Friends, Family and Foes Alike

Five years on from the defining fight of my life as an artist I come to you as an open book, with an amnesty, with agape love; what you decide to do, whether you decide to read it and seriously entertain the seemingly foreign ideas it presents, like the proposition of the sovereignty of the individual as the cultural cornerstone of reality, our traditional concept of reality in the western, Christian sense of sovereign individual divinity, will define you as much as that proposition defines my vision of the Ultimate Reality of our lives.

Let me begin to tell you of the adventure I’ve been on by saying that to be an artist is to live dangerously, by that I mean artists deal in dangerous ideas long before the public ever considers them properly. In this case I was dealing with a false allegation of improper behavior towards a young female lifeguard at the Boulder North Rec Center and shortly thereafter given a hearing in a kangaroo court in which I felt the weight of the whole violent potentiality of the city, followed by a summery execution of my social reputation by a dolt of a Judge; read this as a pathological attempt at tribal social castration because it was a pejorative charge, and finding, intended to neuter me socially, artistically, and creatively for rest of my life, but as you will see, he was batting out of his league when he came up against this eighth grade grad.

Anyway, unless you read the book you will not understand, nor be able to consider in detail, the circumstances I was confronting five years ago in John Stavley’s courtroom, the consequences of which went on to haunt me, and then guide me, for the past five years. Tragedy, especially malevolent tragedy, is like that. It will define who you are and what kind of world exists out there in the abstract sociolinguistic construct we casually call reality. In this case I was up against, and had to pass through, the reality of the Underworld world of the Collective Unconscious of a town that appears to be getting more polarized, more fear-filled, and more malevolent towards art and artists as time marches on. Coincidentally, this is when the city most needs the artist, the St. George archetype, to triumph over the poseur, the reactionary and the provocateur, and last but not least, the dragons unleashed by demagogues.

What you have in the book, as a work of literary art, is the description of how a moral injury is inflicted and how the artist, the protagonist, was able to find his way out of the Abyss of the Jungian Self, as defined in an adventure story. Moral injury is a recently developed concept in psychology introduced by Jonathan Shay, MD, PhD, in his work with returning war veterans, intended to define what it is to have your soul fractured.

Moral injury is not pathological; it doesn’t display pathological origins although it can trigger a psychosis and lead to pathological behaviors if the person is pushed beyond his or her limits. It turns out that PTS(D) is symptomatic of a moral wounding by way of warfare, battle fatigue and PTS are the same thing, and demoralization and dehumanization is the initial reaction to being morally betrayed by those in authority.

I suffered such an injury at that hearing, as odd as that may sound in light of the seemingly innocuous nature of the charge, but even stranger than that was that I found a way out of the Abyss of the Self using a redemptive narrative and ancient mythology. The Abyss of the Self is the place where your soul travels, the Underworld of legend and lore, in search of identity and meaning when your moral frame of the world, your so-called reality, is blown apart. I was shoved and pushed and cudgeled into that opening in the social fabric and onto a metaphysical warfare landscape by soul-snatching monsters that roam the city of Boulder freely, and I contend are getting more dense by the minute.

The upshot of that Sansara of Stupidity coming out of Boulder’s Justice Center was that my vision of the world, the world the artist sees, came more sharply into focus. The metaphysical world of the transcendent revealed itself to me over these past years and in the light of that revelation I can give to you, through my art, an interpretation of what I now see with my writer’s eye, my Third Eye. I see that all of reality is sacred, all of sentient reality and consciousness itself, and in that vision of the Ultimate Reality of legend and lore true happiness is found in the pursuit of the beautiful, the pursuit of truth, the pursuit of compassion and in the striving, grasping, and contact with the transcendent I found I was able to map this unknown territory with the imagination and my pen.


Having entered the realm of the metaphysical through that rip in the fabric of reality, the hearing, I saw that I too was involved in warfare; metaphysical psychospiritual war, the Kurukshetra War of Vedic mythology. And within that theatre I was going to have to do battle with both the darker forces within me, in light of my own Daemon and demons, and those without, like the Triad of Evil, the trolls at the local pool.

These otherwise psychologically identified sets of enemies of the authentic Self took time to study in their hideous forms, and overcome, thus the five years in the desert. In other words, over the past five years I’ve had to fight demons and dragons and gorgons and all while dealing with Sméagols and dolts like the Judge as well as the restless rest of the profane that had formed into a vigilante mob, including those only peripherally involved; this may mean you.

Why I did this can be found in the Bhagavad Gita but in effect I was trying to subordinate my own subconscious impulses for justice and revenge, while at the same time trying to understand the Collective Unconscious of the town in its ever increasingly hysterical propensity for hunting scapegoats to cover its own administrative incompetence, as much as its malevolence toward the outsider.

And so that is where I find myself now, in a fight with those that would rather claim their collective righteousness over acknowledging their collective ignorance, fighting with the Pigs of Ignorance on Bolder Boulder’s legal and administrative team of Miscreants and Monstrous Idiots, Trolls and Dolts with Ms.Cole and John Stavley serving as erstwhile Captains of Boulder’s neo fascist destiny as they define Boulders new utopia of cultural sterility.

So once more into the breech; I’ll continue this fight with the City Council of Boulder to its end, because I see it as a good fight, a fight for freethinker’s rights to free speech everywhere, and thus worth fighting; and with my art it is dragons I’ll slay, and gorgons and basilisks I’ll wound, and trolls I’ll maim, city councilmen and women, and journalists, and lawyers, all in an effort to bring a Renaissance of Free Speech back to a town at war with itself in hopes of building a freer, more just, more benevolent society. This proposition is not new after all, in every mythological adventure involving dragons you have to cut them into pieces, after you kill’em good, and make from its stew bones and fleshy parts a new world dish of sovereignty and beauty and a love of truth for all to imbibe.

This may all come across as a little fantastic, maybe even hyperbolic, but I almost lost my life at that hearing; I lost most of my friends and family, all but one stalwart sister and one steadfast friend, after they tried to burn me, like Giordano Bruno, at the stake using my stories as kindling, my ideas about them and their town; but this is not about revenge, it’s about what it takes to become a great writer. Boulder, you might say as things stand currently, has no room to become anything but a poseur or an ideologue.

If you understand what it takes to become great, in your own life, to your family and community, after reading the book, then you will have gotten its meaning … now go out and slay your own dragons, and good luck, you’ll need it because there are a lot of places like Coulder, Colorado out there!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Open Letter #4

Politics versus Deontology in the Light of a Metafiction

It has been over a hundred days since I sent each member of the Boulder City Council copies of the Death of Due Process excerpt from my Coulder, Colorado trilogy; yet not one person in direct relation to this august body, or the City Parks Department, has responded; not one, not even just to say thanks for sending it along and giving them a heads-up on the crime of institutional mobbing. Nor has intellectual curiosity given birth to an investigation by the Press as far as I can tell; the phone does not ring, the mailbox remains empty.

So, let’s try something different.
In this letter I will explore political expediency versus deontology in the nature of duty and obligation, when it comes to those in charge of the city’s reputation as a benevolent society, in terms of the behavior of the City Council toward the assurance of due process for all its citizens, as well as the correct way of handling a petition of grievance.

I want to point out that this dilemma of endeavoring to get a reasonable hearing to a case of slander involving city employees via an open, civil dialogue, by way of petitioning the city council for redress and getting no reply, is not a political problem of willful blindness so much as it is a cultural paradox, or phenomenon, that points to a metastasizing attitude of malevolence toward those in the city without the financial means or political connections to defend themselves, so that now I have no other choice but direct political action; and for me that means using my art, the written word, to reshape the culture by taking this case of malevolent slander into the public arena.

The problem, as I see it, for the Council and the city’s political and journalistic class in general, is that you cannot govern benevolently, or fight for free speech vigorously, without dealing with the underlying stories of the disenfranchised; that is if you truly desire to get public figures to act accountably towards those citizens within their purview who are without any real political power.

The problem of bureaucratic malevolence in this minor civil case may not seem to warrant any kind of particular political action in a show of genuine concern, but I assure you that this inaction references a worrisome cultural political trend of protecting the status quo at any cost that has taken hold of the city’s political elite since the Ramsey case. The indifference of the Council and the Press towards its citizens by its leadership has now morphed into a routine of abiding and condoning even the smallest criminal incompetence this much smaller case points to, and I contend is thereby indicative of a larger problem that has crept into every level of civic life; creating the cultural dynamics of a collectivist reality, in defending the quo at any cost, even at the cost of its national reputation, as some of its citizens have become collateral damage; the Ramsey’s left town, as have I … but I’ll be back!

What the situation calls for is an intellectually astute grasp of the reality that political expediency just leads to more cover ups; as of now Ms. Cole has tied John Stavley to a sinking ship. At this point those on the Council will want to ask themselves, rhetorically, ‘Do I really want to sail into the future on that ship?’ Right now, I fear, seemingly reasonable people on all sides are continuing to look at this case through a pejorative lens. However, to see the part of the iceberg that is ripping into the city’s cultural legacy requires looking at the case through a cultural lens.

In addition, the problem for the Press (in this I am addressing the editor of the Daily Camera in particular), as an advocate of the People embodied in putting forth that it is the public check on government run amok, and in being perhaps the only political voice of the disenfranchised in what passes for the elite circles of the political and lawyerly class in Boulder, is that if no one reports on the institutional mobbing of marginalized citizens, if no one takes seriously the petition I have put forth as encompassing more than me, then I believe that herd morality is now at the true core of Boulder’s cultural repose. This one a misdemeanor civil case in which the alleged perpetrator will never be seen through anything but a pejorative lens, that one an unsolved murder in which the family will never be seen as being anything but accessories to murder; both parties libeled as a result of institutional incompetence and bullied into leaving town.

Without reasonable and responsible inquiry of the government by the Press, imposed by an intellectually curious professional class or if nothing else a prurient journalistic class, the People without power and influence have little chance for justice in the City on the Hill. One has to ask, somewhat rhetorically, somewhat realistically, is the Press just another propagandist for the quo, rousing the mob from its slumber when it serves the town’s leaders interests, a power nodule unto itself, a class of cultural minders in a polyarchy of elites that picks and chooses what stories headline the tabloid, by way of choosing which people’s stories are important to the citizens of Boulder? Is the Daily Camera the Fox News of Boulder whose editorial board only speaks for some of its citizen’s interest; those with power and influence?

Unfortunately, this problem of the lack of journalistic and political accountability and integrity is endemic in our society at large. Most times the solution for both classes of professional minders is the same; those with their hands on the levers of power and those that possess a microphone of the People facilitate, and too often perpetuate and condone the irresponsible, the incompetent and even the criminal to preserve the quo. They quite literally are willing to cut off their noses, their own intellectual pursuit of the truth and justice, to spite the lone citizen with proofs, and writs, and glossy eight-by-tens with arrows and circles in hand, for the collective of the quo.
The proposition seems to be that if the charge of institutional mobbing, which may have precipitated an ex parte miscarriage of justice, is not taken seriously by the gatekeepers of the quo, those in charge of the welfare of the city, then maybe it never really happened at all. This is naive if not outright self-serving so be forewarned, the next step in this city’s political playbook, and possibly in the Press’s too, after the willful blindness gag, is that if the artist, the rabble-rouser, the outlaw writer, makes too much trouble they’ll put him in the Broken Personality Box and trundle him off to the stocks in the square and maybe even prison.

I’m going to show you where that sort fascistic cultural thinking places the People of Boulder in this seemingly insignificant civil case, in a false allegation taken too far by its employees and ignored in its devastating aftermath by its leaders, and how that affects the town’s cultural conscience as it steams full force into an Dizznified Orwellian utopia with super-clean streets and glaring smiles. I’m going to show you that world, the Underworld world of Coulder’s Collective Unconscious in a grain of sand; in a simple civil case with Dragons and Gorgons and trolls and Sméagols, at least one of each.

Willful blindness is the same as institutional entropy and, in this case it’s a cultural crime, if nothing else, against Boulder’s legacy of Peace, Love, and Understanding. This situation would be just merely pitiful if it weren’t so dangerous; Orwellian dangerous. In as much as I am dealing, at least at this point, with people that can’t seem to see, or refuse to see, beyond the political expediencies of the day. I will attempt to explain my writing, my art, in a way that might be more helpful for those that cannot understand their deontology in abiding and condoning tribalism, elitism and ideological fanaticism which is leading all of us to incomplete, unjust, Orwellian outcomes; think political double-speak and watch lists, and thought police.

Point one …
This work is presented in the Romantic tradition. It is borne on the backs of Plato and Mencius and Gnostic ideals. From the musings of a few Greeks and a lone Confucian to the chivalric traditions of the Languedoc and the Cathars it speaks to a different modality of ‘being’ in the world. From William Blake’s grain of sand poetry, to Ken Kesey’s Cuckoo’s Nest and Jim Morrison’s admonition to ‘break on through to the other side’ it also speaks about the moral landscape of the metaphysical. Like so many artists before me, I’ve portrayed the hero’s journey, Austin’s journey, in the Romantic tradition.
I’ve taken a mythological redemption narrative and wrapped my story of the emergence of the Great Writer, in Jungian terms, around it; entrapped, as I am like a butterfly in the still wet amber of the current legal hunting season in the feminist’s crusade for the Toxic Male, I’ve portrayed that journey through the politically correct hysterical conundrum of current cultural trends with poetic license.
Blake used Christianity and Nordic mythology, Tolkien made it up from scratch with invented languages and all sorts of creatures both enlightened and dark; think Sméagols and Rangers. I use the Egyptian Osirus and Sumerian Gilgamesh sagas among other Near Eastern epic stories in portraying the power of using transcendent ideals to navigate the Underworld world of Coulder in the quest to find the distant shore of artistic freedom, infusing the adventure with Hindu and Buddhist and Confucian philosophical traditions of the Far East.
For instance, in the excerpt The Death of Due Process I name John Stavley as Justice Sewall of Salem fame, a mistake on my part for he should have been named as an enemy of civility from the get-go, but nonetheless I did it that way because after the infamous Justice Sewall of Salem, Mass. hung nineteen beautiful, long-necked ladies until they strangled to death he decided that maybe he’d been on the wrong track all along. The thing most people don’t realize about Justice Sewall, of the infamous witch-hunt trials, is that he also wrote the first anti-slavery pamphlet published in the United States. Ultimately, his is a redemptive narrative and in this way the use of Sewall in place of Stavley was meant to point to a redemptive narrative for all involved; including the city’s current cultural trajectory as it spirals into what looks to be the abyss of elitism, tribalism, collectivism and ultimately, totalitarian authoritarianism.
I do all of this using what I call the Haystack method. Monet painted his haystacks in all kinds of weather and in all types of lighting so that maybe, just maybe, we could see a real haystack in all its detail and refinement and glory at one sitting, like he could. Like Monet, I paint and repaint the encounter with the horrific feminine, the director of aquatics Ms. Cole, and the tyrannical patriarchy, Stavley over and over throughout the work. Monet, through his art was imparting his vision of ordinary, mundane reality in transcendent glory; through my art I’m going to show you what it feels and looks like on the end of a vigilante mob’s rope and a transcendent, artful reality that seems to be beyond the grasp of those that currently work for and lead the city, the Press included, and it’s not going to be pretty.

Point two …
The two players are both carpenter philosophers. They act in the abstract in relation to the social fabric as you and I do in as much as they both think they’re the only narrators of their own destinies. They are two philosopher Kings; one barely managing to rule the Kingdom his own conscience, and the other in touch with questionable realms of consciousness beyond the mundane and ordinary. They are quintessential Christ-like figures cast upon the shores of the Collective Unconscious of the City on the Hill. The story we are all familiar with is that Christ comes to town and is crucified as the ‘other,’ the ‘stranger,’ the ‘outlier’ and then, as he is being crucified, says unto them that can hear, ‘Father, forgive them they know not what they do.’
This form of prose is essentially dialectic and meant to show two sides of the mobbing, the alleged harassment in its thinly veiled malevolence, and the PC culture conundrum that subconsciously beacons us all into mob rule with the seduction of righteousness as we all march in lock step to a grand new utopia. You don’t necessarily need these insights to understand the predicament of being a tall poppy, in a mountain meadow full of poppies, but it helps.

Point three …
The city as a character in the story plays out in two ways; Boulder has a cultural legacy of benevolence; of peace, love and understanding, in the form of the ideals of the Beat Generation, among other folk tales, that is being misappropriated for civic propaganda and used as cover by poseurs and reactionaries alike.
Naropa’s school of disemboweled poetry is but one example of hollowed out haloes, its graduate, who has long run the local poetry slam, is one example of a poseur playing off the past without any real authenticity in the pursuit. The female editor I hired to help me with the book, a post grad English major from Naropa, who threatened to call the police on me after she learned that the story was about me, having delivered nothing in the way of editing after being paid in advance, is another.
Last year Boulder was rated as the number one city in the nation; I suspect they didn’t interview any of the Christ-like figures standing sentry on the street corners, the social outcasts of the ongoing process of financial marginalization of the outsider brought to you by the neo-fascism of reactionaries like John Stavley, for their opinion on the current state of civic affairs as they begged for change right in front of them.
The Ramsey Case, which is now infamously on par with the O.J. case out of L.A., is but another example of this malignant predicament of voiceless outcry against a civic government that is tone deaf to the cultural aspirations of its past heroes and leaders. Both of these philosophical and political attitudes are still shaping the culture of the City on the Hill; and the Beat ideals of peace, love, and understanding are taking a serious beating; in point of fact I contend they are in a coma and teetering on the threshold of death’s door.

Point four …
There are historical and literary references throughout the book.
For example, there is a passage in the book where I point out that John Stavley is acting out the Nixonian legacy of legal megalomania, and Ms. Cole is Nurse Ratched, a reference to Ken Kesey’s One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest.
First, you would have to know that Nixon once said he was above the law because he was President of the United States and therefore the Common Law did not apply to him. You would also have to know that Ken Kesey, a Merry Prankster, was at heart a Romantic writer and that Nurse Ratcheted was trying to kill the romantic, freethinking spirit of Randall McMurphy because he wouldn’t conform to the rules and regulations of the psych ward; in this case the insanity of a Dizznified version of reality called Coulder, Colorado. Kesey was pointing to regular, conformist society as a madhouse delusion enforced by apparatchiks like Ms. Cole and John F. Stavley.

Point five …
I’m pointing to the role the artist and metafiction have in what we are teaching those involved in malevolence when we let the lying and incompetence stand. By ignoring me, my petition for redress, those in charge of leading the culture onto firmer, higher ground are, in effect, ceding the moral high ground to poseurs and reactionaries and becoming defenders of the indefensible; the Press included.

Historically, it was the role of great writers like Huxley, and Kesey and Solzhenitsyn and Thomas Paine to speak the truth boldly; Paine spent a lot of time in jail as a consequence so that speaking up is not without its pain, as in my own societal excoriation, but the true artist is compelled to this work because he knows all of us are Spartacus, and without the voice of the artist at the table of public polity all of us will be nothing more than slaves to ideologies; feminist or authoritarian or news world or market world fearmongering propaganda as we become apparatchiks protecting our property values; spying on our neighbors, casting aspersions in schadenfreude gossip, masters of lawyerly double-speak, forgetting our obligations to our ancestors in their quest for freedom by enshrining the sovereignty of the individual into the law; a citizen’s freedom to speak and think and write as he so chooses.

[Insert here the names of the current city council members as well as two members of the cricket quartet including the editor of the Daily Camera and the former head of the ACLU in Boulder pointing-out that they were defined to me as some of the leading intellectual lights of the city, and as longtime defenders of the tenets of the culture … Tolkien’s Rangers]

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Open letter, City of Boulder #3

Another #MeTooSuicide
Armando Vega Gil, Dateline Mexico; April 3, 2019

It appears that the founder and bassist of the Mexican Rock band Botellita de Jerez musician Armando Vega Gil took his own life this past week after being anonymously accused on Twitter of sexually abusing a minor. This accusation is ten plus years old, anonymous and was placed on a social media outlet, #MeTooMusicosMexicanos.

Mobbing is a crime according to Colorado Statute.
At this point the question for the City of Boulder becomes, was there an anti-mobbing policy in place when I was taken to court in 2014?
If there was an anti-mobbing policy in place, was it followed?
If not, is there now a current anti-mobbing policy in place?
If not, why not?
Has any action been taken to amend or formulate an anti-mobbing policy since my book has come to light?
These are just a few of the questions I hope to raise in the coming months.

I’m hoping by now you can see that if my work is not followed up on with due diligence the problem of false accusations expands to affect more than the accused. Soon it will encompass more than Ms. Cole and John Stavley as current and former employees of the City of Boulder to include the city council and city attorney’s office.
The book is that singular act by a singular individual that I hope will expand the awareness of the devastating effect a false accusation of this kind of scurrilous behavior can have on different types of individuals, and should thereby change the current discussion so that the due process of the law argument can be treated with as much attention as the initial accusation of alleged harassment; with due diligence.
The problem, as we mark sixty days since I sent the book to the city council, is now metastasizing into a problem of leadership. This kind of issue, if not treated properly, is like a political cancer that sends the community into a death spiral of authoritarianism for those connected to it because it ends up spreading throughout the body politic as a tyrannical ideology that protects the status quo at all costs.
I believe (a) crime(s) was (were) committed against me by Ms. Cole in cooperation with John Stavley and no amount of kicking the can down the road is going to make that issue go away. I repeat, for those that are politically challenged, I almost lost my life because of what was done to me by those employees. Therefore, I will not be going away until I have a fair and impartial hearing.
I believe also there is a time and a season for everything and that this issue of the execution of due process and due diligence, is coming to your town. The prudent and courageous and responsible thing to do is get out in front of it. In that vein I again offer my open hand in an effort to define a middle ground. For me the issue is literary and cultural, as well as legal. I have no idea whether Mr. Vega Gil or Mr. Coughlin were guilty as accused, Accusata, se Cusseta, in the Latin as accused so guilty, but what I do have ideas about is how to prevent suicide as a reaction to a public mobbing, a kangaroo court, and the indifference of entrenched politicians and activist judges to counterclaims against the #MeTooMovement in the form of a lack of Due Process.
The system is broken and in order to defend myself, then and now, I would have had to hire a lawyer. I have no money and because there are no other alternative methods of holding anyone accountable in my case against those city employees that have devastated my life, I have therefore petitioned the city council.
So far to no avail, this is a pitiful situation.
China is still under totalitarian rule, but everyone in the world knows about the guy in Tiananmen Square that stood down the tank column. No one in their right mind would stand in front of a tank column unless he was in the grip of moral outrage; no one in their right mind would stand up in front of an army of lawyers with the financial resources of the City of Boulder, except for the same reason.
Let it be noted that not only do I think I might have a legal case for a violation of simple legal norms and practices, and maybe perhaps even the evidence of an ex parte conspiracy, but I also believe the young lady at the heart of the matter might have a legal case for Reckless Endangerment, as well as a Tort of Outrage lawsuit. I’ve come to believe that she and her family were used as proxies by Ms. Cole to cover her own bungling incompetence. Yet, as of this date, no one from the City of Boulder has contacted me personally to clarify any aspect of my story.
No smart and responsible politician wants it on their record that they were repeatedly warned of the problem of public mobbing and yet did nothing about it in terms of policy and or reconciliation if, God forbid, someone else is mobbed by other city employees and as a result decides to take their own life. Being a member of a mob, however tangentially, is the lowest thing an person can be, and now that the city council has been informed, well, that makes you tangentially responsible for what city employees do and say in wielding state-sanctioned violence.
This is a grave and terrible situation and it is also what you where elected to handle, the hard problems in city administration, and I think with thoughtfulness and goodwill we can all benefit from a thorough discussion of the particulars. I believe a crime was committed against me and for that the city will have to be held accountable, mostly, probably, in the public arena, as is my purpose in writing these open letters. I’m laying-in a moral foundation for future argument and your dalliances will not be helpful to you in the long run unless they are orientated to investigation and due diligence.
I say these things to be helpful and what I hope to see in the future is a change in the cultural direction of the city’s attitude toward what appears to be its stance that it is above the law. I’ve never understood why the city has not issued a final formal apology to the Ramseys for a case the city obviously bungled and, if the past is prologue, I suspect I can expect the same treatment. However, I think it would behoove you to change that dynamic because I think in admitting that mistakes were made lie the keys to a brighter future for the whole community.
No one involved in my case has ever, even in Stavley’s courtroom, been held accountable for what they claimed allegedly happened. Please take responsibility for your employees and your own leadership. If it helps, think about it this way: if even one of them comes forward and admits what they did, maybe because they’ve had an epiphany of conscience, then the others will by default have to either blame that singular person collectively, or admit their part in the conspiracy.
Alternately, an intrepid reporter could decide to follow up on the story, either way this case is a house of cards, especially as regards the transcript, and yet I still believe in people, that they will eventually come out from under the spell of Ms. Cole’s authoritarianism and fashionable feminist ideologies and wake up to the real challenges of character in their lives.
I believe in my accusers and the city council to do the right thing, eventually. And yes, I know that’s the kind of naiveté that got me into this situation, but faith in our fellow man is the only hope we have as a community for a less tribal, less factional, less fearful, less elitist and less paranoid future.

Post Script

Joe Biden, need I say more?
Their names again are Armando Vega Gil and John Coughlin, Bassist and National Champion Skater.
I’m sure there are others, like me, not famous, and already forgotten.
It’s the same old story, innuendo, gossip, fear of and for political shelter from politically correct vigilantes. Let us work together, let us find the middle ground, let the madness stop with the beginning of a reasonable civil discourse. The middle ground is in the way we define the art of the coming civil discourse.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Open letter #2, City of Boulder


The John Coughlin Case Revisited

In the past few days a press report on the John Coughlin case has surfaced that some people on the City Council may want to read.
USA Today, March 4th, 2019.

The report is a follow-up article by Christine Brennan of USA Today on the status of the sexual allegation case against Mr. Coughlin in terms of SafeSport’s involvement in, and censure of, his participation in this past National Championships and what repercussions have followed, given the nature of the tragedy of his suicide.
As it stands now, a month and a half after John Coughlin took his life just one day after being issued an interim suspension by SafeSport of his privileges to work in his sport, just prior to this year’s National Championships, the case is stalled in a war of words between Anne Cammett, President of U.S. Figure Skating, and representatives of Safesport; in this article represented by Dan Hill, a spokesman for Safesport.
In it he said Safesport’s mission statement can roughly be stated as follows:
“SafeSport works to identify and deal with reports of sexual abuse in several sports and on several levels of competition.”
In the press story by Ms. Brennan, Dan Hill speaking for SafeSport in a phone interview makes his case, first stating:
“That in its investigation of the allegations against John Coughlin, as well as other figure skating cases, it discovered ‘a culture in figure skating that allowed grooming and abuse to go unchecked for too long.’”
Note the generality of the statement; he’s casting aspersions but not identifying anyone in the particular and at the same time implicating everyone in figure skating by saying the investigation has uncovered a “culture of abuse and grooming” in the sport.
This is called ‘doublespeak’ by George Orwell in Animal Farm.
Dan Hill went on to say:
“The issues in this sport are similar to those the Center has seen in many others and cut across a wide population … this cannot be allowed to continue … the center addresses these cultural issues every day through training and education and by, on a case-by-case basis, holding those who violate the (SafeSport) code accountable.”
Note how wide a loop he throws, and of course no one wants it to continue, so that statement appears to be self-serving, and then he follows that up with the implied threat that those who violate the code will be held accountable.
In what form, or forum, shall they be held accountable?
Does this include all staff members in the process of implicating their fellow colleagues? What if they are wrong in their accusation, or worse drive someone out of the sport and into suicide based on gossip and innuendo?
Who becomes liable for a wrongful death in that case?
How does that proposition, of having everyone under constant surveillance by unqualified associates affect their interpersonal relationships?
Are they all to spy on one another?
Is it now a culture of fear and suspicion we want to replace the existing one? And last, but not least, where in his answer does he mention due process?
Is this just really bad sentence structure or more doublespeak in a statement that is really all over the map?
A little later in the interview he elaborates that SafeSport has become aware of these issues “with the reports we have been seeing and the anecdotal stories, and evidence we have been receiving.”
Does this remind anyone besides me of the Anita Hill exchange with Republican Sen. Simpson wherein the good Senator said he was receiving all sorts of reports concerning her behavior under the door and over the transom?
It’s an infamous quote by Sen. Simpson:
“I really am getting stuff over the transom … I’ve got letters hanging out of my pockets … I’ve got faxes … I’ve got statements from her former law professors, statements from people that know her, statements from Tulsa, Oklahoma saying ‘watch out for this woman’ … nobody’s got the guts to say that because it gets all tangled up in this sexual harassment crap.”
The next day he elaborated … “I’m not going to use it. It’s not sworn to. The woman said she would give an affidavit.
The woman at the heart of Sen. Simpson’s remarks turned out to be Mary Constantce Matthies, a lawyer from Tulsa in private practice, who went on to clarify what she sent to Sen. Simpson as follows … “the information was third-hand to me, and I passed it on in the ‘for what its worth category’.”
Andrea Mitchell later called her out for refusing to be interviewed on television and clarify what she meant saying, “you’ve raised this now at the hearings, and you’ve raised it just now with me, but refused to go on television.”
Isn’t this McCarthyism of the worst order?
And it goes on from there …
Now back to quoting Mr. Hill of SafeSport,
“Without getting into the specifics of any particular person, we have had people want to explain how the sport works, with concerns about how young women in particular are treated, especially in pairs skating.”
Well, first of all, that sentence is a good example of bad sentence structure, because I for one can’t tell which fire he wants to put out first.
Does he want to accommodate those people with concerns for the welfare of the young ladies, while not, of course, mentioning the welfare of the men who are accused of misconduct which may entail due process, or is his first concern in chasing down the hearsay, innuendo, gossip and reports coming in under the door and over the transom?
He says this without going into the nature of the evidence needed to prompt an investigation; is it hearsay, or circumstantial or just plain old shop talk that his organization is investigating and so the question becomes where, exactly, is the threshold line of offending behavior that can cause someone to come under investigation in what appears to be a free-for-all process?
Still later he says, “If you want to change the culture of this sport, people have to come forward. All covered individuals (USFS member coaches, staff, board members, and officials among others) have an obligation under the code to report, and the Center does enforce that obligation. As we’ve seen in gymnastics, it takes brave people speaking up and enough of them to get a culture shift.”
Here he is again stating the obvious (we are all for the good guys and gals with white hats on and against the ones with black hats) and then again obliging those under the auspices of SafeSport to be good apparatchiks in their fealty to the code and report everything to the Center for SafeSport no matter its validity, to protect themselves, and let those in charge, inside SafeSport, decide what is good for the whole sport and who should be singled out; this is a collectivist mantra, Orwellian, but whatever.
And he once again he throws shade on Mr. Coughlin by bring up the infamous Larry Nassar case in gymnastics without qualifying or redeeming Mr. Coughlin’s participation in that scandal one way or another.
Three times now I’ve called him out on Orwellian machinations, just for the record.

……… Now for something completely different ………


The USFS, the national governing body for the sport of figure skating, replied to SafeSport in a statement of its own on Monday afternoon of the 4th of March stating as follows:
“U.S. Figure Skating fully supports the mission of the U. S. Center for SafeSport and works in cooperation with the Center to help end abuse in the sport. The Center (for SafeSport) has clearly stated it will not advance its investigation into the allegations against the late John Coughlin. U.S. Figure Skating is constantly striving to ensure athlete safety and looks forward to working with the Center to better understand the issues raised by this case.”
There she is, our hero, Ms. Cammett, the current President of USFS standing both alongside SafeSport and also tending her side of the issue. In this exchange we can see she is re-stating what she understands SafeSport’s position is in the investigation just for clarity and goes on to state that it is also the quest of her organization.
The association President went on to say, that twice in the past six weeks USFS has asked for the investigation to be completed, while SafeSport has maintained it cannot continue to investigate someone who has died.
And, in its new statement SafeSport offered a still further rebuttal to her inquiries.
Again quoting Mr. Hill, “The Center has made it clear to all parties … (sic) USFS, that the Center’s actions were consistent with its code and mission … and the Center cannot advance the investigation when the named respondent is no longer a ‘threat.’” (The quotes around the word ‘threat’ are my markings.)
Well, yeah, of course he’s no longer a threat, he self-selected you might say, ostensibly it is implied, to terminate the investigation.
But if he killed himself due to the humiliating nature of the trolling and social media feedback brought on by the SafeSport warning alone then we may be looking a wrongful death indictment rather than a suicide.
If true, this means SafeSport is on the hook, legally and morally.
Mr. Hill goes on to say, “The most sever penalty (in the code) would be permanent ineligibility … and in this instance the respondent’s eligibility to participate is no longer an issue …the Center is dedicated to providing a fundamentally fair adjudication process … and indeed fairness dictates an incomplete investigation when it is impossible for the respondent to provide testimony regarding events about which only he would have knowledge.”
Well, I’d say he’s now permanently ineligible, self-selected or otherwise, and as luck would have it that would also qualify as the most severe penalty, two birds with one warning you might say.
So yes, I guess it wouldn’t be an issue at that point for SafeSport, unless you were looking into how the issuing of the warning may have affected Mr. Coughlin’s state of mind prior to his suicide.
Again he claims a fair process, but doesn’t mention either legal due process initiated by an agency from outside the Center, or entertaining Ms. Cammett’s two requests for further investigation and instead wants to close the investigation, and the troubling questions it has brought into the public arena.
Obviously SafeSport wants to change the subject.
Going on, Mr. Hill also said, “While the Center (for SafeSport) can proceed with an investigation even if the respondent does not want to cooperate, it cannot complete an investigation when a respondent is deceased.”
Thin gruel, for nourishing fair play and due process when someone has already killed themselves, but then the mission statement he may be following isn’t really interested in coming to the bottom of the matter where all parties could find a third space for a more open dialogue.
Obviously SafeSport would be facing both a financial and image problem if they were found guilty of kicking off the trolling, or inciting shunning and ostracization toward the accused, and would naturally be interested in shutting down an investigation into a mobbing that may have triggered the suicide.
USFS’ reply to this was, “The lack of a completed investigation has produced great uncertainty … innuendo and speculation” concerning the allegations against John Coughlin.
Again, President Cammett comes through, professionally concerned about the welfare of all of her people. Obviously she gives a damn about what really happened and is looking forward to the future, to prevent any other preventable deaths in the wake of this new form of McCarthyism.
……… In the same article the following exchange was cited ………
On January 7th 2019 in an email to USA Today Mr. Coughlin called the allegations against him “unfounded.”
Quoting Mr. Coughlin, “While I wish I could speak freely about the unfounded allegations levied against me, the SafeSport rules prevent me from doing so since the case remains pending.
I note only that the SafeSport notice of allegation itself stated that an allegation in no way constitutes a finding by SafeSport or that there is any merit to the allegation.”
Again Dan Hill replied as follows in the same telephone interview,
Mr. Coughlin’s assertion that he was being prevented from speaking freely about the allegations against him by SafeSport “is not true.”
Going on to cite the SafeSport website, and the interim measure process that was communicated to Mr. Coughlin directly (the SafeSport process), made it clear that he could provide information, evidence, speak for himself, and even ask for a hearing that would have been accommodated within 72 hours by rule. That hearing would have been in front of an independent arbitrator. That’s such a critical part of all of this (process).”
I tell you there is someone like Mr. Hill, in this process in the slandering process initiated against me by Ms. Cole; his name is John Stavley look for him.
And I know from having been in John Couglin’s shoes I couldn’t find the words, much less the legal wherewithal to rebut the false accusations against me, especially given the assumptions couched in the way John Stavley ran his court. His acceptance of the pejorative accusation based on reports flying in over the transom and under the door, and his willingness to use judicial discretion to muddy the line between accusation and actual guilt, in three weeks much less 72 hours.
Personally, even as a writer familiar with the use of harmful words as in gossip and innuendo, I was so stunned at the amount of lying in my case I couldn’t find the right concepts relating to what a mobbing actually entails in the three weeks between being served with the TRO and the hearing.
And after years of research into that subject I have only now begun that recovery process in asserting my sovereignty in light of the bungling of an authoritarian Judge in a kangaroo court and a city that wants the problem to just go away, like Mr. Hill and the Center for SafeSport.
I will not allow the case against me to be closed prematurely.


In conclusion …..

So, where does that leave us in the Cole, Stavley Case?
Well, first off I want to thank USFS’ President Anne Cammett for being persistent in her advocacy for due process in John Coughlin’s case and I want to state that what I think we’re seeing here is the beginning of a smear campaign put forward by Mr. Hill to safeguard the Center for SafeSport against a wrongful death lawsuit.
There are two final points:
Dr. Janice Harper is a former nuclear physicist who was mobbed in her workplace, Los Alamos I believe, lost her high level security clearance and later her job, and decided to go back to school and received a Doctorate in Psychology.
She went on to sue the Atomic Energy Commission and won. She now works in the field of Psychology and has become an expert on mobbing. She has produced a list of the circumstances that can be found at the root of a mobbing and of those six parameters my case has five.
Also Dr. Zimbardo, author of the infamous Stanford Prison experiment, teaches on the psychology of mobbing and defines it in his work on the Social Vectors of Evil. Of his list of parameters, my case hits six of seven of the qualifiers of a mobbing.
I am aware that his work has recently been brought into question, but I am skeptical of the methodology of the author of the article that has impinged upon his work, nonetheless what he states about the social vectors that causes groups to move toward malevolence over discernment is helpful to get a better understanding of what exactly happens when tribalism trumps individual sovereignty in and out of the courtroom.
As I’ve stated before, this issue of mobbing is bigger than any one person, institution or city and therefore I will pursue justice in this case until the City of Boulder responds to the accusation that its city employees committed the crime of a mobbing in my case.
I believe both Ms. Cole and John Stavley worked together to circumvent due process in my case and I have yet to hear from the city regarding this accusation. I am endeavored upon finding a third space wherein a civil discourse can be undertaken to expand the definition of due process in relationship to those accused of the sometimes fatal crime of ‘harassment.’
I almost lost my life due to the way the false allegations where processed by Ms. Cole. I was put through a hearing with John Stavley that had nothing to do with due process. I’m not going away until this grievance is addressed.
So I am going to carefully lay a foundation, a moral foundation of argument and actual real life events, such as the Coughlin case upon which this discussion can be based, and the City of Boulder’s leaders are crucial to that process. I have in good faith brought this subject into the public arena, I have petitioned for redress and I am waiting.
Ultimately this is not about me personally, this is about the culture of Boulder, and although your city employees may have indeed committed a crime, the bigger picture is one of finding a way to handle future problems that are generated out of false accusations.
In point of fact, now that the city has been apprised of the case, my case, they are now legally liable for ANY future problems regarding mobbing policy.
I question how the response might differ if I were lodging a complaint against Ms. Cole for sexual harassment, how would the discussion differ, and what steps would be taken to hear me out in the era of the #MeToo movement?
It’s a different ballgame now, and the City Council can be on the cutting edge of this new discussion that is coming, or alternately be left behind defending the indefensible.
Good luck with all of that. My hand is open, as well as my mind and I hope, sooner rather than later, that the City Council will see that they can shape a better, more fully human culture through good leadership that allows for the presumption of innocence, individual sovereignty and due process.

This is a follow-up article I came across recently, it matches my case almost point for point, and has an interview with John’s father and sister. Have respect for what they say, this mobbing cost John Coughlin his life. Mobbing is a crime.

The Kansas City Star
Spun out of control: The desperate final days of skater John Coughlin
By Eric Adler and Rick Montgomery
February 17, 2019; updated February 19, 2019

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

John Coughlin

This man was killed by mobbing, social media harassment and a bureaucracy, Safesport, that either was not aware of what mobbing is, did not care that they were complicit in committing a crime against another person, or does not care.  Hopefully, now that Boulder’s bureaucracy is aware of the crimes committed in their name, maybe things will change, but I’m not holding my breath.

The question is how much time has to pass after the leaders of a community, be it Boulder or Safesport are made aware of this kind of criminal activity before they too become complicit in the coverup?

Mobbing is a crime!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

John Coughlin; press release addendum

Press Release Addendum

As you may be able to tell by the cards some of you have received I was hoping to release this book before the holidays, but for several reasons, including allowing all those involved a quiet and peaceful holiday, I delayed. At this point the manuscript for the first book is ready and in the process of being edited for continuity. However, with the recent suicide of the National Pairs Figure Skating Champion John Coughlin, I feel there is no more time to delay. Perhaps this book could have helped prevent that tragedy had it been released earlier, but hopefully it might prevent another.
I too have dealt with suicide. I too was trolled and my world disappeared at the hands of a few unfounded accusations that turned into a vigilante mob action. The upshot of which resulted in a civil court Judge forgetting his duty to the law as he joined the hanging party in handing down a restraining order based on no material evidence that any harassment had taken place. My point is this madness has to end, the Rule of Law and Due Process is the legal standard at stake here and mob actions cannot be allowed to run rampant over them.
The current state of affairs concerning the indoctrination of radical feminism into the court of public opinion vis-à-vis Toxic Masculinity and Third Wave ideology against the Patriarchy has bled-through the civil discourse concerning legitimate crimes and misdemeanors against women and has now captured the legal process with its insistence on enforcing an immoral imperative. As of now all men are suspected of being criminal rapists, pedophiles and pederasts, and have to prove otherwise in every context that ever was or will be based simply on the allegation of harassment.
My heartfelt condolences go out to John’s family, the skating community, and to all those he helped and all those who will never know how much he had to offer the world. I predict neither Safesport nor any other agency involved will ever be held accountable for kick-starting the trolling and harassment, nor will we ever find out what was at the heart of the allegations, but we do know the result of the accusation alone; it destroyed his world, his life, his family and left his friends devastated. And there will always, from this point forward, be an asterisk by his name.
This is where civil-minded men and women of honor separate themselves from the morality of the herd, the quislings, the weak-kneed and spineless, the virtue signaling Judges and authoritarian DAs, the tyrannical zero-tolerance stand against the Patriarchy, read Toxic Masculinity of the Patriarchy, which is at the heart of Third Wave feminism, and once again create for the world a benevolent society wherein the Sovereignty of the Individual is once more codified into civil conduct through the proper use of civil discourse and the practice of Due Process in the Rule of Law.

But thus; if powers divine behold our human actions, as they do, I doubt not then but innocence shall make false accusation blush and tyranny tremble at patience.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

press release for An Immoral Imperative

General Press Release of

An Immoral Imperative

Robert Gerard

What you have before you is one story of many in the vast and ponderous mythological narrative of the legend of Travis Trimegistus,
The Peripatetic King of all things Ennobling and Emboldening.
What you have before you is literally a mythological legend in the making.
The structure of the story is contemporary rendition of Dinner with André; a conversation between two carpenter philosophers that think they’re inspired creators of cosmological axioms; writers, cosmologists, idlers and dreamers. The overall project of three books is a trilogy of law, psychology, and the relevancy of ancient mythology in service to creating a more lawful and civil society without castrating the masculine temperament by way of the current trend toward feminist ideological fascism.
This is the story of the other side of the #MeToo Movement; the side of the falsely accused. This side of the story is yet to be told in its truly horrifying detail, although there are the Dr. Duke, and the Geoffrey Rush trials and many more examples of men fighting back.
My contention is that there is collateral societal and psychological damage that is not now a part of the public conversation, suicide foremost among them; people’s lives are being ruined based on flimsy charges and some of the maligned, after the public excoriation and dehumanization and shunning, are opting for suicide or worse. This series of book lays out the dynamic of an alleged incident, the gossip and innuendo that became facts in a kangaroo court, and the aftereffects on the existential problem of reality for the protagonist, Travis.
This is a press release and therefore I can’t give the prelude away, but with a careful reading I think you will understand the problems harassment charges create for the accused; both the legal and psychological challenges. There is, of course, the Kavanaugh case, and even your own State Legislature and The University of Colorado at Boulder are now caught in the crossfire of this particular part of the Culture War.
This is relevant on another level too because it also brings into focus, in the first chapter, the problem of self-censorship in this new age of politically correct aesthetics; in this latest wave of totalitarian intolerance of artistic expression. This presents the Degas, Lewis Carroll problem; both have recently been accused of being, or at least having pedophiliac leanings, and yet people of all ages have related to their artworks for years without this lens.
The existential societal question becomes … what effect is this Third Wave feminist ideology of the Toxic Male having on Art and the Authentic Voice of the Artist? Do you, as writers, professors, coaches and business mentors find yourselves overly cautious, paranoid?
This ‘harassment’ phenomenon presents political, cultural, personal, and societal questions regarding the Rule of Law as well. It’s complicated and divisive and that makes it politically charged, and so it’s about you and your work.
I’m a carpenter philosopher, an eighth-grade dropout, Homer’s ‘Nobody’ that is trying to put a stake in the eye of the neo-fascistic Cyclops of Third Wave feminist ideology that is threatening the moral castration of every decent man in the country and therefore the social structure, not of the status quo, they’ve already secured that territory, but the moral high ground, the sovereignty of the individual, that has become vulnerable to an immoral imperative.
Conversely, this could be just another rabbit hole, yet I’m hoping curiosity gets the better of you and you come to see that at the bottom of the rabbit hole is another world; in this case I’ve exposed the Underworld world of Boulder’s Criminal Justice System that currently finds itself one of many progenitors of a radical version of feminist ideology through its Manichean machinations.
I am the Man in the Arena; the writer, the explorer of new worlds with the authenticity of the written word manifest in an honest and enlightened search for the Ultimate Reality
… I am the Common Man … I am you!
Currently, the following offices and officials have received a copy of this book excerpt:
The office of the Governor, the State Representative of Boulder, along with Senators Neville, Jones and Finberg et al., all the County Court Judges in Boulder and for added measure, and contemplative cohort comparisons, the County Court Judges in Ft. Collins, as well as the Recreation Department Heads in Boulder; Jason Stolz and Ms. Cole, and of course, the Press.
Copies have also been sent to the Social-psychology Department of the University of Colorado Boulder because they too are currently involved in a sexual harassment scandal, and because you may want to broaden your own understanding of Mobbing and Jungian Archetypal mapping of the Underworld world through their expertise.

Thank you sincerely,
Robert Gerard

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment