Ray Jeffrey Whinges to the Outer Banks Faithful

Ray Jeffrey Scientology

It appears that Ray Jeffrey can have his cake and eat it too when he is addressing his faithful anti-Scientology followers in the notorious secret Facebook group where fair game is coordinated against his former clients.

He can accuse his former clients of stealing from him while also whinging about his difficulties in being able to prove it but assuring everyone he would win.

He can do all this while propping up the conspiracy theory that Monique took a pay off from the Church of Scientology while cutting him out of the deal, while also preparing everyone for his backing out of providing the evidence to prove it.

And few in the outer banks will ever spot the manipulation and prestidigitation to which they are being subjected by Ray.

I can only say that getting out of Scientology should have taught the exes in Outer Banks that hero worship is not any good for critical thinking. Nor is it any good for the freedom of thought and the rule of law.

If Ray Jeffrey is going to accuse his former client publicly of stealing from him then he has an obligation to prove it.

If after this display, he does not follow through, then just what kind of attorney is Ray Jeffrey?

UPDATE: I added a comment below that comprises a discussion I found on the Internet. Take a look at the reasoning that Monique gave for dropping her lawsuit. Doesn’t it look exactly like the points that Ray Jeffrey is making above?

Why is Ray’s argument so understandable, when Monique’s argument is just a cover for stealing money from Ray Jeffrey and his team?

3 Responses to Ray Jeffrey Whinges to the Outer Banks Faithful

  1. Alanzo February 19, 2018 at 9:38 am #

    A very interesting conversation I came across on the internet:

    [–]alemmingnomore
    Huh, what a very different Marty Rathbun than was in Louis Theroux’s documentary about Scientology. Almost like he did a 180. Wonder what could cause that. Maybe all of the squirrel busting and intimidation from Scientology that he said he was going through finally got to him.

    [–]Outrageousclaim
    Maybe all of the squirrel busting and intimidation from Scientology that he said he was going through finally got to him.

    Lol, or it could, you know, be because of the fat sack of cash they likely recovered for settling their case behind the backs of their lawyers.

    [–]ClaudWaterbuck[S]

    Lol, or it could, you know, be because of the fat sack of cash they likely recovered for settling their case behind the backs of their lawyers.

    Another conspiracy theory.

    Where’s Ray Jeffrey’s second hearing?

    Why isn’t he pursuing this under-the-table payment that the Church supposedly made to the Rathbuns? Because even he knows it probably doesn’t exist?

    [–]Outrageousclaim
    No one is just going to drop a case for ZERO dollars out of the blue for no reason after being involved in protracted litigation and winning several important legal battles.

    Also, how do you know Jeffrey isn’t pursuing action? Texas has a 4 year statute for breach claims (Monique) and a 2 year statute on tortious interference claims (Marty). And this happened less that a year ago.

    If I were Jeffrey, I might wait until after the Rathbuns filed their 2017 income taxes before filing suit. That way, I could immediately subpoena their income tax records after filing suit to see if they reported to the IRS their receipt of a giant bag of money from the CoS in 2017.

    [–]ClaudWaterbuck[S]
    No one is just going to drop a case for ZERO dollars out of the blue for no reason after being involved in protracted litigation and winning several important legal battles.

    For the life of me, I’ll never understand why so many anti-Scientologists don’t seem to know how to read when it comes to the document below, filed to the court in jeopardy of perjury, by Monique Rathbun when she dropped her case. It provides the reasons she dropped it – again – on the penalty of perjury.

    “I wish to move to dismiss the complaint in the 207 the District Court that the instant Petition for Review proceeding is based upon, rendering the Petition moot. While performing their retreat strategy from this lawsuit my former lawyers made two things abundantly clear to me: a) my lawsuit is not worth it financially for former counsel or anyone to continue to litigate, and b) my husband and I have effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve by our own independent efforts.

    “It is a travesty that the statute (Texas Citizens Participation Act) designed to prevent suppression of the rights to speech, association and petition has been used to delay remedy for violations of those very rights in this case for two and one-half years. However, resolving the issues presented in the instant Petition for Review would do nothing to correct the statute’s vulnerability to manipulation that effectively vitiates the Texas Constitution’s Open Courts Policy. Furthermore, the defects in the complaint that Petitioners seized upon to create inordinate delay in this case were included by former counsel over my strong objections. As pled by former counsel the operative complaint serves as fodder for considerable future motion and appellate practice for scientology lawyers, as it has so served to date. I do not have the resources, the time, nor the motivation to litigate in the Supreme Court of Texas against scientology’s army of lawyers in the defense of errors made by attorneys who subordinated my wishes in favor of interests inimical to my own. Consequently, I believe it would best serve justice, judicial economy and the public interest to voluntarily terminate my lawsuit.”*

    This suit was not dropped for no reason. These were the reasons it was dropped. They were filed to the court when it was dropped. Why do no anti-Scns ever seem to be able to think with the ideas here? All their conspiracy theories overlook what Monique herself said because Tony Ortega prestidigitates their attention away from what was filed. Anti-Scientologists are like little kittens being run around the room, chasing Tony’s red dot across the floor and up the walls with his laser pointer.

    Critics like the Rathbuns who have been in legal cases against the Church of Scientology say that it is like looking down the barrel of a loaded gun every day. Monique’s case dragged out for 2.5 years, and never saw a trial date. Mark Rathbun knows the tactics that the Church employs to ensure that lawsuits against Scientology never see a trial (See Laura De Crescenzo – 8 years, Luis Garcia – 5 years) and it appears that Ray Jeffrey did not take his clients’ advice.

    You really need to step back and look at this from a wider perspective than Tony Ortega’s reporting allows you to see.

    See full document here: https://www.scribd.com/document/310825810/Monique-Rathbun-v-Scientology-request-to-lift-stay

    [–]Outrageousclaim

    For the life of me, I’ll never understand why so many anti-Scientologists don’t seem to know how to read…

    Dude, I am no anti-Scientologist. I can hardly think of a group of people I dislike more.

    when it comes to the document below, filed to the court in jeopardy of perjury

    A motion to lift a stay for a dismissal is not a verified pleading that subjects you to perjury (much less the unopposed one filed here).

    In Texas you have a right to dismiss your case. You don’t have to explain yourself or swear to anything. All you have to is file a notice saying “I drop my claims against Defendant,” and your case is over.

    Source: I’m a licensed Texas lawyer

    Here, all Monique had to do was file a motion saying, “Please lift the stay so I can dismiss my case in the lower court.”

    But like a person with a guilty conscience, Rathbun decided to needlessly volunteer her purported “reasons” as if the court gives a fuck. It awkwardly sticks out. It is like a person walking up to a random cop on the street to explain why he doesn’t have weed in his pocket.

    Her reasons are also nonsensical:

    While performing their retreat strategy from this lawsuit

    What retreat strategy? SHE FIRED THEM and then immediately dismissed case. She is the one exiting. This is her strategy. Duh.

    my lawsuit is not worth it financially for former counsel or anyone to continue to litigate

    Nonsense. Again, they didn’t fire her as client because her case had no value. They were actively pushing her case until SHE FIRED THEM.

    b) my husband and I have effectively achieved the primary purpose that the lawsuit was originally intended to serve by our own independent efforts.

    What does that even mean? The purpose of the civil lawsuit was the same as any other—to obtain money. Maybe this is a clever admission that they did make a backdoor settlement with the CoS

    As pled by former counsel the operative complaint serves as fodder for considerable future motion and appellate practice

    Totally fucking wrong and laughable. The CoS’s motion and appellate practice is controlled by what defenses it asserts in its own answer to the lawsuit—such as its affirmative defense that Rathbun’s claims are barred by the TX anti-slapp statute.

    I do not have the resources, the time, nor the motivation to litigate in the Supreme Court of Texas

    Another total crock of shit. A non-lawyer client literally has no involvement with appeals. The lawyer pays for all expenses, files all briefs, and does all oral argument. Not a single minute of her time is needed. She is not even required to be present during argument.

    Monique’s case dragged out for 2.5 years, and never saw a trial date

    So what? Dude, I have far less complicated cases that have been going on for more than 5 years due to appeals.

    But guess what, Texas allows you to recover pre-judgment interest on any recovery you make at trial. The longer they delay, the more money you make.

    IMO, everything that Monique has done is consistent with the behavior of a deadbeat plaintiff that backdoor settles a case to avoid having to pay for attorney fees and expenses.

    [–]ClaudWaterbuck[S]
    As an attorney in the state of Texas, I don’t understand why you find it so impossible that a client might not want to sue the Church of Scientology for the rest of their lives.

    I’m also wondering what kind of deal you think that the Church of Scientology would make with the Rathbuns that would include DM handing over a fat sack of cash to them AND Marty keeping up all the criticism he has made of David Miscavige since 2009, as well as continuing to make videos that drive traffic to his site containing all that criticism?

    Have you ever seen the Church of Scientology shudder one of its critics into silence that way?

    These are just basic reasons why the under the table deal to steal money from Ray Jeffrey’s law firm makes little sense to me. I’m not saying it’s impossible – as a hypothesis, it has a certain level of probability. It’s way more probable to me though, that they don’t want Scientology 24/7 in their lives any more. And as long as the Church doesn’t harass them with Squirrel Busters and surveillance cameras and dildos sent to their workplace – and everything else they’ve endured non-stop since 2009 – they probably figured that it is worth the loss of money to drop everything and walk away.

    Then Tony Ortega and his Underground Bunker started in with his “turncoat spy” campaign, which I’m 100% positive Marty did not appreciate because I talked to him about it.

    Marty Rathbun has been one of the most effective critics of Scientology in its history. And look at all the “understanding” and “support” that he and his wife are getting from other critics and anti-Scientologists for the personal decisions they’ve made for their own lives.

    The common sense, real world hypothesis to explain what we are seeing with Marty Rathbun is that he is in “fuck all y’all” mode. He is sick of the exploitation and the hypocrisy, lying and hysteria on both sides and wants nothing more to do with it. But not before he lets everyone know what he saw from behind the scenes as an anti-Scientologist. He did it with Scientology, and now he is doing it with Anti-Scientology.

    Same behavior. Same deal.

    His video above, and others like them, are a public service, in my opinion.

    And by the way, posting your license and making your point about perjury was well played. I stand corrected on those points of Texas law. I am not a lawyer and do not want to pretend I understand the byzantine complexities of that world. I just thought I’d make the point that you do not file a letter to a court with lies in it. At least regular people don’t. As you suggested, maybe lawyers do, but regular people usually don’t.

    I think that Monique Rathbun dropped her harassment lawsuit against the Church of Scientology for many reasons, and that filing contains those reasons. Are you actually saying that if that filing was filled with lies, which it must be if your hypothesis is correct, the filing would not be considered at least an attempt to defraud the court – let alone defraud Ray Jeffrey?

    Under your “fat sack of cash” scenario – wouldn’t the Rathbuns be risking criminal charges and possibly going to jail for doing what you say they did? Why turn a civil lawsuit into possible jail time for yourself and your spouse?

    Would it be worth it to have that “fat sack of cash” hanging over you and your family for the rest of your life?

    [–]Outrageousclaim
    Her case had huge value and she literally had nothing to lose, as all the case expenses and fees were done contingency style. And like any other litigant, the only time she would lose from her life is sitting for oral deposition (a few hours) and appearing at trial (if the case actually went to trial and didn’t settle).

    By analogy, if you have a scratch off lotto ticket that is one scratch away from winning $1 million, then you are going to scratch it (or make money by selling it to someone). You aren’t just going to rip it up and throw it in the trash.

    I’m also wondering what kind of deal you think that the Church of Scientology would make with the Rathbuns

    Uh, to get Monique to drop the case so that they the can avoid creating bad case law, avoid depositions, and avoid a jury rendering a disfavorable, precedent setting jury verdict.

    Are you actually saying that if that filing was filled with lies, which it must be if your hypothesis is correct, the filing would not be considered at least an attempt to defraud the court

    Yes. The court literally does not care nor performs any sort of analytical inquiry about why you want to drop your case. It gives zero fucks. She could put down that space aliens told her to do it and the case would still be dismissed.

    And considering this motion was unopposed, the judge probably just signed the order and didn’t bother reading that motion. Unless their is opposition to a motion, judges typically don’t read the motion and just sign the order.

    Under your “fat sack of cash” scenario – wouldn’t the Rathbuns be risking criminal charges and possibly going to jail for doing what you say they did

    No, not at all. If she took money to settle her case and didn’t pay her prior attorney, then she would be liable to her attorney for breach of contract, but by no means is it criminal to breach a contract.

    [–]ClaudWaterbuck[S]
    Thank you for this. It certainly fleshes out your, and others, hypothesis that Marty and Monique stole money from Ray Jeffrey’s law firm.

    Surely though, attorneys in the Great State of Texas have carved out some powerful avenues of recourse to such rip-off behavior from dead-beat contingency-fee clients, right?

    So far, Ray Jeffrey has attempted to subpoena the Rathbun’s financial records in a hearing that resulted in a loss for him because he held the hearing in the wrong jurisdiction. Am I right about that?

    Isn’t that a kind of rookie mistake which wasted everyone’s time and money, including the court’s?

    You say he is probably waiting to re-try his attempt in the correct jurisdiction after the Rathbun’s file their taxes so he can see their income and whether they got a big fat sack of cash from the Church of Scientology. Why didn’t Ray Jeffrey wait to hold his hearing until after the 2017 taxes, then? And in the right venue?

    What if Ray Jeffrey is not the great Scientology-slayer that everyone thinks he is, but is actually an incompetent boob that Marty could see was going to keep them in court for the rest of their lives against Scientology. What if the reason they dropped the case is as Monique said in her filing?

    What if the Rathbun’s taxes don’t show any kind of fat sack of cash?

    Conspiracy theories are usually proven in the minds of people who hold them by the fact that there is no proof for them. The reason there is no proof for a conspiracy theory is because the conspiracy itself made sure there was no proof. So the fact that there is no evidence for them is what makes them true.

    If there is no evidence of a pay-off to the Rathbuns, will you still cling to this conspiracy theory of yours while the simple answer remains written in Monique’s filing to the court?

    EDITED TO ADD: This hypothesis that the Rathbun’s stole money from Ray Jeffrey always includes having to downplay what it’s like to sue someone, especially someone like the Church of Scientology.

    And like any other litigant, the only time she would lose is sitting for oral deposition (a few hours) and appearing at trial (if the case actually went to trial and didn’t settle).

    By analogy, if you have a scratch off lotto ticket that is one scratch away from winning $1 million, then you are going to scratch it (or make money by selling it to someone). You aren’t just going to rip it up and throw it in the trash.

    Are you really comparing sitting in depositions with Scientology lawyers grilling you and going to trial while suing the Church of Scientology to scratching off a winning lotto ticket?

    Why is it so impossible to see things from a client’s viewpoint here, especially while discussing a client’s reasoning for dropping a lawsuit against the Church of Scientology who was harassed daily by them for years?

    [–]Outrageousclaim

    Surely though, attorneys in the Great State of Texas have carved out some powerful avenues of recourse to such rip-off behavior from dead-beat contingency-fee clients, right?

    Yeah, you can sue them for breach of contract (assuming they still had the money and haven’t already converted it).

    So far, Ray Jeffrey has attempted to subpoena the Rathbun’s financial records in a hearing that resulted in a loss for him because he held the hearing in the wrong jurisdiction. Am I right about that?

    I have no idea. All I know is that they filed a request for a pre-suit deposition and it was denied. I wasn’t at the hearing and don’t know why the judge denied it. I can tell you this much, I have been denied pre-suit depositions on many occasions. It is rare for a judge to grant them unless extraordinary circumstances exist.

    You say he is probably waiting to re-try his attempt in the correct jurisdiction after the Rathbun’s file their taxes so he can see their income and whether they got a big fat sack of cash from the Church of Scientology.

    You are mixing apples and oranges. What Jeffery did was file a request for a a pre-suit deposition, presumably so he could ask Monique questions under oath about back door settlements.

    Jeffrey did not file a lawsuit for breach of contract seeking money. He still has YEARS to do this.

    What if the Rathbun’s taxes don’t show any kind of fat sack of cash?

    Well, if they did settle but didn’t report it, then they would be criminally liable for tax evasion. And if they didn’t settle, then they are all good.

    If there is no evidence of a pay-off to the Rathbuns, will you still cling to this conspiracy theory of yours while the simple answer remains written in Monique’s filing to the court?

    Again, her purported reasons weren’t put in her filing for the Court’s benefit. While you are free to accept her reasons as convincing, her reasons are not gospel and are afforded no special deference.

    The reality is that we don’t know what happened, but the circumstances are entirely consistent with a deadbeat client. This is why lawsuits exist, so that the parties can discover evidence and prove their claims. And, of course, id honor a judgment that there was no back door settlement just like I’d assume you would honor a judgment holding that there was one.

    Are you really comparing sitting in depositions with Scientology lawyers grilling you and going to trial while suing the Church of Scientology to scratching off a winning lotto ticket?

    Dude, they already signed up for being deposed when they filed the suit. That was something they already bargained for. If they were so worried about being deposed, they never would have filed suit in the first place.

    And yes, there case was like a lotto ticket, except she had far better odds. Had Monique won, she could have been awarded millions at trial or settled for tons at mediation. Her case had VALUE.

    But she just decided to simply throw her case in the waste basket without making a dime? While you are free to buy this, I’m not buying.

    Why is it so impossible to see things from a client’s viewpoint here, especially while considering a client’s reasoning for dropping a lawsuit against the Church of Scientology who was harassed daily by them for years?

    I’ve already explained myself. Her reasons are laughable, reek of a guilty conscience, and are consistent with the deadbeat client scenario.

    Hey, the good news is that you don’t have to accept my opinion! I am just some guy on Reddit.

    [–]ClaudWaterbuck[S]
    Well, I do appreciate your information. You have taught me some things here.

    In this whole debate, I don’t think anyone has put this hypothesis this succinctly:

    Her reasons are laughable, reek of a guilty conscience, and are consistent with the deadbeat client scenario.

    You are right. If Ray Jeffrey pulls out the proof that Marty and Monique Rathbun ripped him off by taking a payout of any kind from the Church of Scientology, I will accept it.

    Until then, I’m going to go with what I’ve seen from Marty himself. When he got sick of Scientology, he exposed the abuses of it and walked away. When he got sick of anti-Scientology, he exposed the abuses of that, too.

    And walked away.

  2. Eileen February 27, 2018 at 6:28 pm #

    Hi Alanzo,
    Whinging?
    What country do you think you are in? According to my recollection you live amidst golden American corn, not in the Orkney Islands or the Welsh countryside.
    You propose that if Ray Jeffrey makes an allegation against Marty R. He is obligated to prove it. By what rule- yours? You make these declarations and seem to think the statement is parent to truth.
    Marty R can sue Ray if he feels defamed. No business of yours or mine about proof. Absent law, we evaluate the evidence and decide whom to believe.
    Not sure why you are choosing these battles, but I don’t think they are taking you in the direction of ex (or ex ex) Scientologist.

    • Alanzo February 28, 2018 at 9:36 am #

      Heloo, Eileen!

      Because Attorneys are licensed to prove things in a court of law, I think you should be suspicious of a lawyer who publicly accuses someone of a tort, an ex-client no less, and then whinges (aiae, lassie) about the difficulties of “suing Scientology”. He of course would not be suing Scientology, would he? He’d be suing Monique and Marty.

      Can’t you see the theatrics here?

      What’s funny is that the difficulties of suing Scientology is why Monique dropped the suit – which is entirely legal, and was her option rather than suing the Church of Scientology for the rest of her life – which is apparently what Ray Jeffrey was setting her up for, the Luis Garcia, Laura DeCrescenzo Happy Meal.

Clicky