Re: [asa] thinking was prosecutors and not that of the judge

From: Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
Date: Fri May 04 2007 - 10:54:58 EDT

On 5/4/07, James Mahaffy <Mahaffy@dordt.edu> wrote:
>
>
> >>> Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> 5/4/2007 7:51 AM >>>
> One thing I want to note *inter alia* is that Judge Jones would make a
> great scientist. His thinking is lucid and clear and his ability to absorb
> and analyze the expert testimony in this case is nothing short of
> phenomenal. Again from the Kitzmiller decision:
>
> Actually, although the law allows him to do it, these opinions were
> written mainly by the prosecutors. While he obviously agreed with them to
> extensively use their brief's in the sciences we would acknowledge where
> they came from. At least it is saying that the lucid thinking was provided
> by the prosecutors and agreed to by the judge.
>
> I have no problem in your liking the logic, but lets give credit to the
> folks that wrote it and it was mainly NOT the judge.
>

I disagree. As good as the lawyers and expert witnesses were the judge's
ability to get to the point was what I noticed.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 4 10:55:19 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 04 2007 - 10:55:19 EDT