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.
Good thing there's a fear of a higher power keeping these folks on the straight and narrow, eh? Err, waitaminute...
HARRISBURG — On the witness stand during Monday's session of the Dover Panda Trial, Dover Area School Board member Alan Bonsell accused the press of just making things up.
Keeping that in mind, here's a description of what happened Monday afternoon.
Wearing a nice gray suit, Bonsell answered every question to the best of his ability and was positively forthcoming and when the lawyers pointed out certain inconsistencies in his testimony, he thanked them profusely and offered expansive explanations for why he may have been misunderstood and cleared up any misunderstandings that may have arisen.
OK, all of that was made up.
Except for the part about Bonsell wearing a gray suit.
Actually, at the conclusion of his testimony, he was in serious danger of ruining that suit.
That was when the judge started asking him to try to explain — um, how should I phrase this? — certain gaps and problems with his testimony.
It was remarkable. Judge John E. Jones III asked for a copy of Bonsell's deposition and started asking him questions about why he felt the need to cover up where the money came from to buy the 60 copies of "Of Pandas and People" that wound up in the Dover high school library.
Bonsell didn't explain very well.
At one point, he replied to the judge's query with, "I misspoke."
"I misspoke" wasn't working. So he tried to layer on some verbiage — at one point, seemingly, speaking random words that had nothing to do with what the judge was asking — to give the impression that he was merely trying to answer the question.
When, in fact, he was merely trying to avoid answering the question.
The more he talked, the worse it got.
By the conclusion, it was clear to everyone in the courtroom that the judge was pointing out that Bonsell might have lied under oath.
That's a problem.
Ask Scooter Libby.
Or Bill Clinton.
Bonsell wasn't being asked about who outed a CIA agent or whether he had had sex with that woman. He wasn't even being asked about a crime — the judge was asking about who bought the copies of "Of Pandas and People" that were donated to the school.
And Bonsell really didn't want to say.
In fairness, Bonsell wasn't very believable even before the judge started laying into him. He said, "I have never brought anything forward to put creationism in the school district in any shape or form" — despite notes from board retreats and other testimony describing him bringing up creationism.
I was expecting him to say, "I did not have sex with that panda."
And so the Dover Panda Trial took an interesting turn. Certainly, the big issues — mostly notably, separation of church and state — remain. But now, members of the Dover Area School Board may have to worry about those aforementioned gaps and problems in their testimony.
Of course, the defendants are going to turn this around and blame those darned liberal activist judges. It doesn't work. For one thing, Jones was appointed to the federal bench by George W. Bush, not known for appointing liberals. And, you know, insisting that witnesses tell the truth in court isn't exclusively a liberal proposition.
On the one hand, school board members can use this to defend against the charge that they were motivated by religious belief in introducing intelligent design or creationism into the biology curriculum. If they were motivated by religion, how come none of them ever heard of the Ninth Commandment — you know, the one about bearing false witness?
On the other hand, it's really a sad day for America when public officials can no longer lie convincingly enough to get it past a federal judge.
I wonder if they were sworn in on a bible.
Is there a decontamination procedure for Bibles polluted by repeated perjury?
You misspoke! That's Sexual Harassment Panda!
A lot of entities are pretending to be Intelligent Design these days
"Why, of course I didn't lie, your Honor. I misspoke. That's different from lying. What? Did I know what I said in the deposition was wrong? I misspoke. Didn't you hear me?
Of course I knew it was wrong. That's because I misspoke. My attorney tells me that lying is one thing; mispeaking is another. So I misspoke. I didn't lie.
What? Well, no, what I said in the deposition wasn't true, but it wasn't a lie, either. I just said I misspoke. What part of that did you not understand. If I had lied, I would have said I lied. I deliberately misspoke so I couldn't be accused of lying. So help me, God!
|
Fire, but courtrooms everywhere were running out of Bibles, so they just use Windex now.
 |
The CrevoSci Archive Just one of the many services of Darwin Central "The Conspiracy that Cares" |
CrevoSci threads for the past week:
CrevoSci Warrior Freepdays for the month of November:
| 2000-11-10 AncientAirs 2000-11-21 AndrewC 1998-11-18 angelo 1999-11-22 Blood of Tyrants 2003-11-26 blowfish 2004-11-08 CarolinaGuitarman 1997-11-28 cd jones 2001-11-30 claptrap 2001-11-16 CobaltBlue 2002-11-21 DannyTN 2004-11-16 DaveLoneRanger 1997-11-30 Ditto 2001-11-16 dmz |
2000-11-11 Ernest_at_the_Beach 2000-11-02 Exit 109 2000-11-12 ForGod'sSake 2001-11-07 FourtySeven 2000-11-10 Godel 2004-11-06 GreenOgre 2000-11-04 harbinger of doom 2000-11-28 HiTech RedNeck 1999-11-05 Ichneumon 1998-11-13 jennyp 1998-11-25 Junior_G 2002-11-17 Just mythoughts 2004-11-11 kaotic133 |
2003-11-18 little jeremiah 1998-11-18 malakhi 2000-11-06 mrjeff 1999-11-05 muleskinner 2003-11-17 Nathan Zachary 2002-11-12 NCLaw441 1999-11-25 Nebullis 2000-11-13 NYer 2000-11-24 old-ager 2004-11-03 PajamaHadin 2000-11-10 Patriotic Teen 1998-11-01 Pharmboy |
2000-11-11 P-Marlowe 2000-11-16 presidio9 2002-11-14 Remedy 2000-11-30 Right Wing Professor 2004-11-18 rightwinggoth 1998-11-15 rob777 1998-11-04 RobRoy 1999-11-16 TerP26 2000-11-04 TigerTale 2004-11-11 untrained skeptic 2000-11-05 will of the people 2003-11-29 woodb01 |
|
In Memoriam
|
Lost CrevoSci Battlefields (Pulled Threads)
Longest CrevoSci Thread Ever 2002-12-11 Evolution Disclaimer Supported (6,871 replies)
Glossary of Terms
Crevo: Creation vs. evolution
CrevoSci: Creation vs. evolution/Science
CrevoSci Warriors: Those who take part on CrevoSci threads
Freepday: The day a Freeper joined Free Republic
The
official beer
of Darwin Central
Is he the pro from Dover?
Funny how they behave just the YEC serial misstaters on FreeRepublic!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!
Well, if we didn't before, we now know why the Discovery Institute wanted to stay clear of this case. It's a loser.
They tried to do an end run around the Constitution, and when caught, they lied and lied and lied. Badly. You'd think with all the practice, they'd be better at it.
Okay, ID supporters. Here's your opportunity - time to denounce those on your side who lie to further the cause. Do you support this stealth-agenda approach, and do you support lying about it on the stand?
The Discovery Institute wants to stear clear of this case because they see their Golden Goose being cooked. I've never felt the folks at DI, or any of the big names in creationism, for that matter, actually believed their press releases. These folks are the philosophical children of televangelists -- creationism and its newest incarnation, ID, were simply ways of fleecing the gullible. Now that ID is getting an airing, and it's being shown to be nothing but bloviation, the DI folks stand to lose their major source of income.
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.
