Posted on 11/01/2005 8:17:35 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
HARRISBURG — After Alan Bonsell finished his testimony Monday, in which he accused two local newspaper reporters of making up the information that drove the Dover Area School District into a First Amendment lawsuit, Judge John E. Jones III demanded to see a copy of Bonsell's previous sworn statements.
Steve Harvey, the plaintiffs' attorney who had cross-examined the Dover Area school board member, offered to provide a clean copy later in chambers.
"I want it now if you have it," the federal judge said. At the end of the first day of the sixth week of Dover's court battle over intelligent design in U.S. Middle District Court, Jones had some questions.
Bonsell sat quietly on the stand chewing gum and swiveling in his chair as Jones reviewed the man's Jan. 3 deposition in which he denied knowing anyone, besides his father, who had been involved in donating copies of the textbook "Of Pandas and People" to the Dover school district.
After he finished reading, Jones asked Bonsell when he became aware that his father, Donald, was in possession of an $850 check used to purchase copies of the pro-intelligent design textbook.
Bonsell said he had given the check to his father.
Last week, former board member Bill Buckingham testified he handed the check, dated Oct. 4, 2004, to Alan Bonsell and asked him to forward it to Donald Bonsell. Written in the check's memo line were the words: "for Pandas and People books."
"You tell me why you didn't say Mr. Buckingham was involved," a visibly angry Jones said, staring at Bonsell as he read from his deposition.
Bonsell said he misspoke. And then, "That's my fault, your honor."
Bonsell said he didn't think it mattered because Buckingham had not actually donated any of his money. Rather, the money had been collected from members of his church.
But Jones pointed out that Bonsell had said he had never spoken to anybody else about the donations.
The judge also wanted to know why the money needed to be forwarded to his father, why Buckingham couldn't have purchased the books himself.
Bonsell stammered.
"I still haven't heard an answer from you," Jones said.
"He said he'd take it off the table," Bonsell said.
"You knew you were under oath?" Jones asked at one point.
Later, outside the courthouse, plaintiffs' attorneys had no comment on Jones' questioning, and Dover's attorney Patrick Gillen had little to say.
"I won't speculate" about the judge's actions, Gillen said. "I'm confident that he's seeking the truth in these proceedings."
Jones' exchange with Bonsell was the second time the judge has intervened in testimony and questioned school board members on his own. On Friday, Jones asked Heather Geesey about her newly acquired recollection that board members at June 2004 meetings were publicly discussing intelligent design, rather than creationism as reported in the media.
In her deposition, Geesey had been unable to recall details about board discussions during the meetings.
Much of Bonsell's testimony echoed Buckingham's from last week.
Buckingham testified about donations from his church. But like Bonsell, Buckingham said initially, in his first deposition on Jan. 3, that he didn't know from where the 60 donated copies came.
Before Bonsell was forced to defend his past recollections, he spent much of his time on the stand accusing the local press, in particular two reporters — Heidi Bernhard-Bubb, a freelance writer with The York Dispatch, and Joe Maldonado, a freelance writer with the York Daily Record/Sunday News — of incorrectly reporting that board members had said "creationism" at the June 2004 board meetings rather than "intelligent design."
Bonsell said the media continues to misrepresent the case and the concept of intelligent design — the idea that life's complexity demands a designer.
Harvey wanted to know why he keeps talking to reporters, since he doesn't feel they are correctly reporting the facts.
Bonsell said because he hoped "some of the truth would get out."
Before Bonsell's testimony Monday, former board member Jane Cleaver had also testified that board members had been talking about intelligent design at the June 2004 board meetings, but the local newspapers reported they were saying creationism.
However, under cross-examination, she said she was unsure if intelligent design had been brought up at meetings in June or later at the July board meeting.
Whether board members were talking about creationism then is important to Dover's First Amendment battle. Attorneys for the 11 parents suing the district over the mention of intelligent design in biology class say board members were motivated by religious beliefs, one of the prongs used by the courts to determine whether an action violates the constitutional guarantee of separation of church and state.
At the Jan. 3 depositions, board members Bonsell, Buckingham, Harkins and Supt. Nilsen all said they did not remember other board members talking about creationism at the June 2004 meetings.
Cleaver, like Bonsell, blamed the reporters, particularly Maldonado, for making up their stories.
"Joe doesn't know how to tell the truth," Cleaver said. "Joe only knows how tell a lie."
Last week, both Maldonado and Bernhard-Bubb testified to the accuracy of their articles. They said no board members ever requested a correction from articles about the meetings.
*crickets chirping*
What I find amusing is the zeal you evo's consume in pressing whatever advantage you seem to believe exists...I've gotten no straight answer from any of you to this question...our existence is threatened exactly how if a teacher in the Dover School District reads a two minute speech indicating an alternative exists to the sainted Darwinian scrolls...to be studied at some other time and place only if desired...
Do you believe the U.S. Constitution prevents these people from using their religious belief in attempting to influence public policy?
If so, please use the Constition and your own words to prove these people do not have the right to attempt to influence public policy based on their religious beliefs.
If you answer no to my question, then who's the bigger liars?
We should look the other way when someone lies?
That's what ID is, after all. This trial has shown that.
And I mine! BWAHAHA!
The trial has shown ID is a lie? Explain please...how in the name of Charlie Darwin are you qualified to definitively make that statement...
So that's what the debate has been reduced to? What's the harm in schools promoting creationism/astrology/yogic flying/astral walking/afrocentrism?
And you're certain that question deserves an answer?
We're constantly told that ID is not about a stealth attempt to introduce Creationism. We're constantly told that it's not about religion - it's about "a new scientific theory."
This trial shows that to be a lie.
Eyah Say there.
Harumph - that's not very diplomatic of you, Sir.
As far as trying to use religion to reticule intelligent design, it is only a feeble attempt to plug the leak in a crumbling sea wall dam.
I smell perjury/obstruction charges against this mendacious witness, if not an additional conspiracy to obstruct charge against the whole lot of them.
These people have have neither scientific understanding nor sense of personal integrity, and this trial is documenting both flaws in their characters. I would not be surprised if the lot of them end up in jail for this.
Damn! - a new use for a reticule.
I'm afraid you have it backwards. Every year more is understood and explained and more information reveals more support for Evolution.
Just because you cannot, or will not try to, understand it doesn't make it more complicated.
Judge Grills Dover Souls?
Looks like a little mistate'n goin on.
LOLOL!!!
In fact, it's going to hell in a handbag.
LMAO!
This is the wake-up call to the Republican Party: either renounce and disown these disingenuous, mendacious, and not very bright Creationists/IDers, or risk being laughed out of office in forthcoming elections. Any political party that takes this anti-science trash seriously won't be by the average voter.
Talked to Ph on the phone yesterday. He is having major technical problems. Looks like he will be off the air for a while longer. Just wanted to pass that on.
Thanks Junior for keeping the ping list going!
You're one Hell of a lot more subtle than I, Gunga Din.
You know, you have a great point. And since we're trying to "open up dialog in the public sphere", that is for those receiving public funding, I suggest that every Christian church of every denomination taking advantage of any tax breaks provided by whatever level of government now be required to read a 2 minute speech right before the sermon.
It might go something like this: Christianity is a matter of faith, and as such it cannot be proven that God exists, and neither is there any empirical evidence for the afterlife. There are gaps in the record and it is only a theory.
Our existence is threatened exactly how if a preacher in the pulpit reads a two minute speech indicating an alternative exists to the Christian religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.