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. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    You should read the quotes on here highlighted from the Village Voice, it provides a detailed answers to this and more. If the cult sends a bunch of stooges with no direct knowledge the court can turn around and punish them by allowing Cook et al. to request by name those to be deposed and force the cult to comply. If they try to fuck around there will be penalties. Also, the question are phrased in such a way, with such soecifics, there really are only a handful of people the cult can send which could have an ounce of credibility. read the VV comments copy and pasted here for even more info on this.

    The cult already screwed itself by at first denying the existence of video tapes to Jeffery, then when they showed up in court they produced the video of Debbie signing the contracts - so they've already demonstrated obstruction in discovery and Texas law deals with this harshly. If the cult tries to fuck around, and they will, it will be punished and could even get a judgement against them or their attorneys sanctioned. Texas discovery is much better for us than the laws in CA of Fla. It seems the cult made some assumptions about discovery procedure in TX being similar to CA or FL - they were wrong and it will hurt them.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
  2. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Because its worth depleting, from page 1 (there is another set of comments from John P worth reading before this one, also pg 1)

  3. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    This is way cool.

    From the end of this blog post:


    In an e-mail, Jeffrey also wanted us to know how much the readers of this blog are contributing to the way this lawsuit is turning out...
    Tony, I would like your readers to know how much we appreciate their responses to your posts of the case documents. Aside from the humor (which I, for one, need during this ordeal), their brilliant legal minds are helping us with their analyses. They may not be privy to all the facts and the nuances of Texas legal rules, but they are raising important points that we are incorporating into our multi-pronged counterattack ....Again, Debbie and my thanks to them and you. -- Ray

    [​IMG] [​IMG][​IMG] [​IMG]
  4. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    church: Judge, let us drag feet & not answer all questions

    See this post at VV for the latest today - and look - in there is a list of questions they don't want to answer ( #5, 8, 10-17, 19, 20, 23, 24, 27, 29 & 30) Plus they want "substantial additional time to [STRIKE]feed the shredders[/STRIKE] designate corporate reprensetatives..."

    The questions are in this link:

  5. RogerB

    RogerB Crusader

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    A wee error re the statement highlighted in red.

    I earlier responded to it without having read Jeffrey's submission, and noted I was surprised he had not given Court citations.

    In actuality, he did. It's all in the "fine print" foot notes.

    He cites very clearly the Courts who have held the Cof$ to be vexatious litigants and cites the Wikipedia article I had posted a month or so ago on an earlier thread concerning these legal cases. And he cites expertly the instances and cases wherein the Cof$ engaged in vexatious actions and activity; both in Court and and as part of the case proceedings outside of the actual Court.

    I fact, in reading his brief to the court, I have to say it is just simply wonderfully presented: quite brilliant, and particularly the part wherein he make known to this Court the nature of the beast that is the Cof$ in Court.

    Debbie's attorney is indeed a class act. :yes:

  6. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: church: Judge, let us drag feet & not answer all questions

    #9 should be on the 100 most stupid thread.

    It says the motion for Summary Judgement will give the defendants the discovery they desperately seek to acquire.

    Now if that isn;t stupid then it's worse than stupid.

    #10 in the unlikely event that Summary Judgement is denied...

    #11 The remaining categories of testimony requested are irrelevant.

    There's a lot of desperation in that document.

    THe church is operating on some weird type of logic. If they can prove something and what they are proving is true for them then that is it it is true and nothing else matters. I wonder where they get that from.

    This is where the logic fail exists within their operations. There is no refuting allowed because all that matters is what they think appies. Everything else does not exist.

    This is the real world and False Data Stripping is not going to be applied. This is what some in Scientology call Severe Reality Adjustment.

    What I find amazing is that Spencer is willing to keep at it. Either he must truly think that the Churches claims are all that matters or he is just servicing his client for all it is worth.

  7. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Re: church: Judge, let us drag feet & not answer all questions

    Village Voice:

  8. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Re: church: Judge, let us drag feet & not answer all questions

    That's kind of a summation of all of it, isn't it? :eyeroll:
  9. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    VV Comments:

  10. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free


    (I love this guy too Lulu!... and T1kk)

    Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
  11. Dilettante

    Dilettante Patron Meritorious

    Just me musing here.....

    After Mrs. Cook signed her "agreement", she did in fact make several statements about the church, it's 'expansion', the importance of the basics and miscavige. That she did in a favorable manner but she did disclose much on FB and other outlets. They weren't trying to shut her up in ALL that time. :confused2:

    Exactly when did she become a bitter, defrocked apostate? After she urged church members to apply policy or was it just prior? :dieslaughing: (You CAN'T blow-we defrocked you!) Let's see that comm-ev on Deb. C'mon. The date on that was.......that's right, they had to scramble to fabricate a da pack on her after the fact.

    Per ethics gradients aren't you SUPPOSED to mention the outness to others? :duh:

    So following policy gets you sued by the church and disconnected from family, friends and business associates. Poor woman is in purgatory! Stupid ass cult can't even pretend to follow their own goddamn policy. :blush:

  12. Ogsonofgroo

    Ogsonofgroo Crusader

    Re: Jeffrey Puts CoS in Deeper Doo Doo

    Awesomeness in action! So nice to see somebody paying attention, I like this Jeffrey dude and think he'll do well given the facts and angles~ noice!

    Cult 0f Foot-bullets will strike again and again :footbullet:
    I wonder if the legal team for cult realizes how much of a career-killer they have embroiled themselves in? Just thinking to myself here out loud, but once they have endeared themselves to the Wee Tyrant DM, who in their right minds would want them except other criminals? Well, this may not be a bad thing I suppose from a monetary view, but who would ever trust them if they decide to actually go and do justice/help people?
    Cult 'wins', then cult will keep spending their 'voluntary religious donations' on them as retained and bought ass-kissers.
    Cult loses and folks will still see them as a bunch of fucks who shilled for a twisted bunch of con artists. Either way~ DERP!


    And oh, where for art thou Toxic-Moxin et al in all this?

    Off to store for more butter! :drama:
  13. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Gotta add Jeff Hawkins. :)

  14. Auditor's Toad

    Auditor's Toad Clear as Mud

    Ah, time has come for the C o $ at the same time to be embroiled in far more lawsuits than they handle.

    Ah, gee, ain't that exactly what the cult did to CAN ? Broke 'em with lots and lots of lawsuits.

    Sooner or later it has to end up with not your best lawyers in the important cases.

    Once knee deep in lawyers the cult is now starting to get thin on competent lawyers.

    That once powerful beast is verging on getting slaughted.

    Ain't this sooooooooooooooo grand !
  15. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Please send details to Mr Jefferys. They are under much time constraint
    and niether he or Debbie has the great knowledge of CO$ history that we have here. It may be useful or not. A heads uop is great, and if they already know no problemo. :)
  16. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    Contract Ratification

    I had to do some research on this word "ratify" that Spencer and the Church is using.

    They are saying that if Debbie Cook was under duress at the time of the signing she "ratified" the contract by her actions of "speaking good about the Church" at some time since, hnce those statements by Debbie Cook praising the Pope on a Rope and the great expansion that were put on the internet by the Church

    That is why they are saying that she was not under duress all this time from the signing just because of those statement she said.

    Jeffrey arguent I gather would show that she made thsoe statements under some type of duress. The Church will counter that there was noting manifesting that showed she was under duress. Of course we know that she was under intense pressure even after she was gone because we kow how the Church work especially when they know they you know about the crimes that were committed at Int Base.

    It is more grabbing at straws.

    It's kind of like saying "you were never bullied because you never spoke up"

    And interestingly enough, bullying is big news in the world today.

    Hell it's even as bad as saying "you were never raped because you never fought off the perpetrator"

    It is so sad and sick, sad and sick at the same time.

    It is even worse than sad and sick. maybe after a few inutes of relaxation I will have more words than such a banal description of "sad and sorry".

  17. Infinite

    Infinite Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller

    Re: Contract Ratification

    The way I read it is that Debbie and Wayne were not only under duress immediately before signing the NDA but also for years afterwards. The SP Times details the level of fear Debbie was operating under:

  18. tikk

    tikk Patron with Honors

    Re: Contract Ratification

    Ratification simply means that if you are a party to a voidable contract, which means a defective contract that you have the option to avoid, will nevertheless be held valid if the basis for the defect (e.g., underage, mental impairment, duress, undue influence, mistake) passes, and you retain the benefit of contract. A void contract cannot be ratified (e.g., mutual mistake, agreement to commit an illegal act, incompetent party), because it is technically not a contract.
  19. freethinker

    freethinker Sponsor

    Re: Contract Ratification

    Isn't that a key point here Tikk, that the "underage,mental impairment, duress, undue influence, mistake", passes? I htink they have a good case that it never passed. The church was very quick to go after Debbie for the email.
  20. Auditor's Toad

    Auditor's Toad Clear as Mud

    Ah, shucks, what did davieboy do to pull all this in ?