Kanabay Court Reporters; Serving West Central Florida Pinellas (727)821-3320 Hillsborough (813)224-9500 Tampa Airport Marriott Deposition Suite (813)224-9500 159 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 00-5682-CI-11 2 3 4 DELL LIEBREICH, as Personal 5 Representative of the ESTATE OF LISA McPHERSON, 6 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. VOLUME 3 9 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, JANIS 10 JOHNSON, ALAIN KARTUZINSKI and DAVID HOUGHTON, D.D.S., 11 Defendants. 12 _______________________________________/ 13 14 15 PROCEEDINGS: Defendants' Omnibus Motion for Terminating Sanctions and Other Relief. 16 CONTENTS: Testimony of William Franks. 17 DATE: June 13, 2002. Afternoon Session. 18 PLACE: Courtroom B, Judicial Building 19 St. Petersburg, Florida. 20 BEFORE: Honorable Susan F. Schaeffer, Circuit Judge. 21 REPORTED BY: Lynne J. Ide, RMR. 22 Deputy Official Court Reporter, Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida. 23 24 25
160 1 APPEARANCES: 2 MR. KENNAN G. DANDAR 3 DANDAR & DANDAR 5340 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 201 4 Tampa, FL 33602 Attorney for Plaintiff. 5 6 MR. LUKE CHARLES LIROT LUKE CHARLES LIROT, PA 7 112 N East Street, Street, Suite B Tampa, FL 33602-4108 8 Attorney for Plaintiff 9 MR. KENDRICK MOXON 10 MOXON & KOBRIN 1100 Cleveland Street, Suite 900 11 Clearwater, FL 33755 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 12 Organization. 13 MR. MORRIS WEINBERG, JR. 14 ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER 101 E. Kennedy Blvd, Suite 1200 15 Tampa, FL 33602-5147 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 16 Organization. 17 MR. ERIC M. LIEBERMAN 18 RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD 740 Broadway at Astor Place 19 New York, NY 10003-9518 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 20 Organization. 21 MR. MICHAEL LEE HERTZBERG 22 740 Broadway, Fifth Floor New York, New York 10003 23 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization. 24 25
161 1 INDEX TO PROCEEDINGS 2 WITNESS WILLIAM FRANKS (Continued from Vol. 2) 3 Direct Examination by Mr. Dandar 162 4 Cross-Examination by Mr. Weinberg 209 Redirect Examination by Mr. Dandar 252 5 Recross-Examination by Mr. Weinberg 271 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
162 1 THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Dandar, you may continue. 2 DIRECT EXAMINATION RESUMED 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q Before the lunch break, you said that there was no 5 difference between a mentally psychotic person and a person 6 who wanted to leave Scientology, they are both psychotic? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Can you explain that? 9 A Well, the view in Scientology is that they are the 10 only salvation for the planet. And if you want to leave, 11 what could be more psychotic than leaving your soul, to your 12 survival. 13 Q If someone wanted to leave, per the policy of 14 Scientology, what would happen to that person? 15 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Are we talking about 16 a staff member or public person? 17 THE COURT: I don't know. 18 MR. WEINBERG: That is my question. Can we 19 make that clear? 20 THE COURT: Yes, make that distinction, if 21 there is a distinction. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Is there a difference between a public member 24 wanting to leave and staff member? 25 A Yes.
163 1 Q Okay, how -- what would happen to the public 2 member who said "I want to leave"? 3 A Mmm, he would be sec-checked --security checked, 4 on an E-meter for his overts and withholds against the 5 Church of Scientology or anything. 6 Q How long a process is that? 7 A Mmm, until -- there is a list of questions, until 8 the list is done. 9 Q And that is it? 10 A For a public person? 11 Q Yes. 12 A Mmm, well, then there is a matter of money, 13 getting money back. Mmm, if you have money on account that 14 hasn't been used yet -- Mmm -- a person has to be given 15 that. 16 Q Do you know if there is policies that if someone 17 is psychotic PTS Type III, that any member of Scientology 18 staff or public has to report that person up lines? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And what does that mean, reporting someone up 21 lines? 22 A Mmm, well, for somebody who is Type III, is that 23 what you're asking me? 24 Q Right. 25 A That means it has to go to the next higher org.
164 1 Well, actually it's a management -- whoever management would 2 be. 3 Q Is that Int Management? 4 A Well, for -- a senior -- the senior CS only has 5 one CS, that is senior CSN, so it would go to Int. 6 Q Okay. And do you know what the purpose of that 7 reporting up lines is? 8 A Well, the purpose is -- Mmm -- reporting up lines, 9 making it -- are you asking making it a policy for people 10 who are Type III that has to be reported up lines? 11 Q Right, Type III. 12 A Mmm, because this is where all of the major PR 13 flaps come from are this -- this designation of psychotic 14 individuals, and they don't -- the policy is not to trust 15 the organization to police itself, so that is why you have 16 to report it up lines, in order to get permission just to 17 have this person on lines. 18 Q What does that mean, on lines? 19 A Well, presumably auditing or training. It's off 20 policy to allow anybody who is Type III to be getting any 21 auditing, any training. And if you wanted to, say, like do 22 an introspection rundown, which would be appropriate for 23 somebody who is psychotic -- Mmm -- you would have to 24 petition -- Mmm -- Int in order to get the go-ahead to go 25 ahead and do it.
165 1 THE COURT: To go ahead and audit? 2 THE WITNESS: Yes, go ahead and do the 3 introspection rundown. 4 THE COURT: Oh, to even do the rundown itself? 5 THE WITNESS: That is right, yes. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q Now, in this case, we have deposition testimony 8 from OSA -- Department 20 OSA employees, Mr. Fontana, who 9 states -- stated he was present soon after Lisa McPherson 10 arrived at the Morton Plant emergency room following her car 11 accident. He knew she had taken off her clothes, he knew 12 that that was a PR flap. 13 And my question to you is why would OSA be in the 14 emergency room on November 18 of '95 when Lisa McPherson was 15 there? 16 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Competence to answer 17 that question. How would he know in 1981 why 18 somebody was in the emergency room in an 19 organization that didn't even exist when he was with 20 the Church, was at a hospital purportedly in 1995? 21 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar? 22 MR. DANDAR: It is still Department 20. All it 23 was was a change of the name. 24 THE COURT: Well, you say that. Does he know 25 that? Did he say that?
166 1 MR. DANDAR: Well, let me tell the Court that 2 we will -- if he can't, we will have people that 3 will say that. 4 THE COURT: All right. 5 MR. DANDAR: But -- 6 THE COURT: I'll allow it then. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Why would Department 20 be involved in a public 9 member being in the emergency room? 10 A Well, particularly -- as I understand it, 11 particularly with Lisa McPherson, she had already had a 12 psychotic episode per her statement in February of that 13 year, '95. Right? 14 Q Right. 15 A So it's possible that they were already alerted to 16 this situation. 17 And then I also read three knowledge reports that, 18 you know, she was having psychotic episodes just before the 19 18th of November. 20 Q While she was in Orlando? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Okay. 23 A So they would be there to contain any PR flap that 24 might occur. 25 THE COURT: Is the word flap, PR flap, F-L-A-P,
167 1 is that a Scientology term? I mean, I can imagine 2 lots of things could be PR flaps. I would think if 3 it was a PR situation or public relations incident. 4 THE WITNESS: Now that you mention it, it 5 probably is a Scientology term. 6 THE COURT: The "flap" part? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes. 8 MR. LIEBERMAN: Actually, Judge, I think it is 9 a Brit term. 10 THE COURT: A British? 11 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q And the fact she's PTS Type III PR flap, do you 14 have -- per policy of Scientology, would the Department 20 15 at a higher level be involved rather than -- or in addition 16 to the local level? 17 MR. WEINBERG: Same objection. If he's going 18 to testify about a policy, if we can identify what 19 the policy and policy number and all that is. 20 THE COURT: All right. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q Do you know? 23 A I'm not sure what the question is. 24 Q Oh. You said before a PTS Type III is required to 25 be reported up lines to Int, International. The fact that
168 1 now we have a local OSA person at the ER because of the 2 potential PR flap with a public member of Scientology who is 3 PTS Type III, is there a policy in Scientology that would 4 require the OSA person to report, as well, up lines to Int? 5 A Oh, yeah, absolutely. Anything that would be seen 6 as an endangerment to Scientology. 7 MR. WEINBERG: Could we just identify for the 8 record what that policy is, what the number is? 9 What -- you know, when -- 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q Can you recall what policy that is? 12 A Mmm, well, there is a 1966 policy on the 13 Guardian's Office, I think titled "Guardian Office," that 14 talks about any situation like this, you are bound to 15 immediately, under line, immediately report this to the 16 Guardian's Office. 17 Q And are you aware, before you left -- 18 THE COURT: Wait a second. Once it is reported 19 to the Guardian's Office, does the same policy say 20 the Guardian's Office shall report it up line to 21 Int? 22 THE WITNESS: No, because Int was established 23 later. When -- the same with the senior CS and 24 introspection rundown, that is when -- that is 25 another policy that requires it be reported --
169 1 actually, it has to get approval from Int to do it. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q To do what? 4 A Introspection rundown. 5 Q Okay. 6 THE COURT: And do you know what that policy 7 number -- or what that would be under? 8 THE WITNESS: Mmm, I know that would be in the 9 introspection rundown pack. It has to be there. 10 THE COURT: That would be if you were -- 11 THE WITNESS: On the course. On the course. 12 THE COURT: That is the best he can do. 13 MR. WEINBERG: Okay, thank you. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Now, in Scientology, is there an Ethics 16 condition -- or is there a -- a term called "bypass"? 17 A Yes, it's -- I know -- it is called danger 18 condition, whenever there is a -- a situation needing 19 immediate -- immediate emergency attention, a danger 20 condition is assigned, which means that the person who is 21 senior needs to -- he is bound by policy to bypass all of 22 the people on line and correct the situation. 23 I assume this is what this OSA fellow was doing at 24 Morton Plant Hospital because it was an immediate PR or 25 potential PR flap.
170 1 Q Who was he bypassing? 2 MR. WEINBERG: I just object to the testimony 3 about I assume anybody was doing anything. Just for 4 the record, I object to that. 5 THE COURT: Okay. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q It's known that Mr. Fontana at OSA was at the ER, 8 all right, that is in his deposition. He does say it was a 9 PR flap. 10 A All right. 11 Q Now, this policy by Mr. Hubbard, you said, '66? 12 A '66, '67. 13 Q Called danger condition? 14 A That -- yeah, that -- yes. I think that is '65, 15 actually. 16 Q Okay. And how does this bypass occur? That is 17 what I'm trying to have you explain to us because I don't 18 understand it. 19 A Well, when a situation -- this is -- there are -- 20 there are lots of policies about this. In fact, this is 21 also part of the Sea Org's responsibility. I'm thinking 22 back to some Flag orders that Hubbard wrote about the Sea 23 Org. 24 The Sea Org is there to handle -- this is why 25 there is supposed to be this flexibility, because the Sea
171 1 Org is supposed to handle potential crisis. And so they are 2 supposed to be ready at any time to bypass and take care of 3 the situation, and not -- Mmm -- not getting off of the 4 situation until it is handled. 5 Mmm, there is a -- a policy letter I think called 6 "Handling Situations" in which he talks about you have to 7 handle it terminatedly. That is the operative word in that 8 policy letter, as I recall, where he said you have to -- you 9 stay there, once you bypass, once you have bypassed all of 10 the people who should have taken care of it but didn't, in 11 this case that would be probably everybody at the Flag Land 12 Base in technical who are supposed to be handling Lisa 13 McPherson and Ethics people who are supposed to be taking 14 care of her. You don't -- once you bypassed, you don't turn 15 it over, you are bound by policy to stay on top of it until 16 the situation is resolved. And specifically until the 17 policy that was found to be out is now implemented and 18 having fixed the situation. 19 Q So in the case of Lisa McPherson, does that mean 20 that anybody at Flag -- everybody at Flag would have been 21 bypassed by Int, wherever Int is located? 22 A Yes. 23 MR. WEINBERG: Well -- 24 THE COURT: I don't even understand that. 25 MR. WEINBERG: Objection.
172 1 THE COURT: He said the man you just spoke 2 of -- he wasn't with Int, was he? 3 MR. DANDAR: He was with the local OSA. His 4 senior was OSA Int. 5 THE COURT: But what he said was that he was 6 bypassed -- he would bypass those who were supposed 7 to be correcting or auditing or whoever they were at 8 Flag? 9 MR. DANDAR: That is what he said. 10 THE COURT: That is what you said, right? 11 THE WITNESS: Yes. 12 THE COURT: So that doesn't have anything to do 13 with Int. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Well, your Honor, just for the 15 record, the Int he's talking about is an entirely 16 different organization than -- than what occurred in 17 this reorganization after he left. 18 THE COURT: I don't understand why you are even 19 objecting. Why do you care? 20 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not -- 21 THE COURT: The man was there, the man was at 22 the hospital. He's telling us why the man was at 23 the hospital. Who cares? 24 MR. WEINBERG: You are right. I agree. 25
173 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Now, who -- who is bypassing Flag under this 3 condition of danger, as you just described? 4 A Int. 5 Q Okay. 6 A When you do introspection rundown, you are 7 basically putting them on notice that they have to be 8 responsible for her by having to report up to them. 9 Q And does the OW that Lisa typed up and was 10 produced in this case where she talked about February of 11 '95, Int Management getting involved in her psychotic break, 12 does that conform with what you just stated as the policy of 13 Scientology? 14 A Yeah, that would be consistent with that. Yes. 15 MR. WEINBERG: I just have an objection, for 16 the record, to what Mr. Dandar said. I don't know 17 what he's talking about, a February of '95 OW of 18 Lisa McPherson. 19 THE COURT: I do. It's about a three-page 20 typed document where it says what was the overt, 21 number one -- what was the overt, then -- 22 MR. WEINBERG: There was something in the fall 23 of '95 that she did at her employers. 24 THE COURT: I thought this said February. 25 MR. DANDAR: She wrote it in the fall of '95
174 1 talking about February of '95. And it is in 2 evidence. 3 THE COURT: Yes, it is. 4 MR. WEINBERG: So my recollection was what I 5 thought. 6 MR. DANDAR: I'll have this marked as our next 7 exhibit, please. 8 MR. WEINBERG: That must have been in Teresa 9 Summers' testimony which I wasn't here for when the 10 document was marked. I'm sorry. 11 THE COURT: It could be. 12 MR. WEINBERG: That is the only thing I missed, 13 so that is where it must have been. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit for 16 identification Number 96. And, of course, this occurred in 17 1993, well after you left the Church of Scientology. But I 18 want you to turn -- it is about an isolation watch at the 19 top. That is what the words say, correct? An isolation 20 watch of Heidi Dagro? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Turn to the second page. You see the first 23 paragraph where it talks about Alain Kartuzinski at Flag is 24 the CS? 25 A Yes.
175 1 Q In charge of John Taylor's correction? 2 A Yes. 3 Q You see where -- the next line where it says Ray 4 Mithoff? 5 A Yes. 6 THE COURT: You lost me. I don't see where you 7 are reading from. 8 MR. DANDAR: I'm sorry. 9 MR. LIEBERMAN: Maybe if we could all have a 10 minute to read it, your Honor. 11 MR. DANDAR: This first paragraph talks about 12 Mr. Kartuzinski. 13 THE COURT: Okay. I found it. Okay. 14 MR. DANDAR: I'll be glad to do that. 15 MR. WEINBERG: Well, could I ask a question? I 16 don't believe this is something that we produced. 17 Could I ask Mr. Dandar where this came from that has 18 "Confidential" on it. 19 THE COURT: Actually, you can't anymore than I 20 let him ask you where you got certain things. 21 MR. WEINBERG: Before it goes into evidence, 22 we'll state an objection to it, until it is 23 authenticated. That is all. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Are you aware that Mr. Mithoff -- where it says --
176 1 MR. WEINBERG: Mr. Dandar, I thought we were 2 going to read this first. 3 MR. DANDAR: I'm sorry. Go ahead. 4 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q This Page 2 says the introspection rundown was not 7 delivered because of the director review having been crammed 8 while at Flag after an earlier similar incident on HCOB 23rd 9 January -- 10 MR. WEINBERG: Objection to reading from the 11 document until the document has been authenticated, 12 identified in some way, I mean -- 13 THE COURT: All right. Can he authenticate 14 this? 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q Mr. Franks, do you recognize the form of this as 17 being a form that is typical of a board of investigation? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. And do you recognize the way it is printed 20 as being something that is copyrighted, comes from the 21 Church of Scientology? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Now, on the second page -- 24 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I don't believe that 25 authenticates this document. If what he wants to do
177 1 is go into detail in it, we have read it, but -- 2 MR. DANDAR: I just have one question on this. 3 THE COURT: Well, I'm not so sure -- in other 4 words, it sort of looks like everything else I have 5 seen. 6 MR. WEINBERG: Right, it may be. We didn't 7 produce this document, so -- that I know because it 8 doesn't have a Bates stamp number. So -- so I can't 9 authenticate it. If somebody asked me, you know, do 10 you -- do you stipulate to its authenticity, I 11 couldn't because I have never seen it before. 12 THE COURT: I'm going to assume, based on what 13 he has said, that it is a legitimate document that 14 comes from where it says. You all can go check it. 15 And if it doesn't, you can show me that and we'll 16 take it out of evidence. 17 MR. DANDAR: This document is attached to an 18 affidavit that I filed in support of the motion to 19 add parties in October of 1999. And I believe it's 20 attached to Mr. Vaughn Young's affidavit. 21 THE COURT: Okay. Well, as I said, go ahead. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Now, the second page, it says that the 24 introspection rundown -- it says: "No auditor or CS was 25 thus qualified to deliver the rundown. This data came
178 1 originally from FSO, Case Supervisor Alain Kartuzinski, who 2 was in charge of John Taylor's correction." 3 And here is the important reason why I'm reading 4 this, the last sentence, "This was later corrected by a 5 telex from Mr. Ray Mithoff who indicated that the rundown, 6 in fact, could be delivered, at which point delivery 7 commenced." 8 I want you to assume -- first of all, let me ask 9 you, do you know Ray Mithoff? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Oh. Okay. Do you know who -- his position? 12 A Well, when I left, he was senior CS FSO. 13 Q All right. And I want you to assume -- and I may 14 be wrong but I think I'm right -- that Mr. Mithoff in 1993 15 was at Int. 16 And would this then conform with what you just 17 previously testified to that Int Management does get 18 involved in orders, rundowns, to commence at Flag? 19 A Yes. 20 MR. DANDAR: I move this into evidence. 21 MR. WEINBERG: I don't know what the 22 authenticity is. But beyond that, I don't have any 23 objection. 24 THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to let it in and 25 assume you'll verify it is authentic. And if it is
179 1 not, you'll bring that to my attention. 2 What number is this, Counsel? 3 MR. DANDAR: 96. 4 THE COURT: And you gave the original to the 5 clerk? 6 MR. DANDAR: I actually gave it to the witness. 7 I'll take it back. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q In Scientology policy, Mr. Franks, does the policy 10 dictate that the tech is infallible? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Does the policy dictate that the tech must be 13 protected at all costs? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Is there any place where the application of the 16 tech and protecting the tech is more important than in the 17 City of Clearwater at Flag? 18 A I would answer yes. 19 Q Yes? 20 A Uh-huh. 21 Q Where is it more important than at Flag? 22 A Maybe I didn't understand the question. 23 Q Okay. Let me start over. Flag is the mecca of 24 technical perfection, right? 25 A Yes.
180 1 Q Is there any -- 2 A Oh, where it is more important? 3 Q Where it is more important than at Flag? 4 A No. I mean -- no. Flag Land Base was meant to be 5 the showcase for Scientology working. 6 Q Were you in any way part of setting up the Flag 7 Land Base in Clearwater? 8 A In '75? No. I just was on the ship at the time. 9 Q Okay. What about after '75? Were you involved in 10 Flag? 11 A No, I went to D.C. 12 Q When you were at COB ED Int were you involved at 13 all with Flag? 14 A Oh, yes. Of course. 15 Q And how was that? 16 A Well, I mean, Flag was the most important single 17 organization that we had. 18 Q And what does that mean to you when -- in your 19 position back then? 20 A Well, it meant that it was the single largest 21 source of income. And it was the showcase for Scientology. 22 Mmm, but the income was very important because we made so 23 much money at the Flag Land Base -- Mmm -- you know, because 24 of that. 25 Q Per policy of Scientology, is the protection of
181 1 the tech more important than an individual's medical 2 condition? 3 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to competence to 4 answer that question. 5 THE COURT: I think I'll allow him to answer. 6 I think he has competence to answer it. 7 A Could you give me that question one more time? 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Per the policy of Scientology -- 10 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, I have got to ask you a 11 question. Doesn't the introspection rundown -- or 12 doesn't the tech that I have seen introduced here 13 someplace suggest that a person in an introspection 14 rundown may, indeed, have a medical condition that 15 needs addressing? 16 MR. DANDAR: Yes, it does. 17 THE COURT: So that would be part of the tech? 18 MR. DANDAR: Yes, it does. 19 THE COURT: So how can you say that -- that the 20 person is less important than the tech if the tech 21 is that there are sometimes physical conditions that 22 need to be taken care of, that would be part of the 23 tech. It just shows somebody didn't do it very 24 well. 25 MR. DANDAR: The rundown says the physical
182 1 condition must be addressed first with a medical 2 doctor, and then you can go into the rundown. 3 THE COURT: Well, I don't believe I read that. 4 I mean -- 5 MR. DANDAR: Let me ask Mr. Franks -- 6 THE COURT: I need to see it. Where is that? 7 Madam Clerk, I don't know if you would have any idea 8 what the number is. I don't know if we have the 9 introspection rundown tech in evidence or not, and 10 I'm not sure I know where it is that I have read 11 that, but I have read that. 12 MR. DANDAR: I'm not sure if I have it today. 13 THE COURT: I don't think we've had that -- the 14 rundown introduced in this hearing. But go ahead, 15 ask -- 16 MR. WEINBERG: I have a copy of the rundown. 17 THE COURT: Could I see it? 18 MR. WEINBERG: Sure. 19 THE COURT: Maybe that is where I saw this. 20 Maybe it isn't. If it isn't, I saw it somewhere 21 else. I'll just have to see if I can find it. 22 Go ahead with your questions. 23 MR. LIEBERMAN: There may actually be several 24 documents relating to it. This is just one of them. 25 THE COURT: Okay.
183 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q In Scientology policy, is the protection of the 3 tech more important than an individual's medical condition? 4 MR. WEINBERG: That is the same objection I had 5 before. 6 THE COURT: I think somebody that was as high 7 up in the Church as he apparently was can answer 8 that question. So that is overruled. 9 A Well -- 10 THE COURT: Of course, there is the First 11 Amendment objection. But I'm not going to deal with 12 that right now. 13 MR. LIEBERMAN: I understand that, right now. 14 I have a standing objection -- 15 THE COURT: Yes, you do. 16 MR. LIEBERMAN: -- to all of this. 17 A The overriding policy would be the greatest -- the 18 overriding policy would be the greatest good for the 19 greatest number of dynamics. And, of course, the survival 20 of Scientology would be the most important. Survival, in 21 this case, of the Flag Land Base. So that would be the 22 first -- Mmm -- thing in order of importance. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q Are you aware of any policy that says the survival 25 of Scientology is the most important thing for a
184 1 Scientologist to maintain except or unless something else? 2 Is there any exceptions to the greatest good for the 3 greatest number? 4 A No. No. 5 Q Now, in the case of Lisa McPherson, based upon 6 what you know of Scientology policy, is there -- or who was 7 in charge of the -- of Lisa McPherson's stay on Scientology 8 property? 9 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. I mean, this is just 10 pure speculation. He's asking for -- I guess he's 11 asking for an opinion as to who was in charge based 12 on what he knew back in 1980? 13 THE COURT: Yes. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Based on the facts Mr. Dandar 15 told him? Is that it? 16 THE COURT: Yes. 17 MR. WEINBERG: I have an objection to those 18 kinds of questions. 19 THE COURT: I'm going to allow it but obviously 20 he wouldn't know the person. He might know the 21 position. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q What position or division of Scientology would 24 have been in charge of making decisions about Lisa 25 McPherson?
185 1 A After Morton Plant? 2 Q Yes. 3 A Post Morton Plant would have been the GO, 4 Guardian's Office. 5 Q Department 20? 6 A Department 20, yes. 7 Q Now, why is that? 8 A Because it is recognized that the senior issue 9 here is possible -- a possible attack on the Church, a 10 possible PR flap. That is the senior concern. The fact 11 that OSA was there that day -- Mmm -- reflects that. 12 Q Does that include the medical condition of Lisa 13 McPherson? 14 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to comprehensive -- 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q As per policy, who was in charge of her stay at 17 the property of the Church of Scientology? 18 A Yes. 19 THE COURT: Who is it? OSA is in charge of her 20 stay? Is that what you said? I just heard a yes. 21 I didn't -- 22 MR. DANDAR: Oh, I asked the question who would 23 have been -- I forgot what I asked. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Would Department 20 be in charge of Lisa
186 1 McPherson's entire stay at the Scientology property? 2 A Absolutely. Yes. 3 Q Does that include the medical condition of Lisa 4 McPherson? 5 A Yes. 6 Q I want you to assume the medical evidence 7 testimony will be -- from the pathologist retained by the 8 estate -- that during the last several days of Lisa 9 McPherson's life, caretakers saw an obvious decline in her 10 physical condition, which also, by the way, was reported and 11 deposed in deposition by Ms. Hof of the INR. And that she 12 wrote reports to Mr. Kartuzinski daily. And she stated she 13 was frantic because of what she saw happening to the 14 physical condition of Lisa McPherson. And she was not 15 getting a response from anyone. 16 Per the policy of Scientology, based upon your 17 experience, can you explain to us why she wasn't getting a 18 response to the reports that she was making? 19 MR. WEINBERG: Well, objection. Improper 20 hypothetical question. I mean, he's given his -- 21 his interpretation of part of the evidence, but he 22 hasn't provided to this witness sort of the rest of 23 the story about what other people who were staying 24 with her, what the other medical examiners have said 25 as to what was going on, their constant
187 1 24-hour-a-day care -- 2 THE COURT: That is your side of it. He's 3 presenting his side. So your objection is 4 overruled. 5 On a summary judgment, you know, which is where 6 we are, sort of, here -- 7 MR. WEINBERG: Sort of -- 8 THE COURT: -- you take his evidence, not 9 yours. His. You have to be able to defeat his. 10 MR. WEINBERG: No, that I know. But what he's 11 asking him is an opinion based only on what I 12 believe is a misrepresentation even of his evidence 13 in this case. 14 THE COURT: Okay. Well, I'm going to allow it. 15 Overruled. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q Further assume that the pathologist retained by 18 the estate opined that the caretakers were watching Lisa 19 McPherson die and that they are guilty of intentional 20 medical neglect. 21 Can you, based upon Scientology policy, written or 22 not, tell us why that would happen to Lisa McPherson? 23 MR. WEINBERG: Just for the record, I have an 24 objection. 25 THE COURT: Yes, I'm going to sustain that. I
188 1 have not read all that. I think you have added 2 things in that didn't happen. I don't think I have 3 heard anything about unwritten policy. 4 MR. DANDAR: Oh. 5 THE COURT: All of the policy was written. You 6 were just fine and I overruled the objection, and 7 then you started to add stuff because apparently you 8 thought if I allowed that, I would maybe allow some 9 more. 10 MR. DANDAR: No, I didn't do that. 11 THE COURT: Then you have an improper question, 12 so -- 13 MR. DANDAR: All right. 14 THE COURT: -- you can start again and see if 15 you can do it better. 16 MR. DANDAR: I'll try to do it better. 17 THE COURT: Is there unwritten policy? I mean, 18 is there policy not written? 19 THE WITNESS: No. In Scientology a byword is 20 if it isn't written, it isn't true. 21 THE COURT: Right, so as soon as you put 22 "unwritten" policy, you're talking about something I 23 don't know anything about. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Based upon the testimony of the caretaker INR
189 1 person, Ms. Hof, that Lisa McPherson was physically 2 declining on December 2 through December 5, that she wrote 3 reports to Mr. Kartuzinski daily, including hand-delivering 4 them to his office, that she got no reply, that she was 5 frantic and she wrote that, "We have to do something 6 different for Lisa McPherson," and based upon the medical 7 doctor, unlicensed, Janis Johnson, who saw Lisa McPherson at 8 7 p.m. on December 5 and said she was majorly dehydrated, 9 that is her words, do you have an opinion, based upon 10 Scientology policy, as to why Lisa McPherson was not 11 immediately taken to the Morton Plant Hospital? 12 MR. WEINBERG: I just want to state my 13 objection for the record. Same objection I had 14 before. 15 THE COURT: Go ahead. 16 A Yes. 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q And what is that? 19 A Mmm, that a condition of danger had been probably 20 applied -- had been applied here. They were bypassing. All 21 of the decisions had to be made up at Int, wherever Int is. 22 And the people locally who were down in the trenches 23 watching Lisa were probably very upset. But they had no 24 power to make a decision. 25 Why? Because the element of this being a PR flap
190 1 became senior -- a -- of senior concern to any other 2 concerns. Unfortunately, including her health. 3 Q And based upon what you know, are you able to tell 4 us if David Miscavige, in 1995, December 5 of 1995, was part 5 of Int? 6 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Competence. 7 MR. DANDAR: I asked him if he knew. 8 MR. WEINBERG: Well -- 9 THE COURT: I'm going to allow it. 10 A Mmm, I assume he is, but I don't know that he's 11 there. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q Based upon what you know about David Miscavige 14 when you worked with him until 1981, and knowing that he's 15 now chairman of the board, can you tell us -- and his 16 management style, can you tell us, based upon your personal 17 experience, if he would have been involved from day one in 18 knowing about Lisa McPherson at the property of the Church 19 of Scientology? 20 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to the form. 21 Objection, competence. Would he have? Your 22 Honor -- 23 THE COURT: I thought you had a continuing 24 objection? 25 MR. WEINBERG: I didn't say relevance, but --
191 1 okay, just form. I apologize. 2 THE COURT: Go ahead. 3 A He would have been all over this like white on 4 rice. 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q Why is that? 7 A Because that is the way David is. He's -- he 8 likes to be viewed as an in-charge kind of guy. So he would 9 be all over this, particularly given the mecca of technical 10 perfection, he would be responsible for maintaining that 11 reputation. 12 Q Per your understanding of Scientology, can you 13 explain why, however, Lisa McPherson would not have been 14 taken back to the Morton Plant Hospital? 15 A Well, I saw the pictures of the body. I mean, the 16 ER doctor had released Lisa to Mrs. Webber. Mrs. Webber was 17 taken off the case. 18 To me, that says the condition of danger had been 19 applied. They didn't want -- and the fact that an OSA 20 representative was there means that -- can you hear me -- 21 means that this was a PR flap or a potential PR flap. And 22 that took precedence. 23 Q Yes. But why not just take her to Morton Plant 24 Hospital? 25 A Well, I'm assuming -- I mean, look at Lisa
192 1 McPherson. She looked terrible. She certainly looked a lot 2 worse than when they took her the 18th of November. 3 Q Well -- 4 A My -- my -- my opinion on this is that as she 5 deteriorated -- in other words, there was no doubt -- we 6 know there was people writing up, hey, this is getting 7 worse, not better. But, Mmm, in a condition of danger, I 8 mean, who is going to go to Int and stick their neck out 9 saying "We better do something"? There is nobody here in 10 Clearwater who can be responsible for taking her to the 11 hospital. And this is a PR flap, foremost. 12 Lisa's individual situation is of less importance 13 now. The PR flap is the primary thing we have to prevent. 14 Q Well, why couldn't they have taken her, per policy 15 of Scientology, to another local hospital, rather than one 16 that took them over 50 minutes to get to? 17 A That is complete speculation. 18 Q Okay. All right. 19 A I mean, for me, I couldn't say. 20 Q All right. Now, before we broke -- well, let me 21 just ask you this question. 22 Are you aware, in your experience in Scientology, 23 of instances where, although Scientology says, in writing, 24 you know, we believe in going to medical doctors and having 25 medical care, not psychiatric but medical care, where people
193 1 who are gravely ill were not sent to medical doctors? 2 A Yes. There was always this tension between you 3 don't -- one, you don't want to meet -- you don't want to, 4 tacitly or -- even tacitly or openly admit technology 5 doesn't work. So if you are auditing the person and the 6 person comes down with cancer, Mmm -- and, secondly -- and 7 maybe even more important, you want to keep auditing that 8 person because you need to keep your auditors busy to keep 9 stats up and you need the money coming in. Then, common 10 sense, when this has become a medical problem. 11 And, yes, I had many, many, many, many experiences 12 with that dilemma. 13 Q The dilemma of what? 14 A Mmm, when to send somebody to a doctor. 15 Q Why is there a dilemma, though? I mean, other 16 than the two things you just said, is there anything else? 17 A Well, I can only tell you my personal experience. 18 In '72 we had this girl who was a class A, a highly trained 19 auditor. 20 I watched -- I was a CO of the L.A. org at that 21 time. I walked by the PC waiting couch. She's waiting to 22 go in sessions. Here she is, her breast is oozing pus. She 23 had an open sore on her breast. And it turned out she had 24 breast cancer, the late stages of it. And she had been at 25 Cedars-Sinai Hospital. They had taken her off the lines and
194 1 they were just auditing her. 2 Q They were what? 3 A They had taken her off -- out of the radiation 4 treatment at Cedars and just started auditing her because 5 the CS at the local organization had decided that here is a 6 person who should just be getting auditing, let's not let 7 her get this radiation treatment. An unqualified decision. 8 And actually an off-policy decision. Their own policy. 9 Which is she should have been on medical lines. And she -- 10 she -- two weeks later she subsequently died. 11 Q So even though it was written get medical care 12 from a medical doctor, they took her off of that written 13 policy and decided to do auditing? 14 A Uh-huh. 15 THE COURT: They didn't, the case supervisor 16 did, isn't that what you said? 17 THE WITNESS: It was a case supervisor and 18 director of processing and the registrar, the person 19 who signs them up and takes the money. 20 The only person who I ever really saw had a 21 clear vision of this policy and maintained it was 22 Hubbard. On the ship we -- you know, we had a 23 situation like that. They would be taken home. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q They would be taken home before they died?
195 1 A Yes. 2 Q They would not be sent to a doctor? 3 A No. 4 Q Lisa McPherson had an apartment in Clearwater on 5 December 5 of '95. She had a mother in Texas. And was 6 there any place -- as far as you know, was there any place 7 locally that -- a Scientology facility, where she would have 8 been taken to, to receive emergency medical care? 9 THE COURT: Who says -- who says that the 10 Church said you have to go to a Scientology 11 facility? 12 MR. DANDAR: That is just one question. I 13 didn't say they have to, no. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I guess -- 15 A I don't know of any. No. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q And the people that were sent home, in your 18 experience, because they had a medical condition, how were 19 they sent home? 20 A Well, when we were overseas, it would be they 21 would have somebody take them home, usher them through 22 Customs, get them on the plane, go home with them and make 23 sure they got there. 24 Q And what if he were here in the United States, do 25 you know how they were sent home?
196 1 A Usually driven. 2 Q And -- 3 A Or put on a plane, depending where they were from. 4 Q But what is the purpose of sending them home? 5 A Put enough distance between Flag Land Base, or 6 Flag, and the imminent death. 7 Q Is that written in policy somewhere? 8 A Yes. He says that -- well, as far as the death 9 goes, no. Not that I know of. 10 Q What -- do you have personal knowledge as to what 11 Mr. Hubbard meant when he wrote, "I would rather have you 12 dead than incapable"? 13 A Mmm -- excuse me -- yes. I think it was sort of a 14 form of iteration of -- it was just his writing style. I 15 don't think he meant anybody had to be dead. 16 THE COURT: You think that had anything to do 17 with -- apparently you reviewed something, things 18 about this case. Do you think that had anything to 19 do with this case? 20 THE WITNESS: Not directly. No. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q Have you read the Jesse Prince affidavit in this 23 case -- 24 A Yes. 25 Q -- where he talks about end cycle?
197 1 A Yes. 2 Q Is there anything in his affidavit that you 3 disagree with? 4 THE COURT: About the end cycle part of it? 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q Any part of his affidavit? 7 MR. WEINBERG: Well, then maybe I guess he 8 needs to look at the affidavit. 9 THE COURT: That is an awfully long affidavit. 10 MR. DANDAR: All right. 11 THE COURT: What is that, asking one witness to 12 testify about the credibility of some other person's 13 sworn statement? 14 I will let him talk about whether or not he 15 disagrees regarding what this hearing is about. As 16 far as what the rest of it is, I don't care about it 17 from this witness. 18 MR. DANDAR: Well, all right. Well, we had 19 testimony, if you recall, from Stacy Brooks and Bob 20 Minton -- 21 THE COURT: About what? 22 MR. DANDAR: -- about somehow implicating me in 23 making Jesse Prince write this affidavit which was 24 not based in fact, was just her -- what she called 25 it, her fabricated scenario.
198 1 THE COURT: Well, Bob Minton didn't testify 2 about that at all. 3 MR. DANDAR: I think Stacy Brooks did. 4 THE COURT: Stacy Brooks, I think, indicated 5 that he followed the same style that she followed, 6 which was sort of this slanted a little bit to meet 7 the facts or what have you. She didn't say -- she 8 just said she didn't have any firsthand knowledge 9 about it. 10 But go ahead, whatever it is you want to do. 11 You are just dragging this out. You wanted to 12 finish by this morning, you told me. 13 MR. DANDAR: I did. And I'm going to soon 14 finish. 15 THE COURT: One you get to that affidavit and 16 ask him if he read it, you are looking at about a 17 three-day cross-examination. So it is up to you. I 18 mean, I don't care at this point, 29 days, 42 days, 19 it doesn't matter. 20 MR. DANDAR: I just have -- 21 THE COURT: You are the one who wants to get to 22 trial in August. 23 MR. DANDAR: I just -- 24 THE COURT: Why don't you ask him about end 25 cycle. That is important to this.
199 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Have you heard the term "end cycle"? 3 A Yes. 4 Q How did you understand the term, from your 5 Scientology experience? 6 A That was -- 7 Q I can't hear you. 8 A That was utilized when you had a terminal PC. 9 Q Someone who is like dying of cancer? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And what did that mean? 12 A Mmm, I refer back to your questions earlier where 13 I was talking about like persons dying, you let him talk 14 about how he feels about dying, Mmm, is he scared about it, 15 this, that. 16 Q And can it be used on someone else who is dying 17 who you can't have a conversation with? 18 A I'm just thinking. I wouldn't have any personal 19 knowledge of that. 20 Q Let me give you an example. Someone who is in a 21 coma who can't talk, could you have an end cycle of that 22 person? 23 A Yes. 24 Q How? 25 A Well, if they can't talk doesn't mean they can't
200 1 hear you. You could say to them -- 2 THE COURT: Well, they can't hear you if you 3 are on introspection rundown because I know you 4 would know they cannot talk to that person, right? 5 THE WITNESS: Right. 6 THE COURT: So there would be no talking, true? 7 THE WITNESS: Absolutely, yes. 8 THE COURT: And there is no question in this 9 record that those people were not talking to Lisa 10 McPherson. 11 THE WITNESS: Okay. 12 THE COURT: Okay? At least nothing that I have 13 read, except maybe on the way to the hospital, and I 14 don't even know that. 15 So based on the fact she was in an 16 introspection rundown, they were following the Step 17 000, what would end cycle have to do with it? 18 THE WITNESS: (No response.) 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Would Lisa -- 21 MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me, did we have an 22 answer? 23 THE COURT: He didn't answer it. 24 MR. WEINBERG: He was shaking his head. 25 THE WITNESS: I guess I sort of lost the train
201 1 of thought here. Are we saying somebody interfered 2 with the introspection rundown to say, "End of 3 cycle. Lisa, drop your body. Lisa, go home"? 4 THE COURT: Is "drop the body" -- maybe this 5 will help settle this here, is "drop the body" the 6 same as "end cycle"? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes. 8 THE COURT: Okay. So you use those terms 9 interchangeably? 10 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. 11 THE COURT: Right? The way that I understood 12 you had talked about "drop the body" was situations 13 where somebody was terminal ill, they were dying -- 14 THE WITNESS: Yes. 15 THE COURT: -- apparently, and it was a 16 situation maybe similar to hospice where they would 17 be sort of comforted in the fact this was 18 inevitable? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes. 20 THE COURT: And that they should -- they should 21 get through it and not be morbid about it and not 22 misunderstand what was happening, what hospice does 23 to try to get people through a dying experience as 24 pleasantly as possible, if there is such a thing. 25 THE WITNESS: That is right.
202 1 THE COURT: I understood that is what you said 2 you knew "drop the body" was. 3 THE WITNESS: Yes. 4 THE COURT: So "end cycle" is like that, that 5 would be something similar? 6 THE WITNESS: That is right. 7 THE COURT: Would you use the term "end cycle" 8 to be equivalent in any fashion with a decision to 9 let somebody die that otherwise didn't need to die? 10 I mean, does "end cycle" equal murder? 11 THE WITNESS: I want to be careful what I say 12 here. Mmm, I -- are we sure that they said "end 13 cycle" to -- 14 THE COURT: No, that is what he says. That is 15 what Jesse Prince says. 16 And what the Church is saying is there isn't 17 one shred of evidence of that. And I'm trying to 18 decide whether there is a shred of evidence of that 19 or not. 20 You know, I -- there are two different theories 21 of medicine involved here. And that is something I 22 deal with every day and I know about that, doctors 23 disagree as to somebody's cause of death, manner of 24 death and that sort of stuff. 25 What I don't know is whether or not, based on
203 1 your opinion, that somebody would have just said, 2 "Well, just let her die, she's just too much 3 trouble, she's a PR flap, so just let her die and 4 that will somehow lessen the PR flap." 5 I mean, is that what is called "end cycle"? It 6 doesn't sound to me like what you are referring to. 7 It sounds like it means something else. 8 THE WITNESS: The way I understood "end cycle" 9 was it means to let's get this over with. Mmm, so 10 you are asking me to interpret that as saying "Let's 11 have her life be done, over"? 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q Let's just not do anything and let it run its 14 course. Let's not intervene medically. 15 THE COURT: No, that isn't what you said in 16 your complaint, Mr. Dandar. That even would be 17 different. 18 You said the decision was made to intentionally 19 let her die, as opposed to take her to get 20 treatment. 21 MR. DANDAR: Well, let her die is deciding not 22 to intervene, let her go, not do anything in 23 somebody who obviously needs medical help right 24 away. 25 THE COURT: Okay. You add that caveat to it.
204 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, that I -- that I can see 2 happening. I see that, let's see what happens while 3 we decide what we're going to do about this PR flap. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q And so decide not to do anything while we decide 6 what to do? 7 A Right. 8 THE COURT: That you can see happening, as 9 opposed to the other scenario being a decision is 10 made, let her lay there in the bed and die and then 11 we'll deal with it? 12 THE WITNESS: Right. 13 THE COURT: You do not think that would have 14 happened? 15 THE WITNESS: I do not. 16 THE COURT: Okay. 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q Is it less of a PR flap for Scientology to deal 19 with Lisa McPherson dying, rather than taking Lisa 20 McPherson, as soon as possible, to the local Morton Plant 21 Hospital emergency room on December 5th? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Why is that? 24 A Well, probably for a couple reasons. One of them 25 being that somebody locally would have had to have made the
205 1 decision. And that would be like jumping onto the third 2 rail, you know, up in the New York subway. It would be a 3 very dangerous move. You would be headed to Ethics, to the 4 RPF, because taking her back to Morton Plant Hospital after 5 you already promised Morton Plant that you were going to 6 care for this woman in the condition that she currently was 7 in -- Mmm -- it would have been viewed as, my God, what is 8 the press going to do with this? 9 Q Compared to -- compared to -- I mean, compared to 10 her being dead and then, what, calling the morgue? 11 A Well, see, that is the thing. Was there anybody 12 competent enough to say this woman is in a coma and she's 13 dying? 14 Q Well, we had a 17-year-old complaining about her 15 for four days, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday. She was 16 only 17 years old. 17 THE COURT: There were a whole bunch of others 18 who weren't, right? 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q The others were Mexican doctor, graduate of a 21 Mexican -- City of Mexico University medical school, Janis 22 Johnson, who used to be a practicing anesthesiologist in 23 Arizona, taught medical school. 24 THE COURT: And they weren't saying that. They 25 were not saying that she was in bad trouble.
206 1 MR. DANDAR: Oh, Janis Johnson said she was 2 "majorly dehydrated on the afternoon of December 5." 3 THE COURT: Yes, on the day she died. 4 MR. DANDAR: But she didn't die apparently -- I 5 mean -- well, there is a lot of conflict on when she 6 died. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Let me ask you this, Mr. Franks. Are you sitting 9 here as a reluctant witness or a willing witness? 10 A I'm pretty reluctant, yeah. 11 Q And when I had you subpoenaed at a restaurant at 12 the International Mall in Tampa, were you expecting to be 13 subpoenaed? 14 A No. I was down here -- I come down here 15 frequently on business, have been for six, seven years now. 16 And I had been asked to get involved in this real estate 17 deal. 18 And I knew Patricia Greenway. Last April, I 19 think, somebody sent me a thing on the Internet about The 20 Profit. And I got in touch with her and we started talking. 21 But actually the conversation turned more into my 22 interest in France where I am studying for a certificate. 23 And so Patricia and I sort of -- that was sort of a common 24 ground for us. 25 Q French?
207 1 A Yeah. Then I happened to hear that she was a 2 realtor. And so I said, "Well, I'm coming down next week, 3 let's get together." 4 So we set up this appointment. 5 Q Were you -- after being subpoenaed, were you 6 contacted by the Church of Scientology to try to tell you 7 not to come? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Was that Attorney Drescher? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And do you know who Attorney Drescher represents? 12 A The Church of Scientology. That is how he 13 presented himself. 14 Q Okay. And did he ask you not to come? Or was he 15 more forceful than that? 16 A He threatened me. He said in the second letter -- 17 well, the first letter was reminding me that I had signed 18 this agreement back in 1986 saying that I would not testify 19 unless -- I wouldn't testify against the Church. It's -- 20 it's more in-depth than that. 21 Q Do you have a copy of that agreement? 22 A Do I -- 23 Q No, did you back then when he first contacted you? 24 A No, I didn't. 25 Q Did ask you him for a copy?
208 1 A No. He sent a copy. 2 Q Okay. And what happened next? 3 A Mmm, then I -- one or two weeks later, I got a 4 letter from him threatening me, basically, saying that they 5 were suing this guy Gerry Armstrong for $110 million, and he 6 had been -- Gerry Armstrong, my connection with him was I 7 had -- in '86, he was part of that global agreement -- in 8 fact, he was the more senior party than I because he had a 9 cause of action against the Church. 10 Q Okay. So how did you take Mr. Drescher's threats? 11 A Well, I wrote him a letter trying to explain that 12 I'm sort of between a rock and a hard place. Mmm, then I 13 pointed out to him, I said, "Look, I'm not an 14 anti-Scientologist," which I'm not. I have not participated 15 in all this other stuff that goes on. The LMT Trust and all 16 that thing is really news to me. 17 And even though I was coming down to Clearwater -- 18 well, I also pointed out to him that the Church knows full 19 well that I come down to Clearwater because they threw me 20 out of the park opposite the Sandcastle I think in '97. I 21 was on the bench making phone calls, and they asked me to 22 leave. 23 Q You are on a public sidewalk? 24 A I was on a park bench. 25 So to get to the point I was making, the Church
209 1 knows I come down here regularly. How can you assume that 2 I'm willing? 3 And also, finally I pointed out to him after 20 4 years why would I want to get involved in all this stuff? 5 Q And as you sit here today, do you still feel 6 threatened? 7 A Oh, yeah. I mean, I know how litigious these guys 8 are. 9 Q And did I tell you that once served with a 10 subpoena, that is a court order for you to appear, and I 11 told you what Judge Schaeffer said, you must appear? 12 A Yes, you did. 13 MR. DANDAR: That is all I have. 14 THE COURT: Thank you. You may inquire. 15 CROSS-EXAMINATION 16 BY MR. WEINBERG: 17 Q Now, Mr. Franks, let's go over a few things at the 18 first. 19 When you say you were the top official or one of 20 the top officials in the Church of Scientology in 1981 -- I 21 think you said -- you didn't order someone to be killed in 22 the Church, did you? 23 A No. 24 Q No. And you don't know anyone in the experience 25 that you had for 13 and a half years in the Church of
210 1 Scientology -- you don't know any staff member or public 2 that was ordered by someone like you in a position of 3 authority to be killed. Do you? 4 A Truthfully? Yes, I do. 5 Q All right. Who is that? 6 A Well, Mo Budlong and Jane Kember. I don't 7 remember who the person was, but it was some fellow in 8 England. 9 Q And this was circa when? 10 A This goes back to the '70s. 11 Q And you were the one that ordered it? 12 A No. I was not the one that ordered it. I 13 happened to come across this. 14 Q And there was no one on any introspection rundown 15 when that was in place that you are aware of that was ever 16 ordered to be killed on the introspection rundown? You are 17 not aware of anything like that, are you? 18 A No. 19 Q And when you did the introspection rundown on 20 people, no one ever instructed you on an introspection 21 rundown to see to it that the person died, correct? 22 A That is correct. 23 Q And the people that -- that you put through the 24 introspection rundown, these were Scientologists that were 25 Type III, right?
211 1 A Yes. 2 Q They had had psychotic episodes. And you, in the 3 course of using Scientology, had gotten them to a position, 4 through rest and relaxation, where they could take this 5 rundown, this auditing, so they could get -- so they could 6 deal with it. Correct? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Right. And, in fact, when the questions were 9 asked you about psychotics in Scientology, the fact of the 10 matter is, is that as of 1973, Mr. Hubbard announced that he 11 had made an amazing breakthrough with regard to dealing with 12 psychotics, and that was the introspection -- that was the 13 introspection rundown, correct? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Right. So that certainly as of 1973 in the Church 16 of Scientology there was a way -- there was technology that 17 was in place to help people that were psychotic -- that were 18 psychotic, correct? 19 A That is how it was presented. Yes. 20 Q Right. So you would talk about some policy back 21 in 1965 where -- and on the ship when somebody was 22 psychotic, you would take them off the ship and send them 23 home. 24 Things changed in 1973 when Mr. Hubbard introduced 25 to the world the introspection rundown, correct?
212 1 A Mmm, yes and no. Because there was a caveat here, 2 you still -- Hubbard went on to say, you know, our job was 3 not to handle the psychotics. And so if you are saying that 4 we didn't -- the Church wasn't obligated to send people away 5 who were Type III, the answer, I would have to say, is no. 6 Q I'm not sure what the question was, but let me 7 just make it clear. If somebody was an insane person, not a 8 Scientologist, he wouldn't be able to come to the Church of 9 Scientology and do auditing. Correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Right. But if there is a Scientologist that for 12 whatever reason has had a psychotic break, a staff member 13 that has a psychotic break and is what has been referred to 14 as Type III, as of 1973 Mr. Hubbard introduced a way in 15 which to help that person, that is the introspection 16 rundown, correct? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And it was your experience that when that happened 19 to people that were Scientologists after 1973, you and 20 others at the Church that were dealing with technology would 21 attempt to help Scientologists that had had psychotic 22 breaks. Correct? 23 A It was a little more selective than what you are 24 saying. Not all people would get the rundown. Some people 25 would be off-loaded and sent home.
213 1 Q But no one you are aware of was ordered to be 2 killed? 3 A That is right. 4 Q Now, you talked some about David Miscavige. And 5 you were asked questions about -- about what you surmised 6 David Miscavige might be doing today. 7 Let me ask you, do you recall how old David 8 Miscavige was when you last saw him? 9 A Mmm, twenty-one. 10 Q And that was about twenty-one years ago, correct? 11 A That is correct. 12 Q And you haven't kept up with David Miscavige in 13 the last twenty-one years? 14 A That is correct. 15 Q You haven't talked to him in the last twenty-one 16 years, have you? 17 A No. 18 Q You don't have any idea, do you, where David 19 Miscavige was or what he was doing in November and December 20 of 1995, do you? 21 A That is correct. 22 Q You don't have any personal knowledge of the facts 23 surrounding what happened to Lisa McPherson in November and 24 December of 1995, do you? You don't have any personal 25 knowledge?
214 1 A No. 2 Q Now -- 3 THE COURT: Personal knowledge, I think he's 4 talking about, as being there, seeing, hearing, 5 watching. 6 THE WITNESS: Okay. 7 THE COURT: You may have some knowledge from 8 reading a file, like I have knowledge, but not 9 personal, what we would include in that. 10 BY MR. WEINBERG: 11 Q Now, you left -- actually, you were discharged, 12 dismissed, from the Church of Scientology -- from the 13 organization, the staff, of the Church of Scientology. 14 Correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And, in fact, the person that you most hold 17 responsible for having dismissed you was this 21-year-old 18 David Miscavige. Correct? 19 A No. Not really. 20 Q Well, haven't you expressed, since then, some 21 upset at David Miscavige for being part of the reason for 22 you being discharged from your spot? 23 A To who? 24 Q So you don't -- well -- 25 A I don't think I have because that is not how I
215 1 think. So -- 2 Q When you left -- when you were discharged from the 3 Church of Scientology and left the staff in -- when was it, 4 December of 1981? 5 A That is right. 6 Q That was before the major reorganization, 7 corporate -- the corporate reorganization of the Church, is 8 that right? 9 A Was it? I don't know. I don't think so. I think 10 we were more midstream. 11 Q Well, the Religious Technology Center was not 12 incorporated until after you left. Correct? 13 A That is -- I believe that is correct, yeah. 14 Q And I don't know if you know, do you know who was 15 the chairman of the board of RTC? 16 A No. 17 Q Now, this Int that you were talking about that you 18 had a title in when you left, are you aware that that has 19 changed at this point and that what we have now is -- what 20 took place since is that there is a mother church called the 21 Church of Scientology, Int, International? Are you aware of 22 that? 23 A I don't know what it finally metamorphized -- 24 meta -- whatever that word is, I didn't know how it 25 eventually changed. We were in the process of changing it
216 1 all when I left. 2 Q And part of what I think you said that you had 3 done along with, among others, David Miscavige, was to, in 4 essence, rid the Church of wrongdoers, people that had been 5 responsible for some of the -- some of the wrongdoing that 6 took place in the '70s, correct, some of the bad actors? 7 A That is one way of looking at it, yes. 8 Q Well, I mean, didn't you, in essence, brag about 9 that in 1981 in the position that you had that -- that, in 10 fact, you took responsibility for having, in essence, shut 11 down the GO and the -- the Guardian's Office and gotten rid 12 of the bad actors there? 13 A I don't know if "brag" is the right word. But, 14 yeah, that is what we were saying. 15 Q And that was a good thing, wasn't it? It was a 16 good thing that the people in the Church of Scientology took 17 it upon themselves, in 1980, 1981, to get rid of people that 18 were attempting to corrupt the religion. Correct? That was 19 a good thing? 20 A If it's as you said, as you characterize it, yes, 21 that would be a good thing. And at the time that is what I 22 believed had happened. Yes. 23 Q Now, you said that -- that you had looked at -- 24 oh, by the way, when you left the Church of Scientology in 25 December of 1981, for several years thereafter you became a
217 1 witness against the Church of Scientology, didn't you? 2 A Mmm, I only once, and that was -- I mentioned 3 that, that was in Julie Christofferson's case in Oregon in 4 1985. 5 Q I thought you testified in a number of 6 depositions. That was the case you testified in at trial. 7 But you testified in a number of depositions in a number of 8 different cases, didn't you? 9 A Well, why don't you tell me because I don't 10 recall. 11 Q Well, I'm asking you first for your recall. 12 THE COURT: He said he doesn't recall. 13 BY MR. WEINBERG: 14 Q Well, do you recall working with certain lawyers? 15 A Mmm, you will be talking about Michael Flynn. And 16 I never worked with Michael Flynn. 17 Q Well, do you remember what lawyer you worked with? 18 A I didn't work with any attorney. 19 Q Were you paid for your testimony? 20 A No. Never. 21 Q Well -- 22 A And, in fact, that is a bald-faced, shall I use 23 the word, "lie." It's just not true. I never worked for 24 anybody. 25 Q Well, is it not true that -- I mean, is it true
218 1 that you were never paid to testify? 2 A In what? No, I was never paid to testify. 3 Q Do you remember testifying in March of '84 in the 4 Cooper case? 5 A I don't believe I testified in March of '84 for 6 the Cooper case. I don't think I ever had anything to do 7 with Paulette Cooper. 8 Q Do you know who Mr. Cooper is? 9 A Mr. Cooper? 10 Q Ms. Cooper? 11 A I know who she is by reputation. But I don't 12 think I ever met Paulette Cooper. 13 Q So you don't remember giving a deposition in that 14 case? 15 A I don't. No. 16 Q Do you remember giving a deposition in the Flynn 17 lawsuit? 18 A Mmm, I remember that -- I remember this because 19 Rick Moxon was taking my -- or he was the opposing side of 20 it up in Norristown, Pennsylvania. I really don't know what 21 the case is. I don't even know how I ended up getting 22 there. 23 But I can tell you for an honest fact I never got 24 paid, and I never worked for any attorney or got anything 25 against anybody except --
219 1 THE COURT: Something like this where you got a 2 subpoena and were asked to come in and tell what you 3 could? 4 THE WITNESS: I believe so. I had -- by 1983, 5 Judge, I had started another job and that is what I 6 was doing, and -- with one exception, and that was 7 Julie Christofferson. 8 THE COURT: What are you people doing? What is 9 the big deal? What has he said that hurt your 10 lawsuit? 11 MR. WEINBERG: Nothing. 12 THE COURT: Throwing around a bunch of files. 13 MR. WEINBERG: I'm really not going to be very 14 long. 15 THE COURT: All right. 16 MR. WEINBERG: And I agree with you. Very 17 little, if anything. 18 Could I just approach, your Honor? 19 THE COURT: Sure. 20 BY MR. WEINBERG: 21 Q I'll show you transcripts to see if I can refresh 22 your recall. Let me show you a transcript of a deposition 23 taken of you in the Paulette Cooper case on March 13 of 24 1984. 25 Do you remember giving that deposition?
220 1 A Let me just -- where was this taken? 2 Q It probably says on the front. 3 A On the front? 4 Q Here (indicating). Taken in the offices of Cohn, 5 Glickstein, Lurie, Ostrin, Lubell & Lubell in New York City? 6 A Is this -- yes, I remember the Avenue of the 7 Americas. But I don't really recall that now. 8 Q All right. Do you recall giving a deposition in 9 the Hartwell -- do you remember the Hartwell case versus the 10 Church of Scientology -- do you remember giving a deposition 11 on February 25 -- 12 THE COURT: Ask him one by one. He never 13 answered whether he remembered the Hartwell case. 14 BY MR. WEINBERG: 15 Q Do you remember the Hartwell case? 16 A No. I remember getting a subpoena. But like 17 Paulette Cooper, I never met the Hartwells. 18 Q This is another transcript, and I believe it is 19 one Mr. Moxon would have taken. Correct? 20 A Yes, I do remember my interchange with Rick. But 21 I don't -- I never -- I'm pretty sure this was the subpoena 22 because I don't think I was very involved with this. 23 Q Do you remember the Van Schaick case? 24 A I know the name. 25 Q Do you remember giving a deposition in that case
221 1 on July 28, 1986? 2 A Where was that? Was that also in -- 3 Q In Pennsylvania, Norristown. 4 A Probably the same. 5 Q Then I'll just show you, for the record, 6 indicating a deposition in the Church of Scientology versus 7 Flynn case taken on March 8, 1985 -- 8 A But, see, I was subpoenaed to it. I was never -- 9 I was under the impression I had to be there. 10 Q I know. But I just asked you if you gave 11 depositions. 12 Do you remember that deposition? 13 A Well, that isn't all you asked me. You asked me 14 wasn't I doing this for hire. I never got paid a dime for 15 it. 16 THE COURT: So that does not change your 17 testimony, his having shown you that? 18 THE WITNESS: Right. 19 BY MR. WEINBERG: 20 Q But you do remember giving those depositions that 21 I just showed you? 22 A Well, they are there. 23 THE COURT: He's right, Counselor, though, you 24 implied he was paid for his testimony. He indicated 25 no, that wasn't true.
222 1 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I'm getting to that. 2 THE COURT: All right. 3 BY MR. WEINBERG: 4 Q Do you remember you entered into -- you and a 5 number of other ex-Scientologists entered into a global 6 settlement agreement with the Church of Scientology, do you 7 remember that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And do you remember when that was? 10 A Mmm, I believe that -- it was December 5, wasn't 11 it, '86? 12 Q Okay. And do you remember that as a result of 13 that settlement, you were paid some money? 14 A $50,000. Yes. 15 Q And that is the settlement agreement that -- where 16 you were paid $50,000 that apparently Mr. Drescher was 17 referring to and sent you a copy of recently, is that right? 18 A That is right. 19 Q And what kind of claim did you have against the 20 Church of Scientology that entitled you to $50,000? 21 A Well, see, that is the thing. I kind of 22 considered -- you know, I had been in the Sea Org. I didn't 23 have anything. I had just recently gotten married. To me, 24 this was found money. I had no claim against the Church of 25 Scientology. I never have had any claim against the Church
223 1 of Scientology. 2 Q But the -- but you still got $50,000? 3 A To me, it was like found money. In fact, 4 actually, that is how Flynn presented it to me, "Come out to 5 California and get $50,000." 6 Q So the lawyer did a global settlement for, what, 7 ten, fifteen, twenty people, of which you were one? 8 A Yes, the number eighteen, eighteen people, seems 9 to be in my head somewhere. 10 Q And there was a lump sum that was paid to the 11 lawyer in the settlement agreement, and then the lawyer 12 decided how much you were to get from it. Is that the way 13 you understood it? 14 A Mmm, yeah. I guess it would be something like 15 that. 16 Q So Mr. Flynn was your lawyer? 17 A No. I didn't have an attorney. I mean, you can 18 see that I wasn't very sophisticated in these types of 19 things back in that period of time. He just said, "Come out 20 and I'll give you $50,000." 21 Q And this was after you had testified in his case 22 and some other cases that he had? 23 A Apparently, yes. 24 Q And you didn't consider that, at least from the 25 lawyer, payment to you for your previous testimony?
224 1 A No. No, I didn't. I felt at the time that it was 2 the Church of Scientology giving me the money for -- in 3 return for my signature. 4 Q Okay, let me just mark -- 5 A The reason -- 6 Q Sure. 7 A The reason I felt that way, because I didn't have 8 any claim against Scientology, nor did I have any intention 9 of putting a claim in against Scientology. 10 Q Was it just the lawyer that did this negotiation 11 on your behalf but you didn't know it until he came to you 12 and said, "Hey, I got some money for you"? 13 A What I think really happened, this guy Mike Flynn, 14 I heard he made a lot of money off this, I don't know. But 15 I think what he brought to the Church was saying, "Listen, 16 I'll get all these Scientologists to sign an agreement, this 17 is the money I want." 18 And really, I didn't have a lot of connection with 19 Mike Flynn. I had maybe seen him once or twice before. 20 Q He was -- 21 THE COURT: Kind of like a class action 22 lawsuit? Is that how you thought of it? Or do you 23 know what a class action lawsuit is? 24 THE WITNESS: No -- I do, but I wasn't involved 25 in any class action lawsuit. That is why I
225 1 considered this to be found money. It is like, 2 "What, I'm not even suing the Church and you are 3 going to give me $50,000?" Who wouldn't take that? 4 MR. WEINBERG: Just for the record, we'll 5 mark -- 6 BY MR. WEINBERG: 7 Q Is this the agreement? I don't -- I'll have the 8 clerk mark a copy. 9 THE COURT: I think it is already in evidence. 10 MR. WEINBERG: Oh, it is? 11 THE COURT: I think so. 12 A Yes, this is the agreement. 13 MR. WEINBERG: It's in evidence? 14 MR. LIEBERMAN: We gave it to the Judge. 15 MR. WEINBERG: We gave it to you, but we didn't 16 mark it as an exhibit. 17 If you could mark this as the next exhibit, 18 please. It is 194. 19 BY MR. WEINBERG: 20 Q And is that the agreement? 21 A Yes, it is. 22 Q And attached to that agreement is an affidavit 23 that you prepared and filed at the time, is that right, the 24 last two pages? Is that correct, sir? 25 A Well, this had been prepared for me. I think they
226 1 prepared it at the time. 2 Q And is that your signature and is that your 3 affidavit? 4 A Yes. 5 Q And was it -- is it true -- was it true then, is 6 it true today, if you look at the affidavit, in the first 7 paragraph -- 8 THE COURT: Are you going to have him testify 9 about this affidavit? Then you need to give him 10 time to read it, unless he already knows what it 11 says. 12 BY MR. WEINBERG: 13 Q Okay, do you want to read it real quickly? 14 A Sure. 15 THE COURT: It is time to take a break so I'll 16 take a break. You can take all of the time you want 17 to read this for whatever reason it is they want you 18 to read it. And then when we come back you can ask 19 him questions about it. You will have read it. 20 MR. WEINBERG: And I don't have much more. 21 THE COURT: We'll be in recess for 15 or 20 22 minutes. 23 (WHEREUPON, a recess was taken from 2:51 p.m. 24 to 3:12 p.m.) 25 ______________________________________
227 1 THE COURT: Okay, you can continue. 2 BY MR. WEINBERG: 3 Q Mr. Franks, on that exhibit, your mutual release 4 agreement, the back two pages was that affidavit. Did you 5 have a chance to look at that affidavit? 6 A Yes, I did. 7 Q And that affidavit accurately reflects, does it 8 not, what occurred before you left the Church of 9 Scientology; that you, among others, had dealt with, in 10 essence, ridding the Church of some bad actors that had -- 11 that had infected, among other places, the Guardian's 12 Office? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And in this affidavit you, I take it, were 15 correctly swearing that as of the date of the affidavit, 16 which is December 5, 1986, that you no longer had any 17 conflict with the Church and that you were satisfied that 18 the Church's present management had taken a very responsible 19 and forthright position with respect to complaints made 20 about the alleged abuses in the Church, correct? 21 A Yes, I stated that I didn't have any conflict with 22 the Church. Yes. 23 Q All right. Now, back for a moment to the 24 introspection rundown -- 25 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor, I gave you a copy
228 1 but I didn't mark it. 2 THE COURT: Do you know what? That is right, 3 you did, you didn't mark it. This is not what I was 4 thinking of. This may be the complete introspection 5 rundown. 6 What I had seen that I think referred to what I 7 was looking for was a much smaller version, maybe a 8 two-pager or three-pager that specifically said 9 "Step 000, it had to do with PTS Type II, PTS Type 10 III." It isn't a big deal. Just somewhere I read 11 something -- 12 MR. WEINBERG: No, there is something like 13 that -- 14 THE COURT: Yes. 15 MR. WEINBERG: -- that explains what PTS Type 16 I, II and III is. 17 MR. LIEBERMAN: I am trying to remember what it 18 is. It may have been something I gave you, it may 19 have been Richard Rice's affidavit explaining some 20 of this. 21 THE COURT: No, there is something, and I 22 believe it has actually even been introduced here, 23 in here meaning here in this hearing, or certainly 24 it could have been in another hearing, but I can't 25 even remember now what we were referring to. But
229 1 whatever it was, I read it -- I couldn't be remotely 2 sure that I was accurate in my statement of it, 3 but -- 4 MR. WEINBERG: But this did have Step 0 and 00 5 in it. You saw that, right? 6 THE COURT: Yes, but that is not the document 7 that had in it what I was speaking of when -- 8 MR. WEINBERG: It's not. And I know what 9 you're talking about. And hopefully this weekend we 10 can locate it. 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 MR. WEINBERG: Because I remember the same 13 thing, reading it. 14 BY MR. WEINBERG: 15 Q I wanted to complete the record, however, with 16 you, Mr. Franks. 17 Prior to -- after this 1965 issue that Mr. Dandar 18 had showed you, which was that Search and Discovery, I think 19 is what it was, you do recall that Mr. Hubbard began to 20 release some issues that led up to the introspection rundown 21 in 1973 in which he for the first time set forth that there 22 were things that the Church -- that Scientology could do for 23 people that were psychotic? Do you -- 24 A That is what he said. Yes. 25 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. By the way, your Honor,
230 1 I'm going to offer into evidence, before I forget, 2 that release agreement with the affidavit, which is 3 194. 4 THE COURT: Okay. Did you -- did I have mine? 5 Is mine down there? Or did you take it back from 6 me? 7 THE CLERK: Yes, here it is. 8 THE COURT: Yes. All right. The introspection 9 rundown. I think you just took it back. 10 MR. WEINBERG: I did. I'm going to give it 11 back to you in a minute. 12 MR. DANDAR: Judge, may I approach? Just let 13 you look at Search and Discovery, and I think there 14 is what you're talking about. 15 MR. WEINBERG: Just for the record, is that in 16 what I just offered, 194? 17 THE COURT: Yes. 18 MR. DANDAR: That is the affidavit? 19 MR. WEINBERG: Right. 20 THE COURT: You can go ahead. I can kind of 21 read this and listen in. 22 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 23 BY MR. WEINBERG: 24 Q Let me show you three different things, one of 25 which will be the introspection rundown.
231 1 One is a 1970 issue entitled "Psychosis." 2 A Take this back? 3 Q Yes, just let it sit here. 4 The second is the 1973 issue which is the 5 introspection rundown. 6 And the third one is a -- it's a February 1974 7 issue which is additional actions on the -- let's see what I 8 just gave you -- okay, which is additional actions on the 9 introspection rundown. 10 And if you could take a look at those while I hand 11 them out. 12 THE COURT: Yes, this may be it. I don't want 13 to interrupt the witness, but under this Handling 14 Type III, this is under Search and Discovery, under 15 handling Type III, Paragraph 8, it says, "The task 16 with the Type III is not treatment as such. It is 17 to provide a relatively safe environment, and quiet 18 and rest and no treatment of a mental nature at all. 19 Giving him a quiet core with a motionless object in 20 it might do the trick if he's permitted to sit there 21 unmolested. Medical care of a very -- nature is 22 necessary as intravenous feeding and fortified 23 sleeping and quieting drugs may be necessary." This 24 is what I was referring to. 25 "Such persons are sometimes also physically ill
232 1 from an illness with a known medical cure." 2 And that was one -- one place that I had read 3 that. 4 Then I have seen it someplace else, again 5 indicating that -- 6 MR. WEINBERG: Right. 7 THE COURT: -- that there may be some folks 8 that need to, you know -- have a medical need that 9 needs to be treated. 10 MR. LIEBERMAN: Just to clarify, your Honor, as 11 Mr. Weinberg is now showing, that 1965 document you 12 are reading came, of course, eight years before that 13 preliminary step was then incorporated as part of 14 the introspection rundown in 1973. Just so you get 15 the continuity of it. 16 THE COURT: Right. 17 MR. WEINBERG: What I just handed up to you 18 were the three documents that I have -- 19 THE COURT: All right. 20 MR. WEINBERG: -- given to Mr. Franks. And 21 those we'll have as exhibit numbers for -- the first 22 one, which is psychosis, will be 195; for the 23 introspection rundown, which is the second one, is 24 196. And for the introspection rundown additional 25 actions, which is the 1974 issue, that will be 197.
233 1 THE COURT: Okay. 2 MR. WEINBERG: And for some reason if you want 3 the full issue which has all of the questions of the 4 introspection rundown, I'll give you this back. But 5 that was just the first two -- 6 THE COURT: I didn't -- 7 MR. WEINBERG: I figured you didn't want that. 8 THE COURT: No, because I don't exactly 9 understand that, and there is no reason why I would 10 have to. 11 MR. WEINBERG: Guess what? Neither do I, so 12 we're -- 13 THE COURT: It requires a class auditor 14 beyond -- no class at all is you and me. 15 MR. WEINBERG: Exactly right. 16 BY MR. WEINBERG: 17 Q Mr. Franks, I have shown you 195, 196 and 197. 18 And those are three which is psychosis, introspection 19 rundown, and then the 1974 additional, what do you call it, 20 additional actions in introspection rundown. 21 And you recognize those policies, don't you -- 22 A Yes. 23 Q -- or those issues? And, in fact, this is what 24 occurred while you were in the Church in the early '70s when 25 Mr. Hubbard made what he believed was -- was -- was a
234 1 startling discovery that Scientology could be used to help 2 people, particularly Scientologists, that had had psychotic 3 breaks. Correct? 4 A Yes. 5 Q All right. And if you -- and I guess you were 6 trained to deliver these services, correct? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And, in fact, delivered the introspection rundown 9 on several occasions? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And when you were delivering the introspection 12 rundown, it was your goal, in delivering the rundown, to 13 assist the Scientologists that you were doing the rundown on 14 to get through his psychotic state, is that right? 15 A Yes. 16 Q The idea was to help the person? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Right? Not to hurt the person. Correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q You weren't trying to hurt the person? 21 A No. 22 Q And you certainly weren't trying to kill the 23 person? 24 A No. 25 Q Now, if you look at the last one I gave you, the
235 1 introspection rundown, additional actions, which is the -- 2 which is the updated issue of February 20, 1974, do you see 3 that? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Under "Programming Data," which is the second 6 paragraph, the issue says, "In the case of a psycho, it is 7 necessary to tailor the introspection rundown steps to the 8 PC, instead of following it as a rote sequence, at the risk 9 of running unreading items on the PC." 10 Do you see that, sir? 11 A Mmm, yes, I think I do. "Programming Data"? The 12 second paragraph? 13 Q Let me just point it out to you. It would be 14 easier. I'm referring to this sentence right here 15 (indicating). 16 A All right. 17 Q Just the sentence down to "PC." 18 A Yes. 19 Q And that's -- and that was the case, the whole 20 idea is that every -- every case is different -- or every 21 person that has this Type III issue is different, and there 22 has -- there had to be, according to Mr. Hubbard, some 23 flexibility in, as he said here, tailoring the introspection 24 rundown in order to address that particular person? 25 A That's right.
236 1 Q It wasn't just taking all these questions that I 2 didn't put in front of you that are also in the issue and 3 asking them -- I mean, you needed to handle a particular 4 case in a particular way depending on that person. Right? 5 A Yes. 6 THE COURT: Is this a direction to the auditor, 7 however? I see in the second -- the paragraph under 8 that "Programming Data," it's talking about the 9 auditors' TR1 and metering must be such," so -- then 10 it goes on from there. But aren't they talking 11 about the auditing? 12 BY MR. WEINBERG: 13 Q This is all direction to the auditor, right? I 14 mean, the whole idea here is that if you can get the person 15 through the initial steps, 0 and 00, get them rested, get 16 them calmed down, what was the word you used? 17 A Destimulated. 18 Q Destimulated, so if you can get the person 19 destimulated, calmed down and rested, then the person could 20 get out of the immediate break, then you can go through this 21 auditing program to help them prevent ever going back to a 22 break. That was the whole idea, right? 23 A Yes, it is the CS's call to when that point has 24 arrived. And I think that is the limbo state that Lisa 25 McPherson was in. And I say limbo state because the
237 1 decision had to be made by the senior CS and the senior CS 2 Int, so that was far away, that wasn't on the scene, as to 3 when Lisa could be released from isolation and be ready to 4 be audited. 5 Q And the auditing would be the second part of the 6 introspection rundown? 7 A Yes. 8 Q The rest, relaxation, isolation is the first part 9 of the introspection rundown, right? 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q Now, I haven't seen any -- and if you can point it 12 out, please point it out to me -- are there any -- can you 13 point to any references I just showed you in the 14 introspection rundown, any references which talk about 15 reporting to Int, to International, or petitioning to 16 International, before doing an introspection rundown? 17 A No, sir. I don't think it would be on these 18 bulletins. 19 Q I mean, don't these bulletins that you are looking 20 at say that the person that is responsible, the person in 21 charge of the case, is the CS? That is the person in 22 charge, right? 23 A Mmm, I'm not trying to think up a good answer, I'm 24 trying to think up the right answer. 25 Q I'll give you as much time as possible.
238 1 A The responsibility of this on Ethics' line is not 2 covered in these policy orders. L. Ron Hubbard here is just 3 addressing the rundown itself and how it should be run by 4 the auditor and the CS. And in that respect you're right, 5 it is the CS's responsibility. 6 Q So that if a person -- one of the people -- 7 THE COURT: Were you done with your answer? 8 I'm sorry, were you done? 9 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. 10 THE COURT: All right, continue on then. 11 BY MR. WEINBERG: 12 Q So in those situations where you did the 13 introspection rundown, were you acting as an auditor, or as 14 a CS? 15 A I was the auditor. Hubbard was the CS. 16 Q Okay. In those situations where -- well, when an 17 introspection rundown is going on, whether it's at the 18 isolation stage or the auditing stage, am I correct that 19 the -- that the person that is responsible for that -- for 20 what happens to the individual who is either in isolation or 21 is getting the auditing and introspection rundown is the CS, 22 not a Guardian Office member, not an OSA member, but the CS, 23 that is who is responsible for delivering those services, 24 correct? 25 A That is correct. Yes.
239 1 Q Now, let me show you -- can I show you one more 2 issue, please. 3 MR. WEINBERG: We'll just mark this as the next 4 exhibit, then I'll put them all in evidence once 5 I -- 6 This will be 198. 7 THE COURT: I don't know what these three you 8 just placed into evidence are as far as -- mine 9 aren't marked, I just suddenly realized. 10 MR. WEINBERG: Let me review that with you. 11 THE COURT: The one that says "Psychosis," what 12 number is that? 13 THE CLERK: 195. 14 MR. WEINBERG: That is 195. Then the 15 introspection rundown is 196. That is the 1973 16 issue. 17 THE COURT: So 197? 18 MR. WEINBERG: That is 197. So if I could just 19 approach you for a second? 20 THE COURT: They both say '74. This one -- 21 (A discussion was held off the record.) 22 MR. WEINBERG: This is the first one so that -- 23 that is -- 24 THE COURT: 195 is this one? 25 MR. WEINBERG: Then this is 196 right here.
240 1 MR. DANDAR: Could you announce what 196 is? 2 MR. WEINBERG: That is the introspection 3 rundown. 4 THE COURT: Technical breakthrough of 1973, the 5 introspection rundown. 6 Next one says "Introspection RD, Additional 7 Actions." 8 MR. WEINBERG: That is the next one. 9 THE COURT: That is 197. 10 MR. WEINBERG: Then what I just showed you, the 11 "Ivory Tower," is 198. 12 THE COURT: Thank you. 13 BY MR. WEINBERG: 14 Q I have just shown you the "Ivory Tower," which is 15 198. Are you familiar with that? 16 A Yes, I am. 17 Q And is the essence of this bulletin that it is the 18 CS that has the ultimate say as to a PC? 19 A Yes. 20 MR. WEINBERG: So I offer into evidence 195, 21 196, 197 and 198. 22 THE COURT: Any objection? 23 MR. DANDAR: No objection. 24 THE COURT: It will be received. 25
241 1 BY MR. WEINBERG: 2 Q Now, quickly, Mr. Dandar -- and also Judge 3 Schaeffer -- asked you about end cycle or end of cycle. Do 4 you remember that? 5 A Yes, I do. 6 Q The word "cycle" is used a lot in Scientology. 7 Correct? 8 A That is correct. 9 Q It refers to typically some activity, part of a 10 cycle of action? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And a cycle of action is one that -- which starts, 13 changes, then stops? 14 A Yes. That is right. 15 Q So that you might -- when you were in charge, you 16 might have assigned some task to one of the people that were 17 under you, and that task might well be referred to as a 18 cycle. Correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And at some point when that task is done, it would 21 be appropriate to refer to that as the end of the cycle or 22 end cycle. Correct? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And you have referred to end cycle like that 25 before, haven't you?
242 1 A Earlier in the testimony? 2 Q No. No. No. When you were a Scientologist? 3 A Yes. 4 Q You used end cycle in that context? 5 A Yes. 6 Q The end of a task? 7 MR. WEINBERG: Just one second. If I could 8 approach, then I'll get a clean copy of this because 9 this has my notes on it. 10 THE COURT: All right. 11 BY MR. WEINBERG: 12 Q I'm going to show you a December 12, 1981 letter 13 that you wrote to some guy named John. Do you see that? 14 A Yeah. 15 Q Would that be a letter that you wrote? 16 A It appears to be so. Yeah. 17 Q If you could just look at the first sentence and 18 read that. 19 A I think it is the third. "This will pretty much 20 acknowledge an end cycle on any rumors or news that might 21 have been generated this week." 22 Q When you used the word "end cycle" in that 23 sentence, you were not referring to somebody dying, were 24 you? 25 A No, I was referring to a completion, you know,
243 1 this should complete discussion on this. 2 Q All right. 3 THE COURT: Remember, he didn't use the term 4 "end cycle." Mr. Prince did. He used the term 5 "drop the body" when he was describing it. 6 MR. WEINBERG: Right. That was why I wanted to 7 ask him about that, because -- 8 THE COURT: That was clear to all of us, I 9 think. I was just simply suggesting to him when I 10 used end cycle, the end cycle being used there was 11 being used there -- being used there meaning 12 Mr. Prince's affidavit, similarly to mean what he 13 was referring to as drop the body. 14 MR. WEINBERG: I guess what I was saying in 15 light of all this talk about end cycle, I wanted to 16 show Mr. Franks how he had used that term in 17 Scientology, and actually I found a clean copy of 18 the letter -- that is okay. 19 MR. DANDAR: Did you mark that as an exhibit? 20 MR. WEINBERG: Do you think it is necessary? 21 THE COURT: No, but I don't know why it was 22 necessary to show it to him, because he said -- he 23 answered your question, yes, that is how he uses it. 24 MR. WEINBERG: All right. 25
244 1 BY MR. WEINBERG: 2 Q Now, let's talk about your involvement with regard 3 to being down here. 4 When was the first time that you can recall you 5 had any communication with Ken Dandar? 6 THE COURT: Tell me why we need to go here? 7 You tell me why we need to do this. Why do we here 8 have to get into that? 9 He's here. He's here because I ordered him to 10 be here, in essence. Now, you know, how -- what 11 happened over in Tampa, that might be important if 12 you have a lawsuit, file your lawsuit, you take 13 discovery -- 14 MR. WEINBERG: It has to do with who he talked 15 to and what he's been told about the case. 16 THE COURT: Okay. 17 MR. WEINBERG: All right? Because he has been 18 asked these -- 19 THE COURT: I'll allow that. But I don't -- I 20 don't want to go through all of the bus ride, plane 21 ride, who was with him, what have you. 22 MR. WEINBERG: Trust me, I told you where I 23 need to go later this afternoon, so I'm trying to 24 get done. 25
245 1 BY MR. WEINBERG: 2 Q Do you recall approximately when and how you first 3 heard from anyone that had anything to do with this lawsuit? 4 A Yes. It was in the Cheesecake Factory, I believe. 5 We were sitting down. And this guy comes up with this 6 subpoena. 7 Q Do you know who the guy was? 8 A You know, I really don't. A tall man. I -- I was 9 just more -- Mmm, I was pretty upset about the subpoena. I 10 wasn't really looking at him. 11 Q Okay. And do you remember when this was, what 12 date? 13 A I believe it was in May. I mean, it wasn't very 14 far -- long ago. 15 Q And were you aware, prior to the subpoena, getting 16 the subpoena in May, were you aware that you had been 17 identified on the plaintiff's witness list as an expert in 18 Scientology prior to that time? 19 A You know, now that I think about it, maybe from 20 Mr. Drescher. I don't know how it came up. He sent me this 21 thing, this letter. This is the first letter I got with 22 this agreement attached to it. And he said, "Are you 23 aware --" blah-blah-blah. 24 And I said, "No, I'm not aware of this." 25 He mentioned Mr. Dandar's name.
246 1 Q So prior to Mr. Drescher's letter, you did not 2 know that you had been identified as a witness in this case? 3 A No. 4 Q And you didn't have any agreement to testify in 5 this case prior to that time as an expert or whatever? 6 A No. 7 Q Okay. And then independently, you just happened 8 to be down in Tampa on some business? 9 A Yes. I come down here routinely, as I said. 10 Q And was it Ms. Greenway that -- 11 A Set me up? 12 Q Excuse me? 13 A I felt sort of set up. 14 Q So you -- so Ms. Greenway -- you were meeting 15 Ms. Greenway in the mall, is that what it was, or at a 16 restaurant? 17 A Yes, we were going to have lunch together. 18 Q She didn't tell you you were going to be 19 subpoenaed in the case? 20 A No, sir. 21 Q Once you were subpoenaed, did Ms. Greenway tell 22 you what was going on, what the case was about? 23 A No. I got in my car pretty quickly, I didn't 24 really discuss it, because I didn't know what her connection 25 was with this. In fact, that still isn't quite clear to me.
247 1 I got in the car and -- and I got directions and came over 2 to Ken's office and asked Mr. Dandar, "What is this all 3 about?" 4 And that is when he sat down and told me. 5 Q He told you what? 6 A Mmm, I think he showed me a complaint. 7 Q Did he tell you why he was subpoenaing you? 8 A Well, yes. I mean, that was my question. 9 Q Well, what was the answer? 10 A Mmm, it was a bunch of words. I was asking him, 11 say, "Like I haven't been in this for 21, 22 years. What do 12 I know? I don't know anything about this woman." 13 And he said, "I called you --" he mentioned Jesse 14 Prince and Hana -- 15 Q Is that Hana Whitfield? 16 A Hana Whitfield, yes. And said that they had been 17 his expert witnesses. And for reasons that I'm not quite 18 sure of, they're no longer his expert witnesses. And -- 19 Mmm -- he was subpoenaing me as his expert witness. 20 Q Did he tell you to say what? 21 A Mmm, say what about what? 22 Q Well, did you ask him, "Well, what is it I'm 23 supposed to testify about?" 24 A Yes, I certainly did. And he said, "Well --" I 25 said, "What do I know? I don't know anything about this. I
248 1 don't know anything about what Scientologists are doing 2 these days. And I don't -- I had seen some things on the 3 Internet regarding Lisa McPherson, but believe me, I just 4 had seen them in passing. I never really bothered to get 5 into them." 6 And he said, "You are going to be testifying on 7 Scientology for what you knew up to when you left." 8 Q Did you explain to him that you had left 20-odd 9 years ago? 10 A Yes. I just said, I told him it was 21 or 22 11 years I'd been out. 12 Q Did he tell you what, in particular, he wanted you 13 to testify about? 14 A I don't know what you're asking me. 15 THE COURT: I don't, either. And it really 16 doesn't have anything to do with this hearing. It 17 might for a trial, and it might be interesting to a 18 jury. But I don't care about it. 19 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 20 BY MR. WEINBERG: 21 Q Was anybody else there other than you and 22 Mr. Dandar? 23 A When I walked into his office, no, it was just me 24 and Ken. 25 Q I mean, had you met with Mr. Prince?
249 1 A Yeah. He came up the other day. I came down here 2 a day early because, you know, I was testifying, you know. 3 I want to know what this is all about. 4 Q What did you meet with Mr. Prince about? This is 5 just the other day, right? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What did you talk to him about? 8 A I don't know. We exchanged war stories. It 9 wasn't really a hell of a lot about this case. 10 Q What did you talk about, your testimony? 11 THE COURT: Counsel, you are absolutely done. 12 He testified different from Mr. Prince, so if he did 13 talk to him, apparently they went off in different 14 directions. That is it. I don't want to hear any 15 more about it. Save it. 16 MR. WEINBERG: I will. 17 BY MR. WEINBERG: 18 Q Do you remember sending a letter on May 23rd to 19 Mr. Drescher? 20 A Yes. Yes. 21 MR. WEINBERG: Can I approach, your Honor? 22 THE COURT: You may. I swear all this stuff, I 23 think, is in the record. 24 MR. WEINBERG: We handed it to you. It's not 25 in the record.
250 1 THE COURT: All right. I suppose at some point 2 what you are going to be asking me to do is rule 3 this man is biased against you, so he must -- 4 MR. WEINBERG: We are really not. 5 THE COURT: If it would have been perfectly 6 acceptable testimony for your side, you turn it 7 around and make it derogatory to your side. That is 8 all I can assume you are doing. 9 MR. WEINBERG: I haven't been trying to do 10 that. 11 THE COURT: That is what you are doing, 12 impeachment, all this sort of stuff. We don't need 13 it. 14 MR. WEINBERG: This corroborates what he said 15 today on the stand. I just want him to identify it. 16 It's in the record. And I'm not going to go on. 17 THE COURT: You take your direction here from 18 Mr. Shaw? Because you know what, this is the kind 19 of stuff -- I see you being handed stuff by Mr. Shaw 20 and then you proceed to ask questions about it. 21 MR. WEINBERG: No, it's -- no, it's in my 22 notes. It is about the last thing I'm going to ask 23 him. And I don't take my directions from Mr. Shaw. 24 THE COURT: Well, you didn't have it up there 25 with you, apparently. I saw him get up and give you
251 1 something else after I said I didn't want to hear 2 anything more about it. 3 MR. WEINBERG: Actually, it is here. He handed 4 me another copy. This is my copy, marked up. 5 THE COURT: All right. 6 MR. WEINBERG: Is there an exhibit number on 7 that, ma'am? 8 THE CLERK: 199. 9 THE COURT: Is this not in the record, Madam 10 Clerk? 11 THE CLERK: No, Judge, not as an exhibit. 12 THE COURT: Is it in the record for something 13 else? 14 THE CLERK: Yes, it is one of those they handed 15 me to -- 16 THE COURT: One of the ones you have in my 17 file? 18 THE CLERK: Yes. 19 BY MR. WEINBERG: 20 Q Is that your letter, sir? 21 A Yes. 22 MR. WEINBERG: I offer that into evidence, your 23 Honor. 24 THE COURT: What number is it? 25 THE CLERK: 199.
252 1 MR. WEINBERG: I believe those are all of my 2 questions. 3 Those are all my questions. 4 THE COURT: All right. Redirect? 5 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q Mr. Franks, Exhibit -- Defendant's 197, the 8 "Introspection Rundown Additional Steps," you still have 9 that in front of you? 10 A Yes. 11 Q The first paragraph under "Programming Data" or 12 "Data," the last two sentences, could you read that. 13 A The auditors' TR1 and metering must be such that 14 he can make the meter -- 15 THE COURT: No. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q No. The first paragraph. 18 A I'm sorry. "If the PC --" that one? 19 Q Yes, "In the case of a psycho." 20 A "If the PC was found to --" 21 THE COURT: Where are you having him read? 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Right here. Right here. 24 A Oh. 25 THE COURT: Why don't you tell him to read the
253 1 last two sentences in the first paragraph? Maybe 2 the last two. 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q Read the paragraph. 5 THE COURT: There you go. 6 A "In the case of a psycho, it is necessary to 7 tailor the introspection rundown steps to the PC, instead of 8 following it as a rote sequence, at the risk of running 9 unreading items on the PC. On any PC this is deadly. In a 10 psycho it is pure dynamite." 11 BY MR. DANDAR: 12 Q Now, you were the in the Church of Scientology 13 when this was written in February 20, 1974, correct? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Now, Mr. Hubbard is warning people who run 16 introspection rundowns that if it is just followed rote, 17 without tailoring it to the person, it could be deadly? 18 A Yes. What he means is that a meter reads per 19 their technology on items that are of interest to the PC. 20 So, essentially, if you are doing it on things that might be 21 totally relevant to you but not -- you know, the PC isn't 22 interested in them, it's just going to drive them up the 23 wall. 24 Q Now, you were with Mr. Hubbard when he developed 25 the introspection rundown, correct?
254 1 A Mmm, I don't know about developed it. But I -- it 2 was in the -- Mmm -- the evolutionary stage. He'd written 3 down the introspection rundown by the time I came back to 4 Flag in '74. 5 Q How many people did he test it on before he 6 published it? 7 A I don't believe anybody. He -- Mmm -- because I 8 know the guy who got the first introspection rundown was a 9 guy named Alan Buchanan. And he was talking to me one day 10 about the fact he felt wretchedly horrible, he had a 11 headache and was throwing up at the end of this rundown, and 12 he said, "I was the research PC." 13 Q Was he psychotic PTS Type III? 14 A He wasn't declared as such. 15 Q Okay. Were you -- I think you mentioned you were 16 also on the introspection rundown? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And were you a PTS Type III psychotic? 19 A I was never declared as such, no. 20 Q You mentioned before that psychotic in Scientology 21 cannot only mean mentally disturbed, but it can mean 22 somebody that wants to leave? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And are you aware of the introspection rundown 25 being run on somebody who wants to leave?
255 1 A Absolutely. That -- my experience in auditing it 2 was on people who wanted to leave. 3 Q And how does the introspection rundown work, in 4 your experience, on someone who wants to leave? 5 A In my experience, it's terrible. It's a terrible 6 situation because -- I mean, Hubbard has it right here, it's 7 like the person -- he just wants to go, he's not interested 8 in staying. The longer you keep them in isolation, the more 9 angry he gets or she gets. 10 Q Have you ever seen, in your experience, the 11 introspection rundown causing someone who wasn't in a 12 psycho -- wasn't psychotic, mentally unstable, but becoming 13 mentally unstable during the introspection rundown? 14 A I have seen people get worse in it, yes. 15 Q The people who have gotten worse, did you ever see 16 them get better? 17 A No. In both cases -- there were two cases that I 18 audited -- there were a total of four, but there were two, 19 the person got so angry and upset and violent that -- and we 20 were in Morocco at the time, that they were just offloaded 21 with an escort and brought back -- they were Americans -- 22 brought back to the States. 23 Q Did you ever offload someone in Morocco who was 24 not escorted? 25 A Yes.
256 1 Q What was wrong with that person? 2 A He was attacking Hubbard and the Church -- or the 3 Sea Org and Flag and threatening to blow our cover. And 4 this person was put out in the middle of the country and his 5 passport was stolen, destroyed. 6 Q So he was put out in the country without a 7 passport? 8 A Right. 9 Q But he wasn't psychotic or ill? 10 THE COURT: Therefore, it would seem as if that 11 would have no bearing on anything now or even at the 12 trial level. 13 MR. DANDAR: That is why -- I just wanted to 14 clarify. I will move on. 15 THE COURT: I'm sure you didn't want to put it 16 out there to prejudice me against the Church. 17 MR. DANDAR: No, Judge. I thought it was 18 something else. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Now, you were actually involved -- I think 21 Mr. Weinberg asked you about this but I want to follow up -- 22 you were actually involved in setting up the Church of 23 Scientology International, weren't you? Wasn't that set up 24 before you left? 25 A It was in the process of being set up.
257 1 Q And as the COB ED Int, you would know that was in 2 the process of being set up? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Mr. Weinberg asked you about you and Mr. Miscavige 5 closing down the Guardian's Office, and he asked you if the 6 wrongdoers were removed, do you remember that? 7 A Yes, I recall him saying that, yes. 8 Q And really, Mr. Franks, isn't it true the ones who 9 were removed were simply the scapegoats to protect 10 Mr. Hubbard from being prosecuted? 11 A Yes. 12 THE COURT: I'm not interested in that. 13 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Now, your settlement that Mr. Weinberg asked you 16 about -- 17 A Pardon me, my what? 18 Q Your $50,000 payment -- 19 A Yes? 20 Q -- you had no claim to settle, correct? 21 A That is correct. 22 Q But you signed a release? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And who prepared this affidavit that is on the 25 back of the release -- or at least today is attached to the
258 1 release? 2 A I don't know who prepared it. Michael Flynn was 3 the one who gave it to me. 4 Q So do you know if the Church of Scientology typed 5 this up for everyone to sign? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Or for you to sign? 8 A Yes. That is what Michael said. 9 Q And was this affidavit a condition of you getting 10 paid $50,000 as part of this negotiation? 11 A Yes. It was my understanding that in return for 12 my signature, I would get $50,000. 13 Q The restructuring of the Church of Scientology was 14 in the process while you were there and continued after you 15 left. Correct? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Now, the introspection rundown, did it take the 18 place of Search and Discovery? I mean, did it supersede it 19 so Search and Discovery is no longer viable? 20 A I guess -- Search and Discovery, to my 21 understanding, was never canceled. The way that Search and 22 Discovery was supposed to be done was the person who was 23 Type III, you let him destimulate, calm down, then you do an 24 S & D on them, Search and Discovery, and then they become -- 25 you know, then you can start -- they start getting better.
259 1 But you have to get them down to not being 2 psychotic. 3 Q The fact that Search and Discovery is part of the 4 course pack known as the PTS/SP course today, '95, does that 5 help you to understand that it is still viable today? 6 A In the Church's opinion? 7 Q Yes. 8 A Yes. Yes. 9 Q Now, "end cycle" also means many things. And one 10 of those things is "drop the body"? 11 A Yes, it could mean that. 12 Q And do you have any agreement with anyone to 13 testify in this case? I mean, do we have a written 14 agreement? 15 A You and me? 16 Q Yes. 17 A No. 18 Q And if Lisa McPherson was at the Ft. Harrison 19 Hotel, contrary to the Flag Base orders that we previously 20 talked about, then she was at the hotel against the written 21 policy of the Church of Scientology? 22 A Yes. That is correct. I think -- 23 Q When Mr. Weinberg says that the senior -- or the 24 CS, the case supervisor, is the one in charge of 25 administering the introspection rundown --
260 1 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. I didn't say that. 2 He said that when I asked him the question. 3 THE WITNESS: No. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q When Mr. Weinberg asked you a question about who 6 administers the introspection rundown, you said the case 7 supervisor. Is that a correct answer? 8 A No, that isn't what was asked me. What was asked 9 to me was is the bulletin -- he had me read the bulletin or 10 read over the sections that he had circumscribed here -- is 11 it the CS who makes the decisions on it according to this 12 bulletin? And I said yes. 13 But the problem is there is a conflict because 14 there are other policy letters about troublesome sources. 15 Q And in the case of Lisa McPherson, was there 16 more -- in your opinion, more than one policy being followed 17 in reference to her stay at the Scientology facility? 18 MR. WEINBERG: Just for the record, I object. 19 THE COURT: Yes. 20 A I would have to say yes. That is why this OSA GO 21 guy was at Morton Plant Hospital. It's not in the rundown. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q So the rundown is written for someone who is not a 24 PR flap? 25 THE COURT: Well, how could that be? I thought
261 1 all PTSs were PR flaps. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q Are all PTS Type III PR flaps? 4 THE COURT: Potential -- potential PR flaps, I 5 should say. 6 A Only if they take their clothes off in the middle 7 of the street. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q And were seen by EMS, police, fire/rescue, ER 10 people? 11 A Right. 12 MR. DANDAR: That is all I have. 13 MR. WEINBERG: I have no further questions. 14 THE COURT: All right. I have one. Just out 15 of curiosity, since you are here, since you may be 16 somewhat unbiased, what is it that, in your 17 experience, one should do when somebody has 18 apparently been a potential PR flap, such as running 19 down the street with their clothes off, and they've 20 gone to the hospital, and the hospital decided they 21 can be released, the Church is here to take them, at 22 the Church's request, to take them? 23 If that person were to have gone back to the 24 hotel, presumably having been released, as capable 25 of making that decision at that moment, and they
262 1 went back to the hotel, then all of a sudden things 2 started going awry and the person started -- I saw 3 in one of these bulletins what I would consider 4 manic, very hyper, what is it that they could do? 5 They don't -- Scientologists don't believe in 6 drugs -- psychotropic drugs -- something that would 7 put somebody out, true? 8 THE WITNESS: That's right. 9 THE COURT: So you have somebody that is kind 10 of going off the walls and they are banging around. 11 What could they do at that point in time? They 12 can't very well take that person and just put them 13 on a plane and send them home. 14 THE WITNESS: Well, one thing they could do 15 would be -- and I saw a letter from David Miscavige 16 in that pile of stuff that I read in Mr. Dandar's 17 office -- where he suggested to have an in-house 18 doctor, someone who you can get a valid medical 19 opinion. Scientologists aren't against medicine; 20 they are against psychiatrists. 21 THE COURT: Is it possible that a case 22 supervisor in that situation, and being a believer, 23 could believe that trying Step 000, getting 24 permission from on high or wherever it is they get 25 permission, could have thought, let's give this a
263 1 try and see if this works? 2 THE WITNESS: The doctor group? 3 THE COURT: No, I'm talking about at that point 4 in time, apparently there was nothing physically 5 wrong with her, apparently. Lisa didn't appear to 6 be physically sick at that point in time. 7 THE WITNESS: Right. 8 THE COURT: I don't think either doctor said 9 that. So this person was being rather off the wall, 10 presumably quite psychotic now, a full psychotic 11 session. Would they try -- would you have tried, if 12 you'd been asked permission, that introspection 13 rundown, Step 000, to see what happened or what 14 would happen if you tried it? 15 Or, you know, you were in charge. What would 16 you have recommended? 17 THE WITNESS: Mmm, in my opinion, Hubbard says 18 over and over again, and he says it -- he implies it 19 here, he said anybody who is psychotic has a medical 20 problem on top of everything else, and that is the 21 first thing that has to be determined is that there 22 is a medical problem. 23 So I think the first thing that should have 24 been done, looking at it from the Scientology point 25 of view, they should have gotten her to the doctor
264 1 and have her have a full physical. 2 THE COURT: Or have the doctor come there? 3 THE WITNESS: Or have the doctor come there. 4 That would have been -- just -- you know, just using 5 their bulletins, if they had followed through on 6 their bulletins, they would have given her a 7 complete physical. 8 I may be wrong, but in the stuff I read from 9 the emergency room, she didn't get that. They just 10 looked at what was -- you know, they gave her her 11 blood pressure and a few other things. 12 THE COURT: Let me ask you another question. 13 Assuming that a case supervisor doesn't follow the 14 tech or the guidelines or whatever it is that 15 they're supposed to follow and they do something 16 different, such as keep the PTS 3 at the hotel, try 17 introspection rundown without getting permission, 18 and that person does as poorly as apparently Lisa 19 McPherson did and ultimately died, would that person 20 be made to answer or -- 21 THE WITNESS: Or sent to Alaska. 22 THE COURT: In other words, that -- they would 23 be very unhappy with that person? 24 THE WITNESS: That's right. 25 THE COURT: That is what happened in this case,
265 1 didn't it? 2 THE WITNESS: I believe so. 3 THE COURT: Mr. Kartuzinski was severely -- I 4 don't know if it is demoted, I don't know what the 5 word is -- he was made a cleaning man or something? 6 THE WITNESS: Well, that is what happens. 7 THE COURT: So apparently he did something 8 wrong? 9 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10 THE COURT: If he would have followed 11 everything he was supposed to do and reported the 12 way he was to report and called the doc the way he 13 was supposed to do, and she died anyway, why, then 14 supposedly he would still be a case supervisor -- or 15 maybe he would have been promoted. But he must have 16 done something he wasn't supposed to do, right? 17 THE WITNESS: Apparently, right. 18 THE COURT: And -- 19 THE WITNESS: Apparently not just because he 20 became a janitor, but because of what happened to 21 Lisa. 22 THE COURT: Well, and -- and if -- he must have 23 done something -- there must have been somebody 24 thought he did something wrong to occasion that. 25 THE WITNESS: Absolutely.
266 1 THE COURT: I mean, he could help it, if -- he 2 couldn't help it, if it just happened, you wouldn't 3 think he was just made a janitor? 4 THE WITNESS: That is right. 5 THE COURT: So if he was made a janitor, he 6 must not have followed the tech and they felt he was 7 somewhat responsible, I think. 8 THE WITNESS: Yes. 9 THE COURT: And it could be not responsible for 10 her death, but responsible for not following the 11 procedure? 12 THE WITNESS: Absolutely. 13 THE COURT: Let me ask you a further question. 14 Could part of that be not following orders as far as 15 letting Int or David Miscavige or whoever that might 16 be know what was going on? 17 THE WITNESS: In my opinion, it would be hard 18 to believe that Int didn't know about this. 19 THE COURT: Okay. That would certainly be a 20 serious violation, I take it, if that was -- 21 THE WITNESS: Yes, it would be very serious. 22 THE COURT: Because he never did do an 23 auditing, he couldn't tell somebody how to audit, he 24 couldn't supervise what the auditor was doing, that 25 never happened, right?
267 1 THE WITNESS: You mean Hubbard? 2 THE COURT: No, I mean Mr. Kartuzinski. 3 THE WITNESS: Yes? 4 THE COURT: And Mr. Kartuzinski being the case 5 supervisor, he himself was supposed to be sort of in 6 isolation, right? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes. 8 THE COURT: He's not supposed to deal with the 9 auditor and he wasn't because there was -- 10 MR. DANDAR: Auditor. 11 THE WITNESS: He's in the Ivory Tower. 12 THE COURT: He's in the Ivory Tower, right. 13 So, consequently, he did something serious, he was 14 made a washer man or janitor or -- or a nothing? 15 THE WITNESS: Right. 16 THE COURT: I mean, case supervisor is kind of 17 a senior position, I take it? 18 THE WITNESS: Yes. 19 THE COURT: Well, he must have done something 20 pretty seriously wrong? 21 THE WITNESS: Clearly. That is why they busted 22 him. 23 THE COURT: Do you know what it is, from 24 looking? I mean, could you tell us? Or would you 25 just be guessing?
268 1 THE WITNESS: It's the lack of medical 2 treatment. I mean, there was no doctor. Some 3 doctor should have come and just said, "Hey, stop 4 this, stop what is going on, this is way past -- 5 even if the technology works, we're way past that 6 point. She has to go and get rehydrated and get 7 medically in the condition where she can be 8 audited." And there was nobody to intervene. 9 My guess is because of this danger condition, 10 they were being bypassed. 11 THE COURT: And you are assuming that based on 12 understanding of what happened as far as dehydration 13 based on Mr. Dandar's experts and what you have 14 read? 15 THE WITNESS: What I have read, and also the 16 fact OSA was at Morton Plant Hospital, which means 17 they had already bypassed. 18 This is a PR flap, and we have to prevent this 19 PR flap. We have to contain it. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 THE WITNESS: Does that answer that? 22 THE COURT: Yes. That gives me some additional 23 insight. See, I can never get one side or the other 24 to even look at the other side, so it is never very 25 helpful to ask them.
269 1 MR. DANDAR: Could I ask two questions? 2 THE COURT: I don't know. What are they? 3 MR. DANDAR: Is this the letter -- I'm going to 4 show him. 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q Is this the letter from Mr. Miscavige to Bernie 7 McCabe that you just referred to? 8 MR. WEINBERG: I object. 9 A Yes. 10 MR. DANDAR: All right. I would like to make a 11 copy of this and introduce this as an exhibit. 12 THE COURT: What is it? 13 MR. DANDAR: It's a letter from Mr. Miscavige 14 to Bernie McCabe while the criminal charges were 15 pending, taking responsibility for Lisa McPherson's 16 death and for making a proposal on how to end the 17 criminal charges. 18 MR. WEINBERG: What is the relevance of that? 19 THE COURT: What is the relevance? 20 MR. DANDAR: Well, he mentioned this is part of 21 the items he looked at. 22 THE COURT: Well, I would hope that 23 Mr. Miscavige would rethink and maybe make a 24 suggestion and maybe have a policy in place that in 25 any further introspection rundown somebody like this
270 1 in Lisa's situation, they would call and have a 2 doctor come. I would hope he would have written 3 such a letter like that. If you -- 4 MR. DANDAR: If you don't think it is relevant. 5 THE COURT: I don't. 6 MR. DANDAR: One question I want to ask. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q When an introspection rundown is planned, does the 9 case supervisor do a program for that? 10 A Yes. 11 THE COURT: When a what, Mr. Dandar? 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q When an introspection rundown is planned and 14 implemented, is there a program written for that? 15 A The program to be put in the PC folder. 16 Q Did you see a -- 17 MR. WEINBERG: That is one question. I object. 18 He rested -- I mean, we ended these questions 19 before -- 20 THE COURT: Then object. 21 MR. WEINBERG: I object. 22 THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained. But you 23 know what he can do now? He can recall him. 24 MR. WEINBERG: Well, then let him recall him. 25 MR. DANDAR: Just one question.
271 1 THE COURT: You have to recall him. You have 2 to ask my permission. 3 MR. DANDAR: May I have your permission to 4 re-call him for one question? 5 THE COURT: You may. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q Did you see a program for the introspection 8 rundown on Lisa McPherson from the time she was there from 9 November 18 of '95 to December 5, '95? 10 A No, sir. That is somebody obviously missing from 11 the folder. It would have to be there per Scientology 12 procedure. 13 RECROSS-EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. WEINBERG: 15 Q Just so the record is clear, that means that 16 Mr. Dandar showed you her PC folder? Lisa McPherson's PC 17 folder? 18 A Yes. I think that is what I saw. Yes. 19 THE COURT: Anything further? 20 MR. WEINBERG: No. 21 MR. DANDAR: No, your Honor. 22 THE COURT: May he be excused? 23 MR. DANDAR: Yes, your Honor. 24 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. You may step down. 25 You may be excused. And you may assume, as
272 1 Mr. Dandar indicated to you, that I insisted that 2 you honor your subpoena and come to court. So if 3 you are ever asked, as far as what I am telling you, 4 you were ordered by me to come to court today. 5 THE WITNESS: Thank you. I appreciate that. 6 (WHEREUPON, the witness is excused.) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
273 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF FLORIDA ) 4 COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) 5 I, LYNNE J. IDE, Registered Merit Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically 6 report the proceedings herein, and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. 7 I further certify that I am not a relative, 8 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' 9 attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. 10 11 DATED this 13th day of June, 2002. 12 13 14 ______________________________ LYNNE J. IDE, RMR 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25