ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo (Debbie Cook Case)

Discussion in 'Debbie Cook' started by Rene Descartes, Mar 6, 2012.

  1. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

  2. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    I'll copy some here for those who don't like to click. This is a doozy!

  3. La La Lou Lou

    La La Lou Lou Crusader

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    It doesn't get boring does it!
  4. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Wow ... read those documents! :biggrin:
  5. LA SCN

    LA SCN NOT drinking the kool-aid

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Latest docs from Jeffrey make a great read.

    Competence inspires such hope for me.

    Dear God, may this be the time and place for the Cof$ Wall of Stone to be annihilated.

    For once and for all let half a century of this abomination of a church and philosophy, replete with justice denied, unpunished crime and abuse, be brought to an end.
  6. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Way to go DM! Brilliant move in suing Debbie and Wayne. :clap: Your pride and arrogance just couldn't resist getting revenge, and now the snowball is much bigger and picking up speed on it's journey downhill.

    And WE THANK YOU!!!! :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:
  7. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    ouchie. :p
  8. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Another brilliant comment from John P. (God, I love this guy.)


    From the high level, this is delightful fun. But some of the details of these filings are utterly awesome. Lawyering at its finest.

    * “Be careful what you wish for” department: In a filing last week, Church attorney George Spencer demanded that Debbie Cook promise not to have Rinder & Rathbun testify in the case. Looks like his wish was granted… The deposition notice says that Mike & Marty will be “in attendance” during the deposition on Monday. It sounds like their presence is to advise Mr. Jeffery, which may well make them ineligible to serve as witnesses later on. But, of course, they’re far more dangerous sitting next to Mr. Jeffery whispering in his ear after every answer, “He’s lying. Now ask him x to catch him at it.” This ought to be causing David Miscavige to have a heart attack on about now.

    * “Hang ‘Em High” Texas justice in action: Exploiting the unusual Texas rule that says they can compel a deposition almost immediately if the party requesting it doesn’t care who it is just brilliant. Notice how Mr. Jeffery uses the list of the matters to be testified to in such a way that there are only a handful of people who can show up? I am sure that if the Church tries to send some low-level underling who doesn’t have direct knowledge of the requested issues, they’ll be sanctioned for it massively. We probably won't know who they're sending until somebody shows up. But Mr. Jeffery must have a pretty good idea, since he'll have Mike & Marty sitting there. The short list of witnesses all undoubtedly knew Mike and Marty well.

    * Look carefully at the list of documents to be produced: Number 11 is “all surveillance videos and photos taken during this litigation, including those of Defendants, their home, their legal team, their law offices and their witnesses.” This is a masterful counterstroke against the surveillance. By now, Mr. Jeffery undoubtedly has his own videos of Scientology OSA goons running around taping him, complete with license numbers. Even better, he may have gotten the Bulverde PD to investigate reports of stalkers, and they may have conclusively linked people taking video and photos of Mr. Jeffery back to the Church already. If the Church denies taping Mr. Jeffery, and then a Bulverde police officer gets on the stand and says “In response to a citizen complaint, I observed someone videotaping Mr. Jeffery’s law office. I approached said person who informed me that they were a private investigator retained by the Church of Scientology.” Who is the court going to believe? The Church or a police officer?

    * Mystery requests 20 & 21: It is very interesting to ask for billing records from attorneys Elliott Abelson (Abelson was the lawyer present when the Cooks signed the agreement in Florida) and Gary Soter. I am totally mystified at what Mr. Jeffery is trying to get at with that one. I have no idea whether billing records would be covered under attorney/client privilege. My only guess is that they’re trying to establish that Mr. Abelson had recorded no entries for phone conversations discussing the agreements with opposing counsel, to prove that Debbie and Wayne were denied access to counsel before signing the agreements. There may be something else entirely going on; this bears watching as a surprise element.

    * “Vexatious Litigant” claim: The opening of the motion to compel is remarkable because the first paragraph calls the Church a “vexatious litigant.” This is a very specific legal term for somebody who files a lot of bogus lawsuits, clogging up the court system. Usually, it’s a specific legal status that is assigned by the Court meaning that the party has been ordered not to file additional litigation without prior permission by the court. Mr. Jeffery is citing a lot of press references, not legal cases to establish that the Church is a vexatious litigant. And he’s not moving for that status here. He’s just putting this issue at the top of the (presumably new) judge’s mind to try to establish skepticism about their motives and maneuvering in what follows, especially in case the judge that hears this motion is ultimately assigned the entire case under the Court’s “complex case” rule.

    When I’ve seen this term used before, the plaintiffs are usually either insane (little old ladies suing every person in their neighborhood for billions of dollars over the noise of sprinklers coming on too early in the morning) or prisoners with nothing better to do than file bizarre lawsuits (I remember a couple years ago some guy in jail who sued Google and Yahoo for using the Internet to steal his thoughts). So to label a corporate entity as a vexatious litigant is to call them insane as an organization. A nice touch!

    * “Discovery Abuse:” The next section of the motion to compel deals with the issue of the video that Mr. Spencer denied existed, but which the Church attorneys then produced immediately in their portion of the case. Mr. Jeffery is ensuring that the new judge in the case understands that the Church has established a pattern of lying about evidence from the very earliest moment in the case. Again, he’s working to seed the opinion of any new judges who come in contact with the case against the Church. Any judge who suspects that a party to the case is abusing discovery, one of the fundamental pillars of the civil legal process, is going to be very upset with that party. It is not going to go well with the Church if they are proven to have abused discovery once the case gets to trial, since the judge can find the Church lacking in credibility because they misled the Court and the other side.

    * Continuance of Motion for Summary Judgment: Mr. Jeffery points out that the filing for Summary Judgment is premature, since there has been no compliance with previous discovery requests. And he points out the totality of circumstances in how the Church has attempted to prevent the Cooks from mounting any defense at all. So now he’s seeking extensive discovery before the motion for summary judgment is heard. One would hope that the Court allows lots of juicy discovery before the motion is heard as a penalty for the Church’s non-compliance.

    So on the whole, the motion opposing summary judgement consists of three parts: First, Mr. Jeffery calls the Church a “vexatious litigant,” which basically means that they are a) insane and b) going to waste the court’s time. Then he goes on to say that they have trampled one of the fundamental pillars of the legal system from the very outset of the case: complying honestly with discovery requests. He then stacks up how the Church’s prior antics have been extraordinary measures to prevent the Cooks from having a legal defense that they are entitled to under the Constitution, and then he closes by pointing out that the Church has violated all sorts of procedural rules in filing their motion for summary judgment so soon, and requests that it be postponed immediately for proper discovery. Hard to imagine that a court is going to rule against a motion like that.
  9. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    More from John P. (I love this guy.)


    A couple more thoughts about the filings, now that they’ve settled in a bit:

    1. The deposition on Monday may be a veiled threat to the Church – if you stonewall Mr. Jeffery by sending somebody on Monday who doesn’t know what they are talking about, that means that the court is very likely to sanction you by approving depositions of a whole bunch of people by name when discovery begins in earnest. And that list would almost certainly have you-know-who at the top. So if the Church doesn’t come clean in the deposition Monday, then the odds increase that Miscavige will have to appear on the stand. And he will have nobody to blame but himself. I have to believe that Mr. Spencer understands this. We’ll see if DM and the rest of the loons and goons do.

    2. The Church filed the suit in a Texas court but wants wants Florida law applied. I now wonder if this sort of maneuver is to keep the Texas court at a disadvantage as to what, exactly, the law is and how to apply the fine points of it correctly. That, in turn, sounds like a strategy to increase the odds of success on appeal, since appeals are usually about whether the judge applied the law correctly, rather than whether the evidence was correct or not. So by expecting a judge to apply a law they’re not familiar with, it would increase the odds of being able to at least mount a long (and expensive for Debbie Cook) appeal fight, even if they’re not ultimately successful. So that may have been a significant factor in the Church’s decision to file suit in Texas rather than Florida.

    3. Related to the point above, I wonder if the choice of law (Florida versus Texas) is not the same thing as “choice of procedure.” In other words, the Texas procedure for quick depositions from “any qualified witness” may not be part of Florida procedure, and Texas procedure applies even if you ask the Texas court to follow Florida law. If that is true, then the Church may have made an error by not taking into account procedural differences between Texas and Florida. They may have assumed that the deposition rules were fairly similar to Florida’s, and they may have been banking on Florida procedure that may allow them to restrict discovery massively. Oops!

    4. Mr. Jeffery’s e-mail to opposing counsel about the surveillance on his offices last week sounded like the beginning of a strategy to drive a wedge between the Church and its local lawyers, putting pressure on them to withdraw. Attorneys can only withdraw from a case “for good cause,” and they may be required to describe that cause before a judge to get permission. I suspect good cause includes persistent attempts by the client to pervert the course of justice, whether it’s criminal behavior like witness tampering, or at least a massive violation of basic principles like discovery abuse. If discovery abuse becomes a persistent pattern, rather than something that the Church could claim is an isolated incident, then it’s much easier for Mr. Spencer to withdraw with his reputation intact. So by documenting all the discovery abuse that has happened in what is still very early innings in this case Mr. Jeffery is making it easy for Mr. Spencer to use that escape hatch.
  10. Petey C

    Petey C Silver Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo


    Isn't it amazing how those SP, DB, downstat wog lawyers and a bitter, defrocked SP apostate can be so clever when they're up against the elite, clear/OT Sea Org planet clearers who have no case on post and are always upstat!!!
  11. afaceinthecrowd

    afaceinthecrowd Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    :thumbsup: :thumbsup::thumbsup:

    Man, I think I'm gonna wind up loosing dough on my Popcorn Futures...I keep eating up all the profits. :biggrin:

    There's a reason why Scn has always had a very small and tenuous footprint in Texas. :yes:

    Texas ain't no SoCal, NorCal or a suburb of NYC like Florida. :no:

    Scn is getting a crash course in Lone Star Law and Culture. :omg:

    “No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that’s in the right and keeps on a-comin‘“. Texas Ranger Motto :coolwink:

    Let 'er Buck!!! :happydance:

    Face :)
  12. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo


    In the Debbie Cook litigation, the cult has "no case". :biggrin:
  13. afaceinthecrowd

    afaceinthecrowd Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Youze sooo clever, HH. :hysterical::hysterical:
  14. scooter

    scooter Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Oh happy day:happydance:

    Wee Slappy McSavage just got bitch-slapped AGAIN by Debbie.:roflmao:

    Dave, look at it as a learning curve - once they fit you with an orange jump-suit, You'll be getting a lot of that from a lot of BIG men. :hysterical:

    Oh, and start practicing holding Your ankles - Your arms won't get so sore that way.:dieslaughing:
  15. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Comments on the question of stalking:

  16. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Some more comments

  17. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Too much glee, Scoot. This is a matter of civil law NOT criminal law. There are no orange jump-suits or shower room calisthenics in play in this. The most that is at stake is financial restitution and as an additional (and very remote) possibility the prospect of backing the church into a position where Miscavige needs to be displaced. There is nothing here relating to a criminal prosecution.

    Mark A. Baker
  18. Kutta

    Kutta Silver Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    That sounds unreasonably tame given that torture, kidnap, etc are surely criminal offenses that will be spotlighted.
  19. freethinker

    freethinker Sponsor

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Civil can turn into criminal especially in Texas but I think you like the idea that it is civil and not criminal.
  20. scooter

    scooter Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo


    I hope however that having these crimes of DM publicized like this will result in the relevant law-enforcement authorities actually taking action and charging the cancerous little gnome with His offences.:yes: