Where's the lambo?
He's got more drama coming. I just saw a comment he posted saying "stay tuned". Again, hinting at something concrete and giving nothing.
Marty Rathbun is acting just like a guy that used to work at the top echelons of an evil cult,
next to a dictator that will stop at nothing to silence its critics...
who has been paid off big time in exchange for bashing one of Scientology's biggest and baddest SP's - Tony Ortega
who has fired his attorney's (a ruse)
and will never ever discuss the law suit again
The attorney's will eventually get paid
Marty will justify his blood money with his bride and baby now taking up his "purpose" in life
and will fade into the sunset much like Debbie Cook and other gagged ex Sea Org Management that escaped Scientology.
It Keeps Scientology Working!
It sucks big time! because people get hurt to pay off these goons that think they are hot shit cuz they worked next to evil.
What I would like to know is why is Mike Rinder not allowing any questions about this on his blog?
Did he get some money too?
You can never out estimate the evil doings of Scientology and those that worked next to the devil hisself.
http://tonyortega.org/2016/05/04/sc...ns-plans-to-ditch-lawsuit/#comment-2658605892Litigation fatigue alone is probably not an adequate explanation for what happened here.Monique didn't just dismiss the lawsuit, or seek a quick and cheap settlement. She fired her legal team, then waited around another 4+ months to see what the Texas Supreme Court was going to do, THEN finally started taking steps to make the case go away.
And all of that happened at a point in the litigation where (1) Scientology was 100% prohibited from doing anything to harass the Rathbuns, (2) the Rathbuns hadn't had to actively do anything in the lawsuit for almost two years, since the whole thing was stayed while on appeal, leaving only the appellate lawyers to do any real work, and (3) THEY WERE OBJECTIVELY WINNING.
Apologies for the all-caps, but come on. This was probably not motivated, at least solely, by litigation fatigue.
deathtoallpoliticians because, after practicing family and contractual law for many years now, this pattern of behavior indicates to me that there is a secret settlement in place. why do you think such an outcome is impossible?
TX Lawyer Not impossible. Just implausible in light of all available evidence. It's also not impossible that the ghost of LRH returned to Earth, gave Marty his eternal blessing, and asked him to immediately fire the legal team and wait several months before getting around to asking to dismiss the lawsuit. Not impossible.
deathtoallpoliticians TonyOrtegai cannot believe it, mr. ortega. my thought is that part of the secret settlement between the parties is the stipulation that (wink, wink) there was no settlement.
http://tonyortega.org/2016/05/04/sc...ns-plans-to-ditch-lawsuit/#comment-2658574840TX Lawyer That would be a stipulation that none of the highly competent attorneys on the church's side of the case would EVER allow their client to make. I would never expose my ass to being sued on such a ridiculously obvious - and readily provable! - conspiracy to defraud my opposing counsel out of a fee agreement. And beyond the personal liability, I would assume there is a damned good chance my license to practice would be yanked if I allowed my client to do something like that without addressing the matter to the court.
I am personally and professionally familiar with several of the attorneys on the church's side of this case. They are not stupid, unethical, crazy, or willing to risk professional suicide
gtsix
If she never intended to seek compensation, taking lawyers on contingency is.... rude. Pay the lawyers fees Rathbuns.
Texas Lawyer seems to be assuming that a settlement must call for the payment of money and/or have some required level of formality. It doesn't.I confess that I don't think well with legal matters and language.
Not sure exactly how "settlement" is defined legally, however it seems "Texas Lawyer" also used it the same way as Marty.
"Our Texas legal expert, an attorney who has handled appellate matters there and goes by the handle “TexasLawyer,” had told us that it appeared to him the case was ending without a settlement, even though many of our readers have assumed that the Rathbuns must have worked out some kind of financial agreement with Scientology after news broke in February that Monique had fired her entire legal team in the three-year lawsuit."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlement_(litigation)
http://tonyortega.org/2016/05/04/sc...pose-monique-rathbuns-plans-to-ditch-lawsuit/
Captain MustSavage TX Lawyer •
Tx Lawyer, wasn't there a ruling in this case that amounted to Judge Waldrip saying that scientology was a business?
If the case had gone ahead, would there have been a chance that this ruling might have had some significant implications for scientology? I've been wondering whether the decision to drop the case might have something to do with that. e.g. the first independent church of scientology has just been set up and I'm wondering if that ruling posed a danger to the indie movement and to possibly to Marty, who has in the past at least, made an income by providing scientology counselling.
TX Lawyer Captain MustSavage •
Yes, if memory serves, you are correct about the trial court's ruling. The court of appeals upheld the decision on different grounds, but I do believe that was part of Judge Waldrip's order.
But there is no possibility that ruling would have been binding on any other court, much less the IRS.
hansje brinker TonyOrtega • 7 hours ago
Well, maybe the Rathbuns have got a better source of income: Although it is announced in the movie of Theroux that Marty isn't paid for it, I can imagine that they (Marthy and Theroux) have made a deal about it.: For each movie in a film-house a certain percentage from the proceeds; transfered to Monique.
With that they finished the whole scientology-shit.......................
The primary purpose of this lawsuit was the termination of the Church of Scientology's harassment of Monique Rathbun. (Recall she obtained a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction.) It appears she has obtained that primary purpose -- the termination of the Church of Scientology's harassment of Monique Rathbun.
Does anyone seriously think the COS is going to start harassing the Rathbuns again once the legal action and temporary injunction are dismissed?
TX Lawyer hasn't nixed this popular theory for one simple reason. He is assuming that the attorneys for the COS would be informed of such a behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement.Ooh TXLawyer back in the Bunker, nixing popular theories: http://tonyortega.org/2016/05/04/sci...ent-2658478422
deathtoallpoliticiansi cannot believe it, mr. ortega. my thought is that part of the secret settlement between the parties is the stipulation that (wink, wink) there was no settlement.TX Lawyer That would be a stipulation that none of the highly competent attorneys on the church's side of the case would EVER allow their client to make. I would never expose my ass to being sued on such a ridiculously obvious - and readily provable! - conspiracy to defraud my opposing counsel out of a fee agreement. And beyond the personal liability, I would assume there is a damned good chance my license to practice would be yanked if I allowed my client to do something like that without addressing the matter to the court.
I am personally and professionally familiar with several of the attorneys on the church's side of this case. They are not stupid, unethical, crazy, or willing to risk professional suicide
Hi TX Lawyer. Some speculation has included the notion that Marty has entered into an arrangement independent of Monique's suit (which of course includes him having her cooperate in dropping her suit).
I imagine this would be considered fraudulent? unethical?
What would the repercussions be?
TX Lawyer an hour ago
Marty and Monique are not lawyers, so nothing they do on their own behalf (and that isn't submitted to a court for approval) would be considered unethical, legally speaking. If they failed to pay and concealed the existence of money owed to their lawyers, that could easily be construed as breach of contract and maybe outright fraudulent. Repercussions for that would be monetary liability for actual damages, plus maybe (at a reach) punitive damages. But again, it's rarely a good idea to sue people without means to pay, and even less so when they have the ability to complain about how you did your job.
Wonder who the Hero will be?
I think Rinder is trying to keep his Blog Site as cool, calm, collected and "clean" as possible. Marty is a lighting rod or, more accurately, a shit storm rod and his shtick, grandstading and attitude would trash up Rinder's Blog if he inadvertently lets it in via the "backdoor". Marty's Persona is not compatible with Rinder's refined style, satire and wit . Just my opinion.
Fink Jonas • 5 hours ago
Knowing how the church operates, I still believe Marty might have been paid in cash by the church to avoid paper trail otherwise ending the case doesn't make sense. I read somewhere some one witnessed Hubbard's pile of cash was slightly smaller than the churches pile of cash, so how big is Marty's pile of cash, somewhere in Texas there might be a storage room with a big pile of cash, he can post all he wants on the fringes of the internet, but I don't believe it, look under the bed is got to be somewhere.
Tony Ortega Mod Fink Jonas • 2 hours ago
If you pay attention to what TexasLawyer is saying, you would know that the Rathbuns wouldn't risk this. Ray Jeffrey would have the ability, through the trial court, to examine the Rathbun bank accounts.
Like I said earlier today, I got another layer of confirmation that there is no financial settlement.
I know it's hard for people to imagine that, but you have to understand that there would be serious legal risks in the Rathbuns trying a trick like that, and all indications are that the Rathbuns are trying to get away from the court and any legal entanglement.
I know my saying this will have no effect. People are just determined to believe that their move made some kind of sense. Every attorney who actually knows this stuff tells me that the move makes no sense whatsoever, at least from a legal perspective.
TX Lawyer hasn't nixed this popular theory for one simple reason. He is assuming that the attorneys for the COS would be informed of such a behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement.
The COS would know everything that TX Lawyer said. Therefore, the COS would not inform their attorneys of the behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement.
If there was a behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement, the attorneys for the COS were just as ignorant of it as Ray Jeffrey.
My guess is that the attorneys for the COS were just as surprised by what Monique did as Ray Jeffrey was.
My guess is that the COS dealt directly with Marty and Monique, and left ALL of the attorneys out of it.
TX Lawyer hasn't nixed this popular theory for one simple reason. He is assuming that the attorneys for the COS would be informed of such a behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement.
The COS would know everything that TX Lawyer said. Therefore, the COS would not inform their attorneys of the behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement.
If there was a behind the scenes, "wink wink" settlement, the attorneys for the COS were just as ignorant of it as Ray Jeffrey.
My guess is that the attorneys for the COS were just as surprised by what Monique did as Ray Jeffrey was.
My guess is that the COS dealt directly with Marty and Monique, and left ALL of the attorneys out of it.
Does anyone seriously think the COS is going to start harassing the Rathbuns again once the legal action and temporary injunction are dismissed?
I find it hard to believe Marty would deal with DM without lawyers being involved. He must know that DM considers him fair game and will therefore lie, cheat, trick and try to "destroy him utterly".
The only protection Marty/Monique have is the presence of lawyers.
Probably he'll go with an India-themed Bluebird RV
for easier travel around Texas.
View attachment 12565