France: Scientology appeal trial Nov. 3 - Dec. 1, 2011

Discussion in 'Media' started by mnql1, May 9, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mnql1 Member

    Translation of a short French article posted on Nov. 10, 2011 on the website of the Europe1 radio network:
    La Scientologie s'en prend à l'Unadfi
    • Like Like x 2
  2. mnql1 Member

    Translation of a French article posted on Nov. 10, 2011 on the website of the Le Figaro:
    La Scientologie s'en prend à l'Unadfi
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Sponge Member

    Thanks mnql1, the French feeds at least have finally livened up a little in the past 30min.
    Sounds like it's getting very heated in the courtroom and it confirms the previous understated local tweets.
    You'd think that the scientology defence army would use its strongest arguments first if it really wanted UNADFI removed as a plaintiff. They have 7 lawyers on this and now they resort to invectives such as "parasite". LOL, pot-kettle.

    Here's a pic of the courtroom (from Nov 3rd) from that guy who was doing the tweets earlier... so you can feel like you're really there....
    jpdeniau jean philippe deniau
    The bar, Scientology
    3 Nov
    • Like Like x 2
  4. James Spader Member

    Merged related threads.
  5. Albion Member

    It did get pretty heated in the courtroom this morning.

    For three hours or so, the various defence lawyers explained why the
    appeal court should follow the lead of the original trial court and
    refuse the request of UNADFI, the counter-cult movement, to be accepted
    as plaintiffs in the case. When, after three hours, Morice got up to
    respond to the attacks against his client -- and some against his own
    professional standing -- things very quickly degenerated, to the point
    that the judge was forced to adjourn the proceedings to break up a
    shouting match between Morice and the defence lawyers, and call in the

    The bâtonnier is a senior lawyer attached to the court, elected by his
    and her peers, who mediates disputes between lawyers and their clients
    and -- as in this case, between courtroom lawyers. It is is job to to
    knock heads together to get a solution. Once the lawyers, the judges
    and the bâtonnier had met in chambers, the judge adjourned proceedings
    until Tuesday.

    The core of the dispute came from lawyer Olivier Morice's response to
    complaints by the defence lawyers against him. They pointed out that he
    had earlier characterised their launch of a string of QPCs as bad faith. (QPCs
    are Priority Questions of Constitutionality, technical attacks on the case to
    get it adjourned or even killed off before the appeal trial takes place. In fact,
    the defence lawyers argued, it was Morice who was guilty of bad faith: they
    accused him of having, at the 11th hour, offered fresh grounds for his application
    on behalf of UNADFI without having given them the required notice of his change of

    Morice, when he tried to argue that these arguments had in fact been long present
    in the case documents, he was subjected to a combined verbal assault from several
    defence lawyers. Naturally, having sat through three hours of their pleadings, he objected
    to being interrupted and gave as good as he got -- so the exchanges quickly deteriorated
    into a shouting match. It looks as if this will be settled one way or another if Morice can
    produce the relevant document from the existing case files -- failing that, he will have to
    find a fall-back position.

    Even once this is settled however, other procedural issues still have to
    be decided before we actually get to the meat of the case -- assuming
    the court does not accede to any of the remaining defence requests to
    have the case thrown out, referred to the Cour de Cassation (Supreme
    Court) etc... So far however, they have rejected eight QPCs.

    In the original case, Morice represented not just UNADFI
    and one of the individual plaintiffs in the case -- so he was free to
    intervene when he wanted in the case. Now that the plaintiff has
    withdrawn from the case, he needs to be able to retain his presence in
    court by having UNADFI accepted as a plaintiff in its own right -- or at
    the very least have the court attach the request to the dossier to be
    decided at the same time the case is decided (as happened at the
    original trial). In the latter case Morice could, I think, continue to
    play the same active role as before, even if his request was eventually
    refused -- and that is just the eventuality the defence lawyers are
    trying to head off.

    Morice's interventions in the original trial were often quite telling --
    in particular, he was able to introduce compromising Scientology
    documents many of which eventually featured in the final judgment. And
    the questions he put to two of Scientology's experts witnesses, who were
    there to support the scientific credentials of the e-meter, drew
    damaging admissions from them that undermined Scientology's efforts (see
    The E-Meter Experts in my earlier coverage).

    If Morice is definitively excluded from the appeal court proceedings, it
    will inevitably have an effect on the trial -- Olivier Saumon,
    representing the Order of Pharmacists on the lesser charges, has kept
    strictly to the events that concern his clients: essentially the
    Purification Rundown. We've not yet had a chance to see what the
    prosecutor in this case is made of (it was a younger pair who appeared
    at the original trial). Inevitably however, he cannot have the specialist
    knowledge that Morice, by virtue of his work with UNADFI, has acquired.

    But all the documents and arguments already submitted to the court
    remain in the dossier and will still be there for the judges to consult.
    So if Morice was forced out of the trial, if it went ahead without him,
    it would be a coup for the defence, but not necessarily conclusive.

    More if/when I have time....

    Jonny Jacobsen
    • Like Like x 9
  6. We are fortunate to have any amount of your time Jonny. Thanks for the on scene report.
    • Like Like x 3
  7. DeathHamster Member

    I suppose there are seven defense lawyers because they are pretending that they represent different clients rather than just seven toes of Scientology's lawyer-sock?
    • Like Like x 2
  8. peterstorm Member

    7 lawyers? This must cost them big bucks.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Anonymous Member

    Can't the courts do something about the blatant timewasting? Like, hold the clam lawyers in contempt for their faggotry?
  10. Albion Member

    Like it or not, these are perfectly legitimate tactics: the QPRs were introduced during
    Sarkozy's presidency to strengthen the rights of the defence. And laws that benefit
    the defence can be applied retroactively.

    If the court dismissed such procedures without considering them carefully that would only
    increase the risk of a mistrial. And no judge wants to see their rulings overturned at the
    Cour de Cassation. Of course the court is perfectly entitled to say what it thinks of such
    tactics when it delivers its rulings: and the judge has already called one defence lawyer to
    order for making what she considered to be inappropriate remarks.

    In the end though, the defence has the right to use whatever tactics it feels will serve its
    clients best. The defendants have had their day in court; they lost. Now they have the right
    to appeal, and go to the Supreme Court if need be. A court case isn't meant to be a foregone
    • Like Like x 5
  11. Like they care.

    This is the lawfare cult, who will spend $10 million to defend a $1 million court case (and then settle at the end of it)

  12. mnql1 Member

    Scientology's lawyers want to refer questions of constitutionality to the Constitutional Council, but the wife (Jacqueline de Guillenchmidt) of one Scientology's lawyers (Michel de Guillenchmidt) is a member of the Constitutional Council. Is this a problem?
    • Like Like x 2
  13. jensting Member

    ^ ^ ^ THIS!

    Best Regards

  14. Albion Member

    I didn't know that: but I still don't think we have any right to make such an assumption.
  15. mnql1 Member

    Michel de Guillenchmidt is identified as a lawyer representing Scientology in many articles about Scientology's appeal trial, for example:
    France: One plaintiff withdrawing from Nov. 3 appeal trial

    The French Wikipedia article on Michel de Guillenchmidt says (translation):
    The photo of Michel de Guillenchmidt below appeared on the website of Le nouvel Observateur on Nov. 3, 2011:


    This is the information that appears about Jacqueline de Guillenchmidt on the website of the Constitutional Council:

    • Like Like x 4
  16. Anonymous Member

    No, but speculation is fun. Speculation will build a narrative that serves our purposes by making a Cult Shill Lawyer look like as much of a double-dodgy-dealing fuck as his clam clients.

    This is still Anonymous. We run this. Life Ruination is just one of the tools in our box of tricks
  17. mnql1 Member

    Translation of an article posted online on Nov. 11, 2011 in the French edition of Slate:
    Scientologie: les grandes manoeuvres pour échapper à la justice
    • Like Like x 6
  18. Anonymous Member

    not looking too good for COS :)
    Their court shennanigans are finally catching up to them.
    Now if they would only realize this in the US

    "Unless a new miracle comes along to save the Scientologists"

    LOVE this sentence.
    Love the thought that people think they would need a miracle to be saved.
  19. timthephoto Member

    i'm wondering if the clams can have their original sentences changed when they get found guilty again?
    like in the UK a "non meritorious" appeal can leave a defendent with a larger panalty than they wasted the court's time bitching about
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Albion Member

    I reviewed Fansten's excellent book on Scientology earlier this year
    at Infinite Complacency. As you can tell from the piece in Slate,
    he has good contacts and has kept up to date on the latest
    developments concerning the movement.
    • Like Like x 4
  21. Sponge Member

    Appeal Day #5

    [thanks mnql1 for the updated translation]
    Another similar report but with a really creepy looking pic of scientology OSA Eric Roux...

    Caption contest:"Just you wait until I bring the pictures of the judge naked, in a hotel room, with a sheep"
    • Like Like x 4
  22. Anonymous Member

  23. Fuck yeah, France!

    Sarkozy can choke on the thousand-cock shitstorm of further European integration, but in the meantime, the judiciary is Doing It Right.
  24. RightOn Member

    wow that is an evil looking picture!
    I would have not been surprised if the background were in flames!
  25. TinyDancer Member

    Great outcomes, so far.
  26. Anonymous Member

  27. DeathHamster Member

    A little shooping could fix that. A cutout of him with a transparent background would make a good Disaster Scilon.
    • Like Like x 2
  28. Anonymous Member

    The Church of Unadfi is being discriminated by the cult of $cientology!

    Now, to get Anonymous recognised as a church!
  29. Quentinanon Member

    If the scientology crime syndicate engages in argumentum ad hominem, that implies they have a WEAK CASE.
  30. Quentinanon Member

    The emotion he displays is Contempt, which is a very common emotion with scientologists. (and does not exist on Hubbard's "tone scale".)

    • Like Like x 2
  31. RightOn Member

    yes please!
    I don't have skilz
  32. RightOn Member

    doesn't even need devil horns
  33. DeathHamster Member

    Okay, I hacked at it with


    Testing testing...

  34. AnonLover Member

    ^^Needs Hamburger strut Anon marching in
  35. RightOn Member

  36. Albion Member

    The defence lawyers in the trial on appeal of Scientology staged a mass walk-out
    this morning after the judge rejected their ninth QPC (Priority Question of
    From the brief comments made outside the court their position is that they cannot
    proceed because they feel the scales are tipped against them.
    The central issue appears to be the court's decision at the previous hearing to effectively
    allow counter-cult group UNADFI to play an active part in the proceedings.
    This was the practical result of the decision to defer consideration of their application
    to be treated as plaintiffs until the after the case had been tried.
    The final QPC, filed on Tuesday, immediately after the judge's decision to defer a ruling
    on UNADFI, concerned just this question of égalité des armes -- having the same
    rights and opportunities as the prosecution and the plaintiffs.
    Scientology had settled with all the individual plaintiffs. The defence lawyers had tried
    with several procedural motions to get the trial either delayed or the previous judgment
    set aside.
    When that failed and the trial of the facts of the case looked like going ahead, they tried
    to get UNADFI effectively excluded from taking an active part in the trial.
    The decision of Judge Claudine Forkel to defer a ruling on whether UNADFI could be
    plainiffs meant that Olivier Morice, for UNADFI, would have been able to play exactly
    the same active role in the appeal trial that he had in the initial proceedings.
    The defence position appears to be that this means the dice are loaded against them in
    court and they cannot proceed under those conditions.
    It took Judge Forkel less than five minutes to read out her ruling rejecting the final QPC.
    A defence lawyer made a brief statement saying they could not continue under such
    conditions and they staged their mass walk-out, lawyer and defendants together.
    The judge immediately suspended the hearing.
    The lawyers for Scientology are preparing to release a statement that will set out their
    position in more detail.
    Outside the court, Scientologist Eric Roux said there was no point in remaining when
    their most basic rights had been denied and every argument they put forward
    Olivier Morice for UNADFI, described the walk-out as laughable.
    The defence team had, with their multiple QPCs, been pursuing a carefully thought-out
    but nevertheless suicidal strategy from the start of the trial, he added.
    • Like Like x 6
  37. Sponge Member

    So, Jonny, in summary it's....


    I expect there will be much texting from the war room at Int. Base to Eric Roux in Paris...
    = You Suck Cock On (the) Eiffel Tower
    • Like Like x 2
  38. Albion Member

    It may simply be that they are abandoning the trial on appeal to
    concentrate on pleadings at the Cour de Cassation to try to get
    the convictions overturned on legal grounds.
    Morice describes it as a suicidal strategy, even if it was clearly
    carefully planned: but it's not over until the last gavel has fallen.
    If they do decide to boycott the trial on appeal, the trial goes
    ahead without them: but the sight of the empty defence benches
    has a fairly powerful symbolic value, which they will no doubt try
    to exploit. They will argue that that the proceedings have been
    stacked against them.
    Or this may just be a piece of courtroom theatrics and they will
    return to the proceedings at a later date. Watch this space...
    UPDATE: according to the latest report from Reuters, the issue is indeed
    that of UNADFI's role in the trial.
    • Like Like x 5
  39. Anonymous Member

    If they get butthurt and ragequit, they should auto-lose.
  40. Anonymous Member

    This episode serves only to intensify legal scrutiny in other countries looking to remove the cancerous cult.

    Vive La France!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins