45 lines
2.8 KiB
Plaintext
45 lines
2.8 KiB
Plaintext
RICHMOND, Va. -- An Army publicist who claims he received a poor job
|
|
evaluation because of his off-duty efforts to expose military UFO coverups
|
|
argued before a federal appeals panel he needs an injunction to protect him
|
|
from his supervisors' ire.
|
|
But a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
|
|
suggested Tuesday the entire case may be unnecessary since the offending
|
|
evaluation had already been excised from Larry Bryant's file.
|
|
Bryant, 52, a 32-year civil service veteran from Alexandria who works
|
|
as a civilian editor for the Army News Service, claimed his First Amendment
|
|
right to free speech was violated because his job rating was based in part on
|
|
his longtime interest in UFOs and the military.
|
|
In 1985, after running ads asking for help in ending "the Cosmic
|
|
Watergate," Bryant received his first-ever unsatisfactory job rating. Bryant
|
|
sued, claiming the Army was trying to block his search for Army
|
|
whistleblowers. The Defense Department later agreed to stop bothering him
|
|
about the ads, but Bryant continued to press his First Amendment case.
|
|
The U.S. District Court in Alexandria threw the case out, saying
|
|
there were other ways to settle the matter besides a lawsuit. The 4th U.S.
|
|
Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, but the U.S. Supreme court overturned them
|
|
both and ordered a hearing.
|
|
As the July 1989 trial began, Bryant asked for a delay because a key
|
|
witness -- a supervisor who allegedly was out to get him because he was "an
|
|
embarrassment" -- was on assignment in Antartica. The court proceeded without
|
|
the witness, ruled in favor of the government, and this appeal followed.
|
|
To Judge Francis Murnaghan Jr.'s inquiries about the proof of UFOs,
|
|
Bryant's lawyer, James Heller of Washington contended Bryant had a First
|
|
Amendment right to seek answers to "unknown events."
|
|
"Why wouldn't he be an embarrassment" if he's following "a theory for
|
|
which no scientific basis has been found?" Murnaghan asked.
|
|
Judge Dickson Phillips Jr., also wondered why Bryant couldn't "get
|
|
his supervisors off his back ... without getting into the First Amendment
|
|
jurisprudence?
|
|
"If the ax really drops on him, then he can sue," Phillips said.
|
|
Heller said Bryant fears that without the protection of an
|
|
injunction, he'll be fired. Since Bryant sued, all his evaluations have been
|
|
top-notch, Heller said.
|
|
In answer to a question, Koppel also noted that the offending
|
|
evaluation wasn't even in the file, because they are automatically thrown out
|
|
after three years.
|
|
Phillips, apparently convinced the revelation made the case legally
|
|
worthless, asked Koppel "Why didn't the Supreme Court look at mootness? They
|
|
put two courts to a lot of trouble for a moot case."
|
|
A decision is expected in about 60 days.
|
|
|