Law suit against CA TSchool ext book by Capeem enters a new phase ....
1 view
Skip to first unread message
arr...@ameritech.net
Sep 6, 2008, 12:46:04 AM9/6/08
to Convert2Hinduism
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, arvind@capeem. org <arvind@capeem. org> wrote:
From: arvind@capeem. org <arvind@capeem. org>
Subject: CA textbook lawsuit: Update
To: patil_nagaraj@ yahoo.com
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 9:14 AM
Dear Friend,
Last month, the Discovery phase came to an end in CAPEEM's lawsuit
against the officials of the California Department of Education (CDE)
and members of the State Board of Education (SBE) and we thought this
would be a good time to give you an update on the status of the case.
As you may recall, we first filed the lawsuit in March 2006
pointing out that SBE had adopted textbooks that not only
indoctrinated children with Abrahamic religions but also disparaged
Hinduism. In addition, CDE had used hostile advisers to advice them on
Hinduism had discriminated against Hindus during the adoption process.
The complaint was filed by Venkat Balasubramani, a Seattle based
attorney, and Mike Newdow, a Sacramento based attorney, joined our
legal team in late 2007.
Within a few months of filing our complaint, we had to overcome
two motions to dismiss our lawsuit. The Discovery Process began
towards the end of 2006 after the court ruled in our favor on the
second motion. We served a number of subpoenas to various parties
including textbook publishers, Hotmail, Dalit Freedom Network, Michael
Witzel, Stanley Wolpert, Charles Munger, Dalit Solidarity Forum
operating out of St. Alban's Church in New Jersey , and also sought
documents from the officials of CDE and SBE.
The subpoenas and discovery requests resulted in us obtaining over
25,000 pages of documents. While we obtained several incriminating
documents, we had to file a motion to compel Michael Witzel to part
with documents he withheld. Witzel handed over many documents before
the scheduled hearing in court, but we did not obtain his
communications with third parties unrelated to the dispute as the
judge stated that they were not necessary for us to make our case.
We appealed this ruling, and in July this year, the appeals court
reaffirmed the decision of the lower court and stated that we had
already been given most of what we had asked for. However, Witzel
turned over some more documents including an email uncovering the fact
that the CDE had conducted a secret meeting that was previously
unheard of. This meeting with anti-Hindu groups was in addition to the
secret meeting that CDE had conducted with Witzel and others.
Among the documents that we received from other sources, we found
extensive links between churches and key people involved in the
adoption process. The counsel for CDE was in touch with her pastor and
other emails showed that the CDE staff acted to assign arbitrary dates
to biblical events. Curriculum Commissioner Charles Munger reported
his victory to a member of his religious group and also gave detailed
instructions to the counsel of CDE on how to handle questions
regarding the description of the crucifixion of Jesus.
We also uncovered a link between Michael Witzel and Dalit Freedom
Network (DFN), a group that operates out of a church in Colorado .
Witzel coordinated his campaign with DFN and planned in advance the
details of what would be spoken at meetings. Witzel also sent an email
alerting DFN to the description of their organization on Wikipedia and
stated that whenever he erased the description, it kept coming back.
An office bearer of DFN followed up on this email by saying that she
did not want to "start being identified as a missions organization"
and wanted to know if they could edit it themselves.
In March this year, we informed you that the court had rejected
the defendants' motion to dismiss the case. In that motion, the
defendants had alleged that we had the same interests as the Hindu
American Foundation (HAF) and were in privity with them. We argued
that we represented different interests and that the nature of our
lawsuit was different from the HAF lawsuit.
After we sent you that message, there has been a tremendous amount
of activity in the lawsuit. The defendants filed a motion to
reconsider the judgment and the judge once again ruled in our favor
saying that the defendants had merely rehashed their arguments.
In the past few weeks, we conducted a number of depositions. Among
those whom we deposed were CDE staff member Tom Adams, former Chair of
SBE Ruth Green, Curriculum Commissioner Charles Munger, Michael Witzel
and other staff members of CDE. We also obtained a signed statement
from CDE's expert Stanley Wolpert. After carefully reviewing the data
in our possession, we decided not to depose James Heitzman as we
determined that despite his bias, he was not that important and we
would gain nothing new from deposing him. Moreover, the defendants'
attorneys agreed to let us use documents related to Heitzman as
evidence without additional identification from him.
On our side, a director of CAPEEM and two parents whose names we
submitted as representative parents were deposed. The defendants also
deposed their own expert Prof. Shiva Bajpai.
Finally, we filed a motion to compel the defendants to hand over a
few more documents that were withheld. We withdrew the motion after
they agreed to give us the documents we sought from them.
The resource intensive Discovery Process came to an end a few days
ago and it would not have been possible for us to successfully
complete this phase without your support. Last year at this time, we
were short of funds and appealed to you for your support after putting
the case on hold and entering into settlement talks.
This week, as the case enters the next phase, we will put forward
the names of our experts and turn in their reports. Although the
Discovery phase was the most expensive part of the lawsuit, the
remaining part of the lawsuit will also use up substantial resources.
We look forward to your renewed support and hope you will donate
liberally and help make this case a success.
You can donate to CAPEEM by writing a check in favor of CAPEEM and
mailing it to
CAPEEM
PO Box 280442
Northridge , CA 91328
You can also donate online by going to http://www.capeem. org and
clicking on the link to donate. CAPEEM is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt
organization with tax ID 56-2565521.
Thank you,
Arvind Kumar
Director, California Parents for the Equalization of Educational
Materials
From: arvind@capeem. org <arvind@capeem. org>
Subject: CA textbook lawsuit: Update
To: patil_nagaraj@ yahoo.com
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 9:14 AM
Dear Friend,
Last month, the Discovery phase came to an end in CAPEEM's lawsuit
against the officials of the California Department of Education (CDE)
and members of the State Board of Education (SBE) and we thought this
would be a good time to give you an update on the status of the case.
As you may recall, we first filed the lawsuit in March 2006
pointing out that SBE had adopted textbooks that not only
indoctrinated children with Abrahamic religions but also disparaged
Hinduism. In addition, CDE had used hostile advisers to advice them on
Hinduism had discriminated against Hindus during the adoption process.
The complaint was filed by Venkat Balasubramani, a Seattle based
attorney, and Mike Newdow, a Sacramento based attorney, joined our
legal team in late 2007.
Within a few months of filing our complaint, we had to overcome
two motions to dismiss our lawsuit. The Discovery Process began
towards the end of 2006 after the court ruled in our favor on the
second motion. We served a number of subpoenas to various parties
including textbook publishers, Hotmail, Dalit Freedom Network, Michael
Witzel, Stanley Wolpert, Charles Munger, Dalit Solidarity Forum
operating out of St. Alban's Church in New Jersey , and also sought
documents from the officials of CDE and SBE.
The subpoenas and discovery requests resulted in us obtaining over
25,000 pages of documents. While we obtained several incriminating
documents, we had to file a motion to compel Michael Witzel to part
with documents he withheld. Witzel handed over many documents before
the scheduled hearing in court, but we did not obtain his
communications with third parties unrelated to the dispute as the
judge stated that they were not necessary for us to make our case.
We appealed this ruling, and in July this year, the appeals court
reaffirmed the decision of the lower court and stated that we had
already been given most of what we had asked for. However, Witzel
turned over some more documents including an email uncovering the fact
that the CDE had conducted a secret meeting that was previously
unheard of. This meeting with anti-Hindu groups was in addition to the
secret meeting that CDE had conducted with Witzel and others.
Among the documents that we received from other sources, we found
extensive links between churches and key people involved in the
adoption process. The counsel for CDE was in touch with her pastor and
other emails showed that the CDE staff acted to assign arbitrary dates
to biblical events. Curriculum Commissioner Charles Munger reported
his victory to a member of his religious group and also gave detailed
instructions to the counsel of CDE on how to handle questions
regarding the description of the crucifixion of Jesus.
We also uncovered a link between Michael Witzel and Dalit Freedom
Network (DFN), a group that operates out of a church in Colorado .
Witzel coordinated his campaign with DFN and planned in advance the
details of what would be spoken at meetings. Witzel also sent an email
alerting DFN to the description of their organization on Wikipedia and
stated that whenever he erased the description, it kept coming back.
An office bearer of DFN followed up on this email by saying that she
did not want to "start being identified as a missions organization"
and wanted to know if they could edit it themselves.
In March this year, we informed you that the court had rejected
the defendants' motion to dismiss the case. In that motion, the
defendants had alleged that we had the same interests as the Hindu
American Foundation (HAF) and were in privity with them. We argued
that we represented different interests and that the nature of our
lawsuit was different from the HAF lawsuit.
After we sent you that message, there has been a tremendous amount
of activity in the lawsuit. The defendants filed a motion to
reconsider the judgment and the judge once again ruled in our favor
saying that the defendants had merely rehashed their arguments.
In the past few weeks, we conducted a number of depositions. Among
those whom we deposed were CDE staff member Tom Adams, former Chair of
SBE Ruth Green, Curriculum Commissioner Charles Munger, Michael Witzel
and other staff members of CDE. We also obtained a signed statement
from CDE's expert Stanley Wolpert. After carefully reviewing the data
in our possession, we decided not to depose James Heitzman as we
determined that despite his bias, he was not that important and we
would gain nothing new from deposing him. Moreover, the defendants'
attorneys agreed to let us use documents related to Heitzman as
evidence without additional identification from him.
On our side, a director of CAPEEM and two parents whose names we
submitted as representative parents were deposed. The defendants also
deposed their own expert Prof. Shiva Bajpai.
Finally, we filed a motion to compel the defendants to hand over a
few more documents that were withheld. We withdrew the motion after
they agreed to give us the documents we sought from them.
The resource intensive Discovery Process came to an end a few days
ago and it would not have been possible for us to successfully
complete this phase without your support. Last year at this time, we
were short of funds and appealed to you for your support after putting
the case on hold and entering into settlement talks.
This week, as the case enters the next phase, we will put forward
the names of our experts and turn in their reports. Although the
Discovery phase was the most expensive part of the lawsuit, the
remaining part of the lawsuit will also use up substantial resources.
We look forward to your renewed support and hope you will donate
liberally and help make this case a success.
You can donate to CAPEEM by writing a check in favor of CAPEEM and
mailing it to
CAPEEM
PO Box 280442
Northridge , CA 91328
You can also donate online by going to http://www.capeem. org and
clicking on the link to donate. CAPEEM is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt
organization with tax ID 56-2565521.
Thank you,
Arvind Kumar
Director, California Parents for the Equalization of Educational
Materials
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages