Debbie Cook's Trial

[GreyLensman]

Now here is agood question that Tony O had, which I have always had myself.
​

Why does that work every time?
Well, not every time, but way more than it should.​

I suspect fear designed on the confidential auditing info. Fear.

Not fear of confidentiality being breached. But fear of losing community, of being shut off from and shunned by friends and family.

That you are dead to me attitude works powerfully.

It's not even services, necessarily - at first maybe, but eventually you realize you are marked and would be fucked over in any future auditing anyway.

 

[Lulu Belle]

There is no way the cult's lawyers could have foreseen what happened in court today. Wouldn't you love to have been there for the meeting today between the cult and their lawyers after what transpired in court? The thread title is Debbie Cook's Trial, but it's looking a lot like the Cult's Trial.

I agree....and I gotta wonder where this could possibly go from here. Wasn't this just supposed to be a hearing on a relatively minor motion?

Can someone please get Tikk to stop by? I would love it if he would weigh in on this.

 

[Free to shine]

Tony has summed up today's events with a really spot on ending observation.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/scientology_vs_1.php

I'll be following him again tomorrow!

This is worth quoting.

<snip>
In this piece, I'd just like to share some thoughts about how the case is going, from my totally unscientific, legally untrained, and I'm-doing-this-fast-because-I-want-a-margarita perspective.

First, let me give George Spencer his due. Scientology's local attorney is good, very good. He's methodical but not plodding. He's precise, and he keeps things narrowly focused. If his opening statement was a bit thin, his examination of Debbie Cook was laser-targeted. He simply wanted to show that she had left the church on good terms -- as the video of her signing her non-disclosure agreement in 2007 seemed to indicate -- that she was of sound mind when she agreed to a gag order, and that she should have been grateful to get $50,000 when she signed the agreement, and additional money and considerations.

Slender, of medium height, thinning on top, Spencer has a bit of a Hume Cronyn kind of look and appears to be in his 50s. He skillfully objected multiple times when Ray Jeffrey was getting a bit ahead of himself with leading questions. And Spencer seemed to think quick on his feet.

I thought he only did poorly a couple of times. Once was when he wanted Debbie Cook to admit that the headlines on news stories about her e-mail were disparaging of the church. It felt gratuitous and a little cruel -- Cook certainly wasn't responsible for the way us journalists write about her, and in a dispute over whether her e-mail disparaged Scientology, our news stories about the controversy are completely irrelevant. Cook actually did what she could to discourage us from writing about her. She asked me to take down her e-mail when I published it on New Year's Day (I complied), and she sent a note to the Tampa Bay Times pleading with them to understand that she didn't want to involve the press.

So to then blame her for the way headlines were written? Not Spencer's best moment.

I perceived another weakness when I thought later of his objection to Debbie Cook's eyewitness accounts of David Miscavige's alleged violence, and his severe mistreatment of her by putting her in "The Hole" at Int Base. Spencer said these stories were irrelevant because the defense had not proven that Miscavige has any connection to the plaintiff in the case, namely Scientology's Flag Service Organization.

This is an incredibly cynical ploy, but there's nothing wrong with it as long as the judge buys it, and Judge Martha Tanner did seem persuaded that the defense had not really proved a connection between Miscavige and FSO. (This is like saying that NBA Commissioner Daniel Stern has nothing to do with the New York Knicks because he doesn't put on shorts and heave three-pointers with the team.)

What I remembered only after I'd left the courthouse, however, is that earlier in the day, Spencer was trying to get Debbie Cook to admit that her New Year's Eve e-mail violated her non-disclosure agreement because it was disparaging.

Disparaging to whom? Well of course, David Miscavige.

So does Spencer get to have it both ways? Does Debbie Cook get punished for criticizing Miscavige, but she can't bring up Miscavige's own mistreatment of her? Well, this is exactly what Scientology's byzantine 1980s reorganization was made for, to provide the church's ultimate leader with deniability, since the shore story is that he's only the chairman of the board of one small Scientology entity, Religious Technology Center. Those who worked for him, however, say there is little in Scientology -- including FSO -- that he doesn't control with micromanaging fury.

On the other side, there's Ray Jeffrey, attorney for Debbie Cook and her husband Wayne Baumgarten. He's more homey, more emotional, and more fun to listen to than his competition, and in a long day in court, that does count for something. There were a few times when Spencer was objecting to the way he led Cook through her testimony that made me wonder if Jeffrey was going to recover. But he has amazing material to work with, so every small stumble quickly was overwhelmed with Cook's stunning testimony.

As for Cook herself, she was pretty damned credible on the stand. She handled Spencer's questions by being neither argumentative nor a doormat. She spoke for herself when she needed to, and it never came off as a wrong move.

I think it would be difficult for anyone to conclude that she had not been through hell, and had signed pretty extreme non-disclosure agreements under less than ideal conditions.

But does any of it matter? This is what makes it so difficult to handicap what's going on in the courtroom. Sure, Debbie Cook provided stunning testimony about seeing a high-ranking Scientology executive ordered to lick a bathroom floor for a half hour, and about her own "confessionals" that gave her a mental breakdown -- but does any of that trump the fact that she signed a gag order and then may have violated it with her New Year's Eve e-mail?

It's hard to read Judge Tanner, and she may just decide that Cook signed an agreement and the church has every right to shut her up. We'll know tomorrow.

But one thing doesn't hinge on the whims of a Bexar County Judge -- today, under oath, one of the most well known former executives in Scientology put on the public record a harrowing tale of degradation in the Sea Org. And you have to think, was that really worth suing Debbie Cook?

 

[Infinite]

[quoting Debbie Cook] . . . <snip> . . . I put out a simple message to not support anything not covered in tech or policy by L. Ron Hubbard and to go up the Bridge. How is that so horrible and despicable? Oh, I forgot, I dared to challenge DM. My OL is L. Ron Hubbard. Why is it DM can’t come up with one LRH reference to support having to donate yourself into a hole to support the IAS or pay for opulent buildings for every org? Well? Could it be that LRH never directed this? Maybe someone in OSA should look up the SEF advices to see what LRH said about getting Scientologists to donate to things like this. Or how about the BIC advices and what LRH actually said about org buildings. There are some serious policy violations going on. I dared to give a few LRH references. But I am still an important part of the biggest cover up in Scientology history. And for that, I expect a certain quid pro quo. If you expect me to help you cover up actual crimes committed at the Int Base, then I expect that you keep your shit together and not fly off the handle with bizarre lies or manipulations of my family, clients and comm lines because I pointed out a few policy violations. So do it. Get your shit together, collect up all the “DA” packs, cease with the “disconnection” program, leave my family alone and drop it. You expect me to “drop it”. DM ordered one of his staff to smack me to the floor while he watched and another one to break my finger and ordered me to be tortured in the hole for weeks, and I am expected to “drop it”. Well I complained about a couple of policy violations and I expect you to “drop it” as well. Get a grip people. There is much worse out there than Debbie Cook complaining about over-regging. I am helping you cover up some things that were seriously off the rails and could be very damaging PR-wise. I would at least expect you to not antagonize me further with your bullshit.

Assuming that there is an FBI investigation under way, isn't withholding pertinent information also a crime? C'mon Debbie, its not you that should be in a civil court dock, its David Miscavige in a criminal court dock.

 

[Free to shine]

Jeff Hawkins comment on Village Voice round-up article.

Jefferson Hawkins 11 minutes ago
Tony, excellent coverage. A few comments:

I don't think that Scientology properly understands that they've lost this round, regardless of the decision. Suppose they "win" and the judge upholds the gag order. Guess what, Scientology, she already talked. News flash.

They are panicked about one thing and one thing only - that current Scientologists will hear Debbie's story. So they had a two-fold strategy: 1) shut her up and 2) make sure Scientologists never hear her story through threats and Security Checks. Number one is already a fail. As for number 2, they may not realize that all of their threats are simply driving Scientologists to search the internet to a degree unprecedented in Scientology history. They'll tell the Org that they aren't looking, but they are.

Most Scientologists that I know are caring people, good people. If they were to hear Debbie's testimony, they would be outraged at the abuse that is being carried out in the name of their religion. They would be disgusted. Anyone with a shred of humanity would be disgusted. What many Scientologists don't realize - but are increasingly realizing - is that THEY DON'T NEED MANAGEMENT. Management needs them, they don't need management. If management were to disappear, Scientologists would be free to practice the subject as they see fit, without harassment, abuse, and all the cult trappings.

This has Scientology's leaders petrified. The storm is coming. More and more are speaking out. More and more are listening. Scientology's managment is hunkered in the basement, waiting for the tornado to blow over and hoping the house will still be standing when they emerge. I wouldn't count on it.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/scientology_vs_1.php

 

[Jquepublic]

Assuming that there is an FBI investigation under way, isn't withholding pertinent information also a crime? C'mon Debbie, its not you that should be in a civil court dock, its David Miscavige in a criminal court dock.

Maybe that's the whole "Remember the Alamo" reference.

Marty was recently quoted by Tony O as having quoted Robert Perry who said, "For a plot hatched in hell, don’t expect angels for witnesses." I think they're aware of their own culpability.

 

[asteroid]

The brand "scientology" has been extremely damaged to the extent it has been compared unfavourably to Al-queda, by poll in the US.

I agree.

After watching this whole drama, I realized the other day... if OSA ever wanted to damage my reputation publicly, all they'd have to do is tell people I was a member of the CofS. That's the only thing that would cause people to think less of me.

Rather damning, isn't it?

Because that's one thing that I don't tell anyone. Very few people know that I was ever involved, and I don't tell them much at all.

 

[RogerB]

Boy, I have to say now masterfully she has played this.

Those letters (exhibits A & B) sent to the Cof$ to set the record straight . . . but now in evidence, add to the coup de grace.

OSA and DM must now be in a complete spin . . .

Talk about putting your own head a the noose!

R

 

[LA SCN]

Just posted:

Things start to heat up as Spencer continues to question Debbie Cook...

Spencer: You understood that it would not only be against Scientology ethics but also affirmatively fraudulent if you accepted the $50,000 unless you intended to live up to the agreement.

Cook: I understood that if I took the upper level materials and I put them out to broad public, or if I did something that was an outright violation of our ethics codes, that that would not be OK. Does that answer your question?

Spencer: You're saying that if you lived up to the spirit of the agreement, then it was OK for you to accept the money?

Cook:First, I never expected or asked for the money. I was going to need medical assistance....We did not plan on getting that money...and it was to make nice at the end. Also, I was out of it. I intended to sign whatever I had to sign to live. I signed pieces of paper that they wanted me to sign so that I could go.

Spencer: So you had no intent to live up to the bargain?

Cook: Really, the only thing that was in my mind was to leave.

(Pardon me for just coming up to speed on the latest of todays events - had to work and then a dinner engagement)

Did you all catch that? Debbie is running the no-answer drill on Spencer for BLOOD...KEWL

oh to be a fly on the dwarfs wall...

 

[GreyLensman]

I agree.

After watching this whole drama, I realized the other day... if OSA ever wanted to damage my reputation publicly, all they'd have to do is tell people I was a member of the CofS. That's the only thing that would cause people to think less of me.

Rather damning, isn't it?

Because that's one thing that I don't tell anyone. Very few people know that I was ever involved, and I don't tell them much at all.

When I started in 1977 the Church had a quirky reputation, not bad, not great. Then the FBI raided.

My cognitive dissonance was that some day this would be an open and free religion, that people would see how great it was and how much it could do for them. That reputation would be better, some day. That it wasn't a cult...

It just went south (park) over the years. Worse and worse, to the point now where as you say ever having been a part of it is truly embarrassing.

 

[LA SCN]

This is all great!
I have never seen so many users viewing a Thread.
History in the making!

You have never seen so many users with so much BPC - excuse me, suppressed emotion, hoping to get it acknowledged and see justice be done at looooong last!

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

I think about his open letter to Mike Rinder every time someone says MR is "brave" for standing up to the CoS.
Yeah, about that...
It must be easier to take on the CoS with the world watching everything that is happening in court.

Yes Boomima!

RVY lived what was in his Heart…as did we all. RVY wrote from his Heart…as should we all.

There is much to be gleaned from his words.

Face

 

[LA SCN]

In our wildest dreams, I don't think any of us thought it would get this far.

This is....really something.

"Hell hath no fury like the woman scorned" ?

I'll say this - Debbie is orders of magnitude more honest and forthcoming than Spin and Marty and has a hundred times the balls.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

The experiences Debbie Cook had within the cofs and the training will be the very things she will be drawing upon to get her through this (TR's can be useful at times!) ... but, I hope she will allow herself to show some real emotion, because that will communicate to the people that actually matter in this, the people that can do serious damage to the cofs.

​

 

[Free to shine]

Twitter slide show:

https://twitter.com/#!/mikeboard1200/media/slideshow?url=pic.twitter.com/sGFEFEYY

From http://radio.woai.com/pages/michaelboard.html?article=9738464

Scientology In San Antonio
The video, played on an old tube tv in Judge Karen Pozza's cramped courtroom, shows a woman with short blond hair, sitting at a desk, signing an agreement to never speak bad about the Church of Scientology.

For a brief minute, Debbie Cook is shown tearing up. The former minister says she was sad about leaving the organziation that she had dedicated 27-years of her life to. A check for $50 thousand was handed over by a church attorney who had flown from California to Florida just to seal the deal.

"It's a straight forward contract case," Scientology attorney George Spencer explained.

But attorneys for the former high ranking member of the church paint a completely different story.

Ray Jeffrey lobbed accusations of kidnapping, torture and beatings that all lead up to the five minute video in this pre-lawsuit court battle over a temprorary restraining order. The Church of Scientology is suing Cook and her husband, Wayne Baumgardner, for violating the terms of an agreement. They're asking for at least $300 thosuand.

Refering to the allegedly assault, Jefferey claims that agreement is not valid.

"Equity requires clean hands and the plaintiffs hands are absolutly unclean," he told the judge. "I've practiced law for 27 years and I've never seen a contract like this."

And that's when he launched into a dramatic narrative that sounded like a Hollywood movie.

Cook was apparently trying to leave the Church of Scientology and, for a brief time, succeded. They went to North Carolina to visit family. When members of the church caught up with them, they lured them back to Florida with promises that they just wanted to end their business relationship. They flew back, according to Jefferey, and were met at the airport by a black Chevy Suburban. "There's been a change in plans," they were told. The driver secretly took them to home where they were held captive for three weeks, subjected to "inhumane conditions," until they signed that paper, allegedly.

"Ms. Cook was beaten. She was tortured. She was degraded. She was made to watch them torture, beat and dedgrgate others."

There were also hints in his opening statement that at one point in time, Cook was ready to commit suicide.

It's the type of attack that the church's attorneys had tried to keep quiet when they asked the judge to ban the media from the courtroom.

Spencer told the judge it's simply not true.

"This case is very simply about Debbie Cook and Wayne Baumgardner living up to the agreements they made in 2007," he explained. "They made the agreement freely, saying they would not disclose or disparage the church."

There's no doubt an agreement was signed. The video proved that.

He says Cook taunted the church. Also said she and her husband were being used as tools and pawns by anti-scientology activists.

The temporary restraining order hearing is expected to go on today and tomrrow. No word yet when the civil lawsuit will begin.

Read more: http://radio.woai.com/pages/michaelboard.html?article=9738464#ixzz1lwsS1SOR

 

[LA SCN]

...
And the truth will bury the Church of Scientology. And not a moment too soon. The Sea Org under David Miscavige's reign is an organization of torture -- mental, social, familial, financial, spiritual, religious, sexual and eventually physical.

Don't forget political and judicial as in payoffs, influence seeking false reports on victims, harassment of jurists, malevolent and frivolous lawsuits.

Anyone reading this who still is a supporting, card-carrying member of the Church of Scientology must, I repeat MUST, stand up and acknowledge the truth of what Debbie Cook says.

She is speaking the truth.

If you deny this is the truth, then YOU ARE A LIAR. YOU ARE IN THE COMPANY OF AND SUPPORTING A MISOGYNISTIC, TORTUROUS PSYCHOPATH.

IN OTHER WORDS, WAKE THE FUCK UP! ARE YOU BRAIN DEAD? HAVEN'T YOU NOTICED THE DWINDLING NUMBER OF PUBLIC AND SENIOR EXECS? HAVEN"T YOU NOTICED THE INCREASING NUMBER OF SPD's? AREN'T YOU TIRED OF GETTING FUCKED ON YOUR IDLE ORG BUILDINGS? CINDY R - YOU ARE A PI - DON'T YOU SEE THE TRUTH IN THE REAL WORLD?

For many others, this crap stopped long ago, because they refused to allow it to happen to them any longer and/or refused to support it anymore. And now it needs to stop happening to you and stop being supported by you.

Goddamnit!

TG1

Amen, brother. Great post!

 

[ClearEyed]

The Village Voice is doing a running report of Debbie's day in court today.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/scientology_dee.php

Almost as good as being there!

Thanks SDM for posting the link. I just read the Tony's first story and his later update on today's proceedings. I'd thought I'd heard just about everything on the abuses under Miscavige (and I also know about abuses prior to Miscavige) but I was still shocked by some of her testimony.

Whether the judge rules in favor of maintaining the gag order or not, As Tony points out:

"one thing doesn't hinge on the whims of a Bexar County Judge -- today, under oath, one of the most well known former executives in Scientology put on the public record a harrowing tale of degradation in the Sea Org."

Debbie's story is now on record and is actionable. IMHO, it's enough to call a Grand Jury investigation into the C of S. As I recall from the "Mary Sue et al" court case, pleading the 5th to a Grand Jury doesn't work very well. Codefendents in that case were jailed for refusing to testify.

Untrained as I am in the fine points of the law, one thing I do know is that it is a human based system. It's not all about process, codes and contracts. It's about people and their rights.

 

[LA SCN]

You absolutely must read this.

I don't really know what to say about it. I really do get that she wasn't expecting the church to come after her the way they did.

I can't for the life of me understand why she didn't expect it.

Oh, she absolutely knew Davey - the church would come after her. She is playing that little self aggrandizing gelded homo shithead like a fiddle. I'll wager she totally knows his case and his buttons. She has kept her integrity as a scilon and followed the constraints of the gag agreement. It was Spin and Marty and now Davey himself who has put the dirty laundry in public. She is being so positively and causatively coy in this drama. I love it.

It is a top notch lowers and amends project she is doing and I would sign off on her rejoining the group of real people she left while in the SO.

"If you want a war, all you have to do is bring it on.
Your call."
Debbie Cook

 

[NoName]

Can someone please tell me wtf she is referring to?

But I am still an important part of the biggest cover up in Scientology history. And for that, I expect a certain quid pro quo.

Is this Lisa MacPherson's death? What happened to Shelley? What happened to LRH? Inurement?

Seriously, does anyone here know wtf? Can anyone speculate?

Also, two observations from today:

1. This is seriously nuclear. I've never once doubted the ex-Sea Org stories, but as someone with legal training I thought prosecution might be problematic because there are plenty of legitimately religious groups that require vows of poverty (only give small allowances) and physical labor. If a court were to rule that pennence through MEST work was illegal, that could have problematic ramifications for, say, Benedictine Monks who legitimately believe in this sort of thing and practice it in a more or less non-exploitative manner. Again, I don't say this to invalidate any of you all here - I am only saying this to say why I would have had trouble ruling against the Co$ for some of the stuff that's come out in the past.

But breaking fingers and forcing people to lick bathroom floors? HOLY SHIT!!!!! My educated prediction is that this is a serious fucking game changer.

2. What is up with the 2 MR's being on the witness list? They've never cooperated with law enforcement, and that's a big point of consternation in the Ex-Scno community. I've heard speculation that Karen is probably the only person who could get Marty to talk. Have we identified another person who could get Marty to talk? If so, this is the other serious fucking game changer.

 

[LA SCN]

I got it wrong, though - Exhibit B, not C.


Here is tampabay.com's PDF of Exhibit A to make it up!

Thanks - I was experiencing severe m/u and underrun phenomena ...