Garcia v Scientology - Federal Fraud Lawsuit - Pre-Trial Hearing - October 2013

TG1

Angelic Poster
Thank you, Xenu's Boyfriend. A great, great compliment. :)

TG1
 
Last edited:

Jump

Operating teatime
Cross-Posted from the Bunker:



Anyways, I'm out of here for a while. Gonna jump in the shower and take a walk down to 801 N. Florida Ave, Tampa, and see if anything happening over at the Federal Courthouse. :coolwink:




Where's my Volunteer SP shirt?

:hmm:




Is this in your size?


beghe.jpg





:drama:
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
I saw this mentioned in another thread but just bumping this one to update it. From the Bunker earlier today:

Next in the Garcia Fraud Lawsuit: Scientology Is Asked to Explain Its Arbitration System

On Friday, federal Judge James D. Whittemore issued an order in Luis and Rocio Garcia’s fraud lawsuit against the Church of Scientology. Whittemore has given Scientology until Thursday to produce a 5-page memo explaining its arbitration system as this case approaches its next hurdle.

On October 3, Whittemore dispensed with Scientology’s attempt to disqualify the Garcia legal team. That failed church motion had put the lawsuit on hold for some six months and was, for the most part, a non-starter. (Here’s our report from the courtroom.) But even before it moved to disqualify Garcia attorneys Ted Babbitt and Ronald Weil, Scientology had filed a motion that would have the effect of dismissing the lawsuit.

In that motion, Scientology asked Whittemore to find that based on agreements the Garcias signed when they were members of the church, they should be using Scientology’s own internal arbitration system to settle any disputes about donations they’ve made. The dispute the Garcias have with them is a religious one, Scientology argues, and there’s no place for a civil law court in such a dispute — the church’s First Amendment religious freedom rights would be violated if such a lawsuit continued.

The Garcias responded by pointing out that they are suing the church over fraud, not religious matters. And besides, they added, Scientology’s arbitration system is a scam. They attached a declaration by former high-ranking church official Marty Rathbun who claimed that Scientology leader David Miscavige wanted the enrollment forms the Garcias and other members signed to be designed to confound anyone who wanted a refund.

See Full Post:
http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/20/ne...y-is-asked-to-explain-its-arbitration-system/
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Scientology realizes the Garcias can't sue them in Florida federal court. HA!

Not sure this is the right thread to mention this in, but the Church of Scientology has responded to Judge Whittemore's demand that they file a 5-page clear, plain English description of their mediation and refund policy. They actually did it. Tony O. covers it in his blog of today's date:

At http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/25/sc...aud-lawsuit-based-on-jurisdiction/#more-11263

But MORE IMPORTANTLY, the effing Church has only now (11 months after the case was filed) decided that they don't belong in federal court in Florida. They are asking to be dismissed from the case.

:hysterical:

Turns out, it's not a bad move on their part, as t1kk explains, again at

http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/25/sc...aud-lawsuit-based-on-jurisdiction/#more-11263

TG1
 

tetloj

Silver Meritorious Patron
This is bad news and could see the Garcias back to square one in the state court. :no:
 

koki

Silver Meritorious Patron
but I only hope that judges in US have some-kind of network between them,and they will realize this storm of lawsuits all over the world,and maybe start lurking moar...even here....:biggrin:
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Shouldn't this have been thought of by the Garcia's attorneys before they decided where and how to file? I mean, surely....
 

Idle Morgue

Gold Meritorious Patron
This is bad news and could see the Garcias back to square one in the state court. :no:

I don't think so - they got fleeced in Florida for most of the money.

9 months later and the Scientology attorney's realize this should not be in Florida courts...?

Translated...

The Scientology attorney's know that the Florida Court will not make Garcia arbitrate within the cult of Scientology and they told David Miscavige this - this motion is Miss Management managing the attorney's again. The attorney's don't care...Scientology just spent another $100K on this motion and the attorney's just got a bonus. My bet - it will stay in the florida court!
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
I don't think so - they got fleeced in Florida for most of the money.

9 months later and the Scientology attorney's realize this should not be in Florida courts...?

Translated...

The Scientology attorney's know that the Florida Court will not make Garcia arbitrate within the cult of Scientology and they told David Miscavige this - this motion is Miss Management managing the attorney's again. The attorney's don't care...Scientology just spent another $100K on this motion and the attorney's just got a bonus. My bet - it will stay in the florida court!

Well, I don't see how it can. I think Garcia's attorneys stuffed up badly.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
There's a new post from this morning over at the Bunker with regards the Garcia lawsuit, and some possible arguments they could use to handle the attempt by Co$ to get it dismissed.

Scientology’s Trust Issues: A Possible Garcia Legal Strategy?
http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/28/sc...-a-possible-garcia-legal-strategy/#more-11299

It seems that even if the suit is dismissed it *could* result in Co$ being sanctioned and paying attorney's fees, not to mention in one pissed off judge.
 
my question is this - can the trust be pierced by examining it's books? If it gave money to the C of S couldn't it then be shown to be a sham or a shell? Mimsey
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
my question is this - can the trust be pierced by examining it's books? If it gave money to the C of S couldn't it then be shown to be a sham or a shell? Mimsey

I don't know. I've often wondered why the Church's finances seem so mysterious and unaudited and off-limits. I could imagine that the Church might have to provide some kind of financial accounting to the IRS. But perhaps that's not true.

I have a feeling this is one of those arcane federal tax questions -- about which I know absolutely nothing.

TG1
 

Terril park

Sponsor
There's a new post from this morning over at the Bunker with regards the Garcia lawsuit, and some possible arguments they could use to handle the attempt by Co$ to get it dismissed.

Scientology’s Trust Issues: A Possible Garcia Legal Strategy?
http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/28/sc...-a-possible-garcia-legal-strategy/#more-11299

It seems that even if the suit is dismissed it *could* result in Co$ being sanctioned and paying attorney's fees, not to mention in one pissed off judge.

It could also result in the "Hole" becoming world news. At least one of the trustees were/is in the hole and probably were seen there by Marty and Mike, and for that matter Debby and others.

From the bunker:-

“The current Trustees of the Trust are Guillaume Lesevre, Catherine Rinder, Richard Fear, Mary Huber and Glen Stilo,” the 2008 document says.

Stilo indicated in his declaration that he lives in Clearwater. Lesevre, Scientology’s “Executive Director International” lives in California, and for much of the past nine years he’s been a prisoner in “The Hole,” according to several eyewitnesses. "
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
It could also result in the "Hole" becoming world news. At least one of the trustees were/is in the hole and probably were seen there by Marty and Mike, and for that matter Debby and others.

From the bunker:-

“The current Trustees of the Trust are Guillaume Lesevre, Catherine Rinder, Richard Fear, Mary Huber and Glen Stilo,” the 2008 document says.

Stilo indicated in his declaration that he lives in Clearwater. Lesevre, Scientology’s “Executive Director International” lives in California, and for much of the past nine years he’s been a prisoner in “The Hole,” according to several eyewitnesses. "

That's a 2008 document. It hasn't been confirmed yet that Guillaume Lesevre was still a trustee at the time the lawsuit was filed.

If that does turn out to be the case it can hopefully make for an interesting hearing. :)
 
Last edited:

Bea Kiddo

Crusader
I don't know. I've often wondered why the Church's finances seem so mysterious and unaudited and off-limits. I could imagine that the Church might have to provide some kind of financial accounting to the IRS. But perhaps that's not true.

I have a feeling this is one of those arcane federal tax questions -- about which I know absolutely nothing.

TG1

Interesting questions.

I know after the IRS tax win (that's what they call it), we were getting audited by independently hired auditors. I think it was yearly. I am not sure if they still require it. If I remember right, the church could hire them, but the IRS had to ok who they were. They would spend weeks going through the books at CCI.

I do know that every org has more than one bank account. Back at CCI the CO Dave Petit would explain to us what the accounts were and what they were for, but I will be danged if I remember!

----

My mom, who is still in the SO (and will be forever) has been on finance lines for pretty much the entire time. I bet she would know a lot about this. She has been FBO (Flag Banking officer... does all banking and allocating/approval of funds for that org) for many, many different orgs including CLO, Flag Bureaux, Bridge Publications, ASHO, CC, Manor Hotel, on and on and on. She has been on finance lines since mid 70's. She was even uplines for a while in the 80's. She was Deputy GI (Gross Income) Exec Int for a while, which is/was an Exec Strata post that probably doesn't exist anymore.

I bet she has a lot of answers.

Not that she will EVER speak.
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
Thanks, Bea.

I'm betting that someone that high up on finance lines would be pretty well safe from internal political bullshit. They would know too much about the Church to piss off.
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
Thanks, Bea.

I'm betting that someone that high up on finance lines would be pretty well safe from internal political bullshit. They would know too much about the Church to piss off.


Well, unfortunately, those are the kind of people that land in places like The Hole. Or on the RPF for all of eternity.

The ones who know too much.
 

JustMe

Patron Meritorious
my question is this - can the trust be pierced by examining it's books? If it gave money to the C of S couldn't it then be shown to be a sham or a shell? Mimsey


The truth is that the trust is a complete sham.

I know because I set it up.

FWIW, here is a posting I made about that trust, CSRT, a few years ago on WhyWeProtest:

https://whyweprotest.net/community/...sing-charges-dropped.39675/page-3#post-840077


[FONT=&quot]I set up CSRT myself in late 1981 as part of the launch of the new "corporate evolution" for organized scientology starting in December 81.

I am intimately familiar with its purposes.

We had much of the initial trust docs worked out with some attorneys in LA but could not get exactly what we wanted out of it which included fully controlling it while at the same time fully passing the IRS's organizational test for exemption. The local firm in LA thought it was great and their litigators said it was "unbreakable". But we knew there were problems with it.

Because the legal work on it got "bugged" I flew to Seattle and worked with two attorneys up there who were hired to help with many aspects of that "corporate evolution". The attorneys were Meade Emory, formally of the IRS, and another attorney in his firm Leon Misterix. Leon basically dictated the CSRT trust document which impressed me to no end as it was so complicated. I had an unlimited expense account and budget for attorneys then this was considered such a top priority.

Bottom line we got the trust doc finished with Leon and their firm "Lesourd, Patten, Fleming, Hartung & Emory" I believe and then flew Meade and Leon down to LA for a huge legal conference to help coordinate everything in this evolution including this trust. In the conference were many attorneys from around the world and some accountants. Names I can think of offhand include Meade and Leon plus Chris Cobb, Bob Harris, Elwood Rickless (American attorney in London), Jacob Arrevad (spelling?) an attorney from Denmark, Larry May and the ones from the local firm who initially drafted the trust that we had Meade and Leon rewrite.

I remember how the LA firm was embarrassed.

Be that as it may, yes CSRT was one of a number of trusts including even a films trust to get a percentage of local organizations' weekly money "in exchange" for having the Hubbard films to use in dissemination and/or training.

CSRT I believe initially got money from orgs to help fund management in CSI (C of S International which housed CMO Int, the ED Int's office, etc.). Three of the big perceived benefits of CSRT (as with some other trusts) were:

1) get as much money as possible out of the local orgs and out of any corporation that houses management so as to make it more difficult to get to the money via litigation against those orgs;

2) set up these entities that could in our opinions most easily pass the IRS organizational and operational tests for 501(c)(3) tax exempt status; and

3) the trusts could then become a place potentially to "safely" get money from compromised corporations such as OTC and RRF at a later time.

The bottom line is that Muldrake is right in saying we were trying to make it all confusing. Indeed, we were trying to make it very difficult for anyone to get to these funds.

CSRT as with the other trusts and corporations were at all times 100% controlled by us in top management and we were controlled by Miscavige and Hubbard. CSRT and other such legal fictions were window dressing to cover what was a centrally controlled organization trying to hide that control through numerous corporate and other legal veils.

The thing is that prior to the "corporate sortout" international management was basically just taking much of the money from local orgs using the "Flag Banking Office", etc. Obviously this created huge potential legal problems as it was making it very, very easy to pierce what corporate veils that then existed.

All these trusts and some contracts did was help hide that same taking of the money from local orgs behind better legal significances and veils that would be much more difficult to pierce.

I know this as I brought the entire corporate planning for this, including CSRT, to Miscavige himself and went over it with him for hours. Much of the questions I had to answer were showing how it still allowed the central control and the taking of the money.

In the 24 hours after that I met with all the then key Watchdog Committee members about this and again explained how they can continue to control things and get all the money they wanted out of it. This included the then WDC Chairman Marc Yager, WDC Reserves Mark Ingber and WDC member Donna Robinson.

Anyway, that's the simplicity of it.

It was supposed to be a highly defensible legal structure which would actually end up being used "honestly" in that it would actually reflect the truth of the operations in a short period of time. As it turned out it only helped hide the lies of central control of operations and money and it was used to make matters even worse.

This is written here to help explain what happened and to make what is written here a public record.[/FONT]
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thank you Denise

I am not in a very good state today to be trying to parse legalese, however I am particularly interested in the applicability/relationship of the following extract of a doc.

It seems to me it shows that the COB of RTC would have a responsibility, as vested by way of being a COB of RTC, interests and have at least some fiduciary/executive/managerial responsibility in the following quote regarding RTC.

"More particularly, the corporation is formed for the purpose of providing a corporate organization through which and by means of which the operations and activities of a church, maybe be accomplished.
Its purpose is to act as the protector of the religion of Scientology by correctly managing and using, and making available for use by other Church organizations, religious trademarks and service marks and the substantial body of confidential advanced religious technology which is a part of a body of
......."

The underlining in the above was done by me to draw attention to 'dots' that seem to connect.

I offer up this for anyone who may wish to note it, search it further, parse it legally or otherwise. I specifically don't want to imply any pressure on Denise to address this area if she does not care to do so.

And I do understand that laws of a certain jurisdiction play a role in or may be lacking in defining the responsibility of Chairs. I just haven't managed to get around to searching those out for California and seeing what (if anything) pertains hereto or not.

Another thing that puzzles me is that the Corporation of RTC is to have NO MEMBERS. That makes NO sense to me.

P.S. I don't know where, but somewhere I know Tikki was asking about CSRT and not RTC, however this is something I have wanted to bring up regarding RTC for a while. And it may well apply to both the Garcia and the Mosey cases.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Luis Garcia Responds: We Don’t Trust Scientology’s Trustee Ploy

Breaking news from the Bunker:

Luis Garcia Responds: We Don’t Trust Scientology’s Trustee Ploy
Yesterday, Luis and Rocio Garcia of Irvine, California filed their response to Scientology’s latest attempt to derail their federal fraud lawsuit in Florida. Attorney Scott Pilutik took pains to help us all understand the basic (if lesser known) legal concept of “diversity jurisdiction” that Scientology had put into question with its latest motion.

Scientology argued, nearly ten months after the Garcias filed their lawsuit against five Scientology corporate entities in January, that the Garcias had erred by filing in a federal court in Tampa. Three of the church’s entities are trusts with trustees in California, and since the Garcias are also in California, a federal court in Florida was not the correct place for the lawsuit. One of the three entities, CSRT, is particularly key to the suit because of the amount of money the Garcias had given it, and its dismissal might cripple the lawsuit.

Now, the Garcias are responding, and angrily point out that it’s awfully late for the church to be discovering the location of its own corporate officers.

Pilutik had anticipated that response, and told us that anger over Scientology’s tardy motion would not be enough to keep the lawsuit from being dismissed. So we asked Scott to give the Garcia response a good look and let us know what he thought of its argument. Have the Garcias come up with a way to counter this problem of California trustees?

<snip>

Read Full Post: http://tonyortega.org/2013/11/05/lu...t-trust-scientologys-trustee-ploy/#more-11435
 
Top