Can be found in the Seattle Times (of all places). It includes such testimonial gems as
Golb testified that he made up all the names he used in his Internet debates, even if they were names of real people who were tangentially involved. He said he wrote an e-mail under Schiffman’s name as a parody to highlight his outlandish and wrong-headed actions, including stealing from his father’s research without crediting him.
Uh huh. Right. As if Schiffman’s position on the Scrolls is in any way similar to Golb’s!
“I never intended anybody to believe that these e-mails were sent by Larry Schiffman,” he testified.
He wrote in Schiffman’s name but never intended anyone to believe it was Schiffman writing. Sure, Raphy, sure. And I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’m willing to sell you cheap. Besides that, since his arrest (until now) he has asserted that he never had anything to do with any of it. But now he’s changed his story. Unsurprisingly (since he’s faced with the absolute Mt. Everest of evidence already proving beyond any doubt that he did write falsely using Schiffman’s name).
Golb gave a heady, lengthy testimony Monday, full of philosophical ideas about access to the scrolls and which theories have been promoted in the press and in the academic community around the world. He invoked the French Enlightenment philosopher Voltaire and the early 1900s Portuguese poet Fernando Pessoa as inspirations for his posts. “I used methods of satire, irony, parody and any other form of verbal rhetoric that became the type of language used by philosophers during the Enlightenment to expose the irrational arguments of their opponents,” he said.
Can anyone say ‘smoke and mirrors’ all intended to confuse and sidetrack the jury from the issue? I can’t wait till he’s cross examined. The DA is going to destroy the facade.
“My purpose was to expose the pattern of unethical conduct in the field of studies in its various forms,” he said, citing exclusion of professors, plagiarism, smearing and a lack of access. Golb said his criminal prosecution is fueled by Schiffman, who’s angry about being called a plagiarist. When questioned by defense attorney David Breitbart, Golb said he didn’t initially tell police the whole truth when they arrived to arrest him because he was scared. “I asked myself whether there was some law I had violated, and I rapidly decided no,” he said. “I had accused someone of plagiarism … these are simple matters, not criminal.” Golb’s testimony was to continue Tuesday.
Unethical? Why, Raphy, look in the mirror. That’s the face of the unethical you see; for that’s a person who pretends to be someone else (in the multiples) in order to foist off dad’s ideas. But truth, Raphy, isn’t determined by majority decision, so even if you had concocted 5 million screen names and posted support for dad under all of them, the truth of the falsity of his position would still be established. You’d think a lawyer would know that. Apparently not.
But Golb remains defiant, as the closing section of the NY Post report shows-
Asked by his lawyer, David Breitbart, if he regretted going after Schiffman, Gollb said, ”No I do not.” ”No regret for exposing his character,” he said. Schiffman was the prosecution first witness when the trial started last week, and testified that Golb’s shenanigans with his identity left him “paralyzed” for about a month.
Of course there’s no regret- he still thinks everything he did was ok and given the chance, he’ll do it again.
Now the real fun… when will BAR bother to notice the testimony of Golb and how will they spin it…