Go back to main Scientology in Canada page
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON BETWEEN: ALLAN ANTHONY BUTTNOR Plaintiff - and - JANICE "KELLY" GARIEPY, REED LEARY and KEN MONTOGOMERY Defendants AND BETWEEN: KEN MONTOGOMERY Plaintiff by Counterclaim - and - ALLAN ANTHONY BUTTNOR and CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF ALBERTA Defendants by Counterclaim _AFFIDAVIT_ I, KENNETH H. MONTGOMERY, of the City of Edmonton, in the Province of Alberta, MAKE OATH AND SAY THAT: 1. I am the Plaintiff by Counterclaim herein, and as such have a personal knowledge of the matters hereinafter deposed to, except where stated to be based upon information and belief. 2. I am now, and was in March, 1991, a Peace Officer holding the rank of Detective. In March, 1991, I was serving as a member of the Edmonton Integrated Intelligence Unit. Part of my assigned duties included that of Being informed and aware of various religious beliefs, primarily those not considered to be mainstream or common. A part of my function and purpose was to act as an advisor to other investigators who may have required knowledge as to any unusual or different religious beliefs, for information purposes or to act as an investigational aid. I was the only Edmonton Police member assigned these duties. My partner was Corporal Reed Leary, of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, who represented the interests of that organization. - 2 - 3. During the performance of my duties, I had discussions with members and ex-members of the Church of Scientology; had discussions with persons, considered by myself and others, to be authorities on the Church of Scientology; read and studied books written about or by Scientologists; and further studied the various and numerous policies of Scientology. As a result of these effort I became aware of the Church of Scientology, and how it operates, and the Church of Scientology became aware of me. 4. On or about March 8th, 1991, Allan Anthony Buttnor was arrested by a member of the Edmonton Police Service for various criminal code offences, and detained in the Edmonton Remand Centre until bail assigned by a proper authority could be posted. I believe, and do believe that, at that time, Allan Anthony Buttnor was the highest ranking Scientologist in the Province of Alberta. I had no part in the investigation, arrest, or detention of Allan Anthony Buttnor. I had no previous knowledge that any investigation was underway. I was not present during the initial investigation, during any interviewing, or the subsequent processing by the Edmonton Police Detention Unit. I was only informed about the incident after the fact, when Allan Anthony Buttnor was being detained in the Edmonton Remand Centre awaiting bail. He would have been aware of these facts as I was never present, and I believe Ms. Susan Kerr would also have been aware, as she would have been told this by Allan Anthony Buttnor or his counsel. In the alternative, Ms. Kerr and I had a telephone conversation on the date Allan Anthony Buttnor was arrested, and I, at that time, clearly informed her of the fact. 5. I believe and do believe that, as a result of the arrest and detention of Allan Anthony Buttnor, Church of Scientology policy was reacted to, or initiated by certain known and unknown members of that organization, including Ms. Susan Kerr, Ms. Hillarie Rockl, and Mr. Mark Gardner, a person purporting to be a legal advisor for that organization. I believe that, regardless of the fact of the situation, the Church of Scientology determined that, due to my assigned duties, I was a threat to their organization, which, as per Scientology policy, had to be dealt with. 6. I believe and do believe that Church of Scientology policy and directives, as initiated at any time by the founder of the organization, L. Ron Hubbard, is, to its' members, policies and procedures which are unalterable, and must be followed by that organization's members. - 3 - 7. I believe and do believe that in following Church of Scientology policy Ms. Susan Kerr directed a letter, dated March 18th, 1991, detailing numerous serious allegations against me, to the Edmonton Police Service, which resulted in an internal complaint, which was investigated as required under the Police Act. That letter is attached as Exhibit "A" of Ms. Kerr's Affidavit. I note that nowhere in her letter is there any reference to the alleged false arrest of Allan Anthony Buttnor. I also note in paragraph two (2) of her Affidavit she indicates "I wrote this letter hoping for some official sanction to be brought against the officers because I believed then and I believe now that the conduct of the two officers in relation to the Church of Scientology was worthy of censure". I note that Ms. Kerr does not mention her letter dated January 23, 1992, which was sent by her to the Edmonton Police Service, wherein she retracts many of the allegations previously made against me. A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit "A" to this my Affidavit. 8. On or about March 20th, 1991, I believe and do believe that, with- out the direct assistance of recognized legal counsel, Scientology rep- resentatives, including Ms. Susan Kerr and Mr. Mark Gardner, initiated the civil action against me, although Allan Anthony Buttnor is shown as the Plaintiff. I also note that in this claim one of the most serious allega- tions made is that of the false arrest and detention of Allan Anthony Buttnor. I believe and do believe that this action was commenced in order to follow Scientology policy. 9. I believe and do believe that neither the Church of Scientology nor the Plaintiff have any desire to pursue their Statement of Claim against me, as this would be contrary to Church of Scientology policy, or current Scientology interests. To support my beliefs, I rely on various Court decisions, including decisions by British High Court Justice J. Latey, of the Royal Court of Justice in England, in 1984, where he details many policies of the Scientology organization, and determines various set policies or directives to be fact, including: a) Scientology forbids recourse to the Law Courts of the country, save in special circumstances with permission. The ordinary Courts are described in the language of Scientology as "wog courts", as indicated on page 5 of Exhibit "B" attached to this my Affidavit. I note that in Scientology's own dictionary "wog" is defined as "WOG. 1. worthy Oriental gentleman. This means a common ordinary run- of-the-mill garden-variety humanoid. (SH Spec 82, 6611C29) 2. a wog is somebody who isn't even trying (SH Spec 73,6608 C02)". Note attachment as Exhibit "C" to this my Affidavit. - 4 - b) "If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization always find or manufacture enough threat against them to sue for peace. Peace is bought with an exchange of advantage, so make the advantage and then settle, ever defend. Always attack.", as set out at pages 20 - 21 of Exhibit "B" to this my Affidavit. c) With respect to dealing with perceived enemies of the organization; "Enemy - SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed," as set out at pages 31 - 32 of Exhibit "B" attached to this my Affidavit. d) "Black Propaganda - About the most involved employment of PR is its covert use in destroying the repute of individuals and groups. More correctly this is technically called Black Propaganda," as set out at page 34 of Exhibit "B" attached to this my Affidavit. e) with respect to the use of the Courts "The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease, if possible, of course, ruin him entirely", as set out at pages 34 - 35 of Exhibit "B" attached to this my Affidavit. 10. I do believe British High Court Justice J. Latey who rendered a Judgment in the Royal Court of Justice in England regarding a child custody suit on July 23, 1984, when he stated in his conclusion, in part: "Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious. Mr. Kennedy did not exaggerate when he termed it "pernicious". In my judgment it is corrupt, sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit, and has as its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard, his wife and those close to him at the top. It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to it's adherents who do not toe the line unquestioningly and to those outside who criticise or oppose it", as set out at page 46 of Exhibit "B" attached to this my Affidavit. 11. I also do believe the evidence as accepted in the the matter of Larry Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California to be relevent as to further confirming Church of Scientology policies and practices where it is stated: - 5 - a) "In his own writings L. Ron Hubbard, Founder of Scientology, set forth the following policy. He wrote: "The purpose of a lawsuit is to harass and discourage rather than to win", as set out at page 18 of Exhibit "D" attached to this my Affidavit. b) "In one of his books, Hubbard gives even more specific instruc- tions about how lawsuits should be filed against people even against the advice of counsel", as set out at page 18 of Exhibit "D" to this my Affidavit. c) "Thirty years ago Hubbard directed a member to: .......... cause blue flame to dance on the Courthouse roof until every- one apologized profusely for having dared to become so adventurous as to arrest a Scientologist who as a minister of the Church, was going about his regular duties", as set out at page 19 of Exhibit "D" to this my Affidavit. 12. I also believe and do believe that, in addition to the information detailed above, Scientology has additional policies which support my beliefs including; a) "The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to suppress Scientology or Scient- ologists are all beyond any protection of Scientology ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an anmesty", as set out in Exhibit "E" to this my Affidavit. b) "Beware of Attorneys who tell you not to sue"; "Never be interested in charges, do yourself, much more charging, and you will win." etc, as set out in Exhibit "F" attached to this my Affidavit. c) "Should you ever be arrested for practicing Scientology, treating people, make very sure, long before the time comes, that you have never used drugs or surgery, and that you have never prescribed a diet, or vitamins, and when that time might come, make very sure that you immediately and instantly, within two or three hours after your receipt of the warrant, have served upon the signer of that warrant, a personal civil suit for $100,000.00 damages for having caused the arrest of a man of God going about his business in his proper profession, and for having brought about embarrassing publicity and moles- tation", and "And if you are fooling enough to have an attorneys - 6 - who tells you not to sue, immediately dismiss him and get an attorney who will sue. Or, if no attorney will sue, simply have an HASI suit form filled out and present it yourself to the County clerk in the court of the area in which your case will come up", as set out in Exhibit "G" attached to this my Affidvit. I note that on page 193, the Scientology dictionary defines HASI as "Hubbard Association of Scientology International" as set out in Exhibit "H" attached to this my Affidavit. 13. I also believe and do believe that in addition to the previous information presented, there is information to support my belief that Scientology and its pertinent representatives have, and are, abusing the legal process and have no intention to pursuing their claim, and are simply following Scientology policy, I refer to Action No. 95393, an action involving the Church of Scientology, other parties, and the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta, Judicial District of Calgary, where the proceedings took place before the Honourable Mr. Justice J. Agrios, in Chambers, and where Justice Agrios commented; "It is apparent that throughout the proceedings the Defendants, and not the Plaintiff (Scientology) were endeavouring to have the Trial heard. I need not repeat the entire and rather remarkable history of this case. The record submitted by counsel for the Defendants speaks for itself. The contempt of Court, the failure to comply with innumerable Court Orders, the need to formally settle Minutes of Appeal; the entire conduct of the Plaintiffs is not one that should be countenanced by our Courts. In my view, the proceedings and the action by the Plaintiffs amounted to a clear abuse of process". See Exhibit "I" attached to this my Affidavit. 14. I also believe and do believe that the intent and policies followed by the Plaintiff by Counterclaim can further be supported and substantitated by the information alleged in the sworn Affidavit of Andre Tabayoyon, which was executed March 5th, I994, in Los Angeles, California, and relates to the case "Church of Scientology International v. Steven Fishman and Uwe Geertz", where Andre Tabayoyon states, "During my 21 years as a Scientol- ogist, I also had many occasions to see how these Scientology policies were applied in many different contexts. The Hubbard Technology, often called Tech, was used to supposedly help people. It was also used coer- cively to control the behaviour of people and to punish them for real or imagined transgressions against Scientology", as set out at paragraph 20 of Exhibit "J" attached to this my Affidavit. Also, with respect to the treatment of "Suppressives", Scientology's own dictionary defines Suppressive Persons (page 415 Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary) as "one that actively seeks to suppress or damage Scientology or a Scientologist by supressive acts". On the same page, suppressive acts are defined as "1. Acts calculated to impede or destroy Scientology or a Scientologist", as indicated in Exhibit "K" attached to this my Affidavit. I believe that Scientologists and through them the Defendants by Counterclaim have designated myself to be a Suppressive Person and therefore Scientologys "Fair Game" policy would apply, as referred to in paragraph - 7 - 9(c) of this my Affidavit. I note that in addition to Justice Latey's reference to the Fair Game policy, Andre Tabayoyon states in paragraph 44 of his Affidavit, attached as Exhibit "J" to this my Affidavit above. "Despite claims to the contrary Fair Game has never been, and never will be cancelled. However, the actions of handling suppressives with trickery, lies, deceit and even destruction have not been cancelled and are still being used today". 15. I also believe that the Defendants by Counterclaim's malicious prosecution of myself as a part of Scientology policy is further supported by the information detailed in a 129 page Judgment issued May 10, 1994 by the Ontario Court of Appeal which relates to the case of Ontario Government Lawyer Casey Hill and a libel case he had involving the Church of Scientology and where I do believe that the Judgment was written by Mr. Justice W. David Griffiths and endorsed by Mr. Justice Marvin Catzman and Mr. Justice Patrick Gilligan of the Ontario Court of Appeal and in that Judgment it is stated "Scientology decides that Casey Hill was the enemy and it set out to destroy him", "It levelled false charges.....In summary, the evidence suggests that Scientology set upon a persistent course of character assassination over a period of seven years with the intention of destroying Casey Hill" and "what seemed to be of overriding importance was the need for specific deterence of Scientology to prevent it from repeating its libel", as set out in Exhibit "L" attached to this my Affidavit. 16. I am further aware that prior to these applications being made, Ms. Susan Kerr did attend Edmonton Police Headquarters on March 21st, 1994, for the purpose of meeting with the Chief of Police. I am aware that she spoke with the Chief's Assistant, Inspector Ronald Harris, and believe and do believe that she advised him that if I were instructed to dismiss my Counterclaim she, in turn, would discontinue a scheduled appeal of her previous complaint against me, which is scheduled to be heard by the Law Enforcement Review Board (LERB). I also note that after undergoing a lengthy investigation by the Internal Affairs Section of the Edmonton Police Service, Ms. Susan Kerr's complaint against me was determined to be unfounded. I also have every reason to believe that when the scheduled hearing takes place, the LERB will also uphold that determination. 17. The Plaintiff by Counterclaim notes that at no time did the Plaintiff institute an action against the Edmonton Police Service member who actually interviewed, arrested and detained him. - 8 - 18. The Plaintiff by Counter-Claim notes that at no time did the Plaintiff institute any action against the Edmonton Police Service. 19. The Plaintiff by Counterclaim notes that R.C.M.P. Corporal Reed Leary did not initiate a Counterclaim against the Defendants by Counter- claim, and it is further noted that where Ms. Susan Kerr initially detailed equal or more serious allegations as against Corporal Leary, he was also subsequently cleared in an R.C.M.P. internal investigation. It is alos noted that Ms. Susan Kerr has made no effort to appeal that decision, al- though she has with me. 20. I believe and do believe that settlement efforts as alleged to by the Defendants to Counterclaim, insofar as a discontinuence, are unreason- able, taking into account all the circumstances, and are only intended to finalize an objective which the Defendants by Counterclaim believe they have already obtained, that being to successfully deal with the charges laid against Allan Anthony Buttnor, and to have my previous duties changed. 21. I believe and do believe that several facts exist which substan- tiate the Counterclaim, and that no facts exist which substantiate the Claim. 22. I make this Affidavit is response to the Defendants by Counter- claim's Application for Dismissal of the Counter-Claim. SWORN BEFORE me at the City ) of Edmonton, in the Province ) (signed) of Alberta, this 13th day of ) ---------------------------------- May, A.D. 1994. ) KEN MONTGOMERY ) (signed) ) ------------------------------- A COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS IN AND FOR THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA. HAMISH J.D. HENDERSON NO. 9103-05525 ---------------------------------------- IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON ---------------------------------------- BETWEEN: ALLAN ANTHONY BUTTNOR Plaintiff - and - JANICE "KELLY" GARIEPY, REED LEARY, and KEN MONTGOMERY Defendants AND BETWEEN: KEN MONTOGOMERY Plaintiff by Counterclaim - and - ALLAN ANTHONY BUTTNOR and CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF ALBERTA Defendants by Counterclaim ---------------------------------------- AFFIDAVIT ---------------------------------------- HAMISH J.D. HENDERSON BARRISTER & SOLICITOR 205, 10715-124 STREET EDMONTON, ALBERTA T5M OH2
Go back to main Scientology in Canada page
Martin Hunt / martinh@islandnet.com / August 15 1997