Winston-Salem official places Ten Commandments at city hall [Vernon Robinson

01/19/2004 Associated Press A city council member placed a granite block bearing the Ten Commandments on a walkway in front of a city hall deserted on Monday's Martin Luther King holiday.

Vernon Robinson, a black conservative who has been on the city council since 1998, said he and four helpers acted on the holiday because the barren adjoining parking lot allowed him to move in a truck and crane to position the one-ton block.

The monument — inscribed on one side with the Ten Commandments and on the other side with the Bill of Rights — was positioned on a landing of the stairway ascending to the 1930s city hall at dawn Monday, Robinson said.

Robinson said he had no permit or other authorization to place the monument on public property.

The $2,000 cost of buying and moving the four- tall, blue-granite block was entirely his own, said Robinson, who is running for a vacant U.S. House seat.

Mayor Allen Joines did not immediately return calls seeking comment on the city's response.

"This display is intended to acknowledge the undeniable role that the Ten Commandments and Bill of Rights have played in developing the American legal tradition," Robinson said in a telephone interview.

"These are the ideas on which society has been built and these works encapsulate the belief system on which the republic was founded."

Robinson said he was inspired to act by former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who ordered a 2 1/2-ton Ten Commandments monument placed in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building in 2001.

A federal judge found the monument to be an unconstitutional promotion of religion by government in 2002. Moore was removed from office last year for violating ethics rules by not obeying the federal court order to remove the monument.

Robinson said the monument was quarried and cut in Georgia and shipped from there.

I don't get you point. Why did they need to pay a lawyer?

Lawyers (plural), not lawyer.

Why do they have to pay the plaintiff's lawyers? Because they won and Moore lost. This is a federal civil case and legal fees can be ordered paid by the losing side and there's a motion before the court for these fees. Because Moore was sued in his official capacity as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, not as an individual, the losing side is the state of Alabama, not Moore personally.

When the judge issued his order for fines when Moore refused to remove the monument, Moore would not be the one that paid the fines. Those fines would have to be paid by the state of Alabama becuase Moore was sued in his official capacity, not personally.

Thanks for posting the two-sided tablet.
As much as I have misgivings about displays of religious material on public property,
I'm in your and Vernon Robinson's debt...because even my passably good education
at a church-affiliated
university didn't wake me up to the number 10...10 amendments in The Bill of
Rights and 10 Commandments.
I hope I'm not the only simpleton who has belatedly noticed this.

"Christian community is one in which there is a unified religious-social code of behavior" - T S Eliot

A minor addendum..."Judeo-Christian community" might have been a better way to
lead off that otherwise great quote from T.S. Eliot.
I'm no theologian, but I think that the book "On Two Wings" by Michael Novak sums up the
case that it has been the morality of the Jews and it's extension into Christian
morality...especially in the United States, that makes this such a different place
from Europe, etc.

Okay, I'm now clear on what you mean. Thanks.

But, the possibility of having to pay the plantiffs legal fees in the event that he wins is all the more reason not to get a lawyer yourself (of for the city to get one). Opposing lawyers talk and when lawyers talk they charge for the time. Again, no need to get caught up in that game.

Even without a lawyer, the other lawyer will call and a call and call. If the possibility exists that you may end up paying for this time, tell him do not call! Again, the only way to win is not to play the game. Even if you (or the city in your example) should get stuck with the plantif's legal fees, those will be far less than the bill would have otherwise been in a full fledged legal battle. And, you are in much better position to argue the fees are excesive if your side has not been party to running them up.

Even if you (or the city in your example) should get stuck with the plantif's legal fees, those will be far less than the bill would have otherwise been in a full fledged legal battle.

Not a chance. The lawyers for the other side will still run up legal bills, and unless you know FRCP and FRAP extremely well--as well as case law--they're going to have to spend more time, not less, in a lawsuit.

And, you are in much better position to argue the fees are excesive if your side has not been party to running them up.

Two different issues. If they take your advice, you'll be on the losing side because, well, they'll steamroller over you. And the losing side pays the legal fees of the winning side. If you're the loser, you eat your legal fees. And while you're haggling out how much the legal fees are, they'll be adding in more billable hours.

Like I said, if you play the game, you pay the bill. How are they going to run up their bill? You don't need case law. You are missing the point. You don't argue the case. Tell the judge to decide it with what he has. What discovery are they going to do in a case like this. You simply don't respond to the discovery requests if they submit them. You don't take their phone calls. You tell them, see you in court, don't bother me, we move the monument when a judge tells us to move it.

Again, nothing you do or say in court or in preparation for the trial is going to make a difference in a case like this. The judge will have already made up his mind depending on his political leanings. Again, the only way to win is not to play the game. Do you just like piling money into the hands of lawyers? That seems to be the only course you advocate.

LOL! What you propose is beyond being steamrollered. It's called being a doormat.
I'd love to sue you. And after you get out of jail for failing to to comply with a court order to compel discovery, you can let me know how you enjoyed jail food and sleeping on a 2 inch mattress.

Excuse me while I show your answer to some lawyers I know. They'll get a big laugh out of it.

You know what, I've been there bud. Show it to all the lawyers you want. The one I was up against in a personal action did not get a laugh out of it. He lost the case for his clients.

And the public utility case I handled without the assistance (and cost) of an attorney also went in our favor. In that case I got the water company to make improvements ahead of getting a rate increase and got the "unbiased" testimony of the State Office of Trial Staff thrown out.

If your lawyer friends are laughing it is at being able to charge for the time they spend sharpening their pencils and all manor of other needless expense.

As for my landing in jail, you will see nowhere in my comments that I would show any disrespect for the court or the judge. People are allowed to represent themselves. With that the judge will give you latitude (and sometime even a little friendly guidance).

So sue away.

OH MY GOODNESS!!!! This is the funniest stuff I have read in a long, long time!!! You people who are saying you are supporting Vernon Robinson are either joking, or you know very little about the true Vernon. My oh my, where to begin. The things I know about Mr. Robinson. First off, I am a devoted Christian (although Vernon would call me an atheist simply because I disagree with him) and a life long conservative Republican (although Vernon would call me a liberal scumbag because I criticize him). In fact, my family and I have worked with Vernon on some of his earlier local campaigns, something I regret deeply now that I know the real Vernon. Vernon will tell you that he is a devoted disciple of Jesus Christ, but in reality he is a devoted disciple of Lee Atwater. Vernon will do anything to get his name in the paper (which he always calls liberal rags if they don't glorify him) or a blurb about himself on Fox News.
Vernon thinks that framing himself as a black conservative in the south allows him to exploit racial and religious tensions, willingly pitting whites against blacks and Christians against anybody who disagrees with him. Vernon openly claims this to be his campaign strategy. He says that he can say things about blacks that whites are too afraid to say and nobody can call him a racist because he's black. Vernon is implying that most conservative whites are racists and bigots, but they're just too afraid to act on it. To me, that's offensive.
It is true that Vernon has spent a lot of his political career fighting against race based government programs (a lot of which are unfair and I do not support), but Vernon has taken on his conservative "crusades" more for his own political advancement and publicity rather than any deep belief in conservatism. I can make this claim because I know for a fact that Vernon Robinson is a liar and a hypocrite. I know this is true because Vernon's adopted child attends a local charter school at which I know many teachers and faculty members. According to very reliable witnesses at the school, before the current school year, Vernon and his wife aggressively lobbied the principle to place their child in the class of the only black male teacher on the entire staff. Now, this wouldn't be at all suspicious if that same teacher Vernon so desperately wanted to teach his child wasn't forced to resign before the beginning of the school year because of gross incompetence and an unacceptable lack of teaching ability. I saw this guy teach personally, and with absolute honesty, he was a terrible teacher. Given Vernon's political rhetoric, one would believe that he and his wife wouldn't care what race their child's teacher was, as long as they were the best qualified. But this isn't true at all. Vernon wanted a certain teacher for his child based solely on his race, with a complete disregard for relevant qualifications. I would say this sounds a lot like Affirmative Action, but that would be unfair to Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action usually only favors qualified minority applicants. I don't disapprove of black families wishing their children to be taught by black teachers, but when a man like Vernon so aggressively criticizes the black community for behavior that he commits himself, you can't help but let the public know what a despicable hypocrite he is.
Believe me, I could write for hours and hours about the misdeeds and sleazy stunts Vernon has pulled for his own publicity, and I will try to when I can find the time because it is all quite fascinating, but his hypocrisy is especially disturbing. Take it from someone who had to learn the hard way, supporting Vernon Robinson will only leave you with feelings of regret, and an overwhelming urge to cleanse thyself.

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.