Helena goes beserk at a deposition: gets charged with assault

What's the stupidest behaviour a lawyer could get up to in the course of her business if she doesn't want to harm her or her client's dignity or credibility? Well, physically attacking the defendant and tearing up a piece of evidence must be among the tops.

Background: Henson is a netizen who has been successfully sued by the Scientology cult. His case arose when he posted a secret Scientology document to draw people's attention to what he interprets as an exhortation to break the law. Scientology is already under a court order not to present its "e-meter" devices as medically effective, but the NOTS document seems to instruct the reader to use the e-meter as a cure for illness.

Henson was hampered by his lack of knowledge of the law and by his lack of representation until the case came to trial. The court ruled that he was guilty of copyright infringement and awarded damages, seemingly allowing the protection of copyright to over-rule a citizen's right to blow the whistle on what seems to be criminal activity. Now, Helena Kobrin and the other lawyers are trying to bring about Henson's total ruin as orded by Scientology scripture.

Subject:      Re: Deposition weirdness (submitted version--Thanks)
From:         hkhenson@netcom.com (Keith Henson)
Date:         1998/06/20
Message-ID:   
Newsgroups:   alt.religion.scientology
                                                                  

          
H. Keith Henson
P.O. Box 60012
Palo Alto, CA 94306
(650) 423-4040



                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                     NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a     )  Case No. C-96-20271RMW
California non-profit corporation, )
        Plaintiff,                 )
                                   )
        v.                         )    DECLARATION
                                   )    RE JUDGMENT
H. KEITH HENSON, an individual,    )    DEBTOR EXAM
        Defendant.                 )                        
____________________________________

          I, H. Keith Henson, declare and state as follows:

          1.  I am the defendant herein. I have personal
knowledge of the matters stated herein.

          2.  At a judgment debtor examination on June 18, 1998,
in the offices of Thomas R. Hogan, I was unrepresented, and
plaintiff was represented by Mr. Rosen, Mrs. Kobrin, and an
unknown paralegal assistant.  During the examination, plaintiff
presented defendant a number of Usenet postings to identify,
though defendant was at a loss to imagine what relevance these
had to his financial condition and believes they were presented
for a purpose unrelated to judgment collection.

          3.  Attached to these postings was a single sheet of
paper which contained instructions to the plaintiff's lawyers
regarding the purpose of the examination as seen by
RTC/Scientology.  

          4.  Plaintiff's lawyer Helena Kobrin was extremely
upset at defendant's seeing this document and (with her
paralegal assistant) came around the table and physically
attacked defendant and ripped the paper into pieces as defendant
was reading the document which--after being admitted as an
exhibit by the court reporter--Mrs. Kobrin now claimed was
"privileged."  

          5.  This attack was witnessed by Mr. Rosen and the
court reporter.  Defendant may be filing criminal assault
charges against Mrs. Kobrin and her paralegal assistant today.

          6.  From the limited view defendant had of this
document, defendant believes the document contains detailed
instructions from the highest level of Scientology (David
Miscavige) about ways to "fair game" or otherwise punish
defendant through abuses of the judgment collection process.  

          7.  As an example, defendant directs the court's
attention to Exhibit A, a letter from Wells Fargo Bank referring
to the fact that an uninvolved third party (defendant's
daughter) had her savings account confiscated by RTC.

          8.  Defendant requests the court (on its own motion)
to order plaintiffs' attorneys to produce this document for an
in camera inspection by the court.  If the court determines the
document to be evidence of abuses of judgment collection or
other harassment, defendant requests that the court consider
reinstating this document as part of an exhibit as already
admitted.

          I declare under penalty of perjury according to the
laws of the United States and the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.

Executed at San Jose this 19th day of June, 1998.

                                              
--------------------------
H. Keith Henson

(I went by the police station and filed a criminal complaint against
Helena Kobrin and Alan Cartwright, #98-170-9717, incident type 240//242. 
Assaulting a critic in a lawyer's office may give them a "critic cluster" 
and, who knows, get them out of the "crime" of giving it to me in the
first place. 

The only way my report would turn into action would be for the DA who
looks the case over to have seen Dateline.  But if anyone wants to notify
the local legal papers in San Jose, they might find it an interesting
twist to report.   Keith Henson)