jail in defense of free speech because that is the fabric

MR. POPE: May it please the Court, Your Honor.
The Respondents have never filed any kind of a motion to join any other party in this matter.

When you entered your order, your initial order in December of 1999,
you entered an injunction against Richard Howd, and you
made it binding, in Paragraph 6, on his officers, agents,
servants, employees and on those persons in active concert
or participation with him who receive actual notice of this
injunction.

The local Scientology organization took that to
mean that they were bound by this injunction and they have
complied with it ever since.

We came in here in February of 2000 and in
effect had a second trial which expanded the matter out
because of other things that had developed since they had a
Minton episode in front of the Fort Harrison Hotel.

Now, let me just give you what is boilerplate
hornbook law on injunctions, because what Mr. Merrett has
done is he’s come in here and suggested that what we’re
trying to do is modify the injunction. That’s not true.
And the law makes a distinction between continuing an
injunction, modifying an injunction and dissolving an
injunction.