Breaking news - Keith Henson detained by authorities - AGAIN

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
Post Reply
User avatar
deb_thang
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:00 am
Location: On the San Andreas Fault

Post by deb_thang » Wed Feb 28, 2007 1:41 am

Hello, Hemetdude from a paisana! :crazy:

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:21 pm

We just heard this afternoon that, at the request of both Keith's
attorney and the County Attorney here, his next hearing has been
postponed from Monday afternoon (March 5) to May 8 (a 60-day delay).

Unrelated to that development is the fact that Keith and I finally put
time into carefully scrutinizing the documents with which he was
released--which were different from the ones given his lawyer,
although there is some overlap. The "warrant of arrest" under which
Riverside County is attempting to extradite him does not jibe with
several of the other documents in the group given him, or with the
case record ("docket") cited by the "warrant" (#HEM014371). (This
document was not released to his attorney.)

The official record of the case cited is available through
http://75.28.114.12/OpenAccess/ Follow directions to get to a page
that offers "Case Number Search." Click on that, and then when a page
comes up that asks for the case number, enter the number you see at
the end of the above paragraph.

In the first place, the warrant provided to the Yavapai County
Attorney's Office is not in the case record. In the second place, the
defendant in HEM014371 appeared in court on the date of the warrant,
giving rise to wonder why the "Warrant" lists, among other charges,
1320(A) PC-M, which is "failure to appear."

Thirdly, the accompanying Sheriff's Department Extradition Unit's "fax
cover sheet" lists the warrant number (the same as the case number),
the same charges as on the warrant, and a date of "05-16-2001,"
although the warrant itself is dated "09/15/00."

Fourthly, the NCIC record (a copy of which was handed to Keith despite
the notation that it should not be duplicated) lists the offense
("OFF") as "obstruction of justice," a charge that appears nowhere
else in the paperwork given to Keith or in the docket of HEM014371.

Those of you who are familiar with HEM014371 might be interested to
note that the "Warrant" (faxed on February 2, the day of Keith's
arrest here) states that the court seal was affixed on September 15,
2000, by "The Honorable Robert H. Wallerstein." I also find it
interesting that the "Warrant" lists a set of charges aside from
1320(A) that includes but is not limited to the single charge of which
the defendant in HEM014371 was actually convicted. (A copy of the
"Verdict" in the trial in HEM014371 is included in Keith's packet, and
I wonder if anyone on this list or their contacts can tell me if it is
usual to redact--white out--the name of the foreperson singing the
verdict. I can understand why it would be, particularly in
HEM014371.)

I've also been amused to discover that there are at least four
different versions of a possible incident on July 19, 2000, in which
the defendant in HEM0142371 may or may not have been taken into
custody by Riverside County Sheriff deputies. A letter dated February
22 to the Yavapai County Attorney from the Sheriff Department of
Riverside County states that "subject has never been arrested" by
them. In the docket of HEM0142371, it states that the defendant in
HEM0142371 was in custody on September 1, 2000, and was released witih
a notice to appear. In other accounts contemporaneous with events on
July 19, the defendant in HEM0142371 was arrested, interrogated while
in handcuffs, without benefit of counsel, and without being told he
was being recorded, then "unarrested," forced onto an ambulance under
threat of bodily harm, and taken to a hospital that refused to treat
him. In the report of a deputy sheriff supposedly involved in events
on July 19, 2000, the defendant offered himself voluntarily for
questioning and was reassured of the voluntary nature of his
involvement.

Hmmm. Even Houdini had to have help getting *into* handcuffs, even if
he could get out of them. And I don't think even Schroedinger's cat
can rival the twists and turns of probability inherent in these wildly
different accounts.

I have serious doubts about the validity of an arrest warrant that is
not in agreement with the court docket or even with the fax cover
sheet with which it was sent. There was a long pause after Keith was
detained during which the plainclothes officer who chased him claimed
he was waiting to see "if California wants him." Could this "warrant"
have been the document proferred as the warrant for his arrest based
on which the arrest here was made? And is it the only basis for
extradition?

If so, I suggest they also extradite Shroedinger's cat, whether alive,
dead, or undetermined.

Arel

P.S. Copies of the warrant are available electronically, along with
others of the documents in Keith's release packet.
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:20 pm

2 March 07 - Report from Keith's wife Arel Lucas....

http://www.operatingthetan.com/arel-lucas-5.html

2 Mar 2007
We just heard this afternoon that, at the request of both Keith's
attorney and the County Attorney here, his next hearing has been
postponed from Monday afternoon (March 5) to May 8 (a 60-day delay).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith's attorney recommends the best way to help
...I'd say anyone and everyone who wishes him well should contact the
California Governor's officeand ask that they not pursue Keith's
extradition because:

*Keith has never committed a violent crime
*he is an author, speaker, scientist, etc., etc.
*his age and health make him a poor choice to expend limited
resources
*California is considering releasing younger and healthier FELONS due
to overcrowding
*there are serious questions as to the constitutionality of the
MISDEMEANORconviction, which will result in further litigation
*in the interest of justice, and penal and judicial economy, don't
extradite


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith's recent activities
Keith just recently presented a paper by proxy at the Netherlands
European Space Agency conference (28 February), and he has a paper due
in the fall on another topic. He is currently working on what are
turning out to be 2 books, both SF, one about the future of the world
after singularity or thereabouts, the other about the human side of
his proposition to the ESA, a massive construction project to loft
solar-power satellites using a (or multiple) space elevator(s). So he
is continuing to write and speak, having made some notes even in jail
about his work. He sends his thanks and best wishes to all those who
have been concerned about him and have supported him, either through
monetary contributions, through personal expressions of support, or by
urging media to tell his story.


Really Good News!
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:24 pm

prison overcowding crisis:

Today at 1:30pm, (California Time) the Governor's Office will hold a live, interactive video Web discussion on California's prison crisis and Governor Schwarzenegger's proposed reforms to reduce overcrowding.
Participate in the discussion! Submit a question now. LINK
http://gov.ca.gov/ask
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
Peter Schilte
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:22 pm
Location: Vierlingsbeek (Netherlands)

Post by Peter Schilte » Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:16 pm

Arnie, I sent a few weeks ago an email to the Governor of California and I got this answer:
Thank you for your email to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Governor Schwarzenegger appreciates hearing from constituents and the issues that matter to them. However, the issue you wrote about falls under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Attorney General. In order to ensure that your concerns are properly addressed, you may wish to contact that office directly at:

The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Attorney General
1300 I Street
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 445-9555

Useful information may also be found at the Attorney General office's home page at http://www.ag.ca.gov. Again, thank you for your email.



Office of Constituent Affairs
"THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM."
- L. Ron Hubbard

http://www.scamofscientology.nl

songbird
Posts: 3605
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:12 am

Post by songbird » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:55 pm

My husband & I sent letters to Gov. Schwarzenegger and to Calif. Attorney General Jerry Brown. The governor's office directed us to the Atty. General's office.

Yesterday we received this letter, dated April 12, from the Atty. General's office:
Thank you for your letter to the office of Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr., wherein you request legal assistance on behalf of Mr. Keith Henson.

Regrettably, we must decline your request in this matter. It appears, from the information provided in your letter, that the Riverside County authorities have jurisdiction in the action involving Mr. Henson. We suggest discussing your views with that office.

The Attorney General's Office is prohibited by law from representing private individuals or providing legal advice, legal research or legal analysis to private individuals under any circumstances.

Again, we regret that we cannot be of further aassistance to you, but hope that the information we have provided clarifies our restrictions in regard to your request.

Sincerely,
Bill Canepa
Public Inquiry Unit
for EDMUND G. BROWN, JR.
Attorney General
I can't imagine that the Riverside County authorities will be of any help, since it is they who are pursuing Keith in the first place!
But we will try contacting them.

User avatar
Braveheart's Girlfriend
Posts: 1037
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:26 pm

Post by Braveheart's Girlfriend » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:56 pm

We got nearly identical letters. We wrote back objecting to the impersonality (LOL!) of their letters. We highlighted our disappointment that free speech no longer exists in America (not that it does absolutely here or anywhere else that we know of) and that we would appreciate not being fobbed off by a form letter when we were voters (absentee, no less - takes some effort!).

We said that if the governmental infiltrations by Scientology (U.S. States and other countries mentioned) in recent years - NEVER MIND THE 70s ESPIONAGE on the U.S. government and consequent imprisonment of key Scientology infiltrators) - that if U.S. elected governmental officials could not stand up to a criminal organization such as the "Church" of Scientology after all the documentation they have at their disposal, then they were likely everything except what they sold themselves to their campaign managers as being when running and re-running. That with each election victory their commitments to important constituencies and stated goals became diluted beyond recognition.

Haven't heard back. But I don't care. There are other "leaders" to lobby. Always. (Well I do care: silence speaks so loudly, as always, in these instances.)
http://alley.ethercat.com/door/

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

From ARS

Post by lermanet_com » Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:50 pm

Keith Henson (and others) has long accused Riverside County DA and
Courts of misconduct in his misdemeanor conviction of harassing a
religion (as if $cientology is a religion!).

Today we have this article from the Los Angeles Times (kudos to the
LATimes for actually publishing something of importance!)

LA Times: Riverside County judge guilty of misconduct, panel says
By Maeve Reston, Times Staff Writer
April 17, 2007

A three-judge panel investigating Riverside County Superior Court Judge
Robert Spitzer said Monday that he repeatedly failed to perform his
judicial duties and was guilty of "willful misconduct" for improperly
intervening in a murder case.

The judges' report will be sent to the state's Commission on Judicial
Performance, whose members will decide whether to punish the 58-year-old
Spitzer. The penalty could range from no action to removal from the
bench. It was not known when the commission will hear the case.

The most publicized complaint about Spitzer was his handling of the
Vondetrick Carr case. Carr was tried for murder after he crashed while
driving drunk, killing a 13-year-old passenger, Kyle Reiber.

During Carr's first trial in 2004, Spitzer angered the Riverside County
district attorney's office by repeatedly asking why the prosecutor was
pursuing murder charges instead of manslaughter.

After the jury deadlocked, Spitzer had a private conversation with the
dead boy's mother, a potential witness in the retrial, telling her the
defendant had not meant to kill her son and that the accident should
result in manslaughter charges.

Kyle's mother and the district attorney considered Spitzer's comments
improper and an attempt to enlist her help in persuading the prosecutor
to charge Carr with manslaughter instead of murder.

The district attorney successfully blocked Spitzer from hearing Carr's
second trial, in which he was convicted of murder.

For more than a year afterward, the district attorney's office filed
papers asking that Spitzer be disqualified from hearing felony cases.

In its report, the three-judge panel said Spitzer "acted in bad faith"
when he met with the victim's mother. "Judge Spitzer abandoned his role
as a neutral arbiter and became embroiled in the case," the panel's
report said.

In two other cases, the panel found that Spitzer also sought ex parte
conversations, or conversations held outside the courtroom, without
seeking permission from the attorneys.

Spitzer, who worked for more than a decade as a Riverside County deputy
district attorney before becoming a Municipal Court judge in 1990 and a
Superior Court judge in 1998, has faced intense scrutiny over the last
few years.

In 2003, Douglas Miller, the presiding judge of the Riverside County
Superior Court, alerted the judicial commission to problems in Spitzer's
court after receiving complaints that he was failing to issue orders in
a timely manner.

During a public hearing before the three-judge panel this year,
Spitzer's staff and colleagues testified that his courtroom and chambers
were so disorganized and messy that some staffers gave up trying to
retrieve missing orders.

Some members of the courthouse staff were concerned that Spitzer was
backdating orders.

In its report Monday, the panel said it did not find evidence that
Spitzer had backdated orders or that he had knowingly signed false
affidavits stating that no matters before him had been awaiting
decisions for more than 90 days, which is the legal limit.

But in more than half a dozen civil cases, the panel said, Spitzer
failed to promptly dispose of judicial matters which amounted to a
"dereliction of duty" and a "persistent failure to perform judicial
duties." In one case Spitzer did not enter a decision for almost six years.

The panel said the judge wasn't properly tracking cases and wasn't aware
the matters had been under submission for more than 90 days or that he
hadn't made his clerks aware he had made a decision.

One of Spitzer's attorneys, Reginald Vitek, said he had not had a chance
to read the full report but was pleased the panel found his client had
not knowingly signed false affidavits or backdated orders, "which were
the most serious charges."

The judicial panel, composed of Justice Fred K. Morrison of the 3rd
District Court of Appeals, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Mary
Jo Levinger and Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Mark H. Tansil, said
the judicial commission should consider Spitzer's reputation for
honesty, his legal acumen and that he frequently took on criminal cases
as a civil judge to ease the backlog in Riverside County.

The panel also praised Spitzer for voluntarily entering therapy "to deal
with the bad organizational habits that were jeopardizing some aspects
of his job performance."

[end quote]

Awards for those who can verify that this article works wonders to
diminish the crimes of Judge Spitzer. Frankly, this judge should be
incarcerated in San Quentin for life.

Q
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
tom_
Posts: 5886
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:13 pm
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by tom_ » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:20 pm

Did Sptizer have any dealings or connection to the ongoing Henson judical debacle?

There maybe another side to this story though. The prosecutor in Riverside County maybe an overzealous SOB with strong political motives whereas
this judge felt the need to curb his conduct (albeit wrongly in a clumsy, clutzy, and improper manner.) Hmmm...

My experience with judges has been both good and bad.....Quote from former Circuit Judge Charles W. Boteler, Jr. of Kentucky; "I don't know what a cult is."

<<<>>>

User avatar
Sponge
Posts: 14692
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:23 am
Location: U.K.

Post by Sponge » Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:16 pm

tom_ wrote:Did Sptizer have any dealings or connection to the ongoing Henson judical debacle?

There maybe another side to this story though. The prosecutor in Riverside County maybe an overzealous SOB with strong political motives whereas
this judge felt the need to curb his conduct (albeit wrongly in a clumsy, clutzy, and improper manner.) Hmmm...

My experience with judges has been both good and bad.....Quote from former Circuit Judge Charles W. Boteler, Jr. of Kentucky; "I don't know what a cult is."

<<<>>>
I did a quick google when I saw this posted on ARS earlier today and I can't find any obvious direct links between Spitzer and the Henson case (other than the fact that, for everyones sake, Riverside really needs to transfer all its judicial operations to a county which has a less corruptable and less incompetant system and start afresh ;)).

User avatar
Braveheart's Girlfriend
Posts: 1037
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:26 pm

Post by Braveheart's Girlfriend » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:25 pm

Agreed.
http://alley.ethercat.com/door/

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Thu May 03, 2007 5:04 am

Dear Friends,

Here I am again, asking for more help. After a real "high" of hope
the day before yesterday, when we realized that time is running out to
receive the Governor's Warrant, we learned yesterday that the Yavapai
County Attorney is not regarding Keith's extradition case here
favorably and has in fact been bugging the Governor of California
about sending over that Governor's Warrant. We don't know the reason
for it, and I am very reluctant to impute base motives to the County
Attorney. Perhaps she has read some of the $cientology hate pages and
believed them. Perhaps she believes she is dealing with a
run-of-the-mill "perp" who is just trying to escape justice.

I've been informed--and I agree--that it is not the place of the
"perp" or his little wifey to try to educate the County Attorney on
the issues and parties behind the extradition proceedings.

We would appreciate your help in bringing light to bear on these
proceedings. Perhaps a little heat wouldn't hurt either. However,
because you will not be speaking for us, I will not dictate what to
say. If you are unclear about the facts of the case, please refer
either to my previous communications, to www.operatingthetan.com, to
www.xenu.net, or links available from those sites to get your ducks in
a row--or please contact us for any details or to clear up any
confusion. (I know *I* find his cases confusing!) Quite simply, he
is a writer, lecturer, and human rights activist burdened by a set of
death threats (more yesterday) from a ruthless cult he has been trying
to expose for their criminal activity. These threats will be a lot
easier to carry out in jail--we saw some of that behavior here--and a
lot easier to carry out in the Riverside County jail, given the
corruption we are trying to expose there.

I am told that agents of $cientology have been gloating on a.r.s.
(alt.relilgion.scientology newsgroup) that Keith "will be going back
to jail soon," as well as that he is "just the first of a long line of
many from ARS that will go to jail." (What for, I wonder? More
trumped-up charges imagined and enforced by agents of $cientology?)
Of course, to $cientologists, all those who oppose their ridiculous
(but viciously prosecuted) plan to take over the planet are
"criminals," and they tend to confuse the law of the land with their
own "ethics" that promote only gain by $cientology top officials.

The person in question is
Sheila Polk, County Attorney
255 East Gurley Street
Prescott, AZ 86301
Phone: (928) 771-3344
Fax: (928) 771-3110
Fax: (928) 771-3375
Victim Services Phone: (928) 777-7353
The deputy in Keith's case is Jennifer Campbell.

My heartfelt gratitude goes out to you all. I'm depending anxiously
on your kindness and sense of justice.

Time is of the essence here!

Arel

You may wish to contact Penny Cramer, telephone (928) 777-7352, who is
a media person, assistant to the Yavapai County Attorney.

Please use the fax number for Sheila Polk, the County Attorney, given
in the earlier email if you have access to a fax.

As always, be respectful. Neatness counts. Again, our gratitude
overflows in your direction!

Arel

P. S. The URL for the County Attorney is
http://www.co.yavapai.az.us/Attorney.aspx and there is a "Contact Us"
URL: http://www.co.yavapai.az.us/ContactUs.aspx?id=15518
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Thu May 03, 2007 5:16 am

When I was at Tucson High School during the last century, there was a
cheerleading cheer for our teams. I seldom went to games (more
basketball than football), but of course those cheers get under one's
skin. One such cheer was "Hit 'em Again! Hit 'em Again! Harder!
Harder!" (I guess that was essentially a football cheer.)

Well, only a couple of weeks before the next scheduled hearing here in
Prescott, they've done it again.

But first a word to (not from) our sponsors. As usual, this email is
going to a "blind-copy" list to preserve your privacy, as well as to
Keith using an address that is public. If it hadn't been for your
interventions with phone calls and whatever other means you used,
Keith might not have survived his four days in jail here as well as he
did. Whoever printed out pages from an Internet site (the local
authorities say it wasn't Detective McClain, who had assured me that
Keith would be extradited in "a couple of days") made sure they were
only the hate pages published by the "Church" of $cientology, despite
the fact that on that day putting his name into Google produced that
site as not #1 but #18. This was clearly inciting to abuse and
inculcating keepers with disinformation while he was in a holding cell
watching them read these hate-filled lies. It seems likely that the
intention was to spread the lies on those pages to the prison
population to do Keith harm. This was after an unlawful arrest
(without warrant) and detention (not taken before judge for more than
64 hours after arrest because the arrest happened--most likely timed
like the one in Canada--on a Friday afternoon).

However, your support intervened, found us a lawyer, and changed the
attitude of Keith's keepers toward both of us. After dismissing me as
the spouse of a perp and suspicious therefor, they suddenly started
handling me in a very gingerly manner on the morning of the Monday he
was released after a long day of legal maneuvering during which the
judge and county attorney here discovered that no felony could be
alleged (but had been implied). Giving me side glances the while, the
person at the "jail desk" told me that they'd had international calls
and a lot of calls in general. We are very grateful for your support,
both financial (which is still paying for Keith's attorney) and vocal.

As I wrote you in one of my last communications, one of the first
documents offered to the local county attorney in support of
extradition was a fraudulent warrant probably created before but dated
September 15, 2000. It was supposedly authorized by the judge whose
way was cleared to preside over the trial of the accused in case
HEM014371, but not only did this document not make its way to the
docket, but that judge--in violation of judicial ethics and law--did
not disclose his previous involvement in the case. The warrant is not
only not viable, it is evidence of attempt to entrap, fraud, contempt
of court, violation of judicial duties and probably several other
crimes.

So now they come back with a thicker wad of papers submitted to the
local authorities, one of which is another warrant, this one
essentially blank!

Once again it's from Riverside, checked as a misdemeanor, with the
HEM014371 case number on it, characterized as a "Bench Warrant for
Failure to Appear." It is in the name of the "People of the State of
California" (if I were still in the state of my birth, I would object
to my name being taken in vain) "vs Henson, Keith." It lists several
charges, the last of which is probably 422.6 (we received a bad copy),
of which the defendant in HEM014371 was convicted, but no one of which
is actually the "failure to appear" statute. It is addressed "to any
peace officer of this state" and says that the defendant had "been
ordered to appear on [blank]."

The date of scheduled appearance is blank!

Then there is more boilerplate to the effect that the defendant should
be arrested and "that he be given bail," which the next line says is
"Set at $0.00." Following some language about how misdemeanors may
only be served during the daytime if no judge's initials appear (which
they do not), the language is "Given under my hand, with court seal
affixed by order of the honorable [blank], judge of said court." For
one thing, this is from the Riverside Court, not Hemet, despite the
fact that this is given as a Hemet case, and it was in Hemet that the
defendant was tried and "convicted."

For another, the place for the name of the judge is blank!

The seal is affixed, and the same signature that appeared on the
September 15, 2000, warrant appears here. What are the chances of
that? Did the judge's clerk follow him to Hemet from Riverside
(whence the fraudulent warrant was apparently issued)? Is the
signature fraudulent? Is there only one person in the Riverside
Courts who both has access to these warrant forms and is in the pay of
$cientology? Did $cientology and/or the County of Riverside think
that two fraudulent warrants were better than one?

This is truly contempt of court!

There is an interesting affidavit from deputy district attorney Jeanne
Roy which admits that the defendant in HEM014371 was picketing, a fact
that was prohibited from mention during the defendant's trial due to
motions in limine. Yet when Judge Walker (the second judge in the
case) tried to bring up free-speech issues delays ensued and finally
Walker was forced by the prosecution to recuse himself because he knew
a prosecution witness (a sheriff deputy who had reported that the
defendant was harmless).

Roy also states that the "threat" of which the defendant was
"convicted" was "so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific
as to convey to said person a gravity of purpose and an *immediate
prospect of execution*." As we all know, the alleged "threat"
involved a joke topic on a Usenet newsgroup, and consisted of a
posting apparently by the defendant pointing out the fallacy of
stating that a "Tom Cruise missile" lobbed from, say, France (a venue
mentioned in other postings) would probably miss its target, that
modern missiles are more accurate. What is "immediate," "specific,"
"unequivocal," or "unconditional" about that response to someone
else's joke? No posting ever mentioned, nor did anyone confront the
"victims" brought forward by $cientology, who were, by the admission
of the Sheriff Department, supposed to have been selected by
$cientology management "at random" from their claimed population at
"Gold" of 735. How specific is it that the whole mile-long compound,
never claimed to be a church before OR after the case or in any other
context, was said to have been threatened by a statement that was not
only in the context of a joke but only apparently saying that a "Tom
Cruise missile" might not miss? (Again as we all know, the Cruise
missile has been doing a very good job lately of "nuking" the "Church"
through his ridiculous behavior.)

Oh, but the same judge who issued the fraudulent warrant and did not
disclose it said it was a believable threat that a single person could
launch a block-long, several-ton intercontinental ballistic missile of
the sort jokingly under discussion, and then informally "sealed" his
remark by telling the court reporter not to transcribe those
proceedings. There is no such thing in law as informally sealing
court proceedings. The judge was breaking the law by not providing
legitimate written documentation of the "seal," and so was the court
reporter who now wants $200 and a court order to transcribe the record
from that day.

I really have to wonder if District Attorney Rod Pacheco (Riverside
County) knows what is going on in the name of the office over which he
presides, or if he knows what was done routinely by his predecessor
Grover Trask, such as entrapment of defendants by failure to give
notice of arraignment, and apparently conspiracy with a local Kult to
convict defendants using $cientology-written warrants and papers. And
attempt to extradite using $cientology-supplied papers. Or did the
County of Riverside not only generate but store two (count 'em!)
fraudulent documents that didn't reach the docket? Deputy DA Roy
swears under oath that extradition "is not sought for any private
benefit or gain"? Can that truly be alleged when the Kult is clearly
behind every attempt since 1998 to put a Keith Henson in jail?

My final question is how long the Governor of California has to sign a
warrant that is clearly only to the internally perceived benefit of
the "Church" of $cientology? Whereas a letter from the Sheriff of
Riverside County stated that a Governor's Warrant was "still in the
process" of being obtained (February 22), the statement to the
Governor of California (alleging picketing and other "threats") was
not actually sent until March 23. By the scheduled date of the next
hearing (May 8), 90 days will have passed since Keith's arrest in
Prescott. How long can Keith be kept on a string here waiting to see
how much influence the Kult of $cientology has over the Governor of
California?

The answer is that the Governor of California has until either May 3
(90 days from the date of arrest) or May 6 (90 days from the date of
his first hearing) to sign the Governor's warrant, depending on
whether the local authorities agree that, given the unlawful arrest
and detention, the date of arrest should apply.

If you haven't already written, called, or faxed the Governor of
California, please do so now. Once again, thank you for your kind
support!

"Hit 'em Again! Harder! Harder!" (but not physically, of course!)

(Watch www.operatingthetan.com for the latest group of documents and a
new photo, soon to come.)

Arel
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

songbird
Posts: 3605
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:12 am

Post by songbird » Thu May 03, 2007 5:07 pm

Fax'd this morning:

Ms. Sheila Polk
Yavapai County Attorney
255 East Gurley Street
Prescott, AZ 86301

Dear Ms. Polk,

As an Arizona resident, I was dismayed to learn that your office is actively seeking a Governor’s Warrant from the State of California for the extradition of Keith Henson.

Mr. Henson, a respected professional engineer, writer, lecturer and human rights activist, is a target of the Church of Scientology’s written policy of using the legal system to harass and silence critics. As a former Scientologist, I can assure you that this organization takes very seriously its mission from founder L. Ron Hubbard to “destroy utterly” anyone who opposes the cult. And they are now trying to destroy Keith Henson.

Extradition for a misdemeanor is extremely rare. In this case, where there appear to have been many irregularities and where Mr. Henson’s “crime” was simply carrying a picket sign on a public highway outside an armed Scientology compound, does it really make sense to use the State of Arizona’s resources in facilitating his extradition? I hope you will agree that it does not.

Thank you for considering my opinion.

Yours truly,

Mary Ann Bosnos

User avatar
Sponge
Posts: 14692
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:23 am
Location: U.K.

Post by Sponge » Thu May 03, 2007 5:08 pm

*Bump*

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests