Leah Remini answers Scientology's appeal in legal slugfest over 'Fair Game' smears

[Karen#1]

TONY ORTEGA
Excerpt:

​

Leah Remini’s attorney Daniel A. Saunders filed a 133-page answer to Scientology’s appeal in Leah’s lawsuit this week, and we have the entire thing for you.

We know it’s been a while since we updated you on this case, so let’s do a quick review to remind you of how we got here.

Leah filed her lawsuit in August 2023 against three defendants: The Church of Scientology International, the Religious Technology Center (the nominally controlling entity in the Scientology movement), and RTC’s Chairman of the Board (and the ultimate leader of the church) David Miscavige.

She’s alleging that since she left Scientology in 2013, she’s been subjected to a nonstop campaign of online smears and in-person harassment that is intended, as Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard laid out in a policy called “Fair Game,” to destroy her utterly.

Scientology responded by filing anti-SLAPP motions, asking Judge Randolph Hammock to gut the case by removing defamation claims that it said were merely opinion about Remini, and not statements of fact. Judge Hammock did remove some of the defamation claims, but denied other Scientology arguments and left in almost all of her causes of action.

Both sides were unhappy with his ruling, and after Scientology appealed it, so did Remini. (Hammock himself is no longer handling the case.)

READ MORE

Leah Remini answers Scientology's appeal in legal slugfest over 'Fair Game' smears

Leah Remini’s attorney Daniel A.

tonyortega.substack.com

 

[Type4_PTS]

TONY ORTEGA
Excerpt:

​

Leah Remini’s attorney Daniel A. Saunders filed a 133-page answer to Scientology’s appeal in Leah’s lawsuit this week, and we have the entire thing for you.


We know it’s been a while since we updated you on this case, so let’s do a quick review to remind you of how we got here.

Leah filed her lawsuit in August 2023 against three defendants: The Church of Scientology International, the Religious Technology Center (the nominally controlling entity in the Scientology movement), and RTC’s Chairman of the Board (and the ultimate leader of the church) David Miscavige.

She’s alleging that since she left Scientology in 2013, she’s been subjected to a nonstop campaign of online smears and in-person harassment that is intended, as Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard laid out in a policy called “Fair Game,” to destroy her utterly.

Scientology responded by filing anti-SLAPP motions, asking Judge Randolph Hammock to gut the case by removing defamation claims that it said were merely opinion about Remini, and not statements of fact. Judge Hammock did remove some of the defamation claims, but denied other Scientology arguments and left in almost all of her causes of action.

Both sides were unhappy with his ruling, and after Scientology appealed it, so did Remini. (Hammock himself is no longer handling the case.)

READ MORE

Leah Remini answers Scientology's appeal in legal slugfest over 'Fair Game' smears

Leah Remini’s attorney Daniel A.

tonyortega.substack.com

If this case ever gets to a trial in front of a jury, Scientology will get utterly destroyed, both in the courtroom and in the media.

It will get much more media attention than other legal cases involving Scientology because it involves a celebrity.

 

[I M Dex]

It boggles the mind that supposedly fair and unbiased courts bend over backward so far to grant an air of legitimacy to an obviously vicious, abusive entity engaged in cruel criminality as an operating basis, and that individuals and their attorneys have to put so much work, expense and jump through hoops in the hopes of getting the protections and compensation they are so obviously due and deserving. The only explanation I can come up with, other than being bought off, is that they are falling right into the intended trap of caving to the path of least resistance.

 

[The_Fixer]

It boggles the mind that supposedly fair and unbiased courts bend over backward so far to grant an air of legitimacy to an obviously vicious, abusive entity engaged in cruel criminality as an operating basis, and that individuals and their attorneys have to put so much work, expense and jump through hoops in the hopes of getting the protections and compensation they are so obviously due and deserving. The only explanation I can come up with, other than being bought off, is that they are falling right into the intended trap of caving to the path of least resistance.

In the Western world this is par for the course. It is a common theme in family law cases nowadays and anywhere where the feminist movement is involved.

The Democrat style parties (globally) in conjunction with the leftist activist movements have carefully arranged the installation of the right kind of judges to achieve these results. A certain bias is the desired result.

 

[I M Dex]

In the Western world this is par for the course. It is a common theme in family law cases nowadays and anywhere where the feminist movement is involved.

The Democrat style parties (globally) in conjunction with the leftist activist movements have carefully arranged the installation of the right kind of judges to achieve these results. A certain bias is the desired result.

I know family law extremely well, I mastered it in successfully arguing in court myself for transfer of my boys' custody to me against my ex's team of 3 attorneys. I also served as director of the New Jersey Council for Childrens' Rights. And you couldn't possibly be more wrong in associating your silly politics with the subject.
I have to say, it's always the rightest side interjecting their politics into other discussions, and its very annoying. I've run a Facebook group for a local sports team with over 30,000 members, with a firm rule to leave politics out of it. And roughly 30 times I've had to toss people for insisting on pushing their political agenda, attempting to hijack discussions, and each and every time the rude offender was a raving, raging right winger. The rest of the group, regardless of their leanings, deplored and protested each violation and brought it to my attention.
If your car gets a flat tire, its not the SP's, the Marcabs, or "the deep state". Its a f*cking flat tire.

 

[The_Fixer]

I know family law extremely well, I mastered it in successfully arguing in court myself for transfer of my boys' custody to me against my ex's team of 3 attorneys. I also served as director of the New Jersey Council for Childrens' Rights. And you couldn't possibly be more wrong in associating your silly politics with the subject.
I have to say, it's always the rightest side interjecting their politics into other discussions, and its very annoying. I've run a Facebook group for a local sports team with over 30,000 members, with a firm rule to leave politics out of it. And roughly 30 times I've had to toss people for insisting on pushing their political agenda, attempting to hijack discussions, and each and every time the rude offender was a raving, raging right winger. The rest of the group, regardless of their leanings, deplored and protested each violation and brought it to my attention.
If your car gets a flat tire, its not the SP's, the Marcabs, or "the deep state". Its a f*cking flat tire.

So you haven't seen what is happening in Australia then?

 

[Isaac]

If this case ever gets to a trial in front of a jury, Scientology will get utterly destroyed, both in the courtroom and in the media.

It will get much more media attention than other legal cases involving Scientology because it involves a celebrity.

Scientology will pay Leah Remini off and she will likely take the money. I hope not.

 

[Type4_PTS]

Scientology will pay Leah Remini off and she will likely take the money. I hope not.

Yeah, it's a civil case, and that's how those types of cases typically end.

I think Miscavige would write a check for 50 million or more dollars to prevent this case from going to trial. But first, he'll drag it out for as many years as he can.

 

[The_Fixer]

I know family law extremely well, I mastered it in successfully arguing in court myself for transfer of my boys' custody to me against my ex's team of 3 attorneys. I also served as director of the New Jersey Council for Childrens' Rights. And you couldn't possibly be more wrong in associating your silly politics with the subject.
I have to say, it's always the rightest side interjecting their politics into other discussions, and its very annoying. I've run a Facebook group for a local sports team with over 30,000 members, with a firm rule to leave politics out of it. And roughly 30 times I've had to toss people for insisting on pushing their political agenda, attempting to hijack discussions, and each and every time the rude offender was a raving, raging right winger. The rest of the group, regardless of their leanings, deplored and protested each violation and brought it to my attention.
If your car gets a flat tire, its not the SP's, the Marcabs, or "the deep state". Its a f*cking flat tire.

FWIW, I am more Centrist than anything else and I hate to see evil and injustice, so I do have something to say about it. If you demand politics are left out of whatever you demand, then you would be like those people who stood back and allowed evil regimes (like the Nazi Party) to come into power because you didn’t want to hear about it.

Using the logic and what you have said above, can I consider you to be a raving lunatic left winger? Probably not, but that is the kind of assumption you are thrusting towards me.

You may have little idea of what goes on over here. The feminists have hijacked the legal system and most of the judges in Family Law are feminist centric. It is appalling some of the decisions that are handed down against the men. They do not care if the children are in danger, the mother comes first not the child. Even though the law says otherwise.

There are no consequences for false accusations from women here.

In DV cases, the police are ordered to arrest and charge the men, never the women.

In the last month here in Tasmania, a professor who had written up a policy for police investigating DV incidents in a fair and balanced way. The police followed it and found they were arresting and charging both sexes at an even ratio. It was working very well until the feminist groups got wind of it and demanded it be stopped and only arrest the men. They also got her removed from her tenure at the University – effectively, had her sacked unless she recants her position on her policies.

There are many more stories out there, but there is also this point:

It isn’t always just a flat tyre. There is also a lot of political interference going on and if we allow it to go unchecked, then we will become just another oppressive state like has always been happening around the world in history.

Once judges are allowed to rule according to their own political agendas, our freedom goes in the bin for good.