CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

References:
HCOB 15 Step 81
HCOB 31 Jan 70
THE CRIMINAL MIND
WITHHOLDS, OTHER PEOPLE'S
It is not what is factual that counts in courts, it is the color one gives it.
The enemy never accuses us of anything they are not doing themselves. This is one for one over the years. They are engaged in what we say they are accused of doing what they are really doing. This is a great one in detecting what they are really up to. They say “fraud” and so we aren’t doing it.
This is a peculiar mental twist prevalent in psychiatrists and psychologists. They divine what the patient is thinking because that’s what they are thinking! And they carry this into their PR and legal actions. All attacks since 1950 have been routinely been spotted as instigators of these attacks and even under Mental Health Hoover’s and thus the FBI’s. The AMA and National Association for underlie J. Edgar Hoover inspired by the FBI case. They say they are doing what they really are doing. And they are engaged in their hostility. We have just a comment to illustrate that a reverse think is in progress in almost every charge is just a leveled.
But be that as it may, legally, the enemy’s actions are basically criminal and so long as this matter is held to a civil level it is not likely to speedily resolve. Soliciting money based on knowingly perjurious testimony or allegations is fraud. And doing it by mail is also mail fraud.
Perhaps if the criminal nature of such a conspiracy, in this and other ways, were brought to bear on the enemy on criminal court channels, it would vastly speed up the obtaining of precedents in the form of summary judgments. I feel we are seeking to handle crooks on civil channels and may be working in the wrong channel.
There is an oddity in American “justice.” A filed suit does not have the status of sworn testimony. It is a suit which opens the door to all the insane civil allegations which occur in the U.S. This containing false and libelous material can be filed with no real penalty to the plaintiff.
In pure law such a filing is perjurious and constitutes criminal libel. Yet no one goes to jail for such filings and the whole weight of the judicial system can be brought down on anyone by any nut alleging he has been wronged, but in actual fact is engaged in criminal libel. The case a precedent on this occurs will be the day when this legal abuse, now prevalent, will cease.
One can become so engrossed in defending against lies that one can overlook the penalty that should legally await such criminals. Not one shred of fact exists in any of their allegations. But a civil court is not the prime arena for this sort of thing. To deny a lie is to leave it stand in people’s minds. To criminally indict the liar is effective disproof. “He didn’t win those cases,” is a weak statement. “He went to jail for those lies,” is a strong one.
As I see it, there are three targets:
1. Summary judgments proofing the Church against such attacks in the future, and
2. The enemy engaged in a good long time, and
3. All of those engaged in the conspiracy the subject of court damages, enough to pauperize them for life.
A complete victory would consist of all three.