Judge Jones falsely denies speaking publicly about Dover case specifics

An article in World Magazine says,

Liz O'Donnell, a courtroom deputy for Jones, told WORLD the judge may continue making public appearances but will make no comments on the Discovery Institute report. O'Donnell said Jones has always avoided speaking about the case directly , using his sudden celebrity to argue for judicial independence. But in an interview with Pennsylvania public radio following his Dover decision, Jones said that ID "simply doesn't fit within any accepted definition of science" and that "even if you cast it as science, I didn't particularly think it was good science." Such original analysis might have done wonders for his ruling. (emphasis added)

I presume that Judge Jones approves the above statements of his courtroom deputy. As the World Magazine article shows, O'Donnell's assertion that Jones has "always avoided speaking about the case directly" is simply untrue. In his commencement speech at Dickinson College, he spoke about his interpretation of the establishment clause, which was the federal constitutional basis of his decision, and he specifically mentioned the Dover case in connection with that interpretation. It is not possible to get any more specific about the case than that. It was a blatant attempt to defend his Dover decision. He also spoke about the case in his speech to the Anti-Defamation League, but I won't count that because he did not talk about the specifics of the case itself but only talked about his thoughts and feelings about all the publicity and the importance of the case.

The World Magazine article also says,

For the past year, Judge John E. Jones III has ridden a wave of celebrity. From radio talk shows to speech engagements to the cover of Time, the U.S. District Court jurist has used myriad public outlets to trumpet the reasoning behind his December 2005 ruling that intelligent design does not belong in public-school science classrooms.

Regarding the statement that Jones "has used myriad public outlets to trumpet the reasoning behind his December 2005 ruling": I don't know whether or not that statement is an exaggeration. I have complete copies of only two of his speeches -- his ADL speech and his Dickinson College commencement speech. Other than his Dickinson College speech, I am not aware of any speech where he discussed specifics about the case.

Of course, Ed "It's my way or the highway" Brayton again shows his ignorance or dishonesty here. He wrote about Jones,

He has talked in general terms about the high profile nature of the case, and he has used the media attention to educate people on the nature of his job such as the need to follow higher court precedent, but he has said nothing at all to defend the substance of his decision.