His Gay Claim Likely To Hold Up

TAMPA, FLORIDA - Whether or not Joe Redner is gay, attorneys and First Amendment experts are calling the strip club owner's recent disclosure a brilliant legal move.
Because how can anyone prove he's not?
"I would assume it would be virtually impossible for them to disprove his clear and unequivocal statement," First Amendment attorney Luke Lirot said.
The owner of the Mons Venus and regular county agitator has publicly said he's gay over and over in the newspapers, radio and television in the past week. The disclosure came after Redner sued the county over its June prohibition barring county government from acknowledging or participating in gay pride events.
County attorneys tried to get Redner's case dismissed by arguing Redner isn't personally affected by the ordinance, implying in veiled legalese that Redner isn't gay.
Redner amended his complaint last week to say he is a homosexual.
In the days since, Redner has given ambiguous interviews, saying with a chuckle that he is in a sexual "transition stage" or that he's announced his sexual orientation "to help a good cause," making his sexual disclosure seem contrived or at least well-timed.
Yet, Redner denies his disclosure is a legal ploy made falsely to bolster his case, although he says the case did spur him to reveal it.
Hillsborough County attorneys are particularly skeptical of Redner's claim and are even contemplating deposing Redner under oath, if U.S. District Judge James Moody deems the issue pertinent.
"If he's made an allegation that he's gay, and that's false, then I think that would be of interest to the court," said Robert Brazel of the county attorney's office. "You're normally not supposed to make false allegations to the court."
Redner said he welcomes the opportunity to sit down across the table from county attorneys and tell all.
"I'm available any time they want me," said Redner, who has two ex-wives, five children and several grandchildren. "I can't wait for them to depose me."
Experts in the First Amendment, the area of law governing many gay rights issues, say it will be difficult to prove anything more than what Redner says. No real legal definition or interpretation of homosexuality exists.
"I'm not sure that the courts have felt it necessary to interpret the reference to homosexuality and address the vagueness and ambiguity of that term," said Joseph Jackson, legal skills professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law.
Several attorneys said they think homosexuality is more of a state of mind.
"I think the best evidence of what someone's sexuality is is the way the person considers him or herself to be," said Rebecca Steele, an attorney for the West Florida chapter of the ACLU. "It's going to be difficult to find proof of anyone's sexuality other than what they testify about."
Lirot said that being a homosexual doesn't require a person to be intimate with someone of the same sex.
"I don't know if it actually needs an act to be completed," said Lirot, who has represented Redner before but isn't involved in the suit against the county. "I guess that's why they call it sexual orientation and not sexual activity."
Even if the county attorneys manage to prove or convince a judge that Redner has lied about his sexual orientation as a way to bring his case, the penalties are financial and rarely enforced.
Plus, Redner disclosed his sexual orientation in a legal complaint, which is not under oath. So if he lied, he hasn't committed perjury, said Tampa lawyer John Lauro.
Under the law, whatever Redner alleges must be assumed true, unless proven otherwise, which means the burden lies with the county to spend the time and money to investigate.
"He's taken a legal position that is unassailable and put himself in a position that if he's gay, he's got standing, and if he's not gay, so be it," Lauro said. "The downside is nonexistent and nobody is going to prosecute him for that."
The legal debate over Redner's sexual orientation may never happen. County attorneys say they'll likely pursue a more mundane legal avenue for getting Redner's case tossed.
Redner, they say, has to prove he has an actual injury. And not being able to admire gay pride library exhibits, which were removed days before the county passed its ban, might not be enough to qualify.
That's the main reason the gay rights group Equality Florida has yet to file a lawsuit or get involved with Redner's lawsuit. It is waiting for the county to enforce the ban, which it sees as more of an illegal action, said Equality Florida spokesman Brian Winfield.
"The strongest lawsuit is going to be about implementation, and frankly we've been standing around since the summer challenging them to implement their own policy," Winfield said.
Redner's disclosure might never be debated because some experts say he didn't need to bring it up. He probably wouldn't have lost his right to bring the case based on his sexual orientation.
Redner said he had no choice once the issue was raised.
County attorneys wrote that Redner showed no "concrete or "particularized' interest at all in "gay pride recognition and events.' "
Yet, First Amendment violations affect everybody. Such violations are better raised by someone or a group of people representing more of the general public, some attorneys said.
"When one of us is oppressed, none of us is free," said Jackson, the professor. "Straight people are harmed like gay people are by discrimination that prohibits expression of a gay viewpoint. So too are all of us harmed by discrimination."
from St. Petersburg Times