Featured Post

HOW SCIENTOLOGY COERCED A CHILD TO HAVE AN ABORTION: THE LAURA DECRESCENZO FILES

HOW SCIENTOLOGY COERCED A CHILD TO HAVE AN ABORTION: THE LAURA DECRESCENZO FILES

—————- In anticipation of her biggest day in court yet, Laura DeCrescenzo and her attorneys hit the Church of Scientology with 928 pages of new filings —————- Details from 18,000 pages of evidence show how Scientology manipulated a child to keep her working under slave-like conditions —————- A key document describing DeCrescenzo’s unwillingness to have her coerced abortion is missing from the evidence Scientology was ordered to produce By Tony Ortega Wednesday afternoon, Laura DeCrescenzo filed explosive new information in her four-year legal odyssey against the Church of Scientology, submitting 928 pages of new declarations and exhibits in anticipation of a crucial October 23 hearing in her lawsuit against the church which alleges abuse, including allegations that she was forced to have an abortion at only 17 years of age. Key to the new filings is information gleaned from thousands of pages of previously secret files that the church fought mightily to keep under wraps. But on Monday, the U.

Share Button

Facebook

Subscribe to our e-mail list

Appeals court: Would deposing Scientology’s leader violate Texas law?

DavidMiscavige2Nick Rogers called us from Austin with a report of what happened today in the Texas Third Court of Appeals as three justices wrestled with the question of whether Church of Scientology leader David Miscavige should be deposed in Monique Rathbun’s harassment lawsuit.

In December, Comal County judge Dib Waldrip ruled that Monique could depose Miscavige about his role in what the Church of Scientology has already admitted to — spending years to surveil her and her husband Marty Rathbun with the use of private investigators and other operatives.

Miscavige’s attorneys filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, which is essentially like putting Judge Waldrip himself on trial. In order to overturn Waldrip’s order and save himself from a deposition, Miscavige has to prove that Waldrip “abused his discretion” when he ruled.

In its petition to the court, Miscavige’s attorneys went on at length about how he was the “ecclesiastical leader” of a rapidly growing worldwide religion, and that it would violate Miscavige’s religious rights to be subjected to questioning.

But in the courtroom today, Nick tells us most of the discussion centered not on religion, but instead on Texas law about “apex depositions.”

This was another part of Scientology’s argument, that the law shields CEOs of companies from being dragged into lawsuits simply as a form of harassment. As the “apex” of a corporation, CEOs should not have to endure questions they have no answers to merely as a legal tactic.

Scientology argues that the law applies in his case, and that Monique Rathbun is trying to depose Miscavige simply as a form of leverage.

Nick tells us that Wallace Jefferson, Miscavige’s attorney and until recently the chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court, made that argument again during the 20 minutes he had to make a presentation.

During her 20 minutes, Monique’s attorney Leslie Hyman countered that by saying the apex deposition law doesn’t apply in this case because Miscavige is not just the “CEO” of Scientology, but he’s actually a named defendant in the lawsuit, and the person the Rathbuns believe was most responsible for directing the harassment at them.

“It wasn’t a very long hearing. Most of the arguments were over whether Miscavige is defined as an apex deposition. That’s what they seemed most interested in,” Nick tells us.

Monique’s lead attorney, Ray Jeffrey, tells us that Justice Melissa Goodwin — one of three justices on the appeals panel — asked a question that Wallace Jefferson didn’t seem to have thought through.

By relying so heavily on the apex deposition rule, did that mean Scientology was giving up on its other argument, that a Texas court simply had no jurisdiction over him? “She said, by merely making this argument about apex depositions, they may have already waived their objection to jurisdiction,” Jeffrey tells us.

Nick and Jeffrey both told us that the justice with the most questions was Scott Field, who grilled Hyman about whether Monique’s team had really done enough during depositions of Scientology employees Warren McShane and Allan Cartwright to get the answers they needed before trying to depose Miscavige.

“The reality of those depositions is that they denied that Miscavige had anything to do with the Rathbun operation,” Ray Jeffrey told us. “Then, when I asked them, how would you know that — how often do you see him? — Cartwright acknowledged that he has no contact with Miscavige. McShane said he knew that Miscavige was not involved. But he admitted that he’s not around Miscavige very often, doesn’t talk to him on the phone. So how does he know?”

Justice Field, however, asked if they had tried to find out from McShane and Cartwright who else would have known more about Miscavige’s involvement. Nick says that Hyman responded that they would just end up doing deposition after deposition.

“It’s kind of Catch-22 for us. They deny he has any connection, but they tell us we should have asked more questions,” Jeffrey said.

Nick told us that another interesting question Field asked was, what allegation had been made about Miscavige’s personal motivation — how would it benefit him to harass the Rathbuns?

“Hyman said it was a personal benefit, to harm the people who are trying to harm me,” Nick said.

Perhaps the most interesting question, Nick says, came at the end, when Wallace had come back after Leslie Hyman’s twenty minutes with time for rebuttal. The question was asked by Justice David Puryear, who said to Wallace, how would you articulate the abuse of discretion by the trial court? Doesn’t trial court have room for discretion?

In other words, what did Judge Waldrip do wrong by deciding that Miscavige could be deposed? This is, after all, the threshold for the writ, that Waldrip had abused his discretion as a judge.

Nick tells us that Wallace answered probably the only way that he could, by saying the facts in the case made the choice for Waldrip clear, and he made the wrong choice.

Ray Jeffrey pointed out to us that Scientology can’t simply disagree with Waldrip’s ruling, they have to show that Waldrip abused his position.

“I just think it’s a lot to say that after all the work he did, that Judge Waldrip abused his discretion,” he said.

We asked him if Scientology’s showy arguments about religion ever came up at all.

“In the opening argument by Jefferson, he really didn’t addresss it at all, but Leslie addressed it in her argument. So when Jefferson got up on rebuttal, he did a couple of minutes on the usual ‘dynamic, growing religion,’ and that these affidavits and depositons are old, and that Scientology is growing and all that sort of thing,” Jeffrey said.

Overall, Jeffrey says, the whole thing seemed rather routine.

“The most questions came from Justice Field. He didn’t seem to be pushing any kind of agenda. They all seemed pretty neutral. None of them knew how to say Miscavige’s name,” he said. “It just underscores again that the Church of Scientology is not well known in Texas.”

Jeffrey said that Monique’s team is “cautiously optimistic.”

The three-justice panel will consider the evidence and issue a ruling sometime in the next 60 days, we’re told.

 
——————–

Posted by Tony Ortega on April 9, 2014 at 18:05

E-mail your tips and story ideas to tonyo94@gmail.com or follow us on Twitter. We post behind-the-scenes updates at our Facebook author page. Here at the Bunker we try to have a post up every morning at 7 AM Eastern (Noon GMT), and on some days we post an afternoon story at around 2 PM. After every new story we send out an alert to our e-mail list and our FB page.

Learn about Scientology with our numerous series with experts…

BLOGGING DIANETICS (We read Scientology’s founding text) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

UP THE BRIDGE (Claire Headley and Bruce Hines train us as Scientologists) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43

GETTING OUR ETHICS IN (Jefferson Hawkins explains Scientology’s system of justice) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

SCIENTOLOGY MYTHBUSTING (Historian Jon Atack discusses key Scientology concepts) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46

PZ Myers reads L. Ron Hubbard’s “A History of Man” | Scientology’s Master Spies | Scientology’s Private Dancer

 

Share Button
  • Science Doc

    Sounds promising.

  • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Here’s my $0.02.

    IANAL, but I’ll try to give a recap as best I can.

    The whole thing started off with one of the judges asking how to pronounce David Miscavige’s name.

    First Wallace Jefferson stood up to talk. He started off laying the general stuff: this is a dispute between the Church of Scientology and Marty and Monique Rathbun that has been going on for years. Originally it was Marty who started a campaign against the Church by posting up his blog, etc. Monique made herself a part of the conflict between Scientology and Marty by posting things on Facebook. He brought everything up to date, saying that Monique has been seeking a deposition from Miscavige since the beginning. Then reiterated the idea that CSI is the responsible party and if it were found to have committed wrong-doing, which he assures the court won’t be the case, that CSI has the means and resources to make good on such a judgement. That in light of the fact that David Miscavige didn’t have a role in the activities and that he has never been to Texas to perform any of these activities, this becomes Monique seeking an apex deposition. Now, he says, Monique and her legal team have had the chance to depose many members of RTC and CSI and that in none of their depositions did they ask pointed questions about David Miscavige’s involvement or lack thereof in these activities taking place in Texas. This shows a lack of good faith on there part, he says, and that Miscavige shouldn’t be pulled away from his “ecclesiastical mission” just to satisfy their desire to depose him. Then he said that a Texas court has no jurisdiction over David Miscavige and that if Monique wants to sue him she needs to do in California and there will be no argument over jurisdiction.

    One of the judges (the female one and forgive me I know none of their names) said that she thought one of the primary questions here was whether or not by submitting to a deposition, is the person really also submitting to jurisdiction? Wallace Jefferson didn’t seem to have a good answer for that, because that’s when he turned the argument into the idea that Monique’s team had ample opportunity to question intermediaries about Miscavige’s activities or lack thereof in relation to this case, but they did not ask those questions. he says they did not ask those questions because they didn’t want a negative answer. Another judge then asked, would it change things if–hypothetically–all other defendants were dropped from the lawsuit and Miscavige was the sole defendant. I’m not sure why he asked that or what the implication was–it seemed like a strange question to my untrained ear. But Wallace’s response was again, no it wouldn’t change things. That’s when he said in that case Monique should sue David Miscavige in California. Finally the same judge asked did Waldrip get to review all of the depositions, and Wallace seemed to get oddly defensive at the question. Answering (and obviously all of this is paraphrased to the best of my ability) that no, but even if he did it would still show that Miscavige should not be deposed and that Monique failed to show food fail in her questioning of the intermediaries being deposed.

    Leslie stepped up and started her argument out by saying that in the history of TX law no court has ever applied the apex deposition rule to a named defendant in a lawsuit. Then she asked how could anyone else know David Miscavige’s actions with relation to this case better than Miscavige himself. She then said, if David Miscavige had come to Texas himself and taken pictures himself and so on, that they wouldn’t be in the appeals court at all and there’d be no question about deposing Dear Leader–I mean Shorty McFistToCuffs. Instead he used agents to do the work for him and now there is an argument over jurisdiction. Everyone in the court room was calling that the “agency argument”. She said that basically, whether Misavige had done the activities or he used someone else to do it, it doesn’t change the fact that he should be deposed for his own actions. One of the judges then asked if she asked the intermediaries being deposed about David Miscavige’s actions and additionally, if they didn’t have the information she was looking for, then did she ask who she should be asking? Leslie then brought up the point about Warren McShane admitting to knowing little about what Miscavige was doing and pointed out that David Miscavige’s office is not staffed and no one really knows what he’s up to at all–except for Miscavige of course.

    One of the judge’s then asks about her theory, saying that is she assuming just because of Miscavige’s authority, is Monique’s team assuming that he knows what is going on? Leslie’s response was that they have evidence which indicates that Miscavige was aware of what was going on. She also pointed out that in prior cases the appeals court did not question whether or not the trial judge had ruled correctly when he ordered a deposition. As it should be in this case, the court should go into this assuming that Waldrip’s ruling that Miscavige should be deposed was correct in the first place.

    After that Leslie went into the discovery process and basically said that despite their extreme efforts to pursue written discovery that the defendants failed to provide any documentation at all in, in fact, claimed it did not exist. Which Leslie said that she and her team have ample evidence that contraindicates that claim. That Scientology does keep detailed records and reams of paper related to all operations, so the evidence must exist somewhere. She then went on to say that they had requested the deposition of Miscavige after Scientology’s team was uncooperative in discovery, basically being left with the idea that no one knows anything except for Miscavige. One of the judges returned to the apex idea, asking if she thought that Waldrip in his ruling was trying to follow the apex deposition rule. Leslie responded that even though Waldrip did not consider this an apex deposition that he felt that the rule would have been satisfied anyway. Then one of the judges asked again, why Leslie thought Waldrip didn’t review all of the intermediary depositions before ruling. Leslie basically implied that he didn’t need to because there had been ample information shared over the months that this trial has been going on. Then when it came down to the wire the proceedings were interrupted by an anti-SLAPP motion which took precedence because of the time constraint, and that was why Waldrip didn’t have time to review all the intermediary depositions. She then said that she thought he had read all of the depositions, but hadn’t had time to sort through Scientology’s numerous objections. Which then made clear to my why Wallace had acted defensive about the question when he was asked–he knew it was his team’s fault that Waldrip made a decision.

    Then one of the judge’s asked Leslie about the directed tort rule, and the alter ego rule. Do these apply to the case. That’s when Leslie emphasized the “agency argument”–that Miscavige had used agents to act on his behalf in Texas which is basically the same thing as if he had carried out the actions himself. Then one of the judges asked about Leslie’s assertion that DM was reaping personal benefit from these activities. Leslie answered by saying that she felt it was more of a psychological benefit in the satisfaction he felt from his vindictive activities, she wasn’t trying to say that he was receiving monetary benefit.

    Wallace came back up and complained that Monique’s team keeps changing their argument that they were “all over the map” with their jurisdiction argument: first they said it was general jurisdiction because Miscavige had been in Dallas for the opening of a church; then it was alter ego; now they are arguing jurisdiction by agency. Then he repeated his argument that Monique’s team had the opportunity to question intermediaries about Miscavige’s involvement in other depositions, but they failed to do so. Then one of the judges asked how Wallace would direct the court in their review of the case and Wallace replied, “Abuse of discretion.” Then said that the court should deny the deposition because Monique’s request to depose Micavige was not in good faith. He also got in a bit about how there were declarations from former church officials that Monique’s team relied on to support their request to depose Miscavige, but that those declarations were out of date and that the church was entirely different than it was back in the days of those people. That the church has taken a whole new turn and that those people in those declarations have no idea what is going on today.

    The whole thing was 45 minutes. I couldn’t tell whether or not the judges were leaning one way or the other by the time they left. I also thought they’d have more questions. I felt like the judges had a lot more questions for Leslie than they did Wallace.

    There’s the best I could do. I’m sure Tony will have input from others, and I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong here! It’s tough to decipher some things with my untrained ears.

    • outraged

      Thank you!! you must know short hand.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        I had trouble staying awake while Wallace was speaking. He was droning on and on and repeating himself, which helped because I didn’t have to take notes on stuff he was repeating. I just put place markers to preserve the chronology. Leslie’s arguments weren’t that new either, so just short notes to kind of remind me of what I heard. But even then I might have missed some things. I did my best though and that’s the best I can do! Hopefully as I go to more of these things I’ll get better at it–and learn more about these things like wtf is the “alter ego argument”. They talked about it a little but it made no sense at all.

        • DeElizabethan

          Thank you Derek so much for attending and giving us some details.

          • Baby

            and I gotta throw in for the record.. I really envy you Derek.. OK carry on..

        • TX Lawyer

          Told ya it would be boring. :-)

    • And I don’t rent cars!

      Derek, you did a fabulous job! I knew you would but this had to be tough, especially without any recording equipment, laptop, or smart phone.

      Thank you so much. Hope you enjoyed being there today!

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        ‘Twas fun! I loved that the local OSA rep (the Director of Special Affairs at the Austin idle morgue) tucked tail and ran when she saw us. She wouldn’t even look at me, like I was a spirit from the ark of the covenant or something, “Avert your gaze!”

        • Free Minds, Free Hearts

          Funny they hid from you Derek, I’d have thought they could confront and shatter with their great communication powers. Oops, I forgot the tech doesn’t work.

          • Buttons72

            So much for confront. Yet another smelly lie by Co$. They teach and support passive-aggression as the rule.

        • And I don’t rent cars!

          Ha! I just finished reading your other comments above and I don’t know how you were able to keep your composure and remain silent especially when Jefferson was talking about “ecclesiastical missions” as if Miscavige was out there “really” saving the world or something. I don’t know how Jefferson could keep a straight face – nor you! I’m glad I wasn’t there as I’m sure I would have been thrown out of the courtroom. I’m a terrible heckler…

          You are really, really good at this. I hope you realize that! Thanks again.

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            Thanks, I try! It’s nice to have something new to write about. While Wallace was droning on and on about how Monique’s team sucks at depositions I was envisioning myself being one of those people who stands up shouting and gets dragged out by security. Not really my style, but maybe after the guilty verdict is announced.

            • TX Lawyer

              It’s probably part of their attempt to persuade the court of appeals that Team Monique didn’t meet their burden of proof to obtain an apex deposition. Basically, the point is that they had the opportunity to develop their evidence, they (supposedly) chose not to do so, so they can’t use the (supposed) absence of proof to justify needing Miscavige’s deposition.

        • Warrior

          Are you referring to Cathy (‘-8.0 on the Tone Scale’) Norman?

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            Yes! You know her i take it? She’s was terrified of us.

            • Missionary Kid

              Good. The rats scurry away.

            • Warrior

              I’ve met the woman a few times. The first time was at the Flag protest in 1997. She was one of the OSA staff (along with Sylvia Stanard and John Carmichael) brought in to deal with the protesters. But I’ve had more dealings with her in Austin during my information campaigns on the Drag. One time she made a false report to the Austin Police Dept. in an attempt to have me arrested. Side note: I knew her mother, Linda Norman, while I was a ‘public’ and a staff member at the Austin Org in 1973-1975.

            • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

              Fascinating. I don’t understand how someone like her can sit through court proceedings in this case and still remain a dedicated believer. She must not be listening to anything going on…you know like CSI openly admitting to a ruthless harassment campaign against an innocent father and mother.

              She sounds like a piece of work.

            • Warrior

              In her mind the harassment of Monique is “the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics”. But you already knew this. :)

            • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

              I did already know that, but it’s become so hard for me to imagine now that I am so far removed from it.

            • Kid Charliemain

              I’m thinking about writing a KR on Cathy and sending it uplines to OSA/Int. She knows who I am, yet has failed to ID me for over 6 months now. In the meantime I’ve just been suppressing local Scientologists left and right. So now I got more time to keep on a suppressin’!!! One more hearing and she’s failed again! LOL..

            • Warrior

              Did you and I once meet at a Starbucks?

            • Lone Star

              No it wasn’t me. I haven’t been inside a Starbucks since the 90s. Even then it was only a few times. Don’t care for it.

        • Missionary Kid

          I believe that there’s little confront and shatter left. Tory Christman has noticed the change. Where the clams used to confront, they now run.

          It’s like us SPs have some sort of repellent that emanates from our bodies that they have to avoid.

        • OrangySky

          So much for ‘confronting and shattering’ your suppression, huh, Derek?
          Bravo, great job!

        • Guest

          This brought a smile to my face. The abusers have lost their power, and now have to deal with their victim’s righteous indignation.

    • Sunny Sands

      You did great, Derek, thanks!

      I’m getting the idea that underlying their surface politeness, the 3 justices are secretly not amused that one of their own, ex-chief justice Wallace Jefferson, would accuse Judge Waldrip, of “abuse of discretion”. Waldrip was obviously careful and methodical. But like was pointed out, it’s the only thing he could say, because simply disagreeing is not allowed.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        Disagreeing is certainly allowed, just not really a legal argument. Heh.

        • aquaclara

          and of course, the whine that Marty posted something mean on facebook….you had to be choking at times just to hold back the words.

          Can we appoint you to give Davey the cleaning with a toothbrush task, once he’s toppled, and you are king of the exes? You will be kind, I know. Instead of the Hole, he can have the top bunk in an overcrowded, smelly room with no a/c.

      • Jgg2012

        Their argument was that he did not read all of the depositions. First, just because he didn’t cite all of them doesn’t mean he didn’t read them, but even if that’s true, what deposition proves that Miscavige was uninvolved? What deposition contradicts anything Waldrip said? As for evidence that he was involved, Tommy Davis whined that Marty punched people and Miscavige was blamed for it; Marty’s blog picks on Miscavige and no one else; Miscavige followed John Sweeney everywhere, so one can infer that he followed Rathbun. Plenty of evidence. Leah Remini was also willing to testify that Davey was obsessed with Rathbun.

        • TX Lawyer

          Actually, the depositions of Tommy Davis and the other still-in Scientology flunkies are competent proof that Miscavige is not involved in this kind of thing. It’s not conclusive proof, and the court is entitled to discount or ignore it if he concludes the witnesses’ testimony is not true — but it is proof nonetheless.

          • Jgg2012

            Right, its not conclusive, there is evidence the other way and I don’t think that he abused his discretion–he could have reasonably gone either way.

            • TX Lawyer

              Yep, completely agree. I just hope the COA sees it that way.

      • TX Lawyer

        They will not care one bit about Jefferson invoking abuse of discretion. That is a necessary requirement for any attorney to allege and establish to obtain mandamus relief from the appellate courts.

        • Guest

          So one can allege abuse without any evidence?

          • TX Lawyer

            “Abuse of discretion” just means that either (i) applied the wrong legal standard or principle, or (ii) there was no factual basis for the ruling he made. Its a completely ordinary principle that invokes the standard under which the appellate court will review the case. It means that the court of appeals is supposed to give great deference to the trial court’s ruling, and to uphold that ruling if there is any proper basis on which the trial court could have issued the ruling being challenged.

            • Guest

              At what point does one draw the the line between frivolous or vexatious litigation, and litigation simply driven by a large war chest?

            • TX Lawyer

              Well it’s not frivolous or vexatious litigation that would be at issue here, as Scientology didn’t start this lawsuit — they got sued, not the other way around. As a general matter, their appellate proceedings would only be considered frivolous if the lawyers filing it could have had no objective basis for raising the issues based on existing law or a good faith extension thereof (I’m paraphrasing, as I haven’t looked up the specific rules). A party can’t be punished simply for pursuing available remedies, even if they are also motivated by the desire to grind the process to a halt and prevent the discovery of facts.

            • Guest

              I read somewhere that even a defendant can be declared a “vexatious litigant” if they demonstrate consistent abuse of the the judicial process by filing frivolous motions

            • TX Lawyer

              That’s for people who file a bunch of frivolous lawsuits. Asshole defendants who get sued a lot and use the system to vigorously defend their right to be assholes don’t qualify as vexatious litigants. They’re just assholes.

            • Dorothy Gale

              Yes that is exactly what assholes do. See “Assholes: A Theory”. A book by Aaron James. They will try to abuse the system. But this kind of continuous abuse of a system can eventually render the system useless. Asshole defendants like Dave, holding his Happy Umbrella of Corporations over his head to keep a drop of rain from getting on his expensive Italian shoes, can sometimes end up inspiring reforms that prevent that style of abuse in the future. All one would have to do to see what’s needed is study what the church of assholes and their asshole lawyers do to defend their right to be assholes, find all the areas of weakness and loopholes, and create reform based upon their actions. When we think of vexatious litigants, we generally think of the person doing the suing, not the person being sued. In the case of the church of assholes, they may be both vexatious litigant and vexatious defendant. Legislation is passed to stop vexatious litigants, why not look at the other side of the coin? It’s fine to be “innocent until proven guilty”. But to abuse the system thereby making it impossible to be found guilty when one IS guilty, makes it seem like Justice is more of a crap shoot than anything else. I know, it’s not about Justice you say. But Justice is what many litigants with valid grievances ARE seeking, and to make that impossible would discourage people from using the system, which IMO happens enough already. When its a “David and Goliath” situation, like with Monique, you can see how the cards are stacked against her, when the church of assholes and their asshole lawyers have such deep pockets that they are capable of abusing the system indefinitely by extending this on forever and ever. To me it feels like “Obstruction of Justice”, I know that is not what it is, technically, but that’s what it feels like. But I’m just Dorothy.

            • Buttons72

              As with douche, assholes are useful. If you don’t have the latter, you die. I’m forswearing that particular ‘name’ for MissCabbage, as he seems to serve no use except to serve as Godfather for a federally protected syndicate.

            • Buttons72

              great.

          • Jgg2012

            I think he means that WJ HAS to allege that, since it is a necessary finding for a writ of mandamus. As for evidence, Tommy Davis and others did testify that he was not involved, but there is enough evidence to the contrary.

    • Free Minds, Free Hearts

      Thank you Derek!!!!

    • Kid Charliemain

      Don’t let Derek fool you with his “untrained ears” claim. He’s very talented at recounting things. I can’t find anything wrong with what he posted above.
      Oh, I was there too. I’m also known as ‘Lone Star’ on some obscure forum. LOL… Although I really think my nic should be OT3peeO. I have very limited powahs…..just like an OT.

      • Free Minds, Free Hearts

        Thank you Lone Star. I really have appreciated your following the courtroom saga and your postings on ESMB.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        Haha! Thanks for the compliments, and for lunch!

      • And I don’t rent cars!

        “I’m also known as ‘Lone Star’ on some obscure forum.”

        You and Derek are much too modest and humble. Stop It! Not only that but both of you excel at writing and consistently getting valuable information out to the rest of us. Thanks for being our eyes and ears in Texas.

      • aquaclara

        Bowing humbly…
        Thanks ever so much for your posts, here and oh, on that obscure forum.
        Love when people come up for air.

      • Elar Aitch

        Hello Lone Star (waves)…tetloj from ESMB!

      • Eclipse-girl

        TY Lone Star. you have done very good reporting yourself.

    • Missionary Kid

      Shorty McFistTiCuffs (I changed the spelling slightly) is added to the dm nickname list. I’ll post it later.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        You know while I was writing that I was wondering if anyone had used it before.

        • Missionary Kid

          Nope. I didn’t have to check, but after you mentioned the possibility, I did check. It’s a new one.

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            There is room for originality left! Haha

            • Missionary Kid

              dm is inspiring — for J & D. I expect a bunch more names out of this.

            • Robert Eckert

              The one I’d like to apply to him is Denied Mandamus

            • Missionary Kid

              Good one. I put it in the list of nicknames. I hope it’s true, too.

    • t1kk

      Fantastic account, thanks Derek. You kept great track of the legal arguments.

      You can see the weakness of Wallace’s position in his remark that Monique’s team is “all over the map” with respect to jurisdiction. Simply put, they /can/ be “all over the map”–a plaintiff needn’t rely on one theory of personal jurisdiction; they can all apply and a plaintiff doesn’t undercut his/her position by arguing them all. Anyway, that remark just read like someone yammering when there was nothing left to say just to fill the space.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        You’re very welcome and I appreciate your abutment!

        Getting into how I personally felt about the two sides. Leslie was very pointed and confident in her arguments (if she had a bit of nervousness in her voice). She covered every base (even went so far as to say if the fifth amendment were invoked it still doesn’t preclude a deposition which seemed to be just reaffirming that there was no reason that Miscavige couldn’t be deposed). The key is she did it all in less than her allotted time and even conceded to give up her remaining minutes. Whereas Wallace was repeating himself in this courtroom and making the same arguments that already hadn’t convinced Waldrip. He also exceeded his time both times, which lead me to believe there was an air of desperation about his argument.

        • Free Minds, Free Hearts

          very interesting. I love that Leslie Hyman is so pithy and to the point.

          • Buttons72

            I have a girl-crush on Leslie Hyman.

        • joan nieman

          ” An air of desperation”. I like that Derek and I am inclined to believe it. Thanks for giving us this information!

        • Buttons72

          How does the saying go, Derek? “… If the truth is not on your side, pound the podium and shout…” Wallace, nice job, dude. This will ensure your $1large/hr., ad infinitum.

        • Buttons72

          That’s when he said in that case Monique should sue David Miscavige in California. Finally the same judge asked did Waldrip get to review all of the depositions, and Wallace seemed to get oddly defensive at the question. Answering (and obviously all of this is paraphrased to the best of my ability) that no, but even if he did it would still show that Miscavige should not be deposed and that Monique failed to show food fail in her questioning of the intermediaries being deposed. – Quoted from Derek

          This is very, very telling to me. I like that Wallace is defensive – he’s using straw man arguments.

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            Food fail is supposed to be good faith…just for the record (damn typos)

      • PreferToBeAnon2

        But what about a defendant? Does it undercut the position to argue both the apex point AND the no Texas jurisdiction?

        • t1kk

          No, it doesn’t undercut; for basically the same reason, and defendants have even a bit more leeway because the defense has more flexibility in advancing conflicting theories, since it’s the plaintiff who has the burden of proof with respect to the facts; facts the plaintiff wants to be careful not get twisted around each other. Defendants are in a different position, mostly arguing that the facts alleged fall short, and offering few of them themselves.

      • Jgg2012

        Plus, they failed to respond to discovery requests, leaving everyone to wonder who paid the squirrel busters, when did Davey learn about it, what were his orders and where the bleep he was.
        I like what Ryan Hamilton recently did in some Narconon cases–when they denied knowledge of things they could easily looked up, he moved that they be deemed to have admitted that certain facts were true.

      • Still_On_Your_Side

        I also think it sounds Wallace used the “all over the map” argument because he was not prepared to address her arguments. I have a hard time with the idea of an appellate court ruling a trial court abused his discretion on the basis of such weak arguments.

        • Buttons72

          I’m stunned that a lawyer of Wallace’s caliber hasn’t dropped out. Maybe I’m naive, but this seems a thinly defensible case, even with 22 lawyers working it.

    • i-Betty

      Superb.

    • Missionary Kid

      I think ya done good. I agree with t1kk’s assessment.

    • Vaquera

      A wealth of information, Derek. Thank you for both taking the time to attend the hearing and for sharing your notes & interpretation of the event. Everyone here at the Bunker truly appreciates your efforts. It feels like I had a friend in the courtroom.

    • Jgg2012

      If Miscavige was uninvolved, who signed the pay checks for the squirrel busters? Who approved of their actions? If Miscavige did not order it, wouldn’t he have learned about it from the internet and put a stop to it?

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        During the arguments Leslie said they had asked for all of that only for Scientology to tell them that they didn’t have any of those records and that asking for them was burdensome.

        • Jgg2012

          Trying to benefit by their own wrongs, in other words.

    • Patty Moher

      “The whole thing started off with one of the judges asking how to pronounce David Miscavige’s name.”

      Hahahahahaha! That had to piss off the twit that thinks he’s the biggest thetan in n Universe.

    • Jgg2012

      “the church has taken a whole new turn and that those people in those declarations have no idea what is going on today” and, of course, there is NO evidence of that and Ray Jeffrey has won two cases that suggest the opposite.
      btw, in the other two cases, Davey did NOT say “I had nothing to do with it”.

    • Eclipse-girl

      Hours late. TY Derek

  • bryan penatr

    wow! whats next whats next! lol WOW!!!!!!!

  • Ruby

    “None of them knew how to say Miscavige’s name.”
    OUCH…that’s gotta hurt the captain!
    I bet they all know how to say Pope Francis’s name.

    • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

      They asked in the beginning and then again in the middle of the trial and seemed to avoid saying his name at all. It was great.

    • AnyOldName1

      And Judge Waldrip stated he never heard of him before the trial…… Geez the fastest growing, dynamic religion, blah, blah, and no one knows the grand pope’s name?

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        You should have been there when Wallace Jefferson said that deposing David Miscavige would be “pulling him away from his important ecclesiastical mission”. I’m surprised that the guy didn’t vomit when he was saying the words. I guess a hefty retainer will help keep anyone’s gag reflex suppressed.

        • Observer

          This important ecclesiastical mission?

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            Ha! Monique Y wasn’t in the courtroom today, so the CICSs were on a long leash. Miscavige’s eyes and ears and mouth and fists and insults-by-proxy in the courtroom are all Monique Yingling.

        • Free Minds, Free Hearts

          Derek, did the appeals court judges raise their eyebrows when Jefferson said that? These guys live in a state full of Christians. They must think this little upstart cult is really pretty odd.

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            They have very good poker faces. So no facial expressions to be interpreted. Although Leslie did make them all smile when she said, “I’m sure we’ll be back here again…”

            • Missionary Kid

              Sounds like they know. They KNOW. That can’t be good for Mustrattage.

          • Guest

            EDIT: “this little upstart SATANIC cult is really pretty odd.”

      • Missionary Kid

        Grand Pope wasn’t on the list, and I added Grand Poop to the list, DAVID MI$CAVIGE NICKNAMES: http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/12/tomkat-project-in-los-angeles-heres-your-chance-to-help-the-show-get-to-tinseltown/#comment-1142337863 If you look there, you’ll see them. Thanks.

  • outraged

    How DO you pronounce Miscavige?

    So See Oh Path

    • Mark

      Sigh Co Path

      • BosonStark

        Just call him the “asthmatic dwarf,” your Honors, or maybe “His Ecclesiastical Lowness.”

      • Eclipse-girl

        See Eye See Ess

      • mzungu

        pathogen

    • Observer

      Home Un Kyoo Luss

      • Elar Aitch

        snickerguffortle – and again with the coffee and the nose!

    • AnyOldName1

      Doesn’t MK have a really long list somewhere in how to pronounce his name or his alias’?

    • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

      Henry VIII?

      • Espiando

        Henry VIII had rational reasons for doing what he did, and he presided over a nation that grew in power and stature. No, if he’s an English king, it has to be John. Absolute loser compared to his father and brothers, lost most of England’s territories in France, pissed off his nobles enough that his powers were limited, and ended his life on the run during a civil war shitting his guts out.

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          I was more talking about the wife murdering part.

          • Espiando

            He only killed two of them, and you can make a case that Catherine Howard deserved it. I don’t think Shelly has. Lou, on the other hand…

          • Robert Eckert

            The wife executions are not really a good parallel. What he did to his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, on the other hand is quite parallel: she was locked up out of sight for years until she died.

            • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

              Hey I still done good. lol

        • Science Doc

          Richard II would be another good choice.

          • Espiando

            William Rufus would be my second choice. Could never hope to live up to his predecessor, got caught up in turf wars with his own relatives, made an enemy of the Church, was foul-tempered, and was so “loved” that he was “accidentally” bumped off.

            • Science Doc

              Richard II was off-ed in prison.

            • Espiando

              So was Edward II, another candidate for DM/English monarch comparison. But Ed Deuce was 1.1 and his wife out-2D, and we can’t have that in Scientology, no sir.

            • Science Doc

              In Chris Marlowe’s Edward II the deposed 1.1 King had a close encounter with a red hot poker.

            • Espiando

              So say the chroniclers as well. DM can only hope for such a pleasant and painless fate.

            • Robert Eckert

              William Rufus was 1.1 also. Unlike Edward Two, who at least managed to “lay back and think of England” with his wife enough to produce an heir (though not enough to prevent her from taking a lover and plotting to kill him), Rufus would not even do that, and failure to provide for the succession was another serious cause for concern.

            • Espiando

              According to scholars, William Rufus might have actually been heterosexual or bisexual. It’s true that he didn’t marry, but his brothers Robert and Henry didn’t either, until they had to for dynastic purposes. The difference between the brothers is that William didn’t have any recorded illegitimate children, while Henry could have filled the roster of a baseball team with his bastards and Robert could have provided the coaches for said team. The problem with the succession wasn’t with William; Henry only had to get married, since he apparently had the OT ability to impregnate women by looking at them. It was ironic that only one of Henry’s legitimate children survived him, and that was a girl.

              William didn’t get along at all with the Church, and guess who provided the records for his reign? Including those lines about loading his court with effeminate men was an effective smear that contrasted him with his ultra-alpha-male dad. When you exile your Archbishop of Canterbury (a future saint who, by the way, has more substantiation for being gay than William Rufus), you have to expect that.

              As for Ed Deuce, we know that he had sex with women at least five times, since he had four kids by Isabella and one bastard son during his “experimental” phase before his marriage. His lovers Piers Gaveston and Hugh le Despenser had seven and twelve children respectively. Well, they had to do something for fun before the Internet.

        • Sandy

          Jeez Espi – you sure have a wide range of knowledge. Just sayin’…..

      • deathtoallpoliticians

        joffrey?

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          Perfect!

    • Guest

      miss-care-idge

    • Baby

      Let’s see Miscaviage..

      A.S.S.H.O.L.E.

      Miscaviage

      • Narapoid

        None to subtle, but baby, Baby!

        • Baby

          Yep.. Ain’t nuthin subtle about me Narapoid..ha

    • RMycroft

      Muff Cabbage. (Scientology, it’s a Jersey thing.)
      http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/360397/whats-muff-cabbage

  • Observer

    Awwww, man, I was hoping DM would have forced Wally to say “They’re trying to pick a fight with the Church of Scientology!”

    • AnyOldName1

      Just call ‘em Cap’n Blackheart

  • PinxEngrayz

    First, kill all the $cientology lawyers. Apologies to William Shakespeare.

  • ze moo

    Sounds like the court did its job and asked the proper questions. I don’t see anything that would result in ‘an abuse of discretion’ by Judge Waltrip. “Cautiously optimistic” would be a good name for a band.

  • Jgg2012

    It sounds to me that it is going to center around the “abuse of discretion” factor. In other words, the court will say “we might not have allowed them to depose what’s his name, but it’s not an abuse of discretion”, especially since McShane and Cartwright gave such uninformed testimony. btw, Miscavige can still challenge jurisdiction after he is deposed. The court of appeals, imo, will not say Waldrip was right, just that he didn’t abuse his discretion.

    • Free Minds, Free Hearts

      Good point. Isn’t abuse of discretion what they accused Waldrip of in order to do the writ of mandamus? I thought the appeals court would be talking about that, not the merits of the deposition. Just because Wally Jefferson doesn’t agree with Judge Waldrip doesn’t mean that Waldrip abused his discretion in making his decision.

  • baddog5623

    I will say it looks like the cult lawyers are trying to switch gears and see this as a fresh court. Yet they are stuck with having to defend past arguments like the religion card. It looks as if it will do them little good as the most damaging questions revolved around Waldrip and the lack of articualted responce as to how he ruled wrong.

  • Satansthetan

    I’d like to see them have to prove its a “growing religion”, or a religion at all for that matter.

  • Espiando

    So far, so good. Team Mosey seems to have figured out where they dug holes in front of Judge Ricky Gervais, then threw dynamite in them before they could bring in the fill for the appeals. The result: the Scientology truck has broken axles. And this process will repeat itself every time there’s an appeal. There’s only so much tarmac and concrete in the world, Team Scilon, and Sugar Ray and Luminous Leslie have a supply of boom-boom straight from Guy Fawkes’ wet dreams.

    Tick tock, tick tock, the defendant is a cock.

    • Baby

      hahahah I read..

      The defendant is a Cook.. ( old eyes) and I was ready to volunteer my services ( Well, if I cooked..)

  • DamOTclese2

    “…grilled Hyman about whether Monique’s team had really done enough during depositions of Scientology employees Warren McShane and Allan Cartwright…”

    Oh that’s cold, cold! You didn’t even mention our little girly bitch Tommy Davis. Cold!

    • Espiando

      Tommy Girl got caught in so many demonstratable lies and such obvious prevarication that there’s a wee bit of disowning going on on the part of Team Scilon. He’s the very definition of “unreliable witness”. More like “unreliable witless”.

      • DamOTclese2

        Sounds like Tommy is the next cast-aside bitch to get thrown under the bus. :)

        • Sejanus

          I for one hope that particular bus shifts from drive to reverse effortlessly……over and over and over again.

          • DamOTclese2

            It’s the only way to be sure. :)

        • Espiando

          Oh, he’s already been thrown away like a used piece of tissue covered in rancid jizz. That’s why The Ghost Of Karin Pouw makes the rare public statement. It was only the Feshbach Ambergris and the non-desire to piss off Anne Archer that prevented him from being locked up in the Hole after the Sweeney Disaster. Tommy did the smart thing by getting his ass out of the Sea Org. As a public, there’s a distinct lack of punishment that can be inflicted upon him.

          • georget1952

            LOL I still watch the video where Sweeney lost it with Tommy D. Not to watch what Sweeney looks like, but what Tommy boy looks like. I LMAO watching little ole’ Tommy get his mouth working, he’s trying like hell to get more words to come out. Reminds me of a toothless old man, HA!

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        My friend took me to see that prick’s house today…or at least the general area. His house is down a hill and hidden by shrubbery (looking at you knights who say ‘Ni’). He lives scarily close to me in a more upscale part of town.

  • Mrs. V.

    Oh, two months? Hurry up and get here, July!

  • Mary_McConnell

    Thank you, Tony. And much thanks to Nick Rogers and Ray Jeffrey. Let’s hope and pray that these justices do their homework and see what the rel situation is, that Miscavige is seen for who he has been in this situation. Answerable in the State of Texas.

  • nosce

    Texas know about big . . . nay . . . Mega Churches. I can see why they are whispering to each other . . psst . . . pssst who the hell is Mocovege or is it Misquiveche . . . how the fu*&% do you say it?!

    • Guest

      To keep it in perspective, one church (yes ONE church building) in Houston gets weekly Sunday attendances of nearly 20,000 (they use the old Houston Rockets venue) – roughly HALF of Scientology’s world adherents. And that’s routine local attendance. Not “mandatory” once-in-a-lifetime international events, of which Miscavige is lucky to get 4,000 victims to attend.

      • Free Minds, Free Hearts

        Yes that is a good perspective. I think 20,000 may be 100% of the scilons, not just 50%…

        • Guest

          It might be a good example for the lawyers. “So a local Texas pastor gets 20,000 people come in person to hear his preaching weekly, millions more via television. How many come to hear your sermons, Mr. Miscavige? Do you even conduct religious services?”

      • Vaquera

        Until last year, I lived four blocks from Lakewood Church. You have to plan your driving routes to avoid the area on Sundays when services let out. Massive auto and foot traffic.

        • Guest

          The members can afford cars…. they are already light years ahead of Scientology:)

  • BigRolly

    Will there be appeals of the appeal?

    • Espiando

      Of course there will. This will be appealed to the Texas Supremes, and then to the US Supremes. And they’ll be bitch-slapped at every level.

      • Pierrot

        I really hope so, that they will be bitch-slapped (not appealing and dragging the proceedings), to be sure they will try to make live difficult for Monique and co.

    • DamOTclese2

      Does the Pope of Scientology shit on the carpet? Of course there will be.

  • http://www.Scientology.Org/ Tommy Davis

    Hey! Now I’m angry! REAL angry! Why didn’t I get mentioned?!

    Just because I shit on the rug when I showed up for my deposition and carpet cleaners had to be called in after I left doesn’t mean I didn’t do my part, you know?

    In my defense David never complained that I wasn’t housebroken.

    • Espiando

      Just to ask you, Tommy Girl: around which of your body parts was David’s leash attached?

      • DamOTclese2

        His mother’s wallet.

    • DamOTclese2

      If you were the real Tommy David you would be real angry that you were dragged in to deposition at all.

      It begs the question about what happened when the real Tommy Davis was deposed. Did he break down in to tears and cry and offer to tell everything he knew to the FBI? :) That would be amusing.

  • BigRolly

    Any idea when the Austin court decides?

    • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

      They have 60 days. Anytime between tomorrow and then. I have a feeling this is going to be a relatively important decision because it seemed like the judges were considering how this might affect cases in the future.

      • BigRolly

        If they appeal it could take years! The U.S. Supreme Court is very slow.

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          The Supreme Court is only concerned with issues of Constitutional Law and I don’t think this has achieved that level by any stretch of the imagination. So no worries!

        • Robert Eckert

          Neither the US Supreme Court nor even the Texas Supreme Court is under any obligation to hear any further appeals. You only get one level of “appeal by right” in general, and in this case since they are not appealing a final judgment but only an interlocutory ruling, even this first appeal was by “petition” rather than by right (that is, the Austin appeals circuit could have just said “denied” without hearing any arguments or issuing any ruling at all). I have no idea how likely the Texas Supreme Court would be to want to take this, but interlocutory appeals aren’t very favored by the court system, so they would probably just say “denied” very speedily; I am practically certain that is what the US Supreme Court would say. Remember a similar thing came up in the Laura deCrescenzo case where a California court of appeals ruled against Scientology on an interlocutory matter, and both the California Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court batted away the petitions without comment.

    • DamOTclese2

      “…within the next 60 days…”

  • Michael Leonard Tilse

    “By relying so heavily on the apex deposition rule, did that mean Scientology was giving up on its other argument, that a Texas court simply had no jurisdiction over him? “She said, by merely making this argument about apex depositions, they may have already waived their objection to jurisdiction,” Jeffrey tells us.”

    I think this point is important. By arguing the “apex deposition” view it would seem to me they have already admitted that DeMinimus is the head of a monolithic corporation headed by DM. That it indeed is all one thing and the offensive acts were unbeknownst to him done by distant underlings. So he would be subject to jurisdiction just as his underlings are.

    They can’t have it both ways. It’s either he is not the apex, but rather a separate defendant claiming no jurisdiction OR he is head of a world wide corporation, the apex, and the only reason Monique is deposing him is because he IS the apex.

    Sweet!

    • Vaquera

      Thx MLT. I didn’t understand what that meant.

    • Missionary Kid

      DeMinimus. I knew you’d come up with at least one new nickname. DAVID MI$CAVIGE NICKNAMES: http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/12/tomkat-project-in-los-angeles-heres-your-chance-to-help-the-show-get-to-tinseltown/#comment-1142337863

    • Espiando

      I don’t think that the apex deposition argument exposes Scientology as the monolith that we know it is. However, it does have one interesting effect: it exposes RTC as a party to the harassment. CSI has been thrown under the bus in an effort to save his skin, but that didn’t seem to work. So now the ground is being prepared to do the same with RTC, using a “rogue element” strategy. The problem is, this links RTC and CSI and exposes the monolith.

      It’s now clear that he’s willing to destroy the entire structure that was specifically created to protect the cult from exactly this eventuality, if it saves himself. The only thing that matters is the cash in the IAS Slush Fund, and since that’s a later layer of rancid cherries on the shit-encrusted Black Forest Gateau, it isn’t covered by the structure.

      • Free Minds, Free Hearts

        Hm. Very thought provoking, Espi.

      • Michael Leonard Tilse

        Thank you Espiando. I see your point. Yes, Darkly Mistaken is willing to throw every scientologist, every corporation, every association, his wife and his mistress under as many legions of oncoming busses as necessary to keep his do unmussed.

        • Missionary Kid

          Darkly Mistaken – a new one.

      • Rudabaga

        It’s very true that all these shenanigans may come back to haunt them in other cases because they will be bound, to some extent, by some of the assertions they’ve made in this case. Could be interesting down the road.

    • Guest

      He’s so in charge that he’s not in charge.

    • Jgg2012

      Right–if he’s apex, he controls the daily operations of the church.

      • stanrogers

        It would actually work the other way ’round from a legal perspective; it would mean that he wouldn’t be expected to have detailed knowledge of what’s going on under the hood as long the engine’s running, so to speak. While such a designation might support consolidated action against all of Scientology’s entities as a monolith (that is, it would make the legal fiction of separate corporations/bodies more or less useless in many ways), it would also serve to isolate Miscavige from individual incidents on the ground barring evidence of direct involvement. Just about anything can be blamed on things like “misapplication of policy”, “rogue employees” and that sort of thing. Either way, though, it sort of fixes the goalposts for future legal actions; the decision as to whether Shimmer is a floor wax or a dessert topping will have been made.

        • Jgg2012

          Well, he takes credit for ANYTHING that goes right. Narconon success story? I did it, I’m great, Sea Org members must buy me a gift, etc. Someone in Narconon dies? We have nothing to do with it!
          Yes, goal posts are fixed for future actions.

    • EnthralledObserver

      This was what I was thinking. Unless he’s trying to maintain that he’s just the apex of the ‘ecclesiastical’ part. Nevertheless, the fact that he’s a named defendant should trump all of that apex crap anyway.

  • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

    By the way. I’m letting you all know that Leslie Hyman does read here and at ESMB. I told her that she has a lot of fans in both places!

    • Free Minds, Free Hearts

      Leslie if you are out there we love your clear and logical approach. You go, girl!

      • PreferToBeAnon2

        I’ll second that!

        • aquaclara

          Three times a charm….

      • Guest

        Leslie is a Hero to the Bunker!

    • Missionary Kid

      Thanks. She sounds like a very sharp woman.

    • And I don’t rent cars!

      OMG! That’s great Derek. Thanks for telling her how much we respect her, She has become a Bunker hero along with Ray Jeffrey, Judge Waldrip, etc. Justice Melissa Goodwin also seems to be sharp as a tack and asked a very piquant question of W. Jefferson today.

      I’m so impressed with the growing number of women who seem to be breaking through the glass ceiling when it comes to the legal profession. And Leslie Hyman sounds like she did a really good job again today. It must not have been easy to go up against a former Chief Justice from her own state.

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        Good news then that one of the judges in the courtroom today was a woman as well! Which I am always happy to see.

      • TX Lawyer

        It was actually a very weird question. It is well established that a specially appearing defendant does not waive his special appearance by submitting to a deposition on the facts relating to personal jurisdiction. I’m not surprised that Jefferson didn’t have a good answer to that, as it’s kind of an alien concept when you’re talking about the separate question of the propriety of an apex deposition.

        • Once_Born

          All of his life Miscavige has been isolated from the world outside Scientology not only physically, but also by his state of mind. In his world, statements like “You don’t have the […] rank to ask that” are perfectly legitimate.

          I suspect Miscavige hired Jefferson because he believes that the same principle must apply in the Wog world – that judges in cases such as the present appeal will not dare to contradict a man of Jefferson’s ‘rank’.

          Jefferson has taken the job, because that’s what he does for a living (and there’s a lot of money in it, win or lose). His client’s misconceptions are not his problem.

          Of course when the appeal is dismissed (I’m betting it will be) this will be the work of SPs, and Miscavige will learn nothing from his failure. I look forward to it.

  • PreferToBeAnon2

    Derek, do you know if these judges read the depo’s and had seen the foul-mouthed texts from the Sweeney fiasco–showing how he directs such off-the-wall operations? Was there any Scientologese that had to be interpreted?

    • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

      I don’t think that they’ve had the time to dig through them all. It seemed like because Waldrip didn’t have time either that they may now spend the time reading through ALL of them instead of just taking a cursory look. Nope, no Scientologese had to be interpreted….well except for Miscavige’s name.

      • PreferToBeAnon2

        I hope they do! And thanks, Derek, for being there today and for reporting back. I can only imagine how you must have felt being there. Proud of you!

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          It’s nice to see the faces behind the veil of evil that is Scientology. I was also genuinely start struck seeing Ray and Leslie. I was surprised when he approached me and asked me my name…and he remembered me!

          • Missionary Kid

            Hey, he’s probably happy to meet some of the good guys. Thanks again for your ears, eyes, and writing.

          • Free Minds, Free Hearts

            That is wonderful you got to meet Ray and Leslie, my heroes. But Derek, you are my hero too! :)

      • Rudabaga

        Did Leslie ever argue that Apex doesn’t apply because the plaintiffs have direct evidence that Miscavige always personally directs such operations through Marty’s firsthand knowledge as his former close colleague?

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          Well she can’t argue of direct knowledge because there is none. There is substantial circumstantial evidence to support the idea that Miscavige is deeply involved in campaigns similar to this one and her argument is that the only way to truly know of Miscavige’s involvement or lack thereof is to ask Miscavige, hence the need for a deposition. The church always has their counter argument about how the “church has changed completely from when insignificant Marty Rathbun left his menial, unimportant position.”

          • Rudabaga

            Well I suppose they could argue that things changed after he left, but it would still provide pretty compelling reasons for directly asking him how and why those changes were made. Changing a huge corporate structure from vertical, top-down control of a particular operation to no control or oversight at all sounds dubious, and thus worthy of further investigation through questioning of the CEO who ordered the change.

    • Robert Eckert

      From Derek’s earlier post: “Finally the same judge asked did Waldrip get to review all of the depositions, and Wallace seemed to get oddly defensive at the question.” There are a couple of reasons for the defensiveness. One, as Derek pointed out, is that it was Scientology’s shenanigans with the anti-SLAPP motion that interfered with Waldrip’s ability to get through the pile of paper. But secondly: at the appeals level they really aren’t supposed to be reading through a bunch of evidence to figure out what the facts are; they are supposed to take what the trial court has found to be the facts as pretty much given, unless the petitioner can meet the high burden of “the evidence is so strong that no reasonable person could possibly have concluded [blah blah blah]”. In other words, when Wallace was arguing that the depositions showed Miscavige had nothing to do with anything in Texas, the appellate judge was asking “Wait a minute, didn’t you go through that argument already in Waldrip’s courtroom, and didn’t Waldrip already conclude otherwise– so are you trying to say Waldrip completely ignored the evidence, or what are you saying?”

  • Pierrot

    Thank you Tony, Nick Rogers, Dereck for keeping us informed.

    Bunkerites, RED X team

    Do not forget to spend some time to whack a few ads, it is a good way to vent and release some of your frustration against co$ & dm.

    https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/taking-down-co-on-craigslist-co-ads-on-craigslist.113779/page-71#post-2443769

    FREELOADER Debt is legally UNENFORCEABLE. Call 1-866-XSEAORG
    DON’T route out, BLOW, Get HELP, get OUT, Call 1-866-XSEAORG

    TY AP

  • Drat

    60 days? I hope Wallace Jefferson can’t use that time to work the panel in private.

  • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Another thing I want to share is that I had the opportunity to speak to Monique’s legal team and they are a warm bunch. I was kind of star struck talking to Ray and Leslie. They were very down-to-earth. I was talking to Jillian and I loved that one of the team came over to talk to me out of understandable concern for Jillian. It was great to see that care and compassion for her!

    I was talking with my friend after the case and I was pondering how sad it is that here we are to support Monique, Marty, and their whole team, but the Scientology lawyers don’t have anyone to come say, “yeah, great job”. I guess that’s why they have to spend a few seconds of mutual masturbation outside the courtroom before running off, whereas Monique’s team can spend a bit chatting with their supporters.

    • TheHoleDoesNotExist

      Jillian?

      • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

        Yeah she was there today

        • TheHoleDoesNotExist

          Shlesinger?

          You must have a photographic memory to remember so much, especially legal mumbo which makes many of us here forget our own names after 5 minutes. Great job.

        • aquaclara

          Yayaayayay! Derek, you rock. Is she doing ok? And did you give her a huge hug from the Bunker?

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            No hug because I didn’t want to be too forward. I’m sure she was nervous as I was. But yes she looks happy and is amazed as I was with the outpouring of support upon her coming out!

        • Pierrot

          I hope that you got some good news about your brother?

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            I had already spoken to Jillian prior. The good news is that as far as she knew him, he hadn’t turned into an unforgivable asshole. The bad news is that he’s still in the sea org in Hollywood

            • Elar Aitch

              Good news is good news

        • And I don’t rent cars!

          Wow. What an extraordinary day you’ve had; you’ve met a lot of our Bunker heroes today! Even the most recent one – Jillian Shlesinger.

          How fitting that so many of you have met up this afternoon – as you are also a favorite Bunker Hero of ours. I’m sure you all made a formidable looking group. It makes me smile to think of all you together in that courtroom. Who would have thought, not so many years ago, that you’d find yourself with all these “crime fighting superheroes,” heh?

          It’s quite amazing sometimes how our lives can change and the future opens up to so many exciting possibilities and to so many fascinating people as they cross our paths. I “knew” you had a very bright future ahead of you, Derek, and it is so gratifying to see it evolve that way. You are quite a remarkable young man and you deserve everything that is good and happy that is coming your way. As I’ve told you before, at the very least, I see a book in your future. Autobiography? Courtroom drama? Scientology? Who knows… But amongst your many talents, you are also an engaging writer.

          • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

            Yes! We are starting to rival the wall of suits on scientology’s side. Except on our side there’s more comfortable clothes and freedom!

    • NOLAGirl

      That’s great Derek. I’m glad they know they have so much support.

    • EnthralledObserver

      Makemerich has bought his friends… and has bought his friends’ friends… etc…

    • Dr_Orpheus

      There are certainly Scientologists who would willingly be there for support if there dear leader wasn’t terrified about them finding out what was going on.

      • Rudabaga

        Can we assume TX Scientologists don’t know this case is happening?

        • Dr_Orpheus

          Their church won’t tell them anything more than a highly edited version of the case, and admitting to having heard the wog version of the trial would earn them an expensive round of sec checks. The surviving members have been well-trained to avoid entheta, although there are encourage signs that many of them are starting to rebel.

    • joan nieman

      Aw! That is so nice. I guess you are an approachable kind of guy Derek!

  • RMycroft

    it would violate Miscavige’s religious rights to be subjected to questioning.[

    As criminals en mass join the Church of Perp…

    • EnthralledObserver

      That is a gobsmacking and audacious defence, innit?

  • Missionary Kid

    Leslie, I’m not an attorney, but I am familiar with debate, and I’ll say that it sounds like your arguments were on point and direct. Brevity, IMO, amplifies the points that are made.

    If Jefferson kept repeating himself, that, to me is a mark of someone who is unprepared, or doesn’t know how to communicate, or has a weak case, or all three.

    • RMycroft

      After the first time, he couldn’t believe that he’d said that, so he repeated it to be sure.

      • Missionary Kid

        :-D

      • richelieu jr

        He was 3 feet behind himself, watching what was happening like it was film there for a second… HE was like ‘Hey, who’s that fat, stuttering loser with his best days behind him, he sure— oops!”

        EXTERIORIZATION WORKS, PEOPLE!

    • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

      I’m sure he’s going to get ridiculed by his fellow judges when this is over. But a paycheck is a paycheck, i guess.

      • Missionary Kid

        i wonder if he bills by the word. ;-)

        • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

          I’m almost 90% positive if he has a good business manager he took this on a hefty retainer basis and is not billing hourly (expenses paid in addition of course). He has so much clout that he could definitely get a contract in his favor.

        • And I don’t rent cars!

          Instead of 1 penny a word like LRH, he probably bills a 100,000 pennies a word. Maybe that’s why he kept repeating himself.

      • Missionary Kid

        I’m sure that they won’t ridicule him to his face.

    • Rudabaga

      You have to remember that as a judge, he hasn’t had to stand up and make an argument in years most likely. He was hired for his reputation, in the hopes some of that shine would rub off on the turd that is Scientology.

      • Missionary Kid

        Good points. Thanks.

  • Jgg2012

    Yes, Monique’s lawyers are “all over the place.” They have to be because Miscavige is all over the place, sending in PIs to every state (including Texas), putting up blogs ridiculing Rathbun (“whoismartyrathbun”) that can be seen anywhere, opening up orgs everywhere, flying around in his leer jet and moving around so much that Cartwright and McShane hardly ever see him.

  • Guest

    What a meteoric fall from grace for the former Chief Justice of Texas. A reputation built over a lifetime, out the window in 45 minutes.

  • Mark

    This is how I imagine Shortarse looks right about now (refresh):

    • Elar Aitch

      Almost adorable (almost)

      • Mark

        I wouldn’t trust it – not house-trained for a start. And I hear they bite.

        • Sarah James

          Does he sleep at the foot of the bed? Not at my house.

    • NOLAGirl

      He looks like an Ewok gone wrong. :)

    • richelieu jr

      “One does not just wakka-wakka into one MoreDoor or Judge Waldrip’s court!”

  • TX Lawyer

    If that 60-day timeframe came from me, please be advised that it’s just an estimate on my part. The court of appeals has no firm deadline to issue its decision, but 30-60 days seems reasonable given the fast track they have apparently put the case on.

    Substantively, the question Justice Puryear asked about the trial court’s discretion is really the proper one. The issue isn’t whether Mrs. Rathbun conclusively demonstrated that she was entitled to take an apex deposition. The question is whether she put on sufficient evidence that the trial judge could have concluded an apex deposition was justified. If it’s a question that could have gone either way, then the appellate court is supposed to be required to let the trial court’s ruling stand.

    Finally, the question of discovery and other proceedings in the trial court regarding the non-anti-SLAPP defendants (namely, Miscavige and RTC). If the anti-SLAPP appeal stays discovery against all the defendants, including the non-anti-SLAPP defendants, then today’s argument was really meaningless, since Miscavige won’t be deposed anytime soon. So I looked at the interlocutory appeal statute and the case law applying it. I did not find any case law ruling on the question of whether the statute (section 51.014(b), Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code) stays all proceedings against all defendants when only some of them file an interlocutory appeal that stays all proceedings under the statute. I did, however, find some conflicting authorities on whether or not all proceedings were stayed on matters that were not being appealed. If, for instance, the certification of a class action were being appealed, the parties might still be able to take discovery on the class representatives’ personal claims, since the personal claims are not being appealed. So make the appellate nerds happy, Ray Jeffrey & Leslie Hyman: see if you can get some more discovery against Miscavige and RTC while CSI appeals the anti-SLAPP ruling. Let’s make some law!

    • Guest

      I love the Bunker:) Thank you

    • media_lush

      boy, someone ate their Wheaties this morning

    • http://tonyortega.org Comrade Dr. Frank Wonderman

      “Somebody some day will say ‘this is illegal.’ By then be sure the orgs say what is legal or not.”
      – L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard, Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, “LRH Relationship to Orgs”

      • Buttons72

        Scary. Seems accurate, sadly.

    • Elar Aitch

      “The issue isn’t whether Mrs. Rathbun conclusively demonstrated that she
      was entitled to take an apex deposition. The question is whether she put
      on sufficient evidence that the trial judge could have concluded an
      apex deposition was justified.”

      Had to read three or four times but it sunk in. Thanks Tx.

      I appreciate all you have to say about how Mr Jefferson is just doing his job but reading Lone Star’s comment at ESMB that he is again talking about millions of members worldwide…..his grandma would know that repeating a lie – uncontested in evidence – is still a lie, as would his Sunday school teacher.

      I understand people using the fulll extent of procedures available and maybe people getting off on obscure or arcane matters of law (identifying these issues can only make the law better), but repeating ‘facts’ that are so readily refuted by reliable information like census collections….? I don’t know of many people who could sleep well at night doing that.

      • TX Lawyer

        Why would he know it’s a lie? Based on the evidence submitted to the trial court, the vast numbers of committed Scientologists appears to be an undisputed fact. And it’s not like you can expect the lawyer to conduct some sort of audit to find out what the true numbers are. I assure you, I have spewed forth any number of numbers based on what my client has told me without independently confirming their accuracy. Our job is to be advocates, no accountants.

        • Elar Aitch

          This process is a real education into the law for the uninitiated amongst us.

        • Kid Charliemain

          That’s a point worth noting. Many of us, myself included, just get so sick of that “millions of Scientologist” claim. Our eyes either roll, or we just get pissed because we know it’s BS. But, as you say, Wallace J. has no way of knowing this. And Monique’s team hasn’t yet chosen to dispute it in court. I suppose it’s just not germane enough to their strategy to dispute it.

          • TX Lawyer

            Either they didn’t deem it germane, or they didn’t see it coming enough to submit evidence to the contrary. But as I think I’ve noted previously, the fact that Scientology keeps asserting in the lawsuit that it’s so amazingly big and expanding should make that fact discoverable in the lawsuit. If it gets to that point, Scientology would do itself a favor to take that issue off the table by some sort of stipulation or agreement with the trial court. But of course [I’m not your attorney, David Miscavige! I don’t look out for your interests!] any such agreement would be an implicit admission that Scientology is small enough to drown in a medium-size fishing pond.

            • Elar Aitch

              Ha! There is hope then that the repeated parroting of this nonsense can be brought back to bite the Diminutive Megalomaniac in his shorts.

            • Free Minds, Free Hearts

              “Diminutive Megalomaniac” – is that new or did I just miss it before?

            • Buttons72

              Miscavige seems to be unable to take sound advice. He’s spent his sociopathic life in an ivory tower. Until recently (and still, in a few cases), he’s won. Old dogs can’t learn new tricks.

            • TX Lawyer

              I don’t have a scorecard, but isn’t the church’s won/loss record probably no better than 50-50? They’re really good at stretching things out endlessly and expensively, but at the end of that process they tend to either settle or get their asses handed to them by a judge or jury.

        • Patrik Axelsson

          TX Lawyer, correct me if I’m wrong (I’m not American nor Texan,), but the size of the CoS has to be entirely irrelevant to the argument here, right? Isn’t it more of Mr. Miscavige obsessive belief that self-aggrandizement = success?

          Would the judges take the old “dynamic, vibrant religion, grown locally on organic farms or whatever” claim under any form of consideration for this?

          • TX Lawyer

            Yes, I believe it to be irrelevant. For purposes of religious freedom or whatever, it doesn’t matter whether Miscavige leads a cult of 1 or 1 billion. Rhetorically, however, it can be expected to impact the scales of justice on some level. Taking the deposition of Crazy Pastor Joe down at the Church of Hi World It’s Me Jesus I’m Back is somewhat less offensive than taking the deposition of Pope Benedict.

        • aquaclara

          The tax returns might make the “growing and growing” and “fastest growing” claim a falsehood. I would like to see that one in court.
          The numbers of locations is provable, other than the “groups” category, which is pretty much meaningless.
          Unless Scientology shows their client lists, the “millions of members” is hard to prove false.
          Had they claimed “richest” we might not be having a dispute….

    • Rudabaga

      It’s so good to have TX lawyers commenting here. I’m a lawyer but I know nothing about SLAPP or TX law so it’s really helpful. Your discovery strategy sounds like a great one. Of course if there’s no case law on point, they could make some bad law too but hey, who hasn’t made appeals nerds cry?

      • TX Lawyer

        It’s a situation that is likely to arise in any number of other interlocutory appeals, so having the appellate courts answer the question is helpful no matter which way they decide it.

  • media_lush
    • Espiando

      When exactly did the winner of the 1997 PGA get gagged by Narconon? As a golfist, I’d like to know.

      • media_lush

        I once hit an albatross…… true story

        • Robert Eckert

          Is it still hanging around your neck?

          • Baby

            BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWHAHAHAHAHHAHA OMG Robert

            No one hits my funny bone as much as you.. haahahaha

            • joan nieman

              I know Baby. Robert has such a wry humor!! Lol1

          • media_lush

            … it was a par 4 and a windy day, there was a slight dogleg that hid the flag with the edge of some woods… felt such an idiot as I spent a good 15 minutes looking for the ball before finding it in the cup… don’t remember the name of the club but it was in Oxted, Surrey.

            • Baby

              Oh Lush you don’t have to be Sorry..

          • joan nieman

            Robert you are so quick witted ! Good one!

        • EnthralledObserver

          My hubby got a hole in one in his first game, second hole. Absolutely, no shit, swear on my life, true story. I kid you not.
          Suffice it to say, he’s now retired from golf.

          • Baby

            OMG EO I just told your story to my hubby.. He said.. ” Shit I would retire from the sport too..” ha.. Good for him!

            • EnthralledObserver

              Yep… ya just can’t top that, hey?
              His younger brothers, who were there to witness it as the day was part of one of their ‘buck’s week festivities’… were so pissed off, ’cause they play all the time and have NEVER got a hole in one.

            • Baby

              Hahaha.. Wow he was Quite the Man that day.. and I’m sure he never let them live it down..hahaha

  • media_lush

    another site has taken up the Jillian Schlesinger story https://www.vocativ.com/culture/religion/escape-scientology/

    • http://xenutv.com/blog Super Power Wog

      This is a good one ML. I don’t remember hearing about the senior who threatened to punch her in the face, so this is new. wOw

    • PreferToBeAnon2

      quite the article!

    • Free Minds, Free Hearts

      Great article, thanks for the link.

    • Innoculated

      Lush, great article, lots of new details about Jillian’s story. Wonder how many others have recently left or are about to. Ghastly description of her boss.

    • aquaclara

      Thanks, ML. This is a great article, and I am in tears, once again. So glad she escaped.

  • Observer

    Really, Disqus? Sigh

  • seataka

    (This slightly off comment is in warm memory of Mr. Grady Ward, Sys admin for the LMT)The eloquent Grady Ward, who has been silenced by $cientology once said in about 1996 : “If David Miscavige can attend a deposition dressed up as Admiral Farragut then Kieth Henson should attend dressed as Bozo the Clown.”

  • Observer

    Attempt #2

    • Baby

      Ohhh Good one Obs. Love the faces.. Perfect

  • Baby

    Leslie Hyman.. Derek informed us that you read the Bunker.. These flowers are for you! We are so proud of you. We JUST are.

    • EnthralledObserver

      Nawww… cute.

    • joan nieman

      Thanks for doing that for us Baby!

      • Baby

        Oh you are welcome Joanie.. anything for my Bunker Buddies! I was so happy when I found that baby squirrel with flowers on Google.. Just darling..

  • Sarah James

    David Misextoys, maybe you should not have sent that dildo.
    Why not travel on IAS funds? You will do just fine in your deposition at least as well as you did on Nightline. Don’t wait too long as Texas has hot summers and you tend to sweat…a lot.

    • Guest

      I think Davey should practice not talking out of the side of his mouth.

      • Panopea Abrupta

        That is definitely not the orifice he uses.

  • media_lush

    would appreciate a couple of grabs from The Enquirer’s article about Cruise’s face… can’t access from UK

    WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO TOM CRUISE’s FACE?!

    https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/what-hell-happened-tom-cruises-face&ct=ga&cd=CAEYAyoTNjM5MzM1OTI0NDEyNDQ3NDY1MTIcZTE4MWFmYzI5MmNhNTY0NTpjby51azplbjpHQg&usg=AFQjCNHofjX9p1I-KSzZOJHaykzYQ3kXoA

    • Observer

      Disqus won’t let me upload them both at once. Here’s the first one.

      • media_lush

        thanks!

        • Observer

          Here’s the rest of the text. That was the only pic. Disqus is not letting me post the screenshot of the rest of the article.

          ——-

          “While he remains a great dad to Suri and works hard at memo rable father-daughter trips, he knows he can never duplicate the experiences the three of them shared together as a family.

          “He sees Katie moving on with her life and that hurts even more. But the fact is, he has not gone on a serious date since his breakup with Katie and has shown no interest in moving on with that part of his life.”

          As The ENQUIRER pre viously reported, Cruise was said to be shattered when his good pal and “Collateral” co-star Jamie Foxx started ro mancing Katie behind his back. And in our last issue, we report ed that friends of the three-times-divorced actor have been try ing to hook him up with fellow Scientologist and “Mad Men” beauty Elisabeth Moss. But “Tom seems to have no interest in dating her or anyone else,” said the friend. “He’s smiling on the outside, but in private, he’s pigging out and eating away his sorrows.

          “He’s gained 20 pounds, and it shows in his face.”

          The ENQUIRER showed the recent pho tos of Tom to top New York City plastic surgeon Matthew Schulman and asked if his puffy face could have been caused by something other than over eating.

          “It could be the result of some cosmetic procedures where he had fat or fillers to make his face look fuller,” said Dr. Schulman, who has not treated Tom. “But a more likely possibility is that he put on weight, or it’s a medical condition.

          “He might be taking an anti-inflammatory or steroids – that could cause him to get that bloated look.”

          Dr. Gabe Mirkin, an expert in sports medicine familiar with the effects of steroid use who has not treated Tom, also ex amined the photographs and said Tom has “the classic puffy cheeks and jaw that comes from edema, or fluid reten tion, from steroid use.”

          Added the friend: “Whatever the reason, it’s pretty clear Tom is depressed over Katie. He needs to either pur sue Katie again or move on before he ruins his looks.”

          • media_lush

            all we need is a member of anonymous to be at the red carpet for his next movie premier (it’s pretty soon) and be seen offering him a Twinkie/Big Mac etc

            • Espiando

              He’d respond more to being offered a twink.

          • Sarah James

            We on the other hand are very happy she got away from him and his creepy cult.

        • Innoculated

          So, according to a “friend” he has been “pigging out” due to misery over loss of Katie. Andrew Morton, unofficial biographer to anyone famous, has second hand info of his misery. Looks like he’s gain 20 pounds (translation,1.5 stones). Or he could be on steroids. Added the friend: “Whatever the reason, it’s pretty clear Tom is depressed over Katie. He needs to either pursue Katie again or move on before he ruins his looks.” Yes, important motivation for creating a relationship. Gelato anyone?

      • Jgg2012

        Maybe he has been using Kirstie’s Organic Liaison supplements?

      • EnthralledObserver

        That’s a pretty shade of blush though…

      • Elar Aitch

        The only thing Tom is devastated about is the loss of his self image…..women don’t leave loving marriages Tom – you self-obsessed dick!

        • EnthralledObserver

          Precisely!

      • Juicer77

        I don’t think he ever adored Katie. She hero-worshiped him and saw only the glare of the spotlight and superficial charm. Pretty soon that wore off and she realized she had been young and stupid. Perhaps the public scorn for CO$ and the lengths Katie went to get away from him are starting to pierce his thick skull.

        • Observer

          Tom doesn’t adore anyone but himself and COB.

    • Observer

      Disqus hates me tonight

    • Observer

      Again

      EDIT: or not. I don’t know what the deal is

    • Observer

      ??

    • Sarah James

      To me he looks the same, maybe a bit more…glib.

      • media_lush

        that’s the beauty of it…. they’re deliberately fucking with him, showing they have no respect for him

      • Jonathan Cummings

        Why is he wearing his hair as if he is 16 years old? Tom must be very afraid of getting older which I do not understand since he should be able to stop the aging process or a least slow it down using his mind. Then again, Tom must be under a lot of stress being that he, and his fellow Clams, are the only people who can actually do anything in an emergency situation.

        • Vaquera

          To mask his receding hairline.

          • Elar Aitch

            Covering up evidence of surgery?

        • Sarah James

          It is another mystery that only Scientology can unravel.

    • Jgg2012

      And, while we’re on the topic, how come 3 judges can’t pronounce the name of his BFF?

    • media_lush

      … and when a site has this headline and uses disqus I couldn’t resist:

      Will Smith is linked to many movie sequels but will we actually see him make them?

      http://www.fansshare.com/news/will-smith-is-linked-to-many-movie-sequels-but-will-we-actually-see-him-make-them/

      pic

    • truth will set u free

      Is this the one you wanted? I think this has been posted already tho..

      • truth will set u free

        Yep should a read further down ..ah well

        • media_lush

          thanks anyway

    • LocalSP

      In the world of plastic surgery it’s called fillers, lots of filler in that face.

    • Elar Aitch

      Mumps?

    • Douglas D. Douglas

      This one, too?

      • Douglas D. Douglas

        Amused that there’s a Jenny Craig “pop up” ad in the first screen shot…

      • media_lush

        thanks

  • Sarah James

    It would be a very good idea to depose Lou. The people that”know” Miscavige has nothing to do with the” Rathbun operation” proved they did no nothing. Lou under oath…now that would be fun.

    • EnthralledObserver

      Lou and Shelly… who would know better what the little prick has been up to? Well.. Shelly will tell us nothing at all, but at least we’ll know what she’s been up to.

      • Sarah James

        And we could see that she is still alive.

  • Bury_The_Nuts

    Cautiously ….Shit yeah!

    Ok, continue whatever you were doing…..

    • EnthralledObserver

      Can we get a cautious, triumphant cry from the Bunker… LOL!

  • Tory Christman

    Get the wimp, “Dave” into court/deposition/whatever it takes. It’s TIME!

    • Espiando

      Failing that, kidnap him, put him into a clown outfit and makeup, then hang an Easy-Bake Oven hooked up to two cans of cock soup around his neck, then parade him down L. Ron Hubbard Way as he’s whipped by a transvestite in a dominatrix outfit wearing a Lou mask. Or is that a little too Fellini?

      • Sir Hemet TC Burlwood, VIII

        Psych eval, psych eval, psych eval!!!!

        • Espiando

          For him, or for me for coming up with that scenario?

          • EnthralledObserver

            Nah… we already know what’s wrong with you… and we’re letting it slide because you amuse us.

            • NOLAGirl

              You have to wait until Espi isn’t looking…give him a drive-by hug…then bolt before he can catch you with his teeth. :) We still adore him.

          • Sir Hemet TC Burlwood, VIII

            What EO said. I don’t think anything would scare him more than a court ordered, inpatient, psychiatric evaluation on a forensic unit, which would include númerous psychological tests and clinical interviews with a variety of mental health experts, +24 hour observation. Such evals can go on for weeks, even months! It is among my favorite DM retribution fantasies. Oh please, oh please, oh please, Old Testament god, make it so!

            • EnthralledObserver

              How to use God to catch the reincarnation of Xenu… I like it. ;)

        • Free Minds, Free Hearts

          He asked for one for Laura DeCrecenzo… so…

    • Jgg2012

      Nah, he’ll just default, lose, spend 20 years hiding assets, etc. much like the “not one dime” nonsense.
      Of course, the contradicting positions he takes and the daily lawsuits will shrink the cult. In ten years, look for him to speak in front of dozens of crazy admirers, not thousands.

      • Tory Christman

        There aren’t “thousands” NOW, Jgg2012! At the “Grand opening of the Pac Base Ideal Morgue”…I’d give it 200-300 tops.

        As I’ve told him for years:
        YOU CAN RUN………….BUT YOU CANNOT HIDE! ….FACT! :) Keep that in mind, “Dave” …
        Tory/Magoo~ Your local, friendly SP!

  • http://askanex.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I have to say it was pleasantly ominous to hear David Miscavige’s name being thrown around in court so much!

    • Vaquera

      Was he refered to as Captain?

  • Jonathan Cummings

    Why is he wearing his hair as if he is 16 years old? Tom must be very afraid of getting older which I do not understand since he should be able to stop the aging process or a least slow it down using his mind. Then again, Tom must be under a lot of stress being that he, and his fellow Clams, are the only people who can actually do anything in an emergency situation.

  • Lee Bowskee

    > None of them knew how to say Miscavige’s name

    Poor Slappy, the little twerp doesn’t get any respect.

    • EnthralledObserver

      He really should just stick with Captain Slappy… everyone knows how to say that!

      • Sarah James

        Or the dildo guy.

        • Elar Aitch

          Captain Misextoys (kudos for that btw)

          • Sarah James

            Thanks, he makes it so easy.

            • Elar Aitch

              Reading that made me snort coffee out my nose a bit

    • Michael Leonard Tilse

      Henceforth he shall be known in all legal proceedings by the apt nom de pube Damp Merkin.

      • Observer

        Ewwwww

    • http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/muslinger/ Jens TINGLEFF

      He will start to argure that since he’s not getting any respect in Texas, Captain David “he is NOT insane!” Miscavige doesn’t have to respect their so-called laws.

  • media_lush

    man, Michael K’s piece on Peaches Geldof….. wow….well, here’s the main bit:

    “The cops still say that Peaches’ death is “unsuspicious,” but how in the hell can you call the death of a chick who was involved with Scientology at one time or another “unsuspicious“? Anytime anybody who was involved with Scientology dies, the cops should bring Xenu in and make that bitch sweat it out under the lights. If a 102-year-old woman died of natural cases and we come to find out that she once read a paragraph in Dianetics at a Barnes & Nobles while waiting for a movie, we should all hold our magnifying glasses up to her death! And then we should create an anti-Scientology shield of protection by sprinkling anti-depressants around us.”

    http://dlisted.com/2014/04/09/peaches-geldofs-autopsy-was-inconclusive/

    • EnthralledObserver

      lol… well, yeah… I reckon I’d agree with that.

    • Sarah James

      Maybe he will join up, what could go wrong?

      She was 25. Not in a car wreck, not eaten by a mountain lion, so unless he knows something we don’t I think I will safely stick with the scientology question.

    • Troy MacGyver SP

      I wonder if they test for niacin in a tox screen. Purifed to death.

    • Jenstnick

      Seriously- that is a beautiful summation.

    • Once_Born

      ‘Not suspicious’ is generally UK police code for ‘there is no evidence of the direct involvement of any other person’. Her body has been released and toxicology texts are ongoing.

      The coroner might note ridiculously high vitamin or niacin levels, but these observations are not relevant in law unless they directly pertain to the cause of death.

  • Captain Howdy

    This all makes me feel like dancing..but not with Leo Sayer.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0LIIiC2sCM

    • Bury_The_Nuts

      Leo sayer ?
      Thank god !

      Care package on the way!

      • Captain Howdy

        I need care like a mutant yogi bear, boo-boo.

    • Elar Aitch

      Awww – Leo Sayer visited by bumblefuck town last year and gave a rip roaring show by all accounts. And he also performs with the Wiggles!

    • Sherbet

      Are you optimistic?

      • Captain Howdy

        Of course not, but as always I’m happily nihilistic despite all the unjustified optimism.

        • Sherbet

          You had me worried there. I was expecting a round of hurrahs and a few smiley faces. You remain unswayed by any hint that this is going to go our way, and by “our” I mean Monique’s way. We’re all in a holding pattern.

          • Captain Howdy

            “The man who is a pessimist before 48 knows too much; if he is an optimist after it, he knows too little” – Mark Twain

    • richelieu jr

      Is Leo Sayer related to Simon Says?

  • Guest

    If Miscavige simply allowed himself to be declared insane, he could avoid this pesky embarrassing deposition.

    • Sarah James

      I am all in for a his prison sentence not a mental ward. :-)

      • Sir Hemet TC Burlwood, VIII

        My vote is for both: A locked forensic unit for the criminally insane. That would be true poetic, ironic, and perfect justice. It is exactly what he deserves. Which is why that sly soap opera joke was soo damn funny.

    • Free Minds, Free Hearts

      Maybe the same psych eval he asked for Laura DeCrecenzo could be done on him…

      • Sarah James

        OMG can you just imagine the can of worms that would open up? I bet they would find blackheart’s brain contained gelato or jello, wait psych eval not brain surgery. Nevermind.
        I think they should ask for a psych eval. That would put an end to him.

    • http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/muslinger/ Jens TINGLEFF

      You forget that he is NOT insane!

  • Sherbet

    I was just thinking — despite DM’s motorcycles and cars (I’m assuming he has some fancy wheels), the “poor guy” really can’t go anywhere, can he? I imagine he’s too paranoid even to tool around the fenced-in church compounds. And outside the gates? Ha! He can’t. So he’s in a prison, a very fancy one, apparently. What’s the point? He can’t travel strictly for pleasure to areas unrelated to cos business. He can’t just pop into a great restaurant. He’s got a lot of money, and he’s stuck behind bars, sitting on the money pile. Maybe someone like Marc Headley could tell us if this is accurate.

    • Captain Howdy

      He has the money to have the same level of security as the president, the real pope or tom cruise so there’s no reason he couldn’t go out. Thing is he knows that if Lou called up a restaurant or a movie theater and said ” Mr Miscavige would like to visit your establishment, could you please close for the evening to accommodate this” they would respond “Who?”. His frail ego couldn’t handle this. That’s why the only time he goes out is when he’s with Cruise.

      • Sherbet

        Very perceptive. I’ll bet you’re right.

        • Captain Howdy

          At least 95% of the people in this world have no idea who David Miscavige is.

          • Elar Aitch

            He’s king of the anthill

            • Jimmy3

              That anthill can become a shiny tree of hope.
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGJ2jMZ-gaI

            • Sarah James

              That was cool, and having been stung by these vicious critters in the past, I see it as quid pro quo. The art is nice too.
              If davy looks for high ground while in Texas…

            • Jimmy3

              It is pretty damn cool and they are vicious critters. But it probably doesn’t hurt them because they are “fire” ants and so anything hot or “molten” would only make them more dangerous. They’re probably terrorizing another neighborhood right now, the only difference being their size, speed and strength have increased greatly. I know some book learners and sciencey nerds will probably come and tell me why I’m wrong, but I don’t care so I won’t even listen.

            • mightandglory

              Comic book reasoning for the win!

            • And I don’t rent cars!

              How beautiful and fascination! Thanks, Jimmy3, for introducing me to those sculptures and medium.

              But I love the idea of the molten aluminum even more. I want a bucket of it to play with. Reminds me of the mercury (from old broken thermometers) I use to keep as a liquid “toy” before it was banned by the EPA. (And the answer is yes to your question… I also played with dynamite and uranium rods from old nuclear reactors.)

          • Still_On_Your_Side

            Perhaps 1%, at most, knows who he is. The judges of the Texas Court of Appeals didn’t, even though there are two appeals before them with Miscavige as a named defendant.

            • Captain Howdy

              I was being really generous.

          • Peter

            Why such a small percentage? I would expect it’s more like 99.8%.

      • vistaril_LOL

        I’m wondering why he has never been papped dining at fancy places, given his status a Tom Cruises’ BFF, if there is enough blood in the water the press could go after pics of his cars, bilkes etc

    • EnthralledObserver

      I think Makemerich wouldn’t hesitate to use CO$ funds to travel and play… who’s going to tattle on him? Nobody until there is some legal requirement for transparency.

    • aquaclara

      He could go to any restaurant in Clearwater (other than the local Starbucks, which isn’t really a restaurant), and no one would recognize him or disturb him. Of course, this is aided by the very real fact that he kicked most of the businesses out of downtown….

      He was in Clearwater for most of last year, according to McShane’s deposition. I can’t imagine he didn’t go out…..

      • EnthralledObserver

        I go out to get decent food that I didn’t have to cook or clean up after… why would Makemerich need to go out? He gets served hand and foot at ‘home’.

    • Troy MacGyver SP

      training wheels.

    • outraged

      He is rarely seen in public. Maybe DM has passed on and this is why Scientology is fighting so hard not to have him deposed. A DM Impersonator has been doing the latest speeches.

    • http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/muslinger/ Jens TINGLEFF

      Diving holidays on the SS Mesothelioma with its hot and cold running slaves. Not so shabby. But happiness, that he can’t buy, I dont think (since he’s a miserable small-minded git).

    • http://www.misstia.com/ Miss Tia

      you’re right….he is in a virtual prison….of his own making by his actions and paranoia……eventually it won’t be so luxurious either…..

  • Still_On_Your_Side

    Wallace’s argument that the deposition testimony was “old” because the church had “changed” is an odd argument to make at the appellate level. How “new” do the stories have to be? Monique is suing on the basis of events that have been ongoing for the past five years. It’s also odd for another reason-it is an admission that the stories about Miscavige are true…..

    • aquaclara

      Excellent point. It bothered me to hear Wallace say that the depositions were “old” when here’s a church that does NOTHING new ever. And that the depositions would be many months fresher if the cult didn’t play such games. Your points are better.

      I wonder if they could get “updated” info in discovery? As if there is any…..

      • http://www.misstia.com/ Miss Tia

        yeah, so is wallace’s claims the structure is ‘new’ an admittance that the ‘church’ is now ‘squirrelly’ since it’s not adhering to LRH?

  • valshifter

    At the en is just another delay tactic of scientology, “you can easily use the law to harass” kind of thing.

  • Narapoid

    He has only Lou

  • Hingle McCringleberry

    I have to admit that lately anytime I hear DM’s name, it comes out super slow in the voice of this lovable character. As in “Daaavid Misscarrrige. . .”

    • http://www.misstia.com/ Miss Tia

      and he’s so wonely……

  • http://BareFacedMessiah.wordpress.com/ BareFacedMessiah

    If DM is the CEO, then how can he not be involved?
    In fact let’s apply Scientology! There are no absoluta! So DM can be deposed just a bit. It is not a question of yes or no. Gray zone is the answer. DM would never reject applying Scientology!

  • Lurkness

    CEO, Apex deposition, etc, etc… It is a BUSINESS, BUSINESS, BUSINESS. And a fraudulent one at that. I wonder, in their mutiplicity of litigation strategies, if they might have yet waived their it is a “religion”/first amendment claims going forward.

    • EnthralledObserver

      One can hope they have made that error and it can be exploited by Team Mosey. :)

      • Lurkness

        Waiver of claims, is an oft overlooked and powerful weapon.

  • http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/muslinger/ Jens TINGLEFF

    Well, if this goes against the criminal organisation known as the “church” of $cientology they will simply appeal as far as they can arguing that the judges are full of shit. Simple as that (but worded more politely). And then, when they get told “no” Captain David Miscavige will have successfully delayed the due process by some years and will start making emergency motions to have the whole thing thrown out because it’s taking too long. And then he’ll be told “no” and then he’ll pay up rather than face questioning under oath.

    Good luck to Monique and to her team. And don’t forget that one can get a victory in court, compensation paid out and the Co$ enjoined to stop harassment, all without signing a gag order – Bonnie Woods proved that in the High Court in England.

    • Lurkness

      As we get past the appeals (on the DM Depo and the outrageos SLAPP filing and the very correct denial), I think Scientology is in for a rude awakening. The good Judge has already expressed his frustration on how much time and taxpayer resources have been wasted on this litigation to date, as well as the discovery abuses by the Scilons, etc. If history is any guide, Judge Waldrip is going to fast track this and will hold feet to the fire and the more Scientology tries to stop it, the more the Judge himself will push back. Team Ray/Rathbun needs to make sure they have their act together, remain reasonable and don’t get in the way of the Judge’s ire and frustration.

    • PRenaud

      And all of this under the direction of the former chief justice of the texas supreme court trying to fool the justice system so that this criminal scumbag can get away with his criminal operations!!!!

  • DodoTheLaser

    Kirstie’s posing with a celebrity only model of E-Meter.
    It’s not clear what “Runaway” means. Or is it?

    • http://www.misstia.com/ Miss Tia

      oh wow, look how great jenny craig has been for her!!!

      • DodoTheLaser

        Yes! Plus OT 7 diet.

        • Sydjazz

          Rice and beans work great with niacin

          • DodoTheLaser

            And CalMag shots.

  • Pierrot

    Outraged by how co$
    openly subverts the law
    and avoids paying taxes.
    YOU CAN HELP, let your fingers RED X their fraudulent ads

    https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/taking-down-co-on-craigslist-co-ads-on-craigslist.113779/page-71#post-2443769

    FREELOADER Debt is ILLEGAL and CAN’T BE ENFORCED Call 1-866-XSEAORG
    Get HELP, get OUT, Call 1-866-XSEAORG

    TY Chutney

    • Panopea Abrupta

      Got ‘em.

      James in Boston is claiming:
      A Scientology “Clear” has: Over 135 IQ

      So how many $cientologist Mensa members are there, anyway?
      The Squirrelbusters are, obviously, but who else?

  • Sydjazz

    CEO implies business to me. Come on. That can’t hide behind the religious cloak now

    • EnthralledObserver

      Their audacity to quote and expect protection under laws designed for businesses, yet claim and hide behind the religious curtain is astounding… and I’m quite fed up that some court hasn’t yet called BS in a meaningful way yet!

      • Sydjazz

        Lets hope this judge sees through the b.s and calls the spade a spade

  • 0tessa

    The judges didn’t like Jefferson’s statement that judge Waldrip abused his position. They don’t take this lightly, it’s an offence really.
    This will cost them, I mean Scientology’s consiglieri/

    • aquaclara

      I agree with you. There are three highly experienced, well-regarded judges sitting on this appeal court, a significant commitment of judicial assets. I believe they expect the lawyers to use this process, well, judiciously. And while Wallace’s halo seems to be shining fairly bright right now, perhaps it’s also recognized that he, of all people, should understand the significance of the appeals process.

      To bring less than a fully-strength case to appeal could appear to be playing games with the court. Now, while Scientology is well-known for this, Wallace was not.
      Scientology throws their opponents under the bus routinely, but for a former Supreme Court justice to do the same with Judge Waldrip goes beyond expected courtroom behavior. The next time they try this, the courts may not be so patient.

      It’s possible that Scientology’s practice of hiring a name could wildly backfire on them here. Had they hired a shark of questionable reputation, no one would be surprised by dirty tricks. It just stands out all the more when you hire someone who was at the apex of the Texas courts. I like that word. It sounds so corporate.

      IMHO. But, of course, IANAL. I have to think that the three appeal judges read at least some of the depositions, and the filings in this case before yesterday’s session. They would have seen the shenanigans in the courtroom, and Judge Waldrip’s disciplined approach thus far. And that this case is about a woman who has been harassed by a cult for years.

      Leslie and RayJ and the entire team did an excellent job once again, bringing their best to this case.
      And so I have to believe that the trial court also appreciated this.

      Let’s keep our fingers crossed for Monique in this round.

  • DodoTheLaser

    Last time I checked, Texas is not to mess with. Just saying.

    • Vaquera

      Here’s a bit of trivia for you, Mr. Dodo: Though many people outside the state of Texas assume that “Don’t Mess With Texas” is a statement of bravado, it’s actually an anti-litter campaign, established in 1985, to keep Texas highways free of trash (however, over the years it has been usurped for other purposes :-). Learning something new everyday.
      http://www.dontmesswithtexas.org/about.php

      (know that I am not scolding, just sharing random knowledge)

  • Sidney18511

    When the justices asked “why would DM harass MR? How would that benefit him?” The answer should of been….he was following the scripture of his religion. That would of opened their eyes!

    • Panopea Abrupta

      I agree completely.
      It IS “scripture” as delivered by a malignant narcissist, a schizoid megalomaniac and all-round general nice guy, source on the sauce.
      Why?
      Because it’s what $cientology does.

  • 1subgenius

    Unless the fix is in this should be a no-brainer. (I’m still betting that the fix is in, although the odds are now even.)

    He’s a named party, not just a proposed witness.
    A COB that doesn’t do anything?

    And, as Sidney18511 points out his ecclesiastical duties include harassment, if the argument is that all his time is taken up with the ecclesiastical.

    He will not be deposed in any event.
    And to that extent it is a gambit, since his refusal will result in a default/victory.
    There still may be a trial on the issue of damages, although I believe any savvy judge could facilitate a big enough settlement.
    (Someone here though previously presented a compelling case for why it can’t be settled. Refresh my recollection.)