Customize

May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

Discussion in 'Marc Headley v. Church of Scientology Internationa' started by blownforgood, May 12, 2009.

  1. Ann O'Nymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    I understand, but:
    1. An employee who has to fight for its rights AND give a very large size of its gain to the very authority who should have taken the case in the first place is not exactly in the same situation than a "mercenary" of law.
    2. Middle Ages are not my reference in terms of sound laws.
  2. LRonAnon Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition


    Only if Marty's coffin isn't nailed first. (stay low marty)
  3. Ogsonofgroo Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    One day Moxon will end up on the stand, hopefully people will have enough undesputed questions by then to really start unpeelings of rotten onion.

    Thank you Barry for that bit of insight posted, interesting to watch and I appreciate it, I think you're doing a fantastic job of making things understandable for lay-people* and I hope ya'll keep posting for everyone.
    *reaspect*

    *(no, no, not Hawiians)

    Cheers!
  4. muldrake Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    This isn't what the law says. The 75/25 split is for *civil penalties* under the law. The employee is entitled to *all* the wages they were guaranteed by law, but under this law, they could also get a split of what the state would ordinarily collect as a fine.

    That's where most of our law comes from, actually. If a legal principle has lasted several centuries, there's probably something to it.

    Qui tam still exists in the U.S. and is generally used to pursue claims against contractors who have defrauded the government. It also existed in the UK until the 1950s when it was abolished.
  5. Ann O'Nymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Does not change much the situation, IMHO. The State expect the citizen to perform one of its duties AND take a large chunck of it in the process. Definitively not my conception of government.
    Thank you for teaching me history... So, even some of those who used it don't use it anymore. Maybe for some reasons ?
  6. TinyDancer Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Ann, I understand your perspective here, because I was quite surprised to learn about the way it's done in the US. It reminds me that the "anti-government" or "small government" movement in the US has been much MUCH more influential than it has been in many other nations. Mind you, if we'd had J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, we might mistrust our government as much as the Americans do too.
  7. pooks Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    This would be completely orgasmic. I can't wait to read those transcripts!
  8. xoixoi1 Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Thanks for the advice guys.

    Just wanted to say that I'm not thinking about suing them for financial gain (except court costs). i just want some recognition from the justice system that they the way they behaved towards me was criminal. I want as many people to know as possible that people like me suffered horribly as children in the cult.

    Will open a seperate thread when I decide to sue. It's looking likely. Does anyone think they will use my pc folder as evidence against me? I think I did admit once to committing an act of genocide (I was only 9 years old though). Will that stand up in court?

    Once again, thanks for the advice.
  9. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    What makes you think it's the "smell of money"? So, like the Scientologists, you think there is nothing else to this?
  10. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    There is no shame in collecting damages even in the terms of money the validation is obviously what you are after but just because the court system deals with money I hope you don't believe that people will think less of you if you collect damages.

    The most important thing, after taking care of yourself is to get every possible record of the harm that scientology inflicts on its members.
  11. re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    The labor cases seek back pay at minimum wage rates. Labor code violations do not authorize emotional distress or punitive damges. Similarly, the B&P 17200 law allows recovery of back pay and injunctive relief. Human trafficking claims allow more categories of damages, however, leave of court is required before pleading punitive damages against "religions" and such.

    The stakes are high mostly because of the numbers potentially involved. There are many employees who have worked many years at less than legal wages. The current payroll would grow considerably if legal wages were paid. Many workers might start to more seriously question practices if the CSI was required to post the legally required notices of wahe and hour rights.

    The forced abortion and e-meter claims add evidence and injunctive relief potential but do not add to the economic damges.

    Also, I get 5 calls from ex-SO members asking how they can help for every call I get about joining the suit.

    The plaintiffs are mostly seeking money they earned for their labor, with some useful injunctive relief claims as by-products. They will have earned every penny they may get in this suit.
  12. avatar2008 Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition


    Good going. Remember, even lions have to run from insect swarms!
    Let your lawsuits blot out the sun!
  13. AnotherMrPink Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Barry's update me make a very happy Anon.

    Better hurry up Tommy Davis with your run around to ex's trying to get them to sign stuff. The tides are turning against you, fast.
  14. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Scientology being what it is, I don't no how much of your post to take seriously. But no, a 9-year-old's admission of genocide will not stand up in court.
  15. webkilla Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    David Miscavige - have you had your daily dose of downstat? you know you want it... you also want tom cruises 'stat' right up yours. :D
  16. eddieVroom Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    On that thought -- any chance we'll see action re "witness tampering" charges soon?
  17. ZeLyt Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    I'm pretty giddy right now. This is awesome.
  18. exOT8Michael Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Man, I sure wish this applied to my being on staff in France way back when...
    I think my average pay was about $16 a week for a 90-100 hour week.
    Oh well, I am still grateful things are catching up with the cult's criminality faster and faster.
  19. re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    I will adress witness tampering issues in private emails from posters who seem legitimate---although my crystal ball is cloudy today.
  20. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    they already have earned it ;)

    best of luck Barry, and of course the Headleys

    and thanks for the postings
  21. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    [Mod note: The poster wants to say:]
    Im reporting myself I linked to the wrong thing anonymously that is for FEDERAL cases my bad very sorry. Leave it and let me be wrong or remove your choice Sorry for being a f' up.

  22. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition


    The federal criminal statute governing witness tampering is 18 U.S.C. § 1512. It does not apply to proceedings in state court, where most expert evidence implicated by medical society rules on expert testimony would be offered. State law governs witness tampering in state proceedings, and it may differ in points of detail from the federal regime, and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

    Blog 702: "Ethics" or "Witness Tampering"? (Part 3)
  23. ReaganYouth Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    xoixoi-

    how long ago did you get out?

    I just passed the bar! have been lurking around this discussion because I don't know much about labor law at ALL, and I am curious about how this will work.

    Do you guys think that this even phases the scilons? they are notorious for obsessively suing in order to get their way, so it almost seems like a lawsuit against them will only result in retaliation. They have nothing but money and lawyers willing to go after EVERYTHING, so i am just wondering if this will even hurt them at all...
  24. Anonynamefag Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    If they weren't worried about it, the Fair Game wouldn't even be in effect. They know that the accusations they're facing (human trafficking, slave labor, et. al) would not only be a PR catastrophe, but could lead to other things such as criminal investigations, and quite possibly revocation of their tax exempt status.

    Anyone think we should make this case go public? We haven't hit the big list since February, IIRC.
  25. Herro Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    You should probably wait until you know the story is true before "going public." Or at least wait until you're fairly confident. I guess you can never actually know for sure. Also, it wouldn't be right to go public with this unless this person is comfortable with his or her story being told.
  26. Ann O'Nymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    I agree, but fail to understand how you connect the last sentence with the rest. Most countries faced at some stage deviant intelligence agencies and politicians who are liars.
  27. ReaganYouth Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    question-
    did the $cilons file an answer to the complaints yet? If so, could someone hook me up to see a link to where they are posted. I think a lot of us (or maybe just me?) are interested in seeing how they are responding and what arguments they are using to justify their actions.
  28. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    like it or not, the Scilons may have an argument that they are considered a religion even if they are a cult, so they get to claim they are a religion/cult protected by the 1st amendment.
    how do we work around that? wont they raise some kinda of religion issues??
  29. NotSoAnon Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition


    Do you know if this was "published" so that it can be used as a judicial reference?
  30. Anonynamefag Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Hence why I asked.
  31. Herro Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Hence why I answered. I think this comm cycle is complete.
  32. re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    By agreement, the responses to the Amended Complaints in both Headley cases are due June 5. We expect demurrers and motions to strike. The 'religion" issues are addressed in the pleadings to an unusual extent. Of course, they will argue that they are a religion. That is old news and not a serious problem. The cases cited in the complaint stand for the legal propositions they are cited for. The briefs I will file in opposition to the initial attacks will go into the law in more depth, but if the inquirer wants to know how to deal with the religion issue he or she should start with the latest complaints, including the Laura D. complaint, all of which are on line.

    In previous letters and briefs, they have largely relied upon staute of limitation defenses, waivers, and purported inapplicability of laws. Acccording to them, the labor laws do not apply because the workers have "agreed" not to be employees and have agreed to be "volunteers" . This should not work for several reasons most of which are spelled out in the complaints. See in particular paragraphs 8-13 in the First Amended Complaint for Laura D.

    Basically, the test of employment is an OBJECTIVE TEST. Their arguments all should fail because they are using a subjective test of employment and they are talking about rights that cannot be waived. The Alamo and Borello cases cited in the paragraphs above make those points in authoritive fashion.

    That the 1st amendment protects beliefs, not illegal conduct, is a bit of any over-statement, but pretty much true with some qualifications. There is no constitutional protection to child labor abuse. Neither is there constituional protection for lablor code violations, forced labor or human trafficking.

    There is no 'religious worker" exception to the labor laws. That is something they have mostly made up. In early letters they argued "waiver", time bar, and hinted at a 'minister exception" argument. The minister exception is not applicable and has not ben argued much lately but it my resurface in their motions. I have an entire reseach file on the minister exception and this is not a defense I much fear. Check out #42 in the latest Laura D. complaint for a brief discussion on the minister excption.

    The labor law case is conceptually simple if you let it be. Employment+ illegal wage=liability.

    Changing topics, a few posts ago I mentioned that the civil cases could lead to findings and conclusions that could then be taken to the state authorities for possible action. WTF-this has lead to some bizarre comments. It is more simple than imagined. If we go to trial, the jury will be given what is called a special verdict form. The jury answers questions of fact and the court can then issue conclusions of law. Also, some questions of contract and waiver will probably by-pass the jury and be decided by the court.

    When this process is over, I expect that there will be court or jury findings and orders that blow their purported defenses out of the water. The court or jury will find plaintiffs to have been employees. Waivers of labor code rights will be found unenforceable at trial. If that happens, the groundwork will have been laid and the department of labor will have a solid point of departure. Similarly, such findings might be used by others under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.

    I should probably not say this, but I will. If you are worried about the religion issue , read the complaints first.
  33. TypingChimp Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Oh, so THAT'S why the Catholic Church got away with pedophile priests. They never paid a dime, just because of that pesky First Amendment and them being a religion. Wait? Members of the Catholic clergy ended up in prison and some dioceses went bankrupt from the lawsuits? When did that happen?

    Religion does not excuse abuse. Pedo-priests are an extreme example, but so are Christian Scientists who are imprisoned because their kids die of treatable diseases like diabetes. Abuse and neglect are still abuse and neglect, regardless of the excuses given by the guilty. What we know about this cult points to an equally extreme example, with the abuses being a symptom of the core "values" of this cult.
  34. TinyDancer Member

    Don't worry about what people here think about your motives for taking action. Just do it! It can be a powerful step in recovery to take a stand and say - what they did was wrong. And if you get money out of the cult, well all the better. I'd rather you have it than the midget.

    You did not actually commit genocide, so you're not going to be brought to account for it. Don't worry about any admission to that effect. Children are highly suggestible and no one will think twice about it.

    /facepalm.jpg

    Where have you been? Read the complaints. The issue has been thrashed through on the boards and is dealt with in DETAIL in the complaints.
    I believe so, because the Wollersheim decision is now accessible on Lexis Nexis http://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/CACourts/ under "CA Court of Appeal Published Cases". Enter: 212 Cal. App. 3d 872
    Barry, seriously, don't waste your time answering questions that are answered in the complaint. The reason some of our comments are bizarre is because people commenting here are from all over the world,and have different legal systems and different life experience.
  35. anonsparrow Member

    ...hi tinydancer... keep risin' to the top...

    Ok so I missed the lawyer response till now.. Thank you BVS.

    Hang in there.. Getter done..
  36. T.W.C_Anon Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition




    If there is any issue with releasing your book and Scientology pulling FAGGOTRY trying to ban it please do not hesitate to let us know about it ok?

    Scientologys days of censoring things is over. Anonymous says so.
  37. re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    I think the vast majority of ex-scientologists who sue are doing so to stop the abuses they endured from happening to others. They deserve to be compensated as well, as do the lawyers who take a stand, it's a major undertaking the way Scientology operates but the walls are crumbling. Money is the only thing they understand anyways, so take em to the cleaners. Thanks BFG, Barry and others for taking on these unconscionable pricks for the damage they have caused so many for so long.
  38. Optimisticate Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    There's the magic word to use with scientology contracts: unconscionable.

    Any contract that is seen by the court as unconscionable will be tossed out and cannot be used in the case. All of the scilon contracts that I have seen, every single one of them, is unconscionable. Contracts signed by children before the age of consent are automatically thrown out.
  39. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    fix'd
  40. Anonymous Member

    re: May 12th Case Update - Marc Headley Deposition

    Slight correction...

    Minors can change their mind about contracts and cancel them, however if both parties have already fulfilled a contract then it cannot be "undone" just because the minor changes his/her mind after the fact. Example: Minor and adult agree to exchange a widget for $20. Two days later, adult delivers the widget, minor pays the $20 in cash. Three days later the minor gets bored with widget and wants his $20 back. Too bad, so sad.

    Second example: Minor and adult agree to exchange a widget for $20. Two days later, adult arrived to deliver widget. Minor has changed his mind (probably spent the $20 on a thingamajig). Minor has the right to cancel the contract and not be required to accept delivery of widget in exchange for $20.

    Workplace example: Minor signs contract to work for one year delivering whatsits. Two months into the contract, minor gets bored and wants to go work at burger joint instead. Minor walks away. The company can't say boo.

    It can be risky to "do business with" a minor because of the minor's rights to cancel contracts (and not keep his/her word). But that doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't do any business with a minor as many are perfectly capable of knowing what they want, paying for what they want to buy, or providing a service or product.

    The Church of Scientology is on risky ground to make contracts with minors to work for sub-par wages. In such a case, no person can waive their "right" to minimum wage. In the case of a minor, it's more likely that the adult would be sanctioned more heavily because of the assumed vulnerability of minors in general.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins