DEFENDANT #22: MARK RICHARD HARVEY #155618 (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

 

Role in People v. Michael Taylor (XNEGA111132)
Mark Richard Harvey, serving as Trial Counsel in the Office of Chief Trial Counsel at the California State Bar, was tasked with investigating professional misconduct complaints submitted by Michael Taylor. Instead of conducting a substantive inquiry, Harvey mishandled the complaints through mischaracterizations and false statements, ultimately closing them without adequate investigation or factual review, thereby thwarting any disciplinary remedy.

Summary of Involvement

Mischaracterization of Material Allegations
Harvey issued a formal dismissal of Mr. Taylor’s complaint, deeming it “conclusory,” “speculative,” and lacking factual support—despite the complaint containing documented examples of sealed-order misuse, unconstitutional psychiatric detention, unauthorized medication, and procedural silencing. These material misrepresentations of the record effectively dismissed core constitutional claims without review.

Closure Without Investigation
Harvey’s response purported that conducting an inquiry “could potentially interfere with the lawyer‑client relationship,” a claim patently false given the nature of the allegations, which did not concern confidential client communications but rather institutional misconduct impacting human rights. By relying on this rationale, he denied Taylor any opportunity for evidentiary review or redress.

Pattern of Administrative Evasion
In doing so, Harvey mirrored the broader trend of institutional silence: the LA Public Defender Office, DA’s Office, State Bar, and higher judiciary all failed to act. His dismissal statement is therefore more than an administrative closure—it is an act of active suppression, constructing procedural cover while leaving systemic abuses unexamined and unchecked.


Why He Is Defendant #22 in the Dossier

• Held the formal authority to initiate professional discipline but chose to obfuscate and mislead rather than investigate.
• Misrepresented the substance of constitutional and ethical allegations, labeling them unworthy of review despite supporting documentation.
• Served as a final gatekeeper preventing internal correction, aligning himself with defense counsel, court officials, prosecutors, and other state actors who enabled ongoing rights violations.
• His actions exemplify institutional complicity — not through direct wrongdoing, but through administrative denial.

> “Mark Harvey closed the gate after all others had walked through. His pen turned the silenced complaint into a sealed whisper, ensuring the Dossier’s truths remain unexamined — unpunished — but not unrecorded.”