1 2 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA 3 CASE NO. 00-5682-CI-11 4 DELL LIEBREICH, as Personal 5 Representative of the ESTATE OF LISA McPHERSON, 6 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. VOLUME 10 9 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, JANIS 10 JOHNSON, ALAIN KARTUZINSKI and DAVID HOUGHTON, D.D.S., 11 Defendants. 12 _______________________________________/ 13 14 PROCEEDINGS: Defendants' Ominbus Motion for Terminating Sanctions and Other Relief. 15 DATE: May 28, 2002, morning session. 16 PLACE: Courtroom B, Judicial Buiding 17 St. Petersburg, Florida. 18 BEFORE: Hon. Susan F. Schaeffer, Circuit Judge. 19 REPORTED BY: Donna M. Kanabay RMR, CRR, 20 Notary Public, State of Florida at large. 21 22 23 24 25 1190
1 APPEARANCES: 2 MR. KENNAN G. DANDAR DANDAR & DANDAR 3 5340 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 201 Tampa, FL 33602 4 Attorney for Plaintiff. 5 MR. LUKE CHARLES LIROT LUKE CHARLES LIROT, PA 6 112 N East Street, Street, Suite B Tampa, FL 33602-4108 7 Attorney for Plaintiff. 8 MR. KENDRICK MOXON MOXON & KOBRIN 9 1100 Cleveland Street, Suite 900 Clearwater, FL 33755 10 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization. 11 MR. LEE FUGATE and 12 MR. MORRIS WEINBERG, JR. and ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER 13 101 E. Kennedy Blvd, Suite 1200 Tampa, FL 33602-5147 14 Attorneys for Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization. 15 MR. ERIC M. LIEBERMAN 16 RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD 740 Broadway at Astor Place 17 New York, NY 10003-9518 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 18 Organization. 19 MR. BRUCE G. HOWIE PIPER, LUDIN, HOWIE & WERNER, P.A. 20 5720 Central Avenue St. Petersburg, FL 33707 21 Attorney for Mr. Minton. 22 ALSO PRESENT: 23 Ms. Donna West Mr. Rick Spector 24 Mr. Ben Shaw 25 1191
1 INDEX TO PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS 2 PAGE LINE 3 Recess 1263 9 Plaintiff's 55 Internet posting by Mr. 1263 16 4 Minton Plaintiff's 56 Internet posting by Mr. 1265 4 5 Minton Plaintiff's 57 Internet posting by Mr. 1275 6 6 Minton Plaintiff's 56 (In evidence) 1275 20 7 Plaintiff's 55 (In evidence) 1276 9 Plaintiff's 58 Internet posting by Mr. 1280 4 8 Minton Plaintiff's 59 Internet posting by Mr. 1281 7 9 Minton Plaintiff's 59 (In evidence) 1286 19 10 Plaintiff's 60 Letter re confidentiality 1287 4 Plaintiff's 66 Order to take 1302 10 11 out-of-state deposition Defendant's 64 Motion for Commission for 1313 18 12 Out-of-State deposition Recess 1340 17 13 Reporter's Certificate 1341 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1192
1 (The proceedings resumed at 9:08 a.m.) 2 THE COURT: Good morning. 3 Okay. This is an order prohibiting defendants 4 from obtaining financial records of Kennan Dandar, 5 of Dandar and Dandar. 6 Mr. Dandar, I'm going to give you one. You 7 make Mr. Lirot a copy. 8 MR. DANDAR: All right. 9 THE COURT: I've got four -- 10 MR. DANDAR: Want me to hand them out? 11 THE COURT: Yeah. 12 -- for you all. The original's been filed this 13 morning. 14 That takes care of that. 15 I'm working on a whole slew of orders, but 16 rather than passing them out piecemeal, except for 17 that one, I'll get them to you when I'm all done 18 with all of them. 19 Second, The Profit. Here it is. I kept it. 20 Guarded it carefully -- 21 MR. LIROT: Very good. Thank you, Judge. 22 THE COURT: -- as requested. And here it is, 23 out of my possession. 24 MR. MOXON: Your Honor, we'll be filing an 25 opposition to his motion -- 1193
1 I don't know if you want me to -- 2 THE COURT: Is that the notice of Patricia 3 Greenway's response, that -- 4 MR. MOXON: Yeah. We'll be filing an 5 opposition to that later on today. 6 THE COURT: Really, I looked at it over the 7 weekend. It -- let me see what -- there were a 8 couple things that it requested that I think really 9 should be fairly easy. 10 He asked me to review the film, The Profit, in 11 camera, which I've done, so that's -- don't need to 12 do anything about that. That was granted. I've 13 done it. 14 As far as finding the film to be totally 15 irrelevant to the instant action, you all have 16 already filed a memorandum suggesting that it's 17 relevant. I can't tell you. I haven't heard all 18 the testimony. So I mean, I know what your 19 positions are. So I can't really make a decision on 20 that. 21 As far as it causing any prejudicial impact, I 22 agree with Judge Beach. It's a real simple matter 23 to ask on voir dire if anybody's seen the movie The 24 Profit. And if so, we'll individually voir dire 25 them and take it from there. 1194
1 Quite frankly, having seen the movie, it's my 2 opinion, if you were a member of the Church of 3 Scientology, I guess, from what everyone has said, 4 it would -- it would be obvious to you that this was 5 a parody on the church. It was not that obvious to 6 me. Even though I'm familiar with -- with things 7 from the perspective of having been the judge in 8 this case and having heard a lot, it was -- it was 9 not that -- 10 I'm sure there were things that a member of the 11 Church of Scientology would find offensive, would 12 find related, that I would not know. There 13 obviously were some things, just based on the 14 knowledge that I have in this case, that I did see, 15 that -- that would make me think that that was a -- 16 an attempt to mimic whatever -- I don't know what 17 you want to call it -- what's the word here? It's 18 sort of a parody on Scientology. I don't want to 19 suggest that it's true because I really have no 20 reason to think that it is, from what little I know. 21 I don't want to say that it's false because I don't 22 know that either. I'm not a member of the church. 23 I don't know Mr. Hubbard. I don't know anything 24 about Mr. Hubbard's background, except maybe the 25 little bit that I know. 1195
1 But if I were not involved as a member of the 2 Church of Scientology, if I were not part of the 3 anticult group, most of whom either were members at 4 one time or certainly have been inundated with those 5 who were -- 6 I don't believe that I would know, if I were a 7 citizen on the street and watched the movie, what it 8 was. Quite frankly, I would think it was a C-minus 9 or D movie, and I would get up and walk out before 10 the thing was over. I mean, I watched it only 11 because I said I would and I was required to. 12 It's -- it's -- it is not a movie that it's ever 13 going to run, at least in the state that it's 14 presently in, in a major theatre. I mean AMC or 15 whatever it is down at Baywatch (sic), where I 16 occasionally go, is not going to run that movie in 17 its present state. 18 Frankly, there's a lot of it you can't see. 19 It's too dark. It is -- that is my candid opinion. 20 If I had gone to the theatre to see it, I would not 21 have stayed to watch the rest of it. I mean, I 22 would have left very soon into the movie. 23 So I don't think that it's going to have a 24 prejudicial effect unless -- unless someone has seen 25 it and it has prejudiced them. 1196
1 If someone has seen it, well, we'll deal -- we 2 could -- you know, if we go to a trial, we can deal 3 with that and see whether that's an excuse for cause 4 or what have you. 5 I dare say, in all probability, if we pick a 6 civil jury that comes from south county, and this 7 thing is shown in some coffee house, or whatever it 8 was, up in Clearwater, there ain't going be a soul 9 who's ever seen it. You know, if -- if there is, as 10 I have said, I would agree that I would not want to 11 ask a question of the whole venire, with the whole 12 venire sitting, "Well, what did you think of it?" 13 We'll just address that in camera and see what the 14 person says and all that sort of stuff, so -- 15 But as to whether it's relevant to this 16 hearing, I don't have a -- I mean, I still think I 17 need more information from some of the witnesses to 18 know. So I can't rule on that. 19 But I -- I don't think it is going to be such 20 that it's going to ruin the ability to pick a fair 21 and impartial voir dire. 22 Now, the third thing you've asked for is so 23 adopt -- 24 So -- 25 MR. MOXON: Your Honor -- but as to that, your 1197
1 Honor, there is -- obviously, we haven't -- we 2 haven't seen this. As I mentioned to you last week, 3 there are -- some people have seen this, but counsel 4 haven't; the parties haven't seen it. 5 Now, the court has, so the court has kind of 6 made some preliminary determinations that are 7 potentially very significant to the case. 8 THE COURT: No, they're not. There's 9 absolutely nothing that I've said that's significant 10 to this case. What I've said, if anybody has seen 11 it, in a jury pool -- which I seriously doubt -- I 12 will take up any questioning of that person outside 13 the presence of the other jurors. That's all I've 14 said. 15 MR. MOXON: Okay. 16 THE COURT: As to whether or not it's relevant 17 to this hearing, I'll make a decision after I've 18 heard all the testimony. That is all I've said. 19 MR. MOXON: Okay. Good enough, your Honor. 20 Your Honor, we would like to, obviously, see 21 this -- see this film also. It's been provided to 22 the court in camera. There's been quite a few 23 references to it during these hearings. There's 24 been money paid to Courage Productions. A lot of 25 the witnesses were -- were in this movie. 1198
1 THE COURT: Well, why didn't you go see it when 2 it was showing? I mean, if it was showing to the 3 public, why didn't you go? 4 MR. MOXON: Well -- 5 THE COURT: I mean, apparently nobody had an 6 interest. If you're saying that nobody from the 7 Church of Scientology has seen it, well, then it's 8 pretty obvious nobody had any interest in it. 9 MR. MOXON: Your Honor, I -- I want to correct 10 that. I didn't say no one has seen it. In fact, a 11 paralegal went down -- and I have talked to another 12 person who has seen it. It was playing for two 13 weeks in Clearwater. However, no, we didn't see it. 14 But he's obviously got a copy of it. We'd like to 15 see this thing. And in fact, Mr. Lirot indicated 16 before we could see it. 17 THE COURT: Is there any problem with allowing 18 them to view this with you present? I mean, I don't 19 think you have to turn a copy of this thing over to 20 them. This is an un- -- this is a movie in process. 21 I don't think that the other side would be entitled 22 to a copy of it. 23 MR. MOXON: Well, it's -- the one that was 24 shown is the one, of course, that I'm most 25 interested in, and the one that was seen by you and 1199
1 the one that was seen by Judge Beach. 2 We'd be perfectly happy to enter into a 3 protective order that it won't go -- 4 THE COURT: No. I'm not going to provide a 5 copy. This is a movie that they are producing and 6 you are not entitled, under anything I can think of, 7 to a copy. You may view it if Mr. Lirot agrees -- 8 MR. MOXON: So The Profit -- 9 MR. LIROT: Judge -- 10 THE COURT: -- with Mr. Lirot being present so 11 you can see it just as I've seen it. I'm not 12 entitled to a copy and you're not entitled to a 13 copy. This is their production. 14 MR. MOXON: Okay. 15 THE COURT: So I will enter that order, that 16 you or anyone from counsel's staff -- 17 You have any problem with that, Mr. Lirot? 18 MR. LIROT: As long as there are no recording 19 devices, I'll even spring for the popcorn. 20 THE COURT: Okay. Well, believe me, you're 21 going to need more than popcorn. 22 But anyway, there you have it. He's agreed to 23 that. I -- I think that's fine. 24 As far as having a copy of it, I don't think 25 you're entitled to it. 1200
1 MR. MOXON: Okay. Well, we'll work out 2 something -- 3 THE COURT: If you think you are, file a motion 4 and I'll rule on it, but right now, I would say no, 5 they don't have to give you a copy. 6 MR. MOXON: Thank you. 7 THE COURT: I don't understand what "C" is, 8 about Judge Beach's previous abatement of disclosure 9 of any documents dealing with Robert Minton or 10 Courage Productions. 11 Whatever Judge Beach has done, you all have 12 obviously agreed and have gone to him. Which I told 13 you if you agree to it, then his orders are binding. 14 If you don't agree to it, one side or the other, 15 then you bring it to me. But if he's done something 16 then it stands. 17 MR. MOXON: Yes. 18 THE COURT: Except for this. I see that you 19 want me to enter -- rehear. I'm not going to rehear 20 his order. He's got to rehear his own order. Once 21 you decide to go to him and let him decide, once 22 he's decided whatever he's decided, he's got to do 23 the rehearing. 24 MR. LIROT: We'll take care of it. 25 THE COURT: I tend to agree, having looked at 1201
1 the -- having looked at the breadth, I can't imagine 2 that this couldn't be viewed outside the state of 3 Florida, if that was what you requested. I don't 4 think anybody's going to view it outside the state 5 of Florida. But you know, I could be wrong. I 6 mean, I don't go to very many movies, so maybe I'm 7 mistaken in my thoughts of the quality of this. 8 But in any event, he's got to rehear his own 9 order to make your pitch. 10 MR. LIROT: We'll set that in front of him when 11 it's appropriate. 12 THE COURT: And whatever abatement that he 13 entered into -- it says "adopted." Well, obviously, 14 if he's entered an order in this case, it's the 15 order. 16 MR. LIROT: Yes. 17 THE COURT: So whatever he's done, that's what 18 stands. So I really don't know that you need to 19 file -- you know, there's a lot of stuff everybody 20 needs to file. But for now, with you all having 21 filed the request saying that it's relevant to this 22 inquiry, that's still pending. That's still to be 23 argued. I don't know that there's anything left for 24 me to do on this. So I think you can save your time 25 for something else. 1202
1 MR. MOXON: All right. Thank you, Judge. 2 THE COURT: Okay? 3 MR. MOXON: There was one other request, 4 however, in the motion. 5 THE COURT: There was? 6 MR. MOXON: Yes. 7 I guess they should just turn it over -- this 8 is just the checks Mr. Minton had provided to 9 Courage Productions. 10 THE COURT: Frankly, I don't see -- if he's 11 abated it, if Judge Beach has abated it, then it's 12 abated. Judge Beach has said they don't need to 13 turn them over. I mean, Mr. Minton, in his quest 14 for global settlement, can do whatever he wants to 15 do. I mean, there's no order, I don't suppose, that 16 can prohibit him. It just probably says if people 17 aren't required to turn over -- 18 I don't know what it says. I haven't seen it. 19 MR. MOXON: Good enough. Thank you, your 20 Honor. We'll take it up with him. 21 MR. FUGATE: Judge, you had asked some time 22 ago, I think, for courtesy copies of the decisions 23 in the breach cases, because we had discussed the 24 judgment amounts. And there was a recent -- I think 25 it was -- I know it's May 22nd, 2002, in the Texas 1203
1 case, the judge finally awarded the attorneys' fees 2 and costs. And I'm going to hand up courtesy 3 copies. 4 THE COURT: Okay. 5 MR. FUGATE: And I also have attached the 6 portion of the -- of the -- make sure I append it to 7 yours -- the portion of the probate code which talks 8 about compromise, which we're going to go back in at 9 some point to try to -- to let the probate court 10 know that we have made some sort of offer and these 11 damages are building against the estate, and the 12 estate apparently doesn't have any money. 13 And I'll -- 14 THE COURT: Are we talking about this -- this? 15 16 MR. FUGATE: What that is, Judge, the first 17 thing -- that's the most recent award of attorneys' 18 fees in the -- 19 THE COURT: Oh. 20 MR. FUGATE: -- Texas case. There is the 21 original award from the trial. I think it totals 22 630,000 now. There is the summary judgment on the 23 issue of liability in the Clearwater Beach case by 24 Judge Baird. 25 You had asked, I think, back when we were in 1204
1 in -- 2 THE COURT: Yes. 3 MR. FUGATE: -- for courtesy copies of those. 4 That kind of walks through those. 5 THE COURT: The first thing I'm looking at here 6 is the one that says Tyler Division, so I'm assuming 7 that's the federal case. 8 MR. FUGATE: Yes. 9 THE COURT: Is there something in here from 10 Judge Baird as well? 11 MR. FUGATE: Yes. There's this -- the summary 12 judgment. 13 THE COURT: I see it. 14 MR. FUGATE: I think it's the last one there. 15 THE COURT: Okay. 16 MR. FUGATE: And -- and the -- the -- 17 Mr. Lieberman's pointed out in the most recent award 18 of the attorneys' fees, there's the individual award 19 of $98,000 as to Mr. Dandar of Dandar and Dandar, as 20 vexatious litigants, that they have to pay, 21 themselves. 22 But the total award is 330,000 -- 23 THE COURT: Is that all in here? 24 MR. FUGATE: Yeah. That's all in there. 25 THE COURT: Okay. Let me -- I don't want to 1205
1 read it right here and now. I'll take it and read 2 it tonight. 3 MR. FUGATE: Thank you, your Honor. 4 THE COURT: Thank you for bringing this to me. 5 This will be of some help. 6 MR. FUGATE: All right. 7 THE COURT: I'm getting to the point where I 8 don't even have space to put my stuff to take home. 9 I think that's bad. 10 Okay. I had my trusty to-do list that I keep, 11 after a three-day weekend, and I -- I didn't bring 12 it. 13 But I remember making -- the one thing that I 14 can remember I wanted to ask you all was, have I 15 ruled on the motion to strike Jesse Prince as a 16 witness, that was filed and heard as of -- I'm going 17 to say 2001; November of 2001. 18 MR. DANDAR: No. You have not signed an order, 19 although you orally pronounced your ruling that the 20 conduct was improper. 21 THE COURT: Well, that, I -- that, yes. And I 22 have an order in process on that. Actually, it -- 23 it may be almost done. 24 But in -- in conjunction with that, you 25 remember I took up your motion for severe sanctions, 1206
1 and I took up the church's motion to strike Jesse 2 Prince as a witness. And as I was reading over that 3 this weekend, I noticed that I kind of made some 4 discussions on the motion to strike. And I said you 5 all can submit memorandums if you want. And I don't 6 know that I ever got any. So I can assume that 7 maybe you didn't want. 8 And in that case, I think I'd kind of more or 9 less implied that I would not strike him as a 10 witness as of that date; that I would find that he 11 was qualified as an expert. 12 MR. FUGATE: I think you said that you believed 13 you could not, if I remember, but I'll go back and 14 look. 15 THE COURT: Well, I read it more recently than 16 you. But what I didn't know is it looked like I 17 kind of left it up in the air; if somebody wanted to 18 submit something, I couldn't remember it. You all 19 may have and it may be in my office somewhere. But 20 I don't know that I can put my hands on it. 21 MR. DANDAR: I submitted a letter citing case 22 law; they submitted a memorandum of law whether or 23 not a court can strike a witness based upon the 24 witness's bias. 25 THE COURT: Oh, if that's what it is, I ruled, 1207
1 in the state of Florida, you can not. 2 MR. DANDAR: Right. 3 THE COURT: In the state of Florida, that you 4 cannot. 5 MR. MOXON: We filed another memorandum after 6 that, your Honor. I don't know -- that never came 7 up during the hearing, your Honor -- 8 THE COURT: The bias? It did come up. It came 9 up over and over. That's the one thing on which I 10 was still not ruling on the spot, because I wasn't 11 sure if the court and the state of Florida could, 12 based on the bias of the witness, contemplate 13 excluding the witness. And my -- my reading of the 14 case law was that that is not something that I can 15 do in the state of Florida. 16 MR. FUGATE: Judge, out of an abundance of 17 caution, can I just look and see? I mean, if I ever 18 say I committed any of this to memory, you're going 19 to -- 20 THE COURT: Trust me -- well, that's why I'm 21 asking. Because I'm -- you know, one day I'm going 22 to ask something and everyone's going to say, "Yes, 23 that's right." Well, that happened to date, so -- 24 MR. FUGATE: That would probably be me. 25 But anyway, if I can just look, I remember the 1208
1 discussion; I remember that we had -- there were two 2 areas that we talked about. I know on the one I 3 remember what your position was, but I just need to 4 look and see if we did. 5 THE COURT: Well, assuming that I -- assuming 6 that I had ruled on that basis, which as I said, I 7 know I have read the cases submitted -- and I know I 8 have -- then I'm going to enter an order denying the 9 motion to strike, effective as of, obviously, the 10 time that -- 11 MR. FUGATE: I understand. 12 THE COURT: -- the matter came up. 13 I mean, I don't know what -- this case has a 14 way of having breaking news every day. So I don't 15 want to suggest that any decision that I might 16 render remains forever, because they have a way of 17 changing. 18 MR. LIEBERMAN: Judge, I have a -- 19 THE COURT: Wait a second. 20 MR. LIEBERMAN: -- a subissue on that. 21 Putting -- aside from the fact whether or not, 22 in the abstract, he might be an expert witness, we 23 have argued and it's in the summary judgment motion 24 we -- we just filed on the wrongful death, that with 25 respect to the specific things he tries to say -- 1209
1 THE COURT: That's -- 2 MR. LIEBERMAN: -- he's -- 3 THE COURT: -- a different matter. 4 MR. LIEBERMAN: -- he's not competent as an 5 expert. 6 THE COURT: This was a motion to strike him 7 from the witness list. 8 MR. LIEBERMAN: Precisely. Precisely. 9 THE COURT: And I said I would consider doing 10 that. 11 I mean, I took testimony from Mr. Prince as to 12 his qualifications. I ruled, based on that, that I 13 would not strike him unless, in the state of 14 Florida, I was able to -- to look to someone's bias, 15 and didn't really rule, if I could, what exactly I 16 would do. But I certainly said I would look. He 17 seemed like a very biased witness to me. However, 18 the case law that was presented said that's federal 19 law, not state law. And therefore, unless there's 20 something else, then I can go ahead and do just a 21 very short order on that. 22 That has nothing to do with the motion for 23 summary judgment that you filed, indicating that 24 whatever it is that he's saying is not based on fact 25 and is not something that -- 1210
1 MR. LIEBERMAN: That he would be competent -- 2 THE COURT: -- that he would be competent to 3 say. 4 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. Precisely. 5 THE COURT: So that's another issue. 6 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. 7 THE COURT: This is whether I would strike a 8 witness from a witness list basically based on bias. 9 And I kind of implied I would not, based on the case 10 law that's been presented. 11 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I have for filing with you 12 today a notice to take judicial notice of -- 13 THE COURT: You filed a couple of those. I 14 hope you remember, when the time comes, because I 15 haven't ruled on those, because it hasn't been time 16 yet. 17 You had filed a motion to take judicial notice 18 of Ms. Yingling's qualifications -- 19 MR. DANDAR: I think I have. 20 THE COURT: -- from Martindale-Hubbell? 21 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 22 THE COURT: I mean, I don't know when you want 23 me to do these things, but they're -- it's buried in 24 this stack here, so -- 25 MR. DANDAR: Well, let's do it right now. 1211
1 THE COURT: Okay. 2 Well, here's another request for judicial 3 notice. 4 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 5 THE COURT: Did you mean to take that up today? 6 MR. DANDAR: Well, I just -- right now I want 7 you to take judicial notice, this a transcript of a 8 hearing in the Wollersheim case in California, where 9 Mr. Rosen, who represented RTC -- he also represents 10 Flag before Judge Baird -- used the Stacy Brooks 11 recantation affidavit that's being used in this case 12 to try to have Mr. Leipold removed as counsel, for 13 suborning perjury, and tried to have the entire case 14 dismissed on their motion for terminating sanctions, 15 just like they're doing in this case. And the 16 court -- 17 THE COURT: You told me they did that one in an 18 hour. 19 MR. DANDAR: Well, whatever this -- this is a 20 total of -- it's 56 pages, so you can read it in an 21 hour. It may have taken less than that. 22 THE COURT: Well, maybe if this case had been 23 going on 22 years, I could have ruled quicker too. 24 But -- 25 Any objection? 1212
1 MR. WEINBERG: Yeah. We haven't read it. I 2 don't think -- 3 THE COURT: I haven't either. 4 MR. WEINBERG: I need to read it and then I can 5 tell you if I've got -- 6 THE COURT: Let's take this up, then -- as we 7 do most things that are filed in the morning, we'll 8 either take it up this afternoon. 9 MR. WEINBERG: All right. 10 THE COURT: Or since I might want to read it 11 too, we'll take it up maybe tomorrow morning. 12 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. That would be good. 13 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, you did file another 14 notice to take judicial notice of the credentials in 15 Martindale-Hubbell of an attorney Ms. Yingling. I 16 don't -- can't remember her first name. 17 MR. DANDAR: Monique Yingling. 18 THE COURT: Yes. 19 Two motions. So how about we take up both 20 motions for judicial notice tomorrow morning? 21 MR. DANDAR: All right. 22 THE COURT: Now, Mr. Dandar, those are your 23 motions, so you bring that to my attention if I 24 forget that I said I would do that tomorrow morning. 25 MR. DANDAR: We'll do that. 1213
1 THE COURT: In the meantime, I will have had a 2 chance to read over these two. 3 I think this is just more information. 4 MR. FUGATE: You had asked for those earlier, 5 and that's the most recent one which was in place. 6 THE COURT: Is that -- is that it for this 7 morning? 8 As I said, I've -- I've returned The Profit. 9 I've -- I did not have a chance to watch Ali and all 10 of the other movies that I hoped to watch. 11 I did have a chance to do quite a bit of 12 reading, catch-up reading, on this case. And as I 13 said, I'm trying to get most of the major orders 14 done and out to you all. 15 The submission of confidential mutual release 16 agreement that was filed, I have that; I've read it; 17 I assume that that will be something that we may 18 take up if and when Mr. -- 19 MR. DANDAR: Franks. 20 THE COURT: -- Franks is called. 21 MR. FUGATE: Yeah. 22 And you had also requested we give you a copy 23 of it -- 24 THE COURT: Yes. 25 MR. FUGATE: -- and that's what I also -- 1214
1 THE COURT: Okay. I don't know -- I guess what 2 I'm saying is there's nothing for me to do at this 3 time. 4 MR. FUGATE: There's not. You had asked for 5 that; we have it, and gave it to you, Judge. 6 MR. DANDAR: Judge, at your request, the 7 plaintiff has made a copy for the court of Stacy 8 Brooks' two depositions -- 9 THE COURT: Oh, good. 10 MR. DANDAR: Two volumes from June 23rd, 2000 11 and one volume from August 15th of 2001. 12 THE COURT: Good. That may be helpful. 13 Because it comes up from time to time, and I've 14 never -- I've never seen it, except little excerpts. 15 I'm looking at my -- my list, my pack of stuff 16 that I brought in with me. 17 The lawsuit that was filed against Stacy 18 Brooks, individually, somebody unknown to me, John 19 Beets (phonetic), and Mark Bunker, I asked for a 20 copy of it so I knew what you all were talking 21 about. I have seen it. 22 Is there anything other than my just claiming 23 my distaste -- I think both sides have had lawsuits 24 filed on somebody right in my courtroom. I wish 25 that wouldn't happen. As I said, perhaps this could 1215
1 be done outside. I just don't like it. People come 2 into my courtroom, and next thing you know, some 3 process server is there filing -- 4 Is there anything for me to do about this this 5 moment? 6 MR. DANDAR: Is that the one from Courage 7 Productions? 8 THE COURT: Yes. 9 MR. DANDAR: I just want to point out that 10 Mr. Moxon had Patricia Greenway of Courage 11 Productions served with a subpoena in your 12 courtroom. 13 THE COURT: I didn't say just one side was bad 14 and the other side was good. 15 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 16 THE COURT: What I said was -- 17 MR. DANDAR: All right. 18 THE COURT: -- that both sides, it seems to me, 19 have had people served in my courtroom. This is one 20 example that was brought to my attention. 21 MR. DANDAR: I think that was outside your 22 courtroom, your Honor -- 23 THE COURT: Listen -- 24 MR. DANDAR: -- in the hallway. 25 THE COURT: Listen to me. Hear me. 1216
1 It would please me if I did not have to deal 2 with people who get upset because they come to my 3 courtroom and get served. It would be nice if this 4 could happen outside. I'm not saying it can't 5 happen; I'm just simply saying I hate having to deal 6 with these things. 7 Is there anything else for me to do with this 8 at this moment? 9 MR. FUGATE: Not at the moment, although I may 10 have some questions on my examination of Mr. Minton. 11 THE COURT: Well, I'll just keep it. But 12 there's nothing anybody needs for me to do about it. 13 I think I just said, "Let me see it." Now I've seen 14 it. 15 It appears to have something to do with 16 copyright or something. So thank God I -- I don't 17 deal with copyright. 18 Okay. And this I don't need to deal with just 19 yet. 20 Okay. I think I'm ready to go. And it's only 21 9:35. 22 MR. DANDAR: That's pretty good. 23 THE COURT: Pretty good, after a three-day 24 weekend, wouldn't you say? 25 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 1217
1 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Minton. 2 Good morning. 3 THE WITNESS: Good morning, your Honor. 4 THE COURT: Okay. Well, this is -- it's always 5 nice to look at your last page of notes and say, 6 "See 3-28." I have no idea what that means. So you 7 pick up -- I'm going to scratch through that and you 8 all pick it up wherever you left off. 9 MR. DANDAR: I think that was a transcript of 10 this hearing that we were looking at. 11 THE COURT: Whatever. I just struck through 12 it. 13 MR. DANDAR: There we go. 14 THE COURT: You may continue. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Good morning, Mr. Minton. 17 THE COURT: Today's the 29th, right? 18 MR. FUGATE: 28th. 19 THE COURT: Okay. 20 MR. DANDAR: Tuesday. 21 THE COURT: Tuesday. Yes. We have a three-day 22 week. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. And you all 23 have off Friday. 24 MR. WEINBERG: Right. 25 MR. DANDAR: And we're back on Monday if we 1218
1 have to be back? 2 MR. WEINBERG: Tuesday. 3 THE COURT: Next Tuesday? 4 MR. WEINBERG: Yeah. I'm traveling -- 5 THE COURT: That's right. So it's going to be 6 Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday? 7 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, your Honor. That pile 8 of materials that was here before -- 9 MR. FUGATE: Excuse me. I took that, Judge, 10 when we were tidying up. 11 THE WITNESS: I don't know if I'll need it, 12 but -- 13 THE COURT: Maybe you won't need it, but in 14 case you do, we'll get it to you. 15 MR. FUGATE: Trying to straighten the courtroom 16 up. 17 THE COURT: Nobody did anything to help me up 18 here. 19 MR. FUGATE: You didn't ask, Judge. 20 THE COURT: I know. I'd be afraid. 21 (A discussion was held off the record.) 22 THE COURT: Proceed. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q Mr. Minton, have you talked to anyone over the 25 weekend about your prior testimony or what you may be asked 1219
1 to -- this week? 2 A No, I haven't. 3 Q Have you reviewed any transcripts of anything to 4 see if you have discovered any more lies in testimony? 5 A No, I haven't. 6 Q Do you know of any other lies in testimony that 7 you haven't told us about? 8 A Not to my knowledge. 9 Q I want to go back to the Gerry Armstrong repayment 10 of loan that you falsely testified about in the April 8th 11 deposition, in the breach of contract case with Judge Baird. 12 And I asked you about that on Friday. Do you recall those 13 questions? 14 A Right. 15 Q And you've also falsely testified in that 16 deposition about the Clambake -- source of the Clambake 17 donation and the source of the $500,000 wire transfer from 18 Europe to the LMT. 19 A Correct. 20 Q Okay. Do you recall, in the hearing of April the 21 9th, Mr. Rosen, representing the Church of Scientology Flag 22 Service Organization, Inc., gave you several opportunities 23 to tell Judge Baird that you lied in your deposition the 24 previous day, on April 8th? Do you recall that? 25 A I don't. 1220
1 Q Okay. Let me direct your attention then to the 2 April 9th hearing, 2002, before Judge Baird, with Mr. Rosen 3 questioning you for the specific purpose of -- for you to 4 recant. 5 Before we get there, isn't it true that the only 6 reason Judge Baird held you in contempt is because you did 7 not show up for your August, 2001 court-ordered deposition 8 in that case? 9 A I'm not sure exactly what -- I think that was a 10 substantial part of it. 11 Q Well -- 12 A I think -- no. I think the other part was -- 13 well, no. I believe that wasn't part of it. I believe 14 there were two issues. Number one is not answering certain 15 questions, and not producing documents. Those were the two 16 reasons. 17 Q Are you sure? 18 A Yes. That's -- 19 Q Well, if you didn't show up for your deposition on 20 August 3rd, 2001, you certainly didn't answer any questions 21 and produce any documents, correct? 22 A Well, this was with respect to the October 23 deposition. 24 Q All right. So are you -- based upon your 25 recollection, are you saying that after the 22 days of 1221
1 testimony you gave in October, 2001, the Church of 2 Scientology filed another motion for contempt against you 3 because you pled the Fifth Amendment and did not produce 4 documents? 5 A That's what I believe it was. You know, the 6 record should speak for itself, but that's what I 7 understand. 8 Q So if the motion -- 9 MR. DANDAR: And we'll get a copy of that. I 10 don't have it with me today. I'll get it before 11 this afternoon. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q If the record shows that's the case, you certainly 14 couldn't possibly have lied under oath in October, 2001 by 15 pleading the Fifth Amendment, correct? 16 MR. WEINBERG: Objection, your Honor. Is he 17 asking whether, by pleading the Fifth, he lied, or 18 is he asking whether at any time he lied during the 19 October deposition? 20 THE COURT: No. What he's saying is, as to 21 those questions where he took the Fifth Amendment, 22 he couldn't have lied. That's just a claim -- 23 MR. WEINBERG: We'll stipulate to that. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25 1222
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Is that true, Mr. -- 3 MR. DANDAR: Well, I don't care if they 4 stipulate. It's just this -- 5 MR. WEINBERG: Well -- 6 MR. DANDAR: -- witness. 7 MR. WEINBERG: -- when you -- 8 MR. DANDAR: He doesn't represent the witness. 9 THE COURT: That's right. Go ahead. That's 10 what he's saying, is obviously, if he claims the 11 Fifth Amendment, you did not tell the lie because 12 you claimed the Fifth Amendment. 13 THE WITNESS: Right. Okay. I understand that. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q So were there other -- other testimony in the 16 filed motion of the Church of Scientology claiming that you 17 lied under oath in October, 2001? 18 A Not that I know of. 19 Q Okay. Is there -- is it part of their -- part of 20 their motion, after your October, 2001 deposition, that you 21 intentionally and willfully refused to produce documents at 22 the deposition? 23 A I believe that was part of it, yes. 24 Q Okay. 25 A Going back to the not showing up at that 1223
1 deposition, there was a subsequent hearing at which Judge 2 Baird required a $20,000, you know, on-the-spot deposit of 3 some sorts just to ensure that I would be showing up for 4 the -- for the deposition when it was rescheduled. So to my 5 understanding and recollection, the contempt issue was not 6 answering the questions in the deposition and not producing 7 documents. 8 Q Going to -- 9 THE COURT: Presumably, somebody has Judge 10 Baird's order that they can produce this 11 afternoon -- 12 MR. DANDAR: We're going to try -- 13 THE COURT: -- so I can see what you're talking 14 about? 15 MR. DANDAR: -- yes, over the lunch hour. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q Going back to the April 9th hearing, the hearing 18 where you're going to come in and purge yourself of the 19 contempt, do you recall, on page 10, this question -- 20 THE COURT: I'm sorry. I hate to just 21 interrupt you all. 22 Where in this binder, the defendant's 23 memorandum of fact and law, is the April 9th 24 hearing? I know I have it. I just don't know 25 where. I'm trying to -- I think maybe it's in here? 1224
1 I don't want anybody giving me another copy of it. 2 MR. FUGATE: I'm just looking, Judge. 3 THE COURT: Go ahead. Go ahead. 4 MR. DANDAR: That's why I'm going to use -- 5 THE COURT: He's going to use the Elmo. 6 MR. FUGATE: Okay. Yeah, Judge, we only 7 provided a portion of it at -- no -- 8 THE COURT: Well, I've seen it somewhere, but 9 if he's going to use the Elmo, I don't need to worry 10 about it, okay? 11 MR. FUGATE: Thank you. 12 THE COURT: So -- 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q On page 10, beginning at line 11, do you recall 15 this question and the following answer? 16 "And at that time, you advised Judge Baird that 17 you had testified, you had testified honestly, and purged 18 yourself for the contempt, right? 19 "Yes, sir. 20 "As a result there was a deposition of you, as 21 scheduled for a week later, October 11th and 12th, is that 22 correct? 23 "That's correct." 24 Now, Mr. Minton, Mr. Rosen is talking about 25 contempt before October the 11th, 2001 deposition, the one 1225
1 you didn't show up for. Do you recall actually telling the 2 court -- 3 MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me. He did show up for 4 the October 11th and 12th deposition. 5 MR. DANDAR: Your Honor, that's not what I 6 said, I hope. 7 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I think that's what you 8 said. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Mr. -- Mr. Rosen, in his question -- 11 THE COURT: I think what he's saying is the 12 contempt was prior to the October 11th deposition. 13 Is that what you're saying, Counsel? 14 MR. DANDAR: Right. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q The contempt order and hearing, where you had to 17 post $20,000, was before the October, 2001 deposition, 18 correct? 19 THE COURT: I thought the October 11th and 12th 20 deposition is where he claimed the Fifth. 21 MR. DANDAR: I don't mean -- I've maybe 22 misspoken three times -- 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MR. DANDAR: -- in a row here. 25 Let me try again. 1226
1 THE COURT: All right. 2 MR. DANDAR: It was a three-day weekend, but I 3 actually worked. 4 THE COURT: I know. I did too. 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q Mr. Minton, isn't it true that you attended a 7 hearing before Judge Baird, before October, 2001, where he 8 found you in contempt for not appearing in August, and -- 9 and required you to post a $20,000 cash deposit with the 10 clerk of the court? 11 A I'm not sure. You know, I mean, I did have to 12 post a 20,000 bond with the clerk of the court. That was 13 his order to make sure that I was going to show up for the 14 deposition when it was scheduled. 15 THE COURT: If this is important, do you have 16 this in your machine there where you can pull it up? 17 I mean, I don't know if you have things categorized 18 where you have them on a computer or not. 19 MR. DANDAR: I can't do it that quick. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 MR. DANDAR: I'm just not that fast. 22 THE COURT: You don't want to break to do that? 23 I mean, I'm asking you. I don't know what -- 24 what -- 25 MR. DANDAR: Well, it just depends -- 1227
1 I just don't know when the hearing was. I'm 2 sure it was sometime in late September, early 3 October, 2001, 'cause I was there, and I remember 4 they wanted him, Mr. Minton, placed in jail 5 immediately until he testified on deposition, and 6 Judge Baird said, "No. How much money you have?" 7 And Mr. Minton said, "$20,000." And he said, "Well, 8 put that in the registry of the court." 9 THE COURT: Well, did he leave it open where 10 Mr. Minton could claim the Fifth Amendment or did 11 that just happen, and that was just a surprise to 12 Judge Baird and the lawyers, or what? 13 MR. DANDAR: No one talked about the Fifth 14 Amendment. 15 THE COURT: Nobody talked about the Fifth 16 Amendment. 17 MR. DANDAR: No. 18 THE COURT: Okay. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Here -- 21 MR. FUGATE: Judge, I think, just for point of 22 reference, I think that there was that hearing; the 23 next deposition he was to appear at was the 24 September, 2001 deposition, where he took the Fifth. 25 THE COURT: It was the October 11th and 12th 1228
1 deposition where you took -- 2 MR. WEINBERG: He took them at both. 3 THE COURT: Yeah. 4 THE WITNESS: Both. 5 THE COURT: Judge Baird wouldn't have had 6 anything to do with -- 7 MR. FUGATE: He wouldn't have known. 8 THE COURT: That was in this case. Judge Baird 9 was October 11th and 12th. 10 MR. WEINBERG: But he answered questions in 11 both too. 12 THE COURT: He did. But he took the Fifth in 13 both. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Right. 15 THE COURT: Over all money matters. Sort of. 16 MR. DANDAR: And he also had a statement -- he 17 and Ms. Brooks both had statements before their 18 depositions in September and October about pleading 19 the Fifth, and the reason why, based upon the RICO 20 allegations. 21 THE COURT: Right. 22 MR. DANDAR: Which I think the court already 23 has. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q On page 10, line 19, you recall this question? 1229
1 "Did you again -- did you have any further 2 conversation with Ken Dandar in relation to that 3 deposition," he's talking about October, 2001, "on the 4 subject of disclosing these checks?" 5 "Answer: Not at that time, no." 6 Was that a truthful statement? 7 A This is the Baird hearing, April 9th? 8 Q Yes. 9 THE COURT: I think -- I think the problem he's 10 having -- and I'm sympathizing with him here -- he 11 doesn't know -- you're talking about some order and 12 he doesn't have it. And there's a lot of dates 13 here. 14 MR. DANDAR: I'm not -- I'm not talking about 15 an order now. 16 THE COURT: All right. 17 MR. DANDAR: I'm just talking about his 18 testimony before Judge Baird. 19 THE COURT: Oh, I see. 20 MR. DANDAR: Yeah. 21 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure. 22 THE COURT: You're saying you don't know if 23 that's truthful testimony in front of Judge Baird? 24 THE WITNESS: I'm just not sure. I don't know. 25 I -- it may be. I just don't know. 1230
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Question, line 23, "How many different times did 3 you have conversations with Ken Dandar on the subject of not 4 disclosing these checks?" 5 And your answer on page 11, "At least six or eight 6 times." 7 Is that a truthful statement? 8 A You know, it's a -- it's a estimate. 9 Q Can you tell Judge Schaeffer how -- when did we 10 meet six or eight times and talk about these checks, meaning 11 the May, 2000 check and the March, 2002 check? 12 A Well -- 13 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to form. 14 A -- the -- 15 MR. WEINBERG: The answer says "discuss six or 16 eight times." Mr. Dandar's question says, "When did 17 we meet"? 18 MR. DANDAR: Fine. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q When did we discuss it six or eight times? 21 A Well, I don't think -- I don't think I'm talking 22 about the $250,000 check here. I think this is related to 23 the 500,000 check. 24 Q Okay. When did we, you and I, discuss the May, 25 2000 check six or eight times? 1231
1 A Well, over the course from May, 2000 to as 2 recently as that conversation on my back porch. 3 Q Up in New Hampshire? 4 A When I was on the phone talking with you in New 5 Hampshire. 6 Q Oh. You were on the phone. 7 A Right. 8 Q I was down in Florida? 9 A Yes. 10 You know, we discussed those checks twice that 11 weekend; both checks twice that weekend. 12 Q Was Dr. Garko present? 13 A No. I'm talking about the 29th and 30th of March. 14 Q Oh, on the phone. 15 A That was the last time we discussed these checks. 16 Q All right. Page 11, line 2, question, "Have you 17 now, sir, purged yourself of that contempt by fully 18 testifying truthfully as to the item identified in paragraph 19 1; namely any and all payments made to Ken Dandar, Tom 20 Dandar, and the law firm?" 21 "Answer: Yes, I have." 22 Was that a truthful statement? 23 A What is paragraph 1? 24 Q "Namely all payments made to Ken Dandar, Tom 25 Dandar or the law firm --" 1232
1 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor, paragraph 1 of what? 2 THE COURT: I have no idea. 3 You're the lawyer asking the question. I mean, 4 I don't know whether -- 5 MR. WEINBERG: But that's the problem with 6 taking a page out of the transcript. You've got to 7 go back in the transcript to see what paragraph 1 8 is. 9 THE COURT: That's true. 10 I remember Mr. Rosen apparently gave the 11 witness a book, and in the book there was all kinds 12 of things, and he'd have them refer to pages or tabs 13 in the book. So I don't know what he's referring to 14 there. 15 THE WITNESS: I mean, it might be -- it might 16 be, your Honor, the recantation affidavit. I don't 17 know. 18 THE COURT: All right. All right. I don't 19 know either, so -- 20 Let's -- let's look at the recantation 21 affidavit. I doubt that would be paragraph 1. 22 MR. FUGATE: No. 23 MR. DANDAR: There was -- 24 MR. FUGATE: Judge -- 25 MR. DANDAR: -- no recantation affidavit at 1233
1 that time. 2 MR. FUGATE: -- if you go back to page 9, it 3 says "that subpoena duces tecum." And I quote from 4 the May 22nd subpoena, "Paragraph 1 required you to 5 produce all documents relating to payment by you or 6 by the Lisa McPherson Trust to Ken Dandar, Thomas 7 Dandar or the law firm." 8 THE COURT: Okay. That's what he's talking 9 about, the subpoena duces tecum. 10 THE WITNESS: I see. 11 THE COURT: That required you to produce. 12 So Mr. Dandar, go to page 10. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q Here it is right here. It starts at line 14. 15 A Okay. I see. 16 Q All right. And says, "You didn't produce them." 17 You say, "No, I didn't." 18 "Can you tell me why you didn't produce them," on 19 page 9. 20 Your answer at line 23, "I didn't have copies of 21 them, number one. Mr. Dandar had asked me not to reveal 22 that those checks came from me." 23 Now you're talking about the check of May 24th and 24 March, 2002? 25 A That's correct. 1234
1 Q Okay. Mr. Minton. What -- 2 A May -- no, no. Not -- May, 2000 -- or -- was 3 that -- 4 Q May, 2000. 5 A May 1st, 2000 and March 7th, 2002. 6 Q When did I tell you, Mr. Minton, not to reveal the 7 March, 2002 check? 8 A Well, the last time you told me was in those two 9 conversations on the 29th and 30th. 10 Q The dates that you told me -- 11 THE COURT: Wait. How's come the March, 2002 12 check is even at issue? There was never a 13 deposition; there was never a request to produce; 14 there was never anything that had to do, in my case 15 or Judge Baird's case, as far as I can determine, 16 with a check that would have been written by 17 Mr. Minton on March of 2002. 18 MR. DANDAR: You're absolutely right. 19 THE COURT: So if Mr. Minton says he lied about 20 that check, I don't know where he lied, and I don't 21 know what difference it would make, because it 22 wasn't -- there was no deposition -- this April 23 business started before any interim depositions, 24 except for the possibility of April 8th. And I 25 don't even know that they went into that in the 1235
1 April 8th deposition. 2 MR. DANDAR: They went into anything that had 3 to do with the Lisa McPherson case. 4 THE COURT: Right. 5 MR. DANDAR: So you're right. But it's in 6 their motion. 7 THE COURT: Okay. It is? 8 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 9 THE COURT: Okay. 10 MR. DANDAR: Both checks. 11 MR. WEINBERG: I don't think so. 12 MR. DANDAR: Suborning perjury on both checks. 13 THE COURT: Well, then, if it's in there, if 14 you're suggesting that Mr. Dandar suborned perjury 15 as to the March, 2002 check -- 16 MR. WEINBERG: I don't think we did. 17 THE COURT: Well, if you did, will you agree 18 that there really is no place you can point to where 19 that occurred? 20 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not aware of any place where 21 Mr. Minton was asked about the March, 2002 check. 22 THE COURT: Where he lied about it. 23 MR. WEINBERG: No. Right. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25 MR. WEINBERG: Exactly. 1236
1 THE COURT: So Mr. Dandar, if they made that 2 allegation, it appears they're going to fail. 3 MR. DANDAR: All right. 4 THE WITNESS: You're right. I didn't testify 5 ever -- 6 THE COURT: No. 7 THE WITNESS: -- about that check. 8 THE COURT: Right. 9 THE WITNESS: Because this all happened 10 recently. 11 THE COURT: So everybody understands, we're 12 talking about the -- 13 THE WITNESS: The 500 -- 14 THE COURT: -- $500,000 check that was not 15 disclosed in the May deposition. 16 MR. WEINBERG: We think the March check is 17 relevant to this hearing for a number of other 18 things. But we never said Mr. Minton lied about it. 19 THE COURT: Or that Mr. Dandar suborned 20 perjury. 21 MR. WEINBERG: Actual perjury, that's correct. 22 THE COURT: Or any -- anything else. 23 In other words, are you saying he told 24 Mr. Minton to lie about that check? 25 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I think what Mr. Minton's 1237
1 testified to is he had discussions with Mr. Dandar 2 about not disclosing the $500,000 check or 3 subsequently the $250,000 check. 4 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 5 MR. WEINBERG: It never came up. 6 THE COURT: So -- 7 MR. WEINBERG: That never happened. That 8 testimony never took place. 9 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, you better cover it 10 then, because the fact of the matter is -- is 11 there's more than just a suborning perjury here; 12 what they're also suggesting is you asked him to 13 mislead or lie in the future about something. So 14 even if it didn't occur, that would not be a 15 credible thing for a lawyer to do. 16 MR. DANDAR: I agree. 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q So Mr. Minton, are you saying to this court that 19 on the night of March 29th, Good Friday, and the morning of 20 March the 30th, both of which, during those telephone calls 21 you told me that Dell Liebreich must dismiss the case of 22 Lisa McPherson or the blood and death of your daughters, 23 your wife and yourself would be on my hands -- you're 24 telling me at that time I went forward and said, "Oh, by the 25 way, Mr. Minton, I want you to lie about these two checks"? 1238
1 A Well, Mr. Dandar you had consistently asked me to 2 lie about those two checks. I mean, at least as far as the 3 500,000, up until the time the March 7th one was issued. 4 Yes. You said, you know, "Bob --" when I told you, "Look, 5 I'm going to have to go down there and tell the truth about 6 these checks. This is what my attorneys are advising me," 7 you said, "Don't do it. Don't -- just concentrate on the 8 checks you've written. Those checks don't have your name," 9 you know, the whole rigamarole again. 10 Q Mr. -- 11 A Yes. 12 Q Mr. Minton, isn't it true I told you -- you're 13 talking about the Sunday in your farmhouse in New Hampshire, 14 February, 2002, in front of Stacy Brooks and Dr. Garko. I 15 told you, "Mr. Minton, all you have to do to purge yourself 16 of contempt before Judge Schaeffer is go in there and just 17 tell her the truth. Who cares where the money came from?" 18 A You never -- 19 Q "It came from friends in Europe; it came from the 20 fat man --" 21 A You never -- 22 Q "-- it came from --" 23 A -- said anything of the kind. You never said 24 anything of the kind in front of anybody that weekend, like 25 that. Not at all. 1239
1 Q Look at page 11 at the bottom. Mr. Rosen's asking 2 you this question. He says, "Now, in the context of the 3 advice or instructions given to you by Judge Baird on 4 November 4th and the advice given to you by your new 5 counsel, Mr. Howie, you understand that to purge yourself of 6 contempt, you must not only comply with the subpoena by 7 showing up but you must testify truthfully. Do you 8 understand that?" 9 And your answer was, at the top of page 12, "I 10 do." 11 "Question: Do you understand that showing up, for 12 example, and giving false answers under oath is not a purge 13 of contempt?" 14 You said, "I understand that." 15 THE COURT: He said, "I do understand that." 16 MR. DANDAR: "I do understand that." Sorry. 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q Yet, Mr. Minton, it's true that the day before 19 this, you lied under oath. 20 A I did. And we went outside, and we came back and 21 said that we had to correct the record. 22 Q Here, Mr. Minton, do you recall that, in front of 23 Judge Baird, where you said, "I'm testifying truthfully," on 24 page 17, line 3, you say, "July or August of '99, I flew 25 into town to Tampa Airport for the purpose of having a 1240
1 meeting at Ken Dandar's office. An important meeting. 2 Which I don't remember whether, at the time, that I knew 3 what the subject matter was. But I was picked up at the 4 airport by Stacy Brooks and taken directly to Mr. Dandar's 5 office, which is very close to the airport. And at that 6 time present at that meeting were myself, Stacy Brooks, 7 Jesse Prince, Michael Garko and Ken Dandar. And that this 8 meeting went on --" 9 THE COURT: Why are you reading from this 10 deposition? 11 MR. DANDAR: Why? 12 THE COURT: Yeah. Why are we back at this 13 reading from depositions? I mean, what is it you 14 want to ask him? 15 MR. DANDAR: I'll ask him the question. I'm 16 sorry. 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q Isn't it true, Mr. Minton, that you did not fly 19 into Tampa airport on July or August of 1999 for this 20 so-called secret meeting to discuss the addition of David 21 Miscavige to the wrongful death suit. 22 A That is true. I didn't. It was later. 23 Q Who -- 24 A And the reason I know it was later is because it's 25 after you moved your offices. 1241
1 Q Well, why didn't -- 2 A And both Stacy Brooks and Michael Garko told me on 3 that Sunday, at the Radisson Hotel, that it was later -- it 4 wasn't July and August. It was a little later than that; 5 sometime in the fall. 6 Q Are you saying today, Mr. Minton, that Michael 7 Garko told you, after this hearing of April the 9th, that 8 you were at a meeting in my office in the fall of '99, where 9 it was discussed, the addition of David Miscavige? 10 A What Dr. Garko said was that -- and this was after 11 he checked his records to see if he had records of that 12 meeting. 13 He said he had records of another meeting that 14 happened later, after David Miscavige was already added. 15 But he said he didn't have his records. He said, "Some of 16 my records are at Ken Dandar's office and I can't get them." 17 If you remember Dr. Garko was not -- you were not 18 talking to Dr. Garko because of the fact that you owed him 19 10 months' worth of statements that you had denied him, 20 saying that you didn't have any money. And he couldn't get 21 hold of his records. He said, "I don't know, because I 22 can't get hold of my --" 23 THE COURT: Wait -- 24 A "-- books." 25 THE COURT: Wait. What does this have to do 1242
1 with whether or not this answer is incorrect? 2 THE WITNESS: Well, it's -- 3 THE COURT: Did you need Mr. Garko to -- to 4 tell you what month it was that you went in for this 5 meeting? 6 THE WITNESS: Well, your Honor, it was after 7 Mr. Dandar had moved from his old office to his new 8 office. And Stacy Brooks and Garko said that didn't 9 happen until the fall. It wasn't July or August. 10 That -- that's all. It was -- you know -- 11 I mean, for example, I said here in this -- you 12 know, I got the dates wrong. 13 I said also the check was 2001, but it was 14 2000. You know, I just didn't remember it. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Isn't it true that Dr. Garko told you after this 17 testimony of April 9th that you were not present at any 18 meeting to discuss the addition of David Miscavige as party 19 defendant? 20 A No. He said he didn't remember the meeting, and 21 he said, "I can check my records." He checked his records 22 and he said, "I don't have all my records because Dandar's 23 got them and I can't get them." 24 Q Do you recall this testimony on page 24 by your 25 own attorney, Mr. Howie, where he asks you, line 16, 1243
1 "Mr. Minton, pursuant to court order, did you appear for 2 deposition yesterday 11:00 at the law firm of Johnson 3 Blakely in Clearwater? 4 "Answer: Yes, I did. 5 "Question: Did you in fact respond to questions 6 during the course of that deposition? 7 "Answer: Yes, I did. 8 "Question: Were your responses truthful? 9 "Answer: Yes. I believe we said at the end there 10 was some clarifications that we needed to make, but yes." 11 Is that a truthful answer, Mr. Minton? 12 A It could have been worded a little better. 13 Q There you were given another opportunity to tell 14 Judge Baird the truth -- 15 THE COURT: What's the page of that, Counselor? 16 MR. DANDAR: 24. Page 24. 17 THE COURT: What's the line number? 18 MR. DANDAR: Lines 23 to 25. I just read 16 to 19 25. 20 THE COURT: What -- 21 You read line 16 -- 22 Okay. 23 MR. DANDAR: Through 25. 24 THE COURT: Line 16 through 25. 25 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 1244
1 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q Mr. Minton, why is it that when you were given 4 those opportunities to recant right there in front of Judge 5 Baird about the three lies that we talked about on Friday, 6 that you didn't tell Judge Baird that you lied and needed to 7 correct your testimony? 8 A Because my attorney and Mr. Rosen had discussed 9 that we would -- once we got the -- the deposition, that we 10 would do it by affidavit. 11 Q So you had a side secret deal with Scientology to 12 wait till you filed an affidavit about it? 13 A It wasn't -- 14 MR. WEINBERG: Object -- 15 A -- a secret deal. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q Between you and Scientology counsel. 18 THE COURT: Mr. Rosen. 19 MR. DANDAR: Mr. Rosen. 20 A Mr. Rosen, Mr. Howie and Mr. Jonas discussed it. 21 You know, I believe it was in the open there in the 22 deposition. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q Well -- 25 A It wasn't outside of the deposition. 1245
1 Q Had you filed an affidavit, Mr. Minton? 2 A No. 3 Q So you never recanted that testimony. 4 A It's something on Mr. Howie's agenda that we have 5 to do. 6 Q Oh. 7 THE COURT: Well -- well, Mr. Minton, you did 8 file an affidavit. You filed a rather lengthy 9 affidavit. The problem is, you left some things out 10 of your affidavit, didn't you? 11 THE WITNESS: Yes, your Honor. 12 THE COURT: And -- and I'm not going to ask you 13 about attorney-client privilege, what you said to 14 your lawyer, but I suspect that I know the answer to 15 this: Your lawyer told you to tell the truth about 16 every lie you'd ever told, that might be material, 17 in your affidavit. 18 That's rhetorical. Need not be answered. 19 Go to your next question. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q But the reason why you didn't bring up the money 22 to the LMT, that was your money and the money of a repayment 23 of a loan you made to Gerry Armstrong -- that was your money 24 on the repayment of the loan -- was because that wasn't part 25 of your deal with Scientology, because that wouldn't bring 1246
1 down the Lisa McPherson case or Ken Dandar, would it? 2 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to the form, your 3 Honor. 4 THE COURT: Overruled. 5 A First of all, I didn't have any deal with 6 Scientology. And those -- no, that had nothing to do with 7 it whatsoever. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Are you saying that you told, through counsel, 10 Mr. Rosen, that you lied about the source of the Clambake 11 money and the wire transfer to the LMT? 12 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. That Mr. Rosen lied 13 about it? 14 MR. DANDAR: No. 15 THE COURT: No. That he told Mr. Rosen the 16 true source of the money. 17 Your objection's overruled. 18 A At that deposition? 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q At -- 21 THE COURT: At any time. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q -- the deposition, at the hearing, any time. 24 A I never had any discussions with Mr. Rosen except 25 for that one time in New York. 1247
1 No, I didn't tell him -- 2 I did tell other people in the Church of 3 Scientology. 4 Q Who? 5 A Mr. Rinder for sure. 6 Q When? 7 A I'm not sure. 8 Q Now, you -- 9 A I -- 10 Q You went -- 11 I'm sorry. Go ahead. 12 A I'm just not sure when it was. 13 Q It was -- 14 A You know, there was -- 15 Q -- before we came to Judge Schaeffer, though, 16 wasn't it? It was before this hearing -- 17 THE COURT: Okay. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q -- started, before Judge Schaeffer, wasn't it? 20 A Yes. I believe so. 21 Q It was before you signed your very lengthy second 22 recantation affidavit, wasn't it? 23 A I'm not sure. There were a number of things that 24 came up after that. You know, I mean, this wasn't a 25 situation where -- you know, we went over these three main 1248
1 areas, you know, and we went over documentation that related 2 to those three main areas. There were a lot of other things 3 that have come up that were never touched on. And they 4 weren't -- it wasn't that they weren't touched on because 5 there was no desire to do it; it was a question of -- there 6 was a lot of stuff to go over -- 7 THE COURT: Are we saying -- 8 THE WITNESS: -- you know -- 9 THE COURT: -- here, Mr. Minton, that it's only 10 if somebody asks you a question about something that 11 you lied about that you're going to tell the truth 12 about it? 13 THE WITNESS: No, your Honor. That's not what 14 I'm saying. I'm saying that, you know, that there 15 is a lot of documentation, a lot of testimony in 16 this case. And it hadn't all been gone over. You 17 know, we -- with Mr. Howie, we tried to go over 18 everything that we could find. We didn't find 19 everything. 20 MR. FUGATE: Judge, I think, in completeness, 21 Mr. Dandar ought to read pages 30 and 31, lines 22 22 through line 8 on page 31 -- 23 THE COURT: Where was he reading from? 24 MR. FUGATE: He was reading earlier in the 25 transcript -- 1249
1 THE COURT: Then the rule of completeness 2 requires that you read the rest of what's right 3 there. If there's something that was done later, 4 you can bring it up. 5 MR. FUGATE: Well, it has to do with 6 recantation, is the only -- 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Mr. Minton, when did you get -- how did you go 9 about getting the UBS checks to me, that were made payable 10 to me? 11 A I called up a financial institution and asked them 12 to get them. 13 Q And that was some other financial institution in 14 Switzerland other than UBS. 15 A It was another financial institution that I asked 16 to get them from UBS in Switzerland. 17 Q And who was that? 18 A I'm going to take the Fifth Amendment on that 19 question. 20 MR. DANDAR: Your Honor, I just can't have 21 Mr. Minton taking the Fifth Amendment to prove that 22 the source of money was from him, because all we 23 still have is his testimony. And then he stands 24 here and takes the Fifth Amendment. 25 THE COURT: Counselor, all I can tell you is he 1250
1 has the right to take the Fifth Amendment. However, 2 remember, I can strike his testimony or find his 3 testimony is untruthful or is not to be believed, or 4 I can simply strike it based on his taking the Fifth 5 Amendment. So there's nothing we can do about his 6 taking the Fifth Amendment. That's a right he has. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Mr. Minton, did the Church of Scientology -- and 9 I'm talking about anyone, including private investigators, 10 attorneys, church officials -- anybody ever find out the 11 identity of the financial institutions that you are taking 12 the Fifth Amendment on? 13 A Not to my knowledge. 14 THE COURT: Do they know as we speak today? 15 THE WITNESS: They don't know, as far as I 16 know, your Honor. 17 THE COURT: Okay. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q Why is it, Mr. Minton, that you had to give Gerry 20 Armstrong a hundred thousand dollars so that he could write 21 a check to you and pay you back? 22 A Just to sort of get rid of the loan. 23 Q That's a scam, isn't it? 24 A It's not a scam. 25 Q That's not his money; it's your money. Why did 1251
1 you go through this elaborate scheme to show that he's 2 paying you back? 3 A I'm not sure. 4 Q Does it have to do with the evasion of paying 5 income tax on the money? 6 A No, it doesn't. 7 Q When did you write a check to Gerry Armstrong so 8 he could pay you back? 9 A I never wrote him a check. 10 Q All right. How did he get the money? 11 A He got a check from UBS. 12 Q And what's the source of that UBS check? 13 A Me. 14 Q What's the name of the financial institution that 15 sent the UBS money? 16 A I'm going to take the Fifth Amendment on that 17 question. 18 Q And you're telling this court that you don't know 19 why you did it that way; why you made this false pretense of 20 showing that Gerry Armstrong was using his money to pay back 21 your loan. 22 A I'm not sure why. 23 THE COURT: Well, let me ask you this question. 24 When you bring in money from the foreign countries, 25 don't you have to pay taxes on it? 1252
1 THE WITNESS: It would -- 2 THE COURT: If you made money? 3 THE WITNESS: -- depend on the nature of it. 4 THE COURT: If you made money in a foreign land 5 and you bring that money into the United States of 6 America, isn't that something that you report and 7 pay taxes on? 8 THE WITNESS: Yes. That's correct. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Did you pay tax on the money that Gerry Armstrong 11 paid you back a hundred thousand dollars on the loan? 12 A I would have to look at my tax returns for the 13 year. 14 Q What year was this? 15 A 2001. 16 Q What month? 17 A I don't remember which month it was. 18 Q Was it before or after your September, 2001 19 deposition? 20 A I think it was before. 21 THE COURT: Isn't there a little box on the 22 income tax return that has a person disclose whether 23 any of the money reported in income came from a 24 foreign source? 25 THE WITNESS: I don't know whether there is. 1253
1 THE COURT: Well, I know there is, 'cause I 2 know I check it "no" every year, 'cause I don't have 3 any. So perhaps if we don't know the answer to 4 these things -- 5 I mean, what did I say as to his income tax 6 return; that -- oh, he claimed the Fifth Amendment 7 on that, didn't he? 8 MR. HOWIE: I believe, your Honor -- 9 THE COURT: Because I would demand that, based 10 on his answer -- right now I would demand it. He 11 may claim the Fifth Amendment after my demand, but I 12 think it's important. So his Fifth Amendment will 13 stand. But at this point in time, it's not just one 14 of those things that I think is -- is personal, that 15 I don't need. I think we need the income tax 16 returns. 17 I'm going to find that I need the income tax 18 return to resolve some of these issues. However, he 19 can claim the Fifth Amendment, refuse to turn it 20 over. 21 MR. HOWIE: Yes, your Honor. 22 THE COURT: But I'm demanding it at this time, 23 saying that I need it for my purposes. 24 And he is claiming the Fifth, is that correct? 25 MR. HOWIE: Your Honor, I'd request permission 1254
1 to discuss that matter with my client -- 2 THE COURT: All right. 3 MR. HOWIE: -- during a recess. 4 THE COURT: You can. 5 MR. HOWIE: Thank you. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q Was the financial institution which you refused to 8 disclose on the -- that the source that paid the UBS Bank 9 for the May, 2000 check that went to me -- is that the same 10 financial institution that was the source of the funds for 11 the March, 2002 check? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Does Patrick Jost know the identity of those 14 financial institutions for which you're pleading the Fifth 15 Amendment? 16 A Not to my knowledge. 17 Q Are you sure you didn't send Patrick Jost to 18 Mr. Pesenti, the French lawyer, and demand money back that 19 you had given him, the $250,000 -- 20 A No. 21 Q -- in any part of the $250,000 that Mr. Jost 22 demanded back on your behalf? 23 A No, I didn't. 24 Q Stacy Brooks do that? 25 A If anybody had anything to do with it, she might 1255
1 have been involved with it, but I don't think so. 2 Q Do you recall a meeting between you and 3 Mr. Pesenti and Mr. Merrett in the French hotel, which I 4 can't remember the name of, which he told us about Friday? 5 A Yes. I do remember that. 6 Q And what was the purpose of that meeting? 7 A The purpose of that meeting -- well, there were 8 several meetings, but the one that related to money was to 9 get money to John Merrett and John-Michel Pesenti. 10 Q For what? 11 A Pesenti, for legal work that he was going to do in 12 France; and Merrett, for legal work that he was going to do 13 in the United States. 14 Q And did Mr. Merrett at that time know that the 15 source of those funds to get to him and Mr. Pesenti for 16 legal work, you were the source of those funds? 17 A He absolutely did. 18 Q And did that have anything to do -- 19 A And in fact he -- not only was he aware of it, he 20 specifically asked that it not be a check from UBS. 21 Q And when was this meeting? 22 MR. FUGATE: Could we identify which "he," 23 Pesenti or Merrett? 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Yeah. Who didn't want the UBS check? 1256
1 A John Merrett. 2 Q Why? 3 A Because he was aware that there were others, and 4 he just wanted to make sure his was different. 5 Q When was this meeting? 6 A You know, I don't remember the dates terribly 7 well, but I would say it was probably March or April of 8 2001. 9 Q This meeting -- 10 A Ms. Brooks -- 11 Q -- discussed -- 12 A Ms. Brooks would have a much better idea of the 13 date. I think -- I think that's when it was. I remember 14 the check that was sent to Pesenti was -- I think it was 15 issued April 4th. So it would have been before that. 16 Q And how would Ms. Brooks know this? 17 A Well, she would know about the time of the 18 meetings in Paris. 19 Q Because she was there? 20 A She was in Paris, yes. We were all in Paris. 21 Q Was she in this meeting? 22 A No. 23 Q Was this before or after Clambake was sent money 24 to send to the LMT? 25 A That would have been after. 1257
1 Q Did Ms. Brooks know the source of the funds that 2 was paid to Pesenti and to Merrett? 3 A No. She was kept in the dark about it. 4 Q Why? 5 A Well, because John Merrett and I consciously 6 wanted to keep her in the dark about this so that she 7 wouldn't have to go into depositions and answer any 8 questions about it. She would just say she didn't know. 9 Q Well, didn't you dissolve the LMT so that 10 Ms. Brooks could plead the Fifth Amendment? 11 A No. We dissolved the LMT because the LMT had just 12 gone through at least a year of substantial legal hassles. 13 And from June of 2001 all the way through the end of the 14 year, those legal demands, through contempt orders, motions, 15 severe sanctions and stuff like that, you know, escalated. 16 You know, at one stage, Judge Schaeffer is saying, "If the 17 church doesn't add Minton as a party, I'm going to add him 18 as a party in the counterclaim." I mean, you know, it was 19 to try to get out of this whole mess. 20 Q Now, you made -- 21 THE COURT: How did you -- how did you know 22 that, Mr. Minton, that I said that? Who showed you 23 that information? 24 THE WITNESS: Stacy Brooks told me about it. 25 THE COURT: How did she know about it? 1258
1 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure. But this was some 2 time ago. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q Last Friday you indicated that you continued to 6 have meetings with representatives from the Church of -- 7 THE COURT: It's true, by the way. I thought, 8 based on the allegations they were making, that you 9 were a necessary party -- 10 THE WITNESS: Right. 11 THE COURT: -- to the counterclaim. 12 THE WITNESS: That's what I understood, your 13 Honor. 14 THE COURT: Right. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Now, last Friday you said you were continuing to 17 have meetings with the Church of Scientology even after 18 Judge Schaeffer's hearing started on this instant motion, is 19 that correct? 20 A Yes, I did. 21 Q And who are you meeting with? 22 A The last meeting I had was with Mike Rinder. 23 Q Who else have you met with while Judge Schaeffer's 24 hearing has been going on? 25 A I think only Mr. Rinder. 1259
1 Q What about Ben Shaw? 2 A I don't think so, since the hearing started. 3 Q Any attorneys present at these meetings? 4 A No. 5 Q Do your lawyers know that you're meeting with 6 Mr. Rinder? 7 MR. HOWIE: Objection as to privilege. 8 THE COURT: Sustained. 9 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q What are you and Mr. Rinder talking about while 12 the hearing's going on, before Judge Schaeffer? 13 A Well, the -- the meeting that -- you know, I 14 initiated a meeting because of my concerns about this 15 Wollersheim payment. And after discussing it with my 16 attorney, you know, I met with Rinder. That's all that was 17 discussed. 18 Q And how many other times have you met with 19 Mr. Rinder? 20 A None since then. You know, a number before then. 21 Q And what did Mr. Rinder tell you about your 22 concerns about the Wollersheim settlement? 23 A Well, I -- I discussed a couple of possible issues 24 related to it, and -- namely, to avoid any appearance of a 25 quid pro quo. You know, if I was going to get, you know, 1260
1 $700,000 out of this, that, you know, maybe I should just 2 assign the money to the Church of Scientology, you know, 3 and -- but you know, after discussing that in more detail 4 with my counsel before the meeting, you know, it was 5 decided, "Look, you know, you've had this thing for more 6 than five years. You know, there's nothing to worry about 7 here. This is not a quid pro quo, and you don't have to 8 worry about it." 9 THE COURT: What was the worry? I get all 10 confused and all concerned about this. 11 THE WITNESS: Well -- 12 THE COURT: I mean, I think we may have talked 13 about this before and it still doesn't make sense to 14 me. 15 The quid pro quo you're talking to Mr. Rinder 16 from the Church of Scientology about, your concern 17 that if you received money that you were entitled 18 to -- you had a UCC filing out there -- that if you 19 received money, it would -- it was bothersome to 20 you. It might look like it was a quid pro quo. 21 A quid pro quo for what? Your testimony? 22 THE WITNESS: No. That -- that we had actually 23 had more in the way of negotiations about this 24 settlement, which we're not doing. 25 THE COURT: And why is it that you care what 1261
1 Mr. Rinder thinks about this? 2 THE WITNESS: No. It was my -- my concern was 3 not what Mr. Rinder thought, but what other people 4 might think. 5 And in fact, your Honor, on the Internet, it 6 was described as a deal for Minton; that, basically, 7 you know, Minton's gotten paid off by the Church of 8 Scientology out of this Wollersheim thing. 9 THE COURT: I see. 10 THE WITNESS: And that's why -- you know, that 11 happened after, you know, they paid the money into 12 the court. People started saying that's what this 13 is; that, you know, he's getting paid off, you know, 14 as part of his secret deal with Scientology. 15 THE COURT: So you were thinking -- you talked 16 to Mr. Rinder about assigning your interest in the 17 Wollersheim case back to the church? 18 THE WITNESS: Well, that's what I -- I -- well, 19 I -- 20 THE COURT: You thought that would help the 21 perception? 22 THE WITNESS: Well, let me just explain. 23 This was a matter that, you know, I discussed 24 with legal counsel -- 25 THE COURT: Be real careful, because you cannot 1262
1 talk about the things you want to talk about and not 2 talk about things that I might want you to talk 3 about. 4 THE WITNESS: Okay. All right. Well, you 5 know, I was -- I was advised that this wasn't a 6 concern; that -- you know, that you didn't need to 7 think of that, you know. And so, you know, I didn't 8 do anything about that. 9 THE COURT: Okay. 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q And when you -- and we're going to get to the -- 12 more details. But when you were trying to purge yourself, 13 as you say, before Judge Baird on April the 9th, you were 14 doing that because you thought the Church of Scientology 15 would get the court to dismiss the contempt order, is that 16 correct? 17 A That's right. 18 THE COURT: Is that a good stopping point? 19 It's about 10:30. 20 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 21 THE COURT: Okay? 22 We'll be in recess for 10 minutes. Till 23 quarter till -- you know, my clock and my watch 24 aren't the same. 25 MR. WEINBERG: This is slow. 1263
1 THE COURT: My watch says 10:25. 2 MR. WEINBERG: I think it's 10:22. 3 THE COURT: Well, let's say 20 till. How's 4 that? 5 Let's just be brave and enjoy our coffee. 6 Let's just say quarter till. 7 Because I want to make a note here. Everybody 8 can be at ease. 9 (A recess was taken at 10:22 a.m.) 10 (The proceedings resumed at 10:23 a.m.) 11 THE COURT: Okay. Continue on, Mr. Dandar. 12 MR. DANDAR: All right. We've had some things 13 marked while we were on our recess -- 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MR. DANDAR: -- your Honor. 16 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 55 marked for identification.) 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q And first thing I want to do is show Plaintiff's 19 Exhibit 55. 20 MR. DANDAR: Wait, Judge. I gave you the wrong 21 one. 22 MR. WEINBERG: Is this a new exhibit, Ken? 23 MR. DANDAR: Yeah. 24 MR. WEINBERG: So it's Plaintiff's 55? 25 MR. DANDAR: I may not have copies for me. 1264
1 I'll hand the clerk's copy to the witness. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q Can you identify that, Mr. Minton? 4 A It would appear to be a post of mine which is 5 repeating a St. Petersburg Times editorial. 6 Q Do you have comments on that, concerning Jesse 7 Prince? 8 A Do I have comments? 9 Q Yes. 10 A Do I have any -- are there any comments of mine on 11 here? 12 THE COURT: Yeah. I don't know what you're 13 asking him. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Did you make any comments, or is that just simply 16 from the St. Pete Times? 17 A I think that's just from the St. Pete Times, other 18 than where I say, "This is one view from the St. Petersburg 19 Times." 20 Q And where did you post that on the Internet? 21 A On alt.religion.scientology. 22 Q And why did you post it? 23 A Well, I thought it was an interesting editorial, 24 given what had happened in the Jesse Prince case. 25 Q What was the date of your posting? 1265
1 A July 24th, 2001. 2 Q Okay. Put that to the side so -- I'll come back 3 to it later. 4 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 56 marked for identification.) 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q And I'll show you what we'll have marked -- what 7 is already marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 56. 8 Now, this is a posting by you, is that correct? 9 A That's right. 10 Q And it's alt.religion.scientology -- 11 A Yes. 12 Q -- correct? Dated June 25th, 2001. 13 A Right. 14 Q What was the discussion about on this posting? 15 A The thread was about a perceived obligation, by 16 people on alt.religion.scientology, that Ken Dandar should 17 be providing more information to the Internet about -- about 18 this case. 19 Q Did you respond to this post -- 20 A I did. 21 Q -- by Mr. Gomez? 22 A I did. 23 Q And read out loud what you said. 24 A Just the highlighted part that you've got here or 25 the whole thing? 1266
1 Q Well, just the two paragraphs on the first page. 2 A "Mike, I share your frustration with Ken Dandar. 3 He has always been unwilling to provide copies of key 4 documents in a timely manner. Part of the reason is that 5 many times when something hits ARS about the case, 6 Scientology's weasel lawyers, Moxon, Hertzberg and Weinberg, 7 cause a stink and cause Ken to somehow get hammered by the 8 court. He hates that and prefers to keep documents away 9 from the Internet. 10 "Ken was picked by Fannie McPherson and endorsed 11 as attorney for the estate by her sisters. Ken is 12 accountable to his client, Dell Liebreich, as personal 13 representative of the estate of Lisa McPherson. He is not 14 accountable to anyone else, especially me, because I am 15 providing money to support the litigation. 16 "It is Scientology's mantra to each and every 17 judge that has sat on the McPherson case that Minton 18 controls the litigation, Minton does that, Minton does that. 19 Not less than 50 percent of the bullshit of every hearing in 20 the case is about the evil Bob Minton." 21 Q Now, was the first paragraph, true? 22 A It's exactly what you suggested I should say. 23 Q I suggested that you put this on the Internet? 24 A You did. In fact, this same statement is almost 25 in one of the depositions that I gave. 1267
1 Q What deposition is that? 2 A This was part -- I don't know which one, but there 3 is a deposition that has something similar to this. 4 THE COURT: This is a deposition of you, 5 Mr. Minton? 6 THE WITNESS: I believe so, your Honor. 7 A This was all part of appearing to distance me from 8 the case. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Where you say in the second paragraph, "he," 11 meaning Ken Dandar, "is not accountable to anyone else, 12 especially me," I told you to put that on the Internet? 13 A You didn't say anything about that paragraph. I 14 put that on my own. 15 Q Okay. 16 A The first paragraph. 17 Q All right. So what is it of the first paragraph 18 that I told you to put on the Internet? The whole thing? 19 A Appear to -- you know, put something on there that 20 appears to continue to distance you from this case. You 21 know, that Dandar is not providing me documents. You know, 22 the whole nine yards on that. 23 Q Well, isn't that true, Mr. Minton? I did not 24 provide you documents in this case, did I? 25 A You did, many times. 1268
1 Q Is that something you've already testified about, 2 or is there anything you want to add on to that list? 3 Because I don't want to go back on old testimony. 4 A No. I think that's -- I think I've testified 5 about it. 6 THE COURT: You know what? Whatever you've 7 given me here doesn't have the last line. 8 MR. DANDAR: It's on the next page. 9 THE WITNESS: It skips to the top of the next 10 page, your Honor. 11 THE COURT: Oh. Oh, okay. Thank you. 12 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q The next page, the paragraph -- the first 15 paragraph, where it talks about, "Scientology drove Lisa 16 insane, incarcerated her against her will, starved her, 17 withheld medical care and killed her through criminal 18 neglect," is that something I told you to write or did you 19 do that all by yourself? 20 A That's something you have said to me prior to 21 this; that, you know, "The last thing --" you know, "If they 22 can keep the focus of this case on you, they don't have to 23 address the -- the issue of Lisa McPherson." That's -- 24 that's something you've said time and time again to me. 25 Q Read the last paragraph out loud. 1269
1 A "Mike, it's not my case to run. If it was, I 2 would disagree with many things Ken has done or failed to 3 do. But since Ken Dandar is not accountable to you, me, the 4 Internet or anybody else except the estate of Lisa 5 McPherson, it's not for us to decide how Dell Liebreich, 6 with the advice of the estate's attorney, runs this case." 7 Q Is that your words, Mr. Minton? 8 A That's -- that's paraphrasing basically what we 9 have always talked about. 10 Q Did I tell you to write that? 11 A No. You didn't tell me to write this. You told 12 me to write this and -- you told me to write in such a way 13 that it appeared that I'm distanced from this case. 14 Q Is that a truthful statement or is this a lie that 15 you posted on the Internet to Mike Gomez? 16 A It's -- it's the way you wanted it written. 17 Q Is it truthful? 18 A No. I don't believe it's a truthful statement. 19 Q What -- what is the truth -- if this is a lie, 20 what is the truth, according to you? 21 A The truth is that I have been intimately involved 22 in this case; that you have been intimately involved in 23 providing information to me. 24 Q Is it true that Mr. Robert Minton -- the Lisa 25 McPherson case is not, quote, my case to run? Is that true? 1270
1 A You know I haven't run the case. You've run the 2 case. 3 Q Is it true, quote, I would disagree with many 4 things Ken has done or failed to do, close quote -- is that 5 true? 6 A I would agree with that. 7 Q Is it true, quote -- 8 THE COURT: I'm sorry, did you say you would or 9 would not? 10 THE WITNESS: I would agree with that. 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q Is it true, quote, That since Ken Dandar is not 14 accountable to you, me, the Internet or anybody else except 15 the estate of Lisa McPherson, it is not for us to decide how 16 Dell Liebreich, with the advice of the estate's attorney, 17 runs this case, close quote -- is that true? 18 A Well, that's something that we talked about. In 19 fact, it -- you know, that came up a couple of times when 20 you -- and I said this to Stacy. You know, when you 21 suggested, you know, "I don't care if Bob goes to jail. 22 It's not going to destroy the case at all." 23 Q Is it true -- 24 A And -- 25 Q I need an answer to my question. 1271
1 Is that last sentence true or false, where you 2 say, "Ken Dandar is not accountable to me." 3 A Well, it's true in a sense -- 4 Q All right. 5 A -- and false in a sense. 6 Q All right. What's the false part? 7 A Well, it's false to the extent that you have been 8 accountable to me because of the money. 9 Q What does that mean? 10 A That means that the money that has driven this 11 case has made you be accountable. 12 Q What does that mean? 13 A I think -- that's -- 14 Q Accountable what? What does that mean? 15 A To me. 16 Q How? 17 A You know, you've provided me this confidential 18 information; you've told me how you were going to do certain 19 things; you've taken advice about how to do certain things. 20 You've not done a lot of things that I asked, that's for 21 sure. 22 Q Name one thing that I did that you told me to do 23 or suggested that I do. 24 A Well, put the word "murder" in that first amended 25 complaint -- 1272
1 Q And you do realize that Vaughn Young drafted that? 2 A -- and -- 3 Q Do you realize that Vaughn Young drafted that? 4 A I realize that Vaughn Young was involved in that, 5 yes. 6 Q Did you give orders to him on what to tell me? 7 A No. 8 Q Isn't that "murder" a quote out of the writings of 9 Mr. Hubbard himself? 10 A Well, I believe that we heard from Scientology's 11 counsel that's not the case. 12 Q Don't you know that to be true, Mr. Minton? 13 I don't care what they -- 14 A I don't know that -- 15 Q -- say -- 16 A -- to be true. 17 Q Pardon me? 18 A I do not know that to be true. 19 Q Have you ever read the declaration of Andre 20 Tabayoyon -- 21 A No. 22 Q -- where he quotes, in paragraph 34 of his 23 declaration, Hubbard's writings about how this can be used 24 to murder someone or cause them to go insane? 25 MR. FUGATE: I would object to this, as the 1273
1 witness -- or as the attorney testifying. He said 2 he hasn't read it. 3 THE COURT: Well, I think he's now asking if he 4 read this. 5 I don't know who that person is. That's a new 6 person. 7 A The only thing I know about that affidavit is I 8 have seen quotes from it concerning weapons. That's all. I 9 mean, that he was supposedly responsible for guns or 10 something at Himmen (phonetic). 11 BY MR. DANDAR: 12 Q You don't recall Mr. Andre Tabayoyon, who spent 21 13 years in Scientology, who knew Mr. Miscavige and Mr. Hubbard 14 personally, according to his declaration -- 15 MR. DANDAR: Which we'll file with the court as 16 soon as I get the exhibits. I just have the 17 declaration. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q -- that he is the one who filed this declaration 20 in the Fishman case, that talks about the power of David 21 Miscavige as captain of the Sea Org ruling every corporation 22 of Scientology? 23 A I told you I haven't read the affidavit. 24 Q All right. 25 THE COURT: For my court reporter -- I have no 1274
1 idea who this person is -- give us the best spelling 2 you can. 3 MR. DANDAR: All right. I'll do that. 4 In fact, I can mark the declaration as an 5 exhibit if you like. But unfortunately, I don't 6 have the exhibits. That's why I wanted to wait. 7 THE COURT: No. I, just for now, would like 8 you to -- 9 MR. DANDAR: Andre, A-n-d-r-e, last name 10 T-a-b-a-y-o-y-o-n. 11 MR. WEINBERG: Just so the record's clear, when 12 Mr. Dandar gets to the point to kind of offer that 13 affidavit -- I mean, as I understand it, the man was 14 a gardener. And this is back in the Fishman case. 15 I haven't seen the affidavit. But I can't imagine 16 the relevance to this case or how that could be 17 admissible without Mr. Tabayoyon, or whatever his 18 name is, being around. 19 THE COURT: I think that at this point in time, 20 if Mr. Minton had said he had heard it and that had 21 something to do with it, it might come in under this 22 same strange way things come in. But he said he 23 didn't, so I think you're probably right. 24 MR. WEINBERG: All right. 25 THE COURT: Unless, of course, Mr. Dandar 1275
1 testifies differently, and then we'll decide at that 2 time. As I said, we let a lot of stuff in here that 3 isn't properly authenticated. And certainly 4 wouldn't come in if we were in a jury trial, but 5 this is a different kind of hearing. 6 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 57 marked for identification.) 7 MR. DANDAR: Like to show the witness 8 Plaintiff's Exhibit 57. 9 THE COURT: Are you offering 56 in evidence? 10 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 11 THE COURT: Any objection? 12 MR. DANDAR: And 55. 13 MR. WEINBERG: 55, I object. It's just a 14 copy -- 15 THE COURT: 56. 16 MR. WEINBERG: 56 is the -- 17 THE COURT: Minton posting. 18 MR. WEINBERG: I don't object to 56. 19 THE COURT: All right. It'll be received. 20 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 56 received in evidence.) 21 THE COURT: Are you offering 55? 22 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 23 THE COURT: Your objection? 24 MR. WEINBERG: I object because that's just a 25 St. Pete Times editorial. I mean, what's that got 1276
1 to do with it? 2 MR. DANDAR: Goes to the state of mind of 3 Mr. Minton personally. 4 THE COURT: Yeah. I think, for this hearing 5 and the fact that Mr. Minton put this on the 6 Internet, it perhaps may have some relevance in a 7 very unusual way. So I'm going to let it in. 8 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 9 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 55 received in evidence.) 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q Mr. Minton, is the -- Exhibit 57 -- 12 THE COURT: Here's a good example, though, 13 of -- of, you know, as I said, the newspaper, I 14 respect the St. Petersburg Times, but I'm always 15 leery about -- and I always display to jurors that 16 the newspaper sometimes is correct and sometimes 17 isn't correct. 18 This says, "Prince was arrested on a 19 misdemeanor charge of cultivating marijuana." There 20 is no misdemeanor charge of cultivating marijuana. 21 That's a felony. I suspect if he was arrested for 22 cultivating marijuana, he was arrested for a felony 23 and the state later reduced the charge to a 24 misdemeanor possession. 25 Now, did the Times mean, in their editorial, to 1277
1 mislead the public? No. But do they really 2 understand some of the things they write about? No. 3 So I mean, this is just -- there's a perfect 4 example of what I explain to jurors why they can't 5 rely on anything they've read in the paper as being 6 factual. Because as I said, I don't think they 7 meant to mislead anybody there. They just happen to 8 be incorrect. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Okay. Look at Plaintiff's Exhibit 57. Is that a 11 posting by you on November 3rd, '99? 12 A Well, it's got my name at the top, but it's not -- 13 it doesn't show a whole message. 14 Q Did you author the three paragraphs that appear on 15 this page? 16 THE COURT: What do you mean, Mr. Minton? I 17 don't understand. This is a different thing than 18 what you've usually seen. What does that mean, that 19 it's not complete? 20 THE WITNESS: Well, it's been reformatted. It 21 starts up here, "Begin PGP sign message," you know, 22 which is usually a couple of lines down. And then 23 it would go to the end of PGP message at some stage. 24 You see in that third line -- 25 THE COURT: Right. 1278
1 THE WITNESS: -- second line, it starts, 2 "Begin --" 3 THE COURT: But if this -- this would be a -- 4 this is you, bob@minton.org? 5 THE WITNESS: Yes. That's -- that's my 6 address. 7 THE COURT: Okay. So I guess the question is 8 whether or not you can look at this, if you wrote 9 this -- 10 THE WITNESS: Okay. 11 THE COURT: I don't understand what -- 12 Is this -- is this not complete? Is there more 13 to it? 14 MR. DANDAR: That's all I have. 15 THE COURT: Okay. 16 MR. DANDAR: I can't answer the rest of the 17 question. 18 THE COURT: So I guess the question is whether 19 you wrote this. 20 THE WITNESS: Well, I believe that this is part 21 of Stacy's thing that's on the Web site. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Okay. So when it says, "Author, Bob Minton," 24 that's not true? 25 A Well, it's just like posting the St. Pete Times 1279
1 editorial. You know, it doesn't mean that I authored it. 2 Even though I posted it. I believe this is Stacy's writing. 3 Q Okay. So -- 4 A That came off of the LMT Web site. 5 Q All right. So why would Stacy Brooks mislead the 6 public, who reads this, looking at it, as if Bob Minton is 7 the author? 8 A Well, Stacy Brooks didn't mislead anybody, because 9 it obviously doesn't have her name at the top. It may have 10 her name at the bottom. But since the post is not complete, 11 I can't tell you. 12 Q Okay. Well, we'll withdraw that one, then, and 13 we'll find the rest of the post. 14 A There's a section on the LMT Web site that has 15 stuff about Lisa McPherson. I think this came out of there. 16 Q Do you recognize those three paragraphs as coming 17 out of there? 18 A I think they did. I'm not a hundred percent sure. 19 Q Did you author a sentence on the Web site that 20 says, "Ken Dandar, who was and is both courageous enough and 21 pure enough to withstand the assaults of Scientology," or is 22 that Stacy Brooks' writing? 23 A That would have probably been Stacy's. 24 Q Okay. 25 MR. FUGATE: So 57 is withdrawn. 1280
1 THE COURT: For now, it's withdrawn, is that 2 right? 3 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 4 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 58 marked for identification.) 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q Let me show you Plaintiff's 58. And is this a 7 posting by you, November 26th of '99? 8 A It would appear to be. 9 Q And do you know who -- who posted the slanderous 10 comments about Jesse Prince on the Internet? 11 A What's slanderous about them? 12 Q Well, you're -- someone talked about Jesse 13 Prince's sexual habits, and you're saying that's not true. 14 You're defending Jesse Prince in that posting, aren't you? 15 A Well, I don't discuss whether -- whether his talk 16 about sexual stuff was slanderous or not, but I am -- 17 Q What do you say -- 18 A I am -- 19 Q -- in response -- 20 A I am defending Jesse Prince, yes. 21 Q What do you say in response to that posting? 22 A Do you want me to read it? 23 Q Sure. 24 A "An anonymous shill comes on ARS and says Jesse 25 seems to talk about sex obsessively. Then, Jennifer, you 1281
1 buy into the anon statement without question. And I cannot 2 begin to imagine why you'd do this. I've spent a lot of 3 time with Jesse, and I can tell you that the only thing he 4 is obsessive about is letting the world know how evil and 5 corrupt the management of the Church of Scientology has 6 become." 7 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 59 marked for identification.) 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Okay. Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 59. 10 MR. DANDAR: I'll move 58 into evidence. 11 THE COURT: Any objection? 12 I don't know why -- 13 MR. WEINBERG: I don't know what the point of 14 it is. 15 THE COURT: I don't either. 16 What is the point of this? 17 MR. DANDAR: His state of mind concerning Jesse 18 Prince. 19 MR. WEINBERG: Yeah. I mean -- 20 THE COURT: I think that at this point in time, 21 I can't see the relevance -- 22 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 23 THE COURT: -- of this, so I'm not letting this 24 in at this time. It may become apparent to me at 25 some point, but it isn't apparent now. So for now 1282
1 this is not in. 2 MR. DANDAR: All right. 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q Look at Plaintiff's 59. 5 A Yes. 6 Q Can you read the -- the ones that I bracketed, the 7 sentences? 8 MR. WEINBERG: Well, excuse me. Are you going 9 to have him identify it first? 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q Is this a posting by you, Mr. Minton? 12 A Yes. It appears to be. 13 Q On December 1st of '98? 14 A Right. 15 Q Now, the -- why did you post this, before we get 16 into the contents? 17 THE COURT: It's an awfully long thing. He 18 might have to read it before he could tell us why he 19 posted it. 20 A So let me read it then. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q All right. 23 THE COURT: I mean, this is a real long one. 24 I think we've seen this before, haven't we? 25 This looks like a posting that I've seen. But I'll 1283
1 keep reading. 2 MR. FUGATE: I think that -- 3 THE COURT: I think this may even be in 4 evidence. 5 MR. FUGATE: Yes. 6 THE COURT: But I recognize it. 7 MR. FUGATE: It's Defendant's 98, your Honor, 8 in evidence. 9 THE COURT: Defendant's 98? 10 MR. FUGATE: Yeah. 11 Let me just show it to you, make sure it looks 12 the same. 13 THE COURT: Oh, okay. Yeah. It's already in 14 evidence. 15 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 16 THE COURT: You can put it in as Plaintiff's 17 59, but it's already in evidence. And go ahead and 18 ask questions. 19 But he still needs to read it if you're going 20 to ask him why he did it. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q Are you finished reading it? 23 A I have. 24 Q And Mr. Minton, this posting concerns your 25 thoughts, after you met with the -- Mr. Rinder a few times, 1284
1 is that correct? 2 A Right. Yeah. About six months later, yes. 3 Q All right. And the one I want you to read out 4 loud is this one that's bracketed in the middle of the first 5 page. 6 A Yes. 7 Q Go ahead. 8 A "Well, Scientology, you remember the two times we 9 met in June and July --" 10 THE COURT: Don't go too fast. My court 11 reporter's trying to take all this -- 12 THE WITNESS: Sorry, your Honor. 13 THE COURT: -- down. 14 That's all right. 15 THE WITNESS: Should I start over? 16 THE REPORTER: No. 17 THE COURT: Go ahead. 18 A "-- when you asked me to, quote, to cut off money 19 to Ken Dandar, unquote, because he says, quote, he has 20 nothing to lose, close quotes. From his statement, you 21 concluded he would not negotiate a settlement with you 22 unless you could strangle him financially. My June Boston 23 meeting with Rinder and Rathbun happened two days after the 24 insulting settlement proposals and multimedia cry-a-thon 25 presented to Lisa's family and Mr. Dandar." 1285
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Mr. Minton, has (sic) that what the Church of 3 Scientology has done to you in these negotiations you had 4 with them in March and April and May of this year, to get 5 you to stop, finally, once and for all, the financing of 6 this litigation? 7 A No. I think you remember from Mr. Merrett's 8 e-mail to you, I already did that. I already stopped. 9 Q Well, you certainly had somebody in Europe send a 10 check over in March of 2002 for $250,000. 11 A No, I didn't. I sent that money myself, and you 12 know it. 13 Q And you sent that check over, as you say, after -- 14 after you made telephone calls to Michael Rinder, isn't that 15 true? 16 A No. 17 Q Didn't you make telephone calls to Michael Rinder 18 in February of 2002? 19 A You know, I've testified about that. And no, I 20 made no calls to anybody in the Church of Scientology. I 21 told you that my attorney contacted Mr. Pope. 22 Q What month and what year? 23 A In February of 2002. 24 Q At your direction? 25 A I authorized it. 1286
1 Q Okay. So after you authorized your attorney to 2 try to make some type of settlement with the Church of 3 Scientology, you, I think your words are, caused to be 4 issued this UBS bank check in March of 2002, correct? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q And is part of your negotiations with the Church 7 of Scientology, if you don't get this case dismissed, is to 8 make sure no further checks are sent to me for the pursuit 9 of this litigation? 10 A There has been no discussions of anything of that 11 nature. 12 MR. DANDAR: I move that Exhibit 59 into 13 evidence. 14 THE COURT: Any objection? Well, it's 15 already -- 16 MR. WEINBERG: It's already 98. 17 MR. FUGATE: 99 -- or -- 18 THE COURT: Yeah. It will be received. 19 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 59 received in evidence.) 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q Now, Mr. Minton, when you walked into the room of 22 Mr. Rosen's office on March the 28th, you were there with 23 Ms. Brooks and Mr. Jonas, your attorney, correct? 24 A He was representing both -- both of us, yes. 25 Q But before he went in to discuss anything with 1287
1 Mr. Rosen, he sent a letter to Mr. Rosen to keep all of the 2 discussions confidential, is that correct? 3 A That's correct. 4 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 60 marked for identification.) 5 MR. DANDAR: And the reason why I'm not running 6 up there right now is I'm looking for Exhibit 60, 7 marked by the clerk. 8 THE WITNESS: I've got the one marked by the 9 clerk. 10 MR. DANDAR: There you go. 11 So I'll hand it to the judge. And this is, I 12 believe, already in evidence, but it would take me 13 way too long to find it. 14 THE COURT: I think it is, because I think I 15 know what you're referring to. 16 MR. DANDAR: Mr. Fugate called it a 17 confidentiality agreement, if I'm not mistaken. 18 MR. FUGATE: I think I called it a letter from 19 Mr. Jonas, but I'll look it up. 20 THE COURT: Mr. Rosen goes by the name of 21 "Sandy" as well as you? 22 MR. WEINBERG: It's very confusing, but he's 23 about two feet taller than I am, a few pounds 24 heavier. 25 THE COURT: When I read "Sandy," I thought it 1288
1 was you, but it's not. 2 MR. WEINBERG: It's not me. 3 THE COURT: I don't know what Mr. Moxon goes 4 by. I always call him "Mr. Moxon." 5 What do people call you? 6 MR. MOXON: Well, "Rick" or "Mox." 7 THE COURT: "Rick"? Okay. But not Kendrick. 8 That's -- 9 MR. MOXON: Kendrick is my name for court, your 10 Honor. Driver's license. 11 THE COURT: Okay. But if I were to see you on 12 the street and I didn't have to call you 13 "Mr. Moxon," you go by "Rick," yes? 14 MR. MOXON: Hopefully, yes. 15 THE COURT: You would hope I would call you 16 "Rick" or something like that? 17 MR. MOXON: Yeah. 18 THE COURT: Let the record reflect we all 19 laughed. That was a joke. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q Now, Mr. Minton, when you entered the room, the 22 office of Mr. Rosen in New York City on March 28th, it was 23 your intention to try to negotiate a settlement with the 24 Church of Scientology, is that correct? 25 A Yes. 1289
1 Q And that negotiations in your mind, at that time, 2 would include you writing a check out to the Church of 3 Scientology, is that right? 4 A Yes -- 5 Q Did you -- 6 A -- it would. 7 Q -- expect -- 8 A It would get to that, yes. 9 Q Did you ever expect it would involve anything more 10 than writing out a check to the Church of Scientology? 11 A No. I didn't expect anything else. 12 Q Okay. Why did the Church of Scientology want to 13 keep these discussions confidential? 14 A Well, the -- Mr. Rosen explained to Mr. Jonas that 15 they had not been happy that I had posted messages on the 16 Internet concerning previous meetings. 17 Q Like the one we just read. 18 A Right. 19 And so they wanted just to be assured that there 20 was going to be, you know, confidentiality with respect to 21 the discussions. 22 Q Well, it was a lot more than that, though, wasn't 23 it, Mr. Minton? 24 A Not that anybody thought of or that was 25 communicated to Mr. Jonas or that Mr. Jonas communicated to 1290
1 me. 2 Q Well, look at Exhibit 60. It says at the bottom 3 of the first paragraph, quote, without trying to anticipate 4 all the ways in which this agreement could be violated, it 5 is specifically agreed that the discussions will not be 6 posted on the Internet; will not be inquired into in 7 discovery in any litigation; and will not be revealed in any 8 court papers or to any court. 9 Wasn't that your understanding as well? 10 A Well, that's what Mr. Jonas wrote. I mean, he's 11 the one that wrote this. He knows how to write a 12 confidentiality agreement. 13 Q When you walked into the room of Mr. Rosen's 14 office on March the 28th, it was your intention and the 15 Church of Scientology's intention, by Mr. Rosen signing this 16 letter agreement, that nobody, including you, Ms. Brooks or 17 anyone representing the Church of Scientology, would tell 18 this court, Judge Schaeffer or Judge Baird or any other 19 court, that you entered into these secret meetings and 20 negotiations. Isn't that true, Mr. Minton? 21 A No, that's not true. In fact, Mr. Jonas said, you 22 know, "This is -- any -- any judge can order you to testify 23 about this agreement, and decide that, you know, that he or 24 she waives the confidentiality of it." 25 Q Does it say that in this letter? You agree it 1291
1 doesn't say that in this letter, does it? 2 A No. That's the legal advice that I was given. 3 THE COURT: Well, your lawyer was Mr. Jonas. 4 Did he think somehow or another that you could enter 5 into some sort of secret discussions, and if some 6 court wanted to know what they were, they couldn't 7 ask you to reveal them? 8 THE WITNESS: No. He thought -- 9 THE COURT: Did Mr. Rosen think this was worth 10 anything? 11 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 12 THE COURT: Mr. Rosen does an agreement that 13 you pay him for? 14 THE WITNESS: No. He's the church's attorney. 15 THE COURT: Oh. Mr. Jonas is? 16 THE WITNESS: No, no. He's my attorney. You 17 said Mr. Rosen. 18 THE COURT: I'm sorry. It's Mr. Jonas that 19 wrote this letter, your lawyer. 20 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 21 THE COURT: And he thought this was an 22 agreement? 23 THE WITNESS: Well, he thought this was a 24 confidentiality agreement. 25 THE COURT: Okay. 1292
1 A You know, the only -- to my knowledge, the only 2 objections that Mr. Rosen expressed to him was the fact that 3 they didn't want this stuff posted on the Internet. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q Mr. Minton, the second sentence of that letter 6 says, quote, as we discussed last week. 7 Now, was there a meeting prior -- a week before 8 March 25th? 9 A No. That would have been a phone discussion. 10 Q Were you part of that phone discussion? 11 A No, I wasn't. 12 Q Last sentence of that letter says, "Mr. Minton and 13 Ms. Brooks and I agree on these terms." So your attorney, 14 Mr. Jonas, did discuss with you the terms of this letter, 15 correct? 16 MR. HOWIE: Objection. Privilege. 17 MR. DANDAR: I think he's already waived it. 18 He already talked about what Mr. Jonas said about 19 this letter. 20 MR. HOWIE: Your Honor, the contents of the 21 letter are not privileged, but discussions with his 22 attorney concerning the creation of the letter would 23 be. 24 THE COURT: I think he waived the privilege as 25 to the -- 1293
1 I'm going to overrule your objection. 2 MR. FUGATE: Well, just so we're clear, I think 3 that this was waived in the Baird hearing. And I 4 know I indicated to your Honor that it was waived 5 for this hearing. So I'm not sure what we're asking 6 about. 7 MR. DANDAR: Well -- 8 THE COURT: He is asking him specifically about 9 a conversation with Mr. Rosen. 10 MR. FUGATE: Okay. 11 THE COURT: The objection's being made on the 12 basis of attorney-client privilege. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q Mr. Minton, this confidentiality agreement, 15 Exhibit 60 of the plaintiff's, is that why you did not 16 mention your negotiations or your meetings with Mr. Rinder 17 and other Scientology representatives to Judge Baird on 18 April 9th? 19 MR. WEINBERG: Object to the form of the 20 question. The whole issue came up in front of Judge 21 Baird. That's where the whole discussion of the 22 confidentiality agreement came up. 23 MR. DANDAR: Not on April the 9th, Judge. In 24 fact, Mr. Howie -- 25 MR. WEINBERG: I'm sorry. April the 9th. You 1294
1 mentioned -- I was thinking the evidentiary hearing. 2 April the 9th. Okay. 3 MR. DANDAR: Well, now that was the beginning 4 of the evidentiary hearing. 5 THE COURT: Your objection is overruled. 6 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 7 THE COURT: April the 9th -- 8 MR. WEINBERG: I missed the date. I'm sorry. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Mr. Minton -- 11 A I'm sorry. Could you just ask that again? 12 Q -- is that why you didn't mention these meetings 13 you had with Mr. Rosen and other representatives of the 14 Church of Scientology with Judge Baird during the hearing of 15 April the 9th, because of this confidentiality agreement? 16 A I don't think it ever came up. 17 THE COURT: Mr. Rosen was asking the questions 18 as I recall, was he not? 19 THE WITNESS: He was. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q And Mr. Howie asked the questions after Mr. Rosen, 22 didn't he? 23 A Right. 24 Q And in fact, at the April 19th hearing, when it 25 did come up, your attorney objected and wanted to enforce 1295
1 this confidentiality agreement. Do you recall that? 2 A I do. That was what we agreed that would be done. 3 THE COURT: Which lawyer was that? 4 MR. DANDAR: The April 19th hearing before 5 Judge Baird, Mr. Howie stood up and enforced 6 Plaintiff's Exhibit 60, the confidentiality letter 7 agreement of March 25th, 2002. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q And there weren't any discussions, as I recall -- 10 someone will correct me if I'm wrong. On April 19th, there 11 weren't any discussions about the content of any discussions 12 you had with the Church of Scientology. 13 MR. WEINBERG: Right. But your Honor, that's 14 the hearing where Mr. Rosen indicated to the court 15 that from the church's perspective, the church 16 waived the confidentiality agreement. 17 Now, Mr. Howie made his objection, but we 18 waived it at that hearing. 19 THE COURT: Don't -- don't associate yourself 20 with Mr. Rosen. Mr. Rosen is not on my -- the top 21 of my list. 22 So I assume that you are not connected with 23 Mr. Rosen. Mr. Rosen -- 24 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not connected -- 25 THE COURT: -- is a lawyer in Clearwater, has 1296
1 nothing to do with in my court. 2 MR. WEINBERG: I -- 3 THE COURT: You are a lawyer here, and you 4 have, as far as I know, nothing to do as being a 5 lawyer in Clearwater. 6 MR. WEINBERG: I wasn't part of that case, but 7 the Church -- the Church of Scientology, I should 8 say, waived the -- the confidentiality agreement at 9 that April 19th hearing. Mr. Howie, for whatever 10 reason, continued to assert it, but I think he 11 wanted to talk to his client about it. But we -- we 12 being the church -- waived it. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 A Just to continue that answer, Mr. Dandar, 15 Mr. Howie did object to it. This is what -- because there 16 was a confidentiality agreement. We objected. Mr. Rosen 17 waived it and Mr. -- your brother, Mr. Dandar, didn't ask 18 any of the questions in the areas that -- that Mr. Rosen 19 waived it. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q When was this? 22 A At that hearing. 23 Q April 9th? 24 A Or 19th, I think. 25 THE COURT: On the 9th, I don't believe he was 1297
1 given the liberty of asking any questions. 2 MR. DANDAR: That's right. 3 THE COURT: Was he? 4 MR. DANDAR: That's right. 5 THE WITNESS: The 19th, I said. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q My brother? My brother? It wasn't Mr. Lirot -- 8 A Your brother or Mr. Lirot. 9 Sorry. It was Mr. Lirot. 10 He never asked any questions in the areas which 11 Rosen waived it. 12 Q Aren't you -- 13 MR. FUGATE: To answer your question, Judge, 14 there was no cross examination on April 9th -- 15 THE COURT: Right. 16 MR. DANDAR: -- nor on the deposition of 17 April 8th. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q Mr. Minton, aren't you aware when you concluded 20 your deposition -- 21 THE COURT: Who was there on the 8th? 22 MR. DANDAR: My brother. 23 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q When you concluded your deposition, or you -- or 1298
1 you actually post- -- what's the word -- stopped your 2 deposition on April the 8th -- 3 A Yes. 4 Q -- that your deposition was supposed to continue 5 right after the hearing on April the 9th with Judge Baird. 6 Are you aware of that? 7 A No. I'm just aware it was suspended. 8 Q Who suspended a scheduled deposition? 9 A Well, suspended might not be the right word. It 10 was continued. 11 Q And my brother, Tom Dandar, showed up for your 12 continuing deposition on April 8th in Mr. Pope's office so 13 he could cross examine you, and you didn't appear. Why is 14 that? 15 THE COURT: What date is that? 16 MR. DANDAR: April 9th. Right after the 17 April 9th hearing. 18 A I have no idea. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Did someone tell you not to appear for the 21 continuation of your April 9th deposition? 22 A Nobody advised me there was a continuation on 23 April 9th. 24 Q Was that part of your negotiations with the Church 25 of Scientology, not to permit my brother to cross examine 1299
1 you? 2 A It never was discussed. 3 Q Are you aware that Mr. Rosen handed my brother, 4 Tom Dandar, a motion to disqualify him and me and my firm 5 during your deposition of April 8th? 6 A I'm not aware of that. 7 Q And you're not aware that he told my brother that, 8 "There's nothing in the motion. You'll just have to wait 9 for the hearing to find out what it's all about"? 10 A I'm not aware of that. 11 Q Was that part of your discussions with the Church 12 of Scientology over the weekend, on April 6th and 7th, to 13 sandbag us on April the 9th? 14 A Absolutely not. There was no discussion of 15 anything of that nature. 16 Q So tell me, when you went into the room, what does 17 the first -- who is the first person that spoke in 18 Mr. Rosen's office on March the 28th in New York City? 19 MR. WEINBERG: For the record, we're off of 20 April 9th and back to March 28th? 21 THE COURT: That's right. 22 MR. DANDAR: Kind of obvious, I think, from my 23 question. 24 THE COURT: I followed it. 25 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 1300
1 A I believe Mr. Rinder did. I'm not certain. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q And what did Mr. Rinder say? 4 A He said, you know, "We understand, you know, based 5 on the discussion we had on the phone, that -- that you want 6 to settle all outstanding issues between yourself and the 7 Church of Scientology." And you know, they basically just 8 wanted to confirm if that's in fact the case, since that's 9 what I had said on the phone, and now we're meeting for the 10 first time face-to-face. 11 Q Did you take any medication that morning, before 12 you walked into Mr. Rosen's offices? 13 A I probably did. 14 Q Did? 15 A I probably did. 16 Q Okay. Was this a very stressful moment for you? 17 A Well, it was somewhat stressful, yes. 18 Q Okay. And when you sat down at the table in his 19 conference room, who spoke first? 20 A I think you just asked me that. 21 Q Okay. And so what was the next thing that was 22 said? 23 A You know, I -- I affirmed that that's in fact what 24 I wanted to do. 25 Q And isn't that in fact what you tried to do before 1301
1 with the Church of Scientology, is to reach some kind of 2 amicable resolution between you and the Church of 3 Scientology, back in '98? 4 A Well, in 1998, when Stacy Brooks and I first met 5 with Mr. Rinder and Mr. Rathbun, we had no -- we didn't go 6 in there with any intention of trying to settle outstanding 7 disputes. We went in there with the idea of trying to see 8 if we could get the Church of Scientology to agree to 9 establish a regular dialogue with critics and to institute 10 certain reforms. 11 Q And that didn't work out at all, did it? 12 A It didn't. During the course of those discussions 13 that were held in Los Angeles and Boston, there was an 14 agreement put in front of me, as I mentioned, concerning 15 settling outstanding issues. 16 Q Now -- 17 A And then -- then there was another time that such 18 a -- an agreement was proposed. And that was while we were 19 in the middle of settling the FACTNet case. 20 Q And they -- 21 A But these were not -- in neither instance was this 22 something that was solicited by me. 23 Q Except this time on March 28th, was solicited by 24 you, correct? 25 A I'm the one who initiated the discussions, yes. 1302
1 Q And your intent or your purpose of initiating 2 discussions was because of all the pressure you were under 3 in reference to the discovery abuse, as you described it, by 4 the Church of Scientology. 5 A Well, it was a lot more than that. I mean, there 6 was -- you know, there was the perjury matters that were of 7 concern; you know, it was -- I mean, we were being inundated 8 with -- on the legal front. 9 We, I'm talking about Stacy Brooks, LMT, myself. 10 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 66 marked for identification.) 11 BY MR. DANDAR: 12 Q Well, let me show you, out of sequence here, what 13 I've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 66. 14 MR. FUGATE: What number? 15 MR. DANDAR: 66. 16 THE COURT: Mine says 67. 17 MR. DANDAR: Then I gave you the wrong one. So 18 give it back. 19 How did I do that? 20 THE COURT: Would you give me 66? 21 MR. DANDAR: I'm trying to give you 66 -- 22 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 23 MR. DANDAR: -- but it looks like I've -- 24 MR. WEINBERG: Here. I've got one. I've got 25 all the copies. 1303
1 MR. DANDAR: Let the record reflect that 2 Mr. Weinberg has all my copies. 3 THE COURT: I still don't understand -- I guess 4 I'll never understand -- nobody seems to be able to 5 stay on one point long enough for me to get this. I 6 wish you'd stay on this one point for a minute. 7 MR. DANDAR: I am. I'm pointing -- 8 THE COURT: I don't understand why you settle 9 with the Church of Scientology for perjury committed 10 in court. 11 THE WITNESS: No. The -- we weren't -- we 12 weren't trying to settle with the Church of 13 Scientology for perjury committed in court. 14 As I said, your Honor -- 15 THE COURT: Well, you went to the Church of 16 Scientology to settle all these things, and then 17 Mr. -- Mr. Dandar said, was the reason because of 18 the extensive discovery that was being conducted. 19 And you talked about that, and you said that was not 20 the only reason. 21 THE WITNESS: Right. 22 THE COURT: This is why you were going for this 23 settlement. 24 You said another reason was the perjury. And I 25 guess I will never understand how it is that you 1304
1 thought you'd go to the church to settle whatever it 2 is you thought you -- whatever the perjury had to do 3 with. 4 THE WITNESS: Well -- 5 THE COURT: Why didn't you go to a lawyer who 6 would have come to the court with that? 7 THE WITNESS: Well, your Honor, the idea wasn't 8 to -- the idea was never to sit down with the Church 9 of Scientology and talk about perjury; the idea was 10 to sit down with the Church of Scientology and try 11 to find a way to get out completely of all this -- 12 all these litigation matters down here, and 13 preferably never to come back again to deal with any 14 of this stuff. 15 THE COURT: Okay. So -- so when you were going 16 up there to settle with the church, a global 17 settlement, whatever it is you call it, the perjury 18 you were concerned with, they had nothing to do with 19 that as far as -- 20 THE WITNESS: No. 21 THE COURT: -- they couldn't offer you a 22 settlement. 23 THE WITNESS: No, your Honor. No, no. That 24 was not -- that was not an issue. 25 THE COURT: Okay. So the discovery abuse was 1305
1 going on, you felt -- you felt you were being 2 hounded or that you had a lot of -- seemed like -- 3 THE WITNESS: Well -- 4 THE COURT: -- endless depositions, endless 5 motions to compel. You knew that you had committed 6 perjury on the 5th. This was a concern of yours. 7 THE WITNESS: Right. 8 THE COURT: What else? What else -- 9 THE WITNESS: Well -- 10 THE COURT: -- were you trying to settle? 11 THE WITNESS: -- you know, I was a party in 12 these cases -- well, you know, in the breach case 13 anyway, at that time, and LMT was. You know, LMT, 14 stroke, me, was in the counterclaim. You know, 15 they'd been alleging that -- that, you know, LMT was 16 my alter ego. 17 So you know, as far as I was concerned, I was 18 already added to the counterclaim through LMT, 19 because that's how they would come get me on the 20 counterclaim, is through LMT. 21 THE COURT: Were you a party to the breach of 22 contract? 23 THE WITNESS: I -- 24 THE COURT: The Clearwater case in front of 25 Judge Baird? 1306
1 THE WITNESS: Yes, your Honor. 2 THE COURT: You were? 3 MR. DANDAR: Not at that time. 4 THE WITNESS: I believe so. 5 I could tell you when I was added. 6 MR. DANDAR: Oh, I'm sorry. I may have 7 misspoke. You might be actually correct. 8 THE COURT: And LMT was a party to the 9 counterclaim at that time? 10 THE WITNESS: Right. 11 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. DANDAR: They were both joined at the same 14 time in the third amended complaint. 15 MR. MOXON: That's -- LMT wasn't a party, your 16 Honor. 17 THE COURT: I didn't think they were. 18 THE WITNESS: Wasn't a party in the 19 counterclaim? 20 THE COURT: No. I don't think LMT was a party. 21 MR. MOXON: They were -- 22 MR. DANDAR: I'm sorry. 23 MR. MOXON: They were named as a co-conspirator 24 in the counterclaim. 25 THE COURT: Yes. But as far as a party -- 1307
1 because this was what was always giving me 2 concern -- the allegations in the counterclaim only 3 named Dell Liebreich -- I mean, the estate of Lisa 4 McPherson, by and through the person -- 5 MR. DANDAR: You're correct. 6 THE COURT: Yeah. 7 MR. DANDAR: At that time there was no other 8 party. 9 THE COURT: Which is why I kept saying to them, 10 "If you don't add Minton as a party, I'll add him 11 myself." The court has a right to add a necessary 12 party. I couldn't understand why he wasn't a party. 13 MR. DANDAR: And he wasn't a party -- 14 THE COURT: So he wasn't a party when he went 15 into these negotiations. 16 MR. DANDAR: Right. 17 THE COURT: So now he goes into the 18 negotiations. And now you're a party. Wow, that's 19 some deal, isn't it? 20 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, as I testified 21 earlier, they showed us a preview copy of me being 22 added individually as a party to the counterclaim. 23 But I believe, or at least it was my understanding 24 and Stacy Brooks's understanding, that the LMT was 25 already a party in the counterclaim. 1308
1 THE COURT: As far as I know, they were not, 2 but I wouldn't -- by God, I wouldn't swear to 3 anything, but it's my recollection LMT was not a 4 party. The only party was an absolute counterclaim 5 on the plaintiff. 6 MR. DANDAR: That's correct. And I'm 7 99 percent -- 8 THE COURT: And I know I never suggested that 9 LMT be added as a party. I did suggest that it 10 seemed like Mr. Minton, based on the allegations, 11 was a necessary party. 12 MR. DANDAR: Well, it's kind of silly to add on 13 a dissolved Florida corporation as a party to 14 anything, but Mr. Minton -- 15 THE WITNESS: But -- but your Honor, on that 16 point -- I mean, remember, the first day of the 17 hearing here, when we first came into the court 18 here, when Stacy Brooks and I first came into the 19 room, there was discussion about whether we were 20 parties. I thought that you'd said then, even then, 21 that Stacy Brooks -- that LMT was a party; that I 22 wasn't, but that you decided to exclude us from the 23 courtroom just because -- 24 THE COURT: Stacy Brooks was a witness on the 25 stand. You were excluded because you were not a 1309
1 party. 2 MR. DANDAR: Correct. 3 THE WITNESS: Right. But I thought that you 4 had said that Stacy Brooks -- you started out 5 thinking -- 6 'Cause remember, we went in and out three 7 times -- 8 THE COURT: Only -- the reason why Stacy Brooks 9 is here as we speak is because I allowed her to 10 stay. 11 THE WITNESS: Okay. 12 THE COURT: And I think she made that clear 13 when she asked. She never asked to be here as the 14 LMT representative. She asked to be here because 15 her testimony was over, and I gave her permission to 16 be here. 17 We went through who was a party. You were not. 18 Therefore, I had to exclude you. 19 THE WITNESS: Right. 20 THE COURT: Very soon thereafter, they -- I 21 think they made a motion to add you as a party. But 22 you hadn't been added. Then they added you. And of 23 course I then sent word immediately through your 24 counsel -- 25 THE WITNESS: Right. 1310
1 THE COURT: -- or maybe I saw you outside -- 2 that you were now welcome because you were a party. 3 THE WITNESS: Right. 4 THE COURT: Therefore -- 5 MR. WEINBERG: I think the confusion -- I'm 6 sorry. The confusion is that in the breach case in 7 Clearwater, LMT was a party and Mr. Minton was a 8 party. And that came up during the hearing. And 9 both of them had counsel, and stayed during that 10 hearing that was in front of Judge Baird. So they 11 had already been added as parties -- 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. WEINBERG: -- to the breach case. 14 THE COURT: Well, you may have read somewhere 15 that I said that if they didn't add you as a party, 16 I was going to. 17 But there again, I don't know why you'd go to 18 the Church of Scientology and meet with them to try 19 to work a settlement of something I said I was going 20 to do. You can't -- the only thing they could do to 21 stop you from being added as a party, if I wanted 22 you added as a party, is drop the counterclaim. 23 THE WITNESS: Mm-hmm. 24 THE COURT: Because as long as the counterclaim 25 was going on, I put them on notice, either add him 1311
1 or I'll add him. 2 So I don't -- again, you know, perjury, being a 3 party to this counterclaim -- and you're going to 4 the wrong place it seems to me. What -- what did 5 you think they could do for you about all that? 6 THE WITNESS: Well, as I said, your Honor, 7 the -- the idea was to be able to extract us from 8 all this litigation. You know, pure and simple. 9 Just extract us from this litigation so that we 10 didn't have to deal with this anymore. 11 THE COURT: Okay. Were there any other 12 litigation you were involved in? 'Cause I don't 13 know. I've heard about a lot of suits. Is there 14 anything else where you were a party to a lawsuit 15 that had been filed by the Church of Scientology, 16 the local church or the church in California or any 17 other entities that you know of, that you could tell 18 me about? 19 THE WITNESS: Other than the Florida cases, I 20 don't think so. You know, the -- the -- I mean, 21 Wollersheim case, I wasn't a party to that case in 22 any way, but -- but clearly, you know, I faced the 23 same kind of liability in the Wollersheim case that 24 I was facing in this case. 25 1312
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q How is that? 3 A Or the Florida cases. 4 Q How were you facing liability in the Wollersheim 5 case? 6 A Well, because of my involvement in the case and, 7 you know, financing the whole thing. 8 Q You just provided funds. How could you possibly 9 be named as a party for loaning money? 10 A No, I didn't say I was named as a party. I said 11 that, you know, I considered that I faced the same kind of 12 liability with whatever they did with Wollersheim, that they 13 could come after me for the money. 14 Q You're talking about a RICO action. 15 A No. I'm not talking about a RICO action. 16 Q Then what are you talking about that you could 17 possibly be sued by the Church of Scientology for providing 18 loans to Mr. Wollersheim or his attorney? 19 A Well, you know, they sued me for having provided 20 Gerry Armstrong a computer, and therefore, you know, I was 21 responsible for his -- you know, 201 acts of infringement -- 22 or not his infringement -- violations of agreement that he 23 had signed. 24 THE COURT: That didn't happen until you went 25 over there to settle all your scores, right? 1313
1 THE WITNESS: Right. But I mean, it was the 2 same principle. 3 THE COURT: You went to settle your scores, 4 and -- and you walked out, you got out as a party 5 here; you got sued -- 6 It's a hell of a deal you made, wasn't it? Or 7 a hell of a thing for you to do. 8 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Well, I mean, you know, 9 the -- at some point, you know -- 10 And I can tell you another major factor here is 11 at some point, Mr. Dandar advised me that my wife 12 had been noticed for deposition. And you know, this 13 is something that she didn't want to be involved in 14 this in any way. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Well, since you brought it up, let's talk about 17 that, and then go back to the one I left off with. 18 (Defendant's Exhibit Number 64 marked for identification.) 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Here's Plaintiff's Exhibit 64. 21 Wait a minute. Am I giving you the right -- 22 Yeah. 23 Give you the clerk's copy. Then I won't -- 24 Here we go. That's Exhibit 64. And that is the 25 Church of Scientology moving for a commission for 1314
1 out-of-state deposition of Theres (phonetic) Minton in New 2 Hampshire on April the 5th, 2002, the date you were here 3 before Judge Schaeffer for your contempt hearing that you 4 prevailed in. 5 Did they discuss this on March the 28th? 6 A No. 7 Q Okay. What you knew about -- 8 THE COURT: Judge Beach signed this? 9 MR. DANDAR: Well, I don't know if it was 10 signed or not. That's just the motion. 11 THE COURT: I'm asking you, Mr. Moxon. Was 12 this signed by Judge Beach? 13 MR. MOXON: This was not heard, your Honor. 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MR. DANDAR: There is an attached order, 16 though. 17 THE COURT: There is an order, right. 18 I'm afraid that I'm going to have to tell you 19 all that from henceforth, you're going to have to 20 come to me with these things. Do not go to Judge 21 Beach for these things. I mean, Judge Beach just 22 isn't -- I mean, bless his heart, he's doing a 23 yeoman's job, and he sits there and he hears all the 24 depositions, but he's just not privy to all the -- I 25 don't know what to call it other than harangue. 1315
1 That's a poor choice -- that goes on in here. He 2 just hears the harangue that goes on in the 3 depositions. 4 So as far as requests to take depositions, 5 commissions to take depositions, motions to quash 6 discovery -- I want to hear them all from now on. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Well, Mr. Minton, let's back up to March 28th. 9 When you went in on March 28th, you already knew, 10 if you look at Plaintiff's Exhibit 66, order regarding 11 out-of-state deposition, Dresdner Bank -- 12 THE COURT: Exhibit 64 now? 13 MR. DANDAR: No. 66. 14 THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Plaintiff's Exhibit 66 is the order to take the 17 Dresdner Bank deposition in Los Angeles. Now, that's one of 18 your Swiss banks, correct? 19 A I'm going to plead the Fifth Amendment on that 20 question. 21 Q The fact that the -- Mr. Moxon represented the 22 church -- 23 A But if I could answer the other part of your 24 question, I was not aware of that. 25 Q Didn't you and I have a discussion about that? 1316
1 A Yes, we did. 2 Q Didn't I call you up and say, "Why hasn't someone 3 filed something on your behalf to stop this bank 4 deposition?" 5 A You told me about it in early April. 6 Q Well, this is an order signed March the 20th, 7 2002. 8 A I understand that. 9 Q And that means there was a motion filed to get 10 this order. We had a conversation about this way before 11 March 20th of 2002. 12 A I don't believe you and I did. 13 Q All right. Were you concerned about the Church of 14 Scientology having an order to take the Dresdner Bank 15 deposition and require the bank to produce documents? 16 A Well, I was subsequently asked by my counsel 17 whether I had any objections to it, and I said no. 18 Q Now, is that because the bank that was being 19 subpoenaed, the branch, was in Los Angeles, and not in 20 Switzerland? 21 A What do you mean? 22 Q Well, is the fact that you weren't concerned about 23 this due to the fact that the bank that they were going to 24 depose was a branch in Los Angeles rather than the main bank 25 in Switzerland? 1317
1 A Well, I think the way to -- 2 I wasn't concerned with them deposing Dresdner 3 Bank in Los Angeles. 4 Q Because? 5 A Because I have no relationship with Dresdner Bank 6 of Los Angeles. 7 Q So when you were informed about this deposition or 8 this order permitting the deposition to go forward, you were 9 pretty sure that that would be a waste of time, because that 10 bank branch would not be able to produce the documents that 11 the Church of Scientology was requesting, is that right? 12 A I guess so. 13 Q Had the Church of Scientology subpoenaed or 14 requested interrogatories or subpoena power for the Dresdner 15 Bank in Switzerland, would you have a different reaction to 16 that? 17 A I wouldn't have been concerned about it. 18 Q And why is that? 19 THE COURT: Well, it's hard for me to imagine 20 that somebody taking the Fifth Amendment in here 21 wouldn't have cared if I had signed an order telling 22 them they can get all the records from the same 23 bank. I mean -- 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q And the question -- you pled the Fifth Amendment 1318
1 to the bank in Switzerland. But you -- why were you not 2 concerned if they got a subpoena to get your records? 3 A Well, I believe that -- 4 THE COURT: You don't even really have to ask 5 it. I mean, the idea -- I just was trying to tell 6 him -- sometimes maybe people don't realize how 7 foolish they sound. 8 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 9 THE WITNESS: Well -- 10 THE COURT: Unless of course, the Swiss bank 11 just doesn't comply with United States orders. And 12 that's very possible. They might have just taken 13 something like this and gone -- thrown it in the 14 wastebasket. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Is it -- 17 THE COURT: That's what I suspect they would 18 have done. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Is the judge's suspicions correct, as far as you 21 know? 22 A To my knowledge, Swiss banks do not comply with 23 civil subpoenas. 24 THE COURT: That's kind of what I -- 25 1319
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q And is it also perhaps another reason, is that the 3 bank -- 4 THE COURT: At least that makes more sense, now 5 that I thought that through, when you said no, you 6 wouldn't have been worried about it. 7 Okay. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Is it also because the bank accounts in 10 Switzerland, the name on the account -- there is no name on 11 the account, is that right? 12 A On what accounts? 13 Q On any of your accounts in Switzerland's banks. 14 Aren't they numbered? 15 MR. HOWIE: Your Honor, we would take Fifth 16 Amendment privileges for this. 17 THE COURT: Well, I think -- 18 MR. HOWIE: I think he -- 19 THE COURT: I think you've got to take it, 20 but -- 21 Okay. I think you can advise him that he needs 22 to take the Fifth Amendment. 23 THE WITNESS: I will. 24 THE COURT: Are you going to do that? 25 THE WITNESS: I will plead the Fifth Amendment, 1320
1 your Honor. 2 THE COURT: All right. 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q Now, let's go back to the meeting -- 5 THE COURT: How did we get this -- whatever it 6 was, over there in -- in Norway, to honor whatever 7 it was we did, whatever it is I signed on Mr. Lund? 8 MR. DANDAR: It was Operation Clambake account; 9 it was not Mr. Minton's account. 10 THE COURT: I know. But why did they pay any 11 attention to what we sent them? 12 MR. MOXON: There's a Hague convention, your 13 Honor, that a number of countries have entered into 14 agreements for discovery. 15 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 16 MR. MOXON: And every country has a different 17 aspect of it that they've agreed to. And Norway 18 happens to have agreed to -- 19 THE COURT: So Norway would honor an order such 20 as Number 66. 21 MR. MOXON: I don't know. 22 THE COURT: If it were done maybe more 23 appropriately for Norway. 24 MR. MOXON: Probably, yeah. 25 THE COURT: They honored something. Because as 1321
1 I said, I got back -- remember that real nice letter 2 calling me very nice names and -- and they sent a 3 whole lot of stuff that you all are -- presumably 4 somebody's having translated? 5 MR. MOXON: Yeah. 6 THE COURT: So that may be the difference. 7 That the Hague convention, some countries will honor 8 paper from the United States courts and some will 9 not. 10 MR. WEINBERG: Every country is different. 11 THE COURT: Right. 12 MR. WEINBERG: For example, in Switzerland, 13 there's mutual assistance treaties. And even the 14 Justice Department -- they can get certain 15 information and they can't get others. 16 THE COURT: Right. 17 MR. WEINBERG: If it's tax-related, the Swiss 18 government won't turn it over. If it's related to 19 terrorists or drugs or something like that -- 20 THE COURT: Then they will. 21 MR. WEINBERG: -- then -- 22 THE COURT: Well, if I ever have a lot of 23 money, I guess I know where I can put it. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q So Mr. Minton, you would agree that no matter what 1322
1 subpoenas were issued out of this court to Swiss banks, that 2 you have refused to identify, you didn't worry about it at 3 all because you knew, as with your banking background, that 4 Swiss banks would simply not honor a civil subpoena for 5 records. 6 A I believe I testified that Swiss banks, to my 7 knowledge, don't honor civil subpoenas for that type of 8 information. 9 THE COURT: Now, Mr. Dandar, you tell me when 10 you come to a good stopping point, because it's 11 noon. I don't care if we go till 12:15 or 12:30, 12 but whenever you're at a good stopping point, we're 13 going to go ahead and take a lunch. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q The deposition that Mr. Moxon wanted to take, of 16 your wife, did that cause you any concern? 17 A Yes, it did. 18 Q And why is that? 19 A Because she wanted to be kept out of this. She 20 had never been involved in it, and she wanted to keep her 21 and the children out of this. 22 Q On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being your most 23 outrageous concern, if I can say that, where would you rate 24 your concern for the deposition that Mr. Moxon wanted to 25 take, of your wife? 1323
1 A Pretty close to 10. 2 Q Now -- 3 A Simply because of my commitment to her to not 4 involve her in any way in any of this stuff. 5 Q The fact that you and your wife are legally 6 separated and not divorced, does that have anything to do 7 with trying to maintain the spousal immunity from her 8 testifying against you? 9 A No, it doesn't. 10 Q Is your wife part owner of any of the Swiss bank 11 accounts? 12 A No. 13 Q Has your wife, with your permission or without 14 your permission, transferred any of your bank accounts to 15 her name only, since -- since 1997? 16 A Could you ask me that again? 17 Q Yeah. 18 Has your wife, Mrs. Minton, transferred any of the 19 bank accounts to her name only since 1997? 20 A Yes. I believe a bank account at Bay Bank. 21 Q Any banks overseas? 22 A Not to my knowledge. 23 MR. DANDAR: I'm going to continue on March the 24 28th, unless you want to take a break. 25 THE COURT: It's up to you. I just said if you 1324
1 would like to tell me when it's a good time to take 2 a break. It's 12:00 noon and that's usual lunch 3 hour in America. And if you wanted to break now, we 4 will. If you'd like to keep going for a while, 5 we'll do that. 6 MR. DANDAR: How about 10, 15 more minutes? 7 THE COURT: All right. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Mr. Rosen was at that meeting on March the 28th at 10 his office, and so was Ms. Yingling, is that correct? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q And Monique Yingling is a -- someone that's well 13 known as an attorney that has represented the Church of 14 Scientology in the past, correct? 15 A My belief is that she's been Mr. Miscavige's 16 personal attorney. 17 Q Okay. And do you also -- on March 28th, did you 18 know that Ms. Yingling was with the Justice Department as a 19 prosecutor, and prosecuted tax evaders? 20 A I didn't know that. 21 Q Or money launderers. 22 A I didn't know that. 23 Q Did you know that Ms. Yingling, in private 24 practice, specialized in tax matters? 25 A Well, I knew that she had specialized in tax 1325
1 matters for the Church of Scientology. 2 Q And why was she at this meeting on March the 28th? 3 A You'll have to ask the Church of Scientology. 4 They brought her. 5 Q What did Ms. Yingling talk about? 6 A She, by and large, didn't talk very much. 7 Q When she, by and large, didn't talk very much, 8 what did she say? 9 A You mean in the parts when she did talk? 10 Q Yes. 11 A You know, I don't believe that she had any 12 substantive thing to say about any of the discussions. 13 Q Did Mr. Rosen say anything about Ms. Yingling? 14 A No, he didn't. 15 Q Did he introduce her? 16 A I think Mr. Rinder introduced her. 17 Q Okay. And what did Mr. Rinder say about 18 Ms. Yingling? 19 A "This is Monique Yingling." 20 Q Anything else? 21 A No. 22 Q During the whole day of March 28th, that's all 23 anyone ever said about Ms. Yingling? 24 A As far as I know. I mean, Mr. Jonas didn't know 25 any more about her than what Stacy and I have told him. 1326
1 Q And during that whole day, Ms. Yingling didn't say 2 anything, as far as you can recall today. 3 A She was principally taking notes, very detailed 4 notes. 5 Q Okay. Now, did Mr. Rosen show you the Armstrong 6 lawsuit on March 28th? 7 THE COURT: The what lawsuit? 8 MR. DANDAR: The Armstrong lawsuit, where 9 Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks are named as defendants. 10 A I think that was one of the two that he showed, 11 yeah. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q When were you served with that lawsuit? 14 A I believe it was the day of the contempt hearing 15 in front of Judge Schaeffer. 16 Q April the 5th. 17 A I believe. 18 Q Was Ms. Brooks served the same day? 19 A I don't know that she was served. 20 Q Were you able to obtain a copy of that Armstrong 21 suit on March the 28th? 22 A No. 23 Q When did you first get a copy of it? 24 A When I was served with it. 25 Q Oh. 1327
1 THE COURT: You did indicate, though, that that 2 was one of the two lawsuits you were shown on that 3 date. 4 THE WITNESS: Well, what they referred to them, 5 "These are preview copies." 6 THE COURT: Right. 7 THE WITNESS: We didn't take the copies and we 8 didn't look at them very much. Mr. Jonas looked 9 through the Armstrong thing a little bit and -- 10 THE COURT: The other suit was -- 11 THE WITNESS: The -- the counterclaim in this 12 case, adding me as a defendant in the counterclaim. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q And when did you get served with the counterclaim? 16 A I don't know. 17 Q Have you been -- 18 A Mr. Howie, I believe, accepted service. 19 Q Okay. Were you shown any other purported copies 20 of any litigation? 21 A No. 22 Q Was RICO talked about on March 28th? 23 A As I mentioned the other day, yes, it was brought 24 up. 25 Q By who? 1328
1 A Mr. Rosen. 2 Q What did he say? 3 A Well, as Mr. Rosen went down the list of all these 4 litigation matters, litigation and other matters that I was 5 involved in, the last item on his agenda was these were -- 6 these were what he had gone through, is amounts of money 7 that had been spent by Scientology with respect to these 8 lawsuits. I believe also how much more money they had to 9 spend on these lawsuits. And the last item on his list was, 10 simply because of the amount was the smallest -- they were 11 sort of in decreasing amounts. And he said, "We've spent 12 approximately $20,000 on a possible RICO suit." 13 Q What was at the top of the list? 14 A The Florida cases. 15 Q Lisa McPherson? 16 A All of these cases here. The Lisa McPherson, the 17 breach case. 18 Q Okay. And all of the cases -- 19 There were about 20? 20 A I don't remember. 21 THE COURT: I don't know 20 cases. I mean, I 22 don't know what 20 cases we're talking about. Are 23 there 20 cases out there? 24 THE WITNESS: I don't think there were 20. 25 1329
1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Were there 20 matters? 3 THE COURT: There are 20 matters on that -- at 4 least 20 people on that chart. 5 THE WITNESS: Right. 6 THE COURT: Is that the chart you're talking 7 about? 8 THE WITNESS: No, no, no, no, no. What I'm -- 9 this is not talking about RICO. This is talking 10 about the list of the cases or matters that I'm 11 somehow involved in. You know -- 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 THE WITNESS: 10 to 15 maybe. I'm not sure. 14 THE COURT: Can you rattle them off? 15 THE WITNESS: I rattled them off the other day. 16 THE COURT: Okay. I'm sorry. I've forgotten. 17 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q And isn't it true that those cases that Mr. Rosen 20 listed, in descending order of money spent by the Church of 21 Scientology, that except for this case, the wrongful death 22 case of Lisa McPherson, and the Wollersheim case, where 23 Mr. Leipold represents Mr. Wollersheim -- all the other 24 cases were people defending themselves on cases brought 25 against them by the Church of Scientology. 1330
1 A No. That's not true. 2 Q Okay. Give me the names of the people who sued 3 the Church of Scientology and you gave money to that person. 4 A Me, Stacy Brooks, Jesse Prince, Jean -- what's his 5 name in Switzerland -- 6 Q Michel Pesenti? 7 A No, no. 8 THE COURT: I didn't understand your question. 9 Didn't you say name the lawsuits? 10 MR. DANDAR: Yeah. Name the lawsuits where 11 Mr. Minton provided funds to people who were suing 12 the Church of Scientology rather than paying them to 13 defend themselves. 14 THE COURT: Right. And then you started 15 saying, "Me, Stacy Brooks --" 16 THE WITNESS: Jesse Prince. 17 THE COURT: Doesn't seem to be responsive. Is 18 that a lawsuit? 19 THE WITNESS: Yeah. These are lawsuits we have 20 against the Church of Scientology in France or 21 Germany. There was the guy that I mentioned the 22 other day, in Switzerland, whose name escapes me at 23 the moment. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Two cases? 1331
1 A Yeah. But I forget his name right now. 2 Q What were those two cases in Switzerland for; what 3 kind of case? 4 A I don't recall. 5 Q Well, was it a wrongful death? 6 A No. 7 Q Was it fraud? 8 A I don't remember -- 9 Q Oh. 10 A -- you know, what they were. 11 Q All right. 12 A You know, I didn't have much to do with the guy. 13 Q All right. 14 A Stacy Brooks dealt with him. 15 Q But that was on the list that Mr. Rosen talked 16 about, right? 17 A Right. 18 Q Okay. When you filed a lawsuit, Jesse Prince 19 lawsuit in France, that's for libel? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Did you tell Mr. Prince in advance that a suit was 22 being filed on his behalf? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Is that still pending? 25 A As far as I know. 1332
1 Q All right. What about in the United States? What 2 lawsuits are pending, that Mr. Rosen rattled off, that 3 involved someone suing the Church of Scientology? 4 A You know, I don't remember any, off the top of my 5 head. 6 THE COURT: This one. The Lisa McPherson case 7 would be a -- 8 THE WITNESS: Yeah. But I think he said other 9 than that. 10 THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. 11 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Other -- before, he 12 had said other than this. But yeah. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q Okay. 15 A You said other than Wollersheim and this case. 16 Q And what did Mr. Rosen say, after he rattled off 17 these list of cases, about how much money the church has 18 spent? 19 A I think it was -- he didn't say anything about the 20 amount. I remember later I added it up. It was 21 $34,925,000. 22 Q That's a pretty exact figure. So he was exact on 23 each case; gave you a figure for each case? 24 A No, that -- I mean, these were rounded off. 25 Q Okay. 1333
1 A But 925 is easy to get out of a rounded bunch of 2 numbers. 3 Q But in front of the 925 is 34 million? 4 A That's what I recall. 5 Q Okay. And so why did -- what did he say in 6 response to this list of cases? What was he trying to 7 convey to you? 8 A The amount of trouble that I'd caused him. 9 Q So when the Church of Scientology sues somebody, 10 and you graciously provided funds to that person so they can 11 defend themselves, Mr. Rosen said that caused them a lot of 12 trouble; the Church of Scientology a lot of trouble? 13 A Well, he didn't use the word, "This is how much 14 trouble you've caused us," but that was the essence of what 15 we were talking about, yeah. 16 Q Did he include FACTNet? 17 A I don't remember whether -- yeah. I think all the 18 copyright cases were, by and large, on there. 19 Q Okay. And what was the next topic of discussion? 20 THE COURT: This -- this -- $34,925,000 is the 21 amount that Mr. Rosen indicated to you, in going 22 through this list of the cases, that you, by your 23 involvement and participation -- 24 THE WITNESS: Or funding. 25 THE COURT: -- funding, had cost the church. 1334
1 THE WITNESS: Right. And that -- I'm not sure 2 whether that figure -- whether it included or 3 excluded future amounts to be spent. 4 THE COURT: Okay. 5 THE WITNESS: Because it was broken down into 6 two parts. But I don't remember whether that had 7 everything in it or not. It might have. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q How -- 10 THE COURT: These were -- these were not -- 11 these, I take it -- maybe they did, maybe they 12 include the Wollersheim judgment, because I guess 13 maybe that was a judgment at that time. But there 14 certainly is no judgment in this case. 15 THE WITNESS: Right. 16 THE COURT: So you're talking about what they 17 were saying it cost them in attorneys' fees and 18 costs, if there were -- 19 THE WITNESS: Yeah. And expert witnesses and 20 things like that. 21 THE COURT: Expert witness fees. 22 THE WITNESS: Yeah. You know, they didn't 23 specify what these -- these numbers consisted of. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Does Mr. Rosen list in that list the Heller case 1335
1 that was filed in the middle district of Florida, Tampa 2 Division, Federal Court, against Ursula Caberta? 3 A I don't know whether that was in the list or not. 4 THE COURT: Well, maybe we could have a list 5 produced. 6 MR. DANDAR: I think -- 7 THE COURT: Then we don't have to worry about 8 it. 9 MR. DANDAR: The plaintiff requests such a 10 list. 11 THE COURT: I think I'd like one too. 12 Mr. Rosen obviously has it. 13 So that's a request, Mr. Fugate, from me. 14 MR. FUGATE: A list -- 15 THE COURT: No. A list. I want to see the 16 list that was provided to this witness -- 17 THE WITNESS: No. It -- 18 THE COURT: -- on March 28th in New York. 19 THE WITNESS: There was no list provided, your 20 Honor. It was -- you know, he spoke about the 21 amounts. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q So whatever he was looking at when he spoke. He 24 was looking at something, correct? 25 A I -- yeah. He had a notebook. 1336
1 THE COURT: Whatever it was he was looking at. 2 MR. LIEBERMAN: Your Honor, I actually was in 3 the process of preparing this -- I thought your 4 Honor might be interested in this -- a short two- or 5 three-page summary of at least most of the cases 6 that have been discussed here, other than 7 Wollersheim or this case, which your Honor clearly 8 knows about, along with some of the -- the decisions 9 or judgments in this case. Most of them are 10 copyright cases which were brought by the Religious 11 Technology Center, which owns the copyrights for the 12 publications. And they involved instances in which 13 individuals such as people you've heard of but don't 14 know too much about -- Mr. Henson, Mr. Ward, 15 Mr. Lerma, Mr. Wollersheim, who you have heard 16 about -- posted Scientology -- RTC-copyrighted 17 materials, usually religious materials, on the 18 Internet in their entirety. 19 In almost every -- in every instance, RTC sent 20 letters requesting the person to withdraw them and 21 they were refused, often in the kind of term that 22 you see Internet postings being made, and with 23 invitations to, "Sue me. I'll just run up your 24 litigation costs." 25 Well, RTC felt compelled to protect its 1337
1 copyrights, and brought a number of cases, and won 2 every single one of them. I was involved in most of 3 those cases. 4 THE COURT: Okay. 5 MR. LIEBERMAN: And we're prepared, as soon as 6 we get all the judgments, or at least opinions put 7 together, to give to you, perhaps, right after -- 8 during or after the lunch break. 9 THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. But -- 10 MR. LIEBERMAN: I don't know whether it's every 11 single case Mr. Rosen discussed. I wasn't there. I 12 don't know what he discussed. 13 THE COURT: Well, Mr. Rosen -- I don't -- I 14 don't know what -- what he might think about this, 15 but this is obviously something that had some 16 bearing on what this witness did afterward. He was 17 there, prepared; he had to write a check. And if 18 Mr. Rosen started to rattle off $34,925,000 as a 19 suggestion of things that the witness had cost the 20 Church of Scientology, I'd like to see the list that 21 Mr. Rosen prepared. Mr. Rosen doesn't want to give 22 me that, that's Mr. Rosen's call. But I'm making a 23 demand for the list that was shown, or the list that 24 was used to discuss this matter -- this matter with 25 Mr. Minton. 1338
1 MR. WEINBERG: We understand. And if he has a 2 list, I -- I don't think there will be any problem 3 about turning it over. 4 THE COURT: Good. And if you have a posting or 5 a filing or whatever you could give me, it would be 6 helpful. Because yes, some of these names, even the 7 names that you just mentioned, from time to time get 8 sort of dropped, and I am left thinking, "I know 9 I've heard it. I know there must be something. 10 They must be part of the anti-Scientology group." I 11 don't really know. And I try not to stop -- I mean, 12 I stop you all enough, and I'm sure I drive you 13 crazy -- 14 MR. LIEBERMAN: Right. 15 THE COURT: -- so sometimes I just don't ask if 16 you have something -- 17 MR. LIEBERMAN: Your Honor, if you'd like, 18 since I was involved at least in the copyright cases 19 and in the so-called Armstrong case, I could take 20 five minutes and run through each of them -- 21 THE COURT: I wouldn't want to hear about it. 22 MR. LIEBERMAN: -- if you want me to. 23 THE COURT: What I want is something in 24 writing -- 25 MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay. 1339
1 THE COURT: -- that I can refer to. 2 MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay. 3 THE COURT: But I'd also like to see what 4 Mr. Rosen had in this meeting, the very first 5 meeting; what it was that he was using to discuss, 6 in the presence of a clear tax expert, what he was 7 using to discuss with Mr. Minton. So -- 8 MR. WEINBERG: Just so the record's clear, for 9 the record, as far as Ms. Yingling, I'm almost 10 positive she wasn't in the Justice Department. I 11 think Mr. Dandar is referring to her husband, who I 12 know very well, within the Justice Department, who 13 was in the Justice Department. But I don't think 14 she was. But -- 15 THE COURT: Well, it's no secret -- 16 MR. WEINBERG: -- I'm wrong -- 17 THE COURT: -- she was the church principal -- 18 MR. WEINBERG: Oh, absolutely. 19 THE COURT: -- tax lawyer in front of the IRS 20 to obtain their exemption. 21 MR. WEINBERG: That's true. 22 THE COURT: Ms. Yingling is a tax -- 23 well-known, well-known tax attorney. 24 MR. DANDAR: She has an LLM. 25 MR. WEINBERG: She was not a prosecutor. She 1340
1 was a well-known tax attorney. She's very highly 2 regarded, not just for Church of Scientology. 3 THE COURT: Right. 4 And you knew that, Mr. Minton, when she was 5 there. You knew this. 6 THE WITNESS: I knew that she was the one who 7 dealt with the IRS on their tax exemption. 8 THE COURT: Right. So you certainly knew that 9 she was a well-known, high-powered, for lack of a 10 better word -- and this is to her credit -- tax 11 attorney. 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 13 MR. DANDAR: This is a good time to break. 14 THE COURT: Good. I'm hungry. See, I'm eating 15 a jelly bean. 16 We'll be in recess till 1:30. 17 (A recess was taken at 12:17 p.m.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1341
1 2 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 3 4 STATE OF FLORIDA ) 5 COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) 6 I, Donna M. Kanabay, RMR, CRR, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the 7 proceedings herein, and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. 8 I further certify that I am not a relative, 9 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or 10 counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. 11 12 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 28th day of May, 13 2002. 14 15 ______________________________ DONNA M. KANABAY, RMR, CRR 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

To Dandar Disqualification Hearing Documents index