blow the whistle
$show the love

special reports

Georgia ranks dead last on ethics, integrity scorecard



March 19, 2012 — Georgia law books are chock-full of statutes written to curtail undue influence on political activity and public policy.

So utilities and insurance companies can’t give to a candidate seeking an office that regulates them. Legislators can’t take political donations while in session. Politicians can’t use campaign money for personal benefit. State workers can’t accept gifts from vendors or lobbyists.

Except when they can.

Time and again, Georgia journalists and watchdog groups have found that money finds a way to flow around those laws:

  • Some 658 state workers accepted sports tickets, speaking fees, fancy meals and other gratuities over a two-year span. It’s been 12 years since the state last fined a vendor for failing to disclose such gifts.
  • Political action committees set up by governors and legislative leaders collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in amounts and at times forbidden for other contributions. Two officials dumped $1 million of campaign money into PACs where they could spend it almost any way they wished. “It’s ripe for the opportunity for corruption,” former ethics enforcer Rick Thompson said.
  • Collectively, executives of insurance companies, public utilities and other regulated entities have become the largest single source of campaign money for regulators running for re-election. Utility officials raise money and work to help re-elect incumbents; a lobbyist for the cable TV industry managed one incumbent’s campaign in 2008.

These and similar findings underscore what can sometimes be a gaping divide between Georgia’s legal standards for public accountability, on the one hand, and everyday practice. Georgia ranks 50th with a grade of F and a numerical score of 49 from the State Integrity Investigation, a collaborative project of the Center for Public Integrity, Global Integrity and Public Radio International. No state received an A.

Eugene Talmadge

News reports and advocacy group have long made Georgians aware of this accountability gap. In fact, as one political family’s history shows, the 9.8 million residents of this state have had a long and often forgiving familiarity with dishonest politicians.

Eugene Talmadge, a populist caught misusing public funds as agriculture commissioner, famously told voters in 1931, “Sure I stole, but I stole for you.” He was re-elected and later won four terms as governor. Fifteen years later, when it appeared Talmadge might die before beginning a final term, supporters stuffed ballot boxes with fraudulent write-in votes so his son Herman could take office in his father’s place. Later forced to give up the job, Herman Talmadge easily won election two years later and served 30 years as governor and U.S. senator. And, after the U.S. Senate censured the younger Talmadge for taking more than $40,000 in bogus expense reimbursements, Georgia Democrats still re-nominated him despite stiff primary challenges.

Ethics ‘was our core creed … until we took over’

Georgia Democrats, who’d controlled the governor’s mansion and the Legislature since the 19th century, were slow to embrace ethics reforms in the post-Watergate era. The Republican minority pushed with limited success to address ethics abuses that many regarded as inherent in one-party rule.

Yet in 2003, when the GOP took the governorship and state Senate for the first time since Reconstruction, ethics reform still took a back seat.

“Ethics was part of our core creed for 30 years,” former House GOP leader Bob Irvin said in 2010 testimony before a legislative ethics panel. “It was our core creed, it seems, until we took over.”

Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue needed two years to get a watered-down ethics bill through the Legislature, which rejected his proposals to ban gifts to state workers, define acceptable campaign spending and stiffen penalties for violators. Perdue imposed the gift ban with an executive order that could be rescinded by a future governor.

Also by executive order, Perdue created an Office of Inspector General to investigate wrongdoing, but its recommendations are advisory only. The Inspector General has no jurisdiction over departments run by constitutional officers – insurance, education, labor, agriculture, law, utility regulators and the secretary of state. Over eight years, the office’s budget has been cut nearly in half.

Budget restraints hobble other state oversight agencies as well.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission forced at least 21 judges to step down since 2008, but kept its doors open only because its investigator and contract attorneys worked without payment.

‘Transparency’ over enforcement

Spending cuts prompted the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission to eliminate nearly all its investigative jobs and focus on clerical duties as the repository of financial disclosures from candidates and lobbyists. Ultimately, the agency’s top two staffers were forced out in June 2011 just as they were seeking subpoenas for campaign and personal records of newly elected Gov. Nathan Deal; commission members said the timing was coincidental.

House Speaker David Ralston

The commission’s downsized oversight of campaign financing dovetails with the vision of House Speaker David Ralston, author of the state’s 2010 ethics law. Ralston advocates transparency — rather than regulation – to allow the public to police campaign finance excesses.

“When [voters] are given information about contributions or expenditures … in a very open and transparent way,” he said in 2010, “I trust the judgment of the people as to where the limits ought to be.”

Between loopholes and ineffective enforcement of disclosure laws, that promise of transparency has frequently proven to be an empty one.

The 60,000 to 70,000 disclosures filed with the commission each year are rarely if ever audited, so candidates, lobbyists and donors face little or no consequence for submitting incorrect or incomplete information.

About 2,000 Georgia officials, including one in five sitting legislators, have failed to pay penalties for filing their disclosures late, or not at all.

The commission, unlike other state regulatory agencies, can’t make its own rules since lawmakers stripped it of that power in 2009. Since then, the commission has been powerless to revise or repeal old rules to reflect new laws or court decisions. That paralysis forced the commission in 2010 to advise an independent political committee that it could hide the identities of its donors.

Oversight loopholes abound

Such obstacles make it doubly difficult for the public to monitor officials’ performance.

With a few exceptions, only elected officials and state department heads must file public disclosures of their financial interests. State law in 2011 dropped that requirement for members of most state boards, commissions and authorities, some of which oversee billion-dollar budgets. Now those board members operate under an honor system, submitting an affidavit each year to confirm that their public actions have not affected their private financial interests.

The governor and other statewide candidates disclose less financial information once they’ve taken office than they did before. If they don’t seek re-election, they need not disclose anything about their financial interests for their final two years in office.

Only statewide office-seekers must reveal any business they’ve had with lobbyists or their clients. Legislators – who generally are much more likely to be lobbied – do not.

Legislative leaders with statewide power – such as the House speaker and Senate president – disclose much less than officials elected statewide. (The lieutenant governor – who’s become little more than a figurehead these days – must disclose as much as the governor does.) Legislators also need not disclose their major sources of income if they are lawyers, consultants or otherwise self-employed.

Elsewhere in state government, officials often can conduct the people’s business with little or no meaningful oversight.

Banking regulators continue to operate in secret, even as Georgia leads the nation in bank failures, at a cost of more than $9 billion to the FDIC.

Investigations of judicial misconduct remain under wraps even after they are closed, so the public often has only the murkiest notion of why a judge might have resigned under pressure.

Exorbitant pension payments, often to politically connected retirees, embarrassed state officials and generated dozens of news stories in the 1970s and 1980s. Legislators responded by making that information confidential.

State law requires no asset disclosures of key upper-level workers handling public money, including pension investment advisors and top procurement officials. Those workers must recuse themselves if they have a conflict.

Access to government often limited

Inconsistent enforcement of Georgia’s open records law can also block citizens’ access to information. Compliance is only monitored by an informal mediation in the Attorney General’s Office, where effectiveness is generally “hit or miss.”

The Open Records Act also exempts the legislative and judicial arms of state government. Each tends to comply with requests for administrative information but has also cited the exemption in refusing to produce other records.

Legislative leaders have trumpeted the need for increased transparency while presiding over a process that effectively denies a seat at the table to members of the minority party. In the Senate, the Republican Caucus meets privately to decide on virtually every bill the full chamber will consider.

House budget writers make major spending and cutting decisions behind closed doors with little subsequent public debate. Sponsors of pork-barrel spending may be identified only on the whim of the Appropriations committee chairmen.

More than a dozen Democratic lawmakers have switched parties in the last decade, often proclaiming the move was their only chance to influence public policy.

Ethics reform an uphill battle

Legislators also reserve the right to police themselves in ethics matters, accepting complaints only if the complainant has direct knowledge of alleged misconduct.  Investigative findings remain confidential under House and Senate rules.

Most lawmakers have also been loath to further rein in the influence of campaign donations, leaving plenty of mechanisms to raise and use large sums of money without technically breaking the rules. Often, these loopholes allow practices that mock the spirit of campaign finance laws.

Both major political parties use so-called “multicandidate mailings” to spend unlimited sums in support of a single candidate. Employing this technique, the parties can spend tens of thousands of dollars above the legal limit for one candidate simply by listing a second candidate’s name in the fine print.

State law also still allows candidates to transfer campaign money to political action committees for which spending is largely unregulated. After ex-Speaker Glenn Richardson did so in 2010 with $220,000 in political donations, he was fined $500 for neglecting to organize the PAC as a non-profit first.

The circumstances of Richardson’s departure in late 2009 seemed to create a climate favorable to ethics reform. The speaker stepped down under mounting pressure from a number of allegations, including his ex-wife’s disclosure of his intimate relationship with a female lobbyist whose bill he was backing.

An ethics bill already in the hopper had attracted broad bipartisan support with 41 co-sponsors – nearly half the number needed to pass it through the House. The measure would have lowered contribution limits, limited lobbyists’ gifts to legislators and capped the aggregate amount that candidates may transfer to other campaigns or political organizations.

The bill never even got a hearing. Instead, Speaker Ralston drafted a bill to increase lobbyists’ disclosures, stiffen some penalties for violators and add sexual harassment and a narrow definition of conflicts of interest to legislators’ code of conduct.

Ralston’s bill was introduced as the House ethics reform package for 2010, sweeping aside the earlier bill. Parliamentary procedures were used, as they were again when the law was further revised in 2011, so the language could not be amended.

Asked about the other ethics bill, Ralston said his bill adequately addressed the issues raised in the Richardson scandal.

“It was my view,” he said, “that campaign finance was not part of that problem.”

Leaving the campaign finance laws untouched also allowed Ralston and other legislative leaders to keep spending campaign contributions to maintain power within their own party.

Party leaders in the Legislature often collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign money from special-interest groups. Since those leaders generally draw no electoral opposition, they donate much of that cash to colleagues’ campaigns, cementing relationships that help them remain in leadership.

“It’s power to them,” one legislator said. “They spread it around like manure.”

Click here to see Georgia’s score on each of 330 indicators of accountability.





Print Friendly, PDF & Email


5 Responses to “Georgia ranks dead last on ethics, integrity scorecard”

  1. E. Denise Caldon says:

    FACT: Since the Talmadge era, our Georgia Constitution, Section IV, B., allows no ethical or fiscal accountability by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. It states: “The government, control, and management of the University System of Georgia and all of the institutions in said system shall be vested in the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia.” The BOR’s attorney, our State’s Attorney General Sam Olens and AJC’s “Golden Boy” for Open Records, just filed his 2nd “Response in Opposition” to the release of Depositions that confirm unquestionable violations by his defendants that have been in place for years. I have copies of all and, one day, Georgians will too. One confirmed violation is the fact that appeals submitted by USG faculty, staff and students from any of the thirty-five USG public institutions are never even read by the BOR Committee on Organization and Law as each USG employee and student are told is part of their legal due process. As one USG faculty member stated, “The USG appeals’ process is criminal fraud!” And with the fact that this same BOR attorney, Attorney General Sam Olens, and his staff have been appointed the legal representatives for our state’s Ethics Commission staff, there is little reason to doubt that Georgia ranks dead last on ethics on the integrity scorecard. It would be funny, if it were not so pathetic and, sadly, the norm in our state government.
    To learn more, read Jim Wall’s article from 2009:

  2. Tina says:

    I saw your report on georgia rating last. Thats no surprised to me cause I am one in thousands of georgia cases where we was done wrong. Georgia has failed us and has took what was suppose to pertect us our constutional right away from us. My children was riped from me with NO evindence stating any wrong doing if you dont believe me go check out my website it . I have hundreds of people from georgia that is will to show proof of what they fail to do as a state of the united states they should be ashamed and punished on what they have done to all of us. your posted just proved to everyone that they know what they are doing but disregard their actions.

  3. Maggie says:

    Well it’s not just in the legislature, the judicial system is just as corrupt.
    Today, Enotah Circuit Judge Lynn Akeley-Alderman was forced to resign after breaking ethics codes by talking to a judge in another county about a meth dealer. She is the second one in recent weeks to resign from the same circuit.

    I personally have experience with a line of crooked judges that runs from Stephens County to Barrow County and all the way to Hall County. It’s not going to get any better until the Judicial Qualifications Committee gets more funding and more investigators.

    One investigator can’t possibly handle all the good ole boy shenanigans
    that goes on in the court system of Georgia!!!!!!! The citizens of Georgia deserve better. Maybe come election time everyone should ban together
    and vote them out!

  4. sr says:

    thank god for this site, but it is overwhelming to try and figure out how a citizen of this state is to get beyond the massive amounts of protective layers that the state of georgia has, if everyone knows and agrees about this corruption on every level what is anyone willing to do

  5. Medical Whistleblower in GA says:

    The corruption is in all the judiciary system

    No. 09-407

    In The
    Supreme Court of the United States

    XXXXXXX MD, PhD Petitioner,
    The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, That Created and Operates the Georgia’s Health Sciences University, (former Medical College of Georgia (MCG); The Georgia’s Health Sciences University, Dennis Marcus, M.D., Individually and in his Official Capacity Under Color of Law as Former Vice Chairman of Department of Ophthalmology of MCG, Emory University, Dr Thomas J Lawley MD Dean school of Medicine, Dr Robert A. Swerlick chairman dermatology Emory University, Theragenics Corp, and Christine Jacobs, President Theragenics Corp.


    On Petition for return the case to the to the United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eleventh Circuit either to be judged in bank (which was previously denied, besides my request) or preferably to have a jury trial based on NEW FACTORS:

    1. Corruption charges have been filed against one of the 3 judges, Gerald Bard Tjoflat in the 11th court of appeals in Atlanta who improperly judged this case. (See Appendix 1).

    2. Until two days ago, we still keep suffering attacks; both physical, and/or professional harassment. All reported to the FBI in Atlanta to special agent XXX. (See Appendix 2).

    3. My daughter and I have recognized the person who attacked her, an employee of Emory University in the Department of Ophthalmology; his name is Micah Chrenek. Chrenek and an IT system technician in the department continue harassment against one of our colleagues.

    4. We have evidence that dozens of people were forced to leave the Medical College of Georgia (MCG as result of my claims, an improperly judged case of a whistleblower. We have a new witness who used to work at MCG in mass communications: Mr. Doug Vinson. He started teaching a class to my daughter XXXX in XXX at the University of XXXX this year, and he mentioned one of the more horrendous cases that just happened at MCG (referring to this case). He said multiple people were fired and had to write a confidentiality agreement saying that they were not fired, and they cannot say any thing about all these issues in the clinical trials happening at MCG. His source was one of the current directors of mass communication at MCG who also told him they have to change all the laws in clinical trials (as I said before), plagiarized from me because I authored them and I gave them in writing to MCG after my firing as suggestions to improve the clinical trials. (See Appendix 3).

    5. We reported dozens of conflicts of interest about the circuit court and the “honorable” Russell Hall, whom we feel unfairly favored the other party. (See Appendix 4).

    6. We found out that two more organizations have been involved in criminal actions against me; 1) Theragenics Inc., the pharmaceutical company I objected to for putting patients at risk in their poorly prepared clinical trial (this was the reason for my unfair dismissal), in the mind of Christine Jacobs. (This company has long track of criminal actions including inside trading) and has been prosecuted before (see Appendix 5), and 2) Emory University in Atlanta, specifically Dr XXX.

    7. Finally, we request a court order from the US Supreme Court to subpoena all the data from the FBI that will support my claims.





    I. Introduction……………………………………………………………….1

    II. Substantial Grounds for Rehearing……………………………………….1

    III. Argument…………………………………………………………………2

    IV. Conclusion………………………………………………………………10

    Certificate Required by Rule 44………………………………………….App. 1




    Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006)…………………………1, 2, 4

    Jones v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia,
    262 Ga. App. 75, 585 S.E.2d 139 (2003)………………………….4

    Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)……………1, 4

    Tuttle v. Johnson Controls Battery Div., 2004-SOX-76
    (ALJ January 3, 2005)………………………………………………1
    45 C.F.R. 46.103……………………………………………………8
    21 C.F.R. 56…………………………………………………………8
    O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4………………………………………………….10

    Petitioner Dr XXXXXXX pursuant to Rule 44(2), hereby files her Petition for Rehearing of the Court’s Order Denying Petition for Writ of Certiorari entered on November 16, 2009. Dr XXXXXXX asserts that this Petition for Rehearing is based on substantial grounds not previously presented.
    In her initial Petition, Dr. XXXX set forth the facts which supported her First Amendment claim which meet the 5-prong test established in Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), and expanded by Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006). Dr. XXXX asserts that, as an additional argument, the Court should consider that Dr. XXXX’s speech should be found to be protected speech based on the obvious conclusion that her interest in her speech outweighed the interests of the public employer, the Medical College of Georgia (“MCG”), in promoting the efficiency of the public services being performed. Any speech by Dr. XXXX concerning practices in clinical trials at MCG is a matter of public concern. This would be true even if Dr. XXXX were found to be incorrect in her speech. Tuttle v. Johnson Controls Battery Div., 2004-SOX-76 (ALJ January 3, 2005). If a complainant can show that she believed that there are wrongful practices in the workplace, then even though an objectively reasonable person might well not reach such a conclusion, the complainant’s disclosure is still a protected speech.
    Dr. XXXXXXX believed that Dr. Dennis Marcus was engaging in serious research misconduct and terrible wrongdoings in clinical trials, the scope of which alarmed her. Dr. XXXXXXX had been hired as clinical trials coordinator for the Department of Ophthalmology at MCG to work specifically with Dr. Marcus on the clinical trials being performed by him and his staff. Her job duties included preparation of forms; contact with medical staff and patients; tracking and reporting budget figures; and data entry and organization of the files related to the clinical trials. Unlike the district attorney in Garcetti who claimed he had been passed up for a promotion because he had criticized the legitimacy of a warrant and where his job duties clearly included discussion of the appropriateness of such warrants, Dr. XXXXXXX’s job duties included no auditing or direct compliance issues. In other words, she had responsibility to keep records in such a way as to comply with the various regulations involved in the clinical trials; she did not have the responsibility or the authority to demand that certain practices be revised or stopped. Indeed, that responsibility belonged to Dr. Marcus as the Principal Investigator (“PI”) on each clinical trial or to the Director of the Department, Dr. Nussbaum.
    Dr. XXXXXXX has demonstrated:
    1. That she exercised her right to free speech (and whistle blowing) when she reported to the Department’s Administrator and Director the fact that Dr. Marcus had not taken steps to correct what she believed to be serious research misconduct;
    2. That her speech addressed a matter of public concern, to-wit: it involved patients and clinical trials conducted in a teaching hospital (trials which would be relied on by the public or pharmaceutical companies which sponsor the trials);
    3. That her speech outweighed MCG’s interests in promoting the efficiency of the public services being performed [Dr. XXXXXXX was disclosing the fact that the clinical trials were severely flawed and, in the case of one study, 12 out of 12 patients died after suffering a severe adverse event (“SAE”).];
    4. That she has shown that the evidence presented in the District Court below did not support summary judgment as to whether her speech was a substantial motivating factor in the termination of her employment (The evidence, in fact, dictated that it is a jury question.); and
    5. That she has shown that there was no credible evidence presented in the District Court to support a finding by the preponderance of the evidence that MCG would have terminated her employment in the absence of her protected speech.
    Pickering, supra; Garcetti, supra.
    In her initial Petition, Dr. XXXXXXX sought a decision by this Court establishing definitive and comprehensive standards by which a public employee’s speech may be examined so that the public employer, like MCG, cannot hide behind the cloak of an assertion that the speech was part of that employee’s official job duties. Dr. XXXXXXX argued that, when determining whether the employee’s speech was on a matter of public concern, such speech must be examined as to the content, form and context. Jones v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, 262 Ga. App. 75, 585 S.E.2d 139 (2003), citing Pickering, supra. Dr. XXXXXXX had nothing to gain by speaking out to the chain of command concerning the misconduct she found in Dr. Marcus’ clinical trials. She did so precisely because this is a matter of public concern.
    Dr. XXXXXXX is requesting reconsideration of the Order dated November 16, 2009, she and her family having experienced almost six years of tremendous physical and emotional suffering and professional and economic losses. Dr. XXXXXXX has lost all of her savings, her retirement funds and still owes her best friend about $45,000 he had loaned her in order to get justice.
    In the District Court, Dr. XXXXXXX believes she has observed tremendous corruption and lack of declaration of multiple conflicts of interest by “a new, out-of-the-blue” appointed judge to her case, Judge Randall Hall, who she believes showed tremendous favoritism to MCG and who she believes had undeclared conflicts of interest such as:
    (1) Judge Hall failed to enforce FOIA Request number: 1066979-000 that Dr. XXXXXXX made to several personnel at MCG (after being advised by the FBI to request it);
    (2) Judge Hall failed to order that a witness, Mr. Allan Vigil, Chairman of the Board of Regents (“BOR”), be deposed;
    (3) Judge Hall failed to grant the request in discovery that the clinical histories and the clinical trials folders of the 12 patients who died in just one clinical trial conducted by Dr. Marcus be produced;
    (4) Judge Hall made it almost impossible for her former attorney, Mr. Dick Hubert, to be admitted in the District Court in Augusta. (Mr. Hubert’s firm was unable to continue to represent Dr. XXXXXXX in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court because Dr. XXXXXXX no longer had funds to pay for their representation, even based on this bad economy since the firm took the case in the lower court at reduced fee rates.);
    (5) Judge Hall failed to report several conflicts of interest in favor of MCG such as the fact that his reception to celebrate his new appointment as judge was held at MCG and that he lobbied for MCG Health, Inc. for $8 million with Dr. Rhan, MCG’s President, when Judge Hall was senator for Augusta;
    (6) Judge Hall had a very close friendship with the former President of MCG, Dr. Rhan, and served on the same committees of the Georgia governor in higher education and also as president (Judge Hall) representing the hospitals in Georgia (with Dr. Rhan as vice-president and Mr. Snell as president of MCG HI) ;
    (7) Judge Hall failed to declare that his former law firm where he worked as an attorney was consulted by Dr. XXXXXXX and was told that the firm could not take her case because that firm had conflicts of interest with MCG;
    (8) Judge Hall showed bias in favor of MCG when he completely ignored the strong evidence showing that MCG forged documents in discovery when Dr. XXXXXXX showed the originals versus those produced in discovery by MCG. Examples include the forged reporting of the Severe Adverse Events (SAE) that should be filed in 24 hours after occurring (MCG showed SAE’s which occurred in 2002, or 2003 on the new forms created in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007.) MCG also forged the pages of conflicts of interest where Dr. Marcus received what Dr. XXXXXXX believed to be multiple illegal payments from multiple pharmaceutical companies, copies of which were produced by Dr. XXXXXXX;
    (9) Judge Hall showed bias in favor of MCG when he omitted the evidence of a tape recorded by Dr. XXXXXXX where Miss Debra Grupp, former assistant for the dean of the School of Medicine, Dr. David Stern, stated to Dr. XXXX that MCG was never going to rehire Dr. XXXXXXX (Dr. XXXXXXX applied to 130 positions at MCG, and she was not rehired for any of them as retaliation for her whistleblower activities.); and
    (10) The lower court ignored the fact that Dr. Marcus had three (3) previous lawsuits against him related to his improper medical practice.
    Dr. XXXXXXX believes the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals was likely influenced by the politicians in the State of Georgia, including Thurber Baker, and believes that basically the Court of Appeals failed even to read the files. In Dr. XXXXXXX’s appeal to the 11th Circuit, the three (3) judges were anonymous to Dr. XXXX until after the decision was entered. Dr. XXXXXXX’s request that her case be heard en banc was denied, oral arguments were denied, and her case was recommended to be unpublished. Further, Dr. XXXXXXX believes the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals omitted declaring a huge conflict of interest (MCG’s main attorney, Ms. Alana Kyriakakis, has a very close friendship with the Georgia Attorney General, Thurber Baker, and worked for him for many years.)
    Dr. XXXXXXX avers that this case is about employment laws, criminal laws, whistleblower protections, retaliation activities, intellectual property, lack of following state laws and specific violations of federal regulations in 45 C.F.R. 46.103 and 21 C.F.R. 56, and free speech, among other issues. Judge Hall declined to rule on the state whistleblower claim. Neither the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals nor the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on these other issues, which Dr. XXXXXXX contends is an improper application of the laws based in the U.S. Constitution. Dr. XXXXXXX believes that even more alarming is the possibility that the Justices of the Supreme Court and their respective clerks did not consider this case seriously. Given the importance of this case for the overall welfare of society, Dr. XXXXXXX asks that the U.S. Supreme Court reconsider this case.
    Dr. XXXXXXX is a medical doctor from Colombia, a former dermatologist, with a Ph.D. in Immunology from the USA and Colombia and a postdoctoral fellow from France INSERN and from the Medical College of Wisconsin. She came to the United States in October 2001 under H1-B visa with her 12-year old daughter with the promise of a faculty position and to be able to continue her research on a new disease she discovered, a new variant of endemic pemphigus foliaceus in El Bagre-Colombia. She worked with Drs. Andrew Mellor and David Munn at the Institute of Molecular Medicine and Genetics (“IMMAG”).
    Before coming to this country, Dr. XXXXXXX was considered a world leader physician and scientist in autoimmune skin diseases and was an associate professor, Director of Bullous Skin Disease Program and Director of International Relationship of the School of Medicine at the University of Antioquia (U de A) in Medellin, Colombia. She was forced to leave Colombia after she demonstrated fraud at the U de A when the President bought second hand equipment with grant money she had earned from several sources, including the Embassy of Japan in Colombia (EJC). Being a person who does not tolerate unethical activity, and notwithstanding the fact that corruption was commonplace in Colombia, Dr. XXXXXXX criticized the leadership at the university of Antioquia (U de A). She and her daughter were threatened, and she took these threats seriously because a few years earlier her uncle, the Interim president of U de A, attorney, anthropologist, theologian and leader in human rights, was assassinated at U de A for exposing unethical activities.
    Dr. XXXXXXX came to this country only to be faced with the same type of unethical activities at MCG. Contrary to their original commitment, Dr. XXXXXXX was not offered a faculty position with Drs. Mellor and Munn upon her arrival but a post-doctoral fellow. Being well-trained in reading microscope slides, she realized Drs. Mellor and Munn were publishing misleading results about the presence of one enzyme named indoleamine dioxygenase (IDO) and sentinel lymph node in patients with skin melanoma. When Dr. XXXXXXX confronted the doctors about this, she became the victim of retaliation and was eventually moved into another position in another department. Interestingly, an “internal investigation” was performed by MCG after Dr. XXXX was terminated and reported this information to MCG officials, and the investigation shows no wrongdoing.
    As discussed in her initial Petition, Dr. XXXXXXX made every effort to work with Dr. Marcus and his staff concerning the irregularities she found in Dr. Marcus’ clinical trials. They ignored her. Dr. XXXXXXX had no choice but to inform Ms. Mipro, the Department Administrator, of her concerns.
    The clinical trials were out of control at MCG for more than a decade as demonstrated to the lower courts through the testimony of former auditor, Ms. Bridgette Taylor. Dr. XXXXXXX felt that she could only come forward with what she found to be serious research misconduct in Dr. Marcus’ clinical trials. This resulted in her wrongful termination, and Dr. XXXXXXX seeks justice as outlined below and the opportunity to serve the public through a job which will contribute to the safe conduct of clinical trials and insure the safety of the patients involved in the studies and the public.
    Dr. XXXXXXX requests that she be compensated for the infringement of her rights and violations of the Whistleblower Act, O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4, by being paid what represents the salaries at a level of an associate or full professor at MCG during the past six years at the approximate annual rate of $110,000 to $140,000; that she be reimbursed her legal costs in the approximate amount of $75,000; that she be reimbursed the cost of the hospitalization of her daughter (after being attacked by someone Dr. XXXXXXX believes was sent by MCG, one of the 13 attacks suffered by her and her daughter, evidence of which was provided to the lower courts) in the amount of $10,000; and that she be paid the cost of immigration for jeopardizing the immigrant status of her and her daughter in the amount of $12,000. This is a total of $697,000. MCG and the BOR should pay the taxes, both federal and state, over these amounts. MCG and the BOR should also pay her retirement and deposit it into her extinguished retirement account. Dr. XXXXXXX withdrew all her savings, sold her house to cover the legal fees and her living expenses for one year during which time MCG used what Dr. XXXXXXX decided was a bogus mediator to recover Dr. XXXXXXX’s evidence and documents in her possession. Dr. XXXXXXX also requests damages of $303,000, bringing the total to $1,000,000. Dr. XXXXXXX also requests that she be rehired as an associate professor, tenure-track, with a start-up package (SUP) of $250,000 yearly for three years, not including her salary [A SUP is a process commonly used when hiring any faculty in research. Most universities in the USA provide this. At MCG the minimal SUP is around $250,000 per year for three years (but some projects have been given as much as $5’000,000 like Drs. Alvin Head and Stephen Meiler in Anesthesiology). The SUP includes laboratory space, student/postdoctoral salaries, laboratory equipment, reagents, test instruments, small tools, glassware, maintenance, core facilities fees, fees for submission of publications, computers, medical and scientific association fees, etc. The SUP is all auditable and is managed directly through MCG and remains inside MCG.] Finally, Dr. XXXXXXX respectfully requests green card sponsors for her and her daughter and at least two years of retroactive vacation.
    Respectfully submitted,

    Certificate Required by Rule 44
    The undersigned Petitioner, pursuant to Rule 44(2) of the United States Supreme Court Rules, certifies that she has presented in this Petition for Rehearing what she considers to be substantial grounds not previously presented and has restricted her argument to those grounds, that she presents this Petition for Rehearing in good faith and not for delay.
    Respectfully submitted,


    U.S. Department of Justice
    Civil Rights Division

    Special Counsel For Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices-CRT
    950 Pesylvania Aveneu, NW.
    Wasghinton, DC 20530

    Re: Charge Against The Medical College of georgia, DJ # 197-19-112

    Dear ,
    Katherine A. Baldwin Deputy Special Counsel/
    C. Sebastian Aloot Trial Attorney/
    William J. Sanchez
    Special counsel

    I received a mail from regular U.S. mail on Jan 3, 2006 from your office. I havent received any other correspondence to my knowledge from your office.

    I highly appreciate your interest in this matter.

    In this memorandum I am answering your question as following:

    1. Your charge indicates that you were terminated in Novemeber 2004. Under 8 U.S.C. ξ 1234b, a charge of discrimination must be filed within 180 days of allegued act of discrimination unless special facts justify the filing of a complaint after that filling period. Provide a statement of the special afcts (e.g., statements by third parties, writtin agreements or notices from MCG or another govermental organization, personal impedimenets to your ability to file a charge, etc.) which you believe explain and justify why your charge was not filed with this Office until Novemeber 2005. Provide a copy of any document(s) in your possession which relate to or explain the special facts which you believe justify filing charge after the 180-day statutory filling period.


    ▓ A complaint was filed twice, by me, in the Office of Affirmative Action Equal Employment Opportunity Office AA/EEO at MCG to Mister Solomon Walker, CAAP Director, AA/EEO (Office phone number {(706) 721-1896} near the end of 2002, in regard to the constraints were placed on her for exposing events that contridicted the By-laws of the School of Medicine as they pertain to misconduct in research. Events such as the use of my computer, the disappearing of files, folders, etc., the disapearance of approximately 600 microscope slides (the only kind of their type and available nowhere else in the world) of invaluable value, and the continued harrasments against me and my former boss, Dr. XXX occured. We received e-mails from the administrators of the school of medicine of MCG recommending her to soley concentrate on her work and not in others (i.e. mine). She was enough honest to tell me about the emails and print them for me. A copy of the emails was filed, with my complaints, to the AAEEOO office. On December 2005 a second complaint was filed to the office of Affirmative Action Equal Employment Opportunity Office AA/EEO at MCG to Mister Solomon Walker, CAAP Director, AA/EEO (Office (706) 721-1896) in regards to my illegal employment termination due to exposure of very bad irregularities in the area of clinical trials (including, but not limited to, the mis-use of budgets, the lack of consent, lack of report, and the severe adverse events among other). As mentioned before, this was the second time that I visited this office and made a formal complaint and filed the forms. I do not have the copies to prove this because they are in the possession of my “lawyer”, Mister Jonn Batson of Augusta, GA. I have an electronic copy of the draft that I filed on Dec 2005 to AA/EEO . The office of AA/EEO in the first case did not have a resolution and the second case was sent to the Director of Human Resources, Ms Susan Norton. She supported the decision of the Provost of MCG, Mister Barry Goldstein, stating that my termination was completelly legal. Ms Susan Norton’s, Director Human Resources MCG, office number is (706) 721-3777.

    No copies of this “investigation” were ever revealed to me, despite the fact I asked for them. Human Resources say that I was re-hirable. I applied to more than a 130 positions and have been discriminated against to be hired again, possibly for and internal complaint against me.

    ▓ Simultaneously, around the first days of December 2004 to the almost the end of May 2005, MCG issued a “Mediator” who obtained 12 folders, 5 CDs, and several zip disks from me full of evidence. After receiving written confirmation via email from me that I provided all the evidence to them, I was to be offered as a rehire (a complete charade). My previous boss, Dr. XXX, who continues to be honest with me, wrote me an e-mail telling me that the President of MCG told her that MCG found no fraud and that I was not going to be rehired. However, the Principle Investigator I worked under was forced out from MCG, along with his assistant, his secretary, the other auditor who controlled clinical trials, and the visual examinator involved in my accusations. MCG denied any fraud, but hired two additional lawyers with knowledge about Federal regulations on clinical trials, two controllers in fraud, and additional clinical coordinators. As a result of these new employees, multiple laws were changed. The changes were based on my personal knowledge of how to improve the control and the clinical trials there, as well as how to control the misconduct in research and microfilm results, etc. I was completely depressed because I was without food and without medical insurance. I went to the Georgia Department of labor in the local area of Augusta, at a suggestion of a friend of mine. In that department, they suggested that I contact another lawyer and also to file an official complaint against MCG in the Office of Human Relations Commission (360 Bay Street, Suite 240, Augusta, GA, phone 706-821-2506). I did both. The copy of the complaint is in the hands of Mister John Batson, who I no longer trust. I do not remember the name of his office, but I can find the building where is located in Augusta. If needed, I am willing drive there during business hours with permission of my boss at EMORY University, where I am presently employed.

    ▓ I sent e-mails to the Federal Drug Administration office about my complaints in clinical trials misconduct. I e-mailed the Governor of the State of Georgia, the Science magazine editors, whose false results generated by MCG investigators were sent and published there, Genetech, the National Health Institute, the director of the University System of Georgia informing them all about the misconduct in research and about the unacceptable irregularities and fraud conducted at MCG. Only the Office of the Governor of Georgia answered me with a short e-mail, which I should have. The copies of all of those e-mails are in possession of my “lawyer”, John Batson.

    ▓ Until late July 2005, I had no information or knowledge about the employments laws at the U.S.A. After the180-day statutory period, I suddenly received an e-mail that my visa as H-1B –employment-based visa was terminated by MCG. This notice came to me after visiting a local lawyer in the Augusta area, who did not even mention this law to me, and took a tape-recorded evidence that I gave to him in a presence of a witness who listened the tape. This lawyer assisted me for over two months, playing around with me. I terminated him as my lawyer and then I suddenly received another e-mail from the Vice President of Legal Affairs from the MCG, making comments on the content of the tape that “supposedly my lawyer has”. I requested several times, by phone and by certified mail, this tape back and no answers were obtained until today. I then consulted another local attorney who honestly read a few of the 5 folders filled with evidence and papers from this case. This firm became interested in the case. I informed MCG about this new attorney. Suddenly, he sent me a certified package containing all the folders I gave him, with no documents taken without my consent. He included a letter telling me that He and his partners will not be able to take the case. However, he honestly mentioned in the letter that I should keep in mind that I have this 180-day period, which I had no knowledge of. Then He sent me to another lawyer in town who also took some of the documents and put me to work for him in a medical case in exchange of payment for him taking my case. He suddenly told me that he could not take the case and he gave me back all my folders. I noticed that several of my documents were missing. I wrote a certified letter asking for them and he returned copies to me, not the originals.

    ▓ After almost begging to my “former lawyer”, John Batson, to please put the trial in the court, and evasions after evasions, he eventually put the case in THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION, on Nov 17, 2005, the Civil action No. CV105-186 complaint in juncture relief jury trial. He refused to give me a copy of the lawsuit. I called the district court, THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION, Augusta 500 East Ford Street, Augusta, GA 30901 phone 706-849-4400. I asked the clerk if was possible to get a copy of the lawsuit, and the clerk told me to send a check for 5 dollars and they will send me the copy. After receiving it and reading it, I was shocked and cried to my current employer. I blamed God, the US Justice and MCG for my suffering. Regardless, I felt that God told me to open the Spanish yellow pages the wife of my current boss gave me. In the book, I found the page of your Office and I felt that I will do one last try. I did it. I sent the information that I sent you and here I am answering your questions.

    2. If you subsequently worked for MCG in a different position after your termination in November 2004, identify the last position you held with MCG, state when you were first provided notice by MCG that your employment in that position would be terminated, and provide the last day you worked for MCG in that position. Provide a copy of any documents in your possession discussing, referring to, ot documenting your termination.

    ▓ Most of the documents in this regard are in the house of my “attorney” and it is my belief that he is not willingly to retunr the documents to me. However, I have extra copies of a few of the missing document. In appendices I am attaching such copies.

    2. State whether you have filed a complain or charge against MCG regarding any aspect of your recruitment, employment, termination, or with aspects to any medical research conducted by MCG. If so, as to each such complaint or charge, provide the following information:

    A. To the Office of Affirmative Action Equal Employment Opportunity Office (AA/EEO), and to the Office of Human Resources (HR) of MCG. And to the University System of Georgia, (USG) Board of Regents.

    a. Date complaint/charge filed: 1. Nov 2002, and 2. December 2004.

    b. Agency and address where the complaint/charge filed: Office of Affirmative Action Equal Employment Opportunity Office (AA/EEO). Augusta, GA 30912-7609.MCG to Mister Solomon Walker, CAAP Director, AA/EEO (Office phone number {(706) 721-1896}. The Charges of Dec 2004 to the AA/EEO Office were sent for them to HR of MCG and to UGA.

    c. Summary of complaint/charge: I was subjected to persecution, discrimination and intimidation. My job status was threatened and my visa status was threatened due to me exposing misconduct in research by two of the most “important esearchers of MCG”:Drs Andrew Mellor and David Munn about IDO. These doctoros were charged with similar acts by an Asian (Chinese), whose id I can not obtain. However, she was also a foreigner and MCG fired her. She was unable to obtain scientific work after that. I also was elected Senator at Large for the Executive Faculty Committee at MCG (with the most number of votes). I exposed that if the by-laws of the School of Medicine are to be changed, as proposed, for dark people linked to the adminstration, the democratic nature of the School of Medicince will be completely changed.

    d. The docket number or other identifing number assigend to your charge: My lawyer has the copies that I gave to him and I fear that he will not return them to me.

    e. The current status of your charge: Nothing has occured and MCG insists that there were no irregularities concerning my unlawful suit. MCG insists that my firing and the un-renewal of my contract was perfectly legal, despite the facts that I received the best score from students, my grants passed triage at the National Health Institutes, I published 8 international and world recognized articles in the best journals of dermatology, I was in more than 10 different international news reports receiving multiples compliments, including the editorial of the Augusta Journal and I received worldrecognition (see appendices). In the second investigation of my firing on Nov 22, 2004, according to HR my dismissal was perfectly legal; however, MCG changed dozens of laws in clinical trials, hired two new lawyers with knolwdege in clinical trials, hired a new controller, and hired a new specialist in acoounting and fraud. MSG also released the person who fired me (a tenure-track Vice Chairman of Ophtalmology, full professor), his senior clinical trial coordinator, his visual examinator, his adminstraive assistant, and one auditor from the Office of Clinical Compliances. Each of these individuals had the potential to expose several of the listed irregularities from the previous 4 years. Briggite Taylor was excellent professional and full of ethics. USG never answer.

    B. To Office of Human Relations Commission, 360 Bay Street, Suite 240, Augusta, GA, phone” 706-821-2506.

    a. Date complaint/charge filed: Around March or May 2004. My “lawyer” has the copy and the exact date.

    b. Agency and address where the complaint/charge filed: To Office of Human Relations Commission (360 Bay Street, Suite 240, Augusta, GA), phone number 706-821-2506.

    c. Summary of complaint/charge: Persecution, discrimination and being threatened with the lost of my job and my visa for exposing misconduct not only in in research, but also in clinical trias at MCG.

    d. The docket number or other identifing number assigend to your charge: My lawyer has the copies that I gave to him and I fear that he will not return them to me. I do not recall this information.

    f. The current status of your charge: Nothing happened. I am told to call the office in Atlanta for MCG is a state Institutions. I called several times and they say this matter is not of their jurisdiction. My “lawyer” supposedly called them and nothing happen.

    C. To Office of Human Relations Commission (360 Bay Street, Suite 240, Augusta, GA, phone” 706-821-2506.

    a. Date complaint/charge filed: Around March or May 2004; my “lawyer” has the copy and the exact date.

    b. Agency and address where the complaint/charge filed: To Office of Human Relations Commission (360 Bay Street, Suite 240, Augusta, GA, phone” 706-821-2506.

    c. Summary of complaint/charge: Persecution, discrimination and being threatened with the lost of my job and my visa for exposing misconduct not only in in research, but also in clinical trias at MCG.

    d. The docket number or other identifing number assigend to your charge: My lawyer has the copies that I gave to him and I fear that he will not return them to me. I do not recall this information.

    g. The current status of your charge: Nothing happened. I was told to call the office in Atlanta for MCG is a state institutions. I contacted the Office of Fair Employmnet Practices, 156 Thirty Ave, Suite 208 Atlanta, GA, 30303, phone 404-656-1736. The contact person was Todd Garvison. I called several times and I was told that this matter it was not of their jurisdiction. My “lawyer” supposeldy called them, too. Nothing happened.

    D. To THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION, Augusta 500 East Ford Street, Augusta, GA 30901 phone 706-849-4400.

    a. Date complaint/charge filed: Nov 17, 2005.

    b. Agency and address where the complaint/charge filed: THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION, Augusta 500 East Ford Street, Augusta, GA 30901 phone 706-849-4400. Illegal firing.

    c. Summary of complaint/charge: Visa cancelled, retaliation against, persecuted, discriminated and threatened for being a whistleblower in a case related to clinical triass at MCG under Dennis Marcus and USG.

    d. The docket number or other identifing number assigend to your charge:
    Civil Action No. CV105-186.

    e. The current status of your charge: My “lawyer” did not want me to have a copy of the lawsuit nor did he want me to review it. Since his attitude was very aggressive to me in the last months, and he acted very “strangely,” I requested a copy directly from the Court House Clerck, and paid $5.00 dollars for the documents. After reading it, I was very dissapointed. Other people who read it notice that my “lawyer” gave the appearance the he was defending MCG instead of me. After this, I sent a copy of the lawsuit to the Judge with a complaint and an unbiass summary that I am also sending in this package to you. As of Monday, January 8, 2006, my “lawyer” has not served the case to MCG and refuses to talk with me with witnesses present.

    For each complaint or charge identified above, provide a copy of your complaint or charge, and a copy of any document(s), investigative report(s), or decision(s) issued by the investigating office or agency.

    Please see the appendices attached in this package that I have.

    4. State wheter you believe that your citizenship or immigration status played any role in any of the allegued adverse employment actions taken by MCG against you. If so, describe the facts which cause you believe that MSC (MCG) took adverse against against you because of your citizensip or immigrating status.

    Absolutelly, because MCG has had issues before with foreign scientist who came to this country with the hope of a better technology, and most are highly educated, and are low payed compared to other Americans, and indeed most peoploe of research are foreigners. It seem to be a modern slavery with scientist, since, mostly of them besides have higher education and skills in comparison with other Americans, or hardly ever get any starting package or a decent salary or a decent titer. Any American, can immediatelly quick and get job in other place, but we depend of the visa. As a proof of that MCG seem to be counting the 180 days of a legal period to charge them and only one of few days after it they sent me out of the blue and e-mail notifing me that I was -out of immigrational status- and that my visa was cancelled. This problem that happen to me is not unique to this company, all hightly qualified immigrants keep to maintain low profiles, and keep their mouth shouts, because USA is a great country and we want to remain here and try to contribute to teach to the new generations of American that their parent snad grandparents worked extremelly ahrd to make of this country what has been and do not get in decadency or spoiliness for lack of ethcis and lack of a justice systems.

    5. State wheter you believe that your national origin played any role in any alleged adverse employment actions taken by MCG against you. If so, describe the facts whcich cause you to believe that MSC (MCG) took adverse action against you because of your national origin.

    Yes, besides my depression, I contacted other institutiosn in December 2004, and get interviewed in Pennsylvania, they bassicly accepted me. I was happy, and told some friends at MCG about my possible job, but suddenly, the Principal Investigator who wants me to work for her, says that Human Resources from her institution spoke with HR from MCG and she turned me down without explanation.

    6. State wheter you believe your termination or actions after your termination by MCG were in retaliation for your exercise of rights protected under 8 U.S.C. ξ 1324b. If so, describe the facts which cause you to believe that MCG retaliated against you, and identify the pre-termination activities you engaged in that you believed constitute retaliation. Provide a copy of any documents in your posssession which you believe are evidence or retaliation on the part of MCG, or document protected activity that you engaged in.

    MCG put a “fake” mediator to obtain the evidence that shows that the clinical coordinators were illegally reciving money from the Pharmaceutical companies and from intermediate adminstrators companies whciha are hired for the NIH to coordinate their studies. This money wasobligatory to be reported to MCG and they dident. The principal investigator of the clinical trials was receibeing more than $10.000. dollars in money and gifts from the companies that we were doing clinical trials, and MCG adminstrators approved this, (I guess without reading the papers) and that is completelly illegal to the FDA and to the NIH. Patients helath were jepardize for not having the properly training and equipment to do the clinical trials, MCG realized after I exposed all these events thatmultiple big heads were or not doing their jobs and or were also involved. I do not know. I applied to more that 150 positions and get zero. I lost my medical and dental insurance, we get sick (my daugher and me), no money no food, with a mortgage and completelly destroyed.MCG jepardized my future green-card application and I trhusted MCG. They just want me to give the evidence to them, and I gave them proof of each one of what I am mentioned here, and about 12 full-folders and Zip discs and disk drives. I lost almost 3 years of what should be an extremelly productive time of my professional life here. Some of the copies especially budgets were sent to the esposored agencies and they should also have copies. We can recover evidence.

    Please provide the requested information to this Office by telephone, or mail as soon as possible, if your response is not received withing 45 days of receipt of this letter or 180 days of the date of the last act of discrimination alleged in your charge, whichever is later, the matter will be dismissed with prejuidice. See 28 C.F.R.ξ 44.301 (d) (2). After this office receives the information requested, it will determine whether it has jurisdiction to investigate all or part of your charge.

    Thanks and please help me and help this country Justice Systemand indirectly other countries who still trhsut USA principles by doing the right.

    Sincerely, XXX


    People forced to leave several medical institutions in GA

    -Dr Dennis Marcus, vice chairman of ophthalmology, advisor for the dean of medicine for clinical trials and the Principal investigator of the 33 improperly conducted clinical trials.
    -Miss Judith Hendrickson, (optometrist for Dr Marcus in clinical trials).
    -Miss June Benson and Miss Sandra Grubisa (clinical trials coordinators for Dr Marcus) (with High school degree).
    -Miss Elizabeth Price acting “nurse” with a high school degree”
    -The ex-Dean of the school of Medicine Dr David Stern.
    -The ex-director of the Medical College and clinics Medical College of Georgia health incorporated (MCG HI) (Mister Don Snell).
    -The ex-president of MCG Dr Daniel Rhan.
    -The ex-Director of the Physician Practice Group of MCG Dr Curt Steinhart.
    -The ex-provost of the MCG Dr Barry Goldstein.
    -Dr Mathew Kluger, ex-Vice-president of Ethics and Vice-president of Research.
    – Mister Donald Lever ex-Regents of the Board of Regents and vice-president MCGHI.
    – Mr. Allan Vigil, ex-Chairman of the Board of Regents
    -Errol B. Davis Jr ex-Chancellor Board of Regents (who we call as witness and the circuit judge denied as a witness).
    -Miss Elizabeth Neely, ex-Senior legal attorney for the Board of regents.
    -Approximately 34 people from the former MCG foundation.
    -Claudia Adkinson PhD, senior legal adviser School of medicine
    – Dr XXXX Dean Emory University.
    -The former ex-director of Human Assurance Committee at former MCG.

    -The MCG old foundation was dissolve and about 37 people were also forced to live based on the laundry money we reported with their relationship with other Fictitious Business Name (FBN) Index such Jurassic Donkey incorporated.


    July 22, 2011

    Dear Dr. Nasca,

    We write to introduce ourselves, and to urgently ask for your assistance in addressing what we believe to be a national medical, scientific, educational and ethical emergency. Specifically, we will share extensive evidence indicating that a subculture of ongoing criminal behavior and massive coverup exists in the top medical leadership of Emory University Medical Center in Atlanta, Georgia, centering on the Dean of the medical school.

    Despite 1) their status as Emory University Medical Center alumni and 2) both living and working near the Emory campus, we have endured years of repetitive criminal harassment within Georgia, with a severe escalation in the frequency of these incidents in Atlanta/DeKalb County over the last 14 months (since May, 2010). Please refer to Appendix A, a chronologic documentation of these incidents for further information. These events include an attempted kidnapping and aggravated assault perpetrated on Dr. XXXX 16 year old daughter,XXXXX, on March 30, 2006(see Appendix A, DeKalb Incident 2). Note that significant evidence exists to indicate that XXX., M.D., has directly sent others to carry out MOST OR ALL of these documented events (including the attempted kidnapping/aggravated assault) since early 2006.

    Due to their concerns for our personal and professional safety, as well as the integrity of Emory Medical Center and its influence on the citizens of our nation, on June 5, 2010 we wrote FedEx to 1) US FBI Director Robert Mueller, 2) US Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa (who investigated the Emory medical school Nemeroff crisis of 2008-09) and 3) Atlanta FBI Special XXX. In this letter (Appendix B), we stated that we had visually identified the alleged perpetrator of the previously described attempted kidnapping/aggravated assault. At this time, we also provided these three recipients with a similar document to Appendix A, ie, a chronologic summary of the repetitive harassments. In addition, we notified DeKalb County Police in early June, 2010 regarding our visual identification of the alleged attempted kidnapping perpetrator.

    As previously stated, beginning in May, 2010 and extending through the present the frequency of the repetitive harassments has greatly increased. We are most disappointed to report that other than the Atlanta FBI listening to us, and the Atlanta FBI stating that “an investigation could be open”, we have seen NO DETECTABLE EVIDENCE OF AN INVESTIGATION into the attempted kidnapping and other crimes from 1) Emory University, 2) the DeKalb County Police or 3) the Atlanta office of the FBI during this period. No statements have been taken, or arrests made that we are aware of. In addition, no updates regarding any actual investigative work have been made to Drs. XXXXX or XXXXX during this period.

    As also stated previously, our experiences and data collection define, in our professional opinion, a national medical, scientific, educational and ethical emergency. Specifically, multiple serious questions arise from an analysis of these events and the law enforcement response to them over the past year.

    First, is Dr. XXX indeed abusing his power, and orchestrating these events from the XXXs office at Emory University Medical Center?

    Second, if he is indeed doing so, could he likely be mentally ill? If he is doing so and not mentally ill, could he be dangerously elitist, sexist, racist or anti-immigrant (vis-à-vis Dr. XXX)? If he is indeed doing so, is this behavior unacceptable within the United States, especially for a person with his professional power and responsibilities?

    Third, if he is doing so, does the Federal government of the United States realize the danger his behavior presents not only to our family and practice, but also to the ethical, sound practice of medicine, science and education in Georgia and nationwide? NOTE: Dr. XXX likely represents the most powerful man in Georgia (the ninth most populous US state), leading or treating millions of trainees, civilian and veteran patients, researchers and their families annually, and ethically guiding them. He serves as the paramount academic and ethical leader of all of medicine in Georgia. He receives and administrates hundreds of millions of dollars of Federal research and educational funding annually. He personally receives millions of legal dollars annually in combined salary, benefits and for his service on multiple corporate boards.

    Fourth, has Dr. XXXXX interfered in any way with investigation of these events by the DeKalb County Police, or the Atlanta office of the FBI? Does the DeKalb County government obey his requests, regardless of negative consequences for the society? Did he actively interfere via Emory Human Resources with the Department of Homeland Security USCIS citizenship applications of Dr. XXXXXz, 2006-2012 to attempt to force her out of the country and cover up the truth (Dr. XXX’s applications have been in processing for an extremely long period and suffered many strange delays, given her outstanding qualifications; see Appendix A, DeKalb Incident 3, and Appendix C)? Is he effectively above the law nationally due to his money, influence and power?

    Fifth, due to his vast Emory fundraising, political skills or other reasons, does Dr. XXXy dictate and direct the response of ALL of the leaders of Emory University in responding to and covering up these matters, including 1) his immediate boss, Woodruff Health Sciences Center Chief XXXX, M.D., a former subordinate of Dr. XXXy from 1996-2007(see Appendix A, DeKalb Incident 17); 2) Emory President James Wagner, Ph.D.(see Appendix A, note following DeKalb Incident 19); and 3) the Emory University Board of Trustees? Does Dr. XXXy extort the remaining leadership of Emory University in any way? Did XXX, M.D., Ph.D. resign as Dr. XXXXs immediate boss after only 3 years in 2010 for this reason(see Appendix A, note following DeKalb Incident 17)? Could the university thus be effectively running out of control vis-à-vis the society?

    Sixth, if these alleged problems with Dean XXX are indeed true, are there other serious crimes that Dr. XXXXX is guilty of (ie, past or current insider trading and/or money laundering with CEO Christine Jacobs at Theragenics Corporation of Buford, Georgia; see Appendix A, DeKalb Incident 1)? Does our data indicate that Dr. XXXxx has been obsessed with controlling/damaging our medical practice and reputations (all three physicians practice in the same specialty) since early 2006 (ie, once he became aware of a triangulation relationship between himself, Dr. XXXX and Theragenics), with a sharp escalation over the last 14 months(ie, following his probable knowledge of our visual identification of Dr. XXXXXXs daughter’s alleged assailant, who is still working at Emory Medical Center)? Also, could someone outside Emory University be controlling or extorting Dean XXXy?

    Seventh, if 1) all of these alleged problems are indeed true, and 2) given Emory University has an endowment currently worth over 4 billion USD, is DeKalb County’s largest employer and landowner and pays no Federal income or local property taxes, has 3) Emory University itself become a formidable, well disguised, medical, scientific, educational and ethical threat to the national and local societies it claims to serve and protect? Does a conspiracy exist to protect Dr. XXXXX at all costs in the top leadership at Emory and in Georgia, and if so, why?

    In summary, we have given our lives to medicine and science, both training past age 40 for our careers and thus longer than most of our colleagues. We treasure and respect the outstanding, world class tradition of education, medicine and science in the United States. We both love Emory University due to our training, and our personal and professional identities are intertwined with Emory. Dr. XXXXX’s mother was a member of the first Emory College class to admit women, specifically the Class of 1957. A location near Emory was chosen by Dr. XXX for our practice, assuming a positive future relationship with the university and for the purpose of research collaboration. Dr. XXX has donated significantly to Emory in recent years. Also, we both have sincere sympathy for Dr. XXXXand the Emory medical school, assuming our suspicions are correct. Dr. XXXXX has attained many professional accomplishments, including within our career specialty. Thus, these harassments represent an ongoing personal and professional terror for us, and are very stressful; moreover, this letter has been very difficult for both of us to write. We should add that in our professional opinion, Dr. XXXX possesses a remarkably sociopathic personality. He is consistently, phenomenally polite, friendly and charming in person, a champion of face-to-face appearances and salesmanship (see Appendix A, DeKalb Incident 20). Unfortunately, we believe he also has a very angry, controlling, hateful, violent and lawless aspect to his personality, played out in a sophisticated manner in private. We believe he attempts to “control”, or force out of the state or country any medical practitioner questioning his activities in Georgia. Investigating authorities should be aware of this amazing, dual aspect of his personality in advance.

    We request the Federal government of the United States to fully investigate these matters, and thus protect the integrity and ethics of our national medical, scientific and educational communities. Although our nation faces many significant challenges today, we suggest that our most precious freedoms as Americans remain 1) the physical protection of our families, 2) the protection of our deepest ethical values, 3) speaking the truth to power and 4) the unrestricted conduct of legal free enterprise. Emory University should represent a treasure of our civilization, not an ethical threat to that civilization. Albert Einstein, Ph.D.(1879-1955), former Professor of Physics at Princeton University and Nobel Prize medalist, provided the following concept regarding good and evil in our world. He stated: “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing”. If Emory University is indeed challenged by evil in this context today, we respectfully and urgently ask that you free this great institution from such evil and its consequences.

    Finally, please do not hesitate to contact us directly if we might provide additional information. We will send copies of this letter, including Appendices A-D and both of our curriculum vitaes FedEx to the officials listed in Appendix D simultaneously in late July, 2011. We thank you in advance for your assistance.





    Background information: XXX, M.D., Ph.D., an internationally distinguished physician and scientist, is a witness to alleged Federal crimes including the deaths of patients in several clinical trials and mishandling of clinical trials preparation site in Theragenics Corporation (Buford, Georgia) clinical trials(and subsequent mismanagement and cover up of these incidents) as a clinical trial coordinator at the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) currently Georgia Health Science University in Augusta. Dr. XXXX believes she was discriminated against as a result of informing her supervisor, Dr. Dennis Marcus, about these issues, resulting in her dismissal from her position in November, 2004. Due to the seriousness and number of individuals involved in her MCG allegations(as well as previous, severe problems in clinical trial management at MCG in 1997-98 involving Drs. Richard Borison and Bruce Diamond), selected, pertinent data was reported by Dr. XX to enforcement officers of multiple agencies of the US Federal Government in early December, 2007. These agencies included the FBI, Director of National Intelligence/CIA, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice/US Attorney General’s office, Internal Revenue Service, Securities and Exchange Commission, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, Drug Enforcement Administration, US Joint Commission and Department of Education. During 2008-10, numerous MCG administration officials retired or were forced out, including the President(Daniel Rhan, M.D.), Provost (Barry Goldstein, Ph.D.), Director of Clinical Trials(George Shuster, D.D.S.) and Chief of the MCG Physician’s Practice Group (John Steinhaus, M.D.). In addition, Dr. Dennis Marcus was forced out of MCG during this period, and the MCG Foundation was restructured.

    Dr. XXXX lived in Augusta, Georgia from September, 2001 until September, 2005, at which time she moved to DeKalb County and has been a continuous resident of the county since that time. She worked at Emory University from September, 2005 until December, 2006 and since that time has worked at the XXXXX. In Augusta, four separate incidents of violent harassment were perpetrated against Dr. XXXX and/or her family members.

    Augusta Incident 1: Occurred on January 31, 2002 at Dr. XXXX’ apartment in Martinez, Columbia County, Georgia, a suburb of Augusta. Her address was 4101 Old Petersburg Road, Apartment G51, Martinez, Georgia 30907. During the day while Dr. XXXX was working at MCG, a person or persons broke into her apartment and stole her personal computer tower, keyboard, monitor, printer, scanner and a small white storage basket. No other items of value, ie, jewelry, radios, television sets, etc. were stolen, despite being present in full view within the apartment. The incident was reported to Columbia County Sheriff’s Office on January 31, Officer Wadis Broxton and Investigator Timothy Burnley, Columbia County Case 2002-00003704.

    Augusta Incidents 2 and 3: Occurred during her residence in Augusta, on two separate occasions, when an individual or individuals came to the door of her residence during the day and pounded their fists as hard as possible for approximately one to two continuous minutes on the door of the residence. Augusta Incident 2 occurred in 2002-2003 at a separate apartment from Augusta Incident 1, specifically at the Lakeside Apartments in Evans, Columbia County, Georgia, Apartment 51. Augusta Incident 3 occurred in the 2003-2005 period at Dr. XXXX’ house, with the address provided in Augusta Incident 4 below. One of these incidents involved as perpetrators a tall Caucasian male, and a second, shorter person. These incidents were reported to the Columbia County Sheriff’s Department.

    Augusta Incident 4: Occurred after Dr. XXXX had moved to Atlanta, but still owned her house at 609 Blue Ridge Crossing Drive, Evans, Columbia County, Georgia 30809. At night on approximately July 30, 2006, a person or persons attacked Dr. XXXX’ house mailbox with explosives, completely destroying the mailbox. No one was living in the house at the time of the incident, and no further items were stolen from the house or yard. Incident was reported on July 31 to Columbia County Sheriff’s Office, Officer Ronald Koch, Columbia County Case 2006-30987.

    With this Augusta background information, we now report a sustained pattern of criminal harassment against Dr. XXXX and Dr. XXXX in DeKalb County, Georgia from 2006 until the present.

    DeKalb Incident 1: Occurred from early 2006 until December 2006, during Dr. XXXX’s postdoctoral fellowship in the Department of Radiation Oncology of the Winship Cancer Institute within Emory University Medical Center in Atlanta. Dr. XXXX had notified the Emory Medical Center administration in late 2005 that she was filing a civil lawsuit against the Medical College of Georgia in Augusta regarding her 2004 experiences as a clinical trial coordinator in poorly regulated Theragenics Corporation(CEO Christine Jacobs; Buford, Georgia) clinical trials, specifically under Dennis Marcus, M.D. in the Department of Ophthalmology at MCG. Dr. XXXX did not know at this time that Dr. Thomas XXX, Dean of Emory Medical School, was the medical chief of Theragenics clinical trials in 2004 at Emory and at all other sites (including MCG). Dr. XXXX noticed that she began to be watched and/or followed within Winship by Otis Brawley, M.D., a Winship administrator also on the board of Theragenics Corporation in 2006. Dr. XXXX did not know at this time that Dr. Brawley had this association, and was surprised that Dr. Brawley showed this level of interest in her activities within Winship. Incident was not reported to DeKalb Police.

    DeKalb Incident 2: Occurred on March 30, 2006 near Dr. XXXX’s home apartment at the Conservatory Apartments, specifically 3448-T North Druid Hills Road, Decatur, Georgia 30033. Attempted kidnapping and aggravated assault was perpetrated on Dr. XXXX’ dependent 16 year old daughter, Villa XXXX, with the shouted threat “You and your Mom had better watch out!!”. The perpetrator was a Caucasian male, 25-40 years old, 5’10” and approximately 180 pounds, with dark hair. Reported to DeKalb Police March 30, 2006. DeKalb Police Report Case 06-044063, Detective Ferreira. Also reported to Special Agent XXXX, Atlanta Division FBI, (404) 679-9000.

    DeKalb Incident 3: Occurred over the January to August 2007 period at Emory University Medical Center, specifically in the Department of Radiation Oncology and possibly within Emory Human Resources. Dr. XXXX experiences a significant delay in delivery of a request for evidence(RFE) letter pertinent to her pending, December 2006 citizenship EB2 application and sent to Emory by the US Citizenship and Immigration Service(USCIS). The RFE request letter from USCIS was held for several months by Emory before being delivered from Ms. Patricia Mouan to Dr. XXXX’s new, 1192 Cumberland Road home address, arriving in a box with a handwritten note placed on her front porch during August, 2007. Dr. XXXX had changed her home address in late January, 2007; her forwarding information was present at the old home address US post office in Decatur, Georgia during this time. Based on the timeline and outcomes of Dr. XXXX’s USCIS application, Emory Human Resources may have further interfered with her application during the 2007-2011 period. Incident was not reported to DeKalb Police.

    DeKalb Incident 4: Occurred in three parts on February 14, 2007(8 am); February 19(12 noon) and February 21(12 noon) at or near the offices of XXXX. A “Mr. Brian A. Zimmerman” entered the offices on the first day, stating that he owned a business and needed to expand his working space. Mr. Zimmerman met with Mr. Jonathan Jones and Dr. XXXX simultaneously on February 14; he specifically asked Dr. XXXX her name twice, and where she was from. Dr. XXXX was very uncomfortable with her interactions with Mr. Zimmerman. Mr. Zimmerman claimed he sought to rent or sublet space in the XXXX building, and provided his card to be given to Michael S. XXXX, M.D. Laboratory Director and Dr. XXXX’ supervisor. In addition, because Dr. XXXX was not present, Mr. Zimmerman was given Dr. XXXX’s card and instructed to call back to discuss this matter directly with Dr. XXXX. Mr. Zimmerman’s card gave his name as Brian A. Zimmerman