After Jane Does make calm legal response, Scientology attorneys are angry — real angry

[Scientology’s lawyers, William Forman and Matthew Hinks]

We told you a week ago that what really struck us about the court filing made on behalf of Danny Masterson’s victims regarding the Church of Scientology’s attempt to gut their lawsuit was how calm and logical it appeared, in distinct contrast to the way Scientology’s court briefs tend to be screechy and petty sounding.

Well, Scientology’s attorneys William Forman and Matthew Hinks have filed their reply, and this time they’re really swinging for the fences.

We wondered if the calm way that the lawyers for the Jane Does had responded to Scientology’s motion to strike might set them off, and boy, that seems to be the case.

We’ll just quote here at length the opening to give you a sense of how teed off these guys seem to be.

Plaintiffs’ Opposition reveals there is no mystery about what is really happening here. Plaintiffs would rather try allegations of rape than allegations of rummaging in garbage cans; they would rather cherry-pick and misinterpret the writings of L. Ron Hubbard than offer proof that the Church Defendants did anything to Plaintiffs. But Plaintiffs’ attempt for prejudice should not work.

The Opposition itself shows that the Motion must be granted. Plaintiffs admit that all of their claims are not “based on” the allegations to be stricken and that such allegations are not necessary to proving their claims. Therefore, under unambiguous law, the allegations are immaterial and should be stricken; no other grounds are needed.

But there are more grounds requiring granting of the Motion. The Motion showed that the only reason Plaintiffs are before this Court – and not in religious arbitration – is that, at Plaintiffs’ urging, the Court of Appeals subscribed to a narrow construction of their claims that excluded conduct while Plaintiffs were Scientology parishioners and would not call for “resolution of ecclesiastical issues.” Plaintiffs try to escape the application of Bixler by asserting that Plaintiff Riales was not part of the Bixler appeal. That argument helps neither the other Plaintiffs nor Riales herself, who never attempts to show why the allegations to be stricken are material as to her. Plaintiffs also try to avoid Bixler by pretending that a decision made by this Court prior to Bixler is controlling, effectively ignoring Bixler as law of the case. Having baited the Bixler Court, Plaintiffs cannot now wriggle off Bixler’s hook.

Are you getting how angry the Scientology side still is about that appellate ruling in January 2022 that restored the Bixler lawsuit? Yeah, it’s palpable.

What they’re screeching about is that after this lawsuit was originally filed in 2019, its first judge granted Scientology’s motion to force it out of court and into Scientology’s trap, otherwise known as “religious arbitration.” But then an appeals court ruled that it was unfair for these former Scientologists (the Jane Does) to have to abide by contracts they signed while they were members of Scientology when the harm they were alleging — the stalking, hacking, even the poisoning of their pets — was happening years after they had left the church.

Scientology (or rather, its boss David Miscavige, who is the real person Forman and Hinks are writing for) is still steaming angry that this happened, and that this lawsuit escaped their trap.

Now, they’re hopping mad that the attorneys for the Jane Does, John Kucera and Seth Lehrman, submitted such a well written and calm response to their motion to strike. The nerve!

But OK, we’re just commenting here on the style of these filings. What about the substance? What’s at stake here is that Scientology is asking the court to remove large sections of a 2020 first amended complaint, saying that they are either irrelevant or that they have to do with Scientology’s internal policies, which shouldn’t be subject to litigation.

Kucera and Lehrman argued that the material Scientology said was irrelevant was actually important to the case, as it showed why the Jane Does had felt they couldn’t come forward with their rape allegations against Danny Masterson earlier, and in order to do that it is necessary to quote Scientology’s internal policies.

Now, in their reply, Scientology’s attorneys are arguing that this misstates the law, and that the Jane Does’ attorneys are cretins and they pick their teeth at the table, or something.

What will Judge Upinder Kalra think about all this sniping back and forth? We’ll find out next week at a hearing on Wednesday. The last time this matter was before him, Judge Kalra seemed pretty level-headed and indicated that he wasn’t going to put up with any nonsense. Will he appreciate the bellyaching by Forman and Hinks? We wonder.

---

The IAS event goes on and on

Another thank you to Alex Barnes-Ross, who sent over these fliers showing that the IAS event is still going on. Or at least, the playback of video of the event.

While the IAS gala itself took place November 3-5 at Saint Hill in East Grinstead, England, these fliers indicate that the first night of the event was played back last Friday night, and the second night, the Patrons Ball, will be played back tonight at the Fort Harrison Hotel in Clearwater, Florida, and probably in other orgs around the country as well.

Also, Alex found this shot of the venue, the clearest view we’ve had yet of the capacity under the big tent. And now there’s really no question that the crowd could only have been about 1,000 people. (Scientology regularly claims six or seven times that.)

---

See the Proprietor in Los Angeles

Our last HowdyCon before the pandemic was held at CFI West in Los Angeles, and those of you who were there remember what a great venue it was.

CFI West’s James Underdown has asked us to return to the scene of that crime and give a talk about our coverage of Scientology, and specifically the adventure of covering the Danny Masterson trials.

Hey, if you’re in town this Sunday morning, come on by. We’d love to see you.

Get all the details here

---

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special material for subscribers. Or, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail).

---

Thank you for reading today’s story here at Substack. For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link to today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Paid subscribers get access to two special podcast series every week…

Up the Bridge: A weekly journey through Scientology’s actual “technology”

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news