Civil case: sparrow harrowing II

Discussion in 'Anon Sparrow' started by Anonymous, May 4, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Anonymous Member

    I can imagine the entire DC cell enjoying such a challenge as well, not to mention the public spectacle it will make.
  2. LarryBren Member

    As someone who has spent over five years on Solo NOTs/New OT VII (yes I was a retard and I am wearing a bag over my head in embarassment even as I type this) I think I have to disagree that Solo NOTs material should be posted here. Afterall, the average OSA person will never have gotten that far on the bridge and would thus not be able to read these posts any longer.

    No it is just wrong! If I didn't think it was wrong I would say that the major parts of SOLO NOTs are locating a BT on your body and asking the "what" and "who" questions until they blow. You "find" that BT perhaps by sensing a mass on the body and seeing the meter read when you put your attention on that body part (or some other such nonsense). Then you ask "what are you?". When you get an appropriate reading response (but not also a "blow", I forget the sorid details) you then ask "who are you?". You keep asking "who are you?" until you get the answer "me" and the BT blows.

    No sir, that sort of stuff should NOT be posted in a reputable forum like this one given the long standing Anonymous traditions of tolerance and fair play.

    I deeply regret that back in March 2008 at Anon's second raid in Boston that I did a SOLO NOTs session for the Anons on the street corner and told them that with the "who" question when you get the same answer (other than "me") two times in a row (like "Mortimus T. Shagnasty") then you must ask the BT "who were you before you were "Mortimus T. Shagnasty?" at which point you will hopefully get it to say "me" and blow.

    I also do not feel that OSA agents should be told that there is a full clearing procedure for BTs who are hard to blow on Solo NOTS where you can actually "clear" them in minutes by asking them things like "can you create?", "do you have pictures are things?", etc., etc to get them to cognite that THEY created their own bank at which point they are "clear" and they then blow.

    So PLEASE whatever you do Anonymous DO NOT post Solo NOTs material like the above in this thread. OSA should be able to read this as well as they try to find out what they can use against Sparrow. Afterall it's only fair and what is Anonymous if not fair?
    • Like Like x 25
  3. Anonymous Member

    For noobs, BTs are Body Thetans.
    BTs are Ghosts.
    BTs are disembodied spirits of dead space aliens, many of them still strung out on psych drugs.

    Scientology is Body Thetans are the true cause of all your difficulties in life.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Chipshotz Member

    Larry, you bad boy.
    Your awesome :)
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Wait, so the BTs actually talk to you? That makes Scientology suddenly sound way more fun.
    • Like Like x 6
  6. Interrobanger Member

    Why would you spend five years chatting up body thetans and blowing them one at a time instead of mocking up a thetan hand and brushing them all off in an afternoon?

    Image of Larry blowing Shag nasty makes Freud happy.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Mark Cabian Member

    • Like Like x 9
  8. Anonymous Member

    You do understand that sarcasm in writing should only be attempted by the greats like Twain?

    Though in the English language there is no standard accepted method to denote irony or sarcasm in written conversation, several forms of punctuation have been proposed. Among the oldest and frequently attested are the percontation point--furthered by Henry Denham in the 1580s—and the irony mark--furthered by Alcanter de Brahm in the 19th century. Both of these marks were represented visually by a backwards question mark (unicode U+2E2E). A more recent example is the snark mark. Each of these punctuation marks are primarily used to indicate that a sentence should be understood at a second level. A bracketed exclamation point and/or question mark as well as scare quotes are also sometimes used to express irony or sarcasm.
    In certain Ethiopic languages, sarcasm and unreal phrases are indicated at the end of a sentence with a sarcasm mark called temherte slaq, a character that looks like an inverted exclamation point ¡.[18]
    In an increasingly technological world, the use of sarcasm in email, text messaging, message boards and blogs has often been misunderstood as ignorance or stupidity: comments meant to be sarcastic have been taken literally or seriously. A newer trend in using sarcasm in cyberspace is to use an italic font for the proposed sarcastic remark to quell any questions as to the intent of a comment[citation needed] or to enclose the sarcastic remark in sarcasm tags as a form of pseudo-HTML such as the following:

    <sarcasm>I'm sure they'll do great.</sarcasm>[citation needed

  9. TinyDancer Member

    Irony. Lol.
    • Like Like x 7
  10. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
  11. Anonymous Member

    That's what Keith Henson said.
  12. anonsparrow Member

    Moxon definitely played a part in amending the stalking charge to include a larger scope of time and changing the wording of it. He probably also played a large part in the mask charge, too. This is, in part, text from the "Government's Notice of Intent to File an Additional Charge":

    "6. The government received information from the complainant's civil attorney in January 2011, and based on that information, the government amended count one of the information on February 11, 2011.

    7. After further reviewing the facts of the case, the government added an additional charge on February 14, 2011."
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Anontacular Member

    I see. I don't like, but I see.
  14. JohnnyRUClear Member

    What a wonderful thing it would have been if Kendrick had been the Moxon who chased squirrels at Gold Base.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Krautfag Member

    I lol'd :)
  16. subgenius Member

    Any chance of the dox in this case being posted?
    So we have delicious cake while waiting for the transcript.
  17. subgenius Member

  18. Anonymous Member

    Did Stacy chase the squirrels - or did she decide to blow the cult by blowing herself up on the high voltage lines?

    Don't want to speculate - but the story is she was found still clutching the power cables. Does anyone have any more info? New thread perhaps?
  19. RightOn Member

    here is the info from that case
  20. JohnnyRUClear Member

    The point is that I wish Kendrick Moxon had gotten fatally electrocuted to death until he was dead and didn't survive.

    Maybe that will make it clear enough for you.
  21. Anonymous Member

    I know what you meant. I was looking for info on the poor girl killed by cult and the weird nature of the death.
  22. well done on being still able to protest sparrow, you glorious faggot.

    still - herro has a point (up to a point) - this could result in more lulz now that you must rethink your tactics. but do me a favour you douche; take that $150 herro sent you and wipe your asshole with it. then finally i can hear someone say "cash was so shit"

    i can fap and die happy. keep on keeping on you fag.
  23. Anonymous Member

    You're right that court reporters have copyright on the transcript, but they generally don't care about posting them if you don't cut into their income stream, such as by making copies for legal purposes, which is where they make their money. Of those who do mind, often they don't mind if you do something like put in an un-removable watermark that renders it useless for legal purposes.

    I have personally put up tens of thousands of pages of transcripts without ever hearing so much as a peep from a court reporter. My personal practice these days is to get permission, which has never been denied. A) I'm willing to accommodate any concerns they have, and B), often the cases involve scumbags who I don't want to save a dime.

    The main rule is don't take money out of their pocket, and they usually won't mind.
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Anonymous Member

    The transcripts aren't a court record until someone uses them, such as in an appeal. Often, transcripts aren't even made unless there is an appeal. The court reporter actually has to create them. Court reporters don't work for free.

    When I did overnight transcripts for House of Representatives committee hearings, my rate was $0.0025 per character not including spaces, plus $1.50 per page. At approximately 15,000 characters per hour and 20 pages per hour, that was around $70 an hour. That was just for me. That didn't count the guy they sent to take a digital recording, the proofreaders who made sure it was okay, or the profit margin for the contractor.

    At approximately the same rate, the D.C. court reporter is only charging slightly more than I got paid, and is actually an official court reporter. Real court reporters often earn as much or even more than attorneys, and I've seen higher cost per page. If you pay much less than that, you get an incompetent who produces an unusable record.

    Once the transcript actually is a court record, a different fee schedule applies. I think it's between $0.50 and $1. Some courts, like federal courts, charge the same fee per page, but don't cap the price of a document like they do with other records, so the fee is $0.08 per page, but doesn't max out at $2.40 for any entire document.
    • Like Like x 6
  25. lostatsea Member

    ITT, getting a real education re: court reporting and transcripts. Jeezum crow, I had no idea.
    • Like Like x 2
  26. Anonymous Member

    Not to get too bogged down in abstractions, but I disagree that trial (or deposition) transcripts are per se uncopyrightable. The useful, if not terribly creative element that I think falls within copyright protection are those formatting elements which make the document useful for its intended purpose, i.e., to provide page and line numbers which make it possible to cite to the record in legal briefs, such as appeals briefs.

    This is analagous to the question of whether West's pagination and star-pagination in their case reporters and database of unpublished opinions are copyrightable. There is an unresolved circuit split on this issue. West Pub. Co. v. Mead Data Cent., Inc., 799 F.2d 1219 (1986) (holding in a 2-1 panel decision that the pagination is protected); but see Matthew Bender & Co. v. West Publ'g Co., 41 Fed. Appx. 507 (2002) (holding in a 2-1 panel decision that it is not).

    As I said earlier, though, I'm not worried about the issue, so long as it doesn't impact the court reporter's income. Since the only parties generally interested in most transcripts are the parties, and the copy used in any appeals is often the only one which ever gets made, court reporters aren't generally expecting much in the way of a continued income stream. In fact, I've rarely even seen a copyright notice on a transcript.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Anon_1HG Member

    Not much of a donation, but in support of Sparrow none the less:

    • Like Like x 5
  28. tikk Member

    I think that the formatting elements present in transcripts are readily distinguishable from the formatting elements in West's and Lexis's pagination, only the latter meeting sufficiently minimal degrees of creativity to take them out of Feist. What formatting elements are present in a transcript are taken care of by the merger doctrine (in short, holding that where there are only a drastically limited number of ways to express an idea, such expressions are uncopyrightable). While some transcriptions may differ from each other in terms of formatting, those differences are too nominal and slight to constitute 'works of authorship' on their own, especially as compared to the West and Lexis additions, which represent proprietary impositions, unique to the uncopyrightable text itself. I could be wrong but I'd welcome litigation as a defendant since from what I can tell, the matter hasn't been fully fleshed out.

    Academics aside, your point is well taken that the issue would rarely ever arise because the court reporter is really only concerned about the initial sale, and perhaps any attempts to resell to likely clients.
    • Like Like x 1
  29. Interrobanger Member

    I don't know if anonymous speaks truth. Adding a digital watermark is trivial. If tikk or Larry Bren believe the concept has merit and has any question, need only ask.

  30. tikk Member

    In this case I think I know who Anonymous is, who happens to be someone for whose opinion I have a great deal of respect. As noted above, I disagree as to the copyrightability aspect but as you note, a watermark is easy enough to create, and not a bad idea to the extent it demonstrates an advance sensitivity toward the court reporter's monetary concerns.
    • Like Like x 2
  31. Diablo Member

    Don't be suprised if the transcript or the court reporter that has the transcript or both end up missing. Maybe RathRinder could share some tips on how to protect the dox since they know all the dirty little tricks of how to repress the truth...hello?
    • Like Like x 1
  32. Anonymous Member

    One of the major court reporter/transcription agancies in SoCal is a WISE business. I don't remember the name off hand. Fortunately they're not working DC.

    As for the two Mahty's sharing dox, I lolled.
  33. DeathHamster Member

    Atkinson-Baker Court Reporters.
    Their site says that they've done 6937 depositions in DC.
  34. xenubarb Member

    Not our fault if you can't recognize sarcasm and find it necessary to post your fail. Just sayin.
    • Like Like x 1
  35. Herro Member

  36. Anonymous Member

    They've also been thrown off a Scientology-related case, sued the judge, and lost. Atkinson-Baker & Assocs., Inc. v. Kolts, 7 F.3d 1452 (1993).
    • Like Like x 3
  37. AnonLover Member


    • Like Like x 1
  38. anonsparrow Member

    This is a wonderful donation. Thank you my friend. *wipes tear*
    • Like Like x 9
  39. Moxon should try litigating with facts at some point in his slithering, slimy career.........

    They say that Kendrick Moxon's twat is rank............

    Just the Facts, Ma'am..........


  40. Optimisticate Member

    Long civil trial is long. Sparrow is not forgotten. Nor are our constitutional rights that Scientology is trying to bypass.
    • Like Like x 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins