ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

Jan 8th Rathbun Hearing

Discussion in 'Monique Rathbun' started by Lone Star, Jan 8, 2014.

  1. Mick Wenlock

    Mick Wenlock Admin Emeritus (retired)

    Its the same "tech" as in the old story of the jewish rebel condemned to die in the condemned cell with tons of others in like predicament and he shouts out to the jailer "tell the king I can teach his horse to sing in a year". The gaoler goes off and then comes back and says the king is very interested in this, the rebel has one year to teach the horse to sing.

    The others who are waiting to die gather round and ask him wtf he thinks he is doing? There is no way to teach a horse to sing, he will never be able to do it and he will be executed anyway. To which the rebel answers "in a year, he may be dead, I may be dead, he may be overthrown, I may escape. Maybe not. and maybe in a year - the horse will suddenly sing!"
  2. dchoiceisalwaysrs

    dchoiceisalwaysrs Gold Meritorious Patron

    It is to harrass Ray Jeffrey. 'the sole purpose of the law suit is to harrass', ( either the opposition, its counsel, any judge who might rule against scientology and to any media or any other SP. Reference: Fair Game Cancellation.

    Edit: oh I see Arnie has laid it out as it actually happened (time and time again) I thought Dilatory practise was perverting the justice system, and I would very much like to see the Law applied here.
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2014
  3. Udarnik

    Udarnik Gold Meritorious Patron

    Classic law school behavior - throw all the shit you've got at the wall and see what sticks. The problem is that outside Academia, judges have real timetables and schedules and workload issues, and they don't take kindly to shit smears on their walls.

    The way around that is to get at the judge, but with all the press attention, I think the days of them getting away with that are in the past.
  4. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    You're way more optimistic than I am.

    The judge could rule in favor of COS and it may not be possible to prove he was "gotten to". :no:

    I remember the Lisa McPherson case all too well.
  5. Udarnik

    Udarnik Gold Meritorious Patron

    Marty was running that. I don't think there is anyone of comparable skill left, and more press is watching this than ever before. I think the network of Exes and soon-to-be exes would root that out quickly in today's climate.
  6. uncover

    uncover Gold Meritorious Patron

    You have to know, that a judge doesn´t get paid per hour, he has to handle (and hopefully finish) an special amount of cases. So if he needs for a case 1 hour or 100 hours he gets the same wage. So they come up with a complex juridical argumentation together with a lot of filings in the hope that the judge will be scared and rule in favour of them so that he can close the case and avoid that his judgement will be reversed from a higher court.

    But I think with Waldrip this could be the wrong strategy.....
  7. dchoiceisalwaysrs

    dchoiceisalwaysrs Gold Meritorious Patron

    But it is happening right now in court, and we don't have the judge's ear so to speak. Arnie described how. It is purely 'bullbaiting' 'finding buttons' 'harassment' dilatory distraction, and an attempt overthrowing the law and the justice rule the world! I know that sounds unfathomable, but it is Caligula's last stand so to speak.
  8. Udarnik

    Udarnik Gold Meritorious Patron

    Oh, I meant running the judge blackmail thing. They still have plenty of skilled lawyers to run dilatory tactics, as those are and were primarily outside help. The OSA has so few skilled personnel now, and I suspect none capable of an undetected blackmail or bribery operation in a hostile field such as Texas. Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I'd like to see them try, because that would land Davy's ass in jail faster than anything that might come out of what he did to Mosey.
  9. Churchill

    Churchill Gold Meritorious Patron

    Unless and until the Judge imposes sanctions against Scientology for what are clearly dilatory tactics

    designed to obstruct justice, this so-called church will continue its unlawful abuse and manipulation of

    the American Legal System.

    The sanctions themselves should be massive and crippling, in the tens of millions,

    sending a clear message that no one, not even a billionaire "ecclesiastical leader"

    is above the law.

    Let the cult then, spend millions appealing it through the system, up to the Supreme Court,

    who I trust would refuse to hear the case.

    The merits of Mosey's case are clear and compelling, and 15 or 50 lawyers

    cannot alter truth.

    Oh, and by the way, Fuck You, Miscavige

    & Fuck You too, OSA
  10. Lermanet_com

    Lermanet_com Gold Meritorious Patron

    Most certainly yes, re technicalities, one great example should be called:

    Kendrick Moxon's Biggest Flub

    Bob Minton was sued in Boston Superior Court for criminal perjuries in the Florida cases,, in hopes they could get a judgement against his property, his home in Boston. That case was remanded to the Clearwater Court, because all the doucments were already there, (and I bet the Boston court sure didn't want to deal with it). Moxon conducted the prosecution of that criminal case in front of Judge - shit, a lady judge, name escapes me at moment ) He introduced exhibit after exhibit of instances of perjury by Bob... and finally rested his case.

    Bob was sweating bullets. A criminal conviction for perjury is a felony and Bob would no longer be able to work as an investment banker, and at the time he was hurting for cash he could spend in the US. I think it was Judge Shaeffer... anyway, Moxon rested his case. Then Bob who by this time had finally done what he should have done long before, had called in his expensive Boston lawyers, sounds like Mc Pfenny ?? (anyone recall his name?) something or other, stood up having not said anything during the whole proceedings, and asked the Judge if the prosecution had rested their case. The Judge nodded yes they have. Then Bob's lawyer, read from the Florida statute for Criminal perjury conviction, which stated, and I am paraphrasing from memory - That there is a statutory requirement that an affidavit be filed in the instant case, however Moxon only filed exhbits from the McPherson case and copies of depositions and testimony transcripts.

    So Bobs Lawyer told the Judge, "So I ask that the charges be dismissed"

    The Judge said "You got me" and Dismissed the charges....

    The same statute re perjury states that if a person recants all prior perjurys in a case, at anytime before the case goes final, then that person cannot be found guilty of criminal perjury, and by this point after all the money drains, Mr Minton simply had to be still able to earn a living as an investment banker...which a conviction would preclude.

    When Bob's lawyer finally stood up and got the case dismissed on that technicality, is the moment Bob saw God. He called me that night and relayed everything I have typed here for you and told me he was going to have to do a recant and might ruin the McPherson case. I told him as long as he would be telling God's truth that he would have my blessing to proceed.

    Arnie Lerma

    PS: I took a lot heat, and was called a liar, when I first described this case because it did not show up in the CW Court docket... which was, it turned out, because the case was brought in Boston Superior and then remanded to Pinnellas Court for trial, which I did not know when I first talked about it years ago.
  11. dchoiceisalwaysrs

    dchoiceisalwaysrs Gold Meritorious Patron

    I so hope you are correct. I mean I just don't see Dip ever being blackmailed. And I very strongly want this to be the dam breaker in which scientology abuses of any kind are brought to a screeching halt. It is not easy to predict as there is a tremendous amount at stake here. Damned now you got me thinking of why would a just recently retired Supreme Court judge who I had thought would have had integrity seems to have just thrown it all away? Much I don't know, but it sure has the possibilities popping to the fore. :unsure:
  12. Wants2Talk

    Wants2Talk Silver Meritorious Patron

    There are currently 149 users browsing this thread. (32 members and 117 guests)
  13. uncover

    uncover Gold Meritorious Patron

    Hmmm.... not really much..... compared to the 11.000.000 Scientologists (claimed). :coolwink: :hide:
  14. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    Look who is talking about this too

    Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum.,1053941,1053977

  15. Deeana

    Deeana Patron with Honors

    In many ways, as the years have passed even the ability to "blackmail" others has diminished as a useful tool for the Cof$.

    Nowadays who but John Travolta (and perhaps his wife) really gives a crap if John Travolta is gay, straight, or bi?

    Straight extramarital affairs? Pshawww! Even gay extramarital affairs have been outed - well, I guess technically tapping one's foot in a men's room stall is not an affair, is it? But the dude stayed in office with his wife at his side.

    A straight male employing hookers? We've been there, done that. (Elliot Spitzer and others) A straight male judge engaging in a sexual affair with a court employee? The judge in the Casey Anthony murder trial in Florida. Had had an affair. Admitted to it. Didn't seem to hurt his career. He acknowledged the affair once again in a newspaper interview just prior to the beginning of that infamous trial.

    So unless someone has been torturing people (wonder who has been doing anything even close to that?) or killing people (and there has been plenty of speculation about this subject in regard to the DEFENDANTS in this case), I think the ability of Cof$ and/or OSA to blackmail Judge Waldrip is not very likely.
  16. Veda

    Veda Sponsor


    Yep, and it looks like recently retired Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, now shill for Scientology Inc., Wallace Jefferson, is seated to the far side.

    Tactics don't seem to have changed much over the decades.

    Legal declaration by Judge M. Ideman of the United States District Court, regarding Scientology Inc. courtroom tactics, dated 21 June, 1993:

    "[Scientology Inc.] has undertaken a massive campaign of filing every conceivable motion (and some inconceivable) to disguise the true issue of these... proceedings. Apparently viewing litigation as a war, [Scientology Inc.] by this tactic have had the effect of massively increasing costs of the other parties... Yet it is almost all puffery - motions without merit or substance."
  17. Knows

    Knows Gold Meritorious Patron

    If Wallace Jefferson had a good character - he would not be there. I think having his brother on the case smells a little clammy!! :whistling: The Co$ are up to something! I am shocked that this has been going on all day with nothing done!! Just Co$ attorney's regurgitating the same stuff just like Co$ regurgitates the tech!! It has been a very profitable day for the Co$ attorney's!! $$$,$$$,$$$cientology - where the only ones who win are the attorney's!!
  18. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    Cedillo shucked and jived unti 3:30 then the Judge called a recess. I had to leave at that point. More later when I'm back home.

    Oh, and YS YS YS YS YS YS YS YS.....:lol:
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2014
  19. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    Natalie M at Tony's Blog

  20. suspiciousperson

    suspiciousperson Patron with Honors

    In England and Wales for barristers we* have something called the "taxicab rule". Basically it states that any barrister - a "trial lawyer" in very simple terms - must take on any case in his/her speciality if the client can afford the fees and there is no reason that would make it impossible for the barrister to represent the client then the barrister HAS to take the client on.

    I would be amazed - but stand to be corrected of course - if something similar doesn't apply in the US, at least in the sense that it's against legal ethics to be too discriminating about what your client gets up to. I really think this ex supreme court judge guy should be "left alone", or at least all the stuff being said against him needs much stronger foundation than assuming he's bent just cause he has a dodgy client.

    Surely no one thinks Johnny Cochrane was anything other than an ace bloke? Equally, it's my understanding that Fred Phelps had very deserving clients (until his family became his clients). Judging a lawyer by their clients and allowing lawyers to pick and choose them is going to end up with innocent people wrongly accused of vile crimes unable to get decent representation.

    *note that while I am using the term "we" I am meaning as an Englishman (sort of), not as a memeber of any legal profession