On Tuesday we told you that we’d heard from the court handling Danny Masterson’s criminal appeal that they accepted a 35,500-word initial brief from Masterson’s attorney Cliff Gardner.
As I remember it, the Does used at least one same term to describe Rapey Masterson. That term was 'jack hammer', as in his sexual performance. I think that is a very common term among women to describe their partners performance. That is not 'cross-contamination', that is just common girl talk. Rapey's lawyer tried to make a big thing out it, but got shot down by the prosecution and the jury.
No matter how well written that appeal is, it is still a hail Mary and I hope it gets thrown out. If any retrial is ordered, maybe Jane Doe 3's testimony will get more respect. Was it 3? One of the Does did not get a guilty verdict. I am not certain which one that was.
Question for TX lawyer, if they don't mind and can speak to this: I got the attorney's reasoning behind saying the Jane Does' stories changed. But, I didn't understand why he spent a lot of his precious words on repeatedly mentioning their testimony in the preliminary hearing and first trial. Can't the state just make that moot by pointing out that a JURY convicted him based on the original reports and testimony in the second trial - because the jury wasn't supposed to know about the preliminary hearing and first trial?
This brings up I guess what the judge's wiser overview of all these matters was:
",,,, We remember that Masterson’s defense attorneys repeatedly made similar arguments about how the DA’s office was bringing the case to avoid the statute of limitations, but the court repeatedly sided with prosecutors....."
it is STILL best for society to have a person who did what Danny Masterson did, to be punished in prison, that's how I interpret the above.
As commenters have commented, he's in prison, where he belongs, after all, that is the right and just outcome. Even if he doesn't admit and understand his guilt in the slightest.
(As a delusional ex Sea Org wasted life idiot that I am, today my "suppressively reasonable" extreme thinking makes me wish "Celebrity Centre" had self evolved some "Volunteer Ethics Officers" and that those fellow volunteer celebs had given Danny a "Comm Ev" or better just talked him into admitting guilt publicly, turned himself in, taken his punishment. As delusional as that seems, that would be the overall best solution and outcome reflecting back upon Scientology's ability to rise their members up to the points of responsibility to go turn themselves in, do their time in prison, and humbly carry on more virtuously in life. Of course official Scientology is far from that, Scientology is still in the much deserved "cult" stage of combined behavior. If I were "EEI" Establishment Executive International, the think tank person over the movement's "ethics" sub zone, I'd be figuring out how to get the Ethics Officers and MAAs up to getting the Scientologist followers to turn themselves in when they've committed felonies like Danny's. )
Back in 1983, when I first moved into the Sea Org unit called "Senior HCO Int" which is the unit that the International Justice Chief is a sub member of, there was an instance of a Scientology parishioner in Michigan, if my recall is right, who with the quick thinking help of their org Ethics Officer/execs, turned himself in when he admitted he'd murdered his family member. All without orders from above the chain of command, all without intervention by Office of Special Affairs. That's the kind of outcome official Scientology has to get itself up to performing.
Danny could still end this, just admit his guilt, stop his appeals, and that'd be the best outcome.
As I remember it, the Does used at least one same term to describe Rapey Masterson. That term was 'jack hammer', as in his sexual performance. I think that is a very common term among women to describe their partners performance. That is not 'cross-contamination', that is just common girl talk. Rapey's lawyer tried to make a big thing out it, but got shot down by the prosecution and the jury.
No matter how well written that appeal is, it is still a hail Mary and I hope it gets thrown out. If any retrial is ordered, maybe Jane Doe 3's testimony will get more respect. Was it 3? One of the Does did not get a guilty verdict. I am not certain which one that was.
My question. Who paid for this tome? What would the cost of a lawyer at that level creating this masterpiece of misdirection?
Question for TX lawyer, if they don't mind and can speak to this: I got the attorney's reasoning behind saying the Jane Does' stories changed. But, I didn't understand why he spent a lot of his precious words on repeatedly mentioning their testimony in the preliminary hearing and first trial. Can't the state just make that moot by pointing out that a JURY convicted him based on the original reports and testimony in the second trial - because the jury wasn't supposed to know about the preliminary hearing and first trial?
This brings up I guess what the judge's wiser overview of all these matters was:
",,,, We remember that Masterson’s defense attorneys repeatedly made similar arguments about how the DA’s office was bringing the case to avoid the statute of limitations, but the court repeatedly sided with prosecutors....."
it is STILL best for society to have a person who did what Danny Masterson did, to be punished in prison, that's how I interpret the above.
As commenters have commented, he's in prison, where he belongs, after all, that is the right and just outcome. Even if he doesn't admit and understand his guilt in the slightest.
(As a delusional ex Sea Org wasted life idiot that I am, today my "suppressively reasonable" extreme thinking makes me wish "Celebrity Centre" had self evolved some "Volunteer Ethics Officers" and that those fellow volunteer celebs had given Danny a "Comm Ev" or better just talked him into admitting guilt publicly, turned himself in, taken his punishment. As delusional as that seems, that would be the overall best solution and outcome reflecting back upon Scientology's ability to rise their members up to the points of responsibility to go turn themselves in, do their time in prison, and humbly carry on more virtuously in life. Of course official Scientology is far from that, Scientology is still in the much deserved "cult" stage of combined behavior. If I were "EEI" Establishment Executive International, the think tank person over the movement's "ethics" sub zone, I'd be figuring out how to get the Ethics Officers and MAAs up to getting the Scientologist followers to turn themselves in when they've committed felonies like Danny's. )
Back in 1983, when I first moved into the Sea Org unit called "Senior HCO Int" which is the unit that the International Justice Chief is a sub member of, there was an instance of a Scientology parishioner in Michigan, if my recall is right, who with the quick thinking help of their org Ethics Officer/execs, turned himself in when he admitted he'd murdered his family member. All without orders from above the chain of command, all without intervention by Office of Special Affairs. That's the kind of outcome official Scientology has to get itself up to performing.
Danny could still end this, just admit his guilt, stop his appeals, and that'd be the best outcome.
Always on principle, the right thing, is get smarter outsiders to give their advice on Scientology related matters.
I so appreciate having a news source like this one.
Endless thanks to outside professionals who give their views here.