date, October 29, 1991, was the date of job termination.
There is substantial evidence that Mr. Race's interrogatory responses were perjured; that Mr. Race did not in fact consult with the psychiatrist, Gertrude R. Ticho, MD [now deceased], a physician licensed to practice in the District of Columbia. See Brief of Appellant, 96-CV-961. Additionally, I possess tape recordings of two telephone conversations in which Dr. Ticho denies any contacts or acquaintance with Dennis M. Race. Officer J.E. Williams, Badge 1226, Second District, Metro DC Police is in possession of copies of those conversations (202 282 0070).
I was seriously defamed by Mr. Race, my supervisor, a coworker (who was subsequently terminated for gross misconduct), and the DC Office of Corporation Counsel. In the past several months I have been sending out job inquiries to employers, which summarize allegations made against me by the above-named parties. On October 12, 2004 ten (10) Metro DC Police officers (including a second district supervisor) plus four (4) FBI agents showed up at my residence because of a letter I sent to an employer, who had contacted the police in alarm. The letter was purely factual; several prospective employers, including The Montgomery County Government, sent me a cordial reply to a nearly identical letter. So damaging was the defamation to which I was subjected that the police were convinced I must be insane to have written such a letter. The police had me transported to DC General Hospital in handcuffs for an emergency psychiatric examination. I was interviewed by a Dr. Martin at DC General (202 673 9319) (ECURA #224623) who determined that I did not require admission. I was released; no medication was administered, prescribed or recommended. Of course, the incident bolsters my Social Security disability claim. I have already received in excess of $100,000 in benefits.
The defamatory allegations about my character that arose at my last place of employment, which I have a legal duty to report to a prospective employer, may impose a constitutionally-impermissible burden on my ability to obtain employment. The allegations, made at my last place of employment, were presumably a substantial factor in SSA's disability determination. Despite the fact that the allegations were made at least 13 years ago, they remain material to my difficulties in my last employment situation.
Facts about my psychiatric treatment history since 1992 are peculiar, if not bizarre:
1. I was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in September 1992 as an outpatient at The George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry (Napoleon Cuenco, MD). The illness did not respond to lithium, and later underwent spontaneous remission.
2. I underwent comprehensive psychological testing at GW in May 1994 (William Fabian, Ph.D.). The testing did not yield a psychiatric diagnosis or disclose any psychotic thought processes. The testing yielded a valid profile. I was not on any meds at the time. The WAIS yielded a verbal IQ of 135 (99th percentile) and an overall IQ of 125 (above average).
3. In February 1996 I was diagnosed at GW (Dimitrios Georgopoulos, MD) with paranoid schizophrenia that later underwent spontaneous remission.
4. In March 1996 I took a psychological test called "The Wisconsin Scales of Psychosis Proneness" (Ramin Mojtabai, MD). Results were negative. I scored six non-perseverative errors -- one of the lowest possible scores, indicating high concept-formation ability. I was not on any meds at the time.
DC DEPT. OF MENTAL HEALTH
5. In July 1996 I entered the DC Dept. of Mental Health System. In January 1998 my psychiatrist, Dr. Singh (a resident) determined in consultation with his supervisor (Stephen Quint, MD) that I suffered from no diagnosis or condition for which meds were indicated.
6. In February 1999 Albert H. Taub, MD diagnosed me with paranoid schizophrenia, which later underwent spontaneous remission. I was later diagnosed with delusional disorder. That portion of my thinking termed delusional has not responded to three different antipsychotic meds: Zyprexa, Abilify, and Risperdal. I currently take Effexor for depression and Xanax for insomnia.
7. On March 16-17 2004 I had a minor bout of paranoid schizophrenia, so-called "24-hour" paranoid schizophrenia, diagnosed by Betsy Jane Cooper, MD. My treatment plan prepared on March 17, 2004 by my case manager/therapist, Dr. Israella Bash, records that Dr. Cooper diagnosed me with paranoid schizophrenia on March 17, 2004; Dr. Cooper prescribed Zyprexa on March 17, 2004, which I took for about a month. There was no change in my delusional thinking. My current diagnosis is delusional disorder. Again, Dr. Martin at DC General recommended no anti-psychotic meds during my emergency psychiatric assessment on October 12, 2004; I was not agitated on October 12, 2004--my blood pressure was normal, 130/85.
I am totally socially isolated. I have no friends. I haven't spoken to my only relative, an older sister, since February 1996.
I have created an imaginary friend who I write letters to periodically, Brian Patrick Brown, manager of the Cleveland Park Branch of the DC Library System. The enclosed disc contains some of my recent letters to Brian.
I like Brian a lot, and would welcome him as a real friend. How I wish I could be Brian's real buddy!
My therapist, Dr. Bash (DC Dept. of Mental Health) is at 202 576 8939. My psychiatrist, Henry Barbot, MD, is at 202 576 8946.
Thank you. The U.S. Attorney's Office in DC (202 514 7566) is familiar with this matter.
In closing, this will respectfully advise the Office of Chief of Police that I have a constitutionally-protected right to seek employment. Also, in order to invoke my rights under the Americans With Disabilities Act I must fully apprise a prospective employer of facts concerning my disability, including allegations (however defamatory) placed in controversy by Dennis M. Race, Esq., his employees, and the DC Office of Corporation Counsel. State action that impairs my right to seek employment or my right to protections under federal law may be legally actionable.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
APPENDIX A:
LETTER FROM OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCES, MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT [unsigned], DATED OCTOBER 14, 2004:
Dear Applicant:
Enclosed you will find the resume/application that you submitted to the Office of Human Resources. We are returning this resume/application because you must apply for a specific position.
In order to be considered for employment with Montgomery County Government, you must apply for an announced position. Information pertaining to current employment opportunities is available on our website at www.montgomerycountymd.gov - click on careers.
We appreciate your interest in Montgomery County and wish you continued success in your employment endeavors.
Sincerely,
Office of Human Resources
Montgomery County Government
APPENDIX B:
LETTER FROM GARY FREEDMAN TO MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT THAT IS VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO THE ONE I SENT TO A WASHINGTON, DC EMPLOYER, WHICH TRIGGERED A LAW ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE BY TEN METRO DC POLICE OFFICERS ASSISTED BY FOUR FBI AGENTS. THE LETTER IS PURELY FACTUAL; IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY THREATS OF VIOLENCE BY ME. THE LETTER SUMMARIZES FALSE, MALICIOUS, AND DEFAMATORY ACCUSATIONS MADE ABOUT ME, AND IS EVIDENCE OF MASSIVE DEFAMATION BY ATTORNEY MANAGERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE LAW FIRM OF AKIN, GUMP, STRAUSS, HAUER & FELD, AS WELL AS THE DC OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL (CHARLES L. REISCHEL, ESQ., DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL, APPELLATE DIVISION). NOTE THAT UNDER SUPREME COURT RULINGS, DEFAMATION BY A STATE AGENCY CONSTITUTES A FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.
[The following letter is stamped by the Montgomery County Government: RECEIVED - HUMAN RESOURCES - 04 OCT 13 A10:47 - MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT]
October 12, 2004
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
#136
Washington, DC 20008
OHR
101 Monroe Street
7th Floor
Rockville, MD 20850
RE: EMPLOYMENT -- ARMED, MASS HOMICIDE -- REASONABLE APPREHENSION OF HARM
Dear Sir:
I am writing to you at the express direction of the Metropolitan District of Columbia Police Department (Officer J.E. Williams, Badge 1226, Second District, Washington, DC: 202 282 0070) that I actively seek employment consistent with my high intelligence as well as my professional and academic credentials.
I am specifically interested in the position of senior legislative attorney for the Montgomery County Council. I am an attorney, licensed to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I hold an advanced degree (Master of Laws) in international trade law.
I am a disabled American, and I qualify for the legal protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act. I believe I have a legal duty to apprise you, as a prospective employer, of the following matters.
1. TERRORISTIC THREATS: On April 21, 2004 the Metro DC Police issued a protective order against me, on the petition of Brian Patrick Brown, Manager of the Cleveland Park Branch of the DC Public Library. Brian Brown alleged that I had made terrorist threats, in writing, against unspecified persons. The six-month order of protection prohibits my entering or loitering in the vicinity of said library, under penalty of arrest and prosecution. The investigating officer was the aforementioned Officer Williams. This will advise that at this time I continue to satisfy the prognostic criteria that were determined by the Metro DC Police in April 2004 to indicate that I am at significant risk of committing a crime of violence or arousing a reasonable apprehension of committing a crime of violence. It is likely that I will satisfy said criteria for committing a crime of violence or arousing a reasonable apprehension of same in the future event I obtain employment with The Montgomery County Council. On April 21, 2004 Officer Williams stated to me: "You seem OK to me right now, but what I'm worried about is what's going to happen a few days from now." Obviously, my future conduct was a substantial concern to the Metro DC Police. [Note that if I had made an actual threat I would have been arrested or transported to DC General Hospital for a forensic psychiatric examination. It is clear that what the MPDC did was to simply rubber-stamp a specious request made by a supervisory DC employee.]
2. VIOLENCE-RISK DETERMINATION: My former employer, Dennis M. Race, Esq. (202 887 4028), a senior management partner at the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, determined, in consultation with a psychiatrist, that my thinking was consistent with a psychiatric "disorder" that might be associated with a risk of violent behavior. See Freedman v. DC Dept. of Human Rights, 96-CV-961 (DCCA, Sept. 1998). [The psychiatrist did not evaluate me personally. There is no documentary evidence that Mr. Race, in fact, consulted a psychiatrist. Under applicable law, the employer had a burden of production, not a burden of persuasion -- a very low evidentiary threshold.] Mr. Race determined that my continued presence on the firm's premises might pose a risk of tort liability for the firm, and terminated my employment effective October 29, 1991. I have been unemployed and disabled under Social Security Administration eligibility rules since the date of the termination. My thinking, upon which Mr. Race's violence-risk determination was based, remains unchanged.
3. HOMICIDE-RISK DETERMINATION: Shortly after conferring with Mr. Race about his forensic psychiatric determination, my supervisor called a meeting of her employees to advise them that she had formed a reasonable apprehension that I might have been planning to kill her [an act of defamation]. The supervisor undertook [self-serving] protective measures [to give the appearance that she needed] to ensure her safety as well as that of her employees against a possible future homicidal assault. See Brief of Appellant. Mr. Race did not challenge appellant's brief. The supervisor was a senior non-attorney manager who reported directly to a member of the firm's management committee, R. Bruce MacLean, Esq. Mr. MacLean is the firm's current managing partner.
4. ARMED, MASS HOMICIDAL ASSAULT: The DC Corporation Counsel determined, sua sponte [relying on legally-irrelevant, "after-acquired" evidence], that my coworkers had formed genuine and credible fears that I might carry out an armed, mass homicidal assault on the firm's premises, and that said widespread fears of an armed, mass homicide were material to Mr. Race's termination decision. See Brief of Appellee, District of Columbia (citing statement of coworker [who was later terminated for gross misconduct] in record on appeal: "We're all afraid of you. We're all afraid you're going to buy a gun, bring it in and shoot everybody!"). At oral argument before the DC Court of Appeals, the Assistant Corporation Counsel declared to the Court, referencing the above record evidence, that I had "admitted" that my "coworkers were afraid of" me. Mr. Race did not challenge the District's handling of 96-CV-961.
5. MULTIPLE ARMED HOMICIDE UNDER FEDERAL LAW: On the evening of August 6, 1998 two Special Agents of the US Capitol Police (Threat Investigation Unit) forcibly entered my home, after frisking me for weapons, and proceeded to interrogate me about an allegation made by a DC employee that, earlier in the day, at the height of an enraged argument, I had threatened to kill two federal officers at point-blank range, execution style in the Capitol rotunda. Later investigation by Agent Steven Horan disclosed that said allegation was mistakenly based on a letter I had written to my psychiatrist (Stephen Quint, MD) and copied to a DC agency that factually summarized Mr. Race's violence-risk determination [an act of defamation]; my supervisor's homicide-risk determination [an act of defamation]; as well as the DC Corporation Counsel's determination that my coworkers had formed a reasonable apprehension that I might commit an armed, mass homicide [an act of defamation]. Though I was exonerated of making unlawful threats, Officer Horan photo ID'd me to all federal officers assigned to the U.S. Capitol Building as a protective measure.
6. POTENTIAL TERRORIST: On August 7, 1998 Agent Horan advised me that the federal government (unbeknownst to me) had previously placed my name on a national registry of potential terrorists because of a letter I had written in 1996 to a local psychiatric facility (The Meyer Clinic), inquiring into out-patient services. Said letter elaborated Mr. Race's violence-risk determination [an act of defamation] as well as my supervisor's homicide-risk determination [an act of defamation].
7. PRESIDENTIAL THREAT: On the afternoon of August 7, 1998 two Special Agents of the U.S. Secret Service placed me under house arrest because of concerns I might pose a risk of harm to President Clinton. The two Secret Service agents were part of a team of six federal special agents who had been assigned to interrogate me and secure my person, over a two-day period (August 6-7, 1998). Federal law enforcement concerns were aroused by a letter I had written and sent to a DC agency that discussed the federal civil rights implications of the DC Corporation Counsel's handling of 96-CV-961. I had sent an identical letter to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R.-PA.) on Capitol Hill, who responded with a cordial and personalized reply. Senator Specter, a former prosecutor, saw absolutely nothing threatening about the letter I had written, much less did he see the need to assign six federal special agents to interrogate me and secure my person.
8. POSSIBLE DOCUMENT FORGERY: The District speculates that I might have filed an inauthentic letter with a DC agency (purportedly written by a psychiatrist) in order to invidiously deny competent forensic psychiatric evidence proffered by Mr. Race under oath that showed I had been reasonably determined to be potentially violent. Presumably, according to the District [contrary to well-established case law], I might have forged a psychiatrist's signature and/or fabricated her letterhead. The U.S. Attorney's Office in DC has not yet issued me a notice of an intent to prosecute me.
9. UNLAWFUL SEXUAL THOUGHTS: The DC Corporation Counsel determined, sua sponte [relying on legally-irrelevant, "after-acquired" evidence], that private, undisclosed sexual thoughts I experienced on April 13, 1990 concerning the activity of masturbation were material to Mr. Race's termination decision as well as to Mr. Race's violence-risk determination. Mr. Race did not challenge the District's brief. I admit to having sexual thoughts in the workplace.
I look forward to hearing from you. Please send my regards to Doug Gansler, Esq. He's a bit of an attention seeker, but he knows what he's talking about.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Gary Freedman
PA ATTY ID 41032
