theyeti

No doubt that this is exactly what he will do (if he isn't already). And there will be conservative wacko outlets that will support him in this. <a href="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28498" target="_blank">WorldNutDaily</a> wrote this article about Hovind's building permit fiasco and incredibly managed to spin things in Hovind's favor. Apparently, the county is stupid for spending bunches of money to enforce its laws, but there's nothing wrong with Hovind spending untold thousands to avoid a $50 permit. Nor is Hovind faulted for the waste of tax-payer money. That tells you a thing or two about WorldNutDaily's standards.

theyeti

Valentine Pontifex

Error in police reports maybe. Another possiblity is that the online records are not up-to-date. Would the records indicate it if he was acting as an agent of the owner? If he recently aquired the property this would be likely and it might provide an obvious explanation of the next question.


This part of the story is puzzling. If he is the landlord than all he has to do to get rid of the renters is give thirty days notice. Unless the renters have a contract with the landlord which specifically gave them a guarenteed long term lease (unlikely) their is utterly nothing the tenants can do about it. (We are assuming Hovind is not violation some civil rights law. If that was the case they could sue.)

And if he wanted to enter the house, he can do that with proper notice. This is done routinely for maintance (which the owner is responsible for), showing the property to potential buyers, inspecting for pests, etc.

Valentine Pontifex

The prosecutor is either going for a plea bargin or hoping the jury will convict him on a lesser charge if a greater charge is offered. For heaven's sake, they will not a conviction on the charge as it stands. The charge is far too severe for the offense.

I would NOT convict even Hovind on a charge that has life in prison as a maximum penalty and I can't imagine a jury filled with potentially sympathetic locals doing so either.

Philosoft

There's already local precedent for the "God's work" defense. Rev. Paul Hill, he of the second abortion clinic shooting, announced his intentions to use that particular defense, in the guise of justifiable homicide, and was promptly denied by Judge Frank Bell. Clearly, the circumstances are vastly different, but any judge with any common sense will disallow use of solely religious defenses or he will find himself in the middle of a mistrial faster than he can say, "Dinoland."

<strong> I'll see what I can do.

Philosoft

It's prosecutor's discretion. There's little chance that a plea bargain will be thrown out if the judge has ruled the defendant capable. Curtis Golden, the DA, isn't much of a glory-hound and Hovind isn't much of a celeb around here, so I don't think Golden stands to gain much by forcing a trial.

Jobar

Might not the relevant portions of this thread be sent to the prosecutor, the local tax assessors office, and perhaps the IRS? They might appreciate the detective work we have done for them...

Grumpy

Shall we have fun with quotes?

Four pages into the thread, and has anyone yet mentioned that Hovind's criminal record, such as it is, has no bearing on the truth or falsity (read: FALSITY) of the claims made in his Dr. Dino lectures?

Silent Dave

That much is a given. "You're a convicted felon, therefore you are wrong" is a fallacy. But people are less likely to listen to convicted felons. The arrest alone, in my opinion, is enough to seriously taint his reputation.


Dave

Dark Jedi

I think the revelry of this thread represents the knowledge that his personal credibility is ruined. As such, far fewer people are likely to take his word for it, and may investigate his assertations themselves. This is the achilles heel of his whole position: a skeptical mind.

Albion

I'm sorry to say I doubt that's what'll happen. It'd be nice, but I think people who believed every word he uttered will just transfer to Duane Gish or Ken Ham or John Morris or one of the other people who are telling them what they want to hear.