On Thu, 05 Jul 2001 04:11:54 GMT, elrond1@home.com (Gregg) wrote: >From: elrond1@home.com (Gregg)
>Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
>Subject: Motion to take bankrupty to Judge Whyte
>Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 04:11:54 GMT
snip Arel had a few comments. Here they are. Keith Henson
They are continuing to claim the legitimacy of their million-dollar claim and chastising Weissbrodt for being so impertinent as to ask them for proof! And they are accusing Judge W of accusing them of doing exactly what they are doing, "forum shopping," because of the time they want for trial, but they characterize it as "limited and timed" instead of saying that they demanded 15 days of trial--an unheard-of amount of time!!! They characterize his "accusation" that this was their "ulterior purpose" in filing the disqualification motion as "offensive"! Notice also that Rosen contends that the "claim of a million dollars" is "uncontested"!?! If that is true, then this needs to be part of Stan's answer or whatever it's called. If there has been no formal protest, then one needs to be made. Rosen pretends to be outraged that the judge asked for proof of that amount. Also, note that on p. 10 in the footnote they have complete mischaracterized and misrepresented your original bankruptcy filing and your reinstatement, saying that you had the "stated intention of derailing the copyright infringement trial then imminent" by the first filing, and then attacking the reinstatement. I think that Stan didn't take it serious because, like all wogs who are not knowledgeable critics, he couldn't imagine a federal judge agreeing to this stuff. He didn't take "illegal influence" on Whyte into consideration. He couldn't. See p. 11, Footnote 14 "Another case"?!? I guess it takes them so long to move in and out that they were sticking around? Or maybe Seid was present and took notes. Or OSA? They probably have OSA all over this judge. p. 12--They accuse you of abusing "the bankruptcy system to avoid paying RTC"--as if you had a million dollars lying around! And if they weren't the ones abusing it! They're also claiming that "evidence has been presented to the court that Henson had sufficient assets to pay the judgment" (apparently the original copyright judgement). This is patently untrue. At the time there was not sufficient equity in the house, and there were no other assets worth even the $10,000 they say the judge recommended. Nor are there now, except the house, in which we have acquired equity at this point by the uncontrolled run up in prices. p. 13. They are also claiming that you violated copyright of their "unpublished work." I don't think it's defensible that NOTs whatsit is unpublished just because it is only published to an elite group within their organization. This is especially true when it comes to the Internet publication worldwide. The California Supreme Court ruled that documents in the Brown & Williamson v. UC case were in the public domain because they were up on the Internet for all to see. There was of course no opportunity for you to present your case that copyright is being used by this crime syndicate as a means of suppression of illegal activities, just as Brown & Williamson used client-attorney privilege as a suppressive activity. Note that in their copyright argument they use Salinger's case (another damn $-ologist) to support their assertion of right not to publish. (Salinger sued his own daughter over a letter of his that she published--apparently one that identified him as a $-ologist.) They pound (p. 13) again and again on their assertion that the bankruptcy was "filed solely to avoid the judgment" in the copyright case. Far from recognizing any public interest, Rosen claims that you "violated [the copyright law] for amusement, for entertainment and to enhance [your] stature." (footnote 15) So much fake indignation! Could this be the same Kult of which Judge Paul Breckenridge, LA Superior Court, wrote: "The court record is replete with evidence that Scientology is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories...and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect....The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L. Ron Hubbard." p. 16--of course the bankruptcy is not an attempt to "harass" you. It's part of an attempt to "ruin" you "utterly"! Note this outrage on p. 17 (footnote): "Were Henson's bankruptcy converted to Chapter 7, RTC could not only reach the substantial appreciation in the value of Henson's house, but its claim against Henson would be nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(6) and would survive post-bankruptcy; while there is a question of dischargeability under Chapter 13, there is little question under Chapter 7 that RTC's claim for a judgment for willful infringement survives. Moreover, under Judge Weissbrodt's proposal, for a payment of $10,000, Henson gets to keep the $400,000 in equity in his house, gets to keep disputed artwork, gets to keep the cash value of his life insurance policies, gets to keep all of his other assets, and gets to keep, beyond RTC's reach, all of his future earnings which have been as much as $130,000 per year. None of this would be beyond RTC's reach were his petition converted to Chapter 7 (as Judge Weissbrodt himself suggested last September) or better yet, dismissed for Henson's fraud (or now, his fugitive status)." They are basically saying you own all the equity in the house, ignoring both World Savings and me. They are overrunning Amber's artwork, simply calling it "disputed," acting as if you had more than one life insurance policy that has cash value, or if it were a lot, and exaggerating the most you've ever earned in one year. They pound again on their claim that your bankruptcy is fraud. If lawyers don't get in here from World Savings and from the other creditors, and if my lawyer and your lawyer don't get off their asses, they will collect the house and everything else. Arel