Temple Academy's, of Waterville Maine, counsel and the judge Dow couldn't be more legally wrong.

in #informationwar7 months ago (edited)

Temple’s lawyer, Alton Stevens, wrote in his reimbursement request to Dow that after more than a decade of a harassing “crusade” from White, “protection orders alone will not stop him.”
https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/09/17/judge-grants-waterville-private-christian-school-harassment-order-legal-fee-payback-in-dispute-with-former-students-father/

  • Scott Monroe
  • sept 16-17

additionally central Maine writes:

“I’ll retire next year and then I’ll go to jail,” said White, who works as a shipwright at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and represented himself at recent court hearings. “I’ll go on a hunger strike and generate so much attention. I’ll make it a national issue. They messed with my boy.”

Before I go into further detail, I will say, if he ends up reading, that People end up starving all the time in jails and prisons-and said facilities and officers get qualified and sovereign immunity for these abuses all the time. Unless he has marketing skills, no one will really care if he self-starves; They might force feed him with tubes. Since he would be starving himself unless he litigates the feeding tubes, it would be unlikely anyone would know outside of the walls without marketting.

The judge granted the plaintiff's attorney's request to make the defendant pay up and gag the respondent [hereinafter defendant]. Luckily, I guess you could say, the defendant works at a shipyard and likely can afford to shell out $6000; Or maybe not so lucky if he has the ability to pay but intends to refuse. White alleges Temple academy made statements in the court they wouldn't seek attorney fees. I have no idea if there is a court reporter, but it would be quite damning for the plaintiff but White has to prove it, and get a court to rule on it. Refusing to comply with a court order is not legally best way to deal with them, although I do agree that people should mock the rulings of many incompetent judges-like Judge Dow.

Family court, or as I call the Joe Biden Family court starchamber is sadly the place where the constitution means squat. It is a place where all the accused are guilty by accusation, and many times, as appears to be the case here, the accusation is purely protected speech.

So what exactly did White do to deserve a harassment TPO? That is a trick question, no one deserves a harassment TPO. Temple Academies own lawyer plead the protection orders alone will not stop him. Since a TPO is an injunction issued by a court in chancery, when harassment is also a criminal offense in Maine,there are numerous problems in just the 3-4 test for the rules of equity,

[1] The moving party must be suffering an irreparable injury who is likely to succeed on the merits of the issuance of the injunction and [2] has no adequate remedy available at law. [3] There will be a balancing on interest. [4]The 4rth test is more for consideration of public policy.

As we see from essentially the first two test, the plaintiff's attorney actually plead the moving party would not prevail on it's issuance and so the order was not curative-and Mr. white reportedly said the same. Also, which is more important why the star chamber is stressed, is harassment is a criminal offense under maine law. So there did exist an adequate remedy in law, but the plaintiff's likely knew that there wasn't even probable cause-they just let the machinery of the starchamber do their thing to innocent people. Maine law also prohibits a court of chancery from having Jurisdiction in such a case. But who really wants to demure a case in equity by saying that the criminal courts have jurisdiction. Cough, Raises hand.

Again what did White do?
He alleged that the school committed child abuse against his son. There was reportedly a dispute between Mr White and the school before that where the school decided they didn't need him as a basketball coach, and the school responded by expelling his son. Thus, his son went into a new school [Carabbec] as an expelled student, but without an explanation of what he done to be expelled. https://bangordailynews.com/2010/03/26/news/dads-dispute-gets-student-ousted/ .
according to centralmaine, White also accuses temple of disclosing private info about his son. Also for those who aren't familiar with Maine: Waterville is a college town, home of Colby College and the lesser known Thomas College; Anson and Emden Maine, last I knew, was the boonies. Back in the day, emden was the place to go for cheap waterfront property. Essentially the school made him return home to the boonies during the important stages of social development as a social pariah.

image.png
Some 50 minutes away from the friends he used to go to school with.
image.png

I don't disagree that the schools behavior in expelling his son was "child abuse", but I doubt it was actionable child abuse in tort-but there might have been a potential for a remedy in equity. My focus is on speech, not contract law and possible exceptions to contracts. But as we also reflect to the lilburne case, it is clear that temple's Academy decision to deprive White of speech and to isolate and silence his son in his youth are both unchristian practices-and exile was the punishment for murderers in Athens. As a Christian organization, they have a duty to be better than the Pagans-They have failed.

(4) Gagging, an unmanly and barbarous cruelty, to be exercised upon beasts, not men, for man differs from brutes both ratione et oratione, in reason and speech; a punishment never heard of in any age; cutting out tongues, and perforations, in cases of blasphemy have been heard of, but never in a matter of such a nature; and this to continue for above an hour, till the blood gushed out of his mouth, as if they would have plucked his jaw in pieces, and all this for nothing; O insuffereable torments."- councel Mr Cook for lilburne.
-https://hive.blog/lilburne/@firstamendment/this-first-tryal-of-crown-v-john-lilburne-1637-3-howell-state-trials-1315-the-importance-of-christianity-in-law

It isn't just the states that have failed to live up to the duties to be better than previous governments as we see through the practice of qualified immunity. It is also the failure of the churches, likely due to decades of the Johnson act, that are failing to teach us (including our institutions) to be better than the pagans. But it isn't the duty of the state to engage in forcing religious doctrine on the churches, nor was it their duty to engage in decades of coerced silencing of the churches.

If White's statement was wrong, then torts could pursue such as libel or a tort, if available, of interference of business. But at the core, they sought to enjoin him for at best a libel. Something not permitted not out of the rules of equity, but per the supreme court on the first amendment itself born out of the infamous Lilburne case that ended the star chamber. see Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931).

So what else did White do?
It is inferred that White picketed on the sidewalk across the street. Assuming the sidewalk was public, This is protected speech, and centralmaine seems to acknowledge this without explicitly stating so. But then they said he:

"went beyond [this]...., also sending messages via social media to accuse Temple officials of misconduct against his son. On Feb. 24 of this year, LaFountain’s husband received an online message from White, who said he would be retiring soon and have “more time” to “keep protesting,” and he referred to LaFountain as “your child abusing wife.”

Notice the newspaper makes this sound more sinister than it really is. On social media, LeFountain's husband could have blocked him. Contacting someone on social media is not a captive audience, and so constitutionally the courts could not have imposed a prior restraint-additionally the ability to block a sender meant that the moving party was likely to succeed in the absence of the order. See Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60 (1983).

Here instead of pleading libel, they used feminist machinations of invoking the unconstitutional Heckler's veto of crying they made me fear for my safety; prohibiting speaker based upon a listeners reaction to the speech. Personally, I prefer the ultimate test of, "You have a second amendment right to self defense but not murder, now get the f___ out of my court room". But really, The first question you really have to ask when someone says they made someone fear for their safety is: Is it protected speech as to categorical and recognized time, manner, place restrictions. if Yes, then "F___ your feelings, case dismissed". If no and the case is in chancery, is there a remedy in the criminal law? If yes, Case dismissed as the defendant has a right to a jury trial." But does this doesn't happen. As centralmaine reports,

Dow’s decision, which did not include any explanation and simply checks off findings on a standard form, follows a trial Aug. 25 at which White and Temple presented witnesses and questioned them on the stand.

But they do say Judge Dow found White's behavior not constitutionally protected speech, because it was harassment on three separate occasions. Nothing central Maine alleges would support the judges ruling that it was unprotected speech. Harassment is not categorically unprotected. In many states, harassment had to be interpreted by the courts to mean something other than harassment to try to save the statutes, but the Maine supreme court (citation ommitted) erroneously treats it as an unprotected category in itself. Obviously, the Supreme court has precedent over the Maine supreme court, and the particular ruling is Coates v. City of Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611 (1971). Alternatively, one can look to United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (2010), and see that harassment isn't among an unprotected category of speech, and brown v Brown, et al. v. Entertainment Merchants Assn. et al., 564 U.S. 786 (2011) emphasizing that the states cannot create new categories of unprotected speech.

The defendant did assert his first amendment rights but maybe not the case laws as is typical for pro-se parties. If the defendant did raise relevant case laws, then that is more damning of the judge. But until the order is resolved he will sadly be disappeared for future protected speech. I say protected not because libel is protected, but because there has been no case in tort to show that the question of a libelous statement is libel. The plaintiffs seek to gag him, in seeking a gag they are not proving him wrong.

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
George R. R. Martin.

And so what what he had to say is now part of an immutable block chain for all of history to see.

More, the judge effectively and illegally prevents White from picketing the school from kennedy memorial drive. A Court doesn't have a power to put up a floating buffer due to vagueness and the first amendment. see Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network ofWestern N. Y., 519 U. S. 357, 376 (1997) . Also the court may not put up a fixed barrier unless that order is narrowly tailored to achieve some compelling governmental interest other than restricting speech. McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464 (2014). It is important to note, centralmaine did not report that White disrupted the operations of the school by his protest which could have invoked a captive audience. KMD is a public road, picketing is protected activity. Obviously, Judge Dow is a failure of a lawyer, so he became a failure of a judge and enemy of the people and traitor to this country, and he now sits as a criminal who should be criminally prosecution under 18 usc 241 and 242. But we all know, the FBI won't investigate, and the USDOJ is complicit and won't prosecute. The legislatures of the many states are under a covid19 lockdown, and we all know Maine's crackhead governor Mills supports lawless judges.

The orders against White should be dismissed

Sort:  

Your current Rank (28) in the battle Arena of Holybread has granted you an Upvote of 100%