Can unrelated incidents of Gestapo-like behavior by AKC Representatives be "representative" of the collective mental state at corporate headquarters?

While taking the win photo, an exhibitor who had taken WB and RWB mentioned to the judge that her RWB was actually the better specimen. The judge responded with insulting comments about the deplorable mouths in the breed to which the exhibitor took exception. The judge then refused to be photographed with the bitch she had just awarded and with great fanfare, dismissed the photographer and ordered the exhibitor to remain in the center of the ring while she called for the AKC Rep.
 
When he arrived, they conferred in private at the judge's table while the hapless exhibitor was left on display in the center of the ring.  The Rep and the judge then braced the exhibitor while a crowded ringside listened. The judge told the AKC Rep her version while the exhibitor stood mute. The Rep then informed the exhibitor that she was on "thin ice" and could be "disqualified." Astounded, the exhibitor attempted to defuse the situation by joking that neither she nor the dog had disqualifying faults. It didn't work. The AKC employee and the judge angrily asserted the bitch had a disqualifying bite, the Rep loudly stating "it's people like you that ruin a breed." The exhibitor suggested they read the standard as obviously, neither of them were familiar with it.

The Rep threatened to call a bench committee and have her suspended. Now angry, she reminded him that there were many witnesses to his incredibly irrational behavior. He looked around uncomfortably and then muttered "your kind isn't worth the trouble." The now-furious exhibitor invited him to call a bench committee, stipulating that she no longer had a problem with the judge who had by then, noticeably and physically distanced herself from the Rep. She reiterated that her comment to the judge should have been accepted as friendly discourse between two dog people. The exhibitor opinioned that she and the judge had both over-reacted but that it was a minor "cat-fight" that paled in comparison to his threats and unprofessional actions. She advised the AKC Rep that she was not a novice, that his loudly voiced opinion of the breed and his personal insults were "way out of line" and that his conduct would be brought before a formal inquiry. 

The Rep turned to the increasingly uncomfortable judge and asked "are you satisfied with this? If not ok with it, we could go ahead and call a committee?" The judge said something like "oh just let it go" and with a wave of her hand, dismissed the fuming exhibitor.

The exhibitor and the judge later agreed to disagree and enjoyed a surprisingly friendly chat during Group judging. Not wishing to involve the judge further, the exhibitor elected not to file a complaint against the AKC Representative.

In another glaring example of AKC Representative misuse of power, riding rough-shod over the feelings and civil rights of the fancy, we feel compelled to disclose the following: 

During the post-judging interview as completion on a final provisional assignment, a very respected member of the fancy made mention to the AKC Rep that he would be coordinating a Retrievers seminar for the Senior Conformation Judges' Association. The Rep became agitated and said what a terrible organization it was and that Wally Pede was "no good", always fighting with AKC, etc. etc. etc. The provisional judge extracted himself from the conversation and upon subsequently receiving his judging approval, put the horrible incident out of his mind.

Some time later, he applied for more breeds and was unlucky enough to draw the same AKC Rep for the interview. She launched the interview by saying that she wanted him to know that he had only received the previous approval due to her computer's malfunction - that had she been able to file a timely report, he would not have received approval. 

The judge was shocked and upset but had no choice other than to continue the interview. He was at the mercy of the AKC Rep's continued harassment and untoward comments during the entire interview and felt himself to be at a terrible disadvantage. 
 
Concluding the interview, the Rep handed him sample disqualification forms and still nervous, he remarked that they were different from the AKC forms he had received at a DJAA seminar. The AKC Rep immediately blew up again, attacking Lt. Col. Pede and the SCJA. The Rep ended her tirade only when he and a judge bystander convinced her that the DJAA was not the same as the SCJA.

This judge awaits approval on his additional breeds, concerned of course, that he will be denied. He has filed an official complaint regarding the AKC Representative's personal prejudices and her slander of a highly regarded judge's association. 

The judge is a member of SJCA, the DJAA, and the ADSJ as well as several other dog organizations. His conviction that personal prejudice or dislikes should not enter into an AKC Rep's actions is shared by TheDogPlace Science and Advisory Board.

It is well known that the SCJA is not an AKC puppet group. Ironically, the Senior Conformation Judges' Association has been publicly critical of the way in which AKC has subverted the constitutional rights of judges.

Our reporter contacted Lt. Col. Wallace H. Pede for comment. He stated that he has sent a personal letter to the AKC board in which he reminds AKC of past incidents involving the same Rep. The matter will be put before the SCJA membership for comment and feedback concerning other incidents of record. 
Col. Pede described a particular instance wherein the same Rep was publicly abusive to him.  She waved a letter to AKC in which Col. Pede had been critical of the Representative's role in the judging approval process.  The letter was in response to  AKC request.

Col. Pede, on behalf of the Senior Conformation Judges' Association, has requested an injunction against the offending Rep and/or that an independent committee be appointed to examine evidence of her repetitiously offensive behavior.  The judging community anxiously awaits AKC action on this matter.