Connect with us

National

Richard Hatch maintains his innocence

Gay ‘Survivor’ winner sees judicial system as ‘corrupt’

Published

on

Richard Hatch

‘Survivor’ Richard Hatch is out of prison again and still maintains his innocence against tax evasion charges. (Photo courtesy Richard Hatch)

Richard Hatch became the first winner of the hit CBS show “Survivor” in 2000, but in the 11 years since, he’s had to survive more than backstabbing teammates, physical challenges and meals consisting of insects.

In 2006, Hatch, who is gay, was sentenced by a judge in Rhode Island to 51 months in federal prison on tax evasion charges, and was freed on probation in 2009. Prosecutors argued that Hatch failed to report his $1 million in winnings from “Survivor,” and money from subsequent public appearances. Hatch denied all charges. Earlier this year he was back in prison on charges of violating his parole after prosecutors claimed the 50-year-old reality TV star failed to re-file his 2000 federal income tax returns, a charge that Hatch denies.

“The prosecutor in this case is nothing short of a bully, and what I’ve been subjected to is nothing short of institutionalized bullying by the prosecutors, the probation department and the judge involved,” Hatch told the Blade just days after his Dec. 12 release from prison. “That’s provable, that’s observable by any objective viewers.”

“I’m absolutely innocent and have been since day one,” Hatch insisted.

Since winning “Survivor,” Hatch has been in and out of legal trouble, including a short arrest in 2009 as a result of granting several interviews with media outlets that were seen as a violation of the terms of his probation. Since his legal woes began in 2005, Hatch has maintained he never intentionally broke the law.

“It’s 2011 and they haven’t yet determined if something is owed for 2000,” Hatch told the Blade. “And all the prosecutor has done is prevented us from getting to the truth by lying to the court and claiming that my arguments aren’t valid when the IRS agents have verified everything I’ve claimed all along from day one.”

He continued, “They convicted me of attempting to evade taxes in 2006 that to this day have never been determined to be due,” Hatch said. “I filed that return in 2002 at the instruction and direction of the IRS using the numbers that they told me to use, I’ve been working with them through a tax attorney and a CPA ever since, and they have yet to complete the assessment for that year, 11 years later now.”

Hatch says he’s fully complied with the terms of his probation.

“When I was on probation, ‘Survivor’ created a show for me this ‘Redemption Island’ they invited me back to face Russell [Hantz],” Hatch told the Blade. “I’d completed my entire sentence, was on probation, perfectly compliant with anything and everything they ever asked, and probation fought the return of my passport, and prevented me, basically, from going on ‘Survivor.’”

“That’s twice now that I’ve been invited and they’ve refused to give me my passport while hypocritically lying, claiming I owe taxes — which I don’t — and arguing with the court that I’m refusing to pay them,” he continued. “So they’re blocking my ability to earn an income, and at the same time telling the court that I won’t pay. And none of it’s true.”

Hatch said that his jail time is the result of bias.

“I’ve learned how absurd these courts are. The original judge, who was biased against me, and held off his retirement to hear the case because he’d been admonished in an earlier case of mine for overstepping his bounds, he should have recused himself and didn’t — [Earnest C.] Torres — and this current judge, his mentee, his protege, William Smith, know so little about taxes they just don’t care. They listen to the prosecutor’s lies, and do whatever they tell them to do.”

“That in itself is reprehensible,” he added.

Hatch declined to answer questions about whether he’s found a job and a place to live after several media reports claimed that Hatch was homeless after his stint in prison.

“It’s just nobody’s business where I’m living and what I’m doing. I have much on my plate, I have some really fascinating opportunities that I’m working on. I’m not interested in talking about it.”

When asked whether he is homeless, Hatch replied, “Again, report whatever you’d like, I’ll give you the same answer, I don’t know where I’m staying.”

Hatch views the American justice system as deeply flawed.

“It’s not just because of my notoriety. It’s mostly because of my unconventionality, part of which is because I’m gay.”

Hatch said that unconventional people like himself — gay people, women, and African Americans — are unfairly targeted and “bullied” by a broken justice system.

“When you have people who want to take advantage of you, abuse you, persecute you, continue to feed the media caricature of this negative image, just because I’m an unconventional guy, that’s what they’ll do.”

Hatch said that the homophobia he claims he faced during his ordeal was not in prison, but in the court system.

“In prison I didn’t face anything significant that’s worth talking about as far as negativity from my peers,” he said. “I faced the same variety of subtle indignities that are brought by people in positions of power who don’t respect those positions and are insecure and otherwise mentally ill. And do things to abuse people who aren’t able to defend themselves.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced

One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.

NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.

John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.

The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.

Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.

Continue Reading

National

Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information

Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.

“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.

 “These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.

It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”

 The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question. 

A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit. 

While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management. 

The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.

 Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.   

“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.

 “Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says. 

Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”

 Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”

Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.

 “As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from  the Washington Blade. 

“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said. 

The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”

It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”

The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society. 

The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections

Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Published

on

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Screen capture: YouTube)

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.

The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.

While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”

“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.

The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.

Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.

Continue Reading

Popular