Scientology in Canada

Al Buttnor/Ken Montgomery Case: 4

Go back to main Scientology in Canada page

BOWLES & MOXON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
6255 SUNSET BOULEVARD
SUITE 2000
HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90028
TIMOTHY BOWLES *            -----------           LESLIE T. W. SOASH
KENDRICK L. MOXON #                                AVA MARIE SANDLIN
LAURIE L. BARTILSON +
HELENA K. KOBRIN $        (213) 953-3360
------             TELECOPIER (213) 953-3351         -------
* ALSO ADMITTED IN OREGON                            OF COUNSEL
* ALSO ADMITTED IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA      JEANNE M. GAVIGAN
* ALSO ADMITTED IN MASSACHUSETTS                 MARCELLO M. DIMAURO
* ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA
May 19, 1994
Mr. David Scorgie, Esq.       This Is Exhibit "E" referred to in the
LENNIE & COMPANY                          Affidavit of
Barristers & Solicitors                    Al Buttnor
1005 10010 106 Street         Sworn before me this 19 day
Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3L8     of May A.D., 1994
Canada                                      (signed)
A Commissioner for Oaths in and for
the Province of Alberta
By Telecopier: 1 403-426-6977
_Re: Buttnor v. Gariepy, et al., and related counter..._
DAVID S. SCORGIE
A NOTARY PUBLIC. A COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS
IN AND FOR THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA
Dear Sir:
I represent the Church of Scientology International. I have
been informed that on May 18, 1994 the counterclaimant in the above
referenced action, Mr. Ken Montgomery, filed certain documents with
which this firm has some familiarity. I have been asked by my
client to provide information to you which may be of assistance in
responding to the documents filed by the counterclaimant.
-----------
I would like to address the bulk of my remarks to the
Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon of March 5, 1994 ("the Tabayoyon
declaration"), which was originally filed in a case in the United
States entitled _Church of Scientology International v. Steven
Fishman_ ("the _Fishman_ case"). One unusual aspect of the Tabayoyon
declaration is that it was filed by the defendants in the _Fishman_
case _after the case had been dismissed_ and was never relied upon by
the Court for any issue. While ostensibly filed by the _Fishman_
case defendants in support of an application for attorneys fees and
costs, the Tabayoyon declaration was not relied upon by the
defendants in their motion. Nevertheless, the defendants' motion
was denied and their application for costs stricken by the Court on
April 4, 1994. It was at this time that the _Fishman_ case
defendants' real purpose for filing the Tabayoyon declaration
emerged.
Within minutes of the April 4 hearing, the tabloid press began
deluging my client with inquiries concerning this declaration,
May 19, 1994
Page 2
citing the defense attorneys in the _Fishman_ case as the source of
the information. It is obvious that the Tabayoyon declaration was
created and filed solely to provide material to feed the tabloid
press. Fortunately no publications in the United States have
printed the allegations contained in the Tabayoyon declaration,
although a story did appear in two of the more notorious foreign
tabloids.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth circuit is
presently considering Church of Scientology International's appeal
on the issue of sealing the Tabayoyon declaration and has agreed to
hear that appeal on an expedited basis.
I have sent to you by overnight freight some of the sworn
statements and documents filed by Church of Scientology
International refuting the allegations contained in the Tabayoyon
declaration. This material is voluminous and it would be
impossible for you to digest all of it in the time remaining before
your hearing. I would strongly urge that you seek a continuance of
the proceedings to enable you to study the refutations and to
prepare your arguments. At minimum, you have my permission to file
this letter with the Court, recognizing, though, that the
information herein is a very small part of the information
available with which to refute Tabayoyon's claims.
All of Tabayoyon's bizarre allegations about the Church and
its relationships with its parishioners are false and defamatory.
Specifically, Tabayoyon was never the head of Church security as he
claims. He was member of a construction crew. He now is part of
a small stable of witnesses who have been paid over $100,000 in
less than a year while occupying themselves in producing the false
statements such as those contained in the Tabayoyon declaration.
According to documents produced by the _Fishman_ case defendants,
Tabayoyon and his wife have received over S17,450 for their
allegations containing, _inter alia_, the false statements made in
their declarations. In the two years Tabayoyon has been out of the
Church he never raised a single allegation until becoming a
witness-for-pay for the Church's opponents. In fact, the same
attorneys who hired Tabayoyon have been attempting to extract
millions of dollars from the Church in exchange for silence on the
part of Tabayoyon and these other "witnesses." They are now under
investigation for perjury. The Church refused to succumb to these
ridiculous demands and you are witnessing part of the result.
Moreover, Tabayoyon's sanity and credibility have been called
into question by a letter he wrote last year claiming to have had
a conversation with L. Ron Hubbard, the Founder of the Scientology
religion, some _seven years after Mr. Hubbard passed away._ For the
May 19, 1994
Page 3
counterclaimant in your case to rely upon such a source is, at
best, reckless and irresponsible.
Documented evidence exists which established the absolute
falsity of the statements contained in the Tabayoyon declaration.
For example:
o     Tabayoyon's claims about weaponry are absolutely and
completely false. The Church's facilities are not "armed
to the teeth," with assault rifles, automatic weapons and
explosive devices. Such an assertion is not only totally
false, it is dangerous and irresponsible.
o     Nor are the facilities in question a "desert base."
Even the most casual observer would notice that the
facility in question is not even located in a desert.
The surrounding countryside is agricultural land,
predominantly dairy farms.
o     There are absolutely no "inmates" or "slave labor"
on the property, as is falsely claimed by Tabayoyon. The
vast majority of the Church staff work at the property,
but commute on a daily basis to their homes in a
neighboring city.
o     The Tabayoyon declaration makes it appear that the
Church built its facilities as a "playground" for
celebrity Scientologists. This contention is totally
false. The property in question is a 500-acre film
studio, which, among other things, produces films to
train Church counselors and to disseminate the
Scientology religion. The Church's facilities are also
used by local community groups to hold civic functions
and the church offers a weekly open house, which
thousands of local residents have attended.
o     Contrary to the false statements in the Tabayoyon
declaration, the Star of California Clipper Ship and
adjoining pool has hosted numerous meetings of the local
Chamber of Commerce, neighborhood meetings, local social
functions and such. It is also a regular feature of the
Church's weekly open house. The contention that Mr.
David Miscavige, Chairman of the Board of Religious
Technology Center, and actor Tom Cruise have spent hours
alone at this pool is nonsense. Nor is this pool the
only structure on the property, or even the dominant
structure. The property contains dozens of buildings
all devoted to the primary function of the facility,
May 19, 1994
Page 4
which is the production of training films for the Church.
o     Tabayoyon's contentions that the Church built an
expensive gymnasium, sauna, Olympic-sized swimming pool
or special concrete walkway for the exclusive use of Tom
Cruise, Mr. David Miscavige and a few select others are
also complete lies. In fact, the declarations I have
sent you are on file in federal court in Los Angeles and
completely disprove these and all the other false
statements contained in the Tabayoyon declaration.
o     No special apartments or facilities were ever built
on the Church's property for the exclusive use of Tom
Cruise or any other celebrity, as is alleged by
Tabayoyon. The contention that a meadow was planted with
flowers for Mr. Cruise and his wife to "romp" in and then
subsequently dug up is complete fiction.
o     The Church's exercise facilities cost nowhere near
the amount claimed and are used by all the staff and
guests on the property. There are also two basketball
courts, volley ball courts, a soccer field, a baseball
field and a one-mile Par course -- all built for the use
and physical enhancement of the 750 church staff members
working there. In fact, Mr. Cruise's only contribution
to the exercise room was to donate some equipment for the
staff to use and he has not even been on the property in
three years.
o     There is also a golf course on the property that was
built at Church expense, but it is run by an independent
golf course management company and is open to the public.
It was built for the benefit of the local residents and
was required by County planning authorities as a
condition to the issuance of the permits necessary for
the renovations done on the property.
o     The food served at the Church's facilities is high
quality and the Church takes pride in the abilities of
its chefs. In fact, our chefs cook the food for the
frequent events held here by local community groups and
the local high school. When Mr. Cruise (or any guest for
that matter) has been to our property, he has eaten the
same food as everyone else.
o     The Church does not have "a specially constructed
cinema" on the property. There is a small "rushes"
theater on the property that the film crew uses to view
May 19, 1994
Page 5
the scenes shot during the day. This is part of every
professional studio and an integral part of film
production. Its cost was nowhere near $150,000 as
Tabayoyon claim.
o     There is only one concrete walkway on the property,
and it was built under the highway that crosses the
property. Contrary to the ridiculous suggestion in the
Tabayoyon declaration that it was built to prevent Mr.
Cruise from getting his feet dirty, it was built two
years ago so that the Church's 750 staff members could
cross a busy highway in safety.
o     There can be no Question about the falsity of
allegations that the Church directed the use of any
Church funds or labor for the personal benefit of Tom
Cruise or any other individual, or that there is any
misuse of Church donations and funds. All Church of
Scientology entities and related corporations were
recognized as exempt from taxes by the Internal Revenue
Service of the United States on October 1, 1993.
Recognition of tax exemption requires that no funds inure
to the benefit of any private individual. Churches of
Scientology in the United States and their financial
records and practices were subjected to the most
extensive examination of any exempt organization in
history, according to the IRS's own statement. Were any
of the charges levelled by Tabayoyon true, exemption
would not have been recognized.
o     Equally false and defamatory are Tabayoyon's other
descriptions of Mr. David Miscavige. Tabayoyon's
comparison of Mr. Miscavige to David Koresh David Koresh
is, in and of itself, defamatory. He has never "beat up"
people on the property, and he has not ordered the
detention of anyone. Far from fitting Tabayoyon's
description, Mr. Miscavige appears at about 40
international Church functions every year, was featured
on network television in an Emmy-award winning interview
with Ted Koppel on ABC's _Nightline_, has met with the
editorial boards of major U.S. newspapers and was
recently a guest at the White House.
It would be impossible in the limited time and space available
for me to give you a complete picture of Tabayoyon and his
declaration, but I trust that the above remarks above and the
material I have sent you by overnight freight are of assistance to
you in getting the Court to see that allegations such as those
May 19, 1994
Page 6
raised by Tabayoyon have no business in Court.
---------
As to Mr. Wollersheim, the petition for writ of certiorari in
support of which Mr. Wollersheim filed the material he has now
filed in your case was denied by the United States Supreme Court.
Mr. Wollersheim is another of the _Fishman_ case  defendants' paid
witnesses, who filed a declaration after the case was dismissed. As
I am sure you have noticed by the ton of Mr. Wollersheim's
writings, he is quite delusional. I attach for your information a
letter received by Church of Scientology International's counsel in
New York from Mr. Wollersheim in 1992 in which advances the bizarre
notion that the United States government is running the Church of
Scientology as an intelligence experiment, and which would
temporarily "rough up" the Church to help maintain its "cover."
---------
With respect to the 1984 decision on the part of Mr. Justice
Latey in the matter entitled _Re; B & G, Wards_ filed by the
counterclaimant in your action, this decision was a bigoted and
merciless attack on the underpinnings of the Scientology religion
by a zealot masquerading as a High Court Justice. Throughout the
entire proceeding, the Church was denied an opportunity to
participate in the proceedings, or even to be advised as to the
allegations being raised concerning it, while the opposition was
allowed free reign to vent their irrational prejudices. with the
Court's blessings. The outcome was as would be predicted from such
circumstances.
You should be advised that the Court of Appeal in the United
Kingdom held that the decision was not able to be relied on outside
the immediate case to which it pertained. More compelling,
however, is the affidavit executed by Mr. David Banks, the father
of the children, the custody of whom was at issue in this case. Mr.
Banks describes in vivid detail the result of Mr. Justice Latey's
decision had on the lives of his children. Anyone who could read
Mr. Banks' affidavit and still lend any credence to the decision of
Mr. Justice Latey in my opinion is without compassion.
---------
The above is merely a small sampling or some of the
information available to refute the contentions contained in Mr.
Montgomery's papers. I urge you again that the material filed by
Mr. Montgomery has no business in a Court file and has been filed
solely to create prejudice against the Church of Scientology in
May 19, 1994
Page 7
hope that the Court will rule from religious intolerance rather
than based on documented facts and the applicable law.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further
assistance.
Very truly yours,
(signed)
Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq.
KLM:mfh
ENCLOSURES

Go back to main Scientology in Canada page

Martin Hunt / martinh@islandnet.com / August 15 1997

1