Is it worth it to sue the church?

[AryaZ]

An easy way to search any site for specific content:

site:https://alanzosblog.com/ "AryaZ"

 

[Emma]

Just curious, when I entered the search terms "AryaZ Scientology" into a search engine to see any other postings on the internet, I see Alanzo's blog comes up as the first item.

Have you told of this experience on his blog as well?


View attachment 15539

Isn't this just a bit tin foiley?

Searching "AryaZ Scientology" if there are no actual results, will return the best results google can find.

"Alanzo Scientology" is the closest match, particularly if you've visited the blog before from a search. You can tell what Google found by what it bolds.

The other two are the same. Look what it bolds.

 

[Type4_PTS]

Isn't this just a bit tin foiley?

Searching "AryaZ Scientology" if there are no actual results, will return the best results google can find.

"Alanzo Scientology" is the closest match, particularly if you've visited the blog before from a search. You can tell what Google found by what it bolds.

The other two are the same. Look what it bolds.

I didn't use Google for the search and generally don't.

I used the Bing search engine in that case. I didn't pay attention to what it made bold because it made some things bold that I didn't search for.
If you look at the screen shot I posted it made "Lake Oroville" bold for reasons I don't understand.

I'm anyways not sure how it is a bit tin foiley. If someone commonly posts on the internet about Scientology using the same screen name and you search for it you'll get results back. But give me a tin foiley symbol if it makes you happy.

 

[Emma]

I didn't use Google for the search and generally don't.

I used the Bing search engine in that case. I didn't pay attention to what it made bold because it made some things bold that I didn't search for.
If you look at the screen shot I posted it made "Lake Oroville" bold for reasons I don't understand.

I'm anyways not sure how it is a bit tin foiley. If someone commonly posts on the internet about Scientology using the same screen name and you search for it you'll get results back. But give me a tin foiley symbol if it makes you happy.

I had a way better explanation but I got distracted and botched it. I think you can kind of see why bing returned those results because of the letters in AryaZ’s name. There were no results so it tried its best for you.

 

[Alanzo]

She is an Ex who has a story of her own experience that questions the honesty of Mike Rinder, who ran OSA for David Miscavige for 22 years.

Therefore, here on ESMB, AryaZ is highly suspect.

Maybe brainwashing is real after all.

 

[Dulloldfart]

She is an Ex who has a story of her own experience that questions the honesty of Mike Rinder, who ran OSA for David Miscavige for 22 years.

Therefore, here on ESMB, AryaZ is highly suspect.

Maybe brainwashing is real after all.

When you flip-flop viewpoints on one subject (here, Mike Rinder), you come across as insincere. As if you are just trying it on for size, and don't really have any moral compass or reasoned position on anything.

Paul

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

When you flip-flop viewpoints on one subject (here, Mike Rinder), you come across as insincere. As if you are just trying it on for size, and don't really have any moral compass or reasoned position on anything.

Paul

Fair enough, but (speaking generally here not about anyone in particular) I've seen it happen that when people are undergoing the process of questioning what they've long believed about a subject, or a person, they go back and forth between the old viewpoint, which still feels comfortable, and a new viewpoint which feels unfamiliar and even scary.

 

[Alanzo]

When you flip-flop viewpoints on one subject (here, Mike Rinder), you come across as insincere. As if you are just trying it on for size, and don't really have any moral compass or reasoned position on anything.

Paul

It's a joke, Paul.

It's a joke about what ESMB has become.

 

[dchoiceisalwaysrs]

I left around 2012. I'm still trying to figure out what to make of advice not to sue the church (when I had clear evidence that OSA instigated a fair game campaign to destroy my business). I was advised against suing, because "the church has a team of lawyers and infinite money," "no one ever wins". Would love feedback.

Welcome to the board AryaZ. Have you had recent discussions with Mike about the advice he gave you about 7 years ago? Perhaps he recalls it and can give you his current opinion regarding his opinion of that time? Maybe he recalls it and recalls your quoted statements a little differently than you do..?
I definitely understand your uncertainty about why you got the advice you stated that you did. I also understand that you went forward with your own decision not to sue despite that advice and now are frustrated about it. Regarding whichever actions you take going forward, I hope they are successful in bringing you some justice or at the least some understanding that there is likely no one who has always received the justice that they deserve. Some may say karma will take care of that....but that is a whole other realm of discussion.

On a slightly different angle, do you think it would be possible for you to provide the 'evidence' with redactions if necessary as might be requested by the originators?
Nothing like helping out in the 'court of public opinion' even if it is too late due to legal requirements. Judges and courts are not the only source of getting justice.

In answer to your survey question... just look at and read all the comments...I would say it depends ..on a lot of factors

 

[freethinker]

It's a joke, Paul.

It's a joke about what ESMB has become.

What has it become, because the only one complaining is you?

 

[AryaZ]

Welcome to the board AryaZ. Have you had recent discussions with Mike about the advice he gave you about 7 years ago? Perhaps he recalls it and can give you his current opinion regarding his opinion of that time? Maybe he recalls it and recalls your quoted statements a little differently than you do..?
I definitely understand your uncertainty about why you got the advice you stated that you did. I also understand that you went forward with your own decision not to sue despite that advice and now are frustrated about it. Regarding whichever actions you take going forward, I hope they are successful in bringing you some justice or at the least some understanding that there is likely no one who has always received the justice that they deserve. Some may say karma will take care of that....but that is a whole other realm of discussion.

On a slightly different angle, do you think it would be possible for you to provide the 'evidence' with redactions if necessary as might be requested by the originators?
Nothing like helping out in the 'court of public opinion' even if it is too late due to legal requirements. Judges and courts are not the only source of getting justice.

In answer to your survey question... just look at and read all the comments...I would say it depends ..on a lot of factors

I have not spoken to Mike about it since then. I doubt a conversation with him about it would resolve anything at this point.

I realize, I should have just sought my own legal counsel. Lesson learned. Hopefully others reading this can benefit from my experience.

It's not something, I even thought much about until seeing the big push by the Jane Doe lawyers to add people to their class action type suits. I assume that AMF and Mike Rinder are coordinating that effort. Then about a month ago, I was telling my story to another ex
and mentioned the conversation with Mike. That is when I found out about Larry Wollersheim and others who have either settled or won.

I trusted that Mike from his experience as head of legal, knew
the church's litigation history.
So if he had told me the history of successful suits against the church vs making it sound like a losing proposition, I may or may have taken another course of action--regardless of how long and stressful it may have been.

And Yes, I might be interested in providing my dox to reliable trustworthy sources.

 

[freethinker]

I have not spoken to Mike about it since then. I doubt a conversation with him about it would resolve anything at this point.

I realize, I should have just sought my own legal counsel. Lesson learned. Hopefully others reading this can benefit from my experience.

It's not something, I even thought much about until seeing the big push by the Jane Doe lawyers to add people to their class action type suits. I assume that AMF and Mike Rinder are coordinating that effort. Then about a month ago, I was telling my story to another ex
and mentioned the conversation with Mike. That is when I found out about Larry Wollersheim and others who have either settled or won.

I trusted that Mike from his experience as head of legal, knew
the church's litigation history.
So if he had told me the history of successful suits against the church vs making it sound like a losing proposition, I may or may have taken another course of action--regardless of how long and stressful it may have been.

And Yes, I might be interested in providing my dox to reliable trustworthy sources.

I don't understand why you think it is a lost cause now. The statute of limitations on fraud can be twenty years in some jurisdictions.

 

[AryaZ]

Not sure how it could be considered fraud? defamation yes, fraud not so sure?

 

[freethinker]

Not sure how it could be considered fraud? defamation yes, fraud not so sure?

Well, there is a thing called tolling the statute. It depends when you found out about successful litigation.

Statute of Limitations Basics

Tolling
There are certain circumstances under which a statute of limitations is tolled, meaning the statute can be extended under certain limited instances, such as:
A delay in the discovery of the injury or harm for which a lawsuit would be filed;
A delay in the discovery of the injury or harm as a result of reasonable reliance on a person in a trusted position; and
If the injured person is a minor (under 18 years of age), the minor’s right to bring a personal injury action (negligence) is tolled until the minor reaches the age of majority.

https://www.allbusiness.com/statute-of-limitations-basics-4133-1.html

 

[AryaZ]

Well, there is a thing called tolling the statute. It depends when you found out about successful litigation.

Statute of Limitations Basics

Tolling
There are certain circumstances under which a statute of limitations is tolled, meaning the statute can be extended under certain limited instances, such as:
A delay in the discovery of the injury or harm for which a lawsuit would be filed;
A delay in the discovery of the injury or harm as a result of reasonable reliance on a person in a trusted position; and
If the injured person is a minor (under 18 years of age), the minor’s right to bring a personal injury action (negligence) is tolled until the minor reaches the age of majority.

Interesting. I'll check it out. I have a call into a law firm anyway.

https://www.allbusiness.com/statute-of-limitations-basics-4133-1.html

 

[Peter Soderqvist]

I left around 2012. I'm still trying to figure out what to make of advice not to sue the church (when I had clear evidence that OSA instigated a fair game campaign to destroy my business). I was advised against suing, because "the church has a team of lawyers and infinite money," "no one ever wins". Would love feedback.

Soderqvist: Maybe this is something for you?

Do you have a Scientology Abuse Claim?
Church of Scientology and Leader David Miscavige Sued for Abuse, Human Trafficking, and Intimidation of Former Member
https://scientologyabuselawsuit.com/

 

[Peter Soderqvist]

Lol...

Actually, I had/have proof of defamation in writing from a dozen different sources.

Soderqvist: I think you have a court case here!
Jane Doe is not a class action suit! The home site is talking about that multiple suits will come!

105. In response to the Aftermath, CSI copyrighted and published a hate website against
Jane Doe, Ms. Remini, and almost anyone else who was featured on the show. This website is
entitled leahreminiaftermath.com (“the website”), and features “© 2019 Church of Scientology
International. All Rights Reserved,” at the bottom of each page.
106. Defendants use this page to disseminate false, defamatory, and inflammatory
information about Jane Doe, all under the CSI copyright.
107. The website features untruthful and damaging blog posts, articles, and videos
dedicated to attacking Jane Doe’s personal and professional reputation, with complete and utter
disregard for the truth.
https://scientologyabuselawsuit.com...v-Church-Of-Scientology-Laffey-Bucci-Kent.pdf

 

[Peter Soderqvist]

Breaking News: Lawsuit Filed Against Church Of Scientology August 14, 2019 – Los Angeles, CA
Today, attorneys representing four sexual assault survivors filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles against the Church of Scientology, the de facto leader of Scientology David Miscavige and actor/staff member Danny Masterson.
https://scientologyabuselawsuit.com/#pr2

 

[AryaZ]

Soderqvist: Maybe this is something for you?

Do you have a Scientology Abuse Claim?
Church of Scientology and Leader David Miscavige Sued for Abuse, Human Trafficking, and Intimidation of Former Member
https://scientologyabuselawsuit.com/

Thanks, I'll check it out.

 

[guanoloco]

Instead of suing have you considered an O/W write up and a 3rd Party check with a copy of Can We Ever Be Friends?