Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: [x-post] scientology
Message-ID: <9506280907.0CTQJ00@support.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35/PRIMP 1.56p
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 09:07:47 -0700
Lines: 104


tommyc@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (Tom Collins)

>Would someone please summarize what happened Friday?

    I'll give it a shot.

>The last I heard was that there was going to be a hearing on preliminary
>motions, restraining orders, dates, timing, etc. It was possible the
>judge would make a ruling or statement prior to the hearing itself.
>
>Apparently no such statement or decision was made ahead of time.
                        
    Right.

>Then the Entheta Brigade ranted and ran out of time without making, in
>court, any substantive points except to go on record that they were
>freaked out by Grady Ward (perhaps because they believe He is the
>perpetrator of Scamizdat?), who has their chief P.I. on the lam from a
>felony warrant.
          
    Right.  Cooley accused me and Grady of conspiring to violate 
    their trade secret scriptures. <spit>

>So, help me out here. The judge COULD have ruled on the spot about a lot
>of stuph, and instead ruled on none of it. 
 
    Right.  Expect an extensive written ruling in the next month.

>It remains to be seen whether there will be a trial, 
 
    Trial by jury has been loosely scheduled for early '96.  The 
    scienos will back out before then or appeal the judge's 
    preliminary rulings to the Supreme Court to stall it.

>whether Dennis gets his possessions back, whether
>Dennis gets his rights to post and preach returned to him, and whether the
>cult will have its bond raised. 
 
    These things will be covered in the pending ruling.

>(They fought tooth and nail against posting
>a bond in the Wollersheim case, eventually got the bond eliminated, and
>are currently, as all the world knows, failing to pay up.)
>
>So. Now the judge is reading and pondering and will make a ruling about
>everything sometimes soon, yes?
                                                       
    Right.

>He may rule that Dennis wins, the eveil Crock of $cn loses, and we all
>rejoice while the cult appeals? 
 
    Unlikely.  There are no motions to dismiss the suit against 
    me.  Only to dismiss Netcom and Klemesrud.

>Or he may rule the reverse. So there may
>or may not end up being a trial date set, etc. Or there IS a trial date
>set and all this is warm-up?
                                              
    Yes.

>Now, on top of all that....
>
>Once upon a time the Clamheads marched into court and yelled Copyright!
>Trade Secret! And the judge said, mildly, "Which is which?" and lo! They
>were thrown into confusion and disarray and took a week or more to write
>out a long answer. What WAS that answer? Can someone show up and read the
>thing? Can it be copied and passed around? Generally speaking, DID they
>assert that X items were covered by the trade secret claim and Y items
>were covered by the copyright claim? 
 
    Yes.  But their documentation was bogus.

>Did they attempt to demonstrate
>(beyond bald assertion) that St. Dennis DID sign a trade secret/nondisclosure
>agreement? 
 
    They produced a document which they claim I signed.  I 
    dispute the signature is mine and other questionable aspects 
    of it.

>Was a response made that said, "No, he did not"? Or is that
>the kind of thing that goes on in a trial and not yet? 
 
    Both.

>Did they attempt
>ANY showing that they DO have the copyright to ANY of the stuph they
>claim the rights to?
         
    There are serious holes in their claims.

>So, I'd like a status report. I'm having trouble keeping track of all
>this. Yes, I read the accounts of the court events. I just don't know
>where this leaves us and what has been sorted out and what hasn't.
 
    Hope this helps.
    
            +--------------------------------------+
           Rev. Dennis L Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
      dennis.l.erlich@support.com  +  inForm@primenet.com
                           "tar baby"