Digger's Doings

Scrutiny is a Beautiful Thing

Ah summertime! Time to rest, relax, read 21-page documents in greater detail...

     So I read through Randall Terry's 21-page explanation for why Troy Newman did him wrong. It's an interesting work that probably would have benefited from some grammatical editing (phrases such as "unearned noteriety" and "enjoy noteriety" would be hyysterically funny were they not being used in a document to argue for a legal cause of action).

     The document answers a good many questions but also raises some. I'll list mine here but would ask you, the reader, to peruse the document yourself and see if it helps you better understand the facts of the case.

     It is no secret that Terry can speak in such a way as to rally people to his cause. This is a gift that served him well in his Operation Rescue work. It does not always serve him well when he is trying to lay out a legal argument  for why he should be able to retrieve a trademark he says is rightly his.

     I think that, while Terry has a personal beef with several pro-life leaders over remarks they made both verbally and in writing during his divorce and remarriage, he should not try to settle that beef in the midst of arguing for his trademark. There are better times and venues for settling that matter (assuming it's even possible to do so). 

Now onto the questions:

       1. According to the www.operationrescuetheft.com website, Terry filed a  Business Certificate with the state of New York for the use of the name Operation Rescue in 1988. Yet, according to his personal defending document (described to distinguish it from his filed legal documentation), he did not apply for a trademark for the name until April of 2007. Why an almost twenty-year delay between the two actions? This could bolster Newman's argument, supported by the legal documents he filed to acquire the trademark that, at the time he filed, there was no other trademark for the name Operation Rescue and that the name, therefore, was not in use - at least not as a trademark.

       2. In several places in Terry's document, he clearly identifies Operation Rescue National as a "separate legal entity and organization" (pg. 2) and a "distinct and separate legal entity" (pg. 7). He descibes how he would attend Operation Rescue National events as the founder of Operation Rescue. So my questons would be: Who, if anyone, is the President of Operation Rescue? Who, if anyone, is the President of Operation Rescue National? What rights do these individuals have over the name and the organization? Can these presidents legally pass on their titles and organizations to others?

       3. Terry expressed "surprise" (pg. 8) that Keith Tucci had passed leadership of ORN to Flip Benham. He did not know prior to it happening that a transfer of leadership of ORN was in the works. This was not a case of one of the local affiliates such as Operation Rescue Atlanta or Operation Rescue Boston picking a new leader but the national organization doing so without informing Terry beforehand or seeking his input. How is this possible? Is Flip Benhan legitimately authorized to be the leader of ORN? Or was he put into place outside of Terry's authority? Considering the somewhat public acrimonious relationship between the two men, would Terry be inclined to remove Benham from leadership and, if so, would he have the legal authority to do it?

     The document makes several statements that, while inflammatory, may or may not have a ring of truth to them. They should be examined more closely:

     On page 16, Terry states that Newman, by his own admission, recognized that the name Operation Rescue could have both monetary and media benefits. According to Terry, it has, in fact, enabled Newman to raise "hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars". Terry then argues that this is all about money - filthy lucre! To an extent I will give him this argument. However, not all lucre is filthy. Terry has not argued that the money being raised is being used to Newman's personal benefit. So how is Newman using the money raised through his use of the Operation Rescue name? Is he using it in a way that is consistent with the mission of Operation Rescue? If so, would that be a "filthy" use of lucre?

     One of the statements that seems to offend many people (including both myself and one of the anonymous posters) is that Terry is "the only pro-life leader that has actually lost everything to the child-killers" (pg. 18). I would agree that, as the "founder" of OR, Terry has probably lost a lot more than most people.  But everything? He seems to be in good health. He has been able to travel and seek higher education for himself. He has a very nice roof over his head. He has a church family that seems to support him. He has a large family and, while some of those relationships are strained, did the child-killers strain them or did the people in the relationships themselves do so?

     How many other rescuers can say they are doing as well as Terry since ending their involvement in rescue? I know I can't. The rescuers I still see or hear from can't. If you are reading this and used to rescue, I would love to hear about how your life has been affected, for better or for worse (or some combination of both) by your involvement in rescue. I'm not suggesting that anyone regrets their involvement in rescue but most people realize that this involvement came with a cost - a cost they, for the most part, gladly and quietly bear.