Since the action left off with video of Hak-Shing William Tam’s damning deposition, it seems only fitting to post something I wrote elsewhere, which should drive home the importance of Tam’s depo for those unfamiliar with him, with his revolting homophobia, and with the further damage his testimony will do to the Anti-Gays’ (so far nonexistent) case:
The Real Reason for the Desperation to
Block Televising the Prop 8 Trial
January 8, 2010
You’ve heard this much already:
Witnesses for the defense in the Proposition 8 trial, due to begin Monday, January 11, with delayed coverage via YouTube, are threatening (and, apparently, in some cases) begging to withdraw from testifying.
Why? The official excuse: They’re afraid such exposure will open them up to harrassment, even violence, from those horrible, radical, militant homosexuals.
Never mind that there has been no reliably documented violence against marriage equality foes. Oh, you’ll hear plenty of stories, all apocryphal and specious at best. (Did you hear the one about the phantom Super-Gay who managed to grab 75 “Yes On 8″ yard signs, punch a poor, defenseless champion of moral values, and then disappear on foot, without a trace?)
Never mind what I like to call… lies.
And never mind all the obvious questions, such as:
“If your name and testimony are going to be part of the public record anyway, what difference is a little TV exposure going to make now?”
and
“Gee, you guys sure were happy to fill the airwaves with your anti-gay screeds, from appearing on ‘Dr. Phil’ to proudly posting your own hate rallies on YouTube. Why are you going shy all of a sudden?”
and
“Are you saying you don’t really stand by everything you said you did?”
No, never mind all that. The real reason is this:
If these bigots are forced, under oath, to own up to all the breathtaking lies they spewed throughout the Prop 8 campaign, they will have made the plantiffs’ case for them, hands down.
Take Mr. Hak-Shing William Tam, one of the original pro-H8 proponents who volunteered “to become a defendant in the case,” and “is now asking to be removed from the case.”
“On Friday, Tam told U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker that he fears for his and his family’s safety. In his court filing, Tam’s lawyers say the trial will bring him unwanted publicity and expose him to retribution from gay marriage supporters.
“Tam also says the case has been more time-consuming and more intrusive into his personal life than expected.” (source)
I’ll wait while you enjoy a good belly laugh at Mr. Tam’s whining about the intrusion into his personal life. (Isn’t cognitive dissonance a wondrous thing to behold?)
All done? Good.
Now, if you are tempted to take Mr. Tam’s concerns at face value, consider this:
Judge Vaughn Walker was very specific about the evidence he wanted to see from the plaintiffs (the good guys). Of particular note is proof that the campaign for Proposition 8 was based on anti-gay sentiment; in other words, did the proponents exploit homophobia (as opposed to making the case that marriage equality posed a tangible detriment to society at large) in order to sway voters to pass the initiative?
That part of the order, my friends, is easier than shooting fish in a barrel. I could post a laundry list of such evidence mostly from memory by now, but I would rather direct your attention to a lengthy PDF file, Plaintiffs’ Trial Exhibit List in Perry v Schwarzenneger, which lists nearly 2,000 pieces of evidence, from prop-Prop 8 press releases to slate mailers to YouTube videos to interview transcripts to depositions and far, far beyond.
Seriously, click the link. Just skim through it. Page after page. Item after item. Bask in it for a moment.
Earlier, I wrote: “If these bigots are forced, under oath, to own up to all the breathtaking lies they spewed throughout the Prop 8 campaign…”
Without all those reams of evidence staring them in the face, the defense witnesses could, of course, perjure themselves — and ask God’s forgiveness later, which would make everything all right (Mormons, especially, have lying for a “good cause,” or Lying for the Lord, down to a science) — and considering how much they’ve lied their asses off already, I wouldn’t think a little thing like perjury would bother their washed-in-the-blood consciences a bit.
But now they can’t lie. They are on tape, in print, on record.
When forced to confront their own statements, they must, else risk a perjury charge, be forced to make the plantiffs’ case. Hands down.
And here’s the extra-added bonus: They are going to be forced to expose themselves as delusional lunatics.
Take our friend, Mr. Tam:
“In the run-up to the Prop. 8 vote, Tam told supporters that if the measure didn’t pass, ‘Every child, when growing up, would fantasize marrying someone of the same sex’ and that the ‘gay agenda’ included ‘legaliz[ing] sex with children.’ He also warned about each state falling one by one into the hands of Satan.” (source)
Mr. Tam, if you were the sole witness for the defense, you would make the case for the plaintiffs, all on your own little lonesome.
I cannot wait to see you take the stand.
Later, I was asked if there were “any legal loopholes for the bigots to win with”; I replied (and am posting it here for the record, so we can see later if my predictions bear out):
IANAL, but none as far as I can see after poring over all the briefs and analyses by people far better versed than I.
The H8ers have won a “gimme” here and there — such as not being ordered to release all their internal campaign emails (no big deal, AFAIC) — but nothing I can see that should have any effect on the outcome.
I predict Olson-Boies will win this one hands down — and then, as the case moves up the appeals ladder, our chances of continuing to win will get smaller and smaller.
And with the makeup of the current SCOTUS, we’re pretty much screwed. OTOH, if by some miracle, the justices actually do their jobs and follow the law as written, they will have no choice but to uphold Judge Walker’s original decision (which I can’t help but believe will be the first, if the only, win for us).
When it gets that far, it’s all going to rest on Justice Kennedy’s shoulders — and he’s nearly impossible to predict, even though he did write the majority opinion on Lawrence v. Texas ([something] I didn’t expect we’d win at all). So that’s something, but I’m not going to pin my hopes on him. Otherwise, I believe it’s going to end up 4 to 4, with Kennedy responsible for the most sweeping civil-rights decision (good or bad) since Loving v. Virginia.
The only thing that gives me any hope at all is the presence of Ted Olson. If I were the praying sort, I’d be praying every minute of the day for his continued good health (it’s going to be a long fight) — and for his wisdom to stay out of dark alleys and small planes.
Posted by: Sapphocrat
Tweet This Post!
Filed Under: California, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Proposition 8
