‘Darth Xander’ files motion challenging Scientology’s anti-protesting injunction

<3!
Are the clams are going to film it? Ask for the same

Their MO is to record so probably. I'll be able to get a transcript if I want.

With eprice of modern camcorders, getting it filmed yoruself shouldn't be too expensive, would it?

do a clay demo

Wonder how many lawyers they are going to drag in for this?

Far more important is the number of OTs. If any known OT attends the depo I'm going to demand that they leave before I sit for any questions. OTs are serious business.

I would not rely on a transcript. Definitely -- and defiantly -- insist on making a recording. Live streaming... meh; I can't watch streaming stuff very well on my rickety PC so no opinion on that one. It is kind of lulzy to think about though.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/284871821/CoS-v-LMT-Request-for-Admissions

Does anyone want to see them? Just alleged print-outs from Flag Down conference web page, alleged transcripts of my and Bunker's comments at FD and a (definitely real) pic of me, Pete and Bunker at same. Plus a listing they put together of dates I supposedly raided down there.

That Wally Pope must've been on drugs when he wrote that. There's no such word as 'genuiness', so far as I can discover, and it would be folly to admit to any such thing.

My best guesses are:

• guinness, or
• genius

either of which could conceivably be admitted to, but make no sense when applied to documents.

Has to have been drugs. is my theory.

Sure, if there's no harm in posting them, let's see them!

One question though. What's the reason for a "Plaintiff's Request for Admissions"?

Isn't that like ... Guinness? ...Darth Xander... they were telling you that you are a World Famous Beer... or... maybe ... you needed a Beer... to cool off in the hot sun after they BSed their way along... a little suds goes a long way.... isn't like they views of MEST....

Ohhh... Disambig... what's going on.... Good to see you.... Thanks for helping me out... you are awesome...

You are a cool guy.... Oh I wish I could have been there.... I always miss all of the good stuff...

#2 is their usual crock. They're taking every time you were in downtown Clearwater and calling it a list "Dates Alex Hageli Has Picketed in Clearwater", when it should be called "Dates Our Creepy Stalkers, PIs, and Hundreds of Video Cameras Spotted Him Legally Present in Downtown Clearwater".

How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg?

so, nothing that THEY did counts as breaking the "injunction"?

I'm really disappointed. No super secret surveillance shots. Am I not worthy of being followed?

oh you are worthy alright. They were looking into your Face Book page, looking at your postings here, and making a list of al the times you protested.
Hey that is IAS money well spent!

No 27 8×10 color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence against you? I is disappoint!

or maybe the COS can shoop in a crowd of Xanders all together protesting in a photo and then claim he didn't have a permit to accommodate that many people.
Protip to the COS: be careful of using cut off heads in the photo, its a dead give away.
crap, did I just give them an idea? LOL

You are so damn funny....hahahahahalolololol

https://www.scribd.com/doc/285932312/Intervenor-s-Response-to-Request-for-Admissions

I just can't understand how the cult can defend something that no longer exists.
How can anyone take their defense seriously?
They have no defense. The Lisa McPherson Trust is no more.
Whether or not it was a "permanent" injunction or not. It's permanence ended when it was dissolved. IMO
If it was still active then they are breaking the law it by setting up their new Disney Land buildings there. Isn't one of those buildings in the old LMT building? Or am I mistaken.
The cult has to lose this. If not, well you know their routine..... court will turn a blind eye, payola, blackmail the participants and all that stuff the cult always pulls.

Thanks Xander! Can you explain this in layman's terms what this request is and what's the point of it? Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't understand what this is all about.

They gave me a bunch of questions to answer about my visits to Flag. I answered them. Just laying the groundwork for the hearing.

I cannot recall, but is there a hearing date set?

Not yet, no. Won't be until we've established a record of facts from which to make our respective arguments. If I had to guess, I'd say hearing in March.

Too bad that these things take such a ridiculous amount to time. Bleck.

Cool. It's nice getting the blow-by-blow and I look forward to hearing about the next move. I hope the groundwork is being laid for some major ass-kicking!

Yeah me too.

On to Plan C. If that doesn't work, back to Plan A.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/287730262/FSO-v-LMT-Order-Denying-Motion-to-Intervene

Judge Minkoff? Any relation?

well bummer.

So if I read that right, you can't intervene to have the injunction lifted but that doesn't necessarily mean that the CoS can't keep trying to use it against you. Is that correct?

so the judge refuses to intervene on an injunction of an organization that no longer exists?
makes sense
I would imagine if this judge is not on the up and up that the COS must have paid him something pretty crazy for Xandar not to win. The last thing the COS wants is this injunction to go away and I would imagine that money is no object to make it remain permanent. (even thought it is no longer there)
Can Xandar ask the judge how an injunction can be permanent for a business that is dissolved? Or is that not allowed?
Is there any other cases (or any laws written) in Florida that point to injunctions being terminated after a business has been dissolved?

As of now, yes. Plan C might take care of that though. We shall see.

Put out a press release!

The decision is primarily based on procedure, and not substance RightOn. The judge said its a very rare thing for someone not a party to litigation to be allowed to intervene years after the case closed (which is true). I argued the circumstances I find myself in with the injunction justified nevertheless justified intervention; Minkoff disagreed. He did note that I'm free to seek a declaratory judgement regarding this whole situation, which is actually how I originally planned on approaching this. That's Plan A. Still working on Plan C.

thanks Xander. What is a declaratory judgement? And what will that do? Sorry not a law noob, or smart for that matter. At least I am honest. Lol