Church of Scientology cases on allegations of intimidation and defamation listed together
Published 02/02/2015 | 18:37
Allegations of intimidation and counter proceedings of alleged defamation involving existing and former members of the Church of Scientology were today linked for a single hearing by a judge.
Judge Jacqueline Linnane told Zabrina Collins and Michael O’Donnell, that injunctions restraining former members Peter Griffiths and John McGhee from assaulting, intimidating or interfering with them, would remain in place until a full trial of both cases.
Griffiths, of Teeling Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, is suing Ms Collins, the daughter of wrongly convicted Co Donegal publican Frank Shortt, for alleged defamation. Ms Collins has an address at Parnell Square West, Dublin.
In December last during a vacation sitting the High Court granted Collins and O’Donnell, a marketing consultant of Cherrywood Lawn, Clondalkin, Dublin, injunctions restraining Griffiths and McGhee, of Armstrong Grove, Clara, Co Offaly. It also referred all matters to the Circuit Civil Court.
Barrister Frank Beatty, told the pre-Christmas High Court hearing, that his clients Ms Collins and Mr O’Donnell had been constantly harassed and assaulted by Griffiths and McGhee.
“My clients are scared and frightened and they should be,” Mr Beatty told the High Court. He said Ms Collins had been intimidated by the two former church members as she had handed out anti-drugs leaflets outside the Church of Scientology premises in Middle Abbey Street, Dublin.
John Smith, who appeared with solicitor Cormac O’Callaigh for Griffiths, told the court his client denied the allegations against him. He said Mr McGhee represented himself.
When Judge Linnane advised all parties to engage in talks to avoid mounting legal costs, Mr McGhee said Ms Collins and Mr O’Donnell belonged to a sect which forbade them from having talks with people outside the Church.
Mr Beatty said there was no basis for the suggestion. A date will be set later for the hearing.
Filed under: Scientology |
Dialogue Ireland 
pedrofcuk
May I ask you where did you meet on January 5th, was it in the High Court or the circuit court?
I remember the judge wanted it in the circuit court to lessen the legal costs? Perhaps you can confirm and we can report it?
You are in fact totally correct. The Examiner was even worse in claiming the cases were merged.
I am afraid I can’t make head or tail of your last comments. It is clear that as yet your side has not been heard, so it is natural that until it is their view will prevail. What is essential is that you and John have a clear view of the actions you took. As I understand your position you, Pete are ready to agree to operate with clear boundaries from here in when protesting Scientology, and John is not. He regards the types of action captured in the various videos as acceptable.
In 2012 John assisted Dialogue Ireland when we protested at a Tony Quinn Educo event at the Helix Theatre. Here his direct action was totally appropriate and he was the victim of people trying to stop his right to legitimate protest.
The You Tube material is currently down.
He was over 50 metres from Tony Quinn at the time. Here we are dealing with a totally different situation in my opinion. The mark of a free society is the right for people to hold different opinions without recourse to abuse, censorship and oppression. This not allowed in Scientology and it seems neither do some ex Scientologists allow dissent.
LikeLike
May I suggest you immediately, meet the other side and agree the terms of protest thereby making their injunction irrelevant. OSA have as much time for me as you.
http://dialogueireland.org/dicontent/a2z/scientology/correspondance/corrintro.html
Forget about OSA and get your defamation case back on track.
LikeLike
“In December last during a vacation sitting the High Court granted Collins and O’Donnell, a marketing consultant of Cherrywood Lawn, Clondalkin, Dublin, injunctions restraining Griffiths and McGhee, of Armstrong Grove, Clara, Co Offaly. It also referred all matters to the Circuit Civil Court.”
This is incorrect. The hearing to get the injunction was on 23rd December. The matter was referred to the Circuit Court on the 5th January by the High Court.
“Allegations of intimidation and counter proceedings of alleged defamation involving existing and former members of the Church of Scientology were today linked for a single hearing by a judge.”
The defamation case was prior to the harassment and assault allegations and so cannot be counter proceedings.
“Barrister Frank Beatty, told the pre-Christmas High Court hearing, that his clients Ms Collins and Mr O’Donnell had been constantly harassed and assaulted by Griffiths and McGhee.”
This is clearly utter nonsense. Frank needs to word clear ‘constantly’.
‘Mr Beatty said there was no basis for the suggestion.’
And while he’s there he ought to read his Scientology policy about how to deal with critics.
LikeLike
There is no strategy of harassment, there never was a strategy of harassment and there never will be a strategy of harassment, foolish or otherwise. Please stop giving OSA fuel with which to stoke flames.
LikeLike
Here Sarah as I replied to you on Facebook the story relates to anti cultism. The case to be decided is about former Scientologists harassing Scientologists. Also a clear case of Defamation of a former Scientoligist has been confused by a foolish strategy of harassment. Read the full evidence in the posts here.
LikeLike
Scientologists have no ethics. They lie and cheat to get their way. They abuse the courts and for what? So they can take peoples money and their health. Scientology is a waste and a waste of human potential.
LikeLike