Opinion ID: 736848
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appellant Violated the March 15 Order

Text: 19 Second, the record overwhelmingly supports the district court's finding that appellant violated the order. Appellant and Brown had a normal working relationship prior to March 1995. Immediately after learning of Brown's March 3 testimony against Gerald, appellant initiated a sequence of hostile actions toward Brown. The first verbal assault took place on March 6, 1995, two days after the Washington Post article detailing Brown's testimony, and continued with further hostile comments directed at Brown on March 6, March 9, and March 14. 11 Furthermore, following the issuance of the March 15 order (and in defiance of it), Young maintained the pace of her harassing comments and actions. On March 22, appellant came to the dispatch office door to turn in her equipment to Brown and said, Get off your ass and take this equipment before I slap you. App. B31. On April 21, appellant made other comments and used profane language in speaking to Brown. App. B29-30. On May 8, appellant declined to show her photos to Brown and stated (in the presence of another correctional employee), No, that bitch is not looking at my pictures. During the same incident, appellant said she would kick [Brown's] ass and blow [her] away. App. B32. After the shift supervisor broke up the argument, Young stated, Brown acts like she can't be touched but I don't care about that suit. App. C56-57. And in the May 16 incident, appellant dropped live ammunition on the floor in front of Brown when returning her equipment and stated that is your problem, App. B33, C4-5, conduct clearly violative of DOC safety policy. These acts in toto indisputably constituted retaliatory action against a protected witness within the meaning of the district court's order. 20