More Transcripts
You've been asking for them, and here they are:
Transcript Day 13 PM (Supt. Nilsen direct testimony)
Transcript Day 14 AM (Supt. Nilsen testimony & cross)
Transcript Day 14 PM (Supt. Nilsen cross; Asst. Superintendent Baksa testimony)
Transcript Day 15 AM (Prof. Stephen Fuller testimony)
Transcript Day 15 PM (Prof. Stephen Fuller testimony)
Transcript Day 16 AM (Buckingham testimony - NOTE: some of this file is garbled in spots. If you scroll down past the first couple of pages, you should be able to read a lot of it.)
Transcript Day 13 PM (Supt. Nilsen direct testimony)
Transcript Day 14 AM (Supt. Nilsen testimony & cross)
Transcript Day 14 PM (Supt. Nilsen cross; Asst. Superintendent Baksa testimony)
Transcript Day 15 AM (Prof. Stephen Fuller testimony)
Transcript Day 15 PM (Prof. Stephen Fuller testimony)
Transcript Day 16 AM (Buckingham testimony - NOTE: some of this file is garbled in spots. If you scroll down past the first couple of pages, you should be able to read a lot of it.)
posted by ACLU of Pennsylvania at 10/31/2005 03:24:00 PM
10 Comments:
I regret that I was unable to open the Day 16 AM file...I really want to read what Buckingham had to say as a witness....especially after the teasers that have been posted.
I am so confused here. I thought the plaintifs had rested and the defense were putting on their case.
Buckingham's testimony, as drawn out by the defense lawyer, seems more like a set up for a perjury accusation than anything.
And why would the defense call the reporters, who testified that the board talked about creationism?
Are the defense lawyers really that bad? Could we be going for "incompetent counsel" on appeal? Am I missing something here?
Cheers, Neil.
Regarding some of the prior comments, some plaintiff witnesses (eg. Buckingham as a hostile) were taken out of strict sequence.
I have been wondering when the 'damaged' transcripts will be replaced with readable ones?
Gary Hurd
nxr said...
I am so confused here. I thought the plaintifs had rested and the defense were putting on their case.
---
You may recall the transcript of the discussion in chambers about the reporters testifying...calling Buckingham appear to be part and parcel of that process. One presumes that the Bonsell testimony goes along with that as well.
I have heard increasing rumors that the defense is planning to plead insanity. Can anyone confirm or refute that?
One can find more transcripts at:
Talk.Origins Dover Page
Wikipedia Trial documents page
-- Mike Hopkins
"Buckingham's testimony, as drawn out by the defense lawyer, seems more like a set up for a perjury accusation than anything."
"And why would the defense call the reporters, who testified that the board talked about creationism?"
I think the plaintiffs are just trying to establish the validity of their claims in their original complaint and some of the documents that follow it (copies of which you can find on the ACLU website).
I think if you read the complaint and some of the documents that follow it, you'll better understand the plaintiff's strategy. So far, it looks to me like their strategy is working reasonably well.
Great post, very informative. I wonder why the other experts of this sector do not realize this. You should continue your writing. I am sure, you have a huge readers’ base already! 메이저사이트
These are in fact wonderful ideas in concerning blogging.
You have touched some good factors here. Any way keep up writing. 경마사이트
My brother suggested I might like this website.
He was totally right. This post actually made my day.
You can not imagine simply how much time I had spent for this info!
Thanks! 카지노사이트
Post a Comment
<< Home