Author Topic: The Desmond Family v. Narconon of Georgia, Narconon International, et al  (Read 226691 times)

Offline mefree

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 4,367
A somewhat more informative report is at the AJC website:  http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/narconon-claims-no-liability-in-death-of-norcross-/nTzZq/

Lawyers making silly arguments just is not very much real news, I guess.

Thanks, Witnessman. The AJC article was linked in my first post after the hearing, but it may have been updated.

Did anyone ever see anything from WSB TV?
The ultimate authority must always rest with the individual's own reason and critical analysis.
-Dalai Lama

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Just call me Slowpoke.  Here are my short (LOL! after the fact) impressions from the hearing on January 17, and I may come back and add more detail when I have more time.

Narconon International's new lawyer (Jay D. Bennett of Alston & Bird) started the hearing, and I have to say, I was not impressed.  His statements ran together so badly and he spoke in such a monotone, it was difficult to follow what he said.  It may be that one of the other attorneys from the firm (William R. Mitchelson, Jr. or Daniel F. Diffley) will argue in Court, which might avoid putting the jury to sleep.  Narconon International's existing lawyer (David Root) took over after Bennett, and his presentation was no better, as far as being interesting goes.  Some things were discussed that are finer points of the law, which I, not being a lawyer, found went over my head.  These things involved pain and suffering discussion, and the requirements for RICO to apply, and it was here that the statement mentioned in the AJC article, “A plaintiff can’t take advantage of his own wrongdoing by illegally taking heroin,” was made, I believe.

They also argued that there was only one claim against NNI in the original claim, and that the jurisdiction was wrong (as both NNI and NNGa have argued since June 2010, and yet the case goes on), as NNI does not and never has done business in Georgia.  They claimed that NNI's only role was to oversee the trademarks and guard against damage to the brand, to which Judge Hydrick questioned, "Wouldn't a death be considered to be damaging to a brand?"  They responded, essentially, "No." 

I almost feel like this was a trick question, and if they had answered yes, it would have indicated oversight, but by answering no, they really illustrated that they are all about the money and that's all.   Jeff, later of course, had a document to refute their statement that they are a separate entity from NNGa; it was an agreement between NNI and NNGa that indicated that NNI would oversee the operations and compliance of NNGa.  I have seen this, but can't find which document it is in at the moment, but I think it's in the Western World docs, if not one in this Desmond thread.   

There was another lawyer present who argued for Narconon of Georgia after Bennett and Root were finished, and she sounded extremely nervous.  I can't really blame her, considering who she is having to defend.  I didn't get her name, to my regret, but probably not to hers.  (I mean you no ill, unnamed lawyer for NNGa.)  I have to wonder if higher-up lawyers pass the less pleasant clients down to the lower-on-the-totem-pole attorneys in their firms, like most companies I've worked for do with jobs they don't want to do.  There is really not much  argument that can be made for Narconon of Georgia at this point, and her argument was not memorable to me, at least not at the moment, but this may come back to me later.

Jeff Harris was, as usual, right to the point, no nonsense, and rightfully indignant about the lack of responsiveness to discovery.  There are still new documents trickling in, and documents still missing.  It's pretty obvious that evidence has either been kept hidden, or destroyed, and Jeff said he would be claiming spoliation (destruction or alteration of evidence, as I understand the term).  We got to watch a brief segment of the video depostion of Lisa Mooty, of the Florida Drug Court, telling what she was told by Mary Rieser and Tracey Stepler when the Desmonds were looking for a rehab.

At one point, when Jeff was pointing out some more undelivered documents, he said, "I'm not even going to ask for sanctions," and I don't know if he was referring to the sanctions against Narconon International that he had motioned for before, or new ones.  So I don't know what happened with the NNI Sanctions; I don't recall hearing about them.  There are some filings that I haven't seen though, except listed on the Docket, so there may be something there that addresses them.
 
Barbara Marschalk (for Narconon of Georgia) seemed like entertainment after listening to the NNI lawyers, like watching a lawyer on a soap opera.  She was very dramatic in her presentation, wringing her hands, and placing them over her heart, as she bemoaned the fate of her client, now that their answers to the initial complaint have been stricken. 

It seems like there is some kind of undercurrent running between Marschalk and the Judge that I didn't understand, nor, if I were an attorney, would I make obvious in court.  At one point, there was some discussion about Judge Hydrick's time, and Marschalk said, "That's why you make the big bucks, Judge."  I didn't get this, but then I haven't been privy to all that's happened in this unusual case.  I think if it were me, though, I wouldn't have said that.   :o

Marschalk seems upset that this case, and her client, has reached some level of fame (or infamy) in the legal community (I can only imagine!), and stated this very dramatically, as if the Court should feel sorry that she is at such a disadvantage.  All in all, though, I have a general feeling of sympathy for her because her client (Mary Rieser) has lied through her teeth to Barbara M. - this much is apparent.  Barbara Marschalk is very southern in her speaking, and, to me, seems generally likable, even if she's a little out of the ordinary for a lawyer.

Judge Hydrick is very expressive with her facial expressions as she listens - I don't know if she's aware of that or not.  I think she gets how bad this is.  Totally.  I think she is making sure everything is absolutely to the letter of the law, so that there will be an airtight case when it's complete, and little chance of a decision being overturned on the inevitable appeal.  I hope so, anyway, and it's just my feeling.

The case definitely seems still on for February 11, with a pretrial hearing set for Feb. 4.  However, I see on the docket that NNI has made a motion for separate trials, so we'll see what happens with that:
Quote
Docket Text Details
Case ID      10A28641
Description      MOTION
Docket Filing Date      16-JAN-2013
Associated Party      DANIEL F DIFFLEY
Text   AADINO -DEF NARCONON INTERNATIONAL MOTION TFOR SEPARATE TRIALS

It seems pretty much the 11th hour for these types of motions to be made, but what do I know?  I'm not a lawyer, I'm just playing one on the internet.   ;)  Hahah, not really, but I do feel like I'm playing a reporter on the internet. 

I'm out of time for tonight, so if anything occurs to me that I forgot to include, I'll come back and post it later.  I believe a lot of the points that were argued were included in the last batch of documents, so me looking over them again might bring some other stuff to mind.
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline BMF

  • Potential Trouble Source
  • Posts: 240
  • Do or Do Not. There is no try.
This is great.  I love to read about the little nuances you dont get to read about in the papers.  If I were an attorney for the NN's I would be nervous too.  This is one of those cases that sticks with you through a career. 
"But now," says the Once-ler, "Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
UNLESS someone like you,
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better. Its not!"   - Dr. Seuss

Offline BigBeard

  • Hill 10 Situation
  • Posts: 648
Could that motion by NN Int for a seperate trial be the first overt indication NN GA is being tossed under the bus??

BigBeard

Offline SocialTransparency

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 1,326
Could that motion by NN Int for a seperate trial be the first overt indication NN GA is being tossed under the bus??

 ;)

 I would imagine so BB. As this is a civil case the jury will find for or against the plaintiffs claims of wrongful death. Justice within a civil case like this sadly is centered on money. Not that the plaintiff is concerned about monetary gains which I very seriously doubt,But this is the only venue currently available to the plaintiffs in seeking justice to be had for the deceased. As Narconon of GA more than likely has zero monetary assets beyond whatever insurance coverage may exist, I'd think Narconon Int would with the possibility of a financial burden judgement to not want to be party to this particular court case ,hence the want for a separate trial.

 Narconon Int knows full well the legal position it and Narconon of GA are in. Thing is Narconon Int is inextricably tied to Narconon of GA. The plaintiffs legal team has shown this to be fact. Narconon Int wants to distance itself from what is about to happen in regard to itself and Narconon of GA. Not from a "Protection of its brand" perspective, but from the monetary burden it would experience if the judge denies it a separate trial and in fact the jury rules in favor for the plaintiff as the case is now presented .

 The judge hopefully will by law allow the jury to come to the conclusion whether Narconon Int and Narconon of GA work hand in hand. Narconon Int will fight tooth and nail in order to avoid this and not make any financial payout! A financial judgement against Narconon Int would send shock waves not only across the legal landscape,but also have implications leading up to the very steps of the so called church of scientology's front door.

 I personally would hope once this case goes to trial it will include Narconon Int. As the state of Georgia,s DCH is moving forward on the revocation of Narconon of Georgia,s license to operate I further hope this also impedes the current scientology board of directors in attempts to open another Narconon within our state.

 We citizens must not forget how this whole sordid affair manifested itself. Scientology is the foundation on which the house of Narconon was built. High ranking scientology members both in and from outside Georgia in my opinion enabled and encouraged its Narconon arm to not only abuse the legal system,but also abuse those in need of actual aid and comfort.

 

Offline BMF

  • Potential Trouble Source
  • Posts: 240
  • Do or Do Not. There is no try.
Could that motion by NN Int for a seperate trial be the first overt indication NN GA is being tossed under the bus??

 ;)

 I would imagine so BB. As this is a civil case the jury will find for or against the plaintiffs claims of wrongful death. Justice within a civil case like this sadly is centered on money. Not that the plaintiff is concerned about monetary gains which I very seriously doubt,But this is the only venue currently available to the plaintiffs in seeking justice to be had for the deceased. As Narconon of GA more than likely has zero monetary assets beyond whatever insurance coverage may exist, I'd think Narconon Int would with the possibility of a financial burden judgement to not want to be party to this particular court case ,hence the want for a separate trial.

 Narconon Int knows full well the legal position it and Narconon of GA are in. Thing is Narconon Int is inextricably tied to Narconon of GA. The plaintiffs legal team has shown this to be fact. Narconon Int wants to distance itself from what is about to happen in regard to itself and Narconon of GA. Not from a "Protection of its brand" perspective, but from the monetary burden it would experience if the judge denies it a separate trial and in fact the jury rules in favor for the plaintiff as the case is now presented .

 The judge hopefully will by law allow the jury to come to the conclusion whether Narconon Int and Narconon of GA work hand in hand. Narconon Int will fight tooth and nail in order to avoid this and not make any financial payout! A financial judgement against Narconon Int would send shock waves not only across the legal landscape,but also have implications leading up to the very steps of the so called church of scientology's front door.

 I personally would hope once this case goes to trial it will include Narconon Int. As the state of Georgia,s DCH is moving forward on the revocation of Narconon of Georgia,s license to operate I further hope this also impedes the current scientology board of directors in attempts to open another Narconon within our state.

 We citizens must not forget how this whole sordid affair manifested itself. Scientology is the foundation on which the house of Narconon was built. High ranking scientology members both in and from outside Georgia in my opinion enabled and encouraged its Narconon arm to not only abuse the legal system,but also abuse those in need of actual aid and comfort.

Yep.  NN Int is trying to slither its way out of paying.  I hope this leads to reform in GA and brings the truth to other states NN is trying to infiltrate. 
"But now," says the Once-ler, "Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
UNLESS someone like you,
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better. Its not!"   - Dr. Seuss

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
Thanks for the hearing summary, ethercat! Much appreciated!

Quote
At one point, when Jeff was pointing out some more undelivered documents, he said, "I'm not even going to ask for sanctions," and I don't know if he was referring to the sanctions against Narconon International that he had motioned for before, or new ones. 


I think Jeff mentioned not asking for sanctions on the more recent stuff that has not been produced because they already proposed the highest level of sanctioning possible, the civil death penalty, right?

Quote
So I don't know what happened with the NNI Sanctions; I don't recall hearing about them.  There are some filings that I haven't seen though, except listed on the Docket, so there may be something there that addresses them.

I don't believe that motion is settled. Here's why:

I believe all this is about NNI  Discovery Sanctions ( about them not providing ordered documents that relate to or were mentioned as existing while undergoing the discovery process).

Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      MOTION
Docket Filing Date      31-OCT-2012
Associated Party      JED D MANTON
Text      
     AADINO - PLTFS MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS AGAINST NARCONON INTERNATIONAL

There was supposed to be a hearing Jan 4th

Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      ORDER FILED
Docket Filing Date      15-NOV-2012
Associated Party      None
Text      
     COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES IN THIS CASE APPEAR FOR A HEARING ON PLTF'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS AGST NARCONON INTERNATIONAL ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 4TH, 2013 AT 1:00 P.M. - TYD

NN Int asked for more time to respond to Plaintiff's motion:


Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME
Docket Filing Date      03-DEC-2012
Associated Party      JEFFREY R HARRIS
Text      
     AADINO - FOR NARCONON INTERNATIONAL TO RESPOND TO PLTFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

Which they then filed:

Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
Docket Filing Date      05-DEC-2012
Associated Party      CHERYL H SHAW
Text      
     AADINO - DEF NARCONON INTERNATIONAL'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PLTFS MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS

It looks like the Jan 4th hearing occurred on this matter alone . All others on the agenda were sent to Jan 17th hearing date. 

This which resulted in some kind of comprmise or agreement. A consent agreement, meaning NN Int consented to whatever the judge agreed upon as sanctions.

This was probably decided after them all reading and discussing the proposed ones the plaintiff filed originally, and NNI's objections in it's response. Plaintiff's sanctions were asking for civil death penalty, IIRC.

So this consent order ( meaning NN Int consents to whatever the sanctions are) were then sent to Plaintiff's  by NN Int's new attorney, for seeing and reading and perhaps for signing and returning:

Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      CONSENT ORDER
Docket Filing Date      11-JAN-2013
Associated Party      JAY D BENNETT
Text      
     AADINO - PLTFS MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEF NARCONON INTERNATIONAL - PLEASE SEE AND READ CONSENT ORDER

Then Jeff Harris sends a Stipulation and PROPOSED consent order to the judge on Jan 8th. This must be as a result of the Jan 4th hearing.

Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      PROPOSED ORDER
Docket Filing Date      08-JAN-2013
Associated Party      JEFFREY R HARRIS
Text      
     AADINO - STIPULATION AND ( PROPOSED ) CONSENT ORDER


So whatever both parties consented to would be the sanctions on Discovery violations. But were they signed and agreed to by NN Int, and then the judge afterwards?

Since they had been and were still going through all this on Discovery Sanctions already, perhaps Jeff stated at the Jan 17th hearing that he wasn't going to file for sanctions on the ongoing discovery violations in order to let the judge know that this behavior is still ongoing. Maybe the order has not been finalized by the judge and maybe this ongoing continued behavior by NN Int was mentioned by Jeff to let the judge know so she could do something with it. Like just sign the original sanctions proposal plaintiff sent in, disregard the one NN Int seems to not be agreeing to, and move on with the case going to trial.

Whatever it is, if sanctions were agreed to, there would be a consent order on file explaining it. Harris filed his stipulation and Proposed on Jan 8th. Perhaps he's just waiting for the judge to make her own decision on it based upon what was settled ( if settled ) or by what Harris originally proposed.
 
I could be wrong. I am not a lawyer, either, lol

I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Thanks for the hearing summary, ethercat! Much appreciated!

You're welcome.

Quote
Quote
So I don't know what happened with the NNI Sanctions; I don't recall hearing about them.  There are some filings that I haven't seen though, except listed on the Docket, so there may be something there that addresses them.

I don't believe that motion is settled. Here's why:

...

It looks like the Jan 4th hearing occurred on this matter alone . All others on the agenda were sent to Jan 17th hearing date. 

This which resulted in some kind of comprmise or agreement. A consent agreement, meaning NN Int consented to whatever the judge agreed upon as sanctions.

...

So whatever both parties consented to would be the sanctions on Discovery violations. But were they signed and agreed to by NN Int, and then the judge afterwards?

Since they had been and were still going through all this on Discovery Sanctions already, perhaps Jeff stated at the Jan 17th hearing that he wasn't going to file for sanctions on the ongoing discovery violations in order to let the judge know that this behavior is still ongoing. Maybe the order has not been finalized by the judge and maybe this ongoing continued behavior by NN Int was mentioned by Jeff to let the judge know so she could do something with it. Like just sign the original sanctions proposal plaintiff sent in, disregard the one NN Int seems to not be agreeing to, and move on with the case going to trial.

Whatever it is, if sanctions were agreed to, there would be a consent order on file explaining it. Harris filed his stipulation and Proposed on Jan 8th. Perhaps he's just waiting for the judge to make her own decision on it based upon what was settled ( if settled ) or by what Harris originally proposed.
 
I could be wrong. I am not a lawyer, either, lol

You may be right, Mary, there may be an agreement pending.  There may have been talks and/or conferences outside of the official record, but I am fairly certain that no (public) hearing occurred on January 4:
http://alley.ethercat.com/storage/10A28641/10A28641-2-2012-12-11-NoticeOfHearing.pdf

Quote
NOTICE OF HEARING
It hereby is ordered that counsel for the parties and for non-party respondent Deb
Danos appear before this Court at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, January 17, 2013, in
courtroom 2A of the DeKalb County Judicial Tower, to show cause why Plaintiff's
Motion for Discovery Sanctions against Narconon International; Plaintiff's Motion to
Compel Against Non-Party Deb Danos; Narconon of Georgia, lnc.,'s Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment or
Partial Summary Judgment; and Narconon International's Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment on All Claims and Motion to
Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction should not be granted. In the interest of
judicial economy, the previously-scheduled January 4, 2013 hearing in this case is
postponed until January 17, 2013.


IT IS SO ORDERED, this 10 day of December, 2012.

Bolding mine.

Now that I'm reading over that again, I don't recall hearing anything having to do with Deb Danos either - she was not present in court, nor was anyone there who stood up to speak for her.  Perhaps the speculated agreement included something about that too.
 ???
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
 read that, and was under the belief that the 17th hearing would go over all that. But you say t didn't. Perhaps some of those items were rescheduled for another dy, just as the clerk told you the hearing time on the 17th had been moved up to 1pm instead of early am.

I seriously doubt the Deb Danos matter had anything to do with the consent order. Deb Danos is a 'non-party' who must fend on her own, separately. Her's is related to the ongoing Clarke 'non party' matter'

Quote
Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      RESPONSE
Docket Filing Date      17-JAN-2013
Associated Party      JEFFREY R HARRIS
Text      
     AADINO - PLTF'S RESPONSE TO NON-PARTY CHUCK CLARKE'S OBJECTION TO AND MOTION TO QUASH PENDING SUBPOENA AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
I just got word from a very reliable source that Mary Rieser has been at Flag in Clearwater for several weeks and no sign of her immediate return.  I'm assuming she is getting sec-checked within and inch of her life and to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars at her expense and also getting her Committee of Evidence.  She was summoned there after the WSB series ran, I believe prior to the protest and the sanctions being announced.

She may have her license stripped from her for being caught lying publicly (apparently they only think its bad if you get caught) and bankrupting NN GA - because the church, ABLE and Narconon all need a scapegoat and she's it for this tragedy.  It enables the higher organizations to not have to be responsible to pin it all on her.  I'd be very surprised if NN GA as it is still exists in six months, and I bet they try to do a new corporation/ restructuring with a different executive director and board of directors.  If May was smart (which she is not), then she should run now and tell all she can before they completely waste her like a snotty tissue.

I got a tip today from an unnamed source that

'Mary Rieser resigned last week from NNGA and is in Clearwater  ( I assume cleaning a dumpster with a toothbrush.) '

Anyone hear anything about this?
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline BMF

  • Potential Trouble Source
  • Posts: 240
  • Do or Do Not. There is no try.
FLAG is helping her.  Its only costing her $9800 for every 12 hours of auditing, but they are there to help.  Toothbrush cleaning is covered in policy.  Its standard tech now.

Sorry to make light of her situation, umm, no im not.  She should be in jail for negligence resulting in the death of another.

To answer your question, no.  I havent heard anything.  Jeannie being at the helm at GA is no better than Mary.  Hopefully GA shuts them down quick. 
"But now," says the Once-ler, "Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
UNLESS someone like you,
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better. Its not!"   - Dr. Seuss

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
FLAG is helping her.  Its only costing her $9800 for every 12 hours of auditing, but they are there to help.  Toothbrush cleaning is covered in policy.  Its standard tech now.

Sorry to make light of her situation, umm, no im not.  She should be in jail for negligence resulting in the death of another.

To answer your question, no.  I havent heard anything.  Jeannie being at the helm at GA is no better than Mary.  Hopefully GA shuts them down quick.

Thanks.
Who is Jeanne?
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
Forget it. I see who in the other thread, in CoolHand's post this morning

Luke had said she was busy getting spanked at FLAG around that time.

I've had various reports of Mary's whereabouts, though I guess timing wasn't specific.  It is my understanding though that Jeannie Trahant is now the acting Executive Director at Narconon Georgia.  There is clearly some plan of action in place from Narconon International if Jeannie is there.  Will it be to facilitate the transfer of students somewhere (as Jeannie did for Narconon Sacramento in 2005), or will it be to form a new corporation in Georgia?  Not sure, but the Narconon trademark license was issued to Mary, so if she's not at the helm anymore, chances are likely they're moving along with their plan B and have given up hope that NN of GA will come through this series blows - the DCH license revocation, the Desmond case, and one or two other things looming...
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
Who is Jeannie Trahant?  Is she from Narconon International? 
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline BMF

  • Potential Trouble Source
  • Posts: 240
  • Do or Do Not. There is no try.
She goes out on project for nn int.  i think she was one of the first grads of the program.  OT blah blah....
"But now," says the Once-ler, "Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
UNLESS someone like you,
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better. Its not!"   - Dr. Seuss

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
She goes out on project for nn int.  i think she was one of the first grads of the program.  OT blah blah....

She's was working at of Narconon Freedom center.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jeanne-trahant/18/640/aa

For a while now. But I guess they asked her to transfer.

Most likely the request came through NN EUS and from them to Jeanne.

She's Larry Trahant's exwife. He's a longtime exec at Narconon Fresh Start formerly Narconon  Southern California.

She is named as a defendent in various lawsuits:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Stop-Narconon/Documents/chimblo-complaint-1996-06-26.pdf

http://www.scribd.com/doc/107223589/Narconon-Stamps-v-Narconon
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,770
She goes out on project for nn int.  i think she was one of the first grads of the program.  OT blah blah....

Oh, this is interesting.  I guess if Narconon International is sending someone (Jeannie Trahant) to run a Narconon when an Executive Director (Mary Rieser) resigns, that puts the truth to the lie about the connections between the two. 

I wouldn't think McDonalds Inc. sends someone out to each of the local franchises when an owner gives it up.  I would think it just closes down, and it's the franchise owner's responsibility to do all the final shutdown procedures.

And Narconon International says their concern is protection of the brand.  I hope the Desmond team sees this.   ;D

Thank you for the extra background, Mary.

   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions

Offline snippy

  • Supressive Person
  • Posts: 396
There are a few more docket items today:

ORDER FILED
23-JAN-2013
Non-Party Chuck Clarke's Objection To And Motion To Quash Pending Subpoena - Granted-TYD
No
ORDER FILED
23-JAN-2013
Pltfs' Motion To Compel Agst Non-Party Deb Danos - Granted-Tyd
No

RULE 5.2 CERTIFICATE
23-JAN-2013
Def Narconon Of Georgia Inc's Supplemental Responses To Pltfs First Reqt for Prod of Docs
Yes
REPLY
22-JAN-2013
Narconon of Georgia Inc's Reply Brief in Support of its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment or Part
Yes

RESPONSE
17-JAN-2013
Pltf's Response to Non-Party Chuck Clarke'S Objection to and Motion to Quash Pending Subpoena and Brief In Support
Yes
MOTION
17-JAN-2013
For Order Allowing Def Narconon International to Bring and Install Certin Multimedia Equipment for Use at the Jan 17, 2013 Hearing - W/Exhibit Proposed Order
Yes

ORDER FILED
16-JAN-2013
Allowing Pltfs to Install and Bring Certain Multimedia Equipment for Use at the Jan 17, 2013 Hearing - Tyd
No
REPLY
16-JAN-2013
Def Narconon International's Reply Brief in Support of its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment on All Claims and Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
Yes

MOTION
16-JAN-2013
Def Narconon International Motion for Separate Trials
Yes
MEMORANDUM
16-JAN-2013
Def Narconon International's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Separate Trials
Yes

ORDER FILED
16-JAN-2013
Allowing Deft Narconon International to Bring and Install Certain Multimedia Equipment for Use at the Jan 17, 2013 Hearing - Tyd
No
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 19:29 by snippy »

Offline mefree

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 4,367
Thanks, snippy!

 ||||9000||||
The ultimate authority must always rest with the individual's own reason and critical analysis.
-Dalai Lama

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,886
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology


 ;D

Docket Text Details

Case ID      10A28641
Description      ORDER FILED
Docket Filing Date      23-JAN-2013
Associated Party      None
Text      
     PLTFS' MOTION TO COMPEL AGST NON-PARTY DEB DANOS - GRANTED/TYD
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.