Scientology denied in Laura DeCrescenzo’s law suit

[Free to shine]

Some interesting developments in Laura's case, as usual Tony Ortega has the news:

Things have really heated up in Laura DeCrescenzo’s forced-abortion lawsuit against the Church of Scientology. As we reported earlier, the church has been ordered to turn over more than a hundred of DeCrescenzo’s “pc folders” — which contain notes taken while she underwent intense interrogations at the hands of church officials, and which should yield thousands of pages of supporting evidence for her allegations of abuse in Scientology’s “Sea Org.” But with only days to go, the church is fighting mightily not to release that material.

We have learned that a petition filed by Scientology was denied by California’s Appeals Court, and on Monday the church then filed a petition with the state’s Supreme Court.

If that petition is denied, Scientology may even petition the US Supreme Court. The church claims that it should not be forced to turn over what it says are confidential confessionals protected by clergy-penitent privilege — even though it’s the penitent, DeCrescenzo, who wants access to the documents.

Read more: http://tonyortega.org/2013/05/01/sc...documents-release-in-forced-abortion-lawsuit/

Also see: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...For-Allegedly-Forcing-Her-To-Have-An-Abortion

 

[Idle Morgue]

Wow - is it just me? Laura is SUING the Church of Scientology - yet they are arguing that they cannot release them due to confidential information - yet they POST people's confidential information on their Suppressive Person Declares...

It is pure insanity! Laura wants her PC folder's exposed. Of course - if they have to - the shredder's have already culled the juicy stuff! Scientology is the science of culling! What a bunch of criminals - just pure insanity!

I did not know Laura was suing the cult - good for her and may she take it all the way!! Another lawsuit hitting the cult when their self induced chips are down with their grand opening of empty buildings peppering our planet and sitting vacant! David Miscavige's lifestyle broadcasted for the world to see. John Travolta getting divorced this year. Tom Cruise last year. People leaving in droves.

Sounds so spiritual, don't it?

 

[Free to shine]

To me this is HUGE. It brings into question the whole of the confidentiality abuses. Go Laura!!

 

[NoName]

Wow - is it just me? Laura is SUING the Church of Scientology - yet they are arguing that they cannot release them due to confidential information - yet they POST people's confidential information on their Suppressive Person Declares...

It is pure insanity! Laura wants her PC folder's exposed. Of course - if they have to - the shredder's have already culled the juicy stuff! Scientology is the science of culling! What a bunch of criminals - just pure insanity!

I did not know Laura was suing the cult - good for her and may she take it all the way!! Another lawsuit hitting the cult when their self induced chips are down with their grand opening of empty buildings peppering our planet and sitting vacant! David Miscavige's lifestyle broadcasted for the world to see. John Travolta getting divorced this year. Tom Cruise last year. People leaving in droves.

Sounds so spiritual, don't it?

It's true about JT then? I only saw it in the Enquirer so I wasn't sure what to think.

 

[Techless]

Wow - is it just me? Laura is SUING the Church of Scientology - yet they are arguing that they cannot release them due to confidential information - yet they POST people's confidential information on their Suppressive Person Declares...

It is pure insanity! Laura wants her PC folder's exposed. Of course - if they have to - the shredder's have already culled the juicy stuff! Scientology is the science of culling! What a bunch of criminals - just pure insanity!

I did not know Laura was suing the cult - good for her and may she take it all the way!! Another lawsuit hitting the cult when their self induced chips are down with their grand opening of empty buildings peppering our planet and sitting vacant! David Miscavige's lifestyle broadcasted for the world to see. John Travolta getting divorced this year. Tom Cruise last year. People leaving in droves.

Sounds so spiritual, don't it?

Geez - wanting to respond better but you've already said it so well IM. (but I must attempt at beginning my 2cents to agree on ABSOLUTE INSANITY factor) The friggin IRONY is beyond my usual command of that topic (I'm pretty good at) - but Christ (or whoever): can't this be used as the final nail in their coffin?...denying info which they've blatantly used to incriminate their detractors.?!? If the gov finds a way to screw this into 'religion oblivion' (a no-go) then we are all already screwed...I'm sure we have been already, but somewhere this crap has to come to a head - we Americans are fairly good at pushing things until...just would be good before the war

Gawd I hope so.

This has a lot more to do than just Scn...BTW - I'm sure most everyone might agree here...
(huge fuckin button here - why let Scn own it? They just use it in some sort of mangled/truth BS which we're all sick of - Hmmm - real drag)

Back to my denial and stiff drink...scared to say: I'm still unarmed, but thinking now otherwise. CNN/Fox news is helping me all along here.

But I DO love to get online here and see a recent/timely news event. I guess just lately there's not enough to satisfy my dreams of the big crash. Wish i had more direct experience to help out with this in a real legal way- feeling so incompetent here-
TL

 

[AnonyMary]

Kudos to Laura and her legal team!! Keep persevering...

 

[BardoThodol]

Should give them plenty of time to shred the folders and replace anything incriminating.

Scn Lawyer: (handing judge six inch stack of folders) There you go, Judge. We've decided that since these are her folders, it wouldn't be a breach of confidence.

Judge: I thought there were hundreds of folders.

Scn Lawyer: (Sighs) We have only the greatest compassion for her, and hope she'll find the solace she needs, but let's face it, Judge, she's a bit of a liar.

Judge: (Scanning through the folders) Seems that all that's in here are confessions about having sex with dogs, little children and any vegetable even remotely resembling a penis.

Lawyer: One of the reasons we tried to prevent them being entered into evidence. Such embarrassing things in there. Did you get to the part where she was planning to kill the President and blow up the Empire State Building?

Judge: None of this is in her handwriting. It's completely inadmissable.

Lawyer: Or the part where she was sending all of the church's money to support Al Qaeda?

Judge: This looks like a compromised, dishonest, fabricated attempt to fool the court.

Lawyer: Or the part where she felt COB looked like a rock star? All his beefy muscles in those custom-fit Tees?

 

[PirateAndBum]

Sadly, I can't see any reason that any unwanted information in her folders would not be shredded. What is to prevent it?

How do you prove what is missing?

 

[Rene Descartes]

Sadly, I can't see any reason that any unwanted information in her folders would not be shredded. What is to prevent it?

How do you prove what is missing?

The Church is between a rock and a hard place here.

If they are forced to give the folders it would seem that this would be bad legal precedence for the Church

If they do submit them and things are missing even if it can't be proven then I suspect that there can at least be reasearch and discovery, calling of witnesses, etc.

Example

Abortion on specific date at aobrotion center; proof from abortion center that abortion took place; nothing in folders around that date; no medical reports; no LOA papers to go get the abortion; no Ethics Orders, no nothing. What are you kidding me? The church that takes such pride in having everything in folders even down to a locational or an origination? This would be a PR fiasco as it would hit every tabloid and talk show and tabloid show.

Either way they are screwed.

They are going to need a bigger boat to get the payoff money to the court room.

Rd00

 

[JBWriter]

Interesting questions raised/opinions offered re: Ms. DeCrescenzo's case in the blog post itself here....

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/01/scientology/

Blog Snippet:

In Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S. 40 (1980), the Supreme Court held that “The priest-penitent privilege recognizes the human need to disclose to a spiritual counselor, in total and absolute confidence, what are believed to be flawed acts or thoughts and to receive priestly consolation and guidance in return.”

That would seem to describe this type of session, though this is being sought by one of the two people in the “penitential communication” who is accusing the other party and the Church of abuse. The Church has previously sought to deny discovery on the basis of the privilege. It was unsuccessful in People v. Thompson, 133 Cal. App. 3d 419 (1982), the California Court of Appeal upheld the admission of internal communications on the basis that it found that the Church member was not ordained as an “auditor” or minister of the Church of Scientology and there was no expectation of confidentiality.


These cases present difficult challenges when the session itself is part of the allegation of abusive and coercive acts in the lawsuit.

....and the comments section below the post also features different views about privilege. Surprised to read comments posted by "TravelingLimey" who is a self-proclaimed scientologist -- guess whose side s/he takes?

TravelingLimey Snippet:

There is a lot of bias here, mostly from the comments but a little from Johnathan Turley himself, though I can see he’s also trying not to be. Consider that the real enemies of this church are the anti-freedom, big government, big pharma, the illuminati (or whatever you like to call it), big bankers, psychiatry (a government tool of suppression & nothing more; don’t be fooled by this), other large corporations that make money from government intervention, & antisocial personalities in general (about 2.5% of any population). You all could be dissing your best friend! ( this particularly applies to L Ron Hubbard himself; everything Scientology should have come from the old man himself, though there could be some differences in management policy if it wasn’t firmly laid down before his death, or a new situation not covered) Many of you know me as a Scientologist & have already bitched & moaned at me for it. Not yet have many of you understood that Scientology means knowing how to know. Along with Hubbard discoveries like Study Technology, its a useful tool for anything! Even that little nonreligious booklet The Way To Happiness was penned by Hubbard; it gave Columbia back to the people recently & has saved & improved millions of lives.

Mr. Turley's blog is regularly read by legal professionals - and I'm happy to see Mr. Ortega's blog is being read by Mr. Turley.

JB.

 

[Free to shine]

Oh this is riveting.

SCIENTOLOGY TO CALIFORNIA SUPREMES: State’s Priest-Penitent Law is Unconstitutional
The documents come from Laura’s “pc folders,” which were compiled as she spent years undergoing brutal interrogations as a member of the church’s “Sea Org.” Unlike in a Catholic confessional, DeCrescenzo’s auditing sessions were not only recorded by auditors, but those notes were reviewed and shared by case supervisors and other church employees — the church itself admits that some 250 officials compiled or reviewed these notes, which contain intimate secrets about DeCrescenzo’s private life. When she demanded the documents — which fill about 140 folders and were compiled over a decade — the church tried to keep them secret under California law that protects priest-penitent confessions (even though it was the penitent — DeCrescenzo — who wanted the material). The superior court in Los Angeles ruled that because Laura’s notes were shared by so many church employees, that law didn’t apply, and the church has already lost an appeal of that decision.

So now the church has petitioned the state’s supreme court, arguing that the law itself is unconstitutional because it discriminates against Scientology’s concept of confessional confidentiality. We now have the church’s petition, and we’re sharing it with our readers.

Tony has a copy of scientology's CA Supreme Court Petition: http://tonyortega.org/2013/05/04/sc...ates-priest-penitent-law-is-unconstitutional/

Remember to read the comments!

 

[This is NOT OK !!!!]

I sure hope Laura can withstand taking a settlement from Scientology and take this thing all the way to open court.

She could subpoena so many people who participated in the forced abortions at Int. CSs, MAAs, Auditors, Security personnel, Drivers, etc. Could all of these people successfully lie in court?

 

[Free to shine]

Update from Tony Ortega regarding the folders:
http://tonyortega.org/2013/05/09/ca...s-response-to-scientology-petition/#more-6704

But in his reply, DeCrescenzo’s attorney Raphael Metzger argues that the church’s petition should be denied for several reasons.

– Scientology asserts that the 259 people who compiled or reviewed DeCrescenzo’s files were all “ministers” without providing any information about them. (As our commenters pointed out earlier, it’s highly doubtful that many of them at all had taken the “ministers” course.)

– California priest-penitent law requires that confessional information is not shared with a third person, but Scientology insists that the 259 people who shared her filed kept them “confidential.”

– Another interesting point: “The fact that [DeCrescenzo] signed a confidentiality agrement as a minor does not mean that Respondent cannot waive the privilege over those files as an adult, that the agreement is enforceable against [her], or that the documents in those folders actually fall within the definition of the clergy-penitent privilege.”

In Scientology’s petition, it claimed that California’s priest-penitent law was unconstitutional because it discriminated against Scientology’s practices simply because they were different than the Catholic confessional. But Metzger turns that notion on its head. Actually, he points out, an important case involving the Catholic church in Los Angeles found that when Cardinal Roger Mahoney tried to make the same argument as Scientology — that confessional material that was shared with two officials was proper as long as it was kept confidential — that argument was struck down. So to give Scientology the right to share confessional material would actually be to discriminate against other religions, and not the other way around.

 

[Free to shine]

Yay!!

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DENIES SCIENTOLOGY PETITION IN FORCED-ABORTION CASE

Scientology strikes out again as it fights a court order to turn over thousands of pages of evidence to former Sea Org worker Laura DeCrescenzo.

This evening, without explanation or a written order, the California Supreme Court denied Scientology’s petition to hold up DeCrescenzo’s lawsuit. The church argued that forcing it to turn over DeCrescenzo’s confessional “pc folders” was a violation of its rights because California’s priest-penitent law itself was unconstitutional.

http://tonyortega.org/2013/05/15/ca...scientology-petition-in-forced-abortion-case/

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Yesterday the Cali Supreme Court denied Scientology's refusal to turn over her folders. Lets assume the US Supreme court does the same. I can see several courses of action the church may take:

A) they turn over the folders
B) they redact portions of them
C) they shred them
D) they claim they lost them
E) they turn over portions that are non-incriminating. Withhold all the rest.

What happens if they do any of the above other than A)? They would be in contempt of court, that is obvious. What kind of fines would that result in? Or jail time? I presume that if anything other than A) would be the work of an "arms length" over zealous employee that would take the fall.

Then again, they might think it is easier to cut a check and make it all go away.

Thoughts?

Mimsey

 

[Lulu Belle]

Yesterday the Cali Supreme Court denied Scientology's refusal to turn over her folders. Lets assume the US Supreme court does the same. I can see several courses of action the church may take:

A) they turn over the folders
B) they redact portions of them
C) they shred them
D) they claim they lost them
E) they turn over portions that are non-incriminating. Withhold all the rest.

What happens if they do any of the above other than A)? They would be in contempt of court, that is obvious. What kind of fines would that result in? Or jail time? I presume that if anything other than A) would be the work of an "arms length" over zealous employee that would take the fall.

Then again, they might think it is easier to cut a check and make it all go away.

Thoughts?

Mimsey

I'm sure they're afraid of the precedent.

If they have to turn over her folders, they have to turn over anyone's folders who asks for them.

 

[Free to shine]

From Tony Ortega: http://tonyortega.org/2013/06/24/la...r-a-protective-order-in-forced-abortion-case/

Laura D to Scientology: It’s Too Late for a Protective Order in Forced-Abortion Case
Laura DeCrescenzo’s attorneys have answered the Church of Scientology’s latest attempt to derail her forced-abortion lawsuit, and they’ve done it in only two pages. (snip) ....
DeCrescenzo’s answer takes only two pages: With only a few days before the church is supposed to turn over the evidence, it’s in no position to be making demands, she says. If at one point there might have been some cooperation on the table, now that Scientology has put Laura through the expense of multiple appeals, she’s in no mood to cut a deal. It’s time for the church to turn over the documents.

A hearing is scheduled for July 1, and we’ll be fascinated to see if Scientology finally must turn over DeCrescenzo’s files after all.

Copies of letter at above link.

 

[RogerB]

Well, yes, there are several sides to this issue of the PC folders.

Here we have the church in its PR touting mental health and counselling and all those other mainstream benefits of their "technology" as a scientifically based "applied philosophy" . . . and now when it suits their warped minds they pull the ruberic of "clergy-penitent privilege" . . . . even though it is the penitent wanting her own files.

Under law, in the realm of medical treatment, such records and files ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE CLIENT/PATIENT. In my view, the same standard should be applied. And I hope her attorney along with the Court is singing that song of who owns the files and who has the right to determine "confidentiality" of one's own issues.

RogerB

 

[Idle Morgue]

Justice Kennedy DENIES Scientology's motion for stay in forced abortion case!

Ortega has been on top of legal matters regarding the onslaught of Scientology's legal woes.

Read Ortega's Blog to get the details.

The church of Scientology does not like to be told what to do but it looks like their good luck with their expensive attorney's has run out. Will we see justice in this lifetime? Have the tables turned on the Cult of Scientology lead by Dictator, David Miscavige? Stay tuned!
Hail to Justice Kennedy for saying NO to the Church of Scientology! Scientology's STAY DENIED!!!

Better get culling those folders ....I am sure the only thing that the Cult will turn over is the "waxing success stories" about how happy she is to be in the RPF and how Scientology changed her life - at 14 - she had none because she had no family - they were all slaves in the Sea Morgue and she was honored and privledged to join the ranks of the biggest slave organization to hit Teegeack in 76 trillion years!!

http://tonyortega.org/2013/06/26/ju...ogy-request-for-stay-in-forced-abortion-case/

 

[TEoS]

Re: Justice Kennedy DENIES Scientology's motion for stay in forced abortion case!

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: For the sake of your own physical safety, please keep at least 10 yards between yourself and David Miscavige this evening.