Defending the indefensible: A Parish of shame. New revelations in the "NAZI" case Simon v Jefferson Parish and Armand Kerlec. A Guest post by Whitmergate.

Asked by McGovern (Simon’s attorney) if he thought a Jewish person would be offended by a supervisor giving the Nazi salute, Kerlec said, “I don’t know whether they would be or not. I mean … I never even thought about whether anybody would be offended by it. There were so many people (co-workers) egging me on all the time that I just figured — I didn’t think about it.

Kerlec also admitted that he probably used the word “n—-r” on the job during his 32 years as a parish employee, but not among black workers. He also acknowledged receiving extensive parish training with regard to racial discrimination and harassment in the workplace, including warnings not to use racial slurs to describe Jews and African-Americans. He testified that he did not know Simon was Jewish until Simon told him.

Not long ago Parish President Theriot found himself characterized as a modern day Nazi, a Fascist, the Hitler of Jefferson Parish whose arrogance laid bare his stupidity; but more disturbingly his contempt for human rights. “TheRiot”, as Theriot was monikered, knee-jerking imprudently and with the questionable advise of counsel, filed suit against the blogosphere. Having his feelings hurt regarding criticisms of his presumed political stature, TheRiot, salivating to find out the identify of the anonymous commentators, ran into the 1st Amendment wall of Free Speech. Very shortly thereafter, TheRiot dropped the lawsuit, put his head between his legs and waddled off with and holding the hands of his similarly entwined lawyers at Phelps, Dunbar. Continue reading “Defending the indefensible: A Parish of shame. New revelations in the "NAZI" case Simon v Jefferson Parish and Armand Kerlec. A Guest post by Whitmergate.”