Browse Search Feedback Other Links Home Home The Talk.Origins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

Trial transcript: Day 4 (September 29), AM Session, Part 1


THE COURT: Be seated, please. All right, we remain in the plaintiff's case, and your next witness?

MR. ROTHSCHILD: Good morning. Your Honor. Plaintiffs call Carol Brown to the stand.

(Carol Brown was called to testify and was sworn by the courtroom deputy.)

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Please be seated and state your name and spell your name for the record, please.

THE WITNESS: My name is Carol Honor Brown. That's C-A-R-O-L, H-O-N-O-R, Brown, B-R-O-W-N.


Q. Good morning, Ms. Brown.

A. Good morning, sir.

Q. You spelled your name Carol Brown, you stated your name Carol Brown, but you also go by another name?

A. Yes, sir. I'm also known as Casey Brown.

Q. Thank you. I've put a binder of exhibits in front of you that we'll be referring to during your testimony. They will also be projected on the monitor before you and on the large screen over to my right.

A. Thank you, sir.

Q. Where do you live, Mrs. Brown?

A. 5401 Davidsburg Road. Dover, Pennsylvania 17315-4146.

Q. How long have you lived there?

A. Since 1983.

Q. Can you describe your educational background?

A. I'm a college graduate, sir, with some post graduate work.

Q. Where did you go to college?

A. I attended several college, including Millersville, Trenton State College, and Rutgers State University.

Q. What did you take your degree in?

A. Secondary education, sir.

Q. And you said you did some graduate work?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. Can you describe that?

A. I did graduate work pursuant to archaeology, but I didn't complete my work.

Q. Are you married?

A. Yes, sir, I am.

Q. And what is your husband's name?

A. My husband's name is Jeffrey Allen Brown, that's capital J-E-F-F-R-E-Y, A-L-L-E-N. B-R-O-W-N.

Q. And we can get some of the spellings later if the court reporter needs it, but that's quite all right. He'll be glad you got it right. Do you have any children?

A. Yes. We each have a child from a previous marriage.

Q. And did those children attend schools in the Dover area school district?

A. They both did, sir.

Q. Do you work?

A. No, sir.

Q. Have you ever worked?

A. Yes, sir, I have.

Q. Prior to retiring what was your last job?

A. I was a correspondent, a newspaper reporter for the York Dispatch, the York Sunday News.

Q. Why did you retire from that job?

A. I realized that I was in a position of conflict of interest when I was sworn on to the board. Friends of mine who were fellow reporters sometimes asked me questions that I could not in good conscious answer unless I broke the oath I took as a school board director.

Q. When did you become a school board director or a member of the Dover school board?

A. 1995, sir.

Q. And how did you become a member of the school board?

A. I ran a write-in campaign to fill out the uncompleted two-year portion of a four-year term.

Q. And did you have further elections?

A. Yes, sir. I was reelected two more times.

Q. What were the complete dates of your service as a member of the Dover area school board?

A. December of 1995 until October 18th of 2004.

Q. And why did your tenure end on October 18th, 2004?

A. I resigned.

Q. Why did you resign?

A. I resigned because I was not in agreement with the direction the board had chosen to go in, and I realized that I could no longer fulfill my obligations to the members of the community and to the students.

Q. Was there any specific issue that you disagreed with the direction of the board?

A. It was the issue of intelligent design, sir.

Q. The change in the biology curriculum?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Has your husband ever been a member of the board?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what were the dates of his tenure on the board?

A. I will be honest, sir. I'm not sure. He was on the board for five years.

Q. And when did his tenure end?

A. His tenure also ended the same night as mine. October 18th, 2004.

Q. During your tenure on the school board did the school board have committees?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And do those committees have chairpersons?

A. Yes, sir, they do.

Q. How are those chairpersons selected?

A. The chairpersons are selected by the sitting president of the school board, sir.

Q. Do the committees of the Dover school board, and you know, we can confine this to the time you were on the school board, did that include a curriculum committee?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. I've heard in this litigation actually multiple curriculum committees. Can you distinguish between the various kinds of curriculum committees that were in operation in the Dover area school district?

A. Yes, sir, there are three basic kinds of committees in general and the curriculum committees in particular. The first is a citizens advisory committee for the curriculum. That is comprised of interested members of the community who wish to volunteer their time, usually under the aegis of an administrator of district, very often the assistant superintendent, sometimes the superintendent, sometimes the building principal.

Then there is the district curriculum committee which is comprised of teachers and department heads. Also under the assistant superintendent, curriculum is part of his job, and then there is the board curriculum committee. It is comprised of a committee chairperson, and no more than three members of the board. The president, the current president of the board is ex officio member of all four committees.

Q. Have you ever served on the board curriculum committee?

A. Yes, sir, I have.

Q. Were you serving on the board curriculum committee at the time of your resignation?

A. Yes, I was, sir.

Q. And were you serving on it throughout the 2004 year? And I mean calendar year, not school year.

A. Until the point of my resignation, sir.

Q. Can you describe how each of these three committees figure into the development of curriculum in the Dover area school district?

A. Curriculum is put together by a combination of people. It usually begins with the district committee comprised of the teachers and any involved administrators. The curriculum may be revised because of changes mandated by the state or changes in the subject matter itself. Also going along with that would be changes in textbooks, the need for new textbooks or additional textbooks.

The district committee would get input from the citizens advisory committee. They're very much a part of this, and the recommendations would then come back to the board and the board would meet both in conjunction with the teachers of the district committee as well as by itself, and then the members, the chairperson of the curriculum committee would bring any needed changes or textbooks to the full board for a vote during a regularly scheduled board meeting.

Q. In the case of this curriculum advisory committee, this citizens committee, would they have meetings to discuss proposed curriculum changes?

A. Yes, generally they do, sir, in the fall of the year.

Q. And would they communicate their views on proposed curriculum changes to the other committees?

A. Yes, sir, they do.

Q. At the time of your resignation who besides yourself was on the board curriculum committee?

A. The chairperson was Mr. William Buckingham, Mrs. Sheila Harkins, who was then board vice president, and myself, with Mr. Alan Bonsell, the president of the board as ex officio member.

Q. And based on what you said in your earlier testimony Mr. Bonsell appointed Mr. Buckingham to chair that curriculum committee?

A. Yes. That is one of the duties of the president.

Q. Who were the other members of the board? I think you've mentioned yourself and your husband, Mr. Bonsell, Mr. Harkins, Mr. Buckingham. Who else was on the full school board as of the time of your resignation?

A. Mrs. Jane Cleaver, Ms. Angie Yeungling, Mrs. Heather Gessey, and Mr. Noel Renwick.

Q. Do you consider any of these people your friends?

A. I did, sir.

Q. All of them?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you ever run with the other, any of these other members of the board on a slate of candidates?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. Who did you run with?

A. I ran with Mr. Alan Bonsell, Mrs. Sheila Harkins, and Mrs. Angie Yeungling. Mrs. Harkins and I were running for re-election at that point.

Q. Did your husband Jeff Brown run with a slate of candidates? Actually let me just withdraw that for a moment. What year was that that you ran with this slate?

A. Around 2001, sir.

Q. Did your husband Jeff Brown ever run on the slate of, with a slate of candidates?

A. Yes, sir. It was more informal however.

Q. Who did he run with?

A. I'm sorry, sir, I blinked.

Q. I'm sorry.

A. He ran with Mr. William Buckingham, Mrs. Jane Cleaver, and they endorsed Mrs. Heather Gessey, who was running as an independent candidate.

Q. During your tenure on the school board did the administration have retreats?

A. Yes, we did, sir.

Q. Did the board have a retreat in January of 2002?

A. Yes, we did, sir.

Q. Where was it held?

A. In the teachers lounge of the North Salem Elementary School.

Q. At what time of day?

A. It would have been early evening, somewhere around 6:30 to 7:00.

Q. Who attended that meeting in January of 2002? And if you can name them best by position or type of position, that's fine.

A. All of the administrators, that would be the senior administrators, including the interim superintendent, the building principals, and all of the assistant principals. I believe we then had two, the language arts supervisor, the technology coordinator, the supervisor of buildings and grounds, the supervisor of food services, the supervisor of transportation, and the supervisor of language arts. I think I have them all.

Q. Did the board members also attend?

A. And the board members, sorry.

Q. Who was the superintendent in January of 2002 for the Dover area school district?

A. Dr. Richard Nilsen was then our interim superintendent, sir.

Q. And who was the assistant superintendent at that time?

A. We did not have an assistant superintendent at that time.

Q. At this retreat in January of 2002 did the members of the board get an opportunity to the identify issues that were important to them?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you describe how that happened, where the seating was, and how each board member had received that opportunity?

A. We began by helping ourself to a buffet. Carol Stambaugh, our food services supervisor at that time, and her workers put out a buffet for us. So everyone helped themselves and found places around a large group of tables, grouped together in a large rectangular form, and Dr. Nilsen tried to seat us so that a board member was seated between an administrator, that was kind of every other one, and as we ate we had opening remarks. I had the honor to be the president of the board at that time, and I made a few remarks and Dr. Nilsen did as well. The gist of the remarks really was desire to air out some of our differences and also some of the issues in which our newer board members were interested in taking on, both praise and blame from different members.

Q. Can you explain how the board members communicated the issues that were important individually to them?

A. We took turns. Initially we had reports from each of the administrators, concerns they might have, achievements that they were very proud of that had been attained over the previous part of the school year or the previous school year, and then our board members took turns.

Q. In preparing for your testimony today did you look at any documents to refresh your recollection about what you and other board members said at that January 2002 retreat?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. And what was that?

A. You presented me with copies of the minutes from two different re,treats sir.

Q. And when you're describing these minutes, do you remember, do you have an understanding of who prepared them?

A. Dr. Nilsen had taken notes, and then he presented copies of the minutes to us at a subsequent board meeting.

Q. Could I ask you, Matt, to pull up Exhibit 21? Plaintiff's Exhibit 21? And that's also on your monitor in front of you. Is this the document that you're referring to?

A. Yes, sir, it is.

Q. Was Alan Bonsell a member of the board at the January 2002 meeting?

A. Yes, sir. He had been sworn in in December.

Q. And was this his first tenure on the board?

A. Yes, sir, it was.

Q. So he had been on the board for about three weeks at the time?

A. Yes. So had Mrs. Angie Yeungling.

Q. Do you remember what issues Mr. Bonsell identified at the January 2002 meeting?

A. He and I shared some issues. One of them was policy. We had discussed uniforms. He also was very concerned with the state of morality, and he expressed a desire to look into bringing prayer and faith back into the schools.

Q. Do you remember him identifying any other issue?

A. He mentioned Bible, sir, and he mentioned creation, creationism.

Q. What did he say about creationism?

A. That he felt it should be a fair part of the, there should be a fair and balanced presentation within the curriculum.

Q. Did he say what aspect of the curriculum he wanted creationism included in?

A. I don't recall that he did, sir.

Q. Was there a board retreat in the subsequent year in 2003?

A. Yes, sir, there was.

Q. And when was that held?

A. That was in March of 2003.

Q. And where was it held?

A. That was also held in the teachers lounge at North Salem Elementary School. That was our normal meeting place.

Q. And was it at the same time of day and evening?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did the same type of people attend the meeting, board members?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Administrators?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was Dr. Nilsen the superintendent at this time?

A. Yes, he was, sir.

Q. And now the full superintendent, not an interim superintendent?

A. Yes.

Q. Was there an assistant superintendent by the time of this meeting?

A. Yes, sir, Mr. Michael Baksa.

Q. Did he attend the meeting?

A. I believe he did, sir.

Q. Did Dr. Nilsen attend the meeting?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did the board members also again attend the meeting?

A. Two of the board members were absent, sir.

Q. Who was that?

A. I believe Mr. Buckingham and Mrs. Yeungling were absent, sir.

Q. Did the board members identify important issues in the same manner that they had in January of 2002?

A. Yes, they did, sir.

Q. And did Dr. Nilsen again take notes of what the board members said?

A. Yes, sir, he did.

Q. Did he subsequently circulate a typed up version of those notes?

A. Yes, he did, sir.

Q. I'd like you to look at Exhibit 25, which will again appear on your monitor. Do you recognize this as the typed version of Dr. Nilsen's notes?

A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. Did you also look at this in preparation for your testimony today?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. But you had seen it shortly after the retreat as well?

A. Yes, I had.

Q. At this time Mr. Bonsell was still on the board?

A. Yes, sir, he was. He was then vice president of the board.

Q. Did he have any role on the curriculum committee?

A. He was chairperson of the curriculum committee.

Q. Do you remember what issues Mr. Bonsell identified at this meeting?

A. Some of the same issues, but in addition we were also upgrading our technology and working on the web site for the school district, and he had some concerns about keeping the site current because we were going through growing pains at that point, sir. One of the issues was coordinating -- I'm sorry, one of his issues which had been mentioned in the previous year but which he was stronger on the second time around was the importance of teaching our students about the Founding Fathers, about early American history, and the role of faith in the founding of America.

Q. Prior to this time was the Dover High School teaching students, or all Dover schools teaching the students about Founding Fathers and our early colonial period?

A. Yes, but not to, there was not the emphasis that I believe Mr. Bonsell wanted to see.

Q. And what specifically was that emphasis?

A. His emphasis was more on making our students aware of the importance of faith in the early history and founding of our country, sir.

Q. Did Mr. Bonsell say anything about creationism at this meeting?

A. I believe there was a brief mention, sir.

Q. And what do you remember him saying?

A. He reiterated some of the same concerns he had the previous year, but his emphasis was more on faith in our Founding Fathers, sir.

Q. Did he say anything at this March meeting about how he wanted creationism taught in relation to evolution?

A. I believe he mentioned the sciences this year, sir. For that year, I'm sorry.

Q. Did there come a time when the school science department requested that the board approve the purchase of new science textbooks?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what textbooks were they recommending the school district purchase?

A. We were looking at changes in our chemistry, physics, and biology textbooks on the high school level, sir.

Q. When did this happen?

A. The first time had occurred in the 2002/2003 school year, sir.

Q. In the case of biology what book did they request?

A. The Miller-Levine biology published by Prentice Hall.

Q. What happened with that request during the 2002/2003 school year?

A. We had an extremely tight budget, not that we always didn't, but it was very much so that year. And even though it was the cycle time for science books, we put off purchase for one year.

Q. Did the teachers renew their request for science books in the 2003/2004 school year?

A. They most certainly did, sir.

Q. In the case of biology did they request the same book?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. At the time that this request was renewed who was the chair of the board curriculum committee?

A. Mr. William Buckingham, sir.

Q. And Mr. Bonsell was the president?

A. Mr. Bonsell was the president.

Q. Who were the other members of the curriculum committee at this time?

A. As I stated earlier Mrs. Sheila Harkins, who was then board vice president, Mr. William Buckingham, myself, and Mr. Bonsell, Bonsell as president of the board.

Q. And you certainly did say that, thank you.

A. Okay.

Q. Were there meetings of the full board of directors for the Dover area school district in June 2004?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. How many?

A. Two, sir.

Q. Did the board have a practice at this time in the 2004 time period of having two board meetings each month?

A. Yes, normally the first and second Mondays of the month, sir.

Q. Were there different functions for each of those meetings?

A. The first meeting of the month was what we called a planning meeting wherein we have the same agenda that we would have for the action meeting, but we took the time and discussed the items that needed discussion, questions might be raised that would then be answered prior to the vote at the action meeting. Also items wherein we were in agreement, became part of the consent agenda, which required only one vote rather than multiple votes.

Q. So it's fair to say when there was a new item that was going to be voted on in a given month, you talked about it a lot in the first meeting and you voted on it in the second meeting?

A. Yes, sir. The only exceptions to that would be retroactive hiring or student discipline hearings, because you're under time constraints.

Q. In these meetings in June was there discussion of a biology textbook?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was there discussion in one of the meetings or both?

A. Both of the meet,ings sir.

Q. Let's start with the first meeting. That would have been the planning meeting?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Can you tell us what you remember about discussion about the biology textbook in the first June meeting, the planning meeting?

A. I believe Mrs. Callahan, Mrs. Aralene Callahan, who's also known as Barrie Callahan, brought the subject up during the public comments section first and questioned whether or not we were going to be voting on the biology textbook.

Q. What happened in response to, if anything in response to --

A. Mr. Buckingham indicated he was not prepared for that.

Q. Did he say anything about the biology textbook?

A. He viewed the biology textbook as in his words laced with Darwinism, sir.

Q. Did you understand what he meant by that comment?

A. To the best of my understanding I believed that he meant he felt there were too many mentions of Charles Darwin in the textbook. There was not a balance of material.

Q. Did he say anything else on the subject of biology textbook or biology?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What else did he say?

A. There were a number of things that were said, sir. There were questions and comments, and Mr. Buckingham stated that, "Two thousand years ago someone died on the cross for us. It is time for us to stand up for him," and he said it in the context of wanting to include creationism side by side with Darwin's theory of evolution, with a small "E," sir.

Q. Do you remember him saying anything else?

A. That's the most vivid recollection I have, sir.

Q. Do you read any newspapers as a regular matter?

A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. What newspapers do you read?

A. The York Dispatch and the York Daily Record and --

Q. What, I'm sorry?

A. And the New York Times.

Q. Was it your practice to read those newspapers during the June 2004 time period?

A. Yes, it was, sir.

Q. Do you remember reading articles about what was going on in the school board meetings, particularly on the subject of biology textbooks?

A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. Would reading those articles refresh your recollection about whether Mr. Buckingham said anything else at the June meetings on this topic?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. I'm going to ask you to look in your binder at Exhibits 45 and 46. There are two --

MR. GILLEN: Your Honor, may I have permission to voir dire the witness?

THE COURT: On what point, Mr. Gillen?

MR. GILLEN: On the point of whether she's seen the article prior to her testimony here in court today, and if so when.

THE COURT: If that's an objection that she hasn't seen them, you can interpose the objection. I think that would be the more appropriate way to do it.

MR. GILLEN: Can we have a side bar, judge?

THE COURT: You may.

(Side bar at 10:07 a.m.)

MR. GILLEN: This just occurred to me, and I don't want to surprise these guys, so I apologize for that because just occurred to me. Did she look at them yesterday? And if I asked her, the judge allows me to voir dire did she look at them yesterday?

MR. ROTHSCHILD: I'll ask her. I mean --

MR. GILLEN: Because this is my, this is the only concern I have. We all know that there's an exceedingly fine line between refreshed recollection and recitation. If she looked at them yesterday and they refreshed her recollection, but she can't remember today, I think that that would be crossing the line.

THE COURT: You lost me, but I'm admittedly dense on occasion.

MR. GILLEN: Well, what I'm saying is this. I fully acknowledge you can look through documents to refresh your recollection in genuine refreshed recollection --

THE COURT: So you're positing that she may have looked at the article yesterday, and that entails what ?

MR. GILLEN: No, I'm not, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying, judge, is if it refreshed her recollection yesterday --

THE COURT: She shouldn't be able to look at it today?

MR. GILLEN: Right, because what is she doing today? If she can't remember it for 24 hours, you got to wonder whether it's recollection or recitation.

THE COURT: Well, you know, here's what we'll do, because --

MR. ROTHSCHILD: May I respond, Your Honor? I mean, it's very common for a witness to just under the pressure of testimony to forget something that is very familiar to her, and I mean it's, you know, he can certainly ask her the question whether she looked at this article yesterday and whatever evidentiary effect that has, but I could have shown her it just today.

THE COURT: Well, I think this. I think the defense has raised is a valid concern that when you use these articles that there's a strong temptation on the part of a witness to, and I think that's human nature, to look down and to read from something that they just refreshed their recollection. So let's do this in an effort to be fair. Why don't you ask her to review the article, take the article from her when you do the questioning. Then she's suitably refreshed her recollection, that she can't use it, and that will take care of the objection in a Solomon-like way. I know of no better way to do it, because I don't know that the distinction that she looked at it yesterday as opposed to today, it might make logical sense, I'm not sure that there's any thought as to that, but --

MR. GILLEN: And truly it just occurred to me and it just seems -- and that's all I'm trying to do, make sure it's genuine refreshed recollection. I know that you're a judge and you'll be mindful of that. I just want to, I think the things you've sketched out is fair.

THE COURT: Why don't we just have henceforth and, you know, as a rule when you're going to use articles to refresh recollection, why don't you have them read it, give them all the time they need, tell them that they have all the time that they need to read it, then snatch it from their hands.

MR. ROTHSCHILD: Can I have them close the notebook? Would that be sufficient?

THE COURT: Or close the notebook, you know, whatever you do, because there is a natural temptation to look down. I think we all have that when it's right in front of us, and I think that will take care of Mr. Gillen's concern.

MR. GILLEN: Thank you, Your Honor.

(Side bar concluded at 10:14 a.m.)

THE COURT: You may proceed, Mr. Rothschild.


Q. Mrs. Brown, have you had a chance to look through Exhibits 45, which is an article by Heidi Barnhart-Bubb in the York Dispatch dated June 9, 2004, and an article that we've marked as P-46 by Joseph Maldonado in the York Daily Record, also dated June 9th, 2004?

A. May I have a moment?

Q. Yes. Certainly.

(Brief pause.).

A. I'm sorry, sir, what was the second one?

Q. Exhibit, I think I said first P-45 and the second one would be P-46.

A. P-46? Thank you.

(Brief pause.)

A. I'm sorry, sir, I can't read the second one. I'm familiar with the gist of it, but I can't read it.

Q. Just too hard to read?

A. Yes, sir. The printing is too small.

Q. I apologize for that.

A. That's fine.

Q. Could you now close your notebook? Thank you. Has that reading the article you could read, P-45, I got one of them right, refreshed your recollection about anything else that Mr. Buckingham said at the first meeting in June?

A. He repeated his statement he had made in late fall of 2003 regarding his disbelief in the separation of church and state. He referred to the separation of church and state as being a myth, and he stressed the importance of teaching creationism because he felt we were doing our students a disservice. Our board president agreed with him that there were only two theories of the origins of life, and it should be taught side by side, evolution and creationism.

Q. And when you're referring to the board president now, you're not referring to Mr. Buckingham but Mr. Bonsell?

A. My apologies. President Alan Bonsell.

Q. Do you remember board member Noel Renwick saying anything at this discussion?

A. Mr. Renwick agreed with the concept of teaching creationism in school.

Q. Did the topic of the biology textbook and the general subject matter of evolution or biology curriculum come up again at next board meeting in June?

A. Yes, it did, sir.

Q. And that would be typically the action meeting?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What do you remember, again focusing on this subject, about what was, what was said at this board meeting?

A. Mr. Buckingham continued his objection. There were comments from the audience, including what I can only describe as a Chautauqua by Mr. Buckingham's wife, Mrs. Charlotte Buckingham. Our normal public comment is limited to five minutes per person, and Mr. Bonsell as board president chose to allow her to continue on for between ten and fifteen minutes, sir.

Q. Educate me, what's a Chautauqua?

A. Sorry, sir.

A Chautauqua to me as I grew up is an old time Christian tent revival. Very often they were held at the York Fairgrounds. I mean no disrespect, but the quote was come to Jesus meetings.

Q. That's not an expression that Ms. Buckingham used at the meeting? It's just how you're describing these tent revivals?

A. Actually she described how to accept Christ as your personal savior. She read portions of scripture and lectured us on our responsibilities to teach our children the truth.

Q. Did she talk about the subject of evolution or creationism in this talk?

A. She spoke very vehemently in favor of creationism and against evolution, and she exhorted us as a board to do whatever it took, even to the point of taking it to the Supreme Court, which her husband had also stated.

Q. How did the board members besides yourself react to Charlotte Buckingham's statement?

A. There were muttered amens, sir.

Q. Do you know who said them?

A. I can't tell you every one who said them, but I heard them on either side of me.

Q. Who was sitting on either side of you?

A. To my left was Ms. Heather Gessey, to my right was Mr. William Buckingham.

Q. Did you understand Mrs. Buckingham to be speaking in support of her husband's position on this issue?

A. Very definitely, sir.

Q. Why did you come to that conclusion?

A. She made it abundantly clear in her language, sir.

Q. Do you remember anything said by board members at this second meeting in June relating to the subject of the biology book, evolution, creationism.

A. There was disagreement between my husband and Mr. Buckingham. We were concerned about the legality. When I say we, my husband and I had discussed this at home. We were concerned that we could get into trouble if we brought in the idea of creationism and did not give equal time if you will, sir, to all faiths, to all beliefs in the origins of life. It was one of the first times that I proposed offering an elective course called comparative world religions on the high school level so that our students could be introduced to the major world faiths and the way in which they're the same and the way in which they differ, in particular the fact that every major world religion has at its core what we Christians call the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The words may vary, but the intent is the same.

Q. You described I guess sort of verbal jousting between your husband and Mr. Buckingham. What did Mr. Buckingham say in that interaction?

A. Mr. Buckingham in essence accused my husband of cowardice because my husband expressed concern that he didn't think we should be doing this. Verbatim he told my husband that he was glad he had not been fighting during the American Revolution because we would still have a queen on the throne ruling our country.

Q. Do you remember anything else Mr. Buckingham said at this meeting on the subjects that we're talking about, the textbook, evolution, education?

A. He was not concerned about us getting into any legal trouble, and he felt that in taking the position he did in desiring to go beyond our normal duties, to go into areas that had previously been ruled upon by the Supreme Court, that he was not violating his oath of office.

Q. Do you remember anything else he said?

A. Not one specific thing, sir. I know that when I quoted from the Treaty of Tripoli of 1787, I believe it's Section 13, to whit where president John Adams makes the point that we do not have a state religion, Mr. Buckingham was not favorable in his response, sir.

Q. And is that everything that you remember?

A. To the best of my recollection, sir.

Q. Were you reading the York papers during this time period after the second meeting?

A. I did at that time.

Q. Do you believe that reading those articles would refresh your recollection about what occurred at this second board meeting in June?

A. Probably, sir. I'm sure I've missed things.

Q. Could you turn to, and I hope these are more readable than the ones I previously handed to you, I think they are, Exhibits 53 and 54 in your notebook? And again I would ask that you read them, and then close the notebook and I'll ask you some more questions.

(Brief pause.)

Q. Ms. Brown, are you able to read those?

A. To some extent. Sorry.

(Brief pause.)

Q. Ms. Brown, a suggestion was made actually by everybody in the room that we can put this on the monitor and that Matt can actually make it more readable, and so let's try that and let me --

A. I'm sorry.

Q. You just tell him when you're done reading that and you can go to the next page.

A. Thank you.

THE COURT: Take your time.

THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I have a vision impairment.

THE COURT: I understand that, and this is not a test. You just take all the time you need to read it.

THE WITNESS: I don't know how to turn it, sir.

(Brief pause.)

THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.


Q. Just let me know when you're done reading this article and we'll go on to the next one.

A. I'm finished, sir.

Q. Did you get all the way to the bottom there? In could you pull up P-54 and do the same for Ms. Brown, and I'll try to remember that for future documents.

A. Thank you, sir.

Q. Having read the two articles, and just for the record that's P-53, which is a July 15th article by Joseph Maldonado in the York Daily Record, and P-54, which is a June 15th, 2004 article in the York Dispatch written by Heidi Barnhart-Bubb, do those refresh your recollection about anything else that Mr. Buckingham said at this second meeting in June?

A. Yes, there were a combination of things, and my apologies for mixing up the comments when they were made. The comments reported in the newspaper articles were accurate in all respects, sir.

Q. Are you describing something you mixed up?

A. The comments concerning two thousand years ago, and at the first meeting I had forgotten the fact that there was a representative from the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State present, and he took exception to Mr. Buckingham's stance and stated comments in very strong terms stating that we would find ourselves in legal difficulty if we continued on this path.

And there was also a voice of reason. Pastor Warren Eshbach, who's a retired pastor at the Church of the Brethren, discussion on this had been going on in the community for some time, and it is obvious that there were strong feelings on all sides. That was apparent in both meetings from comments, not only from my former fellow board members but from members of the audience. Mr. Eshbach, Pastor Eshbach urged us to find a compromise position. Unfortunately by the second meeting we had not reached a compromise position since that had solidified.

Q. And what do you remember about that second meeting after having reviewed the two exhibits?

A. They did quote me more than I recall.

Q. Let me just try and refine the question. Do you remember anything more about what Mr. Buckingham said at the second meeting after having reviewed --

A. Again he was adamant in his statements, and he apologized for some somewhat insulting remarks that he had made at the prior meeting. I personally took offense at his apology because of his tone, but he did make the apology.

Q. One of the things that you testified about is that this two thousand year ago statement, I think you said it was in the first June meeting. Does reading these articles refresh your recollection about which meeting it occurred?

A. I switched the meeting, sir.

Q. When was that comment?

A. It would have been at the second meeting, sir.

Q. Thank you. Mr. Buckingham has testified in a deposition in this case that he didn't say that comment in either of the June meetings, he had said it at a much earlier meeting. Based on your recollection is that accurate?

A. No, sir, it is not accurate. The comment that he made at the June meeting that he had made previous, there were two. One was that the separation of church and state is a myth, and the other related to anyone, anyone who does not agree with bringing faith into the schools is un-American and should return to the place from which he or she came. Those two statements verbatim, they are not exact, I know that, were first made by Mr. Buckingham at the November 10th, 2003 board meeting, and it was an entirely different subject, sir.

Q. And they were repeated again in the June meeting?

A. They were indeed.

Q. But the two thousand years ago statement, that you recall as having being said at a June meeting?

A. Most definitely, sir. There is no doubt in my mind.

Q. Was the purchase of a biology book resolved at either of these June meetings?

A. No, sir, it was not.

Q. Were any other biology books under consideration at the time of these June board meetings?

A. Not at that point in time, sir. We had already discussed a number of texts in curriculum meetings with the teachers.

Q. And their recommendation at this time was the Miller-Levine book?

A. They felt, and I would have to agree that it fits, it fit the best of any of the textbooks available into our curriculum instructional guide and also with the then current state academic guidelines.

Q. After these meetings in June did the board curriculum committee meet to discuss the biology books?

A. I'm sorry, sir. Yes, it did.

Q. When was that?

A. It was that same week I believe, and I had been in error on the date, but I believe it was that same week.

Q. After the --

A. The second meeting in June.

Q. And before or after the second meeting in June?

A. After the second meeting in June, sir.

Q. Where did this occur?

A. To the best of my recollection it occurred in the conference room at the high school, but I may be in error. It may have been in the conference room in the administration building.

Q. Who initiated this meeting? Who asked that it be had?

A. I believe it was a combination. We all wanted to resolve the issue, sir.

Q. Who attended the meeting?

A. Representatives from the science department at the high school. To the best of my recollection Mrs. Bertha Spahr, who was then head of the science department, and ninth grade biology teachers Mrs. Jennifer Miller and Mr. Robert Eshbach who, is the son of Pastor Eshbach. Mr. Michael Baksa, the assistant superintendent. Mrs. Sheila Harkins, Mrs. William Buckingham, and myself. And Mr. Bonsell might have been there. But I cannot be certain.

Q. What happened at that meeting?

A. Basically Mr. Buckingham presented a list of his objections to the text, and we then reviewed them one by one.

Q. How many objections are we talking about?

A. I recall somewhere around twelve, fourteen.

Q. Did these objections have any common theme?

A. All of the objections, all of the page numbers that he objected to were listed in the index under Charles Darwin or Darwin's theory of evolution.

Q. I'm going to ask you, Matt, to pull up Exhibit 31, please. Do you recognize this as being the Prentice Hall biology textbook that was under consideration?

A. Yes, I do, sir.

Q. And Matt, could you turn to page 12 of the document? And actually pull up page 13 as well. Can you these those two pages on your monitor?

A. I recognize them, sir. I cannot read them.

Q. And what do you recognize them to be?

A. This was part of the introductory guidelines of science. Mr. Buckingham objected to Mr. Charles Darwin's inclusion, I believe it's 1859 when he first published his findings on theories of natural selection and related materials.

Q. Your Honor, may I approach the witness?

THE COURT: You may.

Q. I'm going to hand you a copy of the book if you want to refer to that, in addition to the page on the monitor.

A. Thank you, sir. This is a standard time line, sir.

Q. And was this one of the pages that Mr. Buckingham objected to?

A. Yes, sir, it was indeed his first page that he objected to.

Q. And what was his objection about this page or pages of the textbook?

A. There were no mentions of creationism or of God.

Q. Did he object to the mention of Charles Darwin on the time line at 1859 when he published origin of species?

A. He felt that we were misleading our students, not telling them the truth.

Q. By putting Mr. Darwin on the time line?

A. Yes, and by not including mentions of the theory of creationism and God as creator.

Q. Matt, could you turn to page 408 in the textbook? And Ms. Brown, if you want to take a minute and turn to that page?

A. I'm getting there. Yes, sir.

Q. This is a page that begins with the heading "Speciation in Darwin's finches." Was this among the items in the book that Mr. Buckingham objected to?

A. That was his last objection, sir.

Q. And what was his objection to the page about Darwin's finches?

A. Because the finch had been named for Charles Darwin.

Q. Did he say anything else about what he was objecting to?

A. That was his objection, sir.

Q. Darwin's name precedes finches, and that made the textbook objectionable?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did he say anything else about why he objected to the textbook?

A. He felt that it didn't give a balanced presentation. I don't believe that he had thoroughly read the text because he made reference of man ascending from lower species of anthropoids, and that is not part of the text material, sir.

Q. Did he say anything about what was missing that deprived the book of balance?

A. The theory of creationism with God as creator of all life.

Q. Did the teachers say anything in response to Mr. Buckingham's critique of the biology textbook?

A. We discussed each of his objections in great length. I say we advisably because I was part of the committee. The teachers explained that in the case of the science time line that this is just standard part of any text in the sciences. It basically gives the students a reference point. They explained in great detail that they do not nor have they ever taught the origins of life. We did not have a policy concerning this, but we had custom.

This was what the science teachers in conjunction with one another had to come up with in response to any student question. If a student asked about the origins of life, our teachers made it a custom to refer the students to their parents or their pastors in their home churches. They indicated they did not feel qualified to cover this subject, nor was it part of our curriculum.

Q. Did Mr. Buckingham bring up any other subjects relating to evolution?

A. I believe he may have mentioned some kind of tape or CD or a tape. I'm not certain if it was that meeting, sir.

Q. Did he say anything about a mural that used to be displayed in the high school?

A. Yes, sir, he did.

Q. Give us some background about the mural that was in the high school. What was the mural?

A. The mural was a senior art project by one of our former students. It was a wall-sized mural, and it depicted the ascent of man in a very graphic fashion, there was nudity, but it was his perception the way human beings have evolved based on his studies.

Q. And was this displayed in the high school?

A. When he donated it to the school it was placed on one of the walls of the science section.

Q. What happened to that mural?

A. When we began our building project many things were removed, and the wall, the mural was taken down. It was to be removed to safety. Our then current supervisor of buildings and grounds was deeply offended by the mural and took it upon himself to burn it.

Q. Do you know why he burned it?

A. He told me himself he felt that it was full of lies and it offended his religious faith, and he had a granddaughter who was coming into the high school at this point in time into the ninth grade and he did not want her or any other student to be exposed to the obscenity, sir.

Q. What happened to this individual as a result of destroying the mural?

A. He was reprimanded and subsequently retired.

Q. What did Mr. Buckingham say about the mural at this curriculum committee meeting?

A. He knew Mr. Reeser, they attended the same church. He was in sympathy with Mr. Reeser's actions. He felt Mr. Reeser had done the correct thing and that we were wrong to accept donations of this nature from our students or anyone.

Q. Did he say why Mr. Reeser had done the right thing?

A. He had removed an offensive obscene thing.

Q. Did anyone respond to that statement by Mr. Buckingham at this meeting, this curriculum meeting?

A. I did, sir.

Q. What did you say?

A. I said that it was not Mr. Reeser's place to make that decision.

Q. Did Mr. Baksa say or do anything at this meeting to respond to board members' concerns about the textbooks?

A. That came later in the meeting, sir. As part of our ongoing discussion I believed Mrs. Harkins, and I may be mistaken, but I think she first mentioned the idea of investigating what other districts, non-public schools were using in terms of science textbooks. By the end of the meeting to the best of my recollection Mr. Baksa had volunteered to do such research and bring the reports back to us, sir.

Q. Did there come a time during the summer of 2004 when another book was being proposed for the high school biology class?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what was that book?

A. Of Pandas and People, sir.

Q. How did the book Of Pandas and People first come to your attention?

A. During a phone conversation with Mr. Michael Baksa the last weekend in July of 2004.

Q. What did he communicate to you?

A. It was just prior to the weekend, he communicated the fact that Mr. Buckingham had proposed an adjunct alternative text.

Q. And did he say it in that -- was this in a phone call or a face-to-face meeting?

A. That was a phone call, sir.

Q. And did he say what that book was?

A. He did indeed, and told me that we had several copies within the district.

Q. And did he say the name?

A. Of Pandas and People.

Q. Was this the first you had heard about Mr. Buckingham's interest in adding Pandas to the high school biology class?

A. Yes, it was, sir.

Q. What did you do when you heard this from Mr. Baksa?

A. My husband was home, he and I discussed it and felt that we needed to try and read as much of the material as we could prior to the following week's board meeting so that we were at least cognizant of what was inside the book.

Q. Were you able to get a copy of the book?

A. Yes. They did not have any copies available at the district administration office, but we learned that Mrs. Harkins had borrowed one of the copies, so she was finished with it, my husband picked it up from her home.

Q. Did you read it?

A. Yes, sir. My husband and I took turns reading it that weekend.

Q. Did you do anything else at this time to investigate the book?

A. Yes, sir, I did, because I was totally unfamiliar with the publisher and did not know the authors of the text. I researched on-line sir.

Q. What kind of on-line sites did you go to to find out information about the book?

A. I researched through scientific reviews, scientific journals, and the publishing houses themselves. I was looking for reviews of this, any other text materials, textbooks that this particular publishing house had brought forth, and I found none. I also wanted to know where it was being taught within America, and in my research I learned that it was not intended for the high school level, that it was written as a college level text, and I was unable to find any high schools, public or non-public, anywhere in the United States who were using the text.

Q. What conclusions did you draw about the book based on your own reading of it?

A. I said it at the meeting that I found it to be poor science and worse theology.

Q. And what meeting did you say that at?

A. The first meeting, the meeting in August, sir.

Q. And before we get to that meeting, what caused you to come to that conclusion upon reading the book? Why don't owe start with the poor science and we can switch to poor theology.

A. Reading the material, the authors obviously had some scientific background. They had some impressive letters behind their name, but they took exhibits, facts, and seemed to twist them around to fit what they were proposing as an explanation for the origins of life, intelligent design. At no point in the text did they use the term God or creationism but, it would have been very, very easy throughout the entire text to replace intelligent design with the word creationism without changing the meaning in my opinion.

Q. Did this book Pandas come up as an issue at the next school board meeting?

A. Yes, sir, it did.

Q. That was in August?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you gain an understanding about how Mr. Buckingham wanted the book Pandas be used at Dover High School?

A. Mr. Buckingham stated at that meeting that he would give us our biology book if we gave him Of Pandas and People to be used side by side.

Q. When you say gave it to you, what do you mean gave it to you?

A. Mr. Buckingham made it very clear that he had the votes to prevent us from passing the motion to purchase the textbooks we so desperately needed unless we were willing to agree to purchase Of Pandas and People at the same time.

Q. So --

A. In essence what he said was if we voted for Of Pandas and People, he would release his votes to give us our biology text.

Q. So Mr. Buckingham was going to deprive the students at Dover High School of the biology textbook that their science faculty was recommending unless he got his Pandas book?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was there a vote taken on the biology textbook?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what was the result of that vote?

A. It was a four-four tie. We lost.

Q. Because I take it a tie goes to the defense?

A. Yes, sir. Mrs. Jean cleaver was not present for the meeting.

Q. If it's a four-four tie the book is not approved?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Same way the Supreme Court works?

A. Yes, sir. I think.

Q. Duly admonished. Ms. Brown, who were the people who voted for the approval of the -- let me just back up. When we're talking about approve the vote here, this is on the Miller-Levine book?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And who voted for the approval of the Miller-Levine book?

A. Mr. Alan Bonsell, the president of the board. Mr. Noel Renwick. My husband, and myself.

Q. And who voted against the approval of the book?

A. Mr. William Buckingham, Mrs. Heather Gessey, Mrs. Jean Cleaver, and Mrs. Angie Yeungling. I'm sorry, not Mrs. Jean cleaver, she was not present. I'm going across the table. Mrs. Sheila Harkins.

Q. Thank you.

A. My apologies.

Q. Was there a second vote?

A. Yes.

Q. How did that happen?


A person who was on the winning side of the vote has the right to ask for a revote to be taken, and after much discussion Mrs. Angie Yeungling chose to ask for a revote, and she changed her vote because as she put it, "We have to let the kids have their books."

Q. So at that meeting the Miller-Levine book was approved?

A. Yes, sir, it was.

Q. Was there any vote taken on Of Pandas and People?

A. No, there was not a direct vote taken.

Q. What happened after that in the school district on the subject of Pandas?

A. One of the things that we had done to work through a compromise on the text, and we thought we had a compromise going into the meeting regarding approval of the Levine text was to change our policy on gifts and donations. As policy chair I brought a revised policy forth on this to allow our superintendent Dr. Nilsen to have the primary responsibility of choosing to accept or reject gifts and donations. If he chose to reject, he was required to give a reason in writing. And by this time we had approved that and we did not purchase Of Pandas and People. They were donated, between fifty and sixty copies were donated anonymously to the school district, and according to that policy Dr. Nilsen accepted them.

Q. You said they were donated anonymously. Did the board or the school district ever announce publicly who donated the books?

A. Not to my knowledge. My only recollection on that point is that Dr. Nilsen stated they were donated anonymously.

Q. Was Dr. Nilsen asked who donated them?

A. Yes, he was.

Q. Did he disclose that information?

A. They wished to remain anonymous is I believe the way he put it.

Q. Do you know who donated the books?

A. I have heard rumors, sir.

Q. You have no personal knowledge?

A. Only through rumors.

Q. Can you tell us who you heard donated the books?

A. My understanding from various friends is that contributions were solicited in Mr. Buckingham's church, that was also Mrs. Cleaver's church, and they purchased some of the books. I understand or I heard rumors to the effect that Mr. Alan Bonsell's father, Mr. Don Bonsell, who had served on the board prior to his son, also donated some of the texts.

Q. Was it your understanding that the donated books were to be placed in the school science classrooms?

A. They were placed in the school science classrooms, sir.

Q. Was there a meeting of the curriculum, the board curriculum committee, in August of 2004?

A. Late August, sir.

Q. Did you attend that meeting?

A. Part of it, sir.

Q. Who else attended that meeting?

A. Because I was not there for the whole meeting I can't be totally certain, but to the pest of my knowledge science teachers were present, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Eshbach, and I believe Mrs. Spahr, and I believe all of the aforementioned board members were there. Mrs. Harkins, Mr. Buckingham, Mr. Bonsell, and Mr. Baksa.

Q. And yourself?

A. And myself, part of the meeting.

Q. At that meeting were materials handed out?

A. Yes, sir, we received materials from Mr. Baksa.

Q. And would you turn to page 660 in your binder? And Matt, if you could pull up the first page of 660? And actually if you can, it may be easier just to flip throughout binder initially, Ms. Brown, just to look at the contents of the document, and when I ask you specific questions we'll use the monitor.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you recognize the documents that are in your binder at Exhibit 660 as the materials Mr. Baksa handed out to you?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And there are four pages to that document?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The first is, it says, has the heading "Dover area school district survey of biology books used in area schools"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And there's handwriting at the top of the page in rather large letters and numbers. Whose happened writing is that?

A. That's my handwriting.

Q. And that depicts the date of August 27th, 2004?

A. To the best of my recollection. It coincided with the curriculum meeting I had noted on my calendar at home.

Q. Did you have a practice of dating the documents you received as a member of the school board?

A. Yes, sir, I did, and I evidently had made, I don't recall, but to the best of my knowledge based on past practice I made an error in the date, and the date was corrected.

Q. And there's also handwriting under the heading "Textbooks used," it says Modern Biology if my reading is correct. Do you know whose handwriting that is?

A. Mr. Michael Baksa's sir.

Q. Can you describe -- what do you know about this document? What is it?

A. To the best of my recollection this was some of the information Mr. Baksa had obtained in talking with in this case non-public schools in the York-Lancaster area, and he explained that he had only that morning received the name of the text being used by the Christian School of York, and that this had already been typed up and that's why he hand lettered the name of the book.

Q. So these were results from the investigation or survey Mr. Baksa had offered to do back in June?

A. Yes.

Q. And each of the schools that are listed here, Christian School of York, Delone Catholic, and York Catholic, these are religious schools?

A. Yes, sir. Delone Catholic is in Lancaster I believe.

Q. By this time students had a textbook, right? Miller & Levine's Biology?

A. I think we had already received them by then, yes, sir. We had approved them.

Q. Certainly approved them. Why was this information Mr. Baksa was circulating here still relevant?

A. I'm not really sure, sir. I found this by accident.

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Baksa was still looking for a supplemental book for the biology curriculum?

A. It is possible, sir, he was.

Q. Could you turn to the next page of the document?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And just to be clear here, there's four pages under Exhibit 660.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that group of four documents, were they handed out together by Mr. Baksa?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And were they clipped or stapled in any way?

A. They were stapled, sir.

Q. And were these materials handed to everybody who was in attendance at that meeting?

A. To the best of my knowledge they would have been.

Q. And that included fellow board members, Ms. Harkins?

A. Anyone present at that meeting. That was the usual practice, sir.

Q. And the board members in attendance were Ms. Harkins, Mr. Buckingham, Mr. Bonsell, and yourself?

A. To the best of my recollection.

Q. Can you tell us what this second page in this document is?

A. This second page is information related to a text for Christian schools.

Q. And if you look at the second paragraph of the document, does it indicate what title of that book is?

A. It is Biology for Christian Schools.

Q. And the publisher of that book?

A. Bob Jones University.

Q. Was there discussion about this page of the document?

A. I don't recall any discussion, but I was not there for the entire meeting, sir. The only discussion I recall was related to the first page and the books.

Q. Could you turn to the third page of the document, which is depicted in a landscape format, and I'd just like you to take a look at the document, I realize the writing is small, and we will, maybe you could pull up the heading on the document.

A. I can read the heading, sir.

Q. And why don't you read the heading of that document into the record.

A. "Views on the origin of the universe and life."

Q. And this was in the materials Mr. Baksa handed out?

A. That was the third page, sir.

Q. Do you know who had created this document?

A. No, I do not, sir.

Q. Matt, could you pull up the next line? And this document seems to define various propositions, "Young earth creation, or creation science; progressive creation (old earth creation); evolutionary creation, (theistic evolution); deistic evolution ('theistic' evolution)," and I'm sure I'll mispronounce this, but "deistiological evolution (atheistic evolution)." Is that accurate?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I want to focus now on the first two columns in this document, which are young earth creation and progressive creation, and I just want to go over -- this document seems to identify certain aspects of each of these propositions?

A. I believe it does, sir.

Q. And if you could, Matt, we're going to be just looking at young earth creation and progressive earth creation, and Matt, if you could go to the second row where it says "Intelligent design in the world," and in the case of intelligent design of the world this document suggests that young earth creation and progressive creation are the same, they both point to a designer?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then we get to age of the universe, and in this case there is a difference. Young earth creation ten thousand years, progressive creation ten to fifteen billion years?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Going on to evolution of life, here we're back in agreement again. Both reject macroevolution, but accept microevolution?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. God's activity in the origin of the world?

A. Yes.

Q. And both say direct, but in the case of young earth creation intervention over six days, progressive creation interventions over billions of years. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And going on to origin of humanity, we're back in agreement here. Both young earth creation and progressive creation accepted Adam and Eve, accepts image of God, accepts sin?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And do you understand those to be basically biblical references?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then going to the last row, which is examples of each, in the case of young earth creation the examples are Institution for Creation Research, Henry Morris, Duane Gish, answers in Genesis, and Ken Hamm, and the examples under progressive creation are the intelligent design movement, Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, Hugh Ross, Bernard Ramm?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And this is all contained in this document that the board members received?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you remember any discussion about this document?

A. No, I do not, but as I stated I was not present for the whole meeting, sir.

Q. Then there's a fourth document. If you could turn to that, Matt? And that's called "Beyond the Evolution Versus Creation Debate"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Again something that all the board members at that meeting received?

A. To the best of my knowledge, sir, yes.

Q. Sort of on the left-hand side of the page halfway down you see religion and philosophy?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. It says "Ultimate beliefs," and then for science, observations and experiments, theories and laws, correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And board members got all of this?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The board members at that meeting?

A. When I found it, it was together. That was how we received it.

THE COURT: If you're going to move on to a new topic --

MR. ROTHSCHILD: This would be a perfect time to break.

THE COURT: Yes, why don't we take a break now. Let's try to hold it to fifteen minutes. I think we'll go to about 12:15 and we'll break for lunch at that time, just to give you a notice. We'll be in recess.

(Recess taken at 11:04 a.m. Testimony resumed at 11:20 a.m.)


Home Browse Search Feedback Other Links The FAQ Must-Read Files Index Evolution Creationism Age of the Earth Flood Geology Catastrophism Debates
Home Page | Browse | Search | Feedback | Links
The FAQ | Must-Read Files | Index | Creationism | Evolution | Age of the Earth | Flood Geology | Catastrophism | Debates