To anyone who has signed a Scn labor contract: From Barry Van Sickle

[trowel]

Quoted from WWP. I have reposted it here with my own emphasis to highlight Barry's request.

Have you been pressured to sign anything in relation to Scientology labor? Do you have relevant information, or can you provide scans of this sort of document? If so please PM blownforgood here on ESMB or PM Barry Van Sickle over at WWP. Thanks!

Re: Update in Headley and DeCrescenzo cases.

They e-filed the expected motions to dismiss last night. I have not had a chance to study the motions but in the mandatiory "meet and confer " process the main aguments were based on staute of limitation defenses.

Documents filed in federal court are available on line to anyone with a credit card and a Pacer account. Anyone interested in doing this can PM me and I will provide the data.

We will be cross-moving for summary judgement on the "employment issue", and have started that process under the local rules. Basically, we are contending that the "volunteer" and "waiver" defenses fail as a matter of law.

There has been some outside interest in helping us file motions for a TRO ( temporary restraining order) on coerced abortions. That is under consideration.

An important issue being raised in Laura's case is the validity of the various purported waivers, confidentialty agreements, and penalty clauses they make people sign to get out. Marc and Claire escaped while Laura tried to "route out" as they say in the jargon.

We have collected several documents used by the scientology enterprise to intimidate departing "employees". One such example purports to be a termination of employment agreement.

We are looking for more examples of routing out agreements and persons willing to be witnesses or otherwise be involved in the mission to establish that such "settlement agreements" are illegal and unenforceable.

Thanks to those who have helped so far and. please, anyone else who is willing and able to help can send me a PM.
BVS

[dt2000]

One thing which I don't think was announced over here, the Scn lawyers moved all three cases from State to Federal Court last Thursday. So it's a bit of a different ball game now in terms of how things are done.

[Alanzo]

This is so good that these agreements that Scientology uses to intimidate people are seeing the light of day.

I am so glad this is happening.

We are witnessing the chipping away of Scientology's ability to coerce and to defraud our fellow citizens.

The trial in France, these trials here....

If Scientology survives them, it will have to emerge with different, more legal and fair practices.

[ILived1984!]

One thing which I don't think was announced over here, the Scn lawyers moved all three cases from State to Federal Court last Thursday. So it's a bit of a different ball game now in terms of how things are done.

Why would the C of S Lawyers move the cases to Federal court and what does this mean for the cases? I sent Barry a copy of my waiver a couple months ago to help out. I hope it helps.

[Kha Khan]

Why would the C of S Lawyers move the cases to Federal court and what does this mean for the cases?

There could be several reasons:

• Much larger and more diverse jury pool. If the case was filed in the downtown branch of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the jury pool would tend to be more minority / liberal. In federal court the jury pool would be drawn from a much larger area, and therefore would tend to be more white / conservative.
  
• It is much more expensive to litigate in federal court, which is more draining on the parties with the least amount of money (i.e. plaintiffs in this case).
  
• Cases in the Los Angeles Superior Court generally go to trial in about a year. Cases now take longer to get to trial in federal court because of the crush of criminal drug cases, which take priority because of the right to a speedy trial in criminal cases.
  
• Federal court is much more procedurally demanding and thorough.
  
• Many consider federal courts to be more sensitive and protective of federal constitutional rights -- in this case 1st Amendment religious liberty, which may be the primary defense of the COS.
  
• Some believe the judges in federal court are of higher quality, leading to legally more accurate results. Federal judges are appointed by the President with the consent of Congress. State judges are elected, frequently after first being appointed by the Governor.
  
• Federal judges have lifetime appointments. As a result, many believe they can better make politically unpopular decisions and better protect minorities -- such an unpopular religion many believe to be a "cult."

[ILived1984!]

There could be several reasons:

• Much larger and more diverse jury pool. If the case was filed in the downtown branch of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the jury pool would tend to be more minority / liberal. In federal court the jury pool would be drawn from a much larger area, and therefore would tend to be more white / conservative.
  
• It is much more expensive to litigate in federal court, which is more draining on the parties with the least amount of money (i.e. plaintiffs in this case).
  
• Cases in the Los Angeles Superior Court generally go to trial in about a year. Cases now take longer to get to trial in federal court because of the crush of criminal drug cases, which take priority because of the right to a speedy trial in criminal cases.
  
• Federal court is much more procedurally demanding and thorough.
  
• Many consider federal courts to be more sensitive and protective of federal constitutional rights -- in this case 1st Amendment religious liberty, which may be the primary defense of the COS.
  
• Some believe the judges in federal court are of higher quality, leading to legally more accurate results. Federal judges are appointed by the President with the consent of Congress. State judges are elected, frequently after first being appointed by the Governor.
  
• Federal judges have lifetime appointments. As a result, many believe they can better make politically unpopular decisions and better protect minorities -- such an unpopular religion many believe to be a "cult."

Kha Khan, thanks for listing these reasons.

Wow.

[Alanzo]

There could be several reasons:

• Much larger and more diverse jury pool. If the case was filed in the downtown branch of the Los Angeles Superior Court, the jury pool would tend to be more minority / liberal. In federal court the jury pool would be drawn from a much larger area, and therefore would tend to be more white / conservative.
• It is much more expensive to litigate in federal court, which is more draining on the parties with the least amount of money (i.e. plaintiffs in this case).
• Cases in the Los Angeles Superior Court generally go to trial in about a year. Cases now take longer to get to trial in federal court because of the crush of criminal drug cases, which take priority because of the right to a speedy trial in criminal cases.
• Federal court is much more procedurally demanding and thorough.
• Many consider federal courts to be more sensitive and protective of federal constitutional rights -- in this case 1st Amendment religious liberty, which may be the primary defense of the COS.
• Some believe the judges in federal court are of higher quality, leading to legally more accurate results. Federal judges are appointed by the President with the consent of Congress. State judges are elected, frequently after first being appointed by the Governor.
• Federal judges have lifetime appointments. As a result, many believe they can better make politically unpopular decisions and better protect minorities -- such an unpopular religion many believe to be a "cult."

Just as long as it's a fair trial.

That's all anyone wants.

[Winston Smith]

Post deleted.

M2

[Ladybird]

Anyone I know who routed out, or was declared or Fitness Boarded out was not given copies of the papers they were coerced in to signing. Many were asked "Why do you want copies?" and were made to sign while being videotaped and their belongings were searched to make sure they were not trying to smuggle out any paperwork. Even the clothes and trunks they wore for years were either taken away from them or the sea org insignia was cut off.

I guess too much of this clothing ended up in salvation army stores and was worn around by homeless bums. Oh wait! Most of those Hollywood derelicts wearing Sea Org stuff were in fact discarded Sea Org members, kicked to the curb after a lifetime of service when they were no longer useful to the cult.

[clamicide]

Anyone I know who routed out, or was declared or Fitness Boarded out was not given copies of the papers they were coerced in to signing. Many were asked "Why do you want copies?" and were made to sign while being videotaped and their belongings were searched to make sure they were not trying to smuggle out any paperwork. Even the clothes and trunks they wore for years were either taken away from them or the sea org insignia was cut off.

I guess too much of this clothing ended up in salvation army stores and was worn around by homeless bums. Oh wait! Most of those Hollywood derelicts wearing Sea Org stuff were in fact discarded Sea Org members, kicked to the curb after a lifetime of service when they were no longer useful to the cult.

Yep, I wasn't even allowed to bring a purse with me when I went to "route out" and sign my rights away. I thought they were afraid I was bringing in weapons, but they wouldn't even let me grab it after I offered to let them search it first. No way in hell they would have given me copies.