Eric Borneman coral controversy

[vwd]

Steve,

So you are admiting that Eric set those corals up in a "facility" that he had not secured. For a "long term" coral study in a facility that he could be literally locked out at the drop of a hat and was. With no one to take care of the Federally protected public property corals, and they could all die.

Would he have gotten a permit if NOAA had known that?

 

[dragonladylea]

I am going to do that. But first, I wanted to see if posting what information I had would help me find more information. And it has. Though it's not the kind of verified documentation that I can post, it's still helpful with regards to my knowing what to say when I contact NOAA.

This statement pretty much confirms my suspicions - There is not enough basis in fact to support this allegation. I sincerely hope that you take a good look at this whole situation with open eyes, learn from it and consider ALL the facts before you make accusations in the future. Starting a "witch" hunt is not the right way to prove a point, true facts are. Being passionate about a cause is fine if you have the information to back it up, going about it this way only made you look bad. Do I think you have a vendetta? No, I think your passion in your cause clouded your judgement on how exactly to handle your case.

 

[sihaya]

This statement pretty much confirms my suspicions - There is not enough basis in fact to support this allegation. I sincerely hope that you take a good look at this whole situation with open eyes, learn from it and consider all the facts before you make accusations in the future.

I have a feeling you would have found some way to come to this conclusion no matter what I said. But anyway... I've made no actual accusations. All I've done is call some attention to what appears to be obvious for the documents and invited people to investigate and/or ponder about the rest. I have learned a lot, but I have no regrets.

 

[trido]

I personally dont care to read Every document posted and dont really care if Eric did something wrong.

noted

I guess I should have made myself more clear. The way I see it, and likely most who read this thread. There are four people debating here. Two who are angry and are trying to get actions (or something) taken against Eric Borneman, and two people who are apparently close friends who have heard the story personally and have seen all of the documents in question.

I will call the two (Siyaha and Cracker2) the prosecutors.
and the other two (StevenPRo and Charles1958) the defense.

So, the prosecutors have brought a case forward to the courts without all of the evidence and admit it. The defense, has all of the evidence but is under direct orders form the defendant not to disclose all of it, possibly to protect his superiors and other government figures.
It has been stated that the prosecutors dont have all of the facts and both admit it. Siyaha,bieng a law student of all things, I dont see how you think you can go forth with your case until you can come forward with all of the facts. It looks to me, and likely most who read this so far. The four of you are at a stalemate. YOU WILL NOT CONVINCE EACH OTHER OF YOUR BELIEFS. Apparently the government doesnt feel that this is worth investigating and has LET IT GO. Maybe you should consider this for yourselves unless you can find some documentaion that can prove your case.

Now I will ask you all. Is there anything more that this thread can provide me to better my hobby or my knowlegde of good reef keeping husbandry?

 

[sihaya]

Well, you do have a lot to say for someone who doesn't think we should be talking about this...


I think the court analogy is a little silly. There are soooo many reasons this is not like a trial or a court or anything of that sort. This is only supposed to be a *discussion* of information posted as official government documents.

 

[dragonladylea]

I have a feeling you would have found some way to come to this conclusion no matter what I said. But anyway... I've made no actual accusations. All I've done is call some attention to what appears to be obvious for the documents and invited people to investigate and/or ponder about the rest. I have learned a lot, but I have no regrets.

I have been the impartial jury in this case as I do not know either one of the parties involved ie The Accused or The Accusor. The only conclusion I could have come to was that the Accusor did not have enough evidence to prove the case. This should be an excellent learning situation for you.

Starting a "witch" hunt is not the right way to prove a point, true facts are. Being passionate about a cause is fine if you have the information to back it up, going about it this way only made you look bad. Do I think you have a vendetta? No, I think your passion in your cause clouded your judgement on how exactly to handle your case.

 

[coralbabies]

A couple of curious things have been mentioned here and other sites for which it would be helpful to better understand so one may fairly asses the intent of all of the players who have chosen to make this a public debate.

What is the motive for the website? I think everyone who reads these threads would all like the answer to this. Not the stated motive, but the real motive.

What does a marriage certificate have to do with topic?

How does "her footprint" being found outside Eric's house at the time of the tank crash effect the story?

What is the intent of the instructions that Sara is supposed to follow?

Perhaps we should approach this more like detectives on case. Look at all aspects of the parties involved. What do they have to gain? What do they have to lose? :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Don't loose your sense of humor.

I mean look back a few posts. Steven admitted that Eric took those corals to a place he could be kicked out of at any time for any reason. Even though it was billed as the facility for the Coral Disease and Health Consortium. Eric was the Chair of the CDHC, where were all the other people to take care of those corals when he got kicked out.

And Eric is so hurt, he won't do or say anything to defend himself. He won't come forward with some secret papers that will clear his name, but then he didn't call the Sanctuary when he got kicked out either.
"let me explain that we would still not know about these problems if Craig Watson had not contacted me(Billy Causey)"

Just do what you were told to do.

The people that can help you, want to help you, but they can't instigate it.

They can only cooperate.

 

[sihaya]

I have been the impartial jury in this case as I do not know either one of the parties involved ie The Accused or The Accusor.

No, you haven't been. Just by classifying us as "accused" or "accuser" you've made yourself partial. I keep on saying that I'm not actually accusing anyone of any legal or moral crime (with the one possible exception of Mr. Borneman's RK article mention of having knowingly purchased some black market corals for the project). I'm only asking questions and pointing out what looks questionable... and possible different interpretations of the documents.

The only conclusion I could have come to was that the Accusor did not have enough evidence to prove the case.

Again, for the umpteenth time... I'm not trying to "prove" anything.

(And I'm sorry, but I find the rest of your post subtly condescending.)

 

[trido]

I have been the impartial jury in this case as I do not know either one of the parties involved ie The Accused or The Accusor. The only conclusion I could have come to was that the Accusor did not have enough evidence to prove the case. This should be an excellent learning situation for you.

Starting a "witch" hunt is not the right way to prove a point, true facts are. Being passionate about a cause is fine if you have the information to back it up, going about it this way only made you look bad. Do I think you have a vendetta? No, I think your passion in your cause clouded your judgement on how exactly to handle your case.

I typically do have alot to say. I just prefer the RDO be used for reef keeping issues pertaining to my fish tank and my hobby as a whole. I dont think that is your agenda at all. Apparently I am not the only one sitting here feeling like the jury. I think the court anaolgy fits perfectly since you are a law student and came to the "table" without all of the evidence and admit it. I do hope you learn from this mistake for future reference. If you can find the rest of the documents and make a decent case I would be very interested in reading about it. The reason I have posted in this thread several times today is to convince you to quit wasting your time trying to convince two other people of your beliefs. I like most who have read through this, have my opinion and all of the typing in the world wont change it until you have more evidence.

Again, for the umpteenth time... I'm not trying to "prove" anything.

With the ferver you have sitting by your computer day in and day out replying to these threads it sure feels like it.

I am done posting in this thread until I see more documentaion. I have much more to worry about in my life than the mistakes others have made at work.

 

[Anonymous]

I have been the impartial jury in this case as I do not know either one of the parties involved ie The Accused or The Accusor.

No, you haven't been. Just by classifying us as "accused" or "accuser" you've made yourself partial. I keep on saying that I'm not actually accusing anyone of any legal or moral crime (with the one possible exception of Mr. Borneman's RK article mention of having knowingly purchased some black market corals for the project). I'm only asking questions and pointing out what looks questionable... and possible different interpretations of the documents.

The only conclusion I could have come to was that the Accusor did not have enough evidence to prove the case.

Again, for the umpteenth time... I'm not trying to "prove" anything.

(And I'm sorry, but I find the rest of your post subtly condescending.)

then what, EXACTLY, are you trying to do ?

 

[dragonladylea]

Sorry but the accusations are pretty clear in a good majority of your posts, I was not being condescending but trying to teach you something that could help you in your future endeavors. Unfortunately you seem to have closed yourself for any possibility of anyone having anything important to say or believe other than yourself. I will conclude my debate with you at this time with this thought.

You can chose to live life to learn or merely exist in ignorance.

 

[sihaya]

Don't loose your sense of humor.

I think that comment about my "footprint" outside Eric's house brought it back. Seriously, where are people getting this stuff? I live in Cleveland, OH. I've been to Houston *twice* in my life (once in 2002 for a med school interview and once for MACNA last year).

 

[sihaya]

then what, EXACTLY, are you trying to do ?

To start a discussion that will turn up (and is turning up) more information. Like the saying goes, sometimes you "need money to make money." The same goes for information sometimes.


dragonlyds- sent you a PM (but totally unrelated to this thread )

 

[vwd]

I agree with sihaya on this point. You have to have a starting point. Sometimes it takes years to get to the truth. and it's even harder when the people involved won't speak up. I really think they are hiding the facts and are hoping this will all go away

 

[sihaya]

I agree with sihaya on this point. You have to have a starting point. Sometimes it takes years to get to the truth. and it's even harder when the people involved won't speak up. I really think they are hiding the facts and are hoping this will all go away

Yay! You're open-minded! This is exactly my point. You have to start somewhere. It might not be the same place you end up, but it's gotta be somewhere.

 

[sihaya]

Just do what you were told to do.

The people that can help you, want to help you, but they can't instigate it.

They can only cooperate.

Dude, I told you... first thing tomorrow morning!

 

[coralbabies]

No, the setence said "her footprint". Like any good attorney knows, it is more often the reaction that tells the story, and not the question.

Trido was exactly correct in the assesment of the situation. The prosecutor has brought forth information to the public trial that is incomplete and built upon presumed guilt. Of all of the possible defendants or coconspiritors involved in the mishandling of the corals, the prosecutor has built the entire case on the alleged guilt of one individual while ignoring the rest.

The prosecutor has mentioned that she is only interested in getting the truth. But, the jurors have observed that the prosecutor has never once in all of the public postings of the so called debate, that her motivation is because she cares deeply about the corals. Perhaps the single most important element of the case and the ultimate concern of the jurors, has simply not been part of the prosecutor's motivation for trying the case. What then is the motivation, the jurors ask?

The coprosecutor's role in the case is also interesting. He is forever trying to mentor his collegue with helpful hints and suggestions. The prosecutor is stuborn, she hears, but is so intent on the task, that she does not listen. The jurors also hear, and are curious about this new turn of events. What is the coprosecutor up to they ask?

The defense team holds the answers. They are bound by attorney/client privalage and cannot not speak though they would like to. They have been helpful to the jury however, a few carefully worded tidbits of information have cast doubt on the vailidity of the case. A few questions here or there to lead the jury in the right direction. The jury listens intently and wonders..................................

 

[andybeats]

I agree with sihaya on this point. You have to have a starting point. Sometimes it takes years to get to the truth. and it's even harder when the people involved won't speak up. I really think they are hiding the facts and are hoping this will all go away

i really think this vince character is a big fat doodie head! now THATS an accusation.

im sure sara will start turning up more info soon, now that the balls is rolling it seems, so for everyone that might have a problem with this thread, keep checkin back.

and i still dont understand why everyone doesnt think that theft and death of federally protected coral species is a crime, is some sucker in a boat paddled out to a protected reef, and started yankin corals out, how many of you would be screaming for his head?

 

[sihaya]

im sure sara will start turning up more info soon, now that the balls is rolling it seems, so for everyone that might have a problem with this thread, keep checkin back.

yep... and ditto

and i still dont understand why everyone doesnt think that theft and death of federally protected coral species is a crime, is some sucker in a boat paddled out to a protected reef, and started yankin corals out, how many of you would be screaming for his head?

Well, yeah, and that's exactly my "motive." Lots of coral were taken... why? and what the heck happened to them?


And enough with the prosecutor vs. defense nonsense. This is NOT a court or a trial. And I'm NOT a prosecutor or a defender.