1. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    Time for GoFundMe!
  2. MikeG

    MikeG Senior Member

    Interesting. So, they are planning on spending a significant amount of money looking for something that's not there. They can misinterpret whatever they might find online, but very different rules will apply for their lawyers.

    What a colossal waste of time and energy.
  3. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    For decades the lottery has been characterized as "a tax on the [ ]."

    I truly don't aim to brush up against the politeness policy, but the lottery thing came to mind
    as I asked myself where in the world would these guys find that kind of money...?
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 15, 2016
  4. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    I'd love to be there when the depose the first witness and when they don't get the answers they want, they keep saying: "Do you understand that you're under oath?"
  5. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    For someone who's not aiming you have an uncanny knack for hitting your target :p

    Halbig says he raised 84K. (and spent 78K, and he hasnt gotten past the FOIA phase yet). There are ALOT more chemmies than SHHoaxers. But I'm not sure why they havent done FOIA requests BEFORE filing the lawsuit. I guess theyll need 2 rounds of depositions for everyone since they arent prepared properly.
  6. Hevach

    Hevach Senior Member

    I think I've said this before, but I think they expect court to work like a Phoenix Wright game. Go in with no admissible evidence, bluff your *** off, and badger every witness mercilessly until one of them breaks down and confesses everything.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Update on the Canadian lawsuit:

    Court documents are posted on http://www.aerialdischargeclassaction.ca/?page=3
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 10, 2016
    • Informative Informative x 4
    • Like Like x 3
  8. Raccoon

    Raccoon Member

    You GOTTA be kidding me. A lawsuit because of CONTRAILS?!
  9. Marin B

    Marin B Active Member

    Sounds like we'll find out in 40 days if the lawsuit is continued. My money is that they don't bother. Seems like these lawsuits might just be ways for the chemtrail promoters to make some money and/or draw attention to themselves. When it gets to the point that actual evidence is asked for, the cases get dropped.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Right on the 40 day deadline (Jan 17th) Mr Juroviesky has filed a new statement of claim! The document hasn't yet been posted online so we can't see whether it contains any actual evidence, but on recent performance I am not too hopeful.

    What happens next, I wonder? I can't imagine the process will repeat a third time, so I expect the judge will have to make a decision on whether to grant the motion to strike.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 2
  11. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    • Informative Informative x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    The amended claim is now online at http://www.aerialdischargeclassaction.ca/uploads/files/Amended Statement of Claim Jan 17 2017.pdf (and attached to this post).

    Still no actual evidence that I can see. A list of times (no photographs, registration numbers, airlines or even aircraft types) when planes were seen leaving trails. They even include mind control as one of the possible motives!

    and again:

    They also mention "Project Cloverleaf", which as far as I can ascertain is an ancient internet hoax? That was the story that originated with AC Griffith, right? https://cloverleafsky.wordpress.com/category/ac-griffith/

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 3, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Why do you think that? The defendant didn't reply to the amended claim. Doesn't that mean the lawsuit should continue?
  15. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    I'm not too sure how these things work, but I took it to mean that it is being referred back to the judge for a final decision, and he will probably decide that the amended claim doesn't answer the criticisms made in the motion to strike, and that therefore the motion to strike should be upheld. Or at least that's what I would do!

    A reminder of what the judge said when upholding the original motion to strike (with leave to appeal)

    http://www.aerialdischargeclassaction.ca/uploads/files/Federal Court Decision Dec 8 2016).pdf

    It is clear that the amended claim does not comply with the rules as stated.

    Edit: as far as I can tell, no further response from the defendant was required, in that decision quoted above. The judge made his decision, and offered the plaintiff an appeal to "salvage" his claim. I believe (though I am certainly not a Canadian law expert!) that the final decision on whether the amended claim is good enough is purely down to the judge now. I suppose it's possible that he could allow the claim to proceed, but from reading his criticisms of the original claim, alongside the amended one, I find it very hard to see that happening.
    Last edited: May 5, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    But apparently they were waiting for something, as nothing happened for more than 3 months, and now they say "Sending the file for Direction to the Case Management Judge, as no further action has been taken by the parties."
  17. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Yes, the delay does seem a bit puzzling. The decision made in December doesn't say that the defendant had to file another motion to strike in response to the amended claim. Perhaps they had the option to do so, and the deadline has now elapsed. Hopefully all will become clear before long with a final judgement.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Looks like the judge himself doesn't know what to do next:
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    It's still dragging on.

    • Informative Informative x 2
  20. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Conference call scheduled for next Tuesday:

    • Informative Informative x 3