Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
Trial transcript: Day 16 (October 27), AM Session, Part 1
THE COURT: Be seated, please. All right, we're back in session, and we are still in the defense case obviously.
MR. HARVEY: Your Honor. By arrangement and agreement with plaintiff's counsel -- excuse me, defendant's counsel, the plaintiffs are now going to call in their case in chief out of turn Mr. William Buckingham as on cross.
THE COURT: All right. We'll have to remember to take up Dr. Nilsen's exhibits at some point. Perhaps we'll do that today later, but no reason to do it now.
MR. GILLEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
(William Buckingham was called to testify and was sworn by the courtroom deputy.)
COURTROOM DEPUTY: State and spell your full name for the record, please.
THE WITNESS: William Buckingham. W-I-L-L-I-A-M, B-U-C-K-I-N-G-H-A-M.
DIRECT EXAMINATION AS ON CROSS
Q. Good morning, Mr. Buckingham.
A. Good morning.
Q. You will recall that I took your deposition on January the 3rd of this year, do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. And I took that deposition to help prepare to make a decision about whether to seek a temporary restraining order. Did you understand that at the time?
A. I don't know that I knew that at the time. I came to know that as a result of the second deposition.
Q. And now have you had a chance to prepare for today's session by meeting with your counsel?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And when did you do that?
A. Yesterday.
Q. And was anyone present other than your counsel?
A. No.
Q. I'd like to just give you some documents that we might be looking at today. Your Honor, may I approach the witness?
THE COURT: You may.
Q. I've just actually given you three things.
A copy of your deposition taken on January 3rd, 2005. You have that in front of you, right?
A. Yes.
Q. I also gave you a copy of the transcript of your deposition taken on March the 31st, 2005?
A. That's correct.
Q. And I also gave you a notebook of some documents that we may look at. I took the liberty of putting them in a notebook so we can keep things straight. Now, Mr. Buckingham, are you aware that the theory of evolution teaches among other things that there is evolution within a species?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's not inconsistent with your personal beliefs, is it, Mr. Buckingham?
A. No, it's not.
Q. And are you aware that the theory of evolution also teaches that man and other species evolved from a common ancestor?
A. Yes.
Q. And that is inconsistent with your personal beliefs, isn't that right?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And you believe that evolution has antireligious implications, don't you?
A. I don't think it's good -- I don't think there's parts of it that are good science. I won't say they're antireligious. I just think it's not good science.
Q. Well, Mr. Buckingham, I'd like you to take a look at a document, it's actually not in your binder, but I'll get you a copy of it. Matt, would you pull up Exhibit 127? Your Honor, may I approach?
THE COURT: You may.
Q. Mr. Buckingham, you're now looking at what's been marked as P-127. That's a newsletter that was put out by the Dover area school district, isn't it?
A. It seems to be.
Q. And that was put out in February of 2005?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you seen this before?
A. Very briefly. If it was shown to me I didn't read it, but I was aware that it existed.
Q. Well, if you turn to the second page, please, there's a question there that says, it's in the second column in the middle, it says, "Are there religious implications to the theory of ID?" Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. And ID is intelligent design?
A. Yes.
Q. And were you aware that the school district put out this information here under this question about the religious implications to the theory of ID? Were you aware of that?
A. As I stated, I didn't read this. I was aware that it existed, but I hadn't read it.
Q. Fair enough. Now, Mr. Buckingham, when we use, I'd like to just make sure that we're talking about, we'll be talking about some terms today and I want to make sure we're on the same page. The word creationism, you understand that to mean essentially the Book of Genesis?
A. Pretty much, yes.
Q. And you personally believe in a literal reading of the Book of Genesis, isn't that right?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. That's one of the foundations of your faith?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And in contrast to evolution you believe that the theory of intelligent design is not inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs, isn't that true?
A. I'm not an expert on intelligent design. I don't know everything about intelligent design. I just know that it's another scientific theory that we thought would be good to have presented to the students.
Q. My question is a little different, Mr. Buckingham. I'm asking you it's your understanding that intelligent design is consistent with your personal beliefs, isn't that right?
MR. GILLEN: Objection. Foundation. He just said he doesn't have a detailed understanding of intelligent design.
THE COURT: Well, the question is different. It has to do with whether it's consistent with his personal belief. So I'll overrule the objection. You can answer the question.
A. I can't answer that because I don't know everything about intelligent design. I don't know.
Q. Mr. Buckingham, I'd like you to turn to a page to the deposition transcript that was taken on January the 3rd, and turn to page 134, please.
A. I'm there.
Q. Line 12, are you there?
A. Yes.
Q. Didn't I ask you the following questions and you give the following answers?
" QUESTION: Earlier today I asked you about whether the theory of evolution was inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs, you told me that it was. You don't need to confirm that. Just kind of remember.
ANSWER: I think I said it wasn't.
QUESTION: No, you definitely said that the theory of evolution was inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs at least to the extent that it taught that life forms were derived from a common ancestor.
ANSWER: Origins of life, yes.
QUESTION: Is the theory of intelligent design as you phrased it, is that inconsistent with your personal beliefs in any respect?"
And then there was an objection, and I said, clarified the question, "Well, in any context," and you said, "In any context no, it's not inconsistent." Do you remember giving that testimony, Mr. Buckingham?
A. I remember giving the testimony, but I think in any context I'm sure there's some context of intelligent design that aren't inconsistent with my faith.
Q. Now, you believe, Mr. Buckingham, that intelligent design is a scientific theory, don't you?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And I asked you at your deposition on January 3rd if you could tell me what you understand intelligent design to mean, and you told me that you believe that intelligent design teaches that something, molecules or amoeba possibly, evolved into the complexities of life we have now. Isn't that right?
A. Without seeing it in front of me I can't tell you if that's right or not, sir.
Q. Please take a look at page 61 of that same deposition transcript. Actually, Mr. Buckingham, it begins on page 60, line 22.
A. I'm there.
Q. Didn't I ask you the following questions and you gave the following answers?
" QUESTION: I'm just trying to understand so we can have a working understanding here of what intelligent design is if we can. Do you have an understanding in very simple terms of what intelligent design stands for? What does it teach?
ANSWER: Other than what I've expressed that scientists, a lot of scientists, don't ask me the names, I can't tell you where it came from, a lot of scientists believe that back through time something, molecules, amoeba, whatever, evolved into the complexities of life we have now.
QUESTION: That's the theory of intelligent design?
ANSWER: You asked me my understanding of it. I'm not a scientist. I can't go into details and debate it with you."
Do you remember giving that testimony?
A. Yes.
Q. And at least as of that date, January the 3rd, that's all that you understood about what the theory of intelligent design is, isn't that correct?
A. Plus the fact that I felt that life was too complex to have randomly happened without a design of some sort.
Q. That's right. In fact, you told me at your deposition that one of the differences between the theory, that between the theory of evolution and intelligent design is that the theory of evolution according to you teaches that the beginning of man is just happenstance, isn't that correct?
A. Can you show me where I said that?
Q. Sure. Please take a look at pages 20 and 21 of that same deposition transcript.
A. I'm there.
Q. If you start on page 20 -- actually to get some context here we really need to go to page 18. The question that was asked was, "Let's just take it for a second," and this is line 11 on page 18, "But let's just take it for a second that the common ancestor, let's say it's some single celled organism many millions of years ago, and that if that's what the theory of evolution teaches that that's the common ancestor, that that violates or is that inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs?"
And then you answered the question over on page 20, you asked me a question, "Ancestor what? Ancestor to what?" And I said, "To all forms of life, including man," and you said, "The question was is that inconsistent with my beliefs?
ANSWER: Yes.
QUESTION: Why is that inconsistent with your beliefs?
ANSWER: Why is that inconsistent with my beliefs?
QUESTION: Yes.
ANSWER: My faith is founded on the Book of Genesis.
QUESTION: Can you explain further?
ANSWER: They're different.
QUESTION: How are they different?
ANSWER: Do you want to do this again?
QUESTION: I would like to make sure that the record is clear on this point.
ANSWER: Again I'm not a scientist, but it's my understanding that in the theory of evolution where it goes back to the beginning of man it's happenstance, it just happened, and that's inconsistent with my faith."
You gave that testimony, didn't you, Mr. Buckingham.
A. Yes, when we talked about the origins of life, yes.
Q. And intelligent design it's your understanding teaches that the beginning of man is not happenstance, correct?
A. True.
Q. According to you, intelligent design expresses an order, as opposed to evolution which talks about chance, correct?
A. I would say evolution talks about random chance and intelligent design expresses an order.
Q. Now, Mr. Buckingham, you're familiar with the book Of Pandas and People, aren't you?
A. Somewhat.
Q. You actually ordered a copy of that book back in the summer of 2004, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. May I approach the witness, Your Honor?
THE COURT: You may.
Q. Mr. Buckingham, I've handed you a copy of the book Of Pandas and People which has been marked as P-11. We might want to refer to it in the next few questions, and my question is do you know whether intelligent design says that life, like a manufactured object, is the result of intelligent shaping of matter? Does intelligent design teach that?
A. I've never heard that.
Q. Well, actually at your deposition you told me that it doesn't teach that, isn't that right?
A. If you can show me where I said that.
Q. Please turn to page 163 and 164 of your transcript. Excuse me, 63 and 64. Page 63, line 19, Mr. Buckingham, the question I asked was:
" QUESTION: Mr. Buckingham, does intelligent teach that life, like a manufactured object, is the result of intelligent shaping of matter?
ANSWER: I think one, I think intelligent design expresses an order, as opposed to the theory of evolution, which talks about chance.
QUESTION: It expresses an order you said?
ANSWER: An orderly process to things.
QUESTION: Who or what directed that order?
ANSWER: I don't know.
QUESTION: But my question is, or excuse me, was, does intelligent design teach that life, like a manufactured object, is the result of intelligent shaping of matter?
ANSWER: I don't know about shaping. I think there's an order in intelligent design that's not in evolution. Whether it's not, it's shaping, I don't know.
QUESTION: Does intelligent design teach that life..."
Let's stop right there. So you gave that testimony on January the 1st, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. I'd like you to turn for just a second to in your book Of Pandas and People there to page Roman VII, it's little "vii," it's one of the first pages in the book. Actually it's right under the word "Introduction" on the right-hand side. I'd be happy to come show you.
A. I have it.
Q. Do you have it?
A. I have it.
Q. And Matt, would you please bring that up on the screen and highlight the language in the bottom right-hand corner? This is Of Pandas and People, this book we're looking at, isn't it?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. This is the book the school district approved for the Dover High School, isn't that right?
A. As a resource book, yes.
Q. As a resource book on intelligent design, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And if you look in the lower right-hand corner it says, "Likewise, proponents of intelligent design throughout history have shared the concept that life, like a manufactured object, is the result of intelligent shaping of matter. Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. You didn't even know that Pandas said that, did you?
A. I didn't remember that it said that. I don't know if I -- no, I didn't.
Q. You didn't know that, correct?
A. No.
Q. Now, do you know whether intelligent design teaches that life owes its origins to a master intellect?
A. I don't know that.
Q. Well, at your deposition you told me that intelligent design doesn't teach that life owes its origins to a master intellect, isn't that right?
A. That's what I'm saying. I don't know what you said you thought I knew.
Q. And in fact if you'll turn to page 58 of this book Of Pandas and People, please tell me when you get there.
A. I'm there.
Q. Just above the words "Suggested reading resources" there's the last sentence in the previous section says, "This parallel strongly suggests that life itself owes its origin to a master intellect." Isn't that what Pandas says, Mr. Buckingham?
A. That's what that sentence says. I don't know the context it was written in though.
Q. So but the point is you didn't even know that Pandas and People, the book that was approved for the Dover High School about intelligent design, teaches that life owes its origins to a master intellect? You weren't aware of that, is that right?
A. If you're asking me if I memorized this book, I didn't.
Q. I'm just asking if you were aware of that. You were not aware of that, isn't that true?
A. No.
Q. I'm sorry, you meant to say correct, isn't that right? Correct, you weren't aware of that?
A. Could you rephrase the question or ask me the question again?
Q. Sure. I'm just trying to establish, you weren't aware that Pandas teaches the life owes its origins to a master intellect?
A. I didn't remember that being in there, no.
Q. Okay. Now, does the theory of intelligent design teach that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent cause?
A. What I know about intelligent design is that it's another scientific theory, and I'm sure there are a lot of things about intelligent design. I don't know.
Q. Well, let me just re-ask the question. You don't know -- just let me make this clear, you don't know whether or not intelligent design teaches that life, the various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency. You just don't know whether it teaches that or not, isn't that right?
A. No, I don't.
Q. You can put that book down. Now I'd like to ask you some background questions. Mr. Buckingham, you now live in North Carolina?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And you moved there in August, isn't that right?
A. Yes, I moved in July, last week of July.
Q. And before moving to North Carolina you lived in Dover, Pennsylvania, isn't that right?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How long did you live in Dover?
A. 28 years.
Q. And at least for the last part of the time you lived in Dover you attended the Harmony Grove Community Church, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. And you at the time just before you left Dover you were a member of the Dover area school district board of directors?
A. That's true.
Q. And you served as a member of the board of directors for between two and three years?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Your first year on the board was from December 2002 to December of 2003, isn't that right?
A. I think I started in February of 2003.
Q. Okay, so you began in February of 2003, and then you were a school board member for all of 2003, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. You were a school board member of all of 2004?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were a school board member in 2005 until you resigned at or around the time that you moved to North Carolina?
A. That's true.
Q. You are retired?
A. Yes.
Q. And you've been retired since 1989?
A. Yes.
Q. And before your retirement you were a supervisor at the York County prison?
A. Yes.
Q. Your highest level of education is high school?
A. I graduated from the Pennsylvania State Police Academy in 1973 and FBI criminal investigation school, and have a paralegal certificate from Penn State.
Q. And you have three children, all grown?
A. Yes.
Q. And they graduated from, all graduated from Dover High School, but that was a number of years ago?
A. That was back in the 80's, early 80's.
Q. And you are married?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. And your wife's name is Charlotte?
A. Yes.
Q. And during the school board year 2004, during 2004 you were the head of the board curriculum committee, weren't you?
A. Yes.
Q. And who was on the board curriculum committee that year?
A. Sheila Harkins, Casey Brown, myself, and Allen Bonsell would be there on occasion as president.
Q. Mr. Bonsell was a member of the committee ex officio, isn't that right?
A. Yes, that would be the term.
Q. Mr. Bonsell was president of the board that year?
A. That's true.
Q. And Mr. Bonsell appointed you to the position of head of the curriculum committee, isn't that correct?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Now, do you recall that in 2003 the board approved funds for a new biology textbook?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you also recall that even though the board approved the funds, it didn't actually approve the purchase of the textbook in 2003?
A. That's true.
Q. And do you remember that in the 2003 and school year there weren't enough biology textbooks for the students to each take one home at night?
A. I know there were books in the classroom. Whether or not they were taken home I don't know.
Q. Well, you knew that there were not enough for the students to take that -- strike that. You knew that there were books in the classroom, but the reason they were in the classroom is because there weren't enough for the students to take them home, isn't that correct?
A. Back at the time I was new on the board and I didn't have sufficient background to really have that knowledge.
Q. Now, do you remember in early 2004 you reviewed the biology textbook that was being used in the Dover High School? Do you remember that?
A. That was being used?
Q. Yes.
A. I don't remember that. I remember reviewing the one they wanted to purchase. I don't remember reviewing the one they were using at the time.
Q. Well, I tell you what. Let's take a look in your notebook at what's P-132. Matt, could you please bring that up?
A. Could you give me the number again, please?
Q. It's 132.
A. Yes, sir, I have it.
Q. P-132 is a handwritten page that has the Bates number, actually two pages have the Bates number 39, and then if you look at the second page it has the Bates number 210. Do you see that?
A. I might be at the wrong part.
Q. If you need --
A. Mine doesn't have a handwritten like yours does.
Q. Well, I tell you what then. You do have P-132 in front of you?
A. Yes.
Q. That has the Bates page number 39 on it?
A. Yes.
Q. That's actually a document that you created?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's a list of references in the Miller and Levine 2004 biology textbook, is that right?
A. It's a 2002 book.
Q. That is a 2002 book, right?
A. Yes.
Q. You went through and you made a list of the aspects of the book that concerned you?
A. I made a list of aspects of the book that talked about one theory and didn't mention any other scientific theories.
Q. Okay. And the aspect of the book that mentioned one theory and didn't mention any other theory all concerned evolution, isn't that right?
A. It concerned Darwin's theory of evolution, yes.
Q. And among other things if you look at this document it says page 386, summary of Darwin's theory, do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. You were concerned that there was a summary of Darwin's theory in the book, isn't that right?
A. I wasn't, I don't think I was concerned that there was a summary of Darwin's theory in the book. I was concerned that the only thing in the book was Darwin's theory.
Q. Is it fair to say that you have a problem with the scientific theory of evolution being presented to the students at the Dover High School in biology class?
A. I don't have a problem with it being presented to the students as long as it's being presented along with the gaps in the theories of evolution.
Q. So I'm talking now not at your present views, because they're not relevant, but I want to know, I'm talking about back in 2004 your point of view was that you had a problem with intelligent -- excuse me, the theory of evolution being present alone. You wanted it to be presented with something else, correct?
A. I knew there were other scientific theories available, and I thought it would be better for the students if other scientific theories, along with Darwin, were presented.
Q. So in other words you wanted to make sure that there were other theories presented alongside of the theory of evolution, correct?
A. Other scientific theories, true.
Q. Now, do you recall a meeting of the board curriculum committee in January of 2004?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you recall who attended that meeting?
A. I can't tell you for sure. I know it was Sheila Harkins, Casey Brown, myself, Mr. Baksa. I don't know if the science teachers were there at that time or not. Might have been.
Q. Well, do you recall a discussion about the teachers watching a video called Icons of Evolution?
A.
A discussion about it? I know I was told they agreed to watch it.
Q. Okay. That was, you were told in or around the time that curriculum meeting in the spring of 2004 that the teachers had agreed to watch the video Icons of Evolution?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, that video was something that that you obtained from The Discovery Institute, isn't that right?
A. I didn't actually obtain it. They just sent it to me. I didn't ask for it.
Q. But in any event the video that the teaches were watching was the video that came to you from The Discovery Institute, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you remember at that curriculum -- by the way, do you know the date of the curriculum committee meeting that we're talking about in the spring of 2004?
A. Not off the top of my head.
Q. It was sometime in June?
A. I think it was.
Q. Do you remember a discussion at a curriculum committee meeting in the spring of 2004 with Bertha Spahr about a mural of evolution?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And do you know a man named Larry Reeser?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Mr. Reeser was somebody that you knew from your church, isn't that right?
A. I knew who he was, but I won't say I was real close to him. I just knew who he was and I knew after I went onto the board that he worked for the school.
Q. But you knew him through your church, correct?
A. That's one of the ways I know him, correct.
Q. Because he was a member along with you?
A. Right.
Q. Now, do you remember at that curriculum, at the meeting with the teachers now, we're talking about in the spring of 2004, expressing a concern that students were being taught that man came from monkeys?
A. I do remember expressing a concern that the origins of life were taught to the point that yes, that man descended from monkeys.
Q. And you were concerned that the biology curriculum might be teaching the students that man descended from monkeys, isn't that right?
A. I won't say I had a concern. I was told right up front that they didn't do that.
Q. And so fair enough. Now, I'd like to turn subjects now and talk about a board meeting that was held on June the 7th of 2004.
A. All right.
Q. Do you remember that there was a board meeting on June the 7th, 2004?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, I'd like you to just take a look at what's been marked P-42 in your book, just so we're on the same page.
A. I'm here.
Q. You're at that page?
A. Yes.
Q. That's actually the agenda for the board meeting, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. By "that," I mean the board meeting on June the 7th, 2004. If you look at pages 8 and 9 of this document, they're in the lower right-hand corner, this little page number, go to page 8. It says "Curriculum" under Roman XIII.
A. I'm there.
Q. And it says next to curriculum it has your name, Bill Buckingham?
A. Yes.
Q. That's because you were the head of the curriculum committee?
A. Yes.
Q. And the section on curriculum carries over to the next page you'll see, but I just want you to confirm for me that that shows that the board was scheduled to consider approval of some science textbooks at this meeting on June the 7th.
A. That's true.
Q. And the board was scheduled to consider approval of the chemistry textbook?
A. Yes.
Q. Actually more than one chemistry textbook, right?
A. I remember one.
Q. Okay, and there's also the board was scheduled to approve some textbooks for family and consumer sciences?
A. Yes.
Q. But in fact the board was not scheduled to consider approval of the biology textbook, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, at this point in time the faculty and administration of Dover High School had already recommended that the board approve the purchase of a new biology textbook, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was the 2002 edition of the Miller and Levine textbook Biology?
A. That's true.
Q. But approval of that textbook was being held up by the board because of the book's treatment of evolution, isn't that right?
A. We were still scrutinizing the book, going through it, and that had some weight, yes.
Q. Now, there wasn't any other aspect of the book other than evolution that you were concerned with at this time, was there?
A. Well, the lack of any other theory, we were concerned with that, too.
Q. But the lack of any other theory in the area of evolution, isn't that right?
A. I.e. intelligent design or something else, scientific to where the students would get a more well rounded education.
Q. I understand, Mr. Buckingham, but I just want to confirm that the book was being held up by the board on June the 7th, 2004 because of the, because of its treatment of evolution and the fact that it didn't consider some other things that you thought should be presented alongside of evolution, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. Now, we actually I suspect are going to have some areas of disagreement about what happened at the June 7th meeting, but let's see if we can focus on just a few areas of agreement. There was a board meeting that night?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were there?
A. Yes.
Q. And the entire board was there?
A. I don't know if Mrs. Cleaver was there or not. She was back and forth to Florida. She was building a home down there, and I know she had some storm damage at one point right after it was near completion, and she was back and forth. I don't know if she was there for sure.
Q. Please take a look at what's been marked as P-43 that's in your notebook.
A. Okay.
Q. Are you there?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. That's actually the minutes of the June 7th board meeting, isn't it?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. If you look at the top of the minutes it shows that all the board members were present?
A. I thank you for refreshing my memory.
Q. Now, another thing we can agree on is that at that board meeting there was some discussion of the biology text, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you expressed the concern that the book taught Darwin's theory of evolution and it was your view that this other scientific theory that you thought should be considered alongside of Darwin's theory of evolution, correct?
A. True.
Q. And in fact at that board meeting you said that you believed the separation of church and state is mythical and not something you support?
A. That's true.
Q. And Barrie Callahan, one of the plaintiffs in this case and a former board member, came up to the podium to ask about whether the board was going to approve the biology textbook. You remember that, don't you?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And in response to Mrs. Callahan's question you said that you were concerned because the book was laced with Darwinism, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. That's a direct quote, right? Laced with Darwinism?
A. That's what I said.
Q. Now, when I first asked you about this at your deposition on January 3rd you didn't admit then that you said that the book was laced with Darwinism, didn't you?
A. I wasn't sure I said it at that point. If you recall, that was shortly after I came out of drug treatment for my Oxycontin that I was prescribed for my back, and I was still going through withdrawal from that and things were kind of foggy.
Q. But the point is you didn't admit it when I asked you about that on January 3rd?
A. I didn't remember.
Q. As a matter of fact, the defendant's answer in this case admits that you said "laced with Darwinism" at that first meeting, correct?
A. I haven't seen it, if you're saying that happened.
Q. Still focusing on some potential areas of agreement about the June 7th board meeting, you said at that board meeting that with respect to evolution you were concerned that if it's taught over and over, the students begin to accept it as fact, didn't you?
A. That's true.
Q. And you said that in response to the comment of a young man named Max Pell, who came up to the podium to speak during the public comments section, isn't that right?
A. I don't know that I said it in response to him coming to the podium and saying anything. I know I said it in response to someone, but I don't know for sure that was him.
Q. And you said at that board meeting that you wanted other scientific theory taught in the classroom alongside Darwin's theory of evolution, correct?
A. I don't know if I said taught or presented.
Q. Well, in any event it was either you wanted other scientific theories taught or presented alongside Darwin's theory of evolution, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, scientific theory is a word that we've had some evidence about in this trial, but I just want to make sure that I understand your understanding of that term. When you say scientific theory, you mean something that is scientifically debatable, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And so you wanted a biology textbook that would present other what you call scientific theories alongside of evolution, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you didn't care what other theories were presented, just as long as other theories were presented alongside of evolution, isn't that right?
A. I wouldn't say that. I had some little bit of background about intelligent design and I felt comfortable that that would be a good fit because of research I did on the computer and so forth.
Q. But putting aside intelligent design for just a minute, you would have been happy with the science teachers teaching any theories that they thought scientifically plausible alongside of evolution, isn't that right?
A. Within certain parameters with the okay of the board, yes.
Q. I mean the main point for you was that there would be something presented alongside Darwin's scientific theory of evolution, isn't that right?
A. In an effort to show that Darwin wasn't the only scientific theory out there, yes.
Q. Right. So it could have been intelligent design, but you would have been happy with something else that was presented alongside of Darwin's theory, isn't that right?
A. I wouldn't have been as happy I don't think, but it would have been something, yes.
Q. And the reason that you wanted these other scientific theories presented is because you were concerned that the students might accept that scientific biological theory of evolution as a fact. That was your concern, wasn't it?
A. To the exclusion of other theories, yes.
Q. Now, moving on to a slightly different subject, when you lived in Dover you had the York Dispatch and the York Daily Record delivered to your home on a daily basis, isn't that right?
A. My father did when he came to live with us after my mother passed away, and he liked getting both the papers, and he was with us for almost seven years before he died of lung cancer, and he liked having both the papers.
Q. When did your father die?
A. He died May the 1st, 2003.
Q. And after that you still continued to receive the York Daily Record and the York Dispatch delivered to your home daily, isn't that correct?
A. They came, but I didn't read them. I eventually stopped them.
Q. Is one of those a morning paper and the other one is an evening paper?
A. The Daily Record is a morning paper and the York Dispatch is an evening paper.
Q. Now, I'd like to ask you some questions about some articles that were in those papers. Please if you would turn to what's been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 44.
A. I'm here.
Q. I'd like you to take a look at that and let me ask you a question. Did you review documents to prepare yourself to testify today?
A. I read some depositions at home before I came up, but I didn't have all those. When we moved a lot of things just got put places I never found yet.
Q. So did you read any news articles from the York Dispatch or the York Daily Record to prepare yourself to testify today?
A. It wouldn't make sense to do that because I don't believe a darn thing they print.
Q. So tell you what, you're going to need read, to look at what's been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 44, and I'd like to know whether looking at that you can tell me you read it when it came out, which is on or about June the 8th of 2004.
A. I couldn't tell you what I read a month ago, let alone June the 8th, 2004.
Q. Well, you just told me that you stopped reading the local papers, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. And so you didn't, is it your testimony that you didn't read any of the articles that were in the papers about the school board in the summer of 2004?
A. No, I didn't. I would be told by people there are things in there, but my experience with the reporters were the articles almost got to be laughable. They'd come to the meetings and we talked intelligent design, and you could almost bet your house they were going to say creationism the next day, and it just got disgusting and I just wouldn't pay for it or read it anymore.
Q. Okay, so you didn't read any of the articles that were in the papers in the summer of 2004?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. And people told you about articles, but they didn't tell you what was in those articles, isn't that correct, Mr. Buckingham?
A. I won't say no one ever told me what was in them, but I know they would tell me, "You're in the paper again or the board is in the paper again."
Q. Well, at your deposition on March the 31st, which Mr. Rothschild took, you told him, you clarified your testimony from your previous deposition to say that you were told that there were articles in the paper, but you were not told what they were. Isn't that correct?
A. Usually I was not, but I won't say I was never told.
Q. Looking at this, what's been marked as P-44, at the top you see there's a heading it says "Dover debates evolution in biology text. Book on hold because it doesn't address creationism." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Is that a true statement?
A. No.
Q. Now, if you turn to the second page of this, and you go to the fourth paragraph down it says that, "Buckingham said although the book has been available for review since May 2003, he had just recently reviewed the book himself and was disturbed the book was laced with Darwinism." That's a true statement, isn't it?
A. Which book are we talking about, the 2004 or the 2002 edition?
Q. Well, if you look at the text of the article it's referring to a biology textbook.
A. They were both biology textbooks.
Q. When you say what were both, the 2002 and 2004?
A. Right. We eventually bought the 2004.
Q. Did you say that either of them on a meeting of the board on June the 7th as reported in this article, did you say with respect to either of them that, "Buckingham said although the book has been available for review since May 2003, he had just recently reviewed the book himself and was disturbed the book was laced with Darwinism," did you say that?
A. I don't know that I said that. I know that I said the book, the 2002 edition was laced with Darwinism. I don't know about the dates we're talking about there.
Q. Okay. Now, if you go down just a few more paragraphs, and we're focusing on statements in here that are attributed to you, if you go down to the seventh paragraph on that page, it says "Opposes separation of church and state. Buckingham said he believes the separation of church and state is mythical and not something he supports." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And that's in fact a true statement. You did say that at that meeting?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Now, I'd like you if you would to please turn to the next exhibit, which is marked P-45.
A. I'm there.
Q. And this is an article from the York Dispatch dated June the 9th of 2004, and it's by a writer named Heidi Bernhard-Bubb. Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you know Ms. Bernhard-Bubb?
A. I know who she is. I don't know her.
Q. You knew that she's a reporter?
A. Yes.
Q. I'd like you to take a look at this and tell me whether you think you read this article at or around the time it was published.
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Okay. Now, if you look there's a second paragraph that has a very similar reference to what we looked at with the previous article about a statement by you that the biology textbook was laced with Darwinism. Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Except that refers to the 2002 edition of the biology textbook?
A. Yes.
Q. In fact, you know that statement is true, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Then the next statement in the article says, "Board member Noel Renwich agreed." Is that a true statement?
A. I don't remember if he did or not.
Q. Okay. Then look at the next paragraph that says, "The book was initially selected by the high school science department and district administration to replace the current textbook, which is six years old and out of date in some areas." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. That's a true statement, isn't it?
A. I don't know that the administration selected it. I think the science department selected it and took it to the administration to bring to us.
Q. So with that clarification that's a true statement, right?
A. With that clarification, yes.
Q. Now, if you go to the next paragraph, I'll just read you the first sentence, it says, "A recommendation on the book will come from the curriculum committee, which also includes board members Sheila Harkins and Casey Brown." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. That's a true statement, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. And then the next sentence says, "Buckingham said the committee would look for a book that presented both creationism and evolution." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. You actually said that?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. You didn't say that at the --
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Now, the march of the articles, let's go on to P-46, which is another article.
A. I'm there.
Q. This is an article dated June the 9th, 2004 from the York Daily Record, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. And it was written by Joseph Maldonado?
A. Yes, it was.
Q. And do you know Mr. Maldonado?
A. I know he's a reporter.
Q. And he was a reporter for York Daily Record, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, did you read this article at or around the time it was published on June the 9th, 2004?
A. No.
Q. Let's look at that, I want to ask you some questions about the text. Look at the very first paragraph in this, it says, "Former Dover high school board member Barrie Callahan repeated her request for new biology books for the high school at Monday night's board meeting." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And that's referring to the June 7th meeting?
A. Yes.
Q. And that's actually a true statement, isn't it? You agree with that?
A. That was normal for her. Every meeting she did that, yes.
Q. And therefore the next sentence in the P-46 is also true, it says, "For the past few months she has appeared several times before the board to request a status update."
A. That's true.
Q. And the next statement says, "Board member William Buckingham, who sits on the curriculum committee, said a book had been under consideration, Biology, by Miller and Levine, but was declined because of its one-sided references to evolution." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. That's a true statement, isn't it?
A. No, it's not. It wasn't declined at that point.
Q. So that statement is true except that it wasn't declined at that point, right?
A. And I don't think I said it's declined because of one-sided references to evolution.
Q. So it's your testimony that that statement in the Exhibit P-46 is in fact not true, correct?
A. True. Correct.
Q. Let's look at the next paragraph. It says, actually the article says, it's quoting you, "'It's inexcusable to teach from a book that says man descended from apes and monkeys,' he said. 'We want a book that gives balanced education.'" Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. Now, that's a true statement. You did say that at the June 7th board meeting?
A. I don't remember saying that.
Q. So your testimony is not that you didn't say it. It's that you don't remember saying it, isn't that right?
A. That's my testimony.
Q. Then the next paragraph says, "Buckingham and other board members are looking for a book that teaches creationism and evolution." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. Now, you said that, didn't you?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. And the statement after that says, "But a former student, Max Pell, told the board Monday night that he was concerned that that type of book would trample on the separation of church and state." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. Now, do you remember a young man by the name of Max Pell speaking at that meeting?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And do you remember him saying something about what the board wanted to do would the trample on the separation of church and state?
A. I can't say I do, no.
Q. So you just don't remember, is that correct?
A. I don't remember everything he said.
Q. You don't remember whether he said this statement, isn't that correct?
A. That's true.
Q. Now, the next paragraph says, "Board president Allen Bonsell disagrees, saying there were only two theories, creationism and evolution, that could possibly be taught. He said that as long as both were taught as theories, there would be no problem for the district." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. Did Mr. Bonsell say that?
A. I never heard him say that.
Q. So it's your testimony that he didn't say it or you don't remember?
A. I don't go with him everywhere he goes. I don't know if he said it or not, but I don't remember hearing him say it.
Q. Well, I guess what I'm trying to figure out is this is reporting that that was said at the board meeting, right?
A. Apparently that's what they're saying was said, but I didn't hear it.
Q. And I just want to make the record clear here, are you saying that you don't remember it, you don't remember hearing it, or are you saying you're sure it wasn't said?
A. I'm sure it wasn't said, because if he would have said it I would have remembered it, because it just wouldn't have made sense.
Q. Okay. Let's talk about the next statement in there. It says, again quoting you, "'Have you ever heard of brain washing?' Buckingham asked Pell. 'If students are only taught evolution, it stops becoming theory and becomes fact.'" That's true, isn't it?
A. It's close, but it's not accurate.
Q. In what respect is it not accurate?
A. What I said was if students are taught the same thing over and over again, whether it's true or not, it becomes fact in their minds.
Q. And then the next statement says, "After the meeting Buckingham said all he wants is a book that offers balance between what he said are Christian views of creationism and evolution." Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. And you in fact did say that at the meeting, didn't you?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. And then the final statement in here says, "He said, 'There needn't be consideration of the beliefs of Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, or other faiths and views,'" and then quoting you directly, "'This country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution,' he said. 'This country was found on Christianity, and our students should be taught as such.'" Do you see that?
A. I see it.
Q. You said that, didn't you?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Well --
A. I didn't say it then. I made a statement similar to that when we having a discussion about taking "under God" out of the Pledge, and I said it to Joe Maldonado after the meeting because he asked me if I didn't think that Hindus and Muslims would be offended by having "under God" in there. I said I didn't think they would, because it doesn't refer to a specific god. It refers to God. And I did make this statement that this country was founded on Christianity, we have the Pilgrims and so forth, and the Federalist Papers, the Preamble to the Constitution says we're all created, you know, it's all through our history, and that's what I was getting it.
Q. So the fact is you definitely said a statement or something very similar to what's reported in this article, correct?
A. Not at this time. It was at the debate about taking "under God" out of the Pledge, to pass the resolution to keep it in.
Q. Right, but you actually said -- it was at a different time, but you said something very similar to what's reported in this paper, isn't that correct?
A. I said something close to that, and I said to it a reporter after the meeting.
Q. Right, and that was at the time of the board considering passing a resolution regarding the Pledge of Allegiance, isn't that correct?
A. That's true.
Q. And that was in 2003?
A. Yes.
Q. In fact, it was in the last part of 2003, the fall of 2003?
A. I believe it was.
Q. Now, when I asked you about this at your deposition you denied saying it ever, isn't that correct?
A. I don't know if I denied saying it ever, if I didn't understand the question or what, but I know I said it when it came to the Pledge.
Q. Please take a moment to look at pages 44 and 45 of your January 1 deposition.
A. You mean January 3 deposition?
Q. I'm sorry, January 3 deposition.
A. What pages were they?
Q. Page 44 beginning at line 7, and continuing on to page 45.
A. I'm there.
Q. Okay, we were talking about an article which we'll actually talk about a little later this morning, and beginning on line 7 I said to you, "It says here that in addition to applauding you for the forthright way in which you dealt with your personal issues relating to Oxycontin, it says that you had made the following statements: 'This country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution. This country was founded on Christianity, and our students should be taught as such.' And it also says, 'Two thousand years ago someone died on a cross. Can't someone take a stand for him?' Do you see that?"
A. I see that.
Q. " QUESTION: Did you make either of those statements?
ANSWER: Not at this time. The 'This country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution, this country was founded on Christianity,' I never say that.
QUESTION: You never said that at all?
ANSWER: Not to my knowledge."
" QUESTION: You never said the statement about Muslim beliefs or evolution? You never said that at all? Is that your testimony?
ANSWER: I don't recall saying that, no."
That was the testimony you gave?
A. I was speaking in the context of a board meeting. I made that statement after a meeting to a reporter.
Q. So even though the words aren't used there, what you meant to say was that in response to the question you never said that at a board meeting, is that correct?
A. That's what I thought you were referring to when you asked me that question, yes.
Q. Now, let's just move on to what's been marked as P-47.
A. I'm there.
Q. This is another, yet another article in a local paper, this one from the York Daily Record, dated June the 10th of 2004, and it's reporting that board meeting that took place on June the 7th of 2004, isn't that right?
A. I'm sorry, I don't see where it refers to a specific board meeting.
Q. Well, if you look at the third paragraph it says, "During this past Monday night's board meeting board members Allen Bonsell, Noel Renwich, and Buckingham spoke aggressively in favor of having a biology book that includes the theory of creation as part of the text." Do you see that?
A. I see that.
Q. That's a reference to the June 7th board meeting, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. That's actually a true statement, isn't it, the one I just read?
A. No, it's not. It's just another instance where we would say intelligent design and they would print creationism. It happened all the time.
Q. And you didn't read this article at or around the time it was printed, did you?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. And then if you look, the paragraph that's just after it, it's just one sentence actually, after the one that I just said is quoting you, and it says, "'All I'm asking for is balance,' Buckingham said." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And you did say that at the June 7th meeting, didn't you?
A. Yes, to the extent that we wanted more than one scientific theory presented, that's true.
Q. And then if you look at what's been marked as P-50?
A. I'm there.
Q. This is a very short article that was in the York Daily Record on June the 14th of 2004. Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And it's another statement in here that says, "Last time, Dover school board member William Buckingham said a new biology book for the district should offer a balance between creationism and Darwin's theory of evolution." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And you didn't read this article at or around June 14th of 2004, did you?
A. No.
Q. And then one more article on the June 7th board meeting is at Exhibit P-51.
A. I'm there.
Q. And I just want to know, this repeats many of the statements, but I just want to know if you read this article at or around the time, June 14th of 2004.
A. No, I didn't.
Q. So there were six articles in the local papers that were delivered to your door every day, reporting on the June 7th board meeting, and you didn't read any of them, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. And nobody told you that statements were being attributed to you such as wanting to teach creationism, no one told you that, isn't that right?
A. I don't remember anyone telling me that, no.
Q. Your wife didn't tell you that, right?
A. No.
Q. Nobody at your church told you that, right?
A. I won't say -- people at the church would come up and tell me there were things in the paper, and sometimes they would blurt out something in passing, but there was never any in-depth discussion of what's in an article. They might have just said, "Hey, they have you talking about creationism again," and we didn't talk about that. We talked about intelligent design.
Q. So is it your testimony now that people did say to you in June of 2004 that the papers were reporting that you were talking about creationism? Is that your testimony now?
A. It's the same as before. I said that on rare occasions they would tell me what was in there, but basically for the most part they didn't, they would just say there's another article in the paper about me or about the school board as a whole.
Q. That's not what you told us at your deposition, is it, Mr. Buckingham?
A. If you want to show it to me I'll look at it.
Q. Go to page 40 of your deposition, line 23.
A. Page 40?
Q. Page 40, line 23.
MR. GILLEN: Which one?
Q. Of the January 1st deposition.
A. January 3rd?
Q. January 3rd. Tell me when you're there, Mr. Buckingham.
A. I'm there.
Q. I asked you, isn't it true that I asked you the followings questions and you gave the following answers?
" QUESTION: Let's turn to the next page of this exhibit, June the 10th. By the way, did anybody report to you at the time, did you see any of this in the paper at the time, the things that we've been looking at?
ANSWER: I stopped reading that stuff in the paper. It got to be -- I never thought it would get like this, and I just got tired of looking at it. Like I say, I would open the paper, read the obituaries, see how my fighting Phills did, and that was about it.
QUESTION: Did anybody come up to you and say in the community, your wife, your friends, anybody come up to you and say, tell you that these things are being written in the paper?
ANSWER: Not that I recall, no.
QUESTION: Nobody at your church mentioned it to you?
ANSWER: Not that I recall."
That was your testimony, isn't it, Mr. Buckingham.
A. Yes.
Q. And then actually you sought to clarify this testimony at your second deposition, didn't you? Do you remember seeking to clarify your testimony at this point at your second deposition?
A. No, but we'll go there.
Q. Well, turn to page 4 of your deposition on March 31st, 2005.
A. I'm there.
Q. Mr. Rothschild asked you the following question and you gave the following answer:
" QUESTION: Is there anything that you testified during that deposition which was held on January 3rd, 2005 that you would like to change or modify?
ANSWER: One thing. There was a question asked about whether or not anyone at my church or any of my acquaintances told me there were articles in the paper and explained what they were to some extent, and I answered no. As I recollect, I was told there were articles in the paper, but I wasn't told what they were. I just want to make that clear, because it kind of even sounded funny to me. People did tell me there were articles in the paper, but I didn't look to see them, and I was just told they were there."
That was your testimony on March the 31st, 2005, isn't that correct, Mr. Buckingham?
A. That's correct, and I would say that 99 percent of the time they didn't tell me what was there. That's probably why I didn't remember the rare occasions when they did.
Q. So you're clarifying your testimony yet again?
A. I'm clarifying my testimony, yes.
Q. Now, Mr. Buckingham, I'd like to turn to another different board meeting. This is the board meeting that was held on June the 14th of 2004. Do you remember there was a board meeting that day?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, as to both of the June meetings, with the exception of what we can point out in these articles and jog your memory, you don't recall anything that happened at them, isn't that right?
A. I won't say that. I recall things that happened at the meeting.
Q. Well --
A. There was some times, the dates I didn't have, you know, in the uppermost of my mind, but I remember some things that happened.
Q. Well, do you remember telling me at your deposition on January the 3rd that you don't remember anything about those meetings?
A. No.
Q. Please turn to page 46 of your deposition on January the 3rd. Line 17.
A. I'm there.
Q. Isn't it true that I asked you the following questions and you gave the following answers:
" QUESTION: Do you remember that there were two meetings in June?
ANSWER: Yes.
QUESTION: Do you remember what happened at those meeting?
ANSWER: No.
QUESTION: Do you remember anything what happened at those meetings.
ANSWER: Nope."
That's your, that was your testimony on January the 3rd, isn't that right, Mr. Buckingham?
A. Because of the dates, I wasn't sure what happened on what date.
Q. Well, you knew that there were some intense discussions about the biology textbook, right?
A. Yes.
Q. But you couldn't tell me any of the particulars about those discussions at your deposition on January 3rd even though I asked you for that, isn't that true?
A. It could be.
Q. Well, I tell you what. Why don't you just look at page 47 of your deposition, line 24.
A. I'm there.
Q. Isn't it true that I asked you the following questions and you gave the following answers:
" QUESTION: Do you remember a meeting in June where there was an intense discussion about the biology curriculum and the biology textbook?
ANSWER: Do I remember it specifically? No."
A. I'm sorry, I'm on the wrong page or something. It's not where I --
Q. Okay. Do you have the right transcript? Maybe you've got the wrong one.
A. I'm at June 3rd.
Q. January 3rd.
A. January 3rd, I'm sorry.
Q. Page 47.
A. I'm there.
Q. Line 23, begins with the word --
A. Okay. All right.
Q. Let's start over. Beginning on line 24, I asked you the following questions and you gave the follow answers:
" QUESTION: Do you remember a meeting in June where there was an intense discussion about the biology curriculum and the biology textbook?
ANSWER: Do I remember it specifically? No. We had different meetings where there were intense discussions about the textbooks.
QUESTION: Which ones do you remember?
ANSWER: The particulars of?
QUESTION: In general.
ANSWER: I can just tell you there were several meetings where we had discussion about the textbooks.
QUESTION: What do you remember about those discussions?
ANSWER: Pardon?
QUESTION: What do you remember about those discussions?
ANSWER: I just remember that we had a debate on it. There were questions about the over the 2004 book and vice versa, and the thought that we would like to have other scientific theories brought into the classroom in addition to Darwin's theory of evolution."
You gave that testimony, didn't you?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And you didn't provide any other information beyond what's stated in that testimony, isn't that right?
A. At that time that's what I could recall.
Q. Now, it's your testimony that at neither meeting no one on the board ever mentioned creationism, isn't that right?
A. That's true.
Q. You're very clear on that point, correct?
A. Absolutely, because it's just something we didn't do.
Q. Okay. Now, about this June 14th meeting, you were present, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And again all nine members of the board were there?
A. Yes.
Q. And your wife spoke at the meeting?
A. Yes, she did.
Q. And she said that teaching evolution was in direct opposition to God's teaching and that the people of Dover could not allow the district to teach anything but creationism. Isn't that true?
A. I can't remember exactly what she said, but I know it was pretty biblical.
Q. And do you remember that the board of directors had a five minute rule?
A. We had a three minute rule, and she went to five.
Q. So let me -- in other words, it's your testimony that a board member -- excuse me, a member of the public could speak up to three minutes, and then they'd be asked to stop speaking?
A. There were times when they went over the three minutes, but basically the guideline was three minutes, because we didn't want somebody coming up and talking for half an hour to monopolize all of the public comment time.
Q. And in fact she went over the time limit, isn't that right?
A. By two minutes.
Q. She didn't speak for fifteen minutes?
A. No, she didn't. I was watching, because I told her before I left the house I didn't know what she was going to say, but I told her, "Make sure you stay within three minutes," and she went over it. She went to five.
Q. Well, do you remember that she quoted scripture during her presentation to the board, isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And at that meeting you said something to the effect that when you were growing up, your generation prayed and read from the Bible and you don't remember it hurting anyone. You said that, didn't you?
A. I could have.
Q. Well, you could have or you did?
A. I don't know if I did or not. I'm saying I could have.
Q. Now, you also said at that meeting, "I challenge you, the audience, to trace your roots to the monkey you came from." You said that at that June 14th meeting, didn't you?
A. I was speaking to an individual who said something to me. I didn't get it all, but it had to do with a monkey, and my knee jerk reaction was to say what I said.
Q. Who was the individual?
A. Lonnie Langioni.
Q. And also at that meeting you apologized if you offended any resident or teachers at any previous meetings, isn't that right?
A. With the tone of my voice, yes.
Q. And also at that meeting you said words to the effect of, "Two thousand years ago someone died on a cross for us. Shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him?"
A. What meeting are we talking about here?
Q. June the 14th of 2004.
A. I didn't say it then.
Q. You're sure about that?
A. Positive.
Q. Actually you know you did say words or those words or words very similar at a board meeting, but it wasn't in June of 2004, correct?
A. It was regarding taking "under God" out of the Pledge, and God was already mentioned in the Pledge.
Q. So the fact is you did actually say words very similar to that, but it was at an earlier time?
A. Yes.
Q. And again that was in the discussion over the Pledge in the last part of 2003?
A. Yes.
MR. HARVEY: Your Honor, we're going to go through some more articles on the board meeting. I'm happy to march through them, but it might be a good time to --
THE COURT: All right. Well, why don't we take our break now? We'll break for about twenty minutes. This will be our morning, mid-morning recess, and we'll reconvene after that point. We'll be in recess.
| Home Page | Browse | Search | Feedback | Links |
| The FAQ | Must-Read Files | Index | Creationism | Evolution | Age of the Earth | Flood Geology | Catastrophism | Debates |
