 |
| Joel Dubina |
The chief judge of the U.S. Eleventh Circuit is ignoring overwhelming evidence that one of his trial-court brethren is acting corruptly in my employment lawsuit against the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB).
This will not come as a surprise to regular Legal Schnauzer readers. In both the Don Siegelman and Paul Minor criminal prosecutions, we've shown that appellate judges often are more interested in protecting rogues on the trial bench than in making sure that justice is served. Now I'm seeing the same sort of behavior in my civil case.
U.S. District Judge William M. Acker Jr. has made statements from the bench that can only be interpreted in one way--that he intended from the outset to rule unlawfully in favor of UAB and against me. In essence, Acker stated in open court that he was going to cheat me, and he proceeded to do exactly that, by granting summary judgment to UAB even though no discovery had been conducted in the case. All sorts of procedural and case law says that simply cannot be done--at least if a judge is making any effort to follow the law.
But Acker, an 84-year-old Reagan appointee, isn't concerned with appearances. He doesn't care who knows that he's crooked--and apparently Joel F. Dubina does not care either.
Dubina is the chief U.S. circuit judge in Atlanta, and he reviewed my complaint against Acker under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. 351-364). Most Americans probably are not aware we have a procedure for filing a complaint against a federal judge. (Here is a link to a Ninth Circuit overview of the procedure for filing such a complaint.) That's just as well because a process that involves judges reviewing complaints against other judges is almost always going to be a sham anyway.
Dubina's handling of my complaint against Acker is a case in point. It's instructive to note that Dubina, like Acker, is a Reagan appointee from Alabama. God only knows how long the two right wingers have been buddies. What were the chances of my complaint against Acker being taken seriously? I would say the word "zero" pretty well sums it up.
Here is a "big picture" view of Joel Dubina: He was appointed a U.S. magistrate judge by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and elevated to the U.S. Eleventh Circuit in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush, rising to chief judge (based on his seniority) in 2009. Dubina took the appellate seat that was vacated when Robert Vance Sr. was killed by a mail bomb in 1989. Vance, a Democrat and Jimmy Carter appointee, was widely known as a supporter of civil rights and was a mentor to future Alabama governor Don Siegelman. When you consider that Siegelman's 2006 convictions have unlawfully been upheld by the Eleventh Circuit--and the political prosecution was brought by the George W. Bush Department of Justice--this question comes to the forefront: Was Joel Dubina's appointment to the Eleventh Circuit, replacing Robert Vance, an early sign that the Bush family was going to sully our federal justice system by appointing political hacks to key positions?
Let's consider Dubina's response to my complaint that Acker had warned me multiple times in a hearing to look up the rule for a writ of mandamus. As I explained in a previous post, Acker's words can be interpreted only one way--at least by anyone who is serious about notions of due process and equal protection under the law:
To fully grasp what Acker is doing here, you have to understand the purpose of a writ of mandamus. The filing of a petition for such a writ is governed by Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP). It is a form of appeal while the case still is in the trial court. That's why it is called an "extraordinary writ"; the process is designed to address close questions of law or fact, not to serve as a pinch hitter for a trial judge who is too crooked to rule correctly on simple procedural issues.
The transcript, read in full, shows there was no legitimate reason for Acker to warn me twice that I would need to learn about the mandamus process. But Acker knew two things about mandamus petitions: (1) They are time consuming; and (2) They are expensive, with an appellate docketing fee of $450 every time you file one.
In so many words, Acker was telling me: "I'm going to screw you on every little detail of this case, and you are going to have to spend months of your time and thousands of your dollars just to make the simplest step forward in your case. I will drain you of your resources simply because I can--and no one can stop me."
Did Dubina take Acker's threats seriously? Of course not. Here is how he brushed them off. (You can read Dubina's full ruling at the end of this post.)
Mr. Shuler provides no credible facts or evidence to substantiate his claim that Judge Acker committed misconduct with respect to this issue. Judge Acker's statements--that Mr. Shuler would need to "study up" on the procedure for filing a writ of mandamus--do not support Mr. Shuler's allegation that Judge Acker was going to "cheat" Mr. Shuler, did not know the law, intending to intentionally misapply the law, or was going to force Mr. Shuler to waste resources by filing multiple appeals. It appears that the statements were made in an effort to inform Mr. Shuler of a process for redress in the event that Judge Acker made any erroneous rulings. Furthermore, the fact that Judge Acker made the alleged statements only to Mr. Shuler, and not to counsel for the defendants, does not support Mr. Shuler's claim that Judge Acker was biased against him, given that Mr. Shuler was representing himself pro se. In this context, the statements appear to be Judge Acker's explanation of the different options available to a pro se litigant, as opposed to an indication of bias against Mr. Shuler.
First, it should be noted that these weren't "alleged statements" from Acker. An official court transcript shows they were exactly as my wife and I reported them in affidavits to support my complaint. Second, Acker's own words show that Dubina's explanation is a pile of horse feces. On page 6 of the hearing transcript, Judge Acker commented on my apparent knowledge of the law:
Mr. Shuler, you, in representing yourself, demonstrated to me that you are more cognizant of and aware of the Rules of Civil Procedure and some of the statutory causes of action you present, or attempt to present, than some of the lawyers that come in here . . .
Acker knew I didn't need to "study up" on the mandamus rule. He simply was making it clear that he was intentionally going to rule against me. He's a cheat and a bully, and he thought I wouldn't have the cojones to file a complaint against him. He was wrong about that one.
Let's also examine Dubina's response to my complaint about Acker stating in open court that he knew that "UAB and the people over there are anxious about this." What did that mean? Here is how I explained it:
How could Acker know that UAB is anxious about the case? It could only be because someone connected to the university told him--and this is the kind of prejudicial communication that is strictly prohibited by judicial ethics rules.
Did Dubina see the obvious? Not a chance. Here is how he brushed this one off:
Mr. Shuler provides no credible facts or evidence to substantiate this claim, as the alleged statement does not support that Judge Acker had inappropriate conversations with someone external to the case. Given that UAB was the defendant in a lawsuit, Judge Acker could assume or perceive that UAB was anxious about the case, without having been informed of that information by someone.
This is laughable, and it shows that Dubina either is a blatant apologist for corrupt judges or he lives in an impenetrable bubble--or both. I'm the one who has been subjected to a career assassination. I'm the one who has been stripped of my livelihood in the midst of an epic recession. If anyone should have been anxious about this case, it was me. But did Acker "assume or perceive" that? Of course not.
In fact, Acker did not "assume or perceive" anything. The transcript shows that he said "I know" that UAB and the people over there are anxious. He was making a statement of fact, based on what someone had told him.
At the risk of sounding overly dramatic, Joel Dubina's handling of my complaint against Judge Acker shows that we need major reform of our justice system. A system of lawyers monitoring lawyers, and judges monitoring judges, is failing horribly--and this is just one more piece of evidence that helps prove it.
Acker Misconduct Ruling
21 comments:
I am careful to study your work, LS, and also the work of Crystal Cox. Both are "bloggers" who have been very methodically etched in stone, so to speak, the raping of our U.S. Constitution's protection of the due process of law. AN INTENTIONAL BUSH DOCTRINE.
Noam Chomsky FINALLY after all these years has told the truth, just as he did with IBM, how we got started here in the DIGITAL NO DUE PROCESS to transfer the wealth of Americans to those whom cannot be named because they're known only by the upfront fruits that are make believing to be our "Leader/s?!"
Of course the global criminal cannibal class love the Bush Crime Family, Skull and Bones is the first clue. "BLUE BLOODS."
Queen Pirate, that is, Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain is the lodestar of whom these "evildoers" actually follow. Well, so to speak. Should Americans have caught the latest display of her royal coming out in THE royal crown with a diamond almost bigger than the Queen Pirate's head! Diamonds aren't found in London, they are from Africa!
Begin first, with the Jewish Lobby again receiving, in this time, MONEY, and yet we have the Legal Schnauzer family pouring REAL LABOR MONIES into the United States courts, all the while the U.S. Courts are not protecting the U.S. Constitution.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30840
Maybe it is time we stop the religions from running the country, the U.S. Constitution DOES NOT permit religions to own and operate the American people!
But, Mitt Romney and the Latter Day Saints, just the American Mormon version of Eastern Judaism, unfortunately.
In a word: NATO.
Until this great giant military industrial complex is into landing gear for the future to be secure, the Legal Schnauzer family along with Don Siegelman, Viktor Bout, Crystal Cox, Sibel Edmonds, et al, are collateral damage and good feeders for the global war on terror until the whimper booms the nuclear winter, tried to send you postcards about all this LS.
Best GOOD LUCK to us all, Roberta
check the larry sinclair website, there is important "seer" info. /rk
Lamar Smith is the Chairman of the D.C. Committee on the Judiciary, and then there is a representative in your state, that is the contact for that same Judiciary Committee, who is licensed at the state B.A.R.
A COMPLAINT TO THIS "BODY" is the one above the NINTH CIRCUIT, and the Ninth Circuit was just instrumental in approving of the torturer lawyer memos, John Yoo and Jay S. Bybee.
John Yoo and Jay Bybee were just convicted as war criminals in the international forum of REAL "law."
Your COMPLAINT, in other words, to the Ninth Circuit is to be no different than what you have already experienced in the "kangaroo courts."
KANGAROO COURTS were intentional and read Noam Chomsky's writing about Citibank.
Citibank basically DECIDED, of course with the blessings of our "government," to CONTROL THE RULE OF LAW.
In other words, banks became the deciders in chief about America and therein lies the rub.
There is NO RULE OF LAW other than what the banksters decide. That is, unless one in how many ? gets lucky enough to find a true American "judicial," sane enough to know what the REAL future of the U.S. is going to be by simply measuring what has been already.
/rk
It's ironic that Dubina states several times that "Mr. Shuler has presented no credible evidence . . . "--and yet the evidence comes straight from an official court transcript, which quotes Acker saying exactly what Mrs. S and I had stated in our affidavits.
This is a rare opportunity for the public to see how judges cover for one another.
Acker is so old, arrogant and corrupt that he let his tongue get loose in open court. There is no glossing over what he was saying. He was planning to cheat me, and that's exactly what he did.
On whose behalf was Acker acting? And who instructed Dubina to cover things up? Those are the big questions.
It seems the "good ole boy" legal network---(talking about a criminal enterprise)is trying to silence the schnauzer one way or another.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation
It's true. Today's British Royals now control more of America's wealth indirectly than they ever did when when they ruled it directly. It's all smoke and mirrors. The Queen & her allies don't give a shit who is elected President of the United States as long as they own all the important land & control the Federal Reserve System. The European Oligarchs are smart enough to rule from behind the scenes & let Barack Obama & Congress be their lightning rod. The power has always been with the residents of Windsor Castle.
My question is, "What happened in the Vance case?" Were there ever any arrests or prosecutions for the mail bombing the put Dubina on the bench in the first place. If there were, were there any connections to a political motive?
Walter Leroy Moody was convicted for the murder of Judge Vance. More than a few people think he did not actually commit the crime.
http://community.aetv.com/service/displayDiscussionThreads.kickAction?as=119137&w=267379&d=578800
There should be no fee to represent yourself pro se in court.
I hear you Anon at 10:23 a.m. But there are filing fees for everything, and they have been escalating in recent years. Here in Bham, the filing fee in fed district court is around $450, and any appellate filing fee is about the same amount. So you are talking about $1,000 right off the bat. Poor folks basically have been priced out of our justice system. I think state-court filing fees can be even higher than that, depending on number of defendants, etc. These fees keep going up as state budgets get tighter, much the way tuition keeps rising for college students.
That's one of many reasons it's exasperating to get screwed by judges. It's expensive to file these cases, so for financial considerations alone, it's important that they be handled correctly under the law.
This is James G Roger and shoot, I'd be tempted to say to him. "Old man, I didn't fall of the turnip truck yesterday."
Judge Dubina: Circut Executive and Misconduct. Scarry!
7/22/2013
Mr. James Gerstenlauer
Clerk, Judiciary Executive Council
Circuit Judicial Council
Eleventh U.S. Judicial Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Telephone: 404-335-6535
Re: Judicial complaints 11-13-90027 through 11-13-90030, and US Freedom of Information Act, Request number 1066979-000.
Dear Judicial Council,
I have received your recent decision letter stating…”Upon consideration of the petitioner’s complaint by a review panel consisting of judges Carnes, Wilson, Pryor, Steele and Rogers, the order of the Chief judge Dubina filed on 18 April 2013 with a non-disqualified judge of the Judicial Council Review panel … affirmed Judge Dubina’s decision”.
I thus kindly make the following request, under the US Freedom of Information Act; Request number: 1066979-000 at http://www.foia.gov/faq.html-. I also request an expedited response (e.g., if an individual suffers the loss of substantial due process rights, his or her request will be expedited; in less than one month).
I also request that an independent agency, such as the FBI, interview and or re-interview one of the surviving patients who survived the 2002-2004 clinical trials directed by Dr. Dennis Marcus at the former Medical College of Georgia in Augusta (MCG), who suffered a clinical severe adverse event (SAE) and was then misled years ago to sign a release of any wrongdoing by MCG and/or the sponsoring pharmaceutical companies who destroyed his quality of life. Specifically, one patient underwent clinical cardiac arrest, and subsequently had to be on renal dialysis as result of these poorly regulated clinical trials that resulted in either manslaughter, or second or first degree murder. I have a contact phone number for this patient.
Under the same FOIA Request number 1066979-000, I ask for a one page summary of this case to be signed by each judge of the 16 non-excluded judges members of the reviewing Judicial Executive Committee (e.g Judge Dubina, Tjoflat and Hall were excluded). I ask for copies of this summary to be sent to me, with a copy to the FBI Atlanta office and to US Attorney Sally Yates. The summary should state that each judge 1) was not contacted in any way and/or 2) was not offered money or favors by the disqualified judges or anyone else to influence the outcome of the review. Under the same FOIA, I further ask that each one of the 16 non-disqualified judges describe what documents they actually received from the Circuit Executive of the US Eleventh District Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, with one paragraph describing its contents. I further ask for this one page statement to be signed and notarized by all members of the review committee, including their respective complete names, contact information, and courts that they serve.
Under the same FOIA request, I will like to know exactly who chose these five review judges Carnes, Wilson, Pryor, Steele and Rogers), and when and where they met to review this case (dates, hours, witnesses, teleconferences; minutes of meetings); I further ask the FBI to review any pertinent recorded information available. Nine years (2004-2013) of persecution, suffering, unnecessary deaths of patients, laundering university money, tax evasion, Medicare and Medicaid fraud and harassment requires more than the word “affirmed” without an adequate review. Under the same FOIA, I request all the documents I sent to the Judicial Executive Committee to be put on their internet website, and also to have the complete rules of the Judicial Executive Committee (including the number of judges designated by law that should review a review of this nature, (i.e, 19, 16, 5 or another number)), also posted on this website. An example of these rules is provided in the following paragraph.
From the Memorandum from the: United States Court of Appeals date: August 1, 2012, Eleventh Circuit, 56 Forsyth Street, NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 from: John Ley Clerk of Court, www.ca11.uscourts.gov, We are pleased to enclose revisions to the Eleventh Circuit Rules and Internal Operating Procedures (IOPs) effective August 1, 2012, page 5, .. The judicial council of the Eleventh Circuit pursuant to its statutory authority has appointed a circuit executive (11th Cir. R. 47-2), adopted rules for the conduct of complaint proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 351-364 (Addendum Three)…
10. Complaints Against Judges. This court’s rule for the conduct of complaint proceedings under28 U.S.C. §§ 351-364 is outlined in Addendum Three.) In IOP 10 page24, in pages 18 and 182, 7. Judicial Council. The judicial council established by 28 U.S.C. § 332 is composed of nineteen members: one active judge from each of the nine district courts, nine active circuit judges, and the circuit chief judge. The judicial council meets on call of the chief judge approximately three times a year to consider and to make orders for the effective and expeditious administration of the courts within the circuit. The council is responsible for considering complaints against judges.,
Under the same FOIA, we remind you that no judge enforced the production of the below requested information for the release of the following documents in my original civil lawsuit. We request these materials.
1. We requested a copy of the MCG internal investigation performed by Susan Norton and approved by Dr. Barry Goldstein that shows that Dr XXX was legally fired by Dr. Marcus, and a copy of the reasons that Dr XXXX’s contract was not renewed in her previous position as an Assistant Research Scientist. We also requested copies of all of her MCG evaluations, with her signature included.
2. We requested copies of the meeting records from the Office of Affirmative Action of the two times Dr XXXX met with Mr. Solomon Walker regarding her two positions at MCG, concerned in each case about losing her position due to whistleblower retaliation against her.
3. We requested copies of all emails received by and/or sent by Dr XXXX at MCG beginning in 2004, including those related to the clinical studies of Dr. Dennis Marcus. We asked for inclusion of e-mails from Dr. XXXX stating that she would not allow a site visit from Theragenics Corporation in November 2004, due to a lack of appropriate preparation for the site visit by MCG (including a lack of radiation oncology training for the patients’ safety).
4. We requested the minutes of any related meetings (Theragenics November 2004 site visit) at MCG, performed with participants Park, Kotti, and XXXX, among others.
5. We requested copies of the 22 memorandums sent in the “Sleep apnea” 2003-2004 study from Bridgette Y. Taylor to Dr Marcus, showing violations of good clinical practice and specifically documenting the non-consent status of almost 100 patients enrolled in the study.
6. We requested copies of the Theragenics, Sleep Apnea, SCORE, DRCR1, DRCR2, Eli Lilly, Parexel and Genentech Clinical Trial Folders that Dr XXXX worked with when working for Dr Dennis Marcus in 2004.
7. We requested copies of all “External Activity” income declared by Drs. Daniel Rhan, Barry Goldstein, Dennis Marcus and Julian Nussbaum at MCG from 1999 to 2007, and signed by each respective individual listed, as well as by the Dean of the School of Medicine.
8. We requested copies of the MCG Health Inc., Research Studies Internal Budget Forms for all of Dr. Marcus’ and Dr. Nussbaum’s Clinical Trial studies, 1999-2007, signed and approved by the appropriate physicians and MCG administrators.
9. We requested copies of the Declarations of Conflicts of Interest declared by Drs. Rhan, Goldstein, Marcus and Nussbaum from 1999 to 2007, and signed by each respective individual listed, as well as by the Dean of the School of Medicine.
10. We requested a copy of any MCG Clinical Trial protocol violations and any memorandums sent to Dr. Marcus for not complying with the good clinical practices in Clinical Trials from 1999 to 2007.
May 31, 2013
Mr. James Gerstenlauer
Circuit Judicial Council
Eleventh U.S. Judicial Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Telephone: 404-335-6535
Re: Judicial complaints 11-13-90027 through 11-13-90030
Dear Judicial Council,
I write to inform you that the same company I exposed paying illegal kickbacks to Dennis Marcus, M.D. of the former Medical College of Georgia (MCG) (to induce him to prescribe brachytherapy; ie, Theragenics Corporation of Buford, Georgia) has been successfully sued in a different, pertinent case for paying kickbacks (as I reported to the State and Federal agencies) because that is a violation of the False Claims Act.
Theragenics Corporation had fused with C.R. Bard, Inc., a medical device company and as it happens at MCG, C.R. Bard provided illegal remuneration to customers and physicians to induce them to purchase Bard’s therapeutic seeds, in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute. The pertinent lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia under the qui tam, or whistleblower provisions, of the False Claims Act. Specifically, the case is United States ex rel. Darity vs. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 1:06-cv-0208-SCJ (Northern District of Georgia). I have already sent this information to U.S. Attorney Sally Yates, and to the Atlanta FBI. Utilizing this additional evidence, we urge you to rule properly over my claims and grant justice as is appropriate. Please see attach proofs.
Sincerely,
XXXX
Anon:
Please keep me posted on this. I haven't yet read all of your material, but I will. We have big, big problems with the 11th Circuit, and it looks like you have experienced that first hand. My personal e-mail is rshuler3156@gmail.com
May 15, 2013
Mr. James Gerstenlauer
Circuit Judicial Council
Eleventh Judicial Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Re: Judicial complaints 11-13-90027 through 11-13-90030
Dear Judicial Council,
On May 14th 2013 we received a letter acknowledging my current complaints.
We have found no evidence of impartiality in the 11th Court of Appeals based on what we had previously exposed. The 11th Court of Appeals and/or Chief Judge Dubina should have known of the possibility of this next step we are taking. We have further determined that the committee includes Chief Judge Dubina, who is in fact one of the judges who is part of the complaint (see previous letter). We would appreciate it if none of the judges that were involved in our original case are part of this committee, and recuse themselves. Clerk John Ley suggested to us by telephone that Judge Dubina should recuse himself from the case, but such has not occurred.
We also wanted to let you know that all communication sent to these judges and committees have been copied to the Atlanta FBI and to US Attorney Sally Yates, in order that they can keep hard evidence in case of previous and/or future complaints against these judges. I will soon be adding all of these letters regarding misconduct and all answers.
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, former Medical College of Georgia (MCG) and Emory University are liable for all economic and non-economic damages. The Plaintiff has previously requested that the Court award compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined according to proof by Plaintiffs against Defendants. The plaintiff’s claim for relief - retaliatory termination, ie, Georgia Whistleblower Act, O.C.G.A § 45-1-4 was never judged. Specifically, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4(b) and (d)(2), it is unlawful for a public employer to retaliate against a public employee for disclosing fraud, waste, abuse, or violations of law, rules, or regulations, in relation to any state programs or operations under the jurisdiction of such public employer.
Dr XXXXX was retaliated against for making disclosures protected under O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4, specifically O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4(e)(2)(D) and (E). Dr. XXX is thus entitled to reinstatement with Georgia Regents University, as well as restoration of all benefits of employment lost as a result of her termination according to O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4(e)(2)(B) and (C). Dr. XXXXX is also entitled to recover her attorneys' fees and all other costs of litigation, according to O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4(f). A jury trial was denied in both the Augusta and Atlanta courts. Dr XXXXX claims, in an ethical and just system, should provide her reinstatement with back pay and such benefits as plaintiff would have enjoyed had she not been terminated. XXX salary in November, 2004 was low; and XXX was a faculty member before taking this lower pay position. XXX took the lower pay position because MCG did not renew her contract; they did this because she exposed that MCG was changing the university bylaws. MCG was in turn changing the bylaws because Dr. Daniel Rahn (ex-president), Dr. Barry Goldstein (ex-Provost and Don Snell (ex-President of MCG, Inc. and Clinics) carefully planned for themselves plus Donald Leeburn from the Board of Regents to be the only 4 voting members of the university (excluding the rest of the Georgia government, and people who paid taxes in Georgia to maintain these great institutions). All of these four people were subsequently forced to leave MCG. Later Dr. XXXXX found that since these 4 men wanted to be the only voters, in order to hide the laundering of clinical trials funds and more funds via the MCG Foundation. The 1) abuses of patients in clinical trials and 2) this money laundering represented the real reasons the FBI and other federal agencies intervened at MCG during 2008-2009. These individuals were actively defrauding the Federal and the Georgia governments. Following this service to society, the Federal judges missed, erred or demonstrated misconduct in her case. Now is the time to rectify these problems.
The plaintiff would expect reinstatement deemed inappropriate under the circumstances, which have in fact not been judged. In an honest ruling, Dr. XXXXX should receive compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial to compensate her for the diminished future earning capacity, mental anguish, humiliation, pain and suffering, and such other damages as resulted from the defendants' improper conduct. Plaintiff's costs of this action include reasonable attorneys' fees, and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by an impartial Judiciary Executive Council.
If any misunderstanding has occurred in the courts or judges, now is the time to address these problems. Again, we have copied the Atlanta FBI and US Attorney Sally Yates.
Sincerely,
XXXXX
May 6, 2013
Mr. James Gerstenlauer
Circuit Judicial Council
Eleventh Judicial Circuit
56 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Judicial Council,
As a background, I was improperly fired in November, 2004 as result of my whistleblower activities exposing clinical trial abuse of patients at the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) in Augusta. In my wrongful dismissal case, no attorney statewide wanted to take the case. Finally, in late 2005, attorney John P. Batson in Augusta took the case, and subsequently acted in a corrupt manner, ie, 1) took evidence from my files, 2) “disappeared” to avoid me and 3) didn’t show me specifically what he was going to file in the court. The day of the case filing deadline, I had to literally drive from Atlanta to Augusta to his house to obtain the lawsuit, and I personally paid the Richmond County sheriff to file the case. I didn’t have the opportunity to see what Mr. Batson wrote before filing. I fired him, after I realized that he was not working in my favor and “had received several thousand dollars from an aunt”, which I suspected to be a possible payoff originating from MCG. I then personally worked the lawsuit pro se in 2007. One of my most serious concerns in the Augusta district court was the fact that four different judges were assigned to my case over the 2005-2009 period. Finally in late 2007, an attorney friend of my husband’s family took the case. In 2005, MCG and the Georgia Board of Regents asked for my evidence in trying to correct the clinical trial problems(and in good faith I gave it to them), 12 huge folders with evidence and including a defective CD-ROM 2004 disk containing incriminating evidence against these MCG clinical trials.
The MCG administration returned only the defective disk because they could not access the disk data. By early 2006 in Atlanta, my family began to be affected by multiple criminal attacks; the worst was a physical attack against my XXX year old daughter XXXX on March 30, 2006, who subsequently had to be hospitalized for one month (please see attached documents). Soon after this attack, we went to the Atlanta FBI with the previously described defective disk, and told our complete 2004-2006 history to Special Agent XXXXX. The Atlanta FBI then tried to open the defective disk, but could not do so. At this point in my case, the evidence consisted largely of my testimony versus that of MCG. The Atlanta FBI was very nice 2006-2007, but helpless to address issues at MCG without more significant evidence. In November 2007, after the attacks increased and the Judge Randall Hall in Augusta demonstrated bias in favor of the defendants (see attached letters outlining misconduct and conflicts of interest), one day I prayed very sincerely to the Virgin Mary and cried. I asked her to help me and kept praying. I then went to work, and out of the blue saw a CD-ROM and placed it into my work computer. The CD-ROM disk was actually the previously described defective disk, and it miraculously opened. The disk contents documented hundreds of files with the names of the patients that died at MCG as resulted of the horrendous 2004 clinical trials that I exposed. I originally thought there were only 3 patients who died, but actually 12 out of 12 died in one specific clinical trial group. I next again contacted Atlanta FBI Special Agent XXXXX (E-mail:XXXX
He advised me to immediately print out the disk, to send the disk information to him by e-mail, and make a copy onto a separate hard disk. I sent him all the evidence showing how MCG was 1) conducting triple and quadruple billing on the same patient procedure, and thus committing Medicare and Medicaid fraud; 2) laundering money through residual accounts and via the MCG Foundation (i.e., the MCG institutional endowment), and 3) committing hundreds of violations of Federal laws involving patients in clinical trials. In 2008-2009, many people at MCG, specifically those who were charged with protecting clinical trial patients were fired or “voluntary resigned” including Dennis Marcus, M.D., who dismissed me in 2004 for protecting Georgia patients.
What an irony, that a single mother at that time, on a work visa and low salary was the only person who tried to seriously protect these patients! The MCG Foundation was forced to close and split into two parts, and more than 50 people left MCG and Emory over the 2007-2013 period (Emory was connected to the MCG clinical trials via Theragenics Corporation of Buford, Georgia). More ironic is that my case judges only chose to rule on “First Amendment rights” that Mister Batson wrote and opted to dismiss the 90% of the case. THEY ALL SAID THE RETALIATION AND WHISTLEBLOWER CLAIMS WERE MERITLESS. Judge Hall refused to hear my claims as whistleblower, and to judge criminal charges against many people at MCG and several people at Emory University. I thus requested a petition for review, because overall all judges on the case erred in several respects in granting summary judgment. My case is Atlanta Circuit Appeals Court Case number 07-10595, and Augusta District Court Case No 05-00186-CV. The Circuit court judges Tjoflat, Birch and Hull “agreed” with the district court in July 2009, for the reasons stated in the district court’s February 12, 2009 order granting summary judgment, that appellant's § 1983 “claims of retaliation were meritless”. How can the courts and the judges explain that all the previously described people were forced to leave MCG and Emory for the 2004 clinical trial activities and the overall 2004-2012 cover-up? Please see my attached letters to Chief Judge Lisa Godbey Wood and to Chief Judge Dubina. Someone is “pretending not to see” and making a joke of myself, the Atlanta FBI and of North Georgia US Attorney Sally Yates, after we saved the lives of so many Georgians. I lost my job, all of my savings, my Augusta home and my professional reputation for making this ethical stand for the people of Georgia.
Post a Comment