Rathbun vs Scientology/Miscavige, et. al -- Preliminary Hearing - Media Reports

Lone Star

Crusader
Guess they've changed their restrictive policy, TG1, because Mr. McCormack's San Antonio-Express News article from September 13, 2013 is now once again publicly viewable here: http://www.expressnews.com/communit...ous-Scientology-hearing-continues-4842896.php

JB

No it's requiring a subscription when I clicked on it. Most newspapers are doing this now.

Incidentally I sat near McCormack during the afternoon phase of the hearing. He's a real colorful character. He's the one who asked me why I was there and I told him that I was representing ESMB. He also got a quick "word clear" on J&Ding. Lol.....
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
No it's requiring a subscription when I clicked on it. Most newspapers are doing this now.

Incidentally I sat near McCormack during the afternoon phase of the hearing. He's a real colorful character. He's the one who asked me why I was there and I told him that I was representing ESMB. He also got a quick "word clear" on J&Ding. Lol.....

Well, that was disappointing! I thought that TG1 had woo woo'd the San Antonio-Express News.
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
No it's requiring a subscription when I clicked on it. Most newspapers are doing this now.

Incidentally I sat near McCormack during the afternoon phase of the hearing. He's a real colorful character. He's the one who asked me why I was there and I told him that I was representing ESMB. He also got a quick "word clear" on J&Ding. Lol.....

Sorry to all for the confusion - the link works for me, so I don't know what's going on with the site. For educational purposes with purely academic intent, here's the story:

September 26, 2013
Verbal pyrotechnics rattled the New Braunfels courtroom Sept. 13 during a contentious hearing over a lawsuit filed by a Bulverde woman against the Church of Scientology and its leader David Miscavige.

In her suit, Monique Rathbun claims a four-year campaign of surveillance, harassment and dirty tricks aimed at her and her husband, prominent Scientology defector Mark Rathbun, was personally directly by Miscavige from church headquarters in California.


“Mr. Miscavige is the one and only person in the Church of Scientology who may authorize a destructive Office of Special Affairs Campaign, such as the one undertaken against the Rathbuns,” the lawsuit reads. “Any and all of these unlawful activities in Texas could have been stopped instantly by a single word from Mr. Miscavige.”

Rathbun's lawyers have tried to subpoena Miscavige for a deposition, but lawyers representing him and the church are fighting back, citing First Amendment issues, and also are trying to get Rathbun's legal team thrown off the case.

“The conduct of plaintiff's counsel is unprofessional, unethical and immoral,” their motion to disqualify reads.

In his answer to the lawsuit, Miscavige claims he's not subject to the jurisdiction of the court because “he has no connection to Texas.”
He also asserts he had nothing to do with the mistreatment of the Rathbuns and doesn't even know the people alleged to be behind it.

Rathbun's lawyers have called him a liar. They've filed a lengthy affidavit by Mark Rathbun, who worked closely with Miscavige for more than two decades, most particularly in operations against perceived enemies of the church.

The affidavit describes Miscavige's alleged close involvement in various legal problems the church has had in Texas and also cites his use of private investigator Monty Drake, another defendant.

While Miscavige claimed in his pleading that Drake is a complete stranger to him, Rathbun described a long working relationship.
“Mr. Miscavige has known of the church's employment of Monty Drake since the 1990s, (when) Mr. Drake became Scientology's primary private investigator for Texas matters,” the affidavit asserts.

The affidavit triggered the church's motion to disqualify Rathbun's lawyers because, they claim, it includes privileged and confidential church information that should not have been made public.

In heated arguments in court this month, a church lawyer expressed shock and dismay at the misconduct of Rathbun's lawyers, and they fired back.

“In their zeal to do whatever it takes to go after David Miscavige, they crossed a huge ethical line,” asserted George Spencer, representing the church. In response, Ray Jeffrey, Rathbun's lead counsel, called the motion “a highly offensive, dilatory tactic.”

He ridiculed the assertion that the affidavit contained confidential information, saying a simple Internet search would reveal most was disclosed long ago in books and news articles about Scientology.
“Everything in that affidavit is in the public domain, and what is so disgraceful, they know it,” he added.

With about 15 high-powered lawyers in his courtroom, including a clutch from California, and so much weighing on his decisions, state District Judge Dib Waldrip made no ruling and said the next court date for the case is not likely to come before mid-October.

*Note: The next hearing is scheduled for October 18, 2013.

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Recap of the media coverage from September 12, 2013 through October 4, 2013:

Excluding
the superlative coverage provided by Tony Ortega of The Underground Bunker, it appears a total of 10 news reports were generated between September 12 through October 1, 2013.

On October 2, 2013, when the same superlative source unexpectedly announced Leah Remini was scheduled to be deposed in connection with this case, the national and international MSM, along with celebrity bloggers, You Tube vloggers/channels, and gossip-centric sites uploaded/filed news accounts -- enough to fill the first five pages of a simple Google search using the word "scientology" -- for two days.

Here's the ESMB relevant thread about that unexpected development: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...-Mosey-lawsuit&p=854817&viewfull=1#post854817

Yep, I suppose a story's a Story if a celebrity's name is attached, but I also think the MSM wants to tell this story.

Know why?
Because aside from ABC-TV's :bullshit: report, I haven't seen anything reported that favors Co$, but I sure have read/viewed accounts that get the key facts correct -- she was never a member of Co$, private investigators harassed her friends/family/co-workers, 'sex-toy' sent to her job, spy cameras, temporary restraining order in place, etc. Those key facts favor Mrs. Rathbun's version of events in the court of public opinion...and the reputation of Co$ sinks further into the mud.

Imagine the settlement offer that was on the table on October 1, 2013.
Now imagine how much it jumped on October 2, 2013.

JB
 
Top