|
||||||
|
SLRC
UPDATE:
Our Response to the Southern Poverty Law Center
Mr. Lyons:
As you know, I contacted your case worker Allison Schaum on Jan. 28 with this same list of questions and received no response. I sent to you a request for comment on Feb. 7, three weeks ago, and received no response until today. We have given you ample opportunity to comment on your cases.
We are on our way to press, but we will hold the article that we are writing until Monday morning at 11:00 a.m. EST as a courtesy.
Sincerely, Heidi Beirich ****************************
Heidi L. Beirich, Ph.D. Dear Miss Beirich,
The 2001 SLRC tax return you requested of Mr. Lyons was sent by regular mail on Friday, February 28. What your publishing schedule has to do with this request can only be imagined. Your organization's agenda is, however, well known. It is not in our interest to assist you in furthering your organization's goals. We are certain that nothing we say or do will induce you to "tell our side," if that is what you meant to imply.
Without a doubt, as your Center has so often done in the past, you will tell your distorted tale with or without reference to any facts. Nevertheless, we carry some small hope that you will astonish us some day by reporting the unvarnished truth. We, unfortunately and as usual, are prepared for yet another artfully crafted deconstruction of objective reality that just barely, but not always, skirts the border of actual malice and libel.
As to your other questions we submit the following:
Beirich: "I now know that you dropped Ryan Oleichi as a client right after his mother's death."
Response: The SLRC did not "drop" Ryan Oleichi as a client. Nor have we ever told anybody that Ryan was "dropped." It is true that his Mother's tragic death made prosecution of the case more problematic as she was not only Ryan's most ardent advocate as his guardian and next friend, but also an irreplaceable witness. Attorney-client privilege prevents us from saying more.
Beirich: ... "and that the Knight case was also abandoned long before a suit was filed."
Response: We represented Katie Knight through two hearings before the Cabarrus County Board of Education. Katie later moved to Ohio to be with her Father. Katie's parents have never contacted us about proceeding with the case after Katie left North Carolina.
And now to your original request:
From Beirich: I am writing to seek comment about the SLRC's law suits. I have tracked down as many SLRC law suits as I can find and these are the outcomes that I have found. I thought I would fact check this with you before using the material. If cases are missing, or outcomes incorrect, I'd appreciate that information.
Beirich: Cases Dismissed: Hays School District
Response: The Hays County lawsuit was dismissed by agreement after it was learned that the Superintendent of the Hays County Schools (the main problem) had transferred out of Hays County and that District 25 UIL changed its policy to include banning of the flag of the United States.
As you and the press have gleefully reported, the Judge in this case was extremely hostile to our position. The Judge told Attorney Lyons from the bench that he himself had been a school board attorney for many years. We have never in our lives seen more one-sided justice than we witnessed in the Hays County case. We could do no right and Hays County could do no wrong. The court keeping the UIL out of the case was clearly an abuse of discretion, and the court heaped a great deal of verbal abuse and written gratuitous insults upon Mr. Lyons. He bore it like a Christian gentleman.
Our legal theories in the case were sound and the SLRC stands by them. We are by no means through with the flag issue at Hays County.
Beirich: EEOC cases--I think 6 of them
Response: 7 EEOC discrimination complaints were filed against DuPont in Richmond Virginia. The complaints cite discrimination based on race, religion and national origin. We fully expected these cases to be turned down by the EEOC. We were not disappointed. The claims were turned down and we have 90 days to file a federal lawsuit.
Beirich: Department of Labor case
Response: The campaign to declare Confederate Americans (or as we prefer Confederate Southern Americans) began with Don Curtis Terrill's desire to participate in a Department of Labor "Diversity Day" celebration. He was refused and a two year EEOC case ensued. The SLRC brought the case into federal court, it was dismissed almost without comment by both the District Court and the 4th Circuit. The Supreme Court refused our Petition for Writ of Certiorari in October 2002. We got exactly the reception in federal court that we expected and no one on our legal team expected to win this case of first impression. As you know the judicial wheels grind slowly and we are prepared to bring this issue again and again in a variety of venues until we find the one judge who will at least let us put on evidence that Confederate Southern Americans deserve the same legal protections as other Americans (especially who are members of persecuted minority groups).
Beirich: Matthew Dixon Case
Response: This is not our case. We have assisted the attorneys where we could.
Beirich: Chisum Womack
Response: The case was dismissed because the case (and attendant pressure) was affecting the grade point average of our client. Our intent was to re-file in state court, but our client had to leave the Corps because of his grades. We pursued the case using other means. The ban on Confederate symbols has been lifted and General Hopgood was retired. We have no firmer support for our work than the Womack family.
Beirich: Cases Lost:
Tim Meadows (my understanding is he was given 6 mos. Probation at the Circuit court level)
Response: You all really have a curious take on reality. Tim Meadows case was a collateral issue. Our focus has always been against the City of Mobile and the Mobile Veterans Commission for their outrageous and egregious behavior by banning the Confederate Veterans flag from a veterans parade. The charges against Tim Meadows were resolved in his favor. There is no finding of guilt and he retains a clean record. He only had to agree to stay out of trouble in the City of Mobile (no problem, he lives outside the city). Considering the political nature of this case and the hostile venue, we are surprised that things turned out so well. This case was not lost, nor is it certainly closed.
Beirich: Cases Settled:
Castorina
Response: Yes - to the satisfaction of the parties. Several school districts have rescinded their ban on Confederate symbols since Castorina settled.
Winston McCuen
Response: Yes - to the satisfaction of the parties.
Beirich: Cases the SLRC was removed from:
The Texas Plaques court case (removed by the Texas division of the SCV)
Response: We were happy to withdraw from the case with the entry of new (and closer) counsel for the Texas Division. The Texas Division was satisfied with our pioneering work on the case. We agreed that the resources available in this case might be better spent on a more local advocate. The Division's new counsel is quite competent to pursue this case and we will assist him in any way he might direct.
The SLRC has always encouraged groups seeking assistance to try and work with local attorneys. In the plaques case we carried the early hearings at the General Services Commission, researched and drafted all the law and pleadings and developed all the theories of legal attack.
We have received nothing but praise for the SLRC's efforts in the Plaques case from rank and file members of the Texas Division.
Beirich: Cases on their way to court:
Lawrence County School Board
Response: Filed Summer 2002, trial was set for Jine 2003. Under a court ordered stay pursuant to the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Act as Principal Ricky Nichols has been called to active service.
Beirich: "Racist Food Products"
Response: Case was filed in February 2003. Defendant has not answered. See our web page for details
Beirich: Also, I put in a faxed request last week for the most current SLRC tax return.
Response: Mailed on February 28, 2003
Beirich: Any information about how much money the SCV gives the SLRC would be appreciated as well. Response: Since Ron Wilson became Commander in Chief, the SCV has not given us a dime. With the settlement of the Castorina case and the March Across Dixie, the SLRC was pleased to GIVE money BACK to the SCV. As a matter of fact the money given to the SCV in the wake of the Castorina settlement is the first time the General Executive Council has ever gotten its money BACK on a heritage case which it funded.
I hope this answers your questions. Again, I encourage you to astonish us some day. Tell the truth without putting it through the "spin" cycle beforehand.
Sincerely,
Dr. Neill H. Payne
PLEASE SEND YOUR TAX-DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO: SOUTHERN
LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER Sincerely,
Allison Schaum
For more information about HK's March Across Dixie contact: www.southerncaucus.org/hkedgerton.htm
|
||||||
|
Home Our Purpose Board of Advisors Board or Directors Contact Us Case Law Current Cases Editorials Legal Research Model Statutes Letters Press Releases Report A Violation Speeches SLRC Bulletins SLRC In The News SLRC Updates Southern Civil Rights Advice |
|||||||
|
|||||||
