One American family’s experience with race, and how the federal courts became the lasting problem

Among the Bailey clients who have filed a motion to open judgment are Angela and Johnny Robinson, a mixed race couple, and their child, who live in Harrisburg.  Until they became involved in the Central Pennsylvania Youth Soccer League, the Robinson’s considered themselves a normal American family – both Johnny and Angela come from families with war veterans, going back to World War 2, and were proud of their family, and the values they were trying to instill in their child.

That all changed when their daughter was placed on a team coached by a racist City of Harrisburg employee, Eric Hicks.   Before at least one game, Hicks told his team “let’s go kick those white girls’ butts”, and at other times told the team to not shake the other teams’ hands because their race, and to not tell their parents things that he had said or done.  The Robinson’s reported Hicks’ racist and otherwise inappropriate conduct to the City and to the league, and that is when the saga really began, ultimately ending with the Robinson’s suspension from the league – for daring to speak out about racist misconduct.

The facts of the case are set forth in the Third Circuit Brief (to be attached).  There was clear evidence that Hicks made the offending race-based statements, and abundant documentary evidence that showed email communications, and planning as to how to retaliate against the Robinsons; yet the case was thrown out on “summary judgment” by Judge Christopher C. Conner, who has a demonstrated history of racial bias or insensitivity, as well as being part of the clique of Judges out to get Bailey, as demonstrated by the fact that he testified falsely under oath at the disciplinary hearings.

The story of the case in relation to this site is the real meaning of the “standard of review” and “scope of review”.  These are concepts that define and limit the ability of the courts to address and resolve issues short of taking evidence and having matters submitted to juries.  It is their excess that allows courts to have a heavy hand in creating cultural climates and concealing government corruption by chronies of the jurists and other agendas.  It is a theme time and time and time again in Bailey cases, and will continue to be addressed significantly, as it is a matter that is at the heart of issues of judicial misconduct, which cannot occur if a judge is constrained by these standards.  Indeed, even judges are, of course, only human, and have natural biases and prejudices that they carry with them in their lives, but, in keeping with the standards and scopes of review, they should still be able to be fair and honest judges even with these human foibles.

The Robinsons’ case shows the real harm that is caused by the “abuses” of these standards of review.  There is clear evidence that there was racial and retaliatory animus at play in the suspension of the Robinsons from the soccer league, and no one can rationally deny that.  That is where the court’s analysis is supposed to stop under its standard of review.  It is not for the court to pass judgment on the evidence, particularly judges like Conner, with demonstrated racial insensitivities and institutional biases, but it is for the courts to allow these things be decided by juries, and that is all that was asked for, and all that should have been provided.

The jury is drawn from the local community, and is a built-in check on cultural, political, and popular climates.  Indeed, the same set of facts could reasonably lead to differing results in two different areas, because cultural differences are built right into the civil rights landscape.  The point is that juries serve an important function in teaching lessons and providing civil vindication on many levels, when they are conducted in fair and open trials, and the federal courts have largely taken this factor out of the equation, which is acting as a cancer on the system of justice, and is allowing it to slip farther and farther down the path of blatant corruption and case-fixing, examples of all of which we brought you.

As we showed you in the Bailey shit storm and struggle within the civil rights struggle articles, juries are sympathetic to these civil rights causes, and have sent strong rebukes and awards in favor of Bailey clients, which cases were later fixed by the courts and taken away on specious grounds.  The agenda to get Don Bailey has led these judges to become even more activist, and to make sure that the cases never get to juries, and are thrown out by these otherwise “esteemed” federal judges on cold hard written records, without hearings, and without even any openness whatsoever.  This is not “justice” in America, but is the system of justice in central Pennsylvania.

In the Robinson’s case, Judge Conner blatantly abused the standard of review, and, because of the agenda to get Don Bailey, they have no hope of justice in this current climate, though they are sure to persist.  The real point is that Judge Conner did real and lasting harm to an honest American family, and race became the issue, and racial divisions were ratified by the Judge, and the course of conduct approved.

If the Robinsons got their day in court and lost, at least they would have the satisfaction of having known that their grievances were heard, but not having gotten that day at all has left the wounds open to fester.  The Robinsons came to the federal courts to deal with the reality of racism in the lives of a mixed-race family in modern America, and the federal courts did nothing but create another reason for the Robinson’s to feel less like an American family, and more like a mixed-race family.  That is a skewed result.

Once again, justice has not been done, and another Bailey client has suffered a second victimization – the first being the prejudices that we all know exist in our worlds, and the second being the secret biases and prejudices of our forum for addressing the first.  The Robinsons’ efforts continue, however, and we will keep you updated.

Thank you.

7 thoughts on “One American family’s experience with race, and how the federal courts became the lasting problem”

  1. Hope you can keep up the good fight, Family Robinson. Again and again, from a myriad of sources I hear about the corruption in the 3rd Circuit. Other attorneys outside the Bailey law firm tell me all efforts are a waste of time. I withdrew since I was being threatened with financial sanctions I can ill afford as an older woman. Judge Caputo was assigned to my case to Open Judgment when Judge Kane recused herself. I suspect ex partie communications between the defendants and Judge Caputo. Yes, I was intimidated and defeated in my efforts here, but most of all, heartbroken, that Judge Kane , Magistrate Carlson, Judge Caputo can refer to Mr. Bailey as “a slouching parody of his former self,”and excuse such behavior. I will be at the polls to vote for Mr. Bailey when he runs for Attorney General. He will continue to be our beacon through this storm.

  2. Keep on fighting for your rights as an American! I can relate to this story on so many levels, for I am in an interracial marriage, and it’s sad to say sometimes it comes back on the children. I just haven’t had enough evidence to do anything about it. I will keep you guys in prayer and whatever is done in the dark will come to the light. Be Blessed!

  3. Our Motion to Open Judgements have been denied. We have entered a Motion for Reconsideration. Today I called Judge Marianis office to see if he had rendered a decision. I was told he denied that as well on June 29th. I asked why we have not been sent Judges decision in the mail. His secretary says it was sent to our lawyer Don Bailey. Since our attorney has been so busy trying to keep his liscense we have been doing everything on our own Pro Se. I explained this to her & she says well you have to let the courts know this. I clearly at that point was like & this is who we have dealing with these big case in the court systems, a bunch of morons. I clearly told the secretary, Mam on every document we’ve been filing it clearly says Pro-Se. What this is is another Judicial corrupt way to keep me from being informed as so the 30 days lapses & I can not file a timely appeal. I asked for an extension & she blatantley said that would not happen. If you would have asked me when we first retained Mr. Bailey as our attorney, even though we had heard some of the judges did not like him, do we think some of these same judges would take their frustrations out on Mr. Bailey clients, I would have said NO, the system is not that cruel. Boy, was I wrong. And the sad part is they can’t even admit they are wrong. I may only have 10 days to appeal but we are certainly going to do it. Every time I find their trying to stick it to even harder it gives me the will power to want to fight even harder. We do have those days where it seems JUSTICE is a thing of another planet. But as long as theres a God we will continue to fight for that justice and in the process make the courts pay for mistreating us & our attorney. As for Mr Bailey, he is one of the most educated but yet down to earth men we have ever met. He, his family, & colleagues are truly great people that get it. They understand about life & dont have their noses or heads stuck up their behinds. Mr Bailey being truly a Great American who believes in Justice for all needs to be in History books one day for all of our grandchildren to learn about & remember. God Bless America with a system like this.

  4. Judge Conner is definitely a racist. We had an issue where the township was harassing us because of the minority children from the Fresh Air fund being at our home and swimming in our pool and raising zoning issues. Warrington Township solicitor Christina Veltri said “You let THOSE kids swim in your pool”.

    The zoning hearing decision was appealed and went to “judge” Conner, who claimed something to the effect of “I don’t understand why Plaintiff is upset about children of color being discriminated against on his property when he is not a minority himself” and yes, we have a copy of this on the official transcript (surprisingly this part was not altered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.