Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge shoots down Cuccinelli's probe of U.Va. scientist
The Examiner ^ | 8/31/10 | Brian Hughes

Posted on 09/02/2010 8:23:44 AM PDT by BitterKlingon

A judge on Monday thwarted Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's bid to investigate whether a former University of Virginia professor fraudulently obtained public research money by cooking up climate change data.

Cuccinelli, a global warming cynic, sought documents relating to the research of climate scientist Michael Mann, who was behind the so-called "hockey stick" graph in last year's "Climategate scandal."

But Albemarle County Circuit Court Judge Paul M. Peatross Jr. said Cuccinelli provided no "objective basis" that Mann defrauded taxpayers.

"It is not clear what [Mann] did that was misleading, false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the commonwealth of Virginia," Mann ruled....

U.Va. officials cheered the judge's decision, and Mann, who now works at Penn State University, called the ruling "a victory for scientists who live in fear that they may be subject to a politically motivated witch hunt."...

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climategate; courts; cuccinelli; globalwarming; kencuccinelli; lawsuit; mann; michaelmann; tortreform; uva; va; virginia
Cuccinelli seems to have a lot of balls in the air -- inevitably, some are going to get dropped.
1 posted on 09/02/2010 8:23:52 AM PDT by BitterKlingon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

Get dropped because of corrupt judges. Ken C is the real deal.


2 posted on 09/02/2010 8:29:54 AM PDT by Frantzie (Imam Ob*m* & Democrats support the VICTORY MOSQUE & TV supports Imam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

The judge’s logic is fallacious. He is essentially saying “you can’t investigate whether he defrauded taxpayers because you have no proof he defrauded taxpayers.” Well, that’s exactly what an investigation is for.

Were he consistent, he would be hard pressed to deny any other target of a criminal investigation the same result.

I guess unless a criminal were to walk in, confess his crime and bring all the incriminating evidence with him, law enforcement is simply supposed to sit back and do nothing.


3 posted on 09/02/2010 8:34:11 AM PDT by henkster (A broken government does not merit full faith and credit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon
...a victory for scientists who live in fear that they may be subject to a politically motivated witch hunt.".....

...what about a "victory" for American Citizens who have been subjected to a politically motivated "scare and terrorize" campaign perpetrated by some "climate scientists"? .....

....damn you global warming "scientist" frauds..

4 posted on 09/02/2010 8:35:54 AM PDT by B.O. Plenty (Give war a chance...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: henkster

The government can’t simply search your stuff unless they already have enough evidence to get a warrant. That’s Constitutional Law 101.


5 posted on 09/02/2010 8:36:33 AM PDT by BitterKlingon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

Didn’t ask for a search warrant based on probable cause. Instead he was issuing a subpoena for business records. Totally different evidentiary standard, and much lower. It’s not clear from the article whether the subpoena was issued to Mann or to UVa. If issued to UVa (which I suspect) he is seeking records held by a 3rd party (not the target of the investigation), for which there is no requirement for probable cause. By the way, in most law schools, this is covered in Criminal Procedure and not Constitutional Law classes.

I would also like to point out that if the state is funding the research with tax dollars, the state has a paramount interest in discovering how those dollars have been spent by issuing the subpoena to the responsible party, in this case, UVa. While the judge may have made the correct ruling that the AG doesn’t have the standing to go after four grants issued by the Feds, apparently one of those grants was a State of Virginia grant, and as the granting entity I think the state is entitled to discover anything they want to about how the taxpayers money has been spent.


6 posted on 09/02/2010 8:53:44 AM PDT by henkster (A broken government does not merit full faith and credit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
Get dropped because of corrupt judges.

Peatross certainly seems to fit the classical definition of a liberal, 'rat judge - corrupt.

"Don't confuse me with the facts ! I am the sole arbiter in this case, and I know what is right."

Ludicrous.

7 posted on 09/02/2010 8:55:26 AM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

All he has to do is FILE THE CHARGES, Arrest him, Seize his assets and then go fishing for evidence. That is what happens when one of us serf’s is suspected of FRAUD.


8 posted on 09/02/2010 8:59:44 AM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

“The government can’t simply search your stuff unless they already have enough evidence to get a warrant. That’s Constitutional Law 101.”

If the government paid for the “stuff” it ain’t his, its theirs. First rule of taking public money, your research is theirs, not yours. Its really that simple. Ken should just find a friendly judge, it works for Mr. Skittles (see Arizona).


9 posted on 09/02/2010 9:06:09 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw

Refile and not in the Marsupial Magistrate’s Court.

Scientific fraud is exceeding serious because cooked data may be used by public and public officials/public servants to make decisions based upon faulty data.


10 posted on 09/02/2010 9:13:09 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: henkster

As much as I would like to see global warmists held accountable, what you say is not accurate.

The judge did not say ‘proof was needed’. What he said was that there was no clear inference that Mann was defrauding.

In order to conduct an investigation, including ordering records and communications to be turned over, there must be a ‘reasonable suspicion’ that something illegal took place and there must be some initial ‘evidence’ not proof to justify a judge ordering a warrant for search.

Likely, the ‘evidence’ was not clearly articulated by Cuccinelli’s office. However, the damaging emails of earlier this year all show that Mann was involved in subverting the peer review process as well as ‘hiding the decline’. These are ‘ethical’ violations, not necessarily criminal. Hence, the judge’s state “It is not clear...”.

We would need to see the details of Cuccinelli’s requests in order to assess the judge’s ruling.

However, there should be Congressional hearings and investigations into Mann and others, and the outcome of those hearings could possibly then be used by Cuccinelli and other AGs to prosecute the global warming alarmists. For such hearings we will need to wait for a GOP takeover of the House.


11 posted on 09/02/2010 9:20:45 AM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

The Commonwealth’s Senate and House have reason enough to look into this.

Then Ken will have his evidence.


12 posted on 09/02/2010 9:27:32 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

The government can’t simply search your stuff unless they already have enough evidence to get a warrant. That’s Constitutional Law 101.

Oh BS. The "government" in the name of the CG or marine police, powers up and boards my boat every other weekend, to perform a "safety check" or look for underlimit fish; without any "evidence" whatsoever. (If one invokes I am on public waters, then what is the University of Virginia?)

With respect to Mann's activities, this is a totally arbitrary ruling by that Judge, who could just have easily said past activities have shown Mr Mann could be involved in grant fraud, and given his funding is taxpayer money, investigation by "objective" elected officials is indeed warranted.

Totally, totally, arbitrary; just as the "government's" contest of Arizona's 1070B. Those who do not understand that the "Law" is basically an arbitrary legal power play are the same who would turn in Jews to the camps (it was "law"). It occurs every day, every minute in the litigious US. The say in any legal proceeding is the Jury; there can be no more just bottom line than a cross section of the society living with the decisions.

That does not mean one should hate the Judge for that decision, that's his own personal deal, but that's all it is. He is an arbitrary prejudiced non-entity (after all he is most likely a lawyer), who could just as easily be countered. Very Very much like Barack Obama.

13 posted on 09/02/2010 10:07:15 AM PDT by jnsun (The Left: the need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon; livius; DollyCali; IrishCatholic; meyer; SteamShovel; Desdemona; grey_whiskers; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

14 posted on 09/02/2010 10:11:47 AM PDT by steelyourfaith ("Release the Second Chakra !!!!!!!" ... Al Gore, 10/24/06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon; Frantzie; EDINVA; iceskater; xyz123; Corin Stormhands; jla; Flora McDonald; ...

The judge in this case did not disclose his own conflict of interest. That being, that his wife worked with/for Mann at UVA.

http://rightwingliberal.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/judge-who-ruled-mostly-against-cuccinelli-kept-quiet-about-a-conflict-of-interest/


15 posted on 09/02/2010 10:37:30 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (I only read the Constitution for the Articles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon
"It is not clear what [Mann] did that was misleading, false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the commonwealth of Virginia,"

What is not clear? Mann is propagating a fraud. The judge is ruling that it is not fraud to peddle a fraud. This judge is DumBO material.

16 posted on 09/02/2010 10:38:22 AM PDT by depressed in 06 (2010, the beginning of the end of our long national nightmare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

This situation does nothing to improve confidence in the impartiality of the judicial branch.


17 posted on 09/02/2010 10:42:43 AM PDT by iceskater (I am a citizen - not a subject. Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

This is insane. The judge would have known this is a conflict of interest.


18 posted on 09/02/2010 10:58:32 AM PDT by Frantzie (Imam Ob*m* & Democrats support the VICTORY MOSQUE & TV supports Imam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: B.O. Plenty

Solution: Cut off all VA taxpayer subsidies for “research”

Spend the money fixing the roads.


19 posted on 09/02/2010 11:16:01 AM PDT by Ceebass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BitterKlingon

Peatross should have recused himself. He is a lecturer at the UVA law school, thus derives some income from the institution invovled in the suit.

http://www.law.virginia.edu/lawweb/faculty.nsf/FHPbI/1198242


20 posted on 09/02/2010 1:34:24 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

At least Virginia tried.


21 posted on 09/02/2010 2:36:44 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

Judge is currently listed on UVA website as current Lecturer in:
“Trial Advocacy” course that meets each Wednesday.

So much for separation and conflict of interest!


22 posted on 09/06/2010 10:48:39 AM PDT by Phosgood ("Send in the clowns" .. but wait ..............they're here! >..<)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson