Laura DeCrescenzos rettsak

Den stadig mer absurde rettsaken til Laura DeCrescenzo ruller videre. Hun ble innrullet i Sea Org som 9-åring, og lære aldri noe som kunen hjelpe henne å få en skikkelig jobb ute i den virkelige verden. Som 17-åring ble hun gravid, og presset til å ta abort. Scientologikirken har prøvd alle knep for å få saken avvist og stoppet, så langt har de bare oppnådd å utsette saken (saken ble startet i 2009).

Nå prøver Scientologikirken igjen å få saken avvist med henvisning til 1st ammendment, med begrunnelsen at de er en religion og at det er deres grunnlovsfestede rett å gjøre hva de vil med sine tilhengere, inkludert å presse mindreårige til å ta abort. I morgen ettermiddag vil det være høring om gruppens seneste framstøt for å vri seg unna.

Tony Ortega:

http://tonyortega.org/2015/12/14/who-are-those-wise-guys-a-tipster-helps-us-get-some-names-of-scientology-operatives/

1 Like

Tony Ortegas kommentar til sin egen artikkel i dag:

Keep in mind, this is a pretty complex case. For example, there will actually be two trials if today’s motion is denied. First, they’ll have a trial on the argument about whether Laura filed on time, a very complicated situation about whether Scientology’s undue influence kept her from filing earlier. My personal opinion is that Scientology believes it has a strong case, and that the testimony won’t be too damaging, and so they will go to trial on this and won’t offer a settlement. If they lose that, it’s on to the second trial, about the facts. At that point I think they would offer to settle, and I wouldn’t blame Laura if she took it. Her attorneys have worked a huge amount, we all know the facts already, and Laura, I don’t think, wants to continue to be a campaigner or something. Of course, a trial on the facts would be spectacular and we’d all like to see it. But it’s easy to tell someone else to roll the dice on years of effort and money spent, etc. I try to understand what they are going through.

Ser ut til at dommeren fik kalde føtter og utsatte til over jul.

Tony Ortega i kommentar:

UPDATE: Judge Treu craps his pants, realizes what he’s up against, and orders a continuation.

Ikke så overraskende, i grunnen.

Nei, ikke egentlig. Denne saken har en milelang forhistorie, og de har nettopp skiftet dommer. Jeg tror dommeren sliter litt med å komme inn in media res. Dommeren be partene essensielt om å rydde opp i argumentasjonen og skrive om hva akkurat denne delsaken handler om.

WWP:

UPDATE 2: Much thanks to Jeffrey Augustine and attorney Graham Berry for attending today’s scheduling hearing. Here are the new dates.

Scientology will file its amended brief on January 21, 2016
Laura’s team will file its amended brief on February 22
Scientology will then file a reply on February 29

The hearing on motion for summary judgment will then take place on March 7 at 8:30 am.

Hey, who’s in a hurry?

http://tonyortega.org/2015/12/15/to...ced-abortion-lawsuit-in-the-name-of-religion/

Scientologikirken har nettopp levert inn sin “forenklede” beskrivelse av saken i rettsaken. De kan ikke lenger nekte for at de behandler SeaOrg som slaver, deres nye forsvar er at de ikke behandlet den 12 år gamle Laura DeCrescenzo noe særlig annerledes enn det den katolske kirke behandler voksen nonner og munker.

Jeg lurer på hva den katolkske kirken har å si om at organisasjonen essensiellt sier at presser gravide nonner til å ta abort…

Tony Ortega:
http://tonyortega.org/2016/01/28/scientology-in-forced-abortion-case-we-treat-people-no-worse-than-the-catholic-church-does/

1 Like

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Monuque Rathbun saksøker Scientologikirken for trakassering

Tony Ortega har en ny oppdatering:

Laura DeCrescenzo, on eve of crucial hearing, explains Scientology for new judge

http://tonyortega.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/John_Doyle.jpg
[Judge John P. Doyle]

Laura DeCrescenzo’s legal team filed its latest brief in advance of a crucial hearing, and we have the document for you. Laura’s forced-abortion lawsuit against the Church of Scientology is almost seven years old now, and trial dates have been set a couple of times. But there’s a final hurdle that she needs to get past, a motion for summary judgment that the church filed that will be considered on March 7.

The hearing was supposed to happen in November, but Judge Rolf Treu, who had inherited the case after Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ronald Sohigian retired, seemed to panic just the day before the hearing and asked both sides to submit new briefs that would more plainly explain the issue.

Hey, we know it’s a complex case, but that just seemed like a complete amateur move to us. And now, just a couple of weeks before this crucial hearing, we’ve learned that Treu is off the case and it’s now in the court of Judge John P. Doyle, who has to do a lot of reading, and quick.

We hope he pays close attention to the document Laura’s team filed this week. It answers Scientology’s latest attempt to portray Laura DeCrescenzo as a griper. In the church’s attempt to explain the lawsuit in clearer terms for Judge Treu, it characterized Laura as a willing “minister” who lived the austere life that a monk or nun might experience in another church. Scientology even dug up an apologist academic who said that things were pretty rough when he was an 18-year-old seminary student, and life in Scientology’s Sea Org struck him as little different.

In other words, Laura is complaining unnecessarily about religious practices that she voluntarily submitted to as a cloistered religious worker, and her complaints are really about religious matters that are protected by the First Amendment.

Well, here’s how Laura’s team answered that characterization:

[…]

Da er saken som ble utsatt over jul igang igjen.

Scientologikirkens nyeste argument er at de ikke kan dømmes for å ha presset DeCrescenzo fordi hun ikke opplevde å føle seg presset den gang hun var 17 og var oppdratt i Sea Org fra hun var 12.

Tony Ortega: Scientology, in forced-abortion case: It’s not abuse if you don’t complain when it’s happening

[quote=“Dovre, post:10, topic:285”]It’s not abuse if you don’t complain when it’s happening
[/quote]

1 Like

Sea org explained

2 Likes

Scientologikirken har fått dommeren erklært inhabil og vil ha omgjort hans siste besluttning. Grunn: Dommerens fetter er scientolog!

Det sier vel det som egentlig trengs å si om organisasjonen når det å ha en slektning som er scientolog er grunn til at den vil ha det vekk som dommer.

Tony Ortega: Scientology gets judge disqualified in forced-abortion lawsuit and wants recent order voided

1 Like

Tony med en oppdatering:

Scientology’s appeal denied, trial date to be set in forced-abortion lawsuit

http://tonyortega.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/MarcLauraClaire-e1468663401497.jpg

[Laura D, center, celebrating a previous victory in her lawsuit with Marc and Claire Headley]

Laura DeCrescenzo has won yet another victory in her seven-year legal odyssey to sue the Church of Scientology over abuse she claims she suffered during her childhood in the “Sea Organization,” including being forced, she says, to have an abortion at 17 years old.

Twice, Laura has had to weather Scientology’s motions for summary judgment. We were in the courtroom both times as, in 2013, Judge Ronald Sohigian denied Scientology’s first motion which claimed that Laura didn’t have enough evidence to go to trial, and earlier this year as Judge John P. Doyle turned down Scientology’s argument that the lawsuit violated the church’s First Amendment religious rights.

Soon after Judge Doyle made that decision in April, he had to disqualify himself when it turned out that he had cousins in the Sea Org, at least one of whom Scientology planned to call at trial as a witness. So the church then petitioned for a writ with California’s second appellate court district saying not only that Doyle’s decision was wrong, but that it should be voided anyway because he was obviously disqualified when he made it.

But this week the appellate court refused to take up the case, issuing a document with a single line: “The petition for writ of mandate or other extraordinary relief filed June 2, 2016, has been read and considered and is denied.”

For some perspective on that, we turned to our attorney and webmaster Scott Pilutik, who has been following Laura’s case closely since she first filed it.

[…]