“The record plainly shows the deliberate and knowing misconduct of Dr. Mann’s counsel in eliciting false testimony from Dr. Mann and misrepresenting his grant funding.”
https://www.steynonline.com/documents/15104.pdf
Ryan Maue writes more comprehensively on X
Update: bad faith. Here, the Court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that Dr. Mann, through Mr. Fontaine and Mr. Williams, acted in bad faith when they presented erroneous evidence and made false representations to the jury and the Court regarding damages stemming from loss of grant funding.
https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1899863562333389272
Yikes!💀
The plaintiff and his lawyers knowingly mislead the court with erroneous information, and “Dr. Mann knowingly participated in the falsehood, endeavoring to make the strongest case possible even if it required using erroneous and misleading information.”
https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1899864622129414348/photo/1
“Setting aside questions of credibility or even perjury …” ORDERED that Plaintiff Michael E. Mann, Ph.D., is SANCTIONED for bad-faith trial misconduct relating to his use of Exhibit 517A, Exhibit 116, and Exhibit 117, and his counsel’s misrepresentations concerning the same
https://x.com/RyanMaue/status/1899866725316788314
Now that Mann has been proven to be a liar in a court of law, he is qualified to be president of any of the ivy league universities.
Interesting. I have been censored on blogs in the past for quoting someone saying that Michael Mann is a “faker, fraud, scofflaw and deadbeat.”
Now, a judge has added “liar” to that list.
I am of the opinion that Michael Mann suffers from a delusional psychotic condition. If he wants to sue me, claiming that an anonymous nobody like myself has irreparably damaged his reputation or caused him measurable financial hardship, that would merely reinforce my unqualified and worthless opinion.
He’s probably delusional enough to have convinced himself that adding CO2 or H2O to air makes it hotter! Even sillier, he might believe that removing CO2 or H2O from air causes it to get colder!
It’s a good thing that sane people aren’t that deluded, isn’t it?
Oh dear! Does a bit of further damage to his credibility. Lying and misrepresenting facts in a court is really not a good idea.
It all seems to be coming apart. Not sure whether to class it as mass hysteria or a moral panic. At any rate its clearly recognizable as being in the same category as a bunch of other historic episodes of collective irrational hysteria of the 20C. One thinks of masturbation hysteria, prohibition, reefer madness, comic book hysteria (‘the Seduction of the Innocent’), Mods and Rockers in England (not, you notice, Wales Scotland or Ireland). Satanic child abuse. Recovered memory. In many ways the reaction to Covid. Project Midland and Carl Beech in England. Currently, but also dying, Trans mania.
Like most moral panics, this one is coming to an end in a mess of confusion with a few key accidental episodes. Trump taking the US out of the UN process and dropping net zero will be one key development. That licenses more people to call the emperor’s nakedness. Mann’s failure to enforce a ban ion criticism of the hockey stick will be a significant footnote. The coming UK U-turn will be another.
Its always been mainly confined to the English speaking countries, which is an important clue – its been considerably Internet transmitted.
Who will even be at the next COP? Will there even be another after that one?
And one day we wake up and look around us, rather like Canadians do every spring as they look back at last winter, shake ourselves, and say to each other, what? Did we really just go through that?
Yes, you did, but its all over now. What’s left is the cleanup.
So if Dr. Mann cannot add up grant totals in an arithmetic column, are we supposed to believe he can calculate what the weather is going to be 100 years from now? I have my doubts.
More to the point, can his guesstimate of historical climate be taken seriously?!
Especially when it conflicts with:
The information he deliberately omits;
AND
Recorded human history;
AND
*Physical evidence* like the fossilized remains of trees that used to grow where it’s too cold for them to grow NOW?!
Back during the trial, there was a daily podcast “Climate Change on Trial”. While audio of the day’s trial proceedings were not available, transcripts were. This podcast was done by taking each days’ transcript and then doing studio recordings of actors/actresses who did pretty good impersonations of the players in the trial.
I happened to have time to listen to these every day (an hour plus podcast with the main parts of the proceedings each day) while suffering some effects of Lyme disease.
Listening to all the testimony, it was astounding, to say the least, when the jury decided what it did.
The main thing I want to add is something not in the current judgement: During the closing argument, the Mann’s attorneys presented a new and novel argument never brought up in testimony. This may have driven the strange jury decision. The argument was (para-phrasing) that “climate deniers to be taught a lesson.” I suspect this hit home with the DC jury.
Is it just me or is there very little discussion of this on youtube? I could find only 1 article with only a single view.
In his ruling, the Judge states that the defendants would be awarded money to compensate for various attorney’s fees. I can’t foresee how much money that will be, I am guessing that the total amount awarded may exceed $5,000. Keep in mind that Dr. Mann was awarded a sum of $5,002.
In short, Dr. Mann may have won the case but lost financially.