isn't Ray one of the people who contributed to "the Secret"? He is trying to portray himself as unfairly persecuted. Well, how is that "law of attraction" working for you, Ray? I guess you aren't thinking positive enough, huh? If these gurus continue to be extended credibility by Oprah, more death and damage will occur. This has to be stopped!

A "Guilty" finding by the jury will go a long way in putting the brakes on these LGAT fiends.

I agree Kalista, it was hard to watch the defense cross examine Dr Bunn..I think they knew that Dr. Bunn was kicking Ray's butt so they had to try and discredit her..Beverly Bunn was AWESOME!!

[prescottdailycourier.com]

From the article above:

The day's final witness, Laurie Gennari, had a starkly different take on the events of the week. She had attended several of Ray's previous seminars and said "there was always some little thing I would latch onto and I thought, that was good, maybe he'll get to the better stuff next time."

But from the moment she arrived at the Spiritual Warrior camp, for which she had paid more than $11,000 including room and board, she felt forced, even bullied, into following Ray's orders.
Her take on one of Ray's catch phrases, "play full-on," "mostly meant to me, do as he says."

She said she felt sleep-deprived and usually hungry, and after seeing people "just shot down" for questioning Ray, she decided that she was "pretty much going to keep my head down and stay off the radar by going along and not making waves."

Because she felt afraid to need an unscheduled bathroom break, she largely ignored Ray's weeklong urging that the participants hydrate thoroughly.

The sweat lodge experience was not a pleasant one for Gennari, who sat near her friend Laura Tucker and Liz Neuman. She noticed that Neuman was having trouble but, near the end of the ceremony, decided she had to leave.

As she neared the exit to the lodge, though, she said Ray told her she was too late, that she must wait until the next round was over before she could leave.
At the end, she said she "blacked out" while trying to leave and was dragged out of the lodge. After hearing of Neuman's illness and death, she said she questioned herself incessantly, and that even though she herself was weakened by the vegetarian diet, the lack of sleep and other elements, she laments she didn't do more to help.

"There's another part of me," she said, "that says why didn't you pick (Neuman) up and drag her out of there?"

Testimony in the trial, which is expected to last until early June, is set to resume Tuesday.


Interesting. I think some of the experienced posters here may verify this, but isn't this classic cult/LGAT philosophy, that is to weaken the people mentally with a low-protein diet and sleep-deprivation so they can't think straight so you can control them easier with hyponosis and suggestions?



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2011 06:02AM by Sparky.

yep, low-protein diet and sleep-deprivation, very standard stuff.

"playing all out" is stolen from Tony Robbins, that means following orders/suggestions, and "maxing all out" your lines of credit, buying the Gurus worthless junk, stolen from other Gurus.

James Ray was recklessly doing all the basic and some advanced techniques, on people who don't know about these things.
Oprah made it all possible, by putting him on her show. Oprah knows a conman when she sees one. But she still puts them on her show, and FORBIDS critical analysis of their methods.
Why?

That is the unasked billion dollar question, that has cost many people their life savings and some their lives.

@Anticult: Yes, plus the long term health effects some of these participants may experience, and how could they ever prove it's from the sweat lodge? SAD. My prayers go out to all of those affected, and I wish I could do more.

Luckily, the defense is doing an idiotic job, in my humble opinion. One example: Comparing the courtroom and Judge Darrow to the sweat lodge and James Ray. (what??) LOL!

The Defense tires desperately to separate Death Ray from the "corporate structure":

[www.dcourier.com]

From the article:

And even though (defense attorney Tom) Kelly might have made his point with the jury, any sense of vindication for his client may have been short-lived.

When it came time for her re-direct examination, Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk went straight to the heart of the issue, reminding the jury through Martin that it was Ray - and not his company - who told the participants the rules of the sweat lodge ceremony, who called for the number of hot rocks to be thrown into the pit, who in fact controlled every detail of the event.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2011 04:16AM by Sparky.

bump

[www.dcourier.com]

From the article:

Further complicating this latest evidentiary issue is the fact that the state intends to call Maricopa County Medical Examiner Dr. Robert Lyon today. Lyon performed autopsies on Brown and Shore, concluding that both had died from heatstroke. Convincing the jury that the victims died that way appears to be the state's best chance at convicting Ray, whom they say recklessly disregarded the risks involved in his very hot sweat lodge ceremony.Defense attorney Truc Do argued that she should be granted more time to prepare for her cross-examination of Lyon now that the doctor has had time to assimilate knowledge of the organophosphate defense.

Prosecution co-counsel Bill Hughes argued in turn that an expert witness must be allowed to modify his testimony as new information becomes available. He also said he intends to ask Lyon about a 2005 incident at a Ray-led sweat lodge in which one man went to the hospital. Darrow has previously and repeatedly ruled that evidence from past sweat lodges is inadmissible, except in narrowly defined legal circumstances, which Hughes said he intends to meet.

----------------------------


Ray may have a good defense team, but it looks like the prosecution is swinging for the fences.

I think the orange jumpsuit is a good look for you, Death Ray. Make sure to kiss your cellmate "Bubba" goodnight for the next 20 years.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2011 09:23PM by Sparky.

I found expanded commentary on this organophosphate defence issue which makes interesting reading re the defence tactics of clouding the issues. The entire article is on this blog:

[celestial-reflections.blogspot.com]


'Having actually moved through two witnesses today -- a record for this trial -- the prosecution was prepared to bring in the next witness on the schedule but the defense objected. The witness in question is Michael Hamilton, who, with his wife Amayra, owns Angel Valley Ranch; the site of this horrific tragedy. The defense's objection stems from the Hamiltons' recent contact with Det. Diskin and their turning over materials pertaining to the poisoning issue. These include some photos of rat poison, information about the wood that was used in the fire, and so forth.

The defense's contention is that the prosecution has violated Judge Darrow's order by allowing communication between witnesses -- Diskin is also expected to testify -- and tipping off upcoming witnesses to trial proceedings that they are not allowed to hear. The defense is also outraged that they only received disclosure notification about this last night, on the eve of Michael Hamilton's scheduled testimony.

Tom Kelly requested the opportunity to question Det. Diskin as to what transpired in conversation with Hamiltons so that he can learn the scope of this egregious impropriety.

The story from the prosecution is, naturally, quite different. There was nothing improper, according to Sheila Polk. The entire thing had been cleared with Judge Darrow beforehand. The prosecution was gathering additional information to address the question of pesticide poisoning that has been presented by the defense. The prosecution contends that this is perfectly appropriate and that this is why the state has a "case agent" available to them; in this case Det. Diskin.

Polk also clarified that they did not, in fact, disclose the materials from the Hamiltons on the eve of Michael Hamilton's scheduled appearance. As is their practice, they emailed the photos and other materials as soon as they had them last week. They then followed up with the formal disclosure which was sent yesterday.

Polk fully recognizes that the organophosphate question is a red herring for which no real evidence will ever be presented but that this is what a strong defense does. There is nothing wrong with it. It is their job to create reasonable doubt. Likewise, it is the job of the prosecution to respond to the defense's case, as it develops, by gathering any necessary information.

To Kelly's claim that the prosecution had seventeen months to get their ducks in a row and gather the necessary evidence, Polk explains that the claim of organophospates was sprung on the prosecution in the defense's opening argument. There is almost no mention of organophospates in the existing evidence.

Worse, their references to an EMT suggesting organophosphates as a cause is "classic hearsay." The unidentified voice is in the background on a recording that was transcribed by the defense. The owner of that voice has never been located. He can, therefore, never be called to testify. He can never be cross examined. And yet the defense has referred to this nameless, faceless entity repeatedly, including in its attempts to confuse the medical personal testifying. (And it occurs to me, that by Do's own standard, as outlined to Mr. Swedberg, an EMT isn't even qualified to assess the cause of death and injury.)
Polk also asserts that the defense withheld the witness, Dr. Paul, who theorized organophosphates. The prosecution, despite repeated requests to interview him, was only granted that interview in January of this year. And his claim of organophosphates only came out in that interview. It wasn't even in his original report.

The state, Polk offers, would have tested samples for organophospates if the defense had disclosed their contention in a timely manner, rather than springing this tactic on them during the trial.

Medical records do not cite organophosphates. The only contention of organophosphate poisoning comes from the hearsay in recorded background noise and defense expert Dr. Paul.

The defense never interviewed Hamiltons and at no point asked them about their pesticides; organophosphate or otherwise.

To this rather solidly reasoned argument, Kelly replied, "We have just turned the Constitution on its head."

Dare I say it? I think Mr. Kelly is something of an exaggerator.

Once again, the argument is that the prosecution should have anticipated the defense's argument. In fact, due diligence would require that they disclose all evidence that supports the defense's contention. By not doing so, they have failed to disclose exculpatory evidence. And they should have interviewed their witness Dr. Cutshall and disclosed to the defense that he could not say "to a medical degree of certainty" that it was heat stroke. This, of course, misstates what Dr. Cudshall said. Do asked him if he could rule out organophosphates with certainty. He agreed that he could not.

Let's unpack this, as Do would say. There is a big difference between not being able to exclude another possibility with certainty and being something other than reasonably certain of the conclusion you've already drawn; in this case, heat stroke. There is no such thing as absolute certainty in medicine. To say that no other possibility exists would be bad medicine and bad science. And the law recognizes that, requiring only a "reasonable medical certainty."


While there must be more than a bare possibility, the law does recognize that a degree of uncertainty is present in almost every medical opinion.

It's one thing to try to confuse the jury with these tactics. That's just a defense attorney doing her job. But to try to confuse a sitting judge? That takes guts.

Judge Darrow appears to be leaning toward the prosecution's position, explaining that his order was designed to keep witnesses from discussing information with each other, especially because of the trial being broadcast. It was never intended to preclude communication between attorneys and witnesses and he seemed a little shocked that Kelly might be suggesting that.

And once again the defense's tactics tried the judge's patience. At various points he ordered both Li and Do to "sit down."

I expect some sort of ruling will be forthcoming tomorrow morning as this and other issues continue to be hashed out.

One other intriguing piece of information emerged during this motion hearing. In reference to defense expert Dr. Paul, Do explained that in his original report he concluded that a finding of heat stroke was inconsistent and pointed to a "secondary process." He did not, at that time, cite organophosphates. That came out later. She connects this later deduction to organophosphates, however. If that's the case, I wonder what he thinks is the primary cause. Because a secondary process or cause is just that. It's an exacerbating factor.

From the medical dictionary:


secondary cause

a factor that assists the primary cause. A cause of secondary importance.

I'm starting to wonder just how strong a witness Dr. Paul is going to be for the defense.'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2011 11:13PM by Stoic.