A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

Discussion in 'Leaks & Legal' started by MartinJDAnon, Jul 13, 2008.

  1. anonymusicz Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Answer when u can. Leave Chanology if u like (I hope u don't). People come and go. We appreciate what u do, when u can do it.

    You didn't ask our permission and u did it nao!!! that's what counts.
  2. monamia Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Yes it helps.

    Buddha be with you.
  3. highoverlord Member

  4. Nibs Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Thanks for offering some support. I have an issue that I have been pursuing for a long time, how can get my PC Folders. I am interested in them for a personal biographical project I am doing so I would be happy with a copy, viewing them or getting them back. I am not all that interested in "confidential" stuff just the basic stuff. I raised the issue on the ex-scn board and get some opinions but no help. PC Folders - Ex Scientologist Message Board

    I contacted an attorney on the East Coast who took the Church on with an unrelated matter and this was his general opinion. What are your thoughts?

    I contacted an attorney to look into how one might get their PC folders returned. The attorney wanted me to make sure that it was understood that "that it was an opinion but not legal advice." So here are the comments.

    I don't recall any incidents where ex-members were able to obtain PC folders. I just asked someone who would definitely know and that person agreed--there has been no such suit. PC folders have been part of discovery in litigation at least once (Lisa McPherson).

    Your PC folder is also considered by the Church to be "confessional" meaning that third parties can't even get to it without a court order and a damned good reason (see Lisa McPherson).

    It is also likely that your ability to obtain your PC folder is restricted by a contract/waiver/clause you signed as a member, and possibly even something you signed when you left.

    There are obvious reasons they don't distribute them; hell, they don't even allow members to read their own PC folders.

    With all that in mind, the only way I'd imagine they would ever permit an ex-member to even look at them would be (a) under court order; or (b) if the ex-member indemnified Scientology every which way, and possibly sign an additional agreement stating that it would not be made public (written about, etc.). But I highly doubt option (b) because a signed piece of paper giving Scientology all the supposed rights in the world might be found unenforceable by a court if the ex-member ignores what they agreed to and publishes the contents anyway. IOW, there is likely no piece of paper that you could sign which would guarantee Scientology that they wouldn't wind up looking bad in the end. And if it were found that one person successfully beat them on this front, others would be knocking at the door.

    So my guess is that there is virtually no scenario by which an ex-member could obtain the contents of a PC folder w/o a court order. The court order would likely have to be based on another claim--the most likely one I can imagine is where, perhaps, the Church would cull info from the PC folder and publish libel based on its contents, and the defamed ex-member would sue to make the PC folder part of the discovery in the lawsuit (its relevancy stemming fromm the allegation that it would be the basis for the defamation). And obviously, the PC folder also serves as a documentary record for what the Church 'knew' at a certain point in time, which would become relevant (and therefore discoverable) if they were accused of harming someone while in their care, as they were in the Lisa McPherson case. There are probably other scenarios where a court order would work to produce the PC folder, but probably not many. And even in the above examples, Scientology would likely fight like mad to prevent the production of any PC folder.

    I don't think that going to court and simply trying to get a court order to compel Scientology to hand over your PC folder, simply because you wanted it back, is likely either. For one thing, there is the aforementioned agreement you likely signed. Secondly, it's not your property, despite it being 'about' you in every way. Then there's First Amendment problems--a PC folder is inherently "religious" (so far as it pertains to aspects of the Scientology religion, and not some secular administrative function), and courts would be wary of ordering a religion to produce documents such as those. Yeah, I know Scientology's claim to being a religion in the conventional sense are flaky, but US courts are going to be pretty wary of getting between a religion and its religious documentation, and generally refuse to make distinctions between the religiosity of one practice versus another.
  5. Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Intentional Tort
    The Church of Scientology’s practice of “disconnection” encourages the practitioners of Scientology to disconnect or shun all contact with former friends and family members who don’t subscribe to Scientology’s methods and could possibly talk them out of their decision to participate in this cult group. Little known, unknown (or just simply unacknowledged) is the fact that this practice violates Intentional Tort, which prohibits the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Scientology’s practice of disconnection destroys marriages, partnerships, and friendships, causing untold emotional pain and suffering to all involved. Everyone has the right to choose with whom they will or will not associate with. “Disconnection,” however, is not a choice. Practicing Scientologists are told who they must “disconnect” from and are denied services until they comply.

    Debt Servitude/Peonage
    The reality for many Scientologists is a life spent as an overworked and underpaid Church staff member in order to pay for their debt owed to the Church for the endless courses and auditing sessions that it requires. This is known as “peonage,” and Section 1581 of Title 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful to hold a person in "debt servitude," or peonage.

    Why have there been no class action lawsuits filed against the C of S on these grounds and why haven't you responded to my emails?
  6. anonyHAL Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Many years ago, I contacted Narcotics Anonymous' World Service Office to ask if they've ever considered going after Narconon for trademark infringement. NA's response was that they had only ever trademarked "NA" and "Narcotics Anonymous". The upshot was that since they had never trademarked "NarcAnon", they had no standing to challenge the use of "NarcOnon".

    What is your opinion?
  7. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Anything that is public record, such as this, you can legally give out. Wether they read it or not is up to them.

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  8. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Well, *YOUR* file should always be open to you. Same way that I can contact the FBA, and once I have proven who I am get any information that they have on me. Same thing with the Priest/Confessor privilege. It doe *NOT* apply to the involved parties. If you re the Priest you have a right to see the file, if one exists. If you are the Confessor, you have a right to see your file. As we *know* Scientology keeps files, you have a right to see yours if you are an Ex-Scientologist. Also remember, that privilege is broken on the contents once you waive the right. ie, you tell a police officer "I confessed to my priest that I have unpure thoughts about LRH and Jello and I want the world to know I thought so and*waive my right to the Priest/Confessor confidentiality". At that point, while the priest can deny it, the confidentiality is no longer in place.

    Double-edged sword though. If you waive confidentiality, they can post the information without consideration.

    Do realize that if they post or use information from the auditing session, it a) violates the Priest/Confessor privilege and b) nullifies it meaning they waive the privilege. It works both ways, but it give you info to bring to the IRS to show they are a cult rather than religion ;)

    Hope his helps:guyfawkes:
  9. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    If you can find *practicing Scientologists* willing to file a suit, then you have a case under this section.

    As fr the Emails. Haven't recieved them. Send me a message here.

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  10. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    NarcAnon can likley claim a usage trademark and try for a trademark violation. They may or may not win. That is a tricky type of suit.

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  11. muldrake Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    I'm not convinced of this, but even if there is such a right, the agreement signed to take Scientology services, leaked here by WL, purports to waive any such right in 5(d) and to make such documents the property of CSI.

    It's probable that in the context of a litigation subpoena, such a contractual term would be unenforceable as against public policy, and in any case, the "priest" in the priest-penitent privilege has no right to invoke the privilege on his or her own behalf, but it's certainly a another hurdle to be considered. It is a near certainty, however, that the response to a polite request by an ex-member to see their PC folder would be an immediate and unequivocal refusal.
  12. tikk Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    I disagree with this assessment.

    To begin with, all Scientologists sign away the right to ever see the information contained in their PC folder, so that particular provision in that contract would need to somehow be invalidated before anything else happened. And any argument attempting to invalidate the services agreement would naturally lead to questioning the reasoning behind why Scientology doesn't permit its adherents to see their PC folders (even while they're members in good standing) would, in my opinion, raise First Amdt issues that they'd likely win on.

    Assuming you got past the contract issue, there is another First Amdt issue lurking, which involves the nature of the type of information found in PC folders.

    Scientology would likely argue that the type of info in PC folders is so inexorably intertwined with Scientology added content, dogma, and gibberish (like e-meter readings) that everything in there is protected, and whatever information that could be extracted would be meaningless without the (protected) context.

    Also, PC folders, their importance, the restrictions and procedures involving them, etc., are described by LRH as religious and sacred. PC folders don't merely contain notes written on blank sheets of paper and filed under an individual's name.

    Legal theories aside, this particular issue is one the CoS would pour considerable resources into to make sure it never happens, because if one person was able to do it, everyone would be right behind that person.

    That all said, if they were to use information contained only in the PC folder against you, it would almost definitely be seen as a waiver; the big problem here, of course, is how one would go about proving that, since they certainly wouldn't admit to it.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. peterstorm Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    An answer:

    Here's to you, Canadian Anons, from the highly regarded, specialist of minority rights and individual liberties, canadian lawyer Julius Grey (sorry in advance for any bad translations):


    La chronique de Julius Grey
    Freedom of expression
    Julius Grey 14/07/2008

    Long unpopular of the great liberties in Canada, freedom of expression has just won three judicial verdicts. In each of these cases, political correctness has taken a hit.

    First, the Supreme Court, in a diffamation case, declared that a commentary made in good faith is justified even if unreasonnable. In occurrence, the use of an exagerated language against homophobes did not involve civil responsibility.

    In another case, B.C.’s Commission on human rights did not retain complaints against journalist Mark Steyn and Mclean magazine following his strong critic of islam.

    Finally, Quebec’s court of appeal refused members of Falun Gong, a new chinese religion, the right to sue a newspaper that had published insulting words about its founder, master Lee. Master Lee himself could have sued. Humiliation and hurt feelings could not however permit adepts of this religion to ask for compensation for themselves. The effect of these judgements will be particularly memorable in religion matters. Religious and conscience freedoms are large enough to carry the right to oppose religion and to critic one or more religions. One can do it politely, with respect, but also in an insulting and strong manner.

    After that series of arguments, it is clear that Mohammed caricatures, contested throughout the world, would be perfectly permissible here (Canada).

    These days, critics of christianism, notably in the history of Quebec, would go along without problems, but other religions are intolerant to critic and satire. After the recent judgements, we could take for granted that there is no more taboo subjects and that only hate propaganda defined in strict way can be sanctioned. It may be time to ask tribunals to re-examine the laws on hate propaganda in which the risks for freedom outweigh the benefits.

    Beyong religion

    The new tendency to favor freedom will extend beyong religion, to all controversial subjects. Equality of the sexes, race equality, and respect of all sexual orientations are very important for us. Is it necessary to insist that those who have a traditionnal or even reactionnary vision of things would keep silence?

    For some years, Canada has suffered from suffocating kindness. Hurtful or offensive things cannot be said to members of powerful lobbies.

    This obligation of kindness is far from being kind. In the name of kindness and absolute rights of so-called victims, we are ready to destroy careers, to impose monetary sanctions and even to use the penal code against those who oppose dominant orthodoxy.

    It’s true that part of the prohibited discourse is the product of ignorance, anger and bad taste. At the same time, there’s a possibility that different and innovative ideas are repressed or un expressed under prudence.

    Let’s hope that tribunal reversals in favor of freedom of expression will halt political correctness and suffocating kindness.

    Canoe – Infos – Liberté d'expression
  14. Nibs Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Thanks for the info. I really have no interest in the IRS issue, I just want the folders. I am looking for a practical approach which would include hiring an attorney. As a declared SP I do not expect that they would welcome any direct communication from me. If you might be interested or know of someone in the greater Los Angeles Area I would like to discuss that approach.

  15. Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Please forgive my frustration--I realize that you are only one person...and you were out of town. I hope that I didn't appear ungrateful because I honestly do feel that you are unselfishly providing an extremely valuable contribution of your time and expertise to the community. I only wish that someone would be willing to file a qui tam complaint against the C of S for its defrauding the government. I know that there is possibly quite a bit of money in it for whoever eventually does it--I simply can't take on any more cases pro se until I am finished digging myself out of the hole that the C of S' "dead-agenting" and "fair game" practices have put me in. I did not choose to represent myself--I'm having to out of necessity. I attempted to contact almost every private attorney in the State of Indiana and not even one would even return my phone calls or respond to my emails. The ACLU has refused my case as has the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Public Justice, Lambda Legal, and Amnesty International. I can't even get any of the professional or non-profit mental health agencies to at least file an Amicus brief on my behalf. When I called the Lafayette Resident Agency of the F.B.I., the special agent on duty was actually expecting my call. Now, how weird is that?
  16. Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Also, I don't think that it would be that difficult to find disconnected friends and family members of practicing scientologists who would be willing to file an intentional tort claim.
  17. tazor Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Co$ tells it's members that their pc files are held in the strictest confidence. Simply another one of their lies. They have people going through pc files all the time that aren't suppose to have access to them. They summarize all the "crimes" a pc has confessed to and post it on a page in the front of the pc folder in case they ever need to fair game that person. The pc folders aren't keep securely at all. Neither are the ethics folders.
  18. Anon516 Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Martin, I am interested in knowing exactly what tax exemptions c0$ claims under U.S. Law. Is there any place where the list of tax exemptions enjoyed by the cult are compiled? I haven't been able to find anything succinct enough I could confidently give the details to bystanders. Reading the outcomes as written by the judge, I'm still not sure how to get the meat across to the guy on the street.
  19. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    The argument here would be that the contract is illegal. If you can prove that it voids the contract as an illegal conract is void on it's face. Anyway, it is not an easy fight.

    Hope that helps :guyfawkes:
  20. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Never said it would be easy ;)

    I do agree that the Co$ will fight this one tooth and nail. It opens up a large hole of crud for them.

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  21. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    This one I will have to research. Give me a few days.

  22. Tuxedo Jack Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Okay, I have a question for you.

    Houston is in possession of the OTIII lecture in MP3 format. We want to blast it out over speakers aimed at the org, which is set back on the lot in a shopping center. The cops don't seem to mind us, and we can't get on the parking lot, as the shopping center is considered private property.

    The noise code specifically states that First Amendment speech is a valid defense to exceeding the noise code.

    NPC Law Library: Houston TX Noise Ordinance

    As this org is in a commercial district on the middle of one of the busiest streets on Houston, an iPod and crappy speakers won't be enough; we need something good.

    Can we legally use powerful speakers to aim the sound specifically _at_ the org and have it considered enough of a First Amendment action to pass prima facie?
  23. Anon1029 Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    I can't find anyone else with this question using the search bar!!
    How can I find out if masks are legal in my state or not?
    I live in Oklahoma, also.
  24. Gorgon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!


    I axed this on another thread and I should have axed it here.

    Does anyone with a brain have an idea about how long it takes the court to rule on the RICO suit? What I mean is whether or not it will be heard or not.
  25. Obi-Wan-anon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Too bad we can't get hypersonic speakers for use here.

    These speakers as shown here:
    ATC Hypersonic Sound Speakers, allow directed sound, leaving the rest of the public out of the "cone" of sound.

    Pointed directly at the org might be considered harassment, but would be lulz: only those in the org, or walking past the org, would hear the sound. Wouldn't have to play OT 3, just a loop of "you are in a cult zone".
  26. Graham Berry Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Hi and welcome to the fray.

    I assume you know who I am and I would appreciate chatting with you and receiving your input, particularly as the civil rights issues are now being presented to the DoJ.

    I will be back in LA Thursday and would appreciate chatting after that.

    Graham Berry
    (310) 745-3771
  27. me57 Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    wow i Pray In The Nme Of Jesus The Christ what You are asking can Legally be done. God Bless:flowers::anon:
  28. Darkanon5 Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Many thanks LawFag just watch your back and stay safe we'll do the rest
  29. muldrake Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Having read it and the previous Letterese suit, my guesses are that it is thrown out, probably under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim), though other contenders are 8(a) (requirement for a plain and simple statement of a claim), res judicata (this has already been decided), and the fact that apparently, this case concerns matters Letterese has already settled out of court. I don't know exactly what the contents of the settlement were, but if it was with Scientology, they'd be sweeping terms. They're pretty sure to respond to it in their motion to dismiss.

    Letterese appears to have tried to re-frame his old copyright suit as a RICO action, and I don't see why he'd be allowed to relitigate his old case in this guise.
  30. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Well, the trick here is the speech type. The arguments can go both ways.

    I would recommend that if you are going to play it, keep the volume to a reasonable level.

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  31. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    I will give a call on Friday
  32. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Call your local Police Station or Bar Association

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  33. Tuxedo Jack Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    We also plan on getting a noise permit, no matter what, and having a critique of the speech right next to a video camera. It's arguable it could fall under the criticism/parody clause of Fair Use, so that's what we'll aim for.

    Thanks again for the advice!
  34. monamia Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Martin JDAnon
    Please don't leave us
    Say you're just really busy.

    Need you.
  35. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!


    Sorry for not having been here much, but the poster is correct. I have been very busy. I am basically back though :)

    And I will be at a protest on the East Coast on the 16th!

    Hope this helps:guyfawkes:
  36. monamia Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Good I was worried!
    So good to c u.
  37. MrNobody Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    Hope you'll be at the DC protest, it'd be nice to meet you and shake your hand.
  38. xfool4now Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    DUDE! will you be near us?

    come party with NYC Anons!!

  39. MartinJDAnon Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    I wll keep you informed which event I show up at. I will be trying to get to NYC, Philly, Boston and DC in the next four months, so we will see where I start :)
  40. me57 Member

    Re: A Lawyer Answers Your Questions!!

    do not forget Us Southeners and THE south is Beautiful stay God Blessed.:flowers:

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins