4 Comments

A case that’s going to trial in a year and a half would not be severely prejudiced by an amendment now. And, do you really want us to explain that they couldn’t amend a complaint in a case that was on hold while other attorneys were busily delaying another trial where one of the defendants in the instant case, now known as inmate no. BW7253 was being convicted of rape? Deep breath.

Expand full comment

Blah, blah, blah. The usual 'you can't touch this' crap from the $cieno lawyers. I applaud the inclusion of RICO charges and I bet the plaintiffs have enough evidence to tie the harassment to the CO$. I don't know when they are going to unveil the smoking gun, but I am waiting for it with baited breath. Judge Kalra is going to find his in basket full of more $cieno excrement and as the old adage goes, 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, confound them with bovine excrement'.

Expand full comment

Permitting an amendment now threatens another extended delay of this case.

Like scientology missmanage could care about delays.

Keep going plaintiffs.

We are watching you davey. Your abuses and tactics are well known these days.

Expand full comment

It can't be normal practice for them to refer to themselves as "Church Defendants," right? I mean, if the defendants were a toy store, they wouldn't continually call themselves "Toy Store Defendants" in all their filings.

Expand full comment