Wal-Mart was within its rights to fire a Joliet store employee who told a lesbian co-worker that she would go to hell because God does not accept gays, and the dismissal was not religious discrimination, a federal appeals court has ruled.
Tanisha Matthews began working as an overnight stocker at the Joliet Wal-Mart in 1996, according to court documents. In September 2005, during a break in the shift, Matthews took part in a conversation about God and homosexuality.
The next day, an employee informed a manager that Matthews had made inappropriate comments about gays to a lesbian employee named Amy. Over the next three months, Wal-Mart interviewed and obtained statements from employees who were present.
In her statement, Amy reported that Matthews was “screaming over her” that God does not accept gays; they should not “be on earth”; and they will “go to hell” because they are not “right in the head.” Five other employees confirmed that Matthews had said gays are sinners who are going to hell.
Wal-Mart fired Matthews after concluding she had engaged in behavior that violated the company’s Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Policy. The policy, which the court said Matthews was aware of at the time of the incident, prohibits employees from engaging in conduct that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment based on an individual’s status, including sexual orientation, and says they can be fired for such conduct.
Matthews, an Apostolic Christian, sued Wal-Mart Stores Inc. for race and religious discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming she was fired because of her religious beliefs and not for violating company policy.
She voluntarily dismissed the race discrimination claim, and the U.S. District Court in Chicago granted summary judgment to Wamart on her religious-discrimination claim .
“Because Matthews has not provided evidence of religious discrimination, we affirm,” the U.S. Appeals Court for the Seventh Circuit said in its decision, announced March 31.
In her suit, Matthews claimed Wal-Mart engaged in religious discrimination by firing her for expressing religious beliefs. “But if Matthews is arguing that Wal-Mart must permit her to admonish gays at work to accommodate her religion, the claim fails,” the Appeals Court stated in its decision.
Wal-Mart “fired her because she violated company policy when she harassed a coworker, not because of her beliefs,” the ruling states.
The decision stated that, “in any event, Wal-Mart’s anti-harassment policy establishes that her conduct qualified as harassment and that Wal-Mart may fire rather than merely suspend her.”
Matthews told the court the Illinois Department of Employment Security found the misconduct that led to her termination was not severe enough to bar her from receiving unemployment benefits, “But the agency’s finding is irrelevant,” the appeals court said.
Matthews also argued that she had been meeting Wal-Mart’s expectations before the incident and was the only employee fired as a result of the conversation.
The summary judgment noted that none of the other employees made comments that violated the harassment policy, noting that Matthews admitted that none of the other employees involved made such comments.
“Finally,” the decision stated, “Matthews argues that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance and sabotaged her case. But Matthews’ remedy for counsel’s allegedly negligent behavior is a malpractice action, not another shot at a trial against Wal-Mart.”
from The Chicago-Sun Times

Susan Stanton

LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA – City commissioners reacted Tuesday to e-mails accusing City Manager Susan Stanton of being biased against gays and lesbians by passing a resolution reaffirming the city’s commitment to diversity.
The resolution, approved before a standing-room-only crowd, reaffirms the city’s commitment to “full and equal rights for all of its residents and employees regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.”
It notes Lake Worth hosts the annual PrideFest event and has hoisted the gay pride flag at city hall for 11 years and that city code forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
The e-mail campaign stemmed from an online petition on Change.org by The Cottage that claims the bar has been the target of unfair enforcement of the city’s noise ordinance because it hosts Sunday tea dances for gays and lesbians. The owner of The Cottage, Loretta Lufty, said Stanton also has used selective code enforcement to target the bar at 522 Lucerne Ave.
The e-mail petition has generated more than 1,300 responses from as far away as Canada. Vice Mayor Suzanne Mulvehill said she received e-mails from Latvia about The Cottage and the city’s alleged homophobic actions. She called the e-mail campaign “cyber-bullying.”
Mulvehill suggested writing a press release explaining the city’s position and working with the Palm Beach County Convention and Visitor’s Bureau to repair the city’s reputation.
Mayor Rene Varela said he did not see a pattern of behavior against businesses owned by or catering to gays and lesbians in the city and accused The Cottage of “pulling out the gay card.”
The owner of The Cottage, Loretta Lufty, said Stanton has used selective code enforcement to target the bar at 522 Lucerne Ave.
The Cottage has been cited twice under the city’s new noise ordinance, though there have been 15 calls there in response to noise complaints since the new noise ordinance was enacted in November.
“This is extremely difficult for me,” said Stanton, formerly Steve Stanton, who was fired from her job in Largo because of her decision to change gender. “I have felt the sting of harassment. The comments attributed to me on the website are not correct.”
In its online campaign, The Cottage cited an e-mail exchange between Stanton and Dennis Vogt, who lives half a block north of The Cottage and has been bothered by music from the bar. In the e-mails, Vogt jokingly suggested throwing eggs at the bar to stop the sound and have the city reimburse him for the eggs. In an e-mail response, Stanton wrote, “What size eggs?”
“I got frustrated about nothing being done about the noise,” Vogt said. “That’s why I sent the e-mail. It was a joke.”
Commissioner Scott Maxwell said the commission should conduct an investigation to determine whether there has been any selective enforcement of city codes or the noise ordinance.
“I don’t think it’s enough to reaffirm our commitment to diversity and say all is well,” Maxwell said.
Maxwell asked for a report detailing every noise ordinance and code enforcement call made to businesses and homes since Jan. 1, 2008.
from The Palm Beach Post
*
*
*

Brandon McInerney & Larry King

Jury selection for the murder trial of Brandon McInerney has been set for May 16 in Santa Barbara.
Ventura County Superior Court Judge Charles Campbell on Monday also set a hearing for pretrial motions for May 9 in Ventura County.
McInerney is charged with killing 15-year-old classmate Larry King execution style during a computer lab class Feb. 12, 2008, at E.O. Green School in Oxnard. McInerney also is charged with a hate crime because he allegedly had adopted white supremacist views and King had identified himself as gay. A police gang expert testified in a 2009 preliminary hearing that white supremacists consider gay people enemies of the white race.
McInerney, now 17, faces as much as 53 years to life in prison if convicted of all charges in adult court. Prosecutors have offered a sentence of 25 years to life if he pleads guilty to first-degree murder and the hate-crime allegation.
A jury will be selected from a pool of Santa Barbara residents, and officials there have indicated they need a month to summon hundreds of prospective jurors. The trial, however, will be in Ventura.
Campbell told lawyers Monday there would have to be “extraordinary” reasons for jury selection in Santa Barbara to be postponed again.
“We can’t do this to Santa Barbara twice,” Campbell said.
Jury selection had been set to start the week of Nov. 16, 2010, in Santa Barbara but was postponed after McInerney’s lawyers filed a motion to recuse the District Attorney’s Office and raised questions about the availability of a defense expert for trial. At the time, Campbell said the postponement would be a “huge disruption” for Santa Barbara Superior Court, which had been prepared to summon 2,200 potential jurors.
Outside the courtroom, defense attorney Scott Wippert said, “We are hoping there aren’t going to be any more delays.”
Early in Monday’s hearing, Wippert wasn’t certain the trial could proceed in May, telling the judge expert witness psychologist Donald Hoagland would be unavailable then due to “personal reasons.”
Wippert said he learned Sunday night that Hoagland wouldn’t be ready and immediately filed a motion to continue the trial, which prompted prosecutor Maeve Fox to immediately oppose it.
“Three years is too long, and this case has got to go,” Fox told the judge.
After Wippert told the court it might be necessary to hire another psychologist, Campbell told Wippert he wanted to hold a hearing so Hoagland could give specific reasons on why he wouldn’t be ready in May.
The judge ordered a recess so Wippert could call Hoagland to ask whether he would be available for trial or when he could appear in court for a hearing to explain to the judge why he would be unavailable.
Wippert returned to court after the recess and told the judge Hoagland will have his report finished by the end of May and be available to testify.
Campbell said this should be sufficient time, noting that jury selection will take about two weeks.
Fox told the judge she can’t complain about the new timetable.
“If we can get this under way, I’ll be there,” Fox told the judge.
from The Ventura County Star

SWARTHMORE, PENNSYLVANIA – A Swarthmore College student and his male friend were punched, kicked and stomped by a group of teens in a campus attack over the weekend that a college official cautioned may have been spurred by homophobia.
H. Elizabeth Braun, dean of students, wrote a letter Tuesday to the college community saying both victims are OK after being treated for their injuries, both on campus and later at the hospital.
“I am writing both out of concern for the victims and campus safety and because I have been made aware of some additional facts and corrections since the initial (public safety) alert went out that I want to share with you,” she stated.
Braun indicated the Swarthmore student and his friend were on Mertz Field early Sunday when they were assaulted by a group of five males and one female. The initial alert indicated the attack happened when the college males were on Magill walk, near the train tracks, and were met by four males and one female.
“Our student has also shared that he and his friend were being affectionate with one another when they were approached by the high school-aged students. While it still isn’t clear what prompted the assault on our student and his friend, it does appear that homophobia could have been a factor in the attack,” Braun wrote. “I know that you share my distress and concern that any type of physical assault would take place on our campus, particularly one that may have been motivated by hate. I know that you will join me in condemning this act of violence on our campus and I appreciate that many of you have already expressed your concern to me.”
The officer who responded to the scene had no reason to suspect homophobia as a possible catalyst for the assault, Chief Brian Craig said Tuesday night. “The first I heard of that was this morning.”
Craig said separate reports were taken by campus security and police, shortly after the about 12:30 a.m. Sunday incident.
“There was no mention of homophobia,” Craig said, adding that such an attack “would be out of character for this community.”
According to Craig, police suspected the Swarthmore College student and his friend, visiting from the University of Pennsylvania, probably angered a group of high school-aged youth who had asked them for booze.
“Were they ville rats?” Craig said one of the college males wanted to know, referring to youth who live in the town and do not belong on campus.
“Apparently the crowd jumped on them,” Craig said, noting that one of the college males was jumped from behind.
Both college males were treated at Springfield Hospital for injuries that Craig described as mostly abrasions, no bleeding cuts.
Police were initially dispatched to the college health center.
Craig, who was at home and did not have a copy of the report available, said the college males might have been walking “arm in arm” when four males and one female first approached them.
“What little I know about these type of incidents, if it centered about homophobia, there are usually comments made,” Craig said. “If any comments were made, it was not reported to us at that time.”
Craig said about 30 minutes prior to the attack, four males and a female were turned away from a fraternity. They were described as two white males, two Indian males and a female.
“I was happy to hear that someone was questioning whether or not they belonged there, and that they were asked to leave,” Craig said.
Braun indicated Owen Redgrave, director of public safety, and his office, in cooperation with Swarthmore police, will continue to investigate the incident “and do all that they can do find the perpetrators of this frightening and upsetting crime.”
Both males have received support from Health Services, Public Safety and the Dean’s Office.
“I had the opportunity to meet with our student (Monday) night and while he is shaken by what happened, he is grateful for the support he has received from the community, and mostly wants to encourage all students to continue to look out for their personal safety at all times, both on and off campus,” Braun stated.
from Delaware County Daily Times