Head honcho at the homo put-down group, NOM, is out with a statement that the district judge in the Prop8 trial allowed testimony that he shouldn't have.
Once again, here's part of the testimony they didn't want heard, testimony about how the Evangelical faithful abandon their gay kids or force them into spiritual violence centers, like NARTH. Recall that several leaders of similar centers recently apologized, recanting in a very, very public way.
Ryan Kendall intrepidly faced the cameras, the courtroom, and retaliation to tell an incredibly personal story:
A. When I was 16, I separated myself from my family and surrendered myself to the Department of Human Services in Colorado Springs.
Q. And what happened when you surrendered yourself to that department?
A. I -- I went in, and I spoke with the case worker. And I told her what had been going on in my family, what had been going on with reversal therapy. And I told her that if I went back to that house, I was going to end up killing myself.
And so they started a dependency and neglect proceeding to revoke my parents' custody.
Q. So did you stop living with your parents and stop going to therapy?
A. That's correct.
Q. And did things get better?
A. I was a 16-year-old kid who had just lost everything he ever knew. I didn't really know what to do. I was very lost. And so the next few years I wandered in and out of jobs. I wandered in and out of attempts at school.
I was incredibly suicidal and depressed. I hated my entire life. At one point, I turned to drugs as an escape from reality and because I was, you know, trying to kill myself.
So, no, things did not get better.
Q. And what happened when you surrendered yourself to that department?
A. I -- I went in, and I spoke with the case worker. And I told her what had been going on in my family, what had been going on with reversal therapy. And I told her that if I went back to that house, I was going to end up killing myself.
And so they started a dependency and neglect proceeding to revoke my parents' custody.
Q. So did you stop living with your parents and stop going to therapy?
A. That's correct.
Q. And did things get better?
A. I was a 16-year-old kid who had just lost everything he ever knew. I didn't really know what to do. I was very lost. And so the next few years I wandered in and out of jobs. I wandered in and out of attempts at school.
I was incredibly suicidal and depressed. I hated my entire life. At one point, I turned to drugs as an escape from reality and because I was, you know, trying to kill myself.
So, no, things did not get better.
Read the transcript from Day 7. The judge says that the proponents opened the door when contending that sexuality was fluid. He quotes at length from their own trial brief. Whether the witness was an 'expert' was never a question at trial.
Here's what the judge said when he ruled against the Prop8 contention that it was not their burden to show forced conversion therapy is or is not related to the permanence of sexual orientation:
THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Campbell.
By the way, I think you took a good deposition.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.
THE COURT: Well, it does seem to me that this is an issue that the proponents themselves have raised in the case, the fluidity of sexual orientation. It is true that this is an issue which largely depends upon expert testimony.
But, as with so many aspects of testimony in a trial and evidence in a trial, actual firsthand experience to illustrate points that have been raised is very helpful, ...
And I think the testimony of Mr. Kendall on this issue can be evaluated by the Court and weighed in relation to the expert testimony and all the other evidence that's going to be presented. And so I'm disinclined to exclude his testimony.
He has, after all, been deposed. Mr. Campbell has had had a chance to explore this gentlemen's testimony and to prepare himself. And so I think it's not unfair to the proponents, having raised this issue, for Mr. Kendall to testify. And, therefore, the motion to exclude him will be denied.
By the way, I think you took a good deposition.
MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.
THE COURT: Well, it does seem to me that this is an issue that the proponents themselves have raised in the case, the fluidity of sexual orientation. It is true that this is an issue which largely depends upon expert testimony.
But, as with so many aspects of testimony in a trial and evidence in a trial, actual firsthand experience to illustrate points that have been raised is very helpful, ...
And I think the testimony of Mr. Kendall on this issue can be evaluated by the Court and weighed in relation to the expert testimony and all the other evidence that's going to be presented. And so I'm disinclined to exclude his testimony.
He has, after all, been deposed. Mr. Campbell has had had a chance to explore this gentlemen's testimony and to prepare himself. And so I think it's not unfair to the proponents, having raised this issue, for Mr. Kendall to testify. And, therefore, the motion to exclude him will be denied.
