Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al
Letter from Michael J. McDermott - Amicus Pro Se. (McDermott, Michael) (Filed on 5/27/2011)
Michael J. McDermott
Pro-Se Amicus – Proposition 8 Cases
CA License #235984
7172 Regional #329
Dublin CA 94568
May 27, 2011
The Honorable Judge James Ware
United States District Court for the
Northern District of California
450 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco CA 94102
Letter to the Court on Motion to Vacate Ruling by Judge Walker –
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 3:09-cv-02292-JW
Dear Judge Ware:
As a Pro-Se Amicus to the both the State and Federal Proposition 8 cases, I write
this brief letter to the Court to provide only that additional information I have that is
related to the Motion to Vacate. I was physically present in Judge Walker’s Courtroom
on the day that Mr. Blankenhorn was cross examined, and witnessed first hand a
spectacle of witness harassment and intimidation that could only be called “Circus Like”
- if one wanted to insult the professionalism of circus workers.
Sitting in the front row of the spectator seats I observed such a constant
background pattern of jeering, laughing, booing, cheering and other forms of witness
intimidation from the crowd (who were overwhelmingly opposed to Proposition 8 and
derisive of the witness and proponents) that I believe it impacted the proceedings and
interfered with the witness ability to testify.
It would have been impossible for Judge Walker not to have heard and seen what
was going on in the back of the Court, but he appeared to actually encourage it, as if he
were an actor making a farewell appearance by playing up to a friendly house.
I do not know if the microphones and cameras were able to pick up the same level
of background noise and commotion in Court, given that they were directionally pointed
towards the front of the Courtroom and the Judge /Lawyers/Witnesses, but it was
certainly apparent to those physically present that what was going on in the back benches
was designed to deliberately interfere with the Witness and Testimony.
Beyond this tainting of the trial by partisan favoritism in allowing a sympathetic
crowd to engage in audience participation in the proceedings, is the issue of Judge
Walker’s rulings essentially denying the Scientific Facts about the pathological nature of
Homo-Anal Coprophile behaviors. It is common knowledge worldwide that the city of
San Francisco has been the epicenter for the creation and transmission of new strains
Aids and related STDs since the beginning of the pandemic in the West a quarter century
ago. Even the US Center for Disease Control publishes the fact that 1 out of 5 HomoAnal Males has Aids, and that those who engage in such Coprophile Behaviors are at
many many times the risk for all manner of health issues than the general population.
If Judge Walker was actually engaging in such Coprophile Behaviors when ruling
on the case - then I submit that his Anti Scientific Bias in favor of validating his own
choices to engage in such Pathological Behaviors shows a clear lack of impartiality and
justifies vacating the decision.
Finally, the ‘Open Secret’ of Judge Walkers Behaviors was only really a secret
from ‘outsiders’ to the Homosexualist Community, which has apparently embraced
Walker as a Hero post retirement. Failure to Disclose in advance the potential for a
separate avenue to pressure the Judge from this militant activist community (say by
private threats of later exclusion from the Homosexualist Community in San Francisco) is
a breach of the Judicial Trust, and Judge Walker should have seen this potential conflict
as clear grounds for Recusal.
I had never witnesses such a level of highly partisan audience participation in any
Courtroom before, and although I found none of the attempts at ‘humor’ from the Judge
or participants to be in the least funny – there were more attempts at jokes by the Judge
and Derisive Laughter from the gallery in this courtroom than I have seen in many
alleged comedy clubs.
Unfortunately, the joke was on our legal system and the Citizens who enacted the
wise moral provision of Proposition 8 in their Constitution, who were the ones truly
targeted by such vicious partisan attacks in that Courtroom.
I sincerely hope and urge that the judgment be vacated, and if need be a new trial
in a Neutral Venue be ordered; one far away both physically and politically from the
pervasive Misandry (Hatred of Men, Masculinity and Normal Heterosexuality) that now
characterizes my old hometown of San Francisco.
Michael J. McDermott
7172 Regional #329
Dublin, CA 94568
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.