I don’t know anything about legal stuff, but it seems to me that the Co$ has made the Garcias’ case for them in two pages. It references (on page 21) that in deciding if a contract is procedurally unconscionable there should be a consideration of whether there was a “realistic opportunity to bargain… or whether the terms were merely presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis”. And then on the same page states that “Here, plaintiffs were entirely free to enter into the Agreements or not, as they saw fit.” Admitting there would have been no chance of bargaining terms and that they were presented on a “take-it-or-leave-it basis”. Just above this (top of page 21) it also refers to considerations of the relative bargaining power of each party. The Co$ had the power of exclusion from, or withholding of “religious” services, perceived authority over a persons “eternity”, and the ability to impose “ethics” procedures, including forcing sec checks, at an incurred personal cost (essentially a fine for questioning the contract’s terms). That seems procedurally unconscionable to me, but then, their whole process is really.

(Page 22) Maybe with testimony from a psych, they could even argue that they were not of sound mind to have entered into a contract with CO$, (considering the power that group held over them at the time) which essentially signs away any rights to a redress of grievances (considering ethics policies). But even without making that argument (and admitting to mind-control) when accompanied with evidence from policy that “suppressive people” may be lied to and deprived of property, they may be able to argue that the contracts were also substantially unconscionable, and that the CO$ entered it in bad faith. Especially if it did not indicate the exceptions and policies that would apply to arbitration after being declared “suppressive” (without a committee of evidence, against their own supposed moral and “legal” codes). Especially if they can get testimony from others who have attempted arbitration and maybe been sent to “ethics” about it or “declared suppressive”, like for example Greg and Debra Barnes (if I remember rightly). This may show it is unconscionable in substance, as it knowingly deceives signers into signing away any and all rights, as the CO$, have no intention of arbitrating any case fairly. And as CO$ willfully entered that contract in bad faith at the time, (unlike the Garcias), that could be fraud in itself no? There must be such a thing as contract fraud in the U.S, making them invalid surely.

Like I said, I know nothing, but it seems to me that CO$ might have blown away a few toes here, at least if the judge dislikes legal bullshittery and abuse of the First Amendment. Hopefully they will at least have shown the bad faith of their arguments and annoyed the judge. I hope the Garcias’ get a ruling in their favour on the issue of the contracts’ legitimacy, for everyone’s sake. And surely the judge will see that CO$’s arbitration process is designed to deny any rights to people like the Garcias and won’t compel people who no longer follow a “religion” to be subject to their whims.

P.S Wasn’t their a ruling that CO$ had to pay refunds or did I misunderstand? They seem to be asserting that they don’t ever have to refund, which also shows the bad faith argument about forcing the Garcias’ into CO$ arbitration in itself.

P.P.S. The rules in the U.S. about religious groups getting to decide how followers get to access “justice”, even against their will, seem so messed up, a good reason in itself never to identify as, or join any religious group, just in case. The institutions’ rights to religious freedom seems to trump an individual’s right to the same every time. It’s sickening.

Anyway, so sorry for rambling on, I’m just angry at the slime their filing is oozing with I guess. I can’t believe CO$ (or any group, but especially destructive ones) can hide behind “religious” freedom to lie, cheat and steal, not to mention imprison and abuse. Damn that stupid IRS decision and it’s far reaching consequences. (But then, I am an evil psych who knows the true history of psychiatry and can personally attest to the effectiveness of the correct psychiatric drugs (for me) and REAL psychotherapy after abuse, so I would oppose them right? lol.) I’ll go back to lurking now. Love reading your comments, this seems like such a good and supportive community. I’m constantly impressed by the ex’s ability to stay strong and supportive of each other, and even joke about their experiences. You are all true survivors and it’s an honour just to lurk and watch. I wish you all continued strength, and peaceful, happy and healthy lives, and hope that one day the world will be free of this insidious cult and it (and DM) will be prosecuted for all the wrong it has done to you, your loved ones, and those who feel they have no-one. And Mr. Ortega’s work isn’t bad either 😀 .

The equal weight is the eternal – the balance is the eternal. The church of scientology has to make even with its victims if it ever will be able to get its asshole removed from people’s attention.

Criminals can only pretend to be the owner of what victims of crime are the real owners of.

Okay Captain Howdy. That video proved your Antipsych cred. You are on the recruitment list

A Sea Org van will be at your home this evening at 6:00 PM.

Please pack for a billion years.

Wow! Talk about another way of arranging a foot shoot. As I understand it, that means that the lawyers would be trained in the job to do things the Co$ way. Judges are going to love that.

You’re welcome.

Be careful in believing what I write. I’m a regular font of misinformation. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and I’m real dangerous. 😉

I’m glad “software companies seem to have given up on the ‘we own your brain’ clause.” Now they, and hardware companies, are trying to patent the world.

Or just sneak the syringe in and inject it into your veins.

Thank you very much for your explanation. Appreciate.

All good friend. I hope it helps too, i dont think they will need it though. These lawyers seem to be pretty good at what they do. Im sure they arent dependent on outside info to win the case.