Not having read the transcript, I don't know how the experts introduced themselves or wanted to be addressed or were addressed by counsel.  I suspect that Judge Jones was just following the testimony on this one. In my experience judges always referred to the witnesses as they requested to be referred to.  Also, I don't think there is much difference between the two in the mind of most folk.  Some professors prefer "Professor" because it is more exclusive set, but some prefer "Dr." because they think it sounds more prestigious and separates them from the non-doctor professors. 

At Howard University, in most departments Dr. is the typical appellation.  Not in the law school though, though we all have J.Ds.

So yes, IMO you are reading too much into it.

On Dec 21, 2005, at 2:10 PM, Steve Monsma wrote:

I've just finished reading all 139 pages.  I will  resist commenting on the
substance of Judge Jones' opinion, but I was struck by one thing.  Without
exception, when referring to the plaintiffs' expert witnesses (such as Miller
and Padian), he refers to them as Dr. Miller, Dr. Padian or Drs. Miller and
Padian.  When referring to the defendants' expert witnesses (such as Behe and
Munnich) he refers to them as Professor Behe, Professor Minnich,, or Professors
Behe and Munnich.  (I've checked and both Behe and Minnich have earned
doctorates.)

Assuming (as I would) that holding a doctorate gives one more credibility than
simply being a professor at some college or university, is this consistent use
of titles an indication of a  bias on Judge Jones' part?  Or am I reading too
much into this?  Is there some more innocent explanation?

Stephen Monsma



_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.

-- 

Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:  202-806-8017

Howard University School of Law                     fax:  202-806-8567

2900 Van Ness Street NW                   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Washington, DC  20008   http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/


"I do not at all resent criticism, even when, for the sake of emphasis, it for a time parts company with reality."


Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons, 1941



_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to