9/24/14: Rathbun v. Scientology: Appeals court hearing, everything on the line

Cat Daddy

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: Texas Court of Appeal Decision in Rathbun v. Scientology

Yeah, I think that the chances of overturning this at the Supreme Court level is practically nil. I think more than ever that they'll pass on even hearing it, which is an automatic trip back down to Comal county with the wonderful Judge Dib!!

Oh Dib!!! We're comin' back baby!!!

(Did he just groan?...Lol...)

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/26/02/20/5776447/5/rawImage.jpg
 
Last edited:

Jump

Operating teatime
Re: Texas Court of Appeal Decision in Rathbun v. Scientology

Yeah, I think that the chances of overturning this at the Supreme Court level is practically nil. I think more than ever that they'll pass on even hearing it, which is an automatic trip back down to Comal county with the wonderful Judge Dib!!

Oh Dib!!! We're comin' back baby!!!

(Did he just groan?...Lol...)


When Dib next sits down with their cadre of legal attack sharks, his bullshit detection circuits will be set well above 'stun'.

:biggrin: :yes: :happydance:
 

JustSheila

Crusader
Just gotta put Panopea's new film on here: :hysterical: :hysterical:

'They'll extradite me to f&*&in Texas!' Lol lol lol!

Personal note to Marty and Mosey:

The Texas courts see you as true Texan residents. You have a home, a community. Congratulations all around. :hug:

[video]https://youtu.be/gK2JLhVnc8Y[/video]
 

Lone Star

Crusader
Re: Texas Court of Appeal Decision in Rathbun v. Scientology

When Dib next sits down with their cadre of legal attack sharks, his bullshit detection circuits will be set well above 'stun'.

:biggrin: :yes: :happydance:

If they start acting impetuous with him regarding a ruling during a hearing, he can say, "Well what are gonna do about it...appeal?" And then bust out laughing.

LOL....
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation



LOL! Scientologists and their tiny leader along with his bestie Tomahawk Cruise (the oh so misguided missile*) must feel that 2015 was their "annus horribilis" ... but they would be wrong because the way things are shaping up they have that to look forward to in 2016 and beyond.

:biggrin:

What a brilliant way to end the last few weeks of drama and suppression (on this planet) I can't wait to see what happens next with Marty and Mosey because if Marty learned nothing else under the guidance of the cofs he certainly learned how to annihilate the enemy and get what he wants, hopefully he can use that for good now and then he and Mosey can start to relax and enjoy life as a family.

Happy, happy days.

I think I'll whack Pink Floyd on, rip all my clothes off and dance round the house now ... or not (don't want to terrify the dogs).

:dancer:



* I know ... pathetic attempt at being a clever clogs (made me laugh though).





 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Here's the essence of why this so important and significant.
The appellate court ruled that their actions were not "Protected" under the 1st amendment.
How sweet to hear it out of the mighty judges in this high court.

This is case law for subsequent law suits.

Mad deranged Squirrel Busters have no 1st amendment protection.

Hurray for this ruling even though they pondered over all the specious arguments of their $1000 an hour Lawyers. AND purchased and bought the former Lamont Jefferson, brother of the former chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court, who was hired with Cult blood money specifically for this type of APPEAL.

Losers !

Criminal Cult deserves some Karma blowback.


Telex:

Congratulations!

"Squirrel" and "Squirrel Busters" are now officially part of the judicial lexicon.

Mission Status: Power

VWD to all!

L


Squirrel on squirrel.jpg
 

Lone Star

Crusader
So far I find no reason to see this as being at all related to the Rathbun decision, but late last night an assassination attempt was made on a State District Judge in Austin outside of her home:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/travis-county-judge-julie-kocurek-shot-outside-hom/npH5r/

It appears that she is going to survive. She was first appointed by then Gov. George W. Bush in 1999. She switched to the Democrat Party in 2006, probably because Travis County is a very Blue County in a sea of Red.

She is the Judge who handled the initial indictment against Rick Perry regarding corruption charges, one of which is still pending. One was thrown out by the 3rd District Court. Perry's made it clear that she, Kocurek, is not on his "Friends" list. One time after leaving her court he made a statement that she publicly denounced:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/judge-warns-against-perry-grand-jury-threats/ng6zb/


I understand that she was returning home and was shot in her driveway. She was out with a friend, or friends. I'm trying to find out if she is a personal friend of Judge Melissa Goodwin, who is on the 3rd District Court of Appeals. The one that handled the Rathbun appeal. Goodwin did not hear this latest appeal, but she did hear the other one last year which dealt with whether DM could be deposed or not. Goodwin is about the same age as Kocurek.

So again, there is no evidence at all of a relation with this judge and the Scientology case. It just caught my eye that a State Judge was almost murdered on the night after the decision by a gunman. He hasn't been caught yet.
 

Lone Star

Crusader
I just got around to looking at which actual Judge wrote the decision on behalf of the 3rd District Court of Appeals. Scott Field.

This is good because I believe that he is the most conservative member of the 3rd District court. The other two who decided this appeal with him are also quite conservative.

The Texas Supreme Court is very conservative. So I think you know why I say this is good that the most conservative Judge wrote the decision. It will have gravitas with the Supremes. Hopefully so much so that they'll just say, "Nah, we don't need to hear it...Appeals Court ruling stands....bitch". Lol....
 

TheOriginalBigBlue

Gold Meritorious Patron
I just got around to looking at which actual Judge wrote the decision on behalf of the 3rd District Court of Appeals. Scott Field.

This is good because I believe that he is the most conservative member of the 3rd District court. The other two who decided this appeal with him are also quite conservative.

The Texas Supreme Court is very conservative. So I think you know why I say this is good that the most conservative Judge wrote the decision. It will have gravitas with the Supremes. Hopefully so much so that they'll just say, "Nah, we don't need to hear it...Appeals Court ruling stands....bitch". Lol....

It looks like a solid test case. The advantage if it gets pushed up to a higher court is a higher level decision establishes a higher level precedent. The church's position looks specious, as in their reasoning appears to be after the fact CYA as opposed to the idea that they originally decided upon this "Squirrel Buster" strategy with the clear self conviction that they were exercising "Freedom of Speech".

They can pay the piper now and establish a lower level ruling or push it up the lines and cast it in concrete.

I think they will double down if for no other reason than to use up the opponent's resources and try to force a settlement.
 

Never In 99

New Member
I've been wondering, does anyone know, how can the Rathbun's attorneys show or prove that DM and the cult itself were behind all the harassment, and that it wasn't just a handful of rogue Scn's acting independently?

Maybe they already have evidence proving this but I haven't followed the case closely and don't know.

In any case, am happy for their recent victory and hope they win big when the trial finally comes up.
 

Gib

Crusader
I've been wondering, does anyone know, how can the Rathbun's attorneys show or prove that DM and the cult itself were behind all the harassment, and that it wasn't just a handful of rogue Scn's acting independently?

Maybe they already have evidence proving this but I haven't followed the case closely and don't know.

In any case, am happy for their recent victory and hope they win big when the trial finally comes up.

because the appeals are based on the COS trying to get DM from not being disposed, to answer questions under oath of perjury.

One has to ask themselselves, if DM is innocent, why won't he just be disposed under oath?

Why hasn't DM just come clean and tell all?

What does he have to hide? If he is clean?
 

Lone Star

Crusader
because the appeals are based on the COS trying to get DM from not being disposed, to answer questions under oath of perjury.

One has to ask themselselves, if DM is innocent, why won't he just be disposed under oath?

Why hasn't DM just come clean and tell all?

What does he have to hide? If he is clean?

This latest appeal had nothing to do with DM being deposed. That appeal was upheld last year. This one had to do with whether the lawsuit against the CoS would proceed or not.
 

Lone Star

Crusader
I've been wondering, does anyone know, how can the Rathbun's attorneys show or prove that DM and the cult itself were behind all the harassment, and that it wasn't just a handful of rogue Scn's acting independently?

Maybe they already have evidence proving this but I haven't followed the case closely and don't know.

In any case, am happy for their recent victory and hope they win big when the trial finally comes up.

This is what the lawsuit is about. Your question, that is. Lurk more.
 

Gib

Crusader
This latest appeal had nothing to do with DM being deposed. That appeal was upheld last year. This one had to do with whether the lawsuit against the CoS would proceed or not.

I know, I was trying to make a point if somebody is so clean and innocent and has their ethics in, why wouldn't they enter the court system freely, speak freely, and even w/o a emeter. Afterall, I assume DM is Grade O comp, you know able to speak to anybody about anything. LOL
 

Jump

Operating teatime
because the appeals are based on the COS trying to get DM from not being disposed, to answer questions under oath of perjury.

One has to ask themselselves, if DM is innocent, why won't he just be disposed under oath?

Why hasn't DM just come clean and tell all?

What does he have to hide? If he is clean?


I think they just want him to answer a few questions (deposed).

If he was to be disposed, the least we could do is ask if he prefers with or without sorrow.
 

Gib

Crusader
I think they just want him to answer a few questions (deposed).

If he was to be disposed, the least we could do is ask if he prefers with or without sorrow.

it's more than that:

http://litigation.findlaw.com/filing-a-lawsuit/what-is-a-deposition.html

"The Discovery Process In a lawsuit, all named parties have the right to conduct discovery, a formal investigation, to find out more about the case. Pre-trial access to this information allows the parties to use facts and potential evidence to better define their strategies and avoid delays once the trial begins. In some cases, what's learned during discovery might even help the opposing sides come to a settlement without having to go to trial at all. Discovery can come in a number of different forms, with the most common being subpoenas for relevant documents, interrogatories (written questions), and depositions--the taking of an oral statement of a witness before trial, under oath."
 
it's more than that:

http://litigation.findlaw.com/filing-a-lawsuit/what-is-a-deposition.html

"The Discovery Process In a lawsuit, all named parties have the right to conduct discovery, a formal investigation, to find out more about the case. Pre-trial access to this information allows the parties to use facts and potential evidence to better define their strategies and avoid delays once the trial begins. In some cases, what's learned during discovery might even help the opposing sides come to a settlement without having to go to trial at all. Discovery can come in a number of different forms, with the most common being subpoenas for relevant documents, interrogatories (written questions), and depositions--the taking of an oral statement of a witness before trial, under oath."

Of course that all is based on the hope the person being deposed doesn't lie, plead the 5th, simply refuse to answer the questions, disassemble, be ambiguous, pull a Rosa Lopez, (not remember), say other people did it without his knowledge, or otherwise not give a valid response. If you remember the depositions that were previously taken in this case, it was pretty obvious they were not exactly forthcoming with the truth.

Mimsey
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Of course that all is based on the hope the person being deposed doesn't lie, plead the 5th, simply refuse to answer the questions, disassemble, be ambiguous, pull a Rosa Lopez, (not remember), say other people did it without his knowledge, or otherwise not give a valid response. If you remember the depositions that were previously taken in this case, it was pretty obvious they were not exactly forthcoming with the truth.

Mimsey
As I recall, in the previous depositions the Squirrel Busters admitted that their expenses were paid by the COS. Thus, I don't see how anyone could contend they were rogue actors.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Excellent post at the Bunker this morning about the Rathbun v. Scientology Cult case.

What happens next in the Monique Rathbun lawsuit?

We wanted to make sure that everyone saw the really interesting comment left by TX Lawyer following the big news about Monique Rathbun’s win at the Texas Third Court of Appeals. We’ve confirmed that TX Lawyer is who he says he is — a Texas lawyer who specializes in appellate matters — and his commentary has always been very illuminating about this lawsuit. Here’s what he had to say after the appeals court affirmed Judge Dib Waldrip’s denial of Scientology’s “anti-SLAPP” motion, filed in October 2013, which stopped the lawsuit in its tracks for more than a year…

<snip>


See Full Post: http://tonyortega.org/2015/11/08/up...ise-to-put-on-a-grand-performance/#more-26551
 
Top