Wednesday
Apr032013
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill First day in court
Apr 3, 2013 Climate: Mann An email correspondent writes to say that he has learned that the first day of hearings in the Mann/NRO libel case will be on 11 April in the District of Columbia.
Reader Comments (24)
I wonder who is backing Manns case?
Regards
Mailman
I think it's going to amuse. The plaintiff will be using all sorts of legal chicanery to deny the Court the evidence which the defendant requires to make his case. A lot will depend upon whether or not the Judge is a Believer. This one will run and run. If you want a resolution, be prepared to fling funds as appropriate.
Please let it be heard by Judge Judy
Any chance that Hansen will testify ? ..would account for the date of Hansen's "retirement" ?
.. like saying he couldn't have testified whilst still a government employee ? ..
The case will be flung out before the defence gets to discover papers, because of Mann's recent admision that he is a public figure.
Deliberate? Who knows.
The most "significant" part of this case has already taken part. Namely, the part where Michael Mann got to strut his stuff, bring the suit and tried to intimidate other critics.
Then it all peters out into the minutiae of a case which does not go anywhere costing the NRO lots but Mr. Mann (personally) nothing.
Bah! Justice...banana...etc...
Perhaps he imagines he is going to unmask the big-oil-funded deniers with an expensive case, and be the hero.
I suspect he's enjoying it, but they say it's not sensible to start believing your own publicity/advertising.
Let the battle commence, but frankly it would not be a surprise to find it ends quickly with Mann declaring 'victory ' and 'martyrdom' no matter what the actual result , which I expect will be it being thrown out has no case to answer.
The more 'interesting ' one may be the more personal one where the case cannot to be just thrown out on the grounds of press freedom and Mann is much more likley to find 'discovery ' a bitch.
It's up to Mann to prove his case. He's the plaintiff. As many have pointed out, he admitted recently to being an "unwilling" or "accidental" or such public figure and an activist one as well. Since, imho, Mann is as public a figure as Obama, then the standard will be "reckless disregard of the truth". The judge is going to have real issues to keep the circus down to just two rings.
However, I'd wager that that climate what's-his-name that just announcing retiring from adjusting temperatures at NASA will be an expert witness.
At least the first ring of the circus begins April 11. Almost makes tax season interesting this year.
It doesn't look like the main hearing - what's listed are two motions, at 9 and 10am, rescheduled from 12th Feb. It appears the motions are only to set the date of the trial and that Steyn, Simberg and the CEI haven't even been served with notice.
https://www.dccourts.gov/cco/maincase.jsf
The judge is Hon. Natalia M. Combs-Greene. There seems to be a lot of criticism of her competence on the web, how much of it justified and how much generated by failed litigants I couldn't say.
I fear the trial is fixed.
Some great reviews to be found on this judge. Depending on which way you slice it, she could be good or bad for Mann:
Interesting post here at a blog I haven't seen before:
johnosullivan
Re: Apr 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM | Geoff Shorten
Interesting link, thanks.
Methinks it will be another 'stitch-up' like all the other so-called 'inquiries'.
Our political elite have invested far too much time and effort (and our money) into their dream of 'global governance' to risk over-exposure in the Mann case.
Geoff - Not wishing to go O/T, I saw the O'Sullivan blog too, though I'm afraid the word that sprang to mind was 'hysterical' rather than interesting, and his CV looked very vague and flaky indeed - check the 'About' and spot all the bits of not-quite-enough-detail.
Further, that O'Sullivan can base his defamatory attacks Combs-Greene on a single wesbite called Robeprobe rather baffled me. It's in no way official.
Any halfway decent alarmist could fisk that post to death in half an hour.
Re: Apr 3, 2013 at 2:36 PM | Phil D
"Any halfway decent alarmist could fisk that post to death in half an hour."
Then why don't you Phil D, instead of indulging in a favoured alarmist trick of 'argumentum ad hominem'.
"The judge is Hon. Natalia M. Combs-Greene."
The judge's name is Greene? Come on!
Because, Marion, despite your odd assumption, I'm not any kind of alarmist. O'Sullivan is just not someone I would wish to see at the forefront of the Climate Realist cause. He is neither a scientist nor a compelling communicator of well-founded and worthwhile opinions. IMHO.
If that counts as ad hom in your book, so be it.
Be less afraid of the judge than of a D.C. jury - D.C. is very, very left of U.S. center, and voted 85% for Al Gore for president. A judge's decisions are made in public, often with articulated reasons, and can be reviewed by appellate courts. Juries' decisions are another matter. There can't be much substance before discovery, and there can't be discovery until the judge rules on the defense motion to dismiss. (Which I hope she will grant.)
Beale,
"I fear the trial is fixed."
I'm telling Lewandowsky you said that.
Re: Apr 3, 2013 at 4:12 PM | Phil D
"Because, Marion, despite your odd assumption, I'm not any kind of alarmist."
I'm afraid, Phil D. the assumptions are yours rather than mine, if you read my post more carefully you would realise that I simply stated you were using one of the alarmist's favourite tactics of 'argumentum ad hominem' and your description of
" the word that sprang to mind was 'hysterical' rather than interesting, and his CV looked very vague and flaky indeed"
seems pretty much like 'ad hom' to me!!
And additionally that
"Further, that O'Sullivan can base his defamatory attacks Combs-Greene on a single wesbite called Robeprobe rather baffled me. It's in no way official."
if you had followed the links more carefully you would have realised that your words are somewhat inaccurate.
Apr 3, 2013 at 3:16 PM | normalnew
"The judge is Hon. Natalia M. Combs-Greene."
The judge's name is Greene? Come on!
------------------------------
The copper that arrested Hansen outside the Whitehouse was named "Green" as well ! LOL !
Watch Lady Justice,
Plastic dashboard robed one.
Melt plastic in heat.
===========
Plaintiff's attorneys are as connected as it is possible to be in DeeCee, to deeleeciously understate the case.
A faint roseate
Colors discovery dawn.
Come on up the sun.
============