Discussion in 'Media' started by mnql1, May 9, 2011.
..and increase the fines and sentences, maybe some of them custodial.
Judges examine the facts of the case, hear arguments, and make rulings.
That's how Law works in a democracy.
Boycotting a trial because you're upset with a ruling is the height of petulance, and should lead to sanctions, at the very least (contempt of court, here we come). I certainly hope that their actions can be legitimately held against them when considering the case.
The other thing that strikes me is that these antics seem to be a tacit admission that the cult believes the only way to win is by legalfaggotry, rather than any validity of their appeal.
Thursday's hearing resumed without the defendants and
their lawyers and the court began looking at the facts of
As things stand, since there appear to be no witnesses
lined up and the defence will not be making its contribution,
it looks as if the trial may well wind up by the end of next
week instead of the first week of December, as originally
So, assuming this appeal court "trial" with absent defendants goes the same way as the original then is a higher court appeal (Cour de cassation) virtually automatic right like the current appeal was, or is it something that has to be weighed up by a judge and granted (or not granted)?
I can see these fuckers trying to take it all the way to the ECHR.
Translation of a French article posted on Nov. 17, 2011 on the website of weekly news magazineLe Point[/url]:
La Scientologie retire avocats et prévenus d'un procès en France
Translation of an excerpt from a French article posted on Nov. 17, 2011 on the website of the TF1 network:
Scientologie : prévenus et avocats quittent le procés
Pretty much automatic, I believe.
If they don't get that, it'll just be one more thing they'll take to European courts.
Of course. After all, their sacred hard sell techniques are at the heart of the conviction for organized fraud; they'll baaaaaaaw about that until the money run out...
I hope they have enough towels then.
well played sir
The appeal is where the defense could have made a huge difference by arguing the merits of the case. Dunno if the Cassation court is going to accomodate that. Of course, it may be that the criminal organization known as the "church" of $cientology is happy to not present any defense other than "it's not fair!"
 certainly worked a treat for our friend Franz who got a previous criminal conviction for hurting Eric Roux's feelings overturned on appeal
How does a trial in France work if one of the opposing parties isn't present? Are there any special proceedings or does the court just carry on as if nothing happened ("Any response from the defense? No? Okay...")?
Perhaps they could put seven teddy bears in the seats as placeholders?
They kinda wore away their chance really. They wasted two weeks on pinning their hopes on these faggotry filings and demands to have UNADFI removed. It was gamble after gamble, with decreasing chances of success. They lost 9 times on the QPCs so now, short on time, they are hurling their toys out of their pram.
If they go to the Cours de Cassation then I understand it to be more like the "normal" kind of appeal i.e. on legal points, not retrying facts of the case. Is that where they want to be? Do they have a legal silver bullet? Or do they just want to buy more time so they can disappear barrowloads of trial dox and drown some judge's pets?
I've no idea but from what our roving reporter, Jonny Jacobsen says, it seems like it just goes ahead without them. I believe that in a French trial court it is a bunch of lay judges with a main judge, with no jury, so maybe they don't have to be so cautious. So, I'm guessing that for it to be thrown out then the defence doesn't just walk out but has to actually file something to withdraw the appeal and take it up the ass as per the original convictions. Jonny's the best one to ask.
I do wonder whether the defence lawyers are going to keep on sticking their heads round the door, so to speak, continually trying to fag up the trial process in the remaining time. They still might calm down and rejoin when they are done with their day of drama queenery.
Maybe they are going to build a large wooden trojan badger.
I have a better idea
I think that's pretty much how it will happen. So far as I know, none of those
involved have called other witnesses, so the judge will read out extracts from
the (former) plaintiffs' accounts and possibly some of the expert testimony from
the original trial and ask the lawyers still present to state their position. That's
why it looks likely to end sooner than originally forecast: with the present lawyers
absent, it will inevitably take less time.
I think it is pretty much a foregone conclusion that this goes to the Cour de Cassation,
when the procedural moves rejected on appeal will be tested again. What will be
interesting to see is what the prosecution asks for (it can't ask for dissolution as it did
last time as the relevant law turned out to have been struck from the law books shortly
before the trial started).
Translation of a French article posted on Nov. 17, 2011 on the website of Le nouvel Observateur:
Une ancienne présidente de la Scientologie porte plainte pour vol
What, they get to bring their PRQs up all over again?
Hopefully the Cour de Cassation will see the tactics as blatant timewasting and rule accordingly.
They can ask for new penalties? If so, I want to see the full-page adverts (remember those? Of all the penalties imposed, that's the one I'm most excited to see) expanded to a double-page spread.
And an expedited costs award.
And whatever you get for Contempt Of Court.
And, as mentioned above, some custodial sentences would be good.
Oh, look, the cult are accusing the opposition of what they themselves routinely do.
ISTR Ron said something about Suppressives accusing others of the crimes they're guilty of...
SCIENTOLOGY IS COMPLAINING ABOUT DOCUMENT THEFT FROM LEGAL FILES?
Hahaha. Oh my giddy aunt. Poetic.
I hadn't even finished laughing at how they bravely ran away away
If they haven't been allowed to consult the case file, how do they know that the documents are gone...?
Quoting from a Slate.fr article previously posted last week by mnql1: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/thre...al-nov-3-dec-1-2011.88104/page-3#post-1951477 .........
^Crystal ball not actually required.
Typical $cilon strategy, stall, stall, then stall some more until the other side runs out of money or the court gets fed up and tosses the case.
Don't forget: complaining that the case has taken too long and requesting that it be dismissed.
It's satire, dummy!
Tony Ortega mentions the appeal trial in his Village Voice blog today (Thursday, November 11, 2011):
Scientology Storms Out of Court in France, Getting Hammered in Florida: It's Time for Thursday Stats!
So the Scis vanished the dox as a way to force UNADFI out of the case - because if UNADFI's app dox re being a plaintiff don't exist, how can UNADFI be a plaintiff?
Scientology Storms Out of Court in France, Getting Hammered in Florida: It's Time for Thursday Stats! - New York News - Runnin' Scared
Johnny- a couple of questions from me. Is UNADFI trying to serve as amicus curiae in this suit? Who is the last remaining plaintiff in this case?
As for the equality of arms - I've always thought that it was a common law concept that did not exist in continental legal systems, of which France is part. I mean in France judges can question witnesses on the stand directly [which would never happen in a common law system]. Plus, in France, judges know the entire case from the get go, as they get a police dossier, while in the common law countries judges only hear what the parties present. That's why I was a bit surprised about the use of the égalité des armes concept in this trial. Do you think it stands a chance?
Actually, not showing up in court is perfectly within the rights of a party in a civil suit, it's just the result will be that their arguments won't be heard and accordingly the position of the other party will be the only one taken into consideration by the judge when reaching his/her decision.
How do I get this (%&^(_%$&*!!!! clown makeup off mah fist?
The Order of Pharmacists is the last remaining plaintiff.
You'll also find that info burried in this Slate.fr article previously posted last week by mnql1: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/thre...al-nov-3-dec-1-2011.88104/page-3#post-1951477
To see where they fit in interms of who or what entity was convicted of what charge, here's the results from original trial reposted...
1. GUILTY Alain Rosenberg. 2 years prison (suspended) 30,000E fine *+
2. GUILTY Didier Michaux 18months Prison (suspended) 20,000E fine *
3. GUILTY Jean-François Valli 18months Prison (suspended) 10,000E fine *
4. GUILTY Sabine Jacquart 10months Prison (suspended) 5,000E fine *+
5. GUILTY Aline Fabre 2,000E fine ~
6. GUILTY Marie Anne Pasturel 1,000E fine ~
7. GUILTY Celebrity Centre 400,000E fine * Ordered to publish details of judgment.
8. GUILTY Scientology Bookstore 200,000E fine * Ordered to publish details of judgment.
* = organized fraud
+ = complicity in the illegal exercise of pharmacy
~ = illegal exercise of pharmacy
Note: (7) & (8 ) are ordered to pay for the details of the conviction to be published in the major French and English-language news outlets including Le Monde, Le Figaro, Libération, the Herald Tribune and Time Magazine – and their websites.
Other individual orders and penalties such as for damages and costs awarded to the plaintiffs add further 27,450 Euros to the total.
For further details, see journailst Jonny Jacobsens court coverage on his excellent blog, "Infinite Complaceny" at: http://infinitecomplacency.blogspot.com/2009/10/courts-ruling.html
Thanks. That sounds promissing. I mean it's an organisation as opposed to a person + pharmaceuticals have money, so it will be more difficult to break them. What kind of damage was Scientology found to have caused them?
Weekly news magazine Le nouvel Observateur reports that, given the absence of Scientology's lawyers and defendants, the appeal trial is now expected to end on Thursday, November 24, instead of December 1.
Source: Source: La Scientologie ne veut plus assister à son procès en appel ("Scientology no longer willing to attend its appeal trial") ("Scientology no longer willing to attend its appeal trial")
The charge brought by the Order of Pharmacists was illegal practice of pharmacy, for which Scientology was convicted at the first trial.
I'm too busy scraping your merde off my shoe.
Puezzzzzzz Eric, put a bung it will you, it's like the fucking chimps enclosure in here!
"We are ceasing to grant legitimacy to a trial that is biased and unfair, in which the basic rights of the defense are not considered."
Wow! Utterly priceless coming from COS!!
Fixed that link for you
Btw, Microsoft translate somtimes comes up with some great ones. My favorite so far is this....
France operates on Roman Law, not Common Law.
I know. I said "I've always thought that it was a common law concept that did not exist in continental legal systems, of which France is part".
France is part of continental legal system, also know as inquisitorial. Hence, the concenpt of equality of arms is less relevant in such a system.
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!