Kanabay Court Reporters; Serving West Central Florida
Pinellas (727)821-3320 Hillsborough (813)224-9500
Tampa Airport Marriott Deposition Suite (813)224-9500
510
1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA
2 CASE NO. 00-5682-CI-11
3
4
5
DELL LIEBREICH, as Personal
6 Representative of the ESTATE OF
LISA McPHERSON,
7
8 Plaintiff,
9 vs. VOLUME 5
10 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG
SERVICE ORGANIZATION, JANIS
11 JOHNSON, ALAIN KARTUZINSKI
and DAVID HOUGHTON, D.D.S.,
12
Defendants.
13
_______________________________________/
14
15
16 PROCEEDINGS: Defendants' Omnibus Motion for
Terminating Sanctions and Other Relief.
17
CONTENTS: Testimony of Kennan Dandar.
18
DATE: June 5, 2002. Afternoon Session.
19
PLACE: Courtroom B, Judicial Building
20 St. Petersburg, Florida.
21 BEFORE: Honorable Susan F. Schaeffer,
Circuit Judge.
22
REPORTED BY: Lynne J. Ide, RMR.
23 Deputy Official Court Reporter,
Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida.
24
25
511
1 APPEARANCES:
2
MR. KENNAN G. DANDAR
3 DANDAR & DANDAR
5340 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 201
4 Tampa, FL 33602
Attorneys for Plaintiff.
5
6 MR. LUKE CHARLES LIROT
LUKE CHARLES LIROT, PA
7 112 N East Street, Street, Suite B
Tampa, FL 33602-4108
8 Attorney for Plaintiff
9
MR. KENDRICK MOXON
10 MOXON & KOBRIN
1100 Cleveland Street, Suite 900
11 Clearwater, FL 33755
Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service
12 Organization.
13
MR. LEE FUGATE and
14 MR. MORRIS WEINBERG, JR.
ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER
15 101 E. Kennedy Blvd, Suite 1200
Tampa, FL 33602-5147
16 Attorneys for Church of Scientology Flag Service
Organization.
17
18 MR. BRUCE HOWIE
5720 Central Avenue
19 St. Petersburg, Florida.
Attorney for Robert Minton.
20
21 MR. THOMAS H. MCGOWAN
MCGOWAN & SUAREZ, LLP
22 150 2nd Avenue North, Suite 870
St. Petersburg, FL 33701-3381
23 Attorney for Stacy Brooks.
24
25
512
1 THE COURT: Okay. I said we would take up in
2 plaintiff's motion to abate dissemination of any
3 portion of the film The Profit. And I was handed
4 shortly before I came into court Stacy Brooks'
5 opposition to motion today.
6 Mr. Howie, are you here for Mr. Minton on this?
7 MR. HOWIE: Yes, your Honor. I have just read
8 the motion to abate. And I'm here on behalf of
9 Mr. Minton, because he's named as a potential
10 injunctee in that case.
11 THE COURT: Okay. I show that you were served.
12 But it may be that they were served by mail, is that
13 right?
14 MR. LIROT: Judge, they should have had a copy
15 faxed to their offices. I haven't been there all
16 day. I wasn't able to check on that.
17 THE COURT: But I see Mr. McGowan is noticed.
18 Yes, Bruce Howie, so I guess it is en route.
19 MR. McGOWAN: I have not seen it until lunch.
20 I -- I have not seen it --
21 THE COURT: Okay. We'll make this fairly
22 brief. I have read the motion.
23 MR. LIROT: We can, Judge. I think that you
24 are aware -- just to give you a little bit of
25 historical statement here, this issue first came up
513
1 before Judge Beach.
2 There was a subpoena that was issued to
3 Ms. Greenway, who I know you know, and
4 Mr. Alexander, seeking a variety of records and
5 things showing the funding.
6 And what we asserted was privileged trade
7 secret, that was important to ensure the commercial
8 vitality of the film, if you give all of the
9 information out, somebody that doesn't want you to
10 be successful in distributing the film.
11 We filed a motion for protective order. We had
12 a hearing in front of Judge Beach, and Judge Beach
13 issued the order, which I had already attached to a
14 similar request made by Mr. Moxon of Ms. Greenway,
15 that she provide copies of checks that were given to
16 Courage Productions by Mr. Minton for the production
17 of the movie, and a variety of other requests that
18 were made, copy of the movie, and I think that we
19 had provided that to you in camera.
20 I had, after --
21 THE COURT: I don't think I received anything
22 in camera.
23 MR. LIROT: Well, I just say generally we gave
24 you a copy of the movie. You watched it on your
25 own.
514
1 THE COURT: The movie? I thought you meant the
2 documents.
3 MR. LIROT: No, ma'am. Not at all.
4 THE COURT: The movie? Yes.
5 MR. LIROT: And I think relative to the
6 documents you said what Judge Beach says still
7 stands.
8 Now, what Judge Beach did is he precluded --
9 and I attached a copy of my order to that particular
10 motion. Essentially what he had done, he just
11 put -- and I'll just read the portion out of his
12 order -- it says: "The Court orders that the
13 subject film not be shown prior to the trial on the
14 complaint," and then he handwrote in, "Or the
15 counterclaim."
16 And what we had done is we filed a motion for
17 rehearing, asking that that be simply the
18 jurisdiction of the State of Florida. We didn't
19 want the whole movie stopped, but we just wanted it
20 stopped for purposes of the State of Florida.
21 Well, that was then. This is now. A whole lot
22 has happened since then. And from our perspective,
23 it looks like the --
24 THE COURT: I don't know what you are speaking
25 for, the plaintiff in the wrongful death case?
515
1 MR. LIROT: I think Judge Beach's order is for
2 anybody to show the movie. Obviously, the
3 presumption then was that my clients, Courage
4 Productions -- or at least, you know, back when
5 Mr. Minton and Mr. Alexander were still speaking, I
6 suppose, I had appeared on their behalf as a
7 representative of Courage Productions, to try to
8 keep any harm from happening or occurring as it
9 relates to the vitality -- or at least the
10 commercial viability of this movie in the future.
11 THE COURT: I'm sorry. I didn't make myself
12 clear. Today you are appearing as co-counsel for
13 the plaintiff, and this is -- the plaintiff in the
14 motion before me --
15 MR. LIROT: That is --
16 THE COURT: -- is the estate of Lisa McPherson.
17 You are appearing for that, for this?
18 MR. LIROT: That is exactly correct.
19 THE COURT: Okay.
20 MR. LIROT: The reason I say that, it came to
21 our attention that on the Lisa McPherson Trust site
22 a number of so-called snippets of the film -- I
23 think I was given information that about ten minutes
24 of the film had been shown, and there was concern
25 here is a snippet, there is a snippet, eventually
516
1 the whole film is out and the commercial vitality of
2 the film is lost.
3 But the reason I make this motion is as the
4 testimony from Mr. Minton came out last Thursday, I
5 believe, his statement was that -- in answer to a
6 question posed to him, he said: "I funded
7 production of a movie about Scientology, The Profit.
8 I invested 2.5 million to have two anti-Scientology
9 critics produce the movie along with me, Jesse
10 Prince, Stacy Brooks and other LMT staff.
11 Mr. Dandar also had an acting role in the movie.
12 Mr. Dandar played an FBI agent. And then it was
13 Mr. Dandar felt the movie would help generate a
14 negative view of Scientology with potential jurors
15 in the area."
16 Obviously this has become a more critical
17 issue. It seems no good deed goes unpunished in
18 this case. So in an abundance of caution, we would
19 like this Court to eliminate whatever potential --
20 shall I say -- sword-like effort is utilized by the
21 defendants in this case to say, "You guys let all of
22 this stuff out on the Internet and you have
23 contaminated the jury pool on the eve of trial,
24 we're going to ask for change of venue. Something
25 bad is going to happen if we don't put a stop to
517
1 whatever is being done."
2 Now, it is certainly our position, and we
3 respectfully submit to the Court, that Ms. Brooks
4 and Mr. Minton, while they may be wanting to get out
5 of the anti-Scientology business or whatever their
6 testimony, continuing to put this out doesn't really
7 say that unless what is being put out over the
8 Internet will come back to be used against the
9 estate. And it's our concern that it's not going to
10 be good for the estate.
11 We think that it's within the province of this
12 Court to certainly stop any additional
13 dissemination.
14 The federal suit I filed is for copyright
15 infringement. There was a response filed that since
16 there is an operating agreement that says before you
17 do anything for Courage Productions, the limited
18 liability company, there has to be full agreement of
19 the two members of that company, Mr. Minton and
20 Mr. Alexander.
21 Well, what had happened was once this started
22 to go out into the -- to the public in the way these
23 snippets, as I said, they just add up and up to
24 eventually what we feel will be putting an end to
25 the commercial viability of the film, I filed a
518
1 lawsuit, in an abundance of caution, based on
2 Mr. Alexander's right, and I attached this as an
3 exhibit to my motion.
4 He has the right to act in the best interests
5 of the LLC. He's not trying to do anything to hurt
6 Mr. Minton. He's trying to protect the only asset
7 the LLC has.
8 THE COURT: The LLC is?
9 MR. LIROT: Being Courage Productions. They
10 are the owners of the copyright of the film.
11 THE COURT: LLC?
12 MR. LIROT: Limited liability company. It's a
13 specific --
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 MR. LIROT: -- entity. And essentially, Judge,
16 if somebody is -- a member of an LLC starts to go
17 off the deep end and do things bad for the LLC,
18 regardless of anything to the contrary, a managing
19 member can take over and say, "I'm going to protect
20 the interests of the LLC."
21 Now, there is an arbitration clause in the
22 operating agreement. The only reason I say that,
23 those are all issues in the federal action. I
24 looked at Mr. McGowan's response. And he alleged
25 what we are trying to do is circumvent or bypass or
519
1 in some way use this Court to buttress what is going
2 on in federal court.
3 That is a separate proceeding. That is a
4 copyright case. We are asking for damages, punitive
5 damages, and all of the remedies available, should
6 we prevail in copyright proceeding.
7 What we want to do here is in the best
8 interests of the estate. It's our position, from
9 the estate standpoint, that there is nothing good
10 that can come from the dissemination of these
11 things, this what I'll call snippets on the
12 Internet. And it looks to us like, rather than try
13 to give an accurate depiction of the movie, it's
14 using materials that are not well produced, I think
15 they are third or fourth generation, they are very
16 bad for whatever future the movie may have.
17 But, most importantly, all they do is fall
18 right into line with what is alleged in the
19 counterclaim. That the movie was produced and uses
20 witnesses and people from the LMT. The snippets are
21 what the general nature of the movie is. You saw
22 it, there is a great number of different actors and
23 actresses in this movie that had nothing to do with
24 the LMT. Well, strangely enough, they don't find
25 their way into the so-called snippets on the LMT
520
1 website.
2 So, basically, it's our position that while it
3 might be some First Amendment fair use issue which
4 we don't think applies, it's our position that the
5 way it's being used right now is to advance the
6 defendant's arguments in the counterclaim to create
7 what we consider is really somewhat of a
8 disingenuous position, because if they are concerned
9 that the movie was made to create some sort of jury
10 contamination or have adverse impact on their
11 ability to obtain a fair trial, why in the heck are
12 people on that side of the camp putting it up on the
13 Internet for?
14 We have spoken with the people at Courage.
15 They have no objection to the entry. And I think
16 that is an important point. We do this in the best
17 interests of the estate. We have --
18 THE COURT: I'm sorry, people from Courage?
19 MR. LIROT: From Courage. Mr. Alexander. Now,
20 whether Mr. Minton thinks it's a good idea or not,
21 I'm sure he doesn't --
22 THE COURT: He's the main stockholder of
23 Courage Productions?
24 MR. LIROT: No. They are equal partners. He's
25 the major investor. But with an LLC, you know,
521
1 whether you put in a dime or dollar, Mr. Alexander
2 apparently wrote the script. Contrary to what
3 Mr. Minton might have testified to, I don't think
4 Mr. Minton had any input into the script. Not
5 important.
6 But the bottom line is we don't think anything
7 good can come out of this, we don't think it's a
8 legitimate fair use of anything because the movie
9 has never been finished, it has never been
10 commercially released, other than one test showing,
11 and it's our position that we don't want it to be
12 used against us.
13 If we're the ones who have made the movie or,
14 obviously, the estate, if it was made to create jury
15 contamination, well, we want to prove that is not
16 the case. We --
17 THE COURT: When you say we're the ones who
18 have made the movie, who is the "we"?
19 MR. LIROT: Well, the allegation by Mr. Minton
20 was that Mr. Dandar and all of this anti-Scientology
21 jihad, as it has been referred to as, everybody got
22 together and said, "Well, we're going after
23 Scientology, plus I'm going to fund this movie which
24 will make Scientology look bad and it will
25 contaminate the jury pool, so anybody who watches
522
1 the film will automatically think that Scientology
2 is a bad thing and enter a verdict in favor of
3 whoever is against Scientology."
4 I'm not saying that we buy into that. We don't
5 want to hear it any more.
6 We would like the Court to issue an order
7 abating any further dissemination of this movie, and
8 I think we're the ones speaking from the strongest
9 First Amendment perspective.
10 The movie belongs to Courage Productions. They
11 are willing to let this court enter an order abating
12 any further dissemination to stop that from becoming
13 an issue. We don't want anybody to say it was out
14 there for purposes of jury contamination. We don't
15 want it to be used as any sort of tool in advancing
16 the counterclaim or motion that is before the Court.
17 And we're willing to sacrifice our rights for the
18 benefit of the estate.
19 THE COURT: "We're willing"?
20 MR. LIROT: Courage Productions and the estate
21 are willing to put their rights aside.
22 THE COURT: Now you are saying "we're" and you
23 are representing Courage Productions and you are
24 here arguing for the estate as co-counsel for the
25 estate.
523
1 This is the very thing I'm going to hear about
2 and have some transcript end up up here about you,
3 Mr. Lirot.
4 MR. LIROT: I'll be more specific. I'll be
5 more specific. The motion is on behalf of the
6 estate. I also represent Courage Productions,
7 subject to whatever objections they have that
8 Mr. Minton hasn't approved of my representation.
9 I think what I have stated is my representation
10 is based on the statutory provisions that allow any
11 operating member of an LLC to take steps that are in
12 the best interests of the LLC. And I would
13 certainly submit that.
14 But the argument before this Court is made on
15 behalf of the estate to prevent any adverse argument
16 made that, A, the film was created to contaminate
17 the jury pool or, B, that it did so.
18 And obviously, Judge, the case law, I think, is
19 pretty clear from your perspective. A trial judge
20 has an affirmative constitutional duty to minimize
21 the effects of prejudicial pretrial publicity.
22 There are many cases that stand for that.
23 THE COURT: Well, I agree with that. The
24 problem is the parties that are listed here as
25 defendant is Church of Scientology Flag Service
524
1 Organization, Janis Johnson, Alain Kartuzinski and
2 David Houghton. They don't have a thing to do with
3 the LMT site, they don't have a thing to do with
4 Courage Productions, they don't have a thing to do
5 with the LLC, and they don't have a thing to do with
6 whatever is going on.
7 I mean, I could enter any order I want to in
8 this case against the Church of Scientology Flag
9 Service Organization. The problem is that isn't the
10 right person.
11 MR. LIROT: Well, Judge --
12 THE COURT: They have no -- no more authority
13 than I do to tell somebody that is not here, that
14 has not been joined, that is not before this Court,
15 to stop disseminating something.
16 MR. LIROT: Well, Judge, I would respectfully
17 disagree with that. I think it is within your
18 province. For instance, the cases where newspapers
19 on many occasions have sought to circumvent gag
20 orders and engage in disseminating different
21 information that certain judges have felt would be
22 prejudicial to whatever it is that they're trying to
23 do to maintain a fair and equal, impartial
24 proceeding.
25 I don't think that Mr. Minton, Ms. Brooks,
525
1 anybody associated with whoever is putting this out
2 on the Internet, I don't think they need to be
3 parties. I think that your discretion to maintain
4 the sanctity of these proceedings allows you to
5 issue a blanket order saying nobody does this
6 anywhere.
7 And, quite honestly, Judge Beach's order says
8 that to some extent. He says nobody can show the
9 movie. Is it not constructively showing the movie
10 if you put in 47 snippets that just happen to be 47
11 scenes from the movie? I think an argument could be
12 made to that effect.
13 So it's our position that you do have the
14 authority to issue whatever order of abatement is
15 appropriate. And we would like to see you do it, in
16 an abundance of caution, so we're not down the road
17 saying, "Oh, all these terrible Internet postings
18 have caused the jury pool to be contaminated, voir
19 dire is affected, now on the eve of trial we have to
20 change venue."
21 Quite potentially, Judge, I see a lot of
22 problems that could come out of this. This seems
23 like the most cautious step to take. And I don't
24 think it is in any way asking for any sacrifice of
25 any First Amendment right that isn't vastly
526
1 outweighed by the protection of these proceedings
2 that I think are appropriate.
3 THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
4 What says the Church?
5 MR. FUGATE: Judge, I don't have a dog in this
6 fight, as the Court pointed out, on the one hand.
7 But I do have a concern because there was a
8 comment just made about the disingenuous position of
9 this side of the camp. I'm not sure if that is
10 pointing to us, or this over here.
11 THE COURT: Meaning at the Church, or
12 Ms. Brooks' and Mr. Minton's lawyers?
13 MR. FUGATE: Right. I'm sorry, Judge.
14 THE COURT: Right.
15 MR. FUGATE: But the problem that I have is one
16 I raised earlier on. And that is the appearance of
17 conflict or the appearance of impropriety, because I
18 just went up and looked at Defendant's Exhibit 139,
19 which is the lawsuit that was filed by Mr. Lirot on
20 behalf of Patricia Greenway. I won't go through all
21 of that again.
22 But by my count, Mr. Lirot now files a motion
23 on behalf of the plaintiff who -- he says he
24 represents the estate, he filed a notice of
25 appearance representing Mr. Dandar individually and
527
1 Dandar & Dandar. He sued a witness in this hearing.
2 He cross-examined another witness in this hearing
3 who is the 50 percent owner of the company that he's
4 filed a lawsuit on behalf of.
5 So he's representing -- or attacking four
6 witnesses in this proceeding: Ms. Brooks,
7 Mr. Minton, Mr. Dandar and Peter Alexander. And
8 he's filing lawsuits that -- if I read the pleadings
9 correctly, he's at odds with one of the 50 percent
10 owners of the company.
11 I see this -- the reason I raise it, I see this
12 as a potential conflict. And I don't want that to
13 go unnoticed by the Court or unobjected to by us,
14 because if there is an adverse ruling down the road
15 somewhere, I can imagine Mr. Dandar saying, "Geez, I
16 didn't realize this, and maybe I didn't get fair
17 representation by Mr. Lirot."
18 But Mr. Lirot, by my count, represents a whole
19 host of people who are witnesses, who are
20 plaintiffs, who are people that he's cross-examining
21 in this case in front of this Court. And I think it
22 is inappropriate.
23 I think under Florida Bar Rule 4-1.7 A and B,
24 there is a potential conflict. And I just call that
25 to the Court's attention.
528
1 Whatever you want to do with regard to the
2 movie -- you know, we obviously made our position
3 very clear on The Profit and on Courage Productions.
4 And we don't need to be --
5 THE COURT: What is your position?
6 MR. FUGATE: Our position --
7 THE COURT: You would agree. Obviously, if you
8 are consistent, you would agree with them.
9 MR. FUGATE: Oh, I do agree that is what it --
10 we have addressed it in our motion.
11 THE COURT: You would agree you want it taken
12 off the site, right?
13 MR. FUGATE: I would agree it ought not to be
14 disseminated during the pendency of this proceeding.
15 THE COURT: Period. All right.
16 Mr. McGowan.
17 MR. McGOWAN: Your Honor, on behalf of Stacy
18 Brooks, first of all, she's not party to the
19 lawsuit, as the Court points out. And that raises a
20 host of problems.
21 What this motion really is, is seeking
22 injunctive relief. She hasn't been properly served.
23 There is no allegations of irreparable harm and
24 other allegations necessary for an injunction as to
25 Ms. Brooks. And the motion is unsworn.
529
1 In addition to that, it is the Courage
2 Productions -- or at least under the guise of
3 Courage Productions, this very matter is in the
4 Middle District of Florida. Stacy Brooks is a named
5 defendant in that case for the very same activity,
6 putting these so-called snippets on the Internet.
7 And that lawsuit, which is in the court file --
8 excuse me, I have a cold -- that lawsuit seeks
9 injunctive relief.
10 So, I mean, what you have got here is you have
11 commercial speech that is protected. There is a
12 fair use defense. There is petition for injunction
13 in the Middle District of Florida. We filed a
14 motion to dismiss, a motion for summary judgment.
15 And they are in the -- their Rule 11C safe harbor
16 right now.
17 So this is nothing more than an end run to what
18 they are seeking in the middle district. They are
19 seeking this Court to do what they can't get the
20 Middle District to do.
21 If they have copyright problems, then they can
22 go and do what they have to do in federal court. If
23 the estate has a problem with Ms. Brooks and they
24 want to enjoin the speech, then they better serve
25 her and they better do it the right way, because --
530
1 because anything -- anything that get signed and
2 enjoined in speech isn't going to have a lot of
3 force and effect. And there is just no jurisdiction
4 to do this as to Ms. Brooks.
5 And so -- so I hear in some motion, unsworn,
6 just served on me by hand --
7 THE COURT: You would admit, would you not,
8 Counsel -- you are absolutely right in the
9 presentation you make.
10 But, on the other hand, Ms. Brooks really wants
11 to set the record straight and go in and make a
12 global settlement, and help Mr. Minton make a global
13 settlement with the Church of Scientology.
14 If she doesn't do this at the request of both
15 sides here, the only reason would be somehow or
16 another that she must think there is some benefit to
17 the Church, or she would take it off immediately if
18 she wanted to settle with them.
19 MR. McGOWAN: Well, the fact is it is taken
20 off. It is down.
21 THE COURT: Then you shouldn't have any
22 objection, either, other than the fact you don't
23 want me entering any order. What you ought to be
24 saying is, "That is fine, we're going to shut it
25 down, but you should not be entering any order."
531
1 MR. McGOWAN: That is why it is shut down, and
2 I don't know Ms. Brooks ever put anything up there.
3 But, you know, I think that is something the federal
4 court should be addressing.
5 THE COURT: All right. Mr. Howie?
6 MR. HOWIE: Your Honor, Mr. Minton is not a
7 defendant or a named party in the federal action.
8 However, they apparently are thinking to enjoin him
9 here. The Court's jurisdiction over him is as
10 counterdefendant.
11 If this is actually a request for injunction,
12 it fails legally because they failed to cite any
13 irreparable harm, and they failed to cite they have
14 no adequate remedy at law.
15 Obviously, if they have adequate remedy at law,
16 they are trying to exercise it in federal court. If
17 this is a motion for protective order, as was just
18 indicated, this is a situation where the snippets
19 that they're referring to are not part of any
20 evidence or documents produced in this case, they
21 were obtained independently.
22 However, given the fact there is no harm being
23 done because the -- the items have been taken off
24 the website, I don't think they provide the Court
25 with an adequate factual basis, either for
532
1 protective order or for an injunctive order, and we
2 would object to the motion to abate.
3 THE COURT: Okay. I'll ask you the same thing
4 that I -- that I asked counsel for Ms. Brooks.
5 The Church here has joined, in essence, with
6 the plaintiff, stating that it would be in
7 everybody's best interests if this wasn't up and
8 running on some site, in the event some potential
9 juror in this case -- in the event there is a trial,
10 a juror sees this and, somehow, because they have
11 seen it, relate it somehow as an anti-Scientology
12 snippet that would cause them to be prejudiced
13 against the Church of Scientology in a lawsuit.
14 If that is not farfetched -- well, that is what
15 the allegation is. So if it sounds farfetched, it
16 does to me, too.
17 Nonetheless, since Mr. Minton wants to settle
18 and wants to make a global settlement with the
19 Church of Scientology, and since they don't want it
20 up and running, then it would seem to me he would
21 want to accommodate that.
22 So I can't grant your order. I have no
23 jurisdiction to enter this order, as far as I am
24 concerned.
25 But I simply tell counsel for Ms. Brooks and
533
1 counsel for Mr. Minton that if there is any truth to
2 the fact that Mr. Minton wants to enter a global
3 settlement with the Church of Scientology, set the
4 record straight, and all of the things he testified
5 to in this Court, he ought to get that off the web
6 as will she, Ms. Brooks. And, therefore, if it is
7 up and running, I can only assume, if they have any
8 control over that, there is something very strange
9 going on. So I'm not going to say any more than
10 that. I think I made myself clear.
11 MR. HOWIE: I'll pass the communication on.
12 Thank you.
13 THE COURT: So your motion is denied but --
14 because I don't think I have any authority to enter
15 that.
16 MR. LIROT: Your directives are clear, Judge.
17 Thank you.
18 THE COURT: Now, if I'm done with this, I'm
19 going to throw it in the wastebasket.
20 MR. McGOWAN: Do we need an order?
21 THE COURT: I don't know. I guess I do. I
22 guess --
23 MR. McGOWAN: I'll do it.
24 THE COURT: I guess what I probably need to say
25 is that the defendants joined with the plaintiffs.
534
1 However, the argument was the Court lacked
2 jurisdiction to enter the order, or whatever.
3 MR. McGOWAN: I'll --
4 THE COURT: The truth of the matter is there
5 is -- it is better not to have it in the order. Put
6 it is denied or put everything in I just said.
7 MR. McGOWAN: The record speaks for itself.
8 THE COURT: I mean, I do want to make it clear
9 that the credibility here of Mr. Minton and
10 Ms. Brooks is at issue in this case in this hearing
11 before me.
12 There is no question that if they are trying to
13 settle something with the Church, the Church's
14 position ought to be exactly what it is, which is
15 take that stuff off the net. That is what the
16 plaintiff wants, too.
17 So there really would be no reason for them not
18 to do that. That is my point. And that is what my
19 order should state.
20 But as far as ordering them to do that, the
21 suit has been filed in federal court. It needs to
22 be decided over in federal court. Okay?
23 All right. Mr. Dandar.
24 THE WITNESS: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Mr. Weinberg, are you ready?
535
1 MR. WEINBERG: Almost.
2 THE COURT: All right.
3 MR. WEINBERG: I get tired, too, every now and
4 then.
5 THE COURT: I get tired. My neck gets tired.
6 MR. WEINBERG: I know.
7 MR. DANDAR: At least you are looking down, not
8 up.
9 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, you are sitting.
10 THE COURT: Although, actually, sometimes I
11 wish I were standing.
12 MR. WEINBERG: I sort of go back and forth. I
13 get stiff both ways.
14 THE COURT: Me, too.
15 MR. WEINBERG: I marked four exhibits that we
16 did before but I didn't put them in at the break and
17 I just wanted to offer them.
18 This is -- let me get my glasses -- this we
19 marked as 163A, which was the subpoena to Vaughn
20 Young which we went over.
21 163B, which is Kartuzinski's emergency request
22 for expedited production of documents from expert
23 Vaughn Young.
24 163C, which is Mr. Dandar's January 19, 2000
25 fax transmittal with the interrogatories, and
536
1 those -- I think it was -- eleven letters to
2 Mr. Young.
3 And then 163D, which was excerpts from
4 Mr. Young's deposition, particularly those excerpts
5 which I read of my exchange with Mr. Dandar
6 concerning the production.
7 And I offer 163A, B, C, and D into evidence.
8 THE COURT: Any objection?
9 MR. LIROT: No objection, your Honor.
10 THE COURT: They will be received. I have
11 forgotten, I'm sure it's in my stack here, because I
12 have it right here. I know you mentioned it. What
13 was the letter? What was the exhibit number of
14 this?
15 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, it is 73, I think, but let
16 me -- I have it in my notes here. Hang on a second.
17 THE COURT: It's all right.
18 MR. WEINBERG: No. No. I actually have a
19 weird way of filing this.
20 THE COURT: I just thought you could get it for
21 me quickly.
22 MR. WEINBERG: It is 73. I was right.
23 THE COURT: 73? That is Defendant's 73?
24 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, it is.
25 THE WITNESS: Judge, if I could just tell you
537
1 something on the record.
2 THE COURT: All right.
3 THE WITNESS: During the lunch break I called
4 my office and spoke with my paralegal, Donna West.
5 I said, "Find this letter, May 2, 1997. Look
6 everywhere, correspondence, Mr. Young's file, Stacy
7 Young's files, if there is one for her."
8 And she reported back to me this letter does
9 not exist in my office.
10 BY MR. WEINBERG:
11 Q Just look at that letter for a second.
12 A Yes.
13 Q We're talking about the May -- whatever -- 2nd,
14 whatever it was, letter, is that the date?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Is that your signature?
17 A Yes, it appears to be.
18 Q And you sent that letter to Mr. Young on or about
19 May 2, 1997. Right?
20 A I assume I did, yes.
21 Q So you have no explanation for how it is you don't
22 have a copy of that letter at this point?
23 A No explanation.
24 Q Or why you didn't have a copy of it when these
25 requests for productions went out?
538
1 A It's the same explanation. It's not in my office
2 anywhere. Now or then.
3 Q Excuse me?
4 A It's not in my office anywhere now and back then
5 when you asked for it in 2000.
6 MR. WEINBERG: Now I'm going to go to a
7 different subject matter.
8 THE COURT: All right.
9 MR. WEINBERG: I'm going to hand Mr. Dandar,
10 for convenience, the fifth amended complaint which
11 is the January 20th -- the extant one, the one that
12 we're dealing with now. I can give you a copy if
13 you want it.
14 THE COURT: That would be good.
15 MR. WEINBERG: It's in your notebook, but it's
16 easier --
17 THE COURT: Yes.
18 MR. WEINBERG: I'm going to give Mr. Dandar
19 that, and a copy of Mr. Prince's affidavit, which is
20 August 20, '99. And I'll hand you up a copy of
21 that, too -- I believe it's already in evidence in
22 this case -- because I'll be referring to those two
23 things. That is Mr. Prince's affidavit from August
24 of '99.
25 THE COURT: Okay.
539
1 MR. LIROT: So I have the affidavit of Jesse
2 Prince?
3 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. That is it.
4 BY MR. WEINBERG:
5 Q Now, Mr. Dandar, you relied solely on the
6 speculation of Jesse Prince with regard to the allegations
7 contained in Paragraph 34 of the fifth amended complaint.
8 Correct?
9 MR. LIROT: Judge, I object to the
10 characterization. I don't think speculation -- I
11 think affidavit is a good enough example. I don't
12 think speculation is --
13 THE COURT: I think that is true. I think you
14 may refer to it as speculation. But I think -- I
15 don't think he's going to be able to suggest that it
16 was speculation. So I think you need to change your
17 terminology.
18 MR. WEINBERG: I'll ask the question again.
19 THE COURT: All right.
20 BY MR. WEINBERG:
21 Q You relied solely on the affidavit, the August 20,
22 1999 affidavit of Jesse Prince, with regard to the
23 allegations contained in Paragraph 34 of the fifth amended
24 complaint? Those are the allegations that include end of
25 cycle -- end cycle and decision to let her die.
540
1 A No.
2 Q In addition to the -- did you rely on the Jesse
3 Prince affidavit back in 1999?
4 A In part, yes, I did.
5 Q Okay. In addition -- for the end cycle
6 allegation, what else, other than Jesse Prince, did you rely
7 on?
8 A I relied upon all of the Scientology-published
9 documents that Mr. Prince refers to, and some he doesn't
10 refer to, in his August '99 affidavit.
11 Q Okay. Anything else?
12 A I relied upon other people, one of which was
13 Vaughn Young, but -- and I know this sounds -- I did see a
14 Scientology dictionary of some kind, some document, that had
15 end cycle. And as the definition of end cycle it said,
16 "To," T-O, "die."
17 Q Anything else?
18 A Right now, I can't remember anything else.
19 Q All right. Now, specifically I'm talking about --
20 my question is focused on -- Paragraph 34. Have you had a
21 chance to look at that?
22 A Of course. Yes.
23 Q The last sentence of Paragraph 34 says --
24 THE COURT: When you are asking your question
25 you are specifically referring to that --
541
1 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, Paragraph 34.
2 THE COURT: But the part of 34 that deals with
3 end cycle? I mean, obviously he could tell you a
4 lot of things about the entire paragraph. It is end
5 cycle, right?
6 MR. WEINBERG: I will make myself clear. I was
7 really referring to Paragraph 34 where the
8 allegation was contained where this was an
9 intentional act by the Church and management of the
10 Church to allow her to die. That allegation is --
11 THE COURT: Read to us exactly what you're
12 talking about.
13 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
14 THE COURT: Because -- in other words, the
15 first sentence says: "The extremist medical
16 condition of Lisa McPherson was obvious to
17 Scientology and all of the individuals --" there is
18 a lot of stuff that I have read in expert
19 depositions that he could refer to about that if he
20 had it.
21 I don't think that is what you're talking
22 about. So I'm trying to say what it is you're
23 talking about.
24 MR. WEINBERG: You're right.
25
542
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q "Yet, the defendants, in total and conscious
3 disregard to the rights of Lisa McPherson, willfully,
4 intentionally, wantonly and maliciously, toward the last
5 days of her life, decided to let Lisa McPherson die, i.e.,
6 end cycle, in Scientology terms, rather than save her life,
7 even though her extremist physical condition was known to be
8 entirely reversible. Scientology has no restrictions on
9 seeking licensed professional medical care. This decision
10 made by Scientology, through the Sea Org by David Miscavige,
11 carried out by Kartuzinski, Johnson and Houghton, was only
12 due to their decision to protect Scientology from bad public
13 relations."
14 That is the allegations that I'm talking about.
15 A That is most of 34. The first thing that comes to
16 my mind is Dr. Werner Spitz, pathologist retained by the
17 estate, who told me, after reviewing all of the information
18 on the medical aspects only, that they simply watched her
19 die. So that is why it is in there like that. That comes
20 from Dr. Spitz.
21 Dr. Bandt --
22 Q Before you go on, so you mean where it says
23 "decided to let Lisa McPherson die, rather than save her
24 life," that comes from Dr. Spitz?
25 A Right.
543
1 Q Okay. What else?
2 THE COURT: Just Dr. Spitz? Or are you -- are
3 you talking about all of the things here?
4 THE WITNESS: No. No. I'm talking about the
5 whole paragraph, but, in particular, the medical
6 part. Dr. Spitz is the one who told me first that
7 his opinion was they watched her die.
8 Dr. Bandt and Dr. Coe also came to the same,
9 independently of all three. They are all acting
10 independently of each other. He came to the same
11 conclusions.
12 Now, Jesse Prince and Vaughn Young contributed
13 to that by bringing in the Scientology thinking
14 about doing everything you can possibly do to
15 protect your seniors, higher-ups, and doing
16 everything you can possibly do to protect the image
17 of Scientology, protect the tech of Scientology,
18 which is the tech never fails anyone. But Lisa
19 McPherson is a prime example it does fail, and so,
20 therefore, in the thinking of Scientology, according
21 to my Scientology experts, and the fact that
22 Scientologists firmly believe that there is
23 reincarnation, you drop your body, meaning you die,
24 you come back later, it's not a big deal. Letting
25 Lisa McPherson die would be the best choice under
544
1 these circumstances, rather than take her back to
2 the emergency room where they had previously
3 promised the ER doctor that they would make sure
4 that she would get better, and if she didn't, they
5 would immediately bring her back, which they didn't
6 do.
7 Now, that is -- this paragraph is a combination
8 of at least three forensic pathologists, plus Jesse
9 Prince, plus Vaughn Young.
10 BY MR. WEINBERG:
11 Q Anything else?
12 A It might even be Stacy Brooks.
13 Q Okay, when your allegation -- this is the
14 complaint now, correct?
15 A That's right.
16 Q Okay. When you say the defendants --
17 THE COURT: Whose machine is that? Sometimes
18 it just gets a little loud.
19 Go ahead.
20 MR. WEINBERG: Sometimes when one
21 concentrates -- I didn't even hear it. But I did
22 when you pointed it out.
23 THE COURT: Right.
24 BY MR. WEINBERG:
25 Q When you say the defendants decided to let Lisa
545
1 McPherson die, you are saying and you are alleging that
2 there was a conscious decision by the management of
3 Scientology, of the Church of Scientology, to allow her to
4 die, correct? That is what the allegation is?
5 A It speaks for itself.
6 Q But am I right?
7 A That is right.
8 Q All right now --
9 A Somebody made a decision --
10 Q Well, not just somebody.
11 THE COURT: Not somebody, Mr. Dandar. It says
12 in here that it was -- it was made by Scientology,
13 through the Sea Org, by David Miscavige.
14 THE WITNESS: That is the only one that can
15 make that decision.
16 THE COURT: Well then, what -- the doctors have
17 got absolutely nothing to say about that, they
18 wouldn't know a thing about that.
19 THE WITNESS: That is what I said. I said this
20 is a combination of medical --
21 THE COURT: Well, who is it that you have that
22 says that?
23 THE WITNESS: On David Miscavige, is Jesse
24 Prince, Vaughn Young and Stacy Brooks.
25
546
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q No other evidence?
3 A Well, there could be other former Scientologists
4 that told me that.
5 THE COURT: Literature? Are you relying on the
6 literature?
7 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Yes.
8 THE COURT: I don't know what literature, but
9 he said before the literature. I want to make sure
10 I know what he's talking about.
11 THE WITNESS: There is the RT News. It says
12 PTS Type III has to be immediately reported up the
13 lines to RTC, the command channels of Scientology --
14 which is the booklet which I now have a complete
15 copy of, by the way -- that talks about reporting up
16 the lines for either PTS Type III or PR problems.
17 And there is some other things that talk about
18 OSA and RTC. Plus the depositions of the OSA
19 members I took in this case that they were
20 immediately on this case as soon as they heard Lisa
21 McPherson took her clothes off and was going to the
22 emergency room, because it was a huge PR flap to
23 Scientology.
24 BY MR. WEINBERG:
25 Q Now, there is not one document, there is not one
547
1 witness that has testified that anyone at the Church of
2 Scientology --
3 THE COURT: Counselor, if you are getting ready
4 to testify, you're going to have to do it. You
5 can't stand here and say that is --
6 BY MR. WEINBERG:
7 Q Do you agree --
8 THE COURT: All right.
9 BY MR. WEINBERG:
10 Q Do you agree -- do you agree -- is there any
11 witness that you're aware of that has testified that David
12 Miscavige or anyone at the Church of Scientology made a
13 conscious decision to let Lisa McPherson die? Anyone?
14 A It would be a high crime of Scientology. They
15 would never testify --
16 Q Just answer that question. Is there anyone?
17 A Never. No. It is the publications by Scientology
18 that show that.
19 Q Is there any document that you have seen in this
20 case that says that David Miscavige or anyone else in the
21 Church of Scientology made a decision to allow Lisa
22 McPherson to die?
23 A Not specifically that says Lisa McPherson. That's
24 right.
25 Q There is nothing specific that you have in this
548
1 case that indicates that there was any decision made by
2 anyone at the Church of Scientology to allow Lisa McPherson
3 to die, is there?
4 A Well, the medical records say that -- to my
5 experts on the medical side -- that someone let her die. I
6 just told you what Dr. Spitz said.
7 Q Now, on this last sentence here, Paragraph 34, you
8 say, "This decision --" I assume when you say "This
9 decision," that is the decision to let her die, right?
10 A Right, let her die, not do anything, omission.
11 Q But when you say the word "decision," you are
12 saying the decision that was made by, in your allegation,
13 the Church management to permit her to die, that is what you
14 are referring to?
15 A Correct.
16 Q You say, "This decision made by Scientology,
17 through the Sea Org, by David Miscavige, and carried out by"
18 these three individuals, you say, "was only due to their
19 decision to protect Scientology from bad public relations."
20 A Correct.
21 Q Now, what evidence do you have that there was a
22 decision by anyone related to Lisa McPherson to protect --
23 that had to do with her death to protect Scientology from
24 bad public relations?
25 A The general business practice of the Church of
549
1 Scientology. The publications of the Church of Scientology.
2 The greatest good for the greatest number. The knowing
3 Scientology or keep it working, keep Scientology working by
4 Mr. Hubbard, saying I would rather have you dead than
5 incapable. The introspection rundown. The search and
6 discovery document course that says the psychotics --
7 sometimes they can't be kept alive. This book, Signs Of
8 Survival, that said if you blow 2.0 on the tone scale, which
9 someone who is psychotic or chronically ill would be, if you
10 can't get them any better, then you let them die quietly and
11 without sorrow.
12 That is the only thing that comes to mind at this
13 time.
14 Q All right. And all that was in your mind when you
15 made this allegation in this complaint that is the extant
16 complaint in this case?
17 A At least that much was in my mind.
18 Q Now, discovery has been going on since February of
19 '97, and it's been ongoing throughout every iteration of the
20 complaint in this case. Right?
21 A Correct.
22 Q And there has been discovery on Paragraph 34 --
23 the allegation of Paragraph 34, the end cycle, permit her to
24 die, public relations allegation, since the fifth amended
25 complaint was filed. Correct?
550
1 A Yes.
2 Q Okay. And you have been asked, in discovery, the
3 question, "What evidence do you have," because in these
4 civil lawsuits each of us parties have an obligation to set
5 forth what the evidence is that supports various
6 allegations. Right?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And specifically you were asked -- I'll just pull
9 it out here -- there were interrogatories that were served
10 by Alain Kartuzinski.
11 And amongst other things, there were questions --
12 there was a question, Question 29, it's an interrogatory --
13 the first set of interrogatories propounded by
14 Mr. Kartuzinski, served on February 14, 2000, which is right
15 after this extant version of the complaint was filed.
16 And it says, "Identify all evidence, including
17 documents and testimony of witnesses, upon which you rely to
18 support your contention in Paragraph 34 of the fifth amended
19 complaint that the defendants willfully, intentionally,
20 wantonly and maliciously decided to let Lisa McPherson die,
21 specifically including in your response such evidence that
22 demonstrates that Kartuzinski decided to let Lisa McPherson
23 die."
24 And the answer was, "Objection. Work product.
25 Without waiving objection, see Dr. Coe's deposition,
551
1 affidavit of Jesse Prince and affidavit of Dr. Spitz."
2 Now, do you recall that?
3 A No.
4 Q Do you want to look at it?
5 A How long ago was that?
6 Q Excuse me?
7 A Was that in '99?
8 Q No, February of 2000.
9 MR. WEINBERG: Could I approach, your Honor?
10 A No. If you say that is what it says, that is
11 fine.
12 BY MR. WEINBERG:
13 Q All right. And since that day, since that
14 production, you -- until this very day, you haven't in any
15 way indicated that there is any other witness, other than
16 Jesse Prince, Dr. Coe and Dr. Spitz, that would support the
17 allegation contained in Paragraph 34, correct? This is it?
18 A I'm not sure. I have answered Mr. Kartuzinski's
19 interrogatories many times, so I'm not sure if there has
20 been amendments to that. If you tell me that is the only
21 answer ever --
22 THE COURT: Has nobody else ever asked that
23 question?
24 MR. WEINBERG: I believe that in this case we
25 tried not to have the parties ask the same
552
1 questions. So I believe in this situation,
2 Mr. Kartuzinski submitted the interrogatories that
3 specifically addressed those allegations in the
4 extant version of the fifth amended complaint.
5 THE COURT: I would say -- obviously, I don't
6 know that, and I hear you saying you believe, so I
7 assume you don't necessarily know that either, you
8 are assuming, the best you can tell.
9 Obviously, any answer to that response on
10 behalf of any of the defendants would have to be
11 added together, even if --
12 MR. WEINBERG: I understand.
13 THE COURT: Okay? If there is another
14 interrogatory, and there is more there, then you can
15 kind of add it together.
16 I mean, this defense is being presented fairly
17 unified, which is obvious from the fact there has
18 never been a defendant's lawyer, here from the
19 moment this started, other than the Church's
20 lawyers.
21 MR. WEINBERG: At this hearing?
22 THE COURT: Yes, and at many other hearings.
23 But the truth of the matter is you all are
24 protecting those three defendants most of the time.
25 MR. WEINBERG: Well, we have -- I mean, the way
553
1 I would put it is we have joint interests. And
2 there is no reason to file five different motions
3 when we can file one on behalf of everybody. That
4 is what we've tried to do in this case.
5 THE COURT: I understand that. And I think you
6 understand what I'm saying. The deal is, is that
7 these people do not have the first lawyer here,
8 Mr. Houghton's lawyer isn't here. Mr. Kartuzinski's
9 lawyer isn't here. And --
10 MR. WEINBERG: Actually, now Mr. Houghton is
11 represented by Mr. Moxon, as well, because,
12 remember, Bob Pulin moved to Hawaii.
13 THE COURT: I think Ms. Kobrin was representing
14 her.
15 MR. WEINBERG: They are partners.
16 MR. MOXON: We're partners.
17 THE COURT: Then he's not speaking on behalf of
18 the Church then.
19 MR. WEINBERG: But I agree with your point.
20 We're not arguing --
21 THE COURT: I hope not, because it is very
22 clear to me the lawyers for the Church are
23 representing the interests of these individual
24 defendants.
25 I am simply saying if these individual
554
1 defendants, or the Church, put out interrogatories,
2 as far as I'm going to be concerned, if he responded
3 and he has forgotten to put it one place, so he put
4 it somewhere else, he gets to add it in.
5 MR. WEINBERG: Absolutely. I agree.
6 THE COURT: All right.
7 MR. WEINBERG: And if I thought there was
8 something else, I would put it in front of him. I
9 don't think there is, particularly in light of his
10 answer today.
11 THE COURT: All right.
12 MR. WEINBERG: So I'm going to mark this as the
13 next exhibit. We've just gone over it, so we don't
14 need to go over it again.
15 THE COURT: Well, I certainly heard about
16 literature many, many times in response to this end
17 cycle business. I have seen literature many times
18 in response to the end cycle. I have seen, in this
19 hearing, stuff about end cycle.
20 So the idea that the Church of Scientology
21 didn't know that he was relying on Church of
22 Scientology literature, despite the fact he didn't
23 have Alain Kartuzinski's response --
24 MR. WEINBERG: That isn't my point. I'm going
25 to get to end cycle in a minute.
555
1 THE COURT: Okay.
2 MR. WEINBERG: That is not my point at all.
3 I'm really talking witnesses here in the
4 interrogatories.
5 THE COURT: Okay.
6 MR. WEINBERG: I have marked as Defendant's
7 Exhibit 164 -- it is the response of February 14 of
8 Mr. Dandar. And specifically we will refer to
9 Number 29.
10 BY MR. WEINBERG:
11 Q Just take a look at it. This was something that
12 was sworn to by Dell Liebreich and filed by you in this
13 case, correct?
14 A Yes. The exhibit number again?
15 Q 164.
16 A Okay.
17 Q Is that right?
18 A Yeah. This is the first answer to this first set
19 of interrogatories. I think I have answered this five
20 times, if I'm not mistaken.
21 THE COURT: Answered what five times?
22 THE WITNESS: The first set of interrogatories
23 by Mr. Kartuzinski.
24 BY MR. WEINBERG:
25 Q Not this particular question, because you answered
556
1 it the first time?
2 A Yes. But -- if I had my file I could tell you for
3 sure, but I didn't bring that today.
4 MR. WEINBERG: There were motions to compel
5 with regard to some of the other questions, I
6 believe. But that particular question he answered.
7 I'll put this back.
8 BY MR. WEINBERG:
9 Q All right. Now, you said, in response to both my
10 question and, I believe, something that Judge Schaeffer
11 asked you a few minutes ago, that in addition to Jesse
12 Prince and Vaughn Young, that you may have been relying on
13 Stacy Young, as well, with regard to the allegations in
14 Paragraph 34. Right? Isn't that what you said?
15 A Yes.
16 Q But you certainly weren't relying on her for the
17 end of cycle allegation, were you?
18 A No.
19 Q No? In other words, you agree?
20 A I agree, I was not. She was there -- she had
21 filed -- in our motion to add parties back in September, I
22 had a declaration from the Wollersheim case where she talked
23 about the micro-management of David Miscavige in all
24 Scientology corporations.
25 Q Was it the Wollersheim case, or the Fishman case,
557
1 that you --
2 A I -- well, I think it's the Wollersheim case.
3 There was no heading on the affidavit or -- or the
4 declaration.
5 Q It was attached to your original motion -- or
6 supplement to your motion?
7 A It was a supplemental additional authority, I
8 believe. Vicki Aznaran talked about it.
9 THE COURT: We all know what it is.
10 MR. WEINBERG: All right.
11 THE COURT: It's in the -- it's in this
12 hearing.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MR. WEINBERG:
15 Q And you knew, back in 1999 when you filed this
16 Paragraph 34 of the amended complaint, that the one example
17 that Stacy Brooks -- back then Stacy Young -- referred to in
18 her prior affidavit about introspection rundown that she had
19 done, and the one example of the introspection rundown that
20 Jesse Prince had been on and set forth in his affidavit,
21 turned out to be the same woman? You knew that, right?
22 A I knew they did one together. So, yeah, I would
23 have to -- yes, I would have to say yes to that.
24 Q And you interrogated both of them at that time,
25 before you filed this complaint, as to what the
558
1 circumstances were of their one life experience on an
2 introspection rundown?
3 A I don't think I interrogated them. But I did ask
4 them questions.
5 Q You knew back at that time that the woman that
6 they had been on the introspection rundown with did not die?
7 You knew that?
8 A I knew that.
9 Q You knew that there had been no orders from anyone
10 above to let her die or permit her to die or to do what is
11 characterized in the complaint as an end of cycle? You knew
12 that, too, right?
13 A I knew that because Jesse Prince and Stacy Brooks
14 told me that they made every effort they could to get her to
15 drink water. Because had they not, she would have died.
16 Q And you knew, at that time in 1999 when you filed
17 the complaint, that no witness that you had talked to,
18 including Mr. Young, Ms. Young or Jesse Prince, had any
19 experience that the introspection rundown had ever been --
20 had ever been used to murder someone? You knew that?
21 A Well, if you're going to use the word "murder," I
22 can't answer that question the way you phrased it.
23 Q Okay. Well, let me ask it a different way. You
24 had no evidence --
25 THE COURT: Asked to let him or her die,
559
1 intentionally let him or her die. That is the way
2 you stated. You didn't use the word "murder" here.
3 MR. WEINBERG: I'll ask the question a
4 different way.
5 THE COURT: I just asked mine.
6 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
7 THE COURT: Let Lisa McPherson die. You said
8 they decided to let Lisa McPherson die.
9 THE WITNESS: Right. They did not put a gun to
10 her head. They didn't do anything -- this is an act
11 of omission. It's like watching somebody bleed to
12 death in front of you. You didn't cause the person
13 to bleed, but you are standing there, or you are
14 walking out of the room, and they are bleeding to
15 death and they can't save themselves. That is an
16 act of omission.
17 That is what my medical doctors said happened
18 in this case. They just didn't do what a first
19 grader would have done. They looked at this woman
20 in a coma-like state and they just virtually
21 abandoned her. And they said that is homicide. And
22 I agree with that.
23 THE COURT: Well, as I read it, they said it is
24 manslaughter, which is kind of a reckless
25 indifference to human life. It certainly does not
560
1 equate, nor is it equatable, with intentional
2 murder.
3 THE WITNESS: Well, no. I agree with you.
4 THE COURT: Your complaint is phrased as if
5 it's an intentional decision by higher-ups to allow
6 her to die intentionally. That is murder.
7 Manslaughter is reckless indifference to human life.
8 THE WITNESS: Well, I do say in -- I believe
9 I'm saying this, Judge, in this Paragraph 34, "Total
10 and conscious disregard for the rights of Lisa
11 McPherson, willfully, intentionally, wantonly and
12 maliciously, rather than save her life, decided to
13 let her die."
14 That is how they told me and that is how it is
15 in the deposition.
16 THE COURT: Whose deposition?
17 THE WITNESS: It's in Dr. Spitz's --
18 THE COURT: No, it isn't. I read it. It is
19 not. It is not in Dr. Spitz's deposition. It
20 certainly isn't in Dr. Coe's deposition. And it
21 really isn't in Dr. Spitz's deposition like that.
22 I mean, he basically kind of gives you a very
23 clear manslaughter. It's very questionable, to me,
24 as to whether or not he gives you an intentional
25 murder. In fact, I think he specifically said it
561
1 isn't.
2 THE WITNESS: And I'm saying to you I'm
3 agreeing with, of course, what my experts say. I'm
4 telling you -- or I'm suggesting to you that this
5 paragraph comports to what my medical experts told
6 me, which is in their deposition, also, after this
7 complaint was filed, is that no one shot her or
8 intentionally did anything to cause the injury.
9 They simply did not do anything, when it was obvious
10 they should have done something. It is an omission.
11 THE COURT: If you would have phrased it like
12 that, you would be in pretty good shape. That is
13 not how you phrased it. And you can't sit here and
14 pretend that is how you phrased it.
15 You phrased it like there was a conscious
16 decision sent down through channels to these workers
17 that told them, don't give her water, let her die.
18 That is what you said. And you have got no proof.
19 THE WITNESS: If you recall, even Stacy Brooks,
20 in this hearing, told you, Judge, that end cycle and
21 her definition and understanding as a former
22 Scientologist, is if someone has a terminal illness,
23 there are processing, as they call them in
24 Scientology, to help the person die.
25 THE COURT: Well, of course according to your
562
1 expert -- according to your experts and according to
2 everything you would be telling this jury, she did
3 not have a terminal illness.
4 You would be saying, and your experts would be
5 saying, all they had to do is take her to the
6 doctor, hook up the IVs and she would be a living,
7 walking, breathing girl today.
8 THE WITNESS: That is exactly right.
9 THE COURT: So that is right. And I know it.
10 So what you have said in here, and what you're going
11 to try to promote in here, is a decision was made
12 "She's no good to us, we don't want her anymore, let
13 her die." That is what you said.
14 THE WITNESS: That is what I said.
15 THE COURT: And you don't have any proof of it.
16 THE WITNESS: But what I have is the medical
17 evidence of my doctors telling me how in the world
18 can anybody let someone get in this condition and
19 not rush them to the hospital.
20 THE COURT: Because they acted with reckless
21 indifference to human life. It is called
22 manslaughter. And it surely is a far cry from what
23 you put in 34.
24 And what the Church is saying, and what they
25 have been saying, and -- once it became apparent to
563
1 me what they were saying, is this is what brought
2 them so much grief. You said out there, everybody
3 said out there, they murdered Lisa McPherson. You
4 said it, and you don't have any proof of it. You
5 still don't have any proof of it, right, except what
6 Jesse Prince may have said?
7 THE WITNESS: I have -- I have proof of a
8 homicide.
9 THE COURT: You have a proof of a homicide
10 through manslaughter.
11 THE WITNESS: I agree with you. That is --
12 THE COURT: You have some evidence of that. I
13 shouldn't say you have proof, but you have doctors.
14 THE WITNESS: And that is what I have been
15 saying all along.
16 THE COURT: No, you haven't.
17 THE WITNESS: If I wanted to say they murdered
18 her, Judge, I think I would have used the word
19 "murder." But I didn't.
20 Paragraph 34 is the reckless indifference, it's
21 the total and conscious disregard, which Florida
22 Statutes equates to intentional conduct. It is like
23 running a stop sign totally drunk.
24 THE COURT: Well, I think what he's saying now
25 is basically he doesn't have any proof that David
564
1 Miscavige, from on high, I said that lightly, but,
2 you know, the top dog, so to speak, top banana, head
3 of the Church, said, "Let's see, she's got problems
4 down there, I think she's better off dead than
5 alive," so they chose to step back and let her die.
6 There is no proof of that. And apparently he's
7 saying that is not what he meant for proof. But --
8 MR. WEINBERG: I can read --
9 THE COURT: But I offered him the opportunity,
10 at the beginning of the hearing, to tell me
11 differently. And I think he said no.
12 MR. WEINBERG: And I agree with you. And I can
13 read, too. And this is what we've been dealing with
14 since -- since it first appeared in this case in
15 September of '99, and ended up in this extant fifth
16 amended complaint.
17 BY MR. WEINBERG:
18 Q I have one more question for you, Mr. Dandar.
19 THE WITNESS: Well, I need to add something to
20 what you said, Judge.
21 I have no document from David Miscavige saying,
22 "End cycle Lisa McPherson."
23 I would never get such a document from this
24 defendant that has, according to the affidavits and
25 declarations from other cases that I have seen --
565
1 they -- they destroy documents all of the time. The
2 last three days of Lisa McPherson's life, those
3 records that did exist are now nonexistent. Those
4 records may have showed us a great deal that was
5 going on.
6 THE COURT: Yes, they might have. And I
7 suppose that is something you might allude to for
8 some sort of reckless conduct or what have you.
9 But it's awfully difficult to allude to
10 something that is not there, to just say, from these
11 little notes that somehow they wrote in there, "Dear
12 Sir," is how they write, "Dear Sir, I got a message
13 from David Miscavige and it told me --" that ain't
14 going to be in those notes.
15 The notes might say, "I thought she needed more
16 water and I thought she was getting dehydrated, we
17 ought to take her to the doctor. And Janis said,
18 'No, you know, she's not that sick yet.'" That is
19 what you might find in those notes.
20 But you wouldn't find anything saying, "David
21 Miscavige gave us a message and it was to let her
22 die."
23 THE WITNESS: Based upon the Scientology
24 business practice of who -- who are the people to
25 get involved in this type of situation to make the
566
1 big decisions, that is not the little people at the
2 little Ft. Harrison Hotel or wherever she was.
3 That is from Los Angeles. That is from the top
4 management people in Scientology where David
5 Miscavige sits at the very top.
6 I have several witnesses, one of whom is going
7 to be Teresa Summers, who used to be a commanding
8 officer --
9 THE COURT: Well, look, is she one of your
10 witnesses?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes.
12 THE COURT: Not for Paragraph 34. You didn't
13 mention her.
14 THE WITNESS: I forgot then -- I didn't have
15 her at the time I wrote the paragraph. That is how
16 I was answering the question.
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 THE WITNESS: I have discovery of her since
19 then. And she was present in the office when an end
20 cycle order came in for someone who was dying of a
21 terminal disease.
22 And it's true, Lisa McPherson did not have a
23 terminal disease. This should never have happened,
24 if what is published by the Church of Scientology on
25 go to a medical doctor was followed. For some
567
1 reason, they didn't do what they published they
2 would do. They did something totally different.
3 THE COURT: Well, there are two explanations
4 for that, isn't it?
5 Number one, their experts are right and your
6 experts are right. That is what you have juries
7 for. That is the first explanation.
8 And the second explanation is, is that they
9 were negligent. They were grossly negligent. And
10 they didn't realize how sick she was. And they were
11 too slow. They should have been quicker.
12 And that is how you can prevail in the lawsuit
13 and get money for it, for the wrongful death. That
14 isn't what you said.
15 THE WITNESS: What I'm saying --
16 THE COURT: You tried to say and you tried to
17 imply, and apparently now that I have been through
18 this hearing, you tried to put out there in the
19 community that the Church, through its leader,
20 determined that this woman should die, made a
21 decision that said, "Don't take care of her, let her
22 die."
23 And the truth of the matter is that is a pretty
24 outrageous allegation. And if you have proof of it,
25 it comes from Jesse Prince.
568
1 THE WITNESS: No, not just Jesse Prince. It
2 comes from Vaughn Young, and there is some coming
3 from Teresa Summers. And I expect there will be
4 some coming now from Bill Franks.
5 THE COURT: All right. Well, then he said he
6 has more evidence. Now, see, I want you to
7 understand this, because we're going to get to this
8 one day.
9 MR. WEINBERG: I know.
10 THE COURT: I gave him this opportunity on day
11 one, because I was kind of confused.
12 Now, listen to me, Mr. Lirot. I don't know
13 what you are sitting back there doing, but listen to
14 this.
15 On the first day of the hearing I made it real
16 clear that I want to know what in the world and
17 where it was you-all were coming from. And I
18 thought you were coming from a theory, I believe I
19 said, of -- some sort of manslaughter theory,
20 reckless display, something like that.
21 Mr. Dandar was very clear to point out to me I
22 was wrong. This was after I pointed out to -- to --
23 to Mr. Lieberman whatever it was legally. Then I
24 finally said, "We're not going there." He was
25 talking about all this. I said, "We're not going
569
1 there. They're talking about a wrongful death,
2 recklessness, some sort of manslaughter type
3 theory."
4 Then I finally looked at you and said, "Isn't
5 that so?"
6 And very clearly he told me -- Mr. Dandar said,
7 "No, that is not what we're saying. What we're
8 saying is they intentionally -- intentionally --"
9 that is not manslaughter, "intentionally allowed her
10 to die."
11 And I said, "I apologize to Mr. Lieberman." I
12 think the record will reflect that.
13 I went home, I read the complaint, and I came
14 back and I said I was really wrong. I thought we
15 were trying a wrongful death here. I thought it all
16 along. I thought, when we did the Frye hearing, I
17 thought we had two different theories, one would be
18 this, one would be that.
19 I have read the complaint. I have listened to
20 what Mr. Dandar said. And, you're right, that is
21 what they're saying. They corrected me. Nobody
22 said, "No, Judge, you don't get it."
23 So now I'm saying again that what you have said
24 here, as clear as a bell -- it's clear as a bell,
25 you might as well have said murder. It says that
570
1 David Miscavige, the man at the top, made a decision
2 that Lisa McPherson no longer needed to live. And
3 he passed the word down, through his underlings, and
4 it got to the workers, and they stood back and let
5 her die, i.e., end cycle, which is exactly what it
6 says, "decided to let Lisa McPherson die, i.e., end
7 cycle."
8 And I have just -- he's asked you what your
9 proof was. You said what your proof was. And you
10 will have to prove it. I mean, you'll have to come
11 forward with some evidence of that to prove it.
12 But, you know, that is what their point has
13 been all along is you have not talked reckless
14 indifference or manslaughter; you talked intentional
15 acts, and you talked about it from their superior
16 leader.
17 And they take great offense at that because
18 they didn't think you had much proof of that other
19 than Mr. Prince in his affidavit.
20 Anyway, proceed.
21 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
22 BY MR. WEINBERG:
23 Q A couple more questions on this point.
24 You don't have any evidence, testimony from
25 anyone, affidavit or testimony, indicating -- saying that
571
1 the introspection rundown has ever had an end of cycle
2 order, as you use it, attached to it? There is no evidence
3 of that, is there? Not in Prince's affidavit, not in Vaughn
4 Young's, not in Stacy Brooks'?
5 A No, there is no evidence, that is right, as of
6 right now.
7 Q And Vaughn Young didn't testify, in his trial
8 testimony that was done by you literally on the day that the
9 final version of the fifth amended complaint was filed, and
10 he didn't indicate in any affidavit that he had any
11 knowledge whatsoever of end of cycle. He doesn't say
12 anything about end of cycle in his testimony, does he?
13 A I don't remember him saying that. I do remember
14 him talking about the public relations aspect of how far the
15 Church of Scientology will go to protect their public
16 relations image.
17 THE COURT: Could I ask a question?
18 MR. WEINBERG: Sure.
19 THE COURT: This is sort of mind-boggling to
20 me. Is it really something that you mean to
21 present, that the Church of Scientology would have
22 worse relations if they had taken Lisa McPherson to
23 the hospital, dehydrated -- let her be dehydrated --
24 hydrated, I should say, if that is what the problem
25 was, and let her either stay or leave or whatever,
572
1 than it was to let her die and go through this flap?
2 THE WITNESS: It's -- it makes -- outside of
3 the thinking of the Church of Scientology, it
4 boggles the mind, it boggles my mind.
5 But I'll have to rely on my former -- my
6 experts who are former Scientologists, especially
7 Mr. Prince, who talks about other end cycles he has
8 seen.
9 THE COURT: I understand that. And I
10 understand that Mr. Prince may say that.
11 But, I mean, I do understand what you alleged
12 and what you said the Church feels about bad public
13 relations and some of those things.
14 But, I mean, nobody in their right mind would
15 think they would want this woman to die in their
16 care because they thought somehow that would not
17 cause bad public relations. Why, they would know
18 very well that would cause huge public relations, as
19 it, indeed, did here.
20 I mean, these -- these are not stupid people
21 we're dealing with.
22 THE WITNESS: The question is why did they take
23 her fifty minutes away to another hospital to -- and
24 lie to their own public Scientology member,
25 Dr. Minkoff, who said they lied -- Janis Johnson
573
1 lied to him. And he was appalled and shocked about
2 her lies about the condition of Lisa McPherson.
3 THE COURT: Wouldn't you say that is reckless
4 indifference, perhaps?
5 THE WITNESS: Well, I think it's a little more
6 than that.
7 THE COURT: Why did she take her at all? Why
8 didn't she kind of bury her in the backyard? How
9 stupid, Mr. Dandar.
10 THE WITNESS: It would be a death -- in this
11 physical condition, either at the Ft. Harrison Hotel
12 or Hacienda, wherever she was, it would be a death
13 that they would --
14 THE COURT: I'm tired of hearing that. Do you
15 have any proof of that, she was at the Hacienda
16 where there were cockroaches?
17 THE WITNESS: Well, that is where the
18 cockroaches are.
19 THE COURT: I don't know if there are
20 cockroaches there or not. But you have no proof of
21 that, and I'm tired of hearing about it.
22 THE WITNESS: Well, I have eyewitness testimony
23 that there is cockroach -- infestation of
24 cockroaches at the Hacienda.
25 THE COURT: Oh, boy. I just don't think I can
574
1 stand another minute.
2 Do you have any proof of the fact that Lisa
3 McPherson was at the Hacienda instead of at the Ft.
4 Harrison?
5 THE WITNESS: Testimony? No.
6 THE COURT: Do you have any proof?
7 THE WITNESS: No. I have no testimony, no
8 documents.
9 BY MR. WEINBERG:
10 Q Well, do you have any proof?
11 A I have cockroaches feeding on Lisa McPherson's
12 body. And if -- if there is none at the hotel, then where
13 is she?
14 THE COURT: No, actually what you have, you
15 have somebody that says there is a 80 percent chance
16 they are consistent with cockroaches. At best you
17 have a 20 percent chance it is not consistent with
18 cockroaches. In your best case you have a doctor
19 that says it is 80 percent consistent with
20 cockroaches. Anybody can look at that and figure
21 there is a 20 percent chance that it isn't
22 consistent with cockroaches.
23 You have a whole bunch of other folks that say
24 it is abrasion.
25 Guess what? With the facts as they are, you
575
1 can look at it and say, well, the 20 percent chance
2 must be the right one here because there is no
3 cockroaches at the Ft. Harrison.
4 THE WITNESS: I -- there is other evidence.
5 Dr. Goff also said, Judge, that based upon his
6 expertise and experience, he can't think of anything
7 else but cockroaches that would have caused those
8 marks.
9 THE COURT: You know, I swear to God I don't
10 think you read the same thing I read.
11 He can't even say it's an insect. He doesn't
12 know if it's an insect or abrasion. He has to look
13 to the medical examiner to tell you whether it's an
14 insect or abrasion. The guy that says it's an
15 insect or abrasion can't tell you he's a 100 percent
16 sure. He can tell you within reasonable degree of
17 medical probability, which is 51 percent.
18 So, guess what? You put all this together,
19 what do you have, a good, smart-thinking lawyer like
20 you? What do you have?
21 THE WITNESS: You have a prima facie case.
22 THE COURT: Well, you have -- what you have got
23 is a good probability, unless you can establish that
24 there are, A, roaches at the Ft. Harrison, or, B,
25 she was at Hacienda.
576
1 What you really have is probably they were
2 abrasions. And that is exactly what they are. And
3 your Dr. Goff wouldn't argue with that because he
4 said he wouldn't even begin to say whether they are
5 insect bites or not.
6 THE WITNESS: Their own entomologist, who is
7 with a master's degree -- I can't remember his name
8 right now but I took his deposition, Judge -- he
9 said this -- based on the pictures he was shown by
10 defense counsel, shows openings in the door which is
11 right adjacent to the public street, and there is a
12 little plant area between the door and the public
13 street. He said those openings in that door are
14 sufficient enough to have roaches or other insects
15 come into that room. And they are attracted by
16 what? There is no lights on in the room and there
17 is feces --
18 MR. WEINBERG: That is not true. That is not
19 what the testimony was. There were lights on and
20 people in the room.
21 THE COURT: Yes, you just don't really need to
22 go there. I have already entered that order.
23 But I just was trying to say -- you seem to be
24 playing right into -- I hate to tell you this, but
25 you seem to be playing right into their hands here.
577
1 It seems like maybe you haven't read their
2 motions or terminating sanctions. It seems as if
3 everything you want to just continue and continue to
4 say and do, with very little proof of it, kind of
5 shows what you were really out to do is to damn the
6 Church of Scientology.
7 THE WITNESS: That is not true at all.
8 THE COURT: Well, it sure does sound like it.
9 And that is what they're saying. And that is what
10 they're saying in their counterclaim. And that is
11 what they're saying in their motion for terminating
12 sanctions, that -- it goes beyond that.
13 What they are saying is that is exactly what
14 the situation is, and that you knew it, and that you
15 and Mr. Minton were in on it together, and this is
16 what you really had in mind to do, which was to set
17 out to ruin, put down, do away with, cause
18 embarrassment to, on and on, the Church and its
19 members.
20 And, of course, you say, well, that wasn't
21 true. But -- but -- you know, you do understand
22 that is what they're saying?
23 THE WITNESS: I do. This allegation, from my
24 experience in doing personal injury/wrongful death
25 cases for over 20 years, this allegation was an
578
1 allegation that I would make against a really,
2 really, really bad nursing home who let someone in
3 bedsores just sit and suffer and die from the
4 bedsore. Someone who made a decision, "I'm not
5 going to do anything about it. I'm going to do the
6 act of omission," and the person dies from a
7 bedsore. Or the person bleeds to death in bed in a
8 bad, bad nursing home.
9 I could care less about the Church of
10 Scientology. I didn't even know about the Church of
11 Scientology, and I lived in Pinellas County, south
12 county, before I ever got this case. I could care
13 less about the Church of Scientology.
14 I'm not Mr. Minton's puppet. I wasn't on his
15 agenda. I was doing the wrongful death case.
16 And this allegation is above a manslaughter
17 allegation but it's below a murder count. It's in
18 the between now. And it is based on my medical
19 doctors, not Jesse Prince.
20 THE COURT: All right.
21 Continue.
22 BY MR. WEINBERG:
23 Q The fact is that throughout this case you have, in
24 pleadings and in public statements, accused the Church of
25 murder, M-U-R-D-E-R, with regard to Lisa McPherson.
579
1 Correct?
2 A No.
3 Q All right. Well, let me show you --
4 A I don't believe I ever used --
5 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, I think you have. I
6 think there is already evidence in this record of
7 that.
8 THE WITNESS: Well, it is the way he framed his
9 question. I don't think I ever used the word
10 "murder" in public.
11 I did use "murder" in a brief to the 2d DCA,
12 because I had my pathologist telling me that is what
13 it was.
14 BY MR. WEINBERG:
15 Q Well, I'm going to show you -- it won't take
16 long --
17 THE COURT: That is where I read it, in several
18 pleadings.
19 MR. WEINBERG: You also heard it on video.
20 BY MR. WEINBERG:
21 Q Remember the December 4, 1999 appearance with the
22 media there where the Lisa McPherson Trust was announced,
23 and your opening line was -- and we played it when
24 Ms. Brooks was on the stand -- "Thank you. I'm here to talk
25 about the murder of Lisa McPherson by a cult known as the
580
1 Church of Scientology."
2 Do you remember saying that to the media and to
3 the public on December 4, 1999?
4 A I think I remember the video being played here.
5 Q And you remember saying that. Right?
6 A I don't remember saying it until you showed me the
7 video.
8 Q And do you remember that on -- that on --
9 A But I thought I was talking about seeing it -- but
10 if you say that is what I said, fine. I thought I was
11 talking about end cycle.
12 Q Well, we just marked it as -- the transcript of
13 your speech. Want to take a look at the transcript and take
14 a look at the opening line? Is that what it says, what I
15 just read to you?
16 A That is what this says, the transcript that I
17 guess somebody at the Church typed up.
18 Q Well, you surely don't want me to play that video
19 clip again when Ms. Brooks was on the stand, but I'll be
20 happy to play it for you.
21 A No. No. It is okay.
22 THE COURT: I mean, if he doesn't remember
23 saying it, you better play it.
24 MR. WEINBERG: Well, let's play that for him.
25 Let's key that up.
581
1 ______________________________________
2 (Whereupon, the videotape is played.)
3 "I'm here to talk about the murder of Lisa
4 McPherson by a cult known as the Church of Scientology."
5 (This concludes the playing of the videotape.)
6 ______________________________________
7 THE WITNESS: Okay.
8 BY MR. WEINBERG:
9 Q Does that refresh your recollection?
10 A It certainly does.
11 Q And the press was there, there was a microphone
12 sitting there from one of the local TV stations. Correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q You weren't reluctant about accusing the Church,
15 in December of '99, right after you had filed your motion to
16 add David Miscavige under the Sea Org theory, with this
17 Paragraph 34, saying that he had ordered the death of Lisa
18 McPherson; you weren't reluctant to say that to the public
19 on December 4, 1999, that this was murder, were you?
20 A Well, it was prior to the hearing, ten days.
21 Q Prior to the hearing, after the motion was filed?
22 A Okay, did I talk about the motion being filed? I
23 don't think so.
24 Q Well --
25 THE COURT: Counselor, you two just really need
582
1 to stop.
2 What you wanted to ask him is whether or not he
3 said that Lisa McPherson had been murdered. He
4 couldn't recall it. And now you have shown him one
5 instance.
6 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
7 THE COURT: Do you have more than that to show
8 him?
9 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, I do.
10 THE COURT: Well, then go ahead, show him that,
11 then we're going to take a break.
12 BY MR. WEINBERG:
13 Q Let me hand you the answer brief you filed in the
14 2d DCA on August 4, 1999. I will refer you to Page 1, the
15 statement of the case. And I -- in the first paragraph, I
16 want you to read what you said in the last sentence that is
17 yellowed.
18 A "This is a case of murder by an organization
19 calling itself a church."
20 Q That is the second time. You acknowledge you
21 filed that pleading. Right?
22 A Yes. I did.
23 THE COURT: What -- what document is that?
24 MR. WEINBERG: Here. I'm going to mark it.
25 THE WITNESS: The answer brief of an appeal
583
1 brief filed by Bennetta Slaughter and other people
2 who worked for the AMC Publishing Company.
3 THE COURT: I have seen this. This isn't the
4 first time I have seen this. It has been filed
5 somewhere in this case.
6 MR. FUGATE: It's in a number of pleadings, I
7 think, to the Second District, your Honor.
8 MR. WEINBERG: I'll mark this as our next
9 exhibit, your Honor.
10 THE COURT: I guess what I'm telling you, this
11 is not the first time that I have seen that
12 allegation in an appellate brief or in an appellate
13 pleading by Mr. Dandar. I don't know if this is
14 where I have seen it before, or if it is in this
15 stack of stuff somewhere.
16 MR. WEINBERG: It's not in the stack of stuff,
17 because we haven't put this document before you.
18 But I think we've referred to it before.
19 THE COURT: All right. What is the number
20 here?
21 THE CLERK: 165.
22 MR. WEINBERG: And I move 165 into evidence,
23 which is the answer brief of appellee filed by
24 Mr. Dandar on August 4, 1999.
25 THE COURT: Any objection?
584
1 MR. LIROT: No. No objection, your Honor.
2 THE COURT: It will be received.
3 BY MR. WEINBERG:
4 Q Okay, now do you remember filing a motion to
5 dismiss the counterclaim with prejudice, motion to strike
6 and motion for sanctions on February 26, 2001?
7 A No. But I'm sure if you have it there, I did.
8 Q Okay. Let me hand that up to you.
9 MR. WEINBERG: Do you have another copy of
10 that?
11 All right, I'm going to hand this to you. And
12 if I could stand by Mr. Dandar, that seems to be my
13 only copy.
14 BY MR. WEINBERG:
15 Q All right, this is a pleading you filed, right, in
16 2001?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And can you read what you have yellowed there?
19 A What you have yellowed?
20 Q What I have yellowed. Correct.
21 A "Redress for the intentional torture and killing
22 of Lisa McPherson."
23 Q Then, at the bottom, you talk about also, same
24 words, "For the killing and torture of Lisa McPherson"?
25 A That's right.
585
1 Q And then, on Page 4, you say, "Scientology
2 maliciously tortured and killed Lisa McPherson"?
3 A That's right.
4 Q And then there are a few other references to --
5 well, one other reference on Page 10, "The torture and
6 killing of Lisa McPherson"?
7 A Right.
8 Q And in that pleading filed in this case, that was
9 a murder allegation, right, "Intentional torture and
10 killing" is murder, right?
11 A No. It said, "Intentional torture and killing."
12 Q Oh, so intentional didn't modify killing?
13 A No. It modified torture.
14 Q Oh, I see. So the killing was unintentional?
15 A No. The killing rose between murder and above
16 manslaughter.
17 MR. WEINBERG: I'll mark that as my next
18 exhibit.
19 A And it didn't say murder.
20 MR. WEINBERG: That, your Honor, is Exhibit
21 166, which is motion to dismiss counterclaim with
22 prejudice, motion to strike and motion for sanctions
23 filed by Mr. Dandar on February 26, 2001.
24 I move that into evidence.
25 THE COURT: What is it? What number?
586
1 MR. WEINBERG: It's 166; Defense 166.
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 MR. LIROT: No objection.
4 THE COURT: Thank you. I'll assume, Mr. Lirot,
5 especially on these pleadings, that they're already
6 part of the record.
7 MR. LIROT: Part of the record, Judge.
8 THE COURT: And as I said, basically I'm just
9 going to assume that you don't have an objection
10 unless you say so, so that --
11 MR. LIROT: Fair enough.
12 THE COURT: Okay.
13 BY MR. WEINBERG:
14 Q Now, you do remember that --
15 THE COURT: What is above a manslaughter and
16 below a murder?
17 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not familiar -- oh, you are
18 asking Mr. Dandar?
19 THE COURT: I'm asking Mr. Dandar.
20 THE WITNESS: Dr. Bandt called it a second
21 degree murder, which -- he also called it homicide.
22 None of my experts would call it murder, first
23 degree, because there was no commission.
24 THE COURT: Well, of course you did.
25 THE WITNESS: Well, I did. And I stand
587
1 corrected by my experts.
2 THE COURT: I mean, you called it a
3 premeditated murder, in essence, by saying it was
4 determined that this is what was going to be done.
5 That is a premeditated act, right? Murder two is
6 something short of premeditation. It is done out of
7 spite, evil -- ill will, evil, this type of thing.
8 That is what murder two is.
9 THE WITNESS: Well --
10 THE COURT: So to prove spite, evil intent, ill
11 will -- I think a classic example of that, sort of,
12 is when you go -- I go to shoot Mr. Fugate and I
13 point at him and -- no, that would be first degree,
14 that would be transferred intent.
15 MR. FUGATE: Right.
16 THE COURT: I'm trying to think, there is
17 classic example when you -- for murder two. When
18 you don't really premeditate it but your mind is
19 such that, as I said, you are being spiteful, you
20 know, you are operating out of ill will, evil
21 intent.
22 So, you know, that, I suppose, could also fit
23 what you have said here, that would be considered, I
24 suppose, a murder two.
25 But again, we -- well, you have been telling us
588
1 what your proof is. And we'll just have to wait and
2 see what you have.
3 MR. WEINBERG: All right.
4 THE COURT: I have read the affidavit of
5 Mr. Prince, and I have not heard Mr. Prince testify
6 and I have not read his deposition and, quite
7 frankly, if it's a thousand pages, I don't want it.
8 So --
9 MR. WEINBERG: The last exhibit in this series,
10 your Honor, with regard to the murder.
11 BY MR. WEINBERG:
12 Q You do remember filing a response to the
13 religiosity motion, which was a 120-page response that you
14 filed on January 18, 2000, along with Ford Greene? Do you
15 remember doing that?
16 A 120 pages? I don't remember doing 120 pages. Is
17 that exhibits?
18 Q Excuse me?
19 A Is that exhibits?
20 Q No. I'm going to show you -- this is my only copy
21 so I'll mark it, it's so long, but --
22 A If you tell me --
23 Q If I can approach, I'll show you a few things, if
24 that is okay.
25 A If it is 120, fine.
589
1 Q Is this the religiosity response where the issue
2 was whether or not the Church of Scientology was a church
3 that you and Mr. Greene filed in whatever I said, early
4 2000?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And it's a lot of pages. Right?
7 A Yes, it is. And my argument is the first
8 argument, that there should be no issue in this case to talk
9 about whether or not they are a religion or not.
10 Q In any event, in this response --
11 A Which Judge Moody agreed with.
12 THE COURT: I'm sorry, your what?
13 THE WITNESS: My response is we don't need to
14 have a circuit court say I declare the Church of
15 Scientology to be a religion. I said that is a red
16 herring. That has nothing to do with this case.
17 And Judge Moody agreed.
18 THE COURT: I don't think anybody disagrees
19 with it, do they?
20 THE WITNESS: There are some courts that cite
21 decisions in this case where -- Judge Kovachevich,
22 for instance, under the Clearwater cases, stated in
23 her opinion she wondered why the City of Clearwater
24 did not challenge the religiosity.
25 And the City of Clearwater did what I did in
590
1 this case, saying we're -- that is not an issue for
2 us, we're not here to challenge that. That is not
3 what this case is about.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 BY MR. WEINBERG:
6 Q But this whole pleading --
7 A But they wanted me to admit they are a church and
8 religion. They wanted Judge Moody to say they are a church
9 and religion. And, personally, I don't think I have to do
10 that. And Judge Moody agreed. It's just not an issue.
11 Q No, except in this 120-page document, you attacked
12 the Church of Scientology's practices which you said were
13 not religious practices. Correct? That is what the whole
14 pleading is about?
15 A Right. It is what it is. And I signed it, and
16 Ford Greene. He has more expertise about whether something
17 is a religion or not than I did.
18 Q All right, but that wasn't why I was going to show
19 it to you.
20 A Sorry.
21 Q On the first page, you and Mr. Greene talk
22 about -- you say "killed Lisa McPherson."
23 A Right.
24 Q Right?
25 A Right.
591
1 Q On Page 4, "It," being the Church, "has
2 imprisoned, tortured, killed and lied."
3 A Right. That is all true. If you're asking me if
4 I still stand behind --
5 THE COURT: I think the term "killed," you have
6 to be real careful with, because a manslaughter, of
7 course, is a killing. I mean, there is a difference
8 in a murder and a manslaughter. They are all forms
9 of killing.
10 And so I'm only interested, really, to tell you
11 the truth, in where he said "murder."
12 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
13 THE COURT: Or "intentionally killed."
14 MR. WEINBERG: This is so voluminous, I think
15 I'll wait until later.
16 THE COURT: All right. And I do think, what
17 he's trying to say, this is not a manslaughter but
18 it's like a murder two.
19 I don't know why in the world you would ever go
20 to the point of trying to establish something like
21 that when it certainly isn't necessary for your
22 wrongful death case. I mean, it just doesn't make
23 any sense.
24 THE WITNESS: Well, I'll move to conform the
25 pleadings to the evidence.
592
1 MR. WEINBERG: Well, excuse me, your Honor, but
2 I think it's a little late for that right now. You
3 gave him that opportunity --
4 THE COURT: He has an -- he has no opportunity
5 to speak right now. We'll finish with this hearing
6 we are in, which deals exactly with the pleadings as
7 you have filed them and as they have been perceived
8 to be public -- at least how you wanted them to be
9 perceived by the public.
10 And that is part of the issue. And that is why
11 I'm letting him go there, because one part of the
12 issue is this was, as they're perceiving it, sort of
13 the evil intent of the estate, which was to attack
14 the Church and attack the -- not the wrongful death,
15 but to attack the Church and kind of undermine it.
16 THE WITNESS: You know, I didn't once allege in
17 these pleadings, I don't believe -- of course, maybe
18 in the -- since they brought an issue of
19 religiosity, but other than that religiosity motion
20 that was not relevant to this case, I don't believe
21 I have said in my pleadings, especially the
22 complaints, that they are not a religion.
23 THE COURT: You don't get it yet.
24 THE WITNESS: I don't get it.
25 THE COURT: You don't get it.
593
1 THE WITNESS: I never heard of this before
2 so --
3 THE COURT: When you say the Church murders,
4 you are attacking the Church. You know what I mean?
5 When you say a church stood by because they were
6 afraid of bad press and intentionally allowed a
7 woman to die, you are attacking the Church.
8 And that is -- that is what -- part of what
9 their concern is. And that is really what has
10 happened as far as -- you know, you're right, you
11 stand by your pleadings. Your pleading says what it
12 says. I didn't realize until this hearing exactly
13 what it said. I just assumed we were off on another
14 course.
15 But, in any event, we are on this course now,
16 and my course says it is time for a break, so let's
17 go ahead and be in recess. It is 10 after. We'll
18 be in recess until 3:30.
19 (WHEREUPON, a recess is taken from 3:10 to 3:37
20 p.m.)
21 _______________________________________
22 THE COURT: Where is that paragraph we've been
23 dealing with? 34?
24 MR. WEINBERG: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Okay. Here is the definition of
594
1 manslaughter. Murder in the second degree is not
2 going to fit, I don't think.
3 Murder in the second degree is an act that was
4 an unlawful killing by an act imminently dangerous
5 to another and demonstrating a depraved mind,
6 without regard to human life.
7 An act is imminently dangerous to another and
8 demonstrating a depraved mind if it is an act or
9 series of acts that a person of ordinary judgment
10 would know is reasonably certain to kill or do
11 serious bodily injury to another.
12 Here is the problem. Number two, is done from
13 ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent.
14 Three. When done, is of such a nature that the
15 acts themselves indicate an indifference to human
16 life.
17 So ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent.
18 But if you get to manslaughter, it does talk
19 about intentional.
20 The victim is dead. That is element number
21 one.
22 Number two. A. The defendant intentionally
23 caused the death of the victim.
24 B. The defendant intentionally procured the
25 death of the victim.
595
1 Or, C, is where most cases I see on
2 manslaughter, is the death of the victim was caused
3 by the culpable negligence of the defendant.
4 Culpable negligence -- I will define it. Each
5 of us has duty to act reasonably toward others. If
6 there is a violation of that duty without any
7 conscious intention to harm, that violation is
8 negligence. But culpable negligence is more than a
9 failure to use ordinary care to another. In order
10 for negligence to be culpable, it must be gross and
11 flagrant.
12 I heard those words somewhere.
13 Culpable negligence is a course of conduct
14 showing reckless disregard of human life or the
15 safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects,
16 or such an entire want of care to raise a
17 presumption of a conscious indifference to
18 consequences, or would show wantonness or
19 recklessness or a grossly careless disregard for the
20 safety and welfare of the public, or such an
21 indifference to the rights of others as is
22 equivalent to an intentional violation of those
23 rights.
24 So that's murder one, premeditated murder, and
25 murder two and three. Premeditated murder doesn't
596
1 apply. So those are your statutory definitions.
2 THE WITNESS: It fits what you just read.
3 THE COURT: Manslaughter.
4 THE WITNESS: But also fits, the last part, I
5 think, also, of second degree, the very last line
6 you read.
7 THE COURT: Well, second degree says that it is
8 from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent.
9 You have to show, when you phrase your thing
10 here, that Mr. Miscavige passed the word down, and
11 apparently it was done from ill will, hatred, spite
12 or evil intent.
13 THE WITNESS: What was that after that, Judge?
14 THE COURT: It is an "and," it has to be one, a
15 person of ordinary judgment would know is certainly
16 reasonable to kill and is done from ill will,
17 hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and is of such a
18 nature that the act itself indicates an indifference
19 to human life.
20 The kicker for murder two is the ill will,
21 hatred, spite or evil intent. So it really doesn't
22 fit there, based on anything I know. There are some
23 pretty -- you know, pretty ugly words in
24 manslaughter under the definition of culpable
25 negligence.
597
1 But I wasn't thinking -- manslaughter can be an
2 intentional death. I don't think that is what is --
3 it's kind of an odd thing that he phrased here.
4 But, in any event, now you know that is what
5 the definitions are.
6 All right, continue on.
7 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, ma'am.
8 BY MR. WEINBERG:
9 Q You mentioned, in the response -- your response to
10 both Judge Schaeffer and I, as to what we might anticipate
11 from other witnesses that could appear.
12 And one of the witnesses you mentioned was Bill
13 Franks. Right?
14 A Right.
15 Q And you said something to the effect that Bill
16 Franks was going to provide evidence that would support the
17 allegation that we're talking about set forth in Paragraph
18 34. Did I hear you correctly?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Now, yesterday we put in evidence the affidavit of
21 William Drescher, which is Defense 143. And attached to
22 that affidavit was the May 23rd, 2002 letter to Mr. Drescher
23 from Bill Franks.
24 You remember that. Correct?
25 A Yes.
598
1 Q And you had already had a copy of that letter
2 before we put it into evidence, didn't you? You'd seen that
3 before?
4 A No. You handed it to me that morning.
5 Q But I'm saying had you been sent by Mr. Franks,
6 the person who you subpoenaed, a copy of that letter?
7 A No, because I would have given that to the Judge
8 right away when it talks about threats made by Mr. Drescher
9 not to appear when being subpoenaed.
10 Q What I'm going to focus on is what he said is
11 relevant to what we're talking about, which is Paragraph 34
12 in the fifth amended complaint.
13 What he says, at the bottom of the second page, "I
14 am sorry for this young woman's fate, but there is no way
15 that the Church killed her or participated in her death. I
16 don't know much about this case. But I wonder why someone
17 would try to pull me into such a case when I know that
18 standard Church procedure as I knew it would not have
19 allowed this to happen. And that is all that I would have
20 to say pertinent to this matter."
21 You see that?
22 A Yes.
23 Q It doesn't sound like Mr. Franks is going to come
24 here and tell us about any knowledge that he has that the
25 Church of Scientology has ever permitted, allowed, ordered
599
1 someone to die on introspection rundown, does it?
2 A I guess you'll have to wait to hear from him.
3 Q Well --
4 A I'm not going to talk about what Mr. Franks may or
5 might not say, nor what he meant by that letter. I have no
6 idea what he meant by that letter.
7 Q Have you -- have you -- is he your expert?
8 A He is an expert.
9 Q No. Is he an expert for the estate of Lisa
10 McPherson in this case?
11 A Well, as much as I can get a person who all I did
12 was subpoena him to come into this courtroom, yes, to talk
13 about Scientology practices, policy, end cycle, I guess, I
14 would hope so.
15 And, no, I haven't subpoenaed him. But I have to
16 pay for his expenses to get here.
17 Q The next question is a yes or no. Have you talked
18 to him about the allegations in Paragraph 34?
19 A I talked to him about the end cycle and I talked
20 to him about deaths in Scientology, and public relations
21 flaps. And -- very briefly, yeah.
22 Q All right. So it's hard for you to understand,
23 explain what he meant when he wrote those words that I just
24 read to you, of Mr. Drescher, about having no experience,
25 from his experience in the church, which I think ended in
600
1 1981?
2 THE COURT: If he's coming, it's kind of
3 irrelevant.
4 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
5 THE COURT: If he doesn't come, then it won't
6 make any difference. So let's just wait and see if
7 he comes.
8 MR. WEINBERG: That is true.
9 BY MR. WEINBERG:
10 Q Now, Mr. Dandar, in addition to statements in --
11 THE COURT: If he comes, I am sure -- and says
12 something different from what is in that letter,
13 then you can impeach him from that letter.
14 MR. WEINBERG: I would suspect that I would.
15 THE COURT: I suspect you would.
16 THE WITNESS: I even agree with that.
17 MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me?
18 THE WITNESS: I agree with that, you will.
19 BY MR. WEINBERG:
20 Q Okay. In addition to statements and pleadings in
21 this case regarding the killing, murder, things like that,
22 you have done quite a bit of media with regard to the Lisa
23 McPherson case since the complaint was first filed in
24 February of '97, is that right?
25 A No.
601
1 Q You --
2 A I have responded -- I responded to what the Church
3 of Scientology has done when the reporters asked me to
4 respond. I did not hold a press conference with my
5 pathologists. And your client did.
6 Q Okay. My question is did you appear, for example,
7 in Court TV Prime Time Justice -- did you do that --
8 December of 1997, and do an interview with regard to the
9 allegations in the case?
10 A Mmm, is that one show? Or is that two different
11 things?
12 Q One show.
13 A I did something -- I did an interview where your
14 associate, Laura Vaughan, was on, and Mr. Rinder and Elliott
15 Abelson was on, if that is the one with Bryant Gumble, Prime
16 Time. If that is the one, yes.
17 Q You appeared on various news shows, particularly
18 at the time of the criminal charge in this case, talking
19 about the allegations?
20 A It's possible.
21 Q Well, you remember that, don't you?
22 A When you say appear on TV, I mean, if someone
23 comes to my office and asks me a question, and I answer the
24 question, like I'm allowed to do.
25 Q Do you remember Mr. Minton's testimony about your
602
1 conversations between you concerning the German TV show ZDF
2 TV?
3 A No.
4 Q Well, did you --
5 A I don't think I was on German TV, was I?
6 Q Yes, you were.
7 A Well, if it played in Germany, I didn't get to see
8 it.
9 Q Well, do you remember being interviewed by German
10 television in your office?
11 A Yes. I do remember that.
12 Q And do you remember that -- that when you were
13 interviewed, you said words, in effect, "We're going to try
14 all of Scientology, every enterprise they have, and the one
15 at the top of Scientology, David Miscavige. He's the
16 absolute ruler of Scientology." Do you remember saying
17 that?
18 A No. Are you going to play it?
19 Q Do you want to hear it?
20 A Well, no. I don't remember saying that. That
21 doesn't sound like me.
22 Q What I am going to play, this will take about
23 twenty seconds or thirty seconds, is three clips, one from
24 Prime Time Justice, one from Channel -- Prime Time Justice,
25 December 18, 1997; one from Channel 13 News, November 13,
603
1 1998; and one from Channel 28 News, December 18, 1997.
2 A So you're just going to play my part, and not your
3 client's part?
4 THE COURT: We'll let you play the other parts.
5 I'm sure if there are three of them and one of
6 yours, I'm sure they talked three times more than
7 you did.
8 THE WITNESS: I don't want to.
9 THE COURT: Well, then don't. All right. All
10 right.
11 _______________________________________
12 (Whereupon, the videotape is played.)
13 "Why would they want her dead?
14 "As bizarre as this sounds, the Church of
15 Scientology will let a member die before they face
16 bad public relations, according to their own
17 copyrighted books on rules and regulations of
18 Scientology.
19 "They killed Lisa McPherson. She's dead. Her
20 entire death was preventable. They chose to let her
21 die.
22 "They killed Lisa McPherson. She's dead. Her
23 entire death was preventable. They chose to let her
24 die in following the dictates of Scientology.
25 "Through an isolation, they were following the
604
1 exact programs authored by the founder of the Church
2 of Scientology, Mr. Hubbard. And as a result of
3 those programs, they killed Lisa McPherson."
4 (This concludes the playing of the videotape.)
5 BY MR. WEINBERG:
6 Q Now, when you said, in December of 1997, which is
7 that first clip that I played -- that we played for you --
8 that the Church of Scientology will let a member die before
9 they face bad public relations, according to their own
10 copyrighted books on rules and regulations of Scientology,
11 that is before you ever met Jesse Prince, right? It was a
12 year before you met Jesse Prince?
13 A Right. That is from Vaughn Young.
14 Q So Vaughn Young told you that?
15 A Right. He was their public relations person. He
16 knows.
17 Q And what were those copyrighted books and rules
18 that said that you would let somebody die before they would
19 face bad public relations?
20 A Well, I don't have those committed to memory. I'm
21 sure they include the ones I already talked about.
22 THE COURT: I'm sure you'll have what it is you
23 are talking about in your response to motion to
24 summary judgment.
25 THE WITNESS: I most certainly will, Judge.
605
1 THE COURT: Yes. So we'll see those at that
2 time.
3 MR. WEINBERG: Okay, you can turn that off.
4 Let me go to another subject, your Honor.
5 BY MR. WEINBERG:
6 Q Switching gears, going to a completely different
7 subject --
8 THE COURT: I'm sure it must be about the
9 agreement.
10 MR. WEINBERG: Well, no.
11 THE COURT: When are we going to get to the
12 three things your lawyer indicated were at issue
13 here?
14 MR. WEINBERG: Well, this is part of it. What
15 we just did is part of the three things.
16 THE COURT: How long are you going to spend on
17 this one?
18 MR. WEINBERG: On this one?
19 THE COURT: Yes.
20 MR. WEINBERG: Not that long. But, I mean,
21 it's discussed and has to do with confidential
22 stuff. It's discussed in our brief.
23 THE COURT: All right.
24 MR. WEINBERG: And our motion.
25 What were you referring to, will I get to the
606
1 agreement? I'm not tracking --
2 THE COURT: I don't know. There are three
3 things your lawyer said were essential to this
4 matter. One was the agreement between -- between
5 the estate, or Ms. Liebreich, or Ms. Liebreich and
6 her brothers and sisters and Mr. Minton to give the
7 bulk of the money, or substantial part of the money
8 or some part of the money. That I have yet to hear
9 about.
10 So I assume you're going to get to that, or
11 else you're not. And if you don't, we'll just
12 eliminate that.
13 MR. WEINBERG: But -- but -- but I believe --
14 and I'm looking for -- here it is, for the -- for
15 the first page of our memo, if I could just address
16 this for --
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 MR. WEINBERG: -- for a moment. We said that
19 we filed this memo seeking various forms of relief
20 based on the extraordinary record of new admissions
21 from Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks, showing that, one --
22 that is why I'm a little confused at the three
23 areas -- showing that, one, plaintiff engaged in
24 perjury and elicited perjury on material matters in
25 this court and in other court proceedings on matters
607
1 relating to the procedures in this case. That is
2 number one.
3 THE COURT: Committed perjury or what?
4 MR. WEINBERG: Or elicited perjury.
5 THE COURT: Okay. Now we're going over his
6 fifth amended complaint, which isn't under oath.
7 MR. WEINBERG: But I'm not there yet.
8 THE COURT: Okay.
9 MR. WEINBERG: Two is plaintiff and her counsel
10 knowingly have made false accusations in this case,
11 including accusations that the defendant and
12 Scientology ecclesiastical leadership knowingly and
13 intentionally murdered Lisa McPherson for the
14 purpose of using such allegations to attack the
15 Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization.
16 THE COURT: I thought that is what we've been
17 doing?
18 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I thought that -- I mean,
19 I was going to review with you what -- I mean, I'm
20 going to show you what we're doing -- I mean, I'm
21 going to show you the three areas. And I think it
22 will be clear that everything that I have been doing
23 falls within the purview of these three areas.
24 THE COURT: I thought that you said you were
25 done with that and you were going into the third
608
1 area. I thought --
2 MR. WEINBERG: No. I said another area is what
3 I said.
4 THE COURT: You mean --
5 MR. WEINBERG: Another subject matter.
6 THE COURT: All right. I thought you were
7 going --
8 MR. WEINBERG: Another --
9 THE COURT: One more and you would be done, and
10 I thought perhaps it would be the agreement which
11 your lawyer said when he made his oral presentation
12 was one of three.
13 MR. WEINBERG: All right. I mean --
14 THE COURT: Continue on --
15 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
16 THE COURT: -- rather than arguing with me.
17 MR. WEINBERG: I wasn't trying to argue.
18 THE COURT: Move on. It's very slow going.
19 And one of these days I'm going to put limits on you
20 all and tell you you have half a day. I haven't
21 done that yet, but I'm going to if you don't move.
22 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I've tried to move fast.
23 And I --
24 THE COURT: Don't make excuses. Just keep
25 going.
609
1 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
2 BY MR. WEINBERG:
3 Q You sent E-Mails and other documents in the case
4 to Mr. Minton. Correct?
5 A I asked and answered that yesterday.
6 THE COURT: Yes, you did. But you have a
7 lawyer sitting back there. He may not have been.
8 THE WITNESS: He may not have been. Well, my
9 brother may have been here then.
10 A But, generally speaking, yes.
11 BY MR. WEINBERG:
12 Q Okay. You remember Mr. Minton's testimony that
13 you E-mailed him the confidential videotaped -- or the
14 transcript of the confidential deposition of Gerald
15 Armstrong? Do you remember his -- his testimony about that?
16 A No.
17 Q Did you?
18 A Not that I recall.
19 Q Is it fair to say you don't recall, one way or
20 another? Or are you denying that you did?
21 A I'm pretty sure I did not. But as I have been
22 saying throughout, if you show me something that is by me to
23 Mr. Minton saying, "Here is the confidential deposition of
24 Gerald Armstrong," I will change my testimony. But as I sit
25 here under oath, I'm pretty sure I can say I did not.
610
1 Q Do you remember Mr. Minton's testimony that he
2 discussed with you the mediation -- the first mediation in
3 1998, and do you remember that he posted a few months later
4 a posting that had to do with that mediation?
5 THE COURT: Here again, I think, Counselor, the
6 problem I have with this, you are trying to ask him
7 about whether what somebody else said is true or
8 not. You need to ask him questions.
9 MR. WEINBERG: Well --
10 THE COURT: And then, of course, when it is all
11 over, you can say this is what Mr. Minton said, this
12 is what he said.
13 You can't impeach him --
14 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not trying to impeach him.
15 THE COURT: What are you trying to do?
16 MR. WEINBERG: I asked him a question.
17 BY MR. WEINBERG:
18 Q Did you --
19 MR. WEINBERG: I was just trying to focus it so
20 we went quicker.
21 BY MR. WEINBERG:
22 Q Did you discuss the first mediation, which was a
23 confidential mediation, with Mr. Minton?
24 A No. Not that I remember. I don't think I ever
25 discussed a mediation with him, except I may have said we
611
1 had a mediation and they offered something that was
2 extremely insulting to my client.
3 Q Which is essentially what he says in his posting,
4 which is Exhibit 98.
5 So is it correct that you had some discussion with
6 him where you told him it was an insulting offer?
7 A I may have said it was an insulting offer. But I
8 certainly didn't tell him the context of the mediation.
9 Q Did you discuss with Mr. Minton the conversations
10 that you had with Fannie McPherson when you met her for the
11 one and only time, as you called it, on her deathbed?
12 A Well, actually, she was sitting in a chair on
13 oxygen. And I met her -- with her somewhere between three
14 and a half to four hours.
15 THE COURT: The question was --
16 THE WITNESS: Yes --
17 THE COURT: Did you discuss that with
18 Mr. Minton?
19 THE WITNESS: I think I told him or a group of
20 people that one statement that Fannie said that
21 still sticks in my mind about, you know, exposing
22 what Scientology did to Lisa McPherson.
23 BY MR. WEINBERG:
24 Q Was that a confidential, privileged communication
25 you were having with Fannie McPherson?
612
1 A Not that time, it wasn't. I had other people in
2 the room when she said that, I believe.
3 Q But other parts of the conversation you raised the
4 privilege to when we sought -- we inquired about it over the
5 five years of this case. Correct?
6 A Correct.
7 THE COURT: I don't know how she could be his
8 client. She's deceased.
9 MR. WEINBERG: He testified that she was his
10 client.
11 THE COURT: Well, he may have thought she was
12 his client. But the truth of the matter is she's
13 dead and it's not her estate. So the truth of the
14 matter is I don't believe she is his client.
15 THE WITNESS: Well --
16 MR. WEINBERG: Well, in this case -- we'll go
17 over in this case it is one of the allegations we
18 have in the motion.
19 But in this case we sought transcript of part
20 of the initial conversation between Mr. Dandar and
21 Ms. McPherson. It's the transcript that ultimately
22 had been given to the FDLE and the Clearwater Police
23 that was produced by the Clearwater Police and/or
24 the FDLE after the criminal case was nolle prossed.
25 Mr. Dandar, who -- we'll show you this -- said
613
1 this was a privileged document and would not produce
2 it.
3 THE COURT: I don't -- Mr. Dandar continues to
4 say she's his client. Mr. Dandar said his privilege
5 and this and that and the other thing.
6 I'm saying, as matter of law, I don't know how
7 this could be. She's dead. Lisa McPherson is not
8 his client. His client is the estate of Lisa
9 McPherson. That is not -- I mean, that is not
10 Fannie McPherson. And it's not Lisa McPherson.
11 It's the estate of Lisa McPherson. So I think he's
12 wrong. I mean --
13 MR. WEINBERG: Obviously, I'm not arguing with
14 you about it. It is just what he said.
15 THE WITNESS: But I did get rulings by Judge
16 Moody that said I was right. She did sign the
17 retainer agreement.
18 THE COURT: Well, you know what? You're here
19 now.
20 THE WITNESS: I know. I'm just letting you
21 know I'm just not throwing this up in the air.
22 THE COURT: And I'm sure when she was alive she
23 was your client. But she's not now.
24 Move on. Sorry I brought it up.
25
614
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q Did you send the 1995 knowledge report of Brenda
3 Spencer Hubert to Mr. Minton?
4 A I don't know. I don't think so. And I'm pretty
5 sure that wasn't a confidential document, either.
6 Q Well, you do remember Exhibit 99, which was his
7 posting that said he got that?
8 A Yes. I don't think he said he got it from me. He
9 might have gotten it from one of -- his spy.
10 Q Did you -- have you now checked with your office
11 concerning the August 30, 1999 draft of the fifth amended
12 complaint that we looked at yesterday and marked as
13 Exhibit --
14 A Yes, we did, Exhibit 145 for the defendant. I
15 did. And it does not exist in my office.
16 THE COURT: What is that?
17 THE WITNESS: That is this crazy-looking --
18 THE COURT: Oh, right.
19 THE WITNESS: -- complaint that someone
20 apparently tried to scan from something. If
21 Mr. Minton had that, I'm sure you would have asked
22 him all kinds of questions about it. But it's not
23 in my office.
24 BY MR. WEINBERG:
25 Q So you don't know who prepared this version of the
615
1 fifth amended complaint?
2 A No. Not based upon this exhibit, I don't.
3 THE COURT: What is the number of that again?
4 THE WITNESS: 145.
5 MR. WEINBERG: It's actually 146.
6 MR. LIROT: There are two different ones.
7 THE WITNESS: No, this one is 145.
8 MR. LIROT: 145 appears to be the one either
9 scanned or is a little rougher text.
10 THE COURT: Okay.
11 MR. LIROT: And 146, I think, has a date of
12 9/6/99.
13 BY MR. WEINBERG:
14 Q And 146 is a -- is a copy that you have confirmed
15 is -- is a draft of what you did in your office. Right?
16 A No, that is the one that is actually filed.
17 Q 145, I mean -- is it 145?
18 A No. No. This is 145. This is the scanned
19 gobbledygook. That one is not in my office.
20 The one that has September '99 in the top
21 left-hand corner, that is attached to the motion to add
22 parties. So that is in my office. That is a filed
23 document.
24 Q And did you send that document, the September one,
25 by E-Mail to Mr. Minton?
616
1 A No.
2 Q And you --
3 A Unless -- wait a minute. Wait. Wait. You know,
4 again, if you can show me something that says I did, I can
5 help answer your question. But I didn't -- certainly didn't
6 send him anything before I filed it. It is a record
7 document in the record of the court, so it's a public
8 record. And if he asked for it after it was filed, I had to
9 send it to anybody, send it to the press, send it to whoever
10 asked for it.
11 Q You keep saying -- and you said it a number of
12 times -- if I can show you, you'll agree with it, which is
13 nice. If I could show you, beyond what I have, I would.
14 But I'm asking you really for your best
15 recollection of whether you sent drafts of pleadings before
16 they were filed, or gave drafts of pleadings before they
17 were filed, to Mr. Minton.
18 A No.
19 Q Okay. Now, you filed a motion for sanctions
20 against Mr. Moxon in regard to the Teresa Summers
21 deposition, didn't you?
22 A Yes.
23 Q You allege that he did not notify her, at her
24 deposition, of the confidentiality provision -- the order
25 that Judge Moody had entered several years before. Correct?
617
1 A Correct.
2 Q You didn't notify her, either, of that at the
3 deposition, did you?
4 A Correct. I wasn't taking her deposition. What
5 was the date of that, by the way?
6 THE COURT: By the way, I don't care about
7 that.
8 MR. WEINBERG: About the -- about the
9 confidentiality provision?
10 THE COURT: I don't care about that, and I
11 don't care whether he filed a motion against
12 Mr. Moxon, and I don't care whether Mr. Moxon told
13 her, and I don't care whether Mr. Dandar told her.
14 MR. WEINBERG: Right. But what I'm going to
15 show Mr. Dandar, if it is okay, is that --
16 THE COURT: If it is something that is
17 relevant, I'm anxious to hear. But all that, I
18 don't care about it. It sounds like you guys fuss
19 and file a motion, bring things to court, typical of
20 what is happening in this case.
21 MR. WEINBERG: I think it's relevant. And
22 what -- what is --
23 BY MR. WEINBERG:
24 Q Is it true, Mr. Dandar, that prior to your motion
25 you actually caused the transcript of the Teresa Summers
618
1 deposition to be E-mailed to Mr. Minton?
2 A We've already covered this.
3 Q And the answer is?
4 A Yes. Because they were so worried that this
5 ex-employee --
6 THE COURT: You've already testified to this.
7 He doesn't have to go over this again.
8 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
9 BY MR. WEINBERG:
10 Q Did you authorize Mr. Prince to E-Mail a draft of
11 the severe sanction motion concerning -- you know, that
12 Judge Schaeffer just issued an order on yesterday concerning
13 Mr. Prince -- to E-Mail a draft of that motion, before it
14 was filed, to Mr. Minton?
15 A No.
16 Q Did you know that Mr. Prince did that?
17 A No. Do you have proof of that?
18 Q Yes.
19 A Okay. Mr. Prince certainly had a copy of that
20 because it concerned him.
21 MR. WEINBERG: Can I approach, your Honor?
22 THE COURT: Save it for Mr. Prince, why don't
23 you? I mean, he -- if he wants to see it, let him
24 see it on his time, not mine.
25 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. That is fine.
619
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q Now, you were present at the May 1999 depositions
3 of Dell Liebreich, Ann Carlson, Lee Skelton and Sam Davis
4 that we did in Dallas, right?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And at those depositions, each of your clients
7 exercised the confidentiality provision and declared their
8 depositions to be confidential. Right?
9 A Yes.
10 THE COURT: Are all those people your clients?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes.
12 THE COURT: Why is that?
13 THE WITNESS: Because they all consider me
14 their attorney, and I consider them my clients.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 THE WITNESS: Am I doing something wrong?
17 THE COURT: Well, I don't know. I don't even
18 see where they're listed on this thing. They are a
19 potential beneficiary.
20 THE WITNESS: It is true they are not parties
21 to this case, nor are they beneficiaries of the Lisa
22 McPherson estate. But they are beneficiaries of the
23 Fannie McPherson estate, which is the sole
24 beneficiary of the Lisa McPherson estate.
25 THE COURT: Well, if Fannie McPherson is dead,
620
1 you'll find if she's the beneficiary she's not going
2 to get much.
3 Go ahead.
4 THE WITNESS: She is dead. Yes.
5 BY MR. WEINBERG:
6 Q And you talked -- during those depositions that
7 were taken in Texas in May of 1999, you had telephone
8 conversations with Mr. Minton, didn't you?
9 A Well, have I testified to that already? Is that
10 what you said?
11 Q No.
12 A Oh?
13 Q I said you had telephone conversations with
14 Mr. Minton about those depositions while those depositions
15 were going on while you were in Texas in May of 1999, didn't
16 you?
17 A It is possible, because that is all you kept
18 asking about is Mr. Minton and Ken Dandar.
19 Q Well, I mean, did you tell him about some of the
20 content of the deposition that had been -- of the
21 depositions that had been deemed, pursuant to Judge Moody's
22 order, to be confidential?
23 A I don't think I gave him the contents. I think I
24 just gave him a general statement. I think he called it on
25 the Internet, to my dismay, a "Bob and Ken Show," or
621
1 something like that.
2 Q Well, this is May of 1999. And we've asked you a
3 number of questions about Mr. Minton. And is there some
4 reason why, while the depositions of your clients -- as you
5 called them -- the beneficiaries in this case, including
6 Dell Liebreich, are being taken, that you are having
7 communications, by telephone, with him about the
8 depositions?
9 A I think I can telephone anybody I want to
10 telephone, Mr. Weinberg.
11 Q I didn't say you couldn't. But you have insisted
12 that Mr. Minton didn't have anything to do with this
13 wrongful death case, right? You said that?
14 A That is right. I still say that. That is still
15 the truth. And it hasn't changed.
16 THE COURT: What were you talking to him about?
17 THE WITNESS: About Mr. Weinberg consistently
18 asking questions about Bob Minton throughout the
19 deposition, instead of asking questions about the
20 estate, the damages to the estate, their
21 relationship with Lisa McPherson, the mother's --
22 you know, normal -- what you would consider normal
23 questions.
24 THE COURT: And why was it you cared about that
25 when it came to Mr. Minton? He had nothing to do
622
1 with it.
2 THE WITNESS: Because I kept objecting to --
3 you know, "Why are we wasting our time sitting here
4 talking about Mr. Minton?"
5 THE COURT: I understand. But why did you feel
6 it was necessary to hustle out and call him on the
7 telephone?
8 THE WITNESS: More likely than not, it would
9 have been afterwards, not during the deposition.
10 THE COURT: Continue on.
11 MR. WEINBERG: I'll just get the dates of the
12 deposition if I can.
13 BY MR. WEINBERG:
14 Q Let me show you what has been marked as -- has
15 been entered as Exhibit 108, Defense 108, which has been
16 admitted in this case, which is Mr. Minton's May 28, 1999 --
17 1999 posting.
18 And if my memory serves me, the depositions of --
19 of these parties were being taken on May 25 and May 24 of --
20 of 1999. Is that right?
21 A That is what it looks like.
22 Q And let me just refer you to this paragraph of
23 Mr. Minton's posting, which is Exhibit 108.
24 And he says, "In any case, the week started out
25 with another hundred thousand dollars to refill the
623
1 McPherson case coffers. The money was deposited Monday into
2 the Dandar & Dandar account while Ken was in Dallas, as the
3 Scieno's deposed Dell Liebreich for seven hours, not to
4 mention 30 minutes for Ann Carlson.
5 "Ken told me on Monday night," Monday night
6 indicating during the deposition, "that it was the 'Bob and
7 Ken Show' for the entire seven-hour intimidation session.
8 They were only interested about her communications with me
9 and what Ken had told her about his communications with me.
10 Not a question about Lisa, I was told. Dell made it real
11 clear to the Scieno side that she wanted everybody to know
12 that Scientology murdered Lisa."
13 Now, does that accurately reflect the
14 conversations that you were having, while these depositions
15 were in progress, in May of 1999 with Mr. Minton?
16 A Well, what is the date of the deposition? Because
17 this doesn't say while the depositions were in progress.
18 Q Well, what he says is, "Ken told me on Monday
19 night."
20 A Yes. What Monday night?
21 Q Well, this is 5/28.
22 A So what -- I can't say that his posting here
23 describes a conversation that took place in the evening
24 while I'm in Dallas, Texas during a deposition.
25 And this does describe what I just said, the Bob
624
1 and Ken Show, seven hours. There is no substance here.
2 Q Tuesday is May 25, 1999. So Monday is May 24,
3 1999. Sam Davis's deposition --
4 MR. WEINBERG: If I can approach, your Honor?
5 THE COURT: You may.
6 BY MR. WEINBERG:
7 Q -- Tuesday, May 25, 1999. Do you see that?
8 A Whose depo is that?
9 Q Sam Davis's. So Ms. Liebreich's was on May 24,
10 which is Monday. Okay?
11 A Okay. So apparently --
12 Q Apparently --
13 A Except this is dated the 28th.
14 Q Right. What he says in here, Monday he had a
15 conversation with you.
16 A Okay.
17 Q That would be after -- after the day's session,
18 possibly during the day's session, with Dell Liebreich,
19 right?
20 A No, it says Monday -- wait a minute, I thought I
21 saw -- yes, Monday night, so it is after the deposition.
22 Q So you called him from the hotel?
23 A Possibly. Sure.
24 Q And -- and you thought that it was -- I mean, he
25 knew you were going to take these depositions. Right?
625
1 A I don't know.
2 Q Well, didn't you tell him in advance?
3 A I don't know.
4 Q Did you tell him you were going to give him
5 briefings on them?
6 A No. This is certainly not a briefing on a
7 deposition.
8 Q You thought it was necessary to fill Mr. Minton in
9 on what had been declared confidential pursuant to Judge
10 Moody's order? You thought that was necessary?
11 A This is -- has no context of the deposition, as
12 far as I'm concerned.
13 Q What do you mean, no context of the deposition?
14 A It's talking about a Bob and Ken Show. It doesn't
15 give them any context of what is going on, what is
16 substantive --
17 THE COURT: Don't argue with him. Save it for
18 argument. Move on to your next question.
19 MR. WEINBERG: All right.
20 BY MR. WEINBERG:
21 Q Do you remember what else you talked to Mr. Minton
22 about, other than what he describes in this posting?
23 A No.
24 Q And do you know where the record of that phone
25 call is? Because that wasn't part of the records that were
626
1 produced in this case.
2 A No. Do you remember -- wait a minute. Why not?
3 THE COURT: How do you know? Maybe it's a cell
4 phone call.
5 MR. WEINBERG: Well, I mean, Mr. Dandar
6 produced --
7 BY MR. WEINBERG:
8 Q Well, do you know if you initiated this call or
9 Mr. Minton did?
10 A I have no idea. No idea whatsoever.
11 MR. WEINBERG: What I do know, your Honor, is
12 that at least Mr. Dandar didn't reflect this is a
13 call from his -- from his telephone, either his cell
14 phone or -- obviously it wouldn't be from his office
15 phone, but in his cell phone --
16 THE COURT: Maybe it was made from the hotel
17 phone. Face it, that is on a hotel bill. You
18 wouldn't expect somebody to check the hotel bills to
19 respond.
20 MR. WEINBERG: No, I didn't. I just --
21 THE COURT: I mean, I have to assume if he made
22 the call, it came either from a cell phone or call
23 from the hotel phone.
24 MR. WEINBERG: Or Mr. Minton made the call.
25 THE COURT: Or Mr. Minton made the call.
627
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q Now, did you ask for permission, from any of
3 these -- from Ms. Liebreich or the four people, to discuss
4 the details of their confidential deposition with
5 Mr. Minton?
6 A I don't recall. In fact, I don't even know if
7 Dell was on the phone with Mr. Minton. I mean, I don't
8 know --
9 Q Well, do you think Dell was on the phone with
10 Mr. Minton --
11 A I don't know.
12 Q -- discussing this case?
13 A I don't know.
14 Q Well, did Ms. Liebreich have conversations with
15 Mr. Minton during the course of this case?
16 A Not --
17 Q About the case?
18 A I don't know.
19 Q Did you discuss the strategy with regard to what
20 your clients, Ms. Liebreich and the other siblings, were
21 going to say during their depositions, prior to going there
22 with Mr. Minton?
23 A Absolutely not. That I'm positive of.
24 Q Now, you have a website for your firm. Correct?
25 A Yes.
628
1 Q And that website was established for you by
2 Mr. Minton?
3 A No.
4 Q It was registered by Mr. Minton?
5 A No.
6 Q Registered in his name?
7 A No.
8 Q Well, what -- what does Mr. Minton have to do
9 about your website -- about the establishment of your
10 website?
11 A Nothing. What Mr. Minton did, at his suggestion,
12 since I didn't know how to do this, is that he registered
13 the name Dandarlaw.com and another one, which I can't
14 remember right now.
15 And all it is, is like a business card on the
16 Internet. You type in Dandarlaw.com, at the time he did
17 this, and it brings up a little business card and gives your
18 name, address and phone number.
19 Then my brother's secretary was knowledgeable
20 about websites, and so I had her develop a website. And I
21 started to use Dandarlaw@AOL as my E-Mail address to get
22 messages.
23 And I was trying to get Dandarlaw.com to bring up
24 my website, instead of this little business card, which
25 didn't do anything except give you name, address and phone
629
1 number. And then Mr. Minton gave me the codes -- because he
2 had no interest in this, he was just doing me a favor -- to
3 connect Dandarlaw.com to my real website, which is
4 Dandarlawyers.com, which is the way it is today.
5 Q So if I understand what you just said, Mr. Minton
6 registered Dandarlaw.com, the domain name Dandarlaw.com?
7 A He registered it, right. He paid for, I think --
8 I think you have to buy it in like a 2- or 3-year interval.
9 Q He did this on November 4, 1999?
10 A I believe that is right.
11 Q It's Exhibit 96, if you want to look at it or --
12 A No. I'm sure that is right.
13 Q And -- and this was just a favor that he was doing
14 for you, much like the favors that you did for him, like
15 incorporating the Lisa McPherson Trust?
16 A Well, he -- he thought -- no -- well, maybe. I
17 guess you could say that, sure. He thought it was crazy
18 that I didn't know how to do this myself. He's a lot more
19 computer and Internet savvy than I was.
20 Q Do you have any idea how much he had to spend in
21 order to register the Dandarlaw.com?
22 A No. I can guess it's about $200.
23 Q A year? Is that the way it works?
24 A It's from '99 -- I think it expires this November,
25 so it will be interesting to see what happens, if I can get
630
1 that, or the Church of Scientology gets it.
2 Q Now, you alleged, at the beginning of the case,
3 and it's still in the fifth amended complaint, that Lisa
4 McPherson was leaving the Church. Correct?
5 A That is correct. That is a truthful statement.
6 Q A truthful statement that that was your
7 allegation?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Mmm --
10 A It's also the truth.
11 Q Now, that allegation that Lisa McPherson was
12 leaving the Church is a central element to making this an
13 anti-Scientology complaint, isn't that right?
14 A No. You know, this is not an anti-Scientology
15 complaint. It's a wrongful death complaint.
16 Q If you go to the fifth amended complaint -- you
17 still have that in front of you?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Paragraph 31A on Page 11, you say, "The above
20 actions of the defendants were the result of persisting in
21 their attempt to subdue the will of Lisa McPherson because,
22 A, she had expressed that Scientology was not working for
23 her and she desired to leave Scientology."
24 Do you see that?
25 A That is right.
631
1 THE COURT: Tell me what the relevance of that
2 has to do with this hearing. There is a dispute
3 here. I mean, I read through it.
4 MR. WEINBERG: No, there is a -- in our motion
5 we have made two allegations with regard to
6 misconduct with regard to two issues that relate to
7 this allegation.
8 One has to do with the Fannie McPherson tape
9 and what happened with regard to it.
10 THE COURT: There is no dispute about that, is
11 there?
12 MR. WEINBERG: Yes.
13 THE COURT: Oh. Okay.
14 MR. WEINBERG: And, secondly, the diary, and
15 what happened to the diary.
16 And what we'll show you and review with
17 Mr. Dandar is that Mr. Dandar made a bunch of
18 allegations throughout this case against us to
19 various judges, starting with Judge Moody, and in
20 order to prevent -- in order to sustain this
21 suggestion that Lisa McPherson was -- had said that
22 she was leaving the Church of Scientology and to
23 prevent us from getting two essential documents, one
24 of which is the Fannie McPherson tape in which she
25 said no such thing, which he knew from -- from --
632
1 from the first day he met her, and, secondly, was
2 the 1995 diary, which the testimony now is that his
3 clients had, and somehow it -- it is no longer
4 around.
5 Both of those documents there was lots of
6 litigation over. And that is what he's going to
7 have to prove. And it's very much --
8 THE COURT: Well, that has some bearing on
9 whether he lied, committed perjury, suborned
10 perjury?
11 MR. WEINBERG: Yes.
12 THE COURT: Okay.
13 MR. WEINBERG: Yes, I mean, it's -- it's
14 briefed in some detail in the --
15 THE COURT: I remember some of the things that
16 you put in there, quite frankly, aren't relevant,
17 will not be relevant, and I will not consider them
18 relevant. I tried to give you-all clues here and
19 there, but you don't want to take them.
20 Put on your evidence. Keep going.
21 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
22 THE COURT: As far as I know, this business --
23 I mean -- about what you have alleged in here about
24 what he did about the Fannie McPherson tape, is
25 accurate. I mean, is there any dispute over it?
633
1 Have you read it, Mr. Dandar?
2 THE WITNESS: About their accusations about
3 what I did with the tape?
4 THE COURT: No. About the fact that you
5 didn't -- Mmm, you didn't give it to them right
6 away, and you made certain allegations about what
7 was on it, and then they finally got it and it's not
8 on it?
9 THE WITNESS: No. I don't think I made any
10 incorrect allegations.
11 THE COURT: Then you better go through it.
12 THE WITNESS: See, I was with Fannie McPherson,
13 I said, almost four hours.
14 THE COURT: She said a --
15 THE WITNESS: She said a lot of things to me.
16 THE COURT: That aren't on the tape?
17 THE WITNESS: That aren't on the tape.
18 THE COURT: I knew we would go there.
19 THE WITNESS: But that is true, Judge.
20 THE COURT: I said I don't know where we're
21 going here but we're going to get through it.
22 THE WITNESS: This allegation about 31A, she
23 wanted to leave the Church and wasn't working -- it
24 wasn't working for her, that is in her PC folders.
25
634
1 BY MR. WEINBERG:
2 Q You --
3 THE COURT: It also has to do with an
4 allegation -- that is why I say this will not get
5 you anywhere.
6 This also has to do with a dispute, the
7 disagreement, of what the testimony of his friend
8 meant when she called.
9 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not getting to the
10 allegation about the friend when she called. I'm --
11 THE COURT: Okay.
12 MR. WEINBERG: I'm focusing on --
13 BY MR. WEINBERG:
14 Q Mr. Dandar, you told the Court, earlier on, there
15 had been a phone call from Lisa McPherson to her mother, and
16 you'd been told about that call by Fannie McPherson where
17 Lisa McPherson said she was either coming home for good or
18 leaving the Church. Right?
19 A Right.
20 Q But Fannie McPherson didn't say that, did she?
21 A Yes, she did.
22 Q Now, you were aware that Fannie McPherson was --
23 did an interview with the Clearwater Police Department?
24 A I became aware she did an interview with the
25 Clearwater Police Department.
635
1 Q Excuse me?
2 A At a certain point in time, I became aware she did
3 an interview.
4 Q Okay. Now, this was turned over as a public
5 record after the criminal charges were nolle prossed by the
6 State?
7 THE COURT: Which was in what year?
8 THE WITNESS: June 2000.
9 MR. FUGATE: June of 2000.
10 MR. WEINBERG: June of 2000.
11 THE COURT: So as of June of 2000 you all had
12 this in your hands?
13 MR. WEINBERG: Yes.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.
15 BY MR. WEINBERG:
16 Q And this is an interview that was done by Ron
17 Sudler, who is a detective that you know, don't you,
18 Mr. Dandar?
19 A No, I don't know him.
20 Q Of the Clearwater Police Department? And Fannie
21 McPherson.
22 And in this interview she's asked a number of
23 questions. But particularly on Page 7 she tells
24 Mr. Sudler -- I think he's Detective Sudler -- the
25 following.
636
1 "Question: Were you aware of any projects that
2 your daughter was working on?
3 "Answer: No, I wasn't. Lisa called me, it was
4 either the first or second week in November. And we were
5 kind of talking about Christmas. She was planning to come
6 home. We were joking, and she was telling me what she
7 wanted on her -- on her shopping list. And that was the
8 last time I talked to her. I did not know she had the
9 accident until I got to Florida. I did not know she had
10 cracked up or been sick. I knew nothing. They didn't call
11 me about anything."
12 Then later in the interview she talks about -- on
13 Page 10 -- the stress that she was feeling in her job.
14 You know she worked for AMC Publishing, right?
15 A She worked for AMC Publishing, that is correct.
16 She felt stress at work, according to the statement.
17 Q Right. And then on Line 3 of 5 or 6 he says, "In
18 fact --" she said, "In fact, she didn't tell me but it was
19 in her diary, and I could kinda tell from the way I talked
20 to her she was just real uptight, never got through work.
21 "Did she just have too much work to do? Or --
22 "Answer: I think she did. Of course, they never
23 think that they do.
24 "Detective Sudler: And you just found this out
25 from her diary -- from reading her diary?
637
1 "Uh-huh."
2 My question is -- is when you met with Fannie
3 McPherson in whatever the day was in January 1997, which is,
4 what, a month or so after this -- this -- no, several --
5 eleven months before this -- after this interview, did she
6 tell you that when she got the call from Lisa McPherson,
7 that Lisa said she was just coming home for Christmas?
8 A No. And that statement doesn't say just for
9 Christmas that you just read.
10 Q Well, I mean, when you look at that interview, it
11 certainly doesn't indicate that Lisa McPherson was
12 dissatisfied with Scientology --
13 THE COURT: You-all are arguing with each
14 other. You can argue it to me, or to a jury, or
15 both.
16 MR. WEINBERG: That is fine.
17 BY MR. WEINBERG:
18 Q Now, then there came a time when we, that is, the
19 Church of Scientology, made a request for the -- for the
20 recorded statement that you had done -- that you had
21 announced publicly that you had done of Fannie McPherson.
22 Correct?
23 A I don't believe I announced publicly.
24 Q Well, you said in some hearing, because we knew
25 about it, that you had recorded a statement of Fannie
638
1 McPherson, you had a recorded statement?
2 A No. What happened is you, the Church of
3 Scientology, requested a copy of the transcribed statement I
4 had of Fannie McPherson, which I never published to anybody
5 that I had one.
6 And that is when I answered, "Yes, I have one.
7 How did you know," more or less, and "I'm not giving you a
8 copy because it is work product and privileged."
9 Q Right, what you said, on January 15, 1998, in
10 response to the third request for production, "No video nor
11 affidavits of Fannie McPherson exist, to plaintiff's
12 knowledge. Plaintiff is in possession of a recorded
13 statement of Fannie McPherson which is work product."
14 That is what you said in January of 1998.
15 Correct?
16 A That is right.
17 Q And you remember that thereafter, there was
18 litigation over whether or not this was really work product.
19 Do you remember that?
20 A There were a couple hearings --
21 THE COURT: I guess I'm just real confused
22 about this. I mean, that is in dispute. You can --
23 you could make a claim that it was work product or
24 not. Different judges would rule different ways on
25 that. What difference does it make?
639
1 MR. WEINBERG: Well, here is what the
2 difference is, your Honor. After the -- the --
3 THE COURT: If I'm not going to get you to stop
4 your questions, just ask your next question and
5 we'll save it for another day. Go on ahead.
6 MR. WEINBERG: All right.
7 BY MR. WEINBERG:
8 Q There came a point in time in or about mid-2000
9 when -- when there was a public records act production by
10 the Clearwater Police, and there came a point in time where
11 we obtained a copy, from the public records act, of a
12 transcript of this recording that you had done of Fannie
13 McPherson.
14 Do you remember that?
15 A I remember some of that, that I can agree with.
16 Fannie McPherson's transcribed statement of my interview
17 with her was never a public record.
18 Q Do you remember that there was a hearing in front
19 of Judge Quesada on April 4, 2001 in which we sought, as a
20 result of that public records act -- we said, "Hey, they
21 can't be a public records act -- they can't be a work
22 product because he already turned it over to the Clearwater
23 Police. Therefore, we want the original tape."
24 Do you remember that?
25 A Oh, I certainly do remember that.
640
1 Q Right. And at that proceeding, you told Judge
2 Quesada that apparently you had inadvertently disclosed
3 that -- that you had given it to the Clearwater Police but
4 you didn't intend for them to keep it. Do you remember
5 that?
6 A I remember telling Judge Quesada I don't remember
7 ever turning it over to the Clearwater Police or FDLE, but
8 there was an FDLE Bates stamp on it. And, my goodness,
9 they --
10 THE COURT: (To the audience) All right, who
11 has what on? Turn it off.
12 All right, go ahead.
13 A And he convinced me -- Judge Quesada convinced me
14 the FDLE Bates number was on there, that means FDLE had it,
15 that means I must have turned it over to them sometime.
16 Then he said, "Are you accusing the FDLE of
17 stealing this document out of your office?"
18 I said no. I just -- I was just standing there
19 embarrassed, before Judge Quesada. I couldn't figure out
20 what to say.
21 I said, "Well, if I gave it to them, I expected
22 them to keep it private and give it back to me."
23 He laughed. You guys laughed. But not one person
24 from your table stood up and said, "Oh, Judge, we put the
25 FDLE numbers and letters on that document, it's our Bates
641
1 number."
2 So he and I were both there thinking that FDLE did
3 that. And the next -- that night I called up FDLE, Lee
4 Strope, and I called up Wayne Andrews, because I thought I
5 was going crazy.
6 And they said, "You never gave us that document."
7 BY MR. WEINBERG:
8 Q Let me refer you to Page 107 of the transcript of
9 April 4, 2001. And --
10 MR. WEINBERG: Do you have another copy?
11 BY MR. WEINBERG:
12 Q Do you see where you say, "This document was
13 given, I believe, by me to FDLE with the expectation --"
14 And then Judge Quesada interrupts: "That party is
15 over, isn't it? You voluntarily gave it to the FDLE."
16 "Mr. Dandar: I believe so. Yes.
17 "Judge Quesada: The party is over. They didn't
18 come into your office, steal it. You didn't leave it on a
19 bus and they picked it up inadvertently.
20 "Mr. Dandar: Actually, they did come to my office
21 but I'm not saying they stole it.
22 "The Court: All right."
23 As a result of that hearing, Judge Quesada ordered
24 the production of that original tape. Correct?
25 A Well, wait a minute. Is this the hearing where
642
1 the officers testified?
2 Q No.
3 A Right, he did order it on this, and then we had a
4 subsequent hearing.
5 But on Page 105 of what you handed me, it said,
6 "Have you looked at this transcript that starts out
7 'Statement of McPherson, January 1997' Bates stamped by the
8 Florida Department of Law Enforcement 327, 328, 329"?
9 And that is what started that downhill spiral.
10 THE COURT: That is another thing you can put
11 on your list when you call one of them to the
12 witness stand to ask them how they got it.
13 THE WITNESS: We did, Judge. Oh, I'm sorry, we
14 called the FDLE.
15 THE COURT: I said, if you want to make a
16 record in this case, you can call and ask them how
17 they got the letters of Lisa McPherson they already
18 had, and you can ask them about this.
19 THE WITNESS: All right.
20 THE COURT: Then we'll have answers.
21 BY MR. WEINBERG:
22 Q Well, but we had a hearing on this because what
23 you did is you filed a motion, after this, accusing the
24 Church and the lawyers for the Church of stealing this
25 document from your office and planting it -- planting it --
643
1 in the FDLE or Clearwater Police Department records.
2 Correct?
3 A You would have to show me where I accused the
4 lawyers.
5 Q Okay, you -- you accused the client?
6 A I mean, even Mr. Fugate said I accused him. I
7 don't think that is correct. I accused the client, because
8 the client has a history of doing this.
9 Q Okay. But you didn't have a shred of evidence
10 that anybody had broken into your office, stole this
11 document and then planted it in the FDLE files which they
12 had, then turned around, in June of 2000, and produced to
13 the public?
14 A I had -- I have -- I had evidence that it
15 happened. And I presented that evidence to Judge Quesada.
16 He chose to believe the person from OSA over two law
17 enforcement officers.
18 Q Well, those two --
19 A And that is his decision and I will not agree with
20 that decision, and I'm sure not asking you to agree with it.
21 But he was entitled to make the decision as he saw it. He's
22 the judge.
23 THE COURT: We really aren't going over this.
24 And I'm going to ask you to move to whatever it is
25 you want to get from that tape. I mean, obviously
644
1 to this day he believes that is exactly what
2 happened.
3 MR. WEINBERG: Our point was, your Honor, is
4 that Judge Quesada made a finding that this was
5 completely incredible.
6 THE COURT: I understand that.
7 MR. WEINBERG: Our point --
8 THE COURT: I mean, I'm going to make findings
9 in this case. And I'm going to find what a lot of
10 folks are saying is incredible. It doesn't mean it
11 is true, and it doesn't mean some other judge might
12 find a perfectly logical explanation for it.
13 You know, that doesn't mean Mr. Dandar didn't
14 believe that somebody from the Church stole it.
15 MR. WEINBERG: The point was he didn't have any
16 evidence of it. It was a false accusation. There
17 has been a pattern of that throughout this case.
18 That is part of what we pled. That is part of what
19 the termination of sanctions is concerning. And
20 that is certainly part of our motion to disqualify
21 Mr. Dandar.
22 THE COURT: All right.
23 MR. WEINBERG: All right, I'll go to the next
24 issue.
25 THE COURT: And you say that on this same thing
645
1 is the Church's Bates number?
2 THE WITNESS: They typed it on there, "FDLE."
3 THE COURT: Who did?
4 THE WITNESS: The Church of Scientology did,
5 after Judge Quesada and I believed it was from the
6 FDLE.
7 MR. FUGATE: Your Honor, all of the discovery
8 had Bates labels on it. We went over that with
9 counsel for the plaintiff. They had Bates --
10 THE COURT: My point has been made. The mere
11 fact that Judge Quesada ruled does not alter this
12 man's belief in what he reasonably believes to be
13 true. He believes it. You thought it was
14 ludicrous. Judge Quesada thought it was ludicrous.
15 I might think it was true.
16 None of that really matters. The idea is this
17 man wasn't intentionally lying. He thought it was
18 true, and he still thinks it is true.
19 MR. WEINBERG: Right. But what was important,
20 when we got this transcript, however we got it,
21 which we did get it from a public records request,
22 when we got the transcript which he tried so hard
23 for us not to get, on the transcript, what -- what
24 the transcript says and what Fannie McPherson told
25 Ken Dandar on January 27, 1997, was:
646
1 "Ken Dandar: And can you tell me when the last
2 time you talked to her?
3 "Fannie McPherson: It was between Halloween
4 and November 18th, just a few weeks before she died.
5 "Ken Dandar: What was the conversation about?
6 "Fannie McPherson: Well, it was about her
7 coming home for Christmas for two weeks, which she
8 never planned to stay that long before.
9 "Ken Dandar: This time she was going to stay
10 longer?
11 "She was going to stay two weeks this time.
12 "And what was the conversation about?
13 "Fannie McPherson: Mostly Christmas shopping
14 and the fun we were going to have. And she couldn't
15 hardly wait to get her," et cetera.
16 And it goes on. And it says nothing in this
17 statement, as indicated by Mr. Dandar to the Court,
18 that Fannie McPherson got a telephone call from Lisa
19 a few weeks before she went to the Ft. Harrison
20 Hotel and said she was leaving Scientology. And
21 that was the point, and that is what was
22 significant, and that is why it is so essential to
23 Paragraph 31A in this case.
24 And I will mark as the -- as our next exhibit
25 the transcript of that conversation.
647
1 THE COURT: I'm sure it's already in, isn't it?
2 MR. WEINBERG: Actually, I don't think it is.
3 THE COURT: All right, well, then mark it. If
4 he didn't make it an exhibit, I would be
5 flabbergasted.
6 MR. WEINBERG: Well --
7 THE COURT: I have seen it and read it.
8 MR. WEINBERG: I'll mark two exhibits. Also
9 there is a March 27, 2001 letter from the FDLE to
10 Mr. Mansell at the Church of Scientology which --
11 which responds to a public records request with
12 regard to this statement that had been turned over
13 in the public records. And I'll read it.
14 "This correspondence was provided to
15 acknowledge that our department --" that is the FDLE
16 " -- is in receipt of your March 16, 2001
17 correspondence regarding the above-identified public
18 record request and is hereby furnishing, in response
19 to that request, this particular transcript," which
20 is attached, which is this version of the -- of the
21 statement, of Fannie McPherson "-- this particular
22 transcript (your letter identified saying it's a
23 statement of Fannie McPherson from CL-01-002;1A:8."
24 It's a police number.
25 THE COURT: Why are you reading this to me? Is
648
1 it I can't read? Or you think it is real important
2 to be on the record? Or what? Are you planning on
3 introducing it?
4 MR. WEINBERG: Yes. It just says they produced
5 this document in the public records.
6 THE COURT: I -- I have no doubt about that.
7 MR. WEINBERG: Okay.
8 THE COURT: I see that. I know it. He still
9 thinks you stole it. It's just that simple.
10 MR. WEINBERG: All right.
11 THE COURT: Don't you?
12 THE WITNESS: I do. 100 percent.
13 THE COURT: And there is no question about it.
14 So you don't disagree on this.
15 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. We'll mark the transcript
16 as 167.
17 And the March 27, 2001 letter from the FDLE to
18 Mr. Mansell, with the attachment -- actually, that
19 is Defendant's Exhibit 53, so that is already in.
20 THE COURT: I kind of told you it was.
21 MR. WEINBERG: The transcript is not, though,
22 your Honor. That is 167.
23 MR. FUGATE: It's 52.
24 THE COURT: The transcript is 52?
25 MR. FUGATE: It's 52, and the letter is 53,
649
1 Judge.
2 MR. WEINBERG: But is it the one that is
3 readable? Okay, I apologize, I was wrong. We won't
4 mark it.
5 THE COURT: I hope we won't go over stuff that
6 has already been introduced already in the record.
7 You can argue about it, you can do all kinds of
8 stuff you want.
9 THE WITNESS: Judge, I'm not asking to
10 terminate for the day, but could we take a restroom
11 break?
12 THE COURT: Sure. But if it's 20 minutes to
13 five, I'll not take a break and go back and work ten
14 minutes.
15 THE WITNESS: Three minutes?
16 MR. WEINBERG: Why don't we just stop for the
17 day?
18 THE WITNESS: You know me. I want to go --
19 THE COURT: I know you do. But the deal is --
20 THE WITNESS: All right, then keep going until
21 you --
22 THE COURT: We're not going to go. We're not
23 going to take a little break. I'm tired. That is
24 it. 9 o'clock.
25 Why don't you try to finish up with him
650
1 tomorrow?
2 THE WITNESS: Are you going to be finished
3 tomorrow?
4 MR. WEINBERG: I'll do my best.
5 THE COURT: I'm going to start really telling
6 you you can't go over stuff you have gone over. I
7 knew this was in the record. I mean, I knew it.
8 MR. WEINBERG: I'm not trying to -- are we off
9 the record? Are --
10 THE COURT: It was there. I'm not going over
11 stuff I have been over.
12 MR. WEINBERG: But --
13 THE COURT: We'll get to that agreement
14 tomorrow, or you're going to stop and I'm going to
15 assume it is not important, which I kind of
16 suggested all along it wasn't very important,
17 because it wasn't. But if you want to get to it,
18 you better get to it. We can't drag this on
19 forever.
20 MR. WEINBERG: I'll get to it. I'm not trying
21 to drag it out.
22 THE COURT: Everybody is dragging it on
23 forever. That is both sides. And, yes, you are
24 dragging it on. And you know --
25 MR. WEINBERG: Are we off the record now?
651
1 THE COURT: Yes.
2 (Whereupon, Court stands adjourned at 4:50 p.m.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
652
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
2
3 STATE OF FLORIDA )
4 COUNTY OF PINELLAS )
5 I, LYNNE J. IDE, Registered Merit Reporter,
certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically
6 report the proceedings herein, and that the transcript is
a true and complete record of my stenographic notes.
7
I further certify that I am not a relative,
8 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor
am I a relative or employee of any of the parties'
9 attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I
financially interested in the action.
10
11 DATED this 5th day of June, 2002.
12
13
14 ______________________________
LYNNE J. IDE, RMR
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25