The lead JPL defense attorney pointed out Tuesday that several co-workers complained about David Coppedge’s demeanor and responsiveness – people with whom he’d never discussed religion or politics. – Donna Evans, “Laid-Off JPL Worker Discounts Complaints”(Montrose Patch March 20, 2012)
Frustrated with not being able to explain the complaints’ context, a red-faced David Coppedge admitted to the lead defense attorney Tuesday that several JPL employees had griped about his professionalism and ability clear back to 2004.
Only back to 2004? Some of us have been team leads in the1990s and faced similar gripes.
All we ever said was, study our dust then. It worked.
Are court cases about this stuff really a good idea in general?
In “JPL attorneys paint David Coppedge as problem employee” (Pasadena Star News , March 21, 2012), Brian Charles reports, Coppedge acknowledged that he failed to disclose his sale of DVDs, as well as earnings from the business to the Internal Revenue Service or JPL as required by the science laboratory’s policy.
Coppedge said his understanding was the disclosure policy only applied to instances where a conflict of interest arose.
Internal Revenue Service? Aw come on.
7 Replies to “More on the Dave Coppedge trial (that JPL/NASA guy who got fired for giving out ID DVDs)”
I thought it was just budget cuts?
So he was a problem.
To take a mans job requires it be a big problem.
tHats the conclusion of society .
The problem was that these people didn’t like a creationist in the circles that most dislike creationism.
its all about secret motivations and proving them.
Therefore the culture of the workplace there is very relevant.
This is a great thing for creationism(s) as it highlights the complaints, as documented in the movie Expelled, of creationists or those perceived to be.
There is a agenda to control truth in these circles.
It seems its very important.
Cases like this introduce the subject to the public and add when more cases are brought before the public.
tHen the whole structure of prohibition and censorship can be taken on and overthrown.
Creationism(s) must in a free nation be taught in public schools where the issues of origins are taught.
Further subjects attacking religion must allow rebuttal or mutual censorship.
WE are in a historic story of freedom and intellectual striving for truth.
Coppedge should be finished with his testimony, cross-examination and any rebuttals- re-direct or re-cross. I am not sure who or what was up next.
Robert- when layoffs come around they usually get rid of the “problem” employees when possible.
Well, they caught Al Capone that way. Are you suggesting he’s not in that league?
The JPL attorneys must be desperate! And I MEAN desperate.
Thank you for the continued reporting on this important case. They mainstream news media seems to have dropped any coverage of it. I guess the Darwin Lobby finally got to them.
Goldurn it, if this isn’t proof of materialism and evamolution, I don’t know what is!
“I guess the Darwin Lobby finally got to them.”
Persecution complex much??? How do you think that. At the start of the trial Coppedge was the only one having news confrences. News coverage actively continued during his entire testimony. Within a day of him being cross examined news information started to wind down.
Afterall it’s part of some darwinist plot to cut out All media coverage just after Coppedge gets to tell his entire side of things and just before they could present there case. (sarcasm)
the simple reality is that the media GOT BORED. They hoped for a great philisphical battle of wits and what they got was an employment lawsuit with an opinionated 61 year old IT professional
As shown above by the OP Coppedge had compaints about him since 2004, he was argumentative with fellow employees and didn’t listen to instruction. Things he has demonstrated in this trial by arguiing with the judge and ignoring instructions by his own lawyer.
JPL DID NOT FIRE HIM. They laid off 2/3rds of the projects staff. (Did those other 200 people get fired too?) Despite Coppedge minor bit of senority it was deemed that his history of complaints, argumentative behaviour and that others possessed greater knowledge and skills at certain required tasks outweighed his senority.
Long story short. There could be a case out there about “creationist” descriminion however, this isn’t it. Also the continued persecution complex, and wilful mishandling of the facts in order to illiceat outrage may interally bolster your cause but externally it causes everyone to do some simple fact checking.