Chuck Baldwin
Bill Pryor's Shocking Comments During Roy Moore's "Trial"
Fri Feb 27 02:58:28 2004
64.140.158.179

The Transcript of the Trial of Chief Justice Roy Moore, Including Bill Pryor's Cross Examination

Also read Chuck Baldwin's eye-witness account of the trial.


The American Inquisition Has Begun by Chuck Baldwin

Bill Pryor's Shocking Comments During Roy Moore's "Trial"
by Chuck Baldwin
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/pryor_comments.html

Cross-examination of Chief Justice Roy Moore
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/RoyMoore_transcript_x.html
Here is a copy of the court transcript of Attorney-General Bill Pryor's cross-examination of Chief Justice Roy Moore


PUBLIC NOTICE RE: ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT COPY CERTIFIABILITY WARNING: An electronic transmission and/or hard copy of the transcript of proceedings is deemed certifiable only to the extent that the reader of this message is viewing a first-generation authorized transmission. All subsequent transmissions of this first-generation electronic copy and all copies printed therefrom are unauthorized and non-certifiable, and the Reporter assumes no responsibility for consequences stemming from the use of such unauthorized non-certifiable copy. Responsibility for such consequences is that of the person or organization whose use of a non-certifiable unauthorized transmission or printed copy creates those consequences, including civil liability arising therefrom. No portion of this file may be redistributed or resold without permission of Jeana S. Boggs, Boggs Reporting & Video, 492 South Court Street, Montgomery, AL, 36104, 334.264.6227.

For a certified copy, please contact Boggs Reporting & Video at the above address or e-mail: boggsreporters@aol.com

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIARY

STATE OF ALABAMA

CASE NO. 33




IN THE MATTER OF:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROY MOORE



** *


EXCERPT TESTIMONY AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE

THE STATE OF ALABAMA COURT OF THE JUDICIARY, before

Jeana S. Boggs, Certified Court Reporter and Notary

Public, in the Alabama Supreme Court Courtroom, 300

Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama, commencing at

approximately 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, November 12, 2003.



APPEARANCE

COURT OF THE JUDICIARY:

HONORABLE WILLIAM D. MELTON

HONORABLE SUE H. MCINNISH

HONORABLE JOHN L. DOBSON

HONORABLE J. SCOTT VOWELL

HONORABLE WILLIAM C. THOMPSON

HONORABLE ROBERT G. KENDALL

HONORABLE JAMES L. NORTH

HONORABLE SAM JONES

HONORABLE JOHN V. DENSON

FOR CHIEF JUSTICE ROY MOORE:

HONORABLE MICHAEL E. JONES

Attorney At Law

JONES & SPORT

P. O. Box 367

Luverne, Alabama 36049

334.335.6534

AND


HONORABLE TERRY BUTTS

Attorney At Law

CERVERA, RALPH & BUTTS

914 S. Brundidge

P. O. Box 325

Troy, Alabama 36081



FOR THE STATE OF ALABAMA:

HONORABLE WILLIAM H. PRYOR

Attorney General

AND

HONORABLE JOHN GIBBS

Assistant Attorney General

STATE OF ALABAMA

11 South Union Street

Montgomery, Alabama 36130

334.242.7300



** *






MR. PRYOR: Your Honor, I would like to

have one housecleaning measure

taken care of.

HON. THOMPSON: Okay.

MR. PRYOR: The last exhibit that the

Chief Justice offered is a House

Appropriations Bill that is now

pending in the United States

Senate, and I just wanted the

record to accurately reflect that

that is a bill -- an

Appropriations Bill that passed

the House. It has not passed the

Senate of the United States. It

has not become law. We do not

object to its admission. We just

wanted the Court to be aware of

its exact status. Do I need to

repeat it?

HON. VOWELL: Do you agree with that?

MR. JONES: Yes, sir. I can verify

that it has passed in the House,

so that's fine with me. Yes, sir.

One other thing, Your Honor, I had

some more copies of these I am

going to give to the clerk. This

is an exhibit we have already

entered and that's just -- makes

copies for everybody.

HON. THOMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Jones.

Could we have the witness return

to the stand.

MR. JONES: He is on his way back, Your

Honor. There he is.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. PRYOR:

Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Chief Justice.

A: Good afternoon, Mr. Attorney General.

Q: Mr. Chief Justice, I believe you testified

on direct examination that you did not

remove the monument because to do so would

require you to violate the First Amendment,

your Oath of office, and the Ten

Commandments?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: While the Glassroth case was pending in the

Federal courts after you were sued in the

U. S. District Court in the Middle District

of Alabama, you had attorneys represent you

in that court; isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall that they presented arguments

on your behalf in those courts?

A: Yes.

Q: One of the arguments that they made on your

behalf was that the monument was not a law

respecting an establishment of religion in

violation of the First Amendment; isn't that

right?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: You made that argument in the District

Courts, didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you made it in the Eleventh Circuit,

didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you made that argument in the Supreme

Court of the United States?

A: Well, we submitted that on --

Q: Right.

A: Well, we asked for a petition for a writ of

certiorari on other grounds; in other words,

if that they had acquired on a “Lemon test,”

but that was an argument we would have

made --

Q: Right?

A: -- in the United States Supreme Court.

Q: Right. You asked the Court -- the Supreme

Court of the United States to hear --

A: Yes.

Q: -- your case and to hear that argument;

isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: The District Court disagreed with your

argument; isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And the Eleventh Circuit disagreed with your

argument?

A: Yes.

Q: And the Supreme Court of the United States

decided not to hear your case; isn't that

right?

A: Yes.

Q: You also presented an argument to the

District Court about your Oath, didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you presented that argument in the

Eleventh Circuit, didn't you?

A: I did.

Q: And in your petition to the Supreme Court of

the United States, you asked them to hear

that argument, didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: And each of those -- well, let me start

first.

The District Court disagreed with

that argument; isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And the Eleventh Circuit disagreed with that

argument?

A: Yes.

Q: And the Supreme Court of the United States

decided not to hear your case?

A: Yes.

Q: Finally, as to your argument that the

injunction violated to the Tenth Amendment,

you presented that argument in the District

Court, didn't you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you presented it in the Eleventh

Circuit, didn't you?

A: I did.

Q: And it was one of the points that you made

in your petition to the Supreme Court of the

United States when you asked them to hear

your case, wasn't it?

A: Writ of mandamus -- I think that it was a --

Q: And the District Court disagreed with your

argument, isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And the Eleventh Circuit disagreed with the

argument; isn't that right?

A: Yes.

Q: And the U. S. Supreme Court decided not to

hear your appeal?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, earlier you also testified, I believe,

that when the mandate was returned to the

District Court, that it was your

understanding that you should pursue the

appellate process and the District Court

should not enter an injunction; isn't that

right?

A: Well, repeat that again, please.

Q: It was your understanding that, when the

mandate came back to the District Court,

that you were to pursue your appellate

process --

A: Yes.

Q: -- and the District Court was not to enter

an injunction of the kind that it entered on

August 5th, isn't that right?

A: Well, the District Court had already entered

an injunction, but they had stayed the

injunction and there was a stay in effect

when the mandate came down.

Q: But you didn't think that the District Court

should enter the injunction that it did

on August 5th?

A: Not lift the stay. Right. I did not think

that they should have lifted the stay to

impose the injunction after the mandate came

down.

Q: Okay. You asked, though -- after the August

5th injunction was entered by the District

Court, you asked the District Court to stay

that injunction, didn't you?

A: After the August 5th --

Q: Yes.

A: -- came down?

Q: Yes.

A: No. No. The District Court asked us if we

had an objection, and we registered an

objection. I believe that's what you are

talking about. Maybe I am confused. But

after the mandate came down, the District

Court on --

MR. PRYOR: May I approach the witness,

Your Honor?

HON. THOMPSON: Sure.

Q: I'd like to show you, Mr. Chief Justice,

what has already been admitted into evidence

as JIC Exhibit Number 10, an Order of the

United States District Court in the Middle

District of Alabama dated the 18th of August

2003.

A: Right.

Q: And do you -- If you would like, take a

moment to look at it. Does that appear to

be an order denying a request by you to stay

the injunction of August 5th?

A: Okay. Okay. Sure. This is -- This is the

motion to stay. Okay. I've got my times

crossed out. I thought you were talking

about after the mandate and about the

conference that the court had. This is a

motion to stay.

Q: Right.

A: Correct.

Q: And the District Court denied your motion to

stay the August 5th injunction?

A: Yes, they did. They did. And then it went

to the Eleventh Circuit. They denied it,

and then the United State Supreme Court

refused to stay the mandate.

Q: Well, they actually denied an application

for a stay --

A: On the mandamus.

Q: -- of the injunction --

A: Yes.

Q: -- on the August 20th?

A: Yes. August 20th is the very day that he

had originally set.

Q: The deadline --

A: I understand what you are talking about.

Q: That's right. The deadline was set by the

August 5th injunction?

A: Sure. I was speaking earlier about the

August 4th conference call.

Q: Sure.

A: I though that's what you were talking

about.

Q: Okay. Mr. Chief Justice, you stand by your

testimony of August 22nd of this year before

the Judicial Inquiry Commission that you

would do it again, don't you?

A: I would do everything that I have done

again. Yes. What I have done is – applies

to the law. If that's -- I see what you are

talking about when I said -- would I do it

again.

Q: Well, as you know, we have admitted into

evidence the transcript of your testimony.

I just -- have a shorthand reference. I

just wanted to know whether you stand by

your testimony of that day?

A: I stand by that testimony of that day, and I

have not reviewed it but --

Q: Well, if you would like to review it, you

can.

A: If I may.

Q: Sure.

A: So that we can know -- here it is. Is this

the whole thing?

MR. JONES: That's the paragraph –

excuse me. That's the paragraph

where the phrase he has just

referred to came from.

A: Okay. This --

MR. PRYOR: There's the entire

transcript, Mr. Chief Justice.

A: Well, if it's possible for me to read this --

Q: Sure.

A: May I read the whole thing?

Q: Certainly.

A: Because I think it's important to know when

I said I would do it again. “Chief Justice

Moore, we welcome you here. We know that

these have been busy times for you. We

appreciate your presence here today.”

Q: You want to read the entire transcript?

A: Well, I think --

Q: I don't mind you reading it, Mr. Chief

Justice, but I would ask that you just read

it to yourself to speed things along.

HON. THOMPSON: The transcript has

already been stipulated to. It's

already in evidence.

A: You know, I didn't want to read the whole

transcript. I wanted to read what I said,

and this is the whole transcript of what

Mr. Gerard (phonetic) said. So --

Q: Okay.

A: If I may read this paragraph.

HON. THOMPSON: Please.

A-I am upholding my Oath. I have nothing to

apologize for. I'm upholding the First

Amendment. I am upholding the Constitution

of Alabama, and we were too ashamed to

acknowledge God. When we let a Federal

judge come in and tell us -- call it the

“Rule of Law,” that we can't acknowledge God

as the Justice System says we must, as the

Constitution says we must, then we have got

a problem. I did what I did all the way

through, not from what you read in the

papers, not from what you imagine about the

politics or religion or forcing my beliefs

on somebody else. I did what I did because

I've upheld my Oath, and that's what I did.

So, I have no apologies for it. I would do

it again. I didn't say I would defy the

court order. I said I wouldn't move the

monument, and I didn't move the monument,

which you can take that as you will. But,

you know, I think you have to have respect

for the Court to tell them when they

the Tenth Amendment of the United States

Constitution, which declares that “The

powers not delegated to the United States by

the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to

the States, are reserved to the States

respectively, or to the people.” In other

words, the establishment of the Justice

System doesn't belong with the Federal

government in Alabama.

One more: But in any event, I

respect the guys and ladies -- and that's my

statement. If you have no question -- if

you have a question, I will be glad to

answer it. And that was it.

Q-And you stand by that testimony --

A-Yes, sir.

Q--- Mr. Chief Justice? And your

understanding is that the Federal court

ordered that you could not acknowledge God;

isn't that right?

A-Yes.

Q-And if you resume your duties as Chief

Justice after this proceeding, you will

continue to acknowledge God as you have

testified that you would today –

A-That's right.

Q--- no matter what any other official says?

A-Absolutely. Without -- let me clarify that.

Without an acknowledgment of God, I cannot

do my duties. I must acknowledge God. It

says so in the Constitution of Alabama. It

says so in the First Amendment to the United

States Constitution. It says so in

everything I have read. So --

Q-The only point I am trying to clarify,

Mr. Chief Justice, is not why, but only

that, in fact, if you do resume your duties

as Chief Justice, you will continue to do

that without regard to what any other

official says; isn't that right?

A-Well, I'll do the same thing this Court did

with starting of prayer; that's an

acknowledgment of God. Now, we did the same

say thing that justices do when they place

their hand on the Bible and say, “So help me

God.” It's an acknowledgement of God. The

Alabama Supreme Court open with, “God save

the State and this Honorable Court.” It's

an acknowledgment of God. In my opinions,

which I have written many opinions,

acknowledging God is the source -- a moral

source of our law. I think you must.

Q-You bring up opinions. Sometimes you've

written dissenting opinions, haven't you?

A-Yes.

Q-And sometimes you've been the only member of

the Supreme Court of Alabama to write a

dissenting opinion?

A-Absolutely. Many times. There is only one

dissenting in all the courts. That's a --

and many times one judge will dissent and

others not.

Q-And if you write a dissenting opinion and

the other eight associate justices have

another opinion, when a case returns to the

Circuit Court, which opinion is the Circuit

judge supposed to follow?

A-With the majority.

Q-Thank you. That's all of my questions.

HON. THOMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Pryor.

MR. PRYOR: Respondent?

MR. JONES: Nothing further. Nothing

further from the Chief Justice.

HON. THOMPSON: