Was I The Victim Of A Federal Civil Rights Violation?

[Gary Freedman]

Back in June I sent the following letter to the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. I allege that I was a victim of a federal civil rights violation.

 

June 24, 2009 XXXX Connecticut Avenue, NW Apartment XXX Washington, DC xxxxx (202) xxx xxxx John L. Wodatch Chief Disability Rights Section – NYA Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 RE: Federal Civil Rights Violation – Disability Discrimination Dear Mr. Wodatch: I am a disabled American. I am writing to request that your office review and refer for appropriate action the federal civil rights violation described in the attached letter addressed to fo rmer District of Columbia Chief of Police, Charles Ramsey. I am a victim of a federal civil rights violation, based on my status as a disabled American. I am unable to apply for employment because of intimidation by the Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia (MPDC). I risk arrest or commitment to a mental hospital if I file an employment application with a prospective employer and invoke my rights as a disabled American. The Social Security Administration determined that I became disabled and not suitable for employment effective October 29, 1991 (the date of my job termination), in part, based on evidence that I evoke fears that I am potentially violent and homicidal. There is substantial evidence that that evidence is unreliable. My Social Security number is xxx-xx-xxxx. The right to seek employment is a fundamental liberty interest guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States; the denial of, or interference with, that right constitutes a federal civil rights violation. See Doe v. Bredesen, U.S. Dist. Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, at Nashville: "Right to Seek Employment . . . While no Supreme Court decision has expressly found the right to work, or at least the right to pursue employment, to be a fundamental right, it can hardly be concluded otherwise." Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, 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 Office of Human Resources Montgomery County Government 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 xxxxx

[ZenDog]

Hey Gary.

Sounds complicated. I'm not a lawyer, so I really don't know what to say. My experience is a bit limited on the mental health issues as well, but I note first off that I've never heard of spontaneous remission with regard to bipolar disorder. My understanding is that it tends toward some form of relatively predictable, cyclic nature of highs and lows - that's a real over simplification isn't it.

I don't believe the psychiatric industry can really diagnose schizophrenia while there is a practice of neural linguistic reprogramming taking place within the social setting.

And, um, if you are sending out letters with the heading:

RE: EMPLOYMENT -- ARMED, MASS HOMICIDE -- REASONABLE APPREHENSION OF HARM

then, um, yeah, probably you do need your head examined. The real bad news is that if there is no one in the psychiatric industry ready and willing to simply tell the truth, then it hardly seems - in my own view - to be in your own best interest to seek their advice.

If nothing else, I do hope you are having some fun.

d.

[Darkhairblueeyes]

Here are some questions that need to be answered:
1) Do you have a history of violent behavior....If not you need to capitalize on that fact when sending these letters.
2) Do you think you have a propensity for violence...(no one knows your thoughts better than you) and if the answer is no to that...you need to make that clear as well.

You need to get evidence in favor of yourself...or hire a Private Investigator...which is something you probably cant afford.
You need to organize your evidence...because what you are going to have to do is defend yourself as though you are your own lawyer.
Assuming that what you said is true....and I am assuming that...the doctors appear to have made a number of misdiagnosis'...The way I see it ...this is said with the assumtion that you are right...is that the way your former employer treated you had to have caused you extreme anxiety...after all they were taking away your livelyhood...and I do think there are ruthless people who do things like that to people...but the burden of proof is on you...and when you were stonewalled, ignored, or worse treated with not only the presumption of guilt but a blatant refusal to believe anything otherwise...I would say that you are suffering from PTSD...and because no one else is trying to find out the truth (people who want the truth does what it takes to get the truth...and they do it objectively...withholding judgement until they have ALL THE FACTS.)
Because what that firm did to you...if you are correct...what they did to you is psychological rape and psychological terrorism...and you have a right to be angry about that...but that doesnt mean that you have the propensity for violence. And then everyone after that happened either stonewalled you or made an assumption based on what SEEMED to be true to them...an assumption made without trying to ascertain the facts of the matter...and that in itself is a violation of your constitutional rights...because in essence you are being accused of something ...and recieving punishment for...something that you are innocent of ...you have been denied due process...everyone down the line based thier actions on assumptions that were made about why you were fired from that firm...they are judging it on surface appearances and no one is taking the time to find out if their assumptions are based on fact or what 'seems' to be true. And since you already know something about the law and how to research...you need to be your own advocate...because if you are standing alone no one else is going to do it...and be on your best behavior. And the reason I think you have PTSD is because I have PTSD and I was a victim of a violent crime and witnessed a violent crime committed on another person and no one did anything...I am still trying to get justice...and like you I either get the runaround or there is assumptions made without confirmation as to whether they are facts or not.
The next time you are sent to a psychiatrist you need to tell them the whole spectrum of what has happened like you did here...and get some evidence in your favor...and then try to get someone of influence to stand behind you...Oprah...Dr. Phil...The Today Show...someone who has enough authority to get something fair going in your favor...because you are owed AT LEAST THAT...a fair, objective, unbiased investigation by someone(s) who is truly interested in finding what the FACTS ARE. That is MHO.

[Darkhairblueeyes]

I agree with jacquin...but before you can do anything...you need to clear your name...and then if you have to give that other information to a prospective employer...then you should be able to include the favorable ruling as well...the information that would clear your name.
Some of the symptoms you have mentioned are symptoms of PTSD...the insomnia...and can include delusional thinking...when flashbacks occur...and extreme anxiety when something triggers your symptoms...and the triggers are usually specificly related to what happened. You need to discuss that possiblitiy with your doctor. Good luck Gary...I hope you can get justice for yourself...and get it in a dignified manner...to clear your name of wrong doing and restore your wounded spirit.

[blondie 11]

that is according to the state and the job. They will find out if they look,in certain jobs for men if you have a strong back they could give a damn. In a career type job position===no way--it evil out here, we all know that