Monson Case British Court Case - 1st Day - Mar. 14 2014

  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:d66316cfb64219713132548716ee2a8e' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>From city worker, March 14 2014</p>\n<p>1. 7:16 am (RfM Time USEDT) and throughout the day</p>\n<p>updates from court</p>\n<p>The churches legal team are implying that Tom Phillips has harassed Judge Rosco and that it is vexatious</p>\n<p>The lawyer has also named the Church as the church of Jesus and Latter Day Saints.</p>\n<p>He is arguing that judge Rosco guided TP how to do this and therefore was out of jurisdiction</p>\n<p>2. 7:53 am</p>\n<p>Today\'s proceedings:</p>\n<p>Church has 6 lawyers present .</p>\n<p>Church trying to set aside summons because of service irregularities .. Spent 30 mins arguing this .</p>\n<p>Then church lawyer spent 10 mins saying that the claims are teachings -- not beliefs.</p>\n<p>10:43 church lawyer trying to discredit Philips , saying he repeatedly correspond ed with court trying to persuade court to issue summons , judge refused this a few times through late 2013 .<br />\nSaying Philips complained about judge roscoe</p>\n<p>Going through reasons judge originally declined to issue summons<br />\nThen judge said Philips had to produce statements from injured parties , church lawyer saying it\'s wrong that judge advised Philips of this ,,, boos in court !!</p>\n<p>Mentioned Ralph\'s statement then Bloor statements ,, judge observed Bloor should have mentioned WHEN HE WAS DEFRAUDED , church lawyers saying with respect that it\'s wrong that judge advised Philips how to proceed .</p>\n<p>Now ripping into Philips lawyer , trying to say he is wrong on a number of points of law .</p>\n<p>Church lawyer saying Philips is mischief ... And not authorized to lay summons .</p>\n<p>Lots of arguing minutiae</p>\n<p>Church lawyer just wrongly quoted church name ,,, church of the Jesus of the latter days !!!</p>\n<p>Keeping arguing it is vexatious saying Philips kept asking for summons and warrant</p>\n<p>Now on page 88 !!</p>\n<p>Church lawyer keeps referring to Mormon church .</p>\n<p>Ooo mormonthink being dissected ,,,,</p>\n<p>Referred to it as Philips own site ...</p>\n<p>Talking about legal fees , saying it\'s astonishing that summons is published in mormonthink , saying it shows it\'s for humiliation of church and vexation .</p>\n<p>6000 years , saying a lot of Christian believe this .</p>\n<p>Saying the motivation is promoting the crazy beliefs through 80000 missionaries . Church lawyer says this is entitled under un religious freedom human rights .</p>\n<p>Saying it is an attack on church scriptures , and designed to harass .</p>\n<p>One person shouted in court and judge says he will be asked to leave if he shouts again .</p>\n<p>Quoting a lot of internet stuff , saying people want money back . Judge said that\'s nothing to do with case , church lawyer said it is .</p>\n<p>To those who said it will be over in 10 mins , it\'s now one hour 10 mins</p>\n<p>Now continually quoting FB chats , trying to assert that it\'s a bunch of idiots commentating ,,, saying people just want monson arresting</p>\n<p>Dredging through lots of internet speculation ,</p>\n<p>3 reporters , 5 exmos and one Tbm in court .</p>\n<p>Heart of defence , he is trying to say ... It is civil and not criminal .</p>\n<p>Trying to say that the questions of beliefs is not allowed in law .</p>\n<p>How can a court possibly embark on judging such issues . Is main issue ... Non justicability</p>\n<p>Again saying they are not fact ,, they are belief . Saying nothing is ever said is said as fact just belief !!!!</p>\n<p>That\'s dissed practically every testimony given !!</p>\n<p>Now talking about catholic Eucharist !!!</p>\n<p>Gay marriage , being diss cussed</p>\n<p>3. 8:30 am</p>\n<p>Off on a tangent talking about very obscure case law ref freedom to hold religious belief . The right to express belief is allowed , therefore no case ,,,</p>\n<p>It\'s 11:40 , I think this will run until this afternoon , prosecution still has to state case .</p>\n<p>Now saying that if Philips won , how could church continue it\'s operations . And that would be judicial interference , a secular court cannot decide such issues ..</p>\n<p>Trying to say it\'s absurd that a religion would lie to obtain money , especially with 14 million members !! Oo no church would do that ,,, all exmos in court thumbs up , church lawyer just dug a big hole !!</p>\n<p>More freedom of right to follow teachings talk ,, lots of case law asserting this right , saying court cannot rule on this , quoted Australia canada and USA , said the same in court .<br />\nFreedom of religion phrase used many times , state has no jurisdiction asserted many times .</p>\n<p>Lord binghams speech quoted a lot , and custom and practice of religion used .</p>\n<p>Just said Philips is a disgruntled ex member ---- he is still a member !!</p>\n<p>Church lawyer has been very inaccurate on several key facts such as this . I think Church lawyer has missed the whole point , of the summons , I think that it should make Philips lawyers job easier .</p>\n<p>4. 8:39 am</p>\n<p>Lunch break then back for the final bit of the church\'s defence</p>\n<p>5. 9:02 am</p>\n<p>Church Lawyers are talking about the first vision!!</p>\n<p>Then onto talking about the quad and tithing.. Not utterly sure he has a point here..</p>\n<p>And is stumbling around vexatious again.</p>\n<p>5. 9:22 am</p>\n<p>End of defence submission ...</p>\n<p>Went through belief s told first vision story ,</p>\n<p>Going through tithe . Gasps when it\'s stated as optional !!</p>\n<p>Emphasizing tom getting media attention !!</p>\n<p>Final argument , ref private prosecution , saying Philips is not authorized - solicitor , or exempt , eg a victim . Very complex here , I\'m just summarizing , lots of legal talk .</p>\n<p>Judge asking questions and clarification . Google if you wish legal services act ,</p>\n<p>church lawyer saying proceedings are not allowed by Philips ... Trying to say it\'s criminal that Philips brought action because he does not fit the authorized criteria ?!? !!!</p>\n<p>It\'s all section 3 sub paragraph 4 it\'s conjunctive with section 4a:b. ... Type stuff, meaning Philips cannot bring prosecution ,</p>\n<p>I think church lawyer is clutching at straws , with obscure rules.</p>\n<p>Church summarizing ten points of why it\'s not valid ,</p>\n<p>1 not compliant with criminal justice act<br />\n2 non justiciable<br />\n3 allegations are about belief not fact<br />\n4 no evidence monson does not hold the beliefs<br />\n5. No vicarious criminal liability in uk law so monson not accountable<br />\n6 monson did not cause the fraud<br />\n7 vexatious harassment of church<br />\n8 prosecutor must refine evidence to prove it\'s not a flippant case and an abuse of process wrong to subject church to abusive process<br />\n9 it contravenes monson’s human rights<br />\n10. Philips is not qualified to bring the action</p>\n<p>Judge straightaway threw out point 10 because Philips is not being paid , the legal services rules exist to stop any fool practicing as a lawyer</p>\n<p>Judge now adjourning until 2:30 , says he won\'t decide today , that\'s 2 hours 35 for what was to be thrown out in ten mins !!</p>\n<p>6. 10:04 am</p>\n<p>they are having a break at the moment but Neil Anderson who wrote the Deseret news article that this would \"go nowhere\" is there</p>\n<p>7. 11:03am</p>\n<p>tomP lawyers up now</p>\n<p>Running through the history of the summons</p>\n<p>On his feet, going through skeleton argument then going to refute the 10 points .</p>\n<p>Philips lawyers very upbeat, clearer,.</p>\n<p>Going through judge Roscoe’s process, confirming that she followed due process .</p>\n<p>It was not a rubber stamp summons; judge roscoe even rephrased the summons.<br />\n“After much consideration and thought”.</p>\n<p>Philips has right to bring a private prosecution as is his constitutional right. Case law quoted where this has happened. Cases have started as a private prosecution in the past like this, and taken over by the CPS - in the uk the crown prosecution service is the queen ultimately who prosecutes people for crime, but Philips has the right to start the prosecution ...</p>\n<p>Quoting the start of private prosecution in British law. Philips again does have the right, parliament gives the right for this , the CPs can take it over and choose to continue or drop the case .<br />\nBelief not fact being discussed.... The big one....</p>\n<p>If someone says a belief e.g. god is the almighty father, that is a statement of belief.</p>\n<p>If someone says this book is translated from this document then that is a statement of fact ... Wow!!</p>\n<p>He says that is the key issue at stake here.</p>\n<p>Now saying let\'s talk this out at a future date ,,,,</p>\n<p>8. 11:34 am</p>\n<p>Asking court to decide on the churches assertion of facts, which he says may be proved to be false.</p>\n<p>Case not about attacking beliefs of the church, but about fraud.<br />\nSaying that church is not immune to prosecution cannot hide behind doctrine because of belief, but when<br />\nLies are involved absolutely church can be held to account.</p>\n<p>Quoting other cases, Catholics Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Church of England, courts cannot decide on doctrinal validity. BUT.... They are in civil jurisdiction ... And not above the law of the land; it\'s about where you draw the line. And done with caution.<br />\nE.g. Rastafarian in possession of cannabis he was prosecuted.... because it was part of an act worship Was no defence ... It was illegal according to law, so Rasta man was convicted!!</p>\n<p>So it\'s now about religion versus law ... If any religious group however well-established carries out an illegal act then the law can cross into belief observance.</p>\n<p>If a priest carries out sexual assault in a confessional, it is no defence for the priest to say what happens in the box is religion.</p>\n<p>Lots of sex crime talk..<br />\n... . (Irony much)</p>\n<p>Talking about book of Abraham now, saying church states it as a fact ref is it a translation, this can be proven.</p>\n<p>Book of Mormon, Philips want to discuss, is that created by smith.</p>\n<p>America populated via Israel, can be proven by DNA</p>\n<p>Joe and Hyrum death , circumstances Surrounding , this is taught as fact not belief .</p>\n<p>6000 year life question, discussed</p>\n<p>Adam and Eve, discussed.</p>\n<p>Philips lawyer talking like the above is laughable.</p>\n<p>See Monty Python type talk.</p>\n<p>Monson, did he know? Did he act dishonestly? Did he expose to risk of loss.</p>\n<p>All can be answered without crossing to belief, just stating that this is fact is fraud, if indeed it can be proved as known to be false and with intent to defraud.</p>\n<p>Church conceded that everything it says is merely belief not fact THIS IS THE BIG ONE</p>\n<p>9. 12:00 pm</p>\n<p>Further court update</p>\n<p>One hour 10 mins in</p>\n<p>Publicity ... Philips lawyer hands magistrate a document , uk version of huff post , talking about summons , monson pic on it , quote from church ,,, the one where they say bizarre allegations ,,,, Neil Anderson -</p>\n<p>the qc the church have used today , saying the court were in error issuing the summonses ,,, a QC giving quotes to press that a case he is defending is nonsense !!! DRAMA!!</p>\n<p>Red face and neck for Anderson in court ... Wow.</p>\n<p>The arrogance!!</p>\n<p>Ripping into monson now , saying he is educated and knows it\'s false , and Quote --- lying for The Lord --- ha</p>\n<p>Asking for trial , because If Philips Bloor and Ralph made up allegations then they attempted to pervert the course of justice therefore there should be a trial .</p>\n<p>Next up ... Dealing with 10 points.</p>\n<p>Interested<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\n10. 12:41pm</p>\n<p>**** I think last update for day ****</p>\n<p>Went through points ... Merely said opposite of what church lawyer said .</p>\n<p>Monson aided abetted or procured or counselled people to make false representations .</p>\n<p>Basics exist for this to proceed .</p>\n<p>Talking about community of christ denying validity of Book of Mormon .</p>\n<p>False representations made in order to procure tithing for the church</p>\n<p>Judge wants evidence that monson made these statements , , sources given . Taught by all leaders .</p>\n<p>Philips lawyer taking church to pieces ,, it\'s like a boxing match where rocky comes back off the floor ,</p>\n<p>Listing sources for statements of facts .... Woah !!! Ensign websites talks videos the list goes on ...</p>\n<p>I\'m tired out , it\'s relentless .</p>\n<p>Judge roscoe really looked into things and filled gaps that she found.</p>\n<p>Wish I could take a picture of devonshires 5 man and 1 woman team , all laid back in their seats with swag . Philips 2 guys one girl team up and down consulting Philips , working and doing .</p>\n<p>Human rights , monson , he has right to practice religion , but not to commit fraud , any more than he has the right to smoke his cannabis ,,, lol . Philips lawyer is funny .</p>\n<p>One hour 45 minutes</p>\n<p>Now church is on his feet again ,,<br />\nHe did a tongue slip ,,, monson is not responsible for what the company ... Errr I mean church says .... Funny !!!</p>\n<p>Fact vs belief brought up again</p>\n<p>Church saying there is no differentiation between the two , Saying that if church is in court then all religion would have to be .</p>\n<p>Trying to say again that religion is not a justice matter . Trying to say all this is an abuse of process , no one has ever complained to the police about church .</p>\n<p>Saying monson is not identify able as responsible for what the church says !!</p>\n<p>If there is a trial then it brings church into disrepute .</p>\n<p>Judgment as to how things will proceed along with reasons to be given next Thursday !! M<br />\nMagistrate all done<br />\nNext thurs 10 am !!!</p>\n<hr />\ndialectic<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case \n<p>Agreed. He can join other illustrious figures like Einstein and Pi :)</p>\n<hr />\nLightworker<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case \n<p>Citiworker , Tom Philips and Legal Eagles. You all made this a day to remember. Thank you so much for what you did today. Our faith in you folks have been elevated and our confidence rewarded. I shall continue to contribute monthly as this is already a done deal.</p>\n<p>When I took the lessons</p>\n<p>Re: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case </p>\n<p>When I took the missionary lessons when I was 19 now in my 60\'s.<br />\nI was taught (as a FACT) that \"the golden plates\" were REAL :{ !</p>\n<p>I was taught on the basis of \"FACT\" not fiction!</p>\n<p>If the general authorities get away with telling their lawyers it is just a \"belief\" and just a \"teaching\" is hogwash !</p>\n<p>Most members that were given the missionary lessons at that time I am SURE were given the lessons in that way!</p>\n<p>I sure hope the JUDGES understand the importance of how the LDS missionaries taught their lessons.</p>\n<p>IT WAS NOT BASED ON BELIEF IT WAS BASED ON FACT (! ! !)</p>\n<hr />\n<p>randyj<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case </p>\n<p>\"Fact vs belief brought up again. Church saying there is no differentiation between the two, Saying that if church is in court then all religion would have to be.\"</p>\n<p>All religion is not on trial, because all religions don\'t have the tithing-tied-into-salvation aspect that Mormonism does.</p>\n<p>\"Saying Monson is not identifiable as responsible for what the church says!!\"</p>\n<p>Funny, I thought Monson\'s official title was Prophet, Seer, Revelator, and Trustee-In-Trust. If he\'s not responsible for what the church says, who is? Daniel Peterson? (sarcasm)</p>\n<p>\"If there is a trial then it brings church into disrepute.\"</p>\n<p>The church is already in disrepute because of its fraudulent origins and deceptive practices. What a trial would do is expose those facts to a wider audience, and allow church members and investigators to make informed decisions about whether they want to be associated with it.</p>\n<p>Kinda funny that the lawyer is worried about a trial bringing the church into disrepute. Duh, if the church has done nothing wrong, and a trial confirms that, wouldn\'t that *increase* the church\'s reputation?</p>\n<hr />\ncityworker<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\ncheers for that....\n<p>lots of material for people to mull over!!</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Interested<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nFrom me to you in lieu of a case of your favourite drink:</p>\n<p>Cheers to you.</p>\n<hr />\nsnb<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\n+1\n<p>I appreciate these updates. Thanks to cityworker for making them and thanks Interested for putting them together in a summary.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>silvergirl<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nFantastic work!!! Thank you so much!</p>\n<p>Just a point of clarification since the names are so close....was it Neil Addison that was there in court today? The same one that was quoted in the initial news articles? Is it correct that he was one of the six on the church\'s legal team?</p>\n<p>There is also an apostle by the name of Neil Andersen. I was confusing the two at one point.</p>\n<p>Thanks again for the awesome real time coverage!!</p>\n<p>SG</p>\n<hr />\n<p>BirdUncaged<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nThank you so much, Cityworker, for your time...and everyone else\'s. Powerful stuff information, indeed. I\'m looking forward to next Thursday!</p>\n<p>I think what the church lawyers argued and contended is very damaging, in of itself, for the church publically. If I were a reporter I\'d have a field day with it! Monson not responsible for the company ;) or the church? Seriously? So much for follow the prophet, he knows the way. Very damaging. I hereby declare March 14th...Tom Phillips Day.</p>\n<p>Yes...even the church\'s lawyers are admitting the power of this to damage the church. And the way they are representing that sentiment reminds me of children on the playground stamping their feet and running off to tell teacher. Teachers hate those kids.</p>\n<hr />\nInterested<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case \n<p>Neil Addison. city worker made the clarification and explicitly said that no GAs were present.</p>\n<hr />\nsilvergirl<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nThanks.\n<hr />\npresleynfactsrock<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nAppreciate your effort and time giving us the latest on the case. Thank you.\n<hr />\nsayhitokolob4me<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nI think it would be a good idea to add to the cut and paste the couple of late comments by cityworker re LDS legal team not showing up next thursday, also went for 6.5 hours today. Thanks so much city worker!\n<hr />\n<p>Shummy<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nfadeout to Eric Idle hanging on a cross and reminding TSM &amp; co to always</p>\n<p>\"look on the bright side of life.....\"</p>\n<p>Kendal Mint Cake<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nIs there anything we should avoid posting, to make sure we don\'t prejudice the case?</p>\n<p>maxxedout<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nThank you for such detailed info. Woke up at 5am in OZ to to read all the overnight activity</p>\n<p>When I took the lessons<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nWhen Jack West gave his \"Book of Mormon On Trial\" presentations, he based his teachings on fact. Sure it was pure sugar coating. But members at the time didn\'t have much to compare his book to. Such as DNA or Grant Palmer\'s \"Insider\'s View of Mormon Origins\", Simon Southerton\'s \"In Search of a Lost Tribe\" etc.</p>\n<p>Tithing is a direct ROOT from the Book of Mormon being told it\'s true to it\'s members ! LIKE AN \"IRON ROD\", IT\'S ALL ONE PIECE!</p>\n<p>THIS IS THE PAST, BUT THE PAST IS WHAT TODAY IS AS WELL IN THE PRESENT.</p>\n<p>You can\'t escape the past as being insignificant especially if members breathed in all this knowledge as being true! And it took money from just about every active members pockets to perform that process! That can be a big chunk of change for a lot of believers !</p>\n<p>A ton of believers wouldn\'t be active I am sure if they knew the Book of Mormon was a fraud in it\'s roots, as well as the BOA etc.</p>\n<p>I am sure many would think, they would love to have the tithing money back. I would like to think the LDS leaders could think \"Do What Is Right\" from the song that was so popular then and generously give back the money they should. But maybe that song is not as active as it once was in the LDS church!</p>\n<p>ozpoof<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nNeil Addison - the guy who on 13 Aug 2010 wrote \"The Vatican cannot and should not demand that all the clergy\'s sexual crimes be reported to authorities around the world\"</p>\n<p>Whatta guy.</p>\n<p><a href=\"http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/aug/13/religion-catholicism?commentpage=1\" title=\"http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/aug/13/religion-catholicism?commentpage=1\">http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/aug/13/religion-cat...</a></p>\n<p>darth jesus<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nthnx for the effort. much appreciated.<br />\ncheers.</p>\n<p>somnambulist<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nbut the wigs! WERE THEY WEARING WIGS? Americans need to know this stuff. after all we watch a lot of TV here.</p>\n<p>somnambulist<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nAnd I forgot to say thank you for all your notes. love reading this!</p>\n<p>Unapproved Message</p>\n<p>hazerdus<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nDaggummit they alsways do this to me. Some peoples told me that they could look into cristal balls or some @#$%&amp; and tell me my future. I paid them 20 BUCKS for thatn and I look now and I see that thye was wrong! They should be sued man. I\'m obveeously to dumb to think fer myself. I jus listen to people when they tell me @#$%&amp;.</p>\n<p>Unapproved Message</p>\n<p>Devoted Exmo<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nFraud is a crime.</p>\n<p>newnamenephi<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nWas it correct that only 5 exmormons and 1 TBM and 1 reporter was in the courtroom? Why would there be so few people inside if that\'s the case? I just can\'t imagine there wouldn\'t be numerous exmos in the UK wanting to see the action? And, why would a Deseret News reporter be there but not a SL Tribune reporter?</p>\n<p>verilyverily<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case </p>\n<p>YES thank you for this..........I\'ve been on pins and needles wondering.<br />\nWhen this portion of everything was over, was Tom smiling? Did he seem happy with what had happened?</p>\n<hr />\n<p>jiminycricket<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nAs posted elsewhere,</p>\n<p>MormonThink has cityworker\'s chronological blogging-notes in a pdf file here: <a href=\"http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf\" title=\"http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf\">http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf</a></p>\n<hr />\njiminycricket<br />\n\"city worker\'s\" notes of today\'s hearing.\n<p>All the blog notes from cityworker are gathered into one pdf document here: <a href=\"http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf\" title=\"http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf\">http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf</a></p>\n<hr />\nzenmaster<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nthe statement from \"City Worker\'s\" commentary that jumped out at me the most was (EMPHASIS ADDED):\n<p>\"if Philips won , HOW COULD CHURCH CONTINUE IT\'S OPERATIONS . And that would be judicial interference , a secular court cannot decide such issues\"</p>\n<p>Basically, if the above statement is accurate, this tells me that the Church gets how much is at stake here. This case is HUGE.</p>\n<hr />\ntempleendumbed<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nThank you city worker.\n<hr />\n<p>jkjkjkjk<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nTithing and Tithing alone are at stake. If there were no mandatory tithing there would be no case here. It is that financial element which constitutes fraud. They would need to be link every other religion (except Scientology) where donations are voluntary and not a requirement of participation or blessings.</p>\n<hr />\nzenmaster<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\nRight...exactly\n<hr />\nkak<br />\nRe: \"city worker\" on the Monson Case<br />\n(begin two quotes)\n<p>6000 year life question, discussed</p>\n<p>6000 years , saying a lot of Christian believe this .</p>\n<p>(end two quotes)</p>\n<p>The first quote -- I read in an earlier article that the suit included the Genesis account of the creation of the world and the 6,000 years age of the world. Someone commented that this should not have been included because it is not uniquely Mormon, just some material from Genesis in the Bible (and 6,000 years is not even stated in Genesis -- just \"In the beginning...\").</p>\n<p>The second quote from the Mormons saying a lot of Christians believe this--that is true many Christians believe this but again, not all Christians believe in a 6,000 year age of the earth. The Bible was not a Mormon creation and should not have been included into this suit.</p>\n<p>The suit with the so far known exception above limited it to Mormon history and Mormon doctrine, and that is what it should be, since this can be evaluated with historical documents.</p>\n<p>\"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org\"</p>\n', created = 1493450611, expire = 1493537011, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:d66316cfb64219713132548716ee2a8e' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 112.

From city worker, March 14 2014

1. 7:16 am (RfM Time USEDT) and throughout the day

updates from court

The churches legal team are implying that Tom Phillips has harassed Judge Rosco and that it is vexatious

The lawyer has also named the Church as the church of Jesus and Latter Day Saints.

He is arguing that judge Rosco guided TP how to do this and therefore was out of jurisdiction

2. 7:53 am

Today's proceedings:

Church has 6 lawyers present .

Church trying to set aside summons because of service irregularities .. Spent 30 mins arguing this .

Then church lawyer spent 10 mins saying that the claims are teachings -- not beliefs.

10:43 church lawyer trying to discredit Philips , saying he repeatedly correspond ed with court trying to persuade court to issue summons , judge refused this a few times through late 2013 .
Saying Philips complained about judge roscoe

Going through reasons judge originally declined to issue summons
Then judge said Philips had to produce statements from injured parties , church lawyer saying it's wrong that judge advised Philips of this ,,, boos in court !!

Mentioned Ralph's statement then Bloor statements ,, judge observed Bloor should have mentioned WHEN HE WAS DEFRAUDED , church lawyers saying with respect that it's wrong that judge advised Philips how to proceed .

Now ripping into Philips lawyer , trying to say he is wrong on a number of points of law .

Church lawyer saying Philips is mischief ... And not authorized to lay summons .

Lots of arguing minutiae

Church lawyer just wrongly quoted church name ,,, church of the Jesus of the latter days !!!

Keeping arguing it is vexatious saying Philips kept asking for summons and warrant

Now on page 88 !!

Church lawyer keeps referring to Mormon church .

Ooo mormonthink being dissected ,,,,

Referred to it as Philips own site ...

Talking about legal fees , saying it's astonishing that summons is published in mormonthink , saying it shows it's for humiliation of church and vexation .

6000 years , saying a lot of Christian believe this .

Saying the motivation is promoting the crazy beliefs through 80000 missionaries . Church lawyer says this is entitled under un religious freedom human rights .

Saying it is an attack on church scriptures , and designed to harass .

One person shouted in court and judge says he will be asked to leave if he shouts again .

Quoting a lot of internet stuff , saying people want money back . Judge said that's nothing to do with case , church lawyer said it is .

To those who said it will be over in 10 mins , it's now one hour 10 mins

Now continually quoting FB chats , trying to assert that it's a bunch of idiots commentating ,,, saying people just want monson arresting

Dredging through lots of internet speculation ,

3 reporters , 5 exmos and one Tbm in court .

Heart of defence , he is trying to say ... It is civil and not criminal .

Trying to say that the questions of beliefs is not allowed in law .

How can a court possibly embark on judging such issues . Is main issue ... Non justicability

Again saying they are not fact ,, they are belief . Saying nothing is ever said is said as fact just belief !!!!

That's dissed practically every testimony given !!

Now talking about catholic Eucharist !!!

Gay marriage , being diss cussed

3. 8:30 am

Off on a tangent talking about very obscure case law ref freedom to hold religious belief . The right to express belief is allowed , therefore no case ,,,

It's 11:40 , I think this will run until this afternoon , prosecution still has to state case .

Now saying that if Philips won , how could church continue it's operations . And that would be judicial interference , a secular court cannot decide such issues ..

Trying to say it's absurd that a religion would lie to obtain money , especially with 14 million members !! Oo no church would do that ,,, all exmos in court thumbs up , church lawyer just dug a big hole !!

More freedom of right to follow teachings talk ,, lots of case law asserting this right , saying court cannot rule on this , quoted Australia canada and USA , said the same in court .
Freedom of religion phrase used many times , state has no jurisdiction asserted many times .

Lord binghams speech quoted a lot , and custom and practice of religion used .

Just said Philips is a disgruntled ex member ---- he is still a member !!

Church lawyer has been very inaccurate on several key facts such as this . I think Church lawyer has missed the whole point , of the summons , I think that it should make Philips lawyers job easier .

4. 8:39 am

Lunch break then back for the final bit of the church's defence

5. 9:02 am

Church Lawyers are talking about the first vision!!

Then onto talking about the quad and tithing.. Not utterly sure he has a point here..

And is stumbling around vexatious again.

5. 9:22 am

End of defence submission ...

Went through belief s told first vision story ,

Going through tithe . Gasps when it's stated as optional !!

Emphasizing tom getting media attention !!

Final argument , ref private prosecution , saying Philips is not authorized - solicitor , or exempt , eg a victim . Very complex here , I'm just summarizing , lots of legal talk .

Judge asking questions and clarification . Google if you wish legal services act ,

church lawyer saying proceedings are not allowed by Philips ... Trying to say it's criminal that Philips brought action because he does not fit the authorized criteria ?!? !!!

It's all section 3 sub paragraph 4 it's conjunctive with section 4a:b. ... Type stuff, meaning Philips cannot bring prosecution ,

I think church lawyer is clutching at straws , with obscure rules.

Church summarizing ten points of why it's not valid ,

1 not compliant with criminal justice act
2 non justiciable
3 allegations are about belief not fact
4 no evidence monson does not hold the beliefs
5. No vicarious criminal liability in uk law so monson not accountable
6 monson did not cause the fraud
7 vexatious harassment of church
8 prosecutor must refine evidence to prove it's not a flippant case and an abuse of process wrong to subject church to abusive process
9 it contravenes monson’s human rights
10. Philips is not qualified to bring the action

Judge straightaway threw out point 10 because Philips is not being paid , the legal services rules exist to stop any fool practicing as a lawyer

Judge now adjourning until 2:30 , says he won't decide today , that's 2 hours 35 for what was to be thrown out in ten mins !!

6. 10:04 am

they are having a break at the moment but Neil Anderson who wrote the Deseret news article that this would "go nowhere" is there

7. 11:03am

tomP lawyers up now

Running through the history of the summons

On his feet, going through skeleton argument then going to refute the 10 points .

Philips lawyers very upbeat, clearer,.

Going through judge Roscoe’s process, confirming that she followed due process .

It was not a rubber stamp summons; judge roscoe even rephrased the summons.
“After much consideration and thought”.

Philips has right to bring a private prosecution as is his constitutional right. Case law quoted where this has happened. Cases have started as a private prosecution in the past like this, and taken over by the CPS - in the uk the crown prosecution service is the queen ultimately who prosecutes people for crime, but Philips has the right to start the prosecution ...

Quoting the start of private prosecution in British law. Philips again does have the right, parliament gives the right for this , the CPs can take it over and choose to continue or drop the case .
Belief not fact being discussed.... The big one....

If someone says a belief e.g. god is the almighty father, that is a statement of belief.

If someone says this book is translated from this document then that is a statement of fact ... Wow!!

He says that is the key issue at stake here.

Now saying let's talk this out at a future date ,,,,

8. 11:34 am

Asking court to decide on the churches assertion of facts, which he says may be proved to be false.

Case not about attacking beliefs of the church, but about fraud.
Saying that church is not immune to prosecution cannot hide behind doctrine because of belief, but when
Lies are involved absolutely church can be held to account.

Quoting other cases, Catholics Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Church of England, courts cannot decide on doctrinal validity. BUT.... They are in civil jurisdiction ... And not above the law of the land; it's about where you draw the line. And done with caution.
E.g. Rastafarian in possession of cannabis he was prosecuted.... because it was part of an act worship Was no defence ... It was illegal according to law, so Rasta man was convicted!!

So it's now about religion versus law ... If any religious group however well-established carries out an illegal act then the law can cross into belief observance.

If a priest carries out sexual assault in a confessional, it is no defence for the priest to say what happens in the box is religion.

Lots of sex crime talk..
... . (Irony much)

Talking about book of Abraham now, saying church states it as a fact ref is it a translation, this can be proven.

Book of Mormon, Philips want to discuss, is that created by smith.

America populated via Israel, can be proven by DNA

Joe and Hyrum death , circumstances Surrounding , this is taught as fact not belief .

6000 year life question, discussed

Adam and Eve, discussed.

Philips lawyer talking like the above is laughable.

See Monty Python type talk.

Monson, did he know? Did he act dishonestly? Did he expose to risk of loss.

All can be answered without crossing to belief, just stating that this is fact is fraud, if indeed it can be proved as known to be false and with intent to defraud.

Church conceded that everything it says is merely belief not fact THIS IS THE BIG ONE

9. 12:00 pm

Further court update

One hour 10 mins in

Publicity ... Philips lawyer hands magistrate a document , uk version of huff post , talking about summons , monson pic on it , quote from church ,,, the one where they say bizarre allegations ,,,, Neil Anderson -

the qc the church have used today , saying the court were in error issuing the summonses ,,, a QC giving quotes to press that a case he is defending is nonsense !!! DRAMA!!

Red face and neck for Anderson in court ... Wow.

The arrogance!!

Ripping into monson now , saying he is educated and knows it's false , and Quote --- lying for The Lord --- ha

Asking for trial , because If Philips Bloor and Ralph made up allegations then they attempted to pervert the course of justice therefore there should be a trial .

Next up ... Dealing with 10 points.

Interested
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
10. 12:41pm

**** I think last update for day ****

Went through points ... Merely said opposite of what church lawyer said .

Monson aided abetted or procured or counselled people to make false representations .

Basics exist for this to proceed .

Talking about community of christ denying validity of Book of Mormon .

False representations made in order to procure tithing for the church

Judge wants evidence that monson made these statements , , sources given . Taught by all leaders .

Philips lawyer taking church to pieces ,, it's like a boxing match where rocky comes back off the floor ,

Listing sources for statements of facts .... Woah !!! Ensign websites talks videos the list goes on ...

I'm tired out , it's relentless .

Judge roscoe really looked into things and filled gaps that she found.

Wish I could take a picture of devonshires 5 man and 1 woman team , all laid back in their seats with swag . Philips 2 guys one girl team up and down consulting Philips , working and doing .

Human rights , monson , he has right to practice religion , but not to commit fraud , any more than he has the right to smoke his cannabis ,,, lol . Philips lawyer is funny .

One hour 45 minutes

Now church is on his feet again ,,
He did a tongue slip ,,, monson is not responsible for what the company ... Errr I mean church says .... Funny !!!

Fact vs belief brought up again

Church saying there is no differentiation between the two , Saying that if church is in court then all religion would have to be .

Trying to say again that religion is not a justice matter . Trying to say all this is an abuse of process , no one has ever complained to the police about church .

Saying monson is not identify able as responsible for what the church says !!

If there is a trial then it brings church into disrepute .

Judgment as to how things will proceed along with reasons to be given next Thursday !! M
Magistrate all done
Next thurs 10 am !!!


dialectic
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

Agreed. He can join other illustrious figures like Einstein and Pi :)


Lightworker
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

Citiworker , Tom Philips and Legal Eagles. You all made this a day to remember. Thank you so much for what you did today. Our faith in you folks have been elevated and our confidence rewarded. I shall continue to contribute monthly as this is already a done deal.

When I took the lessons

Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

When I took the missionary lessons when I was 19 now in my 60's.
I was taught (as a FACT) that "the golden plates" were REAL :{ !

I was taught on the basis of "FACT" not fiction!

If the general authorities get away with telling their lawyers it is just a "belief" and just a "teaching" is hogwash !

Most members that were given the missionary lessons at that time I am SURE were given the lessons in that way!

I sure hope the JUDGES understand the importance of how the LDS missionaries taught their lessons.

IT WAS NOT BASED ON BELIEF IT WAS BASED ON FACT (! ! !)


randyj
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

"Fact vs belief brought up again. Church saying there is no differentiation between the two, Saying that if church is in court then all religion would have to be."

All religion is not on trial, because all religions don't have the tithing-tied-into-salvation aspect that Mormonism does.

"Saying Monson is not identifiable as responsible for what the church says!!"

Funny, I thought Monson's official title was Prophet, Seer, Revelator, and Trustee-In-Trust. If he's not responsible for what the church says, who is? Daniel Peterson? (sarcasm)

"If there is a trial then it brings church into disrepute."

The church is already in disrepute because of its fraudulent origins and deceptive practices. What a trial would do is expose those facts to a wider audience, and allow church members and investigators to make informed decisions about whether they want to be associated with it.

Kinda funny that the lawyer is worried about a trial bringing the church into disrepute. Duh, if the church has done nothing wrong, and a trial confirms that, wouldn't that *increase* the church's reputation?


cityworker
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
cheers for that....

lots of material for people to mull over!!


Interested
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
From me to you in lieu of a case of your favourite drink:

Cheers to you.


snb
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
+1

I appreciate these updates. Thanks to cityworker for making them and thanks Interested for putting them together in a summary.


silvergirl
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Fantastic work!!! Thank you so much!

Just a point of clarification since the names are so close....was it Neil Addison that was there in court today? The same one that was quoted in the initial news articles? Is it correct that he was one of the six on the church's legal team?

There is also an apostle by the name of Neil Andersen. I was confusing the two at one point.

Thanks again for the awesome real time coverage!!

SG


BirdUncaged
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Thank you so much, Cityworker, for your time...and everyone else's. Powerful stuff information, indeed. I'm looking forward to next Thursday!

I think what the church lawyers argued and contended is very damaging, in of itself, for the church publically. If I were a reporter I'd have a field day with it! Monson not responsible for the company ;) or the church? Seriously? So much for follow the prophet, he knows the way. Very damaging. I hereby declare March 14th...Tom Phillips Day.

Yes...even the church's lawyers are admitting the power of this to damage the church. And the way they are representing that sentiment reminds me of children on the playground stamping their feet and running off to tell teacher. Teachers hate those kids.


Interested
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

Neil Addison. city worker made the clarification and explicitly said that no GAs were present.


silvergirl
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Thanks.
presleynfactsrock
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Appreciate your effort and time giving us the latest on the case. Thank you.
sayhitokolob4me
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
I think it would be a good idea to add to the cut and paste the couple of late comments by cityworker re LDS legal team not showing up next thursday, also went for 6.5 hours today. Thanks so much city worker!

Shummy
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
fadeout to Eric Idle hanging on a cross and reminding TSM & co to always

"look on the bright side of life....."

Kendal Mint Cake
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Is there anything we should avoid posting, to make sure we don't prejudice the case?

maxxedout
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Thank you for such detailed info. Woke up at 5am in OZ to to read all the overnight activity

When I took the lessons
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
When Jack West gave his "Book of Mormon On Trial" presentations, he based his teachings on fact. Sure it was pure sugar coating. But members at the time didn't have much to compare his book to. Such as DNA or Grant Palmer's "Insider's View of Mormon Origins", Simon Southerton's "In Search of a Lost Tribe" etc.

Tithing is a direct ROOT from the Book of Mormon being told it's true to it's members ! LIKE AN "IRON ROD", IT'S ALL ONE PIECE!

THIS IS THE PAST, BUT THE PAST IS WHAT TODAY IS AS WELL IN THE PRESENT.

You can't escape the past as being insignificant especially if members breathed in all this knowledge as being true! And it took money from just about every active members pockets to perform that process! That can be a big chunk of change for a lot of believers !

A ton of believers wouldn't be active I am sure if they knew the Book of Mormon was a fraud in it's roots, as well as the BOA etc.

I am sure many would think, they would love to have the tithing money back. I would like to think the LDS leaders could think "Do What Is Right" from the song that was so popular then and generously give back the money they should. But maybe that song is not as active as it once was in the LDS church!

ozpoof
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Neil Addison - the guy who on 13 Aug 2010 wrote "The Vatican cannot and should not demand that all the clergy's sexual crimes be reported to authorities around the world"

Whatta guy.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/aug/13/religion-cat...

darth jesus
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
thnx for the effort. much appreciated.
cheers.

somnambulist
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
but the wigs! WERE THEY WEARING WIGS? Americans need to know this stuff. after all we watch a lot of TV here.

somnambulist
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
And I forgot to say thank you for all your notes. love reading this!

Unapproved Message

hazerdus
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Daggummit they alsways do this to me. Some peoples told me that they could look into cristal balls or some @#$%& and tell me my future. I paid them 20 BUCKS for thatn and I look now and I see that thye was wrong! They should be sued man. I'm obveeously to dumb to think fer myself. I jus listen to people when they tell me @#$%&.

Unapproved Message

Devoted Exmo
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Fraud is a crime.

newnamenephi
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Was it correct that only 5 exmormons and 1 TBM and 1 reporter was in the courtroom? Why would there be so few people inside if that's the case? I just can't imagine there wouldn't be numerous exmos in the UK wanting to see the action? And, why would a Deseret News reporter be there but not a SL Tribune reporter?

verilyverily
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case

YES thank you for this..........I've been on pins and needles wondering.
When this portion of everything was over, was Tom smiling? Did he seem happy with what had happened?


jiminycricket
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
As posted elsewhere,

MormonThink has cityworker's chronological blogging-notes in a pdf file here: http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf


jiminycricket
"city worker's" notes of today's hearing.

All the blog notes from cityworker are gathered into one pdf document here: http://www.mormonthink.com/files/fraud-case-2014-03-14-live-blogging.pdf


zenmaster
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
the statement from "City Worker's" commentary that jumped out at me the most was (EMPHASIS ADDED):

"if Philips won , HOW COULD CHURCH CONTINUE IT'S OPERATIONS . And that would be judicial interference , a secular court cannot decide such issues"

Basically, if the above statement is accurate, this tells me that the Church gets how much is at stake here. This case is HUGE.


templeendumbed
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Thank you city worker.

jkjkjkjk
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Tithing and Tithing alone are at stake. If there were no mandatory tithing there would be no case here. It is that financial element which constitutes fraud. They would need to be link every other religion (except Scientology) where donations are voluntary and not a requirement of participation or blessings.


zenmaster
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
Right...exactly
kak
Re: "city worker" on the Monson Case
(begin two quotes)

6000 year life question, discussed

6000 years , saying a lot of Christian believe this .

(end two quotes)

The first quote -- I read in an earlier article that the suit included the Genesis account of the creation of the world and the 6,000 years age of the world. Someone commented that this should not have been included because it is not uniquely Mormon, just some material from Genesis in the Bible (and 6,000 years is not even stated in Genesis -- just "In the beginning...").

The second quote from the Mormons saying a lot of Christians believe this--that is true many Christians believe this but again, not all Christians believe in a 6,000 year age of the earth. The Bible was not a Mormon creation and should not have been included into this suit.

The suit with the so far known exception above limited it to Mormon history and Mormon doctrine, and that is what it should be, since this can be evaluated with historical documents.

"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org"