• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

[Merged] David Coppedge is suing the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for 'religious discrimination'

Questioninggeller

Illuminator
Q
Joined
May 11, 2002
Messages
3,048
David Coppedge is suing the Jet Propulsion Laboratory claiming religious discrimination because of his support for intelligent design. The Discovery Institute has been busy issuing press releases ("Coppedge is suing JPL and Caltech for religious discrimination" and here, here, and here). So the Discovery Institute thinks intelligent design is religion after all?

A local paper has picked up the story and in the legal analysis, it says even IF Coppedge's story is true he likely doesn't have a case. William Becker, Coppedge's lawyer, is no stranger to suing over intelligent design/creationist cases and Becker is on the board of directors of Illustra Media-- a intelligent design/DI affiliated organization.

Intelligent Design proponent who works at JPL says he experienced religious discrimination
By Emma Gallegos, Staff Writer
San Gabriel Valley Tribune
Posted: 04/18/2010 07:02:56 AM PDT


An employee at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory says his supervisors harassed and demoted him after he shared DVDs promoting his views on evolution, according to a complaint filed with the Los Angeles Superior Court.

David Coppedge is an IT employee who has worked on JPL's Cassini mission since 1997, but he is also a Christian who edits a blog titled "Creation-Evolution Headlines." The blog promotes the theory of intelligent design - the idea that an intelligent being - not evolution or random processes - is responsible for creating life and the universe.
...
JPL declined to comment on the case, because officials had not received a copy of the complaint early Friday afternoon, spokeswoman Veronica McGregor said.

After Coppedge discussed intelligent design with JPL scientists, his supervisors told him not to stop discussing religion. Last April Coppedge's bosses demoted him. Coppedge had been a leader on the system administrator team for the Cassini mission, according to the suit.
...
But a case like his probably won't have a shot in court, because courts have viewed intelligent design as a religious belief, rather than a scientific theory, according to Gary Williams, a professor at Loyola Law School.

Certain kinds of religious activity are protected if they are not intrusive - such as wearing certain religious garb - but speech during work hours is not included, he said.

So even if intelligent design is viewed as a religious belief, employers have the right to restrict what their employees discuss in a work context, Williams said.
...
This is not the first suit that Becker has taken up to defend proponents of intelligent design.
...
Click to expand...

Full: San Gabriel Valley Tribune
 
I think he just failed at his job and is crying discrimination with ID as his excuse, just like all the rest of these creationist "victim" stories.

Maybe if he spent more time at work doing his job instead of handing out Ben Stein DVD's then he wouldn't have gotten demoted.
 
He should sue for blatant anti-stupidity discrimination and credulophobia. Then he'd have a case.
 
Robo Sapien said:
I think he just failed at his job and is crying discrimination with ID as his excuse, just like all the rest of these creationist "victim" stories.

Maybe if he spent more time at work doing his job instead of handing out Ben Stein DVD's then he wouldn't have gotten demoted.
Click to expand...

Any particular evidence for saying that, or is it just your feeling?
 
Religious discrimination in the workplace is firing / failing to promote / taking disciplinary action against someone for holding certain beliefs, or for taking certain basic (and necessary to that religion) actions that do not impede performing one's job duties. Religious protection does not cover activities that are not a necessary part of the religion, interfere with performing one's duties, or disturb othere workers.

Proselytizing at work is not a protected activity. Game, set, and match to JPL.

Lawsuits like this are generally just done for publicity.
 
Last edited:
More on this:

Former JPL employee claims he was fired for doubting Darwin
By Beige Luciano-Adams, Staff Writer
PasadenaStarNews.com
02/02/2011


A computer administrator at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who was laid off last week plans to add retaliation charges - and a possible free speech violation claim - to a pending discrimination suit against his former employer, an attorney said Wednesday.

David Coppedge, a specialist and systems administrator who worked on NASA's Cassini mission at the Laboratory since 1997, was terminated on Jan. 24.
...
He filed suit with the Los Angeles Superior in April of last year, claiming he was demoted at JPL for propagating his beliefs at work, citing protection under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

A JPL spokeswoman said Coppedge's "suit is without merit."

But while the original lawsuit rested on claims of discrimination under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act, Coppedge's legal team is now considering a new tactics - including taking a page from the Supreme Court's Jan. 19 in NASA v. Nelson.
...
JPL claims Coppedge was let go in a round of routine layoffs related to Cassini's budget.

"The spacecraft operational workforce on Cassini has gone down 40 percent since its prime mission ended, and it's currently in its second extended mission," said JPL spokeswoman Veronika McGregor. "During that time, this is a natural attrition of that workforce."
...
Gary Williams, a professor at Loyola Law School, previously pointed out that courts tend to view intelligent design as a religious, not a scientific belief. He said that protections for religious activity have not been read to include speech during work hours.
...
Click to expand...
Full: PasadenaStarNews.com
 
The name, Casey Luskin, and these two sentences caught my eye:
The former JPL employee is currently getting some public relations help from the Discovery Institute, a conservative lobbying organization with right-wing Christian ties best known for their promotion of intelligent design.

Becker is currently engaged in a separate lawsuit against the California Science Center in Los Angeles which also claims First Amendment violations related to intelligent design.
Click to expand...
Becker is David Coppedge's attorney. Casey Luskin is an attorney that works for the DI directly.
 
NASA computer specialst David Coppedge alledges NASA fired him over ID

I ran a couple of searches to see if this was being discussed, but didn't come back with anything. If this is a duplicate thread, please feel free to merge/move as necessary.

Coppedge, who worked as a team lead on the Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its many moons, claims he was discriminated against because he engaged his co-workers in conversations about intelligent design and handed out DVDs on the idea while at work.

Intelligent design is the belief that a higher power must have had a hand in creation because life is too complex to have developed through evolution alone.

Coppedge lost his team lead title in 2009 and was let go last year after 15 years on the mission.

In an emailed statement, JPL dismissed Coppedge’s claims. In court papers, lawyers for the California Institute of Technology, which manages JPL for NASA, said Coppedge received a written warning because his co-workers complained of harassment.​

Does this guy actually have a case? It really feels like he's grasping, and trying to point at something other than himself (and the economy) for the reason he lost his job. It feels very much like another case of the myth of the persecuted Christian.
 
I read about this earlier today. I think the fact that he was discussing religion and handing out DVDs at work might have more to do with it than his actual personal beliefs. It would be interesting to know if he was warned about this behavior.
 
Monza said:
I read about this earlier today. I think the fact that he was discussing religion and handing out DVDs at work might have more to do with it than his actual personal beliefs. It would be interesting to know if he was warned about this behavior.
Click to expand...

The report that I read indicated that there had been complaints of his "harassing" co-workers. I would be surprised if he had not been warned; I would think a large institutional employer like NASA gets good enough legal advice to make sure they have a case before they fire someone for cause.
 
He pestered other employees and they complained; he wasted working time with his IDiocy, passing out DVDs and promoting his website; he was warned, disciplined and then demoted.:rolleyes:
The bit about his being "team lead on the Cassini mission" appears to be a lie, he was a technician.

Links:
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress...oppedge-case-a-study-in-tactics-and-strategy/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/update-david-coppedge-vs-jpl-19-apr-2010/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/coppedge-seems-desperate-to-settle/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2012/03/02/coppedge-v-jpl-caltech-trial-wednesday/
 
catsmate1 said:
He pestered other employees and they complained; he wasted working time with his IDiocy, passing out DVDs and promoting his website; he was warned, disciplined and then demoted.:rolleyes:
The bit about his being "team lead on the Cassini mission" appears to be a lie, he was a technician.

Links:
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress...oppedge-case-a-study-in-tactics-and-strategy/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/update-david-coppedge-vs-jpl-19-apr-2010/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/coppedge-seems-desperate-to-settle/
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2012/03/02/coppedge-v-jpl-caltech-trial-wednesday/
Click to expand...
'Lead' would be a supervisory technician, not the same as the 'leader' of the entire project.

And it appears that he was demoted from lead to regular technician, allegedly after complaints.

I can't imagine why anyone would object to their supervisor proselytizing on the job... :rolleyes:
 
We had a guy at Fermilab years ago who used to try to convert everybody to his brand of Christianity. This did not play well in an international facility with almost every religion on the planet present at one time or another. He was warned many times and finally he was fired.
 
BenBurch said:
We had a guy at Fermilab years ago who used to try to convert everybody to his brand of Christianity. This did not play well in an international facility with almost every religion on the planet present at one time or another. He was warned many times and finally he was fired.
Click to expand...

And undoubtedly blames everyone else to this day.
 
So the trial has started. While Coppedge and his attorney have made their accusations in the press and lawsuits, and we finally hear from the defense:

Update: Lawyers Depict Two Sides of Laid Off JPL Worker

Attorneys for David Coppedge and Jet Propulsion Laboratory gave opening statements Tuesday in the plaintiff's religious discrimination case.
March 14, 2012
montrose.patch.com
By Donna Evans


Wearing a tie flecked with spacecrafts, former JPL employee David Coppedge listened Tuesday to two versions of himself: a competent worker and evangelical Christian whose religious and employee rights were violated; and a stubborn man with no self awareness who pushed his viewpoint on colleagues.

During opening statements, lawyers for Coppedge and Jet Propulsion Laboratory offered disparate depictions of the man suing the California Institute of Technology, which manages JPL for NASA, claiming his belief in intelligent design led to his layoff in 2011.

Defense attorney Jim Zapp repeated several times during his hour-long opening that intelligent design has nothing to do with this case.

"Frankly, Mr. Coppedge was his own worst enemy,'' he said, noting the plaintiff was argumentative, had poor customer service and believed he was right when everyone else was wrong.
...
Defense Opening Statement

Other colleagues felt harassed by Coppedge, who frequently offered to lend them intelligent design DVDs. Some accepted, some did not - but one colleague in particular took offense to a "secret list'' he was keeping that tracked who borred them, when they were returned and what the employees said about the DVD. A sticky note on the list read "try again.''

The complaints came to a head in March 2009.

After working with Coppedge for a decade, Chin wanted to try to coach Coppedge about how to improve his behavior in the office, Zapp said. He told Coppedge not to discuss religion or politics in the office if it was unwelcome or disruptive.

"If he’d accepted Chin’s helpful advice, and said, 'I heard what you’re saying; I disagree...and I’ll try to watch it – we wouldn't be here. There would be no case,'' Zapp said.

Instead, Coppedge grew increasingly agitated, took it as a "war on intelligent design,'' and challenged Chin to a debate outside JPL (he declined), Zapp said. From there, Coppedge escalated the converstion by demanding to know who his accusers were. Chin opted not to tell him and Coppedge said he felt it had become a "hostile work environment,'' so a human resources investigation was launched, Zapp said.

Zapp called into question Coppedge's behavior with another JPL employee. Coppedge was discussing his support for Proposition 8, the state-wide ballot measure that eliminated the right for same sex couples to marry, with Scott Edgington. According to Zapp, Coppedge made insulting remarks and Edgington had to ask Coppedge to leave -- twice.
...
Click to expand...
Full: montrose.patch.com

A little more background:
JPL trial focuses on access for media
By Brian Charles, SGVN
03/13/2012 07:40:11 PM PDT
pasadenastarnews.com


A lawsuit about whether the Jet Propulsion Laboratory wrongfully terminated David Coppedge has turned into an argument on whether the court can bar media to protect the privacy rights of witnesses, and whether those testifying can be asked about their religious beliefs in the civil trial.

Former JPL employee David Coppedge claims he was fired in 2011 due to his expressed belief in intelligent design over the theory of evolution.
...
Coppedge was laid off from JPL in 2011 after working as a full-time staffer since 2003; he had worked as a private contractor with JPL from 1996 to 2003.

His advocacy of intelligent design, as well as his strong faith in God as an evangelical Christian, was never a secret, Zapp said.

But problems for Coppedge began to mount when he started confronting co-workers about intelligent design and trying to convince them to watch DVDs advocating the controversial theory, Zapp said.

Coppedge lent the intelligent design video "Unlocking The Mystery of Life" to co-worker Margaret Weisenfelder, the court heard Tuesday; the DVD had a note attached with the names of fellow employees and the words "try again."

The note led Weisenfelder to believe Coppedge was keeping track of co-workers responses to the DVDs, Zapp told the court.

"In looking at this, Ms. Weisenfelder thought Mr. Coppedge might be targeting people," Zapp said.

Weisenfelder told Coppedge's supervisor, Greg Chin, about the DVDs and said she was "tired of David talking about politics," according to attorneys for both sides.

During a meeting on March 2, 2009, Chin told Coppedge he was "harassing co-workers" by confronting them with his religion, and said he should no longer talk about religion and politics with them unless they broached the topic, Becker said.

"Mr. Coppedge was being told he was the only employee at JPL who didn't enjoy political and religious freedom," Becker said.

Coppedge responded to Chin by saying: "This gets into my rights, this gets into my civil rights, and I think you may be creating a hostile work environment by your tone and your comments," Becker told the court.

Coppedge filed his suit in April, 2009, one month after his confrontation with Chin.
Click to expand...
Full: pasadenastarnews.com

From the Discovery Institute's website:
The Deep, Dark Secret of NASA's Big, Bad Scary Pro-Intelligent Design Harasser David Coppedge: He's Shy
David Klinghoffer March 15, 2012 3:52 PM


...
He's so far faced only the questioning of his own attorney, William Becker, who sometimes shows impatience in the court with Coppedge's manner of speaking, which mixes a certain careful hesitancy with a tendency to digress.

Every time we come back from a break and Coppedge gets back up on the stand, Becker has to ask him if he feels well enough to proceed. He asks him in private too. In this morning's testimony, Becker solicited the information that Coppedge considers himself an Evangelical, which theoretically means that he takes opportunities to evangelize. He said that he does so, when the occasion is appropriate and the listener is willing. But asked what he actually says in such situations, Coppedge drew a blank.

This frustrated Becker, as he couldn't seem to hide, which again made you fear that Coppedge would break under the pressure. It made me wonder if Coppedge isn't too bashful to offer a proper evangelical pitch for anything. Think about it. "Pushing" your ideas on anyone, as distinct from diffidently offering them a DVD and making a note in your diary if they liked it or not (as Coppedge did), requires a fearless nerve, a certain cheekiness. In Jewish terms, chutzpah.
...
Click to expand...
Source


That Coppedge's own attorney is getting "frustrated" by Coppedge's interaction could be quite interesting for the defense's point that Coppedge was annoying/harassing co-workers.
 
Here's an interesting article from Time:

Legal Smackdown: NASA, Religion and Intelligent Design
By Jeffrey Kluger
Monday, Mar. 19, 2012
Time.com


It's been a long time since I graduated law school and was admitted to the bar, and I've surely forgotten more than I remember. But here's one bit of legal street-smarts I've retained: if you're a plaintiff filing a trial brief, you may not want to write it as if it were a screenplay — and then admit that you're making stuff up. That's just one of the curious wrinkles in the case of David Coppedge, the plaintiff in an ongoing courtroom smackdown that also involves NASA, religious freedom, workplace decorum and the origins of life.
...
A reading of the trial briefs and other filings, available on the NCSE website, make a strong argument for JPL as the more temperate party, and Coppedge as a provocateur and — not to put too fine a point on it — a pain. JPL's defense is manifold: Coppedge, it says, had long been a subject of complaints by coworkers, and Greg Chin, his supervisor, had received reports "from at least fifteen project members about Coppedge, focusing on his uncooperative attitude and poor listening and interpersonal skills, which contributed to issues about his technical performance."
...
The brief's supporting evidence does a fair job of backing up its claims that Coppedge was prickly at best and confrontational at worst. Moreover, it is true that unmanned NASA spacecraft — including the celebrated Voyager probes to the outer solar system, the Galileo probe to Jupiter and the Spirit and Opportunity Mars rovers — often exceed their originally anticipated lifespans and while the missions continue for additional months or years, they do so with less funding for staff and support. Most critically, JPL argues that it was at no point seeking to control the content of Coppedge's religious or political communications with his colleagues, but rather his conduct in expressing those views. That, of course, is the critical Constitutional distinction that allows employers to maintain decorum without trampling the First Amendment.

As for Coppedge's case? Well, begin with the fact that despite his presumably sound representation by counsel, his brief opens with a quote from Chin that reads, "David, stop pushing your religion on people!" and even appends a date on which the statement was made. The exclamation point may be interpretive, but if the language is accurate, Chin appears to have been with his rights as a supervisor. "Pushing" religion on colleagues is a very different thing from merely discussing it — at an appropriate time and place and in an appropriate manner — and that goes to the heart of the conduct versus content distinction.
...
Far more bizarre is Coppedge's inclusion of a three-page "screenplay" dramatizing his interactions with one of the complaining coworkers, including such dialogue as "I'm so uncomfortable with David approaching me about watching an intelligent design DVD and talking about my stance on Proposition 8." The coworker then, in the "screenplay" version of the incident, sobs.
...
Click to expand...
Full: Time.com
Here are the documents that the article is referring to: NCSE.com
 
Having worked at JPL as a Caltech employee from 1980 - 1997, mostly as a systems administrator in the institutional computing organization, here's my two cents:

Working in academia is different than working in corporate America, especially for an institution as prestigious as Caltech. There are a lot of really smart people working at JPL, which also means that there are a lot of really weird people, and a wide diversity of political opinions and religious beliefs. Academia is way more accepting of the weirdness and diversity.

I have never experienced any other workplace more tolerant of individual quirks than JPL. One guy came to work every day with his hair dyed and permed into blond curls, wearing women's high-heeled shoes, and a bra under his shirt. Another guy always wore huaraches, t-shirts and ragged cutoffs. Nobody ever said boo to them as long as they did their jobs. IMO, Coppedge would have had to have been really annoying to get someone to complain.

I can recall plenty of spirited discussions with JPL co-workers regarding sensitive topics like politics or religion, but nothing that crossed the line into harrassment. Employees were expected to behave like adults, and mostly they did.

One thing that Mr. Coppedge seems to have failed to notice is that if you work with scientists and engineers - but you are not a scientist or engineer yourself - you had better tread very carefully when arguing about science or engineering with people who may actually know what they're talking about.
 
The defense has started its cross-examination of Coppedge, and already it doesn't look too good for Coppedge and those who want to make him out as a creationist martyr:

Laid-Off JPL Worker Discounts Complaints
March 20, 2012
montrose.patch.com
By Donna Evans

The lead JPL defense attorney pointed out Tuesday that several co-workers complained about David Coppedge's demeanor and responsiveness -- people with whom he'd never discussed religion or politics.


Frustrated with not being able to explain the complaints' context, a red-faced David Coppedge admitted to the lead defense attorney Tuesday that several JPL employees had griped about his professionalism and ability clear back to 2004.

The terminated systems administrator read from his handwritten notes, which documented complaints his manager relayed to him eight years ago. At that time, Greg Chin passed along the co-workers' issues with Coppedge in an effort to have him adjust the way he interacted with people, defense attorney Jim Zapp said.
...
Click to expand...
Full: montrose.patch.com
 
ben m said:
Which of the NCSE documents has the "screenplay"? I could use a laugh.
Click to expand...

It's the one labeled "12/2/11: Plaintiff's Trial Brief" on the NCSE Coppedge page. Here's a link to the file:

http://ncse.com/webfm_send/1685

On page one:
"David, stop pushing your religion on people!"
--Greg Chin, March 2, 2009
Click to expand...


The screenplay starts on page four and continues on to six with this introduction:
This is how the screenplay of this suspense thriller with all of its harrowing action would read[1]:

INT. WORK AREA-LATE AFTERNOON

COPPEDGE quietly approaches WEISENFELDER

COPPEDGE
Hi, Margaret. Tomorrow's the election and I was wondering if you have decided on Proposition 8 yet? I will be voting for it.

WEISENFELDER
(annoyed)
I disagree with your position on it and don't care to discuss it.

COPPEDGE
Is there anything I can say to chang your mind?

WEISENFELDER
No.
...
Click to expand...

The footnote is:
Some liberties have been taken with the dialogue and action as artistic license. The dialogue is generally taken from Huntley's notes and Weisenfelder's deposition testimony.
Click to expand...

Why would a lawyer include a "screenplay," much less one with "artistic license" in a court brief?
 
Last edited:
I am amused the 'screenplay' includes scenes where Coppedge is not present. Perhaps he's admitting to covert surveillance?

... and apparently the entire 'dramatic confrontation with Coppedge' consists of replying 'sure' to a 'would you look at this DVD?' question. The tension, it is unbearable!
 
Last edited:
I kept reading the title of the thread as, "David Copperfield is suing the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for 'religious discrimination'". Needless to say I was wondering why exactly a magician would be taking umbrage at a science lab.
 
I'm amused that, when we're in Dover, PA, we're expected to pretend that Intelligent Design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content. That's why the court has no business taking it out of school curricula---deciding which science to teach is the job of the school board, not the court, so Intelligent Design is science science science and we're insulted that you would say otherwise.

(Which implies that you could fire Coppedge for ordinary, secular, job-related stupidity.)

And now in Pasadena, we're getting the opposite. Now, intelligent design is a personal religious expression, and work-place speech about Intelligent Design is protected under the religious clause of employment law. That's why Caltech has no right, under EEOC law, to restrict Coppedge from saying whatever he wants, case closed thank you.

(Which implies that you can't put it in public-school science curricula.)
 
ben m said:
i'm amused that, when we're in dover, pa, we're expected to pretend that intelligent design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content. That's why the court has no business taking it out of school curricula---deciding which science to teach is the job of the school board, not the court, so intelligent design is science science science and we're insulted that you would say otherwise.

(which implies that you could fire coppedge for ordinary, secular, job-related stupidity.)

and now in pasadena, we're getting the opposite. Now, intelligent design is a personal religious expression, and work-place speech about intelligent design is protected under the religious clause of employment law. That's why caltech has no right, under eeoc law, to restrict coppedge from saying whatever he wants, case closed thank you.

(which implictly es means that you can't put it in public-school science curricula.)
Click to expand...
ftfy
 
I need to get my eyes checked. I thought the thread title said "David Copperfield".

And I was like "What... can't he just make them disappear?"
 
JPL & Coppedge

billw said:
I have never experienced any other workplace more tolerant of individual quirks than JPL.
Click to expand...


I worked at JPL as a contractor from 1981-1984 and as a JPL direct employee from 1984 to 2008 when I was laid off due to budget constraints and simultaneously retired. I second billw's comment; I don't believe for a second that religious discrimination would ever be a factor in any termination at JPL, and I worked in groups with just about every kind of religious outlook you can think of. I was actually rather surprised by the wide sweep of tolerance for individual eccentricities (which may have been affected by my previous Air Force service, where individual eccentricities are illegal). At one point we decided that one of our supervisors was a "space alien" based on a list found in National Inquirer (or some such rag), "ten ways to tell if your co-workers are space aliens". He scored on all 10 points!
 
ben m said:
I'm amused that, when we're in Dover, PA, we're expected to pretend that Intelligent Design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content. That's why the court has no business taking it out of school curricula---deciding which science to teach is the job of the school board, not the court, so Intelligent Design is science science science and we're insulted that you would say otherwise.
Click to expand...

One might consider that the court ruling was initiated by 11 parents that filed the lawsuit. And the voters ousted all 8 of the school board members who voted in favor of ID in the first election after that.

Considering that, I'm amused that you think you're expected to pretend that Intelligent Design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content when you're in Dover.

ben m said:
And now in Pasadena, we're getting the opposite. Now, intelligent design is a personal religious expression, and work-place speech about Intelligent Design is protected under the religious clause of employment law.
Click to expand...

But the court in Dover ruled that ID was religion, so it's hardly the opposite for lawyers in Pasadena to claim that ID is religion. That would be called 'agreeing'.

If he'd been fired because he believed in ID I suspect the courts would continue to agree with each other and he'd have a chance at winning based religious discrimination.
 
Bob Klase said:
One might consider that the court ruling was initiated by 11 parents that filed the lawsuit. And the voters ousted all 8 of the school board members who voted in favor of ID in the first election after that.

Considering that, I'm amused that you think you're expected to pretend that Intelligent Design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content when you're in Dover.

But the court in Dover ruled that ID was religion, so it's hardly the opposite for lawyers in Pasadena to claim that ID is religion. That would be called 'agreeing'.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point - it's not what the law says that ben m finds amusing, it's what ID proponents say. The whole point of ID is to pretend that creationism is actually science and not religion. That's the sole reason ID even exists as a concept - it was invented by going through a book (Of Pandas and People) and replacing all instances of "creation" with "intelligent design". Obviously this effort was so hilariously transparent that very few people actually fell for it, but since then creationists have mostly stuck with it, presumably in the hopes that if they repeat it enough times everyone will suddenly start believing them.

It's therefore quite amusing to see an ID proponent now arguing the exact opposite. The entire reason for the existence of ID is to pretend creationism is not religion, but now we have a creationist desperately arguing that ID absolutely is religion. That the law agrees it's still obviously religion is irrelevant to that amusement.
 
Bob Klase said:
Considering that, I'm amused that you think you're expected to pretend that Intelligent Design is an ordinary scientific theory with no religious content when you're in Dover.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you read my meaning backwards.

In the context of the Dover trial, Intelligent design advocates were eager to have us believe ID was science. In the context of the Coppedge trial, intelligent design advocates are eager to have us believe ID is religion.
 
A little more from the cross-examination:

JPL attorneys paint David Coppedge as problem employee
By Brian Charles, SGVN
PasadenaStarNews.com
03/21/2012 11:12:57 PM PDT


The lead attorney for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory civil trial with former employee David Coppedge painted the plaintiff Wednesday as a confrontational employee.
...
Despite JPL's requirement to disclose outside business interests, Coppedge never disclosed to JPL any information about his sale of DVDs.

"At JPL you took ethics training once a year, where you were supposed to report outside business activity," said James Zapp, lead attorney for JPL.

"You never reported these activities to JPL."

Coppedge acknowledged that he failed to disclose his sale of DVDs, as well as earnings from the business to the Internal Revenue Service or JPL as required by the science laboratory's policy.
...
On occasion, the culture of JPL offended Coppedge, according to his own testimony Wednesday.

In 2003, when a JPL Christmas Party began to be referred to as a Holiday Party, Coppedge objected. He testified Wednesday, that while change to a Holiday Party accounted for the agency's diverse population, it did so at the expense of Christians like himself.

"This doesn't include me and my beliefs," Coppedge said, pointing to a holiday flier admitted into evidence Wednesday. "We are having to sacrifice for a very small minority."
...
Wednesday marked the fifth day of testimony in the civil case between Coppedge and JPL. He was laid off as part of a massive downsizing of the Cassini Mission at the Pasadena-based science lab in 2011. One in three workers on the Cassini project received pink slips, with Coppedge among those laid off.
...
But Zapp said co-workers characterized Coppedge as confrontational and stubborn well before the 2009 incident with Chin. As far back as 2004, his co-workers described him as difficult to work with, a micromanager and someone who was "quick to say no," according to testimony Wednesday.

Chin defended Coppedge to his superiors, Zapp said, but Coppedge didn't listen.

"Everything that Mr. Chin said to you about customers' viewpoints, you would dismiss and say `you don't understand me," Zapp said.
...
Click to expand...
Full: PasadenaStarNews.com

and

JPL trial: Coppedge, NASA agency tell different tales
By Daniel Siegal
GlendaleNewsPress.com
March 21, 2012


Two very different narratives are emerging from the trial in which former Jet Propulsion Laboratory worker David Coppedge claims he faced discrimination because he discussed the theory of intelligent design with co-workers.
...
But with Coppedge facing cross-examination on Wednesday, JPL lawyers laid out a history of complaints about Coppedge's work that had nothing to do with religion or politics.
...
Zapp asked Coppedge about a March 2004 meeting where Cassini project supervisors Greg Chin and Clark Burgess told Coppedge that co-workers complained he was stubborn and difficult.

“Office managers thought you were uncooperative, and Mr. Chin told you that some of the office managers on Cassini were even asking that you be removed, is that correct?” Zapp asked.

Coppedge said his own notes from the meeting confirmed the topic had been raised.

“[Chin] reported that members of my own team had expressed the same concerns, that I appeared too opinionated or unwilling to listen,” Coppedge said.

On Wednesday, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest Hiroshige told Coppedge several times to give yes or no responses to Zapp's questions, rather than adding commentary.
...
Click to expand...
Full: GlendaleNewsPress.com
 
ben m said:
Sorry, you read my meaning backwards.

In the context of the Dover trial, Intelligent design advocates were eager to have us believe ID was science. In the context of the Coppedge trial, intelligent design advocates are eager to have us believe ID is religion.
Click to expand...

You are correct. It seems I took your intent the opposite of what you intended. Sorry.
 
This seems to be the only news report, including Discovery Institute press releases, on the trial in the last week, but it has only a few new details:

JPL, former employee fight over religion in science
By Brian Charles, Staff Writer
DailyNews.com
April 2, 2012

...
Coppedge, a darling of the creationist/intelligent design community, runs a creationist blog. He has been a member of the Bible Science Association for more than 20 years, according to Coppedge's own testimony.

"Through his links to Bible science groups it's clear to see the linkages to creation science and intelligence design," Rosenau said.

JPL supervisors told Coppedge to cease distributing the DVDs, which the agency viewed as religious in nature. He was also told to avoid engaging co-workers in political and religious dialogue during work hours.

Since the civil trial kicked off March 12, Coppedge has testified that his JPL supervisors reacted with hostility to his open expression of his political and religious beliefs and influenced their reviews of his performance at the lab.
...
JPL denies Coppedge's claims and the lab's attorneys have presented evidence to bolster their claim that Coppedge was a problem employee. They also argue that Coppedge's layoff was part of a normal reduction in force called for in NASA's budget.

With 21 witnesses to call, the case is expected to last several weeks. But, when Judge Ernest Hiroshige renders his decision, the announcement will resonate far beyond the walls of the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, according to advocates for both evolutionary theory and intelligent design.
...
The conservative Discovery Institute has skin in the game, too. Josh Youngkin, a Discovery Institute staff attorney, is assisting attorney William J. Becker Jr. in Coppedge's lawsuit. And Becker himself is an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian advocacy group.
...
Click to expand...

Full: DailyNews.com
 
The trial must been dealing less with political/religious issues and more with human resources concerns, judging from the lack of news stories and the Discovery Institute reports about the case. Surely if there were some proof of Coppedge's claims discussed in court the Institute would have been sending press releases about it, and there would be as many stories published as there was when the trial started.

Here's two recent articles from the past week:

Fired JPL worker's skills questioned
Former supervisor testifies that other workers had to fix 'sloppy mistakes.'
Valley Sun
By Daniel Siegal
April 01, 2012


A Jet Propulsion Laboratory manager offered testimony this week that appeared to undermine former JPL worker David Coppedge's claim that he was let go from the rocket science lab because of his belief in the intelligent design of the universe.
...
On Thursday, JPL manager Greg Chin laid out the specific complaints that he addressed with Coppedge prior to Coppedge's dismissal in 2011.

Chin said Nick Patel, who replaced Coppedge as the informal “team lead” for the information systems support office on NASA's Cassini mission to Saturn, had reported, “There were several sloppy mistakes other [administrators] had to fix.”
...
As his technical competency was questioned, Coppedge's ability to get along with co-workers also was called into question.

James Zapp, JPL's lead attorney, questioned Chin about notes he had made before meeting with Coppedge in 2009 that said co-workers had lost confidence in Coppedge.

“I had conversations with office managers, various customers, looked to find their opinions; and some of them just did not want to work with David,” Chin testified.
...
Click to expand...
Full: Valley Sun


JPL 'intelligent design' trial coming to a close
Economist to be called as a witness for the lab next week.
Valley Sun
By Daniel Siegal
April 7, 2012


Closing arguments may take place next week in the case of a former Jet Propulsion Laboratory worker who claims he was fired for his advocacy of the theory of intelligent design of the universe.

David Coppedge, a former systems administrator on JPL's Cassini mission to Saturn, is seeking unspecified damages, though an expert witness called on his behalf estimated Coppedge is entitled to about $850,000 in lost and potential wages, according to attorney William Becker. Coppedge also is seeking an unspecified amount for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
...
Earlier this week Becker and James Zapp, the lead attorney for JPL, argued over the witnesses JPL could call in an attempt to refute Coppedge's claim.

“They can come in with 90 people who will say my client is a bum, but the documentary evidence doesn't hold up,” Becker said.

Zapp said the witnesses would bolster testimony offered earlier in the case that Coppedge had earned a reputation within JPL as a stubborn and uncooperative co-worker.

One of JPL's remaining witnesses is economist Michael Ward, who Zapp said will counter the $850,000 figure offered by Coppedge's economic expert, Ted Vavoulis.
...
Click to expand...
Full: Valley Sun
 
Last edited:
Journalists and the Discovery Institute have not been writing about the on-going trial, but it seems that Coppedge is having a hard time proving his case. Usually you don't ask for a new trial if you think you're going to win.

The court filings, posted by the NCSE are here.

What grounds does Coppedge want a new trial? A JPL worker revealed that their staff were ranked every year, and Coppedge was ranked low. Coppedge claims that these were hidden from him and there should be a new trial.

According to Coppedge's motion to exclude employee's ranking claiming Coppedge should have received the documents, but was not given any (See: "4/9/12: Plaintiff's Motion in Limine 7 to exclude Employee Performance Ranking Records"):
4/9/12: Plaintiff's Motion in Limine 7 to exclude Employee Performance Ranking Records said:
On April 2, 2012, Kevin Klenk testified about a “forced ranking system” for compensation purposes.
...
Klenk testified that between 2007 and 2009, Plaintiff [Coppedge] ranked in the lower half of all section employees.
...
On cross examination, Klenk testified that the ranking of employees was recorded in written form produced annually. These documents were never produced in response to discovery requests, even though they would have been evidence of a legitimate, non-discriminatory, non-retaliatory, non-pretextual reason for adverse employment actions taken against Plaintiff.
...
Click to expand...


According to the JPL, in the opposition to Coppedge’s Motion in Limine #7 from April 10th:
JPL'S opposition to Coppedge’s Motion in Limine #7 said:
Coppedge’s Motion in Limine #7 is nothing more than a feeble attempt to utilize an unobjectionable portion of testimony as grounds to obtain a new trial that Coppedge already believes he will need. The testimony in question — former Section Manager Kevin Klenk’s description of departmental rankings used for compensation purposes, explanation that Coppedge ranked in the lower half, and reference to written documentation of those rankings — was never called for by any of Coppedge’s discovery requests or deposition questions.
...
Finally, the compensation rankings were not among those responsive documents; while the compensation rankings corroborate the layoff rankings, they were not considered in the layoff process and thus do not constitute evidence that Caltech took the actions it did (i.e. laying off Coppedge) for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.
...
Second, setting aside the fact that Coppedge never requested the compensation rankings, he suffered no prejudice from the fact that Caltech did not provide them in the discovery process, because they are not evidence on which Caltech contends it based any of the decisions in this case.
...
Click to expand...
More analysis on this blog.


Before this filing, Coppedge filed a motion "to exclude Cumulative & Irrelevant Witnesses" (4/4/12: Plaintiff's Motion in Limine 6). These "irrelevant witnesses" are 12 people who worked with or supervised him. Coppedge's filing says they are irrelevant and it will take too much time for them to testify.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom