------------------------------------------------------------------- F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. (Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network, Incorporated) a non-profit computer bulletin board and electronic library 601 16th St. #C-217 Golden, Colorado 80401 USA BBS 303 530-1942 FAX 303 530-2950 Office 303 473-0111 This document is part of an electronic lending library and preservational electronic archive. F.A.C.T.Net does not sell documents, it only lends them according to the terms of your library cardholder agreement with F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. ===================================================================== 0851 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 ------------------------------ 5 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY ) 6 INTERNATIONAL, a California ) 7 non-profit religious ) 8 organization, ) 9 Plaintiff, ) 10 vs. )No. 93-3843-HLH(Tx) 11 STEVEN FISHMAN and UWE GEERTZ,)VOLUME VI 12 Defendants. ) 13 ------------------------------- 14 15 Continued Deposition of GARRY L. SCARFF, 16 at 221 North Figueroa Street, Suite 1200, 17 Los Angeles, California, commencing at 18 10:21 A.M., Monday, August 2, 1993, 19 before Paulette M. Griffin, CSR No. 2499. 20 21 22 23 24 25 PAGES 851 - 1125 0852 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 3 FOR THE DEFENDANT UWE GEERTZ: 4 5 LEWIS, D'AMATO, BRISBOIS & BISGAARD 6 BY: GRAHAM E. BERRY, ESQ. 7 221 North Figueroa Street 8 Suite 1200 9 Los Angeles, California 90012 10 11 ALSO PRESENT: 12 13 BARRY VARANESE, VIDEO OPERATOR 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0853 1 GARRY L. SCARFF, 2 having been previously duly sworn, testified 3 further as follows: 4 5 VIDEO OPERATOR: Good morning. We are back 6 on the record. The date is August 2nd, 1993. The 7 time is 10:21 A.M., beginning of Tape 1, Volume V 8 in the continuing deposition of Mr. Scarff. 9 10 EXAMINATION (CONTINUING) 11 BY MR. BERRY: 12 Q. Good morning, Mr. Scarff. 13 A. Good morning. 14 Q. I would like to remind you that you 15 are still under your oath, the oath that you took 16 at the commencement of this deposition. 17 Do you understand that? 18 A. Yes, I do. 19 Q. And I would like to also note for the 20 record that it is now 10:20. The deposition was 21 noticed for 9:30 on a date continuing from 22 day-to-day basis. Plaintiffs have still not 23 arrived. We note, however, that we are instructed 24 by the court reporting service that plaintiff is 25 continuing to collect its copy of the twice daily 0854 1 expedited transcript as soon as such transcripts 2 are ready for such collection. 3 Now Mr. Scarff, I would like to now 4 look at your involvement with the Church of 5 Scientology on a chronological basis, but first of 6 all, let me ask you about your education and 7 earlier employment. 8 Could you, please, very briefly 9 indicate your education or educational 10 background. 11 A. Starting at which time? 12 Q. Let's start with junior high school. 13 Tell me where you went to school and when you went 14 to school. 15 A. If you are going to ask me for the 16 dates, it's going to take a minute. 17 Q. Just very brief. As best as you can 18 recall it. 19 A. 1968 to 1970 I would have been 20 attending JFK Junior High School in Rockledge, 21 Florida. In 1969, I'm sorry, 1970 to '71 I 22 attended the Sanford Naval Academy in Sanford, 23 Florida. '72 to '74 attended Merritt Island High 24 School, Merritt Island, Florida. '75 to '76 25 attended South Eastern Bible College, Lakeland, 0855 1 Florida. And '77 to 1982 attended Portland State 2 University, Portland, Oregon. Then in '83 to 1985 3 attended Portland State University, Portland, 4 Oregon to get my Master's degree. 5 Q. Let's go back a moment to Portland 6 State University and going from your time at 7 Portland State University indicate what 8 educational degrees or diplomas that you have 9 obtained. 10 A. My first degree was a Bachelor of 11 Science in law enforcement in a program called 12 administration of justice law enforcement with a 13 minor in the prelaw program. 14 Q. And where did you receive that from? 15 A. Portland State University. 16 Q. And then after that? 17 A. Then I received a Master's of public 18 administration degree with a minor in finance, 19 Portland State University. 20 Q. And when did you receive that? 21 A. I received that in 1985. 22 Q. From where? 23 A. Portland State University. 24 Q. And when did you graduate with the 25 earlier degree? 0856 1 A. 1982. 2 Q. That was the law enforcement? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. Any other degrees that you have 5 obtained? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Now what about your employment 8 history? Very briefly. 9 A. At which time do you want me to 10 start? 11 Q. Well, from your first -- let's start 12 in 1976. Would that be one of your first 13 significant jobs? 14 A. '76 I was a busboy in a restaurant. 15 Q. Yes. What was your first significant 16 job? 17 A. Well, I was in the military with the 18 National Guard in '77. 19 Q. Okay. Which unit was that? 20 A. It was the Oregon National Guard. 21 U.S. Army. 22 Q. And tell me about the training you 23 commenced and how long you were there and when you 24 finished. 25 A. Well, I was in basic training at Fort 0857 1 Jackson, South Carolina. Then went to Fort Sam 2 Houston, Texas, where I got medical training. And 3 then in February of '77 returned to Portland, 4 Oregon. 5 Q. And then what? 6 A. And then in September '77 started 7 school. 8 Q. Any other jobs that you have held 9 between the National Guard and the present point 10 in time? 11 A. Not up to September '77 that I 12 recall. 13 Q. What about then from September '77 14 through until today? 15 A. Had numerous jobs. Because I was a 16 student at Portland State University and I was on 17 the college work study program where I was limited 18 to part-time jobs, it was whatever job was 19 available and how much was budgeted in that 20 position. So because of the budgetary positions I 21 jumped from job to job to job in the college work 22 study program. 23 I worked in the business affairs 24 office in Portland State University. Worked in a 25 security office at Portland State. Worked for 0858 1 Multnomah County in various different jobs, one 2 being a courier. 3 I was a pretrial release assistant 4 working under the corrections officials in the 5 jail. I worked in the crime analysis unit of the 6 Portland Police Bureau. 7 Worked clerking, I wasn't really a 8 court clerk but I assisted judges at the county 9 courthouse for a period of three months. 10 Q. When was that? 11 A. That was about the basis of it. That 12 would have been approximately '78. 13 Q. And when were you in the crime 14 analysis of the Portland Police Bureau? 15 A. This would have been April of '78 to 16 approximately December '79. 17 Q. And what were your duties there? 18 A. Well, crime analysis was mostly 19 statistical reporting. I was in charge of 20 examining all the police reports that had come 21 through the precinct. And we had a huge map on 22 the wall and I was in charge of connecting the 23 areas that these crimes existed or had occurred at 24 and marking it on a map for the purpose of 25 preparing an annual document released each year by 0859 1 the police bureau to the public which records high 2 crime areas versus low crime areas and the 3 incidences of the various crimes and the areas in 4 which their frequency occurred. 5 Q. And what other jobs have you held 6 that you have not testified about so far? 7 A. Well, I was a pretrial release 8 assistant where I was in charge of interviewing 9 inmates in the jail for the purpose of 10 recognizance. At that time the county had a huge 11 overpopulation problem with inmates, and laws had 12 been passed limiting the amount of inmates that 13 could be kept within a facility. So I was in the 14 position of interviewing as many inmates as I 15 could and recommending release in lieu of bail in 16 order to facilitate reducing that population. 17 Q. And who employed you to do that and 18 when? 19 A. Multnomah County employed me to do 20 that. Multnomah County Corrections Division and 21 this would have been 1978. And I worked with the 22 county till April of '84, '83. 23 Q. And doing the same job? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And then what? 0860 1 A. And then I worked as a courier for 2 the Multnomah Corrections Division routing the 3 mail between the various penal facilities and the 4 courthouse. 5 Q. And after that? 6 A. And then after that I worked for the 7 business affairs office at Portland State 8 University. 9 Q. And when was that? 10 A. That would have been June of '83. 11 And I worked there till approximately September of 12 '83. 13 Q. And then what? Where did you work 14 next? 15 A. I had various jobs in the area as a 16 store detective and undercover security person for 17 various stores with an agency called Western 18 Intelligence Services. And I was put in various 19 stores throughout the area on a contract basis for 20 store detective work. Had one position at 21 Montgomery Wards as an undercover security 22 person. 23 Q. And did you cease doing that at some 24 point in time? 25 A. I ceased doing security work 0861 1 following graduation from school. And shortly 2 before graduating with my Bachelor's degree I 3 joined the Air Force ROTC with the possibility of 4 joining the Air Force as an officer, a 5 commissioned officer. And that went from the time 6 that I -- from September of '84 to when I started 7 graduate school, which would have been September 8 of -- no. No. I got my dates wrong. Starting in 9 September of '81 through September of '82 is when 10 I was in the Air Force ROTC. In '82 is when I 11 started graduate school. 12 Q. And then are there any other jobs 13 that you held? 14 A. Not that I can think of unless you 15 want to count the one week that I worked at the 16 Church of Scientology on staff. 17 Q. No, we will get back to that. But I 18 am trying to take your employment history from the 19 time you graduated roughly now through until 20 today. 21 A. Well, yes, yes, there was. In May of 22 19 -- 23 Q. I mean, for example, did you ever 24 work at J.C. Penney Insurance? 25 A. That was further on down the line. 0862 1 Q. Let's just take it step by step. 2 A. I am trying to do that. Please 3 understand that there has been many years that 4 have occurred here and I am trying to recollect 5 here, and by pressuring me or pushing me to go 6 faster I am not going to be of any help to you. 7 Q. Sorry. 8 A. Following graduation from school, and 9 this would have been in August of '85, I had a 10 part-time job with TLC Dry Cleaners, which is a 11 dry cleaning corporation. I was a computer 12 assistant. And I worked there until May of 1987. 13 In July of '87 I became an insurance 14 sales agent with J.C. Penney Insurance. That was 15 till December of 1988 when they went out of 16 business. 17 Then I worked for a collections 18 company, I'm sorry, Grantree Furniture as a 19 collector until I was laid off in 19, I believe it 20 was 1990. 21 Then I went to work for Fred Myers at 22 a retail store until I quit in March of '91. 23 Then I worked from March of '91 24 through December of '92 for the Red Lion Hotel 25 when I was involved in a car accident, and I 0863 1 remained unemployed on disability up until April 2 of 1993 when I received an insurance settlement 3 for the accident. 4 Q. Now, did there come a point of time 5 in your life that you became associated with the 6 Church of Scientology? 7 A. I took a personality test in May of 8 1976 at the former office of the org, Scientology 9 organization, on the corner of Southwest Broadway 10 and Salmon Street. And from that personality test 11 in which I failed drastically I was told I had 12 quite a few problems that needed to be dealt 13 with. 14 I signed up for a communications 15 course. And I stayed with that course for 16 approximately, if I recall, one, one and a half 17 weeks, and then I left because I was being 18 pressured very heavily for additional money to 19 take any further, more courses. 20 Q. When was this? 21 A. This would have been May of '76. 22 Q. And in what manner were you being 23 pressured to take further courses? 24 A. Well, I was told the communications 25 course was the most introductory course you could 0864 1 take in Scientology and that I had to in addition 2 to taking the communications course, I needed to 3 sign up for auditing. And that auditing was $100 4 an hour. 5 And I told them I could come up with 6 a hundred dollars, and in fact, did pay them a 7 hundred dollars for one hour of auditing, but I 8 was then told that the $100 was simply a down 9 payment to the package that I had to pay for. 10 Because auditing is not given on an individual 11 basis. You have to sign up for a package of it 12 for it to be effective in that they only sold 13 auditing in packaged sessions of $1500. And that 14 I had to come up with an additional 1400. 15 And when I told them I could not do 16 that, there was a minister by the name of Leigha 17 Clark working at the Mission of Davis which at 18 that time was right across the street from the 19 org. And Leigha and another gentleman there, whom 20 I remember as Ken Hoden, whom struck me as being a 21 priest of some sort, because he wore his black 22 garb with a white collar that you would usually 23 see of a Catholic priest wear. 24 And Leigha told me in a very nice 25 way, could I not sell material possessions that I 0865 1 may have that I don't need to take these courses. 2 And I told her that I had no possessions to speak 3 of, I mean, that I didn't need. 4 Later that day, she came by my 5 apartment and when I let her in, she said, "Well, 6 can't you sell your television set? Can't you 7 sell your stereo? Don't you have any clothes you 8 can sell?" 9 And I said, "These are things that I 10 rely on." 11 She says, "Well, once you take our 12 courses, you are going to realize that you don't 13 need a television set. You don't need a radio. 14 You don't need these things. And so you can 15 probably sell these and get a good price so you 16 could take our courses." 17 When I told her I would not do that, 18 she then said, "Don't you have a mother and a 19 father that you can ask for money from? Or a loan 20 from?" I told her at that time that -- she knew 21 for a fact at that time based upon earlier 22 conversation that I was looking to attending 23 school at Portland State. And she asked me if I 24 knew any teachers, any neighbors. Did I have a 25 family doctor? Did I have a dentist? Did I have 0866 1 a priest? Can't I go to any of these people and 2 ask for money in order to take these courses 3 because these courses were very important. And I 4 said, no. And then she left. 5 And I would get regular visits by 6 her. One, two times a day. 7 It got to a point that I went to the 8 apartment manager and told him that I was being 9 harassed and that people kept coming knocking on 10 my door leaving notes from someplace called the 11 Church of Scientology. And it got to the point 12 when the manager would call me up and said that 13 the people that you talked about are here from the 14 Church of Scientology. They are on their way up. 15 And it necessitated me at the time of hurrying out 16 of my apartment and hiding on a fire escape or 17 going down the backdoor just to avoid them because 18 they are constantly pressuring me for more money. 19 Q. And when was this? 20 A. This was May and June of 1976. 21 Q. And with regard to the Church of 22 Scientology, what happened next? 23 A. That was the end of it. After a 24 week, week and a half I just refused to go back. 25 I -- 0867 1 Q. Did there come another point in time 2 in your life when you again became involved with 3 the Church of Scientology? 4 A. There was one time involuntarily, 5 yes. 6 Q. When was that? 7 A. This is the incident which I referred 8 to earlier with regards to Fred King and the 9 Academy of Kung Fu. 10 Q. What happened with regard to that? 11 A. At that time, that period which I 12 recall as being the summer of '79 that I signed up 13 to take karate courses at the Academy of Kung Fu. 14 Q. Where was this academy? 15 A. Portland, Oregon. 16 Q. And did anything happen with regard 17 to the Church of Scientology? 18 A. Yes. At that time I was associated 19 with Adrian and Anne Greek who were cult education 20 people. And the Greeks tried to talk me out of 21 signing up with the Academy of Kung Fu because 22 they said that Scientologists basically ran the 23 place, that Fred King was an official in the 24 Church of Scientology. And I told them that the 25 only reason for my going there was to learn karate 0868 1 and nothing else. And it didn't bother me. 2 However, after signing up for the 3 course and spending a week at the academy, I was 4 ordered by Fred King to come into his office to 5 have a word with him. And at that time he 6 informed me that he knew that I was associated 7 with the Greeks who were enemies of the Church of 8 Scientology of which he was a member, and that he 9 knew that I was there to spy on him because of his 10 relationship to the Church of Scientology. 11 And I informed him that that was not 12 the case. That I simply wanted to learn 13 self-defense. And he was adamant that I was there 14 to spy on him. 15 He later -- well, he told me to leave 16 the premises and he would contact me, because he 17 assumed at that point that I was no longer 18 interested in being a member of the academy. And 19 I told him, in fact, that nothing had changed 20 insofar as what I wanted with this self-defense 21 training, that I wanted to remain a member. And 22 he said he would contact me later in the day. 23 Later in the day he called me, asked 24 me if I would come down to the Academy of Kung Fu 25 to speak with him, which I did. When I got to the 0869 1 Academy of Kung Fu, he walked me across the street 2 to an apartment across the street, went to the 3 second level of this building where I was greeted 4 by two other individuals whom I recognized as 5 being instructors at the academy. And shortly 6 thereafter an oriental man came in and I was 7 advised that he was a member of the Church of 8 Scientology's Guardian's Office. And he had a 9 tape recorder with him. 10 And Fred King again asserted that he 11 knew that I was there to spy on him but that I 12 could redeem myself and I could continue courses 13 at the Academy of Kung Fu and that I would have 14 Mr. King's trust if I would sign a declaration 15 that they had prepared. 16 And at first he tried to get me to go 17 ahead and sign it without reading it. I said no, 18 I don't want to sign anything unless I have an 19 opportunity to read it. So I read it. And that 20 was a first time I had seen a document like this 21 because it referred to a number of individuals, 22 through whom I knew about, and the declaration 23 attacked the integrity of each one of these 24 individuals in some very slanderous ways. 25 It referred to one of the attorneys, 0870 1 and I forgot which attorney it referred to, I 2 believe it was Gary McMurray, as having -- as 3 being an alcoholic and having a sexual problem in 4 the way he dealt with women. And there are a 5 number of other things about the people in this 6 declaration, most of whom I did not even know. 7 And they wanted me to sign it under oath that I 8 knew these facts to be true. 9 The declaration seemed to be very 10 indicative of Julie Christofferson because at that 11 time Julie Christofferson was involved in a 12 lawsuit against the Church of Scientology for 13 fraud. 14 And at first I refused to sign it, 15 but then the duress became very difficult to 16 sustain. Fred King became volatile and threatened 17 to become very physically abusive if I did not 18 sign it. And I recall this oriental gentleman 19 from the Guardian's Office being very serious, 20 didn't talk a lot. And under the pressure of the 21 situation I signed it. And right after I signed 22 it, the Japanese man smiled and grabbed the 23 document and ran out of the building. 24 And I recall, although I didn't 25 recall that it was happening at the time that we 0871 1 were discussing this declaration, that they had 2 the tape recorder running. 3 Q. Who had a tape recorder running? 4 A. The Japanese man brought the tape 5 recorder in, but when he ran out with the 6 document, he didn't take the recorder with him. 7 And -- 8 Q. Sorry. Have you ever seen this 9 document since? 10 A. I have not. We did -- he wanted it 11 notarized. So Fred walked me over to a notary 12 public in a business office across the street, had 13 me sign it and he had it notarized. And -- 14 Q. Has anyone ever referred to this 15 declaration since in your presence? 16 A. Not in my presence since. I learned 17 that evening from a phone call that I received 18 from Anne Greek that Fred King and another 19 Scientologist by the name of Lee Meeckoms walked 20 into the Positive Action Center unannounced and 21 they knew of course who Fred and Lee were. And 22 they played a portion of the tape. And Anne knew 23 that this was a harassment technique because they 24 played a portion of the tape but not all of it. 25 And then refused to tell Anne when she asked him 0872 1 where the tape came from and why it was taken. 2 Now, whether -- and whether it had my consent or 3 not and they refused to do it. They said they 4 played a portion of the tape, made some kind of, 5 some threat, verbal threat to Anne Greek, and 6 left. 7 And she said it was just a harassment 8 technique. That these people are dangerous and 9 don't have anything to do with them. 10 Q. And you mentioned the Guardian's 11 Office, what is the Guardian's Office? 12 A. I know what the Guardian's Office is 13 now, I did not know what it was at the time. 14 Q. Did the gentleman from the Guardian's 15 Office say anything as to where he was from? 16 A. No. Fred King said he was from the 17 Guardian's Office. He would not talk. He simply 18 had the document with him. 19 Q. What do you know now to be the 20 Guardian's Office? 21 A. The Guardian's Office when published 22 by the Church of Scientology simply describes it 23 as an administrative branch of the church. The 24 Guardian's Office is the office which is 25 responsible for all the unlawful, unethical, 0873 1 covert and overt intelligence activities 2 perpetuated by members of the Church of 3 Scientology to benefit the agenda, whether it's an 4 open agenda or a hidden agenda of the Church of 5 Scientology. 6 Q. Is the Guardian's Office still in 7 existence? 8 A. Yes, it is. 9 Q. Is it still in existence under the 10 name the Guardian's Office? 11 A. No. It's not. Following the 12 conviction of 11 high ranking members of the 13 church including the wife of founder L. Ron 14 Hubbard, they changed the name of the office and 15 renamed it the Office of Special Affairs. 16 I need to take a small break, 17 please. 18 Q. Before you take a break, do you know 19 someone called Michael Meisner? 20 A. I have heard the name. I have heard 21 the name, yes. 22 MR. BERRY: Let's go off the record for a 23 moment to let the witness take a break. 24 VIDEO OPERATOR: Go off the record. The 25 time is 10:51 A.M. 0874 1 (Recess taken.) 2 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 3 The time is 10:58 A.M. 4 BY MR. BERRY: 5 Q. Mr. Scarff, you were testifying 6 before the short break as to an incident involving 7 the Church of Scientology Guardian's Office and a 8 Kung Fu Academy. Is there anything else with 9 regard to that testimony that we haven't covered? 10 A. Yes. But before we touch on that, 11 you were asking me about a Mike Meisner or 12 something like that. 13 Q. Yes. Mike Meisner, do you know who 14 Michael Meisner is? 15 A. I heard Michael Meisner, and this is 16 a conversation I had with someone that he had -- 17 was a member of the Church of Scientology that 18 cooperated with the authorities and then went into 19 some kind of witness relocation program because of 20 testimony given on behalf, his behalf to 21 authorities that was adverse to the Church of 22 Scientology. 23 Q. You never met him yourself? 24 A. No, sir. 25 Q. Now returning to the Kung Fu Academy, 0875 1 and the encounter with the Guardian's Office. Did 2 you have something to add to your testimony before 3 we move on? 4 A. Yes, I did. I was visited again by 5 Fred King after I informed Mr. King that I had 6 spoken with the Greeks and told them what 7 happened, and that I profess to have signed this 8 declaration under duress and that you had 9 threatened me, and I am referring to Fred King as 10 having threatened me. 11 Q. Thank you for that clarification. 12 A. Then later that evening I was visited 13 again by Fred King and a Dr. Jim Aunft. 14 Q. And what happened then? 15 A. And Aunft had a tape recorder with 16 him, and he came in with the tape recorder 17 running, and Fred King slammed me up against a 18 wall and said he was going to do bodily harm to 19 me. And shortly after that I was visited by a Lee 20 Meeckoms, who had also earlier attended or went to 21 the Positive Action Center in the company of Fred 22 King to play the tape of the time that I was 23 signing the declaration, and it was basically 24 harassment and threat. 25 And shortly after that I called the 0876 1 Portland police and I filed a report with the 2 police that I was being harassed by these 3 gentlemen. And I subsequently filed complaints 4 with the Better Business Bureau and also the 5 Department of Justice, that's the State Department 6 of Justice, Consumer Affairs Division alleging 7 fraud. And the Better Business Bureau responded 8 by saying that the matter was in the hands of the 9 consumer of fraud division. And the consumer of 10 fraud division responded with a letter saying that 11 Fred King had been contacted, and Fred King had 12 been advised to refund the money to me. 13 Q. And what happened? 14 A. Shortly after that I received a 15 letter from an attorney by the name of Tim Bowles, 16 an Oregon attorney, and it was a threat letter 17 threatening me with legal action if I pursued 18 anything against Fred King, spied on him or 19 anything like that. And I dismissed the letter. 20 Then I got a check in the mail from 21 Fred King and it was for the full refund. And I 22 noticed on the back of the check written in very 23 small pencil, and the statement was that I by 24 signing this check will not hold Fred King 25 responsible for any further actions relating out 0877 1 of this incident. And I erased the pencil and in 2 ink I wrote at the very top of the check, "Nice 3 try, Fred." And then I signed it and cashed it. 4 Q. And when did you receive the letter 5 from attorney Tim Bowles? 6 A. This would have been in the summer of 7 '79. 8 Q. Now, turning your attention to 9 Exhibit-21. And specifically to the fourth page 10 of that exhibit -- 11 A. Wait a second. I am caught on the 12 microphone. Okay. 13 Q. Specifically the fourth page of that 14 exhibit. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. The photograph on that page, is that 17 of anyone you know? 18 A. Well, this is Tim Bowles. This is a 19 gentleman that was here on the first day of our 20 deposition and he is the head partner of Bowles & 21 Moxon. I have gotten to know Tim Bowles much more 22 after this original incident. At that time Tim 23 Bowles was an Oregon lawyer, and then he 24 eventually moved to Los Angeles. 25 Q. Did you have any further contact with 0878 1 Mr. Bowles at the time of the letter you received 2 from him? 3 A. I had no contact with him at all. It 4 was simply a letter that I got in the mail and I 5 did not speak with him or anything. I do recall 6 sending a copy of that letter to the Consumer 7 Affairs Division. But that was it. It was simply 8 a letter -- I made a copy and I eventually threw 9 it away -- to me. It had no meaning to me. 10 Q. You say it was a threatening letter. 11 In what way was it a threatening letter? 12 A. It said he was a representing 13 attorney for Fred King, and it alleged that my 14 purposes for going to the Academy of Kung Fu was 15 to spy and that by virtue of spying on a business, 16 it interfered with the business aspects. And by 17 my spying on Fred King, not only was I violating 18 some laws against Fred King on a personal level, 19 but I was violating business laws. And that as a 20 result of my spying activities, I was injuring not 21 only Fred King but I was injuring his business and 22 the stability of that business. 23 And again, the letter was rampant 24 with a lot of legal terminology that made no sense 25 to me. So again, like I said, I made a copy, I 0879 1 sent it to the Consumers Affairs Division, but I 2 eventually threw that letter out because it had no 3 meaning to me and I had no further contact with 4 Mr. King and I received no further communications 5 from Mr. Bowles. 6 Q. Now, was there any further contact 7 with the Church of Scientology at that point in 8 time? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Did there come another point in time 11 when you again became involved with the Church of 12 Scientology? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. When was that? 15 A. In the spring of 1982, approximately 16 March or April of 1982 there was a woman on campus 17 by the name of Alana Arnold. And she, like I had 18 seen previously on campus, was coming on with 19 stacks of Scientology pamphlets introducing, 20 trying to entice students to come to the Church of 21 Scientology to take the personality test. 22 And I was doing my homework at a 23 table in the cafeteria. She came by. Gave me the 24 Scientology pitch, and I saw it as an opportunity 25 to tell her just how much I thought of the Church 0880 1 of Scientology. 2 And I assume based upon what happened 3 after that, she saw it as an opportunity to take 4 that challenge, because I was very negative. And 5 during our conversation I talked about how I had 6 earlier taken a communications course and was 7 being pressured to surrender money that I didn't 8 have to the church and plus I had this incident 9 with Fred King. 10 And she told me that that had 11 absolutely nothing to do with the Church of 12 Scientology. She said the Church of Scientology 13 had a very excellent standing in the community. 14 That it was a member of the Chamber of Commerce. 15 And that whatever happened to me was a very 16 unfortunate incident incurring out of the 17 misbehavior of members of the church, but it had 18 absolutely nothing to do with the church itself, 19 and that I should be very angry and had a right to 20 be angry, and I should come down to the Mission of 21 Davis and address it to the minister down there, 22 or the director of the mission at the time. 23 And I did that. I did exactly that. 24 I went down to the Mission of Davis. 25 Q. And when was this? 0881 1 A. This would have been in 1982. 2 Q. And what happened when you went to 3 the Mission of Davis? 4 A. There I met John Carmichael. 5 Q. Who is John Carmichael? 6 A. John Carmichael at that time was the 7 PR director and currently he is with the org in 8 New York. I believe he is a director of public 9 affairs in Manhattan. And I was also introduced 10 to Martin Samuels. 11 Q. Who is Martin Samuels? 12 A. Martin Samuels was identified to me 13 as a director of the Mission of Davis at that 14 time. 15 Q. And -- 16 A. And I conversed with Mr. Samuels and 17 told him what happened, and he apologized. He 18 said that certainly it was out of character with 19 the Church of Scientology, and that those 20 individuals had no right treating me the way that 21 they did. 22 And that was basically it other than 23 they asked me what led me to come down and 24 complain. And I said well, I was angry. And he 25 said what else led you to come down, because 0882 1 certainly if you were angry after all these years, 2 you didn't come down and complain right after it 3 happened; right? No. I said no. Well, something 4 else brought you down other than the fact that you 5 were angry. 6 And I told them that I had talked to 7 Alana in the school cafeteria and she had some 8 things about Scientology that was something that I 9 wanted. And I recounted how I saw an attitude 10 within some Scientology members which is something 11 I wanted. 12 Q. So what was said next? 13 A. By who? 14 Q. By you or John Carmichael. 15 A. I was getting to that. 16 Q. Okay. 17 A. I told Martin Samuels that the one 18 thing that really impressed me about Scientology 19 was the fact that they were very confident. They 20 seemed to have a lot of positive, self-esteem. 21 And even, they had a little bit of arrogance, 22 which is something that I wanted. 23 Something -- because one of the 24 reasons that I went to the Academy of Kung Fu was 25 to be able to stand up to myself because I had 0883 1 always been an introvert, and this is one way I 2 saw to be an extrovert and being out in the 3 community and having some happiness. And I saw 4 this in Scientologists, they seemed to be very 5 happy, very self-confident. And he told me 6 certainly I could gain that if I stuck with the 7 course. 8 And he also told me that if I decided 9 to take courses and come back to the church that 10 if I had a problem at any time with someone in the 11 church harassing me or threatening me, that I 12 could always go to him. And that was the basis of 13 the conversation. I was duped. I went back. 14 Q. Did he tell you what he could do if 15 you went to him about harassment? 16 A. No, sir, he didn't. He simply said 17 he would take care of it. 18 Q. Now, you have talked of the Church of 19 Scientology missions and orgs. Can you explain 20 what you mean by those various terms? 21 A. There is the mission within the 22 Church of Scientology which advertises itself to 23 be the ecclesiastic or religious entity of the 24 Church of Scientology. 25 Whenever someone is first introduced 0884 1 to the church, they are taken to the mission 2 because the Church of Scientology wants you to 3 believe and, of course, you are referred to as 4 "raw meat" in the same respect that someone 5 joining a new organization might be referred to as 6 "green." They want you to have or come away with 7 the idea that the Church of Scientology has some 8 religious environment connected to it, so they 9 will take you to the Mission of Davis. 10 And there you will see the posters 11 and stuff talking about the Religious Technology 12 Center, the Church of Scientology. You will see 13 the Church of Scientology emblem or the cross, if 14 you want to call it that. And it is the entity 15 whereby one takes all the introductory courses and 16 takes introductory auditing. 17 The org, whereby the mission is the 18 franchise of the church and at that time there 19 were numerous individuals that owned the 20 franchises separate from the Church of 21 Scientology, the orgs are basically the affiliate 22 branches of the mother church, the Church of 23 Scientology International. At the org you can 24 take some of the same introductory courses but you 25 can also take the higher level of auditing. They 0885 1 are referred to now as Class 5 orgs, though I am 2 not real specific what that means. But you can 3 take higher level courses. The higher levels of 4 auditing. And it's where individuals who have 5 been in the church for quite some time will take 6 their courses. 7 Q. Was there any mention of Tim Bowles 8 in this meeting with Martin Samuels that you have 9 just been testifying about? 10 A. Yes, I did mention to him the, what 11 happened with the Academy of Kung Fu and the 12 actions that I took. But there was no discussion 13 about it. Again, he simply said that if I was 14 ever in a position of being attacked, that he 15 would intercede. And he would put a stop to it. 16 Because again, they were not actions reflective of 17 the normal routine within the Church of 18 Scientology. That it was simply individual 19 actions. 20 Q. Now, what happened next? 21 A. I took courses at the church. I took 22 the communications course over again. Which I was 23 not charged for in that because I already paid for 24 it. Plus I had paid a hundred dollars for one 25 hour of auditing, which I did not receive. And 0886 1 being that I had paid a total of $125 already, 2 which they would not refund to me, because at that 3 time you signed an agreement that courses were 4 nonrefundable, they simply said I could take the 5 communications course without charge. 6 Did so. Completed it. Took another 7 course called "The Problems of Work." And one 8 called "Ethics." And completed those. And also 9 there was a woman there, whose name to this day I 10 cannot remember, and Martin basically said this is 11 a person I can go to for counseling and I would 12 not be charged for it. 13 Q. Now, where did you take these 14 courses? 15 A. At Mission of Davis. 16 Q. And was that separate to the org? In 17 terms of October -- was it physically separate 18 from the org? 19 A. It was physically separate from the 20 org. The org at that time was split off into two 21 physical entities. 22 Down the road from the Mission of 23 Davis on Park Avenue or Park Street which -- 24 strike that -- on Park Avenue they had a place 25 where one could take courses where also on Sundays 0887 1 you could attend the, quote, religious service for 2 parishioners of the church. 3 And then across the street there was 4 a physical building which was a walk-in area where 5 people could take the personality tests. And 6 there were a number of meeting rooms and offices 7 where Sea Org. members routinely came in and out. 8 And that to me at that time was the setting for 9 the org because there was no other Scientology 10 building that I can recall. 11 Q. To whom did you make payments of 12 these courses that you took? 13 A. There was a course registrar there 14 who took payments. There is a course registrar in 15 every mission that you pay. 16 Q. And were the payments to the org or 17 were they to the Church of Scientology? 18 A. That's a good question. I don't 19 know. I paid cash. And they simply issued a 20 receipt and that was it. But on the receipt it 21 said Mission of Davis. 22 Q. Did you subsequently acquire 23 information which led you to conclude what happens 24 with regard to monies received by orgs and 25 missions and the Church of Scientology 0888 1 International? 2 A. I did later on because -- 3 Q. And what was that knowledge? 4 A. Well, in 1984 Martin Samuels was 5 visited by some members from Los Angeles and he 6 disappeared. I mean, he was no longer involved 7 with the Mission of Davis. And at that time I 8 didn't know what happened to him. But there was 9 some talk about the fact that even though he owned 10 the Mission of Davis or this was a franchise, he 11 still had financial obligations to the Church of 12 Scientology, because he was using their name. But 13 that he was holding back on money or something 14 like that, and stealing money, and that's why he 15 had left. 16 Q. Do you know who visited him from 17 Los Angeles? 18 A. I had no idea at the time. I later 19 learned, though, that the international finance 20 police from the Church of Scientology 21 International visited him and was responsible for 22 his leaving the Mission of Davis. 23 Now much later in my conversations 24 with David Butterworth I was informed that he was 25 a thief, and that he was stealing from the church 0889 1 and that's why he was kicked out. Conversations I 2 have had with other people contradict that. And, 3 again, I don't know the whole aspects, so I can't 4 speak to that. 5 Q. And when were these conversations 6 with David Butterworth that you have just referred 7 to? 8 A. David Butterworth would have been 9 late 1991. Particularly in a conversation I had 10 with him in November of '91 in Los Angeles when I 11 asked him about Martin Samuels and what happened 12 with the Mission of Davis. 13 Q. And who is David Butterworth? 14 A. David Butterworth is the director of 15 the Office of Special Affairs, Church of 16 Scientology International. 17 Q. Now going back to 1982 I believe it 18 was, what happened next after this conversation 19 with Martin Samuels? You took these courses. 20 A. I took courses. I continued with 21 counseling. They were not auditing in the sense 22 that I know what auditing is today. They were 23 counseling where I sat down on a sofa and I talked 24 with a counselor from the church. But eventually 25 the counseling took on a different meaning when 0890 1 they told me that they were going to start 2 charging me $100 an hour for counseling, which is 3 distinctively different from what I recall them 4 telling me earlier is that they were there for my, 5 anytime I needed them they would be there for me, 6 and there was no talk of money. 7 But they said very reasonably they 8 had bills to pay like anybody else, and that it 9 would require my paying $100 an hour for 10 counseling. 11 Q. Now, did you testify that you were 12 engaged -- had you been through some processing at 13 this point in time? 14 A. Right. 15 Q. Can you describe what you meant by 16 processing and what it involved? 17 Let's, first of all, clean up the 18 question. Can you describe what you meant by 19 processing? 20 A. Processing is a form of counseling 21 just like auditing. And processing is -- well, 22 there is the assist processing which prefers to 23 eliminating any type of mental aberrations that 24 may be holding you back from successfully pursuing 25 a project or an event. 0891 1 For example, if I came in to take a 2 course and there was something that was happening 3 in my life at the time that was very stressful 4 that was holding me back and it was because of 5 some anguish or bad event, they told me that your 6 mind acts like a camera, and when you experience 7 that event, it takes a picture of that image and 8 that image remains with you in your psyche. 9 And that all this talk about people 10 having -- what's the word -- the word today is 11 called dyslexia, but they said anyone that says 12 they have any type of physical handicap that 13 prevents them from reading things or accomplishing 14 things in an academic way, it's all bullshit. 15 It's all psychological bullshit because it doesn't 16 exist. That it's because of the engrams. It's 17 the mental pictures that you hold onto that hold 18 you back from pursuing things. 19 And so processing helps to relieve 20 you of those harmful mental images that hold you 21 back. And a lot of it was touch processing. 22 Q. Where did this processing take 23 place? 24 A. In the Mission of Davis. 25 Q. And you say it was touch processing, 0892 1 what did you mean by that? 2 A. Again, you are asking me questions of 3 a very psychological, mental health regiment which 4 has absolutely no credibility anyway within the 5 Church of Scientology, but beside the fact, if I 6 had any type of pain that was holding me back, 7 they would have a processor come into the room; 8 they would have you sit very still in a chair 9 focused on the wall, told not to remove my focus 10 from the wall at any time, and they would touch me 11 on a part of my body. And while they touched me 12 they would say "Feel my finger." My response 13 would be "Thank you." 14 And then they would touch me at 15 another part of the body. Feel my finger. My 16 response would be thank you. This was said over 17 and over and over and over again constantly. And 18 they would touch various parts of my body and I 19 could not react in the way that I can look at him, 20 that I could move. I had to remain very focused. 21 And I said "Thank you." And pretty soon it became 22 very repetitive. 23 I recall getting dizzy. Of sourse 24 your eyes looking at a blank white wall tends to 25 play tricks on you. And if I -- that's why I 0893 1 referred earlier to an altered state of 2 consciousness or an altered state mentally, 3 because I remember seeing lights moving around. I 4 was getting dizzy. And pretty soon it became very 5 instinctive and very repetitive and almost 6 programmed. Feel my finger. Thank you. Feel my 7 finger. Thank you. And I wouldn't were present. During these breaks that 11 you said that I have taken well over 30 minutes 12 on, I have been present, sir. And I have waited 13 for other attorneys to come to be present. This 14 last break I took, as you are well aware because I 15 walked right by, sir, I was talking to the guard I 16 was here. 17 Q. You were here after 35 minutes. 18 A. After speaking to counsel. But 19 despite that, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Calhoun was not 20 present. So you, sir, could not have proceeded 21 with this deposition anyway because Mr. Calhoun 22 was not present. And during these breaks I have 23 been here, sir, waiting for Mr. Calhoun to end 24 what business he had to end to come to this 25 deposition. 3032 1 So your complaint there is basically 2 null and void, sir, because you can't direct that 3 at me. I have been here waiting for this depo to 4 continue but we could not because Mr. Calhoun 5 needed to be here, sir. So I would take that, 6 address that complaint to Mr. Calhoun and ask him 7 not to be involved in any of other type of 8 business, I guess. But I have been here, sir, 9 waiting for this depo to continue. So don't hash 10 that on me. Again that is another 11 misrepresentation you have decided to throw out in 12 the deposition. 13 As far as the other things, that's 14 fine. Mr. Bowles, it is clear at this point that 15 you and I are going to be seeing a lot of each 16 other. You are going to be going before a 17 committee on discipline and I will be there, sir. 18 There will be a Bar complaint. And we will both 19 be in contact regarding that, sir. So I have a 20 feeling that you and I are going to be around each 21 other for quite a bit for a time in the future. 22 So you can make whatever complaints 23 you wish. I have always made it and said it on 24 record that if the judge in any case rules for me 25 to do something, I will abide by a judge's ruling 3033 1 because this is not a Scientology court we are 2 dealing with. We are not dealing with Scientology 3 officials. We are dealing with a justice system 4 that does things on a fair an equitable basis. I 5 will accept the judge's ruling. 6 But you, sir, are not the judge as 7 you have tried to point yourself out or tried to 8 make me feel you were. 9 And I have been told, thank God, that 10 I have rights and responsibilities and those 11 rights and responsibilities have been given to me 12 most recently by attorneys that care about what is 13 happening to me in this process that I simply 14 cannot afford to pay. And if I choose to receive 15 counsel from attorneys that from the goodness of 16 their hearts and in pro bono want to give that 17 advice to me, I am going to accept it. And if you 18 don't like it, all I can say, Mr. Bowles, is stuff 19 it. 20 MR. CALHOUN: I don't have any questions of 21 you, Mr. Scarff; however, I would ask for 22 clarification of your statement in response to 23 Mr. Bowles. Are you refusing to answer, and this 24 is going to be a long question so if it is 25 difficult, ask me to break it down. I am going to 3034 1 put these as two alternative positions. 2 Are you telling us that you will not 3 answer any questions Mr. Bowles puts to you about 4 your life experiences or are you telling us that 5 you will only not answer questions about those 6 life experiences you contend you discussed with 7 Mr. Bowles in the context of an attorney-client 8 relationship? 9 THE WITNESS: As I have said on record 10 before, I will not discuss those experiences that 11 were discussed directly with Tim Bowles or any of 12 his associates that were under attorney-client 13 privilege. And that came under attorney-client 14 privilege. And I'm speaking specifically to not 15 only personal conversations I had with this man 16 sitting across the desk from me, but his 17 associates. 18 I have been advised by counsel that 19 even if Mr. Bowles was to leave this 20 cross-examination and simply replace himself with 21 Mr. Wiener or Mr. Moxon, that attorney-client 22 privilege still stands because it is still the 23 same law firm and that attorney-client privilege 24 covers the entire law firm. And I am asserting 25 that privilege. I have been told I have that 3035 1 privilege so I am asserting it. 2 If Mr. Bowles wants to ask me 3 questions that were not discussed in the contexts 4 of attorney-client privilege, he has the right to 5 do that and I am prepared to cooperate with him. 6 But he has made it very clear that he wants to 7 throw all of the stuff that was part and parcel to 8 our attorney-client privilege and simply throw it 9 on the table and use it against me. He does not 10 respect my position here. He has chosen to 11 represent the Church of Scientology International 12 over me. 13 And as far as he is concerned, when I 14 left the Church of Scientology evidently in his 15 opinion he is no longer my attorney and, 16 therefore, he has the right to strike at me any 17 way he chooses whether it is unethical, whether it 18 is a breach of his legal obligations. He simply 19 feels he has the right do that. 20 So in answer to your question, I am 21 prepared to answer any questions he has as long as 22 it was not content of our attorney-client 23 privilege. 24 MR. CALHOUN: I have no further questions. 25 MR. BOWLES: So, Mr. Scarff, we will take 3036 1 your word for it, is that it, as to what we 2 discussed and what we didn't from the 3 attorney-client privilege context? 4 THE WITNESS: Yes. 5 MR. BOWLES: I guess with that we are closed 6 until order of the Court. 7 MR. CALHOUN: Since this doesn't relate to 8 the conduct of the deposition, the issues that you 9 have asked about, it is not a 30(d) issue, not in 10 my opinion. 11 MR. BOWLES: I wouldn't think so either. 12 MR. CALHOUN: It would sound like we need to 13 do the usually 10-day meet and confer and exchange 14 of positions. It looks like it is going to be a 15 three-party situation because we have our 16 position, you have your position and Mr. Scarff 17 has his position. So we will need to work out a 18 mechanism whereby papers from each of the 19 respected positions are collated for the Court's 20 benefit. 21 MR. BOWLES: I agree with that. One thing 22 we are going to do immediately is to collate the 23 questions and answers that we think ought to be 24 made. 25 MR. CALHOUN: I understand. 3037 1 MR. BOWLES: The question that were given 2 and the answers that should be given in response. 3 So, Mr. Scarff, as Mr. Calhoun will 4 tell you there are local rules here on setting 5 meetings to resolve these matters informally 6 initially and then taking off to the Court for 7 those matters that cannot be resolved in the form 8 of a joint statement and we will be bringing a 9 motion and we will be taking the lead on the meet 10 and confer. 11 THE WITNESS: I am also going to ask, 12 Mr. Calhoun, I don't know if this is my right to 13 ask you or even make you aware of it and I am 14 going to ask Mr. Bowles the same thing, is that in 15 this ex parte, whatever you have to do, there is a 16 full and complete discovery process because it is 17 clear that Mr. Bowles has chosen to withhold a 18 number of client files which he claims he doesn't 19 have when in fact he does. He again is 20 obstructing this process by not providing full and 21 complete discovery in this deposition. 22 MR. BOWLES: Mr. Scarff, this is the Fishman 23 case. This is not the Garry Scarff case. 24 THE WITNESS: You have tried me already, 25 Mr. Bowles. You have been trying me in this 3038 1 cross-examination. 2 MR. BOWLES: When the other side brought you 3 in to make this your case, we have every right to 4 cross-examine you. 5 MR. CALHOUN: Let's see if we can work 6 something out here in terms of it may be possible 7 to get answers to some of these questions without 8 necessarily getting answers to all of them. I 9 suspect all of these won't be answered. But if 10 there are questions that Mr. Scarff decides to 11 answer, can we agree on a procedure by which that 12 would be done? 13 MR. BOWLES: I would rather make that part 14 of the meet and confer process itself rather than 15 go into a long discussion about that point right 16 now. I suppose one of the things you are thinking 17 about is bringing him back. 18 MR. CALHOUN: Bringing him back or having 19 video conference or there is any one of a number 20 of methods that large corporations have been using 21 for the past decade to allow interrogation or 22 meetings to occur on a cross-continental basis 23 without necessarily incurring the cost of people 24 flying back and forth. 25 MR. BOWLES: Well, all I can say is we are 3039 1 prepared to work with you on the most 2 cost-efficient manner without sacrificing the 3 benefits we have had so far which of course are 4 video. 5 MR. CALHOUN: The methodology that I am 6 speaking of would effectively be a conference room 7 in California and a conference room wherever 8 Mr. Scarff is located and the entire process is 9 videotaped. One would be merged together. 10 MR. BOWLES: We will consider it. 11 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know whether this is 12 being treated as complete or not, if it is not 13 complete. 14 MR. BOWLES: I don't think it is complete. 15 So I guess with that we are adjourned. 16 VIDEO OPERATOR: We will go off the record. 17 The date is August 18, 1993. The time is 18 12:03 P.M. End of Tape 1, Volume XVI, continuing 19 deposition of Mr. Scarff. 20 (TIME NOTED: 12:03 P.M.) 21 22 23 24 _____________________________ 25 SIGNATURE OF THE WITNESS 3040 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 2 ) ss: 3 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 4 5 6 I, ______________________________, a 7 notary public for the County of Los Angeles, State 8 of California, certify that on __________________, 9 19 ___, the foregoing deposition was submitted to 10 _____________ _______________________ for 11 examination and was read by the witness, at which 12 time any changes made by the witness were entered 13 upon the deposition, and was signed by the witness 14 before me. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ___________________________________ 22 Notary Public in and for the County 23 of Los Angeles, State of California 24 25 3041 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss: 2 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 3 4 I, LEE BRENNEMAN, C.S.R. No. 5222, do hereby 5 certify: 6 That the foregoing deposition of GARRY L. 7 SCARFF was taken before me at the time and place 8 therein set forth, at which time the witness was 9 put on oath by me; 10 That the testimony of the witness and all 11 objections made at the time of the examination 12 were recorded stenographically by me, were 13 thereafter transcribed under my direction and 14 supervision and that the foregoing is a true 15 record of same. 16 I further certify that I am neither counsel 17 for nor related to any party to said action, nor 18 in anywise interested in the outcome thereof. 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed my name 20 this 18th day of August, 1993. 21 22 23 24 ___________________________________ 25 LEE BRENNEMAN, C.S.R. No. 5222 3042 1 I N D E X 2 VOLUME XVII 3 4 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1993 5 6 WITNESS EXAMINATION 7 8 GARRY L. SCARFF 9 10 (By Mr. Bowles) 2990 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3043 1 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS 2 GARRY L. SCARFF 3 4 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED 5 207 Partial condensed transcript 3013 6 of the deposition of Patricia 7 Ryan, taken May 13, 1993. 8 9 208 Partial condensed transcript 3018 10 of the deposition of Anne 11 Greek, taken May 7, 1993. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it is true. 5 Q. 50, any portion of that true? 6 A. No. None of it is true. 7 Q. Paragraph 51, any portion of that 8 that's true? 9 A. The first sentence is true. The 10 second sentence is true with exception to the name 11 Kisser. 12 Q. Let'on can do touch processes on you and 8 touch you in the neck, for example, and all that 9 pain would leave the various parts and become very 10 centralized in the neck. And sometimes that touch 11 would bring about a boil or a red scar, and it 12 would all be centralized in the neck. And through 13 the touch processing you could eventually 14 eradicate that focal point of pain. And that 15 manifestation of an injury in that one place. But 16 that too was a good sign because if your body was 17 racked in pain and through touch processing you 18 were able to bring all that pain to one focal 19 point, then you wouldn't have to go over the 20 entire body. You could simply focus on one 21 point. 22 And one physical manifestation that I 23 had coming out of those sessions was anal bleeding 24 and hemorrhoids. And I even went to the health 25 care facility at Portland State University and was 0905 1 treated for it. 2 I believe it was a Dr. Markelson who 3 was the head physician there who was treating me 4 for that. And I couldn't understand why I had 5 anal bleeding and hemorrhoids after the result of 6 that. 7 But they told me that because the 8 physical mind and the mental mind sometimes work 9 with one another, that the fact that I had had a 10 homosexual experience that through thinking about 11 it during this processing that it kind of 12 manifested itself. And I really didn't understand 13 that, but I kind of got the impression that during 14 these sessions that one, either they were telling 15 me the truth, or two, maybe I had been raped and 16 didn't know it. I can't explain. I don't know. 17 I don't know what happened. 18 Q. Did you receive medical attention for 19 the bleeding and hemorrhoids? 20 A. Yes, I did. 21 Q. Do you recall the doctor from whom 22 you received medical attention? 23 A. I believe his name was 24 Dr. Markelson. I know that he is still the 25 physician on staff. He is in fact the physician 0906 1 in charge of the PSU student health department. 2 Q. Whereabouts? 3 A. Portland State University, right on 4 campus. He has a practice off campus on Northeast 5 33rd and Knot Street, which is right across the 6 street from what used to be the Positive Action 7 Center. And he is the physician in charge of the 8 health department there. 9 Q. And do you recall when this 10 occurred? 11 A. This would have occurred in 1983, 12 about 1983. 13 Q. Do you recall when in 1983? 14 A. I can't remember dates. 15 Q. Now, you referred to a coach. Would 16 this be the person who was conducting the 17 processing? 18 A. This is a person in charge of the 19 processing whom you went to for instructions and 20 advice and that person would be in charge of 21 instructing you how to do the training routine 22 properly and who you basically get feedback off 23 of. But the coach was the -- always a person in 24 charge of the session. So if you failed or 25 succeeded in the session, it was really the 0907 1 subjective opinion of the coach. 2 Q. Was it always the same coach? 3 A. No. There was one gentleman by the 4 name of Lyle that I recall. And another one. And 5 I can only remember what she looks like, I don't 6 recall who she was. But the physical 7 manifestations that I had with the hemorrhoids and 8 the bleeding always took place after I had the 9 sessions with Lyle. They never took place after I 10 had the sessions with the woman. 11 Q. On how many occasions did you have 12 the physical manifestations involving hemorrhoids 13 and bleeding? 14 A. Twice. Twice. 15 Q. Did you ever speak to Lyle about it? 16 A. Only in terms of the coaching that 17 took place. I mean, as far as having the physical 18 manifestations, he said, yes, sometimes your mind 19 and your physical mind manifest itself with one 20 another. So if you are thinking something 21 mentally, for example, if you really think hard 22 about having a stomachache, sometimes you can 23 manifest a stomachache. 24 Q. Were you engaged in any other conduct 25 with any other person around the time of those two 0908 1 occasions which may have caused the hemorrhoids or 2 anal bleeding? 3 A. No, sir. I was having no sexual 4 contact with anybody. In fact, I wasn't having 5 sex with anybody at that time. 6 Q. Now, when you say "that time," what 7 point in time are you referring to? 8 A. 1982 to about 1984. It was during 9 that time in fact I wasn't even dating anybody, 10 because I had such a low self-esteem and that's 11 why I went to the church because I felt by virtue 12 of what I had seen and observed that I can be like 13 these people, very self-confident. And I would be 14 able to date again. And I could carry on a 15 relationship and it's something I wasn't able to 16 do up to that point. 17 Q. Did you ever complain to Martin 18 Samuels or anyone else at the church about these 19 physical manifestations? 20 A. There was no reason to complain. I 21 was told that the mental mind sometimes reacts 22 with the physical mind. And physical 23 manifestations take place, and that they had proof 24 of this, and that the medical association, other 25 agencies had supported those conclusions. And I 0909 1 simply believed it. 2 Q. And who told you that? 3 A. Not only my coach but this is 4 something that is constantly told to members at 5 the church. And it is even told to members today, 6 that everything that Scientology does has been 7 proven to be and substantiated to be valid and 8 correct and all the medical associations have all 9 substantiated the truth and accuracy behind any 10 Scientology claim. 11 Q. And when you said you were told this 12 by your coach, which coach are you referring to? 13 A. We are talking about Lyle. 14 Q. Now, you said you felt discomfort 15 during this processing. What did you mean by 16 that? 17 A. I didn't understand how anyone 18 despite the basic premise of touch processing, why 19 it was necessary to be touched in private areas 20 which I considered to be very uncomfortable. 21 Q. And what about nausea? You mentioned 22 nausea, what was that? 23 A. Because I was looking at a white 24 wall, I was told to look at a black -- because he 25 had taken a black pen just like this, and he put 0910 1 it right on the wall, and he told me to stare at 2 the black pen on the wall and to constantly not 3 take my eyes off it despite the times that he was 4 calling me a fucking fagot, a cock sucker, a butt 5 fucker, and all kinds of things. That I am a 6 mama's boy and remain focused on the wall. 7 Because he said that he saw in me the 8 result, the anticipated result that someone could 9 come up to me and do all those things and say all 10 those things to me and it would not bother me, I 11 would not get emotional, I would not cry. I would 12 be able to simply say "Thank you" and walk away. 13 And it would not bother me. 14 But it did bother me, and I couldn't 15 understand why the touching was happening. And I 16 mean, Lyle was very well known in the mission. 17 The way that people were interacting with him and 18 stuff like that, so I assumed this man knew 19 exactly what he was doing. I trusted them that 20 they knew what they were doing. 21 Q. And when you have been saying "he" 22 through out your last answer, to whom are you 23 referring? 24 A. Lyle and the fact that Martin Samuels 25 told me that this wasn't -- I'm sorry. I don't 0911 1 know how to answer your question. I just trusted 2 someone that told me that misbehavior on the other 3 part of other people is personal, and it's -- it 4 has nothing to do with the Church of Scientology, 5 to trust them and I trusted them and this is what 6 happened. 7 Q. Would you like to take a break for a 8 moment? 9 A. (The witness nods head.) 10 MR. BERRY: We will go off camera for a 11 moment. 12 VIDEO OPERATOR: We will go off the record. 13 The time is 12:12 P.M. 14 (Recess taken.) 15 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 16 The time is 12:18 P.M. 17 BY MR. BERRY: 18 Q. Mr. Scarff, do you feel able to 19 proceed now? 20 A. (The witness nods head.) 21 Q. Mr. Scarff, you testified that you 22 reinvolved yourself with the Church of Scientology 23 in 1982. Is that correct? 24 A. That's correct. 25 Q. For what period of time did this 0912 1 period of involvement commencing in 1982 with the 2 Church of Scientology take? 3 A. Till August of '84. 4 Q. And during that period of time, was 5 there anything else that you were doing with the 6 Church of Scientology other than you have just 7 described? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And what was that? 10 A. In addition to taking the courses and 11 the counseling, understanding that at the same 12 time I was a full-time student at Portland State 13 University, so the courses I was taking where it 14 might take a full-time student a week to do was 15 taking me like a month to do. 16 In March, I believe it was March 3rd 17 in 1984, I signed a contract with the Church of 18 Scientology for, I think they told me it was a 19 five-year period. When you go on staff with the 20 Church of Scientology at a mission versus when you 21 go on staff with the Sea Org. where you sign up 22 for a billion years, at the Mission of Davis you 23 sign up for either a two-and-a-half-year contract 24 or a five-year contract. 25 And they told me because of the 0913 1 immensity of the counseling that I would need that 2 it would be better to sign up for a five-year 3 contract with the church because a five-year 4 versus two-and-a-half year-contract you received 5 substantial discounts on counseling and on the 6 books. And that I would be in a position of being 7 able to satisfy financially paying for the tuition 8 and the books at the Church of Scientology as well 9 as keeping up the financial requirements of my 10 studies at Portland State University. 11 And so I agreed to a five-year 12 contract with the church, although John Carmichael 13 told me at the time that for someone signing up 14 for a five-year contract required a special 15 permission or something since I was not going to 16 work full-time with them because I was also 17 attending school. So on my contract, you will 18 note that he left that blank when it asks for a 19 circle of the two-and-a-half and the five-year 20 contract at the top here. And after I signed the 21 contract I never saw it again. So I don't know 22 what happened in the process. 23 Q. So did there come a time when you 24 signed a contract with the Church of Scientology? 25 A. Yes. It was March 3rd of '84. 0914 1 Q. If you will turn your attention -- 2 A. I'm sorry. 3 Q. If you turn your attention, please, 4 to what previously has been marked as Exhibit-23, 5 would you tell me whether you recognize that 6 document. 7 A. It looks very much like the documents 8 I signed; however, it wasn't two pages like this. 9 It was a long 9-1/2-by-14 page and there was only 10 one page. But it looks very much like the 11 document that I signed back then. And John 12 Carmichael was the one that signed it, yes. 13 Q. Does it look like a photocopy of the 14 document you signed? 15 A. Yes, it is. Again, it's two pages in 16 the exhibit where it was only one page. 17 Q. Is that your signature on the second 18 page? 19 A. Yes, sir. 20 Q. And the various initials throughout, 21 whose are those? 22 A. Those are my initials. 23 Q. And have you seen John Carmichael's 24 signature before? 25 A. Yes, I have. 0915 1 Q. And the other signature at the bottom 2 of the second page, do you recognize that 3 signature? 4 A. It looks very much like John because 5 one of the comedies that we talked about quite a 6 bit at that time is we referred to John as 7 Dr. John because relating back to experiences that 8 we have had with physicians who don't know how to 9 write. And we call him Dr. John because he 10 scribbled whatever he wrote. 11 Q. Now, are you familiar with a 12 Scientology term known as "auditing"? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Have you ever received auditing? 15 A. I have received basic auditing in the 16 church. 17 Q. When did you receive basic auditing? 18 A. That would have been in the summer of 19 '84 just prior to my leaving in August. 20 Q. And can you first of all tell me what 21 auditing is? 22 A. Auditing is counseling again except 23 that they use the ergometer or the E-meter I think 24 it's called, an ergometer, it's an E-meter which 25 acts like a lie detector test. And they look like 0916 1 cans where they are connected to this machine. 2 And it registers electrical impulses in your 3 body. Versus a lie detector that measures skin 4 impulses, this machine is supposed to register 5 electrical impulses. 6 So if you're answering a question, 7 and that question you have been asked registers a 8 response which is painful or one that might 9 reflect some negative experience, it will register 10 on the machine. And by virtue of the readings 11 that are on this machine, one would be able to 12 determine whether, one, you are telling the truth, 13 or two, when you're answering a question that 14 there might be some hidden pain behind your answer 15 in that question which they would need to get to 16 at a later date. 17 For example, if they asked me if I 18 had been abused as a youngster and I had blanked 19 it out of my mind and said no, the E-meter would 20 be able to pick it up that I should have answered 21 yes when I in fact said no. And by the reading, 22 they would be able to tell whether there was 23 something in my subconscious that I was not 24 expressing. 25 And they would be able to pick up on 0917 1 that later and really delve into it. 2 Q. Are you familiar with the term 3 "withhold"? 4 A. I have heard the term withhold, 5 yeah. 6 Q. Have you heard it in connection with 7 auditing? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. What is a withhold? 10 A. I was told a withhold are those 11 things that you do not want to reveal information 12 that you may have, incidences that need to be 13 brought out and discussed that either is 14 consciously or subconsciously I am withholding. 15 Q. Are you familiar -- 16 A. And they told me that once I was in, 17 they were able to extract that information from 18 me, whether it was on a very conscious and an 19 expressive level, that if it was a subconscious 20 withhold, they would be able to extract that from 21 me and they referred to it as the taking off the 22 withholds. 23 Q. Are you familiar with the term 24 "overt"? 25 A. I have heard of it, but I am not sure 0918 1 as to its meaning. I think overt means those very 2 open and overt things that you recall. But, 3 again, I am not real, real positive. 4 Q. Now, how many auditing sessions do 5 you recall having with the Church of Scientology? 6 A. I believe it was 15 because it was in 7 a package of 15 sessions. 8 Q. Did you pay for those sessions? 9 A. No. I was told that because I had 10 been on staff with them, that I could be put on a 11 type of financial agreement. That eventually I 12 would either have to work it off or I would have 13 to also work part time in addition to working it 14 off. And it would be basically like a credit 15 thing. 16 Because in 1983, I think it was '83, 17 that I had turned over $6,000 of student financial 18 aid over to the church to pay for all those 19 courses and treatment, counseling that I had 20 already received. And they said that I needed to 21 do that. So I turned over my college tuition to 22 them. 23 And I know of other people who did 24 things on credit. And so they simply establish 25 credit for you. But they would remind you over a 0919 1 period of time that you needed to start making 2 payments on these things. 3 Q. Are you familiar with the term 4 "freeloader"? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. What's freeloader mean in the Church 7 of Scientology? 8 A. A freeloader particularly when you 9 are on staff is that you're taking advantage of 10 the church and that a person is acting in a way 11 that, you know, that he or she has no intent of 12 paying you for the courses or the services that 13 has been rendered. 14 Q. And are you aware of any connection 15 between freeloading and the pressure to start 16 paying for courses? 17 A. I'm sorry? 18 Q. Are you aware of any connection 19 between the term "freeloader" and the pressure to 20 start paying for courses? 21 A. Oh, definitely. 22 Q. What is that connection? 23 A. I guess I don't really understand the 24 extent of your question, but I will try to answer 25 it from what I understand. A freeloader is 0920 1 someone that is willing to accept a service and 2 accept a gift from somebody but is not willing to 3 pay or make the payments which is required for 4 those services and they are freeloading off 5 somebody. And there was always the pressure of 6 individuals to pay up in the course. But it was 7 only after a service or a course had been rendered 8 did they start to put the pressure on you to pay. 9 It was like there was no pressure 10 when they joyfully said, "Take the course. Don't 11 worry about the payment. We will deal with that 12 at a later date." But then several times 13 throughout the process when you are taking a 14 course or you were in auditing, "We need you to 15 start making payments on this." And it came as a 16 surprise, because you assumed that as stated 17 earlier, that when you sign up for a course, you 18 signed up for auditing, that after it was over, 19 then you could go out and find some means with 20 which to pay it. But that wasn't the case. 21 It was like in the middle of doing 22 something, they would throw the ball at you and 23 say, "We need you to start making payments on this 24 right now and if that requires you borrowing money 25 from your family, your friends, your ministers, 0921 1 your coach, your teacher, then you have to do it." 2 Then they would really put the pressure on you. 3 And I mean, it reminded me back when 4 I first started, was first introduced to auditing, 5 when they told me it was a hundred dollars an hour 6 and I felt comfortable with that because I felt 7 over a period of time that I could raise a hundred 8 dollars and take an auditing and then come back 9 and take some more auditing. They said, "No, you 10 can't do it that way. We only do it one way and 11 that's the $1500 up front and we need that right 12 away." 13 And, of course, I have seen that in 14 the mission during the time that I was there with 15 other students that came in. And it wasn't like 16 we need $5 here and $10 there. Bring us a check 17 in tomorrow for $500. We don't care how you do 18 it. Just bring it in. And it was very forceful. 19 And that's the best way I can explain it. 20 Q. Now, in connection with auditing, 21 apart from holding these two cans which are 22 attached to the E-meter, what else occurred? 23 A. They asked me a lot of questions, and 24 I would respond. And then they asked me not only 25 questions of a practical level but how I would 0922 1 have responded differently. And then they made 2 suggestions on how I might appropriately deal with 3 this situation and asked me to think about them. 4 And then again to tell them how I would respond to 5 it. And each time I, they asked me to do 6 something, I would respond to it. And they would 7 thank me for it. And then they asked me for 8 things that occurred in my background which didn't 9 make a lot of sense. 10 For example, the coach told me that 11 she could remember that 7,000 years ago that she 12 had been a princess in England. And if I had had 13 any thoughts about that. And if I said no, she 14 would write it down, and she would look at the 15 E-meter and she would make notes. 16 And she said that she recalled asking 17 me at one time of a dream that I had when I was a 18 kid. And I related to her that when I was like 19 four or five years old, and this is something that 20 I had talked to my parents about, and they knew 21 about, I had major dental surgery in a hospital, 22 and I had woken up. And I remember seeing a woman 23 standing next to my bed that I identified at that 24 time as an angel. And I described what she looked 25 like, how she was dressed and what was happening 0923 1 around me. And that following this surgery I told 2 the dentist and the nurse, because I was 3 hospitalized during this time, and my family, and 4 I was convinced at that time as I was convinced up 5 to the time I was with this counseling session 6 that I was visited by an angel. I truly believed 7 that. 8 And then it just got into all kinds 9 of macabre type of stuff. Like if I can envision 10 myself 1,000 years ago where would I be. And we 11 just got into discussions that made no sense at 12 all. And she said, "Don't worry. Things that 13 don't make sense to you will soon later become 14 apparent to you. That they do make a lot of 15 sense." 16 Q. Have you heard the term "past lives" 17 in connection with Scientology? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And did you later learn there was any 20 connection between what you were talking about 21 then in auditing and the past life concept? 22 A. Much later, yeah. 23 Q. Now -- 24 A. I suppose you are referring to the 25 fact that we came from Teegeeack. 0924 1 Q. Is that a Scientology belief? 2 A. Yes. Yes. There is no heaven. 3 There is no hell. And we didn't come from Adam 4 and Eve. We came from a galactic confederacy 75, 5 I think it was million, maybe it was billion years 6 ago. 7 Q. And have you heard of the term 8 "future lives" in connection with Scientology? 9 A. I'm sorry? 10 Q. What about future lives, have you 11 heard that word in connection with Scientology? 12 A. Yeah. Yes, I was told that when we 13 die, that we simply drop our bodies and our spirit 14 lives on. 15 Q. Are you familiar with the term 16 "billion year contract" in connection with 17 Scientology? 18 A. Yes. That's what the Sea Orgs. 19 Q. And what's a billion year contract? 20 A. A billion year contract is a contract 21 every Sea Org. member is required to sign. And my 22 understanding of that is, and it came from L. Ron 23 Hubbard who had a very imaginative mind, that even 24 as one drops his body, the spirit and the soul 25 lives on and it lives on to inhabit another body. 0925 1 And that one by virtue of the spirit would be able 2 to live a billion years. 3 Q. You mentioned that you were being 4 asked questions; correct? 5 A. (The witness nods head.) 6 Q. What sort of questions were you being 7 asked? 8 A. Well, I recall a lot of different 9 questions. One is what courses do you like in 10 school? What are your favorite courses? Why do 11 you like those courses? And then as we would get 12 into a pattern of, for example, talking about my 13 course work, then the coach would ask me, "Have 14 you ever had sex with your mother? Would you like 15 to have sex with your mother? Have you ever seen 16 your mother naked? What color was your first 17 dog?" 18 And so there was no specific pattern 19 that we go by. It jumped around constantly and 20 every time this little needle on this thing 21 bounced back and forth she was writing notes. And 22 it made no sense to me what her notes say, because 23 to me it looked like gibberish. But she said 24 there was a pattern there. And it would help me 25 in the long run. 0926 1 There were specific questions about 2 what happened to me in the seventh grade. And 3 what happened during a time that I had earlier 4 talked about my mother being kidnapped and raped, 5 at least that's what my mother told me. About my 6 parents very violent divorce. And, of course, my 7 homosexuality and the problems that resulted from 8 that. And being involved in the occult when I was 9 in high school and some of the things that 10 happened with that. 11 And it just hit in all the very 12 painful areas and different areas which I just 13 wanted to put out of my mind but they were there 14 specific but they said auditing cannot be 15 effective if you were intending to come with the 16 idea that you could simply remove these from your 17 mind because one cannot operate from a very 18 analytical mind and be clear of all those things 19 and all those aberrations that affects an 20 individual without taking everything that has 21 happened and laying that out on the table and 22 poking each one of those things and pushing them 23 out of the way. 24 So, I mean -- as far as -- everything 25 that I can remember was addressed. Even a time -- 0927 1 I can recall a conversation long ago, and it was 2 after they asked me these questions, was I able to 3 pick up a lot of this stuff. And I remember one 4 question that came out and it was about my 5 mother's infidelity at a very young age that my 6 father had told me about. And it was something 7 that I had not remembered for years and just by 8 virtue of her throwing it out or asking some 9 questions, it was like she pushed a button. And 10 that popped right up. 11 And then, of course, it was how did 12 you feel about that? How would you feel about 13 that? How would you feel if you walked in on 14 that? And it got very analytical. And I really 15 felt out of control because a lot of questions 16 were being asked, and it made no sense why they 17 were being asked what the point they were being 18 asked. But they said it would all come together 19 eventually and after enough auditing that I would 20 come to see why all these questions were essential 21 for my well-being. 22 Q. Well, you mentioned control. And 23 previously you talked about control in connection 24 with hypnosis. Was there any connection in these 25 auditing sessions with your previous testimony 0928 1 regarding hypnosis? 2 A. Yeah. I mean, one of the aspects of 3 the auditing was that when I was under stress I 4 would strike out. And that I had -- I was very 5 ill-tempered. And I became angry quite easy. 6 And she said it was because of the 7 awful way that I was treated growing up, that it 8 was the reason I was so angry. And that I needed 9 to exercise some discipline. And I needed to 10 allow myself to be in a position where I simply 11 listened and absorbed like a dry sponge all the 12 things that were coming into me. Because I was 13 setting up these mental barriers. 14 And when they try to help me, it's 15 like I was pushing them away. And they said I 16 acted like a rubberband. I would pull it in, then 17 push it back out. Pull it in, then push it back 18 out. And I had to allow myself just to sit there 19 like a dry sponge and absorb all that was coming 20 in and trust them. And they told me that I had to 21 act like the Japanese do where I would leave my 22 shoes at the door and walk in with just my socks 23 on and to just open up and trust them. 24 And I wanted to trust them and so I 25 trusted them. And I just accepted it. 0929 1 Q. And what connection do you think the 2 auditing sessions had with hypnosis? 3 A. I think that it put me into a 4 position where I allowed them initially to control 5 me but it got me to a position where they were 6 able to manipulate me. Because each time after 7 the auditing, I mean, they initially told me that 8 after an auditing session, I would feel wonderful, 9 and I would feel refreshed, and I could function 10 at a much saner intelligent level. And I did feel 11 some strength afterwards. But it was always like 12 I needed something else. That there was always 13 something else that I needed. And it repeated 14 itself over and over again. 15 And some of the questions that were 16 coming to me are things that were very 17 confidential and I did not understand how they 18 knew about these things. I mean, they were asking 19 me, for example, about my mother and some of my 20 aunts and my uncles and they were naming them by 21 name. And these are things that I had not told 22 them before. And I was wondering how they got 23 this information. And I just figured that under 24 hypnosis that they are able to get this 25 information, because to me there was really no 0930 1 other way they could have gotten it. 2 And it just -- I just recall times 3 that I was there they said it would last an hour, 4 and there were blocks of time where I would go in 5 there like one or two o'clock in the afternoon, 6 and I would be out of there at 4:00. And 7 sometimes I had trouble sleeping at night. And I 8 failed to remember things. And -- I don't know 9 what happened. 10 Q. You talked about this information 11 being confidential. 12 A. They told me it was confidential. 13 Q. Did you have any expectation as to 14 how they would treat this information? 15 A. They told me that it was confidential 16 and they even had me sign some kind of church 17 document saying that it was confidential and it 18 was protected. And I told, particularly with my 19 mother, because I had an estranged relationship 20 with my mother, that I was uncomfortable about her 21 ever knowing about the sexual parts in my life. 22 And they said they couldn't tell my mother even if 23 they wanted to because it was protected 24 information. 25 Q. Did there ever come an occasion when 0931 1 you learned that was not true? 2 A. Yeah. 3 Q. And what was that occasion? 4 A. Eugene Ingram brought it up to me in 5 October 1991 and said among other things he would 6 use it to blackmail if I didn't -- 7 Q. And when you say "it," what do you 8 mean? 9 A. I'm sorry? 10 Q. When you say you would use it, what 11 do you mean? 12 A. He was going to use the information 13 that was retracted from every counseling session 14 that I had, every conversation where a knowledge 15 report was filed on me, every auditing session 16 that I had, that all of that was now an open 17 encyclopedia of information available for his 18 disposal. And that he would use it, if necessary, 19 to have me thrown in jail for the rest of my 20 life. And that Bowles & Moxon was within the 21 perfect rights to sue me for all that. 22 And that it looked like that all the 23 times I had been in the church that I was simply 24 there as a freeloader depending upon them for 25 support, that I wasn't there with the true intent 0932 1 of learning anything. And despite the fact that I 2 had turned over $6,000 of tuition money to them 3 plus approximately $125 when I first joined, that 4 my initial intent was to pull some kind of prank 5 on them. And that that could be held against me. 6 And he said by virtue of his being a 7 former Los Angeles police officer with all these 8 credentials, that the time had ended for me to 9 play games and that I had one option, that my 10 options had run out. That I had one option. That 11 I could agree as to his terms and that I better 12 take it very seriously, because he said that he 13 works -- the client that he works for would not 14 have sent him all the way to Portland, Oregon to 15 talk to me unless they considered it very 16 important that this action take place. 17 Q. And when was this? 18 A. This was August 4th, 1991. 19 Q. Let's go back to the auditing 20 sessions before we finish this session of the 21 deposition. Are you familiar with the term "PC 22 folder"? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. What is a PC folder? 25 A. When you first come into the Church 0933 1 of Scientology, the purpose of the auditing and 2 taking courses is to reach a level on the bridge, 3 what they refer to as the bridge of freedom, which 4 is like a chain of command structure of various 5 courses and counseling that you need to take in 6 order to get up this -- the stepladder of this 7 bridge. 8 And the purpose for the initial 9 auditing and counseling courses was to clear your 10 body of the engrams. Engrams being the 11 destructive and painful images, mental pictures 12 that were holding you down from being productive 13 and successful. 14 And that initially after a number of 15 auditing sessions and initial courses, that you 16 would become clear of all those engrams. And you 17 would basically become what is referred to as a 18 Clear. And by becoming a Clear you could go on to 19 the different OT levels and go up the gradient and 20 basically learn how to take control of your life. 21 An a PC folder stands for preclear 22 folder. And it's all of the information that is 23 extracted from you, not only in the conversations 24 you have had, but in all your auditing sessions, 25 all the notes, everything is compiled into the PC 0934 1 folder, which is everything about you up to the 2 time that you become a Clear. And that PC folder 3 is what one expects from a psychiatrist or a 4 psychologist. That it's a confidential folder of 5 information. 6 I have found out, however, from 7 Eugene Ingram that that PC folder becomes part of 8 that evidence that he is accessible to should he 9 ever want to use it against me. 10 Q. You mentioned something about notes. 11 Was there any connection between notes and 12 auditing sessions? 13 A. Yes. They took down notes in the 14 auditing sessions. They took down notes. They 15 took down the readings and they marked the 16 readings and how far the reading was going. 17 I recall -- I recall her telling me 18 that particularly in incidents, for example, where 19 they were very painful and very hard to talk 20 about, that the needle will go all the way over to 21 one side. And I forgot exactly what she said, but 22 it was something like you have just rock slammed 23 or slammed hard or you have slammed something, but 24 she said that needle went all the way over and 25 almost kicked right out of the machine. And it 0935 1 was definitely one area that needed to be 2 addressed. And so she would write notes to that 3 effect. 4 And again she or Lyle told me that 5 these were simply things that were to remind them 6 of the things that needed to be addressed at a 7 later time. 8 Q. So who were your auditors? 9 A. One auditor was Lyle. The other 10 auditor, John Carmichael had audited me. Jim 11 Condum was another auditor. 12 VIDEO OPERATOR: Excuse me. Counsel, go off 13 record to change tape? 14 MR. BERRY: Okay. We are going off the 15 record so the tape can be changed. 16 VIDEO OPERATOR: We will go off the record. 17 Today is August 2nd, 1993. The time is 12:50 P.M. 18 End of Tape 1, Volume V in the continuing 19 deposition of Mr. Scarff. 20 (Recess taken.) 21 (The luncheon recess was taken 22 at 1:00 P.M.) 23 24 25 0936 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 (P.M. SESSION) 3 4 GRAHAM E. BERRY, ESQ. 5 6 7 8 9 ALSO PRESENT: 10 11 BARRY VARANESE, VIDEO OPERATOR 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 REPORTED BY: 25 LEE BRENNEMAN, CSR No. 5222 0937 1 (The deposition of GARRY L. SCARFF 2 was reconvened at 1:58 P.M.) 3 4 GARRY L. SCARFF, 5 having been previously duly sworn, testified 6 further as follows: 7 8 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 9 The date is August 2, 1993. The time is 1:58 10 P.M. Beginning of Tape 2, Volume V, continuing 11 deposition of Mr. Scarff. 12 13 EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. BERRY: 15 Q. I wanted to mark some exhibits but 16 let's go off the record a second. There are more 17 exhibits than I anticipated. 18 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The time 19 is 1:58 P.M. 20 (Recess taken.) 21 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 22 The time is 2:04 P.M. 23 MR. BERRY: Good afternoon, Mr. Scarff. Let 24 me remind you that you are still under oath this 25 afternoon. 0938 1 Now before we proceed, I would like 2 to mark A number of new exhibits. Exhibit-179 3 will be -- is a document entitled "The Fair Game 4 Law." It is a five page document. 5 Exhibit-180, which is an HCO ethics 6 order dated March 6, 1968 declaring a number of 7 people suppressive persons. 8 Exhibit-181, an HCO policy letter of 9 16 February 1969 entitled "Targets Defense." 10 And Exhibit-182, which is a 11 continuation of that same document. 12 (Defendant's Exhibit-Nos. 179 13 through 181 were marked for identification 14 and are annexed hereto.) 15 MR. BERRY: And if we may go off the record 16 again for the moment. 17 VIDEO OPERATOR: We will go off the record. 18 The time is 2:05 P.M. 19 (Recess taken.) 20 VIDEO OPERATOR: Back on the record. The 21 time is 2:07 P.M. 22 MR. BERRY: I was just dealing with 23 exhibits -- There is no Exhibit-182. Exhibit-181 24 is a three-page document entitled "HCO Policy 25 Letter of 16 February 1969 Issued for Confidential 0939 1 Targets Defense." And it is a three-page 2 document. Exhibit-182 is withdrawn. 3 Q. Before we broke for lunch, 4 Mr. Scarff, we were talking about auditing. Where 5 was this auditing done? 6 A. At the Mission of Davis. 7 Q. And are you familiar with a document 8 entitled the Joburg questionnaire or Johannesburg 9 Questionnaire? 10 A. There is a questionnaire that I am 11 familiar with that is called the South African 12 something or other. 13 Q. Was that used in connection with the 14 auditing process? 15 A. Yes, it was. And it inferred -- 16 there are questions in it that asked whether one 17 had bestiality, sex with animals. 18 Q. Now, Mr. Scarff, you made a reference 19 earlier on about using your tuition money to pay 20 for this auditing. What did you mean by that? 21 A. It is self-explanatory. What are you 22 asking me? 23 Q. Well, you refer to $6,000 tuition 24 money, I think. 25 A. Yes. 0940 1 Q. Was that the student loan scam that 2 you previously testified to in relation to 3 Exhibit-165 which is a document entitled "Illegal 4 Activities on Behalf of Church of Scientology"? 5 A. That is correct. 6 Q. Now, this morning you mentioned that 7 Mr. Ingram had shown you the contents of your PC 8 folder and other documents at a meeting between 9 you and him in I believe it was 1991? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. Can you telling me how this meeting 12 came about? 13 A. Yes. On or about October 4th, I was 14 preparing to get ready to go to work. It was 15 approximately two o'clock in the afternoon. I had 16 to be at work at 2:45. There was a knock at the 17 door. A small, rotund individual who flashed a 18 badge in my face said that he was a private 19 investigator working for Bowles & Moxon and that 20 he would like the talk with me, and he basically 21 pushed his way into my apartment very forceful. 22 And he said he wanted to talk to me. And I said I 23 couldn't talk with him because I was getting ready 24 to go to work. He continued and said it would 25 "only take a minute of your time." 0941 1 And then he pulled a copy of the 2 letter, the John Kerns' letter which I have talked 3 about and is on record, and said do I know 4 anything about the letter. 5 And I said, "Yes. I sent the 6 letter." And I knew immediately that it was 7 Scientology because the way he was acting, the way 8 he was pushing. 9 And I said I could not talk with him 10 at that point. 11 And he remained very persistent. 12 Anyway, that's where it all started, 13 a knock on the door and a very forceful private 14 detective pushing his way into my apartment. 15 Q. And by "John Kerns' letter," what are 16 you referring to? 17 A. It is the -- I believe it was April 18 1991 letter that I sent to John Kerns who was a 19 vocations director for the archdiocese. 20 Q. Is that what has been previously 21 marked as Exhibit-70 in the first volume, I 22 think? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. So what else happened at that 25 meeting? 0942 1 A. He pressured me to talk with him. 2 And I said okay. And he said he wanted to talk to 3 me about it because his clients who represented 4 the Church of Scientology was very angry and were 5 looking at filing civil processes against me and 6 that if I would talk to him, that he could 7 probably convince his clients not to take any 8 actions against me. 9 I told him at that point that I was 10 on my way to work. I was halfway dressed. I 11 needed to get dressed and go to work. 12 He said, "Don't worry about it. You 13 can talk to me. I will take you to work." He 14 said he did not have a car but he had a driver. 15 And said, "Fine. I just need to get dressed." 16 And he said that -- Anyway, he said 17 that he would make an arrangement with me to talk 18 with him in depth at a later time. He said, "How 19 about midnight?" Because midnight was the time I 20 got off from work. 21 I told him that I would rather talk 22 to him the next day. He says, "No. I am only 23 here for a limited time. I need to talk to you at 24 midnight when you get off work." 25 We agreed to do that. He said he was 0943 1 going to drive me. 2 Went to the car, and I immediately 3 noticed Gwen Mayfield as being the driver of the 4 car. 5 Q. Who is Gwen Mayfield? 6 A. Gwen Mayfield was my terminal at the 7 Church of Scientology. And she was at one time 8 the President of the Church of Scientology and was 9 at this time Director of the OSA in Portland. 10 Q. And what was said by Mr. Ingram with 11 regard to you being sued, I think it was, by 12 Bowles & Moxon? 13 A. He said they were looking at suing 14 me, right. 15 Q. Did he explain why they were going to 16 sue you? 17 A. No. When we were in the automobile 18 driving to my place of employment, he wanted to 19 know why I wrote the letter. 20 Q. "The letter" being Exhibit-70? 21 A. That's correct. 22 I said I didn't want to talk about it 23 at that time. Gwen Mayfield was sitting right 24 next to me. It was clear she was extremely 25 agitated. She would not look at me. She would 0944 1 not say anything. 2 And in the process of taking me to 3 work, she got lost, took the wrong road and became 4 very hostile and very agitated and finally took me 5 to work. 6 And I told Mr. Ingram that I would 7 meet him at a restaurant which was three blocks 8 down the road from where I worked approximately 9 midnight or a few minutes thereafter. He agreed 10 to do this. 11 I left the car and went to work. 12 Q. What time was this? 13 A. This was approximately 2:40 in the 14 afternoon. 15 Q. Do you remember the approximate date? 16 A. I want to say October 4th. It was 17 approximately two days prior to the first 18 declaration being signed. 19 Q. And by "first declaration," are you 20 referring to that series of declarations we have 21 previously marked as Exhibits-9 through 12? 22 A. I believe those were the documents. 23 I don't have them with -- well, yes I do. Wait a 24 second. If I can look at the -- Let me look at 25 the date of the first document. 0945 1 It occurred October 4th, 1991, 2 because it was two days prior to the time that I 3 signed them. 4 Q. So I believe you testified that you 5 arrived at work; correct? 6 A. I arrived at work at 2:40. Went to 7 work. 8 Q. Where were you working at the time? 9 A. At the Red Lion Hotel. 10 Q. What were you doing for work at the 11 Red Lion Hotel? 12 A. I was a guests services 13 representative. I was involved in driving guests 14 to and from the airport. 15 Q. What happened next? 16 A. My job required me to drive to two of 17 the Red Lion hotels, pick up guests, bring them 18 back to where I was stationed which was the main 19 hotel of the chain, pick up guests, go to the 20 airport. 21 Approximately on my second run coming 22 back from the other two motels to the main hotel, 23 there was Eugene Ingram standing there in front of 24 the front doors of the hotel. 25 When I went to him and asked him what 0946 1 he was doing there, he smiled and said, "I am now 2 checked into the hotel. I am a guest here at this 3 hotel." 4 He said that he was going to 5 accompany me to the airport. And I said that was 6 not possible, it was for guests only. He said 7 that he had already cleared it with the manager of 8 the hotel, that he had never been to Portland 9 before, and that he wanted to see the sights and 10 because he came by plane, he couldn't drive on his 11 own. Not that he couldn't rent a car and drive it 12 on his own, but he said that he had secured 13 permission from the manager of the hotel to jump 14 into my van and to basically accompany me to the 15 airport as I took guests to the airport. 16 And he did so. And we went to the 17 airport. He asked questions. Came back with 18 guests from the airport to the hotel. During this 19 time, he was asking me all kinds of questions in 20 the presence of these guests. 21 And as the guests disembarked, 22 Mr. Ingram stayed right in the van and said that 23 he wanted to go on the next run with me. And I 24 said that wasn't possible. In fact, I went into 25 the hotel and told my manager about this private 0947 1 detective refusing to leave the van. And he 2 called the manager, and I don't know what 3 conversations was said with the manager, but 4 because I was behind schedule, they simply refused 5 not to follow up on the situation. 6 And Mr. Ingram stayed with me for the 7 entire nine-hour shift. 8 Q. And what occurred during the time 9 Mr. Ingram was with you on that nine-hour shift? 10 A. During the time that guests were 11 inside the van, he asked a lot of very simple 12 questions about what I had been up to, where I 13 have been, about people that I knew, associates 14 that I had. And then when guests were not on the 15 van, he asked more sensitive questions, things 16 that he would not want the general public to 17 hear. 18 Q. And what things did he ask you about 19 and talk about -- Sorry, withdrawn. 20 What things did he talk to you about 21 when there were not guests in the van? 22 A. They were mostly accusatory 23 questions: Did I not know that by writing a 24 letter like that that I was going to wreak the 25 anger of Scientology? Didn't I know from my years 0948 1 of experience and association with the church that 2 one does not write letters like this? Didn't I 3 know if I sent a copy of this letter to David 4 Miscavige, that he would become angry and very 5 concerned? "Didn't you sign a contract with the 6 Church of Scientology making certain promises, and 7 how come you didn't keep them?" 8 And he said that he wanted to take a 9 declaration from me and that if I knew what was 10 good for me, that I had better cooperate. And it 11 was a very accusatory. 12 Q. Did he say what he meant by "if you 13 knew what was good for you"? 14 A. No. But I knew. 15 Q. What did you know? 16 A. I am sorry -- 17 Q. And what did you -- Withdrawn. 18 What did you know he meant when he 19 said "if you knew what was good for you"? 20 A. When one is in the Church of 21 Scientology and one becomes a suppressive person 22 or is labeled a PTS, one knows the repercussions 23 that take place when one turns against the Church 24 of Scientology or even criticizes it. And I was 25 considered a PTS at the time. 0949 1 Q. Turning your attention to 2 Exhibit-179, is that a document containing at the 3 top references to categories of persons you 4 recognized in the Church of Scientology? 5 A. Yes, I do recognize them. 6 Q. And what do you recognize those 7 categories of persons to be? 8 A. Either SP's, being the suppressive 9 persons, or PTS, being potential trouble sources. 10 Q. Now, why did you believe that -- 11 Sorry, withdrawn. 12 Did I understand you to say that you 13 understood you were a PTS or SP at that time? 14 A. At that time I was a PTS. 15 Q. What was the basis for your belief in 16 that regard? 17 A. Because a PTS in the Church of 18 Scientology means that you are a potential trouble 19 source, that you are doing something or saying 20 something that is critical or adverse to the 21 agenda of the Church of Scientology. 22 And anyway, I was considered a PTS by 23 virtue of the letter that I had written and -- 24 that is my understanding. 25 Q. Did Mr. Ingram make any other threats 0950 1 to you? 2 A. Mr. Ingram told me that if I did not 3 cooperate, that I am looking at spending the rest 4 of my life in jail. 5 Q. And what did he tell you in that 6 regard? 7 A. He told me that there was enough 8 stuff that he had on me to put me in jail and that 9 he had information on me dating back to 1976 from 10 one conversation I had with a waitress that I 11 worked with in a restaurant. 12 And that everything that I had ever 13 said, anything that was ever told to me, anything 14 that I did in the Church of Scientology was kept 15 and that he had all of those at his disposal and 16 that the files that they had on me read like a 17 stack of encyclopedias and that if someone off the 18 street came in and read everything they had on me, 19 it would take them at least three months just to 20 do a cursory review. 21 Q. Did he show you any of the documents 22 that he said he had on you? 23 A. No. And he refused to do so. I 24 asked to see them, and he refused. He said it was 25 work product privilege because he worked for a 0951 1 lawyer and that he needed the lawyer's permission 2 to show them to me. 3 And I said, "Well, if they are my 4 documents and has my name on it, you don't need 5 any fucking attorney" -- and I used those specific 6 words -- "fucking attorney permission to let me 7 see things that have my signature on them." 8 He said, "Yes, I do," because he 9 didn't work for me, he worked for the attorney. 10 Q. Did you have any understanding as to 11 the nature of these documents that he had, at 12 least some of them? 13 A. None whatsoever at that time. 14 Q. Did he indicate the nature or the 15 sort of information he had about you? 16 A. When you say "nature," other than the 17 fact that Scientology had it? 18 Q. You testified that he said he had 19 information on you that he could send you to jail 20 with. Correct? 21 A. (No response). 22 Q. Did he indicate what sort of 23 information that was? 24 A. No. He simply referred to the fact 25 all the information that he had on me read like a 0952 1 stack of encyclopedias. 2 Q. Did he make any reference to any 3 activities you may have performed for the Church 4 of Scientology at an earlier time? 5 A. No. But he said that there was 6 information derived from all my auditing files and 7 everything that I had told counselors in the 8 church. 9 And I told him that that was all 10 confidential and it was covered under a Privacy 11 Act and it could not be released, and he laughed 12 and said that at the time that this information 13 was provided to counselors in Scientology that a 14 Privacy Act did not exist and therefore it wasn't 15 covered. 16 Q. Was there any reference to anything 17 you might have done at the Portland Police Bureau 18 of Crime Analysis Unit? 19 A. Yes, there were specific things. 20 Q. And what was that? 21 A. It wasn't the Portland Police Crime 22 Analysis Unit, it was the County Corrections 23 Divisions where I was running LEDS NCIC checks on 24 people which was a violation of the law, and he 25 brought that up. 0953 1 And the fact that I had brought up an 2 arrest or sought an arrest record on Julie 3 Cristofferson and got a computer printout on Julie 4 Cristofferson and had also secured information on 5 her mother who lived in Montanna by way of the 6 NCIC data banks and the fact that I was rummaging 7 through police files and records to try to find 8 evidence on people. 9 Q. And why were you doing that? 10 A. And they say even though I was doing 11 this at the instruction of individuals in the 12 Church of Scientology, that it was within his 13 power as a former Los Angeles police officer who 14 had all kinds of contacts with the FBI, CIA, 15 Portland police that he could easily make it look 16 like that I was the trouble source and that 17 Scientology had absolutely nothing do with it. 18 And he made it very clear to me that 19 the Church of Scientology had more money than God, 20 and he made that statement, that it has more money 21 than God, and that they had all these attorneys 22 working for them and I had nobody and he could 23 make it stick. 24 Q. And what did he mean by "make it 25 stick"? 0954 1 A. Meaning that he could set me up as a 2 fall guy for a criminal activity and I would have 3 no defense whatsoever because I am talking about a 4 little man facing a huge conglomerate. 5 Q. By "criminal activity," was that the 6 computer activity you testified to? 7 A. Not only that. Eugene said that he 8 had the ability to put -- to set me up for a fall 9 and that he could even create something to make me 10 look like I have done something wrong. 11 And again I believed him because this 12 man flashed me not only a badge showing "Private 13 Investigator," he showed me an LAPD badge which he 14 had, and I assume this man had some contacts with 15 the law enforcement. The fact that he had this 16 oval-shaped silver badge that said "Los Angeles 17 Police" on it, I assumed this man was a cop in 18 some way. 19 Q. Did he actually show it to you? 20 A. Yes, he did. Yes, he did. And he 21 also had an identification card from the LAPD, and 22 I assumed this man had some kind of connection 23 with the LAPD. 24 Now, I didn't see it long enough to 25 see when this thing expired or whether it had an 0955 1 expiration date, but it did have his picture on 2 it. And the picture was old. It was an old 3 picture. Because the facial features were a lot 4 thinner than his facial features were at that 5 time. But it was an LAPD identification card. 6 Q. Was there a -- 7 A. You have to understand something, 8 Mr. Berry. If I had left after being dismissed as 9 a candidate for the archdiocese of Portland, if 10 that didn't mean a hell of a lot to me and I 11 wasn't so angry and I was of the mind-set that, 12 okay, I lost out on this one, I am going to go on 13 with life, in that mind-set I would have known, 14 God, I have would have known not to write a letter 15 speaking critically of the Church of Scientology 16 to anyone. I certainly wouldn't have sent this 17 letter to the Church of Scientology because I knew 18 the repercussions of that action. 19 However, I was so angry and so upset 20 about being dismissed as something that I saw as a 21 life-long vocation that I was throwing the wind at 22 anyone. I was angry at the world. I was angry at 23 myself. I was angry at the Church of Scientology 24 because they wouldn't talk to me. I was certainly 25 angry at the Greeks because I considered them 0956 1 responsible partly for my being dismissed. 2 So I wrote this letter out of anger 3 and in disgust. And my mind-set at the time was I 4 didn't give a damn if the Church of Scientology 5 came and ran me over with a bulldozer. I was 6 going to get back at somebody. And that's why I 7 wrote the letter. 8 But anyone of a rational mind at that 9 time, I am not saying I had any rational mind, but 10 anyone of a mind-set that was thinking clearly at 11 the time would know better than to challenge the 12 Church of Scientology because the Church of 13 Scientology has a history and a well-known 14 reputation for not sitting down and being slapped 15 in the face. 16 They get up and they attack their 17 aggressors and their critics with so much vigor 18 that, I mean I think it has already been 19 established on record how much vigor they attacked 20 the critics to the point that it caused a lot of 21 their victims a lot of anguish and a lot of pain. 22 Q. Did Mr. Ingram make any other threats 23 to you on this occasion? 24 A. He didn't make any death threats or 25 anything like that, but he simply made it known to 0957 1 me that he had all the information available to 2 him and that he could do anything with it that he 3 wanted. And he -- when I said that all the 4 documents, all the auditing records, the PC file, 5 everything was confidential, that I had in fact 6 signed a statement stating that it was 7 confidential, he asked me if I had a copy of it, 8 and I said, "I do not." 9 He said, "Well, we don't seem to be 10 able to find a copy of it, either." And he said 11 by virtue of my writing that letter to Father John 12 Kerns, that it declared everything, every type of 13 security protection for records or statements made 14 in the Church of Scientology now null and void and 15 that had I not opened my big mouth and said 16 something, that we wouldn't be in this predicament 17 and Eugene would not be in Portland at that time 18 talking with me. 19 Q. Did he indicate whether he had 20 information as to any specific things such as army 21 records or drug abuse or homosexual experiences? 22 A. He said that through the U.S. Army 23 personnel command in St. Louis, Missouri, I think 24 it is -- it is St. Louis. I don't know if it is 25 in Missouri or Kansas City -- that he had army 0958 1 records, that he had my credit records. He 2 claimed to have some hospital reports on me from 3 cocoa, Florida which surprised me because I never 4 recall being in a hospital in cocoa, Florida, 5 although since I was only a child when I was in 6 that part of Florida, it could be true. 7 He had copies of identification, 8 voter's registration records, my birth 9 certificate. 10 He claimed to have all that same 11 information on my father, and to prove it, he told 12 me some facts about my father that I thought was 13 pretty uncanny, but he knew where my father was 14 born, where my mother was born, how many brothers 15 I had. He said he had done the whole gamut of 16 investigation on my family. 17 It was very clear to me that this man 18 had done quite a bit of research on me and he knew 19 exactly what he was talking about. 20 Given that fact, when he said he 21 could set me up and do me some bad damage and make 22 it so I spend the rest of my life in prison, and 23 given the fact that at that time I knew he was 24 from the Scientologists, I would have been 25 incredibly stupid not to listen to him. 0959 1 Q. Did he say anything about past 2 homosexual experiences? 3 A. Not at that point. That did come up 4 later when we talked about Ford Greene. 5 Q. There were no threats with regard to 6 past homosexual experiences? 7 A. (Shaking head.) 8 Q. You said you feel you would have been 9 incredibly stupid. What do you mean by that? Did 10 you feel as though you had freedom of choice? 11 A. Absolutely not. There was no freedom 12 of choice. I mean if I wanted to take his 13 challenge and -- See, my belief at that point, 14 Mr. Berry, is if I had said no, if I told him to 15 go jump in the lake, go to hell, whatever my 16 response would have been to debunk his challenges, 17 that I could very well find myself walking out of 18 the door of the hotel and being arrested and 19 ending up in prison somewhere for something that I 20 may or may not have done from my past because he 21 made it very clear to me -- I mean if this was an 22 honest police officer doing his job, I don't think 23 there would have been all these statements made 24 that he could set me up on some phony charge and 25 see that I spend the rest of my life in prison for 0960 1 it. 2 And again after sending that letter 3 to John Kerns and sending a copy to the Church of 4 Scientology, it was something that I immediately 5 regretted afterwards because I realize that in my 6 anger and in my frustration in creating this 7 letter and sending it, that I had really done 8 myself in as far as Scientology was concerned 9 because they were going to react. 10 And I had considered several options 11 at that time. One was suicide. One was moving 12 out of the state and getting as far away from 13 Oregon as I could. And one was just to ride the 14 flow and hope that nothing happened. 15 And for a while I thought that 16 nothing did happen because I didn't hear 17 anything. And I was out of contact with the 18 church. But then in October I got a knock on the 19 door and was unannounced. 20 Q. And this was who? 21 A. Eugene Ingram pushing his way into my 22 apartment. 23 Q. Did Mr. Ingram give you any choices 24 or options? 25 A. Yes, he did. He said, "Cooperate or 0961 1 go to jail for the rest of your life." Pretty 2 good options, I would say. 3 Q. How did you feel about that? 4 A. Violated. Extremely violated. Very 5 upset. Very scared. 6 Q. You were scared? 7 A. I was terrified. I was terrified 8 with the fact that all those times that I poured 9 out my heart to people that I thought really were 10 there to help me and cared about me and someone 11 that I went to in a very vulnerable stage of my 12 life, to find out they had organized all the notes 13 from those times and they were now sitting in the 14 hands of this man who is a law enforcement officer 15 claiming to be able to set me up on a phony 16 charge, yes, I was terrified because I was 17 terrified about how and where this information was 18 going and how he was going to use it. 19 And he told me that he was well known 20 in the church and that he was popular because he 21 had gotten into the media, and he even told me -- 22 he asked me if I had read the Time magazine 23 article on Scientology, and I said I had but I 24 only did a cursory glance at it, I didn't recall 25 the specifics of what was in the article. 0962 1 He said, "Here is a copy." He showed 2 me a copy and he said, "Read this side bar. It 3 talks about me." 4 I recall the side bar not being 5 positive, the statements about Mr. Ingram were not 6 too positive. And he seemed to get a thrill out 7 of the fact that he was talked about in Time 8 magazine and that they had made these statements 9 about him. 10 Q. Was that the side bar we looked at 11 last week in Exhibit-169? 12 A. Yes. It refers to him as being fired 13 from the LAPD for several criminal activities. 14 Q. As a result of feeling terrified, 15 what did you do? 16 A. I made the decision to cooperate with 17 him. I felt my only option in lieu of killing 18 myself at that time because there was nowhere else 19 to go, nowhere else to run to, was to simply and 20 fully cooperate. And that's what I did. I just 21 gave up. 22 Q. And finally on this area, why did you 23 give up? 24 A. Because I had no place else to go and 25 I was scared. I didn't have the courage to face 0963 1 this man down. And certainly I didn't have the 2 people behind me to support me in facing this man 3 down. I was alone, and this man told me of the 4 powerful church behind him and the fact that he 5 was a law enforcement officer and the fact that he 6 would show me a badge and also he was an LAPD 7 officer. 8 Q. And by "this man," who do you mean? 9 A. Eugene Ingram. 10 Q. Now, what happened next? I think 11 I -- 12 A. We get into the substance of the 13 declarations. 14 Q. You had been in the van with him and 15 finished the first shuttle van run. 16 A. Right. And then -- 17 Q. So what happened after that? 18 A. At midnight he waited outside of the 19 hotel. I got off work about five minutes after 20 midnight. We walked three blocks to the Lion's 21 restaurant which is a 24-hour restaurant. 22 We sat there and he interviewed me, 23 and he wanted to know everything that had happened 24 with me from day one, and he said that if I 25 cooperated with him, that he would talk to his 0964 1 clients and work to see that his clients did not 2 take any type of adverse action against me. And 3 that he may not be in a position of talking his 4 clients out of taking some kind of action, but 5 that he had established because of his work 6 history with them a good rapport with them and 7 might be in the position of helping me out if I 8 cooperated. So I was willing to do that. 9 And so we sat down in a restaurant 10 booth for five and a half hours, it was like 5:30 11 in the morning, until I was so tired I just 12 couldn't continue, and I told him I was leaving, I 13 was going to go home. Plus I had to be at work 14 that same day at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. 15 And he had these small notebooks with 16 him, and he simply wrote and he wrote for five and 17 a half hours. And he said that with the 18 information I gave him plus some of the 19 information that he had, that he was going to 20 build a declaration. He was going to have me read 21 it, initial each page and sign it. And if I 22 didn't do that, then he had already mentioned 23 those options and that I had two options: Do it 24 or not do it. It is a simple choice. 25 Q. So what happened next? 0965 1 A. Went home. He called me at one 2 o'clock in the afternoon, just prior to my leaving 3 to go to work, said that he wanted me to come by 4 the motel room where he was at and sit down and 5 talk with him some more. 6 Told him that I could not do it, 7 first because there was an internal hotel policy 8 that employees do not associate with individuals 9 on a personal level within the hotel. And two, 10 because I was on my way to work and had to be at 11 work at 2 O'clock. 12 And he said, "Well, I need you just 13 here for a few minutes. If you need to, you can 14 snake out the back way." 15 And so I went to the hotel, to his 16 hotel room. He wanted some more information. And 17 I really had to step in and, like ten minutes to 18 two, and say, "I have got to leave." He was 19 trying to pressure me to go to work late because 20 he needed this information. 21 And said he needed to get back to 22 L.A. on business and that he needed to get this 23 done and out of the way. 24 So at 2:00 he jumped in the van with 25 me again, and during this time he wrote notes for 0966 1 approximately three hours. Then at midnight we 2 met again, and he said that he needed to get back 3 to L.A. and that he wanted to start building upon 4 these declarations. And so the next day I called 5 in sick and I spent the entire day with him. 6 Q. What day would that be? 7 A. I believe it was October 5th. 8 Q. Now, you said that he was talking 9 notes both in the van and at the restaurant. 10 A. Right. 11 Q. What were these notes taken in 12 connection with? 13 A. Everything that -- My entire history 14 just as you have done here today. Including my 15 role in two deprogrammings, one which involved the 16 Greeks and the other involving the University of 17 Oregon student. 18 And he said what he is going to do is 19 build these declarations as an indictment against 20 Cynthia Kisser, the Cult, that he was going to 21 come down on the Greeks. 22 And one statement he made to me which 23 really pushed a button with me was that I would be 24 incredibly stupid to have any type of sympathy or 25 respect for Adrian and Anne Greek because he said 0967 1 they were the ones responsible for my being kicked 2 out of the seminary. 3 I have to admit at that time I was 4 very angry at the Greeks for their role in that. 5 And my feelings at the time is that if anything 6 detrimental happened to the Greeks, I wouldn't 7 give it a second glance. 8 Q. Was anything said about any attorneys 9 at this point in time? 10 A. Just Bowles & Moxon. Bowles & 11 Moxon. I told him that prior to my cooperating 12 with him in any way, I wasn't going to assist him 13 in any inkling of a manner unless I had some 14 guarantee from him -- his clients that they were 15 not going to prosecute me or hold me civilly 16 responsible. 17 And he said, well, he can't do that. 18 And I said, "Well, I am not going to cooperate, 19 then, because I don't want to go to jail." And 20 frankly I didn't trust him and I didn't trust his 21 clients. 22 And he said, "Let me work it out. I 23 will talk them into getting you a letter promising 24 that they won't hold anything against you." 25 And then about nine o'clock at night 0968 1 which was near the end of my shift, Eugene Ingram 2 was out in the lobby area and said, "Gary, I have 3 got the letter you are looking for." He gave it 4 to me, and it was in the envelope. Inside was a 5 fax. And that fax has been entered on the record 6 here. 7 And the information on the fax was 8 quite different than what I expected it to be. 9 Because they were talking about gaining 10 information on me in order to do a lawful 11 investigation on the Cult, and that is exactly 12 opposite to what Eugene Ingram told me he was 13 planning to do. 14 Q. Well, would you take a look at what 15 has been previously marked as Exhibit-30 and tell 16 me what that is. 17 A. This is a letter that Eugene Ingram 18 gave to me which was faxed up from Tim Bowles and 19 Bowles & Moxon on October 4th. And you will 20 notice that it came to Eugene on October 4th at 21 11:34 -- I am sorry 10:34 at night. And it is 22 basically talking about Ingram being a licensed 23 investigator hired to conduct a lawful background 24 investigation into the Cult. And that is not what 25 Eugene told me. 0969 1 In fact, I challenged Eugene on that 2 statement, and he said, "Well, this letter was not 3 written for my benefit, it was written for the 4 benefits of the Cult." 5 Q. And the letter is signed by Tim 6 Bowles; correct? 7 A. Well, I assume so. I didn't see him 8 sign it. 9 Q. Is that the same Tim Bowles that you 10 identified this morning in relation to Exhibit-21? 11 A. Yes. The impact article. 12 Q. Yes. The impact article. 13 So what happened next? 14 A. He proceeded to take notes. And then 15 on the night of October 5th, he spent 16 approximately four hours in my apartment in one of 17 my lazy chairs transcribing his notes and 18 information through the phone to a receptionist at 19 Bowles & Moxon. 20 Q. How do you know it was a receptionist 21 at Bowles & Moxon? 22 A. He told me. And he was talking to 23 the secretary over the phone. And he was 24 transcribing this information on the phone. And 25 he did not break during that entire three-hour 0970 1 period while he was doing that. He was simply 2 reading this information over the phone. 3 And I recall him making several 4 statements to the receptionist that, "No, you 5 cannot break right now. Tim needs this 6 information right away. We need to get this out. 7 We don't have time. Can you hold on for another 8 five minutes?" 9 And I got the idea that the secretary 10 was getting tired, whoever was typing this 11 information down, and wanted to take a break. And 12 Eugene was telling her that she couldn't because 13 Tim needed this information right away. And I 14 assume that meant Tim Bowles, but I am not sure. 15 Q. And what sort of information was he 16 reading over the phone? 17 A. His notes, the notes that he had 18 written down. And he had the notes patterned. He 19 had already like paragraphs set up in what he was 20 reading over the phone which was the way the 21 declaration was going to be -- how the declaration 22 was going to be formed. 23 And that was it for the night. He 24 went home approximately midnight to 12:30 in the 25 morning. I had to be at work the next day. 0971 1 He called me at 12:30 in the 2 afternoon and said that I needed to come by the 3 motel room around two o'clock because the 4 information that he had transcribed down to Bowles 5 & Moxon was being published -- or being prepared, 6 I am sorry, and it was going to be mailed to him, 7 I guess he said overnight mail, so it would come 8 to him the night after. And that's what 9 happened. 10 I went to the Red Lion Hotel at 11 approximately two o'clock, and he said I would 12 have to wait a while because the declarations had 13 not yet arrived. 14 At approximately 2:15 there was a 15 knock on the door. It was Gwen Mayfield with a 16 bunch of envelopes. And he opened the envelopes, 17 and they were these prepared declarations that you 18 see in the exhibits. 19 MR. BERRY: At that point let's take a 20 five-minute break. 21 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The time 22 is 2:53 P.M. 23 (Recess taken.) 24 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 25 The time is 3:17 P.M. 0972 1 BY MR. BERRY: 2 Q. Mr. Scarff, I think you just 3 testified that at 2:15 P.M., Gwen Mayfield came to 4 the hotel room; correct? 5 A. That's correct. 6 Q. What happened next? 7 A. She handed him an envelope -- 8 actually two envelopes, which had the declarations 9 in them. And when I asked him how he had gotten 10 these declarations so fast, he said that they had 11 been typed by the law firm in Los Angeles and then 12 mail packed the same night back to him. And that 13 they were prepared for signature but that we had 14 to wait a few minutes because he had called a 15 notary public to come to the motel room and that 16 he wanted me to hurry up within the 20 minutes 17 that I had to read through all these declarations 18 and sign them and then the notary public would 19 sign off on it. 20 The notary public was a few minutes 21 late. So around 2:30 the notary public told 22 Mr. Ingram that it was usually in her knowledge of 23 something like this when I signed on to a 24 document, I had to review it first before signing 25 it, because Eugene tried to talk the notary public 0973 1 into going ahead and signing them before my 2 signature and that he was willing to pay her extra 3 if she would simply go ahead and sign them and 4 stamp them and write "commission" on them before I 5 had a chance to identify myself and sign them 6 because he was in a hurry to get it done. 7 Q. Do you recall what was said between 8 him and the notary public regarding that matter? 9 A. Yes. He said that he was in a hurry, 10 that I had to get to work and I did not have time 11 at that point just to sit down and sign each page 12 and sign it on the back page where it required it 13 and that he was in a hurry to get this back to his 14 lawyers because they were expecting it and there 15 was only 10 minutes to do so. 16 So he tried to browbeat her into 17 going ahead and signing it without my signing it 18 first. And he said, "Well, we do this in 19 California all the time. I don't understand why 20 you can't do it here in Oregon." 21 She was very ethical, and she said, 22 "I am sorry, here in the State of Oregon we have 23 to identify the person signing it, and we can only 24 sign it after they have signed it first." And she 25 basically pushed away Eugene each time Eugene 0974 1 tried to talk her into doing this. 2 He said, "Well, look, I am a private 3 investigator." He showed her his badge and 4 license. And he says, "Can't you kind of bypass 5 the law this time because this is something we 6 need to do in a hurry." 7 And she remained very strong in her 8 position that I had to sign it first before she 9 would sign it. She said she wouldn't until I 10 signed it first. 11 Q. You said something about the payment 12 of extra money. What did you mean by that? 13 A. What did I mean by that. I think you 14 need to talk to Eugene what he meant by that, but 15 Eugene was telling her he would pay her extra 16 money if she would go ahead and sign the 17 declaration first and let me sign it at a later 18 time. It was his desire at that time for her, 19 being that she was already there and he was paying 20 for her time there, for her to go ahead and sign 21 each declaration stating that she has witnessed my 22 signature and then I could sign it myself several 23 hours after the fact, after I got off work. Which 24 would have been nine hours later. 25 And she refused to do that. She said 0975 1 it was against the law. 2 Q. Now, while we are on the issue of 3 things being against the law, are we here talking 4 about those documents referred to in Exhibit-165 5 or at least that matter referred to in Exhibit-165 6 as "assisting creation of false declarations to 7 benefit the Church of Scientology under penalty of 8 perjury"? 9 A. That is correct. 10 Q. Now, what happened next? 11 A. I didn't have time to review them. I 12 only had ten minutes. Because the notary public 13 was not going do accede to Mr. Ingram's demands, I 14 went ahead and I didn't give him any argument. I 15 just went ahead and signed them as fast as I 16 could. 17 Q. Why did you do that? 18 A. Because I only had ten minutes in 19 which to do it. He said the notary public was 20 here. I needed to go to work, and I had one of 21 two options: I could sit there and review and 22 read this and be late for work and possibly lose 23 my job or I could go ahead and sign these and take 24 off to work and let the things fall where they 25 may. 0976 1 You have to understand the notary 2 public was there. Eugene was pressuring me to go 3 ahead and do it because his clients, Bowles & 4 Moxon, was waiting for these and they had to have 5 them, they had to be signed by 5:00 o'clock 6 because that's when Express Mail went out. 7 And given the time constraints, I 8 went ahead and signed them because that's what he 9 pressured me to do. He said they had to be done 10 right at that point. That's exactly what I did. 11 I didn't feel I had any other choice. 12 Q. Was there any discussion at that 13 point in time about the contents? 14 A. No. He said that everything in 15 the -- in the body of the declarations was exactly 16 what he had transcribed over the phone the night 17 before. I later found out in fact that that's 18 not -- that was not true. 19 And then -- 20 Q. So what happened next? 21 A. At approximately 4:30, Eugene came 22 down. He was waiting there at the guest services 23 reception area. When I came back in from one of 24 my runs. He had a huge envelope with him, and he 25 said, "These are your copies of the 0977 1 declarations." 2 And between 2:30 and 4:30, in that 3 period, he had managed to get to a copy center and 4 run off all copies of the ones that I signed 5 complete with the notary public's signature and 6 stamp, and he gave me copies. 7 It was during breaks in my runs that 8 night that I realized the declaration was a 9 masterpiece created by someone other than myself 10 and that the information stated in the declaration 11 was incredibly different from what I recall some 12 of the conversations being over the phone to the 13 receptionist at Bowles & Moxon the night before. 14 And when I asked Eugene about that, 15 he said that he had to clean it, up somewhat to 16 make it so that when people read it they could 17 make a connection paragraph to paragraph to 18 Paragraph. But he said he did clean it up. 19 Well, he really did a good job of 20 cleaning it up because it is full of 21 misrepresentations and lies. They have a lot of 22 statements in here that I did not make. It is a 23 story that I signed because I was under stress 24 within a ten-minute period or face losing my job 25 to sign. 0978 1 And so I guess I am responsible for 2 it because I signed it. 3 Q. We will get to what the declarations 4 say in a moment. 5 What happened next? He gave you the 6 copies; correct? 7 A. He gave me the copies. 8 Q. And then what happened? 9 A. He checked out of the hotel. And as 10 far as I know, he flew back to Los Angeles. 11 Q. Did there come a time when you 12 discussed the contents of the declarations with 13 Mr. Ingram? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And did there come a time when you 16 expressed any concern as to the contents? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Tell me when that occurred. 19 A. Well, I talked with him on the phone 20 several times and expressed concern, but again he 21 said, "Just remember what we had talked about" and 22 that, "Just remember who was responsible for 23 getting you kicked out of the seminary," "Just 24 remember what I said" and "You have one of two 25 options: You can listen to me and do what I tell 0979 1 you to do or you can do the other, but I won't be 2 responsible for what happens." 3 Q. What do you believe -- Sorry, 4 withdrawn. 5 What did you take that to mean? 6 A. It was a subtle threat. 7 Q. A subtle threat of what? 8 A. To do the things that he had already 9 said that he could do to me if I didn't cooperate. 10 Q. And was anything said at all 11 regarding the contents of these declarations being 12 signed before a notary public? 13 A. I am sorry, I missed your question. 14 Q. Withdrawn. 15 Was anything else said by Mr. Ingram 16 with regard to the manner in which these 17 declarations were prepared and signed? 18 A. Yes. He said that he was going to 19 use these declarations as overt opportunities 20 against the Cult and that he was going to 21 duplicate these and he mentioned a 500 figure at 22 first, and I asked him why in the world would he 23 want to duplicate a declaration 500 times, and he 24 said because they are going to go out throughout 25 the United States and within a matter of two to 0980 1 three days, people as far as Florida, Maine and 2 even Canada would have copies of my declaration 3 and they would know about the declaration. 4 Plus he had been in contact with a 5 number of law enforcement agencies about the 6 criminal and hate activities of the Cult and he 7 was going to include a copy of this declaration 8 with further correspondence with these agencies. 9 And he also stated that sometime in 10 the future, maybe within two to three weeks, 11 depending upon his schedule, he was going to come 12 back to Portland and he wanted to spend several 13 days with me going back to the origins of where 14 the deprogrammings took place and that he wanted 15 to give as much information as possible because he 16 knew that the Cult was the organization primary in 17 endorsing and being directly involved in the 18 kidnapping and deprogramming of individuals 19 associated with so-called cults. 20 Q. Were you concerned about what you had 21 declared under penalty of perjury in these 22 declarations? 23 A. When I signed these, Mr. Berry, I 24 wasn't under penalty of perjury despite what this 25 says because Eugene Ingram specifically told me 0981 1 that was specifically why he had a notary public 2 do this versus a court reporter do this. 3 First of all, I did not raise my 4 right hand and swear to this. 5 He said that this declaration was 6 simply for the benefit of Scientology against the 7 Cult. And by virtue of having a notary public who 8 was simply a witness that pays so much money to 9 get a notary stamp, that anybody can be a notary 10 public, it doesn't take any type of competence to 11 become a notary public, that by her simply signing 12 the witnesses releases me from any type of 13 liability and that the penalty of perjury 14 statements are considered null and void. Because 15 the only time a declaration of any type can be 16 held under the penalty of perjury is when it is 17 signed in the presence of a court officer, a 18 judge, a law enforcement officer or someone with a 19 judicial power. 20 Therefore, when I signed this, even 21 though it said penalty of perjury -- and I remind 22 you that when I signed this, I didn't even really 23 read that, I simply signed it because I was in a 24 hurry to get to work, then I had four declarations 25 to sign at the time, that this meant absolutely 0982 1 nothing. 2 Because again I knew a notary public 3 had no judicial power, and I believed a man who 4 told me he was both a police officer and a private 5 investigator. So why would I have any reason to 6 doubt this? 7 Q. And when did Mr. Ingram tell you 8 these things about penalty of perjury and notary 9 publics that you have just talked about? 10 A. He told me the day after I signed it 11 when he was back in Los Angeles because he had 12 given me his mobile telephone number. He has a 13 mobile phone that he carries around. He has it 14 with him at all times. 15 And I gave him a call and I 16 questioned him about it because I said, "Under 17 penalty of perjury what is going to happen if 18 anyone in these declarations comes back at me? I 19 am not going to be able to defend myself because 20 these things are frivolous, they are not true." 21 And he said, "Don't worry because if 22 they try to sue you, it would blow up in your face 23 because the penalty of perjury simply gives this 24 declaration an essence of credibility, but it has 25 no specific powers and can't be used against you 0983 1 because again you weren't sworn under oath to 2 sign, sworn under oath to sign this." 3 Q. Let's go to the four declarations 4 that you signed and examine them. 5 Turning to the exhibits, which are 6 the four declarations that you signed and have 7 just been referring to? 8 A. The Exhibit-No. 9 dated October 6th. 9 Exhibit-10 dated October 6th. Exhibit-11 dated 10 October 6th. Exhibit-12 dated October 6th. 11 Q. Let's go to Exhibit-9. Exhibit-9 12 appears to contain 109 paragraphs; is that right? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. Do you know who drafted Exhibit-9? 15 A. I do not. I know that, like I have 16 said on record before, Eugene Ingram transcribed a 17 bunch of information over the telephone to Bowles 18 & Moxon the night before this was signed. And 19 this came back to me in the form of a prepared 20 declaration. 21 I don't know who the creators were, 22 no. 23 Q. Did you ever learn who the creators 24 were? 25 A. Yes. 0984 1 Q. When did you learn who the creators 2 were? 3 A. In November of '91. 4 Q. And how did you learn who the 5 creators were? 6 A. David Butterworth told me. 7 Q. What did David Butterworth tell you 8 in that regard? 9 A. He told me that Tim Bowles and Ken 10 Moxon were the ones that created the declaration 11 because any type of declaration had to be prepared 12 by attorneys, that Mr. Butterworth, being that he 13 was not an attorney, could not prepare 14 declarations since it was going to be used for 15 legal purposes. 16 Now, again, maybe Mr. Butterworth was 17 lying to me and he prepared it. But that's what 18 he told me. 19 Q. What about the other declarations, 9 20 through 12? 21 A. The other declarations are shorter. 22 And what they are, and again I don't know who at 23 Bowles & Moxon prepared these, but the other ones 24 have some new information because what Eugene 25 intended to do with four declarations is to make 0985 1 one large general declaration which was indicting 2 of Cult and individuals in it. 3 Then from information gleaned from 4 that general declaration, he created three smaller 5 ones which would be focusing on three individuals 6 that he had targeted for incrimination. One of 7 those individuals targeted was Bob Brandeberry, 8 who was a well-known deprogrammer at that time. 9 Another one was Adrian and Anne Greek. And then 10 the other one was Ford Greene. 11 Q. Now, the smaller ones, Exhibits-10, 12 11 and 12? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. Sorry, withdrawn. 15 Do you know who created or drafted 16 Exhibits-10, 11 and 12? 17 A. I assumed it was from the information 18 from Eugene Ingram, but no, I don't know who 19 drafted it. 20 Q. Did you ever learn who drafted 21 Exhibits-10, 11 and 12? 22 A. I know they came from Bowles & 23 Moxon. David Butterworth told me that Tim Bowles 24 and Ken Moxon were the ones that drafted all four 25 of my declarations. 0986 1 Q. Did you ever discuss the contents of 2 all four declarations, Exhibits-9 through 12, with 3 Mr. Bowles or Mr. Moxon? 4 A. No, sir, I didn't. I only discussed 5 it with Eugene Ingram. 6 And after telling me that I had one 7 of two options to take, then there was no point in 8 my discussing it with Bowles & Moxon. 9 Q. Why do you say that? 10 A. I already explained it. I had two 11 options: I could cooperate and face repercussions 12 from the Church of Scientology, repercussions from 13 Bowles & Moxon because Mr. Ingram said there would 14 be repercussions if I didn't cooperate, or I could 15 simply surrender, totally surrender to Mr. Ingram, 16 which I did. 17 And those were my two options, and I 18 took the latter. That's all the explanation I can 19 give you. 20 Q. Was anything said about what sort of 21 repercussions would come from Bowles & Moxon? 22 A. Simply that they would have me thrown 23 in prison for the rest of my life based on created 24 information that Mr. Ingram said he was well 25 equipped to do given his law enforcement 0987 1 authority, law enforcement contacts. 2 Q. Was that the conversation you 3 testified to earlier? 4 A. That's correct. 5 Q. Now turning your attention to the 6 first declaration, can you go through that 7 indicating which paragraphs or portions of 8 paragraphs are incorrect in that. 9 A. Sure. 10 Q. Just indicate paragraph by paragraph 11 which paragraph is not true. 12 A. Now, the question I have is what if 13 some information in the paragraph is not true and 14 some is true; would then the entire paragraph be 15 in doubt? 16 Q. No. Just indicate which particular 17 information. 18 A. Number 1 is true. 19 2 is true. 20 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 is true. 21 10 is totally false and a creation of 22 someone at Bowles & Moxon. I did not say it. 23 Q. When you say you did not say it, that 24 was not information that you gave to Eugene 25 Ingram? 0988 1 A. Absolutely not. Except there is a 2 portion in here which refers to statements that I 3 made regarding the Jonestown massacre which I had 4 made to the public and to the press. And these 5 are statements that I made as a Scientologists at 6 Gwen Mayfield's instruction in order to bring 7 incriminations down on the Cult. 8 So some of the information in 9 Paragraph 10 is correct, but the inference is not 10 correct because I did it on behalf of the Church 11 of Scientology. 12 Q. Which information is correct in 10 -- 13 or, sorry, which information is not correct? 14 A. Well it talks about the Greeks 15 arranging for me to speak at PAC and CAN events 16 and they encouraged me to embellish. I don't need 17 to go further because they never encouraged me to 18 embellish anything. That's Eugene Ingram's lie. 19 The information which is true is that 20 I did say that I had a girlfriend and a son and a 21 father that all perished in the People's Temple. 22 I said this on a very public level, and again this 23 was at the directives of the Church of 24 Scientology. 25 To even further incriminate the Cult 0989 1 and in an attempt to kind of make them look 2 ridiculous, I did a media interview in Milwaukee, 3 Wisconsin during a Milwaukee CAN conference, and 4 during a panel which I was invited to speak on, I 5 talked about how I attended Fidel Castro's 6 birthday party in Cuba, which anyone would look at 7 and laugh. But again it was to make CAN look bad 8 and try to throw -- kind of sling mud at the 9 officials of the Cult because anyone that saw that 10 would see that it was a ridiculous statement. 11 Q. Let's move through this quickly in 12 identifying which portions are correct and 13 incorrect. 14 A. 11, Lines 1, 2, 3 -- let me just -- 15 Well, most of the information in Paragraph 11 are 16 untrue with regards to Adrian and Anne Greek and 17 some of the deprogrammer and CAN member Wayne 18 Barber knowing that my stories about the People's 19 Temple were false. 20 And again information that Anne and 21 Adrian Greek and Bob Brandeberry advised me and 22 encouraged me to make false statements and that 23 Wayne Barber said I was CAN's golden boy and that 24 I should keep it up. None of that is true. It is 25 -- Eugene Ingram told me for a fact that he is 0990 1 the one that came up with the word "golden boy." 2 Q. And Paragraph 12? 3 A. And then the latter portion of 4 Paragraph 11 is true. I did stand up and give a 5 speech. 6 Number 12 is absolutely false. 7 13 is false. 8 14 is true; however, in reference to 9 the article contending lies and misquotes, they 10 are all arranged by the Church of Scientology 11 against the Cult. 12 Number 15, 15 is absolutely untrue. 13 And if you notice the last sentence, it talks 14 about my never taking courses from the Church of 15 Scientology. That was a deliberate statement by 16 Bowles & Moxon and Ingram to reflect that I was 17 not a Scientologists and I was not acting on 18 behalf of Scientologists. 19 Q. Why would they do that? 20 A. Because as the whole idea of creating 21 these declarations was to -- and again this was 22 another operation, was to put me out there as a 23 disgruntled member of the Cult who was legitimate, 24 because I had been a deprogrammer and I could 25 prove that. And they could not disprove it. 0991 1 And by showing me to the world as a 2 disgruntled Cult member that was tired of their 3 deprogramming and their lies about not being 4 involved in deprogramming, I would have a better 5 appeal to the public and a better appeal to the 6 media than coming out and saying that I was a 7 Church of Scientology member because the Church of 8 Scientology had such an incredibly poor reputation 9 with the media and the public. 10 So they saw this as a real 11 opportunity to slap the Cult. 12 Q. Have you heard the phrase "plausible 13 denyability" before? 14 A. Never. Never heard of it. 15 Number 16, true. 16 17 is true. 17 18 is true. 18 19 is true. 19 20 is true. 20 21 is true. 21 22 is true. 22 The first part of 23 is true. The 23 part where Adrian Greek told me to steal documents 24 in order to learn Sheryl's exact location, none of 25 that is true. 0992 1 24 is true. 2 25 is not true. 3 26 is not true. 4 27 is true. 5 28 is true. 6 The essence of 29 is true, but the 7 statements there are not true. 8 Q. By "the statements," you mean -- 9 A. Bob Brandeberry did try to climb into 10 bed with me and I pushed him away, and that was 11 the end of it. And Mr. Ingram decided to create a 12 story out of it, and all the information here is 13 absolutely untrue. I won't even dignify it. 14 Q. 30? 15 A. Number 30, not true. 16 31 is not true. 17 32 is untrue. 18 33 not true. 19 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 20 not true. 21 43 is true with exception to the 22 statements that these two deprogrammers charge a 23 minimum of $25,000. If you notice any type of 24 Scientology document or statement or anyone from 25 Scientology talking about deprogrammer, they 0993 1 always seem to come up with this minimum $25,000 2 figure toward deprogrammers, and this is not 3 true. 4 44 is true. 5 45 is true. 6 46 is not true. 7 47 is true. 8 48 is true with exception to the last 9 sentence. 10 49 is not true. 11 50 is not true. 12 51 not true. 13 52 untrue. 14 53 is true. 15 54 is not true. 16 55 is true. 17 56, the first part is true, but the 18 last sentence is not true because I did not 19 physically restrain Chris. I was in charge of 20 driving and I was in charge of keeping the doors 21 open so they could pull them out, but I didn't 22 restrain him. 23 Q. Was that the -- 24 A. This is the Eddie Fallon kidnapping. 25 Q. Did you have any other involvement in 0994 1 that incident other than you have just indicated? 2 A. No. Well, I am the one that actually 3 put the deprogramming together. I was involved in 4 that. Because Mr. Fallon had contacted a number 5 of other people who were referred to him. And 6 because it was the holidays, they didn't want to 7 get involved. 8 And his father was desperate and 9 suspected his son was in a satanic cult and said 10 that he had hired a private investigator to keep 11 surveillance on his son. And the investigator had 12 some overt fear of santanics and had a loaded 13 weapon with him and was going in with guns 14 blazing. I said, "But if you want to kill your 15 son, go ahead, that's your business." And he was 16 very emotional on the phone. So I took the case. 17 But other than the initial 18 arrangements and bringing people in and opening 19 the door and closing the door and driving to 20 Bellevue Hospital with the kid in the back of the 21 van, no, I was not physical at all with this 22 gentleman. 23 Q. So that was Paragraph 56? 24 A. Right. 25 Paragraph 57 is not true. 0995 1 58 is not true. 2 59 is not true. 3 60 is true with the exception that 4 the individual was not handcuffed. 61 is not -- 5 well, it is true with the exception of him being 6 handcuffed. 7 62 is true. 8 63 is true except with the exception 9 of being handcuffed. 10 64. 64 is true. 11 Q. If you turn your attention to the 12 second paragraph, second sentence of 64 -- 13 A. With the exception of the handcuff. 14 And with the exception of the father punching me. 15 The father didn't punch me. 16 65 is true. 17 66 true. 18 67 is false. 19 68 is false. 20 69 is true, but I didn't know 21 anything about plane arrangements or airline 22 arrangements. 23 70 is true. 24 71 is true. 25 72 is false. 0996 1 73 false. 2 74 is false. 3 One of the points I should mention in 4 this declaration is Eugene drafted it so that it 5 would look like I was the one totally in charge of 6 the deprogramming. That's not true. Once the 7 deprogramming took place, Mary Alice Chronalagor 8 and her assistant took over and were in total 9 charge. I was not. And Eugene wanted them to 10 take second step, second base and allow me to be 11 in charge of this deprogramming, and that's how 12 they drafted it. 13 Q. By "they" you mean -- 14 A. Bowles & Moxon and Eugene Ingram 15 because throughout the rest of this declaration, I 16 am the hero of this deprogramming. And it 17 couldn't be further from the truth. 18 Q. So the next paragraph is -- 19 A. 75, true. 20 76, true. 21 77 is false. 22 78 is true. 23 79 is true. 24 80 is true. 25 81 false. 0997 1 82 is false. 2 83 is false. 3 84 is false. 4 85 is false. 5 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93 are 6 all false. 7 94 is true. 8 95 is true with the exception of the 9 $25,000 figure attributed to Anne Greek. 10 96 is true. 11 97 is true with the exception of the 12 second sentence about the frequency of the talks 13 between Ford and I. 14 98 is true with the exception of the 15 comment made about the hot water. 16 99 is true with the exception of Ford 17 being forced to attend meetings with his mother. 18 Paragraph 100 is true with the 19 exception of the last sentence where Mr. Greene 20 said that he frequented Castro Street. However, 21 Ford did tell me that he had been in the Castro 22 Street area doing social research while he was a 23 law student in law school and it was for some 24 legal project. 25 Paragraph 101, not true. 0998 1 102, 102 is true with the exception 2 of the marijuana jars. They were very small jars 3 that had buds, marijuana buds in them, whereas 4 Eugene would like you to believe there are these 5 three gigantic bottles that had all these stalks 6 in them. He really inflated that. 7 Q. What about the word "frequently"; 8 would that be your description or somebody else's? 9 A. 102? That's a true statement. 10 103 is correct. 11 104 is true. 12 105 is true. 13 106 is true with the exception of the 14 last line that refers to upsetting Cynthia 15 Kisser. I know that it upset the Greeks. I don't 16 know what Kisser's reaction was, and I didn't ask 17 her. 18 107. 107 is true. 19 108 is true. 20 109 is not true. 21 Q. Now, do you have any knowledge of 22 what, if anything, was done with Exhibit-9, the 23 document we have just been discussing? 24 A. Oh, yes, I know exactly what happened 25 to it. 0999 1 Q. What did happen to Exhibit-9? 2 A. Mr. Ingram told me that he had 3 duplicated this document at least 500 times. And 4 later I found out in a conversation with David 5 Butterworth in Oklahoma City that copies of this 6 declaration were sent through -- sent to every 7 Scientology organization within the continental 8 United States. Everyone. 9 And I learned within a three to 10 four-month period after I started doing projects 11 with the OSA which required my communicating by 12 phone with people throughout the United States 13 within the Scientology orgs, they all complimented 14 me on the declaration which they had in their 15 office and that they read. 16 And I am talking about phone calls 17 down to Miami, Florida, to New York to South 18 Carolina, to the Midwest. So I know that these 19 declarations got all over. 20 Mr. Ingram had also provided me 21 photocopies of letters he sent to law enforcement 22 agencies in which he said, "If you will notice the 23 enclosed declaration which has 109 paragraphs." 24 So this also accompanied letters along with a 25 similar declaration he retrieved from Jonathon 1000 1 Nordquist. 2 MR. BERRY: Let's take a break for a couple 3 of minutes while I send a document. 4 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The date 5 is August 2, 1993. The time is four o'clock P.M. 6 (Recess taken.) 7 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 8 The date is August 2, 1993. The time is 4:17 P.M. 9 beginning of Tape 3, Volume V. Continuing 10 deposition of Mr. Scarff 11 BY MR. BERRY: 12 Q. Mr. Scarff, let's now take a look at 13 Exhibit-10 and perform the same exercise as we 14 just performed with regard to Exhibit-9. 15 A. This exhibit was specifically geared 16 toward incriminating and attacking Cynthia 17 Kisser. 1 is true. 18 2 is true with the exception of the 19 last sentence which is false. 20 3 is true with the exception of the 21 comment regarding the $25,000 per week therapy and 22 the line at the bottom of the first page which 23 talks about the rehab services and the last 24 sentence in Paragraph 3 which refers to statements 25 that individuals should mortgage their homes in 1001 1 order to raise money in order to pay for rehab. 2 Number 4 is false. 3 5 is true with the exception of the 4 minimum $25,000 for deprogramming fees. 5 6 is true. 6 7 is true. 7 8 is true with the exception to the 8 statements made about Cynthia Kisser. 9 9 is true with the exception to the 10 fees noted for deprogramming. 11 10 is is true. 12 11, false. 13 12, false. 14 13, false. 15 14, false. 16 15 is true. 17 16 is true with the exception of the 18 reference to contracts provided by Adrian Greek. 19 17, true. 20 18, true with the exception to the 21 last sentence regarding my restraining the 22 victim. 23 19 is true with the exception to the 24 comment about handcuffs. 25 20, true with exception to the 1002 1 reference of duct tape. 2 21, false. 3 22 is true with the exception -- 4 reference to handcuffs. 5 23 is true with the exception of 6 handcuffs. 7 24 is true. 8 25 is true with the exception to the 9 handcuff reference. 10 26 is true with the exception to the 11 reference to the father hitting me. 12 27 is true. 13 28 is true. 14 29 is false. 15 30 is false. 16 31 is false. 17 32 is true. 18 33 is true with the exception of the 19 last sentence. 20 34 is false. 21 35 is false. 22 36 is true. 23 37 is false. 24 38 is true. 25 39 is false. 1003 1 40 is true. 2 41 is true. 3 42 is true. 4 43 is false. 5 44 is false. 6 45 is false. 7 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53. 8 Q. What about those ones? 9 A. They are all false. 10 54, 55 is false. 11 Q. Now, do you have any knowledge as to 12 what was done with Exhibit-10, this declaration? 13 A. This was compiled, as well, and sent 14 to Scientology orgs and sent on by Eugene Ingram 15 to various law enforcement agencies that he wanted 16 to create situations and complaints against. 17 Now, one purpose for these going to 18 the various entities is because each Scientology 19 entity had their own projects and own complaints 20 which were being filed with authorities. And 21 Eugene felt that if there was a massive 22 letter-writing campaign going on by Scientology 23 orgs around the country and if for example the FBI 24 got 500 letters and complaints with 500 25 declarations of Gary Scarff going to the FBI, that 1004 1 it would give the FBI the feeling that if Eugene 2 Ingram himself wrote a letter, they could turn 3 their backs to it. But if 500 organizations 4 around the country threatened to bring this very 5 public in each of their jurisdictions, that the 6 FBI may not want to do anything but they would 7 have no choice, their hands would be tied, and by 8 virtue of 500 letters of complaint, they would be 9 forced to take action against Cynthia Kisser. 10 And that was simply an idea that 11 Eugene had set about every agency that he was 12 going to file complaints against. 13 They were going to put the pressure 14 on each one of these agencies to do something or 15 their credibility would be seriously in doubt. 16 Because it would be easy for them to ignore the 17 complaints by 10 people, but 500 people around the 18 country, he didn't think so. 19 Q. And how do you know this was what was 20 done, Exhibit-10? 21 A. I don't know what was done. This is 22 what he told me. 23 And it was also affirmed to me by 24 members around the country including Mary Anne 25 Ahmad who was the PR director in Chicago and Sue 1005 1 Taylor who is the PR director in Washington, D.C. 2 who is a very power person in the church on the 3 East Coast. 4 Q. Turning your attention to Exhibit-17 5 and Exhibit-18, those are both the same document, 6 I understand? 7 A. Right. This is a declaration which I 8 worded and signed on September 11th in the 9 presence of today Dan Leipold. It was an 10 immediate declaration I provided him so that he 11 could use this in cases that were pending 12 immediately. 13 Q. And are the contents of Exhibit-17 14 true and correct? 15 A. Absolutely. 16 Q. Who worded Exhibits-17 and 18? 17 A. I did. 18 Q. And were they true and correct when 19 stated? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. And do they remain true and correct 22 today? 23 A. They sure do. 24 MR. BERRY: Let me attend to a matter that I 25 have to attend to for a second and go off camera 1006 1 for a moment. 2 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The time 3 is 4:25 P.M. 4 (Recess taken.) 5 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 6 The time is 4:28 P.M. 7 BY MR. BERRY: 8 Q. Mr. Scarff, let's turn our attention 9 to Exhibit-11. 10 A. This is a declaration -- 11 Q. Let me put a question here. What is 12 Exhibit-11? 13 A. Exhibit-11 is a declaration which was 14 created to incriminate Attorney Ford Greene. 15 Q. Can you go through it and indicate 16 which, first of all -- let me withdraw the 17 question. 18 You didn't prepare Exhibit-11, did 19 you? 20 A. I did not. 21 Q. Can we go through it paragraph by 22 paragraph as we have with Exhibits-9 and 10 and 23 have you indicate which paragraphs are true and 24 which are false. 25 A. 1 is true. 1007 1 2 is true with the exception of the 2 last line. 3 3 is true with the exception to the 4 last line. And referring to main deprogrammer. 5 4 is true with the exception to the 6 third sentence about talking very early in the 7 morning. 8 Paragraph 5 is true with the 9 exception to the hot water reference. 10 6 is true with the exception to the 11 reference to being forced to accompany his 12 mother. 13 7 is true with the exception to the 14 comment about frequenting Castro Street. 15 8 is false. 16 9 is true with the exception to the 17 reference to the three large canisters. 18 10 is true. 19 11, true. 20 12, true. 21 13, true with the exception to the 22 reference to Cynthia Kisser. 23 14, true. 24 15, true. 25 16, false. 1008 1 Q. Now turning your attention to 2 Exhibit-19, what is Exhibit-19? 3 A. 19 is the declaration which 4 Mr. Greene asked me to provide on behalf of his 5 client Gerald Armstrong. And what I noticed in 6 the drafting of this declaration is that although 7 I was doing it on behalf of Gerald Armstrong, it 8 really deals more with Ford Greene himself. 9 Q. And are the contents of this 10 declaration true and correct? 11 A. I would like to go paragraph by 12 paragraph. 13 Q. That's what I was going to do next. 14 So let's do that. 15 A. 1 is true with the exception to the 16 current residence information which I will not 17 reveal. 18 2 -- 19 Q. And that is -- Sorry, withdrawn. 20 Why is that? Sorry, withdrawn. 21 Is that for the reasons you stated at 22 the beginning of this deposition when I asked you 23 for your address on the record? 24 A. On the basis of the fair game policy 25 by the Church of Scientology implemented against 1009 1 me, I will refuse to provide my address on record, 2 yes. 3 Q. And do you have any concerns in that 4 regard in connection with Mr. Eugene Ingram? 5 A. I think anyone would who has been 6 threatened, yes. The man has threatened to kill 7 me and my family. I think I have every reason to 8 be afraid of the man. 9 Number 2 -- 10 Q. If Mr. Ingram was present at a 11 session of your deposition, how would you feel? 12 A. I would feel very threatened and I 13 would demand that an armed police officer be near 14 me, and if the Court ruled against that, then I 15 would simply disobey the Court. Because I will 16 not attend any deposition with Mr. Ingram present 17 unless I have some sort of physical security with 18 me. 19 Q. You said you would feel threatened -- 20 A. The man has threatened to kill me and 21 my parents on several occasions. I take this man 22 to be very serious. He has misrepresented himself 23 many times in a very serious fashion as a police 24 officer for the City of Los Angeles. 25 I have found out the facts about his 1010 1 record with the LAPD which is incredibly different 2 than what he tells people. 3 And I have every reason to fear for 4 my life and to fear for the life of my family, and 5 I will do everything I could to protect that. 6 Q. Would the presence of Mr. Gene Ingram 7 at a session of your deposition have any effect on 8 the testimony you are able to give? 9 A. No, absolutely not. I would come 10 here and be very honest and very truthful. I may 11 die as a result of it, but I am still going to be 12 honest and truthful. 13 Q. Would you feel intimidated in any way 14 by his presence? 15 A. Most definitely. That's why at my 16 lest deposition the attorney had to go to court 17 and try to get a special master on my behalf 18 because of the threats and intimidation which was 19 very prevalent in my first deposition with both 20 Mr. Weiner and Mr. Eugene Ingram. 21 Q. Now turning your attention back to 22 Exhibit-19 and continuing with Paragraph 2, let's 23 continue with the same exercise we have been doing 24 with the previous declarations. 25 A. Number 2 is true. 1011 1 3 is true. 2 4 is true. 3 5 is true. 4 6 is true. 5 7 is true with the exception to the 6 reference to Randy Spencer, which we have already 7 addressed on record. It was Laurie Bartilson who 8 was present, not Randy Spencer. 9 Q. Anything else about that paragraph? 10 A. I am having a hard time reading the 11 paragraph, first of all. 12 Q. You have previously given some 13 testimony about Eric Moran. 14 A. I am having a real difficult time 15 reading this. The words are all -- Right, Eric 16 Moran, which is in reference to Aaron Mason, and 17 Aaron Mason was not present. 18 Q. Is Eric Moran an error? 19 A. Yes. And I have already -- And after 20 preparing this, I informed Mr. Greene of this, and 21 Mr. Greene said he already submitted this to the 22 Court but it was no problem because once I 23 appeared in court on February 19th, that I would 24 simply correct that in court, it was no problem. 25 So it did not necessitate redoing the 1012 1 declaration. 2 Paragraph 7, section A, B, C, D, E is 3 correct. 4 F is correct. 5 G is correct. 6 Q. And then there is another G, I think, 7 isn't there? 8 A. Is that a G? Yes, I guess so. 9 Q. Maybe it is a -- 10 A. I can't tell. 11 Q. Maybe it is an 8. Yes, it is an 8. 12 A. 8 is true. 13 And the rest of the declaration is 14 true through No. 9, which is also true. 15 Except in reference to No. 9 which 16 states that Ingram, Butterworth and lawyers of 17 Bowles & Moxon expressed they would do anything to 18 prevent Armstrong and Ford Greene from working 19 together. That is true, but it was not simply to 20 keep them from working together. The fact that 21 they were working together made these individuals 22 very angry, and they wanted to destroy both 23 individuals. 24 It was more of a streak of vengeance 25 to get at them simply because they knew despite 1013 1 Mr. Greene's personal problems and some of the 2 baggage that he carried, that he was a very 3 effective force against Scientology. 4 And they knew about Gerald Armstrong 5 being a former high ranking member of the church 6 that had the most to give as far as credible 7 statements against the church. 8 And the two of them together really 9 scared the hell out of the people involved in 10 Scientology, and they wanted both of them out of 11 the picture. 12 Q. And you say in Paragraph 9 that 13 Ingram, Butterworth and lawyers at Bowles & Moxon 14 wanted that result. Which lawyers at Bowles & 15 Moxon wanted that result? 16 A. Tim Bowles, Kendrick Moxon. 17 Q. Did you actually have conversations 18 with Tim Bowles and Kendrick Moxon in which 19 statements to that effect were made? 20 A. Yes. These occurred on Saturday, 21 December 21st, in the offices of Bowles & Moxon in 22 a conference room where both Tim Bowles, Ken 23 Moxon, Laurie Bartilson, David Butterworth, Eugene 24 and I all sat at a small table and discussed this. 25 Q. Previously heard testimony from you 1014 1 regarding that which we may loosely be describing 2 as the conspiracy to murder Ford Greene; correct? 3 A. That's correct. They wanted Ford 4 Greene dead. 5 Q. And is that your signature on the 6 sixth page of -- sorry, the fifth page of 7 Exhibit-19? 8 A. Yes, sir, it is. 9 Q. Now, turning back, then, to 10 Exhibit-12, what is Exhibit-12? 11 A. Following the -- Wait a second. I 12 think we have addressed this, didn't we? 13 Q. Is that the same exhibit -- 14 A. I believe this is a copy of the 15 same -- 16 Q. Yes, it is the same as Exhibit-10. 17 It bears the same exhibit stamp from a previous 18 deposition on 9/11/92. 19 So were there three or four 20 declarations that were -- 21 A. There were four declarations. 22 Q. Now, after the execution of those 23 four declarations, what happened next? 24 A. Well, within two weeks following 25 these declarations, Eugene Ingram came back to 1015 1 Portland, told me I would need to take three days 2 off from work, that he and I were going to go to 3 Eugene, Oregon, locate the house where this young 4 man, Eddie Fallon, had been kidnapped, then we 5 were going to drive to Bellevue, Washington to 6 find the safe house. 7 Mr. Ingram said he was bringing all 8 his videotapes with him and he was going to 9 videotape the home where the deprogramming took 10 place and just do a videotape autobiography of the 11 deprogrammings that took place, God, six years 12 prior to the time that he -- this -- these 13 declarations were created. 14 And then we would go to Seaside, 15 Oregon to locate the house where Jim Boland had 16 been detained for the purposes of deprogramming 17 and that he wanted to substantiate all the 18 information on the deprogrammings which they then 19 could use with some vitality against the Cult. 20 And he flew to Oregon, and we went to 21 Eugene. I told Mr. Ingram, and I was very honest 22 about this, that six years had passed, a lot of 23 development had happened, a lot of things change 24 over six years, and I simply did not remember 25 where anything was in Bellevue, Washington or 1016 1 Eugene, Oregon. 2 And Eugene Ingram seemed intent on 3 driving through every street in the City of 4 Eugene, through every street in Bellevue, 5 Washington, to find these safe houses. Or find 6 these houses. Excuse me. 7 So we drove to Eugene and drove up 8 and down streets for, God, it was like six to 9 eight hours, and I told him houses that vaguely 10 looked familiar and could be the houses that -- 11 could be the house where Mr. Fallon lived. 12 And we made numerous stops to various 13 title companies in the city where Mr. Ingram did 14 research of records to determine whether this was 15 in fact the house that was used. 16 I told him about a hotel that we had 17 stayed at in the city. We tracked down the 18 hotel. And he pressured the hotel manager into 19 turning over to him hotel records. 20 We found out that the hotel since we 21 stayed in it in 1985 had changed ownership and now 22 belonged to a Vietnamese couple. And so Eugene 23 Ingram and I drove to the home of this Vietnamese 24 couple which he was able to squeeze out of the 25 hotel -- the new hotel managers, and the owner, 1017 1 the Vietnamese owner -- I am sorry, the wife who 2 was co-owner of this hotel was quite flustered and 3 angry that Eugene was able to find out where she 4 lived because all that information was considered 5 confidential. 6 And Eugene was able to get from her 7 more information. And when I asked him how he was 8 able to get that information from her, he told me 9 that he had learned that this couple was involved 10 in some type of criminal activity, some organized 11 criminal activity, and that he had threatened to 12 expose it if this woman did not cooperate with 13 him. 14 And so she bled, that's his word, she 15 bled information to him. 16 And so we, through his own personal 17 information and through going back to title 18 companies, he -- we couldn't find the house but -- 19 Q. Which house was this? 20 A. The house where Eddie Fallon was 21 taken from Eugene, Oregon. 22 So at the end of the night, and this 23 was probably like nine o'clock at night, Eugene 24 was on the phone with Roger Stodola down at the 25 Office of Special Affairs in Los Angeles, and 1018 1 Mr. Ingram informed me that Stodola had ordered 2 him via instructions from Bowles & Moxon to drive 3 to Bellevue, Washington and try and find that 4 house. 5 So we drove to Washington, got in 6 Washington State near the Seattle area at 7 approximately one o'clock in the morning at which 8 time we checked into a motel, and the next day we 9 spent the entire morning and afternoon looking for 10 this house in the middle of the woods in the 11 surroundings of Bellevue, Washington. Could not 12 find it. 13 Mr. Ingram got an idea, wanted to -- 14 instead of looking for this house at in the middle 15 of the woods, was to call every private 16 investigator that was listed in the telephone book 17 in 1982 and see if any of these investigators were 18 still around today. 19 He called Roger Stodola. Roger 20 Stodola called back and gave Eugene Ingram all the 21 private detectives that were listed and licensed 22 in 1982 in Eugene, Oregon. 23 I am sorry, 1985 in Eugene, Oregon. 24 And so I got on the phone and called 25 several private investigators and told them that I 1019 1 was a candidate for the Los Angeles Police 2 Department, that they were doing a background on 3 me, that I had been somewhat involved in these 4 kidnappings and that I wanted to make sure that 5 there was nothing in those situations that might 6 have me precluded from candidacy to the LAPD. 7 This was a script that Mr. Ingram 8 provided to me. And he said it would work. In 9 fact it did when I was on the phone with these 10 PI's. 11 Eventually Mr. Ingram took over and 12 started calling private investigators in the 13 Eugene area from his mobile phone and was able to 14 track down the gentleman responsible for keeping 15 surveillance on Mr. Fallon. 16 And from Bellevue, Washington in the 17 late evening, we drove straight to Eugene, Oregon 18 where at approximately nine o'clock at night this 19 private investigator agreed to meet with me and 20 Eugene in a bar in Eugene, Oregon. 21 And shortly after he arrived, Eugene 22 asked me to leave the bar because he was going to 23 work on this private investigator. 24 And he spent approximately another 25 five to six hours with this investigator in the 1020 1 bar getting the man drunk. And at three o'clock 2 in the morning, I believe it was around three 3 o'clock in the morning, it was very late, Eugene 4 came out, said that he had gotten this man 5 thoroughly drunk and the man was about to crack. 6 And the man wanted me and Eugene 7 Ingram to come with him to his house where he had 8 called his wife and his wife was going to fix us 9 breakfast. 10 Q. What happened next? 11 A. We went to this private 12 investigator's house, we met his wife. She fixed 13 us breakfast. The man asked me why I wanted the 14 name of the victim of the deprogramming because at 15 that time, if you notice in the declarations, I 16 listed as Chris because I didn't recall his name. 17 And we were trying to get the name of the victim 18 and where this situation took place. 19 Eventually Eugene Ingram was able to 20 get the information out of the private 21 investigator, got the name of the person, the 22 victim, and found out the address where this 23 deprogramming took place. 24 And the next morning we drove to the 25 house, where Eugene talked the occupant of the 1021 1 house into letting us into the house so he could 2 videotape the inside of the house, videotape the 3 outside of the house, go down to the basement. 4 And then Mr. Ingram provided me a 5 script and told me to read from the script while 6 he videotaped me. 7 Q. Did you have any part of creating 8 that script? 9 A. No. No, what I did -- 10 Q. Did you comment on what was contained 11 in the script? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Why not? 14 A. Because Eugene Ingram made it very 15 clear to me from the beginning if I did not 16 cooperate, I had one other option. And I didn't 17 want to pursue that option. 18 Q. So what happened next? 19 A. Mr. Ingram gave me a piece of paper 20 very much like this, had some words on it, told me 21 to read them, to think about it, put the paper 22 aside. He was going to turn on his video camera, 23 and he wanted me to talk right into the camera 24 about this is the house where the deprogramming 25 took place, a house Cynthia Kisser was involved, 1022 1 and basically lie through my teeth about what was 2 happening. And he videotaped this. 3 During that time he turned off his 4 videotape camera approximately two to three times 5 because he said I wasn't being effective enough, I 6 wasn't speaking clearly enough. That the first 7 time I ever got to mention Cynthia Kisser "We 8 definitely need to get Cynthia Kisser there 9 because she is the one we want to burn." 10 So eventually I got it correct. 11 Q. Now, did you -- 12 A. And he also took me into the house 13 and I had to -- on camera, I said, "This is where 14 we grabbed him and threw him down and handcuffed 15 him, and this is where we dragged him out the 16 door," and I just went throughout the house while 17 he filmed me. 18 Q. At your deposition in the Wisel case, 19 was anything said by the Scientology 20 representatives and lawyers with regard to any 21 videotapes? 22 A. Yes, they did. 23 Q. And what was said at the Wisel 24 deposition about videotapes? 25 A. They were prepared to submit into 1023 1 evidence videotapes they had which I assume are 2 these videotapes. And -- 3 Q. And have you since learned of a 4 communication from Bowles & Moxon in which -- 5 sorry, let me rephrase that. 6 Have you since requested a copy of 7 your file from Bowles & Moxon? 8 A. Yes, I have. 9 Q. And is that request reflected in 10 Exhibit-154? 11 A. 154 is the request, yes. 12 Q. And did Bowles & Moxon subsequently 13 respond to that request? 14 A. Yes, they did. And that letter -- I 15 need to find the letter. I can't find the 16 letter. 17 Q. Let's go off camera a moment while we 18 find that letter and also several other documents 19 I want to use. 20 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The time 21 is 5:42 P.M. 22 (Recess taken.) 23 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 24 The time is 5:10 P.M. 25 BY MR. BERRY: 1024 1 Q. Now, Mr. Scarff, before we go to the 2 exhibit that we went off the record in order to 3 locate, was there just a videotape that was taken 4 by Mr. Ingram during the visit to Eugene, Oregon 5 that you have been testifying about? 6 A. No, there wasn't. 7 There was also several audiotapes 8 that Eugene took from Portland to Eugene, Oregon, 9 from Eugene to Bellevue, from Bellevue back to 10 Eugene, Oregon. 11 Q. What do you mean that he took? 12 A. Mr. Eugene Ingram recorded numerous 13 conversations we had, and they were scripted 14 conversations. And when I say "scripted," I mean 15 scripted because during the time that he was 16 taking these tape-recorded conversations, he would 17 stop the tape, remind me what I had to talk about, 18 who I had to refer to, to always get Cynthia 19 Kisser in there as the criminal that we are trying 20 to indict, always include certain information. 21 And he had everything written down, 22 and he said, "You need to refer to this, and you 23 need to remind yourself not to be bullied here, 24 that you are a victim, that you are a victim of 25 the Cult Awareness Network and that you have been 1025 1 hurt by the Cult Awareness Network, and you will 2 come off as much more legitimate if you refer 3 yourself as a victim." 4 So several times throughout our 5 dragging around Oregon and Washington, he would 6 turn the tape on, turn it off, make adjustments, 7 turn it on and turn it off. 8 And I asked him, "Well, how is anyone 9 going to believe listening to this tape that it is 10 a legitimate tape because they are going to hear 11 all these sounds of the tape being turned on and 12 off, turned on and turned off?" 13 He said, "Don't worry about it. And 14 don't worry about you repeating yourself because 15 once I get back to California, I am going to turn 16 these tapes over to Golden Era Productions" -- 17 which is a major production and video facility for 18 the Church of Scientology where a gentleman by the 19 name of Ray and Golden Era will take the tapes and 20 edit them and transpose them onto a fresh tape, 21 and that the tape would be created in such a way 22 as that it will be an inflammatory incrimination 23 of Cynthia Kisser. 24 And he said in both his experience as 25 a Los Angeles police officer and from what -- 1026 1 given the competence that Golden Era Productions 2 can take in revising and reediting and tampering 3 with tapes, both videotapes and audiotapes, that 4 they can produce a finished result that is so 5 professional that not even an FBI agent would be 6 able to tell it from an original. 7 And I believe in my last deposition 8 when the Scientology attorneys said they were 9 going to introduce audiotapes and videotapes into 10 the deposition record, that these were the results 11 that I was talking about. Because the only 12 audiotapes and videotapes that I know of are those 13 that were created specifically by Eugene Ingram 14 for the benefit of Bowles & Moxon and for the 15 Church of Scientology which Mr. Ingram told me 16 were going to be tampered with and reedited and 17 gleaned to make this nice incriminating piece of 18 evidence toward the Cult Awareness Network. 19 Q. Who was trying to incriminate the 20 Cult Awareness Network? 21 A. Bowles & Moxon, the Office of Special 22 Affairs and Eugene Ingram. 23 Q. Now, we have previously looked at 24 Exhibit-154, which you testified was your request 25 for your file from Bowles & Moxon. 1027 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. Turning to Exhibit-163, have you seen 3 that letter before? 4 A. Yes, I have. And this is a letter by 5 Mr. Robert Weiner of Bowles & Moxon simply trying 6 to come up, unsuccessfully, with a legitimate 7 reason to deny me access to all the tapes, 8 videotapes and audiotapes, and record the 9 information about me with regards to my request 10 and this legal letter delivered to him July 28th. 11 He has thus far refused to abide by 12 the letter and has provided me zilch. 13 Q. We have previously talked about what 14 they have said they have in your file and what you 15 believe should exist? 16 A. It is not what I believe to exist. I 17 know to exist and they are lying. 18 Q. And with regard to Exhibit-163, is 19 there any reference to audiotapes or videotapes? 20 A. None whatsoever. In fact, they 21 say: "There is no credible basis for your 22 client's request for any documents listed as 23 client files, and in case to the extent there is a 24 client file, Mr. Scarff has the only document it 25 contained." 1028 1 Well, if it is the only document it 2 contained, I can based upon my own experience 3 conclude only one thing, that they have destroyed 4 and shredded official documents so they would not 5 be in the position of providing these documents to 6 me. 7 It is an operation of both Bowles & 8 Moxon and the Office of Special Affairs that when 9 official documents are requested under any type of 10 subpoena or anything like that, under a legal 11 process, and the Church of Scientology does not 12 want any type of prosecutorial agency or otherwise 13 to retrieve those documents, they will destroy 14 them, they will shred them. 15 And to me, that's illegal tampering 16 of evidence. And they do it on a wide scale 17 basis. 18 They have large shredding machines in 19 the OSA office, and I have watched them shred 20 documents in that office. And I fully believe 21 that if in fact they no longer have the huge 22 amount of paperwork they told me before they did 23 have at the time that I was at Bowles & Moxon and 24 at the Office of Special Affairs, then all of my 25 documentation has been shredded, and where it is 1029 1 at now, I couldn't know. 2 Q. Have you seen shredders at the Office 3 of Special Affairs below Bowles & Moxon? 4 A. At the time I was there, there were 5 three large shredders inside the war room of 6 Bowles & Moxon where they also keep their 7 computers, all their fax machines, everything that 8 is of a technical basis. 9 And they have three large shredders 10 in the office which is also where that leader 11 board is that I talked about. 12 Q. Which is the leader board? 13 A. The board that had all the names of 14 the perceived enemies of Scientology and what 15 operations were being done on them, and they were 16 compiling statistics of all the operations of the 17 individuals. It is the same room. It is the 18 working room for the Office of Special Affairs. 19 Q. Going back to Gene Ingram's visit to 20 you in Eugene, Oregon, when did this occur? In 21 fact, let me withdraw the question. 22 Going back to Eugene Ingram's visit 23 to Oregon, he asked you to take three days off, I 24 think you said. 25 A. That's correct. 1030 1 Q. Were you able to afford to take three 2 days off? 3 A. No, sir, I was not. 4 Q. So was anything arranged as a result 5 of that? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. And what arrangements were -- Sorry, 8 withdrawn. 9 What conversations took place between 10 you and Gene Ingram regarding that problem? 11 A. Mr. Ingram agreed to pay me $200 a 12 day for expenses and loss of wages. He told me 13 that he usually pays any witness that assists him 14 $200 a day and this would support me in the loss 15 of wages and benefits. 16 And he paid me $600 for the time that 17 we were both in Oregon and Washington. 18 If you will turn to Exhibit- -- 19 Q. Let me ask you to turn to 20 Exhibits-31, 32 and 33. What is Exhibit-31 in 21 this regard? In fact, I think we had previously 22 identified Exhibits-30, 31, 32 and 33. 23 A. I am trying to remember because I see 24 October 15th up there. I am trying to remember 25 what happened on the 15th. 1031 1 I spent one day with Eugene Ingram on 2 the 15th in gathering up the evidence, what he 3 referred to as evidence. 4 Q. Let's back up here a moment. Is 5 Exhibit-31 you previously identified as including 6 a check from Ingram Investigations dated October 7 9? 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. In the amount of $200? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. And then we have Exhibit-32 you 12 previously identified as a check for $600 from 13 Ingram Investigations, October 19th; correct? 14 A. And that was for payment of the three 15 days we were in Oregon and Washington, correct. 16 Q. And then on November 19 as reflected 17 by Exhibit-33, there is a check for $500 from 18 Ingram Investigations to you; correct? 19 A. That's correct. 20 Q. Let's go back to Exhibit-31, the 21 check from Ingram Investigations to you dated 22 October 9, 1991. 23 What were the circumstances that led 24 to that payment of money to you? 25 A. Because in his preparing and creating 1032 1 the first set of declarations, which I signed on 2 October 6th, I had to take off a day from work to 3 help him. And he told me at the time he did not 4 bring his checkbook with him but when he got back 5 to Los Angeles, he was going to pay me $200 for 6 the loss of wages on that day. 7 And that's what this check reflects. 8 October 9th, which was three days after I signed 9 the declarations, he sent me a check for $200. 10 Q. And then the document above that is 11 your deposit slip? 12 A. That's correct. My bank account at 13 that time was First Interstate Bank. 14 Q. And that is some days after? 15 A. On the 15th, right. 16 Q. Now, what is Exhibit-32, then, which 17 is the October 19, 1991 check in the amount of 18 $600 from Eugene Ingram to yourself? 19 A. This reflects the three days that I 20 was required to take off from work to assist 21 Eugene Ingram to both the Bellevue, Washington 22 area and Eugene, Oregon in his investigation. 23 And the check was given to me in 24 person on October 19th, 1991, for $600, and I 25 deposited it in the bank on October 19th. 1033 1 Q. And what about Exhibit-33; what was 2 that one? 3 A. This is reflective of my November 4 1991 visit to Los Angeles in which I was ordered 5 to come down, and I had to take off time from work 6 to do so. 7 Initially David Butterworth and Matt 8 Bratchi told me that they were not going to pay me 9 for my time there. And so I went to Eugene Ingram 10 and told him and, Eugene said, well, he would take 11 care of it. 12 And Eugene contacted, he claims, Tim 13 Bowles and Tim Bowles approved David Butterworth 14 providing me $500 for time lost. And thus 15 Mr. Ingram wrote me out a check for $500. 16 Q. And have we previously had testimony 17 from you regarding that visit to Los Angeles? 18 A. That's correct. That is reflective 19 of both my anti Cult Awareness Network conference 20 and also the disruption campaign that was done at 21 the Jewish Federation Center against Priscilla 22 Coates and Patricia Ryan. 23 Q. Anything else? 24 A. And also the midnight meeting 25 following the disruption conference in which David 1034 1 Butterworth, Eugene advised me of their directive 2 to me to kill Cynthia Kisser. 3 Q. Now, what happened after you 4 concluded the videotaping of -- Sorry, withdrawn. 5 What happened after Mr. Ingram 6 finished videotaping you at the house in Oregon? 7 Let me back up again. 8 You were previously testifying that 9 there was a scripted videotaping. 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. What happened next? 12 A. Following completion of the 13 videotape, I never heard or saw or heard anything 14 about the videotapes again until Mr. Ingram -- I 15 expect those were the videotapes and audiotapes 16 that I had referred to earlier were brought with 17 Mr. Ingram to my last deposition in which they 18 were expecting, and I am speaking of the opposing 19 attorneys from Scientology, of introducing into 20 evidence against me at my last deposition, but 21 because their conduct forced a termination of the 22 deposition, they never had a chance to do that. 23 Q. So Mr. Ingram finished videotaping 24 you; correct? 25 A. That's correct. 1035 1 Q. Then what happened? 2 A. And then after that, we went to 3 Bellevue, Washington, to -- no, I am sorry. We 4 had already gone to Bellevue Washington. 5 After that drove back to Portland, 6 Oregon, and he flew back to California, and then 7 shortly after that, I got a telephone call that I 8 was going to go Oklahoma City. 9 Q. Very briefly, for what purpose? 10 A. To disrupt the Cult Awareness Network 11 conference in Oklahoma City. 12 Q. Now let's turn to Exhibit-13. But 13 before doing so, let me ask you about something 14 first. 15 Did there come a time in late 1992 16 when you had a conversation with Mr. Ingram? 17 A. When you say "late," what are you 18 talking about? 19 Q. Well, did there come a time after you 20 left the Church of Scientology and after you 21 ceased being involved in the Office of Special 22 Affairs that you had a conversation with Mr. Gene 23 Ingram? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. When was that conversation? 1036 1 A. This would have been early October -- 2 I would say the first or second week of October. 3 I believe it was around October 5th. 4 Q. And what was said in that 5 conversation by you and Mr. Gene Ingram? First of 6 all, before I ask you that, where did the 7 conversation take place? 8 A. At -- He called me at home. 9 Q. And where were you living then? 10 A. At 2137 Northeast Weilder in 11 Portland, Oregon. 12 Q. About what time was this? 13 A. Approximately four o'clock in the 14 afternoon. 15 Q. Do you remember the approximate date 16 or day of the week? 17 A. No. 18 Q. And who called you? 19 A. I am sorry? 20 Q. Who called you? 21 A. Eugene Ingram called me. 22 Q. And you recognized his voice? 23 A. I know Eugene Ingram's voice, yes. 24 Q. What was said, if anything, during 25 this conversation? 1037 1 A. The last conversation I had with 2 Eugene Ingram, he told me that he had evidence 3 confirmed through his law enforcement buddies and 4 through his own investigations. 5 He related that I did not know it but 6 both I and he, and I am referring to Mr. Leipold 7 from the Cult Awareness Network, were under 8 surveillance and had been watched and followed, 9 and he asked me why I was talking to the Cult 10 Awareness Network. And I told him he knew exactly 11 why. 12 And then Mr. Ingram offered me a 13 substantial amount of money not to say anything. 14 Q. Now, how much did he offer you? 15 A. $25,000 to keep my mouth quiet. And 16 he said that if I accepted, I would simply have to 17 sign some kind of legal document which would state 18 under penalty of some perjury, or some legal 19 document, that by accepting the money, I would say 20 nothing that was contrary to Scientology. 21 And that's all it took. And that 22 would be simply someone from the Church of 23 Scientology would come to me, have me sign it, 24 they would turn over the check to me, that would 25 be the end of it. But I could not talk about 1038 1 anything. 2 Q. How did this subject come up? 3 A. I don't know. 4 Q. Do you recall -- 5 A. I never demanded any money. I never 6 called him up and said I was going to blackmail 7 them. In fact, I had no contact with them. 8 I wouldn't even call them because 9 just prior to that, they were calling me 10 threatening me and saying that they knew I had 11 been in contact with the Cult Awareness Network. 12 And I was denying it all along because I was 13 terrified of them. 14 Why he called me and offered me 15 $25,000, I can only reasonably assume that this 16 was a trick on Mr. Ingram's part, that he was not 17 sincerely interested in giving me $25,000 but if I 18 said yes, then to him that would have been a 19 confirmation that I had contacted the Cult 20 Awareness Network. And he was just trying to fish 21 for the information. 22 Q. Did he say anything about what he 23 meant by keeping your mouth shut? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. What was that? 1039 1 A. That I was not to reveal the subject 2 of my conversations of our discussions in both 3 November and December of '91 about killing Cynthia 4 and killing Ford Greene. 5 Q. Was anything else said in that 6 conversation that you are just talking about? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. What else was said? 9 A. Just with regards to other criminal 10 actions. 11 Q. Did -- 12 A. That directly -- That Tim Bowles, his 13 client, was directly involved in. 14 Q. What was said in that regard? 15 A. I forgot the exact conversation. But 16 it was if that -- I am going to plead the Fifth on 17 this, Mr. Berry. I don't want to get into it. 18 Q. That is -- That's fine. 19 Was there any discussion regarding 20 where you would live and work? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. What discussion took place regarding 23 that? 24 A. Mr. Ingram again made the offer to me 25 that if I accepted the $25,000, that he would also 1040 1 help me move to Los Angeles and he would get me a 2 job. 3 And he also said earlier that I had 4 voiced interest in joining the Los Angeles Police 5 Department as a police officer and that he had a 6 very positive reputation with the LAPD, that he 7 was very good friends with L.A. Police Chief Daryl 8 Gates, that he had a friend by the name of Officer 9 Long who worked in Personnel and was in charge of 10 the background investigations for new recruits to 11 the LAPD and that he could use his influence to 12 circumvent the process and that all it would 13 require for me to become a L.A. police officer was 14 to apply and that eventually I would be accepted 15 and that no background investigations would be 16 done because he along with his friends in the LAPD 17 would be able to circumvent that process. 18 And of course by that time I wasn't 19 in having anything to do with Eugene Ingram. 20 Q. Are you aware -- Sorry, withdrawn. 21 Do you have any knowledge with regard 22 to Scientology's attitude towards the mental 23 health profession? 24 A. Uh-huh. 25 Q. What is that knowledge? 1041 1 A. They take a very aggressive -- I am 2 trying to formulate the right word. They are very 3 aggressively anti-psychiatrists, 4 anti-psychologists. 5 They direct their members that when 6 it comes to therapy, they are not to have any 7 contact with psychologists, social workers and 8 psychiatrists. Particularly psychiatrists because 9 psychiatrists are in the business of prescribing 10 dangerous and toxic medications to help -- to deal 11 with mental disorders. 12 And that there is a very large 13 conspiracy in this country occurring with 14 psychiatrists, particularly with those that 15 prescribe the medication Prozac. Because Prozac 16 is produced by the Eli J. Lilly Company which has 17 some kind of business connection to Time/Warner, 18 which is also the publisher for Time magazine. 19 And given the May 6, 1991 article in Time magazine 20 which exposed Scientology, they inferred that 21 there is a connection between the makers of Prozac 22 and Time magazine and that they are all in one big 23 conspiracy. 24 And also that Prozac is also a toxic 25 medication that stimulates and serves as a 1042 1 manipulative agent to one's ability to function in 2 a healthy mental state. 3 And so there has been a lot of anti 4 things thrown out towards psychiatrists and 5 psychologists. 6 Q. Is -- Withdrawn. 7 Do you have knowledge of any 8 Scientology operations against the mental health 9 profession? 10 A. Only in a very general sense. 11 Q. And what is that general knowledge, 12 very briefly? 13 A. Just the media campaign against 14 psychologists and psychiatrists. Not any 15 specifics that I can think of. 16 Q. Now, you were part of the operations 17 of Scientology against the Cult Awareness Network? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to 20 whether there are parallels between the operations 21 against the mental health profession and the 22 operations against the Cult Awareness Network? 23 A. I think there are some very different 24 parallels. You are talking about people, for 25 example, deprogrammers, who are not qualified 1043 1 counselors to deal with individuals that have 2 mental disorders. And it has a lot to do with 3 qualification. And in the eyes of Scientology, 4 the only individuals that are competent enough to 5 qualify anybody to be effective mental health 6 counselors are other Scientologists. 7 They would have you believe that 8 their own form of counseling, i.e., auditing and 9 processing, is valid and substantiated and that 10 all of those treatments that are implemented by 11 psychiatrists and psychologists are not proven to 12 be effective and are not substantiated, when 13 actually the facts are reversed of what they would 14 have you believe. 15 Because in the Church of Scientology, 16 there has been no substantiation that auditing or 17 processing is valid or legitimate in any way 18 whatsoever other than that which is -- has been 19 provided in testimonies, and testimonies are very 20 frequent within the Church of Scientology. In 21 fact, they are almost forced testimonies by 22 individuals in the mental health professions who 23 are Scientologists who make public testimonies to 24 the benefits of auditing and processing. 25 But mental health professionals who 1044 1 claim that cults practice mind control and 2 brainwashing, who claim that Scientology is a cult 3 that practices brainwashing and mind control are 4 often targets of the Church of Scientology, and I 5 think it has a lot to do with the fact that these 6 individuals that make those statements about 7 Scientology are very credible, are very 8 legitimate, and the Church of Scientology has a 9 lot to fear from prominent mental health 10 professionals that can substantiate these things 11 on a very objective and valid basis. 12 It is also one of the reasons I 13 believe Dr. Geertz is being attacked. 14 Q. Is there any connection in your 15 experience with the Church of Scientology between 16 the campaign against the mental health profession 17 by Scientology and its Fair Game Doctrine? 18 A. I guess I didn't understand your 19 question. 20 Q. In your experience with the Church of 21 Scientology, is there any connection between its 22 campaign against mental health professionals and 23 the Fair Game Doctrine? 24 A. Only if those mental health 25 professionals dare to say anything which can be 1045 1 construed by the Church of Scientology and its 2 officials to be an inflammatory towards 3 Scientology. 4 And that doesn't necessarily mean 5 that a mental health professional has to make an 6 overt statement critical of Scientology. But if 7 anyone in the mental health profession simply says 8 something which can be subjectively construed by 9 an official in Scientology as being anti 10 Scientology, then that mental health professional 11 will most assuredly become a victim of Fair Game 12 by the Church of Scientology. 13 Everything in the church is very 14 subjective, and it is unfortunate that there are 15 individuals in this world that are the product -- 16 or the victims of Fair Game when in fact they have 17 no reason to be, if you want to assume that 18 Scientology's reasons for victimizing people with 19 the Fair Game policy are legitimate. 20 Q. Let's turn to Exhibit-13, as I said a 21 few minutes ago. What is Exhibit-13? 22 A. Exhibit-13 is the final declaration 23 created by Eugene Ingram and, according to David 24 Butterworth, created with the assistance of Tim 25 Bowles and Kendrick Moxon following Eugene Ingram 1046 1 and my three-day trip to Oregon and Washington 2 where he was able to substantiate quite a bit of 3 the information on both the Edward Fallon 4 deprogramming that I was involved in and the Jim 5 Boland deprogramming that I was involved in. 6 Q. How did Exhibit-13 come into 7 existence? 8 A. I just said that it was created by 9 both Eugene Ingram and individuals in the Bowles & 10 Moxon law firm. 11 Q. Did you -- First of all, when was it 12 signed? 13 A. It was sent to me -- it was by 14 overnight mail. According to Eugene Ingram -- It 15 came into my hands during the time that I was at 16 the national Cult Awareness Network conference in 17 Oklahoma City doing the disruption campaign. 18 I had received a phone call from 19 Eugene Ingram. Eugene had told me earlier that he 20 expected to be in Oklahoma City but that he had 21 been de railed and sent somewhere else to do some 22 investigation for Bowles & Moxon and that he had 23 finished the declaration and that he was going to 24 mail pack it to David Butterworth and that David 25 Butterworth would get it to me. 1047 1 And then the next day, David 2 Butterworth gave me the declaration, asked me to 3 do exactly as I had done in the prior declarations 4 except this time I had an opportunity to read it, 5 to sign each page and, then left it up to me and 6 Anne Laws, who is the Director of the Office of 7 Special Affairs in Dallas, Texas, to scan the 8 Oklahoma City phone book and find a notary public 9 that would sign this. 10 That's what we did. We found a 11 notary public, we went to her home, and she signed 12 it. 13 Q. Did you request the preparation of 14 Exhibit-13? 15 A. No. No. Eugene wanted it simply 16 because he wanted something that could be more 17 substantiated and definitely wanted to 18 substantiate the deprogrammings because one of the 19 primary, if not the most important slam, if you 20 want to call it, against the Cult Awareness 21 Network is the perceived notion by Scientology and 22 all the other cults that are criticized by the 23 Cult Awareness Network is that deprogramming 24 serves as an indictment of the Cult Awareness 25 Network simply because there are members within 1048 1 the Cult Awareness Network who are involved in the 2 practice of deprogramming, some of which have 3 involved kidnapping. 4 Because these members are simply 5 deprogrammers, then that must mean there is a 6 connection been illegal deprogramming and the Cult 7 Awareness Network. And despite the total lack of 8 foundation and the failure of the Church of 9 Scientology to prove that whatsoever, they 10 continue to use that as an indictment of the Cult 11 Awareness Network. 12 And that's why Mr. Ingram decided to 13 prepare this final declaration because in this 14 declaration versus the last four that were 15 prepared -- 16 Q. Referring to Exhibit-9 through 12? 17 A. Correct. 18 This exhibit substantiates at least 19 two deprogrammings which occurred, two 20 deprogrammings which cite and point to Cynthia 21 Kisser as having been involved in the incidents, 22 which in fact are not true. 23 Q. Did you have any part in the creation 24 of Exhibit-13? 25 A. None whatsoever. 1049 1 Q. Did you have any input into the 2 language in Exhibit-13? 3 A. None whatsoever. 4 Q. Did you have any discussions as to 5 its contents before you signed it? 6 A. None whatsoever. 7 Q. Did you see a draft of it before you 8 signed it? 9 A. No, I did not. 10 Q. Did you read it before you signed it? 11 A. I did read it, yes. 12 Q. Did you -- who was with you when you 13 read it? 14 A. David Butterworth. 15 Q. And where were you when you read it? 16 A. In David Butterworth's motel room at 17 the Sheraton where the conference was being held. 18 Q. And which conference was this? 19 A. The Cult Awareness Network conference 20 in Oklahoma City. 21 In fact, when we went to get this 22 notarized, Mr. Butterworth would not even let me 23 have the declaration. He gave it to Anne Laws and 24 directed her to keep it in her hot little hands 25 and then to make sure it got back to David 1050 1 Butterworth. But he wouldn't even let me hold 2 it. 3 Q. Did he -- 4 A. If the -- 5 Q. Was that the word "hot little hands"? 6 A. No. That's my impression of it 7 because I asked if I could see it. He let me see 8 it, but it was only in his company. 9 And I asked him if I could take it to 10 my motel and read it, and he said, "Absolutely 11 not." 12 Q. So when you saw it before signing it, 13 did you read it paragraph by paragraph? 14 A. Yes, I did. 15 Q. Did you have any conversation with 16 David Butterworth about that? 17 A. No, I did not. 18 Q. Why was that? 19 A. Because I knew what was expected of 20 me, and I knew that short of the only other option 21 that Mr. Ingram told me was available to me that I 22 only had one choice, and that was to sign it and 23 to get it to Anne Laws and to accompany her while 24 there was a notary public in attendance. 25 And that's exactly what I did. I did 1051 1 not question. I had no place to question 2 Mr. Butterworth. And I think I was very 3 intelligent and very smart in not doing so. 4 Q. When you said you only had one option 5 with Eugene Ingram, what are you referring to 6 there? 7 A. The repercussions that Eugene Ingram 8 said would befall me if I did not cooperate fully 9 and without question. 10 Q. Was that the conversation you 11 testified to earlier? 12 A. Yes. That occurred in October. 13 Q. Now -- 14 THE WITNESS: I need to take a small break. 15 BY MR. BERRY: 16 Q. Just before we do, did you feel any 17 pressure from Mr. Butterworth with regard to 18 signing this declaration? 19 A. I did. But not the degree that I 20 felt with Eugene Ingram. 21 I knew in my conversations with David 22 Butterworth that he is very dedicated to the 23 Church of Scientology. He told me that he had 24 been in Scientology for well over 19 years. And I 25 knew that this man, given some of the 1052 1 conversations I had earlier with Anne Laws, was a 2 very powerful official of the Church of 3 Scientology. And I felt very threatened in his 4 presence because I knew this man carried a lot of 5 weight and is a very powerful man, and I get a 6 little threatened by that. 7 But I did not feel the threat to my 8 safety and welfare to the same extent I felt it 9 around Eugene Ingram. 10 Q. Prior to going through this paragraph 11 by paragraph, we will take a break you just 12 requested. 13 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The time 14 is 5:59 P.M. 15 (Recess taken.) 16 VIDEO OPERATOR: We are back on the record. 17 The time is 6:02 P.M. 18 BY MR. BERRY: 19 Q. Referring again to Exhibit-13, 20 Mr. Scarff, do you have an understanding as to who 21 or -- Sorry, withdrawn. 22 Do you have an understanding as to 23 whether any lawyers were involved have the 24 preparation of Exhibit-13? 25 A. Yes, sir. 1053 1 Q. What is that understanding? 2 A. Tim Bowles and Kendrick Moxon. 3 Q. How did you come by that 4 understanding? 5 A. Eugene Ingram told me. 6 Q. Did you have any conversations with 7 Tim Bowles and Kendrick Moxon that confirmed that? 8 A. No. But Eugene Ingram is an employee 9 of Bowles & Moxon, and I believe Eugene Ingram is 10 telling the truth. 11 Again, like I said before, in my 12 original declaration Mr. Ingram sat in a lazy boy 13 chair in my apartment for a period of three hours 14 on my telephone was transcribing this stuff to 15 Bowles & Moxon, and there was even one point in 16 which the person taking the information over the 17 phone evidently had to go to the bathroom and hung 18 up, and Mr. Ingram dialed Bowles & Moxon. And I 19 observed him dialing the telephone number of 20 Bowles & Moxon, and so I know he was talking to 21 them. 22 And so if Bowles & Moxon was involved 23 in creating this -- these first four declarations, 24 I have no reason to believe that they were not 25 involved in the second declaration because there 1054 1 are paragraphs in the final declaration which are 2 word for word from the preceding declarations. 3 Q. How was the declaration received, if 4 you know? 5 A. According to Eugene Ingram, he was 6 going to mail pack it in the overnight mail where 7 they have express delivery to David Butterworth. 8 However, it did not go to David 9 Butterworth it went in the name of Andrew Bagley. 10 I remember this specifically because David 11 Butterworth being such a big cheese in the Church 12 of Scientology, his presence was not known by 13 anyone in the Cult Awareness Network that I know 14 of, and he chose to keep that secret. He did not 15 want anyone in the Cult Awareness Network or its 16 security, which was run by Galen Kelly at the 17 time, to know that he was in the building. 18 So he registered under the name of 19 Andrew Bagley. If you check the motel records 20 during that time, you will find that Andrew Bagley 21 was registered at the motel but David Butterworth 22 was not and that David Butterworth was in the room 23 named in -- put in the name of Andrew Bagley. 24 And so it is my understanding that 25 the mail pack went to the room of Andrew Bagley 1055 1 but it was David Butterworth that was staying 2 there. 3 Q. Was anything -- Sorry, withdrawn. 4 You previously testified having a 5 conversation with David Butterworth before going 6 off with Anne Laws to sign this. Was anything 7 said by David Butterworth as to how he had 8 received the document, Exhibit-13? 9 A. He didn't, no. He didn't tell me 10 himself. Eugene told me how he was going to send 11 it. 12 Q. When did Eugene tell you that? 13 A. He told me the night before. 14 Q. And how did he tell you? 15 A. He called me up on the telephone and 16 he told me. 17 Q. And did you have an understanding of 18 where Eugene was when he made that telephone 19 call? 20 A. No. No, because it was my prior 21 understanding that he was going to be in Oklahoma 22 City, and he called me and said that he had been 23 derailed by -- maybe "derailed" is not the word 24 for it, but that Bowles & Moxon had sent him 25 elsewhere on another case and that he would not be 1056 1 in Oklahoma City. 2 Q. Now, turning your attention to 3 Exhibit-13, just as we did before, could you go 4 through it and indicate which paragraphs are true 5 and which paragraphs are false and which 6 paragraphs may contain elements of both? 7 A. Paragraph 1 is true. 8 2 is true. 9 3 is true. 10 4 is true. 11 5 is true. 12 6 is true. 13 7 true. 14 8 true. 15 9 true. 16 10 is false. 17 11 is false. 18 12 is false. 19 13 is false. 20 13 is true. Although in this 21 paragraph the reference to the lies, misquotes and 22 exaggerations of my experiences were in fact 23 created with the assistance of the Church of 24 Scientology. 25 Paragraph 15, false. 1057 1 Q. What about 14? 2 A. I was just talking about 14. 3 Q. Okay. 14 was partially true; is that 4 correct? 5 A. That's correct. 6 15, false. Entirely false. 7 16 is true. 8 17, true. 9 18, true with the exception to the 10 reference to Anne Greek telling me to bring 11 handcuffs. That's not true. 12 Number 19, true. 13 20 is true. 14 21 is true. 15 22 is true. 16 23 is partially true except to the 17 reference that Adrian Greek told me to take 18 documents out of a business location. 19 24 is true. 20 25 is false. 21 26 is false. 22 27 is false. 23 28 is true. 24 29 is false. 25 30 is false. 1058 1 31 is false. 2 32 is true with the exception to the 3 references to amounts of money paid to individuals 4 of which I had no knowledge about whatsoever. 5 33 is false. 6 34 is false. 7 35 is false. 8 36, false. 9 37, false. 10 38, false. 11 39, false. 12 40, false. 13 41 is partially true with the 14 exception to the deprogramming fee of $25,000. I 15 have no idea whether that is correct or not. 16 And also the last sentence which 17 refers to individuals having to mortgage their 18 homes in order to raise money to pay for 19 rehabilitation services. 20 42 is false. 21 43 is partially true with the 22 exception to the minimum of $25,000 necessary to 23 conduct any deprogramming. 24 44 is true. 25 45 is true. 1059 1 46 is true with the exception to the 2 reference to Cynthia Kisser being involved. She 3 was not. 4 57 is true with exception to the 5 $1,000 I charged for expenses. 6 48 is true with exception of my 7 reprimanding Adrian Greek for a statement he has 8 made. 9 49 is false. 10 50 is false. 11 51 is false. 12 52 is false. 13 53 is true. 14 54 is partially true with the 15 exception to the contracts that had been furnished 16 to me by Adrian Greek. No such contracts 17 existed. 18 55 is true. 19 56 is partially true with the 20 exception to the last sentence regarding those 21 involved in the physical restraint of the victim. 22 57 is true with the exception to the 23 handcuffs involved. 24 53, partially true with the exception 25 of the duct tape involved. 1060 1 Q. 53? 2 A. 58, I am sorry. 3 59 is true with exception to 4 handcuffs. 5 I am sorry, the duct tape involved. 6 No duct tape was involved at all. 7 60 is true with the exception to 8 handcuffs being referenced. 9 61 again is partially true with the 10 exception to the handcuffs. 11 62 is true. 12 63 is true with exception to the 13 reference to handcuffs. 14 64 is true with exception to the 15 assault that is referred to coming from the 16 father. 17 65 is true. 18 66 is true. 19 67 is false. 20 68 is false. 21 69 is false. 22 70 is false. 23 71 is true with the exception to the 24 last sentence referencing the Church of 25 Scientology. 1061 1 72 is false. 2 73 is false. 3 74 is true. 4 75 is true. 5 76 is true. 6 77 is false. 7 78 is true. 8 79 is true. 9 80 is true. 10 81 is false. 11 82 is false. 12 83 is false. 13 84 is false. 14 85 is false. 15 86 is false. 16 87, false. 17 88, false. 18 89, false. 19 90, false. 20 91, false. 21 92, false. 22 93, false. 23 94, true. 24 95 is partially true with the 25 exception to the $25,000 deprogramming fee paid to 1062 1 Anne Greek. 2 96 is true. 3 97 is true. 4 98 is partially true with the 5 exception to the absence of hot water, which is 6 referenced. 7 99 is partially true with the 8 exception -- with exception to the reference that 9 mother forced him to accompany her. 10 100 is partially true with the 11 exception to the reference to frequenting Castro 12 Street. 13 101 is partially true with the 14 exception to this reference that Greek loved to 15 hug people and that he learned this while a member 16 of the Cult Awareness Network and that he hugged 17 me while he was nude and refused to let go. 18 And also the reference that he had 19 attempted to encourage me to have sexual activity 20 with him. 21 Q. That's untrue? 22 A. That is false. 23 102, partially true with the 24 exception to the three large mason jars holding 25 marijuana. 1063 1 103 is true. 2 104 is true. 3 105 is true with the exception to the 4 reference to Cynthia Kisser. 5 106 is true with the exception to the 6 reference to Cynthia Kisser. 7 107 is true. 8 108 is true. 9 109 is false. 10 Q. Do you have an understanding of what 11 happened, if anything, to Exhibit-13 after you 12 signed it? 13 A. I know that these were reproduced. I 14 was not -- 15 Q. What do you mean? 16 A. They were duplicated and distributed. 17 Q. So Exhibit-13 was duplicated? 18 A. That's correct. And I don't know to 19 what extent they were duplicated. 20 The 500 figure that had been told to 21 me earlier to the number attached of the earlier 22 documents which had been distributed, no one told 23 me how many of these had been duplicated and 24 distributed, although I do know, and it is based 25 upon the letters that I have received copies of 1064 1 from Eugene Ingram which are in the record of this 2 deposition, copies of this have been included in 3 those letters. 4 I also know in my contacts with law 5 enforcement officials during the time that I was 6 in the Church of Scientology that copies of this 7 deposition had been sent to those law enforcement 8 officials. 9 Q. Do you know by whom? 10 A. Eugene Ingram. Eugene Ingram in fact 11 attests to it in the numerous documents which are 12 in the record. 13 Q. Now, was the Church of Scientology 14 involved in the creation of Exhibit-13? 15 A. Most definitely. 16 Q. And in what manner? 17 A. Eugene Ingram is an employee of the 18 Church of Scientology. And the document was 19 provided to me by one of the highest-ranking 20 officials of the Church of Scientology. I don't 21 see how they can say they weren't involved. 22 Q. And was the Church of Scientology 23 involved in the dissemination of Exhibit-13? 24 A. Most definitely. 25 In fact, I had conversations with 1065 1 Cory Trammel in the San Francisco area. August 2 Murphy who was with the org in San Francisco. 3 Mary Anne Ahmad, Randy Kretchmar, Carol Brooks who 4 were in the Chicago office. Spoke to Reverend 5 Andrew Bagley, who is in the Kansas City office. 6 Spoke to Richard Behar, who is with the flag land 7 base in Clearwater, Florida. Spoke to George 8 Robertson in Baltimore, Maryland. Spoke to John 9 Carmichael in New York and Sue Taylor in 10 Washington, D.C. and all of them congratulated me 11 on the effort that was reflected in this 12 transcript dated November 1st, 1991. 13 Q. You are reaching to Exhibit-13? 14 A. That's correct. 15 Q. Was the Church of Scientology 16 involved in the creation of Exhibit- -- Sorry, 17 withdrawn. 18 Do you have any knowledge as to 19 whether the Church of Scientology was involved in 20 the creation of Exhibits-9 through 12? 21 A. Most definitely. 22 Q. What is that knowledge? 23 A. Eugene Ingram, as I have said before, 24 is an employee of Bowles & Moxon which is the 25 in-house law firm for the Church of Scientology. 1066 1 I had -- after meeting David Butterworth for the 2 first time in November 1991, it became very clear 3 to me through the conversations I had with David 4 Butterworth that this wasn't an orchestrated 5 effort by both the Office of Special Affairs, or 6 the Guardian's Office however you choose to call 7 them, or Bowles & Moxon. 8 Q. You have previously testified as to 9 the distribution of Exhibits-9 through 12; 10 correct? 11 A. Yes, I have. 12 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to the 13 involvement, if any, of the Church of Scientology 14 in the distribution of Exhibits-9 through 12? 15 A. I just thought I said that. 16 Q. We were dealing with Exhibit-13. 17 A. No, you said 9 through 12. Both 9 18 through 12 and 13. 19 Q. Sorry, I was dealing with the 20 creation of 9 through 12. Now I am talking about 21 the distribution of 9 through 12. 22 Do you have any knowledge as to the 23 involvement of the Church of Scientology in what 24 you testified was the distribution of Exhibits-9 25 through 12? 1067 1 A. Only on the basis of what Eugene 2 Ingram told me, and he said that 9 through 12 was 3 duplicated 500 times and distributed throughout 4 the country. 5 Q. And you have any knowledge as to 6 whether the Church of Scientology was involved in 7 that distribution? 8 A. Well, I think a person would have to 9 be an absolute fool to come to any belief that 10 they weren't, simply because the individuals 11 involved in this were Eugene Ingram, who was a 12 paid employee of the Church of Scientology; Bowles 13 & Moxon, which is the in-house law firm for the 14 Church of Scientology who is located within the 15 corporate buildings of the Church of Scientology, 16 and for anyone to even consider that, they would 17 have to be an absolute fool. 18 Q. Now, did you have any other 19 conversations with Eugene Ingram with regard to 20 these declarations, Exhibits-9 through 13? 21 A. I can't recall any at this time. I 22 may have, but I just can't recall at this time. 23 Q. Did you have any conversations with 24 Eugene Ingram as to any role that you would play 25 following the execution of these declarations 9 1068 1 through 13? 2 A. Most definitely. 3 Q. And what was that -- when was that 4 conversation? 5 A. My conversation with him was both in 6 October and November, particularly during the time 7 that I spent there in Los Angeles between November 8 16th and November 19th, I believe. 9 Q. And what was said in those 10 conversations regarding the role that you have 11 just referred to? 12 A. Mr. Ingram said, and he said this in 13 the presence of David Butterworth, that although 14 there were going to be projects in the future that 15 the Office of Special Affairs would want me to be 16 engaged on and be a part of under the tutelage of 17 David Butterworth and under the control of David 18 Butterworth, my primary function at that time was 19 to be a legal witness for Bowles & Moxon and that 20 I was to do absolutely nothing unless I cleared it 21 first with Eugene Ingram because I was going to be 22 his legal witness against the Cult Awareness 23 Network and that if I listened to him and I played 24 my cards right, that I would be responsible for 25 bringing down the Cult Awareness Network. 1069 1 And he stressed that, "David 2 Butterworth may ask you to do some things. You 3 clear them with me first because he may ask you to 4 do some things which are improper, and I want it 5 clear that you are a legal witness. And if there 6 is any problems, you are told to do something you 7 don't agree with and that I am not available, you 8 get on the phone and you call Tim Bowles or you 9 call Ken Moxon and you talk to them about it." 10 And in fact it was on Saturday night 11 following my disruption campaign at the Jewish 12 Federation Center that David Butterworth made up 13 the idea and wanted me and some other church 14 members to go to both the homes of Priscilla 15 Coates and Rachael Andrez, who is a member of the 16 Jewish Federation Center, I believe she is a 17 Director of the Council on Cults and Missionaries 18 in Los Angeles, and I was to harass these 19 individuals. 20 And Eugene Ingram put a stop to it, 21 saying absolutely not, "That would circumvent my 22 plans for him to be a witness." 23 Eugene told me that in the future, 24 there were going to be law enforcement 25 investigations, there were going to be lawsuits, 1070 1 there were going to be all kinds of things 2 happening against the Cult Awareness Network and I 3 was going to be the nail on their coffin and that 4 was exactly how I was going to be used. 5 Q. Were these declarations that you had 6 signed, 9 through 13, going to be a part of any of 7 those lawsuits? 8 A. Very much so. But they were being 9 used as evidence. 10 In fact, there were a number of 11 letters that I received from Eugene Ingram to the 12 FBI, Postmaster General's Office, one official in 13 Illinois, and it states right in the letter, 14 including the letter that he sent to the Criminal 15 Investigation Division of the Internal Revenue 16 Division in Chicago to Ms. Alana Arnold, he states 17 right in the content of his letter, "Enclosed are 18 the sworn declarations of Gary Scarff and Jonathon 19 Nordquist," and he is referring to this 20 declaration here. 21 Q. Those letters are already in 22 evidence, aren't they? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. And what is the basis -- Sorry, 25 withdrawn. 1071 1 Beyond those letters, do you have any 2 knowledge as to these declarations being involved 3 in those litigations? 4 A. I guess I don't understand your 5 question because I think I have answered that 6 already. 7 Q. Did you have any discussions with 8 anyone as to how these declarations were going to 9 be used in litigations? 10 A. Yes. Simply because that no one 11 would be able to dispute the credibility of these 12 declarations simply because Eugene Ingram's 13 reputation as a private investigator was so 14 pristine and without any type of argument in the 15 eyes of law enforcement agencies and that with 16 Eugene's letters, given his pristine reputation as 17 a law abiding citizen if you want to call it that, 18 along with this phony declaration, that no one 19 would be in a position of disputing the 20 declaration. 21 Q. And when did you have that 22 conversation? 23 A. November '91 in the offices of the 24 Office of Special Affairs. 25 Q. And who was present? 1072 1 A. Butterworth, myself, Eugene Ingram. 2 Q. Did you ever have any conversation 3 with any Bowles & Moxon attorneys regarding the 4 use of these declarations? 5 A. Not that I can recall right now. I 6 am not saying that it didn't happen; I just can't 7 recall right now. It has been a long day. 8 Q. But you do recall having a 9 conversation with Eugene Ingram about using these 10 declarations, 9 through 13, in litigation? 11 A. Mr. Berry, I was talking to Eugene 12 Ingram on a daily basis. Yes. I was Eugene 13 Ingram's golden boy, if you want to use that 14 term. 15 Q. And what was the -- withdrawn. 16 Was the Church of Scientology going 17 to have any connection with the use of these 18 declarations in litigations? 19 A. I -- Excuse me for being frustrated, 20 but -- 21 Q. I know it is repetitive. 22 A. -- but it is very repetitive. I have 23 repeated myself. I think it has been asked and 24 answered. 25 Q. It was asked answered and in respect 1073 1 to the distribution around the countryside. Now I 2 am being specific with regard to the use in 3 litigation. 4 A. I am sorry, the repetitiveness of 5 this, I don't understand what you are asking me 6 that I haven't already answered. 7 Q. We previously asked you was the 8 Church of Scientology involved in its distribution 9 to various orgs, missions, et cetera. And you 10 said yes. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Now I am being specific with regard 13 to the use of these declarations in litigation, 14 which is something different. 15 A. And what was your question? 16 Q. Whether you had any knowledge as to 17 whether the Church of Scientology was going to be 18 involved in the use of these declarations in 19 litigation. 20 A. Most definitely because if you look 21 at the lawsuit which was created on my behalf by 22 Bowles & Moxon and which bears the name of Tim 23 Bowles on the Complaint, you will notice that 24 there are paragraphs in that Complaint which match 25 a couple of paragraphs in this declaration. 1074 1 And the wording for that Complaint 2 starting from the time that it was initially 3 drafted up to the time that it was revised two 4 times, it uses information word for word out of 5 this declaration. 6 Q. And is that Exhibit-19? 7 A. Yes, it is -- No, I am sorry, 19 is 8 not the one. I retract that. 9 Q. Sorry, Exhibit-16. I am sorry. 10 A. That is the one, yes. 11 Q. Can you assist me in pointing to 12 those paragraphs? 13 A. Well, as I have said before, I would 14 not be able to do that with the initial Complaint 15 because the initial Complaint is not in the 16 record. The first and second redrafts are not in 17 the record. What is in the record is the third 18 redraft. 19 Q. Yes. 20 A. I am looking at the wrong -- It says 21 October 6th. I couldn't figure out why in the 22 world. 23 Well, they both refer to my 24 residence. That part is specific. And both the 25 Complaint and declaration refer to Cynthia Kisser, 1075 1 her role in the Cult Awareness Network and the 2 authority and control she has over CAN affiliates, 3 and also refers to what the Cult Awareness Network 4 is. They also both refer to Defendants Adrian 5 Greek and Anne Greek which are listed quite often 6 in my declaration. 7 I mean there is just a lot of 8 similarities there. 9 Q. Going back to Exhibits-9 through 13 10 for a moment, before we continue with 16, did you 11 have an understanding as to whether Bowles & Moxon 12 was to have any role in the use of Exhibits-9 13 through 13 in litigations? 14 A. I can't answer that with a yes or no 15 because to me it was synonymous with both of 16 them. It was a coordinated effort between the 17 both of them. That was my understanding. 18 So whether they had any specific 19 ideas by which they would utilize this, I don't 20 know. 21 Q. And how did you acquire that 22 understanding? 23 A. With my conversation with David 24 Butterworth and Eugene Ingram because David 25 Butterworth informed me. 1076 1 And this was also reaffirmed to me in 2 the numerous conversations that I had with him and 3 also in the numerous phone calls whereby I tried 4 to contact him and he wasn't available because he 5 spent an inordinate amount of time in the offices 6 of Bowles & Moxon constantly making sure that both 7 the covert and overt operations that they were 8 conducting did not throw up any red flags as far 9 as attorneys were concerned. 10 So there was a constant sharing of 11 information, a constant coordination going on 12 between the Office of Special Affairs and Bowles & 13 Moxon. 14 And in fact Bowles & Moxon -- in one 15 of the exhibits Mr. Bowles already admits to 16 working for the OSA. So there was this constant 17 coordination going on. 18 So to ask whether Bowles & Moxon was 19 planning to use this in any way, I would simply 20 respond that it was a synonymous coordination 21 going on between OSA and Bowles & Moxon to the 22 point that they were working as one large 23 organization. And that is the best way I could 24 answer it. 25 Q. Now, you previously have given us 1077 1 testimony about the proposed Complaint, 2 Exhibit-16. Correct? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. I am not sure whether I asked you 5 this in connection with this, forgive me if I did, 6 but maybe the question is obvious -- the answer to 7 the question is obvious, but I need to ask it, 8 anyway. 9 Did you have any understanding as to 10 whether the Church of Scientology was going to be 11 involved in the -- First of all, did you have any 12 understanding as to whether the Church of 13 Scientology was involved in the preparation of 14 Exhibit-16, the lawsuit that was to be filed by 15 you? 16 A. The only way that I can answer that, 17 if you want to presume that Bowles & Moxon and the 18 Office of Special Affairs, Church of Scientology 19 International are two straight entities, I can 20 honestly tell you, and I think it is documented by 21 the fact that Mr. Bowles has his name on it, that 22 Bowles & Moxon prepared this document. It comes 23 from Bowles & Moxon. You can read that at the top 24 of the exhibit. 25 And also somewhere in the exhibits 1078 1 are briefs that I sent to David Butterworth who 2 does not work for Bowles & Moxon; he worked for 3 the Church of Scientology International through 4 the Office of Special Affairs. 5 And that Mr. Butterworth worked very 6 closely with me on coordinating the language of 7 this Complaint. 8 And so it was a triangle effort. 9 There was David Butterworth, there was Bowles & 10 Moxon, and there was myself. And we all worked 11 together to produce this one document, and the 12 documentation proves that. 13 So in answer to your question, yes, 14 the Church of Scientology International was 15 directly involved in this Complaint. 16 Q. Now -- 17 A. I am sorry, if I can refer to 18 Exhibit-No. 50, this is the brief that I was 19 speaking of that was sent to David Butterworth who 20 is an official in the Church of Scientology 21 International, which confirms the statements that 22 I just made. 23 Q. And is Exhibit-50 a document that you 24 previously testified is connected with the 25 evolution of Exhibit-16? 1079 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. Let's change areas here for a moment 3 and introduce a new exhibit, Exhibit-182. 4 (Defendant's Exhibit-No. 182 5 was marked for identification and is 6 annexed hereto.) 7 BY MR. BERRY: 8 Q. Exhibit-182 is the Complaint in this 9 case. 10 First of all, I would ask you to turn 11 to Page 1. On Line 19, there is the statement: 12 "Plaintiff Church of Scientology International, a 13 California nonprofit religious corporation 14 (church)." 15 In your experience through your 16 involvement with the Church of Scientology 17 International, is the Church of Scientology 18 International engaged in predominantly religious 19 activities? 20 A. Absolutely not. 21 Q. And -- 22 A. It is a lie. 23 Q. What knowledge do you have in that 24 regard? 25 A. Mr. Berry, I belonged to this church 1080 1 for ten years. I think that in that time, I would 2 know whether this is a church or not. And I was 3 engaged in many of its covert and overt operations 4 both legitimate and unlawful. And I think in that 5 amount of time, I would know whether this is a 6 religious institution or not. 7 This is simply another means that 8 officials of the Church of Scientology have 9 strived, albeit unsuccessfully, over a period of 10 two decades to show that they are a legitimate 11 religious institution. 12 And granted the courts, by virtue of 13 wanting to make rights, civil rights available to 14 everyone freely, the Church of Scientology has 15 kind of twisted and distorted that to their 16 convenience by stating themselves as a religious 17 corporation. 18 And, as I have said before and I will 19 say again, if by virtue of this deposition I am 20 feeling euphoric and I think this is a real 21 spiritual experience to me, I am going to start 22 referring you to, Mr. Berry, as Reverend Berry and 23 I will start referring to the court reporter as a 24 deacon because I am going to consider this a 25 religious service, if that sounds inane and 1081 1 ridiculous, I think you can talk to the Church of 2 Scientology about inane and ridiculous statements 3 because this is just another ridiculous attempt by 4 the Church of Scientology to establish some 5 identity and legitimacy as a religious 6 corporation, and in fact it is not. 7 Q. Well, turning your attention -- 8 Sorry, withdrawn. 9 If it is not a religious corporation, 10 then what is it, in your experience? 11 A. It is a criminal organization in and 12 out. No questions about it. 13 VIDEO OPERATOR: Excuse me, Counsel. May we 14 go off record to change tape? 15 MR. BERRY: Yes, we will now go off the 16 record and change the tape. 17 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The date 18 August 2, 1993 the time is 6:45 P.M. End of 19 Tape 3, Volume V. 20 (Recess taken.) 21 VIDEO OPERATOR: Back on the record. The 22 date is August 2, 1993. The time is 6:56 P.M. 23 Beginning of Tape 4, Volume V, continuing 24 deposition of Mr. Scarff. 25 MR. BERRY: Could you read back the last 1082 1 question and answer. 2 (Record read.) 3 BY MR. BERRY: 4 Q. And very briefly, what is the basis 5 for that statement? 6 A. Because I was a member of the Church 7 of Scientology from 1982 to 1992, I was working 8 intensely with the Office of Special Affairs from 9 1991 to 1992 and in that short span of a year was 10 involved in numerous projects with the Church of 11 Scientology. And I have been around them long 12 enough to know that it is not a religious entity 13 in the eyes that most people would perceive it as 14 a religious organization. That is simply a ruse 15 by them to try to provide them some legitimacy if 16 not tax-exempt status for their activities. 17 And I mean the whole reason the 18 Church of Scientology has deemed itself religious 19 is to gain some favorable tax advantages by the 20 government by listing itself as a church. 21 Q. And you previously submitted a list 22 of illegal activities that you conducted on behalf 23 of the Church of Scientology as Exhibit-165; is 24 that correct? 25 A. That's correct. 1083 1 Q. And we added to that the statement 2 the preparation of a false lawsuit; correct? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. Now turning your attention to Page 2 5 of Exhibit-182, on Line 13 is the words 6 "concerning the Scientology religion." If I 7 asked you the same question as to it being a 8 religion, would you give me the same answer you 9 have just given me? 10 A. I am sorry, you are referring to? 11 Q. Page 2, Line 13. 12 A. I would have to tell you from my own 13 experience and my own subjective viewpoint, which 14 is I think a viewpoint shared by quite a few 15 intelligent and well-informed people in this 16 world, that Scientology is not a religion, it is 17 an excuse to advance a phony philosophy that has 18 screwed up quite a few people that have been 19 involved with it. 20 Given what I have said before, that 21 in this country a religion can mean anything to 22 anybody and it is widely self-defined, if someone 23 in the Church of Scientology by any stretch of the 24 means considers it a religious philosophy, then 25 whom am I to say that it is not a religion for 1084 1 them? 2 But in the aspect that Scientology 3 has used it to promote themselves in the manner in 4 which Ms. Bartilson refers to it in this 5 Complaint, no, it is not a religion and it is 6 simply a poor excuse to give them some legitimacy 7 which they do not have. 8 And Ms. Bartilson is a fool to even 9 suggest it in this Complaint. 10 Q. Turning your attention to Page 2, 11 Line 25, -- well, let's state the whole sentence. 12 Line 23 on Page 2. 13 "Scientology is an 14 internationally recognized 15 religion, consisting of hundreds 16 of churches and missions engaged 17 solely in religious, charitable, 18 humanitarian and 19 community-oriented endeavors." 20 Now, Mr. Scarff, in your experience 21 with the Church of Scientology, is it engaged 22 solely in religious, charitable, humanitarian and 23 community-oriented endeavors? 24 A. That is an absolute falsehood. And 25 it is comical to read that in the Complaint 1085 1 because it is absolutely untrue. 2 Q. In your experience, why is it a 3 falsehood? 4 A. In my experience I didn't see these 5 thing happening. Of course -- Let me retract 6 that. 7 Yes, there are Scientologists 8 involved in charitable, humanitarian and 9 community-oriented endeavors. Yes, that is very 10 true. The only difference is the difference 11 between a Scientologist being involved in any type 12 of these endeavors versus someone that you would 13 perceive to be involved in such endeavors is that 14 there is no sincerity involved by Scientologists 15 because they only do it as a public relations 16 ploy. And they do it because it is good PR. 17 And what they don't mention in this 18 is that when they do provide charitable, 19 humanitarian and community-oriented endeavors, 20 they pressure the individuals that are receiving 21 that -- that are on the receiving end of those 22 endeavors for a letter praising Scientology for 23 their help in providing these endeavors, and then 24 by virtue of that letter, they publicize it and 25 tell the world how wonderful they are because 1086 1 "Look, we got a letter from them," as if they are 2 the only ones that ever receive a letter for 3 helping out their churches. 4 I have been with the Mission of Davis 5 in Portland on charitable drives whereby there was 6 absolutely no charity whatsoever. In fact, 7 homeless people have come to the Church of 8 Scientology and have been thrown out on their 9 butts because there is no compassion or sincerity 10 or any desire to help these individuals because it 11 is a common belief within the Church of 12 Scientology that if a person chooses -- if a 13 person is homeless or ill or lacks some benefit 14 that we have come to expect in society, that is it 15 is their chosen desire to do so and that they have 16 no one to blame for their predicament but 17 themselves. 18 And whenever a decision is made to 19 provide some form of charity to the community, it 20 is only done in terms of the public relations 21 value it brings to the church. It is very 22 technical. It is very deliberate and it is very 23 coordinated. There is no compassion involved in 24 this whatsoever. 25 And I think that is the thing that 1087 1 the public really needs to be aware of because to 2 me it is sick and it is so indecent it is -- it is 3 terrible. That's all I can say. 4 Q. Let me go back to my question again. 5 A. I thought I answered your question. 6 Q. Is it engaged solely in religious, 7 charitable and humanitarian and community-oriented 8 endeavors? And I am focusing on the word 9 "solely." 10 A. I am sorry, I didn't see the word 11 "solely." That changes things. No, that is a 12 deliberate lie. 13 Q. What is the basis for your answer 14 that it is not solely engaged in those things? 15 Very briefly. 16 A. I would answer that with a question. 17 Would you please tell me what is charitable, 18 humanitarian and community-oriented about ordering 19 the deaths of two individuals they perceive to be 20 enemies of the church? 21 Q. And to what are you referring in that 22 regard? 23 A. They ordered me to murder Cynthia 24 Kisser and Ford Greene. Please tell me how that 25 can be construed as charitable, religious, 1088 1 humanitarian or community-oriented. It doesn't 2 make a lot of sense to me. Does it to you? We 3 are speaking solely now here. 4 Q. Yes. 5 So is the Church of Scientology 6 involved in other activities? 7 A. Oh, yes, very much so. They are 8 engaged in lawful activities on a daily basis. 9 Q. Turning your attention to the next 10 sentence: "The religion seeks to enhance its 11 adherents spiritual knowledge of themselves and 12 their creator." 13 Is that a correct statement? 14 A. That is not. It is a joke. 15 Q. For what reason is it not a correct 16 statement? 17 A. Because during my experience in the 18 Church of Scientology, one of the recruiting 19 pitches is that Scientology is interdenominational 20 and anyone from any religion, whether it be 21 Christian, Jew, Buddhism, Hinduism, can join the 22 Church of Scientology and enjoy the benefits of 23 Scientology as well as continue to benefit from 24 their spiritual convictions no matter what their 25 religion is. 1089 1 However, as you become more and more 2 involved in Scientology, you realize that it 3 doesn't connect, it is in no way relevant to your 4 religious beliefs, and you come to find out later 5 on if you get up to the levels of the OT VIII and 6 beyond that L. Ron Hubbard admits to having a 7 God-like status. He admits to being the 8 Antichrist. He admits that the Bible and 9 everything that is in it is all falsehood, that in 10 fact we have ascended from a planet millions and 11 millions of years ago and that we were all 12 products of this galactic confederacy which 13 doesn't make a lot of -- wouldn't make a lot of 14 sense to a lot of people unless they read his 15 science fiction books and then realized that his 16 religious philosophy was probably realistically a 17 psychotic episode that evolved out of his 18 imagination and his science fiction books. 19 I don't see how the Church of 20 Scientology that discredits the Bible and 21 discredited Jesus Christ as being a pedophile. L. 22 Ron has said in his confidential documents in 23 confidential testimonies that Jesus Christ was a 24 lover of young men, young boys. To me that would 25 infer that he is a pedophile. 1090 1 How anyone can infer that Jesus 2 Christ, the son of God, of being a pedophile and 3 discredit the Christian religion and to say that 4 someone who may be a Christian could come into 5 Scientology and to enhance his spiritual 6 knowledge? It is totally contradictory and makes 7 no sense whatsoever. 8 Of course you have to realize, too, 9 that the individual that comes into the church 10 initially has no idea about the sayings of L. Ron 11 Hubbard. And of course the Church of Scientology 12 would not provide that information if asked for 13 it. They would simply say it didn't exist. 14 So that statement is absolutely 15 false. 16 Q. Now referring to the next sentence on 17 Page 2, Line 28: 18 "The churches and 19 missions of Scientology provide 20 spiritual training and 21 counseling to their parishioners 22 in accordance with the 23 scriptures of the religion." 24 Mr. Scarff, were you what could 25 loosely be referred to as a parishioner of the 1091 1 Church of Scientology at one point in time? 2 A. Would you please rephrase that? 3 Q. This morning you testified about your 4 involvement with the Scientology mission and org 5 in Portland; correct? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. Now, would you consider yourself to 8 have been a parishioner as a result of that 9 association? 10 A. Absolutely not. 11 Q. What would you have considered 12 yourself? 13 A. I was a member. 14 Q. And -- 15 A. I took courses and I had counseling, 16 but none of it was religious and none of it was 17 spiritual. None whatsoever. 18 And this -- You read from this line 19 about scriptures. I have been in the church for 20 ten years, and I have friends who are in the 21 church well over ten years, and I don't recall any 22 time a scripture was presented to me in this, 23 quote, religion. Scriptures don't exist. 24 If Laurie Bartilson has some, I wish 25 she would make them available. And maybe she can 1092 1 do that in this case. 2 But other than the paranoid and 3 schizophrenic comments made by L. Ron Hubbard in 4 his writings regarding our ascension from a 5 galactic confederacy 75 million years ago, there 6 are no scriptures in the Church of Scientology 7 except for those philosophical statements which 8 officials of the Church of Scientology in order to 9 orchestrate and further their own agenda refer to 10 as scriptures. 11 And whom am I to say that an 12 individual including myself can refer to the 13 exhibits in my deposition as religious 14 scriptures? I guess I am free to do that. It is 15 a free country; right? So I am going to refer to 16 the exhibits at my deposition as my religious 17 scriptures. I think that makes sense. 18 Q. Now, lower down on that Page 3, 19 Line 21, there is the statement -- Let's go up a 20 little higher. Let's read the whole paragraph to 21 put it in context. At Line 15: 22 "In the course of an 23 interview with one or more 24 representatives of Time magazine 25 regarding the religion 1093 1 Scientology, including reporter 2 Richard Behar, Fishman and 3 Geertz made false, defamatory 4 and malicious claims of and 5 concerning plaintiff specified 6 below including that Fishman was 7 a member of the Scientology 8 religion, that the church was 9 involved in fraudulent scams." 10 Let's stop there with the words "the 11 church was involved in fraudulent scams." In your 12 experience, do you have knowledge -- Sorry, 13 withdrawn. 14 In your experience with the Church of 15 Scientology, do you have knowledge of the church 16 being involved in fraudulent scams? 17 A. Yes, I do. 18 Q. And briefly what are you referring 19 to, if anything, in that regard? 20 A. I am referring to my knowledge and 21 personal experiences of providing money, funds to 22 the Church of Scientology derived from student 23 loans. 24 I am referring to Internal Revenue 25 Service scams for the purpose of evading taxes. 1094 1 Q. And turning your attention to 2 Exhibit-165, does that assist you in responding to 3 this question? 4 A. Yes. I could have -- I didn't need 5 this. I didn't need to look at this because I 6 remember. 7 I am referring to stealing money from 8 organizations for the purpose of benefiting the 9 Church of Scientology financially. 10 I am referring to teaching 11 individuals in the Church of Scientology how to 12 defraud the U.S. Government of student loan funds 13 for the purpose of furthering the Church of 14 Scientology agenda. 15 Fraudulent scams is something that is 16 implemented and even becomes fruit for a lot of 17 think tanks of the Church of Scientology on a 18 continual basis. That is nothing new. 19 Q. Now, once again you have given some 20 testimony in this area, but two lines further down 21 is the statement, and this is on Page 3 and Line 22 23 of the Complaint: "The Church of Scientology 23 ordered him to kill his psychiatrist Uwe Geertz 24 and to commit suicide." 25 On the basis of your experience with 1095 1 the Church of Scientology, is that is an 2 unbelievable claim by Stephen Fishman? 3 A. It is not unbelievable to me at all. 4 Q. And why is that? 5 A. I think you will, as was referred to 6 you earlier in this deposition, you could refer to 7 my experience as Steve Fishman West Coast simply 8 because I was ordered to kill two perceived 9 enemies of the Church of Scientology, and although 10 I was not ordered to do so, I was told that one 11 favorable means of evading prosecution was to 12 commit suicide. 13 And it wasn't simply a matter of them 14 instructing me that it was an option. It was 15 them, and I am speaking of Eugene Ingram -- I 16 should say he, not them -- but Eugene Ingram as a 17 representative of the Church of Scientology showed 18 me a proper way to kill myself and an unproper way 19 to try to kill myself. He showed me which would 20 be more effective than the other, and told me 21 why. And it was a very deliberate statement on 22 his part. 23 And so, no, this fits within the mind 24 set of Scientology, at least that which is known 25 in the Office of Special Affairs, which is the 1096 1 covert intelligence -- covert and overt 2 intelligence offices for the Church of Scientology 3 International. 4 Q. Now, turning your attention to the 5 rest of that paragraph, do you have any knowledge 6 or experience as to whether the CAN Church of 7 Scientology would attempt to distance itself from 8 a person who made the claims that Stephen Fishman 9 made? 10 A. Oh, yes. 11 Q. And what is that knowledge and 12 experience? 13 A. I think -- I mean that has been 14 observed, particularly in my deposition here in 15 the numerous letters which have been received by 16 your office on my behalf, or with reference to me 17 by Robert Weiner, the attorney for Bowles & Moxon 18 in which he has slandered and defamed me as a 19 mentally unstable person, as a pathological liar 20 which has been confirmed by the Cult Awareness 21 Network, and has said some other very slanderous 22 things towards me which I am going to welcome the 23 opportunity to have him prove in a court of law. 24 Because I want to see if he can do it because none 25 of the statements are true. 1097 1 And during this entire process and my 2 coming out and laying it on the table, that has 3 happened to me in the Church of Scientology, they 4 have constantly denied and simply said that I 5 can't be trusted, I am a mentally unstable 6 person. 7 But that's nothing new. That is 8 nothing new to Bowles & Moxon and certainly 9 nothing new to the officials of the Church of 10 Scientology. Because if you will look at every 11 single case where someone in a court situation has 12 challenged the Church of Scientology, it is the 13 same with each individual person: they're 14 mentally unstable or they are unstable mentally in 15 some way or fashion, they are out to get money, 16 they are crooked people. I mean the modus 17 operandi is very much the same with everybody. 18 And in the eyes of Church of 19 Scientology, no one that brings any type of 20 litigation or is in any way adverse to the Church 21 of Scientology has a legitimate grievance because 22 a legitimate grievance does not exist when it 23 comes to being adverse to the Church of 24 Scientology. 25 So I would just say that my own 1098 1 experience which has been proven in the 2 testimonies, one only has to look at the exhibits 3 which have come from Mr. Robert Weiner, that what 4 he has relayed in these proceedings about me is no 5 different than has been relayed to every 6 individual that has said anything critical or 7 adverse to the agenda both open and hidden of the 8 Church of Scientology International. 9 Q. So in essence what is the basis for 10 the lack -- the answer you have just given me? 11 A. I thought I just gave you the basis. 12 My experience. 13 Q. With the Church of Scientology? 14 A. With the Church of Scientology as has 15 been substantiated on court record. 16 Q. Now turning your attention -- Just 17 before we leave this area, one further question. 18 On the basis of your experience with 19 the Church of Scientology, do you have any 20 knowledge regarding a claim by Mr. Fishman that 21 the records of his involvement with the church 22 between the years of 1978 and 1986 have been 23 destroyed by the church? 24 A. Well, first of all, I have no proof 25 whether that occurred or not. 1099 1 Q. I am speaking in terms of your own 2 experience with that type of situation. 3 A. Well, my own experience of which I 4 have already testified to before, the Church of 5 Scientology will do anything they can to evade any 6 type of prosecutorial or investigative action 7 against them. And they routinely destroy 8 documents. They shred them. They destroy them. 9 It has been my experience that I 10 simply cannot believe given the church's need and 11 mind-set to constantly collect data and to have 12 that available whenever they need it to 13 incriminate or try to incriminate somebody that 14 they would simply destroy a document, put it out 15 of existence. 16 That is not to say they would 17 photocopy everything they have and store it 18 somewhere in a secret place and destroy the 19 official documents, but there is no way that 20 anyone in the Office of Special Affairs would 21 destroy a document, especially given the fact that 22 it could be used at a further date against 23 somebody. 24 Q. Turning your attention to -- 25 A. I would like to finish that 1100 1 statement. I thought we were going to be 2 interrupted here. 3 Q. Sorry. 4 A. And I would just add to that that 5 there has been a lot said about me and I have 6 produced a lot of stuff into the record here which 7 came from the Church of Scientology, and it is 8 interesting that in letters from Robert Weiner 9 from the Church of Scientology that he would claim 10 that Bowles & Moxon only had one single document 11 on me in my client files when I produced just a 12 lot of documents that came to me from Bowles that 13 I had in my possession that were much more than 14 one single document. 15 So one, Bowles & Moxon have lied. 16 They have decided to enter into this process a 17 series of lies to try to hinder the fact that they 18 have documents on me, and either they have hidden 19 them or they have destroyed them. Because now 20 they are saying that nothing exists that is 21 available to me. 22 One would have to come to their own 23 conclusion, but I have seen them destroy 24 documents. 25 Q. Now turning to Page 4 of the 1101 1 Complaint, Exhibit-182, Line 5, Paragraph: 2 "Fishman and Geertz made 3 these statements to Behar with 4 intent and knowledge that such 5 statements were likely to be 6 published in a nationally 7 distributed magazine and that 8 said publication would result in 9 immediate and severe loss of 10 reputation for plaintiff." 11 Now, on May 9 -- May 6th -- Sorry, 12 withdrawn. 13 Were you involved with the Church of 14 Scientology International after the publication of 15 the Time magazine article that we are talking 16 about here? 17 A. Yes, I was. 18 Q. And during your involvement with the 19 Church of Scientology International, did you 20 acquire any information as to whether they had, 21 quote -- whether they had suffered a, quote, 22 immediate and severe loss of reputation, close 23 quote? 24 A. You mean as far as Time magazine? 25 Q. Did the Time magazine article do any 1102 1 further damage, to your knowledge, to the 2 reputation of Scientology than already existed? 3 A. Oh, most definitely, simply because 4 the information in the Time article was very 5 correct and very accurate. And if there was any 6 damage, it was a well-deserved damage because the 7 truth came out. 8 Q. What I am driving at, was that truth 9 already out there? 10 A. The truth was out there. It simply 11 became focused and became part of the public 12 arena. 13 Q. And in your experience with the 14 Church of Scientology, what sort of press did it 15 routinely receive, negative or positive? 16 A. The Time magazine article? 17 Q. No. From other press articles, 18 what -- Let me rephrase this. 19 In your experience with the Church of 20 Scientology, had the organization had a problem 21 with bad press in the past? 22 A. Oh, constantly, yes. Constantly. I 23 mean the only media that I recall gave it a 24 negative reaction or had anything negative to say 25 about it were all the magazines published by the 1103 1 Church of Scientology. 2 Q. You mean positive, you mean -- 3 A. Negative. 4 Q. About what? 5 A. The Time magazine article. Anything 6 else that I read that referred to it was 7 positive. 8 Now, there was one article in 9 American Lawyer magazine where the author states 10 that some of the claims made by Richard Behar may 11 have been misinformed and that he made have been 12 misinformed in some of the information -- in the 13 information he received, therefore publishing any 14 inaccuracy. 15 But I saw absolutely nothing in the 16 independent media, and I am talking about 17 independent of the Church of Scientology and all 18 its propaganda, that had shown any type of desire 19 on the part of Time magazine to publish a 20 scurrilous article that had no legitimacy or 21 accuracy to the statements it made whatsoever. 22 Q. Turning your attention to Paragraph 23 10 on that same page, it reads: 24 "As the mother 25 church" -- referring to the 1104 1 Church of Scientology 2 International -- "plaintiff" -- 3 the Church of Scientology 4 International -- "is regarded by 5 the public as the Scientology 6 church and the institution 7 responsible for the activities 8 of Scientologists in the United 9 States." 10 Is that -- Isn't that an incorrect 11 statement? 12 A. Who is the plaintiff on this? 13 Q. Church of Scientology. 14 A. CSI. That is not correct. 15 Q. What is -- 16 A. That is not correct. 17 Q. So -- 18 A. It is kind of mixed here. I would 19 say it is correct and incorrect. Because when the 20 public -- Given the fact that there are so many 21 entities within the Church of Scientology and the 22 general public who is not aware to the purpose of 23 Scientology or its numerous entities or even its 24 numerous front groups, it would be easy to just 25 roll them all into one big ball and say, yes, they 1105 1 are the Scientology church because they are not 2 informed about the specific entities. 3 But on a legal basis, I would say 4 that's not correct. But here it refers to the 5 regard that it has by the public and -- 6 Q. If you turn your attention to the 7 Time magazine article and the -- which is 8 Exhibit-168, Page 55 of that article, the section 9 dealing with Steve Fishman and Dr. Geertz, which 10 you have seen before and we have dealt with at 11 length, do you recall any reference to the Church 12 of Scientology International in that section, 13 those two paragraphs? 14 A. In what two paragraphs are you 15 talking about? Are you talking about reference to 16 Steve Fishman? 17 Q. Yes. And Dr. Geertz. 18 A. Well, it refers to Scientology 19 business antics. It refers to the church jargon 20 for suicide being EOC. 21 Q. Is there any reference to Church of 22 Scientology International, that specific entity? 23 A. No. 24 Q. And in your experience when 25 memorandum are talking about Scientology, are they 1106 1 specifically referring to the Church of 2 Scientology International? 3 A. Oh, no. Absolutely not. I mean you 4 have got the missions, you have got the orgs. You 5 have various front groups that have their own 6 specific agendas, but they make no reference to 7 the Church of Scientology International. 8 In fact, they claim to be separate 9 from the Church of Scientology International. You 10 have got WISE. You have got ABL. You have got 11 Ways of Happiness. You have got all these 12 organizations that claim to be fraternal groups of 13 Scientology members, but they have no connection 14 whatsoever to CSI. 15 So if that is what this paragraph is 16 claiming, then again Ms. Bartilson is 17 misrepresenting herself in this claim. 18 Q. Are you saying Ms. Bartilson because 19 it appears to you that she is the drafter of this 20 Complaint? 21 A. That's what it says on the front 22 page. I would assume either that or they simply 23 have chosen to use her as the conduit for which to 24 file this Complaint which is not unnormal in the 25 Bowles & Moxon law firm. 1107 1 Q. Have you spoken with members of the 2 public with Scientology? 3 A. During or after I was a member? 4 Q. Either. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. In your experience with when members 7 of the public are speaking with you about 8 Scientology are they specifically referring to the 9 Church of Scientology International? 10 A. As an entity, no. 11 Q. Now, turning your attention to Page 12 5, Line 27, Paragraph A "Plaintiff was involved 13 with Fishman in criminal theft." Plaintiff is 14 Church of Scientology International. 15 Do you have any experience with 16 regard to that allegation? 17 A. I can only speak in my own personal 18 experience. 19 Q. And what is that? 20 A. As the Church of Scientology, well, 21 because I work for the OSA which is a branch of 22 the Church of Scientology International Los 23 Angeles, and my terminal was the chief official of 24 the OSA, that was David Butterworth who was the 25 director, and my involvement in criminal conduct 1108 1 within the Church of Scientology International is 2 all coordinated, endorsed and supported by 3 Mr. David Butterworth, who is the top official in 4 that division. 5 Q. And if I asked you the same question 6 with regard to Paragraphs B, C and D, would your 7 response be the same? 8 A. Yes, it would. 9 Q. I think you have already given some 10 testimony regarding Page 6, Line 6 of and 11 concerning plaintiff. 12 A. Uh-huh. 13 Q. Now, turning to Page 6, Paragraph 16, 14 with regard to Paragraph 16A do you have 15 experience with the Church of Scientology 16 International which is contrary to its claims not 17 to have been involved with Fishman's crimes or 18 fraudulent activities? 19 A. I can only answer that they have said 20 and have asserted in court record that very same 21 thing here. All you would need to do is replace 22 Fishman's name with my name and they will assert 23 the same things, A, B and C. 24 They would be correct in the 25 statement that I can only speak from my own 1109 1 experiences in the Church of Scientology in that I 2 have no proof of my direct link with David 3 Butterworth although I think I have established 4 that somewhat in some of the photographs that I 5 have. And that it is my word against the word of 6 Scientologists. 7 And I guess it would take a prudent 8 and intelligent individual to make the 9 determination of who is telling the truth. 10 Someone who has a history of lies and unlawful 11 activity or someone that has been in the church 12 and experienced it over a long period of time. 13 Q. And of course in this case the judge 14 will be making that determination. 15 Now, turning to Page 8, Paragraph 24, 16 which says, "Defendants have charged plaintiff the 17 serious criminal acts and fraudulent conduct." 18 What is your experience in that 19 regard? 20 A. In my experience I have been involved 21 in criminal acts and fraudulent conduct with the 22 endorsement and the coordination and at the 23 directives of officials within the Church of 24 Scientology International including attorneys for 25 Bowles & Moxon whom are the opposing attorneys in 1110 1 the case in which you represent Mr. Geertz. 2 Q. Now, turning your attention to the 3 next paragraph it states that prior to the 4 publication of the Time magazine article the 5 Church of Scientology International had enjoyed a 6 good reputation as an organization dedicated to 7 the dissemination and promotion of the Scientology 8 religion. 9 On the basis of your involvement with 10 the Church of Scientology is that a correct 11 statement? 12 A. Yes and no. 13 Q. Well, let's deal with the -- could 14 you explain your answer. 15 A. Sure. It is correct in that the 16 plaintiffs had enjoyed a great reputation as an 17 organization so far as its own members were 18 concerned. Unfortunately it was only its members 19 that believed they have that good reputation. For 20 every one else that is absolutely not true. 21 They have a very poor insidious 22 reputation with the public. And one only has to 23 look at the documented evidence to show that. I 24 mean they can mouth off all they want about how 25 they have such a great reputation as an 1111 1 organization. But again, let's look at all the 2 court records that have existed over the last 20 3 years that were reflective anything remote dealing 4 with the Church of Scientology. And I would 5 challenge the Church of Scientology to come 6 forward with one scintilla of evidence to show 7 that the Church of Scientology has this good 8 reputation which is reflected right here in this 9 statement. 10 Q. Let me ask you this question -- 11 A. I would just end that in stating that 12 whoever drafted this -- there is a term that some 13 people tend to be legends in their own mind. I 14 think that is very applicable to this statement. 15 Q. Let me ask you this question. Do you 16 have any knowledge as to the general reputation of 17 Scientology in the community? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And what is that knowledge? 20 A. Since I left the Church of 21 Scientology and I have spoken to families and 22 friends, they said my leaving Scientology was the 23 best thing that ever happened to me. 24 Q. What is the basis of your knowledge 25 as to the general reputation of Scientology in the 1112 1 community? 2 A. Well, not only things that you see in 3 the general media, on television, what I have 4 heard in church groups, what I have heard from 5 people from all facets of society, religious, 6 professional, people that have read, people that 7 have been in contact with the Church of 8 Scientology, I think the biggest thing is that it 9 is a cult. But I -- 10 Q. Let's stop there a moment. On the 11 basis of -- sorry. Let me withdraw the question. 12 With that basis in mind what is your 13 knowledge as to the general reputation of 14 Scientology in the community? 15 A. Extremely poor. Extremely. 16 Q. Can you explain that? 17 A. Well, I think I have explained that 18 already. If I am missing the boat here -- 19 Q. This is a particular question. 20 A. In my conversations with individuals, 21 and I am not talking about individuals that were 22 once involved in the Church of Scientology as 23 Mr. Weiner might try to you introduce into the 24 record -- 25 Q. This is a he very technical question 1113 1 that I am asking you -- 2 A. And I thought I got rid of technology 3 when I left the Church of Scientology, so please 4 tell me -- I guess if you rephrase the question, 5 because it makes no sense to me what you are 6 asking. 7 Q. What is the general reputation? 8 A. The -- 9 Q. -- of Scientology in the community? 10 A. Outside of the Scientology 11 community? 12 Q. Yes. 13 A. Very bad. It stinks, if that's a 14 better word for it. It reeks. 15 Q. And why does it stink and reek? 16 A. Because I think Scientology 17 underestimates and underminds the intelligence 18 that the general public has toward becoming 19 informed of organizations like this. If they 20 really and truly believe, and I thought this was 21 the case for the period of time I was in 22 Scientology, and it is reinforced when you are 23 inside the organization, that the general public 24 has no wit of understanding of what is really 25 going on here. 1114 1 But there has been enough said. 2 There has been enough published not only in an 3 opinion but are in court records which people have 4 a real interest in when they are hearing about 5 court cases involving this church. 6 There has been enough told to me in 7 my associations with law enforcement officers whom 8 I am now working in investigations with, 9 investigating the Church of Scientology and its 10 activities, that the general consensus, and we are 11 speaking outside of this, isolated reinforced 12 Scientology gobbledygook that they want to promote 13 within the organization, that it has an 14 incredibly, an increasingly lousy reputation with 15 the general community. 16 And this paragraph is false, is 17 totally comical. 18 Q. Now, let's take the Church of 19 Scientology International specifically. Do you 20 have any knowledge as to the general reputation of 21 the Church of Scientology International in the 22 public community? Yes or no. 23 A. And let me preface that. You are 24 saying we are not talking about law enforcement 25 community. We are talking about the general -- 1115 1 Q. I am talking about the general 2 public. 3 A. I can't answer that because in my 4 experience as a Scientologists -- see, the Church 5 of Scientology is very limited in what it provides 6 to the public insofar as its entities and what 7 entity does. And when the public looks at 8 Scientology they look at that time whole ball of 9 wax as being Scientology. 10 And that has a lot to do with the 11 fact Church of Scientology International chooses 12 to conceal its official purpose. That when one 13 looks at the Church of Scientology International 14 it is one big ball of wax and its reputation is 15 not good whatsoever. So in regards to the CSI as 16 an entity, I can't answer that. 17 Q. I think you have actually. 18 Now turning back to Paragraph 26, 19 which is on Page 8, you were involved with the 20 Church of Scientology International after the 21 publication of the Time magazine article, correct? 22 A. Yes, I was. 23 Q. Did the publication of the Time 24 magazine article interfere with the Church of 25 Scientology International's ability to conduct 1116 1 religious affairs to disseminate, advance the 2 principles and practices of Scientology? Let me 3 restate that. I think I have gotten myself 4 convoluted here. 5 As a result of the Time magazine 6 article and on the basis of your experience with 7 the Church of Scientology after the publication of 8 the Time magazine article, was the Church of 9 Scientology International's ability to conduct 10 religious affairs damaged? 11 A. Well, you can't damage something that 12 isn't broken. You are talking about religious 13 affairs and religious affairs do not exist within 14 the Church of Scientology so how can damage be 15 substantiated when something does not exist. 16 Could you answer -- I don't understand what you 17 are asking me. 18 Q. You have answered my question. 19 Did the publication of the Time 20 magazine article on the basis of your subsequent 21 experience with the Church of Scientology 22 International damage its ability to disseminate 23 the principles and practices of Scientology? 24 A. Well, I certainly think that it 25 affected it simply because the Church of 1117 1 Scientology had a very difficult time following 2 the publication of this very true and accurate 3 article to disseminate its propaganda which 4 concealed, which was a real representation of the 5 Church of Scientology. 6 I think it impaired in that respect 7 simply because a lot of people were not willing to 8 accept what was being told to them by Scientology, 9 particularly after this article came out. People 10 became informed. People learned the real story 11 about Scientology, not some glib propaganda that 12 was handed to them by the Church of Scientology. 13 And people became more informed about the true 14 nature of the Scientology. In that respect it was 15 impaired. 16 Now, with regards to their ability 17 to -- with regards to the statement that their 18 ability to disseminate these materials was 19 impaired, that's not true whatsoever. I mean 20 business was as usual. 21 Now, certainly it made a lot of 22 people very angry and it certainly made David 23 Miscavige very angry if you listen to the comments 24 were floating about in the Office of Special 25 Affairs. It really pissed him off particularly 1118 1 with regards to the expose on his conduct. The 2 fact that he puts Saran Wrap over the top of his 3 water glass because he is afraid somebody is going 4 to breath into it or spit it to it or lace it with 5 some kind of poison. The man is very paranoid. 6 That is very believed in the Church of Scientology 7 because they would like you to believe that 8 Miscavige has ghosts chasing him that want him 9 dead. 10 Q. What do you mean by your statement 11 that after the publication of the Time magazine 12 article which went on as usual? 13 A. When I say business as usual, nothing 14 was stopped within the Church of Scientology. 15 There is procedures. There are policies you 16 follow. There is a course of conduct that is 17 followed. And of course they did it. 18 When the Time article was published 19 it simply expanded the horizons by which the 20 Church of Scientology committed to their policy of 21 fair game. Whereas they had like, I had earlier 22 testified in evidence about the board in the OSA 23 office and the list of people, that they were 24 putting the fair game policy onto that they were 25 investigating, that they were wreaking operations 1119 1 against. After the Time magazine article I 2 assumed that they kind of made the names on that 3 board smaller and they added a whole chunk of 4 other names that they are going to start wreaking 5 these operations against and that was a result of 6 what was published in the Time magazine article 7 and that Steve Fishman and Uwe Geertz' name ended 8 up on that board. 9 And that business was as usual but 10 with much more vigor because if this article was 11 published in a low-keyed community magazine and it 12 made Scientology unhappy, then it would have been 13 simply them expanding horizons to start going off 14 those individuals that criticized them in this 15 low-keyed magazine article. 16 We are talking about Time magazine 17 which is an institution in our media. It is a 18 very well known and well read magazine and it 19 really pissed Scientology off to the point that 20 they had really expanded their horizons and they 21 were prepared to go after everyone in that article 22 that criticized them with much vigor and a real 23 well organized endeavor to do anything they could 24 to destroy the personal and professional 25 integrities of those individuals named in that 1120 1 magazine article. 2 Q. Is part of the business of 3 Scientology making money? 4 A. Definitely. Definitely. 5 Q. Well -- 6 A. That's why L. Ron Hubbard formed the 7 Church of Scientology. I mean he made the 8 statement that as a science fiction writer the 9 best way to make all the money in the world was to 10 start, his own religion and that's exactly what he 11 did. 12 Q. After the publication of the Time 13 magazine article while you were involved with the 14 Church of Scientology International, did the 15 Church of Scientology International continue in 16 the business of making money? 17 A. No, absolutely not. In fact they 18 lost a lot of money and they ended up spending a 19 lot of money on publications to counter the 20 statements made in the Time magazine article. 21 In fact they came out with a very 22 professional thick glossary publication called -- 23 something to do with the falsehoods of the Time 24 magazine article. And these publications have in 25 fact been provided as gifts to various libraries 1121 1 throughout the country. And in the body of these 2 publications it goes page by page by page 3 counteracting with what Scientology claims to be 4 the, quote, truth about statements made in the 5 Time magazine article. 6 Q. But you don't have any personal 7 knowledge that they lost any money, do you? 8 A. I am sorry? 9 Q. You don't have any personal knowledge 10 that the Church of Scientology -- 11 A. I have personal knowledge that the 12 Mission of Davis has lost money on it, oh, yes. 13 People can't sell books. They can't sell their 14 courses because people are always reminded of Time 15 magazine and what happened in Time magazine. I 16 can speak of the mission of Davis. I can't speak 17 of CSI, no. I know about people in the Mission of 18 Davis are struggling right now financially because 19 people have been informed, well informed because 20 of the Time magazine article. 21 Q. But you have no knowledge about the 22 Church of Scientology International losing any 23 money, correct? 24 A. No. No. 25 MR. BERRY: Thank you. That's a suitable 1122 1 place to stop for the evening. The deposition is 2 continued until tomorrow morning at 9:30. 3 VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. The date 4 is August 2, 1993. The time is 7:54 P.M. End of 5 Tape 4, Volume V. Continuing deposition of 6 Mr. Scarff. 7 (Recess taken.) 8 (The taking of the deposition 9 of GARRY L. SCARFF was adjourned.) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1123 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss: 2 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 3 4 I, LEE BRENNEMAN, C.S.R. No. 5222, do hereby 5 certify: 6 That the foregoing deposition of GARRY L. 7 SCARFF was taken before me at the time and place 8 therein set forth, at which time the witness was 9 put on oath by me; 10 That the testimony of the witness and all 11 objections made at the time of the examination 12 were recorded stenographically by me, were 13 thereafter transcribed under my direction and 14 supervision and that the foregoing is a true 15 record of same. 16 I further certify that I am neither counsel 17 for nor related to any party to said action, nor 18 in anywise interested in the outcome thereof. 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed my name 20 this 2nd day of August, 1993. 21 22 23 __________________________________ 24 LEE BRENNEMAN, C.S.R. No. 5222 25 1124 1 I N D E X 2 VOLUME VI 3 4 MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1993 5 6 WITNESS EXAMINATION 7 8 GARRY L. SCARF 9 10 (By Mr. Berry) 853 11 (By Mr. Berry) 937 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1125 1 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBITS 2 GARRY L. SCARFF 3 4 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED 5 179 Five-page HCO Policy Letter 938 6 of March 1, 1965. 7 8 180 One-page memo to Those 938 9 Concerned from The Founder, 10 dated 6th March 1968. 11 12 181 Three-page HCO Policy 938 13 Letter of 16 February, 1969. 14 15 182 Nine-page document entitled 1079 16 "Complaint of Personal 17 Injury," with three-page 18 attachment. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ================================================================= If this is a copyrighted work, you are acknowledging by receipt of this document from FACTNet that on the basis of reasonable investigation, you have not been to obtain a copy elsewhere at a fair price, and that you are and will abide by the following copyright warning. WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photo copies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified by law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement. FACTNet reserves the right to refuse to accept an order for copying or other duplication, or delivery of copied or duplicated material if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. ------------------------------------------------------------------- CARD CATALOG ENTRY DOS FILENAME OF TEXT FILE: E:\PCB\SCN\FILES\SCARFF\SCA08023.TXT DOS FILENAME OF IMAGE FILES: ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: SECURITY CODE: DISTRIBUTION CODE: NAME FOR BBS: SORT TO: CONTRIBUTOR: LOC. OF ORIG: NOTES: For additional verification see image files contained in the file with same name and .ZIP extension. UPDATED ON: UPDATED BY: =================================================================