never a jury trial two issues here relating to the st amendment one is that i was not allowed as a member of the press equal access to a public meeting the other is that the defendants retaliated against me for my reporting and if if i could direct you to the summary judgment order which is on special appendix page page sixty go to page sixty seven dollars the of the decision states plaintiff's evidence of retaliation rests on little more than speculation although circuit was aware of and disapproved of plaintiff's blog and may have been involved in the decision to not renew plainness lease there is no evidence on the record that serco wanted to harm plaintiff because of his blog reporting that seems as if the court wants nothing short of a flat out confession by mr serpico that rarely happens a jury should have been allowed to decide this jury instructions in fact say that circumstantial evidence is as good as direct evidence again on page sixty seven quote from the decision here the heart of the retaliation issue is whether the non renewal of plaintiff's lease was motivated by pla exercise of his st amendment right because the record could not lead a reasonable jerk to conclude that it was defendants are entitled to summary judgment i do not know how a judge could have predicted there was a smirk and the timing there circumstantial evidence is a clearly no one denies that i reported on numerous horrific sexual scandals against mr serpico and that he was ultimately fired for that he was aware of and spoke to the entire battery park city authority staff at meetings about my blog encouraging them not to read it a witness who worked there at the time confronted him hey were you involved in greer's eviction he smirked shrugged did not deny it there was no affidavit ever denying it and i'm the st person in thirty years to ever be evicted for any reason whatsoever from this defend i was never i never missed or in fourteen years and again evidence that is not a reason is the original housing court case never mentioned whatsoever that missing payment was the reason they just said it's a condo we don't have we have the right to not renew willy nilly there was never now two years later when the battery park city authority lawyers got involved they started to use that to feds and there's just no evidence that the there's i have many years of emails where i was complaining to the landlord that their accounting system was archaic and desire for full so they had a chronic problem not just with me and everybody where their accounting budget and then the evidence proffered was fat fabricated it was if you look at the spread sheets that's not the real accounting  appendix the summary judgment as there is no evidence that officials who decided to well st of all the entire equal access decision is moot if the individuals in healing circle were not removed because s removed somehow the judge determined that the lower court determined that a c e o and chairman did not have final decision making authority only because theoretically the board could review there is no evidence that the board ever reviewed this in fact it's standard procedure that the board never reviews matters like this the board meets once a month to review basically r f p contracts that set everything else is delegated new york state law  the c e o and heal the right so there's there's a law showing that dennis meal had final making authority and there's no practice on any of the meetings i've attended since two thousand and nine were such matters were ever reviewed by a board were late fees and there were discussions about whether the late fees were going to be waived i think that there's no question that the landlord defendants were well within their rights to not renew the lease because of repeated late payments and indeed other instances where the landlord defendants had not renewed other tenants leases because of late payment and rent now that's all it goes to the landlord defendants i think in addition there's the problem that they e mail asking whether she had been evicted and the fact that mr serpico and mr rossi one of the landlord defendants had been seen together having coffee even in combination those facts do not arise t serco after they had been dismissed for failure to plead individual involvement in the equal access claim the district court was well within its discretion to deny the request to amend the complaint a  rd time to reinstate these defendants this was after discovery had closed the request was made in mist in dr greer's summary judgment motion he cited cases in our brief that where district courts routinely deny an amendment at that stage in the litigation i would also just note that between mr may heels deposition where he admitted that he had been the one to direct that dr greer observe the meetings from a separate room two months passed between that deposition and when dr moore filed his summary judgment motion doctor dr drew filed no less than sixteen letters in the district court during that time period and dollars supreme court case of lowe's mine vs the florida municipality is extremely similar to my case it was a man exercising his rights in a public meeting and the corrupt board of the local municipality had him arrested in my case i wasn't arrested i was barred from the meetings that the close my case rules that a probable cause pretext excuse is not going to defeat a st amendment case like mine the entire defense rests on probable cause which i refute on the basis of evidence and even if it were true it wouldn't stand up to those mine the other thing about equal access is this court has an opportunity to define when is it behavior w and being kicked out jim acosta c n n has was kicked out of the white house sued but that d c circuit never addressed that this would be the st time anyone can ever say when are you so disruptive at a meeting that you deserve to be removed from the white house or the battery park city three board meeting of note every single one of the defendants from dennis mcgill serpico the head of legal the head of have all been fired in disgrace there's multiple federal lawsuits against them for the same accusations