Zabrina Collins part- spokesperson, part Stormtrooper, for Scientology, Phoenix February 2015

Phoenix

001px Cover.indd

We note that the article claims that the case brought by Zabrina Collins was for assault. However, it was for harassment and not for assault and the judge sought to get that sorted as originally the Pete Griffith case for defamation was to be heard in October but was deferred till January. As you can see in the article the defamation case was looking bad for Zabrina as the issues were pretty clear. However, this went pear shaped when in their enthusiasm to alert the public about the cult the Ex Scientologists actually strayed into the public domain which they should have kept away from till the court case was heard. Not in discussing the events in  a public court which have been reported in the media, but rather the actions in the court in October and since this case was first started in 2013 in public. They continued to engage with Zabrina when it would have been wise to cease all activities till the case was over.

The result was a case for harassment. You could hardly expect the Scientologists to sit on their hands? This for them was the road to total freedom. The judge wanted to get both parties to agree to differ, but as yet this has not happened. Clearly the judge would like to set up a code of protest. Simple things like agreeing to not go near the Scientologists home, or places of employment. Nor entering their places of employment and keep away from the entrance to the Mission property in Middle Abbey St. and protesting across the road so there is no bumping into people by accident or design. Looking at the videos I would have thought it would be easy to agree to this and allow the substantial case about defamation to proceed. Now with the presence of Hodkin the Scientology lawyer who I encountered 20 years ago it looks like the Scientologists are trying to make this an assault case. What we have is zealous cultists and anti cultists in a case of handbags, not assault.

Another important point is these issues are a matter of a civil rather than a criminal nature. So talk about assault are merely the natural expression of a contested zone between two groups. 1. A group of deeply influenced Scientologists who believe their actions are necessary to be faithful to Scientology. 2. On the other side are Ex cultists who believe that they have a mission to use every method they can to attack the cult. What the ordinary person sees as harassment they see as the end justifies the means.

Anyone, however, who opposes their strategy who is equally opposed to Scientology is regarded as an enemy and is subject to virulent attack. The clear strategy the Scientologists are following is to try to change this from a case for harassment to one for criminal assault. This case has not been heard yet but all the evidence I have seen points to the need to define the limits of protest?

However, why let these actions get in the way of a clear defamation case?

We will find out soon enough.

One Response

  1. Censorship and name calling are tactics used by Scientology not ones to be used in response which is totally counter-productive because when you do so you start loosing the argument and moral high ground.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: