The proceedings on 04/06/06 will be somewhat preliminary. This hearing will be before a panel of 2 Appellate Judges who will determine, based on the evidence presented by both sides, whether to remand the case back to TN State Circuit Court, or whether to uphold the previous Circuit Court decision to dismiss the case.
Many, but not all, observers conclude that the Judge for the Circuit Court, Judge Marie Williams, felt intimidated by TWI & their attorneys' attempts to make it appear that the issues in the case involved First Amendment concerns. She ostensibly felt better to get the opinion of the Appellate Court and have that in her back pocket prior to proceeding with a jury trial in her Circuit Court.
Previously she allowed the case to be re-directed {at TWI's request} from her State Circuit Court to Federal District Court, but the Federal Judge logically remanded the case back to her State Circuit Court.
Aside from Judge Williams seeking external validation, one would also have to consider such 'soft' judicial issues such as case complexity-simplicity, convenience-inconvenience in the court's schedule, confidence-apprehension based on the Judge's experience. In light of these latter considerations, it is conceivable that the dismissal was simply a 'dump and terf' of the case for the sake of convenience.
Another consideration is that both firms for TWI, Baker & Hoestetler, as well as the Chattanooga firm of Miller and Martin, are very 'connected' politically.
Though very unfortunate, it may well be that Circuit Court Judge dismissed the case because she feels that it has no merit.
There are least several considerations regarding this potentiality.
Given that the Judge felt the case had no merit, why did she allow it to proceed for 3 years {June 2002 to June 2005}? Why not a much earlier dismissal? Of the initial five or so irrelevant obstructions that TWI's counsel advanced, the Peelers prevailed. Then, the jury trial date was postponed two or three times. It seems to me, that at that point, with the Judge out of fallacious 'reasons' for allowing delay in the trial, her last ditch option was to terf & dump the case to the Appellate court. This would appear to be more so in the realm of unconscionable laziness, cowardice, fear of personal judicial incompetence, and disrespect for the Plaintiffs' time and 'uncomfortable' lack of closure.
Nevertheless, the possibility remains that the Judge does in fact believe that the case has merit and desires to obviate later attempts at irrelevant appeal by TWI; thus, she is garnering as much legal external validation for the case as possible prior to the jury trial.
If the case lacked merit, why did Federal District Court Judge Carter remand the case back to State Circuit Court, rather than dismissing it from the Federal system?
If the case in fact lacks merit, then via metonomy {of the part for the whole, the Peelers being the ex-twi rank and file part representing the whole body of ex-twi rank and file TWI members}, all those individuals who have voiced legitimate complaints both here and at Waydale, must also lack merit. I seriously doubt this is the case, as this Forum reveals with much painful reality and pathos.
Yikes! I've read and re-read your last post, jkb, but I'm confused. I think you're addressing a hypothetical case scenario of the possibility that the Peeler case may be dismissed, but it has not as of yet.
As it is presently scheduled, do you know if this is the beginning of the actual trial or if it's another pre-trial hearing to determine if there will be a trial at some future, not-yet-scheduled date?
I hate that twi gets away with so much just because of the mega bucks that they have ( that ironically WE gave them) to pay their scummy attornies.
Damn, I begrudge every morsel of food that they put in their lying perverse mouths and every square of toilet paper that they use to wipe their nasty selves and every stitch of clothing on their unthankfull backs..... because every bit of it is bought with hard earned money that was generously given by people they have decieved, and betrayed :( .
As it is, the case has been dismissed from the State Circuit Court in Chattanooga by Judge Marie Williams. Therefore, the Peelers' attorneys appealed the case, which is why it is now before the intermediate TN Appellate Court. A three judge panel will hear oral arguments by Counsel for both Plaintiffs & Defendants on 04/06/2006 in Knoxville, TN.
Interestingly, this is largely an academic exercise by the three Appellate Judges. This is because the law clerk for the Appellate Judge will review all case materials to date & this law clerk, himself or herself only a first year practicing attorney, will actually write the opinion {decision} for the three Judges to 'review!' Probably ~ 90% of the time the Appellate Judges will go with the 'suggestion' of the law clerk, & thus render a cosmetic vicarious decision. Therefore essentially the Peelers will have a law clerk deciding if their case is to be remanded to State Circuit Court. Hopefully this law clerk will be aware & sensitive to the subtle power of spiritual abuse & not become befuddled by the irrelevant arguments of TWI.
Rather than the central issue being one of First Amendment considerations, probably the central issue before the Appellate Court will be consideration of the application of the statute of limitations. The Peelers contend that, due to TWI's systematic exploitative manipulation via deceptive undue influence, that they could NOT have reasonably understood the machinations of their spiritual abuse by TWI & thus filed a lawsuit before they in fact did in June of 2002. TWI will unethically contend that the Peelers knew or should have known that they were being systematically and strategically exploitatively manipulated priior to this time, and that therefore the statute of limitations bars any legal action.
However, this decision regarding the statue of limitations is a decision to be made by the jury, not a Judge, & is based on both mandates and legal precedents. For a Judge to make this decision would be a usurpation of the Plaintiffs' {Peelers'} right to have this decision made by a jury, who, via the jury trial process, is given the benefit of explanation how thought reform was utilized by TWI to purposefully indoctrinate and deceive its members, including the Peelers.
Hopefully the Appellate Judges will be intrigued by this pleasantly unusual case and pay very close attention to all the pertinent details. If two out of the three of them concur that the Peelers, because of TWI's utilization of individual psychological and group-wide social undue influence, did not know or could not have known to file the case sooner, then the case would be remanded to State Circuit Court for a jury trial.
However, if the Appellate Judges are feeling lethargic & thinking superficially on 04/06/2006, & really just don't want to have to put forth the work and effort to cogitate the case in requsite deepth, they can uphold the dismissal of the case.
Hopefully, the panel of Appellate Judges will be up to speed on this date, carefully evaluate the law clerk's legal analysis & suggestions, and reach a logical conclusion indicating an understanding of the reality of undue influence via thought reform & its impact of the statute of limitations.
The Peelers want to express their gratitude for the much-needed emotional support.
The hearing before the Appellate Court took place today from 9:30AM to ~ 10:15AM. The three judge panel was composed of Judge Lee, Judge Susano, & Judge Swiney. Both Susano & Lee were former plaintiff attorneys whereas Swiney has a background in defense. Lee is the singular female Judge on this panel.
Whereas, prior to the hearing, it appeared as though the proceedings would focus on the issue of the statute of limitations, in actuality this was a foregone conclusion in the Peelers favor and the intensity of questioning by the judidical panel centered firmly on First Amendment issues.
The Peelers' Attorney, Mike Anderson, did a superb job of both presenting the case as well as addressing the Judge's concerns on the difference, and the significance of the difference, between religious beliefs as contrasted with a religious group's actions, deeds, behaviour, & non-liturgical practices.
The judiciary appellate panel typically hands down a ruling in 90 - 180 days.
Whereas, prior to the hearing, it appeared as though the proceedings would focus on the issue of the statute of limitations, in actuality this was a foregone conclusion in the Peelers favor and the intensity of questioning by the judidical panel centered firmly on First Amendment issues.
How long ago did these events take place? I guess the statute of limitations would normally be what, 7 years?
How long ago did these events take place? I guess the statute of limitations would normally be what, 7 years?
Glad they are proceeding.
The events took place from 11/1972 to 07/2001. Preliminary legal activities began in 08/2001 with the case actually being filed in June 2002.
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!
During the Appellate Court hearing for entertainment of oral arguments on 04/06/2006, one of the three judicial panel members was 'having difficulty' understanding how one can separate religious beliefs from religious practices, whereupon the Peelers' attorneys offered this analogy which favorably shocked this particular interrogating Judge....
The Al Queda members involved in the 09/11 events held certain bizzare & mean-spirited beliefs, which were foolish but acceptable in the USA, as long as these beliefs were held in mind only. However, when they became involved in the CONDUCT of flying the planes into buildings & thereby injuring &/or killing innocent people, they incontrovertibly crossed the line between First Amendment protection of religious beliefs and associated non-injurious religious practices.
jkb - Please let the Peelers know that I'd also love to be there for the decision in 90-180 days. I'd love to lend physical support as well as the daily prayers I've prayed as long as I've known about the case.
I was delighted to be able to meet Ron one day. He was someone I would have loved attending a twig with once upon a time or being neighbors with these days. He was a great example of what I think of when I think of a Christian man. I'm very proud of him and his wife for sticking with what's obviously been a huge and unpleasant task. Not just anyone could endure all they've been through and have yet to get through.
You said,"
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!"
The one thing consistent about twi is they never cease to amaze me with their insanity!
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!"
So let me see if I got this right for some who are still in or thinking about bolting out the door.
TWI's own attorneys admit that they (The Peelers) were being conned from the beginning. He (said attorney) is using this as a defense.
There you have it folks, from the mouth of TWI, via their attorney who represents what they say and are - YOU ARE BEING CONNED AND HAVE BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING.
The whole point of a "con" job, is the offenders have your confidence and your trust; you trust them implicitly and that is HOW they get away with what they do. If you DIDN'T trust them, they COULDN'T con you.
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!"
So let me see if I got this right for some who are still in or thinking about bolting out the door.
TWI's own attorneys admit that they (The Peelers) were being conned from the beginning. He (said attorney) is using this as a defense.
There you have it folks, from the mouth of TWI, via their attorney who represents what they say and are - YOU ARE BEING CONNED AND HAVE BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING.
Unbelievable
This bears repeating!
Those poor folks working for minimum wage; having to get part time jobs outside TWI and living without insurance, retirement, savings and a permanent, guaranteed roof over their heads should seriously consider this. THIS, folks, is The ministry of God?? THIS is how God wants his flock taken care of?
Take 'em for all you can, Peelers!!!
I maintain that TWI's god is not a god I ever want to worship again.
I'd have to think the twi lawyers were smart enough to couch any admission like that in phrasing like "Even if said allegations were true ... blah blah ..." Since the statute of limitations is not the issue now (apparently), I'm pretty sure they didn't surrender on the other parts. That was just one tactic of the defense to stop the thing from proceeding further, the way I'm guessing.
Still a significant point could be that the statute of limitations was not a factor (setting precedent?), but I'm thinking since this was ongoing for them till 2001, they are in a different category from those that got out many years ago.
Again, just the way I see it from what little I know.
Recommended Posts
jkboehme
Hi bowtwi,
The proceedings on 04/06/06 will be somewhat preliminary. This hearing will be before a panel of 2 Appellate Judges who will determine, based on the evidence presented by both sides, whether to remand the case back to TN State Circuit Court, or whether to uphold the previous Circuit Court decision to dismiss the case.
Many, but not all, observers conclude that the Judge for the Circuit Court, Judge Marie Williams, felt intimidated by TWI & their attorneys' attempts to make it appear that the issues in the case involved First Amendment concerns. She ostensibly felt better to get the opinion of the Appellate Court and have that in her back pocket prior to proceeding with a jury trial in her Circuit Court.
Previously she allowed the case to be re-directed {at TWI's request} from her State Circuit Court to Federal District Court, but the Federal Judge logically remanded the case back to her State Circuit Court.
Aside from Judge Williams seeking external validation, one would also have to consider such 'soft' judicial issues such as case complexity-simplicity, convenience-inconvenience in the court's schedule, confidence-apprehension based on the Judge's experience. In light of these latter considerations, it is conceivable that the dismissal was simply a 'dump and terf' of the case for the sake of convenience.
Another consideration is that both firms for TWI, Baker & Hoestetler, as well as the Chattanooga firm of Miller and Martin, are very 'connected' politically.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
You don't even mention the most likely possibility, jkboehme. That is that the judge dismissed the case because she thinks it lacks merit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
Though very unfortunate, it may well be that Circuit Court Judge dismissed the case because she feels that it has no merit.
There are least several considerations regarding this potentiality.
Given that the Judge felt the case had no merit, why did she allow it to proceed for 3 years {June 2002 to June 2005}? Why not a much earlier dismissal? Of the initial five or so irrelevant obstructions that TWI's counsel advanced, the Peelers prevailed. Then, the jury trial date was postponed two or three times. It seems to me, that at that point, with the Judge out of fallacious 'reasons' for allowing delay in the trial, her last ditch option was to terf & dump the case to the Appellate court. This would appear to be more so in the realm of unconscionable laziness, cowardice, fear of personal judicial incompetence, and disrespect for the Plaintiffs' time and 'uncomfortable' lack of closure.
Nevertheless, the possibility remains that the Judge does in fact believe that the case has merit and desires to obviate later attempts at irrelevant appeal by TWI; thus, she is garnering as much legal external validation for the case as possible prior to the jury trial.
If the case lacked merit, why did Federal District Court Judge Carter remand the case back to State Circuit Court, rather than dismissing it from the Federal system?
If the case in fact lacks merit, then via metonomy {of the part for the whole, the Peelers being the ex-twi rank and file part representing the whole body of ex-twi rank and file TWI members}, all those individuals who have voiced legitimate complaints both here and at Waydale, must also lack merit. I seriously doubt this is the case, as this Forum reveals with much painful reality and pathos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bowtwi
Yikes! I've read and re-read your last post, jkb, but I'm confused. I think you're addressing a hypothetical case scenario of the possibility that the Peeler case may be dismissed, but it has not as of yet.
As it is presently scheduled, do you know if this is the beginning of the actual trial or if it's another pre-trial hearing to determine if there will be a trial at some future, not-yet-scheduled date?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
How very frustrating <_<
I hate that twi gets away with so much just because of the mega bucks that they have ( that ironically WE gave them) to pay their scummy attornies.
Damn, I begrudge every morsel of food that they put in their lying perverse mouths and every square of toilet paper that they use to wipe their nasty selves and every stitch of clothing on their unthankfull backs..... because every bit of it is bought with hard earned money that was generously given by people they have decieved, and betrayed :( .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
bowtwi,
As it is, the case has been dismissed from the State Circuit Court in Chattanooga by Judge Marie Williams. Therefore, the Peelers' attorneys appealed the case, which is why it is now before the intermediate TN Appellate Court. A three judge panel will hear oral arguments by Counsel for both Plaintiffs & Defendants on 04/06/2006 in Knoxville, TN.
Interestingly, this is largely an academic exercise by the three Appellate Judges. This is because the law clerk for the Appellate Judge will review all case materials to date & this law clerk, himself or herself only a first year practicing attorney, will actually write the opinion {decision} for the three Judges to 'review!' Probably ~ 90% of the time the Appellate Judges will go with the 'suggestion' of the law clerk, & thus render a cosmetic vicarious decision. Therefore essentially the Peelers will have a law clerk deciding if their case is to be remanded to State Circuit Court. Hopefully this law clerk will be aware & sensitive to the subtle power of spiritual abuse & not become befuddled by the irrelevant arguments of TWI.
Rather than the central issue being one of First Amendment considerations, probably the central issue before the Appellate Court will be consideration of the application of the statute of limitations. The Peelers contend that, due to TWI's systematic exploitative manipulation via deceptive undue influence, that they could NOT have reasonably understood the machinations of their spiritual abuse by TWI & thus filed a lawsuit before they in fact did in June of 2002. TWI will unethically contend that the Peelers knew or should have known that they were being systematically and strategically exploitatively manipulated priior to this time, and that therefore the statute of limitations bars any legal action.
However, this decision regarding the statue of limitations is a decision to be made by the jury, not a Judge, & is based on both mandates and legal precedents. For a Judge to make this decision would be a usurpation of the Plaintiffs' {Peelers'} right to have this decision made by a jury, who, via the jury trial process, is given the benefit of explanation how thought reform was utilized by TWI to purposefully indoctrinate and deceive its members, including the Peelers.
Hopefully the Appellate Judges will be intrigued by this pleasantly unusual case and pay very close attention to all the pertinent details. If two out of the three of them concur that the Peelers, because of TWI's utilization of individual psychological and group-wide social undue influence, did not know or could not have known to file the case sooner, then the case would be remanded to State Circuit Court for a jury trial.
However, if the Appellate Judges are feeling lethargic & thinking superficially on 04/06/2006, & really just don't want to have to put forth the work and effort to cogitate the case in requsite deepth, they can uphold the dismissal of the case.
Hopefully, the panel of Appellate Judges will be up to speed on this date, carefully evaluate the law clerk's legal analysis & suggestions, and reach a logical conclusion indicating an understanding of the reality of undue influence via thought reform & its impact of the statute of limitations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outofdafog
Thinking about the Peeler's today and wishing them the best. I believe this is scheduled for today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Oh, thanks for the reminder!! Also in my thoughts. I hope they kick butt and take names!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
The Peelers want to express their gratitude for the much-needed emotional support.
The hearing before the Appellate Court took place today from 9:30AM to ~ 10:15AM. The three judge panel was composed of Judge Lee, Judge Susano, & Judge Swiney. Both Susano & Lee were former plaintiff attorneys whereas Swiney has a background in defense. Lee is the singular female Judge on this panel.
Whereas, prior to the hearing, it appeared as though the proceedings would focus on the issue of the statute of limitations, in actuality this was a foregone conclusion in the Peelers favor and the intensity of questioning by the judidical panel centered firmly on First Amendment issues.
The Peelers' Attorney, Mike Anderson, did a superb job of both presenting the case as well as addressing the Judge's concerns on the difference, and the significance of the difference, between religious beliefs as contrasted with a religious group's actions, deeds, behaviour, & non-liturgical practices.
The judiciary appellate panel typically hands down a ruling in 90 - 180 days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Jkboehme,
Are you able to post a copy of the transcript of the proceedings?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
OM,
I will check into it. If it's available, I will either post it or have it posted, presuming it's OK with Paw et al.
JKB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
themex
:blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Good job Peelers, TWI thrives because too few have the guts and stamina to stand up and hold twi accountible for their dishonesty.
Thanks for the update jkboehme :)
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Thank you's to the Peelers!!!
:eusa_clap:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
What's up Mex? Are you confused? In other words. The Peeler's laywer made a good case that twi went beyond what religious groups can do.
Edited by justloafingLink to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
How long ago did these events take place? I guess the statute of limitations would normally be what, 7 years?
Glad they are proceeding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robes
Ron,
Hope all is well with you!
I'm thinking about you guys and praying for you and your family all the time.
Keep your chin up and hang in there. It's a long road but it will be worth it in the end and I'm glad you're staying the course.
I'll come up and be with you all for the trial if you want...just drop me a line and I'll be there.
hugs,
Robi
Robi2777@yahoo.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washingtonweather
This is a good thing!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jkboehme
rhino,
The events took place from 11/1972 to 07/2001. Preliminary legal activities began in 08/2001 with the case actually being filed in June 2002.
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!
During the Appellate Court hearing for entertainment of oral arguments on 04/06/2006, one of the three judicial panel members was 'having difficulty' understanding how one can separate religious beliefs from religious practices, whereupon the Peelers' attorneys offered this analogy which favorably shocked this particular interrogating Judge....
The Al Queda members involved in the 09/11 events held certain bizzare & mean-spirited beliefs, which were foolish but acceptable in the USA, as long as these beliefs were held in mind only. However, when they became involved in the CONDUCT of flying the planes into buildings & thereby injuring &/or killing innocent people, they incontrovertibly crossed the line between First Amendment protection of religious beliefs and associated non-injurious religious practices.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bowtwi
jkb - Please let the Peelers know that I'd also love to be there for the decision in 90-180 days. I'd love to lend physical support as well as the daily prayers I've prayed as long as I've known about the case.
I was delighted to be able to meet Ron one day. He was someone I would have loved attending a twig with once upon a time or being neighbors with these days. He was a great example of what I think of when I think of a Christian man. I'm very proud of him and his wife for sticking with what's obviously been a huge and unpleasant task. Not just anyone could endure all they've been through and have yet to get through.
You said,"
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!"
The one thing consistent about twi is they never cease to amaze me with their insanity!
God bless the Peelers!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outofdafog
You said,"
Interestingly enough, TWI's attorneys allege the Peelers knew or should have known they were being conned from the beginning!"
So let me see if I got this right for some who are still in or thinking about bolting out the door.
TWI's own attorneys admit that they (The Peelers) were being conned from the beginning. He (said attorney) is using this as a defense.
There you have it folks, from the mouth of TWI, via their attorney who represents what they say and are - YOU ARE BEING CONNED AND HAVE BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING.
Unbelievable
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
The whole point of a "con" job, is the offenders have your confidence and your trust; you trust them implicitly and that is HOW they get away with what they do. If you DIDN'T trust them, they COULDN'T con you.
Good job, Peelers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
This bears repeating!
Those poor folks working for minimum wage; having to get part time jobs outside TWI and living without insurance, retirement, savings and a permanent, guaranteed roof over their heads should seriously consider this. THIS, folks, is The ministry of God?? THIS is how God wants his flock taken care of?
Take 'em for all you can, Peelers!!!
I maintain that TWI's god is not a god I ever want to worship again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I'd have to think the twi lawyers were smart enough to couch any admission like that in phrasing like "Even if said allegations were true ... blah blah ..." Since the statute of limitations is not the issue now (apparently), I'm pretty sure they didn't surrender on the other parts. That was just one tactic of the defense to stop the thing from proceeding further, the way I'm guessing.
Still a significant point could be that the statute of limitations was not a factor (setting precedent?), but I'm thinking since this was ongoing for them till 2001, they are in a different category from those that got out many years ago.
Again, just the way I see it from what little I know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.