The approach sounds awfully passive. Can't the case be litigated
more aggressively to force GWP to set forth the facts support its
claims?

--- In gentlewindvictims@yahoogroups.com, "jfbergin" <jfbergin@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> The latest in the Millers / Gentle Wind Project's lawsuits against
> us has now been scheduled for trial in October or November 2006 in
> York County (Maine State) Superior Court, Alfred, ME. This state
> lawsuit follows upon the Millers / GWP's January 6, 2006 dismissal
> from Maine District Federal Court where they filed their first
> lawsuit in May 2004.
>
> The new lawsuit will be heard by Maine Superior Court Justice G.
> Arthur Brennan and by a Maine jury. According to the Court
> schedule, the Millers (Plaintiffs) have one opportunity for a
> settlement offer prior to trial. After that, they'll "have their
> day in court" on what they initiated two years ago against us and
> other defendants.
>
> Gentle Wind Project leaders filing the lawsuit are the Plaintiffs,
> John–AKA "Tubby" Miller; Moe–AKA Mo, Olivia, Claudia Panuthos,
> Mary Elizabeth Carreiro (Panuthos/Silver/Carreiro/Miller); Carol-
> AKA Max, Mapes Miller; Shelly–AKA Dianne, Mugsie, Shelbourne
> (Boyce/Koster/Miller); Pam–AKA Colleen Ranheim; Joan Carreiro;
> and Gentle Wind Project.
>
> Rather than filing Motions for Dismissal, or Summary Judgment, it
is
> important for us to go to trial since there are contested facts.
>
> A few of the contested facts are:
>
> The Millers et al contend that we defamed them by reporting – in
our
> personal stories about our 17 years as followers of the Millers /
> GWP – that there was group sexual activity (called "energy work")
> among the leaders and followers and that followers were told that
> this "energy work" would bring the designs for new GWP "healing
> instruments" from the "spirit world" to the GWP leader,
John "Tubby"
> Miller. The Millers et al have each denied, under oath during
> depositions, that group sexual activity of any kind took place
among
> GWP members / followers.
>
> The Millers et al also deny that Gentle Wind Project is a cult,
and
> they claim in their promotional material that they have "clinical
> research" on the effectiveness of their "healing instruments" and
> that this "research" meets scientific standards. Based on our
years
> of association with GWP, as followers and board members, we
disagree
> with their cult denials, and have shown how the GWP so-called
> research is anecdotal and/or conducted by GWP believers. This is
> all described in our personal reports at:
> http://www.windofchanges.org/InsidersStories.html and at:
> http://www.windofchanges.org/HusbandsPerspective.html
>
> A copy of the Millers' et al latest lawsuit is at the bottom of
the
> page at our public interest website, Wind of Changes, for anyone
> interested in GWP: http://www.windofchanges.org. Their remaining
> pleadings against us are state claims such as defamation. We have
> filed Counterclaims against the Millers et al, which can be read
at:
> http://www.windofchanges.org/counterclaims.html
>
> The Alfred, Maine courthouse isn't large by big city standards,
but
> seating is open to the public should anyone want to get a close-up
> view of the Gentle Wind Project and the Millers' offense/defense.
>
> We are being represented by skilled attorneys of Drummond, Woodsum
&
> MacMahon, Portland, ME: http://www.dwmlaw.com – Jerrol Crouter,
> Esq., Managing Director of the firm, and Brian Willing, Esq.
>
> We have also received excellent pro bono legal assistance from,
> among others, The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at
Harvard
> Law School: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/home?
> wid=10&func=viewSubmission&sid=893 . Together, our attorneys won a
> Motion for Summary Judgment against GWP/the Millers when Senior
> District (Federal) Court Judge Gene Carter dismissed GWP's RICO
> (racketeering) Federal claim against us in January.
>
> The Millers' second attempt at a Federal claim – the Lanham Act –
> was dismissed early in their Federal lawsuit by Judge Carter. In
> fact, the Magistrate Judge dismissed their entire lawsuit
initially,
> and then the Millers filed an Amended Claim and squeaked by on a
> technicality for the RICO claim, which required an additional year
> of motions, depositions, etc, before it was summarily dismissed
this
> year.
>
> The Millers et al are represented by Portland law firm Verrill &
> Dana (James Goggin, Esq., Dan Rosenthal, Esq., Suzannah Pogue,
Esq.)
> to file their "convoluted" (in the words of Senior District Judge
> Gene Carter) lawsuits against us and originally against Rick Ross
of
> Rick Ross Institute, Steve Gamble of Equilibra, Ian Mander of New
> Zealand Cult List, Ivan Fraser of The Truth Campaign, and Steve
> Hassan of Freedom of Mind – all who have public service websites
> where our original stories or links were posted, or other opinions
> on the cult-like aspects of GWP.
>
> Ian Mander was also sued again by the Millers, and has not
> responded; repeating his seemingly complete disregard for their
> continuous lawsuits from his vantage point in New Zealand – where
> the legal system apparently discourages lawsuits by sanctioning
> litigious Plaintiffs who are shown to be misusing the law.
>