Tag TCEQ ethics

Michael Honeycutt, TCEQ Tox Director, Lies under Oath

Moderator Leave a comment

Michael Honeycutt, Ph.D., whom this post tersely exposes, is the director of toxicology of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). He is also the current chairman of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Science Advisory Boards but, amid some controversy concerning his ethics, reportedly will not be seeking reappointment when his term ends next month.

Readers may consult “What TCEQ Exec L’Oreal Stepney Would Ask Michael Honeycutt if She Cared Whether the Directors Her Agency Employed Were Unscrupulous Stooges” and its attendant links for specifics concerning this post.

Note: The writer’s publication of satirical images like the one below is not meant to suggest to the reader who has been victimized by court process that people who lie in court or abet liars in court deserve to be lampooned merely. It is the writer’s conviction, rather, that they deserve to be harshly censured in court, like those who are lied about, threatened in court, like those who are lied about, and sent to jail, like those who are lied about too often are. The deplorable fact is that liars like Honeycutt are almost always rewarded for their misconduct with the court’s thanks. Criticism and satiric commentary are thus victims’ only lawful recourse.

Michael Honeycutt, Michael Honeycutt PhD, Michael Honeycutt TCEQ, Michael Honeycutt EPA, false testimony, L'Oreal Stepney, L'Oreal Stepney TCEQ, Toby Baker, Greg Abbott, Tiffany Bredfeldt, Tiffany Bredfeldt PhD, Tiffany Bredfeldt TCEQ, Bredfeldt TG

Michael Honeycutt, Ph.D., director of toxicology of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), represented as an even fatter big fat liar

WHAT MICHAEL HONEYCUTT DID:

Lied under oath in a lawsuit in which he phoned in an appearance to help a colleague who had lied under oath deprive the writer of his First Amendment liberty to report their lies.

WHAT MICHAEL HONEYCUTT COUNTED ON:

That his and his colleague’s testimony could never be published.

HOW MICHAEL HONEYCUTT DID IT:

By testifying that I had called his colleague a “fraudulent scientist” because I told him she was a liar.

Honeycutt also reported secondhand fictive tales of sexual harassment/aggression that he acknowledged under oath he had made no attempt to clarify let alone verify.

WHY MICHAEL HONEYCUTT DID IT:

Because he had an inappropriate relationship with his colleague, who was and continues to be his employee. Whether that inappropriate relationship went beyond willing service to her as an agent in an enterprise that was later deemed unlawful, the writer can’t say. (Honeycutt did, however, testify that he had provided his colleague with a private office with a door that locked, and the woman was nominated to a post at the EPA coincident with Honeycutt’s nomination.)

WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES WERE:

An unconstitutional censorship order prohibiting the writer from reporting years of false testimony by Honeycutt’s colleague, a married woman who had indulged an infatuation at the writer’s home in 2005. The writer lived under the order for five years, sustaining himself by manual labor, before it was dissolved in 2018, when the woman’s accusations were dismissed, and a mutual order was entered by the court prohibiting her from ever revisiting them publicly (though the writer is certain they continue to circulate privately). While the writer lived hand-to-mouth, Honeycutt was paid a generous six-figure salary for performing in an air-conditioned facility what is reportedly held by many to be suspect science for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).

The illegal order Honeycutt was instrumental in coercing from a since disgraced judge was only dissolved after a protracted two-year contest following his colleague’s seeking to have the writer imprisoned, which Honeycutt apparently supported, and her false allegations continue to be preserved as public documents that can only serve to impede the writer and that have galled and gnawed at him, to the diminishment of his and others’ lives, for nearly 15 years.

WHAT MICHAEL HONEYCUTT HAS DONE SINCE 2018:

Relished his moment in the spotlight as the EPA’s chief science advisor by all appearances.

Copyright © 2020 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com

What TCEQ Exec L’Oreal Stepney Would Ask Michael Honeycutt if She Cared Whether the Directors Her Agency Employed Were Unscrupulous Stooges

Moderator 4 Comments

The author of this post, Todd Greene, was baselessly sued in 2013 (not for the first time) by a scientist in the employ of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) named Tiffany Bredfeldt, who called upon her boss, Michael Honeycutt, TCEQ director of toxicology and today head of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Science Advisory Boards, to witness on her behalf.

Both of them are Ph.D.’s, which is the sort of fact judges are more apt to find compelling than, say, the truth.

Bredfeldt, a married woman, had targeted Greene at his home in 2005, indulged an infatuation, and then hoaxed the police and the courts to whitewash her conduct by claiming she was afraid and had been sexually accosted or assaulted (the details of her narrative and their specificity varied broadly with each retelling).

Greene would be in and out of court with Bredfeldt, based largely on allegations of hers stemming from their three-month acquaintance in 2005, for no less than a dozen years.

The upshot of Bredfeldt and Honeycutt’s tag-team effort was an unlawful injunction imposed upon Greene that forbid him from speaking about Bredfeldt’s conduct or his own travails in the “justice system,” even “by word of mouth.”

The illegal injunction, which violated Greene’s First Amendment rights (and concealed lies), was dissolved in 2018 (five years later) after Bredfeldt sued to have Greene wrongly imprisoned for allegedly violating the censorship order.

Recent posts on this blog have criticized administrators at the TCEQ for their claims and conduct and provided a brief series of statements culled from the hours and reams of “evidence” that show so plainly that Bredfeldt is a liar that even a bureaucrat or a judge couldn’t fail to discern the fact.

Following in the tracks of the most recent post of this kind, “What L’Oreal Stepney, Newly Named TCEQ Exec, Would Ask Tiffany Bredfeldt if She Cared Whether the Scientists Her Agency Employed Were Fucking Liars,” this post imagines questions that TCEQ executive administrators might pose to Dr. Honeycutt to clarify conclusively whether he carelessly involved their agency in a vicious hoax that would lead to a wronged man’s nearly being imprisoned.

Michael Honeycutt TCEQ, Michael Honeycutt PhD, Michael Honeycutt, Michael Honeycutt EPA, L'Oreal Stepney, L'Oreal Stepney TCEQ, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, Toby Baker TCEQ, TCEQ executive director, false testimony, lying, liar

Michael Honeycutt, Ph.D., the EPA’s “top scientist” and toxicology director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)

In a letter sent to you at the TCEQ in 2011, Mr. Greene informed you that one of your married employees, Tiffany Bredfeldt, had falsely testified against him and continued to make defamatory claims about his character and behavior despite, apparently, having been offered a chance to simply and quietly recant years before.

Discounting any ethical obligation a government scientist who’s called upon to give expert witness testimony might have to represent facts accurately, one would expect you to feel some burden to ascertain the truth of these allegations prior to participating in a lawsuit in another state that you must have known was intended to have Mr. Greene judicially censored on pain of incarceration.

When asked by Mr. Greene what your familiarity was with the underlying matter that led you to witness for Dr. Bredfeldt, you testified that you “didn’t ask for details” or “clarify” them because as her employer “it would not be appropriate.”

QUESTION: How do you justify your involvement in a matter that by your own admission you hadn’t made any effort to fathom?

You testified that Dr. Bredfeldt had told you Mr. Greene “propositioned her,” and opined that this meant Mr. Greene had sought to have sex with her. This obviously contrasted with what Mr. Greene had told you.

QUESTIONS: What was the basis for your giving preferential treatment to Dr. Bredfeldt’s account, one that you admitted you had accepted at face value and made no attempt to clarify? Do you consider this choice ethically conscionable?

You also testified that Mr. Greene accused her of being a “fraudulent scientist.”

QUESTION: Was this what Mr. Greene said to you, or were you urged to make a false statement to satisfy the expectation of your employee’s attorney?

You said that Mr. Greene told you Dr. Bredfeldt was a liar who lacked “good morals,” and you acknowledged under oath that these were “pretty significant allegations,” the implication being that they were allegations that diminished her trustworthiness and value as a scientist.

You also said that Dr. Bredfeldt told you Mr. Greene “wouldn’t take no for an answer.” Yet she told the police that Mr. Greene had taken no for an answer, and she told Mr. Greene himself that he had been “nice” to her and that she had “never felt the need” to tell him she was married.

Dr. Bredfeldt’s account to you is plainly contradicted by her own statements, ones she entered into evidence voluntarily.

QUESTION: If you considered the allegation of lying significant, what if any actions have you taken since Dr. Bredfeldt’s allegations were dismissed in 2018?

Not long prior to the 2013 lawsuit, TCEQ Director L’Oreal Stepney had answered charges of censorship leveled at this agency by declaring that it is “wrong” and not representative of TCEQ policy.

QUESTION: Did this public repudiation of censorship cause you any misgivings about assisting Dr. Bredfeldt to obtain a censorship order against Mr. Greene, one that was notably thrown out five years later for being wrong?

Finally, Mr. Greene has alleged that in 2016 Dr. Bredfeldt said in court that you considered her latest lawsuit “good experience” for occasions when she might be called upon to give expert witness testimony as a TCEQ scientist.

QUESTION: Did you wish Dr. Bredfeldt success at having Mr. Greene jailed?

Copyright © 2020 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com

*Readers may wonder why questions like those in this post and the post “What L’Oreal Stepney, Newly Named TCEQ Exec, Would Ask Tiffany Bredfeldt if She Cared Whether the Scientists Her Agency Employed Were Fucking Liars” couldn’t have been raised in court. The simple answer is that judges will flatly deny defendants the opportunity to ask questions whose answers aren’t likely to support the conclusions the judges have already formed.

**TCEQ administrators have seemed to respond to this writer’s posts by using search engine manipulation to suppress the posts and images associated with them in Google’s returns. Readers who are curious to see verification of this need only Google the name Michael Honeycutt, for example. He’s a prominent political figure these days. Yet Google’s image strip for him will rarely appear on the first page of its returns for his name, and when it does, it’s at the bottom.