Discussion in 'Anon Sparrow' started by tikk, Jun 23, 2011.
The 'weakest' of the 'weak.'
I like how the judge gave Sparrow some good advice to keep his protests about the message on Scientology and to not let it get personal. To be fair, with Scientology's handling tactics involving direct or indirect mochery and confrontation, that is no easy feat to not take these matters personally. Still, was wise advice for Sparrow.
big hard cocks for everybody
The discussion on the last day between the Court and Mr Key is very important.
Where they discuss the use of masks or covered faces as valid under the 1st ammendent rights but when "harrassing" or "abuse" is acted out it may not be.
Also it seems if someone lies why don't they make up alot more lies. So it is the extent of lying that decides wether your lying or not.
On the matter of "memory" if something upsets you so much as to take criminal proceedings in a US court of law, would you not remember everything in detail?
Cave me in, bra
I'm still curious if Kimmy has done OTIII and the Class VIII auditor course.
Good - btw, it was a smashing piece, Barb!
Just finished reading the transcripts. Well worth the wait. I Lol'd! I gasped! Unputdownable! A tour de force!
Firstly, a triumph for Sparrow - he did what was necessary to protect himself and his rights from a sinister bunch of criminals, and got it all on video.
Secondly, a triumph, too, for Radio Paul. His evidence of Kim's 2d Clyde's 'Brian treatment' threat pretty much sunk their credibility. Not too good, Clyde!
Thirdly, the above-mentioned anons who analysed the videos. You served up a gourmet defense for the lawyers to present. Brilliant!
Mr. Key didn't do too badly, either!
The judge gets a definite pass, but I can't help feeling more than a little disappointed that he made not even an oblique reference to the complete lack of credibility of the prosecution's principal witnesses. That is the most glaringly obvious aspect of the case.
"Unputdownable" transcripts were unputdownable. I was up very late last night, reading them. Outstanding job, everybody.
That's really shitty that the Government couldn't put up a better case.
I think the Government Owes Sparrow an Apology. That Government case was ridiculous. Your witnesses Contradict each other, you neglect that there are multiple times where there is interaction and no stalking took place. This really should have been thrown out. But at least the smack down finally came, and after 5 days at trial. Justice was served. Now hurry up and smash that civil trial!!!!!
The judge seemed to indicate that had the prosecutor been able to prove that Sparrow had mentioned Kim's sister while he was wearing a mask, he would have been found guilty on the second charge.
True but that's the whole point. The Prosecution had no Solid evidence of anything. All they had was shoddy testimony.
And the fact that Kim never called the cops before about harassment until July 20th nuked their credibility. If she was really being harassed and followed around with a boner, she would have called the police. and she didn't.
I'm glad he took the judge's advice, by making a fucking great big sign, 6.5ft tall, with "Protesting Scientology....Abuses" in large bright friendly letters at the top.... just so nobody would ever mistake him for doing anything else. What a clever idea.
This is probably as much or possibly even more fun than watching Sparrow's videos. I'm sure it was no party for him, but at the end of the day people are more glued to what is going on at the DC idle org than ever.
I think the prosecution must have thought that the sheer volume of circumstantial rhetoric would be enough.
At times I felt that the judge was too kind to the prosecution in letting them spout what seemed like irrelevant stuff and hearsay unrelated to the actual events but I guess it leaves no room for the cult to bitch and moan that the judge wasn't fair. He was more than fair to them.
It was the prosecution that sounded like they were on the back foot whereas the defence seemed to just steam-roller on as well as taking advantage of some wonderful gifts.
In my non-lawyery opinion.
Looking forward to reading the transcripts. The excerpts are delicious. Thanks for posting the links!
Correct me if I'm remembering this wrong, but the Sparrow openly admitted that he brought up Kim's sister and I think it was also on video. Luckily for Sparrow, he was not wearing a mask when he said that.
One omission on the part of the defense was the justification for the mask considering Scientology's fair game policy against critics. Granted, Sparrow was known to Scientology the moment he spoke, but he wears the mask as a symbol of Scientology's attacks on critics. This was never brought up. But had Sparrow been wearing the mask when mentioning Kim's sister, would this have been critical to the defense?
Certainly Key was informed by Sparrow about this so it's interesting that he chose not to bring it up, since he did bring up fair game and SP declares.
Finally finished going through the transcripts, and while Sparrow's videos were telling, I find it very strange no one subpoenaed Vicky & crews video tapes. They would have established very quickly if, and when, Sparrow was wearing a mask when interacting with Kim.
I'm also a bit suprised the judge apparently bought into the Whole Foods incident when the transcript shows no evidence, except Kim's statement, it actually happened. In fact the only substantiated contact with $cientolgists at Whole Foods was the conference requested by them, that Kim didn't attend, where Sparrow was asked not to protest their Easter egg hunt.
It was also pretty obvious Kim was running on a script, and not actually answering questions unless boxed in by Mr. Keys or the judge. I suspect the other $cientology witness will be forced to retake TR-L until she learns not to contradict the primary witnesses story so badly.
Hopefully the transcript, with all the $cientology waffling and contradictions, can be used in the civil case. Sylvia's vids would be nice too I suspect.
Hypothetically, even if Sparrow was wearing the mask when he asked about kim's sister, the prosecution did not have a picture of him acting in a manner to intimidate. The only real evidence to that would be the testimony by kim, which we can all see, and as the defense points, she is nearly impeached because of all the other inconsistencies in her testimony.
Finally, even the judge concedes that based on kim's testiomny, he only wears the mask over his face "about 60% of the time."
This is too much uncertainty for the judge to consider evidence that the mask was worn.
D2 P16 L11-16 (Day 2, Page 16, Lines 11-16)
Thank you, Anon Sparrow, for having these documents posted. They shed much light on the legal boundaries within which IRL protesters operate and how courts view the free speech / personal safety trade-off. That D.C. mask law, in particular, seems ripe for abuse. The court seemed to apply a low threshold to run afoul of it.
Not only could he say no, he had a duty to say no, if he didn't think the case was arguable. (Not assuming he didn't think it arguable, just stupid.)
Not just per Nuremberg, but the canon of ethics of lawyer people.
Any professional must make their own judgment, or they're not a professional.
Just a lackey.
Imagine one brain surgeon telling another to "lop that thing off."
They other thinks it looks just fine.
Not really a hard decision for a professional.
As a lackey I would say "gimme the scalpel".
The office of the District Attorney is a hierarchal institution. The DA makes the decision which cases to prosecute, and assigns people to do that. I bet there was tons of pressure on the DA to bring the case to trial, and he just sent one of the young lawyers to do it [I'm presuming he was young, because of his title of an associate DA].
It must have been a very humbling experience for the prosecutor. He was totally humiliated in court by his own witnesses. His objections were idiotic and he lucked out that the judge went easy on him. Some of the judges I know would have scolded him bad.
if he didn't "believe" in the case he should have refused
end of story
he is a licensed professional..........that mandates independent judgment and accountability
take a stand
or be a scapegoat
none of us, especially professionals, should do something/anything just because someone tells us to
(believe me i'm taking into account the pressures of earning a living)
btw that associate d.a. made some of the same mistakes as the asshat cop who harrassed sparrow in his latest video
we are living in a quantum world now
I don't know the personal circumstances of that particular prosecutor. He probably doesn't feel that strongly about Scientology as we do, and Sparrow can appear irritating in his videos, at least to outsiders.
Right now there is a whole world of unemployment for lawyers. Many of my American colleagues were either fired or sent home for a year by their firms with 25% of their salary. The world of law is not as idialistic as Law and Order portrays it. Most of the cases are just another case to finish and move on to another. Especially if you're under instructions of your boss. So I don't necessarily blame the prosecutor of that case. I also don't think he was fighting too hard for Kim Belotte. His opening statment was like five times shorter than the one Sparrow's lawyer gave.
I have to respectfully disagree. While I like the fact that the judge gave this as advise, not an order I have to say I think he would have better served the public interest to advise Kim that what Brian did was well with in his rights and further false complaints from her could could be compromising to her. Either a person has a right or they don't! For a judge to suggest that someone using their rights a particular way opens them up to false charges is something I don't agree with. He was found not guilty and that means not guilty. I don't want to come off as bashing the judge because I am not. He did a wonderful job in this case listening to the evidence and made the correct choice in finding Sparrow innocent.
To put it another way, next time Scientology claims their members are feeling afraid because Sparrow is hurling what they perceive as insults at the building and their members fear for their safety and file new stalking charges or harassment complaints, how will the judge caution Sparrow to protest then? Think I am wrong? They called the police on him today when he was across the street! So each time they drag him in to court he is cautioned as how the judge thinks he might act to reduce friction and sooner or later he is not effective and his rights are watered away. Grant it the judge only suggested this but the underlying issue is why caution someone from using their full rights under the law? If the cult makes a false claim then Sparrow has a recourse for it and that should not be to practice his rights less effective or as to his liking.
Again This is just my respectful disagreement with your post not a challenge or a bashing.
I appreciated the Judge's fairness when he distinguished between religious beliefs and policies.
In first or second section, Page 29, Line 12 -14. Kim Belotte essentially asked if her religious believes would cause her to lie, and she said no. But Mr Key brought up the SP consequence, can be tried, sued, Lied To" was a Policy not a Belief.
So as I understood it, the Judge let enter into evidence (?) one of the fair game mantra policies.
Then he said because it was Policy, that he then couldn't assume every Scientologist would lie. If it was a sci Belief, then yes. I thought that was excellent.
I would suggest without knowing that it went something like this.
Officer responds to the scene. Is convinced from Kim's acting job that she is traumatized. Takes a statement from what he describes as a distraught woman to the point she can hardly speak. Has seen this before but in real cases and believes her. Does a piss poor job of interviewing Sparrow, most likely because what Kim stated and his past experience he feels he does not need too.
Takes it to a Detective who follows up and gets additional false statements. They refer it to the prosecutor.
Prosecutor reads the reports and says if this alleged behavior took place then that would be illegal. He is relying on reports from people who get it right more often than not. Makes the formal complaint.
Moxon enters and provides a bullshit context that freaks the hell out of the prosecutor. Describes Brian as a Frankenstien part sex offender part international terrorist part nutcase loon ready to snap.
Everything the cult did was a fail. The reason the prosecutor failed so badly here is because all of the evidence he had was tainted with lies to by Kim and other cult members. If he had known how full of it she was and how badly she would be exposed he would be obligated to not proceed with this case. Prosecutors are not supposed to move forward with a case believing the defendant is innocent or if they know they will loose.
So this disaster for the DC Prosecutors Office goes solely to fault of the Church Of Scientology.
doesn't address any of the issues i raised
its one thing to just put your head between your legs and do a job
its another to lop off an organ you don't think needs lopping
or persecute a human you don't feel deserves it
to repeat, i'm not assuming this prosecutor didn't "believe" in the case
but if he didn't he's guilty of a very bad thing
or maybe you've been falsely prosecuted and didn't mind a bit
for those who don't assume they have a billion years this life is pretty precious
i'm assuming you haven't done 36 hours in a shit hole jail cell
for no good reason
most of the people in "the system" in this instance fucked up wildly
and finding excuses for it rewards it
You are correct, once he understood it was a policy it got in. Can you imagine if they tried to say, your honor we do have Fair Game but it is protected as a religious right! Well to some extent they tried that but Tom Key did a good job of making a point earlier that the ruling they tried to hide behind does not cover criminal behavior. What a great point to make from now on. Well your honor Kim Belotte essentially asked if her religious believes would cause her to lie, and she said no. Except when her religious beliefs actually mandate that she lie!
And in most places no beliefs justify criminal behavior. (Nod to Senator Xenophon)
The analysis of the strategy and tactics of Mr. Key is getting pretty high level......I think the man did the hard work of thinking. And not just treating this as a minor case.
You wouldn't want to lose an organ, or even part of one just because your doctor thought it was no big deal, would you?
Thinking is the hardest work of all, and Mr. Key didn't mind the heavy lifting part of his profession.
If you act civilly and legally during a protest, then the ONLY thing that could become an issue is the topic you are trying to dispense. I think that was the judge's point. That's why I promote Gandhi Tech because it takes away any aspect of bad behavior on the side of the protesters. Being nice promotes the message over any personal quarrel or conflict, because there's nothing else to talk about. THEN if the Scilons act like douchebags, they are the only ones acting like douchebags, and then the contrast between how they act and how you act becomes part of your message.
I am really not disagreeing with you that the DA should have never taken the case. That case stood zero chance. It was embarrassing to read the testimonies of DA's witnesses. And yes, it's horrible that Sparrow had to spend 36 hours in a detention cell.
I'm just very cynical about the world of law. Most of the DAs are overworked and really don't give a shit. They've lost their idealism long time ago. So that associate prosecutor did what he was told to do. Not particularly well, or in a very passionate manner. But he took the case to trial and probably forgot all about it soon after. This case was no more than a bad stat to him.
I thought I'd read a little bit each day and then I couldn't put it down. Sparrow's lawyer was really a fun read, and kudos to him for not losing his temper with Belotte. I would have liked it if the judge had cautioned her about making false accusations, but I took his comments to Sparrow as helpful advice, helping him avoid similar situations in the future.
Right. ADAs prosecute the cases that are assigned to them or they get fired. Taking a principled stand in that instance would've been career suicide. If that's an indictment of the legal system then so be it, but it's not like it's ever been any different, and it's not any different anywhere else in the world.
I think your making the same mistake I believe the judge made. Who gets to decide what is civil behavior here? Scientology? The question before the court was not was Sparrows behavior civil but if it was lawful and the judge decided it was. Then to go back and say I think you can do it this way or that way would be more effective or be a less aggressive way way etc is just wrong to me. The judge is giving two and mixed messages here. As I stated this was his opinion and not direction and I respect that I have to say the judge has no idea of how Kim or the cult will twist things the next time or just flat out lie again. With all respect Gandhi Tech is no more recognized as an exceptable forum of protest that the Westboro Baptist Church Tech in our courts. What is legal is legal and what is not is not. As I said if he found Sparrow not guilty he would have done a better public service to tell Kim and instruct her about twisting the facts and bringing charges without proof and what defines proof. To lecture and or to advise Sparrow is the judges right but there is just no point considering he did nothing wrong and the judge by his own admission said so. As yo the argument about the cult acting like douchbags and how you act as a part of your message is irrelevant if no crime is committed. Does anyone here want to say the cult did not act like douchbags already? With the call to the police today does anyone think that the cult will stop acting like douchbags down the road? Does anyone here think the cult has ever not looked like douchbags in the past or they did not come of ass looking like that in this case? Remember Kim lied to the police on the 20th and gave fake tears that would have gotten anyone arrested. Remember the officer saying that day on the video he was going to try to have Sparrow charged? My point is again for the judge to advise someine how he thinks they should act could keep them from enjoying or using their full rights under the law.
I don't Jeff is just talking about results in a court of law, but the court of public opinion.
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!