On Friday January 15, 2010 I was interviewed at my residence by two officers from the Justice Department about a law enforcement matter. The officers were concerned about my blog My Daily Struggles, which, in the apparent opinion of the Justice Department, constitutes a vain attempt to call into question the legitimacy of a court decision in an unlawful termination case that had been fully adjudicated as of September 1, 1998.
I am able to say I was a victim of workplace mobbing on this blog without contradicting the respective judgments of the D.C. Superior Court or the D.C. Court of Appeals in Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998).
The D.C. Superior Court and the D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed a prior agency determination that I was not a victim of unlawful conduct under the D.C. Human Rights Act of 1977. The issue of workplace mobbing was not before the D.C. Superior Court or the D.C. Court of Appeals; the act of workplace mobbing is neither defined nor prohibited under the D.C. Human Rights Act of 1977.
The action of the Justice Department in questioning my right to critically analyze the D.C. Court of Appeal's opinion in Freedman was nonsensical. I am not protesting the Court's opinion in Freedman -- beyond the fact that it rests on an incorrect reading of the record and an arguably material error of fact that denies the retaliatory animus of my former direct supervisor.
My Daily Struggles protests the fact that I was a victim of workplace mobbing during my employment at the D.C. law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld; the blog protests the fact that the firm's senior managers knew I was a victim of mobbing and notwithstanding that knowledge took the expedient measure of terminating my employment; and the blog protests the fact that the firm knowingly defrauded the D.C. Department of Human Rights and by extension defrauded the D.C. Court of Appeals. Like so many others, the D.C. Superior Court and the D.C. Court of Appeals were the innocent dupes of a fraud and racketeering conspiracy carried out by the senior management of Akin Gump. See Brief of Appellee District of Columbia, Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (appellant formed a good faith belief that Akin Gump engaged in various crimes that in their entirety might constitute the crime of racketeering under federal law). The legal issues of workplace mobbing, fraudulent concealment of knowledge of workplace mobbing by Akin Gump attorney managers, and racketeering by Akin Gump's attorney managers (as described by the D.C. Office of Attorney General) have never been adjudicated by any court. It follows, therefore, that My Daily Struggles does not protest any previously adjudicated legal issues.
The act of workplace mobbing is a legal issue that never came before the D.C. Superior Court or the D.C. Court of Appeals and for which there was no legal remedy in the 1990s.
Is there anybody in the DOJ with a brain? Lanny, maybe I should be glad your people don't have brains. All I need is somebody with the ability to issue checks on the 3rd of every month.
You know, maybe I am schizophrenic. I seem to see things that even experienced attorneys do not see. And it happens all the time. The ravages of severe mental illness are indeed tragic.
My final word to the Justice Department -- you are all pathetic dupes.
And by the way, I am not being sarcastic. According to a George Washington University Medical Center psychiatrist, I may suffer from a disorder (Aspergers Syndrome) that prevents me from appreciating sarcasm.
Waiter, I'd like to order no. 9.