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 www.exscn2.net.



Scientology Settles with Debbie Cook

Discussion in 'Debbie Cook' started by Pooks, Apr 24, 2012.

  1. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    I would love it if Debbie "woke up" as a result of all of this but I suspect it's going to be a rough ride for her no matter what happens.

    She's sick, she's middle aged with no apparent "real life" job skills, and she's married to a guy who apparently wishes he was back in the SO.

    If she pulls out of this she's probably going to have to make some big changes. And it's going to be tough because she can't go to those in for help and she can't go to those out for help.
     
  2. The_Fixer

    The_Fixer Class Clown

    An old expression springs to mind: They can dish it out, but they sure can't take it back.

    It's a pretty common thing in the real world too.
     
  3. The_Fixer

    The_Fixer Class Clown

  4. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    One of the points in the Forbes article is the possession of your information by others on the Internet. It nothing compared to that which the church has in spades, from credit card #'s, overts given up in session, kr's and reports you have written or had written about you, bank account #'s, flight data etc. When I thought they were ethical, it didn't bother me. Now, I resent them having the information, and even more so, I resent when they tell lies about me and there is absolutely nothing I can do to stop them from doing so.

    Mimsey
     
  5. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Again this begs the question why would she give up and walk away worse off than before, without their being a pay off it doesn't make much sense.

    However, I think you might be painting a rosier picture of her life before Jan. 1 than was the reality. She blew the SO, there is no way she was treated "well" by the cult after she demanded to leave with Wayne. They may have let her maintain a facade of being in good standing, but knowing the cult there were whispers, gossip, generally shitty treatment. The thin facade was probably only done to keep them in line or in fear of it being worse.

    Her business was not flourishing, she may have had some Scio clients but it seems once the $50,000 x2 money they got when they left the SO ran out things got rough financially. In fact it seems the letter came at a point when all the money would have been gone, the business not providing adequately made them start feeling very insecure in the wog world. Had to chap Debbies ass that after decades of grueling work in the SO she couldn't make an adequate living, ESP after being told how superior her training was.

    Besides as people who left the SO weren't they automatically classified as DBs and full of overts/withholds?

    As for Waynes kids I have to believe once Wayne blew he got the "good roads fair weather" BS from his SO son, don't know if that would apply to the other son. I would think the relationship with the son was used as a way to keep them in line. But I have to ask some of you Ex-SO how big of a deal would Waynes relationship with his son be? Wayne has been in the SO since they were small so I can't imagine he got to see them much or form a close relationship. I know we all like to assume family/kids relationships would be paramount to people, that it would come before all else, but this doesn't seem to be all that true among hardcore Scientologist and ESP SO members. I think Mike Rinder is a pretty good example of the Ex-SO /indie mindset regarding family and children. Also the whole GE, just a body for a thetan crap, encourages that bio family is not important.

    I just don't think Debbie was doing all that well prior to 2012 and didn't have all that much to lose. So why not take a gamble by writing that email? At least from an true believer perspective she may trigger some positive effect. When it evolved into a lawsuit (which she had to know was a good possibility) then there was the chance of improving her finances.

    This is the main reason I have a hard time believing she would walk away without a payoff. She probably needed the money, so why walk away even worse off? alienating both churchies and indies, leaving her with few options for income via her business now and in the future, for basically nothing? The fact Debbie is in her 50's, her health is poor and her wog work history non-existence makes me think she couldn't walk away from this whole thing w/o compensation. Even if she wanted to settle and go away it doesn't seem like a viable option. Even just keeping the indie donation and support flowing would have been better than just settling for nothing and earning their wrath.

    Sigh, like I said the only hints we will probably get as to what went down will be watching the course Debbies life takes over the next year or two from afar.
     
  6. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Not to mention her mounting legal bills for Ray would help motivate her settling rather than get into a protracted and expensive and uncertain legal battle.

    Mimsey
     
  7. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader


    You make it out like she called the shots as to whether she settled with or without money. She's fortunate that she didn't get stuck owing the cult $300,000+, along with a monstrous attorney bill. She blew it when she broke the NDA on Nightline and other media outlets after the restraining order hearing in Feb. That hearing didn't cancel the NDA.

    Some just can't accept the fact that she didn't have a million dollar leverage on DM. She didn't even have a dime's worth of leverage because what she got was nada.
     
  8. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    Sometimes Bad PR > million dollar leverage

    Rd00
     
  9. Infinite

    Infinite Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller

    Why can she not go to those who are out for help?
     
  10. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Per the injunction, she is forbidden from:

    Meeting or conferring, either electronically, telephonically, or in person, with any person or organization that Defendants know who has attacked or disparage or who intends to attack or disparage any of the Church parties.

    I guess it is in how you interpret it. Technically, I guess it doesn't expressly forbid that she get help from anyone who is out.

    However, if you read the whole injunction, it's quite draconian. She's basically not allowed to say a word against anything or anyone in COS, especially to anyone else who has ever said a word about anything or anyone in COS.

    Pretty much anything she says or does around anyone who is in Scientology or who is no longer in Scientology can be used against her. It would be pretty hard to get any help from an ex and not in one way or another violate the injunction, deliberately or accidentally.
     
  11. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    That is assuming she, as a true believer, would want to go down that path. Maybe this whole thing will wake her up the the reality of her church, but she was the FLAG captain and been in Scientology all her life - it will be a shock to her if she does start reading all of what is out there on the net. She may end up like the indi's and disbelieve much of it, and consider DM evil and LRH the savior of mankind.

    Mimsey
     
  12. Infinite

    Infinite Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller

    Whoa! I haven't read the whole document so didn't realise just how locked down they are. Short term, its probably in their best interests in terms of any therapy they might seek and getting on with integrating back into the real world. Long term, however, how utterly isolated they are in terms of seeking that unique and, in its own way, therapeutic comfort which comes from spending time in the company of those with shared experiences. How alone must they feel right now?
     
  13. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Exactly.
     
  14. Mick Wenlock

    Mick Wenlock Admin Emeritus (retired)

    Well it would appear that what YOU think would be a pay off isn't necessarily what Cook would see as a pay off. I think both Lulu and Tikk make the points very well. Tikk gives a pretty sound (IMHO) description of the legal side and Lulu brings up some very smart observations about the mindset.

    Cook is not very smart. I think that she thought that her e-mail, sent out as it was to believers would generate buzz, would make her look like she was really "on source" and would, no doubt get her into some hot water but hey - she thinks she is 'tough'.

    I think she got the crap scared out of her.

    And I think her husband got the crap scared out of him - you have to remember that these are Scientologists - they don't have courage or bravery, they have selfish self interest, period.

    There is one thing that I think would have got her to sign - that her husband would be able to be in touch with and talk to his family.

    and for those who think that DM et al would never agree to that - a similar offer was extended to me 8 years ago if I would agree to shut up and agree to be officially "working on" my a-e. I refused.


    Bunny are you an ex? (I'm not trying to be funny - I just don't remember) but what you describe is exactly how an exSO would expect to be treated - remember that is how she has spent the last 30 years of her life.

    do you have anything at all to back that up? I have no idea if she was making money or not - I tend to agree with you that she would be surprised at how much it all failed to work - but that would not necessarily prevent the idiots from hiring her. But - once again all that does is give her motivation to send the email to the "insiders" - not to foment a revolution but as part of getting her own ethics in. If she was not making it on the outside she would assume it was because she was tolerating out-ethics and "not taking responsibility"

    And here is the strange part - she would expect the cofs to respect her for it - and if she was wrong, to correct her. She would never have expected to have ended up in court.

    It is never that simple - the answer is yes, and, no.

    Well as someone who's step son is in and disconnected I am probably in a good position to answer . It all depends - some families have very strong ties and bonds and some don't. There are XSO who got booted out for refusing to compromise their family ties.

    So its not a one size fits all proposition.

    Scientologists don't gamble like that. She would write an email like that if she were trying to handle her own ethics and she would risk getting her head smacked by the cofs for it. I do not believe for a second she was trying to be a champion of the indies.

    As for getting the money - we she would have had to be a lot further out to even contemplate trying to get money from the cofs - I know a LOT of XSO and the vast majority of them have never even contemplated that. One day maybe - but not now.

    You keep retreating to the unproven assertion that there was a pay off to be had.

    First things first - if this had gone to an honest to goodness litigation it would have taken years and Debbie knows that - ever XSO does. If she was, as you asset, already not making money how would she have lived while having to support herself and pay legal bills? For litigation that would drag on for YEARS?
     
  15. Lulu Belle

    Lulu Belle Moonbat

    Bunny, there's a lot in yoru post, and it being Monday morning, I don't have time to respond to all of it, but I can tell you as a long time Sea Org member myself there is no way in hell Debbie wrote that email in the hope of getting money out of COS as a result.

    There are a multitude of reasons that I say this. One of them is the frame of mind of someone who had been in her position. One is the knowledge anyone who has been in has as to how COS exhausts any opponent in litigation.

    As Mick said, on some hallucinatory level she was trying to "put ethics in". There are reams of policies in Scientology about Knowledge Reports and how the individual is responsible for the survival of the group by reporting outnesses.

    (Of course you are reporting to the fox who is watching the henhouse that the chickens are disappearing....)
     
  16. Magoo

    Magoo Gold Meritorious Patron

    This is very, very interesting to me. This shows/proves Daveyboy and gang are *very* concerned about ANY connections with "Ex's", "Critics" "Anonymous" and "Indies". This is quite an expansion from in 2000---when they tried to get me to sign (getting $$ back from ASHO and IAS) that I'd "Never talk to the critics on the Net or any Staff of $cientology, volunteers, etc". It was still a gross attempt to cut me off from people, however, they've seriously expanded this per the above quote.

    And for anyone getting their $$$ back, please note how it went down, (for new peeps out):
    A) They (OSA) fax'd over "Waiver".
    B) I called my Attorney---saying I'm NOT signing this waiver
    C) The attorney said "If you want $$$ back, u have to sign a waiver: SOP"
    D) Me: "You have NEVER seen a "Waiver" like this--I'll fax it to you".
    E) In less than 3 minutes my attorney called me back to say:
    "You can call them and tell them, per your attorney you are not only NOT going to sign *that* "waiver"---it's an ILLEGAL Waiver". (So I wonder if Debbie's is, too?)
    F) I wrote what I was "ok" with ("I won't sue ASHO---and this suit with ASHO does *not* equal all of the "church of $cientology, Int" etc--So it left it open that I can, in the
    future if I want, to sue other areas of C of $)
    G) We met to sign it and get $$$ owed ($$$ on Account For BC)
    H) We met in restaurant. "Pam Shannon" pulled out the SAME WAIVER MY ATTORNEY SAID IS ILLEGAL.
    G) I said: "I told you I WON'T SIGN THAT!~
    H) She gave a catty (1.1) Grin and said "We thought you say that.
    Ok, here's the other one" (the one I said I would sign).

    ALLLLLLLLLLLLL the way up to the last second, they STILL tried to stop my free speech. <<<<<EPIC FAIL OSA~!!!! :omg:

    So is whatever DC signed "Illegal"? Sure sounds like it.
    Did she fight it at all? :confused2:
    Just sayin.

    "Church"??? MY ASS~!~~

    Tory/Magoo

    PS: I went right from getting my 5K back ($$$ on account at ASHO) to
    their bank downtown. What happened next is VERY odd. The TELLER took out gloves, put them on, took the check, put it in an envelope and THEN gave me the 5K. ODD? You betcha. "Mafia-like organization"? OH YEAH!!
    PSS: Screw you, OSA floor mats and Davey the whimp-ass boy: Tick Tock, Tick Tock: Time IS on **our** side!!! :cheers:
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  17. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    It must not be illegal because it was mediated and signed by attorneys from both sides along with Debbie, Wayne, and the CoS. It's the official settlement recognized by the court which ended the case and prevented the trial. It's not a long document so I encourage everyone to just read it. It's still linked earlier on this thread and over at the VV.
     
  18. BunnySkull

    BunnySkull Silver Meritorious Patron

    Hey Mick & LuLu:

    Sorry, I wasn't saying absolutely she got a pay off just more thinking/writing out loud trying to wrap my head around it all. I think it's very possible she did not get a pay off (If she did I think it would be for far less than the mils Marty predicted). Her walking away with nothing isn't logical to me, but lord knows true believers aren't logical.
     
  19. Mick Wenlock

    Mick Wenlock Admin Emeritus (retired)

    Your last sentence Bunny - that nails it in a one very insightful sentence.
     
  20. LA SCN

    LA SCN NOT drinking the kool-aid

    What a 'Rocket Read' of a ride the whole Debbie Cook email and trial has been. Only the principals of the case can say with 100% accuracy payoff or no payoff. Not me, not Tikk or anyone else except the lawyers and those they represented. and they are not talking.

    Obviously there was behind the scenes litagation going on. I hope the truth comes out on that someday and the speculation can be resolved.

    When the settlement first came out, I was on board with the 'on the face of it' idea that Debbie got no dollars and could not understand the idea that she did. Then I got educated on how that works and is done all the time. The beating the Church was taking publicly and potential legal risk makes a great case for wanting it to all go away, especially at the bottom line of $$ which is THE STAT in the church.

    In early comments it was stated that the court would not want to get embroiled into religion. However, it would not have been the first time the courts weighed in on religious issues:

    From Wikipedia: In 1879, in Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Morrill Act [regarding polygamy], stating: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinion, they may with practices." THAT is exactly what needs to happen to the C of S - its illegal practices brought to light and outlawed.

    So had the case played out, issues raised about the practices at Int Base and the treatment of 'detainees' and the side issue of disconnection may well have gotten a public airing.

    Contrary to what has been stated, there was more damaging testimony to come. Read Debbies emails to Kathy True, entered as Exhibits A and B February 9th. The church is violating the rights of the 'detainees' even though they have been rendered too stupid to know it or complain due to the same type brainwashing and duress used by Stalin and Mao to extract confessions from political prisoners. Only with the addition of the delightful 'make nice' spin video at the end where the victims are paid not to say anything about their treatment.

    Another point to consider is, why would Debbie appear on Good Morning America and Nightline if it would damage her case? Remember, she was mid a court case and I'm sure her lawyer was advising her on what she should and should not do in the media.

    At the very least she dodged a $300,000 bullet, not to mention further haggling over the $100,000 NDA hush money.