SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MARIN

In anticipation of this Court granting Defendant Gerry Armstrong (“Armstrong”) an

A. The clauses that Armstrong claims are unconscionable:

1.    Para. 7D, the clause requiring Armstrong to maintain strict confidentiality and silence;

2.    Para. 7D, the clause penalizing Armstrong with liquidated damages of $50,000 per

utterance;

3.    Para. 7F, the clause prohibiting Armstrong from seeking Scientology religious

services;

4.    Para. 7G, the clause prohibiting Armstrong from voluntarily assisting or cooperating

with persons adverse to the contract’s beneficiaries identified in para. 1 (the “beneficiaries;”

5.     Para. 7G, the clause prohibiting Armstrong from cooperating with any organizations

aligned against Scientology or the beneficiaries;

6.    Para. 7H, the clause prohibiting Armstrong from voluntarily testifying or participating

in judicial, administrative or legislative proceeding adverse to Scientology or the

beneficiaries;

7.    Para. 7I, the clause prohibiting use of evidence in litigation;

8.    Para. 10,  the clause prohibiting Armstrong from assisting or advising individuals,

partnerships, associations, corporations, or governmental agencies contemplating any

claim or engaged in litigation or involved in or contemplating any activity adverse to

Scientology or the beneficiaries.

B. Fact issues for examination and adduction of evidence pursuant to C.C.C. §
1670.5:

1. What was the commercial setting between and involving Scientology, the

2. What was the contract’s purpose, and the purpose of each clause claimed to be

3.  What have been the contract’s effect, and the effect of each claimed unconscionable

C. Legal issues for adjudication:

1.  What procedural unconscionability existed at the time of the signing of the contract?

2.  What substantive unconscionability exists in the contract and in each of the claimed

Witnesses

1.    Gerry Armstrong. He will testify about the contract’s commercial setting, purpose

and effect.

2.    Graham E. Berry. Mr. Berry is a California attorney who has agreed to testify. He

will testify about the effect of the contract’s various clauses on himself and others and

their rights; on Scientology litigation and extralitigation practices; and on Rules of

Professional Conduct, legal representation, conflict of interest factors within the

commercial setting at the time of the signing of the contract.

3.    Michael Flynn. Mr. Flynn is an attorney living in California. He represented

Armstrong in the litigation against Scientology through the signing of the contract.

Mr. Flynn also represented several other people who were Scientology victims or

targets and had claims against Scientology and various of the beneficiaries. Mr. Flynn

was himself a target of Scientology fair game and had his own claims that were

settled in the 1986 global settlement. Armstrong has been in contact with Mr. Flynn

over the past two weeks, but has been unable so far to obtain Mr. Flynn’s agreement

to testify.

4.    Ford Greene. Mr. Greene is a California attorney who has agreed to testify. He

employed Armstrong as a paralegal from 1991 through 1995, and represented him in

the consolidated cases through that period and at trial in 2004. Mr. Greene has

represented several other people with claims against or defending against various

Scientology entities. He will testify about the effect of various clauses on himself, his

practice, his relationship with Armstrong, on Scientology victims’ rights.

5.    Caroline Letkeman. Ms. Letkeman is Armstrong’s wife and has agreed to testify. She

is in the class of people identified in the injunction in this case as “persons acting in

concert” with Armstrong. She will testify about the effect of the contract and its

various clauses on her life and her relationships. She was herself a beneficiary at the

time the contract was signed, and she will testify about her knowledge of the nature,

views, intentions and activities of Scientology and the beneficiaries.

6.    Stephen A. Kent, Ph.D. Dr. Kent has agreed to testify. He is a professor of sociology

at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, and is an expert in cultic groups including

Scientology. He has written specifically about the Scientology v. Armstrong case and

the subject contract in published professional papers. In 2002 Scientology threatened

him with prosecution pursuant to the contract for allegedly “acting in concert” with

Armstrong. He will testify about the contract’s effect on himself and on his

relationship with Armstrong and others, and about the information that Scientology is

seeking to suppress with its contract.

7.    Michael L. Walton. Mr. Walton is a California attorney who has agreed to testify. He

and Armstrong have been friends since 1982. Scientology filed a fraudulent

conveyance case against Mr. Walton and his wife (Marin Superior Court Case No.

157680) pursuant to the contract’s clauses. Scientology eventually abandoned their

claims, which were false. Mr. Walton will testify about the effect of the contract on

his life, his family, his practice and his relationship with Armstrong.

8.    Lawrence Wollersheim. Mr. Wollersheim has agreed to testify. He and Armstrong

have been friends since about 1982. In 1986, a few months before the settlement of

Mr. Flynn’s Scientology cases, Mr. Wollersheim obtained a jury verdict against

Scientology in Los Angeles Superior Court for $25 million. This was reduced on

appeal to $2.5 million, which Scientology paid, with an additional $6 million in

interest, in 2002. Scientology threatened Mr. Wollersheim with prosecution for

“acting in concert” with Armstrong, and employed the contract’s clauses to interfere

with their personal, spiritual and business relationships. Mr. Wollersheim will testify

about the commercial setting at the time the contract was signed and its effects over

the past twenty years.

Armstrong is continuing to canvass for other people with knowledge regarding the

Armstrong requests that Scientology make available the following witnesses for

1. David Miscavige. He is the supreme ruler of Scientology, a beneficiary of the contract,

2.  Andrew H. Wilson. Mr. Wilson is a California attorney and has represented

3.  A corporate representative for the specific Scientology entity named as plaintiff in this

Exhibits

Armstrong is here only identifying categories of proposed exhibits, and will provide a full

1.    Statements by Armstrong containing his knowledge and experiences regarding

Scientology or the beneficiaries, uttered before signing the contract.

2.    Statements by Scientology or the beneficiaries about Armstrong made before the

contract was signed.

3.    Statements by Scientology or the beneficiaries about Armstrong made after the

contract was signed.

4.    Statements by Armstrong containing his knowledge and experiences regarding

Scientology or the beneficiaries, uttered after signing the contract.

5.    Documents admitted into evidence at trial in Scientology v. Armstrong Los Angeles

Superior Court Case No. C420153.

6.    Documents delivered to Scientology from the LA Court Clerk or any source as a

result of Armstrong’s dismissal of his case against Scientology as part of the

settlement.

7.    The contract and other documents relating to the global settlement.

8.    Any documents already filed in this case or the consolidated cases.

9.    Documents relating to intelligence operations run on Armstrong at any time by

Scientology or the beneficiaries, physical assaults on him by any beneficiaries, and

efforts to have him prosecuted or harassed as a result of any contractual clauses.

10.    Documents created by third parties, media, government agencies, etc. relating to

Scientology’s relationship with Armstrong or with his class, the “Suppressive Person” class.

11.    Scientology’s IRS Form 1023 submissions, or any other documents provided to the

IRS that mention or relate to Armstrong in any way.

12.     Documents relating to Scientology’s nature, particularly its religious nature, its

religious scriptures and its indicia of religion.

Discovery

Armstrong does not have an attorney yet, but is in touch with a number of attorneys

Armstrong former attorney Julia Dragojevic, co-counsel with Mr. Flynn in the LASC

Discovery Time Estimate

Armstrong anticipates that two months will be needed to file the motion mentioned

Armstrong also anticipates that any other discovery, depositions, etc., including whatever

Hearing Time Estimate

Armstrong estimates that direct examination of his witnesses and the witnesses

One of Mr. Armstrong’s key witnesses Lawrence Wollersheim, will not be available, for

Armstrong is willing to give Scientology any reasonable amount of time it requires to

 PROOF OF SERVICE

I am over the age of eighteen years and am not a party to the within action. My business

I served the following document:

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of California, the United States and Canada

Executed on September 27, 2007 at Chilliwack, B.C., Canada.