Gerry Armstrong--Declaration of 04-21-1994

§ What's New || Search || Legal Archive || Wog Media || Cult Media || CoW ^® || Writings || Fun || Disclaimer || Contact §

DECLARATION OF GERALD ARMSTRONG

I, Gerald Armstrong, declare:

1. I am over 18 years of age and a resident of the State

of California. I have personal knowledge of the matters set

forth herein, and if called upon to testify thereto I competently

would.

2. I am making this declaration in response to the

Scientology organization's efforts to have part of the Court's

file sealed in the case of Church of Scientology International v.

Steven Fishman and Uwe Geertz, United States District Court for

the Central District of California, Case No. 91-6426-HLH(Bx). It

is my request that for the reasons set forth below no papers in

that case be sealed.

3. One of the documents the organization seeks to seal is

a declaration I executed on February 22, 1994 in response to

falsehoods made about me and my experiences with the organization

by its leader David Miscavige in his declaration executed

February 8 and filed in the Fishman case. At paragraph 14 of my

February 22 declaration I stated:

"I will also take the opportunity to advise this

Court that Mr. Miscavige's organization considers that

it has me under a contract whereby it may sue me for

filing this declaration, not because it is untrue or

libelous, but because that is what the organization

insists its contract permits. This contract was

obtained by Mr. Miscavige as the result of his

organization's years of attack on my attorney Michael

Flynn, as stated in paragraph 7 subparagraph h. above.

In order to get the organization to cease its fair game

against Mr. Flynn I had to sign its contract, which,

according to Mr. Miscavige, allows him and his agents

to say whatever they want about me in any court

proceeding or in the media and I may not respond. If I

do respond I become subject to a $50,000.00 liquidated

damages provision for every utterance, and the target

in another Miscavige-ordered costly and harassing

lawsuit. The three lawsuits, Armstrong II, III and IV

described in paragraph 7, subparagraphs o, p and q, and

the contempt of court proceedings at subparagraph r,

are all pursuant to this contract. The contract is

against public policy and illegal."

A copy of the first page of the February 22 declaration, pages 12

and 13 which contain this quoted-section, and the signature page

are appended hereto as Exhibit A.

4. On April 5, 1994 the organization did indeed amend its

complaint in Church of Scientology International v. Gerald

Armstrong, et al. Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 052395

(Armstrong II) to add a cause of action for my providing the

February 22 declaration to attorneys for defendant Uwe Geertz in

order to correct the Miscavige falsehoods, and it did indeed

claim $50,000.00 in liquidated damages and additional damages

which it states are incalculable. A copy of the face page of the

organization's Verified Second Amended Complaint for Damages and

for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief for Breach of

Contract, pages 25 and 26 which contain the cause of action

relating to my February 22 declaration, the signature page and

the verification page are appended hereto as Exhibit B.

5. On April 15, 1994 I filed a Second Amended Verified

Cross-Complaint for Abuse of Process in the case of Church of

Scientology International v. Gerald Armstrong, et al. Marin

County Superior Court Case No. 157680, which included in

paragraph 69 at page 24 the allegation that the organization's

claim of damages in Armstrong II for my February 22 declaration

response to Miscavige's falsehoods in Fishman was an act in

furtherance of its actual litigation motives of obstruction of

justice, suppression of evidence, assassination of my reputation,

use of the discovery process for gathering intelligence on its

enemies, and making an example of me to scare knowledgeable

witnesses into silence, which act constituted an abuse of

process. A copy of my second amended cross-complaint is appended

hereto as Exhibit C.

6. Since the organization has made my February 22

declaration the subject of its litigation in its unsealed

Armstrong II case it is inconsistent of the organization to seek

to seal the declaration in the Fishman case. Sealing the

declaration in one case when the organization will use it in

another case wherein the declaration will not be sealed will only

generate confusion; which is in fact the organization's purpose

in seeking to seal not only my declaration, but all the other

documents filed in Fishman as well. Pursuant to its policies to

"use the law to harass" the organization will then capitalize on

the confusion it has generated to further its attacks on its

fancied enemies.

7. The Scientology organization has since 1984 accused me

falsely of violating court sealing orders at least a dozen times,

including three attempts to have me found in contempt of court

for alleged violations which the organization fabricated.

Meanwhile the organization has itself refused to honor the same

sealing orders, and has used documents which it had itself had

sealed to attack me. Sealing documents at the insistence of this

organization only provides it with a mechanism to obstruct

justice and use our courts to wage an unjust war on its

designated enemies.

8. Appended hereto as Exhibit D is a copy of a declaration

I executed March 15, 1990 and filed in the California Court of

Appeal in support of a petition to be able to respond in an

appeal the organization had taken from an order of the Los

Angeles Superior Court unsealing that Court's file in the case of

Church of Scientology of California v. Gerald Armstrong, Case No.

C 420153 (Armstrong I). At paragraphs 20 through 24 and 26

through 39 I describe a series of affidavits executed by

organization personnel Kenneth Long and Sheila Chaleff which were

filed in 1987 in the case of Church of Scientology of California

v. Russell Miller & Penguin Books Limited in London, England in

the High Court of Justice, Case No. 6140. The organization

falsely accuses me in its affidavits, copies of which are

appended hereto as Exhibit E, of "knowingly violating several

court (sealing) orders."

9. I did not respond in the Miller case to the

organization's charges of sealing order violations because one of

its lawyers, Earle C. Cooley, had threatened through my attorney

Michael Flynn that I would be sued if I even talked to Mr.

Miller's or Penguin Books' lawyers (see paragraph 20 at page 9 of

my March 15, 1990 declaration, Exhibit D hereto). Following my

filing of the March [15], 1990 declaration in which I denied the

organization's charges the organization refused to change its

claim of sealing order violations. On December 25, 1990 I

executed a declaration, which was also filed in the Court of

Appeal, detailing the facts underlying the organization's charges

in the Long and Chaleff affidavits of sealing order violations

and refuting the charges. Paragraph 17 at page 10 of the

December 25, 1990 declaration, a copy of which is appended hereto

as Exhibit F, described Mr. Long's repetition of his sealing

order violation charges in a declaration he executed March 26,

1990, a copy of which is appended hereto as Exhibit G. Paragraph

20 at page 10 of the December 25, 1990 declaration details the

truth behind Mr. Long's false charges. Although the facts I give

in both the March 15 and December, 25, 1990 declarations have

remained unrefuted, the organization refuses to correct its false

charges against me in its declarations and affidavits. That is

unsurprising, however, because one of its purposes in litigation

is to generate as much confusion as possible. In the area of

what is or is not sealed or unsealed or has or has not been

sealed when in what court where it is particularly easy for

confusion to be generated and false charges of violations to be

made, and the Scientology organization has taken great advantage

of that fact and great advantage of the inclination of the courts

of this country to treat the organization with the same respect

given to honest parties who lack its determination to subvert

justice.

10. In paragraph 25 at page 10 of my March 15, 1990

declaration (exhibit D hereto) I list ten documents which Mr.

Long had appended as exhibits to his affidavit of October 5,

1987, all of which had been part of the record in the Armstrong I

case which the organization had insisted be sealed as a condition

of settlement of the case. The organization, while making false

allegations of sealing order violations or even manufacturing

"violations" in order to make its charges, simply will not

respect any court's sealing order itself if it will gain some

advantage by violating such order.

11. Appended hereto as Exhibit H is a copy of a document

published and distributed by the organization entitled "" Factnet"

- Perversions, Criminality and Lies." On information and belief

this document was ordered, written and ordered disseminated by

David Miscavige. It is an example of what L. Ron Hubbard, the

organization's leader before Miscavige, called "black propaganda"

or "black PR," which he defined as "spreading lies by hidden

sources," or "a covert attack on the reputation of a person,

company or nation using slander and lies in order to weaken or

destroy." At page 3 and 4 of this publication is a section

devoted to me. It is almost all lies and clearly libelous. It

includes the description of a dream I had and was inspired to

write down. Organization covert operatives stole my writing and

filed it in the Armstrong I case. The dream is insignificant

because it was only a dream. What has become significant about

it is its misuse and perversion pursuant to the organization's

black PR and fair game policies. The writing was specifically

sealed in Armstrong I. The Armstrong I trial judge, Honorable

Paul G. Breckenridge, Jr. stated at page 12 of his decision of

June 20, 1984, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit I,

that the organization's intelligence, legal and public relations

arm "was no respector of anyone's civil rights, particularly that

of privacy." The same is true in 1994, and for that reason too

the organization's efforts to seal the declarations of its

"enemies," when it will itself use whatever is sealed to abuse

those people should be rejected. The Breckenridge decision was

affirmed on appeal on July 29, 1991, Church of Scientology of

California v. Armstrong, 232 Cal. App. 3d 1060, 283 Cal. Rptr.

917.

12. On September 11, 1991 the organization filed a motion

to seal the record on appeal in Armstrong, supported by a

declaration of Kenneth Long executed September 10, 1991 in which

he falsely claimed that a lengthy list of documents in the

appellate record, plus the trial transcript had been sealed

throughout the Armstrong I litigation and should therefore be

sealed again to preserve the organization's "property and privacy

interests." The organization's motion and the supporting Long

declaration are appended hereto as Exhibit J.

13. Appended hereto as Exhibit K is my opposition to the

organization's motion to seal the record on appeal and my

declaration in support thereof executed October 16, 1991. I

point out in the opposition and declaration that the documents

and trial transcript the organization was seeking to have sealed

in the appellate record were, contrary to the organization's

claim, public documents which had been widely disseminated

because of the great public interest in them, and that sealing

the record would be senseless. The same is true regarding the

documents, in addition to my February 22, 1994 declaration, which

the organization seeks to have sealed in Fishman. I myself have

received a copy of two full file boxes of these documents, and

had already given them to yet another person for copying for

himself and others, again because of the great public interest in

these materials, long before I learned of the organization's

attempt to have them sealed.

14. Appended hereto as Exhibit L is a copy of the

California Court of Appeal's denial of the organization's motion

to seal the record dated December 5, 1991.

15. Appended hereto as Exhibit M is page 15 of the

organization's second amended complaint in Armstrong II (see also

Exhibit B hereto). At paragraph 61 the organization alleges that

I have violated its "settlement agreement" by failing to return

two documents. This is untrue. Both of these documents I

obtained years after the 1986 settlement, and both are public

documents. One of the documents the organization publishes to

this day in its books. This allegation is significant, however,

because it shows the sort of liberties the organization will take

with the truth to be able to allege any sort of "violation" by

its "enemies."

16. Appended hereto as Exhibit N is page 17 of the

organization's second amended complaint in Armstrong II (see also

Exhibit B hereto). At paragraph 72 the organization alleges that

I have violated a sealing order in Armstrong I by authenticating

a portion of a transcript. This is untrue. There never was such

a sealing order. The transcript was disseminated to countless

people around the world, and is widely available. Again it shows

the abuse this organization make of any sealing order, real or

not, and the confusion it will generate with its allegations of

violations.

17. Judge Breckenridge declared in 1984:

"In addition to violating and abusing its own

members civil rights, the organization over the years

with its "Fair Game" doctrine has harassed and abused

those persons not in the [organization] whom it

perceives as enemies. The organization clearly is

schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre

combination seems to be a reflection of its founder

LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been

virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his

history, background and achievements." ( Exhibit I

hereto)

The organization desperately seeks to rewrite its dark history,

just as Hubbard sought to rewrite his. It uses its schizophrenia

to deliberately forget the facts and truth so that it can

continue to madly attack its imagined enemies. It

compartmentalizes its monolithic organizational self in its group

mind to support its schizophrenia. It has its various entities

and mouthpieces appear in court as it suits its purposes to make

its mad allegations and give plausibility to its denials of its

victims' allegations. Our courts should not support the

organization's efforts to rewrite history, but should act to

restrain its autogenetic madness.

18. At page 23 of my opposition to the organization's

motion to seal the record on appeal in Armstrong I (Exhibit K

hereto) I stated that:

"This Court has a golden opportunity in this

matter to send the message to (the organization) to

cause them to abandon their hope of enlisting the

assistance of the judiciary to hide their past and

confuse the truth, and to place their hope for a

peaceful future in openness, not secrecy."

The same is true today in whatever the Courts do in the Fishman

case. But add too the protection of those people who have the

courage to come forward, stand up to this organization and say

some of what they know. Do not leave them even more exposed to

the organization's malevolence than they are already by sealing

their words.

I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws

of the State of California that the foregoing is true and

correct.

Executed at San Anselmo, California, on Apri1 21, 1994.

Signature Gerald Armstrong 04-21-1994

§ What's New || Search || Legal Archive || Wog Media || Cult Media || CoW ^® || Writings || Fun || Disclaimer || Contact §