This is being written due to a request by a certain relatively high level government official.
Comments and suggestions are welcome. It should go off by Wed of next week at the latest.
Much thanks for anyone who wants to help.
. . . . more indications of corrupt activity in the Riverside Courts.
To put this in context, the same three cult members who were witnesses at my trial in Hemet sued me as a civil action in the Hemet court. This was mid 2001. Corporate money supported the suit since they are all poor as church mice--in fact, one of the copies I was sent had extraneous unrelated papers from the major law firm Paul Hastings attached.
As I mentioned previously there were a remarkable number of odd events in the course of Hemet legal actions in this case, the most impressive of which was the judge reading "his" judgment (which my lawyer was convinced had been written by the cult) into the record with his hands shaking.
Last fall I was found liable in summary judgment for $75,000, enough costs to bring the total up to almost $100,000, plus having a permanent injunction issued, which has been used to prevent anyone else from picketing the cult's armed and razor-wire encircled paramilitary compound near Hemet.
The injunction is entirely irregular since (under law) a California court cannot issue a permanent injunction in a limited case.
I appealed on this and other grounds.
Because it was a limited case, the appeal went to the Riverside Superior Courts Appeals section, the same as my misdemeanor conviction.
The cult's lawyers argued to the Appeals court that I should be denied the right to file an appeal. In January of this year in response to the court's order to show cause, I quoted the case the Judge cites below. Recently I heard something from a cult source that indicated the case had been decided so I asked a friend to check the court files. According to him, they didn't even bother to file a proof of service that I had been mailed a copy of the order.
CASE TITLE DEZOTELL, V. HENSON, CASE NO. 003381
Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss Henson's Notice of Appeal based on the disentitlement doctrine is GRANTED.
In his opposition defendant relies on cases such as Doe v. Sup. Crt. (Polanski (I 990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1409, which held that a fugitive may defend a civil action brought against him by appearing through counsel. However where the fugitive initiates the relevant proceeding, the disentitlement doctrine applies equally to civil and criminal cases. (Doe, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at 1403.
Accordingly, this appeal initiated and maintained by a fugitive must be dismissed.
The fax I have of this entry in the court file is unsigned and undated.
My civil right to due process has obviously been violated in this matter. I can't even ask for reconsideration because they hid the outcome from me for so long. Additionally, the judgment of the Riverside court is simply illogical.
Polanski appealed a lower court's decision. Had that Appeals court followed the logic presented here, they would have found that Polanski's appeal was a new case and denied his appeal on the cited grounds. Instead Polanski's appeal was *granted.*
Polanski's appeal ruling would never have been made at all, much less in favor of Polanski if appeals were considered a "new action." It is clear from context that the Appeals court considered Polanski's case to be part of the original filing, not a new matter.
The cult's motivation and policies leading to corrupting justice are not hard to understand. They oppose free speech about them for the simple reason that exposure ruins their market for exorbitantly expensive fraudulent psychological and medical "treatments." The scope of their spending was accidentally exposed early in 2002 when an activist judge in a Florida case (Lisa McPherson wrongful death) forced them to file notes as exhibits about expenses that had been mentioned in testimony about settlement talks. The expenses totaled almost $35 million. Two summation entities stated spending over a million on me, and that they expected to spend another $360,000. Considering previous statements by the cult in court (Rosen, September 13, 2000 before the bankruptcy court in San Jose) this may be seriously understated, but in any case, that much money would go a long ways in Riverside County. (I have hard copy of these exhibits, or they can be obtained from the Florida court.)
The illogical and hidden Riverside appeal ruling is only the latest incident in a long string of serious irregularities and criminal acts involving Riverside County dating back to *before* I started picketing in 2000. It included filing false records with the court (notice of service of the original indictment) and tampering with court records (Judge Wallerstein illegally sealed testimony in conflict with his minute orders to delete evidence the cult wanted expunged from the appeal record). I don't believe that the courts and government agencies in Riverside County are corrupt in all matters, but where the "classically terroristic" cult is concerned, the corruption now appears complete.
Los Angeles is not much better. The LAPD has been rebuffed on "political grounds" multiple times in attempts to get DA's office to take decisive actions against the cult or their agents. The LAPD was aware back in 1995 that Tom Klemesrud had been drugged with chloral hydrate (a schedule drug) by a female cult operative in the course of committing another crime (trying to frame Mr. Klemesrud for murder). Under the federal drug statutes, she and cult leaders all the way to the top could have been sentenced up to 40 years behind bars.
If you want the details on this story here is the URL:
Since that article was written, Mr. Klemesrud had a medical procedure that used chloral hydrate. He subsequently executed a declaration (attached) stating that he is certain he was drugged with this specific drug on January 14, 1995.
After many years of observation, I don't believe conventional investigation and prosecution will work, and neither do any of the lawyers or investigators who have experienced the cult first hand. People don't fear the cult so much as they fear the courts and justice system which the cult has made into an expensive but very effective weapon against any who would oppose them. The cult crushed even the IRS under a mountain of litigation (roughly $125 million.)
Unconventional methods will be required, possibly [deleted] by invoking the current no-nonsense approach toward paramilitary terror organizations cloaked as "religions." This would be a politically popular course of action--as a recent survey by the cult demonstrated.
"CLEARWATER - Earlier this spring, as the Church of Scientology prepared for its biggest trial in recent history, professional researchers combed Tyrone Square Mall asking Pinellas residents what they thought of the church.
"'A cult,' said person after person.
"'Scam,' said one. 'Crooks,' said another.
"The researchers, hired by the church, questioned 300 people. Their findings were grim: Four out of five had unfavorable things to say about Scientology."
Very Truly Yours,
H. Keith Henson
PS. Incidentally, the above phrase "classically terroristic" was found to be reasonable for Time Magazine to have used it in their 1991 article on January 12, 2001 by the Second Circuit Court of appeals (Docket Nos. 98-9522(L), 99-7332(CON)).