What's new

Co$ sues Debbie Cook in Texas

Magoo

Gold Meritorious Patron
While this may be true of Magoo, it is not true of the kids raised in the Cult, all the minors who were raised in the Cadet Org, were/are in Scientology schools and go on staff or join SO, and had to sign these kinds of papers. :no: There are both subtle and unsubtle forms of being coerced. :grouch:

Am I confused, or do you have me mixed up with Mark? I agree with exactly what you're saying. He's saying he doesn't think it happened with......

I'm saying it does, and it's not OK.

:rose:

TLC
 

Magoo

Gold Meritorious Patron
I wonder if Debbie's Facebook history might become evidence, should she offer it up.

Because if Debbie was violating her agreement in 2011, way before her "email", by simply conversing with other Scientologists on Facebook, if her months of Facebook communication, which is public, and OSA might have been reading, if NONE of her months of Facebook communication was deemed a breach of the agreement, BUT, THEN just her "email" of Dec 31, 2011 is considered a breech, then I wonder if that inconsistency in WHEN it is that Scientology decides to pounce on her for her "breech" of the agreement, but maybe that's irrelavent, and maybe there are dozens of earlier breeches in amongst her Facebook communications.

I guess she was simply expected NOT to discuss Scientology at all, the rest of her life.

I remember I asked Elliot, as I signed my ridiculous agreement, I asked him, "Does this mean I can't even talk to my brother about my life in Scientology?"

I had a genuine concern.

I mean it is totally unrealistic to expect a person NEVER to communicate to anyone about one's life's history, where the mundane incidents, of reminiscing about some Sea Org incident in my life, it is just unrealistic to expect a person to NEVER in the rest of their life, not slip and discuss some incident of their Scientology Sea Org career! All could be technically a breech.

I recall Gerry Armstrong brought up this unrealistic expectation of his agreement.

These agreements deny human nature to discuss a person's life with another human being.

Are we technically not allowed to even discuss our lives?

It's absurd.

Exactly, Chuck.

Back in the 90's I was at first just helping my auditor/then good friend, Bill Yaude---who I trusted inside and out.
Then one day he told me "We need to go see some peeps at OSA Int".
We did.

I was shown a "Top Secret Agreement" telling me that I could NEVER tell

----David Miscavige
----Any Execuitives (And they listed Heber and others)
--- Any Ethics officers
---- Any Auditors
----Any of my friends
----My husband and family
And IF I did, I'd have to pay some exorbitant amount of $$$$$.

I'll never forget it: I looked at Yaude and said:
"This sounds like the Old GO days (Guardian's office, where 9 people went to jail once they were caught, including Mary Sue Hubbard).

He: "Tory: Look at me. LOOK AT ME. You know me. Would *I* do *anything*
illegal?" :eyeroll:
At the time, I honestly didn't think he would.

I asked him: "What about me? How will *I* get auditing and ethics, etc?"

He: "Tory---we have THE TOP auditors on the Planet who will help you"
So with that, I signed it.

Months later when I quit and they did their "De-brief" /Spiritual Rape with 5
"OT's" and Gavino Idda grilling me on: What are you going to say about this?"


I could only think of that early promise and what absolute liars they were.
I know many of you have heard parts or all of this story. I repeat it for anyone
who may still be "in"....thinking/trusting that group. That IS what happened.

It still took me some months to actually get on ARS, make my 4,000 posts in 4 weeks and in that, wake FULLY UP and Escape OUT.

Bless you ALL :bighug:

Tory/Magoo
www.youtube.com/ToryMagoo44
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Put yourself in Debbie's lawyer's shoes, and think if there is any fruitful angle here.

I think the most obvious defenses, from the limited amount I know, would be coercion and an unenforceable agreement because, without disclosing it, the NDA as written denies the religious rights to practice Scientology.

I have mentioned this in earlier posts, but simply, a party who cannot communicate freely and cannot follow Hubbard's scripture on the "gradients of ethics" (speaking derogatorily about a non-optimum condition, et al) effectively has forfeited their ability to be a Scientologist.

Even in many other scenarios beyond the world of Scientology, it is an unconsciable infringement on basic human rights. Imagine that Debbie sought medical or psychological treatment and the physician asked her questions about moments of physical stress (sleep deprivation, malnutrition...) or psychological abuse (gang bang sec checking, standing in a garbage can while groups of people hurled insults at her, etc....). She would (according to that ridiculous agreement) not be able to tell her own doctor or therapist what happened. In other words, she would have given up her right to seek medical care.

If I were on her legal team, I would have her and others doing an exhaustive research project that compiled all of the LRH references that support her actions of writing and sending that e-mail.

The good part of this is that no matter what legal theory the defense is building its case around, one can be 100% sure that there is LRH policy that makes it mandatory for Scientologists to do exactly what Debbie did.
 

Man de la Mancha

Patron with Honors
Debbie's lawyer will have to ask Scientology why it is, that Scientology did NOT charge her with a breech in these other instances

I don't believe a party is required to sue for every breach, but I believe courts may imply modifications to an agreement based on the parties' conduct. However, I believe that generally applies when a party accepts his contractual benefit while silently acquiesing to the other party's breach in such a way the other party reasonably believes the terms have been changed. The classic example is the landlord who continuously accepts rent a week late - some courts probably find an implied change to the due date. Excellent thinking though Mr. Beatty, and good idea for everyone to brainstorm. I bet attorneys sometimes get stuck in their legal mindset and often get good advice from lay-people looking from the outside in, especially when they all spent some time on the inside too!
 

Stat

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Debbie Cook sued by Cult of Scn

I also wish her personal victory over the monstrosity known as the Church of Scientology.

But as far as her aspirations to resurrect the Church, frankly I'd rather see COB continue running it so far into the ground that it becomes impossible for anyone to even find the bones, let alone salvage and bring it to life again.

Well said. I agree. Either way though, no matter who will win in this legal battle,
Scientology will loose regardless, due to the whole wrong premise or whatever.
No need to worry. :)
 

Stat

Gold Meritorious Patron
I could be wrong....

but I think Debbie Cook will be offered an even bigger Pay out by Scientology to be Silent, & retract or smooth over her comments......

probably accompanied by an even more damming "waiver - or non disclosure document" to be signed by Debbie Cook....& witnessed by Scientology Lawyers ....

It's a good point and it happened before, Osiris.
Money are good like that, even if one is a nattering Scientologist.

The thing is though, I am pretty sure Debbie considers herself totally
on-purpose and on-source Scientologist. And she uses the Internet.

That is the beauty of this situation that has no precedent like that.
In a way, she acts like an anti-dot to the whole thing.

Also, perhaps as that female robot voice in the 1st Alien movie telling
Sigourney Weaver's character that the ship will self-destruct due to the
whole clusterfuck. The character was tough, so she and her cat jumped
in a shuttle and escaped the death and horrors (sort of). There were some
sequels. I'm starting to think that it's actually a pretty good analogy. :biggrin:
 

Stat

Gold Meritorious Patron
I wonder if Debbie's Facebook history might become evidence, should she offer it up.

Because if Debbie was violating her agreement in 2011, way before her "email", by simply conversing with other Scientologists on Facebook, if her months of Facebook communication, which is public, and OSA might have been reading, if NONE of her months of Facebook communication was deemed a breach of the agreement, BUT, THEN just her "email" of Dec 31, 2011 is considered a breech, then I wonder if that inconsistency in WHEN it is that Scientology decides to pounce on her for her "breech" of the agreement, but maybe that's irrelavent, and maybe there are dozens of earlier breeches in amongst her Facebook communications.

I guess she was simply expected NOT to discuss Scientology at all, the rest of her life.

I remember I asked Elliot, as I signed my ridiculous agreement, I asked him, "Does this mean I can't even talk to my brother about my life in Scientology?"

I had a genuine concern.

I mean it is totally unrealistic to expect a person NEVER to communicate to anyone about one's life's history, where the mundane incidents, of reminiscing about some Sea Org incident in my life, it is just unrealistic to expect a person to NEVER in the rest of their life, not slip and discuss some incident of their Scientology Sea Org career! All could be technically a breech.

I recall Gerry Armstrong brought up this unrealistic expectation of his agreement.

These agreements deny human nature to discuss a person's life with another human being.

Are we technically not allowed to even discuss our lives?

It's absurd.

It is absurd. Of epic proportions.

Forcing people not to talk about it makes it even more so.

And hopefully raises questions.
 

Thrak

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Debbie Cook sued by Cult of Scn

Well said. I agree. Either way though, no matter who will win in this legal battle,
Scientology will loose regardless, due to the whole wrong premise or whatever.
No need to worry. :)

Yeah it's in scientology's DNA to drive itself into the ground. Some are simply more competent than others at accomplishing that. There's a hell of a "cognition": To apply scientology is to destroy scientology. It truly is and is compelled to be the church of footbullets.
 

chuckbeatty

Patron with Honors
Exactly, Chuck.

Back in the 90's I was at first just helping my auditor/then good friend, Bill Yaude---who I trusted inside and out.
Then one day he told me "We need to go see some peeps at OSA Int".
We did.

I was shown a "Top Secret Agreement" telling me that I could NEVER tell

----David Miscavige
----Any Execuitives (And they listed Heber and others)
--- Any Ethics officers
---- Any Auditors
----Any of my friends
----My husband and family
And IF I did, I'd have to pay some exorbitant amount of $$$$$.

I'll never forget it: I looked at Yaude and said:
"This sounds like the Old GO days (Guardian's office, where 9 people went to jail once they were caught, including Mary Sue Hubbard).

He: "Tory: Look at me. LOOK AT ME. You know me. Would *I* do *anything*
illegal?" :eyeroll:
At the time, I honestly didn't think he would.

I asked him: "What about me? How will *I* get auditing and ethics, etc?"

He: "Tory---we have THE TOP auditors on the Planet who will help you"
So with that, I signed it.

Months later when I quit and they did their "De-brief" /Spiritual Rape with 5
"OT's" and Gavino Idda grilling me on: What are you going to say about this?"


I could only think of that early promise and what absolute liars they were.
I know many of you have heard parts or all of this story. I repeat it for anyone
who may still be "in"....thinking/trusting that group. That IS what happened.

It still took me some months to actually get on ARS, make my 4,000 posts in 4 weeks and in that, wake FULLY UP and Escape OUT.

Bless you ALL :bighug:

Tory/Magoo
www.youtube.com/ToryMagoo44


Yea, you and me and lots of others slid by with the "bad" easy to violate types of legal docs.

So they couldn't really come after us with those docs we signed.

The one's they do today, have that substantial settlement amount given, I wonder where they got that $50,000, out of which account, to pay off Debbie, since I don't factually think there is an legitimate account they could get that from, musta been the OSA Int weekly allowance, which comes from the FSO, so factually that means the FSO paid Debbie's gag agreement, although the FSO just forks up the money and doesn't know who it goes to, that's decided up the chain by the Gilman Hot Springs head finance honcho, to approve the 50 Gs to Debbie and the 50 Gs to Wayne.

Tory, other recently released Sea Org members, got other amounts, like in the $5,000 per person range, for the "lesser cheezes".

That I guess can make them scared to violate the agreements more.

SO many ironies here, as bad as Hubbard was, he'd roll over in his grave if he knew they shelled out gag money with these legal settlements.

Miscavige is such an idiot.

"Sue the dwarf, not the Cook!" should be on the latest protest signs!
 

chuckbeatty

Patron with Honors
It's a good point and it happened before, Osiris.
Money are good like that, even if one is a nattering Scientologist.

The thing is though, I am pretty sure Debbie considers herself totally
on-purpose and on-source Scientologist. And she uses the Internet.

That is the beauty of this situation that has no precedent like that.
In a way, she acts like an anti-dot to the whole thing.

Also, perhaps as that female robot voice in the 1st Alien movie telling
Sigourney Weaver's character that the ship will self-destruct due to the
whole clusterfuck. The character was tough, so she and her cat jumped
in a shuttle and escaped the death and horrors (sort of). There were some
sequels. I'm starting to think that it's actually a pretty good analogy. :biggrin:


If she gets more money, it will be:

"Debbie's Gag Upped by Scientology"

"Miscavige outsmarted by clever former FSO Captain and her legal advisors"
 

chuckbeatty

Patron with Honors
I think the most obvious defenses, from the limited amount I know, would be coercion and an unenforceable agreement because, without disclosing it, the NDA as written denies the religious rights to practice Scientology.

I have mentioned this in earlier posts, but simply, a party who cannot communicate freely and cannot follow Hubbard's scripture on the "gradients of ethics" (speaking derogatorily about a non-optimum condition, et al) effectively has forfeited their ability to be a Scientologist.

Even in many other scenarios beyond the world of Scientology, it is an unconsciable infringement on basic human rights. Imagine that Debbie sought medical or psychological treatment and the physician asked her questions about moments of physical stress (sleep deprivation, malnutrition...) or psychological abuse (gang bang sec checking, standing in a garbage can while groups of people hurled insults at her, etc....). She would (according to that ridiculous agreement) not be able to tell her own doctor or therapist what happened. In other words, she would have given up her right to seek medical care.

If I were on her legal team, I would have her and others doing an exhaustive research project that compiled all of the LRH references that support her actions of writing and sending that e-mail.

The good part of this is that no matter what legal theory the defense is building its case around, one can be 100% sure that there is LRH policy that makes it mandatory for Scientologists to do exactly what Debbie did.

yea to all.

I suddenly remembered that the moonies shit on Ford Greene, when he was a moonie, propelling him to learn the lawyer trade, he then sues the moonies, wins some major legal precedents!

And Ford helped Gerry, Ford helped other big cases, Ford helped Stefan Castle most recently.

I guess it's futile to ask cults to learn from their mistakes, until they un-cult themselves.

Maybe a cult characteristic scholars ought include in their list of cult requirements is imbecile legal cases based on the cult founder's imbecile legal scriptures.

I go from hating the lawyers to loving them for taking advantage of the Scientology cult leader's idiotic legal scriptures!

It's like one of LRH's formulas: Affinity plus Reality plus Communication equals Understanding.

Cult Leader plus paranoia equals ex member enemies around every corner who must be sued into silence.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
yea to all.

I suddenly remembered that the moonies shit on Ford Greene, when he was a moonie, propelling him to learn the lawyer trade, he then sues the moonies, wins some major legal precedents!

And Ford helped Gerry, Ford helped other big cases, Ford helped Stefan Castle most recently.

I guess it's futile to ask cults to learn from their mistakes, until they un-cult themselves.

Maybe a cult characteristic scholars ought include in their list of cult requirements is imbecile legal cases based on the cult founder's imbecile legal scriptures.

I go from hating the lawyers to loving them for taking advantage of the Scientology cult leader's idiotic legal scriptures!

It's like one of LRH's formulas: Affinity plus Reality plus Communication equals Understanding.

Cult Leader plus paranoia equals ex member enemies around every corner who must be sued into silence.


:clapping: :clapping: cool formula! :clapping: :clapping:

And there seem to be other ARC (Absurdly Ridiculous Culticide) Formulas where cults make it go right to kill themselves. . .


Cult
technology
plus believers is
greater than society's
ability to suppress laughter.



 
Last edited:

NonScio

Patron Meritorious
If she gets more money, it will be:

"Debbie's Gag Upped by Scientology"

"Miscavige outsmarted by clever former FSO Captain and her legal advisors"

I am somewhat astounded at how cheap the cult manages to buy off/bribe
former members "in the know" to keep quiet. $50,000 after 29 years?
Less than $2,000 a year! The more common $5,000 for "lesser" members
is almost too ludicrous to comment on.

Probably ex culties used to $25/week pay think $5 k is a lot of money and
$50K a king's ransom. That illusion reflects how long they have been isolated
from the real world. Cook, with her inside knowledge, could probably have
demanded $1 million and gotten it. Even the $1 million would only reflect
under $35,000 per year for her probable 16 hrs a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks
a year, 29 years. I figure that to come out to about $5.92 hr. $5 million
would have brought that up to a more respectable $29.60 hr and more
appropriate as a middle class wage.
 
Last edited:

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
I see no reason why the Co$ had to enter into an NDA with Debbie and Wayne. It is not like they should have to BLACKMAIL their former staff who might divulge all the illegal activities that were never done by this most ethical organization.

Maybe Wayne and Debbie have decided that forcing people into bankruptcy, committing suicide, breaking up families and shooting others is not the road to OT.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology)

"In a 1967 policy titled Penalties for Lower Conditions, Hubbard wrote that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

"The 1986 judgment by a Los Angeles jury was upheld by the California Court of Appeal in 1989. During appeals, the Church again claimed Fair Game was a "core practice" of Scientology and was thus constitutionally protected "religious expression".[4] The court decided that the Church's campaign "to ruin Wollersheim economically, and possibly psychologically" should be discouraged rather than protected"

Is it possible that Debbie and Wayne were coerced into signing the NDAs based on their knowledge of such Scientology policy (religious expression) and real world practice of this sick cult? I call Blackmail
 

chuckbeatty

Patron with Honors
I see no reason why the Co$ had to enter into an NDA with Debbie and Wayne. It is not like they should have to BLACKMAIL their former staff who might divulge all the illegal activities that were never done by this most ethical organization.

Maybe Wayne and Debbie have decided that forcing people into bankruptcy, committing suicide, breaking up families and shooting others is not the road to OT.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology)

"In a 1967 policy titled Penalties for Lower Conditions, Hubbard wrote that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

"The 1986 judgment by a Los Angeles jury was upheld by the California Court of Appeal in 1989. During appeals, the Church again claimed Fair Game was a "core practice" of Scientology and was thus constitutionally protected "religious expression".[4] The court decided that the Church's campaign "to ruin Wollersheim economically, and possibly psychologically" should be discouraged rather than protected"

Is it possible that Debbie and Wayne were coerced into signing the NDAs based on their knowledge of such Scientology policy (religious expression) and real world practice of this sick cult? I call Blackmail

that's logical, but Scientology Sea Org staff life is unwitting trauma, that many ex leaders eventually realize is unjust, and they gurgle up in protest against their abusive lives, when they finally come to their senses, and the gags are supposed to prevent this whole recurring pattern.

So many ex Scientologists have risen up in protest one way or another, against the Scientology abuses they accepted when they were abused, but which they conclude, once out, that they were indeed abused, Scientology is just doing the damage control of that.

Plus Hubbard's Manual of Justice, google and read it, Hubbard was into legal tactics as policy pretty advanced even at that period, late 1950s.

He even was into OSA like tactics against his 2nd wife. And she him.

It's in the DNA of Hubbard's paranoid thinking about "enemies" he sees and it's Scientology church scriptures, so it will take conscious senior "Exec Strata" and WDC level conscious corporate decisions to get rid of the OSA sub bureaucracy and all those Hubbard paranoia tactics. That seems almost impossible to any of the recently departed leaders, but that is about the only thing that will ever stop official Scientology from their maddog tactics. It somehow has to be retired/erased from the Hubbard scriptures playbook, consciously, by their leadership councils (Watchdog Committee and Executive Strata, which in Debbie's email, she details how those two councils have been decimated).

The Scientology legalistic tactics are not rational , because Hubbard was not rational, and that's not gonna change till management changes/retires the OSA sub bureaucracy.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
That seems almost impossible to any of the recently departed leaders, but that is about the only thing that will ever stop official Scientology from their maddog tactics. It somehow has to be retired/erased from the Hubbard scriptures playbook, consciously, by their leadership councils (Watchdog Committee and Executive Strata, which in Debbie's email, she details how those two councils have been decimated).

The Scientology legalistic tactics are not rational, because Hubbard was not rational, and that's not gonna change till management changes/retires the OSA sub bureaucracy.

Of course, Hubbard carefully set it up so that "everybody must follow exactly LRH policy". And, "LRH policy cannot be altered, amended or cancelled". The notion is firm that, "follow LRH policy and you will succeed, do anything else and you will fail".

I can't imagine any true-believing, severely over-indoctrinated senior executive Sea Org Scientologist EVER entering on a road to CHANGE LRH policies, orders, instructions or advices. These are viewed as "gospel". Hubbard seemed to anticipate such a possibility (i.e. KSW, how people will alter anything at any time), and he carefully designed and built a system that COULD NOT ever be "degraded" or "squirreled" by alterations. Change is forbidden.

Changing the Hubbard playbook is unlikely. Especially with the true-believing fanatics that they are. :confused2:

And, THAT is a good thing. Because, as long as they ruthlessly continue to follow Hubbard's playbook, they will continue to dig their own grave. The footbullets will never stop, until they have received so many that they fall dead into the open grave.
 

chuckbeatty

Patron with Honors
Of course, Hubbard carefully set it up so that "everybody must follow exactly LRH policy". And, "LRH policy cannot be altered, amended or cancelled". The notion is firm that, "follow LRH policy and you will succeed, do anything else and you will fail".

I can't imagine any true-believing, severely over-indoctrinated senior executive Sea Org Scientologist EVER entering on a road to CHANGE LRH policies, orders, instructions or advices. These are viewed as "gospel". Hubbard seemed to anticipate such a possibility (i.e. KSW, how people will alter anything at any time), and he carefully designed and built a system that COULD NOT ever be "degraded" or "squirreled" by alterations. Change is forbidden.

Changing the Hubbard playbook is unlikely. Especially with the true-believing fanatics that they are. :confused2:

And, THAT is a good thing. Because, as long as they ruthlessly continue to follow Hubbard's playbook, they will continue to dig their own grave. The footbullets will never stop, until they have received so many that they fall dead into the open grave.

I wish Debbie would lose, go to CW, protest in front of the Fort Harrison, keep getting fines for violating her non disclosure agreement, and keep track of her increasing debts to Scientology, and keep a thermometer, and see how HIGH she can push her debt into astronomical ranges, for continuing to violate her NDA (non disclosure agreement)!

And have a sign

"Debbie Cook, Former CO FSO. Thankyou David Miscavige, Sir! Shawn Lonsdale, rest in peace, the "New" Cult Watch of Scientology's "Mecca""

She absolutely could live for free, be a homeless person, stay in Clearwater citizens' homes, for years, being fed and taken care of for free, by the hundred of citizens who'd gladly put her up for a night or few days at a time, and go on protesting, raising her debt, and posting her debt like Scientology's skyrocketing stats!
 

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
Quote Originally Posted by Expelled 4 Life View Post
There are times and places to take a stand. This is such a time and place. Donate to Debbie's legal fund. A link is here

no it's not.

It's neither the time nor the place.

No matter what your opinion of Debbie is, and granted she's been part of the abuse, at this point in time she is fighting Miscavige in a case that will impact on every ex SO and every future ex SO.

Therefore I am backing Debbie and helping her financially, even if it's only a small amount I can afford. I hope others will do the same. If you want to see the end of these outrageous NDAs, and you want to have the freedom to speak out, that is.

My two cents.
 
Top