Breaking news - Keith Henson detained by authorities - AGAIN

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
Post Reply
songbird
Posts: 3605
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:12 am

Post by songbird » Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:40 pm

lostinspace,
Not to worry. Keith's wife Arel removed the petition from the website yesterday - more info to come.

User avatar
I'mglib
Posts: 5745
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:17 pm

Post by I'mglib » Sun Jul 08, 2007 2:45 am

I saw this posted on ARS:
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6322465
Battle with Scientology sparks Schwarzenegger pardon request
The Associated Press
Article Launched: 07/07/2007 12:29:22 PM PDT


SACRAMENTO—A former Silicon Valley computer consultant whose decade-long fight with the Church of Scientology led to his ruin is asking Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to free him from a Riverside County jail.
Keith Henson's crusade against the church brought him a misdemeanor conviction for interfering with the rights of others to practice their religion. The 64-year-old Californian is now two months into a six-month jail sentence for the crime.

It is the latest development in a war that forced Henson into bankruptcy and prompted him to flee to Canada to ask for political asylum.

Henson's troubles began in the mid-1990s, when he was living in Palo Alto and happened upon an Internet page criticizing the church for operating more like a cult.

Henson published documents on the Internet detailing Scientology's approach to medical treatment. The church sued him for copyright infringement and won $75,000 in damages after a four-day trial in 1998.

The ruling forced Henson into bankruptcy. But he moved to Southern California and began picketing Scientology organizations. He was arrested outside a Scientology facility in Riverside County in July 2000 and charged with making terrorist threats and interfering with religious rights.

He fled to Canada in 2001 and sought political asylum. When he was denied asylum in 2005, he returned to the United States and was arrested in February.

His wife and daughter drove two days from Arizona to Sacramento to present Schwarzenegger on Friday with a petition seeking a pardon or clemency.
A Schwarzenegger spokesman wouldn't comment on the request.

———

Information from: San Jose Mercury News, http://www.sjmercury.com



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

Post by Sponge » Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:34 am

I'mGlib, Thanks for that. I'll put the link in the running media section thread on Keith Henson news links.

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

Post by songbird » Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:06 am

Arel took the petition down on Thursday and printed it out so that she could present it to Gov. Schwarzenegger's staff on Friday. Thus the push earlier in the week for additional signatures - and we did see 70-75 new signatures added during the week - so the number presented to the Governor was larger. :)

User avatar
Come_to_the_Event
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:08 am
Location: Moscow, ID

Post by Come_to_the_Event » Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:44 am

Glad to see this finally getting media attention in Cali. Does anyone know what page of the Mercury News it was on?

Perhaps a "FREE HENSON" picket in sacramento would draw more attention and make the governor take the case seriously.
What the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.
-Harry Houdini

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

Post by Sponge » Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:45 pm

Regarding the Release/Bail hearing scheduled for today, it was disposed and with a request for extension of time which was was filed today. It is scheduled for tomorrow, 10th July (I've no idea why).
07/09/2007 8:30 AM DEPT. B2 HEARING ON MOTION RE: RELEASE ON OR OR BAIL DISPOSED
Minutes
HONORABLE ANGEL BERMUDEZ PRESIDING.

COURTROOM ASSISTANT: KAF-K. FULLER

PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY R KLEOPFER.

DEFENDANT REPRESENTED BY PVT ATTY MARK WERKSMAN.

DEFENDANT PRESENT.

COUNSEL STIPULATE: CONTINUE.

HEARING CONTINUED TO 07/10/2007 AT 8:30 IN DEPARTMENT B2 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF COUNSEL.

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO RETURN ON ANY AND ALL FUTURE HEARING DATES.

REMAINS REMANDED TO CUSTODY OF RIVERSIDE SHERIFF.

MINUTE ORDER PRINTED TO ROBERT PRESLEY DETENTION CENTER.

User avatar
Roan
Posts: 2128
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:36 am
Location: California

Post by Roan » Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:01 am

Is it open to the public?

User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:08 am

Roan wrote:Is it open to the public?
It should be. Almost all proceedings in criminal court are open to the public.

User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:24 am

Bad news. Court minutes show bail was denied today, so it appears Keith will do the 180 day sentence previously imposed.

The minutes of his appearance on 5/30/07 indicate he entered a guilty plea to Count 4, which I assume was for failure to appear. It doesn't look like the judge imposed any additional time for that, but gave him the 180 days imposed when he was sentenced in absentia on 07/20/2001.

He will get good time credits against the 180 days, and already got a total of 33 days credit (23 + 10 good time), so I calculate he will be released on September 5, 2007.

All court minutes are available at http://tinyurl.com/2rzv84 -- search the Riverside criminal cases. It looks like a couple of clams also won a six-figure judgment against Keith in Case Number HEC009673, available under the Riverside Civil/small claims tab of the same site.
Case HEM014371 Defendant 547981 , HENSON KEITH

Action: Hearing on Motion Re: RELEASE ON OR OR BAIL Date: 07/10/2007 Time: 8:30 AM
Division: B2 Hearing Status: DISPOSED

HONORABLE DENNIS A. MCCONAGHY PRESIDING.
CLERK: K. COMBS
COURT REPORTER: M. FULLER
PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ALAN TATE.
DEFENDANT REPRESENTED BY PVT ATTY KELLY QUINN FOR ATTY WERKSMAN.
DEFENDANT PRESENT.
MOTION BY DEFENSE REGARDING SET BAIL IS CALLED FOR HEARING.
MOTION DENIED.
NO BAIL ALLOWED
REQUEST TO UNSEAL ALL TRANSCRIPTS OF TRIAL EXCEPT
FOR IDENTIFICATION OF JURORS IS UNAPPOSED AND
IS GRANTED. 15-DAY EXTENSION FOR FILING OF
COURT REPORTERS TRANSCRIPT IS GRANTED
REMAINS REMANDED TO CUSTODY OF RIVERSIDE SHERIFF.
SAVE MINUTE ORDER TO CASE.

User avatar
probity
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:27 am
Location: Back to top

Post by probity » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:10 am

Perhaps there's a bright side to this in the motion to unseal all transcripts.

Morsicle
Posts: 2084
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:29 am

Post by Morsicle » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:12 am

This is a very disappointing situation for the critics.

Legal means nothing in the face of public opinion. We could see all charges dropped tomorrow and the cult send Keith a dozen roses, if we could only get the media focused in on this.

I’ve tried in, in my small way to drum up some interest. I know that’s just a drop in the bucket compared to the efforts of legal pros and die-hard critics like spacecootie. People who do far more than just contain and report the facts, but use their high octane legal wherewithal to do everything they can to help this man. Probono work, you name it.

Really puts me to shame.

And yet nothing. Barely a splash out there. One article in the Mercury News was about it.

Anyone know where 20/20 was? CNN?

Nobody will touch this and yet Keith is poised to be a true national folk hero, if someone would only pay attention.
"What a lot of people don't realize is that Scientology is black magic that is just spread out over a long time period."

-[url=http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/penthouse-LRonHubbardJr-interview-1983.htm]L. Ron Hubbard Jr[/url].

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

Post by songbird » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:06 am

Moriscle,
I share your frustration. I've tried and tried to stir up media interest in this - writing many letters, making many phone calls. I came close to getting a well known radio talk show host to cover this story, but in the end the producer decided against it, citing the same reasons that I've heard elsewhere: (1) Everybody knows that Scientology is a wacky sci-fi cult ... what's new here? (2) Everybody knows that Scientology harasses its critics ... what's new here? (3) This topic doesn't have broad enough appeal.

I've talked and talked, written and written, with no luck. The most that I've accomplished is to persuade Glenn Reynolds, the man behind the popular instapundit.com, to do regular updates on Keith's situation.

There is a well known magazine that's interested in an article on Keith, and I've contacted some people who post regularly here about writing it. We'll see what may come of that.

User avatar
I'mglib
Posts: 5745
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:17 pm

Post by I'mglib » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:36 am

Thanks for the info, Spacecootie.

I looked for that case number you posted.

It was DEZOTELL VS HENSON, and it said it was over $10,000, but I didn't see an exact amount. It looks like it was from a lawsuit that started in 2002.

I googled around, and it looks like the lawsuit was, in a nutshell, for interfering with the plaintiffs right to practice their 'religion.'

This is a crazy, crazy world (or maybe it's just this country). How??????

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

Post by Sponge » Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:20 am

I'mglib wrote:Thanks for the info, Spacecootie.

I looked for that case number you posted.

It was DEZOTELL VS HENSON, and it said it was over $10,000, but I didn't see an exact amount. It looks like it was from a lawsuit that started in 2002.

I googled around, and it looks like the lawsuit was, in a nutshell, for interfering with the plaintiffs right to practice their 'religion.'

This is a crazy, crazy world (or maybe it's just this country). How??????
The "Dezotell vs Henson" is the ongoing civil case menioned at several points earlier in this long head-spinning thread. Its the usual drill. Keith gets convicted and 3 clams pop up and file a civil suit and ring the tills for big "damages" claim. Of course they are not doing this because anyone was actually damaged. No, not really. They are doing it simply because they can and are instructed to do so by cult lawyers who are themselves instructed to do that by David Miscavige.
It is easier to get a result when suing someone on the the same basis as their previous criminal conviction.

Anyway, the next item on that agenda for that is set for next Thursday:-

07/19/07 9:30 AM DEPT. H5 HEARING RE: MOTION TO/FOR CORRECT JUDGMENT BY H KEITH HENSON -

User avatar
spacecootie
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am
Location: Thunderdome

Post by spacecootie » Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:31 am

I'mglib wrote:Thanks for the info, Spacecootie.
I looked for that case number you posted.
It was DEZOTELL VS HENSON, and it said it was over $10,000, but I didn't see an exact amount. It looks like it was from a lawsuit that started in 2002.
I googled around, and it looks like the lawsuit was, in a nutshell, for interfering with the plaintiffs right to practice their 'religion.'
This is a crazy, crazy world (or maybe it's just this country). How??????
Once you open the case on the Riverside County Courts website, you can read the clerk's minutes of court proceedings for any date by clicking on the link that says "minutes."

If there is a camera icon on the far right, you can click on that and see the court documents that are filed in PDF format. (Unfortunately, documents apparently aren't scanned onto the website in the criminal case.)

One of the most interesting documents, filed by the plaintiffs' attorneys on 05/17/2007, is titled DECLARATION OF RHEA SMITH IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CORRECT JUDGMENT. Ms Smith describes, in great detail, how she has been in charge of Internet monitoring since 1995, which includes reading ARS.

The minutes of 10/07/2002 shows that the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was granted; basically, they won because Keith was convicted, so the court found the issues in their lawsuit had already been decided.
.
MOTION AND MOTION FOR A FINAL JUDGMENT AND INJUNC BY HILLARY DEZOTELL, KEN HODEN, BRUCE WAGONER. DAVIS & WOJCIK 10/07/2002 - 1:30 PM DEPT. H4 wrote: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT
* * * * *
(1) PLAINTIFFS SHALL HAVE JUDGMENT IN THEIR FAVOR AGAINST DEFENDANT FINDING HIM LIABLE FOR
VIOLATIONS OF PLAINTIFFS CIVIL RIGHTS IN THAT DEFENDANT VIOLATED CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 52.1
AND AWARDING STATUTORY CIVIL PENALTIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000.00 FOR EACH PLAINTIFF, THUS
FOR A TOTAL OF $75,000.00; AND ATTORNEYS FEES IN THE AMOUNT $23,666.65;
* * * * *
(2) PLAINTIFFS ARE FURTHER GRANTED INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS MORE FULLY SET FORTH IN THE PERMANENT
INJUNCTION.
* * * * *
(3) THE REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL, DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS SECOND AND THIRD CAUSES OF ACTION,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS GRANTED.
Keith's motion to correct the judgment -- set for hearing next Thursday, as Sponge points out -- says the court lacked authority to grant the permanent injunction.

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests