Sunday, January 12, 2014

Akin Gump -- Conspiracy Against Rights

January 13, 2014
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008
Phone: (202) 362-7064

Matthew Caspari, Esq.
General Counsel
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health
64 New York Avenue, NE
3rd Floor

Washington, DC 20002

Phone: (202) 673-7440

RE: Social Security Disability Claim No. xxx-xx-xxxx

Dear Mr. Caspari:

The enclosed legally-operative document certifies that I continue to adhere to a body of beliefs that, according to the Government of the District of Columbia, justified my former employer's (Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld) determination made in October 1991 that I was not suitable for employment because of mental illness and that justified the employer's conclusion, made in consultation with a practicing psychiatrist in violation of the American Psychiatric Association's so-called Goldwater Rule, that I was potentially violent, i.e., that I posed a "direct threat in the workplace."  See Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment) (Sept. 1, 1998).  The employer's decision to terminate my employment effective October 29, 1991, as detailed in a sworn statement dated May 22, 1992 (executed by Dennis M. Race, Esq. and Laurence J. Hoffman, Esq.) and filed with the D.C. Department of Human Rights, was the basis of the U.S. Social Security Administration's determination that I became disabled and entitled to disability benefits effective as of the same date.

The enclosed document, styled STATEMENT OF GARY FREEDMAN CONCERNING MENTAL STATUS AFFIRMATION MADE BY THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL, (1) may affect my right to future disability benefits paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration and is executed under penalty of U.S. Code Title 42, Ch. 7, Subchapter II, §408; (2) may impair my right to jury duty secured by the Constitution of the United States; and (3) may impair my right to enjoy the benefits of The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), U.S. Code Title 42, Ch. 126,
which statute permits an employer to deny employment to a disabled individual who poses a "direct threat in the workplace."


Gary Freedman

cc: U.S. Social Security Administration

      Christopher Kavanaugh, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney DC       Federal Bureau of Investigation WFO



Gary Freedman said...

Conspiracy Against Rights

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 13 › § 241
18 U.S. Code

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Gary Freedman said...

Verizon Fios ( 0 returning visits
Commack, New York, United States
13 Jan 06:30:16 PM

Gary Freedman said...

Global Crossing ( 0 returning visits
Chicago, Illinois, United States (Encrypted Search)
15 Jan 09:39:46 AM
15 Jan 09:41:10 AM
15 Jan 09:41:47 AM
15 Jan 09:43:30 AM
15 Jan 09:44:36 AM
15 Jan 09:50:03 AM
15 Jan 09:50:51 AM

Gary Freedman said...

Rcn Corporation ( 0 returning visits
Washington, District Of Columbia, United States (Encrypted Search)
20 Jan 07:12:54 PM