Great to read you’re feeling good.
There are a few fact errors in what you’ve written about the Scientology v. Armstrong litigation and war,1which I will deal with later.
Just now, I am writing to ask from you essentially what I have been asking from Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder for the past few years:
- Communicate to me;
- Debrief to me and my legal representatives;
- Execute declarations that contain facts elicited in the debrief;
- Make themselves available to testify in any legal proceedings to correct the injustices or situations they helped make.
You will recall telling me about Miscavige and Rathbun claiming that they possessed the materials stolen from the trunk of my car by their agents in 1984. There was a briefcase and about 300 pages of original writing and artwork.
I asked you a number of times for a declaration with the facts you knew concerning these materials and you always ignored my requests, and after some point more than a decade ago had treated me quite inimically.
I wrote to Rathbun about these stolen materials, and he too has ignored my communications. See, e.g., http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3304
You now write that you were present and informed about my legal troubles with Scientology as they were happening. I would like to obtain from you the details you recall from that period.
You write that you were present when the conditions of the Scientology v. Armstrong “settlement agreement” were negotiated. I was not present during that negotiation, and your information could be helpful in correcting the crime this “settlement agreement” and similar ones perpetuate.
To understand what happened prior to and during the “settlement” from my perspective, and its effect since 1986, please see the video of my discussion in Berlin in 2011:
You write that from 1983 through 1986, you would receive on a daily basis intelligence reports generated by ASI staff, OSA and RTC concerning secret and illegal operations by Scientology against me, my lawyer Michael Flynn, and other plaintiffs he represented.
This material is very relevant right now in the issue of the Scientologists’ tax exemption, and in US and international court proceedings. You perhaps were not aware that Rathbun and Rinder continue the frame-ups of Flynn and me in Rathbun’s 2013 book, which Rinder edited, and they continue their black propaganda against their fair game victims, and SPs generally. In that way, they are very much not me, as you say.
Your details about these daily intel reports about ops against Flynn and me, and related knowledge you have about the Scientologists’ war on us could be legally and historically helpful
The operations against Jerry’s lawyer included having knowledge of someone putting water in the gas tank of an airplane piloted by Michael Flynn with his son on board.
It is not clear exactly what you are saying about the Flynn plane incident being an operation. To my knowledge you have not testified regarding your knowledge of ops or fair game against Flynn or me, and this could be helpful.
I’d have thought I had been clear by now, but I go by Gerry. It’s Gerald, legally, but I’ve gone by Gerry-with-a-G since elementary school.
You write that you attended years of board room meetings at ASI to figure out how to get rid of me, and a few others. You mention that Hubbard sent communications (“advices”) ordering people such as me, and presumably including me, attacked, set up, jailed, annihilated, etc. Your details concerning both Hubbard and Miscavige’s participation in such fair game activities could be helpful.
You write that there were banker boxes full of Hubbard advices “spewing hate filled vitriol about” me. I have known that this must be the case, because I know how Hubbard worked and how his Scientologists still work. This is the first time, however, that someone who actually viewed some of the mass of material about me has described it, even in very general terms. I would like to get from you the details necessary to identify these materials for legal purposes.
Please let me know if you are willing to debrief to me about your experiences and knowledge relating to Mike Flynn and me that you acquired while inside the Scientology cult.
I began to recall being on the other side of the fence when Gerry Armstrong had to defend himself against Scientology style black ops for years. Scientology sued Jerry for absconding with 22 banker boxes of personal documents and artifacts of L Ron Hubbard. I’m not trying to retell the story of Jerry Armstrong here but ultimately, Scientology paid Jerry a settlement of $800.000 in exchange for his promise not to copy or discloses the content of the banker boxes he’d taken. What the hell was in those boxes? It’s a fascinating, well documented cock up of what happened when author Omar Garrison and his research assistant Gerry Armstrong verified L Ron’s actual education and military record history among other subjects. In a nutshell, too much of the information they were able to factually verify of L Ron’s past was contemptuously contrary to the yarn L Ron spun for his devout adherents and any other ear that could hear. Gerry Armstrong went on to violate his agreement with Scientology hundreds of times and is still perused by Scientology’s attach dog legal machine. I know something about this because I was present and informed about Jerry’s legal troubles with Scientology as they was happening. I recall being present when the conditions of the settlement agreement between Gerry Armstrong and Scientology (Which in effect included whatever was best for Author Services Inc, ASI) was negotiated.
From 1983 until the settlement in 1986, I would receive on a daily basis, usually sometime between 6-8 pm, intelligence reports generated by staff of Special Project Operations (ASI), OSA and RTC concerning secret and illegal operations by Scientology against Jerry, his lawyer Michael Flynn, and other plaintiffs represented by Michael Flynn’s firm. The operations against Jerry’s lawyer included having knowledge of someone putting water in the gas tank of an airplane piloted by Michael Flynn with his son on board. There was instant access into the lives of people who were deemed enemy’s Scientology through well paid and placed private investigators. These professionals sold their services to their Scientology paymasters because they had the latest modern bugging technology that was confirmed US CIA grade technology. Scientology was able to buy the services of ex-police, ex-FBI and other agency. Phone records were a fruitful source of information. Through illegally obtaining phone records Scientology always seemed to be a step ahead of their perceived enemies. ASI lead attorney was Earle Cooley. A big part of his job as legal council was to made sure we rode a fine line to separate church principles from the illegal activities sanctioned by the same principles.
There were years of board room meeting at ASI to figure out how to get rid of Jerry Armstrong, L Ron junior, David Mayo and a few other people who had devoted their lives in servitude to L Ron and his grand ideas. All of these devoted people turned out to be Suppressive Persons all along according to the instructions from L Ron via his publishing organization ASI. It was new management’s job to hunt them down and get them put in jail. Some may recall during the early to mid 1980’s L Ron got a bug up his ass and thought he had the power to have people criminally prosecuted for disobeying or being out of step with what he wanted. This is way past just having a stick up your ass, he really wanted this done and some people did get set up and went to jail. It was required protocol to hate and contribute to the destruction of men and women that I had never met or laid eyes on. We would be sitting in the board room at L Ron’s Author Services organization reading advice’s from L Ron calling for the heads of staff he felt offended him somehow. Listening to Miscavige and other staff figuring out ever clever ways to get rid of the people who were aggravating poor L Ron. As we sat there making up plans to attach the very same people who were at L Ron’s side doing everything in their power to do his will. L Ron never wavered when it came to annihilating the oldest and closest devote adherents he had. There is no retirement in the business of Scientology. Ron taught his prodigy to quickly and quietly get rid of the most loyal staff members without remorse.
There were banker boxes full of “advises” from L Ron spewing hate filled vitriol about Jerry. The information that Jerry provided to Russell Miller and Jon Attack about L Ron’s actual history did in fact exposed his underbelly and pulled back the curtains on his imaginary life he expected others to believe.
During the negotiations to settle with Jerry Armstrong the settlement was intentionally construed to make it too easy for anyone to claim Jerry had violated his agreement with Scientology. Those who were present knew this settlement, that still plagues Jerry today was not done in good faith. The actual intent of the settlement was to cause Jerry to be incarcerated for violation of his settlement agreement2 and that is exactly what has happened. The other factor is this; Jerry didn’t want to take any of Scientology’s money and he didn’t want to settle. He was in effect forced to settle by his own lawyer Michael Flynn. Michael Flynn and his whole family had been hounded by Scientology hired thugs and they were tired of it. Flynn was also the attorney of record for other ex-Scientologist in a civil class action lawsuit….you get the idea. We had them right where we wanted. Each person received a settlement but Jerry was the only hold out. We even knew about the deteriorating relationship between Jerry Armstrong and lawyer Michael Flynn because we were the ones causing the confusion. In the end Jerry was forced to settle or be attached by his own attorney who wanted out and had been working on contingency anyway. There are standard legal agreements a plaintiff makes with a lawyer who takes on a case on contingency. The rule and agreement that comes into play is the plaintiff will agree to settle the case if there a reasonable offer on the table. Jerry was obligated to accept the settlement. Someone can say that better than me but you get the idea, Jerry was forced to settle, then he was set up to violate the settlement whereby Scientology would recover its money times three and if possible get him arrested and put in jail.
After years of acting like I hated people I’d never met or seen with my eyes like Jerry Armstrong took some getting use to. Getting Jerry had been en grained in my mind. Even after being out of the cult for some years. I remember the first time I talked with Jerry years after I had left the cult. On a physical level I felt uncomfortable being around him or even engaging in personal or meaningful conversation. On a certain level I was afraid of Jerry and this made no sense. None of that changed the facts of how all of this made me feel emotionally. In L Ron’s alternative reality, it was considered a flaw to openly show or express emotion or empathy. We were all just ever replaceable characters in L Ron’s movie. Suffice to say I didn’t foster or encourage a speaking relationship with Jerry because I didn’t want to. The problem is this is how Scientology technology is designed to protect itself in the minds of its own.
Long before I testified in a court of law as an expert witness, Jerry had already been there doing that, the same as I would do later. The real truth is when I met Jerry I had not entirely overcome the misconceptions and false information I’d learned about him through the years. I was dismissive of Jerry and didn’t fully appreciate, let alone realize the personal sacrifice and contribution he made when he exposed L Ron for being the lying ass clown he was.
It was only after reading the Russell Miller book with fresh eyes that I finally better understanding and more fully appreciated the work Jerry did. Since I’ve read the books again with fresh eyes so much has changed. I know I was Jerry when I woke up from the spell and stopped lying for and protecting Scientology. That meant it was my turn to be persecuted by juvenile intelligence tactics, endlessly financed on behalf of dead L Ron. These days both Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder are Jerry too! No one owes or is obligated to me for anything and ultimately it may not matter what I think but I will say this. I don’t monitor Scientology activities anymore like I use to. That being said, It sure does make me smile when someone sends me something about Mike Rinder speaking out. He’s even been known to refer to Scientology as a cult. This is the guy who was the public face of Scientology for years! My heart goes out to him and his new family. These days Mike doesn’t mince words when tells people about Scientology, what a turnaround bless him. Marty Rathbun is probably the most knowledgeable person in existence when it comes to how Scientology plays ball in a law suit. From what I can tell he and his wife are progressing excellently with their lawsuit against Scientology, you have my blessing for that.
Affidavit of Michael Rinder1
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
1. I was a member of the Board of Directors of the Church of Scientology International from 1983 until 2007, when I terminated my relationship with the Church of Scientology and all related entities.
2. I was raised as a Scientologist from the age of 6 and, as such, am well versed on the policies and procedures of the Church of Scientology.
3. During the course of my employment with the Church, I was responsible for creating the Enrollment Agreement and “arbitration” clause, and I would have been responsible for providing the rules for “arbitration.” No such rules were ever created for the “arbitration” process beyond selection of the arbitral panel, nor were, or have they ever been delineated. It simply was not the intent of the Church that the “arbitration” process amount to anything beyond a statement on paper.
4. During the course of my employment as head of the Church’s worldwide legal matters for more than 20 years, I became aware of attempts made by persons to get their money back from the Church. Every such attempt was reported to me on a weekly basis.
5. Since the inclusion of the “arbitration” clause in the Enrollment Agreement, I am not aware of a single instance where anyone has participated in “arbitration”.
6. I have read the Declaration of Mike Ellis filed in an attempt to comply with the Court’s Order dated September 24, 2014 and can state of my own knowledge, that the procedure described for the Committee of Evidence has absolutely nothing to do with “arbitration” nor was it ever intended that that procedure apply to “arbitration”. I note that the Affidavit of Mike Ellis fails to respond to the Court’s Order of September 24, 2014 which states as follows:
“Within ten (10) days, Defendants shall also provide evidentiary support for the following statements made in their Response to Court Order Regarding Arbitration Procedures: “The Church of Scientology International Justice Chief (“IJC”) has ruled that the procedures and rules governing a Committee of Evidence apply in arbitration proceedings” (Dkt. 91 at 2). Plaintiffs may rebut any such evidence within ten (10) days. (Emphasis supplied).
The Affidavit of Mike Ellis offers no evidence that there has been a ruling that the Committee of Evidence Rules apply to arbitration other than to intimate that that was the intent in 1963 (when the original “policy letter” was written which is now partly incorporated into the book Introduction to Scientology Ethics), which was long before arbitration ever existed in any enrollment agreement. In fact, no such ruling of the International Justice Chief ever took place. To the contrary, the Committee of Evidence Procedure could not possibly be used in arbitration as is shown by the cites provided by the church to The Introduction to Scientology Ethics book which contains the procedures and rules governing the Committee of Evidence. The purpose and function of the Committee of Evidence is completely incompatible with the limited procedure set forth in the Enrollment Agreement for choosing arbitrators. That is because the purpose, function and procedural substance applicable to the Committee of Evidence was not, and is not, intended to apply to arbitration.
(a) A Committee of Evidence is convened when it is suspected or alleged that a given person has committed a wrong (a “Crime” or “High Crime” in Scientology parlance) as opposed to a refund of contributions or allegations of fraud against the Church. “Crimes are punished by convening Committees of Evidence and may not be handled by direct discipline.” (Introduction to Scientology Ethics [all cites are to the 2007 edition of Introduction to Scientology Ethics Bridge Publications Inc, hereafter referred to as ITSEJ p. 307). “A Committee of Evidence is convened on the subject of a known Crime or High Crime, as it has come to be looked on (and is) a trial by jury, there being a charge. (ITSE p. 349)
(b) A Committee of Evidence functions as a fact-finding jury and is in no way similar to an arbitration panel. ” (It is] a fact-finding body composed of impartial persons properly convened by a Convening Authority which hears evidence from persons it calls before it, arrives at a finding and makes a full report and recommendation to its Convening Authority for his or her action.” (ITSE p. 338) The highest “Convening Authority” in Scientology is the International Justice Chief.
(c) A Committee of Evidence consists of appointed members, rather than party-selected arbitrators. “The Chairman is appointed at the discretion of the Convening Authority appointing the Committee.” “The Secretary is appointed specifically by the Convening Authority.” (ITSE p. 338) “Members of the Committee are specifically named by the Convening Authority. In addition to the Chairman and Secretary they may not number less than two or more than five.” (ITSE p. 339)
(d) A Committee of Evidence is not authorized to preside over matters relating to return of funds. “The org or any part of it may not be sued for financial damages or refund.” (ITSE p. 355)
(e) As written into the Enrollment Agreement, the guise of “arbitration” was intended to apply after a person exhausted the review by the International Justice Chief, who is the highest authority in Scientology. The Enrollment Agreements state: “Any dispute, claim or controversy which still remains unresolved after review by the IJC shall be submitted to binding religious arbitration in accordance with the arbitration procedures of Church of Scientology International … ”
(f) Unlike the procedure established for naming arbitrators, the Committee of Evidence is “composed of Chairman, Secretary, and two to five Committee members appointed by the Convening Authority” (ITSE p. 346), not three scientologists in good-standing chosen by the parties as is the case in arbitration.
(g) The Committee of Evidence findings can be altered or nullified by the convening authority, who “approves, mitigates or disproves the Findings and Recommendations of the Committee of Evidence he or she appoints” (ITSE p. 338) and he ” … may disband a Committee of Evidence he or she convenes if it fails to be active in the prosecution of its business, and may convene another Committee in its place” (ITSE p. 338)
7. Committees of Evidence are specifically not to deal with matters of “refunds.” Mr. Ellis has been intentionally disingenuous in para 2 of his declaration where he references the original 1963 “Policy Letter” on Committees of Evidence as referring to “refunds”. But this reference was subsequently changed, and refunds are no longer mentioned with regard to Committees of Evidence in current church policy. This is why he did not cite to Introduction to Scientology Ethics, because the word “refund” no longer appears in the discussion of Committees of Evidence. Yet at para 5 he avers that this book is the policy of the church that is “understood by members of the religion” not an obscure 1963 edition of a “policy letter” that is generally unavailable to the public.
8. Even so, the 1963 “policy letter” Mr. Ellis cites and the entire Introduction to Scientology Ethics, do not include the word arbitration anywhere.
9. On the other hand, the Enrollment Agreements make no mention of Committee of Evidence rules – the only specification concerning arbitration procedure is directly contradictory to the procedures described in Introduction to Scientology Ethics.
10. On page 2 of the Declaration of Mike Ellis, he states “since 2002, over 5,000 of these proceedings (Committee on Evidence) have been conducted”. Yet, he has not denied that there has never been an arbitration hearing in the entire history of The Church apart from an unnamed and untimed “recent” request for arbitration which presumably postdates all Enrollment Agreements and the motions in this Court.
11. The Committee of Evidence chapter appears on page 337 of Introduction to Scientology Ethics. On page 309 of the same book it states “Suppressive Persons or Groups relinquish their rights as Scientologists by their very actions and may not receive the benefits of the Codes of the Church.” It is without question that the Plaintiffs in this case have been declared suppressive persons by The Church so that even if some strained interpretation were to apply the Committee of Evidence Rules to the arbitration process, they would not apply to these Plaintiffs who by Church decree are not entitled to participate in any benefits of the Codes of The Church. The International Justice Chief has sent letters to those requesting refunds, denying them access to any Scientology “justice,” even denying them the right to a Committee of Evidence, let alone arbitration, on the basis that this is a “High Crime” in Scientology
“Demanding the return of any and all donations made for standard training and processing actually received or received in part and still available but undelivered but only because of departure of the person demanding (the donations must be refunded but this policy applies)” (ITSE p. 312) and thus they are not entitled to the “benefit” of any Scientology justice procedures.
I hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this 15th day of October, 2014, in Palm Harbor, FL.
From Tony Ortega’s blog post of July 29, 2014:
Hana joined Scientology in 1965, became Clear number 60, then went to sea with L. Ron Hubbard, who made her captain of one of his ships. Increasingly disillusioned by what she saw of Hubbard up close, and especially after the material released in “OT 3,” she eventually left Scientology in 1984 and then became one of the most well known critics and intervention specialists. By 1991, she was probably the biggest “SP” on the planet, and the attention paid to her by the church’s private eyes proved it…
During her interview, Hana says, “I think that if Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder ever decide to talk about this, they will talk about some of the operations that were launched against us, because they were extensive.”
We talked to Rinder, who said that between 1986 and 1993, he wasn’t working with OSA except for a period regarding Gerry Armstrong and some other specific matters. In 1991, when Hana’s surveillance was so heavy, Rinder says he was working on the LRH Life Exhibition as LRH PPRO Int (personal public relations international) after a stint in the Rehabilitation Project Force, the Sea Org’s prison detail. He says he had no experience in or oversight of the operations against Hana and Jerry Whitfield.
“But I have no doubt that they underwent the same things that were done to Vaughn and Stacy Young, or Graham Berry, or others I am familiar with” he says. “Private eyes following them, calling in complaints against them, moving in next door, listening in on cordless phone calls, the whole thing,” Rinder says. 1
Gerry wrote Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder many times and asked them to debrief about the extensive operations that were launched against him. He has made no secret of what was wanted, and what it was for, but have published openly. From March 2014:
I am not asking Marty or Mike for a deep psycho-philosophical shift, when, for example, a person changes from lying as a pro-survival activity and way of life and starts to value and desire truth telling and that becomes a way of life. I am also not denying that such a shift could perhaps occur, or be related. I think testifying seventy-some days in Scientology litigations might have altered me psycho-philosophically, and certainly being M & M & every other Scientologist’s target for all these years has.
I believe, however, that the testimony or truth that Marty and Mike can provide me, which would assist in correcting injustices, can be provided in a couple of days. They know how to debrief, know how to tell the truth, and have always had the ability. The idea that Scientologists cannot tell the truth or do not know truth from lies is a ruse that some Scientologists use to escape responsibility and natural consequences for the bad acts they know they’ve committed against their victims, or are still committing.
Marty and Mike are at cause over their refusal to now assist the people they helped to damage or destroy by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities. Their condition or their place in their long or short path of waking, recovery and healing is not why they have not assisted their victims. They had the ability to assist people while inside Scientology and the Sea Org, and the idea that they have lost that ability since leaving is ridiculous. They also have the same reasons for refusing to assist their victims that they had while in the SO. They did not acquire a new set of reasons for doing what they had always done: something or anything other than assisting their victims, giving justice, telling the truth.
I am just requesting the narrow, relevant truth about a clear and active matter: Marty, Mike, Hubbard, Miscavige, et al. v. Armstrong & friends. Marty and Mike are two individuals with a great deal of information, who are now presenting as fighters for justice who have told the truth about their part in victimizing others. Since they have not told the truth, and do not seek justice, even in correcting injustices they perpetrated and can help correct, the logical conclusion is that they are “Loyalists” mispresenting themselves.2
See also this note that includes Rinder’s clarification of why, as Graham Berry wondered, he had “not done anything to assist redeem, or apologize, those others of us who were damaged and/or destroyed by OSA’s intimidation, litigation and defamation activities.” It’s his timelessness.3
- The Unabomber Op (January 4, 2019)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 8) (February 28, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 7) February 27, 2018
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 6) (February 26, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 5) (February 25, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 4) (February 24, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 3) (February 22, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 2) (February 20, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 2) (February 20, 2018)
- A letter to Mike Rinder: Your victim speaks up (Part 1) (February 18, 2018)
- Mike Rinder: Keeping the IRS tax exemption working (Part 3) (February 17, 2018)
- Mike Rinder: Keeping the IRS tax exemption working (Part 2) (February 16, 2018)
- Mike Rinder: Keeping the IRS tax exemption working (Part 1) (February 14, 2018)
- Scientology Tax Exemption — Muffins Strikes Back (February 5, 2018)
- GA’s open letter to Mike Rinder: What’s lacking now? (January 7, 2017)
- No do it Mike Rinder. Tell the truth. (December 10, 2016)
- No truth from Rinder? No reconciliation (December 08, 2016)
- Letter to Alex Gibney on the IRS deal, public policy, and calling out Rathbun and Rinder (March 6, 2015)
- Deposition of Michael J. Rinder (January 6, 2015)
- GA Letter to Jesse Prince (November 14, 2014)
- GA Letter to Jesse Prince (November 9, 2014)
- Jesse Prince: The Future is Here and I’m Feeling Good. (November 7, 2014)
- Affidavit of Michael Rinder (October 15, 2014)
- Tony Ortega quoting Mike Rinder… (July 29, 2014)
- GA letter to Marty Rathbun re the petards in his Memoirs (January 12, 2014)
- Declaration of Michael Rinder (January 1, 2014)
- Declaration of Michael Rinder (December 3, 2013)
- Declaration of Michael Rinder (November 7, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Pat Broeker (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on John G. Peterson (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Gerald Feffer (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: The Juggernaut (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Earle Cooley’s partner and protégé, Harry Manion (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: Earle Cooley was bigger than life… (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: The Battle of Portland (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Robert N. Harris and Eugene Ingram (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on All Clear, Joey Deciccio, and the Flynn problem (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on the Check Forgery Frame Ads (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Clayton Ruby and Marlys Edwardh (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on mounting the offensive against Flynn and FAMCO (May 28, 2013)
- Mark Rathbun: on Michael Flynn, Geoffrey Shervell and Gerry Armstrong (May 28, 2013)
- Skirmish over YT video of Mike Rinder black PRing Gerry Armstrong and Graham Berry (June 16, 2012)
- Markus Thoess Interview of Mike Rinder (ca. June, 2011)
- To Mike Rinder (April 14, 2010)
- Transcript of Jesse Prince’s Speech (March 26, 2010)
- Transcript: The Truth Rundown: From renovation to IRS Rathbun rises through the ranks (June 21, 2009)
- Declaration of Gerry Armstrong (March 7, 2006)
- Testimony of Jesse Prince (Volume 8) (July 11, 2002)
- Testimony of Jesse Prince (Volume 7) (July 10, 2002)
- Testimony of Jesse Prince (Volume 5) (July 9, 2002)
- Testimony of Jesse Prince (Volume 4) (July 9, 2002)
- Testimony of Jesse Prince (Volume 3) (July 8, 2002)
- Affidavit of Jesse Prince (May, 2002)
- Affidavit of Michael J. Rinder (May 9, 1999)
- Robert Vaughn Young: RVY Update by RVY (September 2, 1998)
- The Jesse Prince Story, Part 1 (August 3, 1998)
- Declaration of Michael Walton (June 6, 1996)
- Declaration of Stacy Brooks Young (December 14, 1994)
- Declaration of Michael Rinder (October 27, 1994)
- Declaration of Vicki J. Aznaran (Sell-out No. 2) (May 19, 1994)
- Declaration of Vicki J. Aznaran (Sell-out No. 1) (May 19, 1994)
- Declaration of Michael Rinder (April 11, 1994)
- Declaration of Gerry Armstrong (February 22, 1994)
- Declaration of Gerry Armstrong (February 20, 1994)
- Declaration of Gerry Armstrong (February 20, 1994)
- Appellant’s Opening Brief (January 19, 1993)
- CSI 1023 Submission: Exhibit III-10-Q: [Loyalist Program illegal video transcript excerpts] (November 23, 1992)
- Declaration of Lynn R. Farny (March 19, 1992)
- Notice of Motion And Motion For Preliminary Injunction For Breach Of Contract (February 4, 1992)
- Declaration of Lynn R. Farny (January 28, 1992)
- Declaration Of Gerald Armstrong Regarding Alleged “Taint” Of Joseph A. Yanny, Esquire (September 4, 1991)
- Memorandum (August 26, 1991)
- Declaration of Lynn R. Farny (August 26, 1991)
- Declaration of Gerald Armstrong (April 9, 1986)
- LA Weekly: Inside Scientology: The Other Side of the Looking Glass (April 4-10, 1986)
- Affidavit of Gerald Armstrong (November 1, 1985)
- Scientology’s edited version of the illegal videos (narrated by Heber Jentzsch) (ca. mid 1985)
- OSA Press Release (April 23, 1985)
- Declaration of John G. Peterson (April 17, 1985)
- Court transcript: Illegal video of November 30, 1984
- Christofferson: Excerpt of Proceedings (April 16, 1985)
- Court transcript: Illegal video of November 17, 1984
- Christofferson: Excerpt of Proceedings (April 12,15, 1985)
- Christofferson: Excerpt of Proceedings (April 11, 1985)
- Heber Jentzsch: On the Loyalist Program (November 30, 1984)
- Scientology’s transcript: Illegal video (November 30, 1984)
- Transcript: Illegal video (November 17, 1984)