Given the cult's elusive ability to lie & misinterpret the letter of the law, the cult, if it wanted to, could get claim those that were allowed in.. Arnie Lerma, Michael Tilse & few others of being an "associate" of Mark Bunker because they are his Facebook friends.
I suggest you check the friend's list on Mark Bunker's Facebook page & see how many of them Laura allowed into the event. The cult could have easily used this as a deceptive ploy to allude his FB as "associates". Arnie Lerma is a FB friend. He was a speaker at the event.
Could you possibly come up with a more easily distinguishable factual scenario and weaker straw man argument than this?
Any minimally decent attorney is much less likely to believe he can non-frivolously argue, and any Court is much less likely to find, that "A" and "B" are "acting in concert" withing the meaning of an injunction regulating the picketing of the Church of Scientology when they: (a) are merely Facebook friends; than (b) both attend a multi-day conference specifically billed as an "anti-Scientology" conference and are witnessed (and perhaps videoed, recorded or photographed) conversing at length about the subject of the conference.
It is difficult to believe that any Court would find, or that even the COS would argue, that two people are "acting in concert" merely because they are Facebook friends.
It is less difficult to believe that a Court would find, and far less difficult to believe that the COS would assert and argue, that two people are "acting in concert" with regard to a injunction governing picketing of the Church of Scientology when they both attend and converse at a multi-day ant-Scientology conference.
The simple truth is it was not your decision. You weren't responsible for trying to protect people who knew were going to picket the COS at the end of the week. You had no responsibility. You had no skin in the game.
EDITED TO ADD:
Your combination in the second quotation of Facebook Friendship and someone attending the conference also adds a degree of separation issue. Let me elaborate.
Say Arnie Lerma is Facebook Friends with Mark Bunker and pickets in a prohibited zone or way. If the COS asserts that Arnie is acting in
concert with Mark based on the Facebook friendship alone, then Arnie's attendance at the conference is irrelevant.
Now say Arnie Lerma is Facebook Friends with Mark Bunker. Bunker doesn't attend the conference. Arnie attends the conference with person "A." Later "A" pickets in a prohibited zone or way. (Arnie does not picket.) The COS then says that "A" was acting in concert with Mark because, and only because, he attended a ant-Scientology conference with Arnie who is Facebook friends with Mark. That is the degree of separation issue / problem. That argument is
very attenuated and
nothing like scenario I described where Mark attends and converses with "A" at a anti-Scientology conference.
Action.
