Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge grills Dover official [Dover trial 11/1/05]
York (PA) Daily Record ^ | 11/1/2005 | LAURI LEBO

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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: bearingfalsewitness; crevolist; dover; evolution; perjuryanyone; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 461-463 next last
To: Junior

Maybe the Bible is lying.


61 posted on 11/01/2005 11:17:32 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: dmz
"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."

Christians already understand that Christianity is a matter of faith. That is the basis of Christianity but I wouldn't expect you to know that.
62 posted on 11/01/2005 11:19:29 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Maybe the Bible is lying.

Only if you read it as literal history.

63 posted on 11/01/2005 11:21:18 AM PST by dread78645 (Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sr4402
I don't think Intelligent Design will go away because of reticule.

Because of a gun sight?

64 posted on 11/01/2005 11:21:43 AM PST by Junior (From now on, I'll stick to science, and leave the hunting alien mutants to the experts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

"I would not be surprised if the lot of them end up in jail for this."

LOL - this isn't Philadelphia, you know!


65 posted on 11/01/2005 11:22:51 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dread78645

What do you read it as, fairy tales?


66 posted on 11/01/2005 11:23:18 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
What makes nature work? What drives natural selection?

Ah, the age old question: Why is there something rather than nothing? Or, why is there God rather than no God?

I don't think reason can answer that question. As soon as you put it into words, the answer falls apart.
67 posted on 11/01/2005 11:24:00 AM PST by BikerNYC (Modernman should not have been banned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp
ID has yet to show that nature cannot and does not produce specified complexity

We do not say that it produces complexity, but that it "is" complex. Evolution is the one that say it produces higher and more complex life forms. Without the assumption that only intelligence can produce SC, ID hasn't a leg to stand on.

All we have to prove is that something couldn't have been been made by shear chance. Believing that you are a product of sheer chance is a pretty good trick you know when you consider the complexity of your body, immune system, brain and DNA.

Using the same logic of evolution and chance, one could be able to say that a Toyota Hybrid was produced by bacterium, not man. Sometimes we need to look at the whole picture and say it is too complex for chance to have done it.

And when we finally admit that chance is too great, we will look at it for life's complexity and make greater scientific advancements than to claim that it is not complex and not intricate.

Sorry, IMHO, evolution will be swept away by sheer amounts of information about the complexity and logic in life (doubling every year) and that it is too intricate to be produced only by sheer chance.

68 posted on 11/01/2005 11:27:46 AM PST by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
They even justify the phrase about making a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Low, even by your limbo-dancing standards in the wordplay arena.

69 posted on 11/01/2005 11:28:03 AM PST by Thatcherite (Feminized androgenous automaton euro-weenie blackguard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Because of a gun sight?

I'm guessing he meant "cuticle"; it makes as much sense.....

70 posted on 11/01/2005 11:28:07 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp
How is nature 'driven'?

Traditionally with a stick, but of late it's been automatic.

71 posted on 11/01/2005 11:28:56 AM PST by Junior (From now on, I'll stick to science, and leave the hunting alien mutants to the experts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
"It's absurdly irrational to imagine that -2 has a square root."

Just use your imagination.

72 posted on 11/01/2005 11:29:01 AM PST by Thatcherite (Feminized androgenous automaton euro-weenie blackguard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
"It's absurdly irrational to imagine that -2 has a square root."

How about imaginary numbers? :)

http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.imag.num.html

73 posted on 11/01/2005 11:30:35 AM PST by phantomworker (Seize this very minute... Boldness has genius, power and magic in it... Begin it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
If the school board members are lying about a measly $850, what else are they hiding?

Call me cynical, but I've got this awful suspicion that at least some of them are creationists.

74 posted on 11/01/2005 11:30:41 AM PST by Thatcherite (Feminized androgenous automaton euro-weenie blackguard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Maybe you're misinterpreting it.


75 posted on 11/01/2005 11:31:05 AM PST by Junior (From now on, I'll stick to science, and leave the hunting alien mutants to the experts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Junior

Thanks for the ping.


76 posted on 11/01/2005 11:32:17 AM PST by GOPJ (Is every democrat a bent kneed Monica?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Because of a gun sight?

Nah thats reticule.

Maybe he meant because of a microscope eyepiece when measuring lengths in microns?

77 posted on 11/01/2005 11:34:06 AM PST by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite
Low, even by your limbo-dancing standards in the wordplay arena.

And I don't even pay Rush royalties.

78 posted on 11/01/2005 11:35:34 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Maybe the Bible is lying.

Feel free to draw that conclusion if that is where you want to go. Some Christians suggest that the more obvious apparent falsehoods in it (when read literally) should be treated as allegories which removes the problem.

79 posted on 11/01/2005 11:35:58 AM PST by Thatcherite (Feminized androgenous automaton euro-weenie blackguard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sr4402
All we have to prove is that something couldn't have been been made by shear chance.

That's often given as an explanation of earthquakes.

80 posted on 11/01/2005 11:37:05 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 461-463 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson