Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Monique Rathbun' started by George Layton, Feb 1, 2016.
its unlikely they had the money to start it without contingency fees
agreed with their lawyers.
Face! Good to see ya, bro!
I'm about as rare around these parts as you are these days, and this thread threw me for a loop, too. But, as with all things Co$, there's sure to be something stupid and / or tawdry at the bottom of all this.
Mosey never suggested that she was doing this for anybody other than herself, because of a situation that was very distressing for herself and her family. Even though it would have had a major impact for future litigants if she'd continued to trial and won, given the history of trials like Wollersheim's, that GO ON FOR YEARS, I understand perfectly why she'd want to settle as quickly as she can, and if I were in her position, I would do the same.
It would have been a thin line between her being some kind of hero, or a sacrificial lamb, if the CoS psychologically destroyed her with the trial, and dragging it out. As it is, if she settled or is just bowing out, at least she did something.
That short article on his blog was reflective of Marty's mindset over two months ago: "Why are people picking on the poor Church of Scientology when there are all these terrorists running around?"
Sounds like a Freedom Magazine article.
'When distraction becomes destructive': https://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2015/11/17/when-distraction-becomes-destructive/
This is not just an apparent settlement arising from necessity. This is a change of mind by Marty, a change of mind that occurred months ago.
Let's hope this is not what it seems, and that we don't see an audio message from Marty similar to the one from Jon Zegel in his infamous (written by Scientology Inc. and well rehearsed by Zegel) "Tape Number 4" of 1987:
It doesn't matter what she intended for herself, when you start something like this it affects others. In this case it would have had major implications.
People tend to forget that they live in a world with other people and you can't truly live separate lives.
If the delivery truck doesn't show up at the supermarket then you don't have food but that delivery guy probably never enters your mind as being at all important in your life.
I don't know US/Texas law, however isn't there still a TRO still in force? If so, it's fairly unlikely that the C of S would have approached Monique directly. It would have gone through their attorney. Any settlement offer made to their attorney, he/she is obligated to take to their client.
What I do know about negotiation is that one gets the best deal from a position of power, not weakness. They were in a fairly strong position legally, so it's difficult to know what happened and why it happened.
The cost is a normal life without constant dealings relative to Co$. I think the emotional, intellectual and spiritual lives of both Monique & Marty have been drained of purpose...But it is altogether possible that the Rathbuns were offered an alternative solution, considering their vulnerability friendly advice, like that given Ms Cook.....
Shewolf smells a rat...will they really 'Move on up a little higher'?
Or the Vicki Aznaran recant.
Well I have to think that if I were in the cofS position and I wanted to get out of this tarbaby situation and I were looking to close it down I would point out that the cofs would appeal ANY ruling until the bitter end, that it took 10 years (I think, not sure) before Wollersheim saw any money from his settlement and that a reasonable settlement now would be a whole lot better than a decade long fight.
Marty would know the truth of that position if anyone would.
it's about the only scenario I can think of that seems to make sense at least to me.
OMFG ! Monique decides to fire her lawyers. Is it most likely a settlement is coming ? Oh. HELL yes !
BUT, that isn't a fact YET and now from an arm chair speculator we have some remarkably vivid imagination that Monique has some fucking wild eyed OBLIGATION to continue HER fight as now has ( in the mind of the one in the arm chair with the wildly vivid imagination ) become bigger than just her, it is ALL America !
( Never mind this reminds me of high school kid telling his girl friends " this thing is bigger than both of us " ! )
But here is MY question : Being someone feels so strongly that this is an issue that affects everybody & is a majorly important issue - then why oh why isn't this person FILING A SUIT & PURSUING THIS ISSUE OUT OF AN OBLIGATION TO ALL MANKIND ?
Or, is it just more so much more comfortable ( and safe ) to express what " others ought to do " ?
Either Monique gets to live her life as she sees fit, or, she's a robotic slave.
PS - Face surely expressed the same opinion of Marty that I've has as long as I've known Marty : lying self serving snake.
Oh, OK, Mosey, nor anyone else, who has taken the CO$ to court should have any more obligation than "what's in it for them?".
I'm sure Scientology s quite fine with this arrangement of:
Someone who has something on the CO$ takes them to court,
CO$ tries to knock them out early with legal shenanigans and time.
CO$ finds that they really have something and they have stamina but not enough to go the distance.
CO$ doesn't like the negative press and shelling out any more than they have to and the possibility that they could lose.
CO$ pulls their opponent aside, says take this, they do, and it's all done, CO$ goes back to what they always do.
CO$ can go on forever on this game because it doesn't stop them because people can be bought.
Don't get your hopes up that the CO$ will come down any time soon with this formula. It's just business as usual.
So why even bother to protest the CO$? They're still here and probably will be for a long time as long as people are willing to settle.
But why change anything?
Yes of course it's reasonable that Marty and Monique would want to settle, there is absolutely no dispute about that. But that's what lawyers do, is to get the best deal for one's client so if that was the only issue, then maybe there were specific terms that couldn't be agreed upon such as gagging clauses which seems to come as standard in C of S settlements.
Maybe for Marty and Monique it wasn't about getting a settlement, but the whole legal case going away immediately. This would be tricky as Ray Jeffrey and his team wouldn't get paid at all for years of work, and while one does the best for one's client, a legal firm isn't a charity either.
Here's what I think may be going on:
Even though the Rathbun's aren't having to pay their lawyers anything the Rathbun's might be in a difficult financial situation. A new baby is expensive to provide for and they recently moved. Marty's work history has been sporadic at best. Mosey did have a career in the healthcare field, which I think at some point she returned to, but she suffered ridiculous harassment at her job due to the CoS bullshit. As a new mother there may be a lot on Mosey's shoulders, she may be the sole financial provider for the family at the moment which means less time with her new baby - which is hard on any mother. Maybe the CoS offered a settlement, one far far less than the law firm thought was possible. Maybe one so low it wouldn't even cover the money they have sunk into it.
If a $1,000,000 settlement was offered, and the law firm is really getting 40% (which is high for a contingency fee but given the type of case totally understandable and practical) that means the law firm would get about $400,000 - which for the sheer amount of work, court time, research, support staff, attorneys, etc.. on the case so far it wouldn't even cover their expenses. I have no doubt they have more than a million in a case that has been this complex and has gone on for two years. So the lawfirm would not be interested in such a low ball settlement, it's literally not even worth their time and means they went into a lot of debt for nothing.
However, for a small family in financial difficulties $500,000 is a godsend and could solve all their financial problems and leave plenty on the table. It might mean a mortgage free home, clearing all CC debt, less work for Mosey and more time with her baby, etc... Given the stress alone this shit has put them through, on top of any financial stresses, she might have just said fuck it, I"m done I can't keep this up for 3 more years to maybe get a really big settlement, I"m at the end of my rope now and I have a baby to care for now. Also keep in mind the type of emotional strain and awfulness the CoS BS plus financial stress can put on any relationship. Marty might have feared his marriage was in danger if this case and it's stress continued and I think that right there would have him end it no matter what. Marty can be hard to read on some issues, but I have no doubt that his relationship with Mosey is by far the most important thing in the world to him and he would do anything to safeguard it.
The lawyers might have said we will not accept such a settlement, because it can't even cover our costs. If the clients are insistent lawyers say well then you will have to discharge us because this is against all of our advice and what we agreed to fight for from the get go. The lawyers jumped into this with both feet, in for the long haul, and had probably gauged exactly what range of settlement would make the years of work and stress worth all of this for all parties. To have the Rathbun's two years in suddenly say, we want to accept far less and walk away? I"m sure it was a terrible shock to Ray Jefferies.
This is just my hunch, based on the little public information I've picked up about the Rathbuns. That Marty had been "working' on a detective novel the past year indicated to me that he wasn't "working' in the traditional sense and that would mean Mosey would have been the breadwinner - unless they have some big honey pot of money we aren't aware of. I had always wondered how the Rathbun's managed to survive financially, esp after Marty gave up on "the tech" - because it seemed auditing indies was at one point their main income source. (Mosey even left her real job to assist Marty with the indie practice at one point.) The CoS has always used "financial pressure" as away to pressure people into settlements. Their spying and whatnot may have led them to believe the Rathbun's were ripe for the picking and the timed a small settlement offer that they wouldn't refuse just to end the stress and worry.
I don't often agree with you, but I think this is a very reasonable analysis based upon the currently available data.
Michael A. Hobson
The lawyers have absolutely no right or power to "not accept" or reject a settlement offer. The client has the sole right and power to accept or reject a settlement offer.
Theoretically, if the amount of a offered settlement would not cover "costs" (a well-defined term in law -- e.g., filing fees, fees for service of process, etc., and NOT compensation for time worked), the lawyers could threaten to go after the client for the amount of such costs not covered by the settlement amount. That almost never happens for two reasons. First, the clients simply don't have the money, and may declare bankruptcy. Two, the lawyers would ruin their reputation in the area of contingent fee law. The advertising in this area tends to be along the lines of "You don't pay unless you win," or "We don't get paid unless you win." If clients realize they might have a downside monetary risk -- that they could be out-of-pocket -- they will pick another law firm. For this reason, the general, almost universal rule is that contingent fee attorneys "eat"" their costs rather than try to get them from their clients.
Ah Sneakster is back! Nice to see you around buddy. It's been a long time
Since I was raised by two lawyers I well understand the fee structure and how things work in the USA. Obviously lawyers don't have the "right" to reject a settlement offer that a client wants, but they can absolutely say I will not go down this road with you and instead be taken off the case if they strongly disagree with a client's course of actions, particularly if they see it as against their (the client's) best interest or sabotaging their case.
No lawyer wants to go down an ugly road of suing a client for costs IF it can be helped, and I highly doubt Jefferies would do such a thing. However, when a law firm is looking at the hundreds of thousand of dollars they will be out of pocket simply because a client has changed their mind two years into a case - they aren't going to go along silently with a bad decision.
There is absolutely NO doubt that before this case was undertaken Jefferies set down with the Rathbuns and they discussed the harsh realities of what the next five years would be like to undertake litigation against the cult. Jefferies may have hoped a settlement may have come quickly - as it did with Cook and the private investigators. However, when it didn't they obviously all agreed to a long term strategy and the practicalities of the siege. Jefferies went in with both feet and fought the mountains of ridiculous motions, appeals, etc... I'm sure his firm had several lawyers and staff who's sole duty was handling this monster case.
After all the time and costs to have a client come in and decide to radically change course two years in....it's equal to the law firm pissing away a million dollars. Ray Jefferies is a smart guy, great lawyer, but he's not some giant firm. The type of money he has sunk into this case can make or break a small firm.
On the other hand, there is alternative. Maybe the CoS made a settlement offer that the lawyers thought was good enough but the Rathbun's did not. The lawyers felt given the time and money involved, and future expenses and time, that the settlement was a good deal for all involved but the Rathbun's did not. The Rathbuns wanted to keep fighting, Jefferies says I don't think we will do much better than this offer and I can't tie up another three years of all my time and energies on a case that's bleeding my firm dry. Once again it's a case of the client going against their attorney's advice, and it such situations the lawyers may ask to be dismissed. I doubt this is the case, but it could be.
I just feel the financial pressure, as bad as it would be on Jefferies, it would be much worse for the Rathbuns. Jefferies, if he's smart as I think, knew the financial realities and would have been prepared for it. But he's running a business, with the Rathbun's it's their personal lives. But if the CoS made a good offer, and Jefferies could only see years of more work for probably very little more return, he could have also put his foot down.
If there's one thing the cult specializes in it's grinding people and lawyers down and using financial pressures to force submission.
Sorry, I get it now. Out-of-court settlement and court settlement are the same thing. Settlements as you said, are all out of court. I had a nutty idea there was a difference, but couldn't find any information about the difference, so that's why. No difference.
I know about the Debbie Cook case. I've been following Scientology news almost daily for over 10 years.
This is The Bunker's second article:
And one of the many comments:
I didn't think about it in quite as much depth as you did, but what I was thinking was exactly along these lines.
It's great in the beginning to be the front-and-center soldier in the battle with everyone cheering you on.
But you get left out there by yourself long enough, and you really just want the fucking war to end.