Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Just leaving this here, but I heard that Rathbun appears to have been the reason this case got screwed up. His declaration, in the end, hurt the case. No pun intended but he blew it for good.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

So Scientology was vindicated after having completley bogus human trafficking charges brought against them. Glad to see that the judge saw this bullshit for what it was. Win after win after win after win. Lol, keep telling yourselves that this happened because the judge is incompetent, not because the suit was total bullshit to begin with.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Marty wrote in his declaration, "For the next five and one half years I worked around the clock coordinating the defense of litigation across the United States and world."

I bet you are right. Marty thinks he is some kind of elawyer and was fingering that case and fucked it up.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

I doubt Marty's declaration sank the case. I also doubt it did much good. It is pretty much irrelevant to most aspects of the case. If it helped at all, it was accidental.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Sorry, but "I heard" doesn't cut it here. Nice try. Or not.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

That is ridiculous. Go back to your anti-Marty OSA websites.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Hope I'm not stepping on toes and doing something objectionable here, but this is an OCMB post by Dorothy that echoes my own views. The laws need to be changed before there's a chance in hell of justice and/or protection for anyone.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

If his declaration was such poisonous crap, then why would Claire Headley's lawyer submit it? I'm not buying this.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

I modify my earlier statement...

The whole US legal apparatus needs to lern2Xenophon

"There are no limits to what you can believe, but there are limits to how you can behave. It is called the Law, and nobody is above it"

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

-1/10

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Yup, keep ignoring reality

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

*sigh*

Seriously, you're just embarrassing yourself now

Come back when you learn to troll properly.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

These two are the same poster.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Yes, this OSA bot needs to return to the rock from which it crawled out from under. Trying to create a rift and trouble like a good little OSA bot.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Yeah, it is win after win after win for Scientology:

The recent 95 page Freedom Rag devoted to saying that COB does not beat his staff was a real win. Billions and billions of BT's read it and agreed. So did Xenu. Like DM, Xenu agrees that people need to be beaten to put in their ethics; Xenu simply prefers to use nukes over fists.

The Italian authorities raiding the Turin Org was a major win.

Jeff Stone just got to see how an association with CoS was a major win for his political career.

Tom Cruise's recent film K&D was box office magic for Tom, losing only $50,000,000+ as per latest numbers; Knight & Day: $74,364,390 6/23/2010. Production costs were $125,000,000 + PR campaign

Knight and Day is symbolic of the Church of Scientology itself as we read from this movie reviewer:

/////

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

The Court's order on the motion for summary judgment was released today. You can read it here:

269_Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

So they admitted that coerced abortions, sleep and eating deprivation, censorship of communication etc. is all part of the Scientology doctrine.
Great, lol.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Yes,i think i am going to poon some christian blogs with this.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Like how they tried to claim Fair Game was a protected religious practise, yeah?

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

I love you!

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Maybe the time's right for a fresh round of harpoonage to our Senators. Especially those who are looking for re-election.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

I love you too!
Man, Anon's are too aewsome for their own britches!
LOL, did I just say britches? Oh what the hell!

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

YES, it can be OPERATION XENOPHON!
Educate the public how the USA is so fearful of stepping on religious freedom that we're actually ENCOURAGING DANGEROUS CULTS BY CONCENTRATING ON THEIR BELIEFS INSTEAD OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT & PROMOTION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES & BEHAVIORS!

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Now how can we turn all this to a flyer?

<3

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Yes. Doing that allowed them to win the very short term goal of a judgement in their favor. They have now willfully sacrificed their credibility in the long term.
Miscavige is an incredibly poor long term tactician or he has a different strategy that doesn't require long term cred.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

A list of the things that were disputed by Claire Headley's side, and blown off by the judge as meritless "objections in disguise" would be good. I'll bet that there are some real issues (with dox) hiding in there.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Scientology 1
Claire Headly 0

Nuff said.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Don't forget captivity by force and "installed that way" razor wire.

• Former Scientologist Recounts Imprisoning Atmosphere at Int Base March 18, 2009, Nathan Baca, Part 6, KESQ.com
• Scientologists Wanting to Leave Church Face Life-Changing Consequences March 19, 2009, Nathan Baca, KESQ.com

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Okay back from walking Bailey!
Geez, thank you ANON's for your posts as it got me thinking.
WHY NOT GET A USA SENATOR TO SPONSOR A BILL?
It could be called the Lisa McPherson and/or Headly's and/or SPARROW, or any cult victim BILL!
How did the Amber Alert get started?
There are thousands of family member's that have been torn apart, ruined & negatively impacted by all these cults that prey on our young!
THAT SADLY our country allows in the name of religious freedom instead of OUR human rights!
Factnet & all the other anti-cult groups (that usually concentrate on a specific cults) can join together @ one web site to advocate/lobby our states elected officials to help us END the criminal activities of all these so called religions in the name of OUR religious freedom!
No I am not not drunk...just saying.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

So what? It's not even the end of the first period.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Agreed. We need to find our Xenophon. There's lots of Congressmen and Senators out there.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Don't forget those Senators looking to be elected for the first time. Maybe Nevadanons can come up with a fresh angle on this issue.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Can anything be done on a state level, or is going federal the only way to get things done?

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI &amp; RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Lol, no. This is over.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

The outcome of this case was pretty much foreordained from the original partial summary judgment. However, while I'm disappointed in the result, the reasons for it give some reason for hope on appeal. Judge Fischer issued a lot of favorable factual rulings in the early part of the opinion, which are mainly consistent with the labor law violation claims. One particularly good example:

Judge Fischer then goes on to rule that this kind of behavior, used to force people to work for you, is completely okay based on the "ministerial exception." The ministerial exception supposedly relates to voluntary participation in religious activity. This set of vile threats described by the judge herself hardly seems consistent with that exception. They threatened to stalk her even if she left town?

If you read on, Judge Fischer's strange conception of the "ministerial exception" takes on vastly expansive tones. One wonders if an Asian child prostitution ring set up shop in her district, and the pimps claimed to be "ministers," and the victims to be cult devotees, whether she would then find the entire scheme protected just by calling it religious. There is nothing in this extremely brief, glib opinion that says otherwise. It seems to state that if anyone, anywhere, calls something religious, that makes it completely immune from the law.

That is not the law.

However, I think the fact that this decision rests on such a slim reed of frankly bizarre legal opinion is good. It contradicts even conservative Supreme Court Justices such as Justice Scalia, who has written opinions stating that claims of religiosity do not magically make it legal for religionists to violate what Scalia called "neutral law of general applicability." The Ninth Circuit is notoriously liberal, though this view is not entirely deserved. A view that just claiming to be a religion renders one immune from all laws might not pass muster even on a conservative panel of the Ninth Circuit (appealing to a Court of Appeals for a federal circuit generally gets you three judges picked from that circuit to hear the appeal and an appeal from that is heard either en banc, that is by the entire circuit or by the Supreme Court).

Finally, there's the standard of review. Generally, factual findings by the original court are treated as true by the appeals court, which only addresses issues of law. However, this trial court's factual findings are actually favorable to the plaintiffs, surprisingly. Where the opinion goes off the rails is in its legal interpretation of those facts.

That's critical, because in appeals of fact findings by the trial court, the trial court is almost always assumed to be right. You don't get to try your whole case again at the appeals level. However, when your appeal is of the legal standards applied by the trial court, the appeals court has no duty at all to defer to those findings, because the appeals court is superior to the trial court in saying what the law is.

That said, appeals usually lose. But this one has a better chance than some, and I would mark its chance of success at maybe 40 percent or so, because almost all of the critical errors the trial court made were related to the law, as opposed to facts.

If an appeal succeeds, the result would be the case would be remanded, probably back to Judge Fischer, to go to trial. Now, that, I don't view as likely to be successful, since I don't think Judge Fischer will be a great trial judge for a case like this. But even in that case, the appeals court judgment will be useful precedent to any future litigants with similar claims, so long as they don't draw the short straw which is Judge Fischer.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

fresh "ANGLE" classic! loving it!

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Thanks for the insight.

Sux to have to be sent back to Judge Fischer when obviously she is incapable of understanding and applying intelligent interpretation of the law.

That, in and of itself, is a crime.

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

I am so in awe of Anons!

Re: Claire Headley v. CSI & RTC - Lawsuit filed - JAN 20, 2009:

Judge dismisses two lawsuits aimed at Scientology - St. Petersburg Times