Debbie Cook's Trial

[HelluvaHoax!]

You sure do love to misinterpret comments & whine, don't you? Very sad. Please grow a pair.

You have been quoted verbatim three (3) times now.

Readers here are not stupid.

They can read exactly what you said.

But keep trying to make it about how bad I am. Footbullets are fun for all to watch.


Verbatim Quote (4th time):"Unless Debbie had videotape of the events proving her claims, her lawsuit would fail." (Smurf)

 

[Rene Descartes]

You have been quoted verbatim three (3) times now.

Readers here are not stupid.

They can read exactly what you said.

But keep trying to make it about how bad I am. Footbullets are fun for all to watch.


Verbatim Quote (4th time):"Unless Debbie had videotape of the events proving her claims, her lawsuit would fail." (Smurf)

I really wish that Mr Baker would chime in and comment about the possibilities of a court case being won against Scientology with no videotape.

Unless he already did and I missed it.

As for misinterpretaton.

I remember once years ago my wife said to me "I want to go to the mall".

I said "okay" and went about my chores around the yard.

15 minutes later she came out and said to me "I told you I wanted to go to the mall why aren't you ready?"

Maybe it is possible that people can misinterpret what they say let alone what they hear or see.

Hmm, I wonder how that works in LRH's definition of Communication with the cause-distance-effect analogies.

Rd00

 

[LA SCN]

You have been quoted verbatim three (3) times now.

Readers here are not stupid.

They can read exactly what you said.

But keep trying to make it about how bad I am. Footbullets are fun for all to watch.


Verbatim Quote (4th time):"Unless Debbie had videotape of the events proving her claims, her lawsuit would fail." (Smurf)

I just had a blognition...no wonder the doofus Gil Garcetti team couldn't convict OJ...they didn't have a videotape!...it had nothing to do with Garcetti changing the venue so the jury would have a prejudicial makeup...or Marcia Clarks footbullet with Mark Furman...or not getting someone with the same size hands as OJ to easily put on the glove...or the defense team being a multi-million dollar who's who of sleaze...

 

[Man de la Mancha]

I really wish that Mr Baker would chime in and comment about the possibilities of a court case being won against Scientology with no videotape.

(deleted text)

Rd00

Why Baker?

 

[Man de la Mancha]

... Most judges & attorneys don't have a "dog in this fight" and are not aware of what most critics know about Scientology...

... You'd be amazed how many judges & attorneys know very little about Scientology, except what they hear on the news.

Very true. Furthermore, judges are duty bound to consider only the facts before them, and not other things they may incidentally know from others or the media.

 

[Gadfly]

I really wish that Mr Baker would chime in and comment about the possibilities of a court case being won against Scientology with no videotape.

Unless he already did and I missed it.

As for misinterpretaton.

I remember once years ago my wife said to me "I want to go to the mall".

I said "okay" and went about my chores around the yard.

15 minutes later she came out and said to me "I told you I wanted to go to the mall why aren't you ready?"

Maybe it is possible that people can misinterpret what they say let alone what they hear or see.

Hmm, I wonder how that works in LRH's definition of Communication with the cause-distance-effect analogies.

Rd00

Hubbard did tak about that phenomena.

It's called DUB-IN. :confused2:

 

[Rene Descartes]

Why Baker?

legal expertise

 

[Mark A. Baker]

legal expertise

Ha Ha.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Panda Termint]

I really wish that Mr Baker would chime in and comment about the possibilities of a court case being won against Scientology with no videotape.

Unless he already did and I missed it.

As for misinterpretaton.

I remember once years ago my wife said to me "I want to go to the mall".

I said "okay" and went about my chores around the yard.

15 minutes later she came out and said to me "I told you I wanted to go to the mall why aren't you ready?"

Maybe it is possible that people can misinterpret what they say let alone what they hear or see.

Hmm, I wonder how that works in LRH's definition of Communication with the cause-distance-effect analogies.

Rd00

I liked this post but didn't like the little Baker zinger. I was conflicted... your story about "I want to go to the Mall" rang a few bells, though.

 

[TG1]

Is the Smurf / Helluvahoax slapfest over?

 

[degraded being]

...

 

[Boomima]

Is the Smurf / Helluvahoax slapfest over?

That would involve someone having the last word and I don't see that happening. Can't they have a duel or something and be done with it?

 

[Terril park]

I have to disagree with you. Most judges & attorneys don't have a "dog in this fight" and are not aware of what most critics know about Scientology. The mistake you make is that because you're aware of some facts, you assume that most others are aware of it, too. You'd be amazed how many judges & attorneys know very little about Scientology, except what they hear on the news. Yes, many know that it has celebrities among it's ranks, but little else.

I've worked with other attorneys and in the courts where Scientology was mentioned and the only thing that resonated was that it was the church that Tom Cruise belonged to.

Most judges & attorneys, who don't have Scientology on their radar, could care less about it, thus the mass amount of information that has been coughed up recently in the media, has escaped them.

I hired an attorney 3 years ago for a lawsuit I filed against a former employer, who Googled my name, learned of my Scientology past, and contacted the cult and received a DA pack on me from Moxon & Abelson. It was a fucking headache with all the time & effort I spent educating my own attorney on what Scientology was all about.. not just a church that attracts celebrities.

It's this lack of knowledge & general ignorance that weighs in the cult's favor.

That was then. This is nhow.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I liked this post but didn't like the little Baker zinger. I was conflicted... your story about "I want to go to the Mall" rang a few bells, though.

Speaks directly to the question of linguistic differences and idiomatic features of native language . Clearly she was speaking in girl but he was listening in boy.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Rene Descartes]

That was then. This is nhow.

Is this heading in the direction of that Spaceballs colloquy?

Please please let it. That would be so much fun.

Rd00

 

[NoName]

That was then. This is nhow.

And tomorrow Tony Ortega says he'll have something about the Hole.

I love how he's one upping himself every day now. Not just every week or month. Every DAY.

Wow.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

... Most judges & attorneys don't have a "dog in this fight" and are not aware of what most critics know about Scientology...

... You'd be amazed how many judges & attorneys know very little about Scientology, except what they hear on the news.

They might too 'have a dog' aside from thier job, that is to know what they're 'judging' about, as I will try to explain below.

Very true. Furthermore, judges are duty bound to consider only the facts before them, and not other things they may incidentally know from others or the media.

Allright then.. Some facts to put before the judge:

From the Larry Wollersheim trials there are this intensely interesting little piece of information:

Most interesting in this case is the trial court considering, then rejecting, the cult's assertion that "Fair Game" and other illegal acts against Larry Wollersheim were a "core religious activity" and therefore protected under the Constitution.

The trial court rejected this ludicrous claim, stating:

It is not only the acts of coercion themselves -- the sabotage of Wollersheim's business and the episode of captivity on the ship -- which are actionable. These acts of coercion and the threat of like acts make the Church's other harmful conduct actionable as well. No longer is Wollersheim's continued participation in auditing (or for that matter, his compliance with the "disconnect" order) merely his voluntary participation in Scientology's religious practices.

The evidence establishes Wollersheim was coerced into remaining a member of Scientology and continuing with the auditing process.

Constitutional guaranties of religious freedom do not shield such conduct from civil liability. We hold the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the Constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts.

From: http://www.lermanet2.com/reference/wollersheim.htm​

This documents Fair Game conclusively! - Note that the Wollersheim case happened well after 1968 when the 'WORD' Fair Game was supposedly cancelled. The Sinister ScamCult of Scientology -actually- tried to have a court decision legalize their terroristic mafia methods. Thereby entering into official court records that Fair Game indeed is a 'core religious activity' that we can thus expect them to do... No shit Sherlock!

A very important thing about Scientology, and scientologists, that judges and lawyers need to be aware of, is that they WILL follow their policies as written by Hubbard. To the letter! - This makes scientology policy crucial to any investigation as it explains why and is the 'motive' for their acts.

Examine this holy Scientology 'policy':

HCOPL 18 OCT 67, Issue IV
PENALTIES FOR LOWER CONDITIONS
··/··
ENEMY - SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.​

This 'Policy' instructs and orders scientologists to steal, 'Deprived of property'.. To physical violence, 'may be injured'.. It then alludes, or promises, the perpetrators protection from the Scientology Organization.. Then suggests trickery, lawsuits and destruction!

This is the 'Fair Game' policy! It -IS- a threath to anyone they have declared an SP, by a large group of religious zealots.

If we consider Scientology beliefs this policy includes murder! - According to Hubbard, a person, a thetan, cannot be killed. But he can be destroyed!

It is quite subversive to civil society, to have a large 'organization' inflame it's members to vigilantry in this way.

Thus it is illegal! - The policy itself is illegal, and the practice of it is illegal!

But scientologists pride themselves of 'having the only justice system in this sector of the universe that actually works!'. That's Hubbard's words.. The regular society's justice system is viewed by scientology and scientologists as being insane and 'abberated'.

This alone should by rights be considered 'contempt for the court' in any trial. (May I suggest that judges start any trial with Scientology to slap 'em with a healthy fine for 'contempt' as the first thing.)

And scientologists believe all this.. They not only 'believe', they 'know' this! - They are absolutely sure and certain about it. To be absolutely sure and certain IS policy too!

And here's another Hubbard quote:

"The law can easily be used to harras!"​

I don't think police, lawyers and judges like to be made fools of anymore than anybody else.

It's time to call $cientologys bullshit!

 

[Lulu Belle]

San Antonio Current has picked this up.

http://sacurrent.com/news/scientolo...torture-abuse-of-dissenting-members-1.1271897

 

[Rene Descartes]

Ha Ha.


Mark A. Baker

Well Mark, I am at a loss as to why you did not step in and comment about the issue under question considering you have stepped in on previous occasions.

Unless I missed a post where you did chime in on this matter. I mean sometimes one might miss a post whilst trying to catch up but I suspect this not to be the case.

In the meantime, carry on mate. Catch you down the road on the sunnyside.

Rd00

 

[Free to shine]

They might too 'have a dog' aside from thier job, that is to know what they're 'judging' about, as I will try to explain below.



Allright then.. Some facts to put before the judge:

From the Larry Wollersheim trials there are this intensely interesting little piece of information:

Most interesting in this case is the trial court considering, then rejecting, the cult's assertion that "Fair Game" and other illegal acts against Larry Wollersheim were a "core religious activity" and therefore protected under the Constitution.

The trial court rejected this ludicrous claim, stating:

It is not only the acts of coercion themselves -- the sabotage of Wollersheim's business and the episode of captivity on the ship -- which are actionable. These acts of coercion and the threat of like acts make the Church's other harmful conduct actionable as well. No longer is Wollersheim's continued participation in auditing (or for that matter, his compliance with the "disconnect" order) merely his voluntary participation in Scientology's religious practices.

The evidence establishes Wollersheim was coerced into remaining a member of Scientology and continuing with the auditing process.

Constitutional guaranties of religious freedom do not shield such conduct from civil liability. We hold the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the Constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts.

From: http://www.lermanet2.com/reference/wollersheim.htm​

This documents Fair Game conclusively! - Note that the Wollersheim case happened well after 1968 when the 'WORD' Fair Game was supposedly cancelled. The Sinister ScamCult of Scientology -actually- tried to have a court decision legalize their terroristic mafia methods. Thereby entering into official court records that Fair Game indeed is a 'core religious activity' that we can thus expect them to do... No shit Sherlock!

A very important thing about Scientology, and scientologists, that judges and lawyers need to be aware of, is that they WILL follow their policies as written by Hubbard. To the letter! - This makes scientology policy crucial to any investigation as it explains why and is the 'motive' for their acts.

Examine this holy Scientology 'policy':

HCOPL 18 OCT 67, Issue IV
PENALTIES FOR LOWER CONDITIONS
··/··
ENEMY - SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.​

This 'Policy' instructs and orders scientologists to steal, 'Deprived of property'.. To physical violence, 'may be injured'.. It then alludes, or promises, the perpetrators protection from the Scientology Organization.. Then suggests trickery, lawsuits and destruction!

This is the 'Fair Game' policy! It -IS- a threath to anyone they have declared an SP, by a large group of religious zealots.

If we consider Scientology beliefs this policy includes murder! - According to Hubbard, a person, a thetan, cannot be killed. But he can be destroyed!

It is quite subversive to civil society, to have a large 'organization' inflame it's members to vigilantry in this way.

Thus it is illegal! - The policy itself is illegal, and the practice of it is illegal!

But scientologists pride themselves of 'having the only justice system in this sector of the universe that actually works!'. That's Hubbard's words.. The regular society's justice system is viewed by scientology and scientologists as being insane and 'abberated'.

This alone should by rights be considered 'contempt for the court' in any trial. (May I suggest that judges start any trial with Scientology to slap 'em with a healthy fine for 'contempt' as the first thing.)

And scientologists believe all this.. They not only 'believe', they 'know' this! - They are absolutely sure and certain about it. To be absolutely sure and certain IS policy too!

And here's another Hubbard quote:

"The law can easily be used to harras!"​

I don't think police, lawyers and judges like to be made fools of anymore than anybody else.

It's time to call $cientologys bullshit!

Brilliant post, thankyou Schwimmy.