The reader is requested to visit all parts of this website for
material supporting this article.
FED UP WITH JUDICIAL DISCRIMINATION YET BELIEVING
IN THE JUSTNESS OF THEIR CAUSE JACKSON CHRISTIANS ARE DETERMINED TO CONTINUE PICKETING CORRUPT MISSISSIPPI FEDERAL JUDGES UNTIL JUSTICE PREVAILS
Photo below, (click on photos to enlarge them), of smiling driver and first load of picketers being delivered to the Jackson Federal Courthouse for 3 days of protesting against years of anti Christian conduct by Mississippi Federal Judges.
Photo below is how Jackson Federal Courthouse looks on a typical Monday morning.
Photo below is how Jackson Courthouse looked during the 3 days late last year when Jackson Christians protested against Federal Judges Wingate and Guirola’s unlawful anti Christian discrimination by personally picketing the judges.
Photo below is of Christians during week long Jackson protest in 2007 against anti Christian conduct by Mississippi Judges against Stephen Dean. There are no photos of Steve picketing because he was busy taking the photos.
For the following reasons Dean contends that the Board and Federal Judges Henry Wingate and Louis Guirola would not have dared treat any Moslem or Gay in the dilatory manner that they have treated him by collectively dragging out the legal process for 7 long years. It may appear to the reader that their only reason for doing so may have been their hope that Dean would simply give up on his quest to represent Christians on Christian issues free, which thousands of Mississippi Christians are aware of, and go away forever.
The Board and the Judges are probably aware that if they treated Moslems or Gays the way they have treated Dean, they would wake up in their fine homes some fine morning, look out their livingroom windows and see a group of picketers outside protesting the way they believe they have been discriminated against. The U.S. Constitution and Dean v. Byerley, 354 F.3d, 540 (6th Cir. 2004) permits such peaceful conduct.
If Wingate, Guirola and the Board would not have treated a Moslem or Gay for the last 7 years in such a disgraceful manner then this is proof that they discriminated against Dean simply because he is a Christian activist! Discriminating against someone because of their religion is a violation of federal law.
In March 2002 Dean applied to the Board requesting that he be allowed to sit for the bar exam so after becoming licensed he could represent Christians on Christian issues absolutely free.
In August 2002 Dean was required to appear before the Board and prove to them that he “possesses the necessary character and fitness” to be allowed to practice law alongside all the other honest lawyers in Mississippi. After Dean testified at the hearing, the Board ruled that he was “mentally and emotionally unstable”. None of the members were licensed by the state to perform a mental examination on anyone, nor had they had him professionally examined.
Is it time for Attorney General Jim Hood to rule whether the Board Members committed a crime when they performed an unlicensed mental exam on Dean and then published the results of their exam?
Dean had never been accused before of being mentally impaired, nor had he ever been examined by any qualified medical practitioner anywhere and found to have a mental impairment.
Dean appealed their decision.
In April 2003, before a courtroom packed to capacity by Jackson Christians, Dean presented reasons to the Board as to why they had acted in an anti Christian manner and requested that they allow him to sit for the bar exam.
Chairman Mozingo stated “this is the first time in the history of Mississippi that an appeals hearing (of the denial of a request to take the bar exam) has been made public and Mr. Dean is the one who requested it” (This is hardly what someone would do if they are trying to hide something.)
The Board then sat on their hands for over 2 full years and did virtually nothing.
Finally, in August 2005 the Board allowed Dean another appeals hearing, which again was made public at Dean’s request, and 47 Christians appeared to show their support for him being allowed to practice law. The Board again, without having him examined by a licensed medical practitioner, personally examined him and ruled that he was “mentally and emotionally unstable”.
But, this time, the Board in their written decision actually gave as reasons for believing Dean was “mentally and emotionally unstable” that he had “criticized them and the Mississippi Supreme Court on his website” lawopenforum.com.
Dean later filed two lawsuits against the Board and its members.
In December 2005 Dean filed the first lawsuit before Federal Judge Henry T. Wingate of Jackson. Wingate proceed to stonewall the case for twenty three-months until November 2007. He virtually took no action on the case until Dean filed a writ of mandamus in October 2007 requesting that a higher court order Wingate to act on the case. Then less than two weeks later, after having stonewalled the case for nearly two years, Wingate dismissed the case offering spurious and disingenuous reasons for doing so. It is Dean’s opinion that only a corrupt federal judge would have conducted himself in such a disgraceful discriminatory manner.
To many Mississippi Christians, Wingate’s two years of stonewalling Christian activist Dean’s case is proof that he is corrupt because he would not have dared to persecute a Moslem or Gay activist in such a contemptible, disgraceful, dilatory manner for two years, then summarily dismiss their case.
In February 2006 Dean filed his second lawsuit, a Federal Civil Rights case, before Federal Judge Guirola of Gulfport, against the Board and its Members, arising out of their personally performing a psychological exam on him without a license. Guirola took virtually no action on the case for one year. Dean, realizing that Guirola would likely stonewall his case just as his fellow Judge Wingate did, filed a writ of mandamus requesting that a higher court order Guirola to act on the case.
Three weeks later in January 2007 Judge Guirola dismissed the case stating “Case is dismissed … for lack of subject matter jurisdiction”. In non legal English Guirola stated that the reason he was dismissing the case was that he had no authority to hear the federal civil rights case even though he is a federal judge. Would he have dared to have dismissed a federal civil rights case filed by a Moslem or Gay and give as the reason that as a federal judge he had no authority to hear a federal civil rights case? Obviously not. Only a corrupt federal judge would have acted is such an outrageous discriminatory manner.
Dean appealed both cases to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. The cases have been there for one year.
This is the problem the 5th Circuit three judge panel has: They are trying to figure out a way to rule for the Board, Judge Wingate and Judge Guirola on all the issues. But, if they uphold dismissal on all the issues, in reality they will be ruling in favor of the Board having performed an unlicensed medical exam on Dean. They will be approving the Board’s finding that Dean is “mentally and emotionally unstable” because he “criticized them[the Board] and the Mississippi Supreme Court….”
Is the Defendant Board’s failure to deny in their responsive pleading that they performed an unlicensed medical exam on Dean an admission by them that they committed a felony? The Federal Rules state that all allegations in a lawsuit not denied by the defendants in their responsive pleading are admitted. It is unclear whether the 5th Circuit Judges will forthrightly address this issue in their decision.
Is it time for Attorney General Jim Hood to rule whether the Board Members committed a felony when they performed an unlicensed mental exam on Dean and then published the results of their exam?