Scientology denied in Laura DeCrescenzo’s law suit

[JBWriter]

Unless they changed it, a person becomes ordained, not the post. I was ordained as a minister around 1980. To achieve that I did the Minister's Course (roughly 15 hours study), then was ordained as a separate action in the Saint Hill Chapel afterwards. The ordination is independent of post - at the time I was on a finance post.

The pre-requisites to the course are, from memory, something like of good moral character (no comment), Student Hat, trained auditor of some minimum standard.

Paul

Thanks, Paul, Face, and everyone else who responded re: "ordination" -- you're all so helpful!

For those who are following this case, here's a link to the SCOTUS site which provides the docket number/petition status/petition info for Co$'s petition for a writ of certiorari: http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12-1495.htm

And here's a snippet from that link:

[/TABLE]

Case Nos.:	(B247794)
Decision Date:	April 25, 2013
Discretionary Court
Decision Date:	May 15, 2013

~~~Date~~~	~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jun 24 2013	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 26, 2013)
Jun 25 2013	Application (12A1247) for a stay pending disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Jun 26 2013	Application (12A1247) denied by Justice Kennedy.

Also, hadn't thought about it while reading through the court filings earlier, but re-read them and see now that another issue might become important in later rulings for this case: the distinction between "Ethics Folders" and "Auditing Folders". The generic term "PC folders" in submitted court papers strikes me as disingenuous, given the education I've received here at ESMB, and I hope it's thought to be similar by the Court.

JB

 

[exccc]

PC folders are synonymous with auditing folders, generally speaking. Ethics folders are just that.

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

plus there are the accounts folders, student folders, and the CF folders ( central files )

Say nothing of the sec checking sessions - where the auditor states "I'm not auditing you" compared to the regular sessions, where he is auditing you. One being an ethics action where the goal is not case gain, and whatever comes up is actionable and not under the shield of confidentiality. Auditing is where the goal is case gain and all withholds and overts revealed are not actionable and are "confidential"

I wonder if that will be the next issue.

Mimsey

 

[JBWriter]

PC folders are synonymous with auditing folders, generally speaking. Ethics folders are just that.

Thanks! And I think you're right - 'generally speaking'. The Courts, however, demand precision in language (even if they don't always provide it, lol) so for the issue of privilege as it relates to this case, that which is considered "confessional" in nature is more likely to be covered by the privilege of confidentiality. Using that standard, auditing folders may well contain 'confessional-type' information -- but -- ethics folders aren't 'confessional' in nature, if I understand what people here at ESMB have so kindly (and patiently) explained to me.

Ethics sessions begin with words spoken to the person being interviewed something like, "This is not an auditing session" to ensure the interviewee completely understands that what follows is something other than auditing.

To, in effect, lump both together (ethics and auditing folders) and try to get everything declared by a court as privileged information isn't wholly truthful, is it? A duty of candor to the tribunal is required by attorneys across the US - and courts don't like to have complicated issues clouded by 'fuzzy' language. To me, the generic phrase, "PC folders" rises to that level -- but I'm not the judge.

Guess how I'd rule?

JB

 

[JBWriter]

plus there are the accounts folders, student folders, and the CF folders ( central files )

Say nothing of the sec checking sessions - where the auditor states "I'm not auditing you" compared to the regular sessions, where he is auditing you. One being an ethics action where the goal is not case gain, and whatever comes up is actionable and not under the shield of confidentiality. Auditing is where the goal is case gain and all withholds and overts revealed are not actionable and are "confidential"

I wonder if that will be the next issue.

Mimsey

Exactly so! There's a TON of information in folders and files that, it seems to me, rightfully belongs to the individual who paid time/money for the creation of those same folders and files.

Imagine if, as a result of this case and its rulings about the legal issue of privilege, 10 people request and receive their individual folders. Let's say 8 of them get together over a weekend and review them and notice certain patterns. About regging. Or stray comments written in the margins. Or that redactions aren't even-handed from one person's folders to another's.
Or...anything that doesn't seem 'right'. That's what Co$ doesn't want -- sunlight. Compare, contrast, consider, and then...conquer.

JB

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

When you read a folder there is a lot there:

A)The session
B) the after session exam
C) various forms the auditor has filled out which may include potentially damning comments by the auditor (she's a dog PC, she's PTS, she's a DB, she's 1.1, she's not coming clean, she a responsible for condition case, she's type one or type two or type three PTS - on and on)
D) case supervision orders of actions to be taken by the auditor, which may include potential damning comments by the C/S
E) programs to handle some aspect of the case
F) Ethics reports of overts / w/h's, natter / out ethics situations that the auditor has uncovered and is reporting to the c/s and to the MAA or ethics officer
G) various prepared lists - some of which, like the white form have information from the P/C's life
H) Listing and nulling lists ( such as "who or what is suppressing you") with a list of the pc's responses
I) folder error summaries
J) crams done on auditors for auditing flubs
K) reports written by the PC, people who know the PC, (KR's - knowledge reports etc)
L) Ethics orders

You get the idea - lots of crap can be said about her. The ethics folders would be a prime target as well - they have conditions assignments, conditions write ups, reports, programs, etc. I hope they go after those as well.

My guess is they will try to remove as much as possible that has any relevance to the case and hope her lawyers aren't savvy enough to know what is missing. If they were smart, they would hire a highly classed auditor to see if stuff was purloined.

Mimsey

 

[Gib]

PC folders are synonymous with auditing folders, generally speaking. Ethics folders are just that.

scientology operates in opposites, plus it's based on mathematics (per hubbard),

pc folders + ethics folders = blackmail folders = incomm

 

[degraded being]

.
.
In NZ......
Back in the nineties I wanted to take my medical records from the university clinic to my new doctor. They would not give them to me for reasons of 'privacy'. So started the, "They are MY godammed files you CANNOT keep them private from ME" argument with them. So I phoned the (Government) Privacy Ombudsmen, and he phoned the university and pointed out their misinterpretation of a clause in privacy legislation. I got my files quicksmart.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

It is a pivotal issue (huge, big, massive, etc) because the cult fiercely protects any information which helps protect the internal workings of the group.

A couple of years ago a young man suicided in Brisbane, Australia. (I apologise for not remembering his name and don't have time to look the case up).

The coroner and the police wanted the man's folders because he had suicided when actively under-taking services at the Brisbane org. If I recall correctly here, the authorities legally subpoenaed the info. The cult moved the folders out of two legal jurisdictions (Queensland to NSW, then Australia to USA) claiming they owned the private information. The cult stone-walled Australian authorities who were investigating a death.

While the above "small" matter may not seem like much, it is a huge "fuck you" to due legal process from the cult. It is ALL about protecting the cult and not allowing due process. That is a serious issue any way you look at it. A man dies, the authorities try to gather information to ascertain why and the cult says "fuck you!" Not healthy.

For authorities to "crack open" access to "private information" (i.e. PC folders) is pivotal to finding out what really goes on behind closed doors and is something the cult has venomously protected over the decades. It is one of the corner-stones of the whole "religious cloaking" set up. Laura's case is pivotal.

Go Laura (and her legal team)!

pivotal is different than big huge and massive, lisa's case was and is huge but it's not pivotal because a wrongful death suit isn't out of the ordinary; they can and do happen anywhere. i don'y think this case is pivotal but i think the forced abortion issue is

i believe "confessional formularies" should be privileged and one of my own biggest criticisms of CoS is they themselves don't respect this privacy and this diminishes the trust between auditor and pc

 

[degraded being]

pivotal is different than big huge and massive, lisa's case was and is huge but it's not pivotal because a wrongful death suit isn't out of the ordinary; they can and do happen anywhere. i don'y think this case is pivotal but i think the forced abortion issue is

i believe "confessional formularies" should be privileged and one of my own biggest criticisms of CoS is they themselves don't respect this privacy and this diminishes the trust between auditor and pc

Do you think it matters that a wrongful death suit could come about by, for example, giving someone medicine X instead of medicine Z, or by not providing a safety harness, as apposed to driving someone insane, denying proper medical/psychiatric assessment and treatment, abusing them to the point of crisis and imminent death and then driving AWAY from close hospitals and clinics who could probably have saved the victim's life.

 

[exccc]

Do you think it matters that a wrongful death suit could come about by, for example, giving someone medicine X instead of medicine Z, or by not providing a safety harness, as apposed to driving someone insane, denying proper medical/psychiatric assessment and treatment, abusing them to the point of crisis and imminent death and then driving AWAY from close hospitals and clinics who could probably have saved the victim's life.

Of course it does!

You and I and everyone who's been inside know all the above is true. Our own experiences with the Church tell us, "Oh, yeah, that IS what happened. I have no doubt about it."

The problem is that's not proof and carries zero weight in a court. Joan Wood changed the cause of death. That was the problem. Full stop.

They got to her. Even if they didn't threaten her directly, they overwhelmed her with conflicting expert testimony. The poor woman didn't know black from white by the time they were through.

At least they settled and gave Lisa's family cash. No one can admit it, but of course they did. Not a criminal conviction, not a public finding of liability, but at least it's something.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Do you think it matters that a wrongful death suit could come about by, for example, giving someone medicine X instead of medicine Z, or by not providing a safety harness, as apposed to driving someone insane, denying proper medical/psychiatric assessment and treatment, abusing them to the point of crisis and imminent death and then driving AWAY from close hospitals and clinics who could probably have saved the victim's life.

it appears likely she was already dead when they put her in the car. i don't know the quality of expertise, but it has been advanced that some of the cockroach bites were postmortem and they may have warmed her body in a bathtub to obscure time of death. this seems a little out there. i'd think the ER people might pick up on that...

there is much we don't know and we shouldn't make presumptions on the basis of the worst we have witnessed

lisa was getting a bit spacy at times weeks before this came down. we don't know just what was going on with her and the shrinks aren't so bad as they once were but they ain't the good guys.

it was another poster who first noted CoS was in a bit of a bind after springing her from the psychs. this made them reluctant to get her to a hospital as she was in an increasingly unsettled mental state and they feared a hospital would hand her to the shrinks. this is NOT an acceptable excuse. when she got to the point where she was fighting them they needed to check off on her. as i have said, i have no problem with practicing medicine without a liscence but that presumes "consenting adults". her wrists and ankles were bruised. application of restraint by unlisenced practitioners is illegal, unlawful and is not condoned

but again, wrongful death happens. not a pivotal case. forced or coerced abortion is an extraordinary occurence and could prove pivotal. this was a news story of a different order of magnitude and i noticed a clear difference of response in the general population. this encroaches on society at large in a way even a case of wrongful death does not

 

[La La Lou Lou]

it appears likely she was already dead when they put her in the car. i don't know the quality of expertise, but it has been advanced that some of the cockroach bites were postmortem and they may have warmed her body in a bathtub to obscure time of death. this seems a little out there. i'd think the ER people might pick up on that...

there is much we don't know and we shouldn't make presumptions on the basis of the worst we have witnessed

lisa was getting a bit spacy at times weeks before this came down. we don't know just what was going on with her and the shrinks aren't so bad as they once were but they ain't the good guys.

it was another poster who first noted CoS was in a bit of a bind after springing her from the psychs. this made them reluctant to get her to a hospital as she was in an increasingly unsettled mental state and they feared a hospital would hand her to the shrinks. this is NOT an acceptable excuse. when she got to the point where she was fighting them they needed to check off on her. as i have said, i have no problem with practicing medicine without a liscence but that presumes "consenting adults". her wrists and ankles were bruised. application of restraint by unlisenced practitioners is illegal, unlawful and is not condoned

but again, wrongful death happens. not a pivotal case. forced or coerced abortion is an extraordinary occurence and could prove pivotal. this was a news story of a different order of magnitude and i noticed a clear difference of response in the general population. this encroaches on society at large in a way even a case of wrongful death does not

Scientologists just have to admit that they do not know how to handle mental illness, it's not what they do and they should not get in the way of the professionals. There may well be bad psyches, but there's also very good, and calling them all implanters and R6 priests is way off from the truth.

On abortion again the Hubbard words from Dianetics, is that abortion is much the same as killing anyone, not to be encouraged.

But the biggest problem with the cult is the inbuilt inability to say ''sorry we got this wrong''

Scientology, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Scientologists just have to admit that they do not know how to handle mental illness, it's not what they do and they should not get in the way of the professionals. There may well be bad psyches, but there's also very good, and calling them all implanters and R6 priests is way off from the truth.

On abortion again the Hubbard words from Dianetics, is that abortion is much the same as killing anyone, not to be encouraged.

But the biggest problem with the cult is the inbuilt inability to say ''sorry we got this wrong''

Scientology, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

yes...

some wise chinaman said "when two great armies clash it is the one which knows how to yield which will prevail"

i think the ideas long on yang and short on yin

but...

dianetics can be used to excellent effect with much psychological distress and disorder. Co$ DOESN"T well understand their own materials. and there is much still mysterious about abnormal psychology

it is likely lisa could have patched pretty well with good 2WC. also, she died of a blood clot. "a being always knows" is very applicable to body things. she may have had an unidentifiable sense of he clot forming and it might have the germ of what drove her nuts. i know that sort of thing does occur from personal experience and observation

 

[degraded being]

yes...

some wise chinaman said "when two great armies clash it is the one which knows how to yield which will prevail"

i think the ideas long on yang and short on yin

but...

dianetics can be used to excellent effect with much psychological distress and disorder. Co$ DOESN"T well understand their own materials. and there is much still mysterious about abnormal psychology

it is likely lisa could have patched pretty well with good 2WC. also, she died of a blood clot. "a being always knows" is very applicable to body things. she may have had an unidentifiable sense of he clot forming and it might have the germ of what drove her nuts. i know that sort of thing does occur from personal experience and observation

"a being always knows". How culty can you get???

All your "mights" = might scmight shite.

Dianetics: What Lisa needed was Commander's Authentic Kool-Aid. Is that what you're saying?

 

[Commander Birdsong]

"a being always knows". How culty can you get???

All your "mights" = might scmight shite.

Dianetics: What Lisa needed was Commander's Authentic Kool-Aid. Is that what you're saying?

it's not very culty at all. it's a set of words peculiar to scientology but it is a serious concept. i've been away from the organization since 1974. this has been a very significant phrase for my own independent studies. i have quite a substantial database and i've worked rather well with it, thank you.


and, as it happens, i have often thought i might have been able to do something for her if i'd been there before the car accident and if i'd been there with any kind of leverage what happened would have been different. but that's my own speculation which i wouldn't have mentioned save for your challenge. so in answer to the question; koolaid no but yes i think i might have been able to help her

 

[Lavalyte]

Scientologists just have to admit that they do not know how to handle mental illness, it's not what they do and they should not get in the way of the professionals. There may well be bad psyches, but there's also very good, and calling them all implanters and R6 priests is way off from the truth.

Yeah, but to admit it would undermine the entire belief system.

 

[Lavalyte]

it's not very culty at all. it's a set of words peculiar to scientology but it is a serious concept. i've been away from the organization since 1974. this has been a very significant phrase for my own independent studies. i have quite a substantial database and i've worked rather well with it, thank you.


and, as it happens, i have often thought i might have been able to do something for her if i'd been there before the car accident and if i'd been there with any kind of leverage what happened would have been different. but that's my own speculation which i wouldn't have mentioned save for your challenge. so in answer to the question; koolaid no but yes i think i might have been able to help her

Cultly or not, it's still a stupid idea. Plenty of people drop dead from heart attacks without the slightest forewarning.
What it is, is a way of blaming the victim. Deep down that very sick guy should have known he was sick! Why didn't he get help earlier? He must not be much of a being, or too degraded to want to help himself! He must have *wanted* to get sick if he didn't take steps to help himself.
In that, it's a culty idea after all.

 

[degraded being]

it's not very culty at all. it's a set of words peculiar to scientology but it is a serious concept. i've been away from the organization since 1974. this has been a very significant phrase for my own independent studies. i have quite a substantial database and i've worked rather well with it, thank you.


and, as it happens, i have often thought i might have been able to do something for her if i'd been there before the car accident and if i'd been there with any kind of leverage what happened would have been different. but that's my own speculation which i wouldn't have mentioned save for your challenge. so in answer to the question; koolaid no but yes i think i might have been able to help her

A lot us of here could have helped her. I'm guessing most would not do it with auditing.

On that concept "A being always knows" ......you have said a few more words about it and you have gone the classic Commander Birdsong Route by making a statement (in this case I think it could be called a platitude) which is so open ended you could drive a whole universe of DC8's through it. What the fuck does it mean? How many hundreds of squillions of trillions of times do beings NOT KNOW....about themselves, about their bodies, about their psyche, about their relationships and on and on and on. They keep finding out things, things that they didn't know or were wrong about. Later they have to alter what they know......the more I think about it the more it seems a being (whatever that means) NEVER KNOWS. How terrible. I like it more than the "knowing being" idea.

 

[JBWriter]

Re: Scientology: Laura DeCrescenzo’s law suit - US Supreme Court - Today

Just a reminder...

Today is the day the US Supreme Court is expected to announce whether or not they will accept the (last-ditch) petition for certiorari filed by the Co$/scientology attorneys regarding 'priest-penitent confidentiality'.

According to Kali Borkoski of SCOTUSblog, their decision will be announced today at 9:30 a.m. (EST).

Link to SCOTUSblog: http://www.scotusblog.com/

Excerpt:

Monday is the first day of the 2013 Term. We expect orders – primarily cert. denials from the September 30 Conference – at 9:30 a.m.

JB