UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Division PATRICK JAMES KNOWLTON ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Civil Action No. 96-2467 FBI AGENT RUSSEL T. BRANSFORD ) (NHJ) et. al, ) ) Defendants. ) ) PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO (1) DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT & (2) DEFENDANTS' ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT COMES NOW Plaintiff, Patrick Knowlton, and files his opposition to defendants' motion to Dismiss, and further files his opposition to defendants' alternative motion for Summary Judgment. Summary of case 1. Plaintiff's main count in this action alleges a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985, "Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights," part (2), "Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror." Plaintiff, a Whitewater grand jury witness, alleges a violation of a civil rights statute which prohibits conspiracies to deter by intimidation or threat any federal witnesses from testifying freely, fully, and truthfully. Plaintiff alleges he was intimidated in an attempt to obstruct justice into the investigation into the death of deputy White House counsel Vincent W. Foster, Jr. 2. Plaintiff alleges that the most significant thing he witnessed in Fort Marcy Park approximately 70 minutes before the discovery of Mr. Foster's body was that Mr. Foster's car was not in the parking lot -- at a time when Mr. Foster was dead. Plaintiff alleges that this fact was covered up by Defendant FBI agent Larry Monroe. On Tuesday, October 24, 1995: (1) the allegation that Monroe's reports contained "outright lies" was published in the London Sunday Telegraph; (2) the Office of Independent Counsel ("OIC") prepared a subpoena for Plaintiff; and (3) presumably Defendant FBI agent Branford was informed of the necessity to serve it. Bransford served that subpoena two days later, on Thursday, October 26. Only the FBI and the OIC knew that plaintiff a was subpoenaed witness. 3. Beginning that same day he was subpoenaed, and continuing for three days, plaintiff was harassed by 26 or more Defendants. The objectives of the harassment were twofold, to: (1) Intimidate and warn the plaintiff; or alternatively to (2) Destabilize and discredit Plaintiff. 4. This technique of subjecting a witness to an overwhelming campaign of non-verbal harassment is known to federal intelligence and investigative agencies. Summary of Defendants' (1) Motion to Dismiss the Complaint & (2) alternative Motion for Summary Judgment 1. Defendants mischaracterize the background of this suit 5. Defendants' Motions attempt to impugn Plaintiff's motives for seeking redress by portraying him as a "delusional" "conspiracy theorist" who "is selling a manuscript concerning his conspiracy theory through the Internet." Plaintiff provided the FBI with a copy of his report in March of 1996. Because Defendants know the report contains no conspiracy theory and that it includes the results of psychiatric and psychological examinations, Plaintiff suggests Defendants' allegations are not appropriate. 6. Defendants further contend that the genesis of this suit is Plaintiff's conspiracy theory, and suggest that it is motivated by one of the witnesses to the harassment Plaintiff suffered, who Defendants characterize as right-wing funded profit-driven conspiracy theorist. This too is baseless. Moreover, prior to that second day of the harassment, Plaintiff had never heard of Christopher Ruddy. 7. Plaintiff's girlfriend, a Ph.D. consultant and educator, witnessed the harassment on October 26, 1995 and the morning of October 27. Her Affidavit, attached hereto, states in part, "At one point, I became so panic-stricken that I had to struggle to keep from crying. I have never witnessed anything like this before or since. It was intentional, coordinated, intimidating, and extremely unnerving." Affidavits from Plaintiff and Mr. Ruddy are also attached. 8. Defendants contend that "Plaintiff's allegations in his amended complaint stem from his conspiracy theory arising from the death of Mr. Foster." Defendants have it backwards. Plaintiff's allegations of obstruction of justice into the investigation into Mr. Foster's death stem from the violations of section 1985(2) alleged in his Amended Complaint (hereinafter referred to by Plaintiff simply as "Complaint"). 9. Defendants contend that "Plaintiff believes the entire 'conspiracy' was part of 'psychological operations' by the defendants or, as he calls it, 'PsycOps.'" Defendants again mischaracterize the basis of Plaintiff's cause. Plaintiff avers that "psychological operations" or "PsycOps" is a term for the modus operandi employed by Defendants to intimidate Plaintiff in violation of section 1985(2), as is specifically set forth in the sworn Affidavits of two of Plaintiff's experts attached hereto, one of whom is a 28 year veteran of the FBI and former Senior Special Agent-in-Charge of the Los Angeles division. 10. Defendants state that "Independent Counsel Robert Fiske ruled Mr. Foster's death was a suicide." Plaintiff notes that Mr. Fiske was dependent on the seven FBI Agents assigned to him, two of whom are named defendants in this obstruction of justice suit. Moreover, Plaintiff nowhere avers that Mr. Foster's death was not a suicide, but rather contends that defendants conspired to cover up that Mr. Foster's body was moved to Fort Marcy Park, and that the section 1985(2) violation alleged was committed in furtherance of that cover-up. 2. Defendants present 18 arguments in support of their dispositive motions 11. Defendants argue: (1) They cannot be sued in their individual capacity; (2) Plaintiff has failed to state a Bivens type claim; (3) Plaintiff's has inadequately alleged a cause under section 1985(2); (4) The Complaint fails to allege that Plaintiff was deterred from testifying or testifying fully and truthfully; (5) The conspiracy counts in the Complaint lack the requisite factual specificity; (6) The facts alleged fail to sufficiently raise the inference of conspiratorial agreement; (7) A single entity (the United States) cannot conspire with itself;
"Don't believe a word you hear. It was not suicide. It couldn't have been." -Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell, 7/20/93, cited in Esquire, 11/93.
Back To The Political Page.
Back To The Foster Page.