Wesley Elsberry and the OSC
During the furore that erupted following the publication of Steven Meyer paper “The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories” in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington the man at the storm centre – Richard Sternberg- of the firestorm called in the Office for Special Counsel (OSC) over allegations that the Smithsonian Institute (SI) were engaging in illegitimate practices to discredit him and make his work environment impossible for the continuation of his research.
The OSC investigated the situation and prior to it becoming clear that the SI were not officially the employer of Sternberg obtained copies of the fascinating emails that were flying around the museum and to and from other scientists from outside the museum. Some of these emails appeared in the final report of the OSC which basically upheld Sternberg’s complaint while pointing out that no action could be taken because the SI was not Sternberg’s employer.
Two of the statements in the report are the following:
1. “Eventually, they determined that they could not terminate you for cause and they were not going to make you a "martyr" by firing you for publishing a paper in ID. They came to the conclusion that you had not violated SI directives and that you could not be denied access for off-duty conduct. This was actually part of the strategy advocated by the NCSE.”
2. "In fact, members of NCSE worked closely with SI and NMNH members in outlining a strategy to have you (Sternberg) investigated and discredited within the SI."
Regarding these statements Wesley Elseberry said:
“I understand that statement (2) to be completely unsubstantiated, and in contradiction to the statement I previously quoted (1). I know that the statement I quoted, that NCSE advised against making a martyr of Sternberg, is correct. So thanks for pointing out that the OSC could not, itself, resist engaging in some whopper-telling of their own, undermined by their own report of NCSE's advice to the SI.”
So (as I understand it) Wesley Elsberry is saying that statement 2 is a false allegation against the NCSE. He is alleging that the OSC judge made a false allegation against the NCSE. Presumably Wesley has clear evidence that statement 2 is false.
When Wesley was challenged to put that evidence in the public domain to clearly demonstrate the dishonest character of the OSC judge he refused. When it was suggested that this made it appear that he did not have the evidence he made the following statement:
“I see that "PicoFarad" (his challenger) rejects the part of US jurisprudence that holds that parties are considered innocent until proven guilty. I'm not surprised.”
Does this innocence until proven guilty apply to both parties – the OSC judge (accussed by Wesley of telling a whopper) and to Wesley Elseberry or just to Wesley Elsberry? If you accuse someone of lying and refuse to present the evidence that you have for this can you be someone who really believes in innocence until guilt is proven?