Kanabay Court Reporters; Serving West Central Florida
                              Pinellas (727)821-3320 Hillsborough (813)224-9500
                            Tampa Airport Marriott Deposition Suite (813)224-9500

 3                      CASE NO. 00-5682-CI-11
                DELL LIEBREICH, as Personal
            7   Representative of the ESTATE OF
                LISA McPHERSON,
 9             Plaintiff,
10   vs.                                     VOLUME 1
                and DAVID HOUGHTON, D.D.S.,
17   PROCEEDINGS:        Defendants' Omnibus Motion for
                                    Terminating Sanctions and Other Relief.
                CONTENTS:           Testimony of Robert Vaughn Young.
                DATE:               June 17, 2002, morning session.
                PLACE:              Courtroom B, Judicial Building
           21                       St. Petersburg, Florida.
22   BEFORE:             Honorable Susan F. Schaeffer,
                                    Circuit Judge.
                REPORTED BY:        Donna M. Kanabay, RMR, CRR,
           24                       Deputy Official Court Reporter,
                                    Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida.

2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 MR. KENNAN G. DANDAR DANDAR & DANDAR 3 5340 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 201 Tampa, FL 33602 4 Attorneys for Plaintiff. 5 MR. LUKE CHARLES LIROT LUKE CHARLES LIROT, PA 6 112 N East Street, Street, Suite B Tampa, FL 33602-4108 7 Attorney for Plaintiff 8 MR. LEE FUGATE and MR. MORRIS WEINBERG, JR. 9 ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER 101 E. Kennedy Blvd, Suite 1200 10 Tampa, FL 33602-5147 Attorneys for Church of Scientology Flag Service 11 Organization. 12 MR. ERIC M. LIEBERMAN RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD 13 740 Broadway at Astor Place New York, NY 10003-9518 14 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
3 1 INDEX TO PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS 2 PAGE LINE 3 ROBERT VAUGHN YOUNG 21 10 DIRECT Mr. Dandar 21 13 4 Recess 42 23 Recess 73 9 5 Recess 114 21 Reporter's Certificate 115 1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
4 1 (The proceedings resumed at 9:07 a.m.) 2 THE COURT: Apparently they just turned the air 3 conditioning on so if you all think it's rather 4 stuffy, it is. 5 Okay. Let's review where we are. I told Sue 6 to check this out for me this morning. 7 I guess this noise will just be a continuous 8 problem from now on. We're going to work this week 9 Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. Thursday and Friday, 10 no. I'm leaving Thursday afternoon, and I've 11 decided I need to get my office, since I'm going to 12 be gone for a couple of weeks, in order. So I'm 13 going to take all of Thursday. 14 Unless we should be within one hour of 15 finishing the whole hearing, in which case I'll 16 finish. But assuming we're not, we're not working 17 Thursday and Friday. 18 Then the following week and the following week, 19 you all are free to do whatever you need to do. I 20 presume you're going to be taking depositions and 21 whatever. But or whatever -- I'm not going to be 22 here. One of those weeks I'm going to be in Naples, 23 the balance of the first week, and then I'm taking 24 vacation the second week, okay? So I'm out. 25 Now, I'm going to assume that I have senior
5 1 judge coverage for the following week. If I don't, 2 I'm going to ask for it. I should, because I should 3 be in trial. So I should have it, but things change 4 whenever you're not in trial. So I'm going to 5 assume that we're going to come back and go Monday 6 through Friday of that week, unless I find out from 7 Sue that I've got some hearing set. 8 MR. FUGATE: Is that July 8th? 9 THE COURT: I don't know. I know it's not the 10 week of July 4th 'cause that week I'm off. 11 So I'm going to assume that we're going to be 12 going all that week, and I'm going to hope that 13 we're going to finish that week. So that's as far 14 as I want to go right now. 15 Obviously, my plans are to go until we finish. 16 So if we're not finished, we'll just keep going. 17 So with that, let's hope with eight more days, 18 that that's enough to finish this off. We ought to 19 hope that's more than enough. 20 I have decided that the closing arguments are 21 going to be essential. I mean, in other words, 22 there's no way in the world that I can remember 23 everything that's been said. Even though I have the 24 transcripts and I appreciate it, and I'll certainly 25 go from your briefs or your closings to those
6 1 transcripts to look. I just need you all to pull it 2 together from your perspective sides so that I don't 3 have to think like both sides and then decide what 4 I'm going to do. So I can tell already that this is 5 not something that I'm going to be able to just rule 6 on when you're done. I mean, it's going to require 7 some thought and attention, and so I need you all to 8 write a closing. 9 This is your burden, yours meaning the church, 10 so this'll be one of those where you will go first. 11 You ought to be working on this. In other 12 words, I don't know -- I mean, granted, you don't 13 have it all, but you've put your case on, so you 14 know what it looks like from your perspective and 15 what you think you've proven, you know. 16 So you know, we -- I need to rule on this as 17 quickly as possible if I'm going to ask you all for 18 closings in writing. I'm not going to rule until I 19 get them, but I don't want to delay this thing where 20 I might normally, where I have no time limits. So 21 what I'm going to suggest is that when this is up, 22 maybe you can give me something within 10 days, and 23 that you all can give me something then within five 24 days. And if you want to respond, I'm going to give 25 you like three days. In other words, we're just
7 1 going to have to make some escalated -- 2 MR. LIEBERMAN: Are those real days or working 3 days? 4 THE COURT: I don't know. We'll look at a 5 calendar when I see when we're done. But for now, 6 just kind of get it in your mind that you all ought 7 not to wait; you ought to be working on this. 8 You had said to me, Mr. Dandar, that you had 9 planned to respond to their -- I presume -- their -- 10 not their little short motion, 'cause I think you 11 did respond to that, but the long -- the memo with 12 the amendments. I thought you said one time that 13 you were working night and day trying to get a 14 response in. 15 MR. DANDAR: I'm still working night and day. 16 I'm on 30 pages now. 17 THE COURT: Well, what is it? I mean, what's 18 this responding to? 19 MR. DANDAR: It's a response to the omnibus 20 motion for termination -- 21 THE COURT: Okay. 22 MR. DANDAR: -- sanctions and motion to 23 disqualify. 24 THE COURT: Okay. And you filed a short paper, 25 already, right?
8 1 MR. DANDAR: Did I? 2 MR. LIROT: Yes. 3 MR. DANDAR: I did. 4 THE COURT: So that's why I said they had a 5 short presentation. And I presume your short one is 6 in response sort of to that. And then they had the 7 long one, and I'm assuming you -- 8 But I mean, you need to get that done. 9 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 10 THE COURT: And you also have got to get done 11 their response to their summary judgment. 12 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 13 THE COURT: That all goes hand in hand. So 14 you're going to have to file your affidavits or -- 15 You ought to really have that done -- 16 MR. DANDAR: Yes. I will. 17 THE COURT: -- okay? 18 MR. WEINBERG: So you don't contemplate any 19 oral argument as far as the closing -- 20 THE COURT: I really don't. 21 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 22 THE COURT: Because I can pretty well know 23 where you all are going. I mean, I can tell from 24 the presentations. I think it's really a matter of 25 proof. What do you think you've proved? Show me
9 1 how you think you've proved it. From the other 2 perspective, what you don't think they've proved. 3 And then, you know, you've given me some law, but 4 now put it in -- 5 MR. WEINBERG: Mix it together, so when the 6 evidence is over, it's over, and then we're going to 7 submit our final argument. 8 THE COURT: Yes. So I don't expect an oral 9 presentation. 10 Even on the -- even on the idea as to whether 11 or not I should consider the opinions or whatever we 12 want to call them of the ex-Scientologists regarding 13 their -- their interpretation of the bulletins and 14 this type of thing, that ought to be addressed. In 15 other words, it ought to be addressed -- it can be 16 addressed briefly, that if -- if I don't consider 17 them, well, then X. If I do, then you better have 18 that in your proof. 'Cause I don't know -- I mean, 19 I've got to decide that too. 20 MR. LIEBERMAN: Let me ask a logistical 21 question as to how you prefer -- for example, on 22 this question of admissibility and rule 404 and rule 23 406, we've given you a memo to that. Do you want me 24 to merely refer to that or incorporate all the 25 arguments in --
10 1 THE COURT: I would just refer to it. 2 MR. LIEBERMAN: Okay. 3 THE COURT: In other words, you've given me a 4 memo on -- on why you don't think -- I think you've 5 laid it out in several points -- 6 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. 7 THE COURT: -- why you don't think -- 8 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. 9 THE COURT: -- it's admissible at all. I think 10 if I were you, however, if I were making a closing 11 argument, I would state "Without it, this is what 12 you have." 13 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. 14 THE COURT: "And with it, this is what you 15 have." Because I have to make some decision on it. 16 MR. LIEBERMAN: Exactly. 17 THE COURT: Because I'm not sure -- and 18 obviously, I'm not sure here -- there may be a 19 difference, for example, in a -- in a decision and 20 on what I would hear here on a claim of fraud on the 21 court, false pleadings, what a lawyer, for example, 22 knew or -- 23 In other words, a lawyer is entitled to rely on 24 a consultant -- 25 MR. LIEBERMAN: Right.
11 1 THE COURT: -- even if the consultant is giving 2 him his or her opinions on things, whether or not 3 they're admissible, in my mind. In other words, I 4 don't have to sit, when I'm hearing from an 5 investigator or consultant, and say, "Gee, I'm not 6 sure if that's admissible under the First 7 Amendment." So there may be a difference in the 8 decisions as to what I will consider relevant to 9 this hearing versus what I might allow at a trial, 10 for example. 11 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes, I understand. 12 THE COURT: So if I were you, on this hearing, 13 I will make an argument with it and without it. 14 MR. LIEBERMAN: Right. I understand. 15 THE COURT: And then I think that if you all -- 16 Oh, this is terrible. This is awful. 17 If you don't prevail on your motion, that I 18 would think that you would at some point in time 19 want to reargue that, as to how much if any of that 20 is admissible before a jury. 21 That's what is awkward. It's awkward maybe on 22 your summary judgment. 23 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. I think -- 24 I'm sorry. 25 I think under summary judgment, you can only
12 1 consider admissible evidence. 2 THE COURT: Right. So you might -- you might 3 want to argue on the summary judgment versus on the 4 motion itself. And maybe -- there may be a 5 difference. I don't know. But in my mind, I would 6 think that, as a lawyer, I would be entitled to rely 7 on certain things without having to worry about 8 admissibility when I decided to file a complaint. 9 So you might want to discuss it both ways. 10 MR. LIEBERMAN: Yes. And I'll discuss that 11 issue too. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. LIEBERMAN: While I think you're entitled 14 to rely on something more, I think you still have to 15 have, as we -- you know, argued to you, you have to 16 have some concrete evidence. 17 THE COURT: Well, you -- you -- make your 18 argument. 19 MR. LIEBERMAN: Right. 20 THE COURT: As far as your First Amendment, as 21 such, you know, if you don't prevail on that in this 22 hearing, it doesn't mean you might not necessarily 23 prevail on the summary judgment or trial or 24 something like that. 25 MR. LIEBERMAN: I understand.
13 1 THE COURT: I don't think you will either, but 2 I can see some distinctions rolling around this -- 3 this addled brain of mine. 4 MR. WEINBERG: But the break will give us an 5 opportunity to really work on this, try to start 6 pulling together this closing argument, I think. 7 And there is obviously a lot that's gone on in 8 this -- 9 THE COURT: I don't know what you all want to 10 use it for. Right now I've got a trial date set. 11 Somebody said they needed to take 10 depositions. I 12 would assume that two weeks would be a good time to 13 take some depositions. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. Those will take a little 15 while to schedule because they're all out-of-staters 16 and they're experts. 17 THE COURT: Well, you know, I would assume that 18 if I needed to take them, I'd be giving you all some 19 dates or asking you for some dates now, so -- 20 But I mean, I'm not saying that you should take 21 two weeks and work on this written closing argument. 22 I'm saying you need to -- both sides need to presume 23 this case is set for trial until I say otherwise. 24 It's going. So you ought to get prepared for it. 25 Whatever it is you need to do to make that
14 1 preparation, that's what you ought to do, okay? 2 All right. You may call your next witness. 3 MR. WEINBERG: I had one thing that I wanted to 4 put in. 5 THE COURT: Okay. 6 MR. WEINBERG: I already talked to Mr. Lirot 7 about this. 8 Plaintiff's Exhibit 79 was one of these 9 Google -- one of these Internet e-mail things with a 10 bunch of affidavits attached. It didn't have the 11 executed affidavits but had the -- you know, had 12 the -- from the Internet affidavit and the affidavit 13 from a woman named Vicki Aznaran. And we had the 14 executed affidavit, so we wanted to put in the 15 actual affidavits to complement Plaintiff's Exhibit 16 79, which had -- I don't know whether they were 17 accurate or not -- but had on the Internet the three 18 affidavits. 19 So that's what -- 20 THE COURT: Any objection? 21 MR. DANDAR: Well, I'd like to compare the 22 two -- 23 THE COURT: Sure. 24 MR. DANDAR: -- three affidavits before I would 25 say yes or no, but I'm going to assume that they're
15 1 the same affidavits. 2 MR. WEINBERG: Yeah. They are. 3 THE COURT: All right. 4 MR. WEINBERG: That's fine. 5 THE COURT: Then I'm going to let them in. You 6 take your copies and you make your comparison at 7 night or whenever you want to do that. And if you 8 have a problem, you raise it with me, okay? 9 MR. DANDAR: Thank you. 10 THE COURT: Just like Ms. Brooks. I mean, I 11 think that those things went in. It was assumed 12 they were the same. She wanted to see them. So 13 they went in. Presumably she's looked at them, and 14 they must be the same because they haven't asked to 15 remove them. 16 MR. DANDAR: I gave her the signed, notarized 17 copies -- 18 THE COURT: Right. 19 MR. DANDAR: -- which I haven't substituted 20 yet, and I need to do that this week. 21 THE COURT: Okay. 22 MR. WEINBERG: So this will be Defense Exhibit 23 200-A, B and C, which are three affidavits -- three 24 declarations of Vicki Aznaran, all executed on the 25 same date, May 19th, 1994. And they are the three
16 1 affidavits that are referred to in the plaintiff's 2 exhibit, which is the Bob Minton posting. 3 THE COURT: And what number was that? 4 MR. WEINBERG: Okay, the -- the plaintiff's 5 exhibit was 79. 6 And here is a copy for your review, your Honor. 7 THE COURT: Thank you. 8 MR. DANDAR: I think they ought to file with 9 the court the settlement agreement that resulted in 10 these three affidavits. 11 THE COURT: Well, do you have it? 12 MR. DANDAR: No. It's confidential. But she 13 completely changed her testimony from her prior 14 declaration after she settled with the Church of 15 Scientology. 16 THE COURT: Well, if it's something you want -- 17 you know -- I mean, I can't demand that they file 18 things, you know. So if you want it, make a request 19 for it. 20 MR. DANDAR: All right. 21 THE COURT: See what they have to say. 22 So what did you tell me -- Number 79? 23 MR. WEINBERG: Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 79 24 was the exhibit, was a Bob Minton posting -- 25 THE COURT: And it had all three of those in
17 1 it? 2 MR. WEINBERG: It had all three of those in it, 3 among other things. 4 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Dandar, you may call 5 your next witness. 6 MR. DANDAR: Plaintiff calls Robert Vaughn 7 Young. 8 MR. WEINBERG: While Mr. Young is making his 9 way, for the record, we have the same objection that 10 we had with -- I assume it's a standing objection. 11 I just want the record -- 12 THE COURT: Just a second. 13 (The witness was sworn.) 14 MR. WEINBERG: We have the same objection to 15 Mr. Young's testimony as we did to Mr. Franks' 16 testimony, as more specifically referred to in the 17 memo that we filed on 404 and 406. And in addition, 18 in this case, Mr. Young has already given trial 19 testimony. And we -- we have fully explored the 20 areas that he said he had any expertise in, none of 21 which we believe had anything to do with this 22 hearing. 23 So those are our objections. 24 I'll try to -- if I have a standing objection, 25 I will not -- I'll try not to reassert that and try
18 1 to just limit my objections to things like hearsay 2 and stuff -- 3 THE COURT: What are the objections that you 4 have a standing on? You said sections 40 -- 5 MR. WEINBERG: 404, which is pattern and 6 practice -- 7 THE COURT: Right. 8 MR. WEINBERG: -- 406, which is similar -- 9 which is -- which is routine. And generally -- you 10 know, generally as to relevance in this case. 11 Because Mr. Young left -- you'll find out, left the 12 church in 1989, and has no personal knowledge -- 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 MR. WEINBERG: -- as to any of this 15 information. 16 THE COURT: As to the trial testimony that has 17 already been taken, you don't need to go over all of 18 it. Just what's -- would be relevant to this 19 hearing. 20 MR. WEINBERG: And of course, the First 21 Amendment argument. 22 THE COURT: Right. 23 MR. WEINBERG: We would argue that. 24 THE COURT: So your objections would be 25 preserved, and you need only really object to the --
19 1 anything additional. 2 MR. WEINBERG: I understand. 3 THE COURT: I'm going to -- I'm going to have 4 to go out and see if the chief judge is here, 5 because we can't have court like that. 6 MR. WEINBERG: We can't hear anything back 7 here. 8 MR. DANDAR: It's hard to hear. 9 Is the microphone on? 10 MR. WEINBERG: Even if it's on, it's really 11 hard back here to hear it. 12 THE COURT: I'm going to take a minute here to 13 see if we're going to have this all day, and what 14 the deal is. 15 (There was a pause in the proceedings; 16 Judge Schaeffer left the courtroom and returned.) 17 THE COURT: The chief says they had said they 18 would not do jackhammers during the day. He sees 19 that they're not paying any attention to him. He 20 has just called to get Carl Baron on the phone. So 21 we'll see who -- we'll see what happens. 22 But he agrees that that really is very 23 difficult to work with that, and he thought he had 24 an understanding with the county that they would not 25 use the jackhammers.
20 1 You could not do a trial. I mean, I would not 2 want to do a trial with that. 3 MR. DANDAR: I'm sitting here -- 4 THE COURT: Well, I know. Just like when you 5 think you're going to express something and it 6 starts, you're going to lose your train. 7 So we'll try to work through it and see what 8 happens. 9 _______________________________________ 10 ROBERT VAUGHN YOUNG, 11 the witness herein, being first duly sworn, was examined 12 and testified as follows: 13 DIRECT EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Please state your full name. 16 A Robert Vaughn Young. 17 Q And spell your last name. 18 A Y-o-u-n-g. 19 Q What is your date of birth? 20 A April 21st, 1938. 21 Q Can you give the court a brief background of your 22 formal education and work history before joining with the 23 Church of Scientology? 24 A I was -- my early education was in southern 25 California. I went to Long Beach State College, Orange
21 1 Coast College, and then in 1961 went to what was then called 2 San Francisco State College, in 1961, and received my 3 bachelor of arts from them, I believe in 1963. 4 Prior to that, I was in the United States Marine 5 Corps, from 1956 to 1959, and served with the Third Marine 6 Division overseas. 7 After San Francisco State and the BA, I worked for 8 a year with the California Democratic Central Committee, 9 working professional -- professional and political 10 campaigns. And after that, then I went back and started my 11 graduate studies. 12 And in 1967 -- I'm sorry. Earlier than that, 13 something like '65, I went to the University of California 14 Davis where I was teaching philosophy, introduction to 15 philosophy, and working on my PhD. And I dropped out of the 16 PhD program in 1969 when I entered Scientology. 17 Q Okay. And could you give the court a brief 18 background -- 19 THE COURT: Did you ever get a master's or did 20 you bypass the master's and work strictly for the 21 PhD? 22 THE WITNESS: It was one of those 23 bypass-the-master's and work straight on to PhD. 24 THE COURT: Okay. So you have some of your 25 course work, but you don't have your PhD, is that --
22 1 THE WITNESS: I was about a year and a half 2 away from -- 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 THE WITNESS: I was two years at University of 5 California Davis. 6 THE COURT: And I'm sorry. Your BS -- or BA 7 was what? 8 THE WITNESS: Philosophy. 9 THE COURT: Thank you. 10 THE WITNESS: And my PhD was being done in 11 philosophy but with an emphasis in certain fields: 12 Philosophy of behavior, philosophy of mind. 13 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q And give the court a brief background of your 16 Scientology experience. 17 A I began studying Scientology in 1968 with some 18 books when I was introduced to it by a gentleman who passed 19 through Davis. And he came to Davis in the summer of 1969 20 to start what was then called a franchise, which was a unit 21 that could offer -- 22 THE WITNESS: That noise really is bad. 23 THE COURT: It really is. 24 Do you want to wait or do you want to just see 25 if they're going to turn it off or what?
23 1 MR. DANDAR: I know a couple of bailiffs who 2 could get them to turn it off real quick. 3 MR. WEINBERG: Or if we could get his 4 microphone on or -- 5 THE WITNESS: Oh, that's much better. Makes a 6 difference if you turn it on. 7 THE COURT: It does. It does indeed. 8 Where is my bailiff? 9 MR. WEINBERG: He was here right before you 10 walked in, so -- 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 A I was up to 1969. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q All right. What did you do -- 15 You said a franchise of the Church of Scientology? 16 A They were called franchises then, which was a -- a 17 unit section that somebody could set up to offer 18 introductory courses. And I went on staff there after my 19 initial training, and was at staff at the Davis franchise 20 from 1969 until '71. 21 THE COURT: Excuse me, Mr. Young. Pardon me 22 for interrupting. It's awfully early in the day for 23 me to interrupt. 24 But you said you began study in 1968. Does 25 that mean you joined in 1968 or just began studying
24 1 the religion and joined later? 2 THE WITNESS: I would have considered myself a 3 Scientologist from the time I started working with 4 the books and started -- 5 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q All right. And then after 1971, from Davis 8 franchise, what did you do? 9 A Well, because of the work that I was doing in 10 Davis, I started to do some public relations work as well as 11 some other staff positions there, meeting the media. I was 12 also running a program in Vacaville Prison, which is a 13 medical facility that's just west of Sacramento -- happens 14 to be the one where Charlie Manson was kept for a long 15 time -- that I would go in every -- you know, every week and 16 hold a class in Scientology. 17 Because of this -- this work, I was recognized, 18 what I was doing, and I was asked to join Department 20 at 19 the San Francisco organization in 1971. And so I joined 20 Department 20 in 1971, and worked at public relations there, 21 which handled public relations media/government for all of 22 northern California, and did that until 1973. 23 In 1973, I was promoted to the national offices in 24 Los Angeles, and worked there in Department 20, in the 25 public relations bureau. And during that time, I served as
25 1 everything from the national spokesman, being quoted in the 2 New York Times; I was a speaker at national fund-raising 3 events; I testified before a senate subcommittee in 1975 as 4 a representative of the Scientology organization; I was on 5 national TV. And I -- I worked on that up through 1982, at 6 which point then I was promoted again and moved into a 7 different unit. 8 Q In 1975, did you obtain letters of recognition as 9 a tax exempt or -- 10 Well, tell us what happened -- 11 In 1975, you received the letters from the State 12 Department, the Air Force and the Department of Labor. What 13 did that involve? 14 A I was directly responsible in a good part of -- I 15 had meetings with representatives of the U.S. State 16 Department, U.S. Air Force and the Department of Labor with 17 regard to their recognition, according to their regulations 18 in those agencies, if you want to call the Air Force an 19 agency; recognition of Scientology as a religion. And when 20 they gave the recognition, the letters were addressed to the 21 Church of Scientology -- were addressed to me. 22 I just failed -- I have -- I have a copy of one or 23 two of them that I just failed to bring with me, still. 24 But those were -- those were addressed to me to 25 just simply show that I was directly involved in some of the
26 1 highest echelons at the time. 2 Q Now, what happened after 1975 in your history? 3 A Well, in 1977, three Scientology offices, one in 4 Washington, D.C. and two in Los Angeles, were the target of 5 what was then the largest raid in the history of the FBI, 6 and they were targeting the very program that I was working 7 on at the time, but they were hitting the intelligence 8 bureaus. And that was in -- I believe in July, '77. 9 And I became the national spokesman on that day. 10 I held a press conference in Los Angeles, and I was the 11 national spokesman for the churches in the United States for 12 months. So if the media had questions about the raid and 13 the indictments that came down -- L. Ron Hubbard's wife, 14 Mary Sue, and 10 others, executives all the way down to 15 low-level operatives, were indicted, and documents were 16 coming out. So I was the person that the media would call 17 up for the interpretation on this. 18 After -- after the raid, we were pretty much 19 decimated as to our functions, and so it was a struggle 20 for -- for a number of years after that, to just sort of 21 keep things together. 22 Q What was the name of Department 20 at that time? 23 A At that time, it was the called the Guardian's 24 Office. And then in 1981, we renamed it the Office of 25 Special Affairs.
27 1 Q Was there any difference in function between 2 Department 20, known as the Guardian's Office, and 3 Department 20, known as the Office of Special Affairs? 4 A No. I was there for the change-over. The 5 policies remained the same, the directives remained the 6 same. People who were indicted were asked to step down and 7 leave, but that was something like four years after the 8 raid. 9 THE COURT: I'm sorry. What was the year when 10 the office was changed or the name was changed? 11 THE WITNESS: In 1981 was when we were doing 12 the change-over. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 Boy, it's peaceful when it's not going, isn't 15 it? 16 MR. FUGATE: Only when there are no questions. 17 THE COURT: Yeah. 18 A Should I continue? 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q Just a minute. 21 Let me show you what I have marked as Plaintiff's 22 Exhibit 98. Do you recognize this? 23 A This appears to be a portion of a policy letter 24 establishing the Department of Special Affairs and 25 Department 20. This is prior to it being called the
28 1 Guardian's Office. It went through basically three phases. 2 The Guardian's Office was actually created in 1966. And so 3 this is -- this is what the area was being called prior to 4 that. So it went through different name changes. 5 Q Well, when it was called The Guardian's Office, 6 and then when it -- the name was changed to the Office of 7 Special Affairs, as this document says, "The Department of 8 Special Affairs not only helps the org by protecting it; it 9 also creates and maintains excellent public relations with 10 the community and media; it carries out public relations 11 programs and actions that create an acceptance and goodwill 12 for the org and Scientology as a whole." Was that the 13 function of the Guardian's Office and then later the Office 14 of Special Affairs? 15 A One of the functions. It expanded quite a bit 16 beyond that, because other bureaus came about in 1966: The 17 finance bureau, the intelligence bureau and the legal bureau 18 and the public relations bureau were the first four. And 19 they had wide-ranging powers given in 1966, as to what could 20 be done as far as the handling of money, the handling of 21 organizations. So this -- this was the start of it. But it 22 expanded quite a bit in 1966. 23 And I'm sorry, I don't -- I don't remember the 24 date of this particular policy. 25 Q The bottom of this exhibit says that, "The final
29 1 product is handled situations which result in the total 2 acceptance of Scientology and its founder throughout the 3 area." Was that also the final product of the Guardian's 4 Office and later The Office of Special Affairs? 5 A Well, it also got developed, but you could say 6 that that would be pretty much the nexus -- I mean, the crux 7 of it, following through on it. 8 MR. DANDAR: Like to move Exhibit 98 into 9 evidence. 10 THE COURT: Any objection? 11 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. Because I don't know what 12 it is. I mean, even Mr. Young says he doesn't -- 13 he's not quite sure what it was. He thinks it 14 predates 1966. But they don't have any heading on 15 this. I don't know where it came from. It's not 16 that there's anything controversial about it; it's 17 just that I don't know what it is. I don't think 18 it's been authenticated. 19 THE COURT: I have a little bit of a problem 20 with that too. 21 Are you -- do you know whether or not this is 22 part of a bulletin or part of -- or are you just 23 guessing that it looks like it? 24 THE WITNESS: No. I -- I can recognize it, 25 ma'am. Because this material was always kept in
30 1 packs of materials that we had to study and restudy. 2 And you get to certain -- like recognizing music or 3 portions of a book, you get to recognize, "Oh, yes. 4 That's it." But I -- I can't attest to the year 5 because I don't know the specific year, but I'm sure 6 that -- 7 THE COURT: But it predated the Guardian -- 8 when it was called the Guardian's Office. 9 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. This predates 1966. 10 THE COURT: I'm going to let it in as -- as -- 11 for whatever it is; basically just -- I think it's 12 being let in for the purpose that the Guardian's 13 Office, Office of Special Affairs, whatever it 14 was -- department -- has gone through some name 15 changes. And as far as -- I guess this only deals 16 with public relations, that part of it that it 17 apparently has -- sort of been consistently in this 18 department. 19 MR. WEINBERG: That's why I'm saying -- I'm not 20 kicking and screaming; it's just -- 21 THE COURT: Right. 22 MR. WEINBERG: -- I don't know what it -- I 23 don't know where it came from. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q That document, that one page, that was -- when you
31 1 were in the Office of Special Affairs -- that document was 2 still part of the pack that people in the office had to 3 study and know, correct? 4 A This document that you just gave me? 5 Q Yes. 6 A Yes. That would have been there. 7 Because whenever these are written, even though 8 they're -- they may be superseded by further developments, 9 all of this material had to be retained, because you -- it 10 also gave you the history of it. So even though they might 11 change the function of a department, you learned that by 12 reading the second one. 13 It's sort of like, you know, court cases get 14 modified, courts modify cases, and so attorneys learn the 15 history. 16 Well, you have to know this. And so even though 17 it could be superseded by -- by a change, the material was 18 kept there so you could study it. 19 MR. DANDAR: Okay. And Judge, what I'm going 20 to offer is something that we only had one page to 21 the last time, and this is the complete document. 22 THE COURT: What was it? Was it already 23 introduced? 24 MR. DANDAR: No. Because -- I don't think it 25 was, because it was only the first page.
32 1 THE COURT: Okay. 2 MR. DANDAR: This is now 99. 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 99. Can you 5 identify that? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What is it? 8 A This is a policy letter written by L. Ron Hubbard. 9 THE COURT: What does the HCO mean? I know I 10 should know, but I can't think. 11 THE WITNESS: Hubbard Communications Office. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 THE WITNESS: It was a standard prefix to 14 policy letters. 15 THE COURT: Right. I've seen it before. I 16 just couldn't remember what it stood for. Hubbard 17 Communication -- 18 THE WITNESS: Office. 19 And that's right across the top, ma'am. 20 THE COURT: Oh, thank you. Maybe that's why I 21 didn't have to ask that stupid question before. 22 THE WITNESS: Even though the policy letters 23 came out from, say, different locations, that was 24 always kept there as designating the type of 25 directive or issue that it was. And so they just
33 1 became known as HCO PLs, HCO policy letters, policy 2 letters, or PLs; various ways to call them. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q And these were found in the books that are printed 6 by the Church of Scientology, correct? This particular one? 7 A Yes. These are now kept in bound volumes. 8 Q Okay. All right. 9 A This -- this particular one in 1965 is considered 10 probably the most important policy letter in Scientology, 11 because it was by the directive of Hubbard and -- and has 12 been kept there -- that it is to be at the front and the top 13 and the first item in every pack of materials that a 14 Scientologist studies, no matter what. 15 There's something called a hat, which is simply 16 the function that you have, the job you have in the 17 organization. And every hat has a pack of materials that 18 you study. Every course you go on has a pack of materials 19 that you study. And that they're required to put this 20 policy letter as the very first policy letter in there, 21 every single pack of material. 22 In the bound volumes that you have, what they call 23 volume zero, it is also the first policy. So this is the 24 policy letter that is probably read more times by 25 Scientologists than any other policy, and it's just hammered
34 1 in constantly as the most important one. Because -- and you 2 can see the title. It's called Keeping Scientology Working. 3 MR. DANDAR: Okay. Now, let's have this one 4 marked as 100. 5 THE COURT: Are you introducing this? 6 MR. DANDAR: Yes. I'm moving it into evidence. 7 THE COURT: Any objection? 8 MR. WEINBERG: No. 9 THE COURT: It'll be received. 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 100. Can you 12 identify this? 13 A Yes. This is another policy letter called 14 Technical Degrades. This is the second policy that always 15 follows the first one. And again, in every hat pack, just 16 about, that you can find, this one will follow the first 17 one. 18 And basically, what these things combined, will 19 hammer to say, is there's only one way to do Scientology, 20 and that's by following the policies and directives of L. 21 Ron Hubbard. Everything that he says in the first one that 22 you showed me, everything that was ever written or said, 23 continues to be true. You cannot cancel it. You can't say 24 it's old. You can't say it's not used. And it's basically 25 to tell Scientologists that there's no other way to do
35 1 Scientology than by the book. And the book is L. Ron 2 Hubbard, everything that he wrote. 3 MR. DANDAR: I'd like to move 100 into 4 evidence. 5 THE COURT: Any objection? 6 MR. WEINBERG: No, your Honor. 7 THE COURT: It'll be received. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Is there a policy written by Mr. Hubbard that 10 says, "I'd rather have you dead than incapable"? 11 A That's in the first one that you gave me, Keeping 12 Scientology Working, Plaintiff's Exhibit 99. And that 13 statement would be found on the last page that, in this 14 particular exhibit, has at the bottom page 13, because it 15 was copied out of one of the volumes. And at the upper 16 portion of page 13, at the bottom of the thick paragraph, if 17 I could just give it the context, he says, "The proper 18 attitude is, you're here so you're a Scientologist. Now 19 we're going to make you an expert auditor no matter what 20 happens. We'd rather have you dead than incapable." 21 THE COURT: Tell me where you were reading from 22 again. 23 THE WITNESS: It's at the last page of the 24 exhibit, ma'am. 25 THE COURT: The last page. Okay.
36 1 THE WITNESS: Go to the top of the page, that 2 long paragraph at the top. 3 THE COURT: Yes. 4 THE WITNESS: And you go to the last few lines 5 of that long paragraph. 6 THE COURT: I see. Okay. Thank you. 7 THE WITNESS: He says, "We'd rather have you 8 dead than incapable." 9 THE COURT: Thank you. 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q In your experience in the Church of Scientology, 12 is that last statement by Mr. Hubbard something that's 13 subject to interpretation? 14 A Nothing is subject to interpretation that 15 Mr. Hubbard wrote. And that's what this policy letter is 16 about. You don't make interpretations, you don't give your 17 opinions; you simply study it. You, what they say, 18 duplicate it. 19 And this policy letter, as I say, is crucial. 20 It's -- you -- it's right there on the second page. You 21 hammer this in and you hammer anything else out of 22 existence. 23 So there's no interpretation, ever, of policy. 24 And that's according to this policy. 25 Q When he writes "rather dead than incapable," what
37 1 does he mean by dead? 2 MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me, your Honor. 3 Mr. Young just said -- my objection is -- nothing is 4 subject to interpretation, and now Mr. Dandar is 5 asking him to interpret what Mr. Hubbard meant. I 6 object. 7 THE COURT: Yeah. It would seem like that is 8 carrying things to a bit of extreme. You're asking 9 him what did Mr. Hubbard mean. Maybe if he talked 10 to Mr. Hubbard he can tell us, but I don't know that 11 he can tell us what Mr. Hubbard meant. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q Okay. What was your understanding, within the 14 organization, of what that meant? 15 MR. WEINBERG: I have the same objection. I 16 mean, he stands here -- 17 THE COURT: Well, I agree. I mean, I think the 18 word speaks for itself. I know what the word "dead" 19 means. So unless -- 20 MR. DANDAR: All right. 21 THE COURT: -- there is some other 22 interpretation put on it by somebody in the church, 23 I know what it means. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q So do you know if there was ever any
38 1 interpretation put on that phrase by the Church of 2 Scientology in your 20 years plus? 3 A No. It was -- it was always in the context that 4 what it means is the technology, the organization, are -- 5 are senior and the most important, so that you have to do 6 everything you can to keep it pure. And besides, we -- we 7 believe that we were reincarnated, and we had lived millions 8 of times, so the idea that you could keep going through 9 other lives was dependent upon your ability to follow the 10 technology. 11 Q Okay. Now, you said you left the San Francisco 12 org as -- 13 THE COURT: Don't -- don't misunderstand me, by 14 the way, when I said I know what the word "dead" 15 means. 16 MR. WEINBERG: I understand. 17 THE COURT: I didn't think that meant that, you 18 know, somehow this meant that -- that if somebody 19 was incapable, somebody was going to shoot them or 20 something like that. 21 MR. WEINBERG: And don't misunderstand my not 22 getting up and screaming for the same reason. I 23 don't -- I think it's patently obvious -- 24 THE COURT: Right. 25 MR. WEINBERG: -- I just object to the process.
39 1 THE COURT: Well, you know, I got to thinking 2 about something that somebody had said once last 3 week or whatever. You know, those folks who study 4 the Christian religion know that the Bible has gone 5 through, certainly, while the words don't change, 6 certainly, what it says, does. And -- anyway, I 7 don't know that I'd have some objection to somebody 8 coming in and saying they thought what it meant. 9 But in any event, you've registered your 10 objection and we'll move on. 11 As I said, I just don't want you to think -- 12 when I saw that, what I said then, that if somebody 13 was incapable -- which I know what that means too -- 14 that somebody was going to line up a bunch of folks 15 and shoot them or anything like that. That is not 16 what I meant when I said I know what the word means. 17 MR. WEINBERG: I understand. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q Tell us -- you talked about you were in the Los 20 Angeles org in 1977 during the FBI raid? 21 A Yes. 22 Q All right. And what -- you were still with 23 Department 20 as the public relations person? 24 A Well, not the republic relations person. I was in 25 the public relations bureau.
40 1 Q But you were the -- 2 A There was somebody in charge of the public 3 relations bureau. So if you were to ever say the PR 4 person -- 5 It's sort of a sloppy phrase, let me put it that 6 way. 7 Q All right. You were -- you were designated as the 8 national spokesperson? 9 A Yes. That was a function that I took on on that 10 day of the raid. 11 We were hit at about 6 a.m. because the D.C. 12 offices had -- the raid had to be coordinated to D.C. And 13 they were hit, I think, at 9. And so I arrived at work at 14 9. The raid was under way. And I was giving my press 15 conference I think about four hours later, down at the Los 16 Angeles Press Club. 17 So they said, "Hey, Young, you're going to hold a 18 press conference. You're going to be the national 19 spokesperson." So it's just an assignment that I took. But 20 it lasted for several months. 21 Q Were you in the Los Angeles org when Mr. Bill 22 Franks was the COB ED Int for life? 23 A I was in Los Angeles but I don't know the exact 24 tenure of his office. I was in a different position while 25 he was ED. I was in two different positions while he was --
41 1 THE COURT: Bailiff, come here a minute, would 2 you? 3 Keep going. We're just -- 4 MR. WEINBERG: I imagine a well-drafted order 5 from the court might have some impact. 6 THE COURT: When I was the chief judge, it used 7 to annoy me to death when I had made some 8 arrangement and some judge would interfere with 9 something I had worked out very carefully. So I'm 10 trying to be very careful not to step on -- 11 MR. WEINBERG: I don't mean by you -- 12 THE COURT: Right. He seemed to be perturbed. 13 He's trying to hold a meeting in there. So maybe 14 we'll find out what success he's had. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q During the late '70s did Mr. Hubbard announce what 17 he considered to be the two most effective arms of 18 Scientology? 19 THE BAILIFF: He wants to see you a minute. 20 THE COURT: Let's see if he wants to see if we 21 can go on with this. I'm going to tell him no. I 22 mean, we can't -- all day, we'll all be lunatics. 23 (A recess was taken.) 24 THE COURT: He's working on it. He's got 25 Mr. Baron's coming down, and there's a call in from
42 1 our court counsel to the county attorney. But I 2 guess the problem is, is it's not just that easy, 3 because there's probably a contract in place, and 4 the question would be whether or not the contractor 5 has the right to do this or not. So he's 6 frustrated -- when I say frustrated, he thought he 7 had an understanding on Friday that they would not 8 do this. Obviously he didn't. So he's working on 9 it. But he -- I said what we need to know is 10 whether it's going to continue, for how many days. 11 MR. WEINBERG: Are they in the building or out 12 of the building? Where are they? 13 THE COURT: They're outside. 14 MR. LIEBERMAN: What about the doctrine of 15 force majeure? 16 THE COURT: What is that? 17 MR. LIEBERMAN: What about the doctrine of 18 force majeure? 19 THE COURT: Well, I remember when they built 20 the criminal justice center, I was in charge out 21 there as criminal administrator, and we had some 22 difficulties, but we usually had our way. As long 23 as we were reasonable. 24 But I mean, on the other hand, if they got to 25 do this and they can't do it at night, you've got to
43 1 let them do it. But what they need to do is tell 2 us -- give us a date. "We're going to do jackhammer 3 work from this date to this date," so all of us 4 would say, "We're not going to hold a hearing." 5 So anyway, continue on. 6 I'm sorry, Mr. Young. This is not the way 7 things usually are here. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Okay. So did Mr. Hubbard ever express or -- 10 express the two most effective arms of Scientology? 11 A He said the two most effective arms of Scientology 12 were the Guardian's Office and the Sea Organization. And 13 that was -- we considered that pretty much true. 14 Q The Guardian's Office was part of -- of what, in 15 the Church of Scientology or the Scientology structure? 16 A Until 1981 -- 17 I'm sorry. I was just pausing because some of 18 these are really rough. 19 THE COURT: I know. Would you like to -- 20 Okay. 21 MR. DANDAR: Now. Go. 22 THE WITNESS: Feels sort of like a root canal. 23 THE COURT: It really does. I feel like I'm in 24 my dentist's office. I'm sure we all do. This is 25 conjuring up -- speaking of --
44 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Anyway -- 3 THE COURT: -- auditing and conjuring up bad 4 memories, why, this is not a good one for me. 5 MR. WEINBERG: It's that reactive mind. 6 THE COURT: That reactive mind. 7 A The Guardian's Office was an independent network. 8 It did not answer to any other network. It went straight up 9 through its own command channels up to Hubbard's wife, Mary 10 Sue Hubbard. And it had its own authorities over the 11 organization. 12 The Sea Organization was a separate arm that 13 started on the Apollo, the ship Apollo, where Hubbard was 14 residing in the Mediterranean. And that extended down into 15 a few organizations which were namely deemed advanced 16 organizations, or the organizations which took care of what 17 was called the upper level materials. And so that would 18 have been the advanced organization Los Angeles, the one in 19 Denmark, the one in the United Kingdom, and of course, the 20 flagship Apollo. 21 So they were kept very separate. Members of the 22 Guardian's Office were not members of the Sea Org. Except 23 on the flagship Apollo. And this was to keep a tension 24 between us. Because we had very different functions. Their 25 function was very much of an internal function, and the
45 1 Guardian's Office or Department 20 was totally an external 2 function. 3 BY MR. DANDAR: 4 Q And there would come a point in time when the Sea 5 Org took over the Guardian's Office. 6 A That was the change in 1981. 7 Q What gave the Sea Org the power to do that? 8 A Well, sort of like asking what gives an 800-pound 9 gorilla the power to decide where it wants to sleep. It 10 just sleeps where it wants. 11 The -- Mary Sue had gone -- Mary Sue Hubbard had 12 gone to jail. A lot of the executive leadership of the 13 Guardian's Office had gone to jail. We were in a great deal 14 of disarray. And so what was called a mission, which is 15 basically a project, team of people, was sent in from the 16 headquarters out at the -- the base at Gilman Hot Springs. 17 And basically there was -- it was just taken over. 18 I was -- I was witness to screaming, nose-to-nose 19 arguments between, say, Bill Franks, who was the executive 20 director, and Jane Kember, who was the guardian worldwide, 21 who was in Los Angeles, as the struggle ensued. And Jane 22 Kember was removed from office. And so we agreed, everybody 23 just agreed. And we became a Sea Organization unit and we 24 signed Sea Organization contracts. 25 And at that point, the Guardian's Office was no
46 1 longer an independent network; it -- it began to answer to 2 other people other than just its own -- Mary Sue Hubbard, 3 who was gone. 4 Q And you were part of the Guardian office people 5 who stayed on and became a Sea Org member. 6 A Yes. 7 Q All right. 8 A I stayed on until early 1982 when I was promoted 9 out to another project that became -- where I was employed, 10 until like, you know, for another seven years. 11 THE COURT: Was it in '81 when this takeover, 12 as you call it, took place, that the Guardian's 13 Office was renamed to the Office of Special Affairs? 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. We were -- we were 15 informed that that was to be the new name. There 16 was a press release issued on it and we were being 17 told that we just had the new name, so we just took 18 on the new name. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q You were still Department 20. 21 A But it's still Department 20. Everything else, 22 all the policies, the directives that -- the packs and 23 materials that you studied, the bureaus, everything else -- 24 Well, there was one other thing. The intelligence 25 bureau was renamed the information bureau, because it was a
47 1 bit of an embarrassment to call it intelligence because it 2 sounded like CIA. Which it was. That's why we got raided. 3 THE COURT: And the -- when this happened and 4 they -- they said, "Okay. Everybody in this office 5 is going to become a Sea Org member," I take it if 6 you didn't want to be a Sea Org member, you just 7 were out of the office. 8 THE WITNESS: That's correct. That was one of 9 the ways it was decided who would stay on. If you 10 didn't want to sign a contract, you went to another 11 organization. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q Now, who -- was there a highest-ranking officer of 15 the Sea Org at the time the Sea Org took over the Guardian's 16 Office? 17 A Until she disappeared, it would have been L. Ron 18 Hubbard and Mary Sue Hubbard, because they held the highest 19 ranks at that time. The chain of command for the Sea 20 Organization went out to the flagship Apollo and it stayed 21 through that until Mary Sue went to jail and until the 22 Apollo was basically -- I don't know how you describe it. 23 Just -- it was ended. It was beached. 24 And that's when they actually -- actually came 25 into Clearwater, when -- to set up the Flag -- what's called
48 1 the Flag land base. Carried the name of the Apollo Flag. 2 And at that point the command structure changed over, but 3 that was a number of years later. 4 THE COURT: Excuse me just a second. 5 They do not need to get up and down when I exit 6 and enter. 7 (There was a pause in the proceedings; 8 Judge Schaeffer left the courtroom and returned.) 9 THE COURT: Well, apparently the order is being 10 given for them to stop, so we'll see how that works. 11 I don't know if that order has filtered down to 12 whoever is on the jackhammer just yet, but 13 presumably it will stop. I hope. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q After the change when the Sea Org took over The 16 Guardian's Office, what happened to you? 17 A In -- I believe it was February of 1982, I was 18 contacted by a unit that I was already familiar with, which 19 was called Special Project. Special Project was a group of 20 Sea Org missionaires -- project personnel, if you will -- 21 who had come into Los Angeles to primarily, as far as we 22 could tell, deal with the litigation that had ensued over 23 the years previous, that was naming L. Ron Hubbard as one of 24 the defendants or parties to the suits. And Special 25 Project's primary function was to take over the litigation,
49 1 because Department 20 had not been able to clear those cases 2 or get them dismissed. And so they were coming in and 3 running these units, which was called an all-clear unit, and 4 things like this. 5 Well, I was contacted by Special Project and 6 informed that they wanted me to join the special project. 7 And this is all I knew about it. It was just a special 8 project. And in charge of Special Project was a young man 9 by the name of David Miscavige. And at first they -- they 10 wanted me to be -- I won't get technical what the title was, 11 but the post -- title changed, the name of it, after a few 12 weeks. But then they decided they wanted me to be the 13 Special Project PR, the public relations for Special 14 Project. And I -- my name was submitted, and came back 15 about -- a few weeks later, and I was told that I had been 16 approved by Hubbard himself. I later saw the dispatch from 17 him. 18 And so I joined the Special Project. After I 19 joined Special Project, then I was informed what Special 20 Project really was. It was Office Services, Inc., which was 21 a for-profit corporation that had been formed in 1981. And 22 we couldn't name ourselves as that because we were residing 23 on church property; we were conducting our operations 24 covertly, because we had to have everything set up. But 25 about six or seven months later, we got offices down on
50 1 Sunset Boulevard and we moved out. But until that time, we 2 just stayed there. 3 And as I said, I thought I was joining Special 4 Project but then I found out I was joining Office Services. 5 Q So did you end up leaving Department 20? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And why was Mr. Hubbard being sued back then, that 8 this -- this Special Project had to come in and get the 9 cases dismissed? 10 A There was so many cases and so many reasons going 11 down, but primarily he was being named because he was the 12 author of the materials and he was on the command line many 13 times. And many times, people who were issuing the suits 14 were former staff members and so they were familiar with the 15 command channels; they were familiar with the command lines; 16 they knew how he issued commands down. And so he was -- he 17 was included because of the policies and because of the 18 management by him until -- until I'd say the late '70s. 19 Q What -- what are -- when you say command lines, 20 what are you talking about? 21 A Well, Scientology organizations are pretty much 22 built on a pyramid model. And the easiest way that you can 23 understand it is through a military model. Which is also 24 why uniforms are worn, military jargon or technical terms 25 are used.
51 1 And so you have a command channel the same way you 2 have command channels in the military. You have somebody at 3 the top and then you have units underneath, and somebody's 4 in charge of each unit. And so commands go down what we 5 even knew as the chain of command. And those were orders. 6 And there's seniors and there's juniors. And then 7 compliances are sent back up this chain of command. 8 And so when I described a while ago the Guardian's 9 Office had its own chain of command, that's exactly what I 10 meant. We had our own chain of command that went up, 11 independently of everybody else. 12 Q Now, when you said Mr. Hubbard was being sued by 13 staff and they knew these command lines and channels -- 14 A I -- I meant to -- if I didn't say, I should have 15 said former staff, because if -- if a staff -- a staff 16 member would never sue -- 17 I just scraped myself. 18 THE COURT: Okay. Is that water fresh? 19 THE BAILIFF: Yes, ma'am. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 A No. These were people who were former staff. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Okay. And so was Mr. Hubbard's name then on these 24 directives or commands and that's how they could prove that 25 he was involved?
52 1 A That's -- that's how the federal government was 2 able to name him as an unindicted co-conspirator. 3 And quite frankly, when we saw the material, we 4 were shaken up that he came within an inch of being indicted 5 along with the other 11, including his wife, because his 6 name was on the materials and his name were on orders. And 7 it's just that he was just -- just by the skin of his teeth, 8 he was not indicted. But he was named as an unindicted 9 co-conspirator. 10 Q Did something change to hide the fact that he was 11 in charge? 12 A Well -- 13 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to -- I've been 14 quiet. But objection as to the relevance of this 15 entire line: Unindicted co-conspirator; did 16 something change as to whether Mr. Hubbard was in 17 charge -- 18 We're in -- we're in 2002. Ms. McPherson died 19 in 1995 and we're talking about something in 1977. 20 Mr. Hubbard died in 1986. 21 THE COURT: I tend to agree. 22 Are you going to bring this up to date? 23 MR. DANDAR: That's what I'm trying to get to, 24 bring it up to date. 25 THE COURT: It's taking an awful long time. I
53 1 mean -- I mean, Mr. Hubbard's dead, for heaven's 2 sake. 3 MR. DANDAR: Well, somebody took his place, 4 Judge. 5 THE COURT: Well, I understand that -- 6 MR. DANDAR: And that's in paragraph 34, and 7 that's in Stacy Brooks' testimony. That's what 8 we're getting to. 9 THE COURT: All right. 10 MR. DANDAR: Well -- all right. 11 BY MR. DANDAR: 12 Q So did there come a time when Mr. Hubbard's name 13 didn't appear on orders coming down through the command 14 channels? 15 A Yes. 16 MR. WEINBERG: Did or did not? I couldn't 17 hear. 18 MR. DANDAR: Did not appear. 19 THE WITNESS: Did not appear. 20 A Not only that, but we -- we followed the same 21 thing. Procedures went in that continued thereafter. 22 Which was when you were issuing orders that may be 23 subject to inspection by outside agencies, authorities, et 24 cetera, that you always had to hide it. The lesson was 25 learned. The only reason that those people were indicted
54 1 and went to jail was because their names were on orders 2 going down, talking about illegal activities. And so the 3 government had, right in there, notes about burglary, notes 4 about eavesdropping, reports going back up. Here's the 5 notes about the wiretap we put into the IRS office. So they 6 were just basically like signed confessions as to their 7 culpability. 8 And so the one lesson we learned real fast, and 9 put in, besides some corporate reorganization, was to make 10 sure that nothing was ever put into writing that could ever 11 make you or the organization culpable for anything, 12 including giving orders from one organization to another. 13 And that went in hard and fast. 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q This young man you first met, named David 16 Miscavige, on the Special Project, the missionaires that 17 came from the -- headed into Los Angeles, did you see him 18 rise in power while you were a member of the Church of 19 Scientology? 20 A Yes, I did. 21 Q And tell us how he did that. 22 A It was an amazing process. Because he began as 23 just a missionaire and it ended up becoming like the tail 24 wagging the dog. 25 Because what Special Project was, was a little
55 1 project sent into Los Angeles to handle a particular thing, 2 that grew to became the dominant organization in the entire 3 Scientology hierarchy. And this was done -- well, I -- I 4 just -- it's -- it's really complex. But it was done 5 primarily, to keep it short, through -- in Scientology, 6 power resides to whoever was the closest to Hubbard and 7 where the orders came from. If you were an aide of 8 Hubbard's directly, on the ship, for example, that made you 9 more powerful than somebody out in the field. So just 10 proximity to power gave you power. 11 In 1982 we were set up to be the receipt point of 12 Hubbard's new communications, because he had moved away 13 because of all the subpoenas flying, and couldn't be found. 14 No one knew where he was. We didn't know where he was. 15 Nobody knew. Not even his wife knew, from what I gathered. 16 And so in 1982, we were set up to be the receipt point of 17 the new communications so we could now start issuing orders 18 back in, keep in touch. And by that, we became the most 19 powerful. 20 And at that point was when David Miscavige, being 21 in charge of Special Project and being in charge of ASI -- 22 the power just shifted. 23 As well as a number of takeovers. I know that 24 Bill Franks was removed and a number of other people were 25 removed from different echelons. So that any opposition was
56 1 just gone. It was -- it was sort of like a political purge. 2 Q So the ASI was a for-profit corporation. David 3 Miscavige was the head. And from there, the rest of the 4 Scientology organizations were controlled? 5 A That's -- that's what I finally learned was to be 6 our function. Because the flagship Apollo was gone. And 7 even though the name of it moved ashore, you know, Flag land 8 base; even though there was the former headquarters in 9 England, there was no command structure to bring it all 10 together. Everything shattered. And so it was our job to 11 bring it together and to be the top of the pyramid. 12 So our function was to -- even though we were 13 for-profit, even though we had functions that he had 14 announced to the world that are true, we had this other 15 function of running the organizations, setting up other 16 organizations. And we did that for a number of years. 17 Q Okay. Was Mr. Miscavige -- did he become the 18 chairman of the board of ASI? 19 A That's how I knew him. 20 Q And what -- was there RTC in existence then? 21 A Religious Technology Center was incorporated, I 22 believe, in 1981, but it wasn't functional when -- when we 23 were being set up. ASI sort of came out of the closet first 24 and then RTC was set up behind it. ASI and RTC, as well as 25 another organization called The Church of Spiritual
57 1 Technology, CST, which is another one that's in the 2 background -- these are all set up at the time as corporate 3 protections. And we were briefed on this and we knew about 4 this. 5 Because before the FBI raid, it was just this, you 6 know, chain of command, and nobody really paid attention to 7 it. But the fact that the federal government was able to 8 indict, convict -- well, they didn't convict. They had a 9 stipulation of evidence and they avoided trial -- this chain 10 of command from a low-level operative, who was going in and 11 stealing documents, right up to Hubbard's wife on the ship, 12 showed that not only was the chain of command vulnerable, 13 but there was no corporate protection; there was no 14 corporate walls. You know, they just went straight through. 15 And of course, that's how we operated. We didn't 16 pay attention to corporations. Half the time you never knew 17 what corporation you were part of. You were just part of 18 the San Francisco org; you were just part of a -- ask a 19 staff member what corporation you were a part of, we didn't 20 know. We didn't care. We were just Scientology units 21 getting our job done. 22 So after -- after that mistake was realized, then 23 all these different corporate entities started to be setting 24 up, and licensing agreements started to be set up, and an 25 entire restructuring of our orders were given, and how
58 1 dispatches were written were all changed to avoid this ever 2 happening again, because it was such a close call that 3 Hubbard was nearly indicted. 4 So RTC was set up, ASI was set up. And as I said, 5 RTC came up later, after ASI was fully functional. 6 Q In the -- were all these new corporations and -- 7 and ASI run by the Sea Organization? 8 A Yes. At that time everybody was Sea Organization. 9 Q Did Mr. Miscavige rise in ranks within the Sea 10 Organization? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And -- 13 THE COURT: What do you mean, everybody was Sea 14 Organization? You mean every single person who 15 belonged to Scientology? 16 THE WITNESS: No, ma'am. I meant the staff 17 members. Anybody above the franchise level or the 18 lower levels, any organization -- any org, what we'd 19 call an org -- Philadelphia, Seattle, et cetera -- 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 THE WITNESS: -- organizational members. And 22 anything higher than that would have been Sea 23 Organization. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q And did Mr. Miscavige -- did his rank in the Sea
59 1 Org rise when he assumed, like, the COB ASI position? 2 A Yes. Somewhere he became captain. 3 Q Do you know how he became captain? 4 A No, I don't. It -- the title just -- rank just 5 appeared. Because I know he was something like, at best, a 6 lieutenant early on, and there were people that outranked 7 him. 8 But we -- see, at ASI and -- especially, we didn't 9 go by Sea Org rank. You go by your post, by your position, 10 by your job. And that's what gave you the authority to get 11 it done so I could -- even though I had a bottom rank in the 12 Sea Org myself, it was by my position in the organization 13 that gave me the authority to order somebody in another 14 organization what to do. 15 Q And in Scientology, in the Sea Organization, are 16 there things known as brevet ranks? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And could you explain the difference, if there's a 19 captain who's a brevet-rank captain versus a captain who's 20 an earned-rank captain? 21 A The Sea Organization has its own ranks. And those 22 you gained through what's called an officer selection board. 23 And your name might be submitted to the officer selection 24 board. And every organization can have its own officer 25 selection board. And so you can be promoted through that
60 1 process. 2 And so you begin as -- they're all naval ranks, 3 you know, petty officers, warrant officers, lieutenants, 4 right on up through the -- the ranks. 5 But the problem was that sometimes the head of an 6 organization, who was given the -- he might be the executive 7 director or the commanding officer of an organization, his 8 Sea Org rank -- his or her Sea Org rank might be lower in 9 actual fact, the actual rank, lower than his juniors. So 10 that person was given what was called a brevet rank, 11 B-r-e-v-e-t. A brevet rank was basically a temporary rank 12 that was to reflect the position of that job that they had. 13 So even though I was a petty officer, say, if I were made 14 the head of the San Francisco organization, I would be given 15 the brevet rank of captain. But when I left that position, 16 the brevet rank would fall away, and I would just carry the 17 other one. 18 So you actually carried two ranks when you assumed 19 certain positions in the organizations. 20 Q Did you -- when people were promoted up in rank, 21 did everyone else know about that? 22 A Oh, yeah. Very much so. It's -- it was -- you 23 know, people took it with great pride. You -- the issues 24 would come out, the officer selection board promotions, and 25 you get to see, "Joe made lieutenant," you know, and you get
61 1 to say, "Congratulations, Joe. Buy me a drink," or 2 something like that. It was -- you know, people took a 3 great deal of pride in it. So these were widely 4 distributed. 5 And you liked to gain rank. You know, it was just 6 a point of personal pride. You didn't make any more money 7 but it was -- you know -- 8 Q Did you ever -- 9 A -- you had more rank. 10 Q Did you ever -- did you ever see Mr. Miscavige, 11 officer -- whatever you call it, board -- promote him to 12 captain, nonbrevet-rank captain? 13 A No. 14 Q And is there a difference between his rank of 15 captain and the other captains within the organization? 16 A Most definitely. It's -- a brevet rank -- you 17 know, there will be captains of the Scientology 18 organizations located in Clearwater, for example, but 19 they're all brevet. They're -- the only one that has ever 20 been designated an actual rank of captain was David 21 Miscavige. There's other captains, but it's captain in name 22 only. It's -- it's like saying, "I'm the president of the 23 rotary club." Well, that doesn't make me the president of 24 the United States. 25 THE COURT: I guess I'm having trouble with
62 1 this. 2 A brevet rank is -- is -- are you saying that 3 Mr. Miscavige is, actual rank, the only captain or 4 the captain? 5 THE WITNESS: He's the only one that has actual 6 rank, captain. All other captains would be honorary 7 ranks. 8 MR. WEINBERG: And my objection to all of this 9 is -- is that Mr. Young left the church in 1989. I 10 don't know how he could possibly say that as of 11 2002. 12 THE COURT: But you have that objection -- 13 MR. WEINBERG: Right. 14 THE COURT: -- throughout so you don't need to 15 make that again. 16 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 17 THE COURT: All -- I understand that. But I 18 thought you also implied, at least, that the brevet 19 rank was the rank of position, which in essence, in 20 an individual org, was more important than your 21 actual rank, if you had a high brevet rank; that you 22 could run that organization, order people with 23 higher actual ranks around, because you held the 24 brevet rank higher than -- than someone else there. 25 THE WITNESS: That's true. But the authority
63 1 stems from the position that you have in the 2 organization and not even from the rank. 3 THE COURT: So the actual rank of 4 Mr. Miscavige, if in fact he is the captain -- I 5 kind of get this -- actual rank isn't as important 6 as the brevet rank. 7 THE WITNESS: The actual rank is more important 8 within the Scientology -- I'm sorry -- the Sea 9 Organization command structure. Within the 10 organizations, it's the position you have. 11 If I am the commanding officer of the Los 12 Angeles organization, that position allows me to 13 give any orders I want to anybody within my 14 organization. And so I suppose -- 15 That's why I say you have to follow a military 16 model on this. That -- 17 But -- however, when I was at a higher echelon, 18 it was my position in the echelon that gave me the 19 authority to issue orders to lower echelons. 20 THE COURT: Your brevet rank. 21 THE WITNESS: Just -- 22 Well, I wasn't given a brevet rank. 23 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 24 THE WITNESS: Like I said, my position -- 25 THE COURT: So your position wasn't
64 1 necessarily -- 2 See, again, I wrote this down, and I thought I 3 understood it, but apparently not. 4 I thought you said the brevet rank was a 5 temporary rank that reflects your position at -- in 6 a staff. And when you leave the position, you lose 7 the brevet rank, and might get another one depending 8 on where you go and where you rank. But that you 9 always kept your actual rank. So -- 10 THE WITNESS: That -- that is true. But it 11 wasn't applied to everybody within the organization. 12 It was pretty much reserved for those that were -- 13 that were in command. 14 And you could say it would be sort of like 15 crazy to say a first lieutenant working for the 16 chief of staff in the Pentagon is able to give an 17 order to a colonel out at some military division 18 because he works in the Pentagon. Well, I don't 19 know. But that's how we did it. That even though I 20 might have a lower position in the Sea Org, if I'm 21 at a higher echelon, that echelon is what gives me 22 the authority to -- 23 THE COURT: So maybe it isn't the brevet rank; 24 maybe it's just the position. 25 THE WITNESS: It is actually more the position
65 1 than anything else, yes, ma'am. 2 THE COURT: So the brevet rank -- I don't know 3 what that means, but the brevet rank may not be as 4 important as the position you hold in a particular 5 org. 6 THE WITNESS: Yes. 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 MR. DANDAR: I have marked as Exhibit 101. I'd 9 like to show the witness -- 10 THE COURT: Oh, dear. 11 MR. DANDAR: That's a heavy one. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q Can you identify Plaintiff's Exhibit 101? 14 A This is a declaration that I wrote in, I believe, 15 October of '99, that was filed in the Wollersheim case, I 16 believe the following month, that Mr. Leipold, who was the 17 attorney of record for the case, asked me if I could draw up 18 and show how the command structure of Scientology works. He 19 asked me, "Would you be able to show it using their own 20 documents," and I said, "Yes." 21 And that's why this is so thick, is because I was 22 to show -- 23 THE WITNESS: A bit what I was just talking 24 about, your Honor. 25 THE COURT: Okay.
66 1 THE WITNESS: In fact there's one document in 2 here I can refer to, to explain what I was talking 3 about. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q Could you point out that document, tell us what 6 the exhibit number is? 7 A Give me just one second. 8 THE COURT: Wow. I think we haven't had a 9 battering out there in a while, so it must have 10 stopped. 11 MR. DANDAR: Someone has the power. 12 A Okay. I found it. 13 Oh, how do I refer you to it? 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q Well, that's a good question. 16 A Okay. Best way is sort of like page size. One of 17 the pages sticking out, one of the 8-and-a-half-by-14 18 sticking out says across the bottom in, like, the top of a 19 newspaper, "International News, Scientology"? It's about 20 the third or fourth 8-and-a-half-by-14 page sticking out. 21 THE COURT: It look like this? 22 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. Looks like this. 23 THE COURT: All right. I have it. 24 Do you all see what he's talking about? Looks 25 like this?
67 1 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. I have that. 2 THE COURT: Okay. 3 THE WITNESS: Okay. If you go just previous to 4 that, one of the 8-and-a-half-by-11 pages, go up 5 four pages -- I'm sorry -- two pages, you'll see 6 something down at the bottom that says, "SCI PROD, 7 P-R-O-D, 11-4-93," looks like a Bates number 153819. 8 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. I see that. 9 THE WITNESS: You have that, your Honor? 10 THE COURT: Yes, I do. 11 THE WITNESS: What this page is, this is a 12 portion of the application for tax exemption that 13 Scientology had filed with the IRS to get their 14 exemption in the '90s. And this was filed under, of 15 course, penalty of perjury. And I happened to find 16 this in D.C. And there's, of course, a few other 17 pages from it. And so this is what they told the 18 IRS in this particular document. 19 And it explains it right there above all the 20 names. There's a paragraph in the middle. It says, 21 "Brevet ranks are assigned to certain positions 22 within the church and have the purpose of equating 23 rank and ecclesiastical authority. One holds the 24 brevet rank so long as one holds the rank to which 25 the brevet rank applies."
68 1 Next paragraph, "The highest ranking officers 2 in the Sea Organization are as follows." And then 3 it gives a column of named rank, earned rank. And 4 you notice at the top it says, "David Miscavige, 5 captain, rank; earned rank, captain." And then 6 you'll notice there's a whole series of names, other 7 captains. There's commanders. And all of them have 8 the word "brevet" after their rank. 9 In fact, if you go down you'll notice at the 10 bottom, Barbara Widmore, W-i-d-m-o-r-e, she's a 11 petty officer third class, and yet she's been given 12 the brevet rank of commander, which is the second 13 highest officer rank within the Sea Organization. 14 Well, that doesn't mean that she is an actual 15 commander. This is brevet. 16 But what's interesting is that David Miscavige 17 is the only one that the Church of Scientology told 18 the IRS -- so this is why this was important, 19 because this is not based upon my experience; this 20 is based upon what they told the IRS -- David 21 Miscavige is the only one that holds an actual rank 22 of captain within the Sea Organization. 23 THE COURT: This -- by the way, this document, 24 I have seen before, this is already in evidence. 25 MR. DANDAR: That particular page is.
69 1 THE COURT: Right. And so this is -- this is 2 what I was referring to when I said I didn't exactly 3 understand. So I've seen this before. But now that 4 you've explained it, I think that perhaps it's -- 5 it's a little more helpful. 6 I suppose that if -- if one of these folks over 7 here that is in a high position ecclesiastically 8 fell from grace, so to speak, or whatever, that they 9 would be removed from their brevet rank. 10 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. 11 THE COURT: But would maintain, as long as they 12 stayed in the church, their actual rank? 13 THE WITNESS: Their earned rank. 14 THE COURT: Their earned rank. Okay. 15 Also, I don't know -- ensign up here, 16 Mr. Rathbun and Mr. Ingberg -- ensign isn't a very 17 high rank either, is it? 18 THE WITNESS: No, ma'am. It's -- it's sort of 19 the bottom of the officer's scale. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 A And also, part of this -- this was drawn up 22 because part of this declaration contained affidavits from 23 Scientology in the Wollersheim case, which they were trying 24 to represent that Mr. Miscavige was just one of many 25 captains. And I was trying to point out, as far as I was
70 1 concerned, that was false testimony; that according to their 2 own documents what they told the IRS was a different matter. 3 And so there's other documents in here to further 4 substantiate it. 5 The purpose in the Wollersheim case was because 6 they were claiming that one corporation alone was involved, 7 and Mr. Leipold was trying to show that there was a senior 8 corporation, a senior command structure that would also be 9 responsible, as far as what he was trying to put forward. 10 And when he asked me about it, I said, "Well, of course 11 that's how it works. This is how the --" 12 In fact what's the irony about this, is the Sea 13 Organization is very proud of this. We never hid this 14 internally. We're very proud that we were what we were. It 15 was just when it came to external authorities, governmental 16 agencies asking about it, that's when you came up with 17 another story. "Oh no, no. We're just a fraternal 18 organization. We're loose-knit. We just sit around like a 19 bunch of Shriners and have fun, you know; crank back and 20 have a couple of beers." You try to make it seem very 21 benign, when really, internally, we -- 22 Hubbard said and he built the thing, and that was 23 our attitude -- we got things done. We had the ability to 24 go into any organization, send in, remove people, put new 25 people in, take over bank accounts. But that was to get the
71 1 job done. Internally, we were very proud of this. 2 And so some of the material that's attached to 3 this is -- are portions of Sea Org publications where they 4 boasted about this. You know, "We went into the Munich 5 organization and we turned it around and got them back and 6 going." So it was always a point of pride -- and you'll see 7 this in some of the attachments -- a big point of pride. 8 But as soon as -- as soon as somebody else from 9 the outside says, "Well, is this --" "Oh, no. No, no." 10 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor, would it be possible 11 to have questions and answers rather than just a 12 narrative here? 13 THE COURT: True. 14 As a matter of fact, I know that we have had 15 little breaks as I've gone in and out. Would this 16 be a good time to take a morning break? 17 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. 18 MR. DANDAR: That would be fine. 19 THE COURT: We're going to go ahead and be in 20 recess for 15 minutes. 21 Sir, I should tell you that while you're on the 22 stand, the whole time that you're on the stand, you 23 really can't talk to anybody about your testimony, 24 including the lawyers -- 25 THE WITNESS: No.
72 1 THE COURT: -- for either side. 2 THE WITNESS: Mr. Dandar has already instructed 3 me, your Honor. 4 THE COURT: You can talk about other things, 5 but you can't talk about what's happening here, 6 okay? 7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. Thank you, your 8 Honor. 9 (A recess was taken at 10:33 a.m.) 10 (The proceedings were resumed at 11:04 a.m.) 11 THE COURT: You may continue. 12 BY MR. DANDAR: 13 Q The declaration in the Wollersheim case that is 14 Exhibit for the plaintiff 101 -- that was filed in the 15 Wollersheim case? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And what you state in your declaration is 18 truthful, or is there anything where it's exaggerated? 19 A No. It's -- it's truthful, and most of it relies 20 upon quoting from the attachments. 21 Q Okay. And the attachments are the documents from 22 the Church of Scientology? 23 A Either from -- directly from Scientology 24 documents -- as I said, there's an IRS document and there's 25 also magazines of the Sea Organization.
73 1 Q There's an exhibit attached to your declaration, 2 X-99, that says, "The Command Channels of Scientology." Can 3 you turn to that? 4 Or let me just ask you this question: What is 5 the -- what is that publication? 6 MR. WEINBERG: Where exactly? 7 MR. DANDAR: X-99. 8 MR. WEINBERG: Just one X? 9 THE COURT: Yeah. I'm not sure that I -- mine 10 go from -- 11 MR. WEINBERG: I've got double numbers. 12 THE COURT: I've got double numbers too. I've 13 got an L, Exhibit L-99, and then all of a sudden I 14 go to something called FF-99. 15 MR. DANDAR: It is set up that way, Judge. I 16 can't explain why. 17 THE COURT: Okay. Well, where -- 18 MR. DANDAR: It's this far from the -- from the 19 back. 20 I should have tabbed it. 21 THE COURT: Okay. I'll keep looking. 22 MR. DANDAR: Want me to do it for you? 23 THE COURT: Yes. 24 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 25 THE COURT: Okay. Did you find it?
74 1 MR. WEINBERG: No, I didn't. 2 THE COURT: Do you want to show them where it 3 is too? 4 Did you find it, Mr. Young? 5 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. 6 THE COURT: Okay. 7 MR. DANDAR: We all have it. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q What is the purpose of this booklet called The 10 Command Channels of Scientology? 11 A Well, it's -- it's stated in there to show the 12 relationships of the various organizations and the command 13 channels. 14 But it really wasn't intended as purely an 15 internal publication, because we had all the policies that 16 are being cited in it. The actual audience for this was 17 external, that could be used with governmental agencies and 18 the courts and bring it all together in one place where they 19 could make their presentation as to how the organizations 20 fit together. 21 And I -- I say it wasn't for internal because it 22 quotes -- just as my declaration quotes from a lot of their 23 material, the command channels booklet quotes from all of 24 their materials. So it was just trying to bring together 25 these things to try to present this for other people.
75 1 Q Are there for-profit organizations or corporations 2 of Scientology that are part of this booklet, the command 3 channels? 4 A Yes. 5 And I need to clarify. This is the -- it says The 6 Command Channels of Scientology, not the Command Channels of 7 the Church of Scientology. And there is a difference. 8 Because inside the booklet, there are for-profit 9 corporations which are not part of any Church of Scientology 10 entity, such as WISE, W-I-S-E, World Institute of 11 Scientology Enterprises. That is a -- not part of the 12 Church of Scientology, but you'll find it in The Command 13 Channels of Scientology. 14 Q Okay. Now, when David Miscavige became captain of 15 the Sea Org, was he at Office Services, Inc. or somewhere 16 else? 17 A First time I recall him assuming the rank of 18 captain, he was with Religious Technology Center. 19 Q Okay. And what was his position at Religious 20 Technology Center? 21 A Chairman of the board. Same sort of title as with 22 ASI. Otherwise we just knew him as COB. 23 Q And within your experience in Scientology, how did 24 David Miscavige exert his power or influence? 25 MR. WEINBERG: Object to that question. I
76 1 think that's a fairly open-ended -- what's that -- 2 what is -- what is he seek -- how did he exert his 3 power? 4 THE COURT: Yeah. Over what? 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q How did he exert his power over the entire -- all 7 the organizations of the Church of Scientology? 8 A Pretty much the way most -- 9 MR. WEINBERG: Well, excuse me. The -- first 10 I'd like to establish -- I'd like at least to 11 establish what it is -- when it was that Mr. Young 12 believes that he became the chairman of the board 13 and what Mr. Young's exposure to Mr. -- you know, to 14 RTC at that point was, if anything. Because I 15 didn't hear him say that he was in RTC. 16 THE COURT: All right. 17 MR. DANDAR: All right. We'll go back a little 18 bit in history then. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q You started reading books in 1968 and you joined 21 in '69. When did you leave the Church of Scientology? 22 A 1989. 23 THE COURT: When did RTC come into effect? 24 THE WITNESS: It was incorporated in 1981, and 25 I believe it was starting to be active, actually,
77 1 more in 1983, was when it started to make its 2 presence known. And I -- I heard the name Vicki 3 Aznaran, from affidavits filed just before I took 4 the stand, and she was the first one, if I recall 5 right, to be the head of RTC. 6 BY MR. DANDAR: 7 Q And were you in the Church of Scientology when 8 Mr. Miscavige became the chairman of the board of RTC? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And how many years were you in Scientology while 11 he remained chairman of the board of RTC? 12 A Well, he was chairman of the board of RTC until 13 the time I left, so that would -- it would include my entire 14 tenure while he was -- he and I knew each other. 15 Q Okay. 16 MR. WEINBERG: Well, could we just establish 17 when he became the chairman of the board as it 18 related to when you left? 19 MR. DANDAR: I think he answered that question. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q But go ahead and do that again. 22 When did Mr. Miscavige become chairman of the 23 board of RTC? 24 A Officially I can't say. Because the way it worked 25 was one just -- he was the source of authority. So wherever
78 1 he resided was where the authority was. 2 He began to work both RTC and ASI, started in 3 1983, and slowly began to move over and spending more time 4 with RTC, until finally he was pretty much operating out of 5 RTC, out of the RTC headquarters full-time, I would say, 6 1980 -- probably 1984. 7 Q And when Mr. Miscavige was chairman of the board 8 of ASI, was ASI the -- have the most authority in all of 9 Scientology? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And when Mr. Miscavige moved himself over into 12 RTC, did ASI lose its authoritative position? 13 A Yes. As well as some functions. The -- RTC took 14 on -- we used to run -- even -- even the Department 20 15 activities, down through the organizations, lawsuits and 16 things like that out of the ASI. But those functions moved 17 into RTC with him so he could concentrate more on just the 18 organizations and making money. 19 THE COURT: I'm going to allow his answer to be 20 given, so go ahead -- 21 MR. DANDAR: All right. 22 THE COURT: -- back to your question, whatever 23 it was. 24 BY MR. DANDAR: 25 Q Up until the time when you left in 1989, who was
79 1 the -- was there any one person that had the most power in 2 all of Scientology after Mr. Hubbard died? 3 A Except for the short hiatus while there was this 4 power struggle going on, finally it emerged that it was 5 Mr. Miscavige. 6 Q And have you kept up with the -- how the 7 organization -- the Scientology organization -- all the 8 organizations -- run since you left in 1989? 9 A That's what I tried to show in this declaration 10 that -- that was presented all the way through IRS filings, 11 et cetera, so that you could see how it operates. 12 Q So Mr. Miscavige, when he exerts any authority, 13 starts, you know -- based upon your experience and what 14 documents you've reviewed, does he exert it because he's the 15 chairman of the board or does he exert it because he's the 16 only captain, earned rank, of the Sea Org? 17 A It's sort of both. Because it's -- in the same 18 military model, if somebody doesn't follow orders, they're 19 removed and replaced with somebody that will follow orders 20 and get it done. And so just by a process of elimination, 21 you finally get the people that you want, that will follow 22 orders. And so that's why people are removed, dismissed, 23 disappear. You know, they're just not around that org 24 anymore, because they've been assigned to another org. 25 And so that's what -- 1982, 1983, and then when
80 1 Hubbard died, again, until finally he had what he wanted: 2 Aides who he trusted who would get it done. 3 Q When Mr. Miscavige was chairman of the board of 4 ASI, was there a chairman of the board of RTC? 5 A I don't know really. 6 Q Okay. 7 THE COURT: Didn't you say Vicki Aznaran was? 8 THE WITNESS: No, ma'am. Her title was 9 inspector general -- 10 THE COURT: Oh. 11 THE WITNESS: -- which was the designated title 12 that was used internally and externally. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q In your 20-plus years as a Scientologist, did you 15 ever come across references to the tech that Mr. Hubbard 16 wrote being referred to as scripture? 17 A No. This was a term that came up later on for 18 litigation purposes. It never appears in his own writings, 19 the word. 20 Q While you were a -- 21 THE COURT: What word? The word "scriptures"? 22 THE WITNESS: Scriptures. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q While you were a Scientologist, did you ever hear 25 anyone, including Mr. Hubbard, call himself or herself the
81 1 ecclesiastical leader? 2 A I don't think he ever used the word 3 "ecclesiastical," and I would challenge anybody to ever find 4 it used by him. Ecclesiastical was a term we began to 5 assume later on in litigation purposes. 6 Q And in your experience, PC folders, which I 7 believe the court is well familiar with what that means -- 8 PC folders -- were they ever considered priest-penitent? 9 A That designation came up after the FBI raid of 10 '77. It was never used before then. After the FBI raid, we 11 had orders to label all folders and all files considering -- 12 containing folders priest-penitent formulary and always 13 represent them as that. The name had never appeared before. 14 So it was -- you did this as a -- as a legal stance to see 15 if we could gain protection, trying to learn from the 16 mistakes. 17 Q And in your experience, could anyone destroy 18 records that is in a person's PC folder? 19 A No. Not -- not really. 20 I need to qualify that, if I may. 21 Q Yes. 22 A If there was any files that were just inviolate, 23 it would be the PC folders, because everything needs to be 24 put in there. And Hubbard even said when in doubt, file 25 things in the PC folder so we know everything about this
82 1 person; you know, if they got, you know, a rash from eating 2 strawberries. 3 But there were times when certain sections were 4 authorized to go in and delete things from folders and 5 destroy records. And I was personally involved in that 6 myself. 7 Q For what reason? 8 A Confidentiality. To hide evidence. 9 Incident that I was involved in was a woman in the 10 San Francisco organization who had been assigned to the 11 intelligence bureau in Los Angeles, and so she was going to 12 become an operative. Marsha -- I can't remember her last 13 name. And I had orders to basically start going in and 14 finding certain things, and just destroy them to -- to not 15 have any trace of her. I destroyed not only her records in 16 the organization, I made sure her name was never on any 17 payroll receipts. I -- we also had orders to go in and 18 check the PC files to make sure certain things were not 19 there so she couldn't be traced. 20 But that was -- again, as I say, this was -- this 21 was extremely rare. But it was only done as a -- like a 22 defensive measure to protect yourself, that she could be 23 arrested and picked up, and you'd want to be able to have 24 plausible denial: "I don't know who she is. I don't have 25 any records."
83 1 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor, could Mr. Young date 2 that, please? 3 THE COURT: Yes. 4 MR. WEINBERG: What his post was at that time? 5 THE WITNESS: This was in 1972 in San 6 Francisco. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Now -- 9 THE WITNESS: Possibly 1971. 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q And you were in Department 20? 12 A Department 20, yes. 13 Q Now, the organization board of all of Scientology 14 has all these lines. Are those called the command lines, 15 connecting one department to another, one division to 16 another? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And then RTC just kind of sits up at the top where 19 there's no lines running to it, is that right? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Why is -- 22 A That's -- that's the diagram. I showed the 23 diagram. 24 Q Why -- why is that? 25 THE COURT: What diagram are you talking to?
84 1 In the command channels? 2 MR. DANDAR: It's in the command channels or -- 3 I mean, I have one here that's in the back of this 4 book. 5 BY MR. DANDAR: 6 Q RTC just kind of sits up there at the top. 7 A Yes. 8 Q Why aren't there any lines connected to RTC? 9 A Because RTC operates, as the most senior 10 network -- and following what we learned back in '77, you 11 don't want to show, like you're doing right now in a court, 12 that there are command lines coming out, even though that's 13 how it operates. 14 Q So even though it's not in writing, it operates 15 with command lines coming out. 16 A Oh, definitely. RTC was set up to be the most 17 senior command organization. 18 THE COURT: When you say because of what they 19 learned, what we learned -- I don't remember how you 20 referred to it -- you're speaking now of the fact 21 that -- what you told us before, about the 22 indictments and how they were able to link some of 23 the folks higher up with certain actions that were, 24 I guess, perceived to be criminal actions, by these 25 command lines?
85 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. The documents that 2 had been seized in the raid, as well as -- 3 THE COURT: Okay. I don't need all of that. 4 But I guess what I'm trying to say is when you 5 said, "Because of what we learned," it's that 6 episode that you're speaking of. 7 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. The indictment and 8 the -- of -- 9 THE COURT: The jailing of the -- 10 THE WITNESS: Well, the jailing followed. But 11 the indictment, it -- that involved Hubbard's wife, 12 who worked right next to him, all the way down to 13 the lowest-level operative; the fact that they could 14 climb through so many organizations and link them 15 all with our own documents at the time. That was 16 what had to be prevented from ever happening again. 17 THE COURT: Okay. 18 BY MR. DANDAR: 19 Q Now, you left in 1989, the organization, correct? 20 A Yes. 21 Q What was your -- where were you working at the 22 time? What was your post? 23 A At the time I left, I was actually out at Gilman 24 Hot Springs, which is the actual international headquarters. 25 But at the time I was still staff at Office Services.
86 1 Q Okay. 2 A Paid staff at Office Services. 3 Q And what were you doing at Gilman Hot Springs? 4 A I had said I wanted to what we call route out, 5 which means you would like to leave your position and just 6 cease working for the organization. And there's a procedure 7 to be followed. 8 And so they sent me out to Gilman to sort things 9 out, so to speak. And I was to stay out there and sort of 10 get rest and recuperation and come to my senses. 11 So finally I realized -- I asked, and they weren't 12 going to allow me to route out, so I just said, "Okay," and 13 I took it upon my own and left. 14 Q And since leaving the Church of Scientology in 15 1989, have you become involved in any manner in assisting 16 people or their attorneys who are in litigation with the 17 Church of Scientology? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Can you tell us how that first came about? 20 A I -- I believe it was in 1994. I don't recall 21 exactly. I was contacted by Dan Leipold, whose name I just 22 mentioned a while ago. And he was the attorney of record in 23 the Wollersheim case. And said that he understood that I 24 had a lot of years -- and my wife at that time, Stacy -- we 25 had a lot of years in. Would -- could he meet with him --
87 1 could we meet with him? 2 And so we did. Met at his office, along with 3 other attorney, Graham Berry. And we spent -- I don't know, 4 maybe five, six hours -- as they sought to find out how much 5 I knew; what did I understand; finding out that I knew the 6 vocabulary, the language. I'd been in virtually every 7 echelon, so I had this experience. 8 And so they -- he said, you know, "We have 9 litigation going and we don't understand the terminology. 10 We don't understand all these bulletins, these policies. We 11 ask questions," like, "What's HCO," like was just asked. 12 And it's -- more than anything else, it's the vocabulary. 13 Q So you -- you didn't go out on the Internet and 14 have a Web site saying, you know, "Come hire me. I'm a 15 former Scientologist," or advertise or send letters to the 16 lawyers who were suing Scientology or defending -- 17 A Not at all. I hadn't been in contact with hardly 18 anybody, just about two people, with regard to my past 19 experiences; just personal friends. 20 They contacted me. 21 Q Well -- well, when is the first time -- since 22 Mr. Leipold contacted you in '94, when is the first time you 23 started preparing as a consultant in reference to 24 Scientology matters? 25 A That would have been actually 1982.
88 1 Q While you were still a Scientologist? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And explain that. 4 A There was a court case in Los Angeles, in Los 5 Angeles Superior Court, where -- I forget which Scientology 6 entity. I think the Scientology International -- as well as 7 Mary Sue Hubbard at that time, who came in -- I forget how 8 it was that her name was added -- were suing Gerry 9 Armstrong. Gerry Armstrong had been an archivist who had 10 basically left with thousands and thousands and thousands of 11 documents. And so he was being taken to court. 12 I was with Office Services at the time. And since 13 I knew about those documents, and worked with them, they 14 told me that I needed to go off and work on this for a few 15 months, put this stuff together as evidence that could be 16 used against Gerry. So I produced documents, worked for 17 other people, put together packs for attorneys, advised 18 them, and then I was called as a witness in the court case 19 and spent a few hours on the stand testifying according to 20 my, at that time, expertise and knowledge about the 21 materials. 22 Q And this is at -- you're testifying for a Church 23 of Scientology entity, and you're an employee for a 24 for-profit corporation, ASI? 25 A Yes.
89 1 Q All right. And then the next time you got 2 involved in litigation, is that with Mr. Leipold? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Okay. And did you have any -- did you file any 5 declarations for Mr. Leipold in that Wollersheim case back 6 then? 7 A No. 8 Q Did you file any declarations for Mr. Berry? 9 A Mr. Berry asked us to come work for him. I didn't 10 start to do any work for Mr. Leipold for quite a while. 11 And as I told you, he was in the room asking 12 questions. And he had litigation going as defense counsel 13 for a suit being -- that was brought against two individuals 14 based upon the 1991 Time Magazine case, for statements made 15 in the magazine, and asked if we could come on as 16 consultants for that case. 17 Q So you and your wife then, Stacy, did not seek out 18 Mr. Berry? 19 A No. 20 Q He sought you out. 21 A Yes. 22 Q And the Time Magazine case, what two individuals 23 was he representing? 24 A Dr. Geertz, which is, I believe, G-e-e-r-t-z, and 25 Steve Fishman, F-i-s-h-m-a-n. Dr. Geertz was the
90 1 psychiatrist of Steve Fishman. And statements were made in 2 the Time Magazine article for which they were being sued. 3 Q Is that something that has to do with Mr. Fishman 4 being ordered to kill his psychiatrist? 5 A Yes. That was the context. 6 Q And did Mr. Berry tell you or your wife, Stacy, 7 what he wanted you to write in your declaration? 8 A Never. 9 Q What was the purpose of your -- 10 A No. When you said -- I'm sorry. I think you said 11 me or Stacy? 12 Q Right. 13 A You know, I was there for, I think, just about 14 every time when she was doing hers, so -- I'm trying not to 15 speak for her. 16 Q Right. 17 A But no, I had never had any evidence or any 18 conversations from her telling me or while I was there with 19 him telling her. But he certainly never told me. 20 Q So did you write a declaration? 21 A I wrote a number of declarations. 22 Q For that case, the Fishman case? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And did Stacy write a number of declarations? 25 A Yes.
91 1 Q Do you know, as you sit here today, whether any of 2 those declarations included anything that was not true? 3 A No. I read hers and I knew about mine, and I 4 never found anything that was false. 5 THE COURT: This is for what I have referred to 6 in this courtroom periodically as the Fishman case? 7 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 8 THE COURT: Okay. 9 MR. DANDAR: Which apparently is included in 10 the Time Magazine case. Somehow. 11 A Well, it stemmed from the Time Magazine article. 12 And originally the defendant -- plaintiff had gotten the 13 case -- whatever you call it -- bifurcated. The cases were 14 almost together -- because there was cases being run out of 15 New York as well. Time Magazine was being sued in New York. 16 And so -- 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q Oh. 19 THE COURT: It really doesn't matter. 20 THE WITNESS: I'm just trying to stay -- 21 THE COURT: Right. I just need to know -- it's 22 been referred to here as, I've heard -- 23 THE WITNESS: Right. 24 THE COURT: -- the Wollersheim case, the 25 Fishman case, and this case, the Armstrong case.
92 1 So I take it this is the Fishman case. 2 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q Did you do any -- did anyone contact you on the 6 Time Magazine case? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Who? 9 A A representative from the office of Floyd Abrams. 10 I don't know Mr. Abrams -- the name of Mr. Abrams' office, 11 but he's well known as probably the most prominent First 12 Amendment attorney in the United States. 13 I was contacted -- 14 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. There's a gesture I 15 missed. 16 MR. DANDAR: I thought Mr. Lirot was. 17 THE COURT: And I always thought it was George 18 Rahdert. And I can see that counsel sitting over 19 here is taking exception to that. 20 MR. DANDAR: I thought it was Mr. Lieberman. 21 MR. WEINBERG: I knew it was not me so -- 22 THE COURT: Right. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q But did you go -- 25 THE WITNESS: Mr. Abrams is the one that's
93 1 always quoted on CNN when they want a talking head. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q So did you go meet with Mr. Abrams at his law 4 firm? 5 A Yes. They asked me to come meet with them. And I 6 flew out to New York, and we spent the day, Mr. Abrams and a 7 number of his counsel, going over it. They wanted to find 8 out what I knew about this, because they were having 9 trouble, again, understanding the jargon, understanding the 10 materials. You know, "I can't read this stuff. What does 11 this organizational chart mean?" 12 THE COURT: Who is Mr. Abrams again? 13 MR. DANDAR: Floyd Abrams is a well-known First 14 Amendment lawyer from New York City. 15 THE COURT: But I mean, who was he 16 representing? 17 MR. DANDAR: Time Magazine. 18 THE COURT: Okay. 19 THE WITNESS: He was representing Time 20 Magazine, yes. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q And again, you did not solicit Mr. Abrams? 23 A No. 24 Q Okay. 25 A And to mention -- he was defense counsel for Time
94 1 Magazine. This wasn't a suit being brought by them, but he 2 was defense counsel. 3 So after that, I went back. And then I was 4 notified that they wanted to retain me. 5 This was a case that Stacy did not work on. We 6 often worked together, but I just worked on this one myself. 7 THE COURT: Who is they again, please? 8 THE WITNESS: Mr. -- for Mr. Abrams' firm. 9 BY MR. DANDAR: 10 Q Did you ever -- were you ever approached by 11 Mr. Rinder after you filed declaration for Mr. Berry in the 12 Fishman case? 13 A I was approached by Mike Rinder after the case was 14 done. They had withdrawn their suit and the case was over. 15 And I don't recall how long after that it was that he 16 contacted me. 17 Q The Church of Scientology dismissed its suit 18 against Mr. Fishman? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And where were you living when Mr. Rinder 21 contacted you? 22 A Newport Beach, which is maybe 50 miles south of 23 Los Angeles. 24 Q And did Mr. Rinder tell you why he wanted to see 25 you?
95 1 A Yeah. He said he wanted to just work things out, 2 you know, and settle some differences. And could we meet 3 and talk it over? 4 Q And did you meet? 5 A I said, "I really am not interested. I don't have 6 anything to work out. No thank you," and hung up the phone. 7 Q What happened next? 8 A A couple of days later he called me again, and he 9 made the request again, you know, saying, "Come on. Let's 10 just work things out, sort it out here; sort out our 11 difference." And I said, "I have got nothing to sort out," 12 and hung up on him again. 13 Q And then? 14 A And then a few days later, Stacy called me. She 15 was living in Seattle. We had separated for a while. She 16 wanted to just -- she was sick of the work. You know, it 17 had been intensive. We had been doing this for a year and a 18 half, and sometimes seven days a week. And she wanted to 19 just get away from everything. So she was up in Seattle, 20 and she called and said, "Mike Rinder called me. He wants 21 to meet and just work things out." So she urged me to do 22 it. I said I didn't think it was a great idea, but since 23 she requested, I said, "Okay." 24 So I flew up to Seattle -- I told her, "Go ahead, 25 set up the meeting." And I flew up to Seattle to her place,
96 1 and we -- we met with Mike Rinder and Mike Sutter. 2 Q Who's Mike Sutter? 3 A Mike Sutter was one of Mr. Miscavige's aides. I 4 don't know what his position was at that time, but he was -- 5 had always been one of Mr. -- Mr. Miscavige's aides. 6 Q And in '94, what was Mr. Rinder's position? 7 A He was -- he was OSA at that time also. 8 THE COURT: He was what? 9 THE WITNESS: He was OSA at that time, 10 Department 20. 11 THE COURT: I mean, but what? Was he in charge 12 of it or -- 13 THE WITNESS: I believe he was, yes. 14 MR. WEINBERG: I do take it from the last -- 15 Could I ask -- 16 Is it 1994? Is that the -- circa the time 17 period that we're talking about here? 18 THE WITNESS: Maybe -- no. Maybe a little bit 19 later than that. I don't recall. I'm sorry. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q You mean '94 or '95 -- 22 A It was after the Fishman case was done, so -- I'm 23 trying to remember -- 24 No, it wasn't '94. It was more like '96. 25 Q Okay. And OSA -- Mr. Rinder being the head of
97 1 OSA, do you know what corporation OSA was in? 2 A Well, the last I knew it was just part of the 3 Church of Scientology California or International. They 4 could have moved it at that time. I don't know. 5 Q Okay. So what did Mr. Rinder tell you when you 6 met with him finally? 7 A Well, you know, the first part of it, since we had 8 been on opposite sides of the litigation and philosophical 9 fence, so to speak, the front end was just social for a 10 while. And then he just said he wanted to sort things out 11 and work things out with us. And this was -- this went on 12 for a number of hours. 13 And I should say the meetings went -- extended 14 across six days. And it took -- it took about -- a couple 15 of days before we got around to more what they really wanted 16 to do. 17 Q All right. Let me interrupt you for a minute. 18 During the six-day period of neg- -- or meeting 19 with him, were you involved in any case? 20 A No. 21 Well, I can't say that right away, because there 22 was some times, like -- like the Time case, where it might 23 be ongoing and you were just hanging back and you might -- I 24 might get a call and say, "Listen, can you show us where 25 policy such and such is?"
98 1 So I don't recall if there was anything just 2 hanging out there. But I know it was pretty quiet. 3 Q Well, let me make it clearer. 4 When you met with Mr. Rinder in Seattle, and 5 Mr. Sutter, had you filed any declarations in any case in 6 addition to the Fishman case? 7 A I may have. I wouldn't want to stand by it 8 because I don't have it really nailed down. 9 Q All right. 10 A There became, finally, so many cases I kind of 11 lose track of them. 12 Q Now, the Fishman case was a defense case. You 13 were -- he was being sued by Scientology, correct? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And Time Magazine was a defense case. He was 16 being -- they were being sued by Scientology. 17 A Yes. 18 Q And we'll get back to the negot- -- or the 19 meetings with Mr. Rinder. 20 But when was the first time you were approached by 21 a plaintiff's lawyer wanting you to do work for the 22 plaintiff's side to sue Scientology? 23 A That would have been you. 24 Q In the McPherson case. 25 A Yes.
99 1 Q All right. Let's go back to '94. Mr. Rinder's in 2 Seattle. You finally hear him as to what he wants you to 3 do. And what is that? 4 A Well, that came, finally, at the last day of the 5 meetings. And I can fill in the front end later if you 6 want. 7 But we met at their hotel, the Doubletree, which 8 is close to the Seattle airport. And he had two sets of 9 documents that he wanted me to -- he wanted us to sign. And 10 he said they were just drafts and we could talk about it. 11 And he showed us these two documents. They were both more 12 than one page. I don't remember how many. One document was 13 to be private, to be used just between us, keep confidential 14 and secret, and the other one was to be able to then be used 15 publicly. 16 The secret one had an amount of money that we were 17 to be paid which came to -- I've never been able to remember 18 exactly -- some odd figure, like 280,000, 240,000. Which 19 you can ask me or I can say later how that figure came out. 20 Q Well, what was the money for? 21 A The -- they wanted us -- well, this is what all 22 the documents were for. The discussions had come up of -- 23 they wanted us to get out of the consultation business. 24 During the meetings prior to that last day, they 25 said, you know, "Isn't there another line of work you'd
100 1 really like to do?" And they knew something about us then. 2 They knew that I liked the Internet, you know, and desktop 3 publishing. I had been a writer from -- ever since the 4 sixth grade. 5 "Isn't there other things you'd like to do?" 6 "Well, there are a lot of things we'd like to do." 7 And this is how we were sort of brought along. 8 "Wouldn't you like to travel?" And, "What would 9 it take to do this? What would it take?" "Well, if I did 10 this, I would need new computer systems." "What would that 11 cost?" "Oh, I don't know. $20,000," you know. And, "What 12 would it take for such and such or another --" "Don't you 13 guys have some debts?" "Yeah." Well, how many debts have 14 you got?" And that's how this figure came up, you know. 15 And, "How long would it take you to -- to get this going?" 16 "Oh, about five years." "Well, what do you think you would 17 need for an annual income in that time?" "Oh, I don't know. 18 Such and such." 19 And so this is how this odd figure, I realized 20 later, came -- came up: That if we accepted this amount, 21 then all we had to do was we had to retract and recant all 22 of our declarations and our testimony and say that we had 23 perjured ourselves, and that we had to implicate Mr. Berry, 24 and said that he had instructed us to do this, and we had 25 written declarations at his instructions.
101 1 And when I saw this, first of all, my -- my 2 stomach just fell. I was sick at my stomach. 3 And I said to him -- I said, "Well, first of all, 4 he never told me to write anything." And Mr. Rinder said, 5 "Oh, we can work this out. Remember, this is just a draft. 6 We'll work this out." It was always this, you know, "We'll 7 sort this out." 8 And I said something else. 'Cause I just looked 9 at this -- 10 And -- and then we went into -- Stacy and I went 11 into the other room. And I said, "No way." I had never -- 12 you know, I didn't like it from the start. She was the one 13 that wanted to do it. I went -- I said, "I'm not going to 14 sign this. This is a piece of crap. This is -- this is -- 15 they're asking me to say I'm a perjurer and to implicate 16 people, and they're going to give me 200 and whatever 17 thousand dollars." 18 Oh, also a gag order. I couldn't talk about 19 Scientology publicly. I couldn't assist in any -- anybody 20 else in litigation. I couldn't assist in any other way. 21 And I also -- the agreement also required that I would have 22 to turn over all my files. All -- or both of us would turn 23 all of our files and records to them. So we basically just 24 expunge everything we have, admit -- you know, confess that 25 we're a bunch of perjurers, implicate Graham Berry, and they
102 1 give us money and we could walk. And that's how we were 2 going to get -- that's how we were going to sort it out. 3 So I came back in, after telling Stacy, "No way," 4 and I just threw the papers on the table and said, you know, 5 "Forget it." 6 Q The papers, were they declarations for you to 7 sign? 8 A They were in the form of declarations but they 9 were not as you might recognize them, because they were 10 drafts. They were 8-and-a-half-by-11 paper, and they were 11 not in a form that you might present to the court, because 12 we were going to work out the wording. So they weren't 13 ready for our signatures at that time. But they were in the 14 wording of a declaration, you know, with even paragraphs 15 that were numbered. 16 Q What was Stacy's position on all this? 17 A She agreed with me to not -- not to do it. 18 As I said, prior to that, she -- she wanted it. 19 She said, "Listen, I --" she wanted out of it. Says, "If 20 we're going to get out of it, let's just see if we can get 21 out of it and start a new life." 22 Q Was she willing to sign the declarations where she 23 admitted that she was a perjurer and Graham Berry made her 24 lie under oath? 25 A No. When I said, "I'm not going to sign this,"
103 1 she says, "Okay. I'm with you." 2 Q Okay. But before you said you weren't going to 3 sign it, did she express her opinion as to what she wanted 4 to do? 5 A No. Because when we walked back into the 6 bathroom, I didn't even ask her opinion. I just said, "This 7 is a bunch of crap." 8 Q All right. And when you came out and said to 9 Mr. Rinder, "No thanks," did he make any other offers, like, 10 "You don't have to recant," or, "You don't have to go after 11 Mr. Berry," or anything like that? 12 A No. Just his first reaction was, "Well, come on. 13 Let's talk about this." And I said, "I've got nothing to 14 talk about. I've seen what you're trying to do, and there's 15 no way that this is negotiable. And I don't want to hear 16 from you again." And his last words were, you know, "If you 17 walk out of here, you know, we can destroy you." 18 Q Did you reply to that? 19 A I said, "Go for it." 20 Q And what happened after you walked out? 21 A We left the hotel, went back to her place, which 22 is maybe 25 minutes away. And there was a message waiting 23 on the phone from Mr. Rinder, which was suddenly a change of 24 mood; no longer, you know, a threat or anything. Just like, 25 "Hey, guys, I know things got a little out of hand. You
104 1 know, things are a little heated. Come on, let's just sit 2 down and, you know, work this out," and a lot of this, you 3 know, blah, blah, blah. So that message was on the phone. 4 Q And did you ever get back with Mr. Rinder? 5 A No. We went out to dinner. And I told her, 6 "Let's --" no way were we going to call him back. So we 7 just went out to dinner. I stayed over. 8 And the next day, he called again and left another 9 message, and I didn't call back. And I flew back to Newport 10 Beach at that time. 11 And two days later, after I got back to Newport 12 Beach, he called me, and I picked up the phone, and he says, 13 "Hey, come on. We'll just -- we'll sort this out." I said, 14 "I have nothing to sort out with you," and, "Don't you ever 15 call me again," and hung up the phone. And that was the end 16 of that. 17 Q There came -- was there ever anything that 18 happened to you afterwards, where you thought that 19 Mr. Rinder had gone forward to complete his original threat? 20 A No. There was harassment, you know, but it -- I 21 haven't been destroyed, so whatever. 22 Q What type of harassment -- 23 A I know -- I know that he filed the declaration in 24 another case which is totally contrary to this, saying that 25 I was supposedly -- we were extorting them for money. Which
105 1 I always thought was funny, because I'm going to fly to 2 Seattle, and he and another person are going to fly to 3 Seattle so I can spend six days trying to extort them on 4 money? It's sort of like to me, on the surface, ridiculous, 5 but that's their story. 6 Q Well, was Mr. Rinder's affidavit -- we talked 7 about this -- have you seen that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And is it truthful? 10 A Well, there's elements of truth in it. You know, 11 we met in Seattle and this sort of stuff. But as far as the 12 motive, as to who contacted whom, no. You know, he 13 contacted me and he contacted her and they offered us money 14 and they offered us two -- you know, two -- 15 THE COURT: This is fairly -- a fairly poor 16 way, Mr. Dandar, to say, is it -- is it true, is it 17 false; and this man who doesn't even have the 18 affidavit in front of him is trying to say what's 19 true and what's not? 20 MR. DANDAR: Right. You're right. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q Did any harassment continue after you told -- 23 declined Mr. Rinder's office -- 24 A Yes. 25 Q -- offer?
106 1 A Yes. 2 Q And tell us what that is. 3 A Oh, boy. 4 THE COURT: I mean, we really don't have to 5 have it. Because obviously, he has stated what 6 happened. We've seen the affidavit. 7 I just don't like it when I see people -- call 8 it suborning perjury, committing perjury, and what 9 have it; being allowed to ramble under oath about an 10 affidavit and what's true and what isn't. 11 MR. DANDAR: I'm trying to find -- 12 THE COURT: I won't have it. 13 MR. DANDAR: I'm trying to find the affidavit. 14 THE COURT: I don't know that I need it. 15 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 16 THE COURT: I don't think you need to go there. 17 MR. DANDAR: All right. 18 THE COURT: I don't think it's being fair to 19 this witness, in light of the allegations that are 20 made in this particular motion, that you should let 21 this witness just kind of guess at what's true and 22 what isn't. 23 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I believe it's marked as an 24 exhibit. And I have a copy that's not marked as an 25 exhibit. Can I just show him the copy I have?
107 1 THE COURT: Sure. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q And it's dated and signed by Mr. Rinder 4 October 27th, 1994 in Los Angeles. 5 MR. DANDAR: But I'm going to actually skip 6 over this question now, 'cause that's a pretty 7 long -- 8 THE COURT: Well, it is. And I know that there 9 is some evidence in here that the other side has 10 gotten in about what Stacy has presumably said. I 11 don't know that she said it, but I -- seems as if 12 there's some hearsay statements as to what she said. 13 So there may be some relevance to having him comment 14 on it. But I think it's just poor form to have him 15 kind of guess what an old affidavit says. 16 MR. DANDAR: It is and -- 17 MR. WEINBERG: And for the record, since 18 Mr. Young has that affidavit in front of him, could 19 we -- you or somebody had asked -- it might have 20 been me -- the dates of these meetings, would that 21 indicate the meetings were in '94 and not '96? 22 THE WITNESS: I see here that says in, "July, 23 '94, Michael Sutter and I spent several days in 24 Seattle --" well, it was actually six. 25 But this seems accurate to me.
108 1 MR. WEINBERG: So it would be '94. 2 THE WITNESS: Yes. I think I said that earlier 3 when I was asked the date, and I believe it was '94, 4 and I think that's right. 5 MR. DANDAR: I think I'll ask him to look at it 6 over the lunchtime, because it's a pretty long -- 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q I'll ask another question: 9 Just generally tell us, did any harassment take 10 place since July of '94 while you and -- against you or 11 Stacy? 12 A Yes. We -- you know, things from being picketed, 13 the neighborhood being leafletted, making accusations 14 against us, anonymous leaflets; neighbors were visited by 15 people asking questions about us. But it was more -- you 16 know -- You know, "I have some questions about the Youngs. 17 Is it true they still use drugs?" It's really like a 18 question that is embedded with an accusation. This went 19 on -- this type of stuff, of -- went on even when we were -- 20 changed locations and moved to different locations. 21 Q Did Stacy start a cat sanctuary in Seattle? 22 THE COURT: Let me ask you a question, 23 Mr. Young. 24 THE WITNESS: Yes, your Honor. 25 THE COURT: Are you able to -- or I should say,
109 1 are you, were you, able to establish other than by 2 what you've surmised or what you think, that this 3 was in fact either members of the Church of 4 Scientology or people hired by the Church of 5 Scientology who were responsible for this 6 harassment? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. There was -- because 8 my field had been public relations. I knew how to 9 work with the media. And I contacted the Seattle 10 Times when we were getting picketed there in west 11 Seattle, and told them about it. The paper 12 contacted them, and they admitted that they were the 13 ones that were picketing. And the story appeared in 14 the Seattle Times, on the front page, about this. 15 So this was a direct public admission that they were 16 sending people in on us. 17 THE COURT: The -- the people -- the pickets, 18 whatever they were, admitted they were connected or 19 affiliated with the Church of Scientology? 20 THE WITNESS: No, ma'am. The woman in the 21 Office of Special Affairs -- I believe -- I believe 22 it was -- 23 THE COURT: The newspaper contacted the person 24 in the Office of Special Affairs and she admitted 25 they were people that she had sent out there?
110 1 THE WITNESS: I believe that was her position, 2 ma'am, but it was -- 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 THE WITNESS: -- somebody speaking for the 5 Seattle organization that said, "Yes, those are 6 Scientologists." 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 BY MR. DANDAR: 9 Q Besides picketing and contacting your neighbors, 10 did they contact any governmental authorities to come out to 11 your house? 12 A Because of the number of cats we had in the house, 13 we started getting strange visits. You know, the Department 14 of Health, Animal Control; a social worker came out who 15 says, "I understand there's a crazy woman living in this 16 house who keeps cats." So we started having all these -- 17 these visits and inspections. They were starting to show up 18 quite a bit. 19 Q And -- 20 THE COURT: This was a part of what you -- 21 you're calling the harassment; it was all this 22 occurring at the same time? 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25
111 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q How -- what period of time did this occur over? 3 A Well, it was the most intense up in Seattle -- I'd 4 say '90 -- it increased. And the picketing was '96, '97, in 5 that -- in that venue somewhere. They came out a number of 6 times over a period of time so I can't really give it a 7 specific date. 8 Q Did it -- did it start getting more intense 9 after -- 10 Well, did you file any declarations in any case 11 that you can relate to when it started to get more intense? 12 A No. It was only after we turned down the -- the 13 offer to sort things out. Because until that time, the 14 harassment was actually pretty minimal. You know, somebody 15 pounding on my door, throwing things through my window. 16 While the window was open, you know. It was -- it was -- it 17 was not nearly to the degree of this intensity until we had 18 finally said we didn't want to settle. 19 Q When is the first time you filed another 20 declaration, after the Fishman declaration? 21 A Oh, gee, I -- that's a tough one. Because I know 22 I started some work for Mr. Leipold for some lawsuits that 23 were being filed that he was the defense counsel for. I -- 24 I really don't remember. 25 Along with the Time Magazine, I also worked for --
112 1 the Sally Jesse Raphael Show was sued, and so the Metro 2 Media Group that owned the show contacted me, and I did the 3 same thing where I was consulting for them, because they 4 were being sued by -- by a Scientologist for a Scientology 5 show. So I really can't put them into an order -- 6 Q Okay. 7 A -- at this time. 8 Q All right. Let me ask you a general question on 9 Scientology. Can anyone change the policies written by 10 Mr. Hubbard? 11 A No. That's -- and that's one of the first 12 purposes of that first document that you introduced, Keeping 13 Scientology Working. It was to -- it was completely 14 forbidden to change them. Other than make a -- you know, a 15 typo or removing a wrong comma someplace, no, you cannot -- 16 you are forbidden from changing them, saying that they're 17 old, omitting them, telling people, "You can't do this 18 anymore because it's old." No. 19 Q What would happen if someone changed the policies 20 written by Mr. Hubbard? 21 A You were in serious trouble. You were -- for 22 example, you could be removed from your -- your position; 23 you could be demoted; you could be in trouble in one way or 24 the other. 25 Q Do you know of any situation where a staff member
113 1 could ignore the policies of Mr. Hubbard? 2 A Again, you do it at your own risk. 3 THE COURT: You tell me when you're at a good 4 stopping point. 5 I think that clock is wrong. It says noon, but 6 I've got 10 till. Is my clock wrong? 7 MR. WEINBERG: Yours is wrong. 8 MR. DANDAR: I've got two till. 9 THE COURT: It's two minutes till. 10 MR. WEINBERG: It's about 11:57, something like 11 that. 12 THE COURT: You tell me when you want to -- 13 MR. WEINBERG: Or thereabouts. 14 THE COURT: Is this a good time to stop? 15 MR. DANDAR: It can be. 16 MR. WEINBERG: Yeah. 17 THE COURT: Let's stop. We're going -- since 18 we don't have much time this week, and since 19 sometimes on my breaks I'm having to take longer, 20 let's just go for an hour. We'll be back at 1. 21 (A recess was taken at 11:58 p.m.) 22 23 24 25
114 1 2 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 3 4 STATE OF FLORIDA ) 5 COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) 6 I, Donna M. Kanabay, RMR, CRR, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the 7 proceedings herein, and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my stenographic notes. 8 I further certify that I am not a relative, 9 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties' attorney or 10 counsel connected with the action, nor am I financially interested in the action. 11 12 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 17th day of June, 13 2002. 14 15 ______________________________ DONNA M. KANABAY, RMR, CRR 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

To Dandar Disqualification Hearing Documents index