[…] 1
L: Do you know any other executives who left Scientology who would have knowledge of Scientology’s criminal activities?
J: No.
L: Mark Yeager?
219
J: Has left?
L: I didn’t know if he was still in or not.
J: That’s the point.
L: Does anyone know if he’s still in?
J: Not me.
L: What about Terry Gamboa?
J: Terry Gamboa would know, Janis Grady would know.
L: They would have known?
J: Janis not so much, but Terry Gamboa would.
L: The type of criminal activity she would be most familiar with?
J: Finance, corporate shenanigans, corporate integrity.
L: Anyone else that you know or has heard of that has left that… Or let me ask this another way, when you were in, what factors were they most worried about?
J: Gerry Armstrong, Lawrence Wollersheim, that girl up in Portland, the Portland case…
L: Julie Titchbourne?
J: Julie Titchbourne?
L: Any other staff?
J: David Mayo.
L: David Mayo.
J: Bent Corydon.
L: Bent Corydon. OK. You have mentioned before that David Miscavige, Norman Starkey, Lyman Spurlock and Marty Rathburn are the four that are most knowledgeable and most involved in Scientology’s past and current criminal activities. Beside those four, you also mentioned a…
J: Ben Shaw.
220
L: Ben Shaw. What other executives are…
J: Jeff Schriver, as far as the black ops thing. Gary Klinger.
L: Gary Klinger. The people that deal with the most secret stuff in Scientology.
J: Marine Bergatti.
L: Marine Bergatti, she’s out of England?
J: Right.
L: She makes regular trips in and out of the United States, has a passport?
J: Wendell Reynolds would know finance. He could tell you, because he did the whole thing.
L: He would have knowledge related to the IRS.
J: Another secret little person in the back that’s right up there, that’s maybe a notch and a half below David Miscavige is Mark Ingber.
L: He would have knowledge about criminal activity?
J: Financial criminal activities.
L: Any of the other top executives that you know that would be the ones most knowledgeable or most involved in criminal activity going on inside of Scientology?
J: No, I think that covers it all.
L: Besides Marty Rathburn being the weakest link and most likely to possibly turn states’ evidence or leave, rather than go to jail himself when they start prosecuting these crimes, is there anyone else in that group of people that you think would be the second most likely person that would say, “I’m not going to jail for all this.”
J: Lyman Spurlock.
L: Lyman Spurlock, why do you say that?
J: Because he is loaded with crimes, he’s loaded with doing the corporate, I mean, as a matter of fact, Dave Miscavige and Norman could easily point their finger to him and say, “He did it.” It’s not real to people how these people operate under orders, but, because by his hand a lot of things happened.
221
L: Do you think they would set it up that way that if something happened, you know, the old Mary Sue was not following policy, this is the renegade in the organization. Do you believe that if David Miscavige or Starkey could avoid the criminal charges and frame one of these other people, would they be loyal or would the frame them?
J: They would frame them in a heartbeat. Like I said, Scientology has a theory, a bent theory. We’ve seen L. Ron Hubbard’s wife go to jail based on orders he was having her execute. So, there is no dignity.
Factnet interview with Jesse Prince (August 26, 1998)
L: OK. Let’s go on with the next one.1
J: [Reading] “Anyone who was fair game or had their reputation destroyed by Scientology.” The people that I know who were definitely fair game was even mentioned.
L: They actually said it within the organization, that somebody was fair game?
J: Yeah.
L: Who said?
J: Marty Rathburn, David Miscavige.
L: Who did they say was fair game?
J: Lawrence Wollersheim, Gerry Armstrong.
L: You actually heard that. What time did they say this? What year?
J: This was during the period of time where there was litigation going between these two litigates.
L: For years Scientology has been saying they canceled the fair game, they don’t do that anymore, that doesn’t exist, and you actually heard them call Lawrence Wollersheim and Gerry Armstrong fair game?
J: Yep.
L: Anything else on that, any other people that you heard them..?
J: Somebody re-wrote the fair game policy. I remember I was there when that happened, because the argument being is that, “Yes, there is still fair game, but public-relations-wise there are some things that are ‘misinterpreted’ in the original policy, so we’ll take them out, but the meaning is there, what you do to these people who are fair game.”
L: Was this altered with L. Ron Hubbard’s approval, or was he dead by them?
J: I was say he was pretty incoherent by then. That was right around all the probate time, all of this kind of stuff. I do believe that Vaughn Young is the person that wrote it, re-wrote it.
111
[…]
137J: Okey Dokey. Let me just see where I am. Uh, Talking about #62 here. [Reading] “Scientology and/or its attorney using confidentialmaterials, disclosures, or confessionsgiven to Scientology by members for blackmail to silence or intimidate the individual?”L: You already mentioned David Mayo.J: Right, OK.L: Anyone else? Did you ever hear them talk? Did you ever hear them say, “Go get his PC folders and get everything out of his folders that the PI’s can use”?J: Yes.L: Who said that to who?J: Marty, I heard Marty Rathburn say it about you, and David Miscavige was sitting there. I heard him say it about Armstrong. Margery Wakefield. I heard him say, Marty saying he had some document that she was already crazy when she came in. Bent Corydon comes up too.L: So, Scientology on the one hand says that these are confidential confessions and they will never ever use them. That’s what they tell the members who are confessing their most deep and intimate secrets, secrets that could damage their lives if they ever became public or known or completely humiliate and embarrass them.J: Right.L: Scientology says, “We’ll never do that.”J: It willfully does it at every occasion.L: And whenever these situations that you saw with Miscavige in the room and Rathburn ordering the contents of a person’s PC file, incriminating information being given to a —J: The OSA people would go through and all the person’s OW write-ups would be pulled out of the person’s pre-clear folder.L: His evil intentions?J: Yeah.L: His rock slams, his sec checks, his OW processing?J: Right.
Notes
- Document source: http://www.xenu-directory.net/news/images/1998-interviews-prince.pdf ↩
Affidavit of Jesse Prince (July 27, 1998. Modified August 14, 1998)
AFFIDAVIT OF Jesse Prince
I, Jesse Prince declare as follows:
1. I am over 18 years of age and currently reside in the state of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. This declaration is of my own personal knowledge and if called upon to testify to the facts herein I could and would be competently able to testify thereto.
2. I am intimately familiar with the Scientology organization, movement and beliefs because I was in Scientology for 16 years (1976-92) and served in the highest ranks, including as the second in command of the Religious Technology Center (RTC). At that time, my position was “Deputy Inspector General, External” which meant being in charge of all activities outside the body of Scientology. This included being in charge of all litigation by or against any Scientology organization, intelligence (spying, covert operations) brought against perceived or imagined “enemies” (which ranged from critics to media to the courts), trademark registrations, and the licensing of trademarks to other Scientology organizations, which was how we tightly controlled all Scientology corporations while creating the false impression of “corporate integrity.”
3. It is incumbent on this and every court, as well as the authorities, to realize the amount of deception, chicanery, lying, manipulation and outright criminality that Scientology will employ to hide the truth about their criminal activities. They will spend any amount of money to do this. I know because I was part of it for years. I received orders to break the law. I issued orders to break the law. I got others to break the law, and then I helped to hide these criminal activities just as they are hiding them now.
4. In fact, this tactic is one of the most coercive used by the Scientology hierarchy: to involve members in criminal acts for which they are then liable, which then prevents the person from speaking out. Even if the member manages to leave or flee, they will be reluctant to speak to the courts or the authorities because they were part of criminal activities. Plus the organization is ready to use Mafia-like tactics to threaten an ex-member if the hierarchy is afraid of their testimony. If the ex-member does speak, the organization will claim no knowledge and blames the individual, calling them a criminal when that person was doing nothing more than following orders under duress.
5. Members of Scientology are induced to confess to acts that, if not outright criminal, are embarrassing or possibly destructive to the person’s job, marriage or profession, for example, shoplifting, adultery, masturbation, or drug abuse. The member is urged to write these down in their own handwriting, under the guise that it is a “religious confessional” for the member’s good. The truth is that these “confessions” are kept to blackmail and extort the member should they dare to speak out. The member is also coerced to sign documents that are self-damaging while protecting the organization, solely in case the member dares to leave their control and speak the truth. I know because I watched this done to others, I did it to others and it was done to me. That is why I respectfully urge this court to recognize Scientology’s tactics and treat them for what they are: criminal deceit to defraud this court at any cost.
6. For the past five years since I fled Scientology, I have been silent because it was my intent to create a new life for myself, away from their obsessive control, and it required all the energy that I could muster to do that. About two weeks ago, I finally became curious as to what was happening within the Scientology world and I used the Internet to look up Scientology and was stunned to discover former friends who had also left and the conflicts being waged in the courts. I contacted one (Stacy Young) who had been a close friend for many years in the cult who told me what had been happening, with former members fighting to have the abuses and the criminality exposed.
7. Because I have intimate and personal knowledge of issues in this case, she put me in touch with attorney Dan Leipold and I traveled to his offices in Santa Ana, California. After speaking with him and others, I realized that this level of criminal fraud and deceit can no longer continue without opposition. I could no longer remain silent, regardless of their terrorism. I offered to tell the court how Scientology really operates with trademarks, copyrights and the courts. In fact, I am doing this at the risk of enduring the hate campaign this pseudo-religion will wage against me, as they have against others, including judges.
8. Let me begin with some basic information about my own Scientology history:
I first became involved with Scientology in September 1976, in San Francisco. In late 1976 I joined the elite Scientology paramilitary organization known as the Sea Organization, also known as the “Sea Org” or the acronym “SO.” The Sea Organization is the actual nexus that controls the Scientology empire. Sea Organization personnel are authorized to take over and control Scientology organizations and to demote personnel, move bank accounts and run the corporation as if the SO personnel were employees or representatives of that corporation but they are not. This is true if the organization was part of the “Church of Scientology” or one of the secular areas such as Bridge Publications. This is possible because the only personnel allowed into executive positions in these organization are those who are in full agreement that the Sea Organization is the commanding organization. This weeding out process guarantees there will be no executives who will resist or protect their corporate integrity. This is how the Sea Organization can operate with impunity, and continue to claim that it is merely a “fraternal organization.” The Sea Organization is a “fraternal organization” the way the Cosa Nostra is.
9. Before I was recruited into the Religious Technology Center (RTC) in 1982, most of my experience was with Scientology technical material; the actual codified techniques used within the organization. This gave me considerable time to become familiar with the material, most of which was written by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. It was that familiarity that prompted my promotion to a technical position at RTC.
10. Physically, I was transferred to and lived and worked at what is known as “Golden Era Studios,” near Hemet, California. It is also known as “Gold” or simply “the base.” RTC’s presence at Gold was fully known to all at the base, but was kept hidden from all others, to try to make it appear that Gold was merely a movie/tape production studio when really the movie/tape production is nothing but a front to mask, hide and protect the top of Scientology’s actual power structure so they cannot be served with subpoenas. (The security system is more befitting a top secret military installation, with its motion detectors, buried sensors, high-speed cameras, night cameras, guards on motorcycles, and barbed wire fences wired to detect anyone touching it etc.)
RTC was at that time the most senior, most powerful and most influential organization in all of Scientology. All at RTC were Sea Org members, as are all at the base. But because of RTC’s position, we were the elite at the base.
11. In March 1983, I became the Deputy Inspector General, External, and a member of the Board of Directors for RTC, as Treasurer. (The only other board members were Warren McShane as Secretary and Vicki Aznaran as President, during this time.) At the time I was appointed a member of the Board of Directors of RTC I was forced to sign an undated letter of resignation. This is standard practice with all Scientology board members and is another means by which the Scientology corporations are controlled while giving the appearance of corporate integrity.
12. In that capacity for the next few years, I traveled about the US and outside of the US on behalf of RTC. I traveled to Germany, Italy, Australia, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Mexico and Canada, with several trips to some of these countries. These trips were to put together an infrastructure that would then interface with RTC for the purpose of trademarks. I became familiar with the law with regard to each area, interviewed and approved law firms, and put the personnel in place that would report to RTC and be our on-the-ground representatives in dealing with the attorneys etc.
13. When Hubbard died in 1986, there was a power struggle in Scientology for the next 18 or so months that resulted in Hubbard’s closest and most powerful aide (Pat Broeker) being removed. The power was taken over by David Miscavige who purged the organization of anyone who was friendly with Broeker. In mid-1987, I was removed from my position and put under armed guard at Happy Valley, a property the organization owns that is a few miles west of Gold and located deep in the Soboba Indian Reservation. I assume the undated resignation I provided on being appointed to the Board was then dated and used to make it appear that I had resigned, when I had not. After a few months, it was decided that I would not escape and I was given various jobs at Gold but kept under watch. My pay was standard Sea Org pay, $24 per week.
14. I should clarify why I (and others) tolerated such treatment for so long. The ability to tolerate such abusive conditions and treatment are one of the most basic requirements for promotion in the Sea Organization and RTC. We were selected and promoted because we vowed such loyalty and demonstrated it daily. Not unlike a military unit, it is the ability of the Sea Org member to take orders, carry out the assignment and to tolerate self-degrading conditions that ingratiates them to their seniors and to the system. That was why I was promoted so highly and why I then tolerated more. Looking back on it, I cannot believe that I actually tolerated such denigration and such abuse and actually deluded myself that it was for my good as well as the good of others.
15. In late 1991, my wife Monika became pregnant and although we were elated, she was ordered to abort the child. The reason for the abortion order is that Sea Org members were not allowed to have children. The order devastated both my wife and me. Our dedication as Sea Org members clashed violently with our intentions as parents and we went through a personal nightmare with me opposing it, to no avail. She got the abortion and afterwards she was not the same. She was devastated at the impact of what she did and that was when she told me she wanted to leave. We fled, with the organization close behind us, trying to find us. They finally did and convinced us to return so we could “leave properly.”
16. Once they had us again behind the barbwire and watched by security, my wife was threatened that if we did not sign certain papers, she would no longer be able to see her father and her sister, who were both in the Sea Organization.
17. This is another coercive power that the organization wields. Like a police state, it can order and enforce family members to alter their relations, and even get them to turn against each other. Monika and I knew that if the organization said she would be kept from her father and sister (by control over them), that she would not again be able to talk to them or see them, let alone visit. This is called “disconnection” in Scientology. We agreed to sign the papers and were able to leave.
18. On July 26, 1998, one of the cult’s attorneys sent a long fax to Dan Leipold that is their first not-so-veiled threat to me, warning me to be silent. The attorney included the document they prepared for me and that I signed under the conditions I just described. I am attaching his letter and the documents I was forced to sign under duress as my first evidence of what this criminal cult does to silence anyone speaking out. (Exhibit 1). It does not surprise me, as it is a standard tactic, to force a person to create or sign a self-damaging document to use when ready.
19. I have also been privy to the destruction and alteration of documents to protect the group. On or about April of 1983 I was present at a meeting, which took place in Los Angeles, California at a Scientology office called Author Services, Inc. (ASI). ASI presented itself as the “literary agency” for Hubbard but it was actually the top of the Scientology empire at that time. All of Scientology was being directed from ASI in 1982. ASI was where various Scientology corporations went to receive orders.
20. Present at the meeting was David Miscavige, then the chairman of the board of ASI, Vicki Aznaran then the Deputy Inspector General of Religious Technology Center, (RTC) and Lymon Spurlock, who was “Director of Client Affairs” for ASI. Mr. Miscavige expressed concern at this meeting that there might possibly be a raid on Scientology by the IRS. At that time, none of the churches of Scientology had received tax exempt status.
21. One principle reason why tax exempt status had not been granted was the IRS’s position that Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard (LRH) was actually the managing agent of Scientology in complete disregard of the corporate structure of Scientology. We knew this to be a fact but also knew that it violated IRS rules and thus had to be hidden.
22. There was concern that the IRS would obtain the hundreds of daily, weekly and monthly LRH orders written by Mr. Hubbard and distributed throughout Scientology. These orders were commonly referred to in Scientology as “advices” to avoid the appearance that LRH was actually running Scientology. In fact, LRH was running Scientology. The principle concern expressed at this meeting was that the LRH orders or “advices” would be used to name L. Ron Hubbard as the managing agent of Scientology.
23. Because of an already existing fear that an LRH “advice” might fall into the wrong hands, these orders from him were written in a way that we could deny it was from him. His name was not on them. He was never cited in the dispatch except in the third person. There was no signature and a salutation in reply was never more than “Dear Sir.” The routing at the top referred to him merely as “*,” an asterisk. However if a person (or an agency) got enough of these, there would be little doubt that we were in touch with Hubbard (via ASI) and he was telling us and each corporation what to do to make him more money.
24. David Miscavige specifically stated that ASI was “already dealing with the problem”, ridding ASI of any documents that would implicate L. Ron Hubbard as managing agent of Scientology. He stated that under his directive the LRH orders, or “advices”, were being collected and transferred by truck to a Riverside County recycling plant where the documents were to be “pulped”. This method of destruction was considered to be better than shredding. I was also given instructions that I was in charge of purging the remainder of the Scientology organization of LRH orders. This was to include Church of Scientology of California (CSC); Church of Scientology International (CSI); and RTC.
25. Several weeks after this first meeting I attended a second meeting at the ASI offices concerning the continuing destruction of Scientology corporate documentation. In attendance at the second meeting were David Miscavige, Lymon Spurlock, Vicki Aznaran, Norman Starkey and Marty Rathburn. At this meeting, David Miscavige for the first time stated that Scientology had been ordered by a court to produce various documents concerning a former Scientology member named Lawrence Wollersheim who had a lawsuit pending in Los Angeles against the Church of Scientology of California. The court had ordered Scientology to produce Mr. Wollersheim’s entire “preclear” (PC) file.
26. A “PC ” file is one of several files kept on members. The PC file is the file that includes all written records of all “confessionals” done by the member. This means that it includes not only the most self-damaging material but it also reflects every problem the person might have had with the organization, including complaints. This PC file grows with the person’s tenure in Scientology.
27. Mr. Wollersheim’s PC file was several thousand pages in length and stood as high as a six-foot tall man. Initially at this meeting it was decided that Mr. Wollersheim’s PC file would be redacted and culled of any evidence or documentation which might assist Mr. Wollersheim in his lawsuit against CSC. There was also concern that the materials known as Clear, OT I, OT II, OT III and NED for OT’s (NOTS) would be open to public inspection if Mr. Wollersheim’s files were produced as ordered. Scientologists are taught that a person could catch pneumonia and die if that person is prematurely exposed to these “upper level” materials without first having taken many hours of preparatory auditing. Ultimately, approximately 50 pages were produced pursuant to the court order. Mr. Wollersheim’s PC file was culled based on a direct order from David Miscavige.
28. Later, I was informed that a second court order was issued to produce Mr. Wollersheim’s entire file. Faced with the prospect of having to produce the entire file David Miscavige gave orders that the entire file simply be destroyed by being pulped.
29. Pursuant to Mr. Miscavige’s orders I ordered Rick Aznaran to take Mr. Wollersheim’s PC files to the recycling plant in Riverside to be pulped. Several hours after I gave the order to have Mr. Wollersheim’s PC files destroyed, Mr. Aznaran returned and confirmed that the records had been pulped and even showed me a small bottle of pulped material, saying “Here’s what’s left.”
30. The material that David Miscavige ordered destroyed and which Rick Aznaran had pulped was the same material that the court had ordered produced in Mr. Wollersheim’s Los Angeles court case against CSC.
31. In early 1983 I attended a meeting at Scientology’s ASI office in Los Angeles. In attendance at this meeting were David Miscavige, Lymon Spurlock, Vicki Aznaran, Patricia Brice and Edith Buchele. The meeting concerned Scientology copyrights. In particular, David Miscavige stated that Scientology was “in trouble” concerning the copyright status of the many published materials of founder L Ron Hubbard. Concern was expressed that many of Mr. Hubbard’s published materials had become ‘public domain” because the materials had not been registered with the United States Copyright office for many years. David Miscavige stated that Scientology had failed to register copyrights for thousands of pages of Scientology material written by Mr. Hubbard. These records included the numerous policy letters and bulletins published by Mr. Hubbard. In particular, Mr. Hubbard published “Policy Letters” (always published in green ink on white paper and intended as administrative directives) LRH ED’s (Executive Directives) which are used for various topics, (always issued as blue ink on white paper) and “Technical Bulletins” published with red ink on white paper covering technical aspect of Scientology such as Auditing techniques, Policy and Ethics.
32. At the same meeting in early 1983 David Miscavige specifically ordered Patricia Brice (who at the time was L. Ron Hubbard’s personal secretary and an employee of ASI) to begin the process of mass copyright registration filings for all of L. Ron Hubbard’s materials. This order was given despite the fact that Mr. Miscavige was already aware that many of the materials in question were already in the public domain. Thus, I know from personal knowledge that in mid 1983 Scientology began a massive program to register Mr. Hubbard’s material with the United State’s Copyright office.
33. Based on my many years of reading and studying Scientology directives including my time as a “Co-Audit Supervisor” and “Inspector General Cramming Officer” I became intimately familiar with the content, form, manner of distribution and publication of Scientology works and directives including the works of L. Ron Hubbard. As a Cramming Officer it was my job to insure that those who employ Scientology “tech” properly adhere to the official guidelines adopted by Scientology.
34. I was requested by counsel for Mr. Wollersheim to review the exhibits to BPI’s renewed motion for summary judgement. These were contained in more than 20 banker’s boxes.
In reviewing these boxes of exhibits I selected out documents at random to inspect. The chart below explains the result of my examination of certain of the exhibits. In examining the plaintiff’s exhibits I compared the alleged LRH originals submitted by the plaintiff’s as exhibits to some early editions of Scientology compilations which contains the policy issues in question. I employed a “1st edition” of the Organization Executive Course, and a “First printing of the Scientology Technical Bulletins for comparison to what BPI has claimed are the LRH originals.
35. I have attached hereto copies of various LRH materials that were published by Scientology in the early 1970’s that prove conclusively that the copy right notices on BPI’s purported “LRH originals” were not present then, but placed on the “originals” at a later date.
Exhibit Date Issued Copyright Registration Title B-1287 1954 27 January 1975 The Church of Scientology Creed FACTNet copy bears no resemblance to original B-1289 1953,ca.endMay 2 May 1956 (renewal 7 February 1983) LRH PAB No. 2 A Summary of SOP 8A Copyright notice 1953 Copyright res. for compilation published Dec. 1955 B-1292 1953 ca.end July 2 May 1956 (renewal 7 February 1983) LRH PAB No. 6 No title Copyright notice 1953 Copyright res. for compilation published Dec. 1955 B-1293 1953 ca. mid. August 2 May 1956 (renewal 7 February 1983) LRH PAB No. 7 Six Steps to Better Beingness Copyright notice 1953 Copyright res. for compilation published Dec. 1955 B-1290 1953 ca. mid June 2 May 1956 (renewal 7 February 1983) LRH PAB No. 3 Certainty Processing Copyright notice 1953 Copyright res. for compilation published Dec. 1955 Exhibit Date Issued Copyright Registration Title B-4 2 June 1959 22 December 1987 (renewal 22 December 1987) HCO PL Purchasing Liability of Staff Members Copyright notice 1959 but original contains reference to CSI which did not exist until 1981 B-2 2 May 1957 24 December 1985 (renewal 24 December 1985) HCO PL Dissemination Original offered by BPI is substantially different from that published as an original in OEC Vol. II 1st Ed. 1970 ; Copyright notice 1957, registration 1985 B-1291 Ca. mid-July 1953 2 May 1956 (renewal 7 February 1983) LRH PAB No. 5 About PABs B-1291 BIP original contains no copyright notice. However FACTNet copy and copy of document published in 1st printing of Technical Bulletins Vol. I contain 1953 copyright notice. Copyright registration is 1955 as part of compilation B-1288 20 July 1956 22 September 1983 (renewal 26 December 1984) Article From LRH to HGC Staff “How to really split a valance.” No Copyright notice in claimed original B-371 16 December 1958 12 May 1983 (renewal 22 January 1986) HCOB Extension Course Curriculum BPI original contains notice 1958, however copy of document published by Scientology in 1976 in Technical Bulletins Vol. III 1st printing contains no copyright notice Exhibit Date Issued Copyright Registration Title B-59 21 March 1965 28 January 1988 (renewal 9 September 1993) HCO PL Staff Members Auditing Outside PCs BPI original contains copyright notice 1958, however, copy of document published in 1970 OEC Vol. I 1st Ed. contains no copyright notice. B-249 28 April 1973 28 April 1988 HCO PL Good Service BPI original shows on face it was 1st published Dec. 23, 1968, not claimed date of April 28, 1973 B-157 2 September 1968 28 January 1988 HCOPL Chaplain BPI original shows on face 1st appeared as Sea Organization Flag Order B-94 24 August 1965 28 January 1988 (renewal 3 November 1993) HCO PL Cleanliness of Quarters and Staff Improve Our Image BPI “original” contains 1965 copyright notice. However, “original” references CSI which did not exist until 1981 B-248 27 December 1972 28 January 1988 HCO PL Speed of Service BPI original shows on face published 1968, not claimed date of 1972 Exhibit Date Issued Copyright Registration Title B-214 4 January 1971 2 May 1991 HCO PL Competence BPI original contains no copyright notice C-3 5 February 1958 27 January 1995 HCO PL No New Charters BPI original contains no copyright notice B-215 25 January 1971 28 January 1988 HCO PL Squirrel Admin Claimed original contains 1971 copyright notice. However, also contains reference to CSI which did not exist until 1981 B-1 25 January 1957 24 December 1985 (24 December 1985) HCO PL Concerning the Separateness of Dianetics and Scientology BPI original shows on face not original but Issue II B-369 25 November 1958 12 May 1983 (renewal 22 January 1986) HCOB Step 6 BPI “original” contains a 1958 copyright notice. However, 1st printing of Technical Bulletins in 1976 Vol. III contains no copyright notice for this document Exhibit Date Issued Copyright Registration Title 36. The above chart documents my observations in reviewing the documents that I selected at random to review. The important points that I believe the Court should note with reference to these documents are as follows:
1. Exhibits B-1289; 1290; 1291; 1292 and 1293 contain a 1953 copyright notice. However, the copyright registrations submitted by BPI are for a compilation published in 1955.
2. Exhibits B4; B-94 and B-215 all contain copyright notices from the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s that contain notations to CSI. CSI is the Church of Scientology International, which did not come into existence until 1981. Therefore, either BPI’s “originals” are not originals as claimed, or the copyright notices were placed on these documents long after they were published. (Exhibits 2, 3 and 4 attached hereto).
3. Exhibits B-59; B-369; and B-371 contain copyright notices from 1958. However, when these originals are compared to first printings or first editions of compilations put out by Scientology in the 1970’s, these copyright notices are not present, indicating that they were placed in the “originals” subsequent to the compilations being published. (Exhibits 5-7).
4. Exhibit B-2 is substantially different from that published as an original in OEC Vol. II, 1st Ed. 1970. (Exhibit 8 attached hereto).
5. Exhibit B-1287. The FACTNet copy bears virtually no resemblance to the BPI original.
6. Exhibits B-1288; B-214; and C-3. The BPI originals contain no copyright notice.
7. Exhibit B-1 shows on its face it is not an original but “Issue II.”
8. Exhibits B-248; B-249; and B-157 show on their face they were published elsewhere prior to the claimed original publication.
37. Based on my knowledge gained as a staff member of Scientology, including my assignment as “Chief Cramming Officer” and based on my examination of the exhibits submitted by BPI in support of their renewed motion for summary judgment, it appears that numerous “originals” submitted by BPI are not originals at all and that copyright notices were placed on documents long after publication back-dating them to the date of publication.
Further declarant sayeth naught.
I declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 27th day of July, 1998, at Santa Ana, California.
JESSE PRINCE
Notes
Declaration of Stacy Brooks Young (December 14, 1994)
CT 7437
I, Stacy Brooks Young, declare as follows:1
1. I am over 18 years of age and a resident of Seattle, Washington.
2. I was a Scientologist for nearly 15 years, from January 1975 until I escaped with my husband, Robert Vaughn Young, in July 1989. From October 1975 until I left I was a member of the elite inner circle of Scientology, an unincorporated organization known as the Sea Organization (“Sea Org”) which rules the Scientology empire. Unbeknownst to the outside world, even to lower level Scientologists, the head of the Sea Org and of Scientology, David Miscavige, subjects Sea Org members to extremely abusive and degrading treatment, sometimes carried out directly by him but often carried out by his key aides.
3. Such abuses include sleep deprivation, an enforced diet of nothing but rice and beans for weeks or even months at a time, incarceration in Scientology prison camps known as the Rehabilitation Project Force (“RPF”) for months and sometimes years; sexual harassment and discrimination, requiring women to undergo abortions with the threat of losing their jobs if they refuse, enforced separation of parents and children, enforced separation of husbands and wives, and denial of proper medical care for people driven into psychotic episodes as a result of such abuse as described above.
4. A year and a half ago, in July 1993, my husband and I were asked by several attorneys to document the abuses we experienced and witnessed while in the inner circle of Scientology. These attorneys were defending people who were being sued by Scientology. Until that time we had kept totally quiet about our experiences because we were aware of how Scientology intimidates and harasses anyone who speaks out publicly about the abuses in this organization. We knew that if we began
1
CT 7438
to talk about what we knew our lives would no longer be our own, that Scientology would apply their “Fair Game” doctrine against us. The Fair Came doctrine directs Scientologists to lie, cheat and destroy anyone perceived as an “enemy.” They claim that Fair Game was canceled long ago, but they are lying. Because we had seen it done to others, we knew that they would send private investigators to talk to our family, friends and neighbors, that they would dredge up everything they could about our private lives, in short, that we would be subjected to a campaign of character assassination just as any other fascist political movement like Scientology would conduct against its critics. However, we made the decision that it was too important to make the truth known, no matter what the cost to our own privacy.
5. The Scientologists have lived up to our worst expectations and beyond. They have stolen our trash, kept us under constant surveillance, sent out libelous information, slandered us to friends and family, and done everything possible to make us “shudder into silence,” as Scientology creator L. Ron Hubbard directed them to do with critics. Our home has also been burglarized twice, and while we cannot prove that Scientology was responsible, we pointed out to police investigators that only our in-home office computers and disks were stolen, while other valuables in the house were left untouched.
6. In July 1994, just this past summer, two high level Scientologists approached my husband and me and offered to pay us money if we would perjure ourselves by stating under oath that the information we have provided in sworn declarations is false, which it is not, and agree never to speak or write another critical word about Scientology again. These two Scientologists warned us that if we refused to agree to their terms they would increase the intimidation and harassment of us, break us financially, and ruin our reputations. We still refused to give in to their threats.
7. True to their promise, they have stepped up their campaign against us in the last several months. It is continuing as recently as Monday, December 12, when a
2
CT 7439
private investigator called my mother and, under the guise that he was doing an investigation of my husband, attempted to turn my mother against me with lurid tales about my sex life. His attempt backfired, however, when my mother made it clear to him that she does not care about my sex life and that his attempt at character assassination made her sick. She demanded to know his name and phone number, and when he refused to give it to her she hung up on him. What they don’t realize is that people outside of Scientology don’t adhere to their Draconian morality, which especially in the Sea Org is so intrusive that people are sent to the prison camp for their sexual practices (the only exception being Miscavige’s hand-picked aides, for whom these same laws do not apply). This same private investigator has already called one of my sisters and my other sisters are now expecting calls from him as well. Our family and friends are aware that this campaign is being waged against us and that it is being done because Scientology has not been able to silence us any other way.
8. I have been shown an extract of a motion made by Church of Scientology International in the case of Church of Scientology International v. Fishman and Geertz, No. 91-6426-HLH (Tx) (C.D.Cal.) in which CSI falsely alleges that my husband and I committed perjury in certain declarations we have submitted for this case. The extract is entitled Two Other Defense Witnesses Signed False Declarations. XXX[initial SBY] XXX[initial SBY] The phrase “two other defense witnesses” refers to my husband and me. It is false.
9. The extract is based on a certain “Rinder Declaration,” submitted October 27, 1994, which is a wildly distorted, false representation of a series of meetings which occurred over an eight-day period in July 1994.
10. In June 1994, two high-level Scientology operatives, Mike Rinder and Mike Sutter, began to call me and my husband begging us to meet with them to “settle our differences.” These two people called one or the other of us nearly every day for approximately a month, insisting that we meet with them and assuring us that they
3
CT 7440
would make it very worth our while to do so, clearly implying that they wanted to pay us money to stop doing the legal consulting work that we have done for Mr. Graham Berry and other attorneys whose clients have been sued by Scientology.
11. My husband Vaughn had no interest in meeting with them at all and told them so in no uncertain terms. Rinder and Sutter continued to call him and even arrived uninvited at our house in Corona del Mar, California, (where Vaughn was finishing up some work in preparation for moving to Seattle,) to try to get him to agree to a meeting. When it became obvious that Vaughn would not agree, they began calling me at our house in Seattle.
12. Mike Sutter called me every day, telling me how important it was that we meet with him and Rinder. Both Mike Sutter and Mike Rinder were superior to me and had a tremendous amount of power over me when I was a member of the cult. Sutter in particular had been assigned to “handle” me after Vaughn and I had tried to leave the cult and had been persuaded to return. Because of this past relationship which I now understand was based on mind control, I was still afraid of Sutter even five years after leaving Scientology. I allowed him to engage me in conversation, and by intimidating me he succeeded in convincing me that Vaughn and I should hear them out. I then talked Vaughn into meeting with them.
13. My state of mind at the time was that I did not want to have anything to do with Scientology any more. Although I did not realize it at the time, I was still under the influence of the cult to the degree that they could still intimidate me, frighten me, and “trigger” strong emotional reactions in me. Scientology was particularly upset about the work my husband and I had done for attorney Graham Berry, advising him about the destructive practices of the upper echelons of Scientology and submitting a number of declarations relevant to CSI v. Geertz. As I explained earlier in this declaration, because of our work for Mr. Berry and other attorneys, Scientology considered us “enemies” and we became the targets of Scientology’s
4
CT 7441
Fair Game doctrine, meaning that we had been harassed and intimidated relentlessly by Scientology operatives. Although they attacked my husband much more viciously than me, it upset me very deeply and frightened me. I did not want to have my private life exposed and I did not want to see my husband’s private life being distorted and exposed and held up to ridicule the way Scientology had been doing.
14. Because of their relentless harassment and intimidation, I had made a decision not to do any more work to expose the truth about the Scientology cult and, indeed, had not done so for several months prior to the meetings with Rinder and Sutter. I was also strongly pressuring my husband to stop so that we could regain our privacy and peace of mind. I wanted Scientotogy to leave us alone.
15. It was in this frightened state of mind that I began to receive the daily phone calls from Mike Sutter. Sutter assured me that the harassment would stop and made it clear that Scientology would pay us a large amount of money if we would settle with them. Sutter also made it clear that if we did not agree to settle with Scientology, we would be subjected to even greater harassment than we had already experienced, although he said that he was “sorry” and that “it doesn’t have to be that way,” if we would only agree to talk to them. I felt extremely intimidated by his phone calls and strongly pressured Vaughn to agree to talk to them. Although Vaughn did not feel that they were being above-board about their intentions, he agreed to it because he knew that I was very afraid of them and he did not feel he should force me to continue in a situation that was extremely frightening to me.
16. Mike Rinder and Mike Sutter arrived in Seattle on Friday, July 8, 1994. Vaughn also flew to Seattle on that day. Vaughn and I met with them nearly every day for the next eight days. I was extremely gracious and cordial to both of these Scientologists throughout the meetings, inviting them to our home and doing everything possible to create an atmosphere of trust and honor. After reading Rinder’s declaration I feel betrayed and outraged that he has now perverted and
5
CT 7441
twisted things that my husband and I talked to them about during those meetings. I do not fault these two individuals. I know that they are under the influence of Scientology mind control and that the vicious lies Rinder has sworn to in his declaration are part of the campaign of character assassination that he is under orders to conduct against my husband and me.
17. However, I wish to correct the many lies and perversions of the truth that he has told about us. I also want to make it clear that I went along with much of what Rinder and Sutter said to us because I knew it would do no good to argue with them about much of what they were saying. Someone under the influence of Scientology mind control cannot change his mind about certain attitudes and beliefs, and I was aware that because these two people were still under the control of Scientology it would do no good to try to argue with them. Therefore, Rinder seems to have come away from the meetings thinking that I agreed with what he said simply because I did not refute it. The fact is that I did not bother to refute many things he and Sutter said because I knew it would be a waste of time. Furthermore, my husband and I had agreed to go along with them so that we could find out whatever it was they had to say to us that was so important that they had begged us to meet with them for over a month. The reason the meetings went on for so many days was that we kept waiting for them to get to the point and weren’t able to find out what it was until the eighth day. (When we did finally get them to get to the point, we walked out.)
18. First and most importantly, at the very outset of these meetings we made it clear that we would not perjure ourselves by recanting any statements made in our previous declarations, that what we had stated was true and we would not now lie by saying that what we had written was not true. Much to their dismay, we also made it clear immediately that we would not in any way denigrate Mr. Graham Berry. They tried to change our minds about Mr. Berry by suggesting that he had put us up to writing our declarations, but we were emphatic in stating that he never did any such
6
CT 7443
thing and we would not say that he did. At the end of the series of meetings we discovered that, indeed, one of their main purposes was to get us to discredit Mr. Berry, who has been extremely successful in litigating against Scientology. A key theme in the declarations they drafted for us to sign was that Mr. Berry had orchestrated every aspect of our “attack” against Scientology. We refused to go along with their character assassination of Mr. Berry.
19. Throughout the meetings they repeatedly suggested that we write declarations but were vague about what they wanted the declarations to say. When they would bring up the subject of these declarations we would repeat that we could not write anything that would in any way suggest that we had lied, since we had not. At one point Sutter asked me what I felt I would be able to say, and I replied that I would be able to say I had written declarations as an expert witness for the defense of Uwe Geertz and Steven Fishman and that I had written them in a way that would be helpful to their defense. lt is utterly false that “when the Youngs — especially Stacy Young — spoke frankly about what occurred here, they revealed that their declarations, too, had been falsified.” We repeatedly emphasized to both Rinder and Sutter that nothing whatsoever in our declarations was false.
20. Many of the statements in the Rinder declaration are entirely false, while others are treacherously misleading in the way statements we made are misinterpreted and deliberately twisted to make me or my husband appear to be dishonorable or unscrupulous.
21. It is completely and utterly untrue that “At the beginning of our discussion, both of the Youngs stated that they did not enjoy manipulating the facts to attack and embarrass their former religion, but that economic hardship had compelled them to embark upon that course.” Neither my husband nor I have ever believed that Scientology is a religion and would never refer to it as such. Furthermore, neither of us feel that we have manipulated facts. On the contrary, we have told the truth about
7
CT 7444
many destructive practices that are part of the Scientology empire in the hopes that exposure of these conditions will lead to their being changed.
22. Rinder’s opinion that “it was apparent that the reason they were talking to us was because they found it emotionally distressing to be involved in an occupation that required them to figure out how to manipulate and distort facts for use in litigation” is contrived and utterly false. Moreover, I never said that I “could not stand living a lie and wanted out.” As I have explained in a previous paragraph, what I found emotionally distressing was the campaign of harassment, intimidation and character assassination Scientology has been waging against us ever since we began to speak out about the abuses inside the cult.
23. Rinder’s statement that I said we “tried to live off various family members while Vaughn attempted to establish himself as a writer” is utterly untrue and a fabrication out of thin air, as is the comment that “the family eventually balked at that, and the Youngs were on their own.” We never “tried to live off” any of our family members and have been “on our own” all along.
24. Vaughn and I did have financial difficulties when we first left Scientology, as do many long-term members of Scientology’s inner circle (and any other totalitarian cult, for that matter) if they are fortunate enough to free themselves from the cult’s psychological, emotional and physical subjugation. Vaughn had been a Scientology staff member for 20 years and I had been one for 15 years. We had no résumé that we felt would make any sense to the “outside” world, nor did we have any references. We were considered “enemies ” by Scientology, so we knew that people still inside the cult would not say anything favorable about us. Since we had had virtually no professional contact with anyone outside the cult for many years, we had no references. It was literally as if we had just landed from outer space.
25. I am sorry that I told these two Scientologists about the hardships Vaughn and I experienced as we were struggling to come out of the cult experience. I should have
8
have realized that they would utilize these details of our personal life in their campaign to discredit us. Rinder has now taken this information and twisted it to support his false argument that we are exposing the truth about Scientology to make money. The Court should know that there are many, many other ways we could make a living that would be much more enjoyable and more lucrative. But we feel a moral obligation to do what we can to expose the civil and human rights violations and serious abuses which this cult is perpetrating on its subjugated mind control victims.
26. Rinder falsely states that “At one point in our conversation, Stacy broke into tears and said that she and her husband only began consulting with and selling declarations to Graham Berry because she and Vaughn were so desperate for money. Stacy said she had been willing to say under oath whatever Berry wanted her to say if it would result in getting paid, as she could not face continuing to live under the financial pressure she and Vaughn were suffering. There was one point during the meetings with Rinder and Sutter when I did, indeed, break into tears. It was certainly not, however, for the reason Rinder states. I began to cry at one point as Mike Sutter was attempting to address my concerns about staff conditions and certain specific abuses I suffered while I was in the cult. Something he said triggered some extremely painful memories for me, memories of being forcibly separated from my husband, having our mail intercepted, being kept under guard to keep me from escaping to find my husband, being deprived of sleep for days on end, being locked in a room and interrogated for days at a time, being screamed at and terrorized by Miscavige and his top aides.
27. For many former cult members, certain things someone might say or do can trigger painful memories from their cult experience and they may find themselves becoming very emotional at unexpected times. I found that simply being in the same room with two members of Scientology’s inner circle, two people who used to have
9
CT 7446
enormous power over me, stirred deep-seated emotions that I had not felt since I escaped from the cult. Of course, I did not explain this to these two Scientologists because I knew they would not understand. But certainly I was not upset for the reason Rinder has stated. He is trying to paint my relationship with Graham Berry in a scurrilous light but his accusations are utterly groundless and false. Mr. Berry never told me what to say in my declarations and certainly never drafted a declaration for me to sign the way Rinder and Sutter did for my husband and me. In fact it is the Scientologists who will say whatever will further their own agenda, regardless of whether it is true or not, just as Rinder has done in his declaration. They assume that people outside of Scientology have the same contempt for the legal system as they do, and that others are guilty of the same illegalities, such as perjury, which they commit themselves as a matter of course.
28. Rinder states that “both Mike Sutter and I brought up how we could not understand how they could tell so many lies in the declarations they had filed, especially those in the Fishman case. Neither denied that this was what they had done…” and repeats his character assassination of us as liars in the next paragraph where he states, “We challenged them to explain how they could justify lying as a way of life…” As I have stated earlier in my declaration, in fact my husband and I both repeatedly told them that we had not lied in our declarations, although throughout the meetings Rinder and Sutter did continue to characterize our sworn testimony as “lying.” The truth is that if either of these people ever admitted to themselves that our testimony is true it would break the spell that Scientology has over them. But Scientology has a self-policing mechanism built into its mind control techniques which makes it almost impossible for someone under its influence to break through. Rinder and Sutter both know that our testimony is true. They are both acutely aware of the abuses we have described. But they are loyal Party Members and are sworn to protect the Party at all costs.
10
CT 7447
29. Clearly the main intent of Rinder’s declaration is to discredit the declarations my husband and I have filed in CSI v. Fishman and Geertz. He seems most concerned with a declaration submitted by me on January 3, 1994, in which I detail how Scientology’s fraudulent negligence in selling Steven Fishman nearly $200,000 of Scientology materials and devices could have driven him into a psychotic episode. Rinder goes on for several pages, carefully reconstructing our conversations to make it appear that I somehow admitted to him that what I wrote was untrue. The subject of my January 3 declaration is extremely sensitive for Scientology and this is why Rinder has spent so much time trying to discredit it. But what I wrote in the declaration is true, and I attached many Scientology documents to prove it.
30. In fact, many people have been driven into psychotic episodes by Hubbard’s techniques, as Rinder well knows. Far from being “pure nonsense,” what I wrote about is one of Scientology’s darkest secrets. I have personal knowledge of many people who have been driven into psychotic episodes by Scientology’s techniques. Hubbard wrote precise directions about how to “handle” these people, including the “Isolation Watch.” Rinder is well aware of these occurrences but cannot admit to it because it would violate Scientology policy for him to tell the truth about this subject publicly. It would threaten his good standing as a Scientologist and might get him sent to the prison camp, known as the Rehabilitation Project Force, where he would be separated from his wife and children, kept under guard and forced to do hard labor for 12 or more hours a day. Scientologists will do just about anything to avoid being sent to the RPF.
31. Rinder falsely states that I admitted to creating a false impression in the January 3 declaration about Scientology creator L. Ron Hubbard’s use of mind control techniques. In fact, it is my firm conviction that Hubbard developed extremely sophisticated mind control techniques, that he did so quite deliberately, and that Scientology practices can be very psychologically damaging because of this. I
11
CT 7448
did not pull quotes out of context for the declaration as Rinder asserts. I would be happy to provide more quotes from Hubbard in which he goes into even more detail about how Scientology can be used destructively.
32. Rinder also distorted a conversation I had with him concerning Scientology’s “upper level” materials. I do know that Hubbard wanted these materials kept secret, but I do not agree that they should be. People have the right to know that Hubbard’s science fiction story about the cosmos is what they can expect after they have been sold many thousands of dollars of Scientology services. I do not consider a science fiction story to be a religious scripture, nor do I believe (as Scientologists claim) that there is any danger that anyone will get sick by reading these materials “before they are ready.” This story has been published in many, many publications over a period of many years, and I have yet to hear of one person who has gotten sick from reading it. I think the only reason the Scientologists are so worried about keeping these materials secret is that they are afraid of losing money if people learn the truth. Certainly it has absolutely nothing to do with religion.
33. Rinder attempts to use me to further his own agenda in discrediting other former Scientologists. He falsely states that I think Gerry Armstrong and Larry Wollersheim are both psychotic. To set the record straight, I do not think either of these individuals is psychotic. Indeed, I think both are doing very well at recovering from their lengthy experience with Scientology mind control. However, I do know that Rinder and Sutter both think Gerry Armstrong and Larry Wollersheim are psychotic. I also know that they think my husband and I are psychotic, along with many other people who have come to their senses and left Scientology. This is because Hubbard said so. He repeatedly stated that anyone who leaves Scientology is psychotic. When I was still in Scientology and working for the Office of Special Affairs, it was accepted as a basic truth that anyone who left Scientology was crazy, especially anyone who left and then sued Scientology, which both Armstrong and Wollersheim
12
CT 7449
have done. The truth is that I consider Gerry Armstrong and Lawrence Wollersheim to be good friends and very courageous individuals.
34. Rinder also attempts to use me to discredit the testimony of another former Scientologist, Andre Tabayoyon. Rinder’s version of my relationship with Andre and his wife Mary is wildly distorted and is clearly an effort on his part to create bad feelings between us. This is a technique called “Third Party” in Scientology, in which someone deliberately tells lies about a person to turn friends against friends. I did discuss an incident involving Andre, but I did so in the context of voicing concern about a friend. I now regret ever having said a word and realize I should have known he would use it to try to destroy my friendship with Andre and his wife, Mary. The conversation was carried on at Rinder’s urging, of course, and I was naive not to see what he was doing. In fact, I value my friendship with Andre and Mary and think they are both extremely courageous to have testified about the outrageous abuses they were both subjected to while in Scientology. I hope they are progressing well in their recovery from Scientology.
35. My husband and I never agreed to “write declarations to set the record straight on points described above along with others.” In fact we never did write any declarations or even portions of declarations but rather waited until Rinder and Sutter presented us with their own declarations, drafted by Scientology, for us to sign. When we read them we discovered that they had drafted declarations which did exactly what we had told them repeatedly we would not do. The declarations they wanted us to sign were utterly perjurious, stating that we had lied about virtually everything we have ever stated in declarations submitted in CSI v. Fishman and other cases. Additionally they wanted us to sign a gag order which would have destroyed our freedom of speech as well as our freedom of association by forbidding us ever to speak about our experiences in Scientology or even to meet with anyone else who was speaking about their experiences in Scientology.
13
CT 7449.1
36. The motion which is based on Rinder’s declaration makes the wildly ridiculous claim that we were in “serious emotional turmoil over what [we] had done” and that we “agreed to execute new declarations undoing the false impressions they had created for Mr. Berry.” In fact, as I have already stated, we never did execute any declarations for them at all, and the declarations they drafted for us to sign were completely outrageous.
37. The truth is that when they showed us the declarations they wanted us to sign I told them they were completely wrong to think we regretted any aspect of the work we had done for Mr. Berry. Indeed, I told them in no uncertain terms that I am very proud of the work I have done for Mr. Berry, because I feel it is extremely important for the truth to come out about Scientology.
38. Finally, the motion claims that we “demanded” to be paid an outrageous sum of money but that “the Church was and is unwilling to pay the Youngs to tell the truth.” In fact, they offered to pay us nearly $200,000 to sign their false and perjurious declarations, but we refused. We told them that we would never sign their declarations no matter how much money they gave us, because we would never perjure ourselves nor would we become pawns in Scientology’s vendetta against Graham Berry.
39. Vaughn and I walked out of the meetings at that point, although they begged us to stay. They continued to call us repeatedly over the next several days, imploring us to meet with them again, assuring us that they would give us a “substantial financial settlement,” but I finally made it clear to them that there was no point in continuing the meetings. Vaughn and I have made our decision to continue to expose the truth about Scientology no matter the cost, and that is what we intend to do. Rinder’s blatantly false declaration is simply another part of their campaign to destroy our reputations and our credibility, which is what they warned us they would do if we did not give in to their demands.
14
CT 7450
40. During the course of our meetings Rinder commented that he couldn’t think of anything he wouldn’t do to silence an enemy of Scientology, that as far as he was concerned, the end would justify the means. Sutter and Rinder both made veiled threats during the course of the meetings, making it clear that if we did not settle with them Scientology would ruin our reputations, break us financially, and generally make our lives miserable. True to their threats, Scientology is now doing everything possible, including submitting perjured testimony to this court, to discredit me and my husband. But all of the testimony I have submitted to this court has been true, and it is extremely important that the information which has been submitted remain on the public record.
I swear under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in Seattle, Washington, this 14th day of December, 1994.
[signed] Stacy Brooks Young
Stacy Brooks Young
Notes
- Retrieved from http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/related/4070.php. Filed in Fishman. ↩
Letter from Heber Jentzsch to James McGovern, Assistant IRS Commissioner (November 5, 1994)
Church of Scientology International
Office of the President
November 5, 1994
James McGovern
Assistant Commissioner (Employee
Plans and Exempt Organizations)
Internal Revenue Service
Room 3408E
1111 Constitution AVe., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20224Re: FACTNET, Inc.1
Dear Jim:
I have written to you previously in February 19942 and again in August 1994 concerning “Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network (“FACTNET”) describing the purposes and activities of this group and demonstrating that the application for tax exemption that they filed — and which was granted by the Service in August 1994 — was fraudulent. I will not repeat the information set forth in those letters but attach copies, (without exhibits) here for your reference. (Exhibits 1 & 2). I am writing this letter to bring to your attention additional evidence concerning FACTNET that has come up since my last letter.
In my earlier letters I described the close relationship between FACTNET and the Cult Awareness Network (“CAN”), an anti-religion hate group that serves as a referral service for deprogrammers, and evidence that FACTNET itself was carrying out similar referral services. Further evidence has been brought to light of these two organizations working together and carrying out similar functions.
FACTNET’s former president, Gerald Armstrong, testified in the last two weeks that in November 1993, shortly after FACTNET was formed, its founder, Larry Wollersheim, gave a demonstration of the FACTNET system to the Executive Director of CAN, Cynthia Kisser and other CAN principles. FACTNET and CAN use very similar language for.describing what they do and similar euphemisms for promoting their deprogrammer referral network. A recent computerized advertisement by FACTNET promoted via the Internet system, says that they can connect up anyone who contacts them to
6331 HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD, SUITE 1200, LOS ANGELES, CA 90028-6329
TELEPHONE (213) 960-3500 FAX (213) 960-3508 / 960-3509
JAMES MCGOVERN
PAGE TWO“an assortment of key mental health professionals, clergy, attorneys, support groups, ex-members, and organizations who work with victims and families of this group.” (Exhibit 3) Compare this to a recently promotional piece for CAN that describes who they are as “. . . mental health professionals, lawyers, physicians, legislators, clergy, law enforcement officers and educators” and in the`next paragraph admits that “CAN recognizes the need for voluntary exit counseling/deprogramming . . ..”
Exhibit 4 FACTNET and CAN are working together and FACTNET appears to be taking part in the deprogrammer referral business.Recent additional evidence of the extent of CAN’s involvement in deprogramming demonstrates what such referrals actually mean.
A declaration from the manager of a Bed and Breakfast house in Albany, Ohio (“The Albany House”) situated near the Wellspring Retreat and Rehabilitation Center, (run by CAN Board member Paul Martin), states that between 1988 and 1993, about 20 different families who stayed at The Albany House said they were having a family member deprogrammed at Wellspring. Members of about 10 of these families stated that their adult child had been kidnapped during the deprogramming upon the advice of CAN. Exhibit 5
Similarly, in a deposition of CAN’s Office Manager, Marty Butz, he admitted that he had given 500 referrals to deprogrammers since he started working at CAN in 1989, including referrals to deprogrammers like Rick Ross known for using force and violence. Exhibit 6 As demonstrated above, FACTNET is also part of this network, working with CAN in its deprogramming referral activities.
That FACTNET is playing an active role in deprogramming is further demonstrated by the fact that its president, Jon Atack, who lives .in the United Kingdom, is himself a deprogrammer, specializing in attempts to deprogram Scientologists. He has been paid tens of thousands of dollars over the years for such services. As described in my August 1994 letter, Atack has also exported FACTNET’s operation to the United Kingdom and has attempted to spread its activities into other parts of Europe by forming a “Counter-Scientology Europe” network. Among other things he has done through this group, he has attempted to incite opposition to the Church’s application for religious recognition with the United Kingdom Charity Commission and has disseminated to the Charity Commission some of the same false information put out by FACTNET.
Atack is also a litigant against the Church in the UK and thus personally interested in causing the Church as much trouble as he can. Recently, however, the suit that Atack filed against the Church was dismissed for lack of merit. The Church was
JAMES MCGOVERN
PAGE THREEawarded costs, which Atack has refused to pay. The Church is taking the necessary collection actions.
My earlier letters briefed you on the kinds of scurrilous and defamatory information that FACTNET has put out about Scientology and the plans of its founder, Larry Wollersheim, to sell this information and otherwise solicit “tax deductible” contributions to fund harassive litigation against Scientology. Recent evidence shows that this is exactly what FACTNET is doing.
One of the major sources of the false information disseminated by FACNET has been Steven Fishman, who was previously convicted for obstruction of justice for falsely trying to implicate the Church in his crimes as a way of deflecting guilt from himself. It didn’t work and he went to jail. Fishman is currently under investigation again by the Probation Department for involvement in a new round of fraudulent schemes and violating his parole by associating with felons.
Fishman recently sought legal representation from an attorney in North Hollywood for a “malicious prosecution” case against the Church of Scientology he wishes to bring. In making this request for representation, Fishman repeated many of the same blatantly false allegations against Scientology that have been promoted by FACTNET. Included in these is the scurrilous allegation that the tragic suicide of David Miscavige’s mother-in-law was actually a murder for which Mr. Micavige may be charged. Fishman also represented that with respect to the funding of this proposed litigation, funds may be forthcoming from FACTNET, a tax-exempt organization headquartered in Golden, Colorado, to help cover the costs of the suit. This shows FACTNET’s funds being earmarked for harassive litigation against the Church, which is not a tax exempt purpose. Exhibit 7
Attorney Graham Berry, who earlier paid about $20,000 to FACTNET for false information (which Berry proceeded to file in court in the Fishman case) attempted to get Senator Chafee of Rhode Island to connect up with FACTNET so as to get Senator Chafee’s assistance in getting the tax exempt status of the Church of Scientology revoked.
Last week, FACTNET’s Systems Op, Bob Penny, posted a letter from Graham Berry in which Berry solicited data which could support his false allegation about the confidentiality of the advanced levels of Scientology religious services. Even though Berry stated that his letter was to be kept confidential, FACTNET posted it broadly on its computer system asking people to send information about Scientology confidential advanced levels to Larry Wollersheim clearly for the purpose of supporting private litigation. This is not an activity that should be supported by tax exempt contributions. Tab 8
JAMES MCGOVERN
PAGE FOURMy letters in February and August 1994 showed that FACTNET does not qualify for tax exemption, that its exemption application was a sham and should have been more than ample to result in revocation of its tax exempt status. The additional evidence provided here demonstrates that FACTNET is operating in the non-exempt manner described in those earlier letters.
Please contact me if I can provide any other information.
Sincerely yours,
[signed] Heber Jentzsch
Heber Jentzsch
President
Church of Scientology
International
Notes
- This document in PDF format. ↩
- February 1994 letter in PDF format. ↩