TEXAS JUDGE DENIES SCIENTOLOGY’S ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION IN RATHBUN SUIT

Carcassed

Patron
But, if (for example) Miscavige claims that he never managed the COS or its staff, imagine how many former Int Executives will be marched in (later via declaration or testimony) to evidence that Miscavige is "manufacturing evidence" of his own liking.

So the best way must be to let as many executives as possible to testify in court where Miscavige is going to be deposed? Executives like Rathbun & Rinder, the Headleys, Debbie Cook and many more. The more who are able to testify, maybe the better it'll probably be. :hmm:

Btw, has a specific date for the deposition been made?
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
And a lot of these court vids has been put up on youtube. Is there maybe a chance to see DM in court via the web?

Judge Waldrip hasn't allowed any actual examination of witnesses or the hairier motion argument to be filmed or even live-blogged. He's made everyone turn off all their phones, computers, cameras, etc.

However, the lawyer in the courtroom have been allowed to keep their computers running. And as we all know, those computers COULD THEORETICALLY be filming what's happening in the courtroom for their (and others' ... heh) review later.

So no, I don't think we'll ever see a video of DM in court via the web -- like we saw Debbie Cook giving testimony in court in San Antonio.

TG1
 

Carcassed

Patron
Anonycat gave a good link, above.

Since the witness has been "noticed" (typically sent to their attorney of record) they are under the jurisdiction of the court and have to show up or face sanctions.

But the fact that they show up doesn't mean they can be compelled to answer questions. Expect Miscavige's atty to OBJECT to a lot of questions and "instruct" his client not to answer. That helps COB a bit but too many objections or intentionally not answering questions (directly or thru double-talk or obfuscation) can become an obvious ruse to avoid discovery--and backfire.

This is just one step, not conclusive of anything. Mosey's attys will use the opportunity to have SPECIFIC REPRESENTATIONS made by Miscavige in response to their questions. It might not look like much (during the deposition) but later contrary evidence/rebuttal witnesses can be brought in (to court during preliminary motions or trial) to blow up for any number of reasons. Provably lying (perjury) is one of the more notorious.

But, if (for example) Miscavige claims that he never managed the COS or its staff, imagine how many former Int Executives will be marched in (later via declaration or testimony) to evidence that Miscavige is "manufacturing evidence" of his own liking.

Depositions, which will become readable to all of the internet at some point, are exacting and often tedious drills that might not look like much on the surface. But they light the fuse for later fireworks.

Judge Waldrip hasn't allowed any actual examination of witnesses or the hairier motion argument to be filmed or even live-blogged. He's made everyone turn off all their phones, computers, cameras, etc.

However, the lawyer in the courtroom have been allowed to keep their computers running. And as we all know, those computers COULD THEORETICALLY be filming what's happening in the courtroom for their (and others' ... heh) review later.

So no, I don't think we'll ever see a video of DM in court via the web -- like we saw Debbie Cook giving testimony in court in San Antonio.

TG1
But for what reasons? I mean, are depositions in general open to the public or is it kept secret? Could this maybe be judge Waldrips own decision? :questions::hmm:
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

Judge Waldrip's Decision, dated March 14, 2014, denied TeamCSI&Co's Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss. :clap:

If CSI and/or any other defendant(s) choose to appeal Judge Waldrip's decision, the TX 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals' online docket is the place to watch.

What's unclear is how long TeamCSI&Co have to file their appeal.
I think it will have to be filed within the next 2 weeks or so.

Here's the link (with 3rd Circuit & Comal County already checked).
Once at the page, simply click "search" and all of the new filings from Comal County will pop-up.
Link: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/CaseSearch.aspx?coa=coa03

JB
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
But for what reasons? I mean, are depositions in general open to the public or is it kept secret? Could this maybe be judge Waldrips own decision? :questions::hmm:

No, depositions are not public events.

They are usually scheduled in one of the parties' law firm's conference rooms. Typically present are

* the person being deposed, who is called the deponent

* the deponent's lawyer(s)

* the lawyer(s) who called the deposition and those who will question the deponent

* a court reporter (who records and later types up a transcript of the proceedings); the deposition transcript is usually made a part of the public record, but some deposition transcripts are deemed by the judge to be confidential and are sealed, in which case the public won't be able to see the deposition. I don't think that's likely to happen in this lawsuit.

* possibly (not always) one or more of the persons who are parties to the lawsuit (plaintiffs and defendants)

* and in cases (like this one) where the deponent is hostile or where there will be so many objections as to render the deposition a futile exercise, a judge will also attend to rule right there on the spot regarding the many objections that are expected
 

Carcassed

Patron
video - I dont think so, but
transcripts..... yeah baby!!!:thumbsup:
Transcripts, easily comprehensible transcripts, mmm...yeah I really hope so. Such a shame all this would be if it happens to slip past unnoticed.

Has the date for the deposition been confirmed? :surf:
 

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
What are scientology's liquid - or indeed shortly realisiable - assets?

I see no reason that they shouldn't go for 25% of that. Miscavige being a sociopath (it would seem) he's perfectly prepared to throw the COS under a bus to save himself. While it is objectively ridiculous, out of proportion, and almost silly, I say put the absolute line at $100 million. They would never, ever get anything like that at court (at least after the appeal against the US jury - why exactly is it you chaps have them for civil cases again? At the very best they can do almost as well as a judge) but I really just don't think that's the mindset you need to approach this with. You need to treat it like something completely different to a court case.

Explicitly put, the Rathbuns need to be very, very, VERY - frankly unrealistically - greedy imo.

As for the idea of starting a trust for other victims, fuck that. Callously speaking, said victims could have sued too, heck they could sue now and take on some of the risk but they don't seem to be.

And the Rathbuns have a child now, and for all I know more to come. That changes perspective. They would be entirely justified in taking as much moolah as they can get. Remember, it's a payment to shut up and go away, not a compensation award. Surely you wouldn't argue that the starbucks in clearwater owes every ex scientologist thousands of dollars just cause it's taken "church" cash?

Marty recently said "he helped create this monster - he has an obligation to take it down". I have a feeling...and maybe it is my wishful thinking....that Monique will take it all the way. Imagine what she has been through and Marty has been beaten by Miscavige. I think this goes deeper than money. Mike Rinder refused money from the cult and he really needed it.

I think between Marty and Mike - they want the whole thing shut down.

If there is a settlement - can't they ask the court to force Miscavige to show them all the money he has and has hidden from view?
 

secretiveoldfag

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

Judge Waldrip's Decision, dated March 14, 2014, denied TeamCSI&Co's Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss. :clap:

If CSI and/or any other defendant(s) choose to appeal Judge Waldrip's decision, the TX 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals' online docket is the place to watch.

What's unclear is how long TeamCSI&Co have to file their appeal.
I think it will have to be filed within the next 2 weeks or so.

Here's the link (with 3rd Circuit & Comal County already checked).
Once at the page, simply click "search" and all of the new filings from Comal County will pop-up.
Link: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/CaseSearch.aspx?coa=coa03

JB

Don't you just hope the suckers will get tired of all this and say GUILTY AS CHARGED, MILUD. What have they got to lose?
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

Don't you just hope the suckers will get tired of all this and say GUILTY AS CHARGED, MILUD. What have they got to lose?

That's a wonderful wish, SOF, and I dearly hope it comes true! :thumbsup:


'Til then, however, I hope we all keep an eye on that 3rd Circuit's online court docket.
JB
 

koki

Silver Meritorious Patron
Transcripts, easily comprehensible transcripts, mmm...yeah I really hope so. Such a shame all this would be if it happens to slip past unnoticed. Has the date for the deposition been confirmed? :surf:
remember TCs....?
 

Lone Star

Crusader
TX Lawyer has made some recent comments on the Underground Bunker regarding the upcoming Appeals hearing this Wednesday.......


TX Lawyer2 days ago The mandamus petition is set for oral argument next Thursday [EDIT: my bad, it's next Wednesday], but there is no deadline for the court of appeals to issue its ruling. Realistically, considering that they have clearly fast-tracked the case, I would expect an opinion maybe 30-60 days after the argument. If Miscavige loses at the Austin Court of Appeals, he can (and inevitably will) file another mandamus petition at the Texas Supreme Court. Mrs. Rathbun could also pursue a mandamus petition there if the Court of Appeals reverses Judge Waldrip's order that Miscavige be deposed.


TX Lawyer2 days ago Oral arguments are open to the public, but the Austin Court of Appeals does not permit the proceedings to be recorded, videotaped, or photographed. If any of these appeals ever make their way to oral argument before the Texas Supreme Court, that court actually broadcasts its oral arguments live and also archives them for subsequent viewing.





TX Lawyer
2 days ago It's not showing up on the appeals court's website yet, but the trial court's docket in the Monique Rathbun case shows that a couple notices of appeal were filed yesterday. Presumably, those are the notices of appeal for CSI and the other defendants who joined in the anti-SLAPP motion that was denied last month. Those appeals are permitted by the anti-SLAPP statute, so no surprise there. The appeals should not delay the discovery process unless the defendants move for and obtain a stay of discovery from the court of appeals.


TX Lawyera day ago Re: the timing on the Church's brief to the Court of Appeals -- no firm date yet, but the brief is due 20 days after the record is filed at the appellate court. The record is supposed to be filed within 10 days of the notice of appeal, but that's the responsibility of the clerk and the court reporter, so it sometimes slips past that deadline. Also, extensions of time to file the brief are routinely requested and granted, and I would expect that to happen here. Bet on a brief actually being filed sometime in late May.
 
Top