1. Marin B

    Marin B Active Member

    This is interesting, Doc No. 52

    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    Looks like it has been dismissed

    • Informative Informative x 2
  3. Critical Thinker

    Critical Thinker Senior Member

    Knowing of Herndon's history of retracted studies and flawed data it is not a surprise, it would be interesting to know the Judge's reasoning with the dismissal of the request to have Herndon's 'expert affidavit' admitted. Would the reasoning be available to the public via the "Interlocutory Decision Certificate of Order entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1379 page(s) 336 - 336"?
  4. Marin B

    Marin B Active Member

    It looks like only final decisions are available on-line. The one linked below (assuming link works) was an initial decision dismissing the case back in December 2016, but with the opportunity for the plaintiff to amend his claims (which he did, and thus the case is still going).

  5. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    And on it drags...

  6. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Is there any limit to the number of appeals? It see,s like each fresh dismissal gets appealed. At what point does the whole thing get thrown out?
  7. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    Can anyone figure out what is going on with this? I tried following it but I don't speak legalese and just went round in circles and disappeared up my own litigation
  8. Svartbjørn

    Svartbjørn Senior Member

    Its up to each judge to decide how many times the plaintiff gets to amend their claim. If the Judge says that specific things in the claim have to be amended or changed in order for the proceedings to continue, and the claimant/plaintiff does so to the judge's satisfaction, then its on to the next thing and so on. If, on the other hand, the Judge decides that its going to be a waste of time and money (primarily the plaintiff's) then they'll put a kibosh on the whole thing.

    Right now, this case looks like its back in the "pleading" Phase.. where you're literally "pleading your case" to the judge. Its all paperwork, filings etc, which is why it tends to drag out.

    The case doesnt really start until you get into the "discovery" or "pretrial" phase, which is where the vast majority of the money that gets spent comes into play. This is where all the evidence is examined, claims are researched, depositions and interrogations take place etc. As for the number of appeals, its generally one appeal per court. So if you start at the bottom and there are 7 "superior" courts above the court that provided the ruling, -generally- speaking you can appeal 7 more times depending on the judge and whether or not they find grounds for an appeal.

    Its a really convoluted system. It looks and sounds easy on paper, but in practice its an absolute quagmire.
  9. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    I see that some more documents have made it onto the "Aerial Discharge Class Action" website now.


    Here is the judge's decision to refuse Herndon's affidavit: http://aerialdischargeclassaction.ca/uploads/files/Pelletier 2018 fc 805.pdf (also attached to this post).

    Essentially Herndon's claims (a) should have been filed earlier, (b) don't relate to Canada and (c) don't contain any evidence or proof. Herndon's expertise is also called into question:

    And costs of the motion have been awarded to the defendant.

    Unsurprisingly, the plaintiff has appealed against the decision, and so it goes on... http://aerialdischargeclassaction.ca/uploads/files/A-249-18 App WA Nov 26 2018 (002).pdf

    An interesting strategy, claiming that looking at photos of contrails counts as "testing". :rolleyes:

    The appeal document also seems to confirm that the cost of Herndon's publishing fees is being picked up by Environmental Voices California, a chemtrail-peddling site that tries to dress itself up as a legitimate environmental activism group. The founder of that site is Deborah J. Whitman, whose Facebook page is full of chemtrail and antivax stuff.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Mar 27, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    If that is an argument, then they might want to consider the paper by Shearer, et al, "Quantifying expert consensus against the existence of a secret, large-scale atmospheric spraying program" https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/084011
    Wherein photos of contrails that were supposedly "chemtrails" were shown to 49 contrail experts, who unanimously identified them as contrails.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Critical Thinker

    Critical Thinker Senior Member

    Is there any sort of financial disclosure information regarding their (Environmental Voices California) revenue and expenses? They seem to have a nonprofit status.

  12. Marin B

    Marin B Active Member

    • Like Like x 1