ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at www.exscn2.net.



TEXAS JUDGE DENIES SCIENTOLOGY’S ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION IN RATHBUN SUIT

Discussion in 'Monique Rathbun' started by Emma, Mar 14, 2014.

View Users: View Users
  1. Rene Descartes

    Rene Descartes Gold Meritorious Patron

    Let it be said that...

    He who lives by [STRIKE]the sword[/STRIKE] LRH tech and policy, dies by [STRIKE]the sword[/STRIKE] LRH tech and policy.


    Rd00
     
  2. NoName

    NoName A Girl Has No Name

    Except that Marty can harass, intimidate, AND win, as well as ruin utterly.
     
  3. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

  4. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

    And a lot of these court vids has been put up on youtube. Is there maybe a chance to see DM in court via the web?
     
  5. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

    So the best way must be to let as many executives as possible to testify in court where Miscavige is going to be deposed? Executives like Rathbun & Rinder, the Headleys, Debbie Cook and many more. The more who are able to testify, maybe the better it'll probably be. :hmm:

    Btw, has a specific date for the deposition been made?
     
  6. TG1

    TG1 Angelic Poster

    Judge Waldrip hasn't allowed any actual examination of witnesses or the hairier motion argument to be filmed or even live-blogged. He's made everyone turn off all their phones, computers, cameras, etc.

    However, the lawyer in the courtroom have been allowed to keep their computers running. And as we all know, those computers COULD THEORETICALLY be filming what's happening in the courtroom for their (and others' ... heh) review later.

    So no, I don't think we'll ever see a video of DM in court via the web -- like we saw Debbie Cook giving testimony in court in San Antonio.

    TG1
     
  7. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

    But for what reasons? I mean, are depositions in general open to the public or is it kept secret? Could this maybe be judge Waldrips own decision? :questions::hmm:
     
  8. JBWriter

    JBWriter Happy Sapien

    Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

    Judge Waldrip's Decision, dated March 14, 2014, denied TeamCSI&Co's Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss. :clap:

    If CSI and/or any other defendant(s) choose to appeal Judge Waldrip's decision, the TX 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals' online docket is the place to watch.

    What's unclear is how long TeamCSI&Co have to file their appeal.
    I think it will have to be filed within the next 2 weeks or so.

    Here's the link (with 3rd Circuit & Comal County already checked).
    Once at the page, simply click "search" and all of the new filings from Comal County will pop-up.
    Link: http://www.search.txcourts.gov/CaseSearch.aspx?coa=coa03

    JB
     
  9. koki

    koki Silver Meritorious Patron

    video - I dont think so, but
    transcripts..... yeah baby!!!:thumbsup:
     
  10. TG1

    TG1 Angelic Poster

    No, depositions are not public events.

    They are usually scheduled in one of the parties' law firm's conference rooms. Typically present are

    * the person being deposed, who is called the deponent

    * the deponent's lawyer(s)

    * the lawyer(s) who called the deposition and those who will question the deponent

    * a court reporter (who records and later types up a transcript of the proceedings); the deposition transcript is usually made a part of the public record, but some deposition transcripts are deemed by the judge to be confidential and are sealed, in which case the public won't be able to see the deposition. I don't think that's likely to happen in this lawsuit.

    * possibly (not always) one or more of the persons who are parties to the lawsuit (plaintiffs and defendants)

    * and in cases (like this one) where the deponent is hostile or where there will be so many objections as to render the deposition a futile exercise, a judge will also attend to rule right there on the spot regarding the many objections that are expected
     
  11. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

    Transcripts, easily comprehensible transcripts, mmm...yeah I really hope so. Such a shame all this would be if it happens to slip past unnoticed.

    Has the date for the deposition been confirmed? :surf:
     
  12. Knows

    Knows Gold Meritorious Patron

    Marty recently said "he helped create this monster - he has an obligation to take it down". I have a feeling...and maybe it is my wishful thinking....that Monique will take it all the way. Imagine what she has been through and Marty has been beaten by Miscavige. I think this goes deeper than money. Mike Rinder refused money from the cult and he really needed it.

    I think between Marty and Mike - they want the whole thing shut down.

    If there is a settlement - can't they ask the court to force Miscavige to show them all the money he has and has hidden from view?
     
  13. secretiveoldfag

    secretiveoldfag Silver Meritorious Patron

    Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

    Don't you just hope the suckers will get tired of all this and say GUILTY AS CHARGED, MILUD. What have they got to lose?
     
  14. JBWriter

    JBWriter Happy Sapien

    Re: TEXAS JUDGE DENIES ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION - Appeal Watch (TAMES link)

    That's a wonderful wish, SOF, and I dearly hope it comes true! :thumbsup:


    'Til then, however, I hope we all keep an eye on that 3rd Circuit's online court docket.
    JB
     
  15. koki

    koki Silver Meritorious Patron

    remember TCs....?
     
  16. Carcassed

    Carcassed Patron

    Transcripts? Sure, but when is it going to happen? Looking forward to reading it though.
     
  17. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    TX Lawyer has made some recent comments on the Underground Bunker regarding the upcoming Appeals hearing this Wednesday.......


    TX Lawyer2 days ago The mandamus petition is set for oral argument next Thursday [EDIT: my bad, it's next Wednesday], but there is no deadline for the court of appeals to issue its ruling. Realistically, considering that they have clearly fast-tracked the case, I would expect an opinion maybe 30-60 days after the argument. If Miscavige loses at the Austin Court of Appeals, he can (and inevitably will) file another mandamus petition at the Texas Supreme Court. Mrs. Rathbun could also pursue a mandamus petition there if the Court of Appeals reverses Judge Waldrip's order that Miscavige be deposed.


    TX Lawyer2 days ago Oral arguments are open to the public, but the Austin Court of Appeals does not permit the proceedings to be recorded, videotaped, or photographed. If any of these appeals ever make their way to oral argument before the Texas Supreme Court, that court actually broadcasts its oral arguments live and also archives them for subsequent viewing.





    TX Lawyer
    2 days ago It's not showing up on the appeals court's website yet, but the trial court's docket in the Monique Rathbun case shows that a couple notices of appeal were filed yesterday. Presumably, those are the notices of appeal for CSI and the other defendants who joined in the anti-SLAPP motion that was denied last month. Those appeals are permitted by the anti-SLAPP statute, so no surprise there. The appeals should not delay the discovery process unless the defendants move for and obtain a stay of discovery from the court of appeals.


    TX Lawyera day ago Re: the timing on the Church's brief to the Court of Appeals -- no firm date yet, but the brief is due 20 days after the record is filed at the appellate court. The record is supposed to be filed within 10 days of the notice of appeal, but that's the responsibility of the clerk and the court reporter, so it sometimes slips past that deadline. Also, extensions of time to file the brief are routinely requested and granted, and I would expect that to happen here. Bet on a brief actually being filed sometime in late May.