![Delayed[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/delayed1.png?quality=75)
If you ever needed an example of just how one-sided Michael Mann is, here’s an example of how this delicate scientific flower can’t handle discovery.
Mark Steyn writes:
Breaking as-it-happens news about a trial that isn’t happening any day soon, or any half-decade soon. Previously on Mann vs Steyn et al, National Review had filed a motion asking for yet another stay in discovery pending the appeals court’s ruling on their appeal – or, indeed, the appeals court’s ruling on whether they’re allowed to appeal. Whatever. I’m bored by all this procedural flimflam and am anxious to proceed with discovery and go to trial, as I could have done by now in almost any functioning jurisdiction.
So I filed an objection. Michael Mann eventually filed an objection, too. He also wants to proceed with discovery but only against me, not against him. A voyage of one-way discovery.
Anyway, yesterday Judge Weisberg announced his decision:
Accordingly, it is this 11th day of April, 2014,
ORDERED that the motion of Defendant National Review, Inc. for a Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Appeal be, and it hereby is, granted; and all proceedings in this case are stayed pending the decision of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on the Defendants’ interlocutory appeals.
So we’re on hold for a while, again. I intend to use this period for trial preparation, including my investigation of Mann and my counterclaims against him. I’ve been immensely touched by the generosity of readers who understand how costly in time and money a campaign of this nature can be, and have supported the Steyn store to a degree I never expected.
Nevertheless, I explained in my objection why I was anxious to get on with it:
3. The charge that a man is a defamer is a serious one and profoundly damaging. With criminal charges, this nation provides a constitutional right to a speedy trial. It offers no such protections in civil court, even though to be accused as a defamer is certainly as damaging to one’s reputation and honor as all but the most serious criminal charges. For an independent writer such as Defendant Steyn, this is especially so: His livelihood depends entirely on his reputation, and as long as this charge stains his character without being answered he is being damaged. As the accused, he asserts his right to confront his accuser in open court in a timely manner.
4. Likewise, the Plaintiff is owed the courtesy of being received straightway without delay. As this Court noted in its Order of January 22nd, the allegedly defamatory statements “go to the heart of scientific integrity”, and thus to the heart of the Plaintiff’s character. If the Court truly believes that, then Dr Mann is entitled to a timely trial that settles the truth of the matter wheresoever it be.
Judge Weisberg acknowledged the unfairness of this in his ruling:
Read the entire piece here, including some frustration by the judge in the case: http://www.steynonline.com/6260/irony-alert
===========================================================
This demonstration of Dr. Mann’s principles, where he doesn’t want to yield to discovery, but let’s go ahead with discovery on Steyn, isn’t just irony, it’s über irony.
What a cowardly Mann. Eventually, this game of musical chairs will stop, and it is pretty clear who’s going to be without one and left holding a broken hockey stick.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You’d almost think that The Mann had something to hide…
For a guy that loves to threaten others with it , it he sure does has much as he can to avoid any court time .
In the end its likley Mann will back down , if sometime disgracefully, for all it comes across as a poor scientists his smart enough to know know that in a court he will not be able to load the basis in his favour and get by on BS has his is normal pratice.
The one hope is that his massive ego will get the better of him , and its there he needs a ‘push ‘ , we should actual encourage Mann all we can. For the day cannot come soon enough that his ‘team ‘ throw him under the bus to save themselves and that they most certainly will do.
Michael Mann, Trenberth, etc. are all cowards.
Further, what has been their contribution to science? The hockey stick, hide the decline and the missing heat hiding in the deep ocean! They call this science?
No wonder they can only pretend to be Nobel Laureates since they will never be real ones!
What really irks me is why no one amongst his so called peers says:
“Come on Mike, you started this mess and it is starting to reflect badly on the rest of us.
So just show them what they want to see, surely there is no reason to hide anything, um…….is there?”
Almost unnoticed and unremarked upon in what has surely become my prime source for judicial entertainment is the departure of Bernard “Bernie” Grimm as one of Mann’s representative consigliere (who’s visage would be recognized by most as the curmudgeonly “defense perspective” talking head on one of the cable news channels…CNN perhaps?).
While the warmist’s delight in the various comings and goings of Steyn consigliere produced a tsunami of pseudo-informed prattle as to the dire consequence of his perceived consigliere instability, nary a word to be found as to whys and wherefores of Grimm’s exit stage left.
David Appell? Popehat? You sleeping with the fishes on this development? Has Grimm seen the handwriting on the wall?
I don’t think it really matters that “they are not Nobel Laureates”.
A Nobel Prize no longer means anything, because when the committee that awards them started handing them out to obvious fools like Gore, Obama, and Krugman, all they accomplished was to completely discredit themselves and their awards.
Sooner or later the King of Sweden will figure that out, too, and resign rather than be made a fool of any longer.
As I understand it Mann has refused to follow the discovery rules in the British Columbia Supreme Court for over three years in his I’ll founded litigation against Dr. Tim Ball.
Mann pretty much defines SLAPP.
Just for the record (and for anyone interested enough to weigh into that wasteland of misinformation), the Wikipedia “Defamation lawsuit” section is laughingly erroneous and out of date.
Does anybody know how long he delayed when he produced the documents for all those investigations that cleared him?
(Anybody have a couple of sarc tags I can borrow?)
Servitude is a bitch. : )
PSU’s Michael E. Mann, that giant among researchers subserviently producing non-science research that is encouraged by some AGW ‘exaggerationists’ who guide the IPCC’s assessment process, delays legal proceedings by what means ($)?
Mann can delay via funds from the Scott Mandia inspired ‘Climate Science Legal Defense Fund’.
What is Mandia’s purpose?
To serve Mann’s kind.
John
There will be no hiding the great Mann’s final decline. He’s pulled out his full bag of Tricks, but soon he will realize this is no pushover Nature journal he’s dealing with. A propos of that, I wonder what the chances are of some his papers being retracted after the case. Com’on buy a book and support your own freedom of speech.
“..like syphilis in that song from Candide.” -Mark Steyn talking about the spread of misinformation by the Warmists. hee hee
‘ ConfusedPhoton says:
April 12, 2014 at 9:51 am’
What does ‘hide the decline’ actually mean?
Gore and Obama actually got the Nobel Peace Price from the Norwegian Parliament. The Peace Price, unlike the other Nobel prices, is awarded by the Norwegian Parliament and not by the Swedish Academy. Thus, no involvment of the Swedish king in the ceremony. Nor is the Norwegian king involved, the Peace Price (including ceremonies) is handled by the (Peace Price) Nobel Committee, appointed by our parliament.
These nationalistic comments do not imply that I applaud the choice of IPCC/Gore for the Nobel Peace Price.
He thinks if he delays long enough, the globe will start warming again.
I wonder if Mann realizes the new situation. We’ll see how loyal his friends (and financiers) are when this gets expensive and the realization hits that he could lose big. It’s fun when the opponents roll over. We’re damned lucky to have courageous souls like Tim Ball and Mark Steyn who refuse to back down from this soulless bully–support them with everything you have.
There will be no hiding Mann’s decline.
======================================================================
I’m sure someone here can give you a detailed answer. Here’s elmer’s more fun answer.
PS Mann sued over this.
Piltdown Mann runs!
Wish Mann would just get on with it; I’m on my fourteenth box of popcorn, and getting restless.
Mann reminds me of the definition of chutzpah:
A young man, convicted of murdering his parents, appeals to the judge at the sentencing:
“Have mercy on me, judge, I’m an orphan.”
Delay is the Mainstay of Defense at Law.
While justice delayed may be justice denied, there are dozens – hundreds – of cunning and nominally legitimate ways to stretch out even the simplest matter, an – eviction for example. And, with a complicated enough case, any defense lawyer worth the name rests easy in the knowledge that most plaintiffs will probably in time run through their anger, energy, patience, money, or all four. Then the guileless victim, surrendering to boredom or the balance sheet, will turn to getting on with his, her or its life and go away . . . Game to Defendant.
Generally, this is never revealed in law school but is a first lesson of practice. I can only send Mark Steyn my best wishes and encourage his persistence.
Tally ho!
Let’s start a gentle-person’s betting pool on this affair:
+ what will the increase/decrease in global temperature from the time of Mann’s first filing to the day of the trial;
+ what will be the change in sea levels for the same period
+ what will be the PPM of CO2 for the same period.
Perhaps someone (our host?) can come up with measurement standards by which these can be judged.
This offers an opportunity for anyone taking any position on climate change to weigh in on something that can be empirically tested.
When Mann sued elmer, what was his basis? Did he claim to be a public figure who’s image was being used without his permission or anything like that?
Tom,
Quite right…wonderfully, Mann is the plaintiff and, in time, his failure to produce will lead to Motions to Dismiss. Three years is a long time to dodge Discovery and most Canadian judges will not look kindly on a plaintiff who seems to be abusing the processes of the Court.