Are minority males who oppose discrimination entitled to equal-protection

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Are minority males who oppose discrimination and illegal activity in good-faith and terminated without cause entitled to Equal Protection? If so, why have the Courts offered no protection for prior EEO activity and used it to further deprive Plaintiff of his rights? 2. Should the Courts and EEOC ignore the EEOC’s published “motivating factor’ standard for all federal agencies and arbitrarily apply the “but for” standard because Defendant alleged there were “suspicions” from unknown sources? Defendant admitted they couldn’t identify any misconduct whatsoever (RE 21 EEOC tr.pg.305 Wyrick Test.). 3. Testimony from England, Wyrick and police prove EEO activity Defendant concealed is the only substantiated cause for termination. Should the Court falsely assert “temporal proximity” is the only thing shown and dismiss the case without opportunity for a fair hearing or discovery? 4. Do employees or Plaintiffs in Title Vil actions have a Constitutional Right to Meaningful Reply and be informed of the source of labels or unsubstantiated complaints imposed on them by the employer, EEOC, and the Court as outlined in 5 CFR § 315.805? Plaintiff wasn’t informed of the KPB Appeal or Clarks report, mislead about the café complaint and given no opportunity to respond to Lewis’ memo. | don’t believe a visitor complained about photos | never took. 5. Do agencies have a right to use police to procure false, off-duty, anonymous reports and enter them in an employee’s work record without substantiating anything? Do unsubstantiated police reports have probative value in employment in the absence of due process? 6. Body Cam footage proves MACA police procured a rumor from Tour Guide, Chris Clark, after the interrogation on July 22. Plaintiff was never informed because a visitor never filed a complaint. How does the Court assert as fact that a visitor filed a complaint at the information booth on July 14* and attribute Plaintiff's conduct? 7. FCRP Rule 56(a) states a court shall only grant summary judgement if “movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact”. Should the Court grant summary judgement when all the Defendant and Courts asserted facts are disproven or disputed? 8. How does a Court base it’s decisions on “similarity in accusations” when there are no accusations against Plaintiff and the Court can’t correctly cite what was said or who said it? Defendant admits “the only formal allegations in this case are those in Plaintiff's fourth amended complaint” (Def.Res. RE 145 ID#1867). 9. At EEOC Hearings is the Plaintiff entitled to Due Process concerning unsubstantiated police reports or allegations being used against them? When a Plaintiff files a charge of Gender Discrimination and Retaliation with the EEOC, do they have a right to identify or cross-examine the opposite sex? 10. Can Gender Discrimination be evidenced by Bias in complaint procedures, false rumors or reports of a sexual nature and the use of a previous gender discrimination complaint in termination? 11. In cases of Retaliation should a case be dismissed because coworkers requested, made or spread unsubstantiated hearsay complaints? Should Defendant take baseless insinuations from the transcript of an EEO complaint and use them as grounds for termination? 12. Should a Plaintiff’s appeal be granted Whistleblower protection when he proves a termination was motivated by his concerns of proven illegal activity? Multiple violations are evidenced in KPB and KDA records. . 13. Do Plaintiff's in Title Vil actions have a right to be painted in the best light? If so, why have the Courts portrayed me in the worst, published fictional narratives of misconduct, and trumped-up false reports? 14. Should a Court consider the source, findings, and circumstances surrounding a police report or allegation? Or, should the Court assert every complaint and allegation against a male has probative value regardless of the substance, because a “complaint was made”? 1