JONATHAN TURLEY
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and other schools.
After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and, in 1998, was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. In addition to his extensive publications, Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers, military personnel, judges, members of Congress, and a wide range of other clients. He is also one of the few attorneys to successfully challenge both a federal and a state law — leading to courts striking down the federal Elizabeth Morgan law as well as the state criminalization of cohabitation.
In 2010, Professor Turley represented Judge G. Thomas Porteous in his impeachment trial. After a trial before the Senate, Professor Turley (on December 7, 2010) argued both the motions and gave the final argument to all 100 U.S. Senators from the well of the Senate floor — only the 14th time in history of the country that such a trial of a judge has reached the Senate floor. Judge Porteous was convicted of four articles of impeachments, including the acceptance of $2000 from an attorney and using a false name on a bankruptcy filing.
In 2011, Professor Turley filed a challenge to the Libyan War on behalf of ten members of Congress, including Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Dan Burton (R., Ind.); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx). The lawsuit was before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
In November 2014, Turley agreed to serve as lead counsel to the United States House of Representatives in its constitutional challenge to changes ordered by President Obama to the Affordable Care Act. The litigation was approved by the House of Representatives to seek judicial review of the claims under the separation of powers. On May 12, 2016, the federal court handed down a historic victory for the House and ruled that the Obama Administration violated the separation of powers in ordering billions to be paid to insurance companies without an appropriation of Congress.
Other cases include his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy; and four former United States Attorneys General during the Clinton impeachment litigation. In the Foretich case, Turley succeeded recently in reversing a trial court and striking down a federal statute through a rare “bill of attainder” challenge. Professor Turley has also served as counsel in a variety of national security cases, including espionage cases like that of Jim Nicholson, the highest ranking CIA officer ever accused of espionage. Turley also served as lead defense counsel in the successful defense of Petty Officer Daniel King, who faced the death penalty for alleged spying for Russia. Turley also served as defense counsel in the case of Dr. Tom Butler, who is faced criminal charges dealing with the importation and handling of thirty vials of plague in Texas. He also served as counsel to Larry Hanauer, the House Intelligence Committee staffer accused of leaking a classified Presidential National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times. (Hanauer was cleared of all allegations).
Among his current cases, Professor Turley represents Dr. Ali Al-Timimi, who was convicted in Virginia in 2005 of violent speech against the United States. In 2020, the federal court found that there merit in the challenges raised by Professor Turley and his co-counsel Tom Huff. Accordingly, the judge ordered his release to protect him from Covit-19 while the Court prepared a decision on the challenges. Pursuant to a court order, Dr. Al-Timimi was released from the Supermax in Colorado and the two drove across the country so that he could be placed into home confinement. He also represented Dr. Sami Al-Arian, who was accused of being the American leader of a terrorist organization while he was a university professor in Florida. Turley represented Dr. Al-Arian for eight years, much of which was in a determined defense against an indictment for criminal contempt. The case centered on the alleged violation of a plea bargain by the Justice Department after Dr. Al-Arian was largely exonerated of terrorism charges in Tampa, Florida. On June 27, 2014, all charges were dropped against Dr. Al-Arian. He also represented pilots approaching or over the age of 60 in their challenge to the mandatory retirement age of the FAA. He also represented David Murphee Faulk, the whistleblower who disclosed abuses in the surveillance operations at NSA’s Fort Gordon facility in Georgia.
Professor Turley also agreed to serve as lead counsel representing the Brown family from the TLC “Sister Wives, a reality show on plural marriage or polygamy. On December 13, 2013, the federal court in Utah struck down the criminalization of polygamy — the first such decision in history — on free exercise and due process grounds. On September 26, 2014, the court also ruled in favor of the Browns under Section 1983 — giving them a clean sweep on all of the statutory and constitutional claims. In April 2015, a panel reversed the decision on standing grounds and that decision is now on appeal.
Professor Turley was also lead counsel in the World Bank protest case stemming from the mass arrest of people in 2002 by the federal and district governments during demonstrations of the IMF and World Bank. Turley and his co-lead counsel Dan Schwartz (and the law firm of Bryan Cave) were the first to file and represented student journalists arrested without probable cause. In April 2015, after 13 years of intense litigation, the case was settled for $2.8 million, including $115,000 for each arrestee — a record damage award in a case of this kind and over twice the amount of prior damages for individual protesters. The case also exposed government destruction and withholding of evidence as well as the admitted mass arrest of hundreds of people without probable cause.
Professor Turley also served as the legal expert in the review of polygamy laws in the British of Columbia (Canada) Supreme Court. In the latter case, he argued for the decriminalization of plural union and conjugal unions. In 2012, Turley also represented the makers of “Five Wives Vodka” (Ogden’s Own Distillery) in challenging an effective ban on the product in Idaho after officials declared the product to be offensive to Mormons. After opposing to the ban on free speech and other grounds, the state of Idaho issued a letter apologizing for public statements made by officials and lifting the ban on sale for “Five Wives Vodka.”
Turley has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues, including the Florida House of Representatives. He also served as the consultant to the Puerto Rico House of Representatives on the impeachment of Gov. Aníbal Acevedo Vilá.
Professor Turley is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. That testimony includes the confirmation hearings of Attorney General nominees Loretta Lynch and William Barr as well as Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. Professor Turley is also a nationally recognized legal commentator. Professor Turley was ranked as 38th in the top 100 most cited “public intellectuals” in the recent study by Judge Richard Posner. Turley was also found to be the second most cited law professor in the country. He has been repeatedly ranked in the nation’s top 500 lawyers in annual surveys (including in the latest rankings by LawDragon) – one of only a handful of academics. In prior years, he was ranked as one of the nation’s top ten lawyers in military law cases as well as one of the top 40 lawyers under 40. He was also selected in the last five years as one of the 100 top Irish lawyers in the world. In 2016, he was ranked as one of the 100 most famous (past and present) law professors.
Professor Turley is one of only two academics to testify at both the Clinton and Trump impeachment hearings. In December 2019, Professor Turley was called as the one Republican witness in the House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearings. He appeared with three Democratic witnesses. Professor Turley disagreed with this fellow witnesses in opposing the proposed articles of impeachments on bribery, extortion, campaign finance violations or obstruction of justice. He argued that these alleged impeachable acts were at odds with controlling definitions of those crimes and that Congress has historically looked to the criminal code and cases for guidance on such allegations. The committee ultimately rejected those articles and adopted the only two articles that Professor Turley said could be legitimately advanced: abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. Chairman Jerrold Nadler even ended the hearing by quoting his position on abuse of power. However, Turley opposed impeachment on this record as incomplete and insufficient for submission to the Senate. He argued for the House to wait and complete the record by seeking to compel key witnesses like former National Security Adviser John Bolton. His testimony was later relied upon in the impeachment floor debate by various House members and he was cited by both the White House and House managers in their arguments before the United States Senate in the Trump impeachment trial, including videotaped remarks played at the trial.
Professor Turley’s articles on legal and policy issues appear regularly in national publications with hundreds of articles in such newspapers as the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal. He is a columnist for USA Today and writes regularly for the Washington Post. In 2005, Turley was given the Columnist of the Year award for Single-Issue Advocacy for his columns on civil liberties by the Aspen Institute and the Week Magazine. Professor Turley also appears regularly as a legal expert on all of the major television networks. Since the 1990s, he has worked under contract as the on-air Legal Analyst for NBC News, CBS News, BBC and Fox News. Professor Turley has been a repeated guest on Sunday talk shows with over two-dozen appearances on Meet the Press, ABC This Week, Face the Nation, and Fox Sunday. Professor Turley has taught courses on constitutional law, constitutional criminal law, environmental law, litigation, and torts. He is the founder and executive director of the Project for Older Prisoners (POPS). His work with older prisoners has been honored in various states, including his selection as the 2011 recipient of the Dr. Mary Ann Quaranta Elder Justice Award at Fordham University.
His award-winning blog is routinely ranked as one of the most popular legal blogs by AVVO. His blog was selected as the top News/Analysis site in 2013, the top Legal Opinion Blog in 2011 as well as prior selections as the top Law Professor Blog and Legal Theory Blog. It was also ranked in the top 20 constitutional law blog in 2018. It has been regularly ranked by the ABA Journal in the top 100 blogs in the world. In 2012, Turley has selected as one of the top 20 legal experts on Twitter by Business Insider. In 2013, the ABA Journal inducted the Turley Blog into its Hall of Fame.
Professor Turley received his B.A. at the University of Chicago and his J.D. at Northwestern. In 2008, he was given an honorary Doctorate of Law from John Marshall Law School for his contributions to civil liberties and the public interest.
For further information: Mr. Seth Tate – 202-994-0537
Icon made by DinosoftLabs from Flaticon
Well, I made a mistake. Sorry about that.
Now it looks as though Colin Powell is NOT going to endorse Barack Obama; neither is he going to endorse John McCain. He now says he will wait until after both conventions to decide if he even wants to endorse anyone.
I still remember watching him when he was trying to push the UN to help invade Iraq. Powell didn’t even believe what was coming out of his own mouth. He knew after that UN speech that he was to be the ‘scapegoat’; the one to blame for the invasion of Iraq, and he was wise enough to leave the administration early.
I still hope he chooses to endorse Barack Obama. Obama is the only logical choice to bring the United States out of the ‘war business’ and start being a nation of ‘people’ again.
Hopefully, Powell will have enough courage to do so and speak at the Democrats’ Convention. I do applaud him for resigning even though he didn’t have the strength to stand up to Bush before that UN speech with his vial of corn starch.
I’ve been reading reports on the Internet that Colin Powell may be endorsing Barack Obama as President instead of John McCain. Looks like some Republickans may be jumping ship and landing on the shores of success with Obama!
Go in Peace my brother, you have no enemy here.
zakimar:
“I find ignorant people look for enemies and things to hate because they have nothing to love.”
****************
Funny, I find “ignorant people” believe preposterous propositions on scant or nonexistent evidence and then bristle when others point that out. That’s why other people call them “ignorant”!
People who look for enemies are sociopathic or paranoid and generally despise classes of people rather than individuals on scant or nonexistent evidence like say for instance, Jewish people.
Must be a “lost in translation” type situation here.
I believe that Barack Obama will choose either Webb, Biden, Hagel, or John Kerry for Vice President.
As far as John McCain, I believe he will choose either Romney, Huckabee, Liebermann, or Jeb Bush for his vice president.
Who do you think are going to be the Senators’ picks for VP? I’m thinking Webb and Huckabee.
I, for one, do not wish to debate any further about religion, because not one religion being practiced today is perfect, since NONE of us are perfect.
Let’s just take a break, a long break about religions, and focus on what will be occurring in the coming weeks at the conventions in Denver and St. Paul. I’m looking forward to the Democratic convention and to hear Barack Obama give his acceptance speech and who he will choose as his Vice President; not too much the Republickan convention–but I do look forward to hearing John McCain speak and tell everyone how he plans on every country in the planet to be a Democracy–at the end of a gun if necessary; because he’s another ‘decider’ and ‘war is the only way to keep the peace’…
I agree on the point of loving thy neighbor, which both Christians and Muslims are supposed to believe, if not necessarily practice enough.
Unfortunately for some, the Truth will come way too late. I find ignorant people look for enemies and things to hate because they have nothing to love.
Mary Leon:
I am now getting a clear read on zakimar’s calculus:
Religious skeptic = Bigot
Dispute Zakimar = Bigot or Zionist Jew
American = Zionist Jew
American Corporations = Zionist Front Organizations
Moderate Muslim w/ attitude = Good
Qur’an/Haddith = Divine word in some passages but not in others
I think with these definitions we can now proceed to discuss relevant topics with our Eastern friend. Why don’t you go first, and I’ll follow.
I am not surprised that two bigots would think alike. I am curious as to how many copies of the Koran you own, and which convenience store you picked them up. Maybe the version you found on the KKK site you frequent wasn’t entirely accurate.
AGAIN, what Islam dictates and what some people (like you) choose to believe are very different things. Last I checked, some Americans and Bush himself feel that your President is a GOOD Christian. I’m sure I don’t need your scholarly expertise to know that Jesus probably didn’t tell him to kill thousands of Muslims and hand their oil to US corporations.
Let us all remember the main two points of religion:
Believe in your God.
Love your neighbor as you love yourself (your neighbor is anyone–neighbor, stranger, the people down the street, the people on the other side of the planet, the good, the bad, the evil ones, the friend or enemy(those that deliberately do the work of the Devil).
This is the hardest thing to do–to love your enemy. I will admit I don’t like Bush and I especially don’t like Cheney, plus all of these people that post here who support the evil they have done in the world. But, we are supposed to do no harm to those who would want to harm us. An exception might be if someone would harm my husband or son, I would probably act out of reflex action and defend them both, instead of watching harm come to them. This is the most difficult thing to do, to try to love your enemy–but these people will one day have to face what they’ve done, and why they were allowed to do it, and face the people who died because of their deliberate decisions to do evil. The most I will ever do is to call them on it–to let them know they are hypocrites and doing the work of the Devil and that I hate what they have done and that innocent people have died because of their greed, selfishness and lust for power.
We’ll all find out this Truth when we meet one day in another place and time…
zakimar:
“I see you forgot to mention beliefs from your own religion. Since you seem to be a scholar of Scripture, perhaps you can recite some of what Jesus had to say about “the Hypocrites”.
*****************
I have no idea what you are referring to as anyone who has read my past comments knows, I have consistently criticized all religions and never expressed whether I am so inclined or not. I do acknowledge the utter foolishness and ruthlessness of some of the Christian Bible and I am sure there we would find substantial agreement. Unfortunately, some like you have a blinder for your own religion, and insist on wearing it on your sleeve as some badge of distinction. I have no trepidation calling you on your interpretations which contrasts sharply with your “sacred texts.” BTW my Qur’an edition does have the passage located at 3:12, but I am advised that other editions may have it either at that location or 3:10 or even 3:11.*
I am certain as you were researching my comment you conveniently missed my quotation adjacent to the one you cited, but I would expect nothing less from a “true believer.” I do note with interest your complete evasion of the central point which is that your contention that “Islam is love,” is decidedly contrary to the “unerring” text of both the Qur’an and the Hadith. On that point, “Former Muslim” and I agree though not his “over the top” commentary. I raise this with you because, given the standard punishment for apostasy, I would not want you anywhere near that line.
*Interested readers can find it for themselves in Chapter 3 at verse 11 at http://www3.alislam.org/index.jsp
BTW, I have just begun to assume everything you say is untrue, but for people that might not want to bother to read the passage of the Koran to which you refer, it is, “Say to those who reject Faith (in God): Soon will ye be vanquished and gathered together to Hell, an evil bed indeed”! (Koran 3:12) I am not a religious scholar of mespos’s caliber, but the two verses are nothing alike, and I do recall that Jews and Christians also believe that those who reject God will end up in Hell.
I would advise all people to read the entire section, up to Surah 3:20, and see how God speaks of Believers being the ‘People of the Book’, which includes Jews and Christians.
Yet one more piece of propaganda or should I say “oversight” (to be polite) by mespo.
I see you forgot to mention beliefs from your own religion. Since you seem to be a scholar of Scripture, perhaps you can recite some of what Jesus had to say about “the Hypocrites”.
The Koran is the word of God and is what a Muslim should follow. The Koran is full of numerous references to previous Prophets and the Bible. Just because other people, who claim to believe in God, chose to ignore His Word does not mean Muslims do the same.
To Jews, who believe in Moses, Jesus was a “false” Prophet as was Mohammed and to Christians, Mohammed was a “false” Prophet, Muslims believe in ALL three. I find perspective to be a good thing.
zakimar:
I certainly agree with your inclusionary sentiments but take issue with one of your factual assertions. When you say that “Islam believes that God loves EVERYONE,” I must confess that is hard to square with much of the Qur’an or the Hadith. The following passages are just a couple (out of scores) of examples from each work showing a rather virulent dislike for non-believers and apostates:
“As for unbelievers, neither their riches nor their children will in the least save them from God’s judgment. They shall become fuel for the fire.”(Qur’an 3:12)
“Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, ‘Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish (anybody) with Allah’s Punishment.’ No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.” (4:52:260 Hadith)
In fact all Sunni Muslim one major Shia Madh’hab agree that the punishment for apostasy is execution (“Murtadd”, Encyclopedia of Islam). This is not cherry picking and I can provide many more similar passages from the “unerring word of the Creator of the Universe” as those devoted to the Qur’an can attest. These rather barbaric notions stand in stark contrast to your beliefs, but I sincerely hope that your view might prevail despite considerable current evidence to the contrary.
Unlike some people including “Former Muslim” (and I think we all know who that is), Islam believes that God loves EVERYONE. And in his love, he has brought Prophets to ALL people. From Adam to Mohammed, there have been thousands of Prophets. Some of Gods children have chosen to ignore the Prophets and others accepted His messages.
I am thankful to have a father that taught me many religions in order that I may compare for myself. I am also thankful that as a Muslim, I am taught to accept Moses and Jesus as my Prophets as well. I would be a little worried, if on the Day of Judgment, I was asked why I ignored his Prophets and the best I could come up with was, “That’s what my parents told me”.
And thank you Dr. Turley for your comments on “Former Muslim”. I also thank you for not deleting that posting so that people have an opportunity to see how some people think. I gain a much greater appreciation for everything I have in life when I come across people that disagree with me.
Mr. Turley,
I totally agree with you about religions, and hope you will accept my apologies for some ‘spirited’ conversations I have had with some of the posters here.
I have sent a suggestion to Barack Obama’s website for you to be nominated for a position on the Supreme Court, if he becomes President. You know Everything from A to Z about the Constitution and you would be a fair and impartial decision maker for our country. I do hope you consider being a Supreme Court Judge, should the situation arise.
I enjoyed watching you tonight on “Countdown” with Keith Olbermann and always look forward to your comments and opinions!
Sincerely,
Mary Leon
To: Johnathan Turley
Re: Illegal hiring of immigration judges.
There are still some very bad things going on. Can you take a moment to advise us?
My husband, John Holya, has been an immigration attorney with Dept. of Justice, now Homeland Security, for about thirty-two years. He applied for Immigration Judge and was then told he could not apply. He filed a lawsuit with EEO last year. He included testimony by Goodling and Gonzalez in his lawsuit. A few months ago, Administrative Judge Joel Kravitz at EEOC in Washington, DC ruled against him, despite overwhelming evidence.
John has worked in an extremely hostile environment since filing. He has pretty much been black-listed from any IJ jobs. John learned from the old school to practice law, not policy. Management does not appreciate that concept. After years of outstanding reviews he now gets poor reviews. He is currently on leave while a proposed suspension is being decided based on a medical problem.
The EEO Lawsuit:
John was a member of the Durnford Class action suit against the Agency and E.O.I.R several years ago
In Nov. 2005, John filed an application for IJ at Florence, AZ. In December, John’s application was returned to him with a letter from A.C.I.J. Owens that the E.O.I.R. only accepted applications for positions that were publicly announced. No announcement for an IJ vacancy at Florence was ever made public. About late June 2005 John learned of two IJ’s that were hired without any public announcements for political reasons, I J Nugent and IJ Nixon. Bruce Taylor was then hired as an IJ due to his political ties. Taylor had never practiced immigration law.
Pursuant to a Freedom of Information request John received an unsigned memo entitled “Immigration Judge Hiring Process.” The memo states that the hiring process ends with the Deputy Attorney General. It was also attached to a memo written by C.I.J. Creppy to his staff. It was attached after the Statement of Robert Owens who stated under oath he did not know how people were hired without an announcement.
All three witnesses interviewed by the E.E.O. investigator in April 2006, stated they did not know who the ultimate selecting official was. It strains credibility that the head of Human Resources, the Chief Immigration Judge’s special assistant and an A.C.I.J. would be unaware of this memo.
The E.E.O. investigator was told that James McNulty, Deputy Attorney General and Chief Immigration Judge Creppy had no part in the selection process. This is contrary to the memo dated February 3, 2005.
Solution request
John’s solution to this case was that he quickly be appointed to the Phoenix, AZ office as an immigration judge with back pay from the time Judge Taylor was hired and that another sum be distributed to him for compensation for lower retirement benefits.
Proposed Suspension:
On April 5th, John took a lunesta and while sleep-walking, attacked me. My son called the police. John has no recollection of the event. In our 34 years of marriage nothing like this has ever happened. I repeatedly told police there was no argument – it came from nowhere. Based on the arrest Pat Vroom, his boss – head of Phoenix ICE, wants him fired.
Prior Harassment:
John has worked in a hostile environment with Pat Vroom and Kimberly Shepard for several years. Their management style has resulted in a high turnover rate. They are especially hostile to older men. John’s co-worker, Art Resnick. retired rather than deal with the problems in the office. Naturally the stress from this situation caused undue stress to John and our family, including our health. People at work and in the private sector have told him to watch out because Vroom and Shepherd were after him. They emailed extremely derogatory and unprofessional emails to our home. Our son, who is a 1st Lieutenant in the Army, saw some of these emails and was shocked. Also, it does not help that it is well-known I worked on democratic campaigns in the past.
Over the last few years John has suffered numerous injuries from falling. He has been to countless doctors, including several neurologists. For several years the doctors only treated the symptoms with pain medicines. Last summer he became so crippled he could only walk a few steps without falling. Last year I went to his neurologist with him and with a written list of symptoms, including not sleeping well and 6-7 strange episodes of sleep-walking. He never remembered the sleep-walking incidences the next day. One time he got up at 2am, got dressed and was “going to the dentist.” Another time he dozed off and got up to go to work at 6pm.
Last fall 2007 they finally determined he suffered from “stenosis.” John put in for FMLA. It was difficult to get the doctors to write the forms – they kept passing it to another doctor. Pat Vroom became angry. She called us constantly and harassed us. She then sent three police cars to our home to check on him. I have a heart condition, was out gardening and when I saw them pull up, I thought something had happened to our youngest son. She used the excuse she was concerned, but a simple phone call to me would have sufficed. She then showed up at our home with an armed guard on the pretext of “helping him.” Rep Mitchell requested an investigation. It seems the office kept “losing the paperwork.” Finally they recommended John see EEO. It went nowhere as there are deadlines.
John started to see what we consider a better neurologist, Dr. Lauren. Then in the spring John hurt his shoulder when, yet again, he fell on the sidewalk at Ace. Along with the pain meds, they put him on a powerful steroid that caused him to gain weight. He also had been complaining about not sleeping for many months. John had many hours of sick time he could have used but Ms. Vroom made it so hostile for him that he feared the situation if he put in for FMLA again. The doctor set John up for sleep tests finally, but they would not take place until May. And of course the results would take a long time. I believe because of undue pressure he was forced to work when he needed to be healing. If Pat had not harassed him about FMLA he would have stayed home rather than go to work with barely enough sleep to keep him alive. He also stalled on the medical tests and doctor’s appointments because of her.
On the evening of April 5th, Saturday, I was watching Rome on HBO. John was also watching it in the master in his chair, the only one he could comfortably sit in in the house, due to injuries. He took a lunesta. Twenty minutes later he walked to where I was, the family room, with a strange gait and odd look on his face. He sat next to me and was babbling about the lack of a dowry. The scene about the girl’s dowry on Rome had just played. I was very concerned about his odd behavior. He then became violent. In 34 years of marriage he has never been violent before. It was incredulous.
I blame Pat fully. John is no more guilty of anything than if he had cancer. Many documents regarding lunesta, sleep-walking, and sleep apnea will prove this, along with statements from several doctors. He was since diagnosed with sleep apnea. Doctors have written prosecutors about his condition, sleep-walking and lunesta. However, his attorney and the prosecutor are finally going before a settlement judge, but not until sometime next month.
In the meantime he has been on paid leave. The union set up a conference call with Arthur E. Adams – Acting Director Field Legal Operations – West in Laguna Niguel, CA. last week. It sounded like Adams had not even read the paperwork. This man is going to decide whether John will be fired. If so we will quickly go bankrupt because we will probably not be able to maintain our mortgage while we try to sell our home. Our savings has gone to legal bills.
This last year has been a nightmare. We have a son going to Iraq in October to fight for a C student from Texas’ ego. He goes with the full knowledge his government has betrayed his father.
His EEO attorney has filed something to have it reviewed, but if they are Bush cronies like everyone else, we are doomed. My ancestor, Josiah Bartlett, first person to vote for the Declaration od Independence, is turning in his grave.
Sincerely
Judy Burke-Holya
Former Muslim:
I rarely monitor or object to postings. However, your posting happened to catch my eye this evening. Frankly, I found your posting to Zakimar to be highly offensive and gratuitous. This site is dedicated to passionate but civil discourse. There are certainly many sites that allow and even welcome attacks on different religions. This is not one of them. We can have spirited debate over the actions and principles of different religions. We welcome debate regarding faith, politics, the law, and most every subject. However, attacking Islam or other religions in this way is unacceptable and I ask that you adopt a more productive and respectful approach to discourse on this blog.
JT