The Armstrong Op

Scientology's fair game on Gerry Armstrong

Introduction 

You are here: Home / Archives for Steven Fishman

Declaration of Stacy Brooks Young (December 14, 1994)

by

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

Letter from Heber Jentzsch to James McGovern, Assistant IRS Commissioner (November 5, 1994)

by

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. 20224

Re: 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 THREE

awarded 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 FOUR

My 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

  1. This document in PDF format. ↩
  2. February 1994 letter in PDF format. ↩

Declaration of Michael Rinder (October 27, 1994)

by

[CT 7417]

I, MICHAEL RINDER, declare as follows:1

1. I am over 18 years of age and a resident of the State of California. I am a director of the Church of Scientology International (‘CSI” or “the Church”), the mother church of the Scientology religion. By virtue of my position, I am familiar with the Church’s legal affairs, and I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this declaration. If I were called upon to do so, I could and would competently testify thereto.

2. In July 1994, another Church staff member, Michael and I spent several days in Seattle, Washington, meeting with apostate Scientologists Stacy and Robert Vaughn Young. The Youngs left the Church in 1989, and approximately four years later, in 1993, they appeared as witnesses for hire in litigation against Churches of Scientology, Scientologists or businesses owned by Scientologists. Among the attorneys who hired and paid the Youngs for their testimony was Graham E. Berry of the Lewis, D’Amato firm, who used their purchased testimony many times in Church of Scientology International v. Fishman and Geertz, No. 91-6426-HLH (TX) (C.D.Cal.).

3. The Youngs’ activities had resulted in the Church spending considerable time and energy to correct the falsehoods they had injected into these lawsuits. So we travelled to Seattle to meet with the Youngs in the hope that direct communication with them might lead them to correct their false statements and cease their campaign against the Church. We explained this purpose for our visit when we met with the Youngs first on July 9, 1994. We told them that recently several other

1

[CT 7418]

litigation opponents of the Church had stated that they had wished we had been in direct communication earlier and it may have prevented years of litigation and disputes. We told the Youngs that we sought to avoid that same situation from occurring with them.

4. We were direct and forthright with explaining why we wanted to meet with them. 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. At the end, however, it was clear that “economic hardship” was simply a euphemism for amoral greed. Their professed guilt about the dishonest quality of their sworn statements could not overpower their craving for money. Thus, we resolved nothing in those talks.

5. Stacy told us that she believed that it would be in everyone’s best interest for the conflict between the Youngs and the Church to end. 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. Stacy said she could not stand living a lie and wanted out, and that Vaughn also “hated” being involved in the litigation. We explained that we simply wanted to resolve matters, get the record set straight, and the Church and the Youngs could get on with their respective lives. They agreed that this was a desirable objective.

6. Stacy recounted the story of what had happened to them

2

[CT 7419]

and how they had come to get involved with writing declarations in the first place. She said that neither she nor Vaughn were good with money and that after leaving the Church in 1989, they had run up tens of thousands of dollars in debts. She said that they first tried to live off various family members while Vaughn attempted to establish himself as a writer. The family eventually balked at that, and the Youngs were on their own. She said they used up their savings and over-extended their credit cards in an unsuccessful attempt to create a computerized, desk-top publishing business. Stacy said that she and Vaughn both wanted to work as writers and eventually took a series of jobs in several small newspapers in the San Diego and Newport Beach areas. These jobs did not pay well, and they were heavily in debt when the last paper for which they worked went bankrupt. Their financial situation worsened as Vaughn was unemployed and refused to take on any employment other than as a writer. Stacy earned the only income, working for an insurance sales firm which she said she hated.

7. Stacy told us that their financial situation deteriorated to the point that she had threatened Vaughn with divorce if he did not get a job. Vaughn then got a job driving a taxi cab. He was unable to continue this however, when, after running out of gas, he attempted to push his vehicle, lost control of it, and injured his leg. Additionally, Stacy said she had suffered a tubal pregnancy, necessitating an operation. Between the medical bills and the lack of a steady income source, Stacy explained that they ended up more than $50,000 in debt, It was in those circumstances that the Youngs turned to trafficking in

3

[CT 7420]

anti-Scientology allegations as a means of making money.

8. Stacy said that in early 1993, at the depth of their financial crisis, a British anti-Scientologist, Jon Atack, introduced them to an active anti-religionist in the Los Angeles area named Priscilla Coates. It was through Coates and her attorney, Daniel Leipold, that the Youngs connected up with Graham Berry, for whom they eventually became paid “consultants.”

9. At one point in our conversations, 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. Stacy said that she had made a vow, like Scarlet O’Hara in Gone With The Wind, that no matter what it took, she would never be poor again. Vaughn explained that it was “a great way to utilize twenty years that I was trying to avoid on my resume,” and that he could work one afternoon and make what would be a weekly salary in any other job.

10. In the course of the discussions, 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, but explained that in order to be able to survive, they provided testimony requested by the attorneys, and that they had to write what was wanted or they would not get paid. Stacy said it was “obvious” they would not be paid to write things that

4

[CT 7421]

would be helpful to the Church.

11. We challenged them to explain how they could justify lying as a way of life, and they told us that what they had mostly done was twist facts and used “creative writing” and innuendo to paint a picture that was negative to the Church. They explained that they had tried to avoid explicitly lying about facts so they could not be accused of perjury. Vaughn especially seemed proud of this, and said that he was a writer by profession, which is why he was so good at preparing declarations and why he was paid so well. He claimed that unlike the Fishman case declarations of Andre Tabayoyon, Steve Fishman and Garry Scarff, where the lies and inconsistencies were obvious, his declarations were worded in such a way as to make them much more difficult to discredit. Nothing he said ever disavowed his explanation of how he manipulated facts to create false illusions.

12. Both of the Youngs readily agreed that they could easily set the record straight by writing new declarations which would “clarify” the statements they had made previously. Vaughn said that he did not want to write anything that would be a “direct contradiction” to what he had written earlier, but this was simply a matter of “interpreting” things differently. He said he intended to make his career as a writer and would need “credibility” in order to obtain future jobs, so wanted to do this “properly.”

13. Stacy said that by writing such declarations they would “burn their bridges” with the anti Scientology camp. She went on to say that this would not be difficult to do as they did not

5

[CT 7422]

want to be involved in anti-Scientology litigation matters any longer and in fact, they were “between jobs” at the time, so it was an opportune moment to bring this entire episode in their lives to an end.

14. Stacy and Vaughn spoke extensively about matters they had put in earlier declarations during the course of several days of meetings. They explained their true views and talked candidly about many matters. For example, in the Fishman case, Graham Berry wanted them to execute declarations to support the contention that Steven Fishman was an experienced Scientologist. Both Youngs said that this presented a problem as the very data which Berry had given them to orient them to the “facts” of the case proved that Fishman was a fraud. Upon reading Fishman’s unpublished manuscript, The Lonesome Squirrel, they told us they had the same reaction: That Fishman was psychotic and that his so-called experiences in Scientology described in his manuscript never occurred. Stacy specifically mentioned by way of example that the manuscript discusses meetings and activities allegedly done by a Church staff member, Lyman Spurlock. Stacy said that she knew that such incidents could not have occurred; that Lyman Spurlock would never have done the actions Fishman alleged and that Fishman’s description simply does not match Mr. Spurlock. Further, she knew that the meetings described between Fishman and Church officials simply could not conceivably have occurred. She said the whole manuscript was ridiculous, a fabrication. Vaughn said he could not even finish the manuscript, it was so bad.

15. Similarly, they both described watching a video of Fishman describing the operation of a Hubbard Electrometer

6

[CT 7423]

(E-meter). The video was supposed to demonstrate Fishman’s competence and knowledge in Scientology. The Youngs said Fishman explained that the meter’s “sensitivity knob” was used to keep the meter’s needle on its dial, and that this was such a ridiculous mistake that they burst out laughing and knew with certainty that Fishman was not an experienced, Scientology auditor.

16. Stacy also pointed out that they both knew that Fishman’s claims of having completed the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course — an advanced course in Scientology counseling — was a lie, that it was physically impossible for anyone to complete the course in the six weeks Fishman claimed. In fact, after recounting these facts, both Vaughn and Stacy stated that they knew that Fishman and his co-defendant, Uwe Geertz, were both crazy and that their allegations about Scientology were false.

17. Stacy said she had to come up with a way of supporting Fishman’s claims for Berry because she needed the money. She said she knew that she could not state in a declaration that Fishman was a long-term Scientologist as that would be, in her words, “completely untrue.” Instead, she said that she played with words and concepts so that she could, without directly lying, construct a picture that would create the impression that Fishman knew what he was saying about Scientology. She said she even knew that Fishman was ineligible for Church services due to an extensive history of psychological treatment, and to solve that she had created a way of explaining his “involvement” by alleging that “the Church had negligently allowed Fishman to read

7

[CT 7424]

church scripture,” and that this “resulted in Fishman’s mental state deteriorating.” She said that she knew his mental state was not good, and that he knew some Scientology words and terms (though he usually misused them) and therefore this was a “credible” scenario that suited the attorney.

18. Stacy said that her theory was used to support the contention that Fishman had been “exposed” to upper level Church scriptures, even though he had never attained that level in the Church and the materials are kept strictly confidential in the Church.

19. She went on to explain that her distortions had extended to allegations about brainwashing, and that here she had quoted completely out of context from the writings of L. Ron Hubbard. She gave this as a classic example of how one can distort the facts. She said that it was ironic that while she was in the Church she had compiled a pack of materials written by L. Ron Hubbard where he had alerted people to the existence and dangers of mind control techniques through the use of pain, drugs and hypnosis. She had created the pack to rebut falsehoods presented by Bent Corydon in his case against the Church and that it showed that Mr. Hubbard was in the forefront of the condemnation of brainwashing techniques and had developed the first techniques to counteract it. For the Fishman case, however, she explained that she took this very same material and pulled selected quotes out of context to give her declaration a 180-degree reverse “spin.” Her Fishman declaration then gave the false impression that Scientology techniques were mind control when, in fact, they are just the opposite.

8

[CT 7425]

20. One of the falsehoods I brought up with Vaughn Young was his allegation that David Miscavige was involved in the death of his mother-in-law, and that Vaughn had stated that it was a murder.He said that “if you read my statements exactly (‘Mr. Miscavige’s behavior was overlooked in the investigation of the death of his mother-in-law… She died… from three shots to the chest and to the temple from a .22 rifle.’) you’ll see I didn’t say David Miscavige murdered his mother-in law.” I told him that this was the impression he created and he replied “Exactly.” He said that he could never have directly made the accusation as it wasn’t true but he crafted his declaration to create that impression.

21. Young said he had done the same thing when he attempted to create the impression that the Church was involved in the death of Steven Fishman’s wife, even though he knew this was simply incredible. However, he explained that they needed statements that would support the defense’s position, so he worked with the material he had.

22. This is what led to him supporting Fishman’s contention that he had been ordered to commit suicide or to “do an ‘end of cycle.'” Young explained that the three words did have a meaning in Scientology, and even though he knew that Fishman falsely claimed the term was Scientology slang for suicide or murder, and that this in fact was further evidence that Fishman was not a Scientologist, he had enough to go on to fashion a statement for a declaration that would be interpreted to support Fishman’s claims.

23. Vaughn also said that the Church could be poisoned by

9

[CT 7426]

throwing around numerous allegations about the Church ordering people to commit suicide or murder. This was especially difficult to respond to when the events were so old they could not be objectively verified, and where no allegation of wrongdoing had been made at the time, so it would be too time consuming to attempt to correct them all.

24. Vaughn had further expanded on this theory when he stated that one cannot simply leave Scientology — i.e., cease being a member of the Church — because a Church policy states that it is better that a person “be dead” than to not be a dedicated Scientologist. Vaughn said he knew the quote was not meant to be taken literally, but again, it was something that as written he could not be charged with perjury for, yet he created a completely wrong impression. Ironically, both of them acknowledged that except for assistance from the Church to help them retrieve their belongings after they abruptly left the Church without notice, they had had no contact with any Scientologists from shortly after they left the Church until they began to file declarations against the Church, a period of more than three years.

25. Stacy also talked about her assertions that the upper level scriptures of the Church were in the public domain. She was challenged on this and admitted that she knew that the Church took great care to maintain the confidentiality of these scriptures as a matter of religious faith and actively would seek to prevent the improper distribution and exposure of these materials. She said she was willing to withdraw her declaration on this matter, as she knew how important this was to

10

[CT 7427]

Scientologists.

26. After Vaughn and Stacy had opened up and talked a great deal about what they had been doing in their anti-Scientology litigation, they also discussed some of the other witnesses who had been hired by Graham Berry to attack the Church. Their descriptions match my personal knowledge and made it obvious that these are not credible witnesses. Stacy specifically mentioned Gerry Armstrong and Larry Wollersheim, both of whom were also paid witnesses for Berry. Stacy told me that Armstrong is psychotic and lives in a delusory world in which he holds conversations with God. She said that Wollersheim is as crazy as Armstrong is.

27. They also talked about Andre Tabayoyon. Stacy was especially upset about him, and described an incident in which she and others were at the offices of Berry’s law firm. Tabayoyon was upset that he had not been paid and began yelling in a wild and uncontrolled manner and threatening to kill people. When Stacy told him to stop shouting and to act more professionally, he began to make threatening remarks to her. His yelling drew the attention of employees of the law firm who came to see what was going on. When they arrived in the conference room where Stacy and Tabayoyon were located, Tabayoyon abruptly stormed out of the office. Stacy also told me that Tabayoyon continually mistreated his wife, Mary, and that he regarded her as a slave. Both Stacy and Vaughn found this conduct very disturbing, and they said they would find excuses not to have to socialize with the Tabayoyons because they were not good company and had nothing worthwhile to say.

11

[CT 7428]

28. The Youngs said they would write declarations to set the record straight on points described above along with others. However, they said that as they would no longer have a source of income they needed help in getting on their feet. They wanted to get into the environmental or animal rights fields. They wanted nothing to do with litigation any longer, and even said that once they got established they might be able to help forward the Church’s environmental campaigns and programs. We said we would try to help find them jobs and might be able to assist them with a small loan or possibly even purchase of the rights to future writings to help them while they embarked on a new career.

29. We suggested that while we made inquiries about possible jobs for them, they should put together declarations which would rectify the falsehoods and misimpressions thay had created. They agreed that this would be easy for them to do.

30. Mike Sutter and I returned to Los Angeles and contacted Church staff and professionals who had connections in the environmental and animal rights areas and lined up several possible jobs for Vaughn and Stacy.

31. We returned to Seattle some days later to give Vaughn and Stacy the good news about the jobs we had found. We thought they wanted to resolve their differences with the Church and settle down to an honest living and that this would come as welcome news. It became clear almost immediately that they were not interested.

32. They said they had not written draft declarations, and in fact, had been thinking about it and had decided that they wanted the Church to pay them $540,000 — enough money to live

12

[CT 7429]

without having to work for five years. They claimed that if they were to set the record straight it would end their careers as anti-Scientology consultants and that this was a lot of future income to give up. They made no mention of the morality of their position, and when challenged on it, merely responded that this was just a matter of money, not of right and wrong nor truth or fact. They would do and say whatever would make them money.

33. In an attempt to make their ridiculous demand sound reasonable, they stated that even for $540,000 they were not sure that they would write the declarations to correct the record as they had earlier agreed. They said that since we had left they had been in communication with some people they refused to identify, and had been given “legal advice’ that if they were to correct the declarations they had filed, the insurance company could sue them for “breach of contract.”

34. It should be made clear here that neither of the Youngs has any claim against the Church and both have stated such when asked this question directly in deposition. I brought this up to the Youngs to make clear to them that they couldn’t even have a reason for thinking we owed them money. I told them that if they wanted peace they had to voluntarily provide truthful declarations to correct their lies and that we would not accede to their extortionate demand. While admitting that we didn’t owe them anything for what they had done while in the Church, their answer was simple. It was not a moral question. They earned a good living distorting facts against Scientology, and for them to stop, we should pay up. Vaughn Young summed up their position by claiming that the more of an asshole one is the more one is

13

[CT 7430]

worth in this game.

35. I told Vaughn that I could not believe he was demanding that the Church pay him an enormous amount of money so he would not have to work at all. He became very indignant at this and threatened that he would “do more” and that we would wish that we had “paid him now rather than have to deal with what he would do to us in the future.”

36. Thus the Youngs ultimately refused to put down on paper what they had so willingly told us in person, because we would not pay them for the truth like they had been paid to lie.

37. The Youngs never retracted their admissions that their publicly filed declarations created false impressions and contained lies. In fact, they even said they would now have difficulty carrying on with their “profession” as witnesses due to what they had told us.

38. In summary, the facts are as follows: When we met with them alone, the Youngs candidly admitted what we have been telling the court all along, they have been lying and intentionally distorting facts. They do it knowingly and will readily admit to it outside the presence of an attorney or Court Reporter. They feel comfortable in making these allegations because they know that unfounded accusations against Scientology are given much greater deference in the Courts than are false and degrading accusations made about others. They saw this themselves when they were in the Church, and now they exploit it for cash.

39. No doubt they will now try to deny the facts laid out in this declaration, but when they do so, their motivation should be

14

[CT 7431]

remembered. They still have their jobs as anti-Scientology witnesses to protect.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 27th day of October 1994 at Los Angeles, California.

[signed]
Michael Rinder
MICHAEL RINDER

Notes

Declaration of Vicki J. Aznaran (Sell-out No. 5) (May 19, 1994)

by

I, VICKI J. AZNARAN, hereby declare as follows:1

1. I am over 18 years of age and a resident of the State of Texas. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth
herein and, if called upon to do so, could and would competently testify thereto.

2. From 1972 until 1987, 1 was a member of various Church of Scientology (“Church”) entities. During that time I held a number of senior positions in the corporate and ecclesiastic hierarchy of the Church.

3. From 1981 onward I knew both Vaughn and Stacy Young, whom I met and had contact with as a result of my work as a staff. r,ember in the Church of Scientology. I am familiar with their positions in the Church.

4. In my staff capacities in the early 1980s, and later in my executive positions in the Religious Technology Center, I was directly or closely involved in meetings with senior staff members of various Church corporations. These senior staff made significant or major decisions which affected the future of the Church. I know that neither Vaughn nor Stacy Young were included in such senior decision-making processes. They were never senior or key Church executives.. They were not consulted regarding, nor were they privy to, the meetings where major issues were discussed and decisions made.

5. I am informed that the Youngs have made claims to specialized knowledge about the corporate status and structure of the Church. Such claims are false. Neither of the Youngs were in a position to have detailed knowledge of the corporate and fiscal structures and operations of any Church of Scientology. In fact, Vaughn Young worked in the area of Public Relations for the entire time that I was acquainted with him. Stacy was primarily a writer in the Church public relations department.

6. Another false allegation is Vaughn Young’s claim to be not only knowledgeable about but personally affected by a dispute in 1986 and 1987 between David Miscavige and Pat Broeker concerning Scientology scriptures. I was with Broeker during this period and was aware of this situation. To my knowledge Vaughn Young was not in a position to know what happened during this dispute.

7. That Vaughn and Stacy Young are experts is not true. They are being called experts not due to expertise in Scientology but in order to collect insurance money for their testimony. When Graham Berry retained me for $2,500 to write declarations, he made it clear to me he would get me classified as an”expert” so the insurance company would pay.

8. What this creates, and what the Youngs are part of, is a stable of people who, for pay, write declarations. The Fishman case is a good example. Neither the Youngs nor I have ever met Steve Fishman.

9. Stacy Young apparently claims special expertise regarding Scientology scriptures. This is just another part of the sham that has been erected around this litigation. She doesn’t hold herself out as an “expert” in her life outside of this litigation. It is only when testimony is needed for Mr. Berry th at the”expert” title is used.

10. To give an example of how this “expert” plan works, Vaughn Young claims, as an “expert,” that Steven Fishman was known and discussed by senior Church executives and staff. For years in the inid-1980s I was one of the highest ranking executives in all of the Churches of Scientology. Furthermore, I never heard David Miscavige or Marc Yager, whom I had regular contact with, ever mention his name. Thus it is inconceivable to me that Vaughn Young would have heard any Church staff member or executive talk about Fishman. He was not in a position to know and I was.

11. The Youngs rely on innuendo to make allegations under the guise of ” expert knowledge.” Here are some specific exanples: a) that End of Cycle within the Church means committing suicide. There is no such policy and in fact this is totally contrary to Church policy and they know this; b) that members of the Church are involved in murder of adversaries. This never occurred at any time and it is a lie that anyone connected with he Church would recognize including the Youngs; c) Vaughn Young implied that there might be something suspicious about the death f L. Ron Hubbard. This is fictitious scandal. I was a senior executive and can state that L. Ron Hubbard’s death was not by anything other than natural causes; d) inferring that the death of Flo Barnett was covered up by Mr. Miscavige. There was never ny question that the cause of her death was due to self-inflicted gunshot wounds. Additionally, the facts are that there was never any order by David Miscavige or anyone else to keep the matter quiet. If such an order existed, I would have known about it: e) an additional forum in which this false information is spread in FACTNET. This is a computer base which seeks to create the impression that Scientology is somehow responsible for the deaths of certain individuals. Anyone who knows Scientology or has been involved with it knows this is not realistic.

12. The above are examples of the falsehood and innuendo created by the stable of false “expert” witnesses that has been created here.

I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America, and under the laws of each individual state thereof, including the laws of the states of California and Texas, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 19th day of May, 1994 in Dallas, Texas.

Vicki Aznaran

Notes

  1. Document source: http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/Aznaran.htm ↩

Declaration of Michael Rinder (April 11, 1994)

by

John J. Quinn
QUINN KULLY & MORROW
520 S. Grand Avenue
Eighth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
(213) 622-0300

Kendrick L. Moxon
Timothy Bowles
BOWLES & MOXON
6255 Sunset Blvd., Suite 2000
Hollywood, CA 90028
(213) 953-3360

Jonathan W. Lubell
MORRISON COHEN SINGER & WEINSTEIN
750 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10022
(212) 735-8600

Attorneys for Plaintiff
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, a California Non-Profit Religious Organization,
Plaintiff

vs.

STEVEN FISHMAN and UWE GEERTZ,
Defendants.

CASE NO. CV 91-6426 HLH(TX)

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL RINDER1

I. Michael Rinder, hereby declare and state:

1. I am a Director of the Church of Scientology International (CSI). I was raised in the Scientology religion and have been a staff member in the Church since 1973. As such, I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this

1

declaration and if called as a witness, I could and would testify competently thereto.

2. As a Director of CSI, I have seen the filings made by the defendants and their lawyers in this case over the past six months.

3. Clearly, the focus of the defendants has not been on trying to disprove the defamation of which they were guilty or even to address issues related to the defamation. Instead, they have sought to turn this case into a witch hunt of the Scientology religion. In doing so, the paid witnesses in this case have specifically targeted the leader of the religion, David Miscavige, for their abusive lies and outrageous accusations.

4. Why would defendants and their counsel devote such an inordinate amount of attention to a non-party such as David Miscavige? Why would defendants’ counsel’s mercenary witness expose their lack of credibility so plainly by their resort to such outrageous and false allegations about him when he never had any involvement with Fishman, Geertz or this case? It is apparent that their effort to denigrate the leader of the religion is part of a campaign to create a false impression of, and thereby, denigrate Scientology. The lies that have been propagated in this case are vile beyond description. Their purpose, as made clear by Graham Berry himself, is to use them as a threat to extort funds from the Church. They have gotten away with this barrage of lies so far, and as a consequence, Berry now has the precedent of this case to use to create a future threat that he hopes will prompt CSI to pay to make him take his lies and go away.

2

5. David Miscavige prevented the Aznarans and Youngs from carrying out what would have been a catastrophic turn of events for the religion. Vicki Aznaran and Vaughn Young were involved in a scheme to pervert the scriptures of L. Ron Hubbard for their own profit. They were caught and stopped by David Miscavige. For this, every Scientologist is grateful. Even then, they were given the opportunity to redeem themselves within the Church. While they now rail against Mr. Miscavige and unleash the foulest lies about him their imaginations can concoct, any Scientologist would have thought it totally proper under the circumstances for those people to have been expelled from the Church without a chance for mercy. However, he gave them another chance. I know that he personally spent many hours with both Vicki Aznaran and Vaughn Young trying to help them regain their self-respect. They decided that rather than face those whom they had betrayed, that they would leave staff. Mr. Miscavige even helped the Aznarans to get themselves established in a new job. They were encouraged to continue in Scientology and treated civilly, as even they have testified elsewhere. Yet, all this being true, the Youngs and Aznarans still have a deep-seated hatred for Mr. Miscavige and have used this litigation to vent that hatred and to seek millions of dollars for their silence. There is no justifiable explanation for this, just as there is no explanation for savages dismembering missionaires who work for years helping them overcome poverty and disease. One can seek to help others and treat people with compassion and dignity, but the blind hatred harbored by a few cannot be restrained, no matter how hard one might try.

3

6. These people have gathered around them a few others who are bitter and harbor an unabiding resentment of Scientology and what it stands for and for their own failures in the Church. They view the Church as their “lottery ticket” and pursue their jackpot with lies and threats at the expense of the millions of happy and satisfied members who support the Church with their time and donations. The Aznarans and Youngs are joined in that pursuit by the likes of Hana Whitfield, Andre and Mary Tabayoyon, Larry Wollersheim, Steve Fishman and Gerry Armstrong. Though they either do not know David Miscavige, or had some remote contact with him many years ago, they are willing to make vindictive allegations, not based on personal knowledge or the truth, and defame him personally and as the leader of the religion. The tactic is as transparent as it is unconscionable — spread venom in the hope that the victims of the hate campaign will eventually be forced to buy their silence so the Church can get on with its real purpose of expanding the Scientology religion and helping more people.

7. While these so-called experts have no personal knowledge concerning David Miscavige, I do. I have known and worked with him since 1976.

8. The sheer volume of despicable allegations made about him are intended to create the false impression that where there is smoke there is fire. These “witnesses” know only too well from their experience in the Church that the tactic of telling bigger and bolder lies has been a strategy employed against the Church in litigation for years. Tell enough lies, and make enough allegations, and an impression will be created which

4

accomplishes the end of destroying a reputation no matter how untrue the allegations are. Public figures are especially susceptible to this fraud as any study of history shows. Jesus Christ was crucified based on the false accusations of Judas Iscariot and the prejudice of the Romans.

9. Pontius Pilate listened to the lies about Jesus and the Christians. The Germans bought the lies about the Jews. Innocence does not prevent the lies from being told. And when those lies fall on ears opened by bigotry and deaf to the truth, irreparable harm is done. Defendants, tactics in this case are a study in this technique.

10. I know David Miscavige personally. As such I know him to be completely honest, and sincerely dedicated to helping people. For what he has done to expand our religion, he has the respect and admiration of millions of Scientologists. And for this same reason, he has earned the enmity and particular scorn of those with a vendetta against Scientology.

11. In the last decade, he has personally done more to ensure Scientology is standardly applied and made more widely known and available than any other single individual. After L. Ron Hubbard, the Founder of Scientology, passed away in 1986, the religion entered a new phase. While there will never be another L. Ron Hubbard, his death marked a time of potential disruption and upheaval, and Mr. Miscavige shouldered the responsibility for not only keeping the scriptures pure, but for guiding our religion into a time of great stability and rapid growth. He never sought personal power or aggrandizement; he was thrust into the position he currently holds precisely because he is so

5

dedicated to helping others through our religion. It is because he has demonstrated time and time again his integrity and selfless willingness to serve for the good of others that he enjoys the support of the staff and parishioners of the Scientology religion.

12. I have spoken to him often, and spent a considerable amount of time working with him on various matters from the positions I have held throughout the years. I know from my own observation that he works sixteen hours a day, seven days a week without respite for only one reason–his sincere dedication to bettering the lives of others. He and his wife live in a single motel-style room. He eats with the rest of the staff in the communal dining room, he drives his own car and carries his own bags. He regularly partakes in general group activities. It would shock most people that anyone would work so hard for so little material reward. It certainly gave pause to ABC News when they saw it with their own eyes.

13. Until 1981, David worked, like hundreds of other Church staff, in positions that dealt with the internal operations of the religion. Apart from the staff he dealt with directly as part of his duties, few knew who he was. I never heard an unkind word said about him. That changed when he took action to protect the future of the Church by taking over and disbanding the Guardian’s Office. This story has been recounted before, but there are three things about it that bear repetition. First, what he did took an enormous amount of courage, for with no authority other than the moral authority of someone dedicated to the well-being of our Church, he overthrew what was at the time

6

the most feared and powerful group in Scientology (that they were feared is exactly why they had gone so far in contravention of Church policy as they were only answerable to themselves). Second, even after having achieved this feat, he did not seek a high profile position or attempt to “take over” the Church. He was happy to have those who were charged with running the Church continue to do so and have no part of it. Third, the overthrow of the Guardian’s Office began what I have seen to be a virtually unending history of personal attacks against him. He didn’t change, he merely became a-known name and high-profile target.

14. Over the last thirteen years, I have seen a parade of personal attacks levelled at Mr. Miscavige which would have caused a less determined and less capable individual to give up and relinquish the position of “lightning rod” for anyone seeking to disrupt or destroy the Church. The first. years saw attacks by government agencies, since proven totally false and unfounded, and documented by the government’s own files gained through the Freedom of Information Act. These attacks went on for more than a decade. Government agencies amassed huge volumes of files on him personally, and were aided by civil litigants who also jumped on the bandwagon and targeted Mr. Miscavige with their spite and malevolence. And in the face of this, when it would have been so easy to give up and walk away, never to be vilified or attacked again, I have seen him persist, because what he was doing in Scientology is important and invaluable to all those who are helped by L. Ron Hubbard’s technology. That determination was buttressed by the fact that none of the accusations made about him were true.

7

15. Mr. Miscavige is very approachable and friendly. He gives regular briefings to Scientology parishioners and staff in our Churches around the world. I estimate that he does such public briefings about 35 times a year. He stops and talks with the staff and public everywhere he goes. I have been with him on many occasions where he has stayed until the early morning hours to talk to individuals who remained after one of his briefings.  It is remarkable how many people know him and approach him as a friend. Thousands write to him to request his assistance on a wide variety of topics, and he always takes the time to help or see that help is gotten.

16. It is David Miscavige who has been the driving force in getting every single book, and all the materials of the Scientology Grade Chart, fully and strictly in accordance with the writings of L. Ron Hubbard. Every Scientologist is eternally thankful for this because it means the full availability of the complete Scientology scriptures as written or spoken by Mr. Hubbard. He took no credit for this accomplishment, though those of us who are aware of the enormous amount of time he spent working to make this goal a reality know that the credit he so graciously gave to others, in fact, belonged to him.

17. Perhaps less important in his eyes than what he does internally in the Church, he has directly and personally given a new face to Scientology through his appearances in the media, responding eloquently and effectively to the same, discredited allegations that have, been again dragged into this case.

18. And it is also David Miscavige who made the tax exemption by the IRS possible. It is he who personally walked

8

into the front lobby of the IRS National Headquarters and through two years of persistent work, ultimately brought about a peace with the IRS that had seemed impossible. But perhaps the most telling point is this: it was the IRS targeting individual Scientologists, merely because they were Scientologists, that motivated him the most in this endeavor. Again, he didn’t take credit for this, he has told me many times that he felt it was his duty to all Scientologists to carry this off so they would be free to practice their religion just like those of other faiths.

19. I have observed through the years David’s dedication to  helping his fellow staff in the Church. It is he who has raised the standards and conditions for staff members by insisting on constantly upgraded living quarters, dining areas and other staff facilities. It is he who has insisted on staff enhancement programs, and recreational facilities being provided for the staff of the Church.  Absurd allegations of slave labor being employed in the Church turn my stomach. I know the truth. They are lies, and those who utter them know them to be lies.

20. Mr. Miscavige has been the driving force in establishing the ideal school where my children have an environment-free from drugs and crime. My children and their peers know him as a friend and think the world of him for his thoughtfulness and care for their well-being and their education.

21. I know his compassion from personal experience. While Vicki Aznaran makes cruel claims concerning the death of my infant daughter, she does not know what in fact occurred, or if she does, she is simply lying to try to create a false impression. In this time of great personal upset, David and his

9

wife Shelly supported my wife and me beyond what could possibly be expected by anyone–seeing to our personal needs, arranging for the most highly trained auditors to give us spiritual counselling, arranging plane fares and reservations, helping with the funeral arrangements and making it as easy as possible in every fashion imaginable for us to come through this upsetting time. I resent any implication that has been made to the contrary by Vicki Aznaran–her statements are beneath contempt.

22. On many occasions I have seen David go out of his way to help others. I well recall two times where I took ill and it was David who called the doctor and personally ensured that everything possible was done to help me recover. He contacted the doctor (both occasions were late at night and required tracking down doctors in the middle of the night) and ensured I was properly treated. It would have been easy for him to let someone else take care of me, but he did so personally, and would not leave or rest until the matter was resolved. These are things I will never forget.

23. I have seen him act in a similar fashion with many others. As I work with him often, and know many of the people that know him, I am aware of the high regard in which he is held by Scientologists and those he comes in contact with. I have never heard a negative statement made about him by anyone other than those who seek to extort money from the Church. It really is that simple.

24. Comparing what I know to what I read in the declarations of these paid “witnesses,” makes the lies even more vivid and callous. There is no resemblance to the individual I know that

10

can be drawn from the innuendo, allegations and falsehoods that are written about him. To believe the statements of this tiny handful of spiteful apostates, in the face of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary, would be to listen to the testimony of Judas Iscariot. Their lies are no less bold, baldfaced or malicious.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 11th day of April, 94.

[signed]
Michael Rinder

11

Notes

  1. This document in PDF format. ↩

Recent posts

Archives

Tags

Ala Fadili Al Tamimi Armstrong 1 Boston Herald Brad Balentine Check Forgery Frame Christofferson v. Scientology Cointelpro Dan Sherman David Kluge David Miscavige Earle C. Cooley Eric M. Lieberman Eugene M. Ingram fair game FAMCO FBI Gerry Armstrong Heber C. Jentzsch Impersonation IRS Jesse Prince John G. Peterson L. Ron Hubbard L. Ron Hubbard Jr. Laurel Sullivan Lawrence Wollersheim Lisa McPherson Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates Loyalist Program Loyalists Mark C. Rathbun Mary Sue Hubbard Michael J. Flynn Michael J. Rinder Monique Yingling Norman Starkey Omar Garrison Pat Broeker PC folders Philip A. Rodriguez Robert Vaughn Young RTC Scientologist The Oregonian Vicki Aznaran