(8/27/09) Yesterday’s proceedings were totally consumed by Kathy’s testimony. Channel Ten filmed most of the morning sessions, but did not film any of the afternoon proceedings.

She was questioned by her counsel who focused on key issues for her case. (1) Kathy described her consistent use of rhythmic danceable ethnic, classical and all types of music with or without words from all over the world. (2) She went on to highlight her 5 years of satisfactory teaching of dance at numerous locations without any complaints on the content of music chosen.  (3) Kathy’s counsel questioned her on the most pertinent conversations with the key staff members at the 2 elementary schools where she was contracted to teach performance dance. (4) Kathy was also asked to describe her independent contractor status and the chaotic class schedules as something subject to frequent days, times and specific location changes of rooms, auditorium or outside on the cement or grass. Kathy was clearly not in charge of her teaching schedule as an independent contractor, but the judge refused to allow any evidence from the IRS which would have insisted that the school district treat her as an employee rather than an independent contractor. The judge was adamant about not allowing any IRS rulings into the case. Some folks suspect possible collusion, conflicts of interest or hidden agreements between the judge and the defense counsel. (5) Kathy’s counsel also questioned her about her health and medical challenges that resulted from the stressors triggered by the unprofessional and discriminatory firing of her without any just cause or reasonable explanation.

The boring anal retentive and pompous arrogant counsel for the defense then cross examined Kathy and wasted much  time (putting many jurors and spectators almost to sleep) going over the most minute and extremely trivial details (not related to the causes of action or any pertinent evidences in the case). This included grilling her on many of the legal details and language of her independent contractor agreement, many irrelevant copies of numerous class attendance forms, plus some of the statements that were made in Kathy depositions, as well as her conversations with school staff members (only a few of which were related to the evidentiary exhibits or causes of action in the case) trying to intimidate and/or entrap Kathy into making perjury statements. The defense attorney repeatedly went over the same minute details again and again (in some cases, as many as 4 different times) and was not stopped from wasting the courts time by either the judge or the counsel for the plaintiff.  

After the defense attorney ran out of trivial details to harass Kathy with, the court allowed counsel for the plaintiff to go over some of the issues raised by her testimony as she was grilled by the defense attorney. Kathy held up admirably under these pressures, and addressed most of the negative issues that were raised by the defense attorney’s hostile questioning. The day ended with the judge mandating the plaintiff’s attorney to wrap up her questions within the first half hour at the start of the day on Thursday morning’s sessions. Then the defense attorney will have one more half hour chance to harass Kathy on the witness stand. After that, she will not be able to offer any testimony, except during approved rebuttal times allowed by the judge. The judge is going to treat each witness this way, so they will only testify once to the court and the jury. After they are done with Kathy, they will examine the lady who is flying in just for the day to testify. She was the one coordinating the after school program, and may be one of Kathy’s antagonists. That will remain to be seen by the tone of her testimony as she is examined by both plaintiff’s and defense attorneys. This concludes the brief summary.