Laura DeCrescenzo forced-abortion lawsuit updates

Discussion in 'Media' started by The Wrong Guy, Mar 20, 2013.

  1. wolfbane Member

  2. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  3. moarxenu Member

    O hai, Bathsheba. Welcome to WWP. Glad you have the requisite thick skin to risk a hearty LURK MOAR or two here.

    Welcome to the conversation.

    Chanology works, and it helps people.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. moarxenu Member

    As I recall, yes, July 2 is the deadline for handing over the folders.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Anonymous Member

    One I recall was a few years ago and that kid in TX who blew and posted a bunch of pics of files stacked willy- nilly in an outdoor storage shed.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. wolfbane Member

    Thanks. I think I had that date confused with deadline for US Supreme Court filing.
  7. Anonymous Member

    Robert Wallace was staff in Dallas, not public. He still shouldn't have had that kind of access having only been in for 10 months.
  8. Anonymous Member

    and it was a video, not pics.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Anonymous Member

    Thanks, It has been awhile and I couldn't remember it clearly, other than as an example of the slovenly manner in which files are kept 'confidential'.
  10. Oh my goodness, you're one of my favorites! I mean, you're all my favorites. Herro a little less than most, but still . . . .

    Honestly, one of the reasons I decided to participate was because I started feeling like a stalker. I feel like I (cyber)know you all so well, and that felt unfair in a way.

    Last question before I end this derail (for which I sincerely apologize): how the hooey do I LIKE a post?
    • Like Like x 3
  11. Anonymous Member

    I guess you haven't been around in a while. Herro's last post was 6 months ago.

  12. Actually, that doesn't surprise me, I re-read dead threads almost as often as new posts. Sometimes I just pick a random page number and look for something I remember being interesting or fun. Like finding my favorite passages in a novel. I see that this strategy (or lack thereof) has messed up my sense of chronology. Okay, I'll try to do better distinguishing between recent posters, and posters I've just *read* recently.
    • Like Like x 2
  13. strange group,

    Anyone see this?
    May 17, 2013
    "Left standing an order by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ronald Sohigian that requires Scientology to turn over more than 2,800 documents to attorneys for a former adherent who claims she was forced into an abortion and otherwise abused during her years of service to the group.

    Sohigian rejected the group's claims of priest-penitent and First Amendment privilege in the suit brought by Laura DeCrescenzo. The plaintiff alleged in a complaint that she was employed by the group from 1991 to 2004, paid less than the minimum wage, and subjected to other illegal conditions. 

    She alleged that she married a co-worker at the age of 16, became pregnant, and that Scientology forced her to have an abortion at the age of 17 because she was a member of the Sea Organization, whose members are not allowed to have children. She filed a complaint against Scientology in April 2009 alleging that she began working for that organization at the age of nine, and became effectively a full-time employee at the age of 10.

    The complaint alleges causes of action for, among other things, labor law violations, infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and deprivation of liberty in violation of the state Constitution, and false imprisonment."

    Child labor working at 9 yrs old, anti-mimimum, wage, anti-unions obv.! They are anti-california, anti-world, anti-workers

    Bye now you are exposed
  14. wolfbane Member

    From TonyO on May 16, 2013:
    It haz been nearly 4 weeks since the Cali Supreme Court ruling. Do we haz a US Supreme Court filing yet?


    And no new actions on the Trial Court docket either (where signs of the case moving into settlement proceedings would show up). However, they got 2 days to go until the next status meeting. So there might still be news on this front coming soon.
    • Like Like x 5
  15. moarxenu Member

  16. Random guy Member

    I think you can only like/dislike once you have accumulated a few likes.
  17. wolfbane Member

    Still no updates to the Trial Court docket, and the status meeting for tomorrow is still on:
    Still no US Supreme Court filing.

    Best wishes going out to Team Laura for tomorrow's status conference. Here's hoping the stupid twats come bearing dox. Lots and lots of dox. And then you can get back on track to defeating their motion for Summary Judgment.
    • Like Like x 3
  18. wolfbane Member

    • Like Like x 4
  19. wolfbane Member

    A breakdown on the delicious dox released yesterday for those who may not have had a chance to plow thru things yet....
    DeCrescenzo Lawsuit: Motion for Protective Order
    • 18pg bawl letter where scilons are claiming EVERYTHING that they are being forced to release should be kept out of the public domain. This is a lulzy read. Desperate cult is desperate.
    • They present 4 arguments/reasons for this request. The first 3 are essentially a retread of the reasons they did not want to release the auditing (PC Folders) files and Ethics folders in the first place.
    • The 4th argument is the kicker, they are trying to claim Team Laura previously agreed to full censorship of EVERYTHING. However, once you read the other dox (N. Daum Exhibits) that does not appear to be the case...
    • Previously, Team Laura offered to work with Team Scilon to mutually draft a protective order to keep the sensitive bits under seal. Despite their claims otherwise, imo this is NOT what happened.
    • What really happened was Team Scilon drafted a protective order separately, with no input/collaboration from Team Laura. And their protective order specifically states ALL DOCUMENTS will be kept under seal and then Team Laura will have to file a fuckton of motions for each and every bit of info that they do not think should be sealed.
    • IOW Team Scilon wants blanket confidentiality on everything, putting the onus on Team Laura to dick around with the shi- that isn't sensitive.
    • GUESTIMATE: Team Laura probably rejected this bullshit offer because a) they had no input on drafting the order. b) it is completely unreasonable to make everything confidential and backtrack shit out from under that blanket seal that isn't sensitive in nature. And/or c) because fuck you Scientology, you fought the battle and lost so you should take the hit and do the paperwork up front - not us after the fact.
    Declaration of Nicholas Daum
    • 42pgs of new infos from cult attorney we haven't seen before and well worth the read.
    • The attached exhibits are key bits from to the two massive filings made by Team Laura (Kathryn Saldana) that we did NOT get released in earlier dox dumping ITT...
    • The Saldana exhibits show that the previous discussion we had ITT re: the big difference between PC Folders vs. Ethics Folders was indeed debated and wrestled with in prior lawfare wranglings.
    Declaration of Allan Cartwright
    • 110 pgs from SO "Legal Director of CSI" lackey. Only the first 7 pgs are new infos and worth reading if you've been following this thread.
    • The attached exhibits are resubmissions of the EXACT SAME DOX previously dumped ITT when the appeal went to the CA Supreme Court, from Jan/Feb 2013 Superior Court filings...
    Other noteworthy points - TonyO provided all the dox filed on this latest action so we didn't miss anything this time around. The US Supreme Court is still not showing any new filings for a Scientology party. And the status meeting scheduled for today is in Superior Court (which I had accidentally'd confused with the trial court in earlier posts) and is underway right now as I type. I suspect this will be Team Laura's chance to explain their NoU response on the cult's blanket confidentiality request. So it will be interesting to see what if anything pops up on the relevant docket link later today...

    • Like Like x 11
  20. moarxenu Member

    Ovar 9000 lieks for Wolfbane!!!
    • Like Like x 1
  21. amaX Member

    Have some pix of Tampa Org sleazing their way through pc folders when they moved from their old building to the new.






    found one more...
    • Like Like x 5
  22. Anonymous Member

    Yeah, I interpreted her lawyer's language to mean, "we are willing to negotiate on the protective order if you stop being a dick about giving us access to the documents in the first place." Scientology obviously continues to fight any handover of documents and are clearly using this protective order as a backup in case they are lose the fight not to do so.
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Anonymous Member

    If you can get a copy of your personnel folder from an employer, your medical chart from a doctor or hospital, a government file from an agency, etc etc why the hell can't YOU get a copy of YOUR pc folder if YOU are clearly consenting to this? These are procedures YOU were there for.
  24. wolfbane Member

    That fight is already lost imo, before they even file it. As I explained upstream ITT (pg1 or 2) there is not a single chance in hell the US Supreme Court will accept this case imo. The filing, if it even happens, is merely a delay tactic. And the gist of why they stand no chance of getting it heard is this:
    • The Evidentiary Code they are disputing is NOT enacted at the Federal level. Only a suggested wording for state lawmakers to enact is codified.
    • This is an area of law specifically left up to the states to define and US Supreme Court has no ground to stick their nose in it whatsoever.
    • California is somewhat unique in the way they enacted the law in question. They are only 1 of 6 states that did not enact the Federal guideline word-for-word, or enact a better worded version of the same stipulations for priest/penitent privilege. End result, California grants more privilege than the Federal recommendation suggests. That is an issue for the state legislature to hammer out since they passed the laws, not the fed court system.
    • Like Like x 7
  25. McLOVIN_1982 Member

    Wolfie.... ya da man! (or woman?!) :0)
    • Like Like x 1
  26. wolfbane Member


    In regards to why the US Supreme will not accept this appeal imo, here's another non-legalsleeze way to put it...

    The federal guidelines for the applicable Evidentiary Codes basically sets 3 somewhat conservative recommendations of granting a 1/2 mile of privilege here, there, and over there.

    California decided to ignore those recommendations and grant 25 miles of privilege here, 10 miles of privilege there, and 2 miles of privilege over there.

    Scientology's bawwwwwl argument will be that in order for them to fully benefit from 25 miles of privilege granted here, they need 6 more inches of privilege added to the 2 miles of privilege in the over there spot.

    inb4USsupremecourtlaughs and says GTFO.

    • Like Like x 5
  27. amaX Member

    ITT wolfie and i both use sleeeezy (except i spelled it sleazy.) sleezy is such a perfect word when describing anything sci related.
    • Like Like x 6
  28. Random guy Member

  29. moarxenu Member

    David Miscsleezy and his sleezfags up to their usual sleezfaggotry..
    • Like Like x 1
  30. wolfbane Member

    Ahhh, the online Superior Court docket has been lagging behind recent events. It appears they were updating things. The way to view it is now this:

    Run a search for Case Number: BC411018 and Filing courthouse: Burbank Courthouse

    Lastest updates that have appeared as of today:
    ^^Those are the same documents already released on The Underground Bunker. So the news here is that there is a hearing set for July 1st on this motion:

    DeCrescenzo Lawsuit: Motion for Protective Order

    Which is 1 day prior to when they are due to hand over the PC Folders and Ethics Folders.

    Still no new filings showing up for Scientology entities at the US Supreme Court. However, the cult has 90 days from the date of the California Supreme Court ruling (05/20/2013) to get that appeal petition filed. So that puts the US Supreme Court deadline at August 18, 2013.
    • Like Like x 4
  31. The Wrong Guy Member

    Laura D to Scientology: It’s Too Late for a Protective Order in Forced-Abortion Case

    Laura DeCrescenzo’s attorneys have answered the Church of Scientology’s latest attempt to derail her forced-abortion lawsuit, and they’ve done it in only two pages.

    The church has until July 2 to turn over DeCrescenzo’s “pc files” — thousands of pages of confessional material compiled while she was an employee of the church starting at only nine years of age. DeCrescenzo believes that the documents will bolster her claim that she was abused as a member of Scientology’s “Sea Org,” including her assertion that she was forced to have an abortion at 17. Scientology has already lost two appeals fighting the court order, and have now asked LA Superior Court Judge Ronald Sohigian for a protective order to keep the documents from being seen by the public.

    Her answer to that request is short and sweet.

    Continued at
    • Like Like x 2
  32. RightOn Member

    so if they DO hand over the files, wont' they be doctored or there will be a ton "missing"? or "lost"
    you know how good they are at losing files.
    France comes to mind
  33. wolfbane Member

    Laura D to Scientology: It’s Too Late for a Protective Order in Forced-Abortion Case


    The protective order response was filed on June 17 but hadn't showed up on the online docket for LA Superior Court as of the end of last week. So that website is still showing a lag time in being current.

    Also worth noting is the scilon attorneys have changed AGAIN.

    Documents filed in Superior Court in April 2012 and the CA State Supreme Court petition filed in March 2013 were listing the CSI defendant attorneys as KENDALL BRILL & KLIEGER LLP and RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD, KRINSKY & LIEBERMAN, LLP; and the RTC defendant attorney as JEFFER, MANGELS, BUTLER & MITCHELL, LLP.

    But the response filed by Team Laura last week lists KENDALL BRILL & KLIEGER LLP and Kendrick Moxon from MOXON & KOBRIN for CSI, with JEFFER, MANGELS, BUTLER & MITCHELL, LLP still onboard for RTC.

    So Eric Leiberman et al from RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD, KRINSKY & LIEBERMAN, LLP - is GONE! At least on the Superior Court docket. But that may just be an indication that is the firm handling the US Supreme Court filing.

    This is the first we've seen Moxon's name show up on paper in quite awhile, although he was present at Sparrow & Narconon TR hearings.
    • Like Like x 1
  34. Anonymous Member

    It is expected that the files will have been tampered with IMO. Hopefully a good lawyer will be able to spot that.
  35. Anonymous Member

    Looks MOXON crawled out from under his rock again
    • Like Like x 1
  36. RightOn Member

    yes. but what if they claim they are stolen or lost? I would think this can hurt them further, but who knows.
    if they don't have anything damaging stuff to show the court, then they get away with even more, or not tried as severely?
  37. wolfbane Member

    They already pissed off the Superior Court judge once by falsely claiming the state supreme court had to hurry because there was looming deadline. So further shenanigans will only add fuel to the fire methinks.
    • Like Like x 1
  38. If Laura gets to see the files, she will know immediately if things are missing. If the Folder Error Summaries look like they were *just* completed, this will be a tip-off.

    Also, unless things have greatly changed, Scientology typically cuts out (with a scissor) items in PC folders which would tend to incriminate them.

    I'll bet Marty Rathbun could give us all some insights on PC folder culling... Marty?
  39. Anonymous Member

    According to a post on TonyO's blog CoS had to submit a list of what was contained in the files. Not sure if this is accurate, but if so, would make tampering difficult. Any lawfags have info on this?
  40. This is a case where Karen #1 would actually be of some use. She could be called in as an expert witness, as she could look through the folders and have a good chance of knowing whether things were altered or missing, even though she was not supervising that particular case.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins