Judge Waldrip grants Monique Rathbun’s discovery request, snubbing Scientology

TG1

Angelic Poster
Here's an ESMB link to the original (giant-sized) Anti-SLAPP Motion filed by TeamScio/CSI: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...e-Rathbun-case&p=863853&viewfull=1#post863853

"SO dudes"? Like Cartwright, McShane, and Davis?
If so...

The Motion for Clarification/Reconsideration, filed December 31, 2013 by RTC/DM's attorneys - Lamont Jefferson, Rachel Ekery, and Wallace Jefferson - included:

Exhibit B: deposition transcript - Allan Cartwright
Exhibit C: deposition transcript - Warren McShane
Exhibit D: deposition transcript summary - Monty Lynn Drake
Exhibit E: deposition transcript - David Gregory Sloat
And...
Tommy Davis' deposition transcript, too.
To read them, see The Underground Bunker here: http://tonyortega.org/2014/01/02/th...ents-filed-in-scientology-lawsuit/#more-12426


Are these the ones you wanted to see, TG1?

JB

Yes, thank you, JB! Really appreciate it.

TG1
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Just got off the phone with a dear friend who is very, very smart.

Remember everything I've written about the distinction:

defendants = CSI/Bryan/Lubow/Sloat (TeamCSI)
"don't-call-us-defendants" = RTC/DM (TeamRTC/DM)

Good - please push that thought to the side for a moment?

#1. TeamCSI* filed the original Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss. (*TeamCSI = CSI, Bryan, Lubow, and Sloat.)

#2. Judge Waldrip got all of the attorneys to verbally agree in open court that a little discovery could proceed to help him decide how to rule on the Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss.

#3. TeamRathbun filed a motion for more time to obtain discovery and to compel CSI&Company to produce more discovery in order to properly respond to the Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss.

#4. Judge Waldrip, in open court and by written Order told the attorneys that as part of discovery, David Miscavige is permitted to be deposed.

#5. TeamRTC/DM filed a motion for clarification and reconsideration of #4, the Order directing that DM be deposed in connection with the originally filed Anti-SLAPP Motions in #1.

If, on behalf of a client, an attorney 'moves' the court to do anything in connection with the Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss, then isn't that attorney representing a "moving party"?

My dear friend pointed out that these phrases, "Anti-SLAPP movants" & "moving parties", seemed 'odd' and not at all what he sees regularly in his work as an appellate-level litigator.

To him, Judge Waldrip's Order directs TeamCSI and TeamRTC/DM...since they've all "moved" the court (filed motions) in connection to the (giant) Anti-SLAPP motions...to turn over the discovery material to TeamRathbun.

It's almost as if Judge Waldrip is saying,

"Okay, you don't want to be called "defendant"? You don't like that label? Fine. Now everyone's an 'Anti-SLAPP movant'. I got me a label maker and I damned well know how to use it, hoss! How you like me now, Captain Phonypants?"

So.

There remains an important distinction in this case between who is or is not (yet) a "defendant".
It's sure clear to Judge Waldrip that TeamCSI agrees that "defendant" is correctly applied to CSI, Bryan, Lubow, & Sloat.
Just as it's clear to Judge Waldrip that TeamRTC/DM vehemently disagrees to the label "defendant".
If his latest Order, which gives some of what TeamRathbun asked for in #3 above, was intended to tell only TeamCSI to turn over the discovery, then why not simply write "defendants"? Easy-peasy.

In the actual Order (the part not shown above in TG1's quote box*) Judge Waldrip begins with a bit of historical background about the filings and he uses the phrase, "moving defendants" when describing TeamCSI alone.
He didn't direct the "moving defendants" in the Order; rather, he used "moving parties" and "Anti-SLAPP movants".
See the distinction?
I didn't.
But I'm sure glad I picked-up the phone!
YMMV. :coolwink:

JB

(*Link to The Underground Bunker to see the embedded scribd Order here: http://tonyortega.org/2014/01/16/ju...hbuns-discovery-request-snubbing-scientology/ )

JB, once again you (and your smart appellate litigator friend) ROCK!

:rock:

TG1
 

Arthur Dent

Silver Meritorious Patron
Shall we start a betting pool on when they move to disqualify Judge Waldrip?

:biggrin:

Or destroy evidence... Shred docs, delete files, bury computers, smash hard drives, spirit privy underlings to other lands. The usual. They really are in a pickle. But it's what you do when you're the c of s and actually believe you're above the law. This will be interesting!

Lawyers do not run the c of s. The c of s always runs the lawyers. Superb formula for failure.
 
Last edited:

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Or destroy evidence... Shred docs, delete files, bury computers, smash hard drives, spirit privy underlings to other lands. The usual. They really are in a pickle. But it's what you do when you're the c of a and actually believe you're above the law. This will be interesting!


Once upon a time Ron rose above the bank. Then Ron rose above Scientologists.

In wanting to duplicate their Founder, Scientologists rose above wogs. Then they rose above the law.

That whole tech of rising must be catching on, because now the whole damn world is rising up against Scientology. Because it's so....risible.
 
Last edited:

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
http://tonyortega.org/2014/01/16/ju...very-request-snubbing-scientology/#more-12592

Judge Waldrip grants Monique Rathbun’s discovery request, snubbing Scientology....

original.jpg


("Observer" from Tony Ortega's Blog posted this photo taken of Captain "Black Heart" David Miscavige, )

Leader of the Church of Scientology that controls every single action within the Organization including harassment of critics and defectors)

when asked about the Judges last ruling on the Monique Rathbun Harassment Case by a reporter that caught him outside the Super Power building smoking a cigarette and screaming at Laurisse Stuckenbrock)

Laurisse replied - "no comment"

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
I wonder how former Texas Supreme Court justices deal with screaming and slapping clients?

:whistling:
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
We need a wise black-robe man meme...

Wise black robe man
His rulings are wise
His black robe is judicial.

I suck ass at shooping, but here's a start anyway.

WBRM.pngWBRM.png

Also, it's grainy because the only clear shot of his face while wearing a black robe was a group shot and I had to cut and increase the size.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
no disrespect to Mosey or Mark...

but regarding discovery....

IF I knew I was being surveilled by $cientology
and I knew I was about to file suit against them for same
THEN I would make sure that I got a **** job standing in the back window...


-----


$cn is totally screwed if they respond in full to discovery demands
 

AnonKat

Crusader
no disrespect to Mosey or Mark...

but regarding discovery....

IF I knew I was being surveilled by $cientology
and I knew I was about to file suit against them for same
THEN I would make sure that I got a **** job standing in the back window...


-----


$cn is totally screwed if they respond in full to discovery demands

Explain your slang, I do not know what you mean. Back up plan ?
 

uncover

Gold Meritorious Patron
$cn is totally screwed if they respond in full to discovery demands.
And they are more screwed if they don´t respond in full to discovery demands (what is nearly impossible within ten days) because then they loose the chance to fight the consideration of evidence of Waldrip. Yes, a defendant has the right to remain silent, but then the judge can interpret this silence in the way how it is comfortable for him.

Believe me, Waldrip is not stupid and he is tricky - and now 20 Co$-lawyers come in his court-room and think they can pull him over the barrel.

The biggest strategic mistake was that Wallace Jefferson was in the court room last time. This is motivating a proud judge:
"Oh, you law-bending-court-terrorists who are stealing my leisure time.... now you show up with the "big guy"..... ok, lets have a look what he has on the ball....
So you have enough time to terrorize the court with a nonsense Anti-SLAPP-motion.... then it shouldn´t be a big problem for you to produce this tons of documents within time.... start.... How do you like that game, law-suckers (from Hollywood-Boulevard) ?"
 
Last edited:

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
Is Monique Ding-a-ling a Scientologist? Where is she on the Bridge? Just curious...not that being anywhere on the Bridge means anything except bat-shit crazier the higher up you go....and I am thinking she must be at the top?
 

Lone Star

Crusader
Is Monique Ding-a-ling a Scientologist? Where is she on the Bridge? Just curious...not that being anywhere on the Bridge means anything except bat-shit crazier the higher up you go....and I am thinking she must be at the top?

I've wondered that myself. I'm sure Karen and Arnie know.
 

Red Valiant

Patron with Honors
So I guess we can safely surmise that $cn is screwed if they screw and screwed if they scron't

Or somesuch

Rd00

This is so true, $cn is screwed and have been since day one. It's just taken so long for the public to grasp their whole convoluted/evil agenda. Personally, I am so excited about this Texas ruling! So much so, I'd even hold the camera capturing Pooks delivering her and Judge Waldrip's children. :)

Being a named party to civil litigation can be most unpleasant. Being a named party in a criminal action is much much worse. However when $cn is involved either in the forefront, or behind the scenes, it can be a complete horrific nightmare!

Dispute resolution has several options...
1. Genuine communication to work things out
2. Intervention with the help of trained mental health professionals
3. Mediation
4. Arbitration
5. Litigation

As we all know, sadly $cn prefers the most agressive and potentially the most toxic choice in #5. It appears that $cn is getting some serious ~payback~ in the case in Texas! :thumbsup: Karma does have a way of biting folks in the hind quarters, especially the knowingly naughty ones.

An outcome of litigation more often than not, can rest upon the venue/jursidiction and the magistrate in charge of the elusive concept of ~fact-finding~ I'm just guessing here, but I believe $cn has raised thier offers of ~settlement~ to exceptional $$$$$$ amounts so this never never never reaches a jury.
We can hope and pray the Rathbuns have no price to compromize their wanting $cn exposed to the entire world. And God bless Mr. Waldrip aka Dib!

Tom
www.flagdown.org
 
Last edited:
Top