Coalition of News Agencies Wants Prop 8 Trial Tapes Released: Sign the Petition

I received the following e-mail this morning from The American Foundation for Equal Rights:

In the lead up to the Prop 8 trial last year, the opponents of Marriage Equality filed a motion to keep the video record of the preceding sealed. They were so afraid to let the public see them commit perjury that many of their key witnesses dropped out.

Click here to add your voice to the fight for Marriage Equality and full disclosure of the lies that are being told about us in open court. These are the same lies that NOM's Maggie Gallagher continues to tell in the halls of congress. The American people have the right to know that the lies beings used against our community have been discredited in federal court.

 Sign the petition and share it with your friends, family, coworkers, church members and anyone else who believes in Marriage Equality and open justice.

Home

Related articles

• Will Prop 8 Tapes Be Available for Everyone? (bilerico.com)
• Media Files Motion Seeking Release of Prop 8 Case Video (towleroad.com)
• Call to release the tapes of the Prop 8 trial (secularnewsdaily.com)
• Judge Walker Explains Use Of Prop 8 Trial Videos; Pro-Marriage Equality Lawyers File Motion For Release Of All Tapes (towleroad.com)

Prop 8 Trial Re-entactment: Day 1, Part 3 (Video)

Here's the latest installment of the re-enactment of Perry vs. Schwarzenneger. This episode continues with the opening testimony of the plaintiffs who willingly put their lives up for public scrutiny in order to fight for our rights. It was so wrong for the Supreme Court to bar video recording of this historic event.

I don't mean to devalue the efforts of the film makers. They did an awesome job putting this together, but the audio is weak in places and the actors appear to be reading their lines. And why do the judge and all the attorneys seem so gay?

First Prop 8 Trial Re-Enactment Videos Now Online (video)

Image via Wikipedia

The first two installments of the federal challenge to California's Proposition 8, Perry vs. Schwarzenegger are now available for viewing at marriagetrial.com and on the Marriage Trial channel on YouTube. The two videos, each over an hour long, cover day 1 of the trial in two parts. The script was put together based on transcripts of live blogging done from the courtroom by MarriageTrialTracker.com and Firedog Lake.

The cast is largely made up of unknowns, however you may recognize Adrienne Barbeau as expert witness Dr. Letitia Peplau, professor of psychology at UCLA and Tess Harper, in the roll of Sandy Stier, one of the plaintiffs in the case.

I promised I'd post them, so here they are:

Related articles by Zemanta

• Prop 8 Trial: The Reenactment (alan.com)
• Supremes Nix Youtube in Prop 8 Trial (healthcarebs.com)
• Prop. 8 Trial Caught On Tape (Sort Of) (blogs.wsj.com)
• Calif. Gay Marriage Trial Re-Enacted on Internet (abcnews.go.com)

Prop 8 Trial, Day 8: Boycotts, Vandals and "The Gathering Storm"

Image via Wikipedia

In trying to keep you all informed with daily updates of the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger Prop 8 challenge in California, my biggest obstacle is that I'm not a lawyer and I don't speak legalese so I've had to rely on daily summaries done by other bloggers. Today, I thought I'd try to do the wrap-up of yesterday's highlights myself. (Wish me luck.)

The day started off with a continuation of cross-examination of Prof. Gary Segura who provided expert testimony about the political powerlessness of Gays and Lesbians, despite the bits and pieces of progress we've made. Their side tried to suggest that when California approved domestic partnerships, our community cheered, Segura pointed out that DP's are preferable to having no rights, not preferable to full marriage rights.


The pro-H8 tried to show that when people voted according to their religious beliefs, they were not being bigoted or homophobic. They also tried to use the calls for boycotts of businesses that supported Prop 8 as a reason why people voted for Prop 8. Segura pointed out that boycotts are a tool used by the politically powerless and are an American tradition going back to the Boston Tea Party and were successfully used by African-Americans during the Civil Rights Movement.

Their side showed news footage detailing isolated incidents of vandalism, fist fights and theft of "Yes On 8" yard signs as proof that people voted for Prop 8 because they were afraid of gays. Segura explained that sometimes individuals behave badly and that even though it's bad P.R. for the movement, it was not enough to significantly effect the way people voted. He also pointed out that many of these events happened after the vote.

Taking advantage of that fact that the pro-H8 side had introduced evidence that occurred after Prop 8 was voted into law, attorneys for the plaintiffs introduced the notorious ad "The Gathering Storm", produced by The National Organization for Marriage, into evidence to illustrate the misinformation and scare tactics used by proponents of the ballot measure to gain support for their side.

The afternoon session saw the the most action as Hak-Shing William “Bill” Tam was called as a hostile witness. Tam, an evangelical Christian, wrote the verbiage on the Prop 8 ballot and was heavily involved with orchestrating events in support of Prop 8, including creation of a website for Asian-Americans that posted a story he wrote with the headline, "Studies Show That Homosexuality Is Linked to Pedophilia". Tam was one five Prop 8 proponents who tried to get out of having to before the trial started.

The pro-h8 side has tried to distance themselves from Tam because his involvement shows that religious-based homophobia was the driving force behind the ballot measure.

To follow the trial updates as they occur, click the Prop 8 Trial Tracker links at the top, right of the page.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Prop 8 Trial - The Most Important Trial in (LGBT) History - (lezgetreal.com)
• Rick Jacobs: Prop 8 on trial: Justice and equality in the age of the Internet (huffingtonpost.com)

Prop 8 Trial, Day 7: "Explosive" Documents Reveal LDS Involvement in Prop 8

We've known almost since the beginning that the LDS (Mormon) Church was heavily involved in financing and orchestrating the effort to pass Prop 8, although they have tried play it down have and outright lied about their behind the scenes activities.

Rick Jacobs continues his live blogging for the Courage Campaign from the trial in San Francisco. In Wednesday afternoon's session, documents in the form of letters and e-mails between the Prop 8 campaign and the LDS, Catholic and certain evangelical churches were introduced as evidence outlining the official talking points regarding the churches' pro-H8 activities.

From prop8trialtracker.com: For example, one letter indicated that the LDS church had identified a volunteer for the campaign in every single zip code. This was a church document that was in the hands of a Prop 8 campaign official, and thus was discoverable. Andy Pugno, the general council for ProtectMarriage.com tried his darnedest to get Judge Walker to exclude it, but failed. 

From Rick’s liveblog:
    Pugno: Objects because document will be revealing.

    Judge: Not to make light of this, but the reason people want to produce documents is that they are revealing.

    Boutrous: It’s from an outsider to the core group. We are attempting to show the level of coordination with groups that Protect Marriage says were not even affiliated with the campaign.

(Rick's comment) This is perhaps the most explosive bit of all, from a document between the LDS Church and the campaign:

    "With respect to Prop. 8 campaign, key talking points will come from campaign, but cautious, strategic, not to take the lead so as to provide plausible deniability or respectable distance so as not to show that church is directly involved."

(Rick's comments) Get that? The LDS Church intentionally worked to hide behind the scenes to disguise their involvement in the public realm. The LDS Church is well aware that the general public does not have the most favorable opinion of them. Attention on their involvement could have hurt their cause, namely passing Prop 8.

Prop 8 Re-enactment Video Scheduled for Posting on Wednesday

According to a press release, video of the re-enactment of Perry vs. Schwarzenegger will be online beginning Wednesday, January 20, 2010. I'll post as much of it here as possible.

For Immediate Release


Proposition 8 Trial Re-enactment Brings Closed Proceedings to the Viewing Public

January 18, 2010 (Los Angeles) -- Last Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling blocking indefinitely the broadcast of a video feed from the San Francisco Federal Court trial challenging California’s Proposition 8.  Within a few hours, a film production team in Los Angeles was readying a script from court transcripts, securing a courtroom set and casting actors in an effort to bring the trial to the people by way of re-enactment.

“We both jumped in and started calling all of our contacts… and never looked back,” says John Ireland, who is co-producing the “made for the web” series with actor and producer, John Ainsworth.  “John and I both agreed that time is short but the time is now.  We have collected a top-notch group of people to tell this story, so the world can see it.”  Both men have been in the documentary and entertainment business for years.

“I was glued to the Courage Campaign’s Prop 8 Trial Tracker when John and I started talking about producing a re-enactment to put on the web.  I wanted to know what was happening in the courtroom and that’s when I knew we needed to produce this.” Ainsworth noted.

The production is using professional actors and, where possible, they are casting as close to the appearance of the real people the actors portray.

The team is being advised by constitutional law scholar and Professor, David B. Cruz, from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, which has made the replica courtroom available.  He is reviewing scripts and advising on courtroom dynamics and flow.  "People across the country and around the world were eager to watch this trial unfold, so I was eager to help make it accessible after the Supreme Court took the unusual step of blocking broadcast,” Cruz said.

Ireland is confident that a sizable audience is ready to tune in.  He says, “There is a huge buzz on the web about this trial.  I think a lot of people across our country were poised to watch the opening statements on the first day.  When access was blocked, the thirst for information just grew exponentially.”

According to Ainsworth, they should have last week’s five episodes “in the can” within a few days.  They will assemble a script each new trial day, notify the relevant actors and film that day’s testimony late into the night.  Ainsworth adds, “We are moving swiftly, so that more Americans can see our government in action as it reviews this landmark case.”

Learn more at:
     www.MarriageTrial.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Prop 8 Trial to be Aired on YouTube... Reenacted by Actors (laist.com)
• Final Decision: Supreme Court Blocks Taping of Prop 8 Trial (laist.com)

Repub. Mayor of San Diego to Testify for Gay Marriage in Prop 8 Trial

Image via Wikipedia

The San Diego Union reports that the Republican mayor of San Diego, Jerry Sanders, will take the stand on Tuesday to testify about why same-sex marriage is important from a government perspective.

According to the Union, The mayor is set to testify at 8:30 a.m., and address the media afterwards on the courthouse steps in San Francisco, spokesman Darren Pudgil said.

Sanders, a Republican, has gained the respect of gay-rights advocates -- and the animosity of opponents -- with his turnaround on the issue. He announced in December 2007 that he would no longer oppose marriage rights for gays, including his lesbian daughter.

"He's testifying essentially on his experience on the issue and why he believes marriage equality is important from a government perspective," Pudgil said.

Why the Prop 8 challenge matters to LGBT Virginians

With the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger court challenge to California's Proposition 8 in full swing, I've been reflecting on what it means to LGBT's living under the repressive laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and what the final result could mean for us here. A lot of Thursday's testimony revolved around the daily stresses caused by discrimination and how the impact is real, but hard to quantify.

I started thinking about all the little events that happen daily to LGBT people that add up over time to make life so much more difficult for us. I remember eight years ago when Paul and I bought our house. Paul found the place first and had already looked around. When it came time for me to see it, we toured the grounds with the owner, an older man, blue collar type who was selling it without a Realtor and, therefore, was not constrained by the Realtor Code of Ethics. In order to avoid potential "issues", Paul did all the talking. If I had questions, I passed them to Paul, who would then ask the owner.

When we had been in the house for a year or two and decided to do some remodeling, we had four contractors come by to look the place over. Each promised to get back to us within a few days with estimates. We never heard back from any of them and they never returned our repeated phone calls. Is this a case of contractors being unreliable or is it homophobia? How do do you tell the difference? When we have a plumber to the house now, it's when I'm at work or make myself scarce for a couple of hours.

Just yesterday, I had a discussion with two of my coworkers about the new taxes reflected on their pay stubs. The two women, one straight, one lesbian, had each added their respective partners to their health insurance and were being taxed on the premiums being deducted from their paychecks. Both of my friends, like most of us these days, are on a very tight budget and the slightest upset can send the family household into a tailspin. I've had Paul on my insurance for a few years now. My response was, "welcome to my world."

Married workers don't get taxed for adding their spouses to their coverage.

We can't legally use the words husband or wife, but the word "partner" is so vague and has the ring of a business arrangement to it. When  you've been living together for several years, the words "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" sound so high school. We're not dating, we're building a life together. Husband or wife are the only words that fit.

The worst, for me, is when someone I've known for years, who knows I'm in a committed 10-year relationship, refers to Paul as my friend. I usually tell them, "he's not my friend, he's my husband." They generally don't know how to react to that. I just smile to myself as I walk away.

Every new encounter, whether business or personal brings with it the decision of how out we want to be. Buying a new mattress, checking into a hotel, any trip to Home Depot or the grocery store, starting a new job, moving into a new neighborhood or filling out any form that asks about your marital status all present people we don't know -- and may never meet again -- a glimpse of our personal lives. Each of these situations has the potential to make us feel welcome and respected or to reinforce the notion that we don't fit it and are not as good as our heterosexual neighbors. Most of us are out and proud and take the honest approach or take it in stride and just brush it off, but sometimes you just resent the intrusion.

My relationship with my "partner" is none of their business, or at least it shouldn't be. That's the irony of our cause. In order for our personal, private lives to receive legal recognition and our God-given rights to be respected, we must make the private very public. In doing so, we never know what reaction we'll get from casual encounters with strangers. Will they be respectful? Will they be rude or ignore us when all we want is a little customer service? Will their religious beliefs cause them to turn ugly and judgmental? Will we be attacked on the street for holding each others' hand or appearing overly familiar with each other?

The challenge to Prop 8 will eventually end in the U.S. Supreme Court. Hopefully, the Obama administration will have an opportunity to shift the balance of the court in our favor with a new appointment before we have our day in the highest court in the land. If we win, doors open for all LGBT Americans. The Defense of Marriage Act and the Virginia Marriage Amendment and others like it around the country, will effectively become null and void. The legal change will be immediate, but the cultural change will take time.

If we lose, it's back to square one. It took two Supreme Court challenges, nearly 20 years apart, to get anti-sodomy laws ruled unconstitutional, yet homophobia not only still exists, but has reached a fevered pitch.

Over time we develop a thick skin and survival tactics that straight couples never have to. This mindset has become so much a part of who we are and how we interact with straight society, that we hardly think about it consciously any more. It makes us suspicious, less trusting and less connected to the larger community in which we live and it just plain sucks.