Font Resize"You can teach creationism without its being Christianity," the Dover Area school board member wrote in a letter to the editor in the June 27, 2004, York Sunday News.
Even though Geesey chose that word, in reference to efforts that month to find a new biology textbook, she testified in U.S. Middle District Court on Friday that her letter wasn't meant to convey the board was considering teaching creationism.
Rather, Geesey told the court, board members had been talking about intelligent design.
But before Geesey took the stand Friday afternoon, two local newspaper reporters recalled several board members using the word creationism at two June 2004 public meetings.
Whether board members were talking about creationism then is important to Dover's First Amendment battle. Attorneys for the 11 parents suing the district over the mention of intelligent design in biology class say board members were motivated by religion.
Plaintiffs' attorney Witold Walczak called newspaper accounts of those board meetings "frankly, the best historical record we have."
Dover's attorneys called the articles hearsay and said the reporters "misrepresented" what took place at the
After months of motions and appeals in which newspaper lawyers fought to keep them off the stand, Heidi Bernhard-Bubb, a freelance reporter for The York Dispatch, and Joe Maldonado, a freelance reporter for the York Daily Record/Sunday News, both testified in the case.
At their lawyer's request, Judge John E. Jones III limited testimony to what they saw and heard relative to the stories.
Under questioning by Walczak, both reporters verified the accuracy of articles they had written about the meetings. But during the cross-examinations, Dover attorney Ed White asked them if they had asked people to verify remarks before quoting them.
"I don't need to check for accuracy because I heard it," Bernhard-Bubb said.
White also asked them if the people they talked to were under oath.
Bernhard-Bubb said no. Maldonado said he doesn't ask them "to state the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
White pointed out that in the articles, no board members are actually quoted saying "creationism," but both reporters said that even though they paraphrased the remarks, board members used the word.
Both Maldonado and Bernhard-Bubb also said they had never heard anyone mention intelligent design at the June meetings.
Their accounts contradicted those of Geesey and of Buckingham, who had testified Thursday. They said board members never mentioned creationism - even though at the time they had both made statements to the media using the word.
Thursday, Buckingham testified he meant to say "intelligent design" on camera with a Fox 43 television news reporter, but accidentally blurted out the word "creationism."
Geesey said she used the word "creationism" in her letter to the newspaper in response to a previous letter published about the textbook controversy, in which Beth Eveland wrote, "creationism is religion, plain and simple."
Geesey testified that she recalled Buckingham and fellow board member Alan Bonsell discussing intelligent design at the June 2004 meetings. That contradicted her sworn deposition, in which she said board members hadn't named what alternatives should be presented to balance evolutionary theory.
When Walczak questioned the discrepancy, Geesey said her letter to the editor, along with Eveland's, had jogged her memory.
At the end of cross-examination, Jones was not satisfied and he began to question the witness himself.
Saying he was confused, Jones asked her to explain specifically how the letters triggered her memory. "I ask you because intelligent design is not mentioned in either letter," he said.
Geesey said her memories of the meetings run together and the letters helped her establish dates.
Also in her deposition, Geesey could not define intelligent design - the idea that life's complexity demands a designer.
In court Friday, she agreed with Walczak that she hadn't thought much about the concept and said she had taken the word of fellow board members Buckingham and Bonsell.
"Bill and Alan said it was a scientific theory," she said.
IN COURT FRIDAY
About the trial
What: Eleven people whose children attend or plan to attend Dover Area schools sued the school board and district, claiming the board's decision to make intelligent design part of the science curriculum violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
The district says it wanted to give fair time to an alternative to evolution theory. Evolution is widely accepted as the unifying concept of biology. Intelligent design says evolution can't explain the complexity of life and that an unnamed designer must have been at work.
When: Trial dates are Monday and Wednesday through Friday.
Who: Judge John E. Jones III will issue his decision at a time of his choosing after the trial.
Why it matters: It's the most significant court challenge to evolution since 1987, and it's the first time a court has been asked to rule whether intelligent design can be taught in public school science class. Experts say the case's outcome could influence how science is defined and taught in schools across the country. The lead defense lawyer said he wants to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Quote of the day
"I don't know what you could possibly hope to achieve." - Judge John E. Jones III, to Dover lawyer Patrick Gillen on Friday. Gillen had asked Jones if he could question school board member Heather Geesey after cross-examination ended and Jones himself had questioned Geesey, telling her he was confused by her testimony.
Quoted differently
In June 2004, York Daily Record/Sunday News correspondent Joe Maldonado and York Dispatch correspondent Heidi Bernhard-Bubb both quoted former board member Bill Buckingham, at a board meeting, talking about standing up for Jesus. But their quotations differed slightly.
Maldonado's articles quote Buckingham as saying: "Two thousand years ago, someone died on a cross. Can't someone take a stand for him?" Bernhard-Bubb's articles state, "Nearly 2,000 years ago someone died on a cross, shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him?"
Outside the courthouse, Dover lawyer Ed White said the differences prove the stories were inaccurate.
Plaintiffs' attorneys say it proves the reporters were not sharing notes, as the defense has said.
In court Monday
Dover Area school board member Alan Bonsell and former school board member Jane Cleaver are scheduled to testify.
GEESEY'S LETTER
Following is the complete letter to the editor written by Dover school board member Heather Geesey and published in the June 27, 2004, York Sunday News:
This letter is in regard to the comments made by Beth Eveland from York Township in the June 20 York Sunday News. I assure you that the Dover Area School Board is not going against its mission statement. In fact, if you read the statement it says . . . to educate our students so that they can be contributing members of society.
I do not believe in teaching revisionist history. Our country was founded on Christian beliefs and principles. We are not looking for a book that is teaching students that this is a wrong thing or a right thing. It is just a fact.
All we are trying to accomplish with this task is to choose a biology book that teaches the most prevalent theories. The definition of theory is merely a speculative or an ideal circumstance. To present only one theory or to give one option would be directly contradicting our mission statement.
You can teach creationism without its being Christianity. It can be presented as a higher power. That is where another part of Dover's mission statement comes into play. That part would be in partnership with family and community. You as a parent can teach your child your family's ideology.
-HEATHER GEESEY
