by spamlite4.knology.net with SMTP; 20 Aug 2003 16:40:04 -0000
Received: by iris2.directnic.com (iris/0.98:relay); 20 Aug 2003 16:40:06 +0000
Forwarded-By: lkh@enticy.org
Received: by iris2.directnic.com (iris/0.98:470161); 20 Aug 2003 16:40:06 +0000
Received: from [64.35.224.3] (EHLO HQF2.eeoc.gov) (64.35.224.3)
by iris2.directnic.com (iris/0.98:470161) with ESMTP
id 470161 for lkh@enticy.org; 20 Aug 2003 16:40:06 +0000
Return-Path: BILLY.SANDERS@EEOC.GOV
Received: from HEADQUARTERS-MTA by HQF2.eeoc.gov
with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:39:42 -0500
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.5.0
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 12:41:19 -0500
From: "BILLY SANDERS"
To:
Subject: Re: Good morning
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_E8B6994E.EB8ADD29"

This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to
consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to
properly handle MIME multipart messages.

--=_E8B6994E.EB8ADD29
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Does not work that way. In fact, the documents in her file don't mention
you in a positive way because she feels you were part of her problem and
did not go to bat for her for a full time job so you will need a
statement from her to support some of your case. RE: Harassment you need
to know that if they took some type of discipline against the harasser
and it ended we might not find a violation of the law despite having the
graphic info. But we will cross them bridges when we get to them. I am
waiting to hear from their attorney re the Fact Finding Conference. I
will be leaving the office shortly and will not be back until next
Wednesday so if you need me you can call me on my cell @ (704) 564-9464.
C U Later

>>> "lkh" 08/20/03 10:49AM >>>

FYI

no response contact from Ms. Thompson.

But that's ok.

Pretty much all of her complaint was filed in my complaint
as supporting documentation. They may have settled her
complaint but that does not lock up the documents in my
complaint. After all, if that was the case, she referred to
many of my documents in hers. There is no judge in this
land who would prohibit my case just because it was
referenced in her case.

And anyway, the federal judges here declared in 2001
that cases settled in private that involved current cases
will be opened upon request. It was an interesting
article where all 10 federal judges in South Carolina
stated their intention to open any closed file needed to
be made public for another case.

Hope all is well with you.

Lee