Apparently this is Time magazine’s strategy for a balanced article:
1. Explain all the strong points from the defendant’s brief.
2. Explain all the weak points in plaintiff’s brief.
3. Decide the case before the trial is over (and ignore the opinions of legal experts).
The author, Jeffrey Kluger, also parrots the vague assertions of employees and ignores the actual events that led to Coppedge’s demotion and the threat from his supervisor that he may be fired if he does not forgo his constitutional rights and stop offering to loan colleagues DVDs that feature JPL scientists. In fact, the woman who first accused Coppedge of religious harassment admitted that 1. Coppedge never discussed religion with her, 2. she accepted the DVD he offered to loan her, 3. she was not offended by the content of the DVD, and 4. she never told Coppedge that any of these actions were unwelcome.
David Klinghoffer observes much the same thing about the Time article, and notes:
The judge on the case, Ernest Hiroshige, read through the same documents and chose not to dismiss the suit as a nuisance. On the contrary, at the rate the trial is proceeding, owing to Hiroshige’s careful, studious pace, this is going to consume probably five weeks of his life. A busy man, Judge Hiroshige obviously felt there was enough substance to Coppedge’s complaint to justify hearing him out along with all the other principal players in the drama, weighing the evidence including the crucial personal testimony, and then drawing a conclusion.