Maldonado?s articles quote Buckingham as saying: ?Two thousand years ago, someone died on a cross. Can?t someone take a stand for him?? Bernhard-Bubb?s articles state, ?Nearly 2,000 years ago someone died on a cross, shouldn?t we have the courage to stand up for him??Dover lawyers say the discrepancy in the quotes proves that the stories are inaccurate. Plaintiff lawyers say it proves they weren?t sharing notes. But this discrepancy was only a drop in the bucket compared to the deluge this week. Alan Bonsell, a ringleader in the ID plot was taken to the mat by Judge John E. Jones III who took it upon himself to cross examine witnesses for the defense when stories didn?t seem to match up. And Bonsell?s testimony about the source of money for pro-ID books didn?t match his January testimony. After more than one grilling from the judge the Dover defenders finally got back to expert witnesses, calling Scott Minnich of the University of Idaho. Minnich brought up the bacterial flagellum again. It would have been a good strategy for defense lawyer to drag the testimony away from the fact witnesses that kept contradicting earlier depositions. But lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center then started asking about the mean treatment of a journal editor who had run an intelligent design article in a peer reviewed journal, presumably to paint ID as an underdog science. Minnich?s testimony would have to rely on public record ? in other words, news reports. Judge Jones reminded lawyer Robert Muise that this was at the very least a change of strategy for a group that has a standing objection to reported stories. It was another bold move for Thomas More Law Center, who is defending the Dover school board for free after spending years seeking out a district dumb enough to try and insert ID into science curricula. As the shield of Christianity, it?s apparently their right to pick fights with the First Amendment wherever they see fit, and suffer no repercussions themselves. In Charleston, West Virginia Robert Muise had reportedly approached the school board asking them to impose ID on their students to spur a legal battle. They declined. Defending Dover was riskier, however, because of all those pesky mentions of creationism from school board members. But that?s OK. Even if they lose, this matchup will serve as practice for the Thomas More Center. Of course that?s little consolation for the school board and Dover area taxpayers who may have to pay legal bills for the plaintiffs in excess of $1 million if they lose. By choosing the More center, the board had even waived their right to $100,000 in liability insurance. It could take until the end of the year for Jones to make his decision. But public opinion may weigh in first; most of the board members are up for reelection on Tuesday.
This is not sustainable.