The Boulder Daily Camera — and, yeah, I’m reading the thing for the first time in months — has their semi-live, semi-updated blog of the hearing going here.

Update: No ruling today, but it should be coming early next week. David Lane, however, had enough fun with Dean Todd Gleeson (3:07 update) that I’ll probably be able to stand the wait.

Update II: There’s audio around from the local radio shows. I’ll post links to some in an update shortly.

Update III: The only Colorado journalist who seems to get what’s at stake in Ward Churchill’s reinstatement: Michael Roberts.

Update IV: KHOW neo-Stalinist shitbirds Caplis and Silverman have done something useful for perhaps the first time in their lives, and posted Ward Churchill’s full testimony here. And if you can’t get enough, you can also listen to their show, here, here, and here, which includes an interview with David Lane, if nothing else. I’ll listen to it today and update with highlights.

Update V: Nope, Caplis and Silverman, still useless. The audio which they claimed to be all of Ward Churchill’s testimony is only about two minutes long. As my dear old grandfather used to say, the geniuses at KHOW could fuck up a ball bearing with a rubber mallet. Anyway, maybe they’ll get it fixed, but I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.

Update VI: The University of Denver law school’s legal blog, The Race to the Bottom, which has pretty much set the standard for coverage of the Ward Churchill trial (for all but a few fringe cranks, that is), has two posts about yesterday’s hearing:

• Churchill Arguments to Reinstate: Battle of “the Message”

Which offers this tidbit:

Professor Churchill’s testimony was—as ever—eloquent. He emphasized that he filed a lawsuit as “a matter of principle to preserve the concept of academic freedom, which is to say that political powers cannot silence professors because they disagree with their beliefs.” (all quotes approximate) “And to obtain justice, restitution, restoration to the position that jury found I was illegally removed from.” Professor Churchill reasserted his trial testimony that when asked if he wanted money, he said no.

And:

• Churchill Hearing: Color Commentary and Prediction

Which makes this prediction:

My prediction is that Judge Naves will rule on the law, which is that reinstatement is the preferred remedy unless the offending employer can prove that reinstatement will severely damage the violating employer’s enterprise. The burden of proof is with the First Amendment violator, and CU does not seem to have met that burden. While the witnesses—especially Professor Jessor—spoke passionately about the importance of research integrity to maintain academic standards, this is a pretty esoteric concept.

They are, as we’ve come the expect, exactly the kind of fair, balanced, and accurate reporting which it has been nearly impossible to find in the Denver media.

Update VII: All right, I lied. As much as I wanted to listen to the Caplis and Silverman show to provide highlights, I just couldn’t bring myself to do it. Sorry.