1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LEXINGTON DIVISIONCIVIL ACTION NO. 5:09-CV-00244-KSF
______________________________________________________
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF C. MARTIN GASKELL
______________________________________________________
C. MARTIN GASKELL PLAINTIFF
v.
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY DEFENDANT______________________________________________________
The videotaped deposition of C. MARTIN GASKELL
was taken on behalf of the defendant before Ann
Hutchison, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary
Public in and for the Commonwealth of Kentucky at Large,
at the law office of Baker, Kriz, Jenkins, Prewitt &
Jones, PSC, 200 West Vine Street, Suite 710, Lexington,
Kentucky, on Wednesday, January 13, 2010, beginning at
the hour of 9:38 a.m. The deposition was taken by notice
and shall be used for any and all purposes allowed by
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including use at
trial.
______________________________________________________
ACTION COURT REPORTERS184 North Mill Street
Lexington, Kentucky 40507(859) 252-4004
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 1 of 242 - Page ID#: 96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 2
APPEARANCES
COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
Francis J. ManionGeoffrey R. SurteesAmerican Center for Law & Justice-Kentucky6375 New Hope RoadP.O. Box 60New Hope, Kentucky 40052
COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT:
Barbara A. KrizBaker Kriz Jenkins Prewitt & Jones, PSC200 West Vine Street, Suite 710Lexington, Kentucky 40507
ALSO PRESENT:
Shirley Carter, VideographerDr. Michael Cavagnero
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 2 of 242 - Page ID#: 97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 3
INDEX
DEPONENT: C. MARTIN GASKELL PAGE
EXAMINATION BY:Ms. Kriz .................................... 4
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE ........................... 242
EXHIBITS
NO. DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED
1 Job position posting 95
2 Online job application 96
3 Cover sheet e-mail, CV, and description 98Of experience
4 Modern Astronomy, The Bible, and Creation 123Lecture notes
5 Affidavit 187
(Above-referenced exhibits accompany original and copy
transcripts.)
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 3 of 242 - Page ID#: 98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 4
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're on videotape
record. Today is Wednesday, January 13, 2010. The time
is 9:38 a.m. We're here to take the deposition of C.
Martin Gaskell at the law offices of Baker Kriz Jenkins
Prewitt & Jones in Lexington, Kentucky, in a case styled
United States District Court, Eastern District of
Kentucky at Lexington, C. Martin Gaskell versus the
University of Kentucky. Case number is
5:09-CV-00244-KSF.
I'm Shirley Carter, the video
technician. The court reporter is Ann Hutchison. The
attorneys will now introduce themselves and state who
they represent.
MR. MANION: Francis J. Manion for
plaintiff, Martin Gaskell.
MR. SURTEES: Jeffrey Surtees for
plaintiff, Martin Gaskell.
MS. KRIZ: And Barbara Kriz on behalf
of defendant, University of Kentucky.
C. MARTIN GASKELL
having been first duly placed under oath, was examined
and testified as follows:
EXAMINATION
BY MR. GASKELL:
Q. Dr. Gaskell, we met before the deposition
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 4 of 242 - Page ID#: 99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 5
started. My name is Barbara Kriz, and I'm here today on
behalf of the University of Kentucky, who you have named
as a defendant in a lawsuit here in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
I'm sure you have met with your attorneys
and they've described for you what a deposition is.
This is a question-and-answer session. Primarily we're
going to be focusing on the allegations that you made in
your complaint that you filed. I'm going to be also
asking you questions about your background before you
filed the lawsuit. I'll be asking you some questions
about what's been happening with you in your
professional career since the lawsuit was filed.
If there's any question that I ask you
that's unclear or you don't understand me, please stop
me and have me explain my question to you or repeat it
for you. If you don't do that, I'm going to presume
that you understand my question and that to the best of
your ability you're giving me a full and complete
answer. Is that acceptable to you?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Also, we have court reporters here today
that are recording your testimony, so we want to make
sure that the record is very clear. So when you respond
to my question, I would appreciate if you would respond
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 5 of 242 - Page ID#: 100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 6
verbally rather than shaking your head or using any kind
of colloquialism that may not be clear on the record.
Okay?
A. Right.
Q. If there's any problems with your
testimony, I'll try to remind you throughout the
course --
A. Right.
Q. -- of the deposition.
Again, as I told you before we got
started, if at any time you need a break, just let us
know --
A. Right.
Q. -- and we'll be sure to accommodate you.
Okay. Let me start by asking your full
name, please.
A. Okay. Okay. My full name, C stands for
Christopher, Martin, I go by, and Gaskell, which you
have it written down somewhere, G-a-s-k-e-l-l.
Q. Okay. And you are currently residing in
Austin, Texas.
A. That's right.
Q. Is that correct?
And how long have you been living in
Austin?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 6 of 242 - Page ID#: 101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 7
A. I have been living there since September
of -- we're in 2010 -- 2007.
Q. And are you currently employed?
A. I am currently somewhat employed.
Q. What do you mean by sole employed?
A. Well, I have a -- I have a position at the
University of Texas, and it is a soft money position, so
it is dependent upon me getting my own grants. And if
they want, and they have, they have me teach.
Q. Do you have a contract of employment with
the University of Texas currently?
A. I'm currently paid independently through a
NASA grant, so I -- that's a complicated question. I
don't know how to answer you want on that.
Q. Well, let me ask you this. Do you have an
office there at the --
A. Yes, I do.
Q. -- University of Texas?
Okay. And are you performing any services
for the University of Texas such as teaching or research
or anything --
A. Research, yes.
Q. -- for the university?
A. Yes. But the funding of that is through
independent grant money.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 7 of 242 - Page ID#: 102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 8
Q. And you used the term "soft money," --
A. Yes.
Q. -- and I know people in academics are --
A. Right.
Q. -- familiar with that term, but generally
the general public --
A. Yes. Let's explain that. So a hard money
position, that is one where there's a fixed budget item
for it on the university budget. It's sort of a
permanent job, although it will also include what are
called tenure track people in there as well. Now, a
soft money position, that is very dependent upon there
being money. And actually in my department, there are
quite a lot of people in that position. I don't know
how many, 20 people maybe in that position.
Q. And the NASA grant that is currently
funding you --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is that a grant that is a recent grant
or -- I noticed in your --
A. It will expire.
Q. -- disclosures that you had had a grant
previously.
MR. MANION: May I jump in?
MS. KRIZ: Yeah.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 8 of 242 - Page ID#: 103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 9
MR. MANION: You're breaking one of
the rules already.
THE WITNESS: I am?
MR. MANION: Yes. You're anticipating
what her question is. I can tell that the court
reporter is having difficulty.
THE WITNESS: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MANION: I'm looking at her. You
two are looking at each other, and you understand each
other, but she may not be. I don't know how she could.
So try to wait.
Q. Let me repeat my question.
MR. MANION: Try to wait for Barb to
ask her question.
Q. Is the NASA grant, is that a recent grant
that you've obtained?
A. It will expire in November 2010, this
year.
Q. And when did you obtain that?
A. I -- it started in November 1, 2007, so
it'll be three years. But I applied for it before that,
of course.
Q. At the termination of this grant is it
your expectation to seek additional soft fund --
A. I am already doing that, yes. That is a
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 9 of 242 - Page ID#: 104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 10
continuing, ongoing process.
Q. And with that funding would you continue
to remain at the University of Texas?
A. Well, I have been on the job market for
the last few years and, of course, applying for the
Kentucky position was part of that. So what one would
like is a more permanent position. And if I did that,
then my current grant or future grants I applied for
will be transferred to my new institution.
Q. You said that you obtained this grant in
November of 2007.
A. Well, the starting date is November 1st.
Q. Starting date. Would you have applied for
that during the period of time you were working for the
University of Nebraska?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. And without getting too technical, could
you tell us what the grant is and who is the sponsor of
that grant?
A. It's NASA.
Q. And what is that funding, for what type of
research?
A. Astronomy.
Q. You indicated that you are currently
funded by that grant, although you're physically present
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 10 of 242 - Page ID#: 105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 11
at the University of Texas where your research is
being --
A. It's carried out in my office at the
University of Texas, yes.
Q. And do you utilize graduate students and
other staff at the University of Texas on this grant?
A. Not this particular grant. Now, there's
other research I'm doing with facilities at the
University of Texas. And the financial support for that
is coming through the University of Texas.
Q. So in addition to your grant work, you're
also doing work for the University of Texas?
A. You could say "for." I would say "with,"
but yes.
Q. Do you have a boss of sorts --
A. Yes.
Q. -- at the University of Texas?
A. David Lambert.
Q. David Lambert? And what is his position?
A. He is the director of McDonald
Observatory. My appointment is technically with
McDonald Observatory.
Q. Okay.
A. But the -- we don't make much of a
distinction between the astronomy department and the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 11 of 242 - Page ID#: 106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 12
observatory.
Q. And until you find a more permanent
location is it your plan to stay at the University of
Texas --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in your current situation?
A. Yes.
Q. There's no end date for your work at the
University of Texas at this time?
A. As far as I know, they'll be very happy to
have me continue.
Q. You have indicated that you have been on
the job market for some time, I think you said --
indicated over the last three years?
A. Yes.
Q. What type of position are you seeking?
A. I have applied for a variety of positions,
so I have applied for, well, obviously, the Kentucky
job, which was a teaching and public outreach position
in the observatory. I've also applied for other
observatory positions with no teaching. I have applied
for regular faculty positions, administrative positions,
so -- in astronomy, so a variety of things there.
Q. And have all these jobs been in the
academic world or have you applied for --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 12 of 242 - Page ID#: 107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 13
A. Depends how you define the academic world.
Q. Are they -- are you seeking employment
with educational institution only or are you -- is your
job search --
A. No.
Q. -- broader than that?
A. No, it's a little bit broader than that.
Q. Okay.
A. It's all astronomy.
Q. Tell me where you have sought employment
outside of a school setting.
A. Outside. Well, one example would be with
the National Science Foundation. Another example would
be with the Keck Observatories, which is -- it's an
independent organization which has connections with
major universities, and I can't be more precise than
that without going to their website.
Q. In your job search have you utilized any
outside resources to assist you, like a search firm or
placement firm?
A. No. Things are fairly simple in
astronomy. There is an American Astronomical Society
job register with every post position. So that, for
example, was where the Kentucky position was posted, and
one looks at them, goes there, clicks on them and
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 13 of 242 - Page ID#: 108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 14
applies.
Q. I want to talk to you about, you know,
your background. From your accent, I presume you're not
from United States; is that correct?
A. I'm not from Kentucky, right.
Q. Okay.
MR. MANION: This is how they talk
outside of Kentucky.
Q. Where were you born and raised, I guess?
A. I was actually born and raised in England.
But Texans have a hard time figuring that out. I have
been accused -- you can type this up too -- I've been
accused of being from Boston.
MR. MANION: There you go. They like
to pretend up there.
Q. In looking through some of the information
that was submitted after the lawsuit was filed, I
understand that you obtained your B.S. in astrophysics
from Edinburgh University in 1975; is that correct?
A. That's actually in my resume submitted
when I applied for the job, yeah.
Q. Okay. Was all of your education before
college in England?
A. That's all in the information that you
have from the university.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 14 of 242 - Page ID#: 109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 15
Q. Okay. When did you come to the United
States?
A. I -- do you want to know when I first came
or when I --
Q. Not just for a visit. I'm talking about
to reside.
A. Okay. I came -- I visited in 1973 but --
to visit grad schools, then I really came to start grad
school in 1975.
Q. And was that for the purpose of attending
classes at the University of California Santa Cruz --
A. Correct.
Q. -- toward your master's?
A. And a Ph.D., correct.
Q. And your resume indicates that you stayed
there to complete your Ph.D. in -- which was completed
in 1981; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. Your first academic appointment
after obtaining your Ph.D., I understand, was with
the -- well, I don't know if the Institute of Astronomy
was an academic appointment.
A. Very much so.
Q. Okay.
A. That's with the University of Cambridge.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 15 of 242 - Page ID#: 110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 16
Q. And that would have been your first job
that you had after you --
A. Yes.
Q. -- completed your Ph.D.
That was a postdoctorate?
A. What's called a post doc, yes.
Q. And my limited understanding of a
postdoctorate is that that does have some limitation in
terms of a time frame.
A. Always, yes. Yes.
Q. And was that just a two-year appointment?
A. I came in the middle of the academic year
there, so it was two years, and then the institute gave
me an extension until the end of the academic year. So
it became two and a bit years.
Q. And did you complete your postdoctorate
there or --
A. Yes.
Q. -- or what was the reason that you stopped
that job in '83?
A. Well, two things, I was offered a
temporary position at the University of Texas and the
position was ending there anyhow. So it was a very
natural transition.
Q. And then you came to work at the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 16 of 242 - Page ID#: 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 17
University of Texas. Was that also in Austin or --
A. Yes. I'm now back there for the second
time.
Q. And was that a limited appointment?
A. Yes.
Q. And it looks like that was for a period of
two years --
A. Right.
Q. -- '83 through '85?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was as a lecturer?
A. Yes.
Q. As an academic, in addition to your --
perhaps your academic appointments, have you always been
involved in your own type of research in the area of
astronomy independent of your job?
A. Always, yes. Now, the fraction of that
which is officially on company time varies.
Q. And is there a particular area of
astronomy that you have concentrated on?
A. Yes. I work in extragalactic astronomy --
extragalactic -- and I work on super massive black
holes. Let me throw in one more word there --
Q. Okay.
A. -- which is active galactic nuclei.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 17 of 242 - Page ID#: 112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 18
Active galactic nuclei are black holes that are actively
swallowing material.
Q. And did this interest grow out of your
Ph.D. focus?
A. Yes. I did my thesis in that.
Q. At the University of Texas from '83 to
'85, was that your first experience as a teacher in the
college setting?
A. No, because when I was a graduate student
I was a teaching assistant. So in a sense I learned how
to teach as an -- as a graduate teaching assistant.
Q. And at University of Texas in '83 to '85
were you teaching all levels of college?
A. I taught one graduate class and otherwise
they were large introductory classes.
Q. And at that time did you have any
affiliation with an observatory at the University of
Texas?
A. In Texas there are two institutions and
they're meshed like this. So like I put my hands
together like this, fingers, they're like this. So
there's the -- the observatory is McDonald Observatory,
which I'm now officially with, then I was with the
astronomy department, but everyone in the astronomy
department uses the observatory and sometimes people
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 18 of 242 - Page ID#: 113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 19
from the observatory teach classes. It's a very close
relationship. The director of the observatory, for
example, my boss, has a tenured position in the
astronomy department.
Q. So University of Texas did have the
observatory back in '83?
A. Oh, yes. They've had it for 75, 80 years
or something.
Q. What was the reason that that -- you left
that job in '85?
A. It wasn't a fixed-term position. And also
I got another position.
Q. Before we move -- was there any
possibility of becoming in that lecture position, was
that a tenure tract possibility?
A. No, it wasn't. There were three or four
of us in those positions there and one of the four of us
did get a tenure track position in the department.
Three of us. Actually, I'm sorry, three of us.
Q. Now, you left that job in '85 and it looks
like you went to -- as a visiting professor at Ohio
State in 1986 --
A. Correct.
Q. -- is that correct?
A. That's correct.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 19 of 242 - Page ID#: 114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 20
Q. And was that immediately after the job at
Texas?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell me what a visiting professor is.
A. It's a nontenure track position. So let's
talk about academic positions. There are people who are
tenured and have very high degree of job security.
Sorry, I'm moving my hands. And then there's an
apprenticeship period, a sort of period to check people
out for that so usually not more than six years before
that, and those are called tenure-track people. Now,
there are also other people at universities, quite a lot
of people actually, maybe some universities half the
faculty who are not what are called tenure track, and
they are on fixed-term appointments, and there are
various names for that that different universities have,
and the name that was used at Ohio State was visiting
position.
Q. What would be a comparable term at other
universities? Associate or assistant professor?
A. Well, if you keep asking me these
questions about different places, we'll get to some more
of those terms.
Q. Okay. Okay. Okay. And that was -- you
understood when you took that job that was for a limited
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 20 of 242 - Page ID#: 115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 21
time frame?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And was it just a year appointment?
A. It was a two-year appointment, but I
resigned it -- no, it was for -- I was actually there
less than one year. It was -- I can't remember if it
was one or two years, but the thing was I resigned that
position to take a more permanent one, a two-year
position.
Q. And that was with SUNY --
A. Yes.
Q. -- or State University of New York in
Stony Brook?
A. Right. And that was a two-year position.
Q. And that was from 1986 to '87?
A. Sounds good.
Q. Okay. And you have your job listed there
also as a visiting assistant professor.
A. Yes.
Q. Was that a similar type of appointment?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. So that was a non-tenure track.
A. That's right. That would have been for
two years.
Q. At the -- at Ohio State University did you
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 21 of 242 - Page ID#: 116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 22
have work associated with an observatory in that job?
A. Not really. Let's say no to that one.
They had an observatory. I did not use their
observatory. And there was a small teaching telescope
on the roof, but I wouldn't quite count that as an
observatory.
Q. What about at State University of New
York? Was there an observatory that --
A. They had a small observatory a little bit
like the one that is being built in Lexington. I did
use that. In fact, I taught a graduate class using
that. Graduate and undergraduate class.
Q. And did you leave that position after the
two-year appointment was over?
A. No. I resigned that position early but
because I got a tenure track appointment at the
University of Michigan.
Q. And it looks like you were there at the
University of Michigan from approximately '87 to '91?
A. Right. Four years.
Q. And your title there was assistant --
A. Assistant professor, yes. That is the --
Q. And that was a tenure track?
A. -- that is the almost universal name for
starting tenure-track position.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 22 of 242 - Page ID#: 117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 23
Q. And does the University of Michigan have
an observatory?
A. Yes, it does. It has several.
Q. And did your work include work --
A. Yes.
Q. -- with the observatory?
What were the circumstances that led you
to leave in 1991?
A. I did not -- not get tenure. I applied
early -- for early tenure and got turned down. This is
a thing that happens to about a third of all faculty.
Q. Once you apply for tenure and are denied
it, is there a possibility of reapplying at some later
point, or is that more or less the end point of an
appointment?
A. For me that was the -- that was the end
point, yes.
Q. Okay. After you were denied tenure did
you begin looking for --
A. Oh, yes.
Q. -- other work?
Okay. And it looks like you were able to
find work at the University of Oklahoma?
A. Right.
Q. Which you began in 1991?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 23 of 242 - Page ID#: 118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 24
A. Yes.
Q. And that title, according to your resume,
was as visiting assistant professor.
A. Right.
Q. Again, that was not a tenure track
position?
A. That's right. Yes.
Q. And did the University of Oklahoma also
have an observatory?
A. Yes, they did. Just like the one now in
Lexington.
Q. And what was the circumstances that led
you to leave that position?
A. I left -- I left that, that was a one-year
position, and I left that to take my position at the
University of Nebraska.
Q. It appears that you had your longest
tenure of employment with University of Nebraska, and
that was from a period of 1992 to through 2007.
A. Right.
Q. Is that correct?
A. Right.
Q. Now, when you took that position was that
a tenure track or was that --
A. No. No.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 24 of 242 - Page ID#: 119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 25
Q. Was there a limited time frame for the
appointment when you were initially hired in 1992?
A. The nature of my employment at the
University of Nebraska is complicated, so if you want, I
can detail every little step of it and how they changed
titles and positions and so on if you want.
Q. Well, I think I will need that
information.
A. Okay. Okay. Okay. So -- and I'm afraid
I can't even remember all of it, but I'll do best I can.
So --
Q. To begin with, though, you understood it
to be a non-tenure track?
A. Oh, yes. That's right. I always
understood it was not a tenure-track position. It was
very clear.
Q. And what happened?
A. Okay. So initially it was a two-year
appointment, and then for a number of years it was a
one-year appointment, and for various reasons the name
of the position changed but my duties did not change
much.
Q. What would the titles that you had?
A. Okay. So at first I was a visiting
associate professor. Then I -- then the next
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 25 of 242 - Page ID#: 120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 26
appointment was a visiting associate professor again,
and then somewhere in there I -- somewhere in there the
title was changed to associate professor, a special
appointment.
Q. But essentially --
A. If you want, I can tell you why but --
then it got changed to research associate professor.
Although I -- still mostly teaching. Again, if you
want, I can tell you why they did that. And then --
then I was made a senior lecturer. Now a senior
lecturer initially was a three-year rolling appointment.
Q. When you say rolling, what does that mean?
A. Rolling means that at each -- at the end
of each year -- sorry.
THE WITNESS: The camera can mind my
hands.
MS. KRIZ: You can use your hands.
It's no problem.
MR. MANION: That's right.
THE WITNESS: Explain visually.
A. At the end of each year, unless anything
was done, the contract was automatically renewed for
another three years. So I always have three years' job
security ahead of me there, and that's called a rolling
appointment. That didn't -- did not last long. That
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 26 of 242 - Page ID#: 121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 27
only lasted three years. And the reason was that the
regents of the university decreed that there could not
be that type appointment. So the position then became a
fixed-term appointment. And I was then given a
three-year fixed term non-rolling contract.
Q. In 2007 what was your specific
appointment?
A. Well, you want to hear all the other ones?
Q. Oh. I mean, you hadn't finished? Go
ahead and finish your description of your evolution of
your job there.
A. Well, you wanted all the details. I'm
giving them to you.
Q. That's fine.
A. But I'm warning you there were a lot. So
where did we get to?
MR. MANION: You were rolling
something.
A. Okay. There's a fixed-term contract.
Now, then the University of Nebraska had an external
review and decided to close down their astronomy
program.
Q. When was that?
A. That review, I think, was in 2000, might
be 2001. If you want, I can -- I can give the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 27 of 242 - Page ID#: 122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 28
information to my lawyers.
Q. Just a ballpark. That's okay.
A. So I was in the middle of a three-year
contract there. After that, the -- see, the external
review recommended the astronomy program be closed and
the astronomy positions be converted to physics
positions, in certain areas of physics. After a -- so
then the question was what happened to people like me
who are non-tenure track, and then the dean wanted --
told the department chairman that in order to get more
tenure track positions he needed to take away the non-
tenure track positions because they all cost money, and
they had to balance the budget. So there were three of
us on these -- again, I'll use the word "soft money."
Not really soft money. We were on these fixed-term
contract positions. And of the three of us, one was a
dual career situation, he was kept, and the other two
were told to leave.
Q. Okay. And you were one of those?
A. And I'm obviously one of those two, yes.
Yes. What I mean by dual career situation is that his
wife had a faculty position.
Q. And when were you informed that -- of
this -- the termination of your relationship with
Nebraska?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 28 of 242 - Page ID#: 123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 29
A. Let me finish details --
Q. Okay.
A. -- in there. So my title was changed
rather often during this period because I was -- I
was -- I had National Science Foundation funding, and I
was working part-time on my research with that. So I
was oscillating between being designated as a lecturer,
which is a pure teaching appointment, and a research
associate professor, which this time really was a
research appointment. The previous time was a teaching
appointment.
Now, where are we now? And the teaching
part of my appointment, I was given about a year's
notice on this, ended in 2006, and I continued in the
research part of that for another year, and then I went
to the University of Texas. The University of Texas, my
position was and is still what's called a research
fellow.
Q. So in 2006 is it fair to say that you knew
that your appointments --
A. Yes.
Q. -- at University of Nebraska --
A. Was ending, yes.
Q. -- were ending? And was it at that point
that you began to actively search --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 29 of 242 - Page ID#: 124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 30
A. Yes.
Q. -- for another position?
A. Yes.
Q. Prior to that, or during the entire time
that you were at University of Nebraska, were you
continuing to do somewhat of a job search for other
positions?
A. I think somewhat of a job search is a good
description of it because I had a relatively permanent
position there. Had it not been for closing down of the
astronomy program, I'd probably still be there right
now. And I -- it was a job I liked. It was a balance.
It was -- it was a lot of teaching, public outreach,
running the observatory, doing my research there. We
had a nice house there. Our family liked it so -- so
probably if the astronomy program not closed, I would
still be there.
Q. Who would -- did you answer to the dean of
the college while you were at University of Nebraska?
A. My immediate boss for all academics is the
department chairman. And I had two chairmen during the
time I was there.
Q. And who were they?
A. The first chairman was an atomic physicist
called Tony Starace.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 30 of 242 - Page ID#: 125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 31
Q. And do you know how to spell his last
name?
A. Star Ace.
Q. S-t-a-r-a-c-e. Okay. And then is that --
did he leave and another department chair come up?
A. No. He -- he'd been chairman for
13 years, got tired of being chairman and went back to
being just an ordinary faculty member.
Q. And who was the chair that succeeded him?
A. He was succeeded by a chairman called
Roger Kirby, a solid-state physicist.
Q. Tell me about the jobs that you -- if you
can recall, that you would have applied for after you
learned that the position in Nebraska was going to be
ending. Obviously the University of Kentucky
Observatory.
A. Well, I think we've already answered that
question because you asked me the type of jobs I'm
applying for.
Q. Right.
A. So the same spectrum of jobs.
Q. Okay.
MR. MANION: Again, Martin, if
possible, wait till you see the question mark above her
head.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 31 of 242 - Page ID#: 126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 32
THE WITNESS: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MANION: Because it's -- I know
it's difficult. The two of you understand each other
perfectly well, but she's even more important.
THE WITNESS: Okay. Sorry.
MR. MANION: In a way.
Q. Not to go back, but when you were in the
one tenure-track position that you had and you were
denied tenure --
A. Yes.
Q. -- were you provided any information as to
the reason for that denial?
A. Yes. The simple answer would be that I
was not aggressive enough in obtaining external funding,
which is a major consideration of universities.
Q. And is this -- I'm completely ignorant of
the tenure process other than just some general
knowledge. You go before a committee, and they -- do
they orally advise you as to what their decision is, or
do you receive some sort of document explaining what the
decision is?
A. The process is that -- the review is based
on one's research, one's teaching, and one's service.
But a large unwritten one in that is also based on how
much money you bring to the university, which is never
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 32 of 242 - Page ID#: 127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 33
officially mentioned, but actually, it's -- I think it
belongs under research really so -- so my research
record in terms of what I was publishing and how many
scientists were citing my research was good, but my weak
point was in not bringing in as much funding as would
have been -- would have been liked.
And so the process is that documents are
collected and external letters. Probably about half a
dozen external letters I got from famous scientists in
my field around the world. Teaching evaluations are
looked at, how many grants I've got, and then the
faculty as a whole votes on that.
Q. And are you provided -- when you're
advised the final decision, are you provided some
documents --
A. There's no written document. There was --
there's an official debriefing by the chairman, and this
was where the chairman explained to me that I was weak
on getting funding and not aggressive enough there.
Q. Do you recall any other information
relayed to you by the dean explaining why you're
denied --
A. It wasn't the dean. It's the chairman.
Q. Or the chairman, excuse me -- denying you
faculty -- your tenure?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 33 of 242 - Page ID#: 128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 34
A. What else did he say? Because this is a
long time ago, you realize now.
Q. I understand.
A. He made one -- I forgot -- incorrect
statement, which was my teaching evaluations were a bit
weak, he thought -- I think that was incorrect -- but
that was the only other thing he mentioned.
Q. Did you contest the denial of tenure?
A. I did, yes.
Q. And tell me how you go about contesting
that.
A. There is a university committee, and they
voted two to one to uphold it. It's a three -- if they
had -- they would either -- their decision would either
have been, I imagine, to say it stands as it is or it
would be referred back to the department. The
department decision was made by the department.
Q. And who serves on this appeal committee of
sorts?
A. Well, it's one of those college committees
which they always have a hard time getting people to
serve on.
Q. I presume it's a different group than --
A. Oh, it's highly --
Q. -- served on your --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 34 of 242 - Page ID#: 129
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 35
COURT REPORTER: Wait, wait, wait.
MR. MANION: She couldn't have got any
of it.
MS. KRIZ: And you're continuing to do
that so I'm going to repeat my question.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
Q. Okay. I presume that none of the members
on this appeal committee would have been the same
members on the initial committee --
A. No.
Q. -- that review?
A. Right.
Q. And in terms of a presentation to this
appeal committee, do you make your case on your behalf
or do you have another --
A. It's just -- I made the case on my behalf.
Q. And does someone argue on the -- to
support the position of the tenure committee?
A. They -- the chairman of the department
would also have made a presentation on this.
Q. Okay. After that level of appeal did you
have any other further recourse?
A. No.
Q. Did you ascribe any --
A. I think, by the way, that -- that I didn't
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 35 of 242 - Page ID#: 130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 36
feel that way at the time, but looking back on it from
decades of experience later, I think it was reasonable
grounds for turning me down for tenure. That was
correct. At that stage in my career I was not
aggressive enough in applying for funding.
Q. Did you pursue any type of litigation as a
result of --
A. No. No.
Q. And did you charge the initial tenure
track committee with any improper motivations in their
denial of your application for tenure?
A. There were a few irregularities in there.
The main one was that the -- the main one was that the
chairman of the department -- let me try to explain
this. When you go for tenure, you have to give a list
of people from whom they may not solicit letters of
recommendations, and there was one person I was involved
with in a scientific controversy at that time. And so I
put that person's name down as somebody not to get an
external letter from. And, in fact, the chairman did
solicit an external letter for that.
Q. You told me that you had a scientific
controversy with this individual?
A. Yes.
Q. And what was the nature of that
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 36 of 242 - Page ID#: 131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 37
controversy?
A. It was over how -- do you really want to
know this?
MR. MANION: Yes. I do.
A. Okay. It was over how accurately you can
measure the time delays of light echos in quasars using
two different statistical methods.
MR. SURTEES: Very well said.
MR. MANION: Did you come to blows
over that?
A. This is a very normal scientific
controversy.
Q. You had a difference with this scientist
and the tenure committee contacted them despite --
A. The chairman contacted them.
Q. The chairman. Okay.
A. The tenure committee is the entire tenured
faculty in the department.
Q. Do you recall the name of the chair of the
department that you were dealing with?
A. Yes. Douglas Richstone.
Q. And because of this scientific
disagreement you had with Dr. Richstone --
A. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Q. I mean with the other gentleman.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 37 of 242 - Page ID#: 132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 38
A. Right. Right.
Q. Dr. Richstone was the chair of the
department.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Who was the individual that you had
the scientific controversy with?
A. It's a professor Julian Krolik,
K-r-o-l-i-k.
Q. And presumably this contact that you had
asked them not to make --
A. Right.
Q. -- was negative, had been negative toward
you?
A. No. The chairman contacted this person
and members of the faculty, they strongly objected to
this and the letter was not included in my tenure file,
but it was -- it was an improper step that he approached
this person.
Q. And was that a point that you raised to
the appeal --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in your appeal?
Okay. Any other irregularities with that
review of your application --
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 38 of 242 - Page ID#: 133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 39
Q. -- for tenure?
A. There was. There was another one.
MR. MANION: Let her finish. Let her
finish her question.
THE WITNESS: Oh, sorry, sorry.
Q. Any other irregularities in terms of your
application for tenure at the University of Michigan?
A. The other irregularity was that the
chairman did not want to show a very positive letter
from a famous theoretical astrophysicist.
Q. And did he advise you why he was
reluctant?
A. Well, I didn't hear about this from the
chairman.
Q. Okay.
A. I heard about this from the other faculty.
Q. Do you know why he was --
A. He gave no reason. He gave no reason to
them or to me that I'm aware of. He also
mischaracterized the letter as well.
Q. And I presume this was another point that
you raised in your appeal?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Those were the two main points.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 39 of 242 - Page ID#: 134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 40
Q. Any other irregularities that you can
recall?
A. I don't think so, no.
Q. Have you ever applied for a job which you
were denied and you believed that the reason for the
denial was based on anything other than your scientific
expertise and background?
A. I applied for a lot of jobs, so I have a
lot to think about there. I don't know the reasons for
any job really why I was turned down for it. That's --
I'm pausing because that's a -- it's a big question.
Q. I understand that's a broad question,
right.
A. So nothing jumps out on the top of my head
there. Maybe you could clarify your question.
Q. Okay. Well, we'll move on and we'll come
back to that.
Have you ever been terminated from a job
other than the denial of your tenure?
A. Well, the one in Nebraska is effectively
termination. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Yes.
Q. That is considered termination. And
that's due to the elimination --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 40 of 242 - Page ID#: 135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 41
A. Right.
Q. -- of the department?
A. No, no, no, no. It's not the elimination
of the department. It's the -- it's the elimination of
the astronomy program.
Q. Okay. Was that a separate department?
A. No.
Q. Okay. That was always in the college
of --
A. Right.
Q. -- of what? What was it -- what was it
contained in?
A. I think it was called the College of Arts
and Sciences.
Q. Okay.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Was it called the
Department of Physics and Astronomy?
THE WITNESS: (Nods head.)
Q. Was it the Department of Physics and
Astronomy?
A. Astronomy, yeah.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Prior to that it was
the Department of Physics and Astronomy.
A. Yes.
Q. And the change at University of Nebraska
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 41 of 242 - Page ID#: 136
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 42
was it just became the Department of Physics, and they
assumed some of the classes of astronomy in that
department?
A. It was suggested that they might even want
to think about renaming the department. I have not
checked. I don't think they have.
Q. Do you know what the department is called
at University of Nebraska now?
A. As far as I know, it's the Department of
Physics and Astronomy.
Q. Okay.
A. But the former chairman, Roger Kirby, did
say that he'd give thought to renaming the department
just the Department of Physics.
Q. During your tenure of employment with the
University of Nebraska, did you do anything to change
or -- the job duties of what you were appointed for? I
mean, you were a lecture --
MR. MANION: Let her finish.
THE WITNESS: Sorry.
MR. MANION: Let her finish.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
Q. I'm not -- I'm not -- I'm not saying that
very clearly, but I guess the way you've described your
job at the University of Nebraska, you had teaching
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 42 of 242 - Page ID#: 137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 43
responsibilities as well as research.
A. Right.
Q. Throughout that period of time was there a
fairly even distribution of your efforts in terms of
research and teaching, or did that change from year to
year?
A. It changed from year to year.
Q. Did you ever take any -- you yourself take
any affirmative steps to change the nature of your
duties --
A. Yes.
Q. -- from -- and what were those changes?
A. Okay. At the stage where my appointment
was 100 percent teaching -- sorry, it was not a hundred
percent, it was almost a hundred percent teaching, there
always was some research in it -- I spoke with the
chairman and my dean about getting more time for doing
research. Faculty typically have a -- well, a three-way
split, I'm not going to say equal, between service
activities, teaching and research. And I was very much
on the teaching side to get most of that. So I was
wanting to get that increased, so I spoke with both --
my chairman, Roger Kirby.
Q. So you wanted to do more research as
opposed to teaching in terms of the distribution of
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 43 of 242 - Page ID#: 138
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 44
your --
A. Of the distribution, yes. Yes.
Q. What point was that? Do you remember a
year when --
A. This would have been -- I could -- I was
going to say I could look up the year and tell you. I
might not get it right right now. It would have been
around 2001. Might have been 2000, might have been
2002. Probably around 2001.
Q. And other than speaking to your -- the
chair and the dean about perhaps changing your duties,
were you able to do anything else to change that?
A. Well, when I went to speak with the dean,
what the dean recommended that I do was to do what is
called buy out of teaching, and that is get a large
research grant which would provide money for the
university to get someone else to teach my class so that
I could do the research. So that was the recommendation
of the dean. I then applied to the National Science
Foundation to do that, and in 2003, I think, I got a
large National Science Foundation grant.
Q. And were you able to buy out --
A. Yes.
Q. -- your teaching responsibilities?
A. Yes. Actually, I got another grant as
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 44 of 242 - Page ID#: 139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 45
well also, let me buy out. Now, then the dean changed
his mind about the buyouts.
Q. Before we get in to that, what year, what
academic year would you have bought out the teaching
portion of your duties?
A. I have to think about that. I think I got
the grant in 2003. The first buyout was in the 2003-
2004 academic year, and I'll say plus or minus one on
that.
Q. And then -- and so the way that works is
you get the grant money and that enables the university
to go and hire other people to --
A. Yes.
Q. -- teach classes that they had
contemplated you teaching?
A. Right. Right.
Q. Okay.
A. This is -- this is a very normal thing at
universities, by the way.
Q. And how many years were you able to buy
out the teaching aspects?
A. I did that for three or four years.
Again, I have to think about that. At least three, I
think. Might have been four.
Q. And you said that the dean at some point
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 45 of 242 - Page ID#: 140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 46
changed his mind about these kinds of buyouts.
A. Yes, he did. The dean had initially
recommended this was the way to do things. Then he --
when it came to approving the first buyout, the
department was completely happy with it; my chairman, my
colleagues, everything was fine there. But the dean
was, as my chairman put it, opposed on philosophical
grounds to hiring a lecturer do research. The -- I
spoke with the dean about this, and he changed his mind
and went back to what he said in the first place. So I
was okay. Then the next year came around and he changed
his mind back to being philosophically opposed to it
again, and the chairman and I had discussions with the
dean about this, and reluctantly and with annoyance, he
flipped back to approving it again. But he was not
happy with doing that.
Q. From 2003 up until the end of your work
with the University of Nebraska, were you continuing to
buy out the teaching portion of your responsibilities?
A. My last year I was just doing research.
Q. Okay.
A. I explained I was a research associate
professor there. I was actually just doing research
that year.
Q. And that work did not require you to buy
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 46 of 242 - Page ID#: 141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 47
out any teaching aspect?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. No.
(Off-the-record comments.)
MS. KRIZ: Just take a break.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please.
We're going off video. It's 10:29 a.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
It's 10:36 a.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, you have -- we've been
talking about your employment history, and you have
indicated that, you know, over the years you have sought
other appointments other than what's -- jobs that you --
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- actually were hired to do. Do you keep
any kind of file in terms of applications you filed or
inquiries you've made, say like over the last five
years, in terms of job applications?
A. I can -- I can certainly have it this
year.
Q. Okay.
A. I'm not sure about how complete my records
are going back beyond that.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 47 of 242 - Page ID#: 142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 48
Q. Okay.
A. Particularly back in the days of paper,
and I guess recycled paper. But no, I know how many
jobs I've applied for this year.
Q. And I'll follow up with a more formal
request, but to the extent that you can provide us
information as to the employers where you have actually
filed applications for employment from the period of
2007 to the present, that's what we're going to be
looking for. Okay?
A. Right.
Q. And again, I'll follow up with a request
through your attorney.
A. Right.
Q. Now, Dr. Gaskell, you have obviously
worked extensively as an astronomer in an academic
environment for the last couple of decades. You've
written extensively in your area. Are there other areas
of personal interest where you have actually published
any type of articles, written any type of books, those
kinds -- published material is what I'm focusing at this
point.
A. I'll have to think a moment about that.
Q. And, for example, I notice from your
website and your resume that you have an interest in
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 48 of 242 - Page ID#: 143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 49
music?
A. That was the other thing.
Q. You have an interest in contra dancing?
A. I think I'm thinking about -- I think in
the academic sense of publishing, no. I do sell my
music, but this is -- this is produced privately on my
own imprint.
Another -- I can't swear that there hasn't
been something somewhere that I've -- I've published
because I don't list anything on my resume.
Q. Right. And I understand that.
A. Nothing springs out at me, but I do a lot
of things and could well be something in there.
Q. In the area of religion have you published
any type of articles, written any kind of books?
A. No.
Q. Lectured in any --
A. Lectured --
Q. -- formal capacity?
A. Well -- sorry.
MR. MANION: I haven't seen a question
mark yet.
Q. I'm not getting my questions --
MR. MANION: I'm seeing commas, not
question marks.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 49 of 242 - Page ID#: 144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 50
MS. KRIZ: Exactly.
Q. In the area of religion you said you don't
recall publishing any type of articles or writing any
books but you have lectured in -- on religious topics;
is that accurate?
A. You've asked a number of questions there.
So could you ask them one at a time, please?
Q. Have you published anything that you can
recall as it relates to any religious topic?
A. I don't think so.
Q. You -- have you lectured on religious
topics?
A. What sort of lectures?
Q. Any type of lectures. Lectures to any --
any --
A. To churches, yes.
Q. Churches, yes. Any private groups?
A. Yes. Private groups, yes. To a major
university in Lexington as well.
Q. Do you keep any type of documentation of
the lectures that you've done in the area -- on the
topic that involves any kind of religious topic?
A. What do you mean by documentation?
Q. Lecture notes, dates on which you've done
the lectures, invitations to speak on particular topics,
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 50 of 242 - Page ID#: 145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 51
those kinds of things?
A. Not intentionally. In a rather haphazard
way. When we left the University of Nebraska, we had to
move to a smaller house and we threw an awful lot of
stuff away. Also, with lectures, they used to be on
overhead transparencies, and now -- I haven't actually
given this lecture recently, but we moved up to
PowerPoints, so I've ditched the old transparencies.
But my lecture notes are available, and have been
available.
Q. Tell me the kinds of topics that you have
addressed in lectures in the religious field.
A. Okay. The lectures -- I have a 16- or 17-
page transcript detailed, not transcript, theme, which
has the title Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation,
I think is the title, something like that, and this is
the main lecture that I give. It has a little bit more
and a little bit less than any one actual lecture I
give.
Q. When did you first recall lecturing on
that topic?
A. That is difficult to remember. Certainly
when I was at the University of Michigan.
Q. And tell me how that interest developed in
that area.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 51 of 242 - Page ID#: 146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 52
A. Oh. Well, when I was a graduate student,
I was part of a Christian graduate student group which
was -- had many scientists in it.
Q. What was the name of that group, or did it
have a name?
A. We called ourselves the Christian -- CGS,
Christian Graduate Students, at the University of
California Santa Cruz. I did not give a talk to them
but -- and in the church library of the church I was a
member of there had a copy of the Journal of the
American Scientific Affiliation, which I read and later
joined. So that's -- was the stage where I got
interested in these topics. But it was a gradual
interest.
Q. And do you believe that as a graduate
student you would have first begun lecturing in this
area?
A. No, no. No, I did not -- I certainly did
not lecture to graduate students. The earliest time for
sure I can -- I can remember now, this is -- there are
public lectures, there are lectures to churches, there
are lectures to groups, and some are more formal than
others, and I just can't -- more informal ones, I cannot
remember all of those, and these things tended to start
off more informally, so I -- so I just can't remember
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 52 of 242 - Page ID#: 147
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 53
that.
Q. You know, how did you get started
lecturing in this area? Did someone --
A. Oh, yes.
Q. -- invite you to speak on a specific
topic?
A. Yes. People thought, oh, this is
interesting. Sorry. People thought this is
interesting. He's a Christian. He's an astronomer.
Let's see what he has to say.
Q. And tell me some of the organizations that
you have lectured to on this topic.
A. Oh, that's hard to remember.
Q. Obviously, it's not an exhaustive list
today.
A. No. So let us throw out a few. Campus
Crusade for Christ.
Q. And what campus was that?
A. No, no, that's an national organization.
Q. Okay.
A. Campus Crusade for Christ. It's multiple
campuses. Intervarsity Christian Fellowship; again,
that's a National Organization on multiple campuses.
And let's see. Churches; I'm afraid I can't remember
all those. Lectures at universities of the more public
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 53 of 242 - Page ID#: 148
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 54
type. These also tend to be sponsored by some of the
groups I already mentioned there. I think both those
groups were probably cosponsors of the one in Lexington.
Q. If you were invited to lecture on this
topic at a university, are you telling me you're
typically invited by some Christian organization that
was sponsoring the lecture?
A. Lectures on campuses are frequently
sponsored by multiple organizations. For example, if a
democratic candidate for U.S. president came to a campus
and spoke, that group would be sponsored by the campus
democrats; it might also be sponsored by the political
science department, that sort of thing. It might be
sponsored by the Dean of Undergraduate Studies or
something. Often when these people are sponsoring, they
are bringing in a bit of money to pay for speakers.
Q. Have you ever been invited by a university
to speak on a topic involving religion that was -- the
invitation was made to you through the -- directly by
the university as opposed to --
A. Only once. Only once.
Q. And what was that?
A. And that was the University of Kentucky.
Q. And when was that?
A. It was about 1996, give or take a couple
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 54 of 242 - Page ID#: 149
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 55
of years. I'm not sure what year, but you have the
information on that.
Q. Okay. And tell me how that invitation was
extended to you.
A. The invitation was extended from the
physics department.
Q. And was there an individual that you had
contact with there?
A. My contact with that was Gary Ferland.
Q. And had you known Dr. Ferland before he
invited you to come to the university?
A. Yes.
Q. And how had you come to know Dr. Ferland?
A. We work in the same field.
Q. So you had a professional association?
A. Yes. Yes. I first met him when I was a
postdoc in Cambridge.
Q. And he was serving at Cambridge at that
time too?
A. I think he had just joined the University
of Kentucky at that time. But he was at Cambridge
before that.
Q. So you've known Dr. Ferland since the
'70s.
A. No, not -- did I say '70s? If I did, I
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 55 of 242 - Page ID#: 150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 56
was mistaken. From 19 -- we first met in 1982 or 1983.
We published a paper together in 1984.
Q. And was that paper -- was that in the
field of astronomy?
A. Yes.
Q. So sometime in 1996 Dr. Ferland contacted
you and invited you to come to speak at the university?
A. Yes.
Q. And what did he tell you about what that
lecture was?
A. How much do you want to know about that?
Q. As much as you can tell me.
A. Right. Dr. Ferland came to Nebraska to
give a colloquium on astrophysics and atomic physics,
and during that he and I had a conversation about
religion and science. And when people ask me these
questions, my standard response is to give them the
handout. So I gave him a copy of the handout of my
lecture notes.
Q. On what topic?
A. This is the -- this is this -- the only
one I mentioned so far.
Q. Okay. The Modern Astronomy --
A. Basically the only lecture I give.
Q. Okay.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 56 of 242 - Page ID#: 151
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 57
A. Yes.
Q. So he asked you a question and you gave
him your lecture notes?
A. Right. And he was very interested in
this. So he brought that back to Lexington and shared
it with colleagues around the department, and after
discussing this with other colleagues in the department,
he thought it would be very worthwhile to have me come
and give a lecture.
Q. And would that lecture have been directed
at any particular audience or at the university
population as a whole?
A. It was directed at the university
population as a whole.
Q. And was there payment associated with that
lecture?
A. No, there was not.
Q. Okay. Were there any other sponsors --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in terms of -- okay.
MR. MANION: You're jumping in.
You're jumping in.
Q. Sponsors of that lecture? Who else were
the other sponsors?
A. I cannot remember, but Dr. Ferland still
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 57 of 242 - Page ID#: 152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 58
has a poster from that talk, and the bottom of the
poster it lists the sponsors. They were major campus
Christian groups, and I cannot remember all their names.
Q. And were you provided any information as
to what you needed -- what topic you were to cover and
what specifically you were to address?
A. It was assumed I was going to say exactly
what was in the lecture notes. And I did.
Q. And where did that lecture take place?
A. In a large room. A very nice room,
actually. Am I allowed to ask Mike Cavagnero what the
name of the room is?
MR. MANION: No. No. What you
recall.
THE WITNESS: Okay.
A. It was a large room. It seated four or
five, 600 people. It had a balcony at the back. I was
on a large stage. I believe there was a pipe organ in
there too.
Q. An auditorium of sorts?
A. Oh, yes. Yes.
Q. And were you one of a number of lecturers?
A. No, I was introduced by somebody and that
was it and...
Q. So you were the only person --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 58 of 242 - Page ID#: 153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 59
A. I was the only person speaking, yes.
Q. Okay. And were there 5- or 600 people in
attendance?
A. The room was not completely full. I would
guess more the order of 3- or 400. The downstairs was
pretty full, of this room.
Q. And you said that you believe Dr. Ferland
probably still has a poster. How was this advertised or
communicated? The lecture.
A. Well, it was a very nice poster, nice
picture on it, and Gary wanted me to autograph it so he
could frame it. And -- it was a very nice picture.
And --
Q. Of you or --
A. No. No. It was -- it was -- it was of
the famous Michelangelo painting in the Sistine Chapel
where God is reaching down to Adam. It's a very, very
famous painting. It's used on many book covers. Very
nice poster. And it was also in the student newspaper
and --
Q. What was the title of the lecture?
A. Probably the same as the title of my
handout.
Q. Modern Astronomy --
A. I don't know.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 59 of 242 - Page ID#: 154
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 60
Q. Okay.
A. But it was something pretty close to the
title on the handout.
It was also advertised in the student
newspaper, which I remember well because the student
newspaper put in the wrong day of the lecture, which
caused the organizers a big panic.
Q. And you believe this was in 1996?
A. It might have been '98. I think it was an
even year.
Q. '96 or '98, okay.
Was there a particular format for this
lecture? Was it a question-and-answer session?
Strictly lecture?
A. The format of the lecture is after being
introduced I lecture for about an hour. The content of
the lecture follows the notes, which you should have,
and then at the end there's a question time. Now, the
ways in which it deviates from the notes are there are
slides that I show, and I also put up a few Bible verses
as well. I think the Bible references are in the notes,
but the actual lists themselves are not. So...
Q. Do you recall any controversy surrounding
that lecture?
A. The only thing that could be regarded as
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 60 of 242 - Page ID#: 155
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 61
controversy was in the question time there was some
aggressive statements and questions by somebody who
identified himself as a biology faculty member who was
sitting at the back of the hall.
Q. And what do you recall those questions
being?
A. They were a mixture of questions and
statements. He was wanting a clarification of my views
on evolution, which if you notice in the lecture notes
is not a feature of the lecture. In fact, I say in the
lecture notes that I have no problem with the theory of
evolution. So I think I could say he wanted a
clarification of my views there and --
Q. So the questions were, in your opinion,
off topic?
A. Oh, no, no. It was a perfectly reasonable
question to ask, but he rather quickly got annoyed.
Q. Before we get in to that. Are there
things that were covered in that lecture that raised
questions about your position as it relates to the
theory of evolution?
A. There are things which could -- even if I
said nothing at all, it's a perfectly reasonable
question for somebody to ask and wonder about. And
other people have asked me about that on other
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 61 of 242 - Page ID#: 156
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 62
occasions. You know, I say nothing about biology
whatsoever, and this is not a biology lecture. It's
very reasonable to ask somebody a question about
something else.
Q. Without going in to your -- the entirety
of your lecture, tell me what your seminal themes are in
this lecture and what information you're trying to
relate to your audience.
A. I want people to know that there is not a
major incompatibility between science and being a
scientist and doing scientist -- doing science and being
religious. That's the main thing. So I start off by
giving examples, a small number of examples, of famous
scientists of the past who were Christians. And that's
about a third of the lecture, actually, I'm talking
about that. Then how much I emphasize things depends on
the audience. Then another thing is I want people to
understand that in this interface between religion and
science there are a variety of views, and not just the
vocal extremes that one hears, but there are positions
in the middle and a range of positions, and that the
confessing, believing Christians hold to a range of
beliefs. So that's like the second thing. And the
third thing is I -- is really an astronomy lecture.
It's talking about what we know about from astronomy
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 62 of 242 - Page ID#: 157
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 63
about the origin of the universe and how does that
compare with what's in the Bible. Then that's --
that's -- then I stop and I take questions.
Q. So the area -- you're trying to convey
information, first of all, about other famous scientists
or scientists that people are aware of in the past --
A. Right. Right.
Q. -- who had religious beliefs?
A. Yes.
Q. On a particular topic or just --
A. I just stick with astronomy, but if I
were -- if I were a biologist giving this to biologists,
I would throw in biology names, but I stick with
astronomists.
Q. Okay. And is there any particular beliefs
that you're focusing on? Is it relating to the origin
of the universe, or are there other religious topics
that you're discussing as it relates to these
astronomers?
A. It's -- the people I -- say again what I
said earlier. It's the compatibility of religious
beliefs with doing science, being a scientist. So I say
these people are famous scientists, names like Isaac
Newton, you've probably heard of. I say, okay, Isaac
Newton believed in God. And there are other names you
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 63 of 242 - Page ID#: 158
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 64
might not recognize, but I say these people -- I don't
go in to their beliefs in detail. They're mostly
Christians, some -- some of other -- other beliefs.
Q. But the beliefs that you're addressing in
this -- in this lecture, is it more to do with the
origins of the universe? Is that the particular area
we're talking about?
A. To fair extent, yes. That's certainly
what people want to hear me talk about. So -- I'm going
to repeat myself, but the three parts of the lecture,
the first part is trying to make it plain that a lot of
scientists today and in the past have had strongly held
religious beliefs, myself included. Then I try to
explain that it's not just the two extremes in this,
that there's a range of opinions and these range of
opinions are held by believing Christians. That's the
middle part of the lecture. And the final part is the
astronomy lecture, saying this is how we think the
universe came about, let's compare this with what's in
the book of Genesis.
Q. How many times do you think you've given a
lecture on this topic?
A. I don't know. A few. Say a few. I could
go home and think about it and maybe find records, but
just say a few.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 64 of 242 - Page ID#: 159
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 65
Q. You said that when you gave the lecture at
the University of Kentucky, you had question-and-answer
session --
A. Yes.
Q. -- and had some rather aggressive
questions --
A. No, no. Only one -- only one aggressive.
Q. Okay. Okay. And do you recall who that
individual was, or did you know?
A. I did not know. He did identify himself
as a biology professor, and I think he might have been
with another colleague at the back of the hall.
Q. And in terms of publicity before the
lecture or any protests or anything like that, anything
like that that you recall going on at the time that you
gave your lecture?
A. No.
Q. You said that the aggressive question had
to do with your clarification of your views on
evolution.
A. Yes.
Q. In your lecture do you discuss topics of
evolution at all?
A. The only thing I said about evolution
was -- in the last part of the lecture I'm going through
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 65 of 242 - Page ID#: 160
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 66
the book of Genesis in order. And the book of Genesis,
first chapter, describes God doing things on different
days, and then it gets to God creating life on the
earth. And if you look at my lecture notes there I kind
of joke about this and say at this point I say yuck,
biology, and -- and I say this is why students take my
classes because they want to avoid biology. They don't
like cutting up slimy things. So -- but the one
statement I sometimes make, and I did make this time, is
that -- I can't remember exactly what I said, but it
would have been something like evolution is not
explaining everything, and there's a lot about evolution
that is not understood. It was something on that level.
And so that was what he asked me about.
Q. Okay. And do you recall what you said in
response to his question?
A. Yes, I do. Because whenever anybody asks
me about evolution, the first thing I do is I clarify
the terminology, because the word "evolution" goes from
wide range of a lot of things. So -- so I make it very
clear that I had no trouble with the natural selection
process. I gave -- I mentioned a couple of concrete
examples. But it's just when it comes to trying to
explain everything, and particularly the origin of life
that I think I would have mentioned there, that we just
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 66 of 242 - Page ID#: 161
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 67
don't have any satisfactory theory right now of that.
Q. And was he disagreeing with you, or was it
just a question he asked of you?
A. Well, I think that he was assuming that I
was coming from a young earth creationist viewpoint. He
got increasingly angry and stormed out, or tried to
storm out in the middle of me speaking -- in the middle
of me answering his question. And I think he was
muttering something like "creationist" or something like
that. That was the feeling I got. And he called it --
it might have been a colleague or graduate student or
somebody with him also walked out at that time. And I
spoke rather firmly, and I said, don't walk out, I'm
still answering your question. And so he stopped, and
this got the entire audience's attention, everybody
staring at him.
Q. Sure.
A. I definitely embarrassed him, or I should
say he embarrassed himself there, and so I finished my
question and then he stormed out.
Q. What is -- what is young earth
creationist? What does that term mean?
A. A young earth creationist is somebody who
believes the -- everything was made about 6,000 years
ago. 4004 BC is a popular date for that, but young
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 67 of 242 - Page ID#: 162
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 68
earth creationists actually don't really pin it down to
a precise date. So they take the view -- a very literal
interpretation of Genesis.
Q. Is this a scientific concept or a
religious concept, creationism?
A. I would say it's a religious concept.
Somebody -- young earth creationist would disagree with
that, but I would say, in my opinion -- would say
religious view.
Q. Do you agree with the young earth
creationist theory?
A. No. No. And I make that clear in the
lecture. It's also clear in the lecture notes.
Q. What is your religion, Dr. Gaskell?
A. I'm a Christian.
Q. And are you a member of any particular
church or denomination?
A. Not all churches have formal membership,
so I'm still formally a card-carrying member of the
Church of England.
MR. MANION: They give out cards?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
A. But the -- we actually -- actually our
family attends two churches right now. We go to one on
Saturday nights and one Sunday mornings.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 68 of 242 - Page ID#: 163
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 69
Q. And what churches are those?
A. The church that meets on Saturday nights
is a house -- what's called a house church, and it is a
multicultural church.
Q. Is it affiliated with any particular
religion?
A. It's Christian.
Q. Now, Christian has a lot of different
meanings.
A. Yes.
Q. I know that there's a protestant church,
Disciples of Christ that is called Christian Church --
A. Oh, oh, sorry. Okay.
Q. -- as opposed to Christian, believer in
Christ.
MR. MANION: The denomination.
Q. -- more of a general --
MS. KRIZ: Right.
Q. So are these churches that you attend
affiliated with any particular denomination?
A. Okay. I'm using the word Christian in the
sense of follower of Jesus Christ.
Q. Okay.
A. Right. So ask your question again.
Q. Okay. What are the denominations of the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 69 of 242 - Page ID#: 164
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 70
churches you currently attend?
A. Okay. The multicultural church is not
part of a denomination. And actually neither is the one
we go to on Sunday mornings. It's what's called an
independent church. If you want a label for me, I would
give the label evangelical. We also participate in a
Presbyterian church as well, mostly to help with the
music.
Q. And have you -- have you been a Christian
since --
A. Age 12.
Q. Age 12. Okay. Did you ever attend any
type of religious educational institute?
A. No.
Q. Other than your side interests in topics
involving religious concepts, have you had any academic
training in religion?
A. No.
MS. KRIZ: We have to change the tape.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please.
We're going off video. It's 11:07 a.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
This is Tape 2. It's 11:24 a.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, you had told me that you had
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 70 of 242 - Page ID#: 165
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 71
had a relationship or had known Dr. Gary Ferland for
some years --
A. Yes.
Q. -- before you were ever invited to come to
speak to the --
A. Yes.
Q. -- university or ever applied for the --
A. Yes.
Q. -- director position.
Did you have a relationship with anybody
else that's affiliated with the University of Kentucky?
A. Well, there are a couple of people who
work in my field there, which was, by the way, an
attraction of going to Kentucky. So the people who work
in my field there, the older people I knew best because
they'd been around longer, so there's -- blanking on
names now.
Q. Did you have a relationship with Tom
Troland? Did you know him at all?
A. No. No.
Q. Okay. What about --
A. It reminded me of the names of the other
astronomers. I'm sorry, just blanking out, I guess.
Q. Okay.
A. Isaac Schlossman, for example, is one in
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 71 of 242 - Page ID#: 166
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 72
the same field. Isaac Shlossman, S-h-l-o --
Q. -- s-s-i-n.
A. Something, yes. Isaac Shlossman and Moshe
Elitzur. Okay. M-o-s-h-e E-l-i-t-z-u-r. And then Nancy
Leveson also works, does closely related work to me, but
actually the first time I met her was the job interview.
Q. Okay. So is it fair to say you were
familiar with Dr. Shlossman, Elitzur and Leveson by
their work, or did you know them personally before you
applied for this job?
A. Well, those lines get blurred in astronomy
so -- we meet at conferences. I served on a review
panel with Isaac Shlossman not too long ago.
Conferences is where you tend to meet people.
Q. Other than your professional contact at
conferences, would you say that you had a personal
relationship with anyone other than Dr. Ferland?
A. Gary and I have known each other longest,
so we're the ones that have closest relationship.
Everybody else -- well, Mike Cavagnero and the fellow
the observatory is named after came to visit in Nebraska
to look at the observatory, so I met them.
Q. And is that Keith MacAdam?
A. Keith. Thank you. Yes.
Q. When was that?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 72 of 242 - Page ID#: 167
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 73
A. That was --
MR. CAVAGNERO: Was it 2005?
MS. KRIZ: You can't answer that.
A. I seem to remember that it was 2005.
MR. MANION: Too much coffee. Let's
cut back.
Q. Do you remember what the purpose of their
visit to the University of Nebraska was for?
A. Well, there is something called a DAMOP
conference was going on. That's the Division of Atomic
and Molecular and Optical Physics, I think. And it's a
big national meeting, and it was hosted by the
University of Nebraska. And while they were there they
took advantage of that, to meet with me and to visit the
observatory which we had built there, which was very
similar to what they were hoping to build in Lexington.
Q. Was it your understanding based on your
contact with Cavagnero and MacAdam at that time that
they were in the beginning stages of restarting an
observatory at the University of Kentucky?
A. I'm not quite sure what stage they were at
there.
Q. And did you -- did they seek you out to
obtain some information from you?
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 73 of 242 - Page ID#: 168
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 74
Q. Okay. And what do you remember about your
conversations? I mean, did you just meet with them at
the conference and talk to them or --
A. We met at the observatory.
Q. Okay.
A. And so I showed them the observatory. I
discussed a lot of technical issues that they needed to
consider about the observatory. I discussed all the
things we were doing with the observatory in terms of
public outreach, education, student research.
Q. At that time were you director of the --
A. Yes.
Q. -- observatory?
A. My title was officially coordinator of the
observatory, but yes. My official title was coordinator
of the observatory. The word "director" sounded too
important to the university.
Q. What were your duties as it related to
that observatory at the University of Nebraska?
A. Oh. Everything.
Q. You did the -- technically ran the
observatory?
A. Yes.
Q. In terms of if a class wanted to utilize
it were you the person that would have taught the class?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 74 of 242 - Page ID#: 169
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 75
A. If it was my class, yes. There's a lot I
can say. How much do you want to know?
Q. Well, go ahead and I'll stop you if
there's too much.
MR. MANION: She'll stop you.
A. Okay. Okay. So let's try to divide up
what the observatory was used for.
Q. Okay.
A. So I mentioned three areas. There was
public outreach.
Q. And what did that involve?
A. Public outreach was I -- mostly I ran
public nights once a month, and depending on the
weather, we would have between a handful of people up to
about a thousand people who'd come, wanted to see
things. Also depended on what was going on in the sky.
So we got to around a thousand when Mars was at its
closest in human lifetime. So I ran those once a month,
and if you want, I can tell you more details about
those.
Q. No, that's adequate for my purposes.
A. And then there was the teaching side of
it. Now, the teaching side of the observatory, when I
started the observatory was when the University of
Nebraska had a fully-fledged astronomy program. By the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 75 of 242 - Page ID#: 170
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 76
time I left, things had changed. Sorry, I shouldn't
have done that. But if you talk about the middle period
there, then there were two main types of astronomy
class. There were introductory astronomy classes, and I
taught all these classes. There were introductory
astronomy classes, large enrollments, and those students
would come by, and depending on their interest they
would either do a lot or do the minimum they could get
away with. And we had the observatory scheduled two or
three nights a week for the classes. For all the
classes. Then, in addition, we had a specialized class
for the beginning astronomy majors, a lab class which
was based around that telescope, and I either taught
that or co-taught that or worked with other people and
teaching assistants teaching that class. They had to be
in a graduate class, but as I said, the graduate program
got closed -- nothing happened to the observatory. Is
that enough detail?
Q. Yes, uh-huh. And then what was the third
component?
A. Oh, sorry. Yes. Then there was student
research. So these are highly motivated students
possibly doing senior theses, had one master's thesis,
and they would go and use the observatory on their own
and do research.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 76 of 242 - Page ID#: 171
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 77
Q. You talked briefly about the public
outreach component of that --
A. Yes.
Q. -- appointment, and you spoke about the
public nights. Was there any particular outreach as it
related to primary schools, K through 12?
A. I was involved with -- hum, a lot of
things. I took part in teacher training workshops, but
they at most just casually visited the observatory, and
we said here's the observatory. There were various
other groups of the public who asked to use the
observatory. Anybody who wanted to could ask for a
special visit. So the SAC Museum -- that's S-A-C -- had
an astronaut camp, for example, in the summer, school
kids, and they came and used the observatory. The local
photography club wanted to learn about taking
astronomical photographs and so -- so they came. And
really anybody who wanted to come, I would let them
come, but in -- Lincoln was very fortunate in having a
city observatory, and the main focus of the city
observatory was public outreach, and I was on the board
of directors and also volunteer at the city observatory.
So when people would telephone me up and ask can I bring
my Boy Scout troop by or something, I would steer them
to the city observatory because the city observatory was
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 77 of 242 - Page ID#: 172
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 78
much better set up for handling Boy Scout groups and
Girl Scout groups and those sorts of groups.
Q. What was the name of that?
A. That is called Hyde Observatory, H-y-d-e.
I'm actually still on the board of Hyde Observatory.
Q. And that has no affiliation with
University of Nebraska?
A. No, it doesn't. We -- and I'm putting on
my Hyde Observatory hat -- I'm still on the board
there -- tried to have a close relationship with the
university. So, for example, we would coordinate
things. We might do joint publicity. If there was a
lunar eclipse, I would be opening the -- what we call
the student observatory on campus. My friends at Hyde
Observatory have Hyde Observatory open, and we might
have a joint press release that said in Lincoln the two
observatories are open if you want to see the eclipse.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Martin, one thing you
might want to clarify -- I'm sorry, did I interrupt?
One thing you might want to clarify is that when they
shut down the astronomy program in Nebraska. I think
you're referring to the graduate program. There was
still astronomy instruction and observatory events going
on after they shut down -- to my understanding.
THE WITNESS: Thanks.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 78 of 242 - Page ID#: 173
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 79
Q. Dr. Cavagnero just brought to my
attention --
A. Do I need to say that? Would you like me
to say that?
Q. No. Let me ask you. He brought this to
my attention. I want to ask you. You know, you told us
a little bit about the fact that it was the decision of
whoever at the University of Nebraska to eliminate the
astronomy department and --
A. It wasn't a department. It was a program.
Q. A program. Okay. But despite that
elimination, the university continued to teach astronomy
classes --
A. The large introductory courses, yes.
Q. Okay. What else has continued to be
taught in the field of astronomy --
A. I haven't been there --
Q. -- at the University of Nebraska at this
time to your knowledge?
A. I've not been there for a few years. At
the time I left, there was a major debate in the
department about what to do about the majors program.
And there was a second external review that took place.
There was a review about 2000, 2001 which recommended
closing down two of the programs in the department; one
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 79 of 242 - Page ID#: 174
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 80
was astronomy, the other was science education. Science
education is totally gone. The -- and just
concentrating on three areas. These were -- happening
five or six years, and about five or six years later was
when the closing down of the astronomy program was
essentially a fait accompli.
There was another -- another review, and a
point that this second review made -- and this is in a
written report that I can give my attorneys to give to
you -- made was that the department could not pretend to
have an astronomy program when they did not. And this
was an issue they had to face up to. They either had to
turn around and hire some real astronomers or they had
to not pretend they had an astronomy major program.
Q. So if somebody goes to the University of
Nebraska now, or based on when you --
A. Right.
Q. -- were there last, they cannot get a
degree in astronomy?
A. They never could get a degree in
astronomy.
Q. Okay.
A. The degree is in physics. But in physics
there are -- now, when I left there were different
tracks, and astronomy was one of five or so tracks
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 80 of 242 - Page ID#: 175
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 81
there. And the education of an astronomer is mostly the
education of a physicist. This was true when I was a
student, still true almost every place I know of. So
mostly when I was an undergraduate I took lectures in
mathematics, physics; but some areas of physics instead
of nuclear physics, let's say, I had lectures and
courses in astronomy. Instead of an advanced physics
lab, I had advanced astronomy lab. And that's pretty
much the case nationwide. And that's probably the case
at the University of Kentucky as well.
Q. So I guess I'm not understanding. What
exactly was eliminated? What was the change?
A. Okay. The change was people.
Q. Okay.
MR. CAVAGNERO: And the graduate...
A. So -- and the graduate program -- and the
graduate program, yes.
Q. So they eliminated any graduate program in
the field of astronomy --
A. Yes.
Q. -- with a physics major with an emphasis
on astronomy?
A. Right. Now, graduate students who were in
the program at the time it was -- were grandfathered in.
I think one of them is still there, actually. But no
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 81 of 242 - Page ID#: 176
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 82
new graduate students were admitted in to astronomy.
Q. Do they still have the observatory there
at Nebraska?
A. Oh, yes. I haven't checked. I think so.
Q. Okay. So this meeting that Dr. Cavagnero
and Dr. MacAdam had with you was essentially to take a
look at the University of Nebraska Observatory --
A. Yes.
Q. -- and see how that was run --
A. Yes.
Q. -- as you understood they were beginning
the processes of opening up an observatory --
A. Right.
Q. -- at the university.
A. Right.
Q. Had you ever met either Dr. Cavagnero --
A. No.
Q. -- or Dr. MacAdam before?
A. No.
Q. That was your first. At that point --
A. No.
Q. -- was there any discussion with
Dr. Cavagnero or with Dr. MacAdam about any positions
that may arise as a result of them opening up an
observatory?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 82 of 242 - Page ID#: 177
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 83
A. No. No.
Q. So this was strictly a conversation about
the observatory?
A. Technical issues.
Q. Okay.
A. Programmatic and technical issues.
Q. When did you first learn that the
University of Kentucky was interested in hiring a
coordinator/director of their observatory?
A. I learned two ways. About the same month
the department, as all departments do, advertised in the
Job Register of the American Astronomical Society.
Also, Gary Ferland sent out an e-mail to various parties
who had provided advice and assistance with the
observatory asking for help in locating possible
candidates.
Q. And do you recall the year or month that
would have occurred?
A. I can give you -- the e-mail to my
attorneys to give to you.
Q. Okay.
A. I think.
Q. And you would have been one of the
recipients of that general e-mail?
A. I can't remember who else got it, but it
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 83 of 242 - Page ID#: 178
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 84
was a -- it was a generic e-mail. This is, again, a
normal thing that departments do. I get these e-mails
all the time saying we have a position, do you have
someone for it.
Q. And were you provided in that e-mail any
specifics as to what they were looking for in a
director?
A. The e-mail might have had -- I haven't
looked at it for a long time. The e-mail might have had
the same wording that the job ad had.
Q. I'm sorry, you have to say it again.
A. Okay. The e-mail might have had the same
wording that the job ad had in it.
Q. Okay. And you said that you saw also a
job posting --
A. Yes.
Q. -- on the Job Register for the --
A. Right.
Q. What was the association?
A. It's the Job Register of the American
Astronomical Society.
Q. In response either to you seeing the job
posting or receiving Gary Ferland's e-mail, did you have
a follow-up conversation with Dr. Ferland about the
position?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 84 of 242 - Page ID#: 179
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 85
A. Yes. The first thing was I was not sure
of the level they were looking at and...
Q. What do you mean not sure of the level?
A. Well, did they want someone with a Ph.D.
or not? And --
Q. The job posting or the Job Register did
not include that information?
A. Well, I got the e-mail before the Job
Register would have come out. So I -- what did I do
there? I think I e-mailed Gary back and said no, I
don't have any students suitable for doing this, or
maybe I've got one but he's too young or something like
that. And then I believe I did ask Gary if the
department was interested in a more senior applicant
like myself, and he replied yes.
Q. What was your understanding of Gary's role
with the observatory?
A. Gary seemed to me to have been the
instigator of the observatory. He and I had talked
about this a long time, so when Keith MacAdam and Mike
came, that was quite late in the process. So I don't
know how Gary -- or maybe when Gary came to -- Gary came
to Lincoln to give the colloquium, that might have been
about the time we were finishing the observatory or
building it, and he was very interested in this project.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 85 of 242 - Page ID#: 180
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 86
Somehow through me, he found out about the project,
possibly when he came to visit, whatever year that was.
And this got him thinking, and he realized that there
was a need for that sort of observatory in Kentucky. So
he asked me for a number of things. He asked me for a
copy of my National Science Foundation proposal, for the
funding for it, which I gave him, and he also asked for
a copy of the plans of the observatory, I think, which
again I think I gave him. And we had a number of
e-mails talking about the issues of it, and I was very
positive in this because building an observatory was a
very positive experience for me, just personally and
also it was one of those rare occasions where you get to
do everything in the grand -- that you say you're going
to do and more, and so it was a very good experience
so -- so I taught Gary that and really encouraged him
that yes this was a worthwhile thing to do and go ahead
and do.
Q. Now, you said your first inquiry back to
Gary after he e-mailed you about the possible job
position was whether it was -- a Ph.D. was appropriate?
A. Well, the first thing, I interpreted it as
he was looking for some finishing graduate student or
somebody to take the position, so I asked if -- job
market myself, and obviously this is something I'm
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 86 of 242 - Page ID#: 181
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 87
interested in, would a senior applicant be considered,
somebody with a Ph.D.
Q. And he assured you --
A. Yeah.
Q. -- that -- did he provide you any other
information as to what they were looking for in a
candidate?
A. No. I don't think so.
Q. Okay.
A. I don't think so. There might be
something in the e-mail, but I don't remember anything.
Q. Then the next step would have been your
review of the actual job posting?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Which was quite likely already in the
first e-mail he sent me.
Q. And --
A. I know, I also checked the website for the
observatory, because the job was advertised on the
website observatory as well.
Q. And did the posting advise you as to how
to go about actually filing the application for the
position?
A. Yes, it did.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 87 of 242 - Page ID#: 182
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 88
Q. And --
A. You had to fill in an annoying on-line
form. That's a-n-n-o-y-i-n-g.
MR. MANION: I think she got that one.
A. Which went like all the way to about the
first time in my life I've been asked what high school I
went to.
Q. For the record, what was that high school?
A. You've got it already.
MR. MANION: Wolverhampton or
something.
A. It was Wolverhampton Municipal Grammar
School.
MR. MANION: There you go.
MR. CAVAGNERO: That was my fault, by
the way. I didn't know I had the privilege of changing
those forms.
THE WITNESS: And I did -- and I did
get -- did get a -- get several F's in French.
Q. Did the job posting tell you whether this
was a staff as opposed to faculty appointment or
position?
A. I think it did. I was under no illusion
it was a faculty position. I certainly knew it was not
a tenure-track faculty position.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 88 of 242 - Page ID#: 183
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 89
Q. In making the decision to file an
application for the job, was it of importance to you
whether this position was either staff or faculty?
A. I would have liked it to have been a
faculty position, of course. I would liked -- I would
have liked it to been tenured and paying enormous
salary. The university administration in Kentucky had
other views. The University of Kentucky administration
had other views on the salary level for the position.
Q. But when you decided to apply for the
position, you fully understood that it was a non-faculty
position?
A. Yes. I think so. Let me clarify that
again. I knew it was not a tenure-track faculty
position, but it involved teaching now. So if a
position involves teaching, do you call it a faculty
position? Right? So that's why I'm hedging on that
question.
Q. Did you make any inquiry as to the
possibility of, although as advertised it was a staff
position, that there may be --
A. No.
Q. -- a potential for --
A. I did not. Because I know the way --
Q. You have to wait.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 89 of 242 - Page ID#: 184
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 90
MR. MANION: You're not letting her
finish.
A. Sorry.
Q. Did you have any information that there
was a possibility that it could evolve in to something
more --
A. No.
Q. -- than a staff? Okay.
Did you understand from that job posting
that this position as advertised had any research
component to it?
A. The undergraduate research was certainly
an intended aim of the observatory and at that point
most of my research was undergraduate research. So it
was a very natural fit for me, therefore, there.
Q. Did the advertisement lead you to conclude
that research was a substantial component of this
position?
A. No. No.
Q. Did you have any conversations with anyone
at the university regarding if you were hired for that
position, bringing any of the soft money that you've
told us about that you obtained through grant
applications would accompany you?
A. If I had been offered the position, then
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 90 of 242 - Page ID#: 185
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 91
that money would have come with me, and that actually
would have been very valuable to the University of
Kentucky because they could use that money for hiring
undergraduate research assistants and graduate students
and sending students to conferences. It would have been
very valuable money for the University of Kentucky.
Q. And that was the Nassau [sic] grant?
A. I had two grants at that stage.
Q. Okay. What was the other --
A. The other was the National Science
Foundation Grant. And that had money in it specifically
for student research.
Q. Now, when you say you could bring that
money with you --
A. Yes.
Q. -- I would infer from that that you would
continue to do work on the research associated with
those grants.
A. Yes. That's right.
Q. So, I mean, how would you have balanced
that with a -- the director position? Would that be
just extra time that you would have spent on your own to
pursue the research funded by that grant, or would that
be part of your, you know, daily work as a director of
the observatory?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 91 of 242 - Page ID#: 186
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 92
A. Well, during the in-person interview one
of the things that Mike asked me, Mike Cavagnero asked
me about was what did I foresee the workload of the
observatory director being. And so we sat down with
pencil and paper or something, one of us had a piece of
paper, and came up with just based on my experiences how
much time various things would take, and I think I
allocated on that something like two or five hours per
week for student research on that.
Now, university faculty do not just work
40 hours a week. Surveys of this show the average
university faculty member works 60 hours a week. There
were times in Nebraska where my day job duties, as it
were, were entirely -- almost entirely teaching and yet,
after hours I was still getting research done, papers
published. So my expectation was to continue the same
way in Kentucky.
Q. You anticipated that the work you would do
fulfilling the grant requirements would not interfere
with your primary responsibilities as --
A. That's right. Now, if it had, then
there's a procedure for handling that. One contacts
one's program director and explains a change in
circumstances, change in scope of project. So it would
affect it how the money was spent, that money rather
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 92 of 242 - Page ID#: 187
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 93
than being spent on my salary and my time would be spent
on paying graduate students or undergraduate assistants.
Q. But the money that could be shared with
the graduate students or whatever, that would be work
pursuant to the grant?
A. Yes, it would. Yes, the undergraduates
working on this -- all the graduate students working on
this would be doing research related to the grant.
Q. And you'd just be overseeing their work?
A. I would be overseeing it, yes.
Q. Okay. Did you in your -- either your
conversations with Dr. Ferland or later in your
conservations with anyone at the university, was it ever
discussed that there may be a problem with time
allocation in terms of your grant work as opposed to the
observatory duties?
A. I can't remember, I think is the short
answer to that. I don't think so, but I can't remember.
Q. Now, you told me that you had to fill out
an online application for the job.
A. Yes.
Q. You told me you talked to Dr. Ferland and
saw the job posting. What other steps did you take or
individuals did you discuss this job with before you
actually filed your application?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 93 of 242 - Page ID#: 188
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 94
A. Nobody. I looked at the website. There
was no discussion with Gary Ferland before submitting it
once he -- once he said you ought to apply for it. I
don't think there is any discussion there. And I looked
at the website, looked at the vision statement of the
observatory, what type telescope it was, a lot of
technical things which I was very familiar with, and
then I sent off my application.
Q. Was there anything on the job posting that
informed you as to the process by which the selection
would be done?
A. No.
Q. Did Dr. Ferland or anyone at the
university provide you any information as to how that
process would work?
A. No, and especially not Gary Ferland
because he was on leave right about that time.
Q. After you submitted an online application
did you subsequently follow up with any contact with
anyone in the department, forwarding them any additional
information?
A. The next thing was Mike Cavagnero sent me
an e-mail requesting me to send a proper application in,
rather the online form.
Q. And did you forward --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 94 of 242 - Page ID#: 189
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 95
A. Of course.
Q. Okay. An application -- did you forward
an application or was that just your CV and...
A. It was my CV and -- my CV and a
description of my relevant experience. It might also
have said something about my vision of the observatory,
but I think it was mostly my relevant experience.
Q. I have some documents here. Since we're
here we'll...
A. I can make sure you have the right one,
yes.
Q. I'll have to take that -- okay.
MS. KRIZ: Mark that.
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 1 marked.)
MR. MANION: Don't say anything till
she asks you a question about it.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, I just handed you a document
that the court reporter has marked as Exhibit 1, and
that appears to be a posting of the job position. I'm
going to ask you if that's the job posting that you
reviewed that we've been talking about?
A. I think it's one of them. I think there's
more than one on the website. But this was certainly
one of them, yes. I recognize the words "Founding
Director."
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 95 of 242 - Page ID#: 190
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 96
MS. KRIZ: Mark this as 2.
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 2 marked.)
Q. Dr. Gaskell, I'm showing you a document
that the court reporter marked as Exhibit 2, and it
appears to be an online application. If you could take
a look at that and advise whether that is, in fact, a
true and accurate copy of the online application that
you filed.
A. You have just given me multiple documents.
Let's redo that, separate things out.
Q. Okay. Looks like maybe that's the -- I
wasn't sure what was attached to your online
application.
A. It sure looks like it.
MS. KRIZ: All right. We'll move that
in to evidence as Exhibit 2.
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 2 attached.)
Q. Now, the application -- the online
application, was there any additional documentation that
you submitted with that other than answering the
questions online?
A. As far as I can remember, it was just
answering the questions.
Q. Now, I have an e-mail -- before I mark
this, maybe you can look through this and sort out from
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 96 of 242 - Page ID#: 191
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 97
here what -- and what I'm asking you now is if you can
identify from those documents --
THE WITNESS: Do you want to label
these?
MR. MANION: Just listen. That's her
job.
Q. -- what you can -- what you would have
submitted to Dr. Cavagnero after you had filed your
online application.
A. Well, this is the cover e-mail --
Q. Okay.
A. -- and it describes two documents, and
that is document number one, which is my CV, and that is
a description of my relevant experience.
Q. Okay.
A. So two documents there.
Q. So the cover sheet e-mail --
A. Yes.
Q. -- plus the CV, plus relevant
experience --
A. Yes.
Q. -- explanation, that would have been what
you would have submitted to Dr. Cavagnero?
A. That's all I submitted, yes.
MS. KRIZ: And we'll move -- mark
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 97 of 242 - Page ID#: 192
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 98
those as cumulative Exhibit 3.
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 3 marked.)
Q. I have other documents that I think your
attorney supplied to me along with your Rule 26
disclosures, or maybe I obtained some other way. If you
look through those remaining documents, can you tell me
whether you submitted any of those documents to the
university along with --
A. None of these were submitted.
MR. MANION: Let her finish the
question.
Q. -- along with any of the applications or
in response to any inquiry from anyone with the
department at the university?
A. These were not submitted.
Q. Okay. Thank you. I'll take those back.
After you submitted the e-mail or
responded to Dr. Cavagnero's e-mail to submit a proper
application, what was the next step in terms of your
contact with the university about this position?
A. I think my next step was scheduling a
telephone interview.
Q. Prior to being contacted about that
telephone interview, did you talk to Dr. Ferland or
anyone else at the university about the process and how
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 98 of 242 - Page ID#: 193
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 99
it was going to work and what the next steps would be?
A. At most, I might have told him that I'd
been chosen for telephone interview. Beyond that I
can't remember.
Q. Who did you have your telephone interview
with?
A. Okay. The telephone interview was with
the chairman of the department, Mike Cavagnero; the
chairman of the search committee.
Q. And that would have been?
A. Tom Troland. And I cannot remember
whether there's a third person or not.
Q. Okay. If I understand correctly, between
the point that you submitted your online application and
your telephone interview, you actually made the physical
move --
A. I did, yes.
Q. -- from the University of Nebraska to the
University of Texas?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. At the time that you had filed your
application or had made the initial inquiries or
discussions with Dr. Ferland, had you already
anticipated leaving the university?
A. I had anticipated leaving, but I had not
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 99 of 242 - Page ID#: 194
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 100
decided where to go to.
Q. When did you make the decision to leave
and go to University of Texas?
A. About the time the application was sent
off. So when I sent it off, I might have known. I'd
have to check my records on that.
Q. It looks like your application was filed
around April -- I mean August 16th. That sounds like
the beginning of the academic year.
A. That's odd. Can I recheck that?
Q. That may have been your response to
Dr. Cavagnero.
A. Oh, that one. Okay, yes. August 16th I
certainly knew, yes.
Q. Okay. Okay. At the time you filed this,
and I think the date on this one was July 9, 2007 --
A. Right. I did not know.
Q. -- did you know --
A. I don't think I knew for certain at that
stage there. I was already talking with Texas at that
point, though.
Q. So at the time you filed the online
application, you knew you were leaving Nebraska --
A. Yes.
Q. -- but you didn't know where you were
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 100 of 242 - Page ID#: 195
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 101
going?
A. The online application didn't ask you
where are you going to leave to. It's the little boxes
you got to check.
Q. Okay.
A. And the box said where are you employed
right now.
Q. And then by August 16th you would have
already made the arrangements?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. In terms of the difference in your
positions at the University of Nebraska and University
of Texas, was there a difference in the pay that you
would have gotten?
A. My -- the 12-month salary in Texas is
formally higher than my Nebraska one.
Q. So it was a better paying job for you?
A. No. I said my 12-month formal salary was
higher. So -- in academia there are complicating
factors. The average academic is paid nine months out
of 12. So that's why I said 12 months rather than -- it
was 12 months there. And then my appointment fraction
at the University of Texas was not a hundred percent.
And the reason it wasn't a hundred percent was so that I
had the possibility of increasing my salary by getting
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 101 of 242 - Page ID#: 196
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 102
more soft money.
Q. Okay. Did you -- in terms of how you
viewed the move from Nebraska to Texas, was this a
lateral move from a financial standpoint, or was this
going to increase your pay or decrease it?
A. I think if you looked at our tax returns
you'd find we actually made more money in Texas but --
but -- okay. Yeah.
Q. How did the -- I presume with the posting
there was some information as to the salary range for
this director of the MacAdam Observatory?
A. Yes.
Q. And how did that pay compare with what you
were earning both at Nebraska and at the University of
Texas?
A. It was higher. Assuming -- assuming that
I was paid at the upper end of the range.
Q. Was the pay a critical factor in your
decision to apply for the observatory?
A. If the salary range had been much lower, I
would not have applied.
Q. You -- we're talking now about the
telephone interview, and you do recall specifically Mike
Cavagnero and Tom Troland participating in that?
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 102 of 242 - Page ID#: 197
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 103
Q. My estimation is that somewhere -- that's
somewhere between September 10th and 14th, 15th?
A. I have the date on my calendar somewhere.
Q. Does that sound about accurate?
A. It's probably on their records as well.
Q. Tell me about that phone interview. What
information was related to you by Dr. Cavagnero and
Dr. Troland?
A. It was more them asking me questions about
things rather than telling -- it was a little
information was told, but nothing stands out there. I
assume that -- I assumed -- I still assume that they had
a standard list of questions they were asking all
candidates. This is normal during telephone interviews.
So, for example, they asked me about my experience with
working with teachers, and I explained my experience
working with teachers and my views on what teachers
needed and wanted.
Q. Was there any question that was posed to
you by Dr. Cavagnero or Dr. Troland that you felt was
inappropriate --
A. Yes.
Q. -- for that setting?
A. There was.
Q. Okay. Tell me what questions were asked
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 103 of 242 - Page ID#: 198
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 104
of you?
A. This came at the end of the interview
where Dr. Cavagnero said: There's a question that I
shouldn't ask or -- "shouldn't" might not be quite the
right wording, but it was something along that, but then
he said: But the dean will kill me if I don't ask it.
"Kill" again might be not quite the right wording.
Q. Okay. And what was that question?
A. Well, so he proceeded to ask the question.
Q. And what was the question?
A. The question was, did I have anything
which could interfere with the performance of my duties
as the observatory director. And since he had sort of
said this was an awkward question to ask because it
might not be an appropriate question to ask, I assumed
that he was asking did I have any physical disability.
So I sort of laughed and said, oh, do you mean do I have
any physical disability interfere, and I said the answer
is no, and that was all that was on the subject there.
But it registered very strongly on my memory.
Q. So the question was, did you have anything
which would interfere with your duties --
A. With the performance of the duties or some
wording like that. Now, my interpretation of that
question was, you know, did I have a sleep disorder so I
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 104 of 242 - Page ID#: 199
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 105
couldn't work at night, or was I physically handicapped
and couldn't climb a ladder. That's how I interpreted
the question. But the fact that Mike Cavagnero
recognized that was an inappropriate question to ask was
interesting, the fact that he said this was a question
the dean wanted him to ask.
Q. And did you know who the dean was at that
point?
A. I didn't learn that till much later. But
this gave me a distinct impression about the dean.
Q. And what was that impression?
A. Not very positive. He gave me the
impression the dean was a man who felt he could break
the rules.
Q. Did you have some outside knowledge that
questions regarding your physical condition were
inappropriate in the context of an interview?
A. I'm not an expert on these things, but I
do know there are some questions that shouldn't be asked
during job interviews, and I think with the American
Disabilities Act and so on, those kind of things that if
it's not specifically job related that one shouldn't ask
about it.
So Mike was getting in to a -- he
recognized at least what was a gray area, and he said
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 105 of 242 - Page ID#: 200
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 106
so. And I think he was -- I sensed that he didn't want
to ask the question and was being made to ask it by the
dean.
Q. Anything else that you can remember
specifically about what -- that telephone interview in
terms of the questions that were asked of you of
Dr. Cavagnero or Dr. Troland?
A. They were all very straightforward
questions about running observatory. And, of course, I
had been doing that for many years, so easy to answer,
and working with teachers, working with the public, lots
of things.
Q. Were there any questions posed of you by
either of these gentlemen as it related to your outside
interests other than astronomy?
A. Absolutely not. Unless that question
about -- anything about me which could interfere with
performing my duties could be construed that way, which
in hindsight it would be construed that way.
Q. At the time did you construe that?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. You construed it in terms of asking you
about a disability as opposed to --
A. I did, yes, as a -- was I a schizophrenic
or an epileptic or whatever, I don't know, but something
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 106 of 242 - Page ID#: 201
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 107
like that.
Q. Okay. Okay. Did you make any comment to
them, that --
A. No, I just laughed.
MR. MANION: Let her finish.
Q. Did you make any comment to them
registering your feeling that this question was not
appropriate?
A. No. I laughed at it and, as I said, I
said do you mean do I have a physical disability -- I
think they laughed at that too -- and the answer was no.
And particularly as the question being blamed on the
dean, I knew that it was not a question that Mike
Cavagnero wanted to ask.
Q. How long would you estimate that phone
interview went?
A. It was about half an hour, 45 minutes,
maybe an hour, something in that range. Very standard
for a phone interview.
Q. Had you undergone telephone interviews for
prior applications for employment?
A. Yes.
Q. And was this consistent with your prior
experience?
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 107 of 242 - Page ID#: 202
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 108
Q. Did either Dr. Cavagnero or Dr. Troland at
that point take the opportunity to tell you what would
be the next step in the search process?
A. They probably said that short list of
candidates, a smaller short list of candidates would be
invited in person. They probably said that because
people always do say that.
Q. Did you have a feeling in terms of your
prospect for the position after that phone interview?
A. No.
Q. Whether it was good or bad?
A. Well, no, from my point of view we had a
nice chat about everything, and I could comfortably
answer all their questions, in my own opinion, well.
Q. Did they provide you any more information
that expanded on the written description of the job in
terms of what your understanding was of the job duties
and what they were looking for in a candidate?
A. There might have been a few things,
probably were, but I cannot remember what they were.
They had no effect on me.
Q. Did you understand that this was sort of a
position that would evolve because it was a new --
A. Yes, I did.
Q. -- newly created? Okay.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 108 of 242 - Page ID#: 203
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 109
A. Yes. And that was very clear later when I
had my final exit interview with Mike Cavagnero because
he phrased questions in that term then.
Q. Okay. What was the next contact you had
with the university regarding the job position?
A. Probably a secretary e-mailing me and
asking me if I could come on some day.
Q. And that was an on-campus interview you
were invited for?
A. Right. Right.
Q. And did you have any discussions with
anyone at the university between your phone interview
and your on-campus interview about the position?
A. No, except I probably e-mailed Gary
Ferland in Cambridge to tell him that I had been invited
for an interview, because he was not on the search
committee and he was not part of the process, he
explained to me.
Q. Did Dr. Ferland share with you any
information he had obtained from the members of the
search committee about --
A. Don't think so. Sorry.
Q. -- about, you know, what their
deliberations were after these phone interviews?
A. No.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 109 of 242 - Page ID#: 204
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 110
Q. So you receive an e-mail inviting you for
an on-campus interview. I believe that that -- your
on-campus interview was October 10th of 2007?
A. That sounds right.
Q. Does that sound right? Okay.
In terms of your application at the
university, was there any reference that you had asked
them not to contact?
A. Yes, there was.
Q. Who was that?
A. It's right on this form right here.
It's -- it says can we contact your current supervisor
or some question like that. It was -- it was could I
contact my chairman, my boss, at the University of
Nebraska, and I put no down for that.
Q. Why?
A. Because I didn't trust the guy.
Q. And was this at that time Kirby or --
A. Kirby. This was Kirby, yes.
Q. Had he done something to break your trust
in him?
A. He and I had a -- well, he and I had --
the -- he was a strong advocate of closing down the
astronomy program, I was not, and that was our main
point of difference.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 110 of 242 - Page ID#: 205
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 111
Q. Were you concerned that he may relay
information about you that was inaccurate?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Had he related information to your
knowledge to other persons about you that was not
accurate?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell me what that experience was.
A. Well, it's -- for -- for example -- for
example, my last semester at the University of Nebraska,
he sent out an e-mail to the department advisory
committee, which I knew -- criticizing me for using the
observatory for public outreach.
Q. Why was he critical of you using the
observatory for public outreach?
A. I don't know.
Q. Okay.
A. The time had been officially scheduled for
me for that, and I sent a long formal reply to him about
this, which I can give to my attorneys so they can give
to you if you want it.
Q. So I guess what was the inaccuracy,
that -- just that his opinion was that you shouldn't be
using it as extensively for public outreach, or was
there some misstatement made about you in that e-mail
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 111 of 242 - Page ID#: 206
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 112
communication?
A. I can't remember without reading it, but I
can give my attorneys a copy to give to you.
Q. Okay. Okay. But you recall that he
criticized you and you felt there was some inaccuracy in
what he said?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Did you -- and you said that you
did file some kind of response to everybody he had sent
the e-mail to?
A. That's right. And to himself and
concerned parties.
Q. So based on that experience you had some
doubt as to whether he would be accurate in his
reference --
A. Yes.
Q. -- if the university contacted him?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Any other -- anything else about
your relationship with Dr. Kirby that raised some
concerns as to using him as a contact reference?
A. There were, and you're going to ask me if
I can give explicit examples, and I'm -- my brain just
doesn't currently have specific examples in there. So
they certainly are there. That's the kind of question I
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 112 of 242 - Page ID#: 207
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 113
would need an advanced notice of. I can give you a
rather long list, I think.
Q. All right.
A. Let's see what's a good example about
that.
Q. Let me ask you this way. Had you used him
as a reference before in your -- in an application for
another job?
A. No. Never.
Q. Okay. Is there -- are there professional
affiliates at the University of Nebraska who you did
identify as a contact reference?
A. Mike Cavagnero e-mailed me in, I think,
September saying that he noted that I checked the box he
should not contact Dr. Kirby. He asked me now that I
had changed institutions would it be okay for him to
contact Dr. Kirby, and I said no. And I offered to give
him the names of other people he could contact at the
University of Nebraska if he wanted to. And also to
make it clear what Dr. Kirby's views of me -- I was not
doing this because Dr. Kirby had a low view of me -- I
sent one or two copies of my most recent annual
evaluations by Dr. Kirby, which were extremely glowing.
So it was very clear that Dr. Kirby had a very high
opinion of my teaching, my outreach, my research and
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 113 of 242 - Page ID#: 208
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 114
everything. This was reflected in my annual
evaluations.
Q. Did you -- were you aware of any
relationship between Dr. Kirby and Dr. Cavagnero?
A. They probably had met each other. I
believe that Dr. Cavagnero was a postdoc of Tony
Starace, Roger Kirby's predecessor. So Dr. Cavagnero
was quite familiar with the Nebraska department. But
anyhow, Mike Cavagnero said in that -- promised in that
e-mail that he would not contact Dr. Kirby, and I took
him at his word.
Q. He sent you an e-mail to that effect?
A. Yes. He replied to my e-mail which had
the evaluations and explained if he wanted to contact
someone in Nebraska, I'd give him other names, and he
said that he would not contact Dr. Kirby.
Q. Okay. What references did you provide the
University of Kentucky?
A. I didn't. He didn't ask for them. I
would have given the names of a couple of colleagues.
Q. Had you been asked for references, who
would you have identified?
A. I would have -- I would have identified --
I would have identified Dr. Kaam-Ching Leung.
Q. You're going to have to spell that for me.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 114 of 242 - Page ID#: 209
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 115
A. Okay. K-a-a-m - C-h-i-n-g L-e-u-n-g.
Q. And was he affiliated with the University
of Nebraska?
A. Yes. He was a tenured professor there.
Like me he was also an opponent of closing down the
astronomy program.
Q. Who else would you have identified?
A. I would have put down Jack Dunn, that's
D-u-n-n, who is the director of the planetarium there,
because I did a huge amount of outreach activity with
him.
Q. And would that have been the university --
A. That's at the University of Nebraska.
Q. The university planetarium as opposed
to --
A. Yes.
Q. -- the Hyde?
A. It's actually -- it's actually -- no, Hyde
is an observatory.
Q. Okay. Okay.
A. So those two people could halfway talk
about my teaching/research side and my outreach side.
Q. When Dr. Cavagnero -- well, he obviously
contacted you to ask you whether now that you've gone to
University of Texas whether you could contact Dr. Kirby,
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 115 of 242 - Page ID#: 210
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 116
you told him no. Did you have any discussions with him
about --
A. No.
MR. MANION: She didn't finish the
question.
Q. Did you have any further discussions with
him about references or people that he had talked to or
had planned to talk to about you?
A. No.
Q. After -- and how long do you think that
this contact with Dr. Cavagnero about not contacting
Dr. Kirby occurred as it relates to your in-person,
on-campus interview? Was it before that, after that?
A. This -- I think this e-mail exchange was
in September. Again, I could find e-mails on that and
give to my attorney to give to you.
Q. Okay. We'll follow up with a specific
request for that.
A. If you haven't done it already.
Q. Okay. Okay. So you were invited to the
university for an in-person interview. Were you advised
as to how many candidates had actually been invited --
THE WITNESS: Can I call a time-out
here?
MS. KRIZ: Sure.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 116 of 242 - Page ID#: 211
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 117
THE WITNESS: Because my water just
ran out.
MS. KRIZ: Let's take a break here.
Let's go off.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by. We're going
off video. It's 12:25 p.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
It's 12:43 p.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, before we broke we were
talking about -- we were getting ready to talk about
your on-campus interview which occurred sometime in
middle October or early, middle October of 2007. Now,
before you actually came for the interview were you
provided an itinerary of what your day was going to be
like?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. My understanding is that you
interviewed individually with the search committee
members rather than --
A. Yes.
Q. -- as a group; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. I have that you would have interviewed
that day with Sally Shafer, Keith MacAdam, Nancy
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 117 of 242 - Page ID#: 212
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 118
Leveson, John Pica, Mike Kovash, Kristin Thomas, a
Professor Ghosh and Uddin?
A. Who is Mike Kovash?
Q. I think he was the director of
undergraduate studies within --
A. Okay. I met with somebody else with John
Pica, but I did not meet with John Pica.
Q. Okay.
A. I think I met with two other people there.
Q. And I have Carol Cottrill, Tom Troland,
and then Mike Cavagnero would have been the last person
you spoke to that day.
A. And I also met with the students.
Q. Okay.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Two of those people
you mentioned were...
Q. Right. It looks like that maybe
Professors Ghosh and Uddin --
A. I also went out for lunch with students.
Q. Okay. And did you -- you also visited the
observatory, did you not?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were accompanied for that visit by
some of the faculty?
A. No, by Mike Cavagnero.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 118 of 242 - Page ID#: 213
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 119
Q. Okay. Okay.
A. That was the very first thing we did.
Q. Okay.
A. There were two visits to the observatory.
That was the first one.
Q. Was it an all-day process?
A. Very much so, yes.
Q. Okay. Each -- did you go to the
professor's office to meet with them for the interview
or were they -- did they -- tell me about the logistics.
A. I spoke with each person in their own
office except for one of the people, we took a stroll
outside to talk.
Q. Okay. Did any of the interviewers have
what appeared to be a script or a list of questions that
they were asking you?
A. No. They -- the questions were all very
similar, actually, that everybody asked with few
exceptions.
Q. You told me you met with some of the
students.
A. Yes.
Q. Was that an interview or was it just --
tell me about that.
A. There were two meetings with students, I
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 119 of 242 - Page ID#: 214
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 120
think. The first one was Dr. Cavagnero took me out to
lunch with, I think, those students, and then there was
a more formal meeting with the teaching assistants who
were going to be or -- going to be or already were
operating the observatory. And then after dinner in the
evening I requested on my own to visit the observatory
at night just to see how well things really worked. And
one or two -- two, I think, of the graduate student
teaching assistants were there for that as well, and
Keith MacAdam was also there for that.
Q. In any of these in-person interviews with
any of these people we've identified, were you
questioned about your personal religious beliefs?
A. Only with Mike Cavagnero.
Q. Okay. The topic never came up in any of
the other --
A. No.
Q. -- interviews?
A. No.
Q. Did any of the other candidates ask you
about any of your publications outside of the astronomy
field?
A. Nobody asked about any of my publications
whatsoever.
Q. Did anyone bring up the lecture that you
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 120 of 242 - Page ID#: 215
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 121
had given at the university --
A. No.
Q. -- several years prior?
A. No.
MR. MANION: You've got to let her
finish.
THE WITNESS: Sorry.
Q. Up unto the point of these on-campus
interviews, in any of the information that had been
solicited from you by the university for the director
position of the observatory, had there been any
inquiries regarding your personal religious beliefs or
your religious affiliations?
A. No.
Q. Now, you said that the in-campus
interviews, the only person who mentioned anything on
the religious topic would have been Mike Cavagnero --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is that correct?
Now, you told me that you met with him
first thing --
A. And last.
Q. -- in the morning and last. In what
contact was the religious topic raised?
A. Okay.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 121 of 242 - Page ID#: 216
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 122
MR. MANION: The first or the last, I
think is the question.
Q. Yeah. Was it --
A. Oh, oh, oh, second.
Q. -- the early part of the day or the very
last?
A. The end. The end.
Q. At the end?
A. Yeah.
Q. Okay. Prior to these on-campus interviews
had you been apprised by anyone that worked for the
university that there had been any discussions about
your religion or your religious affiliations or anything
in the area of religion?
A. No.
Q. Tell me about the interview with Mike
Cavagnero and how this topic was raised.
A. Okay. Mike and I have exchanged e-mails
about this, which you should have, so I think we're in
rough agreement on this. So to the best of my
recollection, Mike began -- we had talked about other
things first, I think, such as the job description, what
the person would do. He then said something like I
check up on candidates very closely or carefully,
something like that, and he then said that he had
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 122 of 242 - Page ID#: 217
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 123
Googled me and one of the things which came up on Google
was the notes for my lecture on astronomy and the Bible.
And he then also -- in parallel with this he also said
that the dean would be doing similar checking and that
the dean would also be concerned about this.
Q. He's told you the dean would be checking
about your online information?
A. Yes, the dean had or would be also
Googling me, would be looking at this, and would -- it
would be of concern to him as well.
Q. These lecture notes that we've talked
about -- well, I guess for the record let's go ahead
and...
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 4 marked.)
Q. Dr. Gaskell, I'm showing you what we've
marked as Exhibit No. 4, and it appears to be a --
A. There are more things here.
MR. MANION: Let her.
Q. It appears to be an article or -- that's
titled Modern Astronomy, The Bible, and Creation, and
under that it has your name and the Department of
Physics & Astronomy, University of Nebraska. Is this
the -- is this a publication that you made?
A. I'm going to not answer that question yet
because you have given me multiple documents.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 123 of 242 - Page ID#: 218
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 124
Q. Okay.
(Documents handed to counsel.)
MR. MANION: Barbara, I think you only
have four of the 12 pages of the lecture notes there,
and then the rest is what? Your CV?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MS. KRIZ: Oh, this is -- okay. Put a
sticker on this one. This one looks to be the...
How many pages is that?
THE WITNESS: Let me check it for you.
MS. KRIZ: Is that -- is that --
THE WITNESS: This is certainly
missing pages.
MR. MANION: It says 4 of 12 on the --
on page 4, and page 1 of 12 on the first page.
MS. KRIZ: Oh, this is...
I guess I don't have all of them,
then.
MR. MANION: In what you sent us, you
had the whole thing, because this is what we got from
you in initial disclosures, and the entire thing is
there.
MS. KRIZ: Did you give me the whole
thing in your --
MR. SURTEES: Yeah. I'm looking at
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 124 of 242 - Page ID#: 219
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 125
the Bates numbers here and we go -- they ended --
MS. KRIZ: Here we are. I think I've
got a good copy now. Put that as 4.
THE WITNESS: Let me check it first
before you staple it.
MS. KRIZ: Yeah, before we put more
stickers on it.
(Documents handed to counsel.)
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 4 remarked.)
THE WITNESS: So now we've agreed on
the document, what is the question?
Q. I'm showing you now what we've remarked as
another Exhibit No. 4 and ask you if this is a copy of
a -- lecture notes that you would have prepared?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And were these lecture notes posted
on a website that was available to the general public --
A. Yes.
Q. -- one that you had access? Okay. And
how would one go about accessing those lecture notes?
A. They were on my personal website, and you
click on a thing that's there and a pdf file appeared,
which was this (indicating.)
Q. Did you have a link to your --
A. By the way, the website is on the bottom
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 125 of 242 - Page ID#: 220
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 126
down there. You can see my personal website right
there.
Q. Okay. Did you have a link to this
personal website on your University of Nebraska
professional website?
A. Yes. Most faculty have links to their
personal websites on their professional websites.
Q. When did you establish a personal website?
How long have you had that?
A. I think the answer is I don't know. It
would have been when we had a change in service
providers at some stage in the '90s. Somewhere in the
1990s, '95, '96, somewhere around there.
Q. And has that website been in continuing
operation since you've started it?
A. I'm a person that's rather slow at
updating websites. I know that my professional website
by the time I left the University of Nebraska, it was
way out of date. My personal website is also pretty out
of date as well. So things -- it doesn't change much.
If you're asking how long was that on the website, I'm
not sure.
Q. Okay. That was my next question. Do you
know when you first would have posted these lecture
notes on your personal website?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 126 of 242 - Page ID#: 221
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 127
A. I can't remember.
Q. Okay. But certainly in 2007 when you had
filed an application for the observatory position this
was a -- these lecture notes were available to the
general public through your personal website?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, you told me that Dr. Cavagnero -- and
we were talking about your on-campus interview with him,
and there was some conversation about this article,
these lecture notes.
A. Yes.
Q. Is that correct?
Okay. First of all, before we go in to
that, did you ever keep any kind of personal notes about
your interviews --
A. I did not.
Q. -- that day?
A. No.
Q. So is it fair to say that any information
you relate to me about those on-campus interviews would
just be based on your recollection as opposed to --
A. Yes, except as I mentioned, Mike Cavagnero
and I have exchanged e-mails about this, where I think
we agree what we talked about.
Q. Okay. Okay. All right. Now, tell me how
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 127 of 242 - Page ID#: 222
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 128
this topic came up in your on-campus interview with
Mike.
A. I just did.
Q. Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MANION: Well, say it again.
A. Okay. I'll say it again. Okay.
Q. He told you that they had Googled you.
A. Okay. I'll say it all again. Okay. He
said that he checked up on candidates carefully, and
that he had Googled me and through Google he had
discovered this article here, and he also said that the
Dean would be or had been doing similar things.
Q. And what did he say about the lecture
notes?
A. Well, the thing he drew attention to, and
I do not remember everything he said about these, but
the thing he drew attention to was that it identified me
as being with the Department of Physics & Astronomy at
the University of Nebraska.
Q. And was this a concern for him in your --
A. He -- the explicit question he asked me,
he made a statement that at the University of Kentucky
there were restrictions on what one could say and do
being associated with the University of Kentucky, and I
believe he asked me if I came to the University of
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 128 of 242 - Page ID#: 223
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 129
Kentucky would I abide by such regulations, and the
answer is of course I would, because every university
has regulations you can and can't do, and you take
workshops on these things and we have to sign
statements. So that was nothing unusual there.
Q. Did the University of Nebraska have rules
about what you could publish with your affiliation with
the University of Nebraska?
A. I cannot remember what they -- what they
were, but merely identifying somebody -- see, this
wasn't published yet. I think -- this is not a
scholarly publication, but if it were a scholarly
publication, as far as I know I could publish anything.
Now, what I couldn't do is use my affiliation with the
University of Nebraska to make money. I couldn't say
I've got some great deal, send me a check to Martin
Gaskell, University of Nebraska and I'll do wonders for
you. I couldn't do things like that. But publishing in
any area -- this is not a publication -- but if it were,
publishing in any area is just fine. If I published
neo-Nazi propaganda, I think I'd have some people
talking to me, but if I --
Q. But you were not aware of any rules,
university rules, that prohibited that?
A. No. And freedom of speech is a pretty
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 129 of 242 - Page ID#: 224
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 130
important thing at a university, freedom of research.
There are people at the University of Nebraska, I'm sure
University of Kentucky as well, there's a -- there are
religious studies departments, the philosophy
departments, philosophy of science, people publishing
these things all the time. But again, I'm saying this
is not a publication. These are notes on my private
website.
Q. Now, you said this is not a scholarly
publication.
A. Right.
Q. Why is it that you under your name, under
the title, you list your affiliation with the Department
of Physics & Astronomy at the University of Nebraska?
A. That's who I am and where I'm at. So to
take an example, Francis Collins, the head of the
National Institute of Health, has published a book on
religion and science, and at the time he published it --
it was actually before he was director of NIH -- he was
the head of the Human Genome Project. On the book it
identifies him as with the Human Genome Project, and
probably somewhere in there is his institution
affiliation and address. So this is identifying
somebody -- if they want to contact me, contact me at
the University of Nebraska here, look me up, telephone
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 130 of 242 - Page ID#: 225
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 131
me and so on.
Q. Is there a reason that you didn't put your
personal home address and contact information?
A. This not only tells you how to contact me.
It also tells you who I am as well. It says I'm an
astronomer, I'm at a university department. Just like
with Francis Collins, it says that he's now the head of
the NIH.
Q. You told me that these lecture notes had
been developed over a period of time.
A. Yes.
Q. Had you developed these lecture notes
prior to coming to work at the University of Nebraska?
A. Yes.
Q. And at that time did you publish your
lecture notes?
A. No, they've never been published. No.
Q. Or listed on your -- were they listed on a
personal website?
A. They would have first --
Q. Listen -- listen to my question. Were
these lecture notes regarding the topic of Modern
Astronomy, The Bible, and Creation, were these lecture
notes published on your personal website before you came
to work for the University of Nebraska?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 131 of 242 - Page ID#: 226
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 132
A. No, because I didn't have a personal
website before then, because I came to the University of
Nebraska in 1992, and that's relatively early days in
the development of the Internet. Web browsers did not
exist in those days.
Q. Okay. Had you ever, even though you did
not have this posted, did you have lecture notes prior
to your association with the University of Nebraska?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you hand those out at any time that
you gave lectures?
A. Not usually at lectures. They -- I made
them available to anybody who asked. And if there was,
say, a Christian group that was sponsoring a lecture, I
would tell them it was available and anybody in that
group who wanted a copy could have a copy.
Q. And would you have listed your employer at
the time?
A. Whatever it was, yes.
Q. Okay. So any time you had provided copies
of these lecture notes on Modern Astronomy, The Bible,
and Creation, regardless of where you were working, you
would always list your employer under your name as the
author?
A. Yes. Yes. It says who I am. And this is
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 132 of 242 - Page ID#: 227
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 133
done with many books outside people's areas, little
blurb in the book and it says who they are, where
they're from, what they work in, what do they do.
Q. Did you have any consideration of the fact
that listing your employer under your name would
communicate to the general public that this is lecture
notes that you prepared as part of your job with the
University of Nebraska?
A. The -- it says on the top here, "These
notes are based on public talks I've given at a number
of universities." All right? So this doesn't say they
are talks at universities. The one in Kentucky was
invited by the physics department. I'm not claiming
this was an official connection with the physics
department in Kentucky or for Michigan State or anywhere
else. So -- but I think the answer to your question is
a simple no.
Q. Did you have any concern that by listing
the University of Nebraska that you were somehow
communicating that the University of Nebraska endorsed
or agreed with your lecture notes?
A. No. No. We -- nobody assumes that the
university endorses our research. And if I publish the
value of the Hubble constant is 72.3, everyone knows
that does not reflect the opinions of my colleagues.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 133 of 242 - Page ID#: 228
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 134
Q. Okay. So you were telling me that
Dr. Cavagnero brought up to you the university
regulation. Did he actually show you a copy?
A. He might have done -- he might have, and I
can't remember.
Q. Okay.
A. He might have done.
Q. But either whether he showed you a copy of
the regulation or in his description of the regulation
you had been familiar with --
A. That kind of regulation.
Q. Okay.
MR. MANION: You're finishing her
questions.
THE WITNESS: I know. I looked to
Ann.
MR. MANION: She may have a completely
different ending in mind.
MS. KRIZ: I'll change it when you're
wrong, but I'll let you go when you're right.
Q. And was there any kind of regulation that
is similar to this at the University of Nebraska that
you're familiar with?
A. I have read through most of the regents'
bylaws, and they're mostly concerned about people making
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 134 of 242 - Page ID#: 229
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 135
money, not about -- not about freedom of speech. And
I'm not sure exactly what the -- now I'm not sure what
the University of Kentucky regulations are. I've not
bothered to go and look them up after the fact.
Q. All right. So after he'd informed you
about that regulation, then what happened next?
A. Well, then we talked about this, about
what it was, and I explained how I gave lectures on this
and --
Q. You mean what these notes are?
A. Yes, this Exhibit 4, Exhibit 4. Yes.
Q. And you told him that it was lecture
notes. Go ahead.
A. And I explained to him that I was a
Christian, and I gave lectures on these things. And --
Q. Did he ask you what your religious
affiliation was, or did you volunteer that?
A. I can't remember. We certainly -- it was
not a major deal, the conversation. He seemed to
already know -- well, he would have known because of the
talk 10 years earlier. The talk a decade earlier was
advertised as I was a Christian and an astronomer, so he
certainly knew that.
Q. Okay.
A. Now, I didn't quite finish your question.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 135 of 242 - Page ID#: 230
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 136
You had something else.
Q. I'm asking you to describe the remainder
of that conversation.
A. Yes. So he then talked about why there
was concern of this. He expected there would be --
would be concern.
MS. KRIZ: We're going to have to
change the tape here a minute.
MR. MANION: Hold that thought.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please.
We're going off video. It's 1:06 p.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
This is Tape 3. It's 1:07 p.m.
Q. Before you proceed, just so that I'm
understanding -- this is a very critical part of the
deposition today.
A. Yes.
Q. He brought up the regulation at the
university and then he asked you what these -- what this
publication or what this -- these notes were, and you
explained to him that these were lecture notes that you
used in lectures that you'd given at various
universities, then you told me that you told him that
you were a Christian.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 136 of 242 - Page ID#: 231
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 137
A. Yes.
Q. And you were not sure whether that was
something you volunteered or whether he had specifically
asked you a question about what your religion was.
A. He probably didn't ask me about my
religion explicitly here. He -- except, of course,
we're talking about my beliefs now.
Q. Right.
A. So I think -- I think Dr. Cavagnero
already knew I was a Christian at that point.
Q. And what makes you --
A. Well, the fact that I had given a
lecture -- I had been invited by the physics department
to give a lecture which was billed as being by an
astronomer who's a Christian.
Q. And what knowledge do you have that
Dr. Cavagnero was even aware of that prior lecture?
A. I don't. But people usually know what's
going on in their department, particularly when it's a
major public lecture.
Q. Okay. So you just assumed that he was
aware of your prior lecture?
A. Yes. And, in fact, I mentioned that once
this lecture had been given at the University of
Kentucky.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 137 of 242 - Page ID#: 232
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 138
Q. And did he comment that he was familiar
with that?
A. He told me he had not attended it.
Q. Okay. So then you offered that you were a
Christian scientist or --
A. We keep the words separate there.
Q. You were a scientist who was a Christian.
A. Right. Yes.
Q. And what else did you communicate?
A. We had a discussion of a few minutes back
and forth on this.
Q. And what do you recall specifically about
this discussion, is what I want you to tell me about.
A. Well, I know -- but what I wanted to do
was to clear up any confusion that he and obviously
others, like the dean, had about me here. So
Dr. Cavagnero brought up some organization, something or
other nearby that I had never heard of -- in fact, I
still can't remember the name of it -- which apparently
was some young earth exhibit museum or something that
was nearby, and he said that because of this, science
and religion was a hot button issue, should we say, in
the community. And I told him that I had never heard of
this place, and then I very explicitly said -- I really
got this clear -- I very explicitly said, those are not
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 138 of 242 - Page ID#: 233
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 139
my views, that I don't believe in a young earth creation
or anything like that. And that my views are very
mainstream, that I -- that I think evolution is how God
did things. And that also is, by the way, stated inside
this document here too.
Q. Okay.
A. Now, at that point --
Q. Before you move on, do you recall him
mentioning to you that in the state of Kentucky we have
a creationism museum?
A. That was what I'm talking about, yes.
Q. Okay. So that's the --
A. What's it called?
MR. MANION: She asks the questions.
Q. It's -- I'm not sure of it's formal title,
but it's referred to colloquially as the creation
museum. That's the organization that he specifically
asked you about?
A. I assume so, yes.
Q. The reason I'm asking you is that in your
complaint, and specifically -- in your complaint -- and
I don't know --
MS. KRIZ: I don't have an extra copy.
Do you have a copy of that? Let me pull it out of here.
I've got multiple copies.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 139 of 242 - Page ID#: 234
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 140
(Document handed to witness.)
Q. And I want to focus your attention to
paragraphs 22, 23, 24. Paragraph 21, let's start with
that one. You make a specific allegation that, "At the
conclusion of the personal interview, Mike Cavagnero
discussed Gaskell's religious beliefs and the exercise
of them."
A. Right. That's what we're talking about.
Q. Tell me in -- you told me that he
mentioned the regulation. Tell me what he did in
talking about your personal religious beliefs and the
exercise of them.
A. The precise language here was written by
my attorneys.
Q. Right.
A. So I'll say that. So the exercise --
let's see the wording here -- religious beliefs.
Religious beliefs, do I -- do I believe that the
evolution is a load of bunk and we're all made 6,000
years ago? No.
Q. Did he ask you that?
A. No, he didn't ask that. But I wanted to
make it clear that was not my view.
Q. Well, what I want -- and we'll get in to
that, but what I want to know for today's purposes is
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 140 of 242 - Page ID#: 235
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 141
specifically what Dr. Cavagnero said to you in that.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay?
A. That's going to be hard to remember word
for word what he said.
Q. Right. And I understand that.
A. Yes.
Q. But what -- obviously something led you to
tell your attorneys that religion was discussed there --
A. Right.
Q. -- and this is what they included in the
complaint. Did you have an opportunity to review the
complaint before it was filed?
A. I did, yes.
Q. Did you feel that there was any inaccuracy
in terms of how they described that --
A. It was not language I would use myself,
but I understand it's standard legalese, yes.
Q. Okay. So tell me specifically how
Dr. Cavagnero asked you about your religious beliefs and
the exercise of those beliefs.
A. Okay. So he's asking what is this, what
it's about. And --
MR. MANION: This meaning Exhibit 4.
Q. Meaning the lecture notes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 141 of 242 - Page ID#: 236
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 142
A. Exhibit No. 4. Exhibit No. 4, yes.
Q. Okay.
A. And I told him, and I can't remember
everything I told him, of course, but I told him that I
gave lectures on this, and that this was something that
I made available to students who asked me about that
question. So -- and so the exercise of them, I assume
the legal phrase there, this is -- means something one
does because of one's religious beliefs, and so if I
were not a Christian, then I would not be doing and
saying this.
Q. Okay.
A. So does that answer your question?
Q. I presume you did to the best of your
ability.
Did Dr. Cavagnero actually ask you about
the content of those lecture notes or --
A. No.
Q. -- just what are these notes?
A. I don't think we got down to the contents
of them, no, I don't think so.
Q. And did he ask you whether you had drawn
the conclusions and lecture on these issues because of
your personally held religious beliefs?
A. That was not necessary for him to ask it
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 142 of 242 - Page ID#: 237
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 143
specifically. He would never -- I would not have
thought of asking that explicit question. So he did
not, no.
Q. Okay. Okay. Did -- after you told him
that you were a Christian were there any follow-up
questions about what that means, what are your personal
beliefs as it relates to modern astronomy, science and
the Bible?
A. We discussed that, and again, I cannot
remember what information I volunteered and what he
asked me about. I'm afraid it's going to be a problem
with all those questions, what did he say.
Q. Okay. Other than you mentioning your
Christian faith, what other comments were made about
that faith and your beliefs?
A. It was -- it was -- it was all about the
religion and science issue. He did not ask me what kind
of church I went to or my view on any theological
question or anything like that.
Q. Did he ask you whether you have believed
in evolution or the theory of creationism or anything
like that?
A. I made it -- as you can tell --
Q. Listen to my question.
A. Okay.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 143 of 242 - Page ID#: 238
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 144
Q. Did he ask? Okay? I know you want to
communicate to me what you told him, but I'm asking
specifically did he ask you questions about this. Okay?
A. Ask that question again.
Q. Okay. You mentioned that you were a
Christian.
A. Yes.
Q. Did he follow up with a question about
what it means to be a Christian and how your Christian
faith relates to the topic that is covered in these
lecture notes?
A. We did talk about that a little, and I'm
not sure whether he explicitly asked me about that, but
I was going to say, as you've noticed with this
deposition, I have a bad habit of jumping in on
statements and answering the question before it's asked.
Q. Right.
A. So I bet I did that there.
Q. Okay. That's -- that's a good answer,
Dr. Gaskell.
A. Somehow I think you believe that
statement.
Q. When he asked you about this article
did -- was this -- did this surprise you?
A. It did. Very much. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 144 of 242 - Page ID#: 239
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 145
Q. Okay. Why?
A. Because asking about somebody's religious
beliefs and exercise of them, the phrase is, is a no-no
during a job search.
Q. But you told me he asked you what the
article was. Did you feel it was inappropriate for him
to ask you what this -- what these lecture notes were?
A. I think that any discussion of it was
inappropriate.
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether it is
appropriate for an employer to research a candidate on
the World Wide Web who is applying for a job at the
university?
A. I -- see, I have no opinion on that.
Q. Have you ever been a part of a search
committee or someone in a position to hire?
A. I have hired individual research
assistants.
Q. Have you ever gone -- been involved in a
process similar to the process that you --
A. Not as a voting --
Q. Listen. Have you ever been part of a
process in which you were part of a committee that
solicited applications for an academic or -- position
and served on any kind of committee that reviewed
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 145 of 242 - Page ID#: 240
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 146
applicants and interviewed applicants?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you provided some type of parameters
by the institution that you were working for as to what
you could and could not cover in the context of those
interviews?
A. I've been to a training workshop on that.
Q. And where would that have been?
A. That was at the University of Nebraska.
Q. And what did you learn as it related to
the topic of religion?
A. Well, the workshop didn't cover religion.
The bottom line is, don't ask questions about things
non-job related, was the bottom line.
Q. When you have -- had the -- been involved
in hiring research assistants --
A. Yeah.
Q. -- or have you -- when you have an
applicant, have you ever Googled them?
A. I don't think I have, no. After the
fact -- things about them, but wasn't a factor in hiring
them.
Q. Do you know how the -- these lecture notes
came to the attention of anyone at the university?
A. Well, after the fact I do. As a result of
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 146 of 242 - Page ID#: 241
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 147
things in the disclosures, yes.
Q. Okay. But up to the point that you filed
the lawsuit, did you have any information as to how the
university came to learn of these lecture notes?
A. Up till the time we filed the lawsuit, I
think I assumed that, as Mike Cavagnero had said, he had
Googled me and the dean had Googled me maybe
independently and found them. I think that's all I knew
at that point.
Q. Do you believe that there's anything
inappropriate about an employer Googling a potential job
candidate for a position with the employer?
A. It depends what they're looking for and
what they do with the information they find.
Q. Okay. But simply looking for the
information on the World Wide Web, do you see any
problem with that?
A. It's going to happen. And information --
information on certain protected categories should not
be used in -- or discussed, even, in a job search
process.
Q. And what forms that statement?
A. Well, for example, the training workshop
that I had to take at the University of Nebraska.
Q. But you said religion wasn't mentioned
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 147 of 242 - Page ID#: 242
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 148
there.
A. No, no, I'm sorry. I did not say religion
was not mentioned there.
Q. Okay.
A. There was a broad category of things that
one should not take in to account, like race and gender
and disabilities and things.
Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that the
way that Dr. Cavagnero came across these lecture notes
was simply by going to your professional website which
was linked to your personal website which contained --
A. I do now as a result of things that were
disclosed.
Q. You do have a doubt? You have doubt --
A. I have a doubt now, but not at the time of
the filing of the lawsuit.
Q. Okay. Okay. How do you think these
lecture notes came to the attention of Dr. Cavagnero?
A. Are you asking me about the documents
which have been disclosed and we have now?
Q. I'm asking you about the lecture notes
that were -- Dr. Cavagnero asked you about on your in-
campus interview, how do you believe he came to access
that information?
A. Well, according to the internal e-mails
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 148 of 242 - Page ID#: 243
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 149
that have been released, it was actually Sally Shafer
who first seemed to have done the Googling and found
these.
Q. Do you have any doubt that the way that
anyone at the university accessed this information was
simply by obtaining it off the World Wide Web?
A. Sally Shafer herself said she Googled it,
or looked on the web, or went to my home website,
something. I have no reason to doubt that.
Q. You told me that you had posted these
lecture notes on your personal website and that you had
provided a link to that personal website on your
professional website at the University of Nebraska.
A. Yes.
Q. By doing that, I assume that you had some
expectation that if somebody saw your professional
website, had an interest in this, they can go to your
personal website and obtain your lecture notes on this
topic?
A. If you went to any university department
you'd find almost all the faculty have links to personal
websites with pictures of their children, things about
hobbies, those kind of things. So yes, I expect that.
Q. Okay. So you didn't have any expectation
that this would -- these lecture notes would not be
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 149 of 242 - Page ID#: 244
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 150
available to anyone searching your name on the World
Wide Web?
A. Ask the question again.
MS. KRIZ: Maybe you need to... I'm
not sure I can repeat that question.
(Last question read.)
A. Okay. I did -- it was the "not" that was
confusing. I did not have any expectation. It's got a
double negative. Sorry. The negative is confusing me
there.
Q. All right. Let me see if I -- let me ask
it again.
A. Rephrase the question, please, yes.
Q. By placing these lecture notes on your
personal website and linking your personal website to
your professional website, did you have some expectation
that the public would be able to access this
information?
A. The public can access anything on the
world wide web, and with or without a link to my
professional website.
Q. In the context of how this was brought up
by Dr. Cavagnero, you've told me that he explained that
there's a university regulation and his concern was you
listing your professional affiliation with University of
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 150 of 242 - Page ID#: 245
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 151
Nebraska on these lecture notes --
A. Yes.
Q. -- and whether you would be able to
conform to the university regulation --
A. Right.
Q. -- which may prohibit something like this.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. After you mentioned to him that you
were a Christian --
A. Yes.
Q. -- tell me what happened at that point in
terms of the discussion about these lecture notes or
your religious beliefs or your religious faith.
A. Well, I clarified that I thought the
mechanism of evolution was how God did things, and that
I was definitely not a young earth creationist or
anything like that, and with this institute that he
mentioned I had no connection with it, I never even
heard of it at that point there. He might have told me
a little about it since I didn't know about it.
Q. Okay. And then what else was discussed
about your religion or your religious beliefs?
A. At that stage I am trying to change the
topic of conversation with him.
Q. Did you say anything to him that you felt
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 151 of 242 - Page ID#: 246
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 152
that this line of inquiry was not appropriate?
A. I did, yes.
Q. And what did you say exactly?
A. The standard response for inappropriate
questions is either you answer the question or you evade
the question, change the subject -- I tried to do
that -- and -- or you flat out tell them this is
inappropriate line of questioning. And what I -- what I
told Mike, since I was thinking that this was something
he was being told to do by the dean, was I said if the
Dean wants to ask these questions, tell the dean this is
not an appropriate line of questioning for a job
interview, something to that effect. So I was saying to
Mike Cavagnero -- his boss is the dean -- he wrote the
dean's name in -- there, and I said tell the dean he
can't ask about this. And then we did change the topic.
Q. My understanding is that he told you that
he had Googled you and that it was likely that the dean
would Google you.
A. Yes.
Q. Did he make any other statements to you
that the dean had Googled you, found this article and
had some concerns about it?
A. The dean having concerns was mentioned,
not what the dean's concerns were. So I was left with
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 152 of 242 - Page ID#: 247
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 153
the impression that, as with the other odd question
during the telephone interview, that Mike Cavagnero had
been told by the dean to ask about this.
Q. What impression were you left with?
A. I was left with an impression that Mike
Cavagnero had been told by the dean to ask about this.
And again, remember during the telephone interview this
question which he said that the dean would kill him or
something if he didn't ask.
Q. Did you feel it was inappropriate to ask
you whether you would have any difficulty conforming
with university regulations in terms of the publication?
A. I didn't think it was inappropriate. I
think to -- there are regulations and you obey them.
And will I obey the regulations? Well, of course, I
would. Yes. It's not a question you'd normally ask
somebody because if you accept -- when you sign up on
the job, you sign a piece of paper and you sign I will
obey the regents' regulations.
Q. Was there any comments made by Mike
Cavagnero in that interview that indicated that he had
some disagreement with contents of your lecture notes?
A. No. No. For all I know, these -- my
lecture note views could have been exactly his views.
Q. Did he make any statements that led you to
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 153 of 242 - Page ID#: 248
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 154
believe that he was critical of the fact that you had
published these lecture notes?
A. "Critical" might be a too strong word.
"Had concerns" is better.
Q. And his concerns were about the
publication as opposed to the contents of the lecture
notes? Do you understand that distinction?
A. I do. Yes, I do. That makes it a little
harder question to answer because if -- it was the
content which made him concerned. I'm just waiting to
see if you were going to ask me another question on
that.
Q. You know, was his statement -- did his
statements lead you to believe that his concern was more
about the publication of the lecture notes as opposed to
the content of what you were discussing in the lecture
notes?
A. I think both.
Q. And what did he say that led you to
believe that he had some concerns about the contents?
A. Because he had mentioned this being a hot
button issue because of this creationist institute.
Q. And when you used the term "hot
button," --
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 154 of 242 - Page ID#: 249
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 155
Q. -- was that a term he used?
A. No, it wasn't. It was my term for that.
Q. Okay.
A. I think we know what we mean by that.
Q. Well, you tell me what you thought he
meant by that.
A. No, he did not use that phrase.
Q. Okay.
A. I'm using it right now. So the discussion
was that this issue of origins is an issue in this area
of Kentucky and, in fact, elsewhere in the country which
there are strong feelings about, you get letters to the
editor of the newspaper, columns about it, sermons
preached about it.
Q. So you would not dispute that this is a
topic that generates a fair amount of --
A. Controversy.
Q. -- conversation?
A. Yes, it does. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Yes.
Q. So that was not inaccurate in terms of him
communicating that to you --
A. No. No.
Q. -- that this is a -- somewhat of a
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 155 of 242 - Page ID#: 250
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 156
controversial topic?
A. I thought he believed -- I believed him
when he said that, yes.
Q. Okay. And had that been your experience
before that these topics tended to have some degree of
controversy surrounding them when you have brought them
up in a university setting?
A. My experience is that it is not
controversial. And I believe I -- now you're reminding
me. I believe I actually said that to him, that my
experience was it was not controversial, my talks were
not controversial, my views were not controversial until
I showed up in Lexington. Because my views are, those
are the majority of scientists.
Q. Something led you to conclude that your
religious beliefs were taken in to consideration by
Dr. Cavagnero in the context of this --
A. Yes.
Q. -- on-campus interview?
A. Right.
Q. Okay. Tell me what led you to conclude
that.
A. Well, I was uncertain when I was asked the
questions as to what he was doing and why he was asking
these questions, but things were made very explicit when
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 156 of 242 - Page ID#: 251
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 157
I had a conversation with Gary Ferland.
Q. Now, if I understand correctly, on the
date that you came for your on-campus interviews Gary
Ferland was not one of the individuals you spoke with?
A. Right. Right.
Q. In fact, Gary Ferland was in England --
A. Yes.
Q. -- at the time; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Do you have any knowledge of what
Gary Ferland's role was with respect to this job
posting, job search, and the search process?
A. Do you mean what did I think then or what
do I know now?
Q. What did you think at the -- during the --
I'm asking your -- based on your knowledge now.
A. My knowledge now, of course I've read all
the e-mails released by the university, so I realize
that Gary was very actively involved in discussions
there. That was not what he told me at the time.
Q. So during the period of time that you
were -- that you had the phone interview and the
on-campus interview, I've asked you specifically whether
you were getting information from Gary Ferland about the
process and what was going on --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 157 of 242 - Page ID#: 252
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 158
A. Right. And I answered that --
Q. -- and you told me you were not getting --
A. Right.
Q. -- that information from him?
A. Right. So the -- what I gathered from
Gary at the time was Gary was on sabbatical in
Cambridge, Gary was not worrying about these things, the
decision was being made in Lexington, and he didn't know
what was going on there. But that turns out not to be
the case.
Q. Now, before we leave the on-campus
interview is there anything else that you can recall
that you and Dr. Cavagnero discussed at that on-campus
interview as it relates to your religious beliefs, your
religious faith?
A. No. I think we've mostly covered that.
Q. When you told him that you felt that the
questions were not appropriate --
A. Right.
Q. -- what was his response?
A. We -- that more or less ended the
conversation on this topic, and I was already trying to
change the topic so we switched over -- I think the next
question I asked I said, was, oh, by the way, did you
also Google my musical compositions. And so we finished
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 158 of 242 - Page ID#: 253
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 159
up talking about that.
Q. Okay. Okay.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Which I have.
THE WITNESS: WHICH HE HAD.
MR. MANION: So have I.
THE WITNESS: Apparently they're not
as controversial.
Q. And to be clear, you have no recollection
of Mike specifically asking you what your religion or
religious beliefs were as it related to the topic of
creation?
A. He might have asked me what my views were
on this. I certainly told him what my views were
because I've noted I have a way of answering questions
before they're asked.
Q. How long was your interview with Mike?
A. Maybe 45 minutes. This was not the only
thing we talked about. We -- a number of other things
and I can't -- there was a schedule. I cannot remember
whether we started on time. It was the last thing of
the day. So I'd say at least 15 minutes, maybe 45,
probably not an hour.
Q. In any of your other interviews with any
of the other search committee members were there topics
that -- or questions asked of you that you found
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 159 of 242 - Page ID#: 254
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 160
difficult to respond to?
A. No, I don't think so. And as I've said
before, they were not about religion.
Q. At the conclusion of this day, did you
have a sense of your prospects for getting this
position?
A. That's a question I just don't ask myself
with job interviews. I know that -- I was not told how
many other candidates there were. I assumed there were
a few. I assumed a few people would be interviewed,
because that's normal. I assumed they got quite a
number of applications.
Q. Did you receive any contact from anybody
at the university telling you, you know, you did well
with your interviews or giving you any feedback in terms
of the process?
A. Well, the formal notification was an
e-mail from Mike Cavagnero.
Q. That was not till January.
A. In January, with profuse apologies for not
having sent it earlier, by which time I had already
heard indirectly from other people in the process that
somebody else had been chosen.
Q. Now, you told me at the time that you
interviewed you had no idea who the other applicants
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 160 of 242 - Page ID#: 255
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 161
were.
A. I did not, no.
Q. Okay.
A. And I didn't even try to find out. It was
not my business.
Q. After the interview, after the on-campus
interview --
A. Yes.
Q. -- you obviously received some
communication from somebody affiliated with the
university about the search process.
A. I think --
Q. What was the first contact you received
after your on-campus interview?
A. Probably sending a travel claim to a
secretary. It was probably sending a travel expense
claim to the secretary.
Q. Okay. What's your next contact with
anyone that was affiliated with either the search
committee or the department?
A. Right. My next contact is with Gary
Ferland.
Q. And when was that?
A. That is in December. I think. Late
December, perhaps.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 161 of 242 - Page ID#: 256
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 162
Q. And he is still in England --
A. Still in England but was about to come
back to Kentucky. And --
Q. Did you contact him? Did he contact you?
A. Gary and I exchange e-mails about research
things from time to time anyhow, and I might have
mentioned, oh, I've not heard anything from Kentucky or
something like that, which generated some strong
response from him like: Why not? They decided months
ago or -- there was some strong response on that.
Q. So until you mentioned you hadn't heard
anything, he didn't bring up what he knew about the
hiring decisions?
A. We'd have to go back to the e-mails and
check, but I think it was -- he and I were talking about
other things, and I mentioned I had not heard anything
from Kentucky, and he was surprised, annoyed about that
since a candidate had been chosen for that.
Q. And did he inform you in that
communication that the university -- who they had hired?
A. I don't think so, but what he -- what he
said was let's talk about this. So we talked over Skype
about this. Actually, he --
Q. Skype, is that -- that's a --
A. S-k-y-p-e.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 162 of 242 - Page ID#: 257
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 163
Q. That's a computer -- where you can talk
over a computer with someone in real time?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. Like telephone.
Q. And do you remember when that Skype
session was scheduled?
A. Gary suggested first that we talk in
person at the American Astronomical Society meeting in
Austin, where I was at the time. He was serving on the
council of the American Astronomical Society, and he was
going to be there for that meeting. Unfortunately, he
had to leave the meeting early because he was time
constrained and we ended up missing each other at the
meeting. And I think --
Q. When was that?
A. The meeting was the second week in
January. And he came into the council meeting and left
straight away, and we did not visually see each other
there. And we spoke over Skype, I think a few days
later.
Q. So in terms of -- I have January 16th as
the date that Dr. Cavagnero officially e-mailed.
A. Yes. It's before that. Yes.
Q. A few weeks before that, you think, is
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 163 of 242 - Page ID#: 258
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 164
when you had the Skype --
A. No, it's within --
MR. MANION: Let her finish.
Q. When was the Skype session vis-à-vis that
official notification?
A. I'm going to guess it was late in the week
of the American Astronomical Society meeting.
Q. And was Dr. Ferland at work or at home
when he --
A. Well, let's see. He was in the U.S.
because we talked in the evening, and that would have
been in the middle of the night if he was back in
Cambridge.
Q. Was he in his office at the university or
at home?
A. Don't know.
Q. Do you recall?
Okay. And what do you recall of that
Skype session?
A. It was a fairly long, long discussion.
Q. And what -- did you bring up the -- I
mean, was the whole purpose of the session to discuss
the observatory selection director?
A. Yes, it was. Gary wanted to express to me
his concerns about the process.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 164 of 242 - Page ID#: 259
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 165
Q. And what did Gary express to you?
A. Gary very bluntly said that I did not get
the job because of the biologists. And I go --
biologists? There was a question mark there.
Q. Okay. What else did he tell you?
A. And so, of course, I wanted to know what
this is about, and he then told me that there had been a
very strong e-mail from the biology department which had
said that if the physics department hired a Christian,
it was like hiring a flat earther. You got the e-mail
so you can read the precise word yourself.
MR. MANION: She's asking for your
recollection.
MS. KRIZ: Right. Right.
A. My recollection agrees with what's in the
e-mail.
Q. And that he communicated to you that the
biologists were concerned about hiring a Christian?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. What else did he say?
A. That one of the biologists was the person
who had stormed out of my talk a decade earlier.
Q. Okay.
A. And then, like everybody, he wanted to
know what did Mike Cavagnero and I talk about.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 165 of 242 - Page ID#: 260
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 166
Q. And what did you tell him?
A. The same I've told you.
Q. What other --
A. He did not ask quite the same questions.
Q. Okay. What -- what else did you -- did
Gary relate to you about the process? Besides the
information about the biologists.
A. Let's see.
Q. Did he specifically tell you that there
had been an internal complaint filed about the process?
A. No. No. I did not learn that till about
six months later.
Q. Okay.
A. That was in a separate e-mail six months
later. He recommended that I talk with Tom Troland
about this. He recommended I call Tom Troland. He said
Tom Troland -- he said that he and Tom had talked a lot
about things here. Tom knew what was going on, and Tom
would tell me what was going on.
Q. Did he identify by name the biologists
that he indicated had been consulted?
THE WITNESS: Hey. That's good. Got
a good system.
A. He probably did not. He did identify him
as the person who stormed out of the talk.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 166 of 242 - Page ID#: 261
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 167
Q. Did you know the name of the guy who
stormed out of your talk?
A. Not at the time, no. I didn't then. With
the documents that are now being disclosed by you folks,
I know now. At least in theory. I can't remember it.
Q. And who is that?
A. I can't remember. But it's in there
somewhere. In theory, I know. Show me the e-mail; I'll
read the name.
Q. Is it Dr. Krupas? Does that ring any
bells?
A. Yes, it does. That sounds -- from what
I've heard, that sounds like the name.
Q. Any discussion about Jeff Osborne or
Sheldon Steiner?
A. Sheldon Steiner's name came up because
either Gary or Tom Troland -- now, this is all in
e-mails, everything now is in e-mails -- somebody
mentioned Steiner, and it was -- maybe I heard the name
Shelly Steiner mentioned verbally first because I was
wondering whether Shelly was male or female. So that
came up there, but really now we're in to e-mails, which
you should all have between people and --
Q. Before we move on to the e-mails, I still
want to focus on the Skype --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 167 of 242 - Page ID#: 262
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 168
A. Right.
Q. -- session with Gary Ferland. Anything
else that you can recall being discussed other than him
telling you that the biologists had gotten involved and
they didn't want to hire a Christian, suggested that you
contact Tom Troland as he had more information about
this?
A. Yes.
Q. Anything else that Gary related to you in
that session?
A. The other thing he thought was that this
issue had been brought up by the person -- is there a
Steve somebody or other in here? There's a Steve
somebody or other who is a staff employee.
Q. Steve Ellis?
A. Yes. He thought that bringing up this
with -- Steve Ellis was behind this, because Steve Ellis
wanted an internal candidate. Gary also told me, by the
way, that the job went to an internal candidate.
Q. So was your inference from what Gary was
telling you that Steve Ellis brought the topic of these
lecture notes up in order to sabotage your efforts in
favor of an internal candidate that he favored?
A. Yes. That was my impression, yes. That
turns out to be I think an incorrect impression, but it
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 168 of 242 - Page ID#: 263
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 169
was my impression at the time, yes.
Q. What else do you recall?
A. He thought the internal candidate was
vastly underqualified.
Q. Did he tell you who it was?
A. He did and I promptly forgot the name.
Q. Tim Knauer?
A. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Q. He did mention that Tim Knauer --
A. I went and looked it up on the Internet
months later. Yeah.
Q. And Gary's representation to you was that
Tim Knauer's qualifications were --
A. Were substantially less than mine.
Q. Substantially less than yours. Okay.
A. He probably had stronger language for it
than that.
Q. And what else do you recall about that
conversation?
A. That was pretty much it. The number one
thing was you didn't get this job because of the
biologists and your religious beliefs, because you're a
Christian. That was number one thing he came up and
said very bluntly.
Q. And had you reached any similar
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 169 of 242 - Page ID#: 264
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 170
conclusions prior to Dr. Ferland telling you that in his
opinion that's what happened?
A. No, because I did not know at that point I
had not got the job until Gary let me know. I was --
Q. Did he make any suggestions to you other
than contacting Tom Troland about what steps you needed
to take if you wanted to register some type of
complaint?
A. No, he didn't. No.
Q. Did he inform you that he had done
anything because he felt that this had not been handled
appropriately?
A. He did not, no.
Q. So it was just sort of information here --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is why I think you didn't get the job?
A. This is what I think happened. Yes.
Q. And did you ask him since he was in
Cambridge how he drew his conclusions?
A. Well, he said that he and Mike Troland
talked.
Q. Tom Troland?
A. Sorry, Tom Troland -- Skyped and talked a
lot about things.
Q. So based on what Ferland communicated to
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 170 of 242 - Page ID#: 265
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 171
you was it your opinion that he had -- Gary Ferland had
drawn his conclusions based pretty much exclusively on
what Tom Troland related to him?
A. He didn't say he had not spoken to other
people, but the one he particularly mentioned was Tom
Troland because he said talk to Tom Troland. I talked
to Tom Troland at the time. Tom is a good guy and Tom
will be honest and forthright and tell you what's going
on.
Q. And did Gary Ferland make any comments
about the other search committee members in terms of his
opinions about them and --
A. No, he did not. No. The only one
mentioned was this fellow Steve Ellis.
Q. And did you know --
THE WITNESS: I ran out of water
again. So time out. And where's lunch too?
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please.
We're going off video. It's 1:50 p.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
It's 2:21 p.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, when we last broke we were
discussing your Skype sessions with Gary Ferland which
would have occurred --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 171 of 242 - Page ID#: 266
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 172
A. Yes.
Q. -- sometime in January of 2008. You had
indicated that in that session that Gary had recommended
that you personally contact Tom Troland?
A. Yes.
Q. Prior to Gary making that recommendation
is it fair to say that your only contact with
Dr. Troland was in the phone interview and then in your
on-campus interview?
A. Yes. Now, let me interrupt you here and
say that the question you asked me before lunch, over
lunch, I thought of a further answer to it.
Q. Okay.
A. You were asking was there anything else
that Gary Ferland said --
Q. Right.
A. -- during his conversation about the
search process, and I remembered there was another
thing. And that was he said that the people in the
department -- I'm not sure whom -- were annoyed that I
had pointed out certain defects in the construction of
the observatory.
Q. Did he identify who those people were?
A. No. It just -- I don't think so. It just
annoyed people. If you want, I can elaborate on what
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 172 of 242 - Page ID#: 267
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 173
that was.
Q. Did it touch on the topic of religion in
any way?
A. I have deeply held religious beliefs about
compliance with safety codes. No.
Q. I presume you're being facetious.
A. I was being facetious, yes.
MR. MANION: Laughter.
Q. But -- so I don't need any further --
A. I don't think so. I just mentioned
that -- obviously Gary Ferland is going to be asked
about this, and I want to make sure our accounts agree.
Q. Right. I understand.
Anything else that you recall during the
break about that Skype session?
A. That was the only thing.
Q. Okay. Did you, in fact, follow up with
contacting Dr. Troland?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Was that via --
A. It was all in e-mails, which you have.
All e-mail. Everything is now e-mails.
Q. Okay.
MR. MANION: But she can still ask you
about what you remember.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 173 of 242 - Page ID#: 268
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 174
THE WITNESS: Right.
Q. Now, how soon after this conversation with
Gary did you e-mail Tom?
A. Fairly soon. It might have been the next
day, or two days. Pretty quickly.
Q. And what do you recall the inquiry was?
Just, you know, summarize what your e-mail would have
said.
A. Probably began Gary told me that. Let's
see. I asked him about the role of biologists. But it
all is in the e-mail so we probably don't need to talk
about this.
Q. And did you ask, then, for input from him
as to what role the biologist played in this selection
process?
A. I did, yes.
Q. Okay.
A. I think. Again, it's in the e-mails.
Q. Okay. And what did he say to you in
response?
A. He said we confirmed the biologists were
consulted. He expressed his own personal disapproval of
that. He said the excuse for doing that was that my
scholarship in biology had to be explored. He thought
that was ridiculous because I have no scholarship in
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 174 of 242 - Page ID#: 269
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 175
biology. He also said that he has no scholarship in
biology either. He suggested I contact Sheldon Steiner
about this. He felt he was not at liberty to reveal
what the biologists had actually said. He also told me
not to expect Sheldon Steiner to be very forthcoming.
And he confirmed that in a later e-mail. Sheldon
Steiner was not forthcoming, although he did not deny he
had written the e-mail. Either Gary or Tom also
recommended I have discussions with Mike Cavagnero, and
also there was an e-mail exchange with Mike Cavagnero
about this.
Q. Did Tom Troland, other than relating to
you that he felt that consulting the biologist was
inappropriate, did he offer you any other opinions as to
his assessment of this process and how it -- how you
were treated in the process?
A. He made it very clear that he felt I was
by far the best qualified candidate and would have liked
to seen me come in the department. But again, this is
in the e-mails.
Q. Okay. Did he give you any information
about the candidate who was selected?
A. I'm not even sure that he mentioned his
name. But my view was that Tim now was none of my
business. In fact, even though I had been given a copy
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 175 of 242 - Page ID#: 270
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 176
of his CV, I have not read it on the grounds I don't
think it's any of my business.
Q. Okay. Any other conversations or
communications with Tom Troland?
A. All communications from now on you should
have a copy of. They're all by e-mail. No telephone
conversations, no Skyping. You have them all.
Q. How long would you estimate this Skype
session with Gary Ferland lasted?
A. I thought you already asked that question.
Maybe 45 minutes, half an hour, something of that order.
Again, it was more than 15 and probably less than an
hour.
Q. Did you just -- was the sole topic of that
the observatory search process -- or director of search
process or...
A. Pretty much, yes. I can't guarantee we
didn't talk about astronomy in there as well. But Gary
was not happy with things.
Q. Okay. After you had this initial e-mail
exchange with Tom Troland, I presume he would have
responded to you either the same day or --
A. Oh, yes, he responded very openly and he
felt that candidates were entitled to some feedback, and
I think Mike Cavagnero felt the same way and they both
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 176 of 242 - Page ID#: 271
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 177
gave me some feedback on things.
Q. Okay. What was your next contact?
Either -- did you contact someone at the university or
did someone contact you after you had this e-mail
exchange with Tom?
A. Well, the e-mails went on for a few pages,
and again, you have all of them. So I --
Q. You did contact -- you did e-mail
Dr. Steiner to ask for his --
A. Yes, I did. And I did not know that he
was not the person who came to my talk. I didn't know
that. And I also e-mailed dean Hoch, who admitted that
the biologists had been consulted but refused to give me
any information.
Q. And were you specific advised in what way
the biologists were consulted about you or...
A. People admitted that this had taken place
because they knew that I knew. Nobody provided any
details. All I knew is this verbal statement by Gary
Ferland that they had said hiring me would be worse than
hiring a flat earther. That was the only thing about
the content that I knew.
Q. And Dr. Steiner declined to provide you
any information?
A. Right. Right.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 177 of 242 - Page ID#: 272
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 178
Q. Who else did you contact to --
A. Steve Hock, I mentioned.
Q. Okay. And he merely told you in an e-mail
that he had contact -- that the biologist had been
consulted about your --
A. He did not deny it.
Q. Okay.
A. If you look at the -- you have got the
wording of this so you can see what we said.
Q. Okay. What do -- just based on your
recollection, what else did dean Hock tell you other
than the verifying that the biologist --
A. He said the decision -- something like the
decision was made at the departmental level. He evaded
my question, didn't answer it, but didn't deny it
happened either. He was a typical dean.
Q. And who else did you contact other than
Steiner, Hock and --
A. Mike Cavagnero.
Q. -- Mike Cavagnero, and Tom Troland?
A. That, I think, is it.
Q. Okay.
A. But again, you have all the e-mails so you
can check.
Q. So you had an exchange with Mike in terms
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 178 of 242 - Page ID#: 273
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 179
of what you recalled of the interview and what he
recalled of the interview?
A. Yes, we did actually, yes.
Q. And did you recall having any disagreement
with his description of what had occurred?
A. No. No, two people can have slightly
different perspectives on a conversation, and my view of
things was, well, I'm being asked questions about my
religion here, what's going on here, while Mike was
emphasizing the -- more the reasons why he was asking
that. He did tell me that the conversation had been
cleared with the dean beforehand. Again, that's all in
the e-mails.
Q. You have mentioned on numerous occasions
today that you felt some of the questions were not
appropriate --
A. Right.
Q. -- based on what you knew about what could
be asked in the context of an interview.
A. Yes.
Q. Up until this -- the point we're talking
about, and I'm presuming this is sometime around January
of 2008, had you consulted an attorney to inquire as to
the legality of the treatment you received in this
search process?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 179 of 242 - Page ID#: 274
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 180
A. Could you break that down to a shorter
question, please.
Q. By January of two thousand --
A. Of which year?
Q. -- of 2008, which should have been when
you were formally advised that you did not get the
position.
A. Right.
Q. Okay? You told me it was sometime in
January that you had this Skype session and that you
then thereafter exchanged e-mails with Dr. Steiner --
A. Yes.
Q. -- Dean Hock --
A. Yes.
Q. -- Mike Cavagnero. This time frame had
you consulted an attorney to inquire in to the legality
of the treatment you received in the search process?
A. The -- my first -- I mentioned this to a
friend from our old church, who is an attorney, who
immediately referred me to these guys (indicating). So
the --
Q. Okay. When you say these guys --
A. Sorry.
Q. -- did they refer you specifically to
Mr. Manion --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 180 of 242 - Page ID#: 275
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 181
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. -- and Mr. Surtees, or did they refer you
to the American Center of Law & Justice?
A. They referred me to one or both of them
because this particular lawyer had done a case jointly
with them, a First Amendment case, in Nebraska.
Q. And --
A. So it was a personal recommendation of
particular people.
Q. And prior to this referral had you had any
prior contact with the American Center for Law &
Justice?
A. We get junk mail from them.
MR. MANION: So do we.
Q. Had you ever worked with them in any way?
A. No.
Q. Had you ever participated in any fund
raising or made --
A. No.
Q. -- contributions to them or anything like
that?
A. No.
Q. Okay. And who is the friend that made the
referral?
A. Jefferson Downing.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 181 of 242 - Page ID#: 276
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 182
Q. And was he someone that -- a colleague in
Texas?
A. No, I mentioned he was -- he was a member
of our church.
Q. Okay. In Texas?
A. No. In Lincoln.
Q. Oh, okay. But you did not contact anyone
immediately after your interview with Mike Cavagnero?
A. I was in touch with Frank and Geoff pretty
quickly after this.
Q. After this meaning what?
A. That would --
Q. After your interview with Mike?
A. No, this is -- no, no. This is where you
had your question.
Q. I'm trying to figure out whether you had
made some steps toward consulting an attorney prior to
the time that Gary Ferland and you had this Skype
session.
A. No. No.
Q. So it was only after --
A. I was unaware of the depth of what was
going on. My only intent -- only thought after the job
interview was that if I had gotten the job there is no
issue. If I don't get the job, then I've got a few
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 182 of 242 - Page ID#: 277
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 183
questions I want to ask Mike Cavagnero about why he was
asking me questions. That was the stage I was at when I
suddenly learned from Gary Ferland there's a lot more to
this going on behind the scenes than I know about.
Q. Did additional information come to your
attention through your e-mail communications with either
the dean, Dr. Steiner, or Mike Cavagnero that were
different than what Gary Ferland had related to you?
A. No. It was very consistent.
Q. Did you at some point learn that there had
been an internal complaint filed?
A. I learned about that in an e-mail from
Gary Ferland in July. I also learned that Dean Hock had
left.
Q. You told me about this series of e-mail
exchanges after your meeting with Gary -- or your Skype
session with Gary Ferland.
A. Yes.
Q. When did that sort of taper off or stop?
A. Oh, it lasted a few days.
Q. Okay. So still January, we're still
talking about?
A. I think all those e-mails are probably in
January, but again, you got the e-mails.
Q. Okay. Okay. And then after -- starting
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 183 of 242 - Page ID#: 278
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 184
in like February of 2008, did you have any further
contact with anyone at the University of Kentucky?
A. Not that I'm aware of. Except Gary
Ferland and I do work in the same field, and we might
have exchanged e-mails about research. But the only two
e-mails that came out of that from Gary which related to
things, one was he forwarded me a copy of Steve Hock's
resignation e-mail to the faculty before he went off to
have adventures in Washington state, and then a little
bit later Gary mentioned there being two internal
complaints or investigations.
Q. When do you think you got that
notification from Gary?
A. I think that was July of that year. And
again, you've got a copy of that.
Q. And was this -- did he just bring this up
on his own, or did you have some questions from him
or -- how do you recall?
A. I didn't ask about it. I would have to go
back to the e-mail and see what he said. We could have
been talking about astronomy.
Now, at some stage in this process the
requirements were that I filed a complaint with the
Kentucky Commission of Human Rights.
Q. Right.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 184 of 242 - Page ID#: 279
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 185
A. And when that happened I believe I
e-mailed Gary to tell him I had done that. Yes, I'm
sure I did. So that was why he told me there had
already been two internal complaints. And I did that
really as a courtesy to a colleague that this was going
on so that he was not surprised when the Kentucky
Commission of Human Rights investigated things.
Q. Did you have any discussions with anyone
at the university about any processes available
internally at the university about pursuing a complaint
of discrimination or mistreatment?
A. No, because those -- I know from other
universities those processes are only available to
people within the university. They're also, I'm told,
very ineffective as well.
Q. Had you ever filed an internal complaint?
A. Had I filed an internal complaint. I
don't think so.
Q. With any employer?
A. No.
Q. So when you said they were very
ineffective, is that just based on --
A. Yes.
Q. -- anecdotal information that was shared
to you by colleagues?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 185 of 242 - Page ID#: 280
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 186
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Now, the Kentucky Commission on
Human Rights complaint --
A. Yes.
Q. -- was filed after you had retained
counsel?
A. Yes.
Q. Or was that filed on your own?
A. Well, if I retained counsel, you mean we
signed the formal -- may I ask my counsel about this?
When I signed the formal agreement. If you define it by
that point, it was before that.
Q. Okay. But you had consulted an attorney
before you filed --
A. But we consulted, yes. So I want to
clarify what you mean by retained.
Q. I guess --
MR. MANION: It takes us a while to
get around to the retainer. So don't be too hung up on
that. Okay? Don't make us look bad.
Q. What I want to ask you is did you consult
an attorney at the time you filed your Kentucky
Commission on Human Rights complaint?
A. Yes. Prior to that. They told me it had
to be done and by what date.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 186 of 242 - Page ID#: 281
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 187
(Defendant's Exhibit No. 5 marked.)
Q. Dr. Gaskell, I'm showing you what we've
marked as Exhibit 5 --
A. Right.
Q. -- and it appears to be an affidavit that
contains your signature on the third page.
A. Yeah. Yeah.
Q. Could you identify that document as an
affidavit that you supplied along with your charge of
discrimination --
A. Yes, I can.
Q. -- with the Kentucky Commission on Human
Rights?
A. Yeah.
Q. I wanted to focus on paragraph 3 of that
affidavit, the first page -- page 2 of 4.
A. 2 of 4.
Q. It begins in October 2007.
A. This is 2 of 4, the big paragraph.
Q. Yes. In that second sentence, it says,
"At the end of the day, the chairman of the department,
Professor Michael Cavagnero, asked me extensive and
explicit questions about my" --
A. Right.
Q. -- "religious beliefs."
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 187 of 242 - Page ID#: 282
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 188
A. This is all -- we've discussed earlier,
yes.
MR. MANION: Let her ask a question.
Q. "He began by saying that my religious
beliefs and my expression of them would be a matter of
concern to the dean and the College -- of the College of
Arts and Sciences." He specifically told you that the
expression of your religious beliefs was a matter of
concern to the dean?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that?
A. Right. Would be a matter of concern to
the dean. Now, they didn't say it had been or was or...
Q. And was it merely the -- your expression
of your religious beliefs as opposed to what your actual
religious beliefs were?
A. This is an expression of my religious
beliefs.
MR. MANION: Indicating Exhibit 4?
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I'm
indicating Exhibit 4 over here, yes.
Q. So your inference from the statement was
that Dr. Cavagnero was referencing your lecture notes
when he mentioned that Dr. -- that dean Hock had some
concerns about your religious beliefs?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 188 of 242 - Page ID#: 283
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 189
A. It was -- it was the lecture notes and the
fact that I would give talks on this topic.
Q. You make the next statement, "The line of
questioning was therefore not accidental, inappropriate
small talk, but a premeditated line of questioning."
A. Uh-huh.
Q. What did you mean by that?
A. Well, any discussion that can be small
talk, we could have talked about my children or
something like that but -- and actually asking questions
about somebody's family is not a thing to bring into the
job interview either, but often we talk about our kids
and things. So, I mean, it wasn't like that. It wasn't
that Mike Cavagnero just said, oh, I happened to find
this, this is interesting, I found your article really
interesting or something like that. No, he's saying
this is a matter of concern, it's going to be a matter
of concern to the dean. And that's why I say -- I got a
clear impression, that -- this is verified later -- that
this was a conversation that the dean knew about.
Q. So you're -- what I'm understanding you to
say is that your belief was Dr. Cavagnero was asking you
these questions because he had been directed by the dean
to --
A. That was my main impression, yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 189 of 242 - Page ID#: 284
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 190
Q. Okay. Okay.
A. And he confirms in later documents
released that he had indeed discussed this with the
dean.
Q. What e-mail are you referencing and what
specifically did it say that it...
A. Let's see. He -- an e-mail in -- one of
the e-mails in January, again which you have, he
verified that the conversation had been cleared with the
dean. He said the dean was -- Mike Cavagnero himself
felt that what he was doing was okay because he had
cleared this with the dean.
Q. You -- the second to the last sentence,
"The chairman gave the impression that there had been
considerable investigation already of my religious
beliefs and my expression of them."
What did the chairman say to you which led
you to that conclusion, that there had been a
considerable investigation regarding your religious
beliefs and your expression of them?
A. Right. This is an impression. This is
not hard evidence of this. So it's hard to say what
gave an impression there. It turns out to have been a
correct impression, by the way, from what we know. It's
a little hard to say what gave an impression about
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 190 of 242 - Page ID#: 285
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 191
something. The mere fact it was being asked, the way it
was being asked, things were brought up, why it was a
concern. These were not things that one person on his
own would probably have come up with. That's probably a
good answer to that question. I thought that the range
of things mentioned was nothing that one person would
necessarily on his own would have come up with.
Q. In your mind was Dr. Cavagnero asking you
what these lecture notes were the same as asking you
what your religious beliefs were?
A. I have to think about that. These lecture
notes are about my religious beliefs, and so again, I
told him what my beliefs were and this was not
necessarily because of an explicit question that he
asked.
Q. In your lecture notes, and I'm quoting,
you make a statement that it is true that there are
significant scientific problems in evolutionary theory.
A. Yes.
Q. Is that a religious belief?
A. No, that's a scientific statement.
Q. And you go on further to say, "that these
problems are bigger than is usually made out in
introductory geology/biology courses, but the real
problem with humanistic evolution is in the unwarranted
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 191 of 242 - Page ID#: 286
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 192
atheistic assumptions and extrapolations.
A. Right.
Q. Is that a statement that you make?
A. Yes. Can you show me what page we're on
because that's --
Q. You know, I don't know what page that's
on. I just wrote the note down. But I can locate it
for you.
A. I can probably find it. There are really
two statements there, and you might be missing a comma
between them or something.
MR. MANION: Let's try page 5 of 12.
In the last big -- about the third paragraph up from the
bottom, the middle of the paragraph, "It is true." Is
that what we were just -- it is true that there are
significant scientific problems?
MS. KRIZ: Uh-huh.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MR. MANION: That's where she's
reading from.
THE WITNESS: Okay.
Q. Would you agree that that statement is
drawing a scientific conclusion?
A. There are two statements there. There's a
comma in the middle of the sentence and a but. And so
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 192 of 242 - Page ID#: 287
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 193
there are two things in there. So you can't say that
statement because there are two things there.
So the first one is, "scientific problems
in evolutionary theory (a good thing or else many
biologists and geologists would be out of a job)," that
is a scientific statement. There are actually about
three statements here. There should be a comma there.
"And these problems are bigger than is usually made out
in introductory biology and geology courses." That is
true as well. That is true just about every subject
toward the university. The issues are always bigger
than they are made out to be in the introductory course.
We gloss over, we simplify things in the introductory
courses. And what's really going on is always a little
bit more complicated and sometimes wrong too. Okay.
And then I say, "but the real problem of
humanistic evolution is the unwarranted atheistic
assumptions and extrapolations." Now, that is talking
about people drawing religious conclusions from the
science. Now --
Q. When you use the term "humanistic
evolution," is that a scientific or religious statement?
A. The use of the word "humanistic" here is a
religious statement, religious category. The word is
also used to mean someone who studies the humanities,
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 193 of 242 - Page ID#: 288
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 194
but that's not the way I'm using it here. The word
"humanistic" is also used to mean someone who studies
the humanities. But that's -- and a few other
dictionary meanings as well, but that is not the usage
I'm using here.
Q. Would you agree that contained within
these lecture notes are scientific comments?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you believe that when you make as a
scientist a scientific comment that it is fair game by
other scientists to review that comment and to question
and research its validity?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you think the fact that because your
scientific comments were included in lecture notes that
also reference religious beliefs that that somehow made
them outside the limits of appropriate comment or
research by other scientists?
A. It could have been okay for somebody to go
very slightly through this and only read the scientific
bits.
In a search I witnessed at the University
of Nebraska, I saw a secretary one afternoon with a
black pen, and she was going over with a black pen
through people's applications and she was blacking out
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 194 of 242 - Page ID#: 289
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 195
all such things that were not scientific and not
relevant to the applications, using -- blocking out what
people mentioned their hobbies and things like that,
anything that mentioned their families, their kids,
anything that was inappropriate to ask about, she was
blacking it out.
So if somebody had done that and blacked
this out and given only the scientific statements to the
search committee, that would have been fine.
Q. But you think that because -- that they
should have picked and chosen out from your lecture
notes what was scientific to read and then disregard
anything that was --
A. Yes.
Q. -- premised on your religious beliefs?
A. Yes. I think it would be rather silly,
but yes.
Q. Okay. Did Dr. Cavagnero ask you
specifically about any of the statements that are
contained within your notes?
A. No. We talked only in general terms about
it.
Q. Now, you -- would you agree that this
article does talk -- touch on issues relating to
biology, the field of biology?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 195 of 242 - Page ID#: 290
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 196
A. Very slightly. And let's try to find
where it does. Just say, yes, it does. You can ask
further questions. In a very small way.
Q. Do you -- the fact that you have signed
this as a member of the astronomy department at the
University of Texas, you're referencing concepts of
religion, biology and astronomy --
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- what is it about the university's
reading this and considering this in the context of
considering your application that you feel is
inappropriate?
A. Because this conveys my religious beliefs.
I think that if I had a document like this and I was
advocating atheism, which people do have things like
this, I don't think it would be an issue.
Q. Are you advocating some position in these
lecture notes?
A. I say what I'm doing right here in the
summary at the beginning here, and I state that this is
intended for Christians who are interested in these
questions here. And this morning when you were asking
me questions, I said in the lecture -- this is from the
lecture notes -- there are three things that I'm doing,
and one thing is getting people to understand that there
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 196 of 242 - Page ID#: 291
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 197
are many famous scientists who are religious. So that
is advocating a religious, okay, point of view. I
also --
Q. But it doesn't sound like you're talking
about any specific religion. You're just -- you're just
informing people that there are scientists who also are
religious people --
A. Yes, I am.
Q. -- regardless of what their beliefs are?
A. That's right. Yes.
Q. Okay. All right. Go ahead and finish
your answer.
A. Well, let's see, there were three things.
Then --
Q. My question is, you know, when you're
talking about science and biology and religion all in
one article, why is it inappropriate for an academic
employer to take a look at what you wrote in considering
your application for employment?
A. If they only look at the science part of
it, that might be okay. Now, I say might be okay
because what was being of concern here was the biology.
I do not teach biology. One little thing I can probably
add to your question do I remember things of my
conversation with Mike Cavagnero, one little thing we
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 197 of 242 - Page ID#: 292
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 198
discussed was what I teach, and I said I teach
biology -- I'm sorry. Cancel that one. Astronomy is
what I teach, not biology. That's in the e-mails and
things. So in physics and astronomy, which I'm familiar
with, we do not ask about people's interests and beliefs
in Germanic languages or things like that. Germanic
language scholarship, their theory the origin of
languages could be totally crackpot. We don't care
about that. It has nothing to do with the job at hand,
which is teaching astronomy and physics.
Q. You've referenced a number of times that
since you filed the lawsuit --
A. Right.
Q. -- you've had an opportunity to review
some of the --
A. Yes.
Q. -- documents that the university supplied.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you specifically have a chance to
review the e-mail in which the biologists were
consulted?
A. I did, yes.
Q. And do you recall that the referral was
to -- for the biologists to review your lecture notes
and to comment on the scientific integrity of your
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 198 of 242 - Page ID#: 293
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 199
lecture notes?
A. What was the question?
Q. Do you recall that in -- about the e-mail?
What specifically -- what issue was framed to the
biologists that they were consulted about?
A. It's been too long since I have read them
and there are 300 pages of e-mail so I can't remember
that.
Q. But from your testimony, my inference is
that you feel that your statements in your complaint
have been verified or supported by the documentation
that has subsequently been supplied to you.
A. And greatly augmented, yes.
Q. So my question is now that you've had an
opportunity to actually review the e-mail that referred
this matter to the biologists, what was inappropriate
about that?
A. That the issue really is not my beliefs in
biology, which the biologist got totally wrong here.
It's the religious aspect of it. They are assuming that
my religious views are antiscience, antibiology. They
did not read this thing closely. They did not read
where I very clearly, explicitly state in here that I
have no trouble with the theory of evolution. None of
the e-mails mentioned that. They also couldn't get my
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 199 of 242 - Page ID#: 294
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 200
name right either.
Q. You indicate that these are notes or
lecture notes that you've kind of -- that have kind of
evolved over time. Now, do you actually hand these out
to students on any occasion?
A. I make them available to -- within limits,
anybody who wants one.
Q. And when you have provided this
information to students, do you specifically tell them
that this -- this has nothing to do with my affiliation
with the university? It is only my personal religious
beliefs?
A. I do emphasize these are my personal views
and beliefs. I don't bother saying it's not those of
the university. Everyone knows these are not the views
of the university.
Q. Do you believe that it's appropriate for a
department chair to review any information that one of
their faculty or staff members would be disseminating to
the student body to determine whether it's appropriate?
A. Not in the area of religious expression,
no.
Q. Have you ever in the context of any of the
prior job applications that you filed, have you ever
been questioned by anyone regarding these lecture notes?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 200 of 242 - Page ID#: 295
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 201
A. No.
Q. Other than these lecture notes, are there
any other publications that are contained within your
personal website that reference religious topics?
A. Some of my musical compositions have
sacred texts. But nobody has talked about this.
Q. Do you continue to have a personal
website?
A. I do, yes.
Q. And is it the same website that you had
when you were at the University of Nebraska?
A. No, because -- and one important -- I have
removed this from the website.
Q. Okay. Why did you remove this from the
website?
A. Well, because of -- I was intimidated.
Q. What do you mean you were intimidated?
A. Well, intimidated means I felt threatened
that this would hurt my job prospects if I had it up
there.
Q. Now, we were talking about the human
rights complaint that you filed, and we specifically
talked about the affidavit that you supplied along with
that. You told me that after you filed your complaint
you made a courtesy communication to Dr. Ferland --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 201 of 242 - Page ID#: 296
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 202
A. Yes.
Q. -- to tell him that you had filed the
complaint --
A. I think so, yes.
Q. -- and give him sort of a heads up.
A. Yes.
Q. Was it at that point that he told you
about an internal investigation?
A. I think that was what prompted him to say
that. I believe that the language is Gary Ferland said
maybe they anticipated your complaint, or something like
that. Again, you've got the e-mails. You can read
that.
Q. And did he tell you about the -- what
conclusions were drawn as a result of that?
A. Yes. He said that he thought -- he said
he thought it'd been reviewed by the university lawyers
who had decided in favor of the department.
Q. And did he tell you what his source of
information was?
A. No.
Q. Did you question him?
A. No.
Q. Did you infer from his statement that
somehow he had personal knowledge about the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 202 of 242 - Page ID#: 297
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 203
investigation and what the conclusion was?
A. Well, people talk about things in
departments, and so he heard it from somebody.
Q. Did he tell you who had actually pursued
that complaint?
A. He did not, no. He said -- I think he
said there was only -- I can't remember if he said there
was one or two complaints. I think he only mentioned
one complaint. I think it was only with the discovery
process we found there to be two complaints.
Q. What was the second complaint?
A. No, there was two people.
Q. Oh.
A. Right. So the two names were I believe
that Tom Troland was the author of one complaint and the
undergraduate director of studies was the other, I
think.
Q. Michael Kovash.
A. Yes.
Q. And just for the record, there was one
complaint and then Troland was interviewed as part of
that investigation. So...
A. Okay. So what was the role of --
MR. MANION: We're not saying that
there were two complaint processes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 203 of 242 - Page ID#: 298
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 204
MS. KRIZ: Okay. Okay.
MR. MANION: Two complainants I guess
in one process.
MS. KRIZ: Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.
Okay.
MR. MANION: If that's the question.
Q. And Gary Ferland specifically told you
that the university attorneys had reviewed this?
A. Yes. He said university lawyers.
Q. And when he -- did he specifically mention
Mike Kovash and Tom Troland in that conversation?
A. No, no names were mentioned there. Just
that there had been a complaint.
Q. Now, in terms of Mike Kovash --
A. Yes.
Q. -- you did interview -- have an interview
with him when you were on campus.
A. Apparently I did, yes.
Q. You have no recollection of that?
A. It was obviously an unmemorable interview.
Q. And other than that, which you can't
really recall, do you have any recollection of any other
contact whatsoever with Mike Kovash?
A. No. I can't even remember talking with
him.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 204 of 242 - Page ID#: 299
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 205
Q. And specifically he was not present or
privy to any of the conversation between you and Mike
Cavagnero?
A. No.
Q. On campus?
A. It was alone in his office.
MS. KRIZ: We need to change the tape.
THE WITNESS: I think we have a
time-out.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please.
We're going off video. It's 3:03 p.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
This is Tape 4. It's 3:04 p.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, you told me that you did not
have any idea as to the other applicants for the
observatory director position at the University of
Kentucky; is that correct?
A. Not until the discovery process.
Q. Are you aware of the applications, CVs,
that were submitted by any other candidates?
A. I received a copy of Tim Knauer's one. I
considered it to be confidential information and did not
read it.
Q. And that was in the context of the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 205 of 242 - Page ID#: 300
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 206
lawsuit; is that correct?
A. That was with the -- with the information
you provided.
Q. Rule 26 disclosures. Right. No, I'm --
and I'm talking before this.
A. Right.
Q. Okay? Were you aware of any of the
information that was submitted by any of the other
candidates for the position?
A. No.
Q. Specifically do you know whether any other
candidate had provided a professional website which
linked to an article similar to the lecture notes that
we've discussed today?
A. It's unlikely that -- of that. I did not
check. Most unlikely because this was the only such
article on the Internet (indicating.)
Q. Do you know whether there was any
information that was uncovered in the evaluation of
other candidates that included a consideration of any
religious articles, lecture notes --
A. I have no knowledge of that.
Q. -- public comments?
So you're not able to testify that your
treatment in terms of how the search committee reviewed
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 206 of 242 - Page ID#: 301
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 207
your application and interviewed you was any different
than any of the other candidates?
A. Right. As far as I know, Mike Cavagnero
could have sat down with each candidate and could have
sent a copy of their resumes, anything from their
website, to the biology department, of every single one
of them. I'm sure if he was properly following
university procedures, he would have done that.
Q. But my question is, you have -- do you
have any information that the university reviewed your
application any differently than any other applicant for
that position?
A. No. As I said, it's quite possible that
Mike Cavagnero, following the university guide in an
effort to treat all of his candidates equally, he went
to every web site he found, everything there, and sent
it off to the biology department. I'm sure he did.
Q. What other universities did you give this
lecture at?
A. Okay. The -- I can't remember all the
groups. I remember the locations. So I gave it at
least once at the University of Michigan. I gave it at
Michigan State University, to two groups there.
Q. And who were those groups if you recall?
A. One group was a large lecture very similar
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 207 of 242 - Page ID#: 302
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 208
to the one in Lexington. I also gave it to a smaller
group of Christian faculty members there. I gave it at
Central Michigan University.
Going back to the University of Michigan,
one group I gave it to was the Christian graduate
student group at the University of Michigan. I remember
that. I also gave it to the University of Michigan.
There was a more public one. I can't -- this is now
over 20 years ago. I can't remember the group. I can
remember the details of that. I also gave it to a
student group there. Let's see. I gave it to the
University of Nebraska. I gave it in a public lecture
there. I also gave it -- I say it, because I varied it
slightly according to context of the audience, because
different audiences have different interests and designs
and things. I gave it to -- it or some version of it to
the Christian graduate student group there at the
University of Nebraska. I might have forgotten somebody
in there. But as I said, it's given -- it's given a
number of times.
Q. It sounds like when you were asked to give
this lecture, it was sort of an extracurricular. It
wasn't in the context of a course or a class, actual
class.
A. Right. Oh, no, no. It was never in the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 208 of 242 - Page ID#: 303
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 209
context of a class. Now, the --
Q. Have you ever been invited to address this
topic in a classroom at a public university?
A. I was invited but I did not accept the
invitation.
Q. And where was that?
A. That was at the University of Michigan.
Q. And what class invited you?
A. It was environmental studies class. And
the professor of the class invited me to come and give a
guest lecture. It wasn't exactly on this. It was a
guest lecture on sort of religion, astronomy and the
environment. But I was -- but I left the University of
Michigan there so that's why I had to decline that.
Q. Oh, you declined that because you were
leaving?
A. I was leaving.
Q. Okay. Were you the only lecturer, or was
this a panel?
A. No, it was a class where most of the
lectures were given by guest lecturers. The reason she
asked me was I was invited as a guest lecturer on
astronomy and environmental issues. It was a class
about 200 students. And afterwards during the question
time one of the students asked me about the religious
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 209 of 242 - Page ID#: 304
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 210
aspects of things, and the professor noted that the
students were extremely interested in that, and so she
asked me to come back next semester and talk about that.
But I couldn't because I was leaving town.
Q. So is it fair to say that you have never
given this lecture --
A. In a classroom --
Q. -- in a classroom --
A. -- at a university class.
Q. -- in a course --
A. That's correct.
Q. -- at a public university?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you been invited by any educational
institutions that have religious affiliations to lecture
on this topic?
A. Curiously, no.
And churches by the way, churches.
Q. Okay. After you learned from Gary Ferland
that there had been an internal investigation, did you
take any steps to further investigate what that
investigation included, how it originated, and what the
results were?
A. I did not because at that stage I think
the complaint through the Kentucky Human Rights
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 210 of 242 - Page ID#: 305
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 211
Commission had already been filed.
Q. And if I understand the process with the
Human Rights Commission, and unfortunately we all
appreciate that this is somewhat the rule rather than
the exception.
MR. MANION: We lost the file six
investigators ago.
Q. You filed it and they did nothing?
A. Absolutely nothing happened.
Q. Okay.
A. Yes. As we expected.
Q. There was a request for mediation, or did
you recall that?
A. I can't remember.
Q. Do you have any recollection of anything
about that?
A. I can't remember.
MR. MANION: That's a good answer if
you can't remember.
THE WITNESS: Right.
Q. As far as you know, you filed your charge
with the Human Rights Commission, they sat on it, did
nothing, and when the requisite time period passed then
you requested to either withdraw the complaint?
A. Right to sue letter, yes. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 211 of 242 - Page ID#: 306
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 212
Q. Have you --
A. Which they were happy to give without
doing anything.
Q. Have you communicated to any other agency
your complaint that you were treated in a discriminatory
fashion by the university?
A. I believe that the Kentucky Human Rights
Commission in parallel sends it to some federal thing.
I think.
Q. Right. Right. And we're --
MR. MANION: That's good. That's all
you need to say.
THE WITNESS: Right.
Q. -- a dual filing state, right. But other
than your complaint, you did not initiate anything --
A. No.
Q. -- independently with the EEOC. Right.
And that was your only actual formal
complaint before filing your lawsuit.
A. Right. Because these guys told me that's
what I had to do.
MR. MANION: Remember, you don't say
what we told you.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
MS. KRIZ: I wasn't going to tell him
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 212 of 242 - Page ID#: 307
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 213
that.
THE WITNESS: That was privileged
information. Delete that.
MR. MANION: Just kidding. When it's
like that.
Q. Do you believe that but for your beliefs
or viewpoints that are articulated in your lecture notes
that you would have been chosen as the observatory
director?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And what leads you to believe that?
A. Well, the job or application was not
written with me in mind, but it essentially -- if it had
been written with me in mind, that's how it would have
been written. Because I had done everything on the job
description with supervising the building construction
of the observatory, doing all the things that Kentucky
was hoping to do, and there was -- there is probably not
a single person in the country with those sorts of
qualifications for doing that.
Q. You have made the allegation that Tim
Knauer had substantially less qualifications --
A. Right.
Q. -- and experience than you do.
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 213 of 242 - Page ID#: 308
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 214
Q. Do you know what Tim Knauer's
qualifications and experience are?
A. Yes. What we do in astronomy is people's
research records are readily accessible on the Internet
so I entered his name in to what's called the ADS and
came up with almost nothing. So what I learned was he
had been a graduate student in the department sometime
in the past and had not -- he had not finished -- not
finished a degree. That's what I learned.
Q. Were you ever provided prior to the filing
of your lawsuit any explanation as to why Tim Knauer was
chosen or recommended by the majority of the search
committee?
A. There were some general statement in an
e-mail from Mike Cavagnero, which you have, and I cannot
remember exactly, but it was a general sort of
boilerplate statement saying that the search committee
took in to account a variety of considerations and chose
another candidate.
Q. And did you believe that that was not
true?
A. Given that by the time I got that e-mail,
I had heard from Gary Ferland what had happened, I did
not believe it, no.
Q. Now, you knew that Gary Ferland was away.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 214 of 242 - Page ID#: 309
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 215
A. Yes.
Q. I'm curious as to why you've put such
reliance on what Gary Ferland has told you when he
wasn't a participant in this process.
A. Well, because he was in close contact, he
said so, with the chairman of the search committee. And
Gary, remember, was one of, if not the person who
instigated this observatory. And he just happened to
arrange a sabbatical the year it was coming to
completion, and the sabbatical had been arranged many
years in advance and that was just bad timing that he
was out of the loop on this.
Q. You're aware at this point that the
recommendation that came out of the search committee, I
think you had two votes and Mr. Knauer had four votes?
A. Right.
Q. Were you aware of that?
A. I was told -- I learned that later.
Q. Right. Did Gary Ferland ever tell you
that he had personally spoken with any of the four
candidates who had voted against you as to the reasons
why that?
A. No, he did not.
Q. But yet you took his conclusion that the
biologists were the -- their opinions influenced these
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 215 of 242 - Page ID#: 310
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 216
four cand -- these four search committee members?
A. I do agree with that, yes.
Q. And on what basis did you conclude that?
A. Well, it's very odd to chose a less
qualified candidate over a clearly very well qualified
candidate. Now, one thing I remember from the disclosed
internal discussions was there was a ranking on a scale
of 0 to 10, and on that scale of 0 to 10 I was ranked 8
and Mr. Knauer now was ranked 5 in there. And as I
said, I don't think there was anybody in the country who
had such a good match to the desired qualifications in
the areas of outreach and teaching and so on.
Q. Have you ever applied and been not hired
for observatory coordinator or director position before?
A. I was not hired for an observatory
position a year or two ago, but this was not a small
observatory like this.
Q. Where was that?
A. That was the Keck Observatories in Hawaii.
Actually -- actually, no, sorry, make that two
positions. I was interviewed for two positions like
this. One position was with the Keck Observatory,
extremely different from the Kentucky Observatory. Both
were. And neither really had this complete match of
interests of outreach and teaching and working with
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 216 of 242 - Page ID#: 311
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 217
students.
Q. What was -- Keck?
A. There are two places; one was the Keck
Observatory.
Q. And how do you spell that?
A. K-e-c-k.
Q. And what's the other one?
A. The other one was the University of Hawaii
in Hilo.
Q. And was that an observatory more similar
to the observatory at University of Nebraska than the
Keck Observatory?
A. Little bit. The best way to describe it
is in terms of the size of the telescope. The Keck
telescope is huge. It's one of the world's biggest
telescopes. It's totally a research telescope. No
teaching component in that at all. No public outreach
component, just pure research with telescope.
The University of Hawaii telescope was for
undergraduate research but not for public education and
outreach, and it was not on campus. Now, the similarity
with the Nebraska telescope and the Kentucky telescope
is they're both on campus.
Q. What -- who was hired for the director
position for the Keck Observatory and --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 217 of 242 - Page ID#: 312
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 218
A. It wasn't director. It was a staff
position. I never bothered to check.
Q. Okay. And do you know how your
qualifications matched that selected candidate?
A. Well, I made the final cut, and they did a
telephone interview with me and they summoned me out
there for an in-person interview, and I bet a lot of
people applied for the position, so both I and whoever
they chose were highly ranked there.
What I said about the Kentucky position is
I would have been one of very few people with a
combination of skills that were wanted. So the Keck
Observatory is wanting somebody with instrumentation
skills with equipment. And that's focusing on that
area. And they obviously thought I had enough
experience in that area to put me in the final short
list. But I'm aware there are lots of other people who
have really specialized in that area while I'm also
involved in student research and teaching.
Q. Do you have any personal knowledge as you
sit here today why you were not chosen for either of the
positions in Hawaii that you've just described for me?
Did anybody tell you we didn't select you because of
this?
A. No. I don't normally ask. I didn't ask.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 218 of 242 - Page ID#: 313
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 219
Q. So I infer from the fact that you didn't
ask that you don't know?
A. I don't know because I didn't ask, yes.
Q. When you questioned Mike Cavagnero as to
whether the selection was based on your religious
beliefs or your communication of those beliefs, how did
he respond to that?
A. That wasn't the question I asked him.
Q. Did you ever ask him that?
A. No, I don't think I did. What I asked
about was the process and what the biologists had said,
which he said he was not at liberty to divulge. But
again, it's all in the e-mails.
Q. Okay. Other than Gary Ferland's
explanation as to why you didn't get chosen, do you have
any other information as to why you were not chosen for
the position at U.K.?
A. Only -- in the discovery documents there's
a tiny bit of discussion of other things.
Q. Okay. And what -- but that's only been
learned since the lawsuit has been filed?
A. It has, yes. There's a tiny bit of
discussion of other things in there. Minor things.
Q. But the motivation for pursuing your Human
Rights complaint and subsequently your litigation was
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 219 of 242 - Page ID#: 314
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 220
based on information related to you by Gary Ferland?
A. No. And the e-mails from Tom Troland and
Mike Cavagnero.
Q. Okay.
A. And really primarily based on those
e-mails. They're right there in writing, bits --
e-mails are in.
Q. Other than this e-mail communication that
you alerted Gary to the fact that you had filed the
Human Rights complaint, did you have any other further
communications with Gary Ferland regarding the search
process and the selected candidate?
A. No, I don't think so. He did express
dissatisfaction with the way the observatory was being
run by the person. I did not ask about that. I felt
like that was none of my business and I was not with the
university and I didn't need -- made some comment about
that. I did not follow up on that.
Q. Do you continue to have regular contact
with Dr. Ferland?
A. Oh, yes, because we work in the same
field. But this correspondence is being monitored by my
attorneys and -- and they're laughing. So we agreed
that all discussion between Gary Ferland and I until
this lawsuit is settled is going to be strictly on
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 220 of 242 - Page ID#: 315
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 221
research. So we do not mention anything about this. He
doesn't know I'm here in Kentucky, for example.
Q. Since you e-mailed him regarding your
Human Rights complaint --
A. Yes.
Q. -- have you had any discussions verbally,
via e-mail, through an intermediary regarding the search
process?
A. No. In fact, I'm very carefully avoiding
having any discussion or contact with him. That's why
we're communicating by e-mails and what we're e-mailing
about is being approved by my attorneys.
Q. Were you ever informed by anyone at the
University of Nebraska that they had been contacted by
anyone at U.K. regarding your application?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Had you ever discussed with anyone at the
University of Nebraska regarding your concerns that the
decision not to select you was motivated by religious
considerations?
A. Not people in my department. Certainly in
our church there were a number of university faculty
people, and I told them what had happened in Kentucky,
but they were in no way involved with the administration
or my department. Completely separate. They did happen
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 221 of 242 - Page ID#: 316
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 222
to be university employees.
Q. And I neglected to tell you, what church
were you affiliated with when you were in Nebraska?
A. That was -- that was Zion Presbyterian
Church. PCA Church, if that means anything to you.
Presbyterian Church of America is the denomination.
Q. Do you have other -- I guess any comment
that you would have made about this would have been just
with your personal friends or family.
A. Uh-huh. Exactly, yes.
Q. Do you -- your attorneys have provided me
a preliminary list of witnesses that you believe may
have some knowledge regarding this -- the lawsuit and
your allegations and what occurred when you came to the
university to apply for this position. Are there any
other individuals who may have knowledge either about
the allegations in your complaint, your experience at
the University of Kentucky?
A. We reviewed these things yesterday, and I
did notice one or two names that were missing, like
Sally Shafer's name, I believe, was missing on the list,
and they will rectify this.
Q. And Sally Shafer, she was one of the
search committee members.
A. Yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 222 of 242 - Page ID#: 317
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 223
Q. And if I understand correctly, the only
time you would have had any communication with
Ms. Shafer would have been in your in-person interview?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And that --
A. It was the first one in the morning.
Q. Okay. Have you had any discussions with
Keith MacAdam about --
A. No.
Q. -- the selection process?
A. No.
Q. What about Dr. Shlossman?
A. Shlossman. If I run in to him, and
remember we work in the same field, if I run in to
him -- I have not run in to him, I don't think, since
then. We have certainly not talked about this, and I
would not.
Q. What about Nancy Leveson? Have you had
any conversations?
A. My only encounter with Nancy Leveson was
the interview in her office when I came for the
interview in Lexington, even though we do work on
somewhat related areas.
Q. And Steve Ellis, any communications --
A. No, he's not somebody I would have any
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 223 of 242 - Page ID#: 318
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 224
contact with because he's a physicist. He does physics
teaching.
Q. So your expectation of getting hired was,
in your opinion, the job description fit exactly --
A. Yes.
Q. -- with your prior experience?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. Had you been hired for this position --
you told us that in the fall of 2007 you had gone to the
University of Texas.
A. Right.
Q. Would you have had to quit a certain
position there in order to come take this job?
A. I would have had -- by -- well, yes.
Q. Okay. Now, I think you told me, and your
attorneys have provided me in the Rule 26 disclosures --
I want to talk to you about your damages at this point.
A. Right. Right.
Q. In terms of, you know, your pay
differential, I think you told me that you believed that
this director position would have paid you more than
what you were earning at the University of Texas
currently.
A. Yes.
Q. Would it have paid you more than you were
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 224 of 242 - Page ID#: 319
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 225
earning at the University of Nebraska?
A. Yes.
Q. In your position with the University of
Texas --
A. Yes.
Q. -- are you provided any benefits of
employment other than salary?
A. I was for the first year, and I am
provided this year as well, up till May something or
other.
Q. And what happens in May?
A. What happens in May. I don't know.
Q. Is it -- I mean is that the end of your
appointment or --
A. No, that's -- that's the end -- end of --
current expected end of the benefits.
Q. And will your job change at that time --
A. No. No.
Q. -- that your benefits will be eliminated?
A. The reason -- the reason for this -- it's
complicated. The reason for this is that if we go back
a long way in our questioning, I was talking about the
various funding sources, and I'm independently funded
through a NASA grant, and the University of Texas would
not contribute benefits through that. You have to be a
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 225 of 242 - Page ID#: 320
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 226
50 percent or 51 percent employee of the university in
order to -- and to contribute benefits through that.
But --
Q. What is your percentage? University --
A. At University of Texas right now zero
percent because I'm on this NASA grant. Right. But in
the spring I was a hundred percent, I think. All these
figures are on a spreadsheet calculation. But the --
Q. So in May your NASA money runs out --
A. No. No.
Q. -- that's why your benefits run out?
A. There is something called COBRA, and
Congress as part of the stimulus package has extended
COBRA. So for us COBRA runs for nine months. I think
it was going from like September 1st or August 1st or
something like that until sometime in May. So that's
what's paying the benefits right now. So thank you
stimulus money.
Q. Okay. Now, COBRA payments, what that
means is that your employer-funded benefits ended and
you are given an opportunity to pay for these benefits
on your own through COBRA.
A. I think so. My wife handles all of that,
so I'm not sure.
Q. So are you paying right now for your --
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 226 of 242 - Page ID#: 321
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 227
any kind of insurance coverage, those kinds of things?
A. Paying a rather lot for it actually.
Q. I mean, that's coming out of your
pocket --
A. It is.
Q. -- as opposed to the university paying any
of it?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Okay. So when did your university-paid or
employer-paid benefits end?
A. Either August -- July 31st or August 15th.
Q. Of --
A. The last --
Q. -- 29th?
A. Wait a minute. No, wait a minute. The --
my full benefits my first year there --
Q. At University of Texas?
A. At University of Texas. I'm now in my
third year. I had full benefits my first year. The
second year I had --
Q. So for '07 -- '07, '08 you had full
benefits?
A. '07, '08 I had full benefits.
Q. Okay.
A. Or close thereto. The next year I had
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 227 of 242 - Page ID#: 322
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 228
benefits for half the year, and the first half of the
year we had to pay some stuff ourselves. And now is a
worrying time because my wife was declared uninsurable
too.
Q. And currently you have coverage for you
and your family?
A. Through COBRA.
Q. But through COBRA.
A. Yes.
Q. Other than insurance coverage, are there
any other benefits of employment that you've had
since -- with your University of Texas appointment?
A. During my first year there were retirement
contributions as well, and during half of the second
year as well of some degree. But all these are
substantially less than would be paid at the University
of Kentucky.
Q. At this point, I mean, do you anticipate
being at the university in Texas for an indefinite
period of time, or do you see a point where you'll be
leaving?
A. I'm on the job market right now, and I
would therefore -- unfortunately -- I say
unfortunately -- I like being in Texas, I would
fortunately hope to go to a more permanent job starting
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 228 of 242 - Page ID#: 323
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 229
sometime this year.
Q. At your phase of your career --
A. Yes.
Q. -- is it likely that you will be able to
obtain a tenure-track position at this point?
A. I have the disadvantage of being what is
called senior, which mostly means being old, and so if
one looked at the Job Register of the American
Astronomical Society -- you can do it online -- you
would find that the vast majority of positions will only
consider junior people. And sometimes I've actually
asked some of these interesting places would you be
willing to consider a senior applicant, and the answer
is no because the level of the position has to be
approved by the administration and there are rules about
what one can and cannot do here, and so there are some
places -- I've applied to all of them which are saying
we will consider senior people.
Q. Well, now, when you use the term "senior"
is that years of involvement in your profession, your
field, or is that an age criteria?
A. Well, the two are correlated quite
tightly.
MR. CAVAGNERO: Does it apply to
non-tenure -- non-tenure track? I'm sorry.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 229 of 242 - Page ID#: 324
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 230
Q. Does senior -- does senior --
A. What senior -- what senior means is -- it
doesn't have a precise meaning, but it means years from
the Ph.D., how much experience, how much teaching
experience, how much research we've done, how famous you
are, those sorts of things.
Q. Is it your expectation that you -- well,
not expectation. Strike that.
A. That's a good --
Q. Do you hope to -- are you primarily
interested in a faculty position as opposed to staff or
a non-tenure track position at this time?
A. Since I need a job I have to be broad in
what I'm applying for. My preference would be to have a
university faculty position, preferably tenured, or at
least some decent job security, as I thought I had in
Nebraska, where I could carry on a combination of
teaching, research with the students and other service
activities, public outreach and so on. I really enjoy
public outreach.
Q. Are all your applications in an academic
setting or are you applying for private industry --
A. I'm not applying for private industry. I
might be forced to do that. No, they're all astronomy
related.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 230 of 242 - Page ID#: 325
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 231
Q. In an academic setting?
A. Well, we talked about that this morning,
and I already answered that question.
Q. Okay. You have alleged that you've lost
income and I presume --
A. Right.
Q. -- that's the difference in what you would
have earned at --
A. Yes.
Q. -- U.K. and what you've earned in either
at the university -- well, just University of Texas.
A. Yes.
Q. You've also alleged that you've suffered
emotional stress and anguish --
A. Yes.
Q. -- as a result of that. Tell me about
that. What do you -- how has that manifested itself?
A. Well, would you define what an emotion is?
It's a consequence of the uncertainty in income and the
low level of income. So it causes distress in what we
can do. It really restricts us. We're having a very
hard time sending our oldest kid to college, for
example, because of this. We worry that we might have
to pull him out of college next year because of lack of
income. Worrying, I think, would count as emotional
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 231 of 242 - Page ID#: 326
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 232
distress. We have had to move to a much smaller house
with our family, which is very cramped. We were forced
to do that. There are things we can't do because we
either can't afford them or don't know that we can
afford them. There are --
Q. Let me ask you this. Would you have been
in the same financial circumstances had you never
applied for the position at the University of Kentucky?
A. I am in these financial circumstances
because I was not given the job at the University of
Kentucky.
Q. My question to you is, would your
financial situation have been any different now had you
never applied -- pursued the job at the University of
Kentucky?
A. I -- it is a hard question to answer
because one doesn't know these what-if things. It could
have been. Let's say it could have been.
Q. I mean, you made the decision to go to
University of Texas --
A. Right.
Q. -- before you ever even -- or had pursued
this --
A. I was in the process of deciding that,
yes.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 232 of 242 - Page ID#: 327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 233
Q. And your position at the University of
Nebraska was older --
A. Yes.
Q. -- over before -- so you would have had to
move regardless?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. Okay. Have you had to seek any type of
professional treatment or intervention for --
A. What do you mean?
Q. -- mental anguish or --
A. No. No. No. No.
Q. Have you ever suffered a financial change
in your circumstances before this -- since you've left
University of Nebraska?
A. Say that question again.
Q. You've told me -- and maybe that was not a
well-stated question. You've told me -- you know, I've
asked you questions about the damages that you've
alleged in this lawsuit. Two of those elements of
damages are emotional distress and anguish, and I asked
you to describe for me how those symptoms have
manifested themselves, and you've told me primarily that
they've surfaced because of a change in your financial
circumstances.
A. Yes, that's right.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 233 of 242 - Page ID#: 328
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 234
Q. Okay. Is there any other way that
these -- the mental anguish and emotional distress have
manifested?
A. It's not just the actual financial
circumstances right now. It's the uncertainty about the
future. So if I were at the University of Kentucky, I
would have a stable job doing what I enjoy doing in
presumably a department I enjoy being in, in a town I
enjoy being in. Nice town here. So instead, there's a
large amount of uncertainty, and uncertainty produces
worry and worry is anguish, anxiety.
Q. Since you filed the application at the
University of Kentucky, how many other applications for
employment have you -- you think you filed? Just
roughly.
A. I'm going to guess about 30.
Q. And have you been -- are you still in
consideration for any of those positions at this time?
A. Yes, I'm still in consideration for maybe
a dozen positions. The number of positions a senior
person like myself can apply for is unfortunately rather
limited.
Q. So my inference is at least, you know,
maybe 18 or so of those are possibilities that are no
longer available to you?
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 234 of 242 - Page ID#: 329
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 235
A. Right. Right.
Q. Assuming that you were rejected as an
applicant for those 18 other employers with whom you
filed an application, what makes them different than
your application at the University of Kentucky?
A. I have no evidence that my religious
beliefs were a factor in any of those decisions.
Q. Have you ever suffered what in your
opinion was mistreatment or discrimination on the basis
of your religion in any other context other than the
employment context?
A. Not that I have any direct evidence of. I
don't think. I might have to think about that one.
Q. Do you personally know the religious
beliefs of the search committee members at the -- for
the position?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Have you made some assumptions about what
their religious beliefs are?
A. No, I haven't. No. I can tell you
statistically what they probably are, but that's all.
Q. Is the topic of religion one that you
discuss frequently with Dr. Ferland?
A. A little bit. We did -- probably the only
time we did was the discussion which stimulated him
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 235 of 242 - Page ID#: 330
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 236
getting the ball rolling and me coming and giving that
lecture.
Q. Do you know what religion Dr. Ferland is?
A. Well, at that time he said that he was
taking his kids to a Presbyterian church on the grounds
it was good for them. I think his wife is a Unitarian
or has Unitarian background.
Q. Do you know whether he's Christian or not?
A. I think he would not self-identify as a
Christian.
Q. What about Dr. Troland? Do you know --
A. I have no idea.
Q. -- what his beliefs are?
A. I believe his wife is Roman Catholic, I
think. I think.
MS. KRIZ: We can take a break here.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please. The
time is 3:44 p.m.
(Off the record.)
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video.
It's 3:57 p.m.
Q. Dr. Gaskell, we're winding up here, but
before we end I want to ask you about some of the
specific allegations in your complaint. You know, you
make some very specific allegations about Dean Steve
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 236 of 242 - Page ID#: 331
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 237
Hock. And I guess generally --
A. Which item are you talking about here?
MR. MANION: Let her -- she's giving
you the general background.
MS. KRIZ: Yeah.
Q. Let me refer to Paragraph 22. "Cavagnero
told Gaskell that Gaskell's religious beliefs and
Gaskell's expression of them would be a matter of
concern to Dr. Steven Hock."
A. Uh-huh.
Q. And I think we've already discussed that
those were not Mike Cavagnero's words. He didn't tell
you that the dean had --
A. No.
Q. -- concerns about your religious
beliefs --
A. Those were my attorneys' words.
Q. -- but he had concerns about the lecture
notes.
A. Yeah.
Q. Right?
Okay. I guess it was your affidavit
that -- you know, you suggest that the questions as it
related to the lecture notes, the questions that Mike
Cavagnero asked you regarding the lecture notes in the
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 237 of 242 - Page ID#: 332
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 238
context of your on-campus interview, that somehow those
were motivated by recommendations or suggestions by the
dean. And I want to know, you know, what is your
knowledge of the dean's involvement in this whole
process?
A. My initial knowledge of involvement came
in the telephone interview where Mike Cavagnero said
he'd be in trouble with the dean if he didn't ask me
this question he was reluctant to ask me. The next
mention of the dean was in the much asked about
conversation with Mike Cavagnero, where I was told the
dean also would be interested in looking in to these
things.
Q. Dean would be interested in looking in --
would be interested in your lecture notes, or was there
something specific that he said the dean was interested
in?
A. Well, if I recap what I said earlier
today, Mike Cavagnero began by saying that he was
investigating candidates, he was Googling me, Dean Hock
was presumably -- had to -- whatever, doing the same
thing.
Q. Okay.
A. Which struck me as quite unusual, by the
way.
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 238 of 242 - Page ID#: 333
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 239
Q. Other than comments that were made to you
by Mike Cavagnero referencing the dean --
A. Yes.
Q. -- do you have any other knowledge of any
other involvement that the dean had in this process?
A. Not until the -- we got the documents
through the discovery process.
Q. Okay. And what documents there led you to
believe that the dean had a -- played a different role?
A. Oh, sorry. I forgot one thing. One thing
was the statement in an e-mail in January in response to
a question of mine to Mike Cavagnero where he said the
questioning had been cleared by the dean. So -- e-mail.
Q. Did Gary Ferland specifically relate to
you that he had knowledge of any involvement by the dean
in this?
A. No. Gary Ferland did not. Remember, Gary
Ferland wasn't in the country at the time.
Q. Gary did forward to you the dean's
announcement that he was resigning from the University
of Kentucky?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. I'm curious why that would have occurred.
Do you know why he sent you that?
A. That's a good question. Why did Gary send
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 239 of 242 - Page ID#: 334
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 240
me that. I must have mentioned -- I must have mentioned
somewhere, maybe in that Skype conversation, about the
dean -- after all, I said that Gary Ferland was very
interested in asking about my conversation with Mike
Cavagnero, what did Mike ask, what did Mike do and so
on, which we now learn after the fact it was something
Gary had suggested he should do. And I told him there
about how the dean's name was evoked. So that's why he
knew I had an interest in the dean. That's probably the
answer to that question.
Q. Had Gary ever communicated to you his
personal feelings about the dean? Did he like him or
not like him?
A. I can't remember on that. Gary would
express occasional comments. I think there are more
complaints about the provost than there were about the
dean. The current provost I've heard complaints about.
Q. You told me that Gary specifically told
you that you were not selected because of the
biologists.
A. Right.
Q. Did he mention any committee member that
he thought was primarily responsible for the decision
not to hire you?
A. Well, yes. I told you that. It was -- he
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 240 of 242 - Page ID#: 335
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 241
thought that Steve Ellis had --
Q. Steve Ellis. Okay.
A. -- played a -- basically a role in that.
Q. Just Steve Ellis was the only one --
A. The only name he mentioned, yes.
Q. Okay. All right.
MS. KRIZ: I think that's all the
questions I have for you. Thank you very much,
Dr. Gaskell.
THE WITNESS: Okay.
MR. MANION: There you go.
THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
MR. MANION: I have no questions.
VIDEOGRAPHER: Stand by, please. This
concludes the deposition. It's 4:03 p.m.
(DEPOSITION CONCLUDED.)
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 241 of 242 - Page ID#: 336
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ACTION COURT REPORTERS 242
STATE OF KENTUCKY )
COUNTY OF FAYETTE )
I, ANN HUTCHISON, Registered Professional
Reporter and Notary Public, State of Kentucky at Large,
whose commission as such will expire May 3, 2012, do
hereby certify that the foregoing deposition was taken
by me at the time, place, for the purpose and with the
appearances set forth herein; that the same was taken
down by me in stenotype in the presence of the witness
and thereafter correctly transcribed by me upon
computer; and that the witness was duly placed under
oath by me prior to giving testimony.
I further certify that I am not related to nor
employed by any of the parties to this action or their
respective counsel and have no interest in this
litigation.
Given under my hand, this 2nd day of February,
2010.
_______________________________ANN HUTCHISON, RPRRegistered Professional ReporterNotary Public, State-at-Large
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 242 of 242 - Page ID#: 337
DireClor search hll p:111 ighlni ng .pa.uky.edu/ukobserl'alory/di recloLhlm
Home
Founding DirectorCommonwealth Observatory, The University
of Kentucky
The University of Kentucky is establishing an observatory with a combinationof state and private support. Its mission is undergraduate education andpublic outreach. Our Department has large introductory astronomy coursesfor non-majors, with typically 1000 students per semester, and smallercourses for Physics and Astronomy majors and students who are especiallyinterested in astronomy. Introductory students will use the observatory tosee the moon and brighter planets, and advanced students will buildinstruments and conduct observations.
We are looking for a leader who will become the founding director of ourobservatory. The construction of the observatory should be complete by theFall Semester, 2007. It will be located on central campus, so that studentshave easy and safe access to it. It will have modern facilities including apermanently mounted 20" Celestron telescope on a Mathis mounting, an AshDome, adjoining lab space as well as a number of small portable telescopes.Among the first duties of the new Director will be to provide guidance inmaking the facility fully functional. This may include working with Celestronand Mathis to make the telescope and its computer controls fully operational.After the telescope is set up we will develop the ability to do both CCDimaging and spectroscopy with advanced students.
The duties will include supervising several observatory Teaching Assistants,who will work with the Director in using the observatory with undergraduates
lof2
; DEFENDANT'SEXHIBIT
I NO. )PL000001
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21-1 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 1 of 2 - Page ID#: 338
Director search http://lightning.pa.uky.edu/ukobservatory/director.htm
and the public. The Director will teach some sections of introductoryastronomy. The successful candidate should be able to set up and operate amodern 20" telescope, have a good working knowledge of the night time sky,be able to supervise graduate teaching assistants, have good communicationskills when interacting with students, staff,' and the public, and be able tomanage the facility's budget. Evening work will be reqUired.
Minimum qualifications are a Masters Degree in astronomy or an astronomy-related area and 2 years of related or the equivalent. The salarywill be in the range $45,040-$74,316/yr. The applications are due by August15 2007 but the position will remain open until filled.
To apply for this position, job # SM517360, submit a UK OnlineApplication at http://www.uky.edu/HR/UKjobs/.Click on the link, then selectthe link "online employment for job seekers" in the upper left corner of thepage. Next click on "search postings" in the upper left corner of the page.Enter "SM517360" in the "Requisition No." line and click on the "search ff
button. The resulting page should say "observatory manager" on the leftunder job title. Click on the "view" link, which will take you to job detailspage. There is a button towards the bottom of the page that says f1apply forthis posting" - that goes to the application form. Our application process istotally electronic. If you have any questions, contact HR/Employment, phone(859) 257-9555 press 2, or email [email protected]. The University ofKentucky is an equal opportunity employer and encourages applications fromminorities and women.
For questions about the observatory director position please contact theDepartment Chair, Prof. Mike Cavagnero. For problems or questionsregarding this web site contact Gary Ferland.
Copyright 2001-2006 Gary J. FerlandFor problems or questions regarding this web contact Gary Ferland.Last updated: July 13, 2007.
20f2PL000002
Case: 5:09-cv-00244-KSF-REW Doc #: 21-1 Filed: 09/28/10 Page: 2 of 2 - Page ID#: 339