GENERAL REBUTTAL:
The respondant's response is incomplete. I think I am entitled to written statements, in their own words from any supposed witnesses. The respondant was supposed to provide a list of all employees, for any of the days there was a protest. Moreover, since I am charging that Mrs. Rainwater cultivated an atmosphere of hostility and sexual-orientation harassment towards me over several years of time; all the current and former employees of the bar for the last two years should be questioned.
There is also no information from the respondant regarding their policies about kissing and dancing, or any examples of similar treatment of other individuals. In a bar where people frequently commit egregious acts, and are only kicked out for the night; me being permanently banned for (at worst) yelling at Mrs. Rainwater, is all out of proportion. Furthermore, any regular patron of the bar will tell you that there is plenty of kissing going on in the bar, but management draws the line at groping. Kelly warned me several times, over the years, to keep hands off of breasts.
The respondant submitted a page of my writing as some kind of evidence. I am a published writer with a BA in Creative Writting. The respondant's submission was the concluding page of a 20-page story I had written, three years ago, for submission to the NPR Radio Show "This American Life." The guidelines for submission to that show specifically say that stories should be about "what you learned" from events. That story was written three years, the first time I was illegally banned from The Finish Line, after being assaulted and traumatized. It is no way indicative of my mindset today, and it used colorful language for the purpose of radio entertainment. Moreover violent fantasies and suicidal thoughts are relatively normal responses in victims of violence.
The only relevance of this document is that, by submitting it, the respondant tacitly admits that the current problems have their roots in events three years old. Furthermore, those events from three years ago establish a pattern of harassment that is echoed here. I was banned for no good reason then, but the Rainwaters relented when the Executive Director of the Pride Center threatened them with protests. This is simply a continuation of that same event, except that this time the respondant's hostility is multiplied because it is not just me alone that is annoying some patrons by my very presence - the situation is exacorbated by me and my girlfriend being affectionate to each other. A lot of people were annoyed that I was a "regular" in there; when my girlfriend and I became a "regular couple" in there, those people got really upset.
The response was submitted by Warren Rainwater, who was not even there on the night of 9 July 2010. Clearly, Mr. Rainwater's employees would tell him a version of events that don't implicate them, and Mrs. Rainwater's friends would tell him versions of events that don't implicate her.
The response contains the phrase "aggressively kissing a female patron", but makes no mention of who that patron was. It also seems to imply that the kissing was unwelcome. While this is completely untrue, I assume that the patron in question is my live-in girlfriend, who was with me that night. We had only been together a few weeks at that time, and she was less committed to the relationship than she was scared of reprisal. But that ratio is changing every day.
The Finish Line has an elaborate surveillance system. If the respondant's version of events were true, they could prove it. Under Colorado law, failure to provide those records can be considered to be evidence that the records would, in fact, implicate the respondant.
On the surface, this might seem to be a case of my word against theirs. Fortunately, we have another account of events which occurred on 7/9. I am submitting a copy of the police report of CSPD, which contains an account of events from Kelly Phillips. This report contradicts the account submitted by respondant.
The police report is not without errors, but it is close enough to be of value to the investigation. In the report, Kelly Phillips (respondant's night-manager), gives a very clear sequence of events.
1. Gina enters and Kelly offers a drink. Clearly Gina has not been banned or barred, if she is being offered a drink; as is alleged in respondant's statement.
2. Gina walks over and starts "talking" with Toni. Kelly seems to be too far away to hear the conversation. Kelly was, in fact, inside the bar, and the conversation took place on the smoking patio. According to Gina's account, earlier in the report, at this time Gina was attempting to negotiate about the issues of kissing and dancing with Toni.
3. Kelly hears Toni say, "When you cut your dick off then you can call yourself a woman." If Kelly could not hear the previous conversation, but she can hear this; the indication is that Toni yelled this discriminatory insult (and policy of the bar, since she is the owner). According to Gina's statement in the report, Toni actually said "When somebody cuts...," which is much more threatening.
4. Kelly reports that Gina then raised her voice to yelling. Which means that Gina was not yelling before Toni gave serious provocation. Gina only raised her voice so that other patrons (potential witnesses) would be alerted to the dispute.
5. According to both Kelly's and Gina's accounts, Gina then threatened to protest the discriminatory policy of the bar, which is an activity that is protected by law.
6. According to both accounts, Kelly then told Gina to leave, and Gina said "no." According to both accounts, Gina was told to leave, but continued protesting, and was physically ejected.
7. According to Kelly, Gina was physically ejected from the bar and from outside the bar, having already been ejected; Gina yelled something back. Kelly says Gina yelled, "You dumb bitch, I've been setting you up." Gina actually said, "You drunk bitch, you set yourself up."
8. Respondant's statement claims that Gina's insult (above) was the reason for Gina being ejected. But that is belied by Kelly's statement that Gina was ejected for protesting and Gina's insult was ex post facto.
9. By her own admission to the police, Kelly Phillips (acting as the night-manager of The Finish Line) has broken Colorado Anti-Discrimination law. Kelly admittedly took reprisal against Gina by ejecting her and denying service, and she addmittedly assaulted Gina by "pushing" her out the door. In her own words, Kelly admits she did this BECAUSE Gina was protesting the discriminatory policies of the bar, specifically that Gina could not slow dance with her girlfriend or kiss anyone. Both of these were discriminatory policies, aimed at Gina alone, that Gina was protesting. Moreover Gina was disputing Toni's discriminatory policy that Gina could not be considered a woman unless Gina had gender-reassignment surgery, a policy which is contrary to Colorado law.
10. Kelly has probably committed perjury by giving false statements either to the police or to the commission, if she is, in fact, witness to the statement submitted by respondant.
SPECIFIC REBUTTALS
I was never asked to leave for kissing anyone. I was warned that I would be "86'd forever, for kissing any girl." I was told that there was "a rule against girls kissing girls", and that I was "not allowed to kiss anyone." It was because I disputed these discriminatory policies, that I was asked to leave.
I did not leave and return, but went immediately to speak to Toni upon my arrival at the bar, after having been told by Kelly, "Toni has been telling people all week that you will be 86'd forever, for kissing any girl."
I did not "confront" Toni, but attempted diplomacy. Toni was drunk, and responded to diplomacy with hate speech.
The F-word was never used. The words "bitch" and the concept of a "set-up" were ex post facto.
Nobody was concerned for Toni's safety. The people who "escorted" me out were a violent mob that Toni incited to attack me, verbally and physically.
I spoke on the phone with Gerald Cunning. He probably was not an actual witness to these events, as he denies that Toni made the "cut your dick off" statement. However, Mr. Cunning will probably be an excellent witness for establishing the atmosphere of sexual-orientation harassment that Toni cultivated. Mr. Cunning himself referred to Gina several times as "it". He stated that the bar had tolerated Gina for several years, including tolerating Gina's "slutty behavior", but it had gone too far and the bar was justified in kicking Gina out for antics that he went on to list in detail, antics that were all rumor and innuendo.
SUMMARY:
In the nearly twenty years that the Rainwaters have owned and run The Finish Line, they have established a reputation for intimidation and reprisal. I have observed that Mr. Rainwater habitually sexually-harasses his female employees, and that both co-owners often threaten both employees and customers. Three years ago, the Rainwaters backed down from a threatened protest, and their hostility has been building since then.
There is no doubt that my regular attendance at The Finish Line has been a source of conflict, between patrons and between patrons and management. There is no doubt that some patrons no longer go to The Finish Line because I go there. There is no doubt that my relationship, with another long-time Finish Line regular, exacerbated the situation. The inescapable conclusion is that the whole story about threatening Toni is pretext to accomplish a discriminatory business policy by indirect means.
Furthermore, if anyone was set-up here, it was me. The evidence all supports my theory that the following things occurred:
1. There were patron complaints stemming from my affectionate relationship with my girlfriend.
2. A furor was generated (among a certain segment of the clientele). The furor grew as exaggerated stories were spread around, and the stories continued to become more and more exaggerated.
3. Toni quelled the furor, by promising to do something the next time I was expected in, July 9.
4. Toni encouraged some of the most homophobic and violent patrons to be there on 7/9, and plied them with free drinks to set the stage for my arrival. Anticipating that I would kiss my girlfriend and give her pretext to ban me, Toni had the mob ready to back her if I objected. She probably also arranged for Mr. Rainwater not to be there, as a moderating influence.
5. Kelly knew something was up, and attempted to warn me; but I walked right into Toni's trap when I tried diplomacy.
In my opinion, if the Finish Line employees can be made to truly believe that the law can protect them from reprisal (and continued harassment by the Rainwaters); then the egregious truth will come out.
