Back in December, Scientology leader David Miscavige stunned us by having the church submit an “amicus” brief on behalf of convicted serial rapist Danny Masterson, trying to sway the justices weighing Masterson’s appeal and get the That ‘70s Show actor released from prison.

At the same time, fourteen other religious groups, in an obvious coordinated effort, also submitted an amicus, also objecting to Masterson’s religious rights supposedly being violated in his criminal trial which resulted in a conviction and a sentence of 30 years to life in prison.

The Second Appellate District very quickly decided not to accept either of those amicus briefs (and without explaining why), and we wondered how Miscavige felt about being denied when our expert, TX Lawyer, estimated that the Scientology leader had spent up to half a million dollars for that attempt to sway the court.

On May 15, the court announced that it had scheduled the oral arguments hearing in Masterson’s appeal for June 25.

Then, on June 1, Miscavige had Scientology’s amicus re-submitted, this time cut down a little in word length, but essentially saying what it had in December. In what we thought was a bit of a surprise, the court this time accepted the amicus, and we posted it here in its entirety.

Now, apparently bolstered by the court accepting Scientology’s amicus, the 14 additional religious groups have also resubmitted their amicus.

We can’t see it yet until the court decides what to do with it, but we imagine that it’s much like the first version, just as Scientology’s was largely the same in both versions.

TX Lawyer wondered if the two amicus briefs had been rejected in December because the court (smartly) assumed they were a coordinated effort by Scientology, and when you considered them that way, as a combined single effort, they came in over a 25,000-word limit.

If that’s true, the court then may have accepted Dave’s Scientology amicus this second time because it was a little trimmed down. And when Dave saw that the court accepted it, now the amicus from the 14 other religious groups has also been sent in.

“Chutzpah,” TX Lawyer calls it.

Well, you can’t keep a ruthless global religious leader down, apparently.

We assume that the 14 religious groups who are submitting this new amicus are the same 14 as last time:

American Islamic Congress; Episcopal Christian Church – La Misericordia de Dios; Hindu American Foundation; Institute for Religious Tolerance, Peace and Justice; International Society for Krishna Consciousness; L.A. Interfaith Clergy Coalition; North Central California Presbytery; Professional Chaplains Inc.; Queens Federation of Churches; Sacramento Valley Family Church; Sikh Dharma (Religion) Western Hemisphere; The Alliance for Enlightened Judaism; United Muslims of America Interfaith Alliance; West Sacramento Sikh Gurdwara.

These friends of Dave, unlike Scientology itself, said more than once in their initial amicus that they had no opinion about the guilt or innocence of Danny Masterson.

Instead, they said, “they are deeply concerned about the use of religious stereotypes and religious evidence to convict an individual. Each can attest that, while they maintain certain beliefs as a group, the individuals that comprise their groups all have their own variations, understandings, and choices they make. In other words, association or membership in a religion does not dictate individual choice or mindset.”

Like Scientology, the 14 groups complained that former Scientologist Claire Headley was allowed to testify as an expert at the trial. (This is really what burns David Miscavige and has him so hopping mad.)

Unlike Scientology, the 14 groups (in an amicus written by a Mormon lawyer), are more explicit about asking that Danny Masterson’s conviction be vacated and that he be let out of prison.

Will the court also accept this re-submission, as it did from Scientology, and with less than three weeks before the all-important oral arguments hearing?

We’ll let you know.

But again, the major point we want to emphasize, and that none of the major news organizations covering the Danny Masterson case is mentioning at all, is that the Church of Scientology and its religious shills are trying to insert themselves in this criminal case, and they are trying to free a convicted serial rapist while pretending that it has something to do with “religious rights.”

It’s an incredible story, and we’re mystified why no one else is paying attention to it.

Bonus items from our tipsters

Know yourself more as a being in Puerto Rico!

Hear a recent win from Angel on the Survival Rundown:

“Well, a big win that I’ve had is that now that I’m doing the SRD for the second time, I realized that the gains I’m having are more OT, they go more directly to the case rather than to the bank, so I’ve been able to know myself more as a being and to have the certainty that I can control my environment, the people around me, I feel more self-determined and more at ease about my space and my area of confron.”

Call to get signed up now!

More tickets! More tickets!

As first heard yesterday on the Group Therapy podcast…

In response to popular demand, we are pleased to announce more tickets are now available for those of you who missed out last time. This second release has extremely limited availability and once they’re sold out, there won’t be any more, so please head to howdycon2026.com to get yours before they’re gone!

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Once again we discussed the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders.

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

— The Proprietor

Read more

We have some breaking news for you. Alex Barnes-Ross and other former Scientologists visited 10 Downing Street today in London, supported by the Aftermath Foundation. Here’s the statement they released…

EX-SCIENTOLOGISTS TO DELIVER PETITION TO DOWNING STREET CALLING ON UK GOVERNMENT TO ACT ON SYSTEMIC ABUSE

London, UK — A group of former members of the Church of Scientology will hand-deliver a petition to 10 Downing Street at 2:30pm on Sunday 7 June 2026, calling on the UK Government to launch an inquiry into abuse within high-control groups and to close legal loopholes that allow such practices to continue.

The group of ex-Scientologists will present a petition along with a dossier of dozens of first-hand survivor testimonies documenting decades of abuse, coercive control, financial exploitation, child safeguarding failures, and forced labour that have occurred within the Church in the United Kingdom.

The handover is expected to take place at the door of 10 Downing Street, where the group will pose for photographs with the petition.

The petition urges the Government to take decisive action, including:

• Launching a public inquiry into high-control groups in the UK

• Strengthening safeguarding laws to recognise spiritual and ritual abuse

• Closing gaps in legislation that allow coercive control outside domestic settings (Serious Crime Act 2015)

• Introducing mandatory reporting requirements for abuse within religious organisations, as proposed by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Safeguarding in Faith Communities.

The petition draws on historic findings, including the 1971 Foster Report, which described Scientology as “socially harmful,” as well as testimonies from former members.

“This is not about belief — it’s about abuse, exploitation, and the failure of safeguarding systems to protect vulnerable people, especially children,” said Alexander Barnes-Ross, who has been leading protests against Scientology’s abusive practices in the UK for the last three years. “For too long, we have been ignored - the media often too afraid to even call us survivors. The Government has previously recognised the harms of this organisation, the Charity Commission ruled it “does not benefit the public” and yet it continues to operate unchanged and free of scrutiny to this day. We are bringing our experiences directly to the Government’s door and asking them to act in order to right the wrongs of the past and prevent further harm.”

The accompanying testimonies describe patterns of alleged abuse spanning decades, including excessive working hours for little or no pay, pressure to sever contact with family members, failure to report crimes to authorities and exploitation of minors within organisational structures. The testimonies demonstrate a systemic issue that has spanned decades, with one account from the 1970s and another as recently as this year.

— Alex Barnes-Ross

Says Alex: “This is an historic moment for Scientology survivors in the UK. For too long, the church of Scientology have gotten away with widespread and systemic harms, and today we went to the heart of government to ask for their help putting an end to it. Our petition calls on the government to open an inquiry into Scientology’s practices, and work with us to find a solution that ends their abusive practices once and for all.”

Amir Essalhi joins us on Group Therapy!

Today at noon Eastern subscribers will receive Episode 171 of our special podcast series, “Group Therapy.”

We discuss the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders, and this week we’re joined by Katherine Olson, Patty Moher, Alex Barnes-Ross and Amir Essalhi!

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

We’re offering this series as thanks to our subscribers for helping to support the work we do here at the Underground Bunker.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Paperwork continues to come in regarding Scientology leader David Miscavige’s grand plans to tear up some rural fields in order to accommodate parking for his annual big tent party at the autumn IAS gala at Saint Hill, the church’s UK headquarters in East Grinstead, England.

Not surprisingly, various environmental groups have been expressing their concerns to the Mid Sussex District Council, which will have to make a decision about whether to allow Dave to bulldoze an “Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty” in order to park a few more cars for an event that takes place for only three days of the year.

We’ve told you in the past that one particular concern is that Saint Hill is located in critical Great Crested Newt territory, which is taken very seriously in that country.

And Alex Barnes-Ross, who started this entire mess when he noticed that Dave had never applied for the proper permits for his big tent each year, tells us that there’s another development on the amphibian front.

After it was pointed out that paving over some fields where newts were living and procreating might be detrimental to the little creatures, Scientology said that a certain amount of newt death was unavoidable, but they would do their best to be careful.

Not good enough, the environmental group NatureSpace now says, and is requiring that if the District Council approves the plans, Scientology is going to have to apply for a special license so the environmentalists can monitor every step of the process. And also, that it won’t happen immediately.

“It is recommended that the NatureSpace certificate is submitted to this planning authority at least 6 months prior to the intended commencement of any works on site,” the new document says.

“Which means no chance of works starting this side of the 2026 IAS event,” Alex points out.

Alex himself submitted a new response to Scientology’s latest plans, and in particular he’s pointing to what’s been taking place lately in another of Scientology’s hot spots — Clearwater, Florida.

The city council there this week took an initial step in turning over a road to Miscavige that he wants as he begins construction of L. Ron Hubbard Hall, a massive performance space which will not only accommodate events like the L. Ron Hubbard birthday in March, but also will transform to host a ball like that which takes place at the IAS event in England.

The implication is clear: Once Dave has his grand hall in Clearwater, he’ll be holding all of Scientology’s big annual events there, including the New Year’s party (traditionally held in Los Angeles) and the IAS Gala.

So, if that’s the case, and the IAS Gala is likely to move to Clearwater once the new Hall is built, why should the Mid Sussex District Council approve permanent, environment-damaging change in a pristine rural spot in England? It makes no sense, he says.

But will the Mid Sussex District Council agree? We await their vote in the coming weeks.

Speaking of Alex, yesterday he held a special event in East Grinstead, and we asked him how it went…

Last night, a group of ex-Scientologists took the stage in East Grinstead to bravely share their stories to a room of 40 local residents. After I introduced the speakers, we heard from Karen Pressley via video about how Scientology uses celebrities to mask abuse. Former Edinburgh executive Amir Essalhi and ex-staffer Pete Griffiths then joined me on stage to discuss working conditions at the IAS event; followed by Bonnie Woods who detailed how she won a landmark High Court case after Scientology engaged in a targeted campaign of harassment against her. There wasn’t a dry eye in the room when Zoe Hancock shared her story of being transported from Sunderland to work at Saint Hill as a teenager before being groomed by one of the Jive Aces, who was in his 30s. She was 14. And then the formidable Danielle Chamberlin detailed how she was locked in the chainlocker by L. Ron Hubbard aboard the Flagship Apollo.

The event drew to a close with a discussion between myself and Dr. Alexandra Stein, a renowned cult expert who explained the campaign we have been working on with the Family Survival Trust to amend our coercive control legislation.

During audience Q&A it was clear that residents of East Grinstead were shocked to hear just how horrific the abuses are that occur at Saint Hill. The message seems to have gotten through. Scientology may donate £50,000 to local charities once a year, but that doesn’t justify the power and influence this organisation attempts to assert over the town and the lives of Scientologists.

When I mentioned the planning application and how it is due to be heard by the District Planning Committee, headed up by our favourite Cllr. Dick Sweatman, you could almost feel the disgust. “How is that legal?” one audience member asked.

Overall, this was the first in what I hope will be many events to come. It wasn’t an attack on Scientology’s beliefs, but an opportunity for survivors to share their stories. If there’s one thing that stuck with me, it’s that despite the abuse they suffered and the threats of Fair Game, survivors are steadfast in their commitment to use their voice… and I am in awe at the bravery and courage of those who spoke last night.

Every voice matters, and every story counts.

— Alex Barnes-Ross

Amir Essalhi joins us on Group Therapy!

Today at noon Eastern subscribers will receive Episode 171 of our special podcast series, “Group Therapy.”

We discuss the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders, and this week we’re joined by Katherine Olson, Patty Moher, Alex Barnes-Ross and Amir Essalhi!

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

We’re offering this series as thanks to our subscribers for helping to support the work we do here at the Underground Bunker.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

We’re fortunate to have appellate attorney TX Lawyer at the Underground Bunker to help us understand Scientology litigation.

We hope you enjoy this discussion with him!

— The Proprietor

Read more

After the Second Appellate District in Los Angeles delivered a nearly total victory to the Jane Doe victims and rejected Scientology’s appeal of its anti-SLAPP in the Danny Masterson civil lawsuit, we were left with a question: What about the AI sanctions?

If you remember, during briefing in the appeal, Scientology had called the court’s attention to what appeared to be hallucinatory AI citations in a document from the Boies Schiller attorneys representing the Jane Does.

Boies Schiller partner John Kucera confirmed that AI had been used in the preparation of the document, and he took responsibility for the errors, without really explaining how they had happened.

Scientology wanted the court to deal very severely with the blunder. Misuse of AI has become a persistent problem in the courts, but this was the first time a national, prestigious firm like Boies Schiller had been caught up in such a debacle.

Scientology not only wanted the court to come down hard on Kucera with sanctions, but also for the Jane Does to forfeit the arguments in their brief that were tainted by the AI glitches.

Instead, the court essentially ignored the AI issue as it affirmed the lower court ruling of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Upinder Kalra, denying Scientology’s anti-SLAPP except for a couple of very minor changes to the Jane Does’ lawsuit.

It was a nearly total victory for the plaintiffs, and at some point we expect the lawsuit will get back to Judge Kalra’s court, where the Jane Does are asking to add another plaintiff and civil racketeering allegations to beef up the case.

Our expert, appellate attorney TX Lawyer, had warned us that before it can return to Judge Kalra’s court, Scientology could throw up several procedural hurdles to slow it down, including asking for a rehearing.

And that is what Scientology has done. But in its petition for a rehearing, it’s not raising an objection about the ruling so much as asking, hey, what about the AI sanctions?

And Scientology understands that the appeals court may simply be handling that issue separately. As you will see in their petition, below, they point out that if the court issues sanctions against Kucera, they can just ignore this petition.

We thought you’d want to see the whole thing, which for once is a brief document.

PETITION FOR REHEARING

This rehearing petition presents an issue of critical importance to the legal profession: the abuse of artificial intelligence. Plaintiffs’ counsel has admitted using artificial intelligence tools to prepare the respondents’ brief. He has admitted filing that brief without verifying the citations. And it is undisputed that the brief contained significant and material citation errors.

Yet this court has not imposed sanctions. Although the court issued an order to show cause identifying the basis for sanctions and signaling that the issue would be argued alongside the merits, the court addressed sanctions neither at oral argument nor in its opinion. If the court still intends to resolve the sanctions issue, it can simply deny this petition as moot.

But if the opinion represents the court’s final word on sanctions, then the court should grant this petition and impose them. The legal profession is witnessing a rapid rise in artificial intelligence abuse. Courts must provide guidance on how lawyers should navigate this new territory—and on the consequences when a lawyer wields artificial intelligence in a manner that violates ethical duties. (See Sheerer v. Panas (2026) 119 Cal.App.5th 367, 371 [explaining that the rule of law is “threatened when litigants falsify the truth, especially when done by using technological innovations that can spin persuasive webs of untruths and invent legal principles or authorities”].)

The Church is unaware of a single court that has declined to impose sanctions when confronted with clear evidence of artificial intelligence abuse. This court should not be the first. Declining to do so suggests that an attorney can escape accountability for improperly using artificial intelligence tools simply by admitting he did so.

Declining to impose sanctions also prejudices the Church. As explained, the Church incurred substantial fees identifying the materially erroneous citations and arguments, bringing them to this court’s attention, and litigating plaintiffs’ motion to file a replacement brief—which this court denied. (See ARB 8–9, 25–27, 30–33, 41–48 [ARB Attachment A]; see generally Opp. to Mot. for Leave to File Replacement Brief.) That work was necessary only because plaintiffs’ counsel violated his ethical duties. A decision not to impose sanctions to make the Church whole disregards the significant harm those violations caused.

This issue was extensively briefed. Plaintiffs did not object to the court’s order to show cause. If the court does not intend to issue a separate order, it should grant this petition, address sanctions, and award the Church the fees incurred as a direct result of plaintiffs’ counsel’s ethical violations.

— Jasjaap S. Sidhu, Jeremy B. Rosen, Ryan M. Dunbar | Horvitz & Levy LLP

— Jeffrey L. Steinfeld | White & Case LLP

Attorneys for Defendants and Appellants Church of Scientology International and Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International

TX Lawyer on new developments in the Danny Masterson appeals!

Today at noon Eastern, subscribers will receive a special podcast episode featuring appellate attorney TX Lawyer.

We’re offering this podcast as thanks to our subscribers for helping to support the work we do here at the Underground Bunker.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

It was only an initial vote, and the Clearwater city council will have to go through it again in a couple of weeks, but last night, after hearing public testimony, the council voted 3 to 2 in favor of giving Scientology leader David Miscavige what he wants: shutting down public access to a portion of South Garden Avenue, which will produce a mega-block that will be the centerpiece of Scientology’s Vatican City in Florida.

Mayor Bruce Rector and council member Lina Teixeira were the two no votes, and both emphasized how much vacating a street like S. Garden Ave goes against everything the city has been trying to do to revitalize its downtown.

As Mayor Rector pointed out, they should be adding streets to bring more people downtown, not taking them away.

But after councilman David Allbritton had very obviously changed his position again (after briefly shocking everyone last year by siding with the no votes) it was a foregone conclusion that Miscavige was going to get his way.

Just to be sure, Scientology had more than twice as many members show up for the meeting last night to speak in support of the project (59 of them) as those who signed up to speak against it.

One of those who did speak against the project was Mark Bunker, who made a very astute observation.

I’ve been looking into Scientology now for close to 30 years, and the one thing that I know is Scientologists are good, decent, smart people who truly believe they’re saving the planet. And I know that because most of my friends now are former Scientologists, and I’ve gotten to know many, many people who grew up in it and experienced the entire setup.

I can’t say that L. Ron Hubbard was a good, kind, smart person. He was a good con man. And I hate the fact that we’re going to have a giant monument to him as the gateway into our downtown as people drive down to the beach.

But there’s no stopping that. I know we’re not here to say, “No, we can’t have an L. Ron Hubbard Hall.” It’s about the road.

I remember when the staff brought this forward. Reading the staff’s report, they all said, “No, don’t turn over the road. We need it for our safety vehicles, we need it for the public, and Scientology doesn’t need that road. They want it, but they don’t need it.”

I would hope that you would reserve it for the public. But that’s something you shall decide shortly.

And decide they did.

Initially, when Scientology requested S. Garden Avenue last year, it was willing to pay $1.3 million for it as it developed L. Ron Hubbard Hall on the east side of the street and L. Ron Hubbard Park on the west.

But when it looked like the city council was going to turn it down, Miscavige had his attorneys send a new proposal arguing that if the street is vacated, Scientology wouldn’t have to pay a dime for the underlying roadbed. Because of the way the right-of-way was established in the 1920s, Scientology’s attorneys argued, the landowners abutting the road still owned the roadbed, and today the owner of all the land around the street is the Church of Scientology.

Florida’s attorney general, James Uthmeier, agreed with that assessment, and he warned the city about using any “discriminatory” language regarding a church being involved in the transaction.

Last night, Mayor Rector and Teixeira were careful to avoid anything that could be seen in that light. Both emphasized that shutting down the street simply doesn’t fit with the city’s adopted plans for downtown development.

But the other three council members — Allbritton, Ryan Cotton, and Mike Mannino — didn’t share that concern, and voted to approve Scientology’s application.

Scientology’s attorney, Robert Potter, agreed to wait as long as possible before actually shutting down the street as the project of building L. Ron Hubbard Hall commences. But eventually, the Hall will join the Flag Building and the Fort Harrison Hotel as Scientology’s grand vision for its Vatican, its “spiritual mecca.”

In this Scientology rendering, we’ve outlined S. Garden Ave, the short street in red that sits right between the planned L. Ron Hubbard Hall on the right, and L. Ron Hubbard Park in the foreground (the Flag Building, to the left, already exists).

When it was his chance to speak, Brooks Gibbs of the Save the Garden movement tried to convince the council that giving over so much of the city’s property to one entity went against what this country’s founders intended. Quoting John Adams, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson, he said that not only would handing over this street to Scientology be immoral, it would be un-American.

But in the end, Dave got his way.

Another vote is required, but it’s hard to see it going any differently than it did last night.

After the meeting, Bunker told us that he was feeling pretty dispirited, and he thought of more he would have told the council if he’d had more time.

“I wanted to talk about the size of the crowd of Scientologists filling these events, to talk about the way they created a staged opening of The Good Life Showroom. And how things may look promising on Cleveland Street, but they are still using deception to launch this whole thing. We can’t trust that even if they do fill up all the buildings, will David Miscavige be micromanaging the downtown like he does Scientology?

“And if there was more time, I wanted to talk about the Scientologists who said they had donated millions to the Hall. I was going to point out they will continue to donate millions for years to come, as they did with Flag and other buildings around the globe whose openings are always delayed. They would have had to press the buzzer and drag me away from the mic.”

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Prepare yourself for a brutal story of Scientology manipulation and extortion, carried out for no more reason than totalitarian control of vulnerable people…

Today marks ten years since I last saw my daughter, Julia.

I left Scientology in May of 2010. That same month I was told to “unfriend” two veteran Sea Org members who had “gone to the dark side,” according to the Santa Barbara DSA (local rep of the Office of Special Affairs, Scientology’s secret police), Lee Holzinger.

I contacted them and asked them what happened. They told me about the Tampa Bay Times article “The Truth Rundown.” I then contacted Lee and told him what they said. He provided me with “dead agent” material about the newspaper and told me to report to ASHO Ethics.

I reported to Ethics and was shown the references about how I was becoming a Suppressive Person by being “in comm” with other SP’s. Then I was sent off to work on “conditions.”

Time went on and I tried to just fade away from Scientology. I pretended that I had stopped talking to SP’s, but I had only just begun my search down the rabbit hole of “entheta” and it made a lot more sense to me than what I was being told by Ethics.

It was at that point that I began telling my daughter Julia and my husband Derrick about ‘The Hole’ and other things that I had read about. Derrick got so angry at me for going on the Internet and contacting SP’s that he said. “What’s next, are you going to start protesting with Anonymous?”

Things got so heated between us during this time period because he was insisting I go back to Ethics. I told him I was done and if he couldn’t deal with that fact, then we should get divorced. I could not go back, knowing what I knew at that point. His response was, “are you kidding, you are my wife and I love you.” At which point we came to a mutual agreement that if he wanted to continue with Scientology that was fine as long as he was OK with me not continuing.

Around this time, I contacted Chris Shelton, who I had known from when he was the Sup at Santa Barbara Org (he was also at our wedding). I learned a lot from Chris and he helped me feel a bit more grounded during this time I was peeking behind curtains at the truth.

He referred me to Rachel Bernstein for professional guidance. Imagine a Scientologist picking up the phone to call a psych for help? I did, and I’m forever grateful for her help.

Julia and Derrick continued to go to the Santa Barbar Org together. This is when she learned to drive. She was in 11th grade at the time. She went to the New Year’s Eve event in January 2014 and met Atreyu, the EO at Pasadena Org at the time.

By the end of the month, she decided to drop out of school, go live at Atreyu’s parents house, and join staff at Pasadena Org. When she announced this to us and we said no way. That’s when the yelling and screaming began. We told her that it was not OK because she was on a Project Prepare to join staff at Santa Barbara Org and part of that agreement was that she needed to graduate first. She was also mid co-audit on the Survival Rundown.

She left home in the middle of the night anyway. She dropped out of high school that week. She began her training to become an auditor.

Somehow, to Derrick’s credit he was able to regain civil communication with Julia. Mostly with just “good roads/good weather.”

In September 2015 Derrick thought he had gone Clear, so they wanted him to go to ASHO (in Los Angeles) to do his CCRD. After his last experience at ASHO getting the False Purpose Rundown, he had to get cleaned up on that at Flag (in Clearwater, Florida) because it went so badly. I helped him book his flight to Flag and did a write up for the Flag Master-at-Arms about how I had stopped talking to SP’s, etc.

This was before he even went there. It seemed OK, but then when he got there, they said he could not go onto his CCRD because he had to handle me. He was not happy about that at all.

In November 2015 Derrick was diagnosed with Stage 4 Colon Cancer. Suddenly “handling his wife” was low on his list. Before he began chemo, I set it up for us all to get together for a family portrait. Also, Julia and Atreyu later came up for Thanksgiving.

We continued to maintain friendly relations.

March of 2016, we went on a family vacation to Hawaii. Derrick had just been in the hospital with sepsis, but we all made it and had a wonderful time.

On June 4, 2016 we went to Universal Studios for my youngest son’s 9th birthday. Little did we know that would be the last time we would see Julia.

In July Derrick had surgery on his colon and liver. This was after a full round of chemo to shrink the cancer. He was recovering from that when he was summoned to go to ASHO Ethics about reports Julia had written on us. They also wanted me to go down for an interview. I figured they just wanted to make sure I was cool, not connected to SP’s and such, so that Julia could get onto her CCRD. I went down for an interview and lied through my teeth. They told me I needed to continue with my ethics program from 2010.

I told them I was good, that I had moved on over the six years and I was fine. They insisted. I said. “and if I don’t?” They said then we will “comm ev” you. I said “have fun with that” and walked out.

From August to October 2016 Derrick continued to report into ASHO Ethics. They kept refusing to show him the Knowledge Report Julia wrote on him. Instead, they kept sending him home to “handle” me. He would tell me what they talked about each time and then I’d tell him what they would require him to do next.

After about four or five times of him going down there, he started to see that what I was telling him was true. He even said to them “you know Tammy told me you would say that.” Finally, he got really pissed and told them he wanted the KR’s he was promised. They said he’d have to come down with me to get both of the KR’s. I agreed, but I told Derrick that they would try to separate us when we got down there. When we were walking through the parking lot holding hands, I said. “together we stand, divided we fall.” We were in agreement.

That’s exactly what they tried to do. At first, he refused, but then he gave in. They wanted me to read a list of references which I could recite verbatim, so instead I went to talk to the Chaplain, who was Ken Hoden at the time. Nice guy, but had no power by that time.

They held Derrick in a room for four hours. He had just been treated for C-diff and was very ill. He refused a meter check due to being ill. The Dir I&R said, “You can be declared for refusing a meter check.” Derrick said, “Do you know how the meter reacts on someone who has been through chemo?” That shut her up and they let him go. I was waiting in the hallway when he came out. He looked at me and said, “Let’s get the fuck out of here.”

In November ASHO Ethics called Derrick down to let him know they were calling a comm ev on both of us. Within a day or two, every Scientologist Derrick knew had unfriended him on Facebook. I had already taken preemptive steps to unfriend all Scientology friends two years earlier. That night I asked Derrick if he was finally willing to look at a few things. He said, “I’m not going to look at anything on the Internet.” I said. “I understand, here’s a story I’d like you to read.” I handed him Lois Reisdorf’s story which I had printed out from Mike Rinder’s site.

I didn’t tell him I got it from the Internet. Her story was so much like ours that he was blown away. Over the next few days, I began showing him more information. We would read The Underground Bunker and Mike Rinder’s site every day and talk about what we read.

We were both comm ev’d with the F&R’s coming out in 2017. I had my husband back and he was on my side. We were united in trying to reconnect with Julia. She sent a disconnection letter to us after the F&R’s came out saying, “I see you both have a program…” Barf.

The years 2017 to 2021 were a blur. Most of our attention was on Derrick beating cancer. We also took that time to go to many concerts and vacations. He retired from being a journeyman electrician in 2018. By 2019 he was running out of options for treatments. I was able to contact the MAA at ASHO to send Julia a message that her dad was going in for risky treatments and he wanted to see her just in case he didn’t make it.

She came up and met with him alone at a coffee shop in Nov 2019.

I begged Derrick to let Julia know that he was out of Scientology. This was an argument I would lose. He wanted to be able to say his goodbyes to her. If he told her he was out, she’d not have those final days with him. I could not begrudge either of them their final goodbyes, but it left me being the bad guy. So not fair.

In December 2020, Derrick went onto Hospice. Again, I jumped through hoops to reach Julia to let her know the situation. The MAA allowed her to call him to talk with him. By that time Julia had broken up with Atreyu and moved to Clearwater with her husband-to-be, Orr Pilo.

Julia would call her dad, he would often miss her calls, because by that time he was heavily drugged and confined to bed. He was so weak the last time she called that I had to prop the phone up for him. I knew this was the last time they would talk. They were still talking good roads stuff, so I put a note in front of Derrick and told him to let her know this may be the last time they talked. He then told her he was fading fast and asked if she had anything she wanted to say. She cried and told him how much she loved him.

I was crying too. That was their last conversation. He died on March 13, 2021. I had to let her know via his email that he passed. She responded by saying thanks for taking care of dad. That was the last time I heard from her.

I would like to add that over all this time I continued to send letters, gifts, pictures, and updates on family. It was like I was trying to come up with the ultimate cheer that would reach her. Crickets.

There’s no going back to good roads, good weather with Julia. Especially with my name penned to so many comments on Tony’s site, lol.

She cannot communicate with anyone else in the family because they all know about Scientology being a cult. The only way she will be able to talk to anyone in her family again would be if she left Scientology. Right now, she’s on OT 7. My only hope is that she’s just as disappointed as others were when they reached that pinnacle.

The last thing I did was send her Russell Miller’s book. No more good roads, good weather for me. That has not worked. Julia is smart, sassy, and strong. If I can make it out, so can she.

— Tammy Synovec

Survivors speaking out at UK event this weekend

Our friend ‘Apostate Alex’ Barnes-Ross has organized an event featuring speakers who will reveal what they went through at Scientology’s UK headquarters, Saint Hill Manor, in East Grinstead, England.

Go to Alex’s site to get more information about this event, taking place on Saturday!

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Wow! After previously rejecting Scientology’s attempt to sway Danny Masterson’s appeal, this time the court has accepted the church’s 70-page ‘amicus’ brief with only three weeks to go before the oral arguments hearing.

Masterson was convicted in 2023 of two counts of forcible rape that put him in prison for 30 years to life. He’s currently housed at the Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo County. He’s appealing that conviction with attorney Cliff Gardner, who will be speaking for the That ‘70s Show actor at the June 25 hearing in Los Angeles.

In December, the Second Appellate District rejected Scientology’s previous attempt to put its weight on the scales with an amicus brief, and without explaining why it was denying to consider a document that our expert, TX Lawyer, said could have cost Scientology leader David Miscavige up to $500,000 to assemble.

This time, however, the court, again without any explanation why, has decided to accept a new version of the amicus that was submitted to the court on May 8.

The amicus is a litany of complaints about the way Judge Charlaine Olmedo and prosecutors Reinhold Mueller and Ariel Anson spoke about Scientology at trial. That harsh language, and Olmedo’s rulings, violated First Amendment guidelines about religion in court, and infringed Masterson’s religious rights, the church argues.

We’ll be very interested to see if the three justices actually ask about this stuff during the June 25 hearing. But for now, we knew you’d want to see the entire thing.

Miscavige must be thrilled that the court might actually be mulling this stuff. But either way, we will point out again that the important thing is that it shows, without ambiguity, that the Church of Scientology and its leader are still fully behind Masterson, and are risking their own reputations in order to help spring a convicted serial rapist from prison.

And that’s a conscious choice, to be sure.

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DANIEL PETER MASTERSON, Defendant and Appellant.

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF AMICUS

Masterson’s conviction was irretrievably tainted by First Amendment violations—in a way that improperly decided religious questions and smeared his religion. These violations denied him a fair trial and, in the process, subjected all Scientologists (and other people and institutions of faith) to intolerable added risks, merely for embracing and practicing their most sacred beliefs.

Imagine, for example, a Catholic being tried on criminal charges in a trial where the judge: states that Catholic beliefs are relevant to whether a crime was committed; egregiously misinterprets Canon law and uses that mischaracterization to justify the otherwise inconsistent testimony of complaining witnesses at a preliminary hearing; bases the decision to bind the Catholic over for criminal trial on that false reading of doctrine; continues to use the false statement of Canon law throughout the trial despite being told by Church authority that this interpretation is wrong; allows a defrocked former nun to testify as an expert on Catholic dctrine; and permits the prosecution to malign the Church and its teachings at will, thus making the case as much about Catholicism as the alleged crimes. Imagine too that the judge shows overt hostility to the Church through judicial comments and actions, then instructs the jury to consider heretical testimony about Church teachings “for the truth of the matter” in deciding guilt or innocence.

This should be unthinkable in an American court committed to constitutional neutrality. Yet that is precisely what occurred, albeit with a different religion, in this case. And it was an affront to the Constitution and contrary to deeply rooted judicial precedent—especially considering Scientology’s status as a relatively new and unfamiliar religion.

To help the Court understand how the First Amendment was transgressed here, this brief will first describe some Scientology-related events of the trial — including repeated mischaracterizations or fabrications of Scientology doctrine and practice. The brief will then detail how the First Amendment was repeatedly violated by state actors in two distinct ways.

First, the trial court improperly decided religious questions and allowed religious issues to be put to the jury in determining whether Masterson was guilty. In so doing, the trial court, in clear violation of the First Amendment, allowed Scientology, and mischaracterizations about its beliefs and practices, to become a central part of the case — so extensively that the words “Scientology” and “Scientologist” were repeated 800 times, more often than variations of the word “rape,” the charged crime. (The State in its response brief continues this disturbing pattern with 60 more references to the Scientology religion than to the alleged crimes.) The trial court’s rulings thus allowed a stream of testimony that contradicted and ridiculed the Church’s beliefs and practices, and which the court presented “for the truth of the matter” for evaluation by the jury.

The second way the First Amendment was violated involved governmental hostility towards Masterson’s religion, manifested in ways that infected nearly every aspect of the case. This hostility extended beyond the religious animus of the police detectives and prosecuting attorneys, who investigated, charged, and prosecuted this case with the direct participation of a Scientology apostate who had engaged in a years-long public campaign of vitriolic attacks on the faith.

The trial court itself exhibited a lack of neutrality, and even hostility, to the Scientology faith through its treatment of courtroom visitors suspected of being affiliated with the Church; its comparison of the Church to violent gangs and white supremacists; and by its prejudicial rulings. And the State, in this very appeal, has continued the pattern of governmental hostility by including in its brief gratuitous, irrelevant testimony hostile to the Church. The First Amendment does not allow government actors to show non-neutrality, much less the hostility shown here, to any faith.

The interests of Amicus Church of Scientology International (“Church” or “CSI”) in this case are by now clear. The Church condemns rape and all forms of sexual violence. But no Scientologist will be safe if courts may judge members of the faith by substituting the court’s own invention of Scientology doctrine for the religion’s actual teachings, let alone issue rulings and allow hostile comments based on those erroneous inventions. And no faith community of any kind will be safe if judges are allowed to interpret scripture to resolve evidentiary issues or to present religious issues and evidence to a jury to use in deciding whether a defendant is guilty of criminal charges.

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND

A. Overview of the Church of Scientology and Relevant Scientology Scripture

Church of Scientology International is the Mother Church of the Scientology religion. Recognized by the IRS as a tax-exempt church, CSI oversees the application of Scientology religious doctrine in Scientology churches, missions, and groups in more than 167 countries, including the United States. (5 CT 1369.) CSI is responsible for defending the Scientology religion and preventing the misuse of its doctrine. (5 CT 1361.)

As a religion established in the mid-20th century (as compared to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism, which have existed for millennia), Scientology’s doctrine and practices may be unfamiliar to many

Scientologists are not modern Benedictine monks, cloistered in enclaves separate from society and adhering to their own invented mores and laws. Rather, they are as much woven into our nation’s fabric as are Baptists, Roman Catholics, or members of the Jewish faith. Scientologists can be found in all walks of life — they are accountants, actors, doctors, musicians, schoolteachers, football players, mechanics, and bus drivers. And they are to be found throughout our country’s cities, suburbs, and rural towns — where they vote, celebrate the Fourth of July, obey the law, go to church, contribute meaningfully to their communities, and take their kids to the park — like everybody else.

Against that real-world backdrop, Scientology Scripture leaves no ambiguity regarding the duties and conduct expected of its members with respect to criminal behavior. The Church’s written doctrine commands obedience to the laws of the land, condemns criminal behavior and recognizes the rights of victims. But despite this clear doctrine, in the proceeding below, state actors repeatedly asserted the opposite — purporting to define Scientology doctrine themselves.

The court began this cascade of constitutional violations at the preliminary hearing, where it improperly interpreted the teachings of Defendant’s faith against him. (“The Court will interpret the pages [of Scientology text] that were just shown.…”) (5 CT 1399.)

The gravity of the court’s error was compounded by the fact that its interpretation was flatly wrong. This mischaracterization of Scientology doctrine launched an onslaught of false statements about the religion that were advanced and repeated multiple times by the court, the prosecutor and/or the prosecution’s designated “expert” throughout the trial. They repeatedly attributed to Scientology doctrine that does not exist, presenting these fabrications as if they reflected actual Church Scripture. Each instance imposed the State’s forbidden interpretation of Church Scripture in place of the religion’s own ecclesiastical authority, creating a false and distorted picture of the religion to prejudice the jury. This was done despite the Church’s attempt to avoid such misinterpretation through filing an amicus brief. (5 CT 1363.)

These misinterpretations were not incidental. They served a tactical purpose: to bolster the credibility of the complaining witnesses and to create a hostile environment for Masterson’s faith in the courtroom to his prejudice. By falsely claiming that Scientology doctrine forbade contact with law enforcement or required internal handling through “Scientology law,” the prosecution transformed its mischaracterizations of religious belief into an evidentiary explanation for the complaining witnesses’ conduct. In doing so, the State improperly allowed its case to rest not on evidence, but on a perversion of faith.

Because courts may not determine or define religious doctrine, Amicus now sets forth the authoritative doctrine of the Church on the matters the State and the court purported to interpret. As the ecclesiastical authority authorized to provide a declaration of Scientology doctrine, Amicus declares below the official Church doctrine — to which courts are required to defer — on the core doctrinal issues that were raised during these proceedings, and which Amicus was expressly denied any opportunity to rebut there. See, e.g., McCarthy v. Fuller, 714 F.3d 971, 978 (7th Cir. 2013) (“The [amicus] brief is the unquestionably authentic statement of the Holy See…. We have no authority to question it.”).

B. Mischaracterization of Scientology Doctrine on Reporting Crimes by Other Scientologists

The trial court, the prosecutors and their purported “expert” falsely claimed throughout the trial that Scientologists are forbidden from reporting crimes committed by other Scientologists to law enforcement. (5 CT 1442–1443; 20 RT 1333, 1336, 1362; 27 RT 2458–2459; 33 RT 3259.) This assertion, presented as fact to the jury, has no basis in Scientology doctrine.

The false depictions of Defendant’s faith that permeated the trial originated in the preliminary hearing, where the court held Masterson over for trial based on its own misinterpretation of Scientology doctrine:

The court’s findings of credibility at the preliminary hearing stage is based both on its evaluation of the witnesses as they testified and the exhibits received, including People’s [Exhibit] 5, the [Scientology] Ethics book, and People’s [Exhibit] 6, the written [Scientology] policies.

These exhibits indicate that the written doctrine of Scientology not only discourages but prohibits one Scientologist from reporting another Scientologist in good standing to outside law enforcement. This expressly written doctrine sufficiently explains to this court the hesitancy and lateness in reporting the crimes charged to law enforcement and also explains the inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimony and the actions taken subsequent to the events that comprise the charges.

Thus, based on the testimony and exhibits presented, the court finds there is sufficient evidence to bind Mr. Masterson over for jury trial. (5 CT 1442–1443 (emphases added).)

The court’s statement of Church doctrine was flat-out wrong. Yet the court used its interpretation to explain away the complaining witnesses’ inconsistent stories and their prolonged delay in reporting.

After that ruling, the Church provided the court with its authoritative explanation of Scientology doctrine, making unmistakably clear that the court’s interpretation had no basis in Scripture. (5 CT 1363.) Rather than correct the error, the court rejected the Church’s clarification and adhered to its own invented construction of doctrine. (25 RT 1993.)

This flawed ruling fatally infected all subsequent proceedings and became the “law of the case.” Subsequently, for example, in ruling on a motion in limine, the court allowed testimony at trial “that Scientologists are prohibited or discouraged from reporting other Scientologists in good standing to outside law enforcement or face repercussions for doing so.” (11 CT 3184.) The court then instructed the jury prior to deliberation that it could:

[C]onsider evidence of Scientology…to explain the alleged victims’ belief regarding Scientology principles and practices related to A, reporting another Scientologists [sic] in good standing to outside law enforcement. (33 RT 3255.)

It is patently absurd for a court or anyone to undertake to interpret a religion’s doctrine by reading just a few passages of scripture. That is especially so here given that the written and recorded spoken words of L. Ron Hubbard (the Founder of Scientology) comprising the Scripture of Scientology include tens of millions of words, including 25 books, some 100 encyclopedic volumes, scores of films, and more than 2,500 recorded lectures. (5 CT 1377–1378.)

Moreover, the court’s statement that the “expressly written doctrine” of the Church “prohibits one Scientologist from reporting another Scientologist in good standing to outside law enforcement,” (5 CT 1443) is dead wrong. The court did not cite to any “expressly written doctrine” for this proposition, and it could not: the so-called “expressly written doctrine” does not appear anywhere in the doctrine of the Church. The court reached this conclusion only by substituting its own language for the text before it, attributing to Scientology a rule that appears nowhere in its Scripture.

In fact, the Church has no doctrine prohibiting or discouraging members from reporting the criminal conduct of Scientologists — or of anyone — to law enforcement. Indeed, Church doctrine explicitly demands Scientologists abide by all laws of the land, including criminal law. As stated in the very text relied upon by the court for its ruling, Preliminary Hearing People’s Exhibit 6:

Nothing in this policy letter shall ever or under any circumstances justify any violation of the laws of the land or intentional legal wrongs. Any such offense shall subject the offender to penalties prescribed by law as well as to ethics and justice actions. (Prelim. People’s Exhibit 6 (L. Ron Hubbard, 23 December 1965) at 18 (emphases added). See also Prelim. People’s Exhibit 5 (Introduction to Scientology Ethics, book by L. Ron Hubbard) at 324.)

The court’s misreading of the doctrine was particularly egregious given the court ignored the closing commandment in the very same policy, which was read aloud by defense counsel prior to the ruling:

Additionally, Your Honor, if you actually look at both the book under the Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists and in People’s 6, which is really just a photocopy of that same chapter in the book, Your Honor, at the second-to-last page of People’s 6, it states – I’ll put it on the screen here.

“Nothing in this policy letter shall ever or under any circumstances justify any violation of the laws of the land or intentional legal wrongs. Any such offense shall subject the offender to penalties prescribed by law as well as to ethics and justice action.” (5 CT 1412–1413.)

This language is universal across Scientology justice doctrine and directly forecloses any claim that Scientologists are prohibited or discouraged from reporting crimes. And it likewise expressly mandates that any offender shall be subject to the penalties prescribed by law. Consistent with that mandate, Church doctrine further states:

Crimes may result in suspension of certificates, classifications or awards, reduction of post, or even dismissal or arrest when the Crime clearly warrants it. (Prelim. People’s Exhibit 5 (Introduction to Scientology Ethics) at 307 (emphasis added).)

In fact, while Scientologists are overwhelmingly law-abiding, the Church and its parishioners do report to law enforcement Scientologists engaged in criminal conduct. No approval is required from the Church to report criminal activity by a Scientologist or anyone else or even to “take him to jail.” (L. Ron Hubbard, 13 October 1982.)

At the preliminary hearing, the prosecution argued that the following Scientology text — which sets forth conduct considered to be a “Suppressive Act” (a High Crime in Scientology)—supported its interpretation of Church doctrine as barring reports to law enforcement:

Delivering up the person of a Scientologist without justifiable defense or lawful protest to the demands of civil or criminal law. (Prelim. People’s Exhibit 5 (Introduction to Scientology Ethics) at 313.)

Scientology’s Founder, L. Ron Hubbard, wrote this doctrine on the same day as the doctrine discussed above providing that “Crimes” may subject a Scientologist to “arrest,” and it plainly does not provide that a Scientologist may not report other Scientologists for committing crimes. The trial court did not merely misinterpret the passage, it replaced the text with an entirely different rule of its own making.

Indeed, the trial court disregarded the actual language of the text which reads, “delivering up the person of a Scientologist.” The trial court instead cited the Scripture as if it were a prohibition on “reporting another Scientologist in good standing.” (5 CT 1443.) Those are different words carrying entirely different meanings. By substituting its own wording for the text before it, the court attributed to Scientology a doctrine that does not exist in any authorized Scripture. L. Ron Hubbard did not write “reporting another Scientologist in good standing” or even “delivering up a Scientologist….” He wrote, “Delivering up the person of a Scientologist.” The phrase, “the person of” is a longstanding English expression and has a specific definition. It means, “in the character of, as representing.”

[1. “Person: A character sustained or assumed in a drama or the like, or in actual life; part played; hence function, office, capacity; guise, semblance; one of the characters in a play or story. (Now chiefly of the dramatis personae or characters in a drama; in the person of = in the character of, as representing.)” Oxford English Dictionary, 1961 printing.]

“Delivering up the person of a Scientologist” thus refers to someone who is delivered up simply because he is a Scientologist for the “offense” of being a Scientologist or practicing Scientology.

[2. “Deliver: To give up entirely, give over, surrender, yield; formerly often spec. to give up to an evil fate, devote to destruction, ruin, or the like. Also with over (obs. or arch.), up.” Id.]

The correct meaning of the doctrine is easily understood by inserting the word Jew, Muslim, Catholic, or Christian in place of Scientologist. The act of “delivering up the person of a Jew” in Vichy, France, during World War II means something quite different than merely reporting a crime committed by a person of the Jewish faith to lawful authorities. Accordingly, the doctrine provides that delivering up a person to civil or criminal authorities for the mere fact of being a member of the Scientology faith and/or practicing Scientology is a Suppressive Act (a High Crime in Scientology). That is precisely and only what the doctrine means.

The historical context of that teaching is also instructive. The doctrine was written in 1965 in response to oppressive and outrageous persecution of Scientologists in Australia, where the Parliament of Victoria had issued a ban on Scientology and enacted legislation making it a crime to be a Scientologist. Bans by the states of South Australia and Western Australia followed.

[3. The Parliament of Victoria enacted the Psychological Practices Act 1965, Act No. 7355 (“Act”), making it a crime, punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment, to teach Scientology, advertise it, or hold oneself out as willing to teach it. Section 31(1). The Act further made it a crime to possess any “scientological records” and authorized the Attorney General “to search such person or premises for such scientological records” and to conduct such searches “at any time of the day or night with such assistants as may be necessary and if necessary to use force by breaking open doors….” Sections 32(3) and (4). (5 CT 1447–1462.)]

While Scientology was vindicated long ago in Australia, there still remain repressive nations that do not recognize or respect freedom of religion.

[4. The Act and other bans were repealed in 1982 and 1983. In 1983, the High Court (Supreme Court of Australia) recognized the wrongness of the Act, finding without question that Scientology is “religious.” The Church of the New Faith and the Commissioner of Pay-Roll Tax (Victoria), 154 CLR 120, 57 ALJR 785, 14 ATR 769, 49 ALR 65, 83 ATC 4652 (27 October 1983). https://uniset.ca/other/cs6/154CLR120.html. This decision stands to this day as the most significant Australian authority on the question of what constitutes a religion and the guiding decision used for determining a religious charity in Australia. (6 CT 1514–1518.)]

For example, five Scientologists in St. Petersburg, Russia, were imprisoned and put on trial in 2020 for charges related to practicing Scientology. On October 1, 2021, the Russian Ministry of Justice listed two Scientology-related entities as “undesirable” thus making participation in those organizations a crime.

[5. The “undesirable” designation means that the cited group “represents a threat to the security of the Russian Federation” and that any Russian citizen who supports the Scientology related organizations may be subject to criminal prosecution. (6 CT 1521-1522.)]

The European Court of Human Rights awarded damages to a Scientologist who was detained by the Russian government solely for being a Scientologist.

[6. Kuropyatnik v. Russia, No. 64403/11, European Court of Human Rights. September 28, 2021. (6 CT 1525–1534.)]

“Delivering up the person of a Scientologist without justifiable defense or lawful protest to the demands of civil or criminal law” is thus considered a Suppressive Act or High Crime in Scientology. When members of the religion are persecuted and prosecuted for their religion, Scientologists have a moral obligation to rightfully stand up and defend “the person of a Scientologist.” The doctrine emphatically does not forbid one Scientologist from reporting another Scientologist to law enforcement for criminal behavior.

History has recorded the atrocities that can be committed against members of a religion whose doctrines are misinterpreted and its followers delivered up without justifiable defense or lawful protest. It was similarly wrong for the trial court in this case to allow the jury to be influenced by a false narrative suggesting that it was Scientology doctrine that prohibited witnesses in this case from timely reporting the criminal violations alleged here.

C. Compounded Mischaracterizations of Scientology Doctrine

The court’s original misinterpretation — that Scientologists are forbidden from reporting their fellow parishioners — was followed by a cascade of further distortions of Scientology Scripture that permeated the trial.

By adopting an invented doctrine on the reporting of other Scientologists, the trial court opened the door to further inventions, including through testimony by an apostate presented as an “expert” on Scientology. And the court enabled the prosecution to weave a false narrative in which virtually every inconsistency in the complaining witnesses’ conduct was explained away by reference to the court-created doctrine and the subsequent falsehoods it spawned.

The prosecution’s closing argument demonstrated the extent to which the court-created doctrine and its progeny permeated the trial:

Now, like all predators, the Defendant carefully sought out his prey. His victims are particularly vulnerable. Most of his victims are members of the Church of Scientology, and that makes sense.

The Church taught his victims rape isn’t rape. You caused this. And above all, you are never allowed to go to law enforcement. What better hunting ground?

In Scientology, the Defendant is a celebrity and he’s untouchable.

Now, in order to understand these victims, in order to understand these crimes and what happened, it’s extremely important to understand their association, their belief in the Church of Scientology.

It affected the way they thought. It affected their actions. It affected their decision to wait and not report these crimes. In Scientology, they weren’t important. The person that was important was the Defendant. He was the up stat.

And that’s why you heard from Claire Headley [the State’s “expert”]. She informed you about what Scientology believes, that Scientology law, their rules, their principles, they guide everything.

They’re the controlling factor. You must obey those rules over all other laws. And the victims, well, they can’t be victims. And whatever they did, they caused it to themselves.

The Defendant, a celebrity in good standing, any complaint filed against him would be filed with a yawn, meaning Scientology would discredit it and would investigate the people who made their allegations, investigate the victims. (33 RT 3259–3260.)

These false statements of Church doctrine embedded in the prosecution’s closing argument, and made throughout the trial, fall into several doctrinal themes. Each reflects a distortion of Scientology Scripture.

1. Scientology Doctrine Requires Obedience to Law and the Reporting of Criminal Conduct.

For example, the prosecution told the jury that Scientologists “must obey [Scientology’s] rules over all other laws,” and its purported “expert” claimed that when secular law and Scientology doctrine conflict, a Scientologist “will follow the law of Scientology.” (27 RT 2452–2453; 33 RT 3259–3260.) These statements bear no resemblance to Scientology doctrine. It is Church doctrine to obey the laws of the land.

Scientology doctrine mandates that every Scientologist obey all civil and criminal laws, and any violation of those laws subjects the offender to civil and criminal penalties as well as to ecclesiastical discipline. As already shown, Church Scripture explicitly provides:

Nothing in this policy letter shall ever or under any circumstances justify any violation of the laws of the land or intentional legal wrongs. Any such offense shall subject the offender to penalties prescribed by law as well as to ethics and justice actions. (Prelim. People’s Exhibit 6.)

This doctrine applies universally. Far from elevating religious rules above secular law, Scientology doctrine expressly identifies criminal conduct as a Suppressive Act — the most serious violation of Church Ethics Codes. In fact, “Any felony (such as murder, arson, etc.) against person or property” is listed as the first Suppressive Act, before any ecclesiastical offenses. (Prelim People’s Exhibit 5.)

The obligation to obey secular law includes the duty to report criminal wrongdoing to law enforcement. The prosecution and its purported “expert” told the jury that a Scientologist must report wrongdoing only to a Church Ethics Officer, not to secular authorities. (20 RT 1362; 27 RT 2453; 33 RT 3259–3260; 34 RT 3410.) This claim is also false. Scientology recognizes civil law and religious ethics as distinct but complementary obligations. Reporting a crime to law enforcement fulfills one’s legal and civic duty; reporting ethical lapses within the Church serves a separate religious purpose aimed at spiritual improvement.

Scientology Scripture is explicit on this point. L. Ron Hubbard taught, and Scientology doctrine teaches, that an individual cannot make spiritual advancement while burdened by criminal conduct for which he has not taken responsibility—meaning conduct he has not confessed, confronted or made good.

Church Scripture recounts instances in which L. Ron Hubbard himself directed parishioners who had committed criminal acts to report themselves to the police and to make good on the harm caused, including instructing a Scientologist “to settle these matters with the police, which he is doing quite commendably.” (L. Ron Hubbard, 7 December 1959.) This principle — that one must take full responsibility for one’s conduct — lies at the heart of Scientology ethics.

Nor does Scientology doctrine punish those who report wrongdoing to the Church, as the prosecution falsely argued. (34 RT 3410.) The obligation to report unethical, destructive or criminal conduct is long-established in Church policy. For example, one such policy issued in 1965 states:

Staff members must personally make certain reports in writing.

…

11. Misdemeanor Report. Any Misdemeanor noted.

12. A Crime Report. Any Crime noted or suspected, but if suspicion only it must be so stated.

13. A High Crime Report. Any High Crime noted or suspected, but if only suspected it must be so stated. (L. Ron Hubbard, 1 May 1965.)

A second policy issued that same year demonstrates that the prosecution’s claim that individuals are punished for reporting wrongdoing is the opposite of Church doctrine:

No person may be penalized for issuing an Ethics Chit. [A report to the Ethics Officer.] (L. Ron Hubbard, 15 December 1965.)

This principle was later reaffirmed in one of the Church’s best-known doctrinal writings, Knowledge Reports, which makes the duty to report explicit and penalizes interference with reporting:

Forbidding anyone to write a Knowledge Report makes the person forbidding it and the person accepting this illegal order both accessories to any later action taken. (L. Ron Hubbard, 22 July 1982 (emphasis in original.))

Scientology neither forbids nor discourages reporting wrongdoing to law enforcement. It requires obedience to civil law, imposes a duty to report unethical and criminal conduct, and protects parishioners who report misconduct.

2. Scientology Doctrine Recognizes Victims and Assigns Responsibility to Wrongdoers.

The prosecution told the jury that Scientology doctrine teaches that victims are to blame for the abuse they suffer: Scientologists are told “you caused this,” that “whatever they did, they caused it to themselves,” and that “they can’t be victims.” (33 RT 3259–3260; see also 27 RT 2463.) At times this was framed in terms of a supposed Scientology doctrine that a person “pulled it in.” (34 RT 3410.) There is no such doctrine. The phrase “pulled it in” does not appear in Scientology Scripture, and no Church policy or practice places responsibility for criminal acts on the person who was harmed.

In fact, recognition of victims is embedded in Scientology from the very beginning. Scientology’s foundational text, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health (1950), is devoted to the harmful physical, mental, and spiritual effects of painful experiences, injuries, and abuses inflicted on an individual — that is, to the ways a person can be harmed or victimized. Far from denying the existence of victims, Dianetics begins from the fact that individuals suffer lasting trauma from what has been done to them. The entire subject of Scientology is rooted in addressing the harmful effects of what has been done to an individual.

Nothing in Scientology doctrine suggests that a person is responsible for being harmed by another. Scientology’s entire Ethics and Justice system is premised on providing justice and recourse for individuals who have been wronged. (See L. Ron Hubbard, Introduction to Scientology Ethics.)

The Scientology Dictionary, moreover, defines “victim” in the same plain sense understood by courts of law: “one who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance or condition.” No Church doctrine prohibits recognizing victims or forbids use of the word.

[7. “Victim: One who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance or condition; one who suffers from a destructive or injurious action.” Scientology Dictionary.]

This recognition of victims is also expressed in Scientology’s ecclesiastical structure. Every Scientology Church and Mission includes a Chaplain whose role is expressly defined in Church Scripture:

To succor those who have been wronged and to comfort those whose burdens have been too great. (L. Ron Hubbard, 2 August 1965.)

Scientology’s ministry reflects this same recognition in the work of the Volunteer Minister — a role L. Ron Hubbard created as a worldwide ministry. In establishing this ministry, L. Ron Hubbard stated:

The quality of being religious implies two things: first, a belief that evil, pain, bewilderment and injustice are fundamental facts of existence; second, a set of practices and related sanctified beliefs that express a conviction that man can ultimately be saved from those facts.

He further described the Volunteer Minister’s role:

A Volunteer Minister does not shut his eyes to the pain, evil and injustice of existence. Rather, he is trained to handle these things and help others achieve relief from them and new personal strength as well. (L. Ron Hubbard, Religious Influence in Society, 1976.)

These doctrinal statements make unmistakably clear that the Scientology ministry’s purpose is to confront suffering, injustice, and harm wherever they appear, and to provide practical spiritual assistance to those who have been wronged or overwhelmed. Far from denying the existence of victims, Scientology’s ministry is expressly directed toward recognizing, assisting, and uplifting them.

One of the most extraordinary claims the prosecution and its “expert” advanced about victims was that “rape isn’t rape” and that Scientologists are forbidden from using the term. (20 RT 1335, 1339, 1362; 27 RT 2457–2458.)

That claim collapses instantly when measured against Scientology’s actual doctrine. The term “rape” appears 497 times across 184 separate doctrinal writings.

[8. Indeed, one complaining witness, [Jane Doe 1], while still a Scientologist, used the terms “rape,” “raped,” and “rapist” repeatedly in written correspondence with the Church’s highest ethics authority without reprimand or restriction. (8 CT 2335–2336.) [Jane Doe 1] also reported her allegation to the Los Angeles Police Department at that time; LAPD investigated and closed the matter with no prosecution recommended, and she suffered no adverse consequences within the Church for reporting it or for using the term.]

From the earliest materials, including his seminal work on human behavior, Science of Survival (1951), L. Ron Hubbard identifies rape as destructive and antisocial conduct, placing it among the lowest levels of human conduct. For example, he further describes a rapist as an individual who uses sex as a punishment and displays a range of extreme antisocial traits, including a disregard for ethics, insincerity, immorality, active dishonesty, fascistic tendencies and a heavy liability to society.

These descriptions make unmistakably clear that rape is regarded in Scientology as among the most destructive and reprehensible acts a person can commit. The notion that Scientology doctrine would minimize, excuse, or protect such conduct is irreconcilable with these foundational teachings. Under no reading of Scientology doctrine could a rapist be afforded leniency, protection, or doctrinal shelter of any kind.

In short, responsibility in Scientology lies with the wrongdoer, not the victim. The prosecution’s claim that Scientology teaches victims — including victims of rape — that they “pulled in” their abuse, or that they “can’t be victims,” is false.

3. Scientology Ethics Applies Equally to All Scientologists.

In another serious mischaracterization, the prosecution told the jury that in Scientology “the Defendant is a celebrity and he’s untouchable,” and in response to any complaint made against him, the Church would “investigate the victims.” (33 RT 3259–3260.) The prosecution’s purported “expert” offered similar assertions, suggesting that Scientology doctrine affords preferential treatment to favored parishioners or those deemed important. (27 RT 2460–2462.) These statements are false. No Scientology Scripture, policy, or practice provides special treatment, protection, or exemption for any parishioner, celebrity or otherwise.

To the contrary, Scientology Ethics and Justice Codes apply equally to all members, without privilege, exemption, or special treatment. These Codes are contained in doctrinal Policy Letters, in which L. Ron Hubbard makes the point explicit:

Policy Letters apply broadly to all organizations and Scientologists without exception. (L. Ron Hubbard, 5 March 1965 (emphasis added.))

Likewise, the Code of a Scientologist, to which every Scientologist must pledge, states:

As a Scientologist, I pledge myself to the Code of Scientology for the good of all. … 9. To embrace the policy of equal justice for all. (L. Ron Hubbard, 5 February 1969.)

Church doctrine does not make exceptions. It does not distinguish between parishioners based on status, notoriety, or position. Consistent with this doctrine, members — including well-known members — have been expelled for serious ethical violations, because the Justice Codes apply without exception. Scientology ethics and justice derive from written policy, not from personal status or discretionary favor.

Scientology doctrine provides no special category of parishioner who is exempt from accountability or whose misconduct is ignored.

4. Scientology Doctrine Does Not Include a Policy of Fair Game.

At trial, the prosecution’s purported “expert” witness falsely claimed that Scientology doctrine includes “many policies that cover Fair Game,” which she described as permitting Scientologists to discredit “an enemy of Scientology.” (27 RT 2466–2467.) That assertion is false. There is no doctrine of “Fair Game” within the Scientology religion, and there is no Scientology policy titled “Fair Game.”

“Fair Game” is a term intentionally misinterpreted by anti-Scientologists to unfairly tarnish the Church. In its original and limited use, the term simply indicated that an apostate was no longer entitled to seek the protections of the Church’s internal Ethics and Justice system.

Owing to continual misinterpretations by anti-Scientologists, the use of the term was canceled in 1968, and the words were removed from the two policies in which they appeared. In the authorized published works of the Church, comprising some 75 million spoken and written words, the phrase “Fair Game” has not appeared for over 57 years. It is therefore impossible for the prosecution’s witnesses or so-called “expert” witness to have encountered this phrase in any authorized Scientology Scripture. The prosecution’s characterization of Church doctrine is false.

It is a matter of Church orthodoxy that the policy the prosecution purports to characterize has been canceled. Throughout the development of Scientology doctrine, hundreds of policies have been canceled in this manner, and those canceled policies similarly do not appear anywhere in Church publications. Whenever any policy is canceled, Scientology orthodoxy maintains that it is no longer Church doctrine. Period.

* * *

These repeated false statements about the faith would have been troubling enough. But over and over, whether from the prosecution, its “expert,” or the court, Scientologists were portrayed as separate from — and fundamentally opposed to — American society, through references to “Scientology law,” “their rules,” “their principles,” and similar characterizations. (See 14 ART (8/23/24) 3712; 18 RT 880–881; 27 RT 2439–2440, 2452–2453; 33 RT 3260; 34 RT 3410–3411.) This was a calculated and extensive effort at othering: “the act of treating someone as though they are not part of a group and are different in some way.”

[9. dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/othering.]0

Such othering of religious minorities has marked some of the darkest chapters in history. Such treatment of any group in our nation — regardless of their race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, religion, or any other characteristic — should never occur. It is particularly odious in our justice system.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

As noted above, the judge, prosecution, and their purported “expert” repeatedly mischaracterized Scientology doctrine and doctrine-based practices — a violation that began at the preliminary hearing and continued throughout the trial. Individually and collectively, these mischaracterizations were a key factor in Masterson’s conviction—and in the First Amendment violations that permeated the trial.

Ecclesiastical Abstention. First, the trial court sought to make its own determinations of Scientology doctrine. This alone violates the Constitution. But to make matters constitutionally worse, the court did so in contravention of the Church’s own authoritative declaration. It is long-settled First Amendment law that “[w]henever the questions of discipline, or of faith, or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law have been decided by the highest of [the] church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final, and as binding on them.” Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. EEOC, 565 U.S. 171, 185–86 (2012) (quoting Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. 679, 727 (1871)). Yet here, the trial court erroneously determined the meaning of Scientology Scripture, choosing an apostate’s harmful and incorrect reading on multiple points and refused to accept the Church’s authoritative statements. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit made clear that this is constitutional error when reversing a lower court that had submitted a religious dispute to a jury and ignored the church’s authoritative determination on the issue. McCarthy, 714 F.3d 971. Besides being prejudicial to Masterson, the decision here was deeply dangerous to members of the Church more generally, as well as to members of all faiths.

Additionally, the trial court allowed false and misleading evidence of alleged Scientology practices and beliefs to be submitted “for the truth of the matter,” purportedly to aid the jury in its decision. But this too is forbidden by the First Amendment. See United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 79 (1944) (reversing a lower court that allowed religious issues to be presented to the jury in a criminal trial).

Religious animus. Government actors also violated the First Amendment in displaying hostility to the Scientology faith. The First Amendment requires strict neutrality towards religion such that even the slightest deviation from neutrality violates the Constitution. See Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colo. Civ. Rts. Comm’n, 584 U.S. 617 (2018). Yet here, by repeatedly showing a lack of neutrality towards Defendant’s faith, the trial court and other government actors repeatedly violated the First Amendment.

ARGUMENT

The Opening Brief (at 125–42) summarizes the two main First Amendment violations in this case. Here, Amicus provides additional relevant context and authority, including explaining in more detail why these errors prevented Masterson from having a fair trial and wreaked havoc on the entire framework of religious liberty protected by the First Amendment.

I. The Trial Court Violated the First Amendment By Deciding Religious Disputes and By Presenting Other Religious Issues to the Jury.

The trial court’s failure to heed the First Amendment’s prohibition on determining religious matters or allowing them to be presented for determination by the jury was particularly clear in the court’s decisions to interpret Scientology Scripture and to admit evidence regarding Scientology doctrines and practices “for the truth of the matter.” (13 RT 673.) These violations not only harmed Masterson, but a decision affirming those rulings would also endanger the rights of all Scientologists and, indeed, all faith communities and their members.

A. The trial court improperly and erroneously interpreted Scientology Scripture.

The court’s decision to interpret Scientology Scripture arose from the fact that there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged rapes, and hence the credibility of the complaining witnesses was the seminal issue at the preliminary hearing and at trial. The accusers’ credibility was particularly important given their years-long delayed reporting to police and inconsistent statements about those alleged crimes to third parties, law enforcement, and in court. (5 CT 1403–1406, 1417, 1425, 1439; 20 ART (5/17/24) 2888; 19 RT 1153; 33 RT 3312.) Hence, the prosecution and the complaining witnesses decided to blame their delay on the Church.

[10. This “blame” is unsupported by the evidence. For example, [Jane Doe 2] left the Church in 2005. (7 ART (8/23/24) 1547, 1634–1635.) She did not report to the police until 2017, 12 years later, a delay that could not possibly be attributed to her purported Scientology beliefs.]

1. Judicial interpretation of Scientology Scripture violated the First Amendment.

For example, at trial, the prosecutor argued that the reporting of a Scientologist in good standing to law enforcement is a religious high crime. This false statement of Scientology doctrine resulted from the trial judge’s misinterpretation of Scientology Scripture at the preliminary hearing. See supra at 13–14.

The trial judge, moreover, did not just slightly misinterpret the Scripture. She gave it a reading, proposed by an apostate of the faith, which was the opposite of what it means. See supra at 13–19.

The trial court then went beyond scriptural interpretation, which itself was a violation of the First Amendment. See United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 257 (1982) (“[C]ourts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation.”) (cleaned up). The court doubled down by taking sides in a religious dispute—between the Church and the State’s apostate “expert”—which was also an independent constitutional violation. As the U.S. Supreme Court put it over 40 years ago, under the First Amendment “[i]t is not within ‘the judicial function and judicial competence,’ … to determine whether” one side or the other in litigation “has the proper interpretation of the […] faith.” Lee, 455 U.S. at 257 (1982). Accord Catholic League for Religious & C.R. v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 567 F.3d 595, 608 (9th Cir. 2009), on reh’g en banc, 624 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[T]he Establishment Clause prohibits government from intervening in a religious dispute.”); Callahan v. Woods, 658 F.2d 679, 686 (9th Cir. 1981) (noting the constitutionally required “abstention from evaluating the merits of a scriptural interpretation”).

Compounding these constitutional violations, the court proceeded to use its false version of Scientology doctrine as a foundation for its finding that the charging witnesses were credible. (8 ART (8/23/24) 1860.) Masterson was obviously (and severely) prejudiced by that ruling.

[11. The court committed a similar First Amendment violation when it declared (in its post-trial June 7, 2023 Findings and Order) that Masterson “remains a Scientologist in good standing to the present day.” (12 CT 3353, emphasis added.) This was problematic from both an evidentiary and a constitutional perspective. As to the first, no evidence had been submitted as to Masterson’s current standing in the Church. Rather, the prosecution, in the closing argument, had stated as fact that Masterson was a member in good standing, and the trial court took it and declared it as religious truth. (33 RT 3286–3287.) More importantly, whether someone is a member in good standing of a religious organization is a theological determination — one constitutionally inappropriate for courts to make. See, e.g., Our Lady of Guadalupe Sch. v. Morrissey-Berru, 591 U.S. 732 (2020). And that is especially so when no evidence, such as a declaration from the Church, had been submitted. As another example, earlier in the proceedings, the trial court sua sponte instructed the prosecutor to do an internet search for the date of Tom Cruise’s wedding as a means to determine whether Leah Remini was a Scientologist “in good standing” at a specific point in time. (2 RT 65–66, 73–74.) Such an instruction would be extraordinary on its own, but all the more problematic given the First Amendment violation, the court determining whether someone was, or was not, a member of a faith “in good standing.” The court used this intrusion into the realm of religion in support of its order quashing a defense discovery request.]

2. The trial court’s refusal to defer to the Church’s authoritative interpretation also violated the First Amendment.

The court’s refusal to defer to the Church’s reading of its own doctrine was a clear constitutional violation. As the U.S. Supreme Court (quoting an earlier decision) put it just over a decade ago, “[w]henever the questions of discipline, or of faith, or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law have been decided by the highest of [the] church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final, and as binding on them,” in their application to the case before them. Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 185–86 (quoting Watson, 80 U.S. at 727). Or, as the Court put it more succinctly in 1990: “The government may not ... lend its power to one or the other side in controversies over religious authority or dogma.” Emp. Div., Dep’t of Human Res. of Ore. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 877 (1990).

[12. Accord Garcia v. Church of Scientology Flag Serv. Org., Inc., No. 18-13452, 2021 WL 5074465, at *9 (11th Cir. Nov. 2, 2021) (“Although [plaintiffs] presented evidence to support their interpretation of Scientology doctrine, the International Justice Chief offered a conflicting interpretation. The First Amendment barred the district court from resolving this underlying controversy about church doctrine. To do so would have required it to decide whether [plaintiffs] or the Justice Chief more correctly perceived the commands of the Scientology religion.” (cleaned up)). California courts likewise recognize and apply these principles. See In re Episcopal Church Cases, 45 Cal.4th 467, 473 (2009) (“State courts must not decide questions of religious doctrine; those are for the church to resolve.”); Protestant Episcopal Church v. Barker, 115 Cal. App.3d 599, 616–17 (1981) (“A civil court is ill-equipped to evaluate church doctrine and ill-equipped to resolve controversies involving the exercise of ultimate church authority.”).]

By interpreting religious doctrine and taking an apostate’s side in a religious dispute, the trial court did just that — thus plainly and doubly violating the First Amendment. See also Presbyterian Church in the U.S. v. Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Mem’l Presbyterian Church, 393 U.S. 440, 450 (1969) (the First Amendment “forbids” courts from “determin[ing] matters at the very core of a religion — the interpretation of particular church doctrines and the importance of those doctrines to the religion.”); Thomas v. Rev. Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 715–16 (1981) (“the judicial process is singularly ill equipped to resolve [intrafaith] differences … Courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation”).

Judicial abstention from scriptural interpretation and from taking sides in religious disputes is required not only by the Constitution, but by the most basic common sense regarding the limits of secular courts. As now-Justice Neil Gorsuch observed, “judges are hardly fit arbiters of the world’s religions.” Yellowbear v. Lampert, 741 F.3d 48, 54 (10th Cir. 2014). To attempt to do so “would risk in the attempt … many mistakes—given [courts’] lack of any comparative expertise when it comes to religious teachings, perhaps especially the teachings of less familiar religions.” Id. (emphasis added). That is particularly true here, given the unfamiliarity many have with Scientology and its voluminous written and recorded Scripture. See supra at 18.

B. The trial court improperly allowed evidence of the meaning of Scientology doctrine and practices through a biased “expert,” and in a manner that invited the jury to resolve religious disputes.

The trial court’s First Amendment violations did not end there. The court also allowed the trial itself to become a forum for deciding what was “true” about Scientology—from allowing a biased “expert” on Scientology to permitting the prosecutors to make false statements about Scientology doctrine and internal policy. All this is precisely what the Constitution forbids.

Expert witness. While expert witnesses are a normal part of civil and criminal litigation, under the First Amendment they cannot be used in determining the truth of religious matters. That was made clear, for example, when the Supreme Court found it constitutionally inappropriate for a state court to countenance an expert witness on “internal church procedures” in Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 718 (1976). In so doing, the state court “ha[d] unconstitutionally undertaken the resolution of quintessentially religious controversies whose resolution the First Amendment commits exclusively to the highest ecclesiastical tribunals of this hierarchical church.” Id. at 720.

Similarly, the D.C. Circuit affirmed a district court’s refusal to allow expert testimony on religious issues because, “after a week of trial, [the district court] found that ‘no expert testimony could effectively filter out the religious elements from the secular ones sufficiently to avoid unwholesome and impermissible entanglement with religious concerns.’” EEOC v. Catholic Univ. of Am., 83 F.3d 455, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1996).

Likewise, the Tenth Circuit, in a panel that included now-Justice Gorsuch, rejected an expert’s testimony suggesting that the presence of a prayer to a particular Mexican saint associated with gangs “was indicative of criminal activity.” United States v. Medina-Copete, 757 F.3d 1092, 1108 (10th Cir. 2014). The court viewed this expert testimony as “approach[ing] psychobabble” and found it “substantially influenced the outcome” of the trial in that case. Id. The court also observed that “[t]he prosecutor referred to [the expert]’s testimony in closing argument,” ruling it was an abuse of discretion to allow these statements by the prosecution, because of their prejudice to the defendant. Id. at 1095.

The defendant in that case had also raised a First Amendment challenge to the prosecution’s conduct, in response to which the court “urge[d] the government to be cautious about appearing to take sides in theological debates,” because a “criminal trial is no place for a theological disputation on sainthood and the power of prayer.” Id. at 1109 & n.6.

Religious truth. Here, by contrast, the trial court impermissibly allowed the jury to consider the truth or falsity of Scientology doctrines and religious practices by ruling that a Scientology apostate, Claire Headley, could testify about those matters as an “expert” witness. As the prosecution made clear in its closing statement, moreover, Headley’s testimony was admitted for the truth about Scientology, not what the alleged victims subjectively believed: “She informed you about what Scientology believes, that Scientology law, their rules, their principles, they guide everything.” (33 RT 3260.)

The trial court’s expansive ruling on Scientology evidence authorized, among other things, “expert testimony regarding Scientology” (33 RT 3255–3256) including how Scientology doctrine related to whether Masterson committed the crimes of which he was accused. (11 CT 3175–3176.) On that basis, the trial court permitted Headley to give testimony about alleged Church practices, policies, and doctrines — all for the “truth of the matter” asserted, including most of the fabrications and falsehoods described above. See supra Part I.B.

Ignoring Church authority. Moreover, the court was well aware that Headley’s proposed testimony on Scientology beliefs about reporting crime was contrary to the Church’s own official statement of doctrine — because it had been presented in the Church’s amicus brief. (5 CT 1368–1369, 1378–1380.) Yet, in the second trial, the trial court allowed that very testimony from Headley — thereby committing a separate violation of the First Amendment. See Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church in N. Am., 344 U.S. 94, 120–21 (1952) (holding that the First Amendment requires the state defer to a religion’s determination of articles of faith even where such decisions are merely incidental to the dispute at hand); Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc. of N.Y., Inc., 819 F.2d 875, 878 n.1 (9th Cir. 1987) (holding that the First Amendment “provides that civil courts may not redetermine the correctness of an interpretation of canonical text” and must instead “accept as a given whatever the [religion] decides.”).

In other words, the trial court bestowed its imprimatur on Headley’s presentation as an “expert” of Church theology, giving her the green light to testify, even though the judge knew Headley’s testimony was the opposite of the Church’s own pronouncements of the plain meaning of its doctrine. The court’s actions would be constitutionally infirm if done in ignorance; when done willfully, they are fatal.

On this point, the Seventh Circuit’s decision in McCarthy is particularly apt. There, a woman who had previously been a nun in a Catholic religious order brought a claim against an individual for, among other things, defamation for calling her a “fake nun.” McCarthy, 714 F.3d at 974. The church was not a party to the litigation, but the alleged defamer submitted a statement from the Holy See, the authoritative Catholic body for determining whether one is officially a nun, that the self-described nun was not, in fact, a nun. Id. The judge, however, refused to accept this evidence as authoritative, thus leaving it for the jury to determine the issue. Id. at 976.

On interlocutory appeal, the Seventh Circuit “reversed, with a reminder to the district court that federal courts are not empowered to decide (or to allow juries to decide) religious questions.” Id. at 980. Writing for the court, Judge Richard Posner declared that “[a] secular court may not take sides on issues of religious doctrine.” Id. at 975.

Moreover, the Seventh Circuit in that case asked the Holy See to file an amicus brief, which it did, confirming that the woman was not a nun. Id. She disagreed, but the court determined that her “argument cannot prevail in the face of the Holy See’s ruling, communicated to [the court] by the amicus curiae brief.” Id. at 978. Once the church submitted authoritative evidence on the religious question at issue, neither judge nor jury had authority to question it. Id.

Under McCarthy, it was thus constitutional error for the trial court here to allow an “expert” to testify on religious issues, including interpreting Church Scripture, for a second reason. Here, as there, the Church had already provided an authoritative understanding of its religious doctrine, and the court was thus bound to defer to that understanding without admitting contradictory “expert” testimony. Instead, the court deliberately looked the other way, encouraging and embracing the false testimony of a heretic.

[13. Nor can it be said that the constitutional solution would have been for Masterson to put on his own expert witness as to Scientology belief and practice. It violated the First Amendment to have dueling experts in Catholic University and Serbian Eastern Orthodox. It thus would have made things even more constitutionally dubious for Masterson to proffer his own expert witness — by doubling the amount of constitutionally prohibited conduct. Under the Constitution, “two wrongs do not make a right.” Gray v. Mississippi, 481 U.S. 648, 663 (1987).]

The trial court’s constitutional error harms all Scientologists — and other people of faith — by increasing the risk of similar unfair and unconstitutional treatment if they are ever charged with a crime.

* * *

In sum, more than merely a trial about the allegations against Masterson, this was also a trial about the beliefs and practices of the Church of Scientology. And the jury was instructed by the court to consider the prosecution’s version of Scientology’s beliefs and practices for the truth of the matter in determining whether Masterson was guilty. (33 RT 3254–3256.) As shown by Ballard, McCarthy, and the other decisions cited above, presenting such issues to a jury is forbidden by the First Amendment.

II. Government Actors Violated Masterson’s Free Exercise Rights By Repeatedly Demonstrating Hostility Towards His Religion.

Under Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 584 U.S. 617 (2018), the proceedings below violated the First Amendment in another way. From the initial police investigation through the second trial, including actions and statements by the trial judge and statements by the prosecuting attorneys, government action was infected by animus toward Masterson’s faith, thus violating the Free Exercise Clause.

A. Masterpiece Cakeshop provides categorical protection against even subtle departures from religious neutrality.

As the Opening Brief notes (at 139–41), the hostility shown towards the baker’s religion in Masterpiece Cakeshop, hostility the Supreme Court held violated the First Amendment, has eerie similarities to the hostility shown here by various government actors, though the hostility shown to Masterson’s religion was considerably worse.

Lower courts applying Masterpiece have followed its direction that even “subtle departures from neutrality” or “masked” hostility trigger Free Exercise Clause protections. Id. at 638. For instance, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, applying Masterpiece, found that “officials at [a professor’s university] exhibited hostility to his religious beliefs” sufficient to overcome a motion to dismiss. Meriwether v. Hartop, 992 F.3d 492, 512 (6th Cir. 2021). Specifically, when the professor visited his department chair to discuss his religious concerns with a new policy, the chair commented that (1) “religion oppresses students and … even its presence at universities is counterproductive”; (2) “Christians in particular … were primarily motivated out of fear”; (3) “Christian doctrines should not be taught”; and (4) “Christian professors should be banned from teaching courses on Christianity— knowing that [the professor] had done so for decades.” Id. at 512–13 (cleaned up). The court found these comments non-neutral and hostile. Id. at 513–14.

Similarly, the Ninth Circuit recently found a Masterpiece violation in Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified School District Board of Education, 82 F.4th 664 (9th Cir. 2023). There, a teacher and member of a school leadership committee “disparaged” the religious beliefs of a Christian athlete group, calling the beliefs “bulls[***]” and lacking “validity.” Id. at 692. A different teacher and committee member accused the group of “choos[ing] darkness,” “perpetuat[ing] ignorance,” and “twisting the truth,” as well as labeling them “charlatans” who “‘conveniently’ forget what tolerance means.” Id. And the school’s principal informed the school via a newspaper article that the group’s beliefs were “of a discriminatory nature.” Id.

The Ninth Circuit found that “[t]hese comments echo the comments condemned by the Court in Lukumi and Masterpiece Cakeshop.” Id. (citing Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 541–42 (1993) (noting comments by city officials describing Santeria as “foolishness,” “an abomination,” and “abhorrent”); Masterpiece Cakeshop, 584 U.S. at 635 (noting comments by Commission members describing the baker’s religious beliefs as “despicable” and comparing them to “defenses of slavery and the Holocaust”)). And the court thus determined that school officials had violated the First Amendment stricture that “the government may not act in a manner ‘hostile to ... religious beliefs’ or inconsistent with the Free Exercise Clause’s bar on even ‘subtle departures from neutrality.’” Id. at 686, 690 (quoting Masterpiece Cakeshop, 584 U.S. at 638).

B. From the outset of their investigation, the prosecution and police violated the First Amendment’s command of neutrality towards religion.

For example, the proceedings here were tainted from the outset of the investigation by governmental hostility to the Scientology religion — including even a stated desire to destroy it. That hostility began with the police investigation, in which the detectives, rather than initially meeting with the complaining witnesses, first met with another apostate of the Church, actress Leah Remini, who had nothing to do with the case’s underlying facts. (2 CT 330–331.)

[14. Remini had her own vested interest in petitioner being prosecuted — making money through an anti-Scientology TV show. (2 CT 330–331.)]

The police embraced Remini, scheduling multiple meetings and phone calls with her. In those calls and meetings they heard, among other falsehoods, that the Church engaged in illegal operations and does not abide by the law, and that Scientology was inseparable from the alleged crime. (See 2 CT 331, 338.)

Tellingly, during the investigation, the detectives were even identifying the case, not as the Masterson case, but as “the COS [Church of Scientology] case.” (See 3 CT 865.) And when one complaining witness, [Jane Doe 1], said “I always wish for his [Church’s leader, Mr. Miscavige’s] death,” one of the police officers responded, “Right,” indicating agreement. (2 CT 338:16–18.)

The prosecution also allowed Remini to play an influential and improper role in the investigation, although she had no percipient knowledge of the facts of the case. For instance, the deputy district attorney (Mueller) not only invited Remini to attend the prosecution’s initial interview of [Jane Doe 1] but allowed Remini to participate in it. And he allowed Remini to interpret or “correct” [Jane Doe 1]’s statements multiple times during the interview — including allowing Remini to object that, “What you told me is not what you’re telling him,” and then to modify [Jane Doe 1]’s statements. (2 CT 339.) And Mueller allowed Remini to play out in front of the alleged victim the questions Remini claimed Church officials would have asked her if Masterson had raped her. Id.

All these actions by the prosecutors and police exhibited the kind of hostility to religion that not only violated the LAPD Policy Manual and the California Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4.1, but was also condemned in Masterpiece and the other decisions discussed above. See, e.g., Meriwether, 992 F.3d at 512 (“[I]rregularities in the university’s investigation and adjudication processes also permit a plausible inference of non-neutrality.” (emphasis added.)). And, under those decisions, this police and prosecutorial misconduct violated the Free Exercise Clause.

C. Before and during the trial, the trial judge repeatedly demonstrated animus toward Masterson’s faith, violating the Free Exercise Clause.

Like the baker, the professor and the student athletes in the cases described above, Masterson “was entitled to the neutral and respectful consideration” of his case. Masterpiece, 584 U.S. at 634. But instead, he repeatedly faced religious hostility by the trial court itself, the scope and degree of which far surpassed the few incidents the State tries to explain away in its Response Brief. See Resp. Br. at 154–61.

1. The trial judge’s statements, conduct, and rulings reflect hostility toward Masterson’s faith.

Besides its false and injurious interpretation of Church Scripture, the trial court displayed unconstitutional animus towards Scientology throughout the trial. Beyond allowing hostile statements by prosecutors, the trial court’s own evident hostility manifested itself in both direct and indirect ways. But whether the hostility was masked or overt, the First Amendment was violated.

Allowing Headley. First, the trial court allowed Claire Headley to testify as a Scientology “expert” by analogizing the Church to a gang or a group of white supremacists, relying on cases that allowed former gang members to testify as “experts” on their former gangs. (11 CT 3183; 27 RT 2439–2440.) Similarly, when drafting the jury instruction regarding Scientology evidence, the trial court used CALCRIM 1403, “Limited Purpose of Evidence of Gang Activity,” which she “modified for Scientology” — i.e., so it now referred to “evidence of Scientology.” (33 RT 3221, 3254–3256.)

Additionally, while the prosecution only asked to allow Headley to testify on two narrow points, the trial court sua sponte ruled that she could testify for any of the six subjects for which testimony on Scientology would be admitted. All of these “irregularities” in “adjudication” likewise point toward “non-neutrality.” Meriwether, 992 F.3d at 514.

What is more, Headley was far from a neutral observer of the Scientology faith. Headley, an apostate, is an avowed anti-Scientologist with a 20-year vendetta against the faith. Before leaving the Church, she was decertified as a minister by a Scientology justice proceeding. She was found to have falsified her ministerial training and to have made false statements when the matter was investigated. Headley was thus removed from her staff position months before she left the Church in the Scientology equivalent of excommunication. Since then, she has been a vocal critic of the faith in the press and on social media. (6 CT 1640–1643, 1676.) Headley also unsuccessfully sued the Church — claiming forced labor. However, when required to testify under oath, her case collapsed as she admitted she enjoyed the work she performed. The District Court dismissed the case on summary judgment, finding her claims meritless, and ordering Headley and her husband to pay more than $42,000 for the Church’s costs. (27 RT 2469.) The Ninth Circuit affirmed. Headley v. Church of Scientology Int’l, 687 F.3d 1173, 1181 (9th Cir. 2012).

For the prosecution to search out a literal heretic who had been removed from her ministerial position and excommunicated to opine on the religious doctrine of her former faith, as an “expert” witness, shows religious animus in violation of Masterpiece.

Yet, despite a plethora of red flags concerning Ms. Headley’s bias, the trial court allowed her to testify as to the truth of Scientology’s beliefs. (1 CTO 122–127; 11 CT 3184.) Allowing the equivalent of an anti-Catholic defrocked nun, who had left the church but could not leave it alone, to be an “expert” on the faith is further evidence of the trial court’s own hostility to Masterson’s religion. See McCarthy, 714 F.3d at 976.

Hostile language. The trial judge’s antipathy towards Scientology also was reflected in the words she used at other points in the trial. (See e.g., 5 RT 316–318; 14 ART (8/23/24) 3712 (stating that Scientology evidence is no more inflammatory than evidence concerning “street gangs, prison gangs, white supremacy, outlaw motorcycle clubs” and Satanists).) Not only were hostile analogies made to counsel, but the trial court also conditioned the jury during voir dire to equate Scientology to criminal groups. (18 RT 880–881 (instructing prospective jurors to consider whether they can fairly evaluate the evidence against Masterson notwithstanding his being a Scientologist, just like jurors must assess evidence against an alleged criminal without regard to his being a gang member).)

In addition, in explaining her rationale for reversing herself and allowing Headley to testify in the second trial, the judge further associated the Church of Scientology with extreme, illegal actions. For example, during oral argument on the state’s motion to allow Headley’s testimony, the court used a hypothetical wherein children were told that they would submit to sex at age 12 because a religious figure told them to, a hypothetical she said was based on the Warren Jeffs case. But those extreme and offensive facts had nothing to do with what was alleged in this case. (13 RT 675–676, 683.)

[15. The analogy to Warren Jeffs is unmistakable evidence of the court’s hostility to Masterson’s religion. Jeffs, on trial for raping minors, was the head of his church and used his position to perpetrate his crimes. Masterson, by contrast, is a parishioner of the Church of Scientology and was charged with crimes that had nothing to do with his Church.]

Modifying jury instructions. Hostility to the Scientology faith was also reflected in the trial court’s modification of its instructions to the jury about the purposes for which Scientology-related evidence could be considered. Specifically, the judge allowed the testimony about Church practices, policies, and behaviors to be admitted for the truth of the matter asserted: Consistent with her repeated associations of the Church with criminality, the trial court repurposed CALCRIM No. 1403 — usually employed in cases involving “gang activity” — to serve as a “limit[ing]” instruction on the use of Scientology evidence. But the modified instruction was hardly limiting, as it informed the jury that it could consider Scientology evidence for virtually any purpose — again, including whether the rapes occurred. Two of these instructions showed particular hostility to Scientology:

Two, to explain the alleged victims’ belief regarding Scientology principles and practices related to, A, reporting another Scientologist in good standing to outside law enforcement or civil authorities and, B, fear of retaliation, fear of being declared a suppressive person and fear of harassment for reporting crimes of another Scientologist to outside law enforcement; ... Six, to further evaluate the testimony of any expert testimony regarding the above. (33 RT 3255–3256.)

CALCRIM Series 1400–1403 are the instructions on “criminal street gangs.” There are no reported cases of these instructions being used in connection with a religion, or for a member of a religion. The prejudicial nature of the trial court deeming Scientology the same as a street gang or white supremacists cannot be overstated. Imagine analogizing Baptists or Hindus or any other law-abiding religious faith to violent criminals. In any context other than comments by a judge in a court of law, this offensive analogy would rightly be deemed defamatory.

[16. Not only is there no evidence of the Church’s ever being involved in gangs or violence, but ironically, the Church has opened its doors in Los Angeles in attempts to facilitate peace between the warring Bloods and Crips gangs. See Nicole Santa Cruz, The Game Meets with L.A. Gangs in an Effort to Stop Killings, LA Times (July 17, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/44ysh7w8 (noting that the event “was held at a Church of Scientology center in the Vermont Knolls neighborhood”).]

Further, in instructing the jury, the trial court further directed them to consider the prosecution’s evidence of the alleged “suppressive” and “fear[some]” nature of the Church’s “principles and practices” to explain away otherwise exculpatory evidence — such as the victims’ delays in reporting as well as their changed narratives of their actions before, during, and after the alleged rapes. Id. The effect of the trial court’s instruction was also to vouch for the prosecution’s “expert” witness and her heretical interpretation of Scientology Scripture. It is hard to imagine an instruction more hostile to a religion or more contrary to the First Amendment.

2. The trial judge displayed hostility to Scientology in her treatment of people the court believed might be affiliated with Scientology.

The trial judge demonstrated the same enmity towards Scientology in her rulings about alleged intimidation by the Church inside the courtroom — despite the fact that, other than outside counsel, the Church never had any representative present.

Church attorney. For example, before [Jane Doe 1]’s second day of testimony, the government informed the trial court that [Jane Doe 1] previously was made to feel “uncomfortable” while on the witness stand by outside Church counsel Vicki Podberesky. According to [Jane Doe 1], Podberesky had made eye contact with her, flipped her hair and rolled her eyes in response to a statement [Jane Doe 1] made on the stand. (25 RT 1988–1989.)

Prosecutors then requested that the trial court allow them to ask [Jane Doe 1] during her testimony whether there was someone she recognized who made her feel uncomfortable during her prior testimony. (25 RT 1989–1990.) Masterson’s counsel objected, arguing that the prejudicial impact from the speculation about “witness intimidation” outweighed any probative value, particularly when no one else, including the trial court, observed Podberesky’s alleged wrongdoing. (25 RT 1991.)

Not only did the trial court grant the prosecutor’s request, but it also criticized the Church for exercising its right to have a representative attend the public trial, even while intimating that the Church had engaged in more sinister conduct:

[I]f the defense has a concern about [the] Scientology[‘s] organization presence in this Court, perhaps you might want to have a conversation that they should stop asserting themselves in the criminal proceeding, whether it’s the form of filing amicus briefs or being present for every court hearing or whatever it is they do. If they wish not to have their presence noted, then perhaps they shouldn’t be present. (25 RT 1993, emphasis added.)

[17. Attending a court proceeding open to the public and petitioning the government in the form of an amicus brief are both acts protected by the First Amendment. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Ct. for Norfolk Cnty., 457 U.S. 596, 606–07 (1982); Colombo v. O’Connell, 310 F.3d 115, 118 (2d Cir. 2002) (citing Chambers v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 207 U.S. 142, 148 (1907)).]

With the trial court’s green light, [Jane Doe 1] testified that Podberesky—whom [Jane Doe 1] identified as “represent[ing] the … Church of Scientology and David Miscavige and every witness that needed [to] come to court to testify” — made her feel uncomfortable by “the way she looked at me,” like “a really dead glare.” (25 RT 2000–2002.)

[18. This testimony is false in part as Ms. Podberesky represented Church of Scientology International and has never represented Mr. Miscavige.]

Another faith’s reverend. Later that day, the trial court again attempted to “expose” Scientology’s presence in the courtroom. A prosecutor claimed that a man wearing a cross “may be here trying to ensure the Scientology rights are — or religion is being protected.” (25 RT 2045.) Setting aside that there is nothing wrong with someone sitting peaceably in a courtroom to ensure religious liberty is being protected, the court did the prosecution’s bidding and interrogated the man: “Gentleman with the cross, who are you?” After the man identified himself as Rev. L’Heureux, the “Moderator on the Committee on Religious Liberty,” the trial court asked him whether he was affiliated with Scientology. (25 RT 2045.) Only after the Rev. L’Heureux said, “I am not a member and never have been,” did the trial court respond: “Okay. He can remain where he’s at.” (25 RT 2046.) The court thus implied that being affiliated with Scientology and attending the trial was improper in some way.

Public defenders. The trial court took on a comparable gatekeeper-to-Scientology role when [Jane Doe 2] stated on the witness stand — without provocation from the gallery — that “there are just some people in the audience, and I’m bothered.” (28 RT 2597.) After removing the jury, the trial court asked two women with dress and hairstyles—business attire and hair pulled back — that purportedly triggered [Jane Doe 2] whether they were “affiliated with Scientology or … involved with Scientology.” (28 RT 2602–2603.)

The trial court allowed them to remain only after they reassured the judge that “in no capacity” were they associated with the Church and were public defenders watching the trial. (28 RT 2603.) Again, the court’s conduct and words implied that there was something wrong with being in the courtroom if one were associated with Masterson’s religion.

Anti-Scientology double standard. Another such incident, involving the minister singled out and interrogated by the court, above, occurred during the lunch break the day the trial court questioned him. (See generally 25 RT 2075–2094.) The minister and another individual were verbally attacked in the courthouse hallway by anti-Scientologists Aaron Smith-Levin and Leah Remini. Id. at 2077–2078. When a sheriff’s deputy intervened, the harassers left their victims alone. Id. at 2081. But five of the jurors and alternates witnessed the incident to varying degrees. Id. at 2082–2090. Defense counsel asked for a mistrial, but after interviewing the five jurors, the judge denied the request. Id. at 2092–2093.

[19. A further “incident” involved a letter Rev. L’Heureux wrote to the judge, asking why he was “singled out on Monday for your public inquiry.” (Letter from Rev. L’Heureux to the trial court (May 4, 2023), at 2.) Rev. L’Heureux also described the incident with Leah Remini and Aaron Smith-Levin. Additionally, a letter from 32 religious leaders was sent to the judge, asking about the questioning of Rev. L’Heureux and the incident with the anti-Scientologists. The trial court stated that she had received the two letters, who they were from, and what they were about. (30 RT 2811–2812.) She further stated she would not respond to the letters, but that they would be forwarded to the Criminal Division’s Supervising Judge to “respond to as he feels appropriate,” and that they would be “referred to law enforcement for whatever they feel is appropriate in light of the communication with the court in the middle of trial.” Id. at 2812 (emphasis added). She thus implied, falsely, that the letter writers may have engaged in illegal behavior. These events also clearly reflected hostility to Scientology.]

Signaling that Scientology posed a threat to jurors, the trial court subsequently sequestered them in the jury room during lunch for the remainder of the second trial, thus igniting fear of Scientology in the minds of the jurors. (26 RT 2184-2185.) At the same time, the court allowed the anti-Scientologist who made the outburst within earshot of the jurors to remain in the courtroom. (25 RT 2093–2094.)

The difference with which the judge treated alleged pro-Scientology people in the courtroom who had done nothing wrong — with suspicion and aggressive investigation — and the way she treated anti-Scientology people who were engaged in aggressive and inappropriate behavior — by essentially ignoring their misconduct — is a further indication that the judge was non-neutral when it came to Scientology. This is closely analogous to the diverse ways in which the human rights commission treated different bakers in Masterpiece, and which the Supreme Court held there violated the Constitution. 584 U.S. at 636–38.

[20. Relatedly, the trial court also allowed — and by its rulings affirmatively encouraged — the complaining witnesses (and sometimes [Jane Doe 3']’s spouse) to testify about alleged harassment by the Church, as well as the civil lawsuit they had filed over the alleged harassment but refused to allow the defense to present counter evidence or cross-examine the witnesses on this testimony. The prosecution’s eliciting of testimony about alleged Church harassment is also evidence of the prosecution’s hostility to Masterson’s faith since the prosecution knew or should have known that the LAPD had already both investigated these allegations and found they were baseless. (See, e.g., 6 CT 1728, 1746, 1800; 7 CT 1812, 1886, 1901.)]

D. Throughout the trial, the prosecution repeatedly showed hostility towards the Scientology faith.

Throughout the second trial, the prosecution also took its hostility toward the Scientology faith to a new level — both directly and indirectly. But whether this hostility was “masked” or “overt,” here too the First Amendment was violated.

Opening statement. In the prosecution’s opening statement, the prosecutor made numerous statements about the Church, its beliefs, and practices, which conveyed at the very least “masked” hostility and subtle departures from neutrality.

In fact, so central was Scientology to the prosecution’s argument that, in Mueller’s opening statement, he used the term Scientology, Scientologists, and Church 67 times, including phrases such as “harassment by Scientology members,” “conduct of Scientology,” or “Scientology prohibits.…”

The same was true of the prosecution’s decision to show the jury pictures that, at very least, violated the constitutional command that “religious neutrality … must be strictly observed.” Masterpiece, 584 U.S. at 639. During the opening arguments in the second trial, the prosecution included in his PowerPoint presentation photos of Church buildings, staff members, and clergy. In that presentation there were five slides of Scientology Churches, but only three of Masterson’s bedroom — the purported crime scene. And the pictured Church building had nothing to do with Masterson as he had never attended the Scientology Church on display. See Settled Record, Ex. 3. There were also six slides of Scientology ministers or staff, compared to nine slides of Masterson. Id. All of this is forbidden under the First Amendment in a case where the alleged crime did not occur at a church or under the supervision of church officials.

Closing argument. The prosecution’s non-neutrality and hostility towards the Scientology religion was most clearly on display in closing arguments, where the prosecution made multiple false and pejorative statements about the Church of Scientology and its beliefs and essentially urged the jury to convict the defendant because he was a member of the Church.

The prosecutor told the jury Masterson was to be convicted because his faith was “a billion-dollar organization that’s retaliating against” the complaining witnesses. (34 RT 3411, emphasis added.) Masterson was to be convicted so the jury could “show these victims that there is justice” since they did not receive justice from the Church: “they were retaliated against by their church,” which “told them there is no justice for them,” the prosecution falsely declared. Id. Masterson was to be convicted because, according to “expert” Claire Headley, Scientology operates under its own law, “You must obey those rules over all other laws.” (33 RT 3259–3260.) And Masterson was to be convicted because he was “a celebrity in good standing” and protected by the Church, which would “discredit” any internal complaints. (Id. at 3260.) Furthermore, the prosecution falsely claimed that the Church “punished” the alleged victims. (34 RT 3410.)

Having set up their closing through an extended, broadside attack on the Church, the prosecutors’ final message to the jury was that it should punish the Church for its supposed mistreatment of the alleged victims, by punishing Masterson:

The Scientology law told them there is no justice for them. … You have an opportunity to show these victims that there is justice. … Find him guilty and give [these victims] their justice. (34 RT 3411–3412.)

And, not surprisingly, the jury responded to the “send-the-Church-a-message” ploy by convicting Masterson.

In all these ways, the prosecuting attorneys — government officers and officers of the court — violated the “strict neutrality” toward religion that Masterpiece says the Free Exercise Clause demands. Instead, the prosecutors repeatedly showed hostility to Masterson’s faith and Church, putting the Church on trial alongside Masterson, and presenting it in as bad a light as possible.

These statements are unquestionably as non-neutral or hostile as those in Lukumi, Masterpiece, Meriwether, and Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Such animus the Constitution cannot abide. Masterpiece, 584 U.S. at 638–39 (“The Free Exercise Clause bars even subtle departures from neutrality on matters of religion,” and the First Amendment’s “requisite religious neutrality … must be strictly observed” (cleaned up)). The prosecution conveyed that hostility, not only with the trial court’s implicit and sometimes express permission, but based on the court’s rulings expressly making such matters relevant to the jury’s decisions.

CONCLUSION

This appeal does not merely present a question of trial error, but a question of constitutional boundaries that state actors crossed again and again. This case illustrates why strict adherence to the First Amendment is mandated in a criminal prosecution, not only to protect the defendant, but to protect every faith community whose beliefs or practices may be misunderstood or maligned — including, in this case, all Scientologists. Here, by both improperly deciding religious questions and repeatedly displaying hostility toward Masterson’s faith, the trial court and the prosecution impermissibly crossed clear constitutional lines.

If these constitutional violations are allowed to stand, no member of any faith will be safe. Courts are forbidden from interpreting scripture and using religion to determine guilt or innocence. The First Amendment does not permit such a result — in this case or any other.

Dated: May 8, 2026

Respectfully submitted,

Alyssa D. Bell | COHEN WILLIAMS LLP

Gene C. Schaerr, James C. Phillips | SCHAERR JAFFE LLP

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Wow, what a treat we have for you today, thanks to the relentless work by Alex Barnes-Ross.

He has managed to pry some very interesting emails out of the East Grinstead Town Council, and they contained, well, a real gem written by Scientology’s UK Public Affairs Director Graeme Wilson. We think you are really going to enjoy reading it.

Here, let’s have Alex explain the situation.

I’ve been working for the last three years on getting the East Grinstead Town Council to listen to us survivors and understand why it’s important they are aware of Scientology’s “safe-pointing” strategy. That request had fallen on deaf ears, with mayors attending events at Saint Hill in the meantime. The Council consistently refused to meet with us, but finally I made a breakthrough with the Clerk (essentially the Council’s CEO) asking me to submit a briefing sheet, which she would circulate to all Councillors.

[Here’s a copy of the briefing sheet that Alex sent to the councillors.]

Abr Safepointing

81.1KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

I produced the briefing sheet along with help from Chris Shelton, and the Clerk kindly shared it with all the elected members on the Council. One of them subsequently forwarded it to Scientology (of course) and OSA’s Graeme Wilson threw a fit.

In response to my records request, the Council redacted names — against FOI and GDPR rules — so we still don’t know which Councillor went running to Scientology. But the response from Wilson is, frankly, comical.

Here’s what Wilson sent.

Dear Cllr [redacted]

I am writing to you as the Public Affairs Director of the Church of Scientology.

It has come to my attention that you have recently been sent a document entitled “Fact Sheet for Councillors Scientology safe pointing,” by a [redacted] called [redacted]. Given the content of this “Fact Sheet” I felt it necessary to correct the mischaracterisation contained in this. As is commonly understood, [redacted] is an [redacted], with a publicly professed agenda to destroy [redacted], while [redacted] seeks to obtain notoriety and income in the process. In doing so [redacted] frequently resorts to outright lies, misinformation and disinformation — and this so-called “fact sheet” is another good example of this.

Forgive me if this is quite a long email, but I feel it needs to be in order to properly address the above-referenced ‘fact sheet.’

As you may be aware the Scientology religion was founded by Mr L. Ron Hubbard more than 70 years ago. Since 1959, when Mr Hubbard first purchased Saint Hill Manor, there has been a Scientology Church in East Grinstead, and Scientologists have been very active in the town community, and in supporting local causes and charities, since that time. Scientology was formally acknowledged as a religion by the United Kingdom Supreme Court in 2013, and the Supreme Court also found that the earlier treatment of Scientologists was “illogical, discriminatory and unjust.”

Prior to that time Scientologists had been subjected to considerable officially sanctioned discrimination and harassment, which was, again, largely the result of misinformation and disinformation being spread about it. There was even for a time — from 1968 to 1980 — a ban on Scientologists coming to the United Kingdom to visit a Scientology Church. It later materialised that there was never any evidence to justify this ban, despite the highly inflammatory rhetoric used when it was introduced by the then Health Minister, who civil servants of the time noted had a great prejudice towards the Church. Despite all efforts to incommode and disadvantage followers of this religion in the past, most of this has thankfully now been reversed. The only reason that our religion survived this onslaught is that Scientologists are good people, with good intentions, who genuinely do good things to help others — because this is like, most religions, the intrinsic ethos of our religion.

It may be noted that the aims of the Scientology religion, first announced in 1950, are the achievement of “a civilisation without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where Man is free to rise to greater heights.” Accordingly, any time there is a reference to the aims of Scientology, these are what is being referred to. Scientology exists solely to help people to help others — which is the entire focus of its activities both inside and outside of the Church. It also works together with anyone who is of good will and who shares in a desire to create a better society.

The Church of Scientology in England is part of an Australian registered charity – its Australian foundation entirely due to the historic discrimination that Scientologists suffered in this country, now thankfully ended.

Turning to [redacted].

Firstly, the United Kingdom headquarters of the Church are not located at Saint Hill Manor. Like much of [redacted] litany of false and misleading information, this is an incorrect assertion.

Secondly, the policies upon which the Church operates are determined by the Church Boards, and change with the times. Policies that Mr Hubbard authored were written for the time and circumstances in which they written, and should be viewed in that context. They were routinely revised and updated by Mr Hubbard himself during his life time. They often delineate how fundamental Scientology principles can be applied in the running of an organisation and are therefore an invaluable reference and guide. But like in any organisation, the operating procedures in the Church evolve to meet the needs and requirements of the present day.

The Sea Organisation is a recognised religious order in this country. It has that name because it was founded by Mr Hubbard when he was based on a ship in the late 1960s. Like the religious orders of any religion, it consists of the most dedicated members, who commit themselves entirely to the service of the Church. They serve out of religious commitment not financial reward, live communally, with their basic needs provided by the Church, together with a small allowance to cover personal necessities. They are no different to other religious orders in these respects. Most Scientology Churches are staffed by volunteers who are not members of the religious order, but the most important Churches are run by members of the order, including the one in East Grinstead.

The Office of Special Affairs is a small office within the Church, responsible for legal matters and external affairs.

In the late 1960s, through to the early 1980s, there existed a body in the Church known as the Guardian’s Office. It was established specifically to stand up to the intense persecution that Scientologists were suffering around the world at that time. Its staff were not members of the religious order, and the job that they were tasked with was unbelievably difficult. In addition to the situation in the United Kingdom and other countries, Scientologists were then also being persecuted in the USA by some government agencies, who passed false information about them both inside of the USA and outside. “Snow White” refers to a programme in the 1970s to legally discover false reports in such files and get them corrected. There are several Court decisions confirming the legal validity of the programme. In violation of what the programme mandated a small number of people violated the law in the USA and were rightly punished. Subsequently the office responsible was disbanded completely. With the advent of Freedom of Information laws, the purpose of the Snow White programme was subsequently achieved. Later, culminating in 1993, the USA Internal Revenue Service concluded the largest investigation in IRS history into all Scientology churches, as well as Church leaders personally. The IRS found everything was fully in order and in compliance with the law, with nothing wrong with any of them, and declared all Scientology churches to be tax exempt, nonprofit public benefit bodies.

There are no restrictions whatsoever on Scientologists establishing any kind of relationships with elected officials. Scientologists come from all walks of life and have political opinions covering the entire spectrum. They are free to do whatever they like, and some have been elected to office in this country and this town. Because Scientologists are engaged with so many activities in the community, many are known to elected officials.

Moreover, the Church of Scientology encourages all Scientologists to engage in good works and help people — because the aim of Scientology is to engage in good works and help people.

In regard to Mr Hubbard’s policy on having a “safe point,” this was formulated in 1972 as a response to the extraordinary persecution Scientologists were suffering and the difficulties this created for the Church to operate at all. Mr Hubbard’s viewpoint was that if important people in the area of our Churches really got to know us, they would be suitably informed when someone tried to subject us to persecution of one form or another, and could come to their own conclusions. The policy was very sensible in the circumstances. Like almost all such policies written by Mr Hubbard it is free to be read by anyone, as they were published in volumes which can be obtained by anyone.

In truth, long before the above policy was issued, the first policy of our Church, since the early 1950s, was, “maintain friendly relations with the environment and the public.”

I am happy to show you and discuss any and all such policies written by Mr Hubbard, should you have any questions. As I said above, they sometimes need to be considered in the context of when they were written, and what we were having to contend with at the time. This is coupled with the fact that the goals of Scientology are altruistic and good — there are no “secret” other goals — a fact that I can personally attest to, having been working to help people as part of the Church for nearly 50 years.

[Redacted] proceeds to then totally misrepresent the report of Sir John Foster QC published in 1971. Sir John was commissioned by the Government to conduct an independent enquiry into Scientology — after they had already imposed the ban on foreign Scientologists coming to this country in 1968. The reason it was commissioned was that they knew that they did not have evidence to support the ban or the false assertion that Scientology “was socially harmful” — but they hoped that an after-the-event inquiry might unearth it. It did not, and the Foster report recommended that the ban be lifted. The statement that [redacted] quotes is the, since disproven, statement of the Minister announcing the ban in 1968. Sir John Foster reached no such conclusion in his report, and said the ban was not justified.

[Redacted] also refers to the Charity Commission decision in 1999. What [redacted] fails to mention is that that decision was itself based on a decades old decision where a judge had suggested that Scientology may not be a religion, and which concluded that the obvious public benefits which flow from religious practices were therefore not applicable. Charity law in this area has been revised since that time, and the Church unequivocally provides nearly all of the public benefits which the Charity Commission have subsequently identified as flowing from religious practices. The UK Supreme Court has now ruled that Scientology is a religion, and the body that operates the Churches in England is registered as a charity in Australia (where it is incorporated).

I hope that that answers any questions that you might have on the so-called “fact sheet.” Its purpose is evidently to try to create divisions and sow the seeds of intolerance towards a peaceful, law abiding and decent religious community. There is unfortunately just too much of this about at present.

If you would like more information, I am happy to meet you, and you have an open invitation to come and tour our Church in East Grinstead. Please let me know.

Kind regards,

Graeme Wilson

Public Affairs Director

Church of Scientology

Well, that’s a precious document. We look forward to the experts in our community taking on Wilson’s many assertions here and providing counterarguments.

And what do you think — should these kinds of reassurances persuade alert, prudent politicians who have the power of Google at their fingerprints?

Bonus items from our tipsters

It’s election day, and we’re interested to see what happens in a couple of races. The Los Angeles mayoral fight is intriguing, and one of our helpers forwarded this item from a Scientologist hoping to have an impact on the outcome by passing out copies of The Way to Happiness…

We asked our tipster if Kelly Watkins, the woman who posted this, more explicitly stated who the “common-sense” candidate was. Our helper didn’t see that, but sent along this image of Kelly and her husband Chris.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Earlier this week, Scientology’s most unhinged of front groups, its anti-psychiatry lobbying arm Citizens Commission on Human Rights, put out a press release celebrating another victory.

CCHR is always happy when it can convince legislators to carry water for the Church of Scientology without them even realizing it.

In this case, lawmakers in Tennessee were convinced to make some changes to a law that allows testing for psychotropic drugs of a mass shooter after an incident injures four or more people. (Scientology would actually like to eliminate all psychotropic drugs altogether, but it settles for these small victories whenever it can get them.)

Anyway, the reason we bring it up is that in the press release, CCHR gave credit for drafting the bill to Tennessee CCHR’s Director of Public Policy, who is none other than — are you ready for this? — Brittany Ruiz.

Yes! That Brittany Ruiz. The former Sea Org worker who tried to run for city council in McMinnville, Oregon in 2020, and who was unsuccessful after we let the good people of McMinnville know who they were dealing with.

Let us remind you what a field day we had with those stories.

We had pointed out that it was pretty unusual for Scientologists to run for public office. But a former Sea Org insider? That made it extra interesting.

Brittany Ruiz had been the deputy commanding officer at the Advanced Org of Los Angeles, a place where high-level church members paid tens of thousands to experience the “Operating Thetan” auditing levels, really arcane stuff.

And then, after she had left the Sea Org, Brittany continued to flex her muscles as a hardcore Hubbardite on Facebook.

Both Jefferson Hawkins and Tiziano Lugli wrote about Ruiz, then known as Brittany Sierra Garrett, enforcing discipline at Facebook. Lugli, in 2010, wrote about what he said was a slander campaign being run against him after he had left the church…

As we started receiving calls from the rest of our very close group of so-called friends, the FaceBook Enturbulator I/Cs were already on the move. The good old JoJo Zawawi teamed up with Brittany Sierra Garrett (old D/CO of AOLA and 2D of Javier Ruiz whom I personally helped extensively to get on his feet after he left the SO). They started an amazing rumormongering campaign against us with vicious lies given by Tom Davis regarding our standing which apparently is “We’re declared SPs attacking the Church joined with squirrel groups and trying to get upstat Scientologists to follow us.”

Here’s another fun example, Brittany in 2011 posting a comment at a Scientology parenting blog, enforcing discipline about the barley formula that Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard had come up with for feeding infants…

Now that’s Keeping Scientology Working!

And as Tiziano mentioned, Brittany’s “2D” — her husband — was Javier Ruiz, another fascinating figure in Scientology history.

Javier’s previous wife was Barbara Ruiz, who had at one time run the “Writers of the Future” front for Scientology before she vanished into thin air, another of David Miscavige’s executives he made disappear.

In 2019 Leah Remini told us that near the end of her time in Scientology, she asked Javier about Barbara, trying to find out what had happened to her friend.

“I told him I was worried about what was going on in Scientology,” Leah says. She told him that Shelly didn’t seem to be around, and Barbara had also seemingly vanished.

“We’re divorced. What do I give a fuck where Barbara is?” Javier told her. And soon after that conversation, Leah found herself being called down for a meeting.

“I was called in and confronted by Shane Woodruff, Todd Woodruff, Hansuli Stahli and Mike Sutter — Hansuli and Mike are Miscavige’s henchmen,” Leah says.

She learned that Javier Ruiz had dropped a dime on her.

“He wrote a Knowledge Report, an internal report on me, saying I was trying to start a mutiny because I wanted to know where Shelly and Barbara were. They confronted me with the KR and wanted to know if I was trying to start a mutiny. That is where the beginning of the end started for me,” Leah says.

We also pointed out that Javier had been a “supercargo” who was involved in the mistreatment of teenage Sea Org worker Laura DeCrescenzo, the subject of her nine-year lawsuit against Scientology that eventually resulted in her winning a settlement in 2018 just before trial was to begin.

The court records in her case documented that Laura had begun her work in the Sea Org in 1990 at only 12 years old, and she was put on a schedule of 90 hours of work each week, for pennies an hour. Yes, 90 hours a week for a 12 year old girl.

She was from New Mexico, but was working and living in Scientology’s Los Angeles headquarters and, you will not be surprised to hear, she got homesick and missed her mother. And it was Javier’s job, as supercargo, to discipline her, which was included in the court records, including this note written by Javier.

Dear [redacted]

This is some data on Laura Diekman.

She originated last week that she wanted leave the SO. This, she said, was based on her missing her [redacted].

Laura has not been doing well since she has been on post. She has not taken full responsibility for the area under her.

Today I went over why people blow with her. She is going to writing OW’s and we’ll take it from there. Apparently her [redacted] has been putting alot of “ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO BE THERE” stuff on her lines. There maybe a PTS sit to handle as the “reason” that she wants to take off is to “help” her [redacted] around the house.

I wanted this data known and will get in comm with you on it.

Thanks, [redacted]

What’s going on here is that a Scientology Sea Org official, an adult man, is writing up a report on a 12 year old girl because she is not taking “full responsibility” for being separated from her family and working 90 hours a week in Scientology’s indentured servitude.

Scientology argued in this lawsuit that because children even as young as 12 are considered “ministers” in the church, they can treat them any way they like.

We suggested that before McMinnville voters elected Brittany Ruiz to office, they might want her to explain a few things about her involvement in the Sea Org, her views as a Facebook enforcer, and what she thought about her husband’s activities as a supercargo.

Fortunately, the voters of McMinnville sent Brittany packing, and she and Javier apparently decided to seek greener pastures elsewhere, landing in deep red Franklin, Tennessee.

Now the two of them are gladhanding local stalwarts of Williamson County’s Republican party, and Brittany has been drafting legislation for lawmakers on behalf of CCHR.

A local tipped us that Javier and Brittany had made the move, and have ruffled some feathers with how aggressive they are. Curious who these newcomers were, they looked around and found our previous reporting.

They tell us that Javier and Brittany in only a couple of years have become deeply embedded in local politics now, and love getting their pictures taken with state legislators, while Brittany pushes the CCHR line whenever she can.

Could a run for office in Tennessee be far away?

We are going to enjoy keeping an eye on the situation.

Bonus items from our tipsters

News from Puerto Rico!

Puerto Rico Ideal Org can now deliver all the services it is meant to deliver en masse! From the Dianetics Seminar, to the Personnel Efficiency, the Dianetics Co-Audit, the Children’s Courses, the Purification, the Survival Rundown, the Grades, Pro TRs, the Academy Levels and yes all the way up to the state of Clear. In fact, we just made our fourth Clear since Grand Opening! Pedro Martinez has now achieved the State of Clear and here is his win:

“This is one of the most beautiful journeys I have ever taken. Having the certainty of my spiritual nature in such a tangible way is impressive. The state of Clear is wonderful, and I want it for everyone. Thank you all!” — Pedro Martinez

We are now looking for people who want to be part of the team making the difference, making Clears and helping everyone survive across all dynamics. Are you interested? Call (727) 303-1930 and speak to Ana Nunez today!

I joined staff more than ten years ago because I wanted to return to the staff what they have done for me. First I started willing to help with anything. I learned a lot from Treasury, until one day I was transferred to the Director of Special Affairs position in the Org.

That was a real adventure for me. I had the chance to work with people from the community at large and make Scientology solutions known to opinion leaders. During those years, the Org was visited by teachers, religious leaders, politicians, students, police officers, etc. It was exciting to see the results of those years with three out of the four guest speakers at our Ideal Org opening.

Today I have the honor of holding the post of Deputy of the Executive Director. Every day is full of new experiences and knowledge to help us impel Scientology into the whole Caribbean! — Marta Vallerino

I was able to move my business here to Puerto Rico and, in our third month operating, our stats are through the roof. We pulled in some amazing flows and we have 3xed our income since the beginning of the year. I attribute this to being on purpose and my tone level being notches higher operating in life. This flows over to my business and I am sharper and more productive.

I went into staff wanting to be more on purpose and surviving on more of my Dynamics over than the 1st and 2nd, I knew I would be happier and winning surviving on all Dynamics (who wouldn’t) and I acquiesced that it would be challenging and not a very comfortable thing to do. However, now being through it, that was a wrong assessment. It was much easier than I thought. I’m also taking what I learned on my Staff Statuses and exec training and applying these at work with winning results.

If you asked me would I do it again, that is an easy one... yes, in a heartbeat and I wish I did it sooner — Tom VanDusen

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

As part of our ongoing look back at the beginnings of the Dianetics and Scientology evolution, we didn’t want May to run out without remembering what L. Ron Hubbard was up to 75 years ago this month.

We’ve been watching how things unfolded 75 years ago in 1951, as Hubbard’s early success with Dianetics had begun to sour. In April, Ron’s second wife Sara Northrup had begun to exact some revenge after his failed attempt to kidnap her and to get her committed. She revealed in a court document that not only had Ron tried to kidnap her, but he had made off with their infant daughter, Alexis.

Last time, we showed you the bizarre letter that Ron wrote from Cuba, where he had taken the baby. He then relocated to Wichita with the help of a wealthy oil man, Don Purcell.

Then, on May 15, Ron wrote an absolutely unhinged letter to J. Howard McGrath, the US Attorney General, trying to turn in Sara and a lot of others as current or former Communists who had attacked Ron with some pretty bizarre methods.

We’re posting the entire letter here. As Russell Miller said in Bare-Faced Messiah, the letter was beyond the pale, even by Ron’s standards…

Even for Hubbard, the rambling, venomous missive was a breathtaking concoction of lies, vituperation and wild allegations rendered all the more dangerous by the rise of McCarthyism.

Here it is in its entirety. Soak up its details, and imagine that anyone ever took this man seriously, then or later.

The Hubbard Dianetic Foundation, Inc.
275 MORRIS AVENUE
P.O. BOX 502, ELIZABETH, N.J.
ELIZABETH 3-2951

211 W. Douglas St.
Wichita, Kansas
May 14, 1951

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Washington, D.C.

Dear Sir:

You will find that I have reported some of these matters to the FBI in Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, D.C. before but this is getting to a point where the mere delivery of facts into files is pointless.

It is more than a belief on my part that the Communist Party or members of the Communist Party have in the past year wiped out a half a million operation for me, have cost me my health and have considerably retarded material of interest to the United States Government.

I am, basically, a scientist in the field of atomic and molecular phenomena. At least, that was my course in college. I followed this into the fields of human thought, identified an energy and produced through twenty years of research, a science of thought known popularly as dianetics.

Although this story starts earlier, when I left the Navy in which I served as an officer during the war, I found myself associated with a woman known as Sara Elizabeth Northrup. I met her in Pasadena in late 1945. She evinced considerable interest in my scientific researches.

In 1949, in Elizabeth, New Jersey, I formed an organization known as the American Institute of Advanced Therapy. Miss Northrup, whom I believed to by my wife, having married her and then, after some mix-up about a divorce, believed her to be my wife in common law, was instrumental in breaking up this organization. In 1950 I wrote a book called DIANETICS and formed the HUBBARD DIANETIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION in New Jersey.

From the first this organization, quite unlike my naval commands, was a source of great turbulence to me. Strange things were done for which I had no accounting. Orders were rarely carried out. Research was held to zero. Funds were spent in unproductive ways.

In August of that year I had reason to believe my wife was unfaithful and went to California. I was afraid of publicity and did nothing about this. By October, things

[page 2]

had come to such a pass in terms of organizational enturbulence that C. Parker Morgan, a member of the Foundation board of trustees told me he believed subversion was taking place. He asked the FBI to make an investigation. I know nothing further of this investigation. However, investigating on my own, I found that the publisher of the book, Arthur Ceppos, Hermitage House, was failing to distribute the book and was actually upsetting the organization by invalidating me and the science. I challenged Ceppos with this and forced him to resign from the board of trustees of the Foundation. At this time I learned also that Ceppos was “formerly” a member of the Communist Party. Resigning with Ceppos and hand in glove with him, evidently, was J.A. Winter, MD, medical director of the Foundation. I discovered then that Winter was a psycho-neurotic discharged officer of the US Army Medical Corps and that Winter seemed to have Communist connections. I was not alert still to any belief that this strange upset in the organization was Communist inspired.

In early October my alleged wife, who a few months later would be claiming we were not married, caused me to make out a will to her via attorney Milt Davis of Los Angeles, leaving her shares in the copyrights and Foundations. I returned to Rahway New Jersey and in late October, while asleep in my home, was slugged. I had no proof of this and so I wisely or unwisely sheered away from publicity for something for which I had no witnesses and tried to carry on. However I was thereafter in poor health.

I returned to Los Angeles. On my first day in town Sara Northrup left our baby in a car and I was arrested for it. I could never understand why the police insisted it was I, but it is a matter of court record that the act was done by Sara.

On December the 5th, while asleep in my apartment, on North Rossmore in Los Angeles I was again attacked and knocked out. When I woke I debated considerably going to the police but was again afraid of publicity for again I did not know who might have done this. It never occured to me to suspect that my wife had any part in this.

I had become so ill by January 1st and was so long overdue in writing my second book that I went to Palm Springs. I returned from Palm Springs in late February to find my wife apparently ill, in bad mental condition, and my baby more or less forgotten in a back room of the Los Angeles Foundation. I instantly took steps, what steps I could, to give my wife help. She seemed to recover.

[page 3]

I was in my apartment on February 23rd, about two or three o’clock in the morning when the apartment was entered, I was knocked out, had a needle thrust into my heart to give it a jet of air to produce “coronary thrombosis” and was given an electric shock with a 110 volt current. This is all very blurred to me. I had no witnesses. But only one person had another key to that apartment and that was Sara.

Further, earlier in the week I had found letters in a “love nest” she had had with a Miles Hollister, an employee of the Foundation. These letters contained, with their love language, also enormous amounts of data on the Foundation and my activities. Further there was a telegram which came from Hollister containing the phrase, “Lombardo should live so long” Lombardo being a name she sometimes called me.

I had been convinced by these letters she had been unfaithful but I was too ill to do anything active. I forgave her and tried to get her into better shape. But on Saturday Feb 25 she flew to San Francisco and my general manager, Jack Maloney in New Jersey, received a phone call from her and Miles Hollister and a psychiatrist named Meyer Zelig in San Francisco that I had gone insane and that they needed money to incarcerate me quickly.

I learned of this quickly by phone from New Jersey and my orders from my eastern Foundation were to get out. I went back to the apartment that night however and found my “wife” had returned but seemed drugged. I found two strange men watching the apartment. I got her out, she consenting, and took her to Palm Springs. Hollister instantly had warrants issued for my arrest for “abducting” my wife and gave the Beverly Hills police a false address for himself. Further, I had put my baby safely in a nursing home and Hollister issued a compalint against me in Los Angeles for kidnapping my own baby. I tried to get Sara out of California, knowing her to be under terrific duress of some kind. She however would not further accompany me than the Arizona border. I have her signed statement, requested of her by me before the border guard that she was under her own power and was with me by full consent. At the moment she demanded to go back I could not deter her naturally without using force and so I let her go.

I went east. My baby was delivered to me there. The child was ill and I took her south to get her some sunshine. I wrote my second book in Havana. I returned here to Wichita.

Meanwhile I was able to integrate this matter and obtained more data from friends. There are many witnesses to these things, Frank Dessler, A.E. van Vogt, Mrs. Fay Clauson,

[page 4]

Richard de Mille, and others.

Sara was associating exclusively and using her position to support a group consisting of Miles Hollister, Gene Benton, (an alias, his real name being Weinberger), Peggy Benton, Roger Starr, Lyn Hite, Henry Hunter, Marge Hunter and Gregory Hemmingway. In the east she was closely and exclusively associated with Dr. Winter, Arthur Ceppos and a Nancy Roodenburg. Using a Foundation position as Executive vice-president, she provided this group with funds. Handling my own accounts she neglected to pay many debts. She was closely connected as well with Hal Moon, a “pastor” in Monrovia or some such town in California. Also she was associated, as a part of this group, with Marc Lawrence, the actor, and via Benton, Stan Kenton, the orchestra leader seems also associated with this group and also with a Will Graff or Graph. Also connected here is Edward Kuhl of Universal Pictures but in what way I am not certain.

Gene and Peggy Benton confessed to our general manager that they had been members of the Young Communists. Henry Hunter and Marge Hunter are alleged to have been connected with Communism. Marc Lawrence, very active in this group, is supposed to have been (admitted in the House to have been) a member of the Communist Party. Hollister stated to me that he had been a member of the Young Communists and is associated with Dr. Werner Wolfe of Bard College.

In November the Medical Director of the Foundation Dr. Rowland Walker died very suddenly, in Winter’s House, of “coronary thrombosis”, after a siege of terrible nerves. In late January or early February, an instructor of the Los Angeles Foundation, on the verge of important research data, was shot to death by his wife who then committed suicide — out of which Hollister and Benton seemed to have attempted to make anti-dianetic publicity. Earlier, in New York, a young patient, after an interview with Gene Benton committed suicide and an effort had been made to publicize.

The group above named has produced remarkable tension in our organization so that the organization has collapsed and another has had to be set up to replace it. Their removal from dianetics has been attended by a most remarkable smear campaign in California.

In February in Chicago I took tests at the Chicago Psychological Institute to guarantee the fact that I am sane. This talk of insanity and other matters in the press have behind them a remarkable clause in the “divorce” petition leveled by Sara “Hubbard” — a receivership for the Foundation and turning it all over to her. She was aware of

[page 5]

that my will had been changed.

Many offers of peace were extended to her before this strange attack was launched. I have been called a “dope fiend” by her. I have been called “insane”. Every effort is being made to get dianetics.

This is data: in August 1950 I found out a method the Russians use on such people as Vogeler, Mindszenty and others to obtain confessions. I could undo that method. My second book was to have shown how the Communists used narcosynthesis and physical torture and why it worked as it did. Further, I was working on a technology of psychological warfare to present it to the Defense Department. All that work was interrupted. Each time I tried to write, a new attack was launched.

As a one-time officer of OXI I try not to see Indians behind every bush. I have not the use of your files. I find out, suddenly, that a Leo West, in charge of our office is a Communist and so discharge him and close that out. But I could not discover these things until damage has been done.

I enclose a validation pamphlet of dianetics. It is not a psychotherapy but a study of the energy of thought. It is important technology. The proof of it in the field of psychotherapy is indicated in this pamphlet.

Those ex-Communists or current Communists “helped me”. They stayed close to me. They shut me off from Communication. I did not realize that my wife was one until this spring. Only then could I separate myself.

While my proof may be slight, it is strange that turbulence in the new Foundation ceased the moment I began to use only personnel screened by a “lie detector”. This present organization is secure as well as I can make it. But the old Foundations have been thrust into oblivion.

Dianetics is important politically. It indicates a way of controling people or de-controling them and of handling groups which is good technology. It is an American science. Arthur Ceppos sat on the press side of dianetics and we have received since the publication of the book a most rabid anti-dianetic press.

The field of Group Dianetics could become an ideology if anyone let it. Who controls dianetics, its techniques and researches can be a menace to the security of this country.

[page 6]

It may be that this is wildcat party activity. It may be that these members are simply ex-Communists. But an Alastair Kyle, stated by Parker Morgan to be a Communist, tried long and hard from New York to get our mailing list.

I only know these things — while I let them, unsuspected, cluster around me, these people stopped dianetics in its tracks. With them gone we can run an organization. But once ejected they began, evidently, through Sara, these remarkable attacks. I believe this woman to be under heavy duress. She was born into a criminal atmosphere, her father having a criminal record. Her half sister was an inmate of an insane asylum. She was part of a free love colony in Pasadena. She had attached herself to a Jack Parsons, the rocket expert, during the war and when she left him he was a wreck. Further, through Parsons, she was strangely intimate with many scientists of Los Alamos Gordos. I did not know or realize these things until I myself investigated the matter. She may have a record.

My plea is simply this: security in which science can work. Why do these people remain at large, free of our press, destructive of our efforts? I have been developing, in spite of these enturbulences, data of some value as this rudimentary pamphlet proves. Dianetics and the Foundation, potent forces, almost fell into complete Communist control or the control of ex-Communists whichever it is. I cannot fight the battle of Communist vs the world as the only opponent or threat. Certainly some one else must be at least faintly interested. My life has been in danger, my work has suffered, my life is still in danger. My reputation is almost ruined so these vermin Communists or ex-Communists whatever they are can take over a piece of society and a technology.

If Russia possessed the notes I have on psychological warfare, she would be that much more potent.

Further, I do not believe these people meant to destroy dianetics but to drive it underground. They “helped” me with radio programs which did not get played, by pamphlets which did not give the whole story (like this validation pamphlet) and by “advice” which attempted to knock every loyal American out of dianetics.

What can one do in the face of this? When, when, when will we have a round-up?

Please compare these notes with your central files. I am certain you will find these names repeated there connections

[page 7]

with Communist activities. Perhaps in your criminal files or on the police blotter of Pasadena you will find Sara Elizabeth Northrup, age about 26, born April 8, 1924 about 5’9”, blonde-brown hair, slender. My own investigation seems to indicate that possibility. Her residence from ‘42 to 45 was 1003 South Orange Grove, Pasadena, Calif. I have no revenge motive nor am I trying to angle this broader than it is. I believe she is under duress, that they have something on her and I believe that under a grilling she would talk and turn stateIs evidence.

I am unsure of Edward Kuhl and Stan Kenton as connected but merely mention them as associated vaguely with this group. I am very sure of the politics or ex-politics of other members of the group. Gregory Hemmingway is the son of Ernest Hemmingway and is employed at Douglas Aircraft in California. He may be a dupe but he has taken a solid role in this group. Roger Starr is probably a dupe. Lyn Hite is not known to be a Communist but associates solidly with Communists. Marc Lawrence was definitely aiding Sara in January 1951 in her efforts to stop the second book.

All these matters are, of course, confidential. I do not wish them to be published in any way. I am not trying to regain a reputation by blaming Communism. But I am trying hard to understand how it is that these persons, all so solidly ex-affiliated or currently affiliated, as a group, work in such close partnership against a technology they know would hurt Communism and yet remain at liberty.

I am applying to the Department of Defense for permit to deliver to them my work on psychological warfare. I hope this new Foundation can operate. Frankly, from what has happened, I am not certain I will live through this. If I do not, know that I have only these enemies in the entire world.

May I respectfully request, sir, your assistance in rendering America a trifle safer for new sciences. I wish I could ask you to extend that clause in the charter of the FBI about persons in distress.

Sincerely,

L. Ron Hubbard

A couple of footnotes:

“Vogeler” probably refers to Robert A. Vogeler of Hungary. Arrested Nov. 1949, Released April 28, 1951, tortured for a confession.

“Mindszenty”: Cardinal József Mindszenty, who had opposed fascism and was imprisoned by a pro-Nazi regime during WW2, then was given a life sentence in 1949 for opposing communism after the war. He was freed in the 1956 Hungarian revolution and died in 1975 in Vienna.

Russell Miller points out that a letter like that, with the country in the grips of a Red Scare, could easily have gotten Sara arrested. But by this time, Hubbard was already known to the feds as a “mental case,” and it was apparently ignored.

“No doubt after the filing clerks had had a good laugh,” Russell says. (Lol.)

No Group Therapy this week

Your proprietor is on the road visiting family this week, and we will be back next week with an episode of our raucous roundtable of enturbulation!

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

It was just in January that we brought you the latest presentation of New OT 8s as they appeared in Scientology’s Freewinds magazine.

Only four months later, they’ve got a new batch!

Here they are, the new class of graduates, the Scientologists who have achieved the highest rung on the “Bridge to Total Freedom,” the pinnacle of what can involve decades of hard work (and a million or two bucks).

Operating Thetan Level Eight, the top auditing level in the church, can only be achieved at the church’s floating cathedral in the Caribbean.

According to Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, these folks should be able to leave their bodies at will while experiencing full perception. They should be masters of matter, energy, space, and time, which means they should be able to conjure things from thin air and fly around the world at a whim.

Hubbard once said that an “OT” could crush a planet between thumb and forefinger.

Alas, while these OT 8 graduates are no doubt happy to put that certificate on the wall, they will have to use conventional means to return home. In sixty years since Hubbard came up with the upper OT levels, no one has actually demonstrated that they bestow any super powers at all.

And in fact, we’ve pointed out in the past that OT 8 is Hubbard’s biggest prank of all on his followers.

You learn that for all those years of auditing you’ve been doing in Scientology, perhaps for decades, and all of those memories you recovered from millions and billions of years ago on other planets, it turns out that all along you were only recovering the memories of the body thetans that were infesting you. And the good news is, now you understand who you are not, and you may now begin learning who you are.

Imagine paying a couple of million for that revelation.

Anyway, here is the latest crop of geniuses. Let us know if you recognize any names!

Maria Angela Meroni, Joe Bertolucci, Anna Maria Azzini

Vicky Guy & Hayden Pringle

Sara Rudari & Sara Lilli

Mary Claire Beilhart, Melanie Baichtal, Cristal Logothetis, Wil Seabrook

Rebeca Pagovich

Roger Zerden & Mandeep Sharma

Joe Banks & Mariela Moi

Azadeh Afzali, Martine Lapointe, Brian McCowin, Georgina Drivas, Elisabetta Malerba

Simon Harrison & Mike Dawson

Ryan Atkinson-Baker & Malna Hidvegi

Avi Hayon & Dasha Gerleyn

Carlos Rodriguez Velazquez & Sandra Schaefer

Kathrin Runge, Jamie Maverick, Marian Henry, Regina Molnar

Mellissa Koel & Kay Plasch

Nikos Kiourtsidis

Tsz-Ho (Chris) Wong & Brittany Muller-Wong

Grant Cardone, professional ham hock

While Grant celebrates the occasion of his daughter reaching the State of Clear, there’s an interesting report that he’s being sued for $1 billion by his former Chief Marketing Officer for defamation. The lawsuit was just filed, so we’ll be interested to see how he responds.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewellery, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Things are really heating up in Clearwater over Scientology’s latest takeover attempt, and we’re fortunate that Mark Bunker is keeping an eye on it…

I attempted to go to last night’s Clearwater city council special work session about the Scientology revamp of downtown, but it was packed with what appeared to be all the excited Scientologists who had recently clapped and cheered at the ribbon-cutting ceremony for The Good Life Showroom. I doubt there were many non-Scientology citizens who were aware a presentation was happening tonight, but Scientologists sure did seem to get notified — and boy, did they applaud at the end of the presentation.

I was in the crowded lobby of the library as we all waited. Only a small fraction of the crowd would get into the chamber. Everyone else would be put into overflow rooms and watch it on monitors. One woman next to me said she had attended the presentation at the Fort Harrison Hotel and asked if I had been there. Like they’d let me in.

I decided to leave and watch the live-stream. Mayor Bruce Rector started things by saying they were holding this meeting because the council keeps getting asked about these much-hyped projects, but the city has been left largely in the dark. The mayor was most interested in hearing from the people behind the various anonymous LLC’s that are involved. It is a question he returned to several times, but it continued to be ducked throughout the meeting.

The presentation consisted of a member from each of the partners in the project speaking about their piece of the puzzle. That is, except for Scientology’s Flag Service Organization. FSO had Scott Dobbins, the head of Hybridge Commercial Real Estate, speaking on their behalf. That was something the mayor was not particularly happy about.

Dobbins is in charge of recruiting businesses into the buildings, and he was most pleased that they found the perfect partner to anchor the project in the EVO entertainment center.

A representative from Gensler spoke about restoring the historic properties that have been in progress for some time. He has been in charge of restoring more than 100 Scientology orgs across the globe. He assured the council that these will be not done in the same fashion as a Scientology property but will reflect the highest quality in retail development. He knows “the Scientology architecture design” and it won’t be in play downtown. Apparently he is aware many have been worried about that.

David Boyd’s family business is restoring clocks, and he showed how they painstakingly updated a clock for downtown to give it the original sheen but with the latest technology.

The mayor let it be known that the three properties currently being restored are not owned by the Flag Service Organization and he was troubled by the fact that the LLC’s members weren’t identified. Flag wasn’t an owner of the properties but they seemed to be organizing and facilitating this project and that is what he wanted to hear about tonight. This was a line of questioning that really irritated Vice-Mayor Ryan Cotton, who was upset the mayor would even raise the question. More on that later.

Dobbins responded by somewhat frantically saying that all of the work being done so far on Cleveland Street was being funded by Scientology parishioners, and the work was being done by some of the most esteemed leaders in their fields. I don’t think anyone doubted the quality of the people doing the work, only the shady way Scientology has gone about taking over the downtown.

Dobbins made it clear that the Cleveland Street Alliance consisted of the Church of Scientology, its parishioners, and then this team of top leaders in their fields. That is something the Cleveland Street Alliance does not make clear in any of the promotional materials they create. The videos created by Scientology never mention Scientology at all.

The mayor pointed out that the Flag Service Organization is a non-profit. “The community wants to know, how is a tax exempt non-profit organization involved with for-profit LLC’s in the project?”

He had hoped someone from Flag would be there to answer that. Nope.

Councilmember Mike Mannino wanted an answer to a quick question: “Why now? What’s changed?”

Dobbins excitedly explained that they have their anchor. The theater is the key to draw in other businesses to make this project work.

Councilmember David Allbritton said we know Scientology builds pretty buildings but when he goes out into the community he is asked, “What’s going to be in them?” He mentioned the properties on Fort Harrison Avenue filled with Scientology front groups like The Way to Happiness and Narconon. There is skepticism in the community about the activation of the properties being restored.

Allbritton asked, of the three properties already under construction what’s going in them? Dobbins couldn’t say. Due to confidentiality he couldn’t talk about negotiations that are underway. So far they have announced the EVO theater and a Japanese restaurant as having committed, and he expects more will be rolling out soon.

Next, Michael Halflants talked about the new designs for Cleveland Street buildings and how they will dramatically improve the shopping and dining experience.

Then it was Mitch Roberts from EVO, who spoke about the theater being much more than just a movie theater but a destination spot to bring people downtown, with dining, bowling, rock climbing, arcades, and THE BIGGEST MOVIE SCREEN IN THE WORLD!

As a movie buff, I can’t knock this. I looked into some of the EVO theaters elsewhere and this really does seem like a worthwhile addition to downtown that “on a rainy day can get beachgoers to come across the bridge and see a movie.”

Myrtle Development LLC is the owner of the EVO property. The mayor once again asked, “Who is Myrtle LLC?” Dobbins again answered with “it is funded by a collection of Scientologist investors.”

A gentleman that didn’t disclose his name jumped up to say “The investors, the owners are not going to accept your offer to disclose that…I think it’s important…you want to know who is going to control these buildings. Who’s going to control the businesses that go into them?”

Yeah, that’s exactly the concern. I will get back to that.

Vice-Mayor Cotton wanted to assure people that Scientology pays taxes. They are the biggest tax payer downtown. (Made easier because they chase away most other tax payers.) Then he ripped into the mayor for wanting to know the identities of the LLC members. Cotton is worried some deranged lunatic will look them up and do something terrible to them. “But at the end of the day, to keep crying about that, I don’t think we should be doing that.”

The mayor shot back in his laid back manner that, “I’m sorry that somehow you don’t like the questions that I ask or someone else asks…”.

He pointedly informed Cotton that in his 35-year career as an attorney he has helped countless non-profits get their tax exempt status. “You have to be very careful that your non-profit activities are separate from your profit-making activities.

In watching the video I realized that the mayor reminds me so much of the great Eugene Levy as Perry Como back on SCTV Network 90.

I thinks some aspects of this project are solid, like the movie theater. That would be an asset.

But — “who is going to control these buildings, these businesses that go into the buildings?”

That’s the real issue because Scientology leader David Miscavige is a ruthless, petty little tyrant who micromanages everything under his control. He controls this project. He orchestrated this scheme. Paying hundreds of millions in cash for properties at 2, 4 or 6 times the market value is “a Scientology thing.”

He has cameras everywhere. He has people like Pat Harney going into wog businesses to get an employee fired for something as slight as saying “L. Ron Hubbard was a lousy writer.” She and other Scientologists chased away a brewery that wanted to come downtown. They still call in phony complaints about “crimes happening” at The Nash Keys Dueling Piano Bar.

This will not be Clearwater’s downtown. This will be Scientology’s downtown.

You know there will come a day when Slappy walks onto the stage at the L. Ron Hubbard Hall to say, “For 50 years Clearwater has been a ghost town. The foolish city leaders allowed it to die. They didn’t have the tech. We do. It took Scientology to save this city. We made this into an Ideal Clearwater and after decades of squalor Clearwater is truly the first Scientology City on the planet!”

HIP, HIP, HOORAY!!!

— Mark Bunker

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Tonight the Clearwater City Council will be meeting to discuss Scientology’s new plans for an entertainment complex on Cleveland Street, and other developments that the church has been planning without the council’s involvement.

Mark Bunker plans to be there and will be speaking, and so we thought we’d chat with him about a number of issues that are facing the beleaguered city at this time.

Bunker is running again for a seat on the council, and we value his opinion about what ails that Florida gulf town, which Scientology surreptitiously invaded in 1975.

Another White House connection: RFK Jr and Dr. Eric Berg

Ian Rafalko sent us this Facebook post yesterday. Like us, he’s been taking notes on the connections between the White House and prominent Scientologists, which now include Ian’s father, YouTube chiropractor Dr. Eric Berg.

The posting not only shows Berg with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but it was written by Penny Jones, a Clearwater Scientologist we’re very familiar with here at the Bunker.

“Now we officially have them in a photo together,” Ian says. “I’d make a video saying I told everybody this would happen, but I don’t feel vindicated with the amount of power he’s gaining. Power is a superficial thing and often subjective, which is why I find my dad’s efforts fruitless. He is so inadequate and incapable that the moment he reveals himself and is actually asked these questions he will crumble to pieces. Or go back into hiding.”

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

When it comes to Danny Masterson’s multiple appeals, we try to keep a very close watch on what’s happening at the Second Appellate District in Los Angeles.

In Masterson’s direct appeal, well-known appellate attorney Cliff Gardner is trying to convince the court that Danny didn’t receive a fair trial by casting doubt on the testimony of the Jane Doe victims, objecting to the way the prosecution brought these cases under California’s “One Strike Law,” and by criticizing the rulings made by trial Judge Charlaine Olmedo, including her decision allowing for more Scientology in the second trial.

Those complaints were answered by the California Attorney General’s office, which in a “respondent’s brief” methodically went over the entire case in a very effective manner, we thought. (And so did our expert, TX Lawyer.)

Now fully briefed, the appeal heads to an oral arguments hearing on June 25, which will be live-streamed so we can all watch it.

Yesterday, another item appeared on the case docket. It might seem small, but we ran it past TX Lawyer, and we thought we would share it with you.

After the court announced that the hearing would take place on June 25, Masterson’s attorney Gardner requested 30 minutes for his allotted time to make his case and answer questions from the three justices.

But Blythe Leszkay, a Los Angeles lawyer in the state attorney general’s office, requested only 15 minutes for her presentation.

Did that tell TX Lawyer anything?

“It’s unusual for an appellate lawyer to request less time than their opponent, and likely speaks to her confidence in the conviction,” he says.

Well, now. That is interesting.

Like we said, just a small piece of information, but one that has us even more in anticipation of the June 25 showdown.

Your proprietor and the former Scientology private eye!

We first interviewed Mark Chauppetta for the Village Voice back in 2011, after he had appeared on the Howard Stern show and talked about working as a private investigator for the Church of Scientology.

It’s very unusual for former PIs to open up after they’ve worked for Scientology, and over the years we’ve been glad we can call up Mark and ask him about things.

This time, however, he turned the tables, having us on for the third episode of his new podcast, “Cover to Overt.” We had a fun time, and we hope you enjoy it. Even if you’ve heard our stories before, Mark shares some more great details about working for Scientology.

Bonus items from our tipsters

Life is only going to get worse — might as well go join staff in Puerto Rico!

I want to make it known that my interest in getting to know the Scientology organization is because everything I have seen in this life has been more of the same, and from what I can see, it will only get worse.

What I have seen in Scientology has been more positive and disciplined, which leads people — myself included — to have more positive and future-oriented thoughts. Everything that exists today is completely archaic and fossilized, which leads toward a path of poor decisions.

With Scientology, I have seen a new futuristic vision and a better quality of life with logical knowledge.

I joined staff to get others to follow. Join me. — Gilberto Cosme Cepeda

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewelry, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

We first told you about John Travolta and his friend Jimmy Marino two years ago, and how fabulous they looked as they were getting ready to attend the 2022 Oscars ceremony.

We followed that up with a curious story about how, in a criminal case involving a couple of pilots working for Travolta, a defense attorney for one of the pilots was proposing that she put Travolta and Marino under oath and ask them about their living arrangements at their Ocala, Florida home, arguing that it was relevant to the charges. But then that possibility went away when the case was moved to federal court.

(Judge Thomas Barber — yes, the same Tampa federal judge handling the Valeska Paris labor trafficking lawsuit — has granted a couple of continuances in the case, and the two pilots face their next status conference on July 27.)

In the meantime, we also showed you a photo of Travolta at the most recent L. Ron Hubbard Birthday Event. In a shot of the crowd, we could see JT and Tom Cruise in the front row at the March shindig, standing in the front row and giving Scientology leader David Miscavige a standing ovation. It’s yet more proof that Travolta is as dedicated to Scientology as ever, despite what you might see on occasion in the tabloid press.

Anyway, Travolta and Marino remain very tight, we’re told, and with JT sporting a stunning and stylish new look at Cannes for the world premiere of his new short movie, Propeller One-Way Night Coach, we wondered if Jimmy was again enjoying the good life as John’s live-in trainer.

One indication that Marino is continuing his role as JT’s assistant or trainer, or whatever, was this photo of Travolta directing his new film, in an article which appeared at Entertainment Weekly. Note the photo credit.

But the thing that really got tongues wagging was Travolta’s dynamite new style at Cannes, where the movie had its premiere.

Travolta explained that because he was making his first trip to Cannes as a director, he thought he would dress the part of an old-time movie helmer, evoking Otto Preminger, or something.

Well, OK. We thought the man simply looked dashing, and perhaps he’s getting a better sense of himself as he gets older.

The compliant press, meanwhile, continues its best to write stories like this…

Which, whenever we see them, we can’t help thinking of this…

Anyway, with Travolta coming out as Eric von Stroheim for his movie’s May 15 Cannes debut, we wondered about a couple of things.

First, how the film went down with critics. And second, was Jimmy Marino there?

While some who saw the picture said it has its charms, The Wrap’s Chase Hutchinson called it a “disaster” that “is not a movie.”

This adaptation of Travolta’s own 1997 children’s novel of the same name is a stiff, agonizingly lifeless affair. For all the ways it seems to be deeply personal and intent on exploring how people are shaped by the formative experiences of their youth, it feels like it may have actually been directed by an alien discovering human interaction for the first time.

The BBC, meanwhile, suggested that Propeller was the latest in a string of misguided projects that indulge actors in personal projects that soon disappear.

OK, but was Jimmy there? According to a photo he posted of himself, yes, Jimmy Marino was at Cannes for the festival.

And on May 21, he attended the movie’s US premiere in New York at the Museum of Modern Art.

Looking good, Jimmy.

We’ll say it again: Being the assistant and very close personal friend of John Travolta certainly has its perks.

Bonus items from our tipsters

Our thanks to the reader who forwarded this report from the Freewinds OT Committee!

Completions Update from the Freewinds OT Committee

Happenings For the Week:

Last week there were 7 NEW OT VIII completions!

A.L.B. - from France living in Uk

F.G. - from Australia

G.M. - from Ireland living in USA

G.R. - from Hungary living in DK

Y.B. - from Israel

B.B. - from Germany

T-HY - from Taiwan

Here is an excerpt from A.L.B.’s Success Story:

On each session I felt bigger as a being. I started to love myself for who I am for the first time. The feeling of guilt that I had for a very long time, that feeling of sadness I had to hide for since I can remember, that constant self-invalidation — all gone. All of it is replaced by a certainty of who I am, calmness in my universe and full ARC toward myself and others. That level made me understand this universe. It is not chaotic anymore, there is no doubt. My knowingness and knowledge is unshakable.

When I finished New OT VII, I felt really good. I felt like I was in a very good state, which is true, I was but I felt like something was missing. I felt I had a brand new blank canvas in front of me and I had all of the paint brushes and every colors and sparkles I could ever need. But I felt I could not start painting, I was scared in some way.

Now after New OT VIII, I am so ready to paint the blank canvas that is my life and I am not afraid anymore. And as my first journey I have started the Competence and Leadership program. Life is beautiful on this side of the Bridge, so if you are not already New OT VIII, I really want to encourage everybody, take your next step and the next one and the one after that. It is worth it, all of it, this is your total freedom.

Meanwhile, from the Harlem Ideal Org…

Brenna Ford

Joining staff at an Org on the other side of the country was not on my to-do list this lifetime. I was perfectly happy with where I was and with the future I had there. While talking to a friend, he had me questioning if I was doing enough. I had huge dreams and goals for my life, but our conversation made me realize that I was never going to be satisfied with good enough or extraordinary. What I was looking for was going to outlive me and was going to influence generations to come. That was the moment that I decided to join staff, now it was just a question of where.

I ended up meeting a friend of a friend who happened to be a Harlem staff member, we got to talking and we immediately connected. I agreed to come to Harlem to check it out and immediately I was pulled in by the personality this place has and I knew that this was where I wanted to be. This area deserves to be in the limelight and I fully intend to make an impact in this area that will radiate through the ages.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewellery, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

As on past Memorial Day holidays, we think it’s important to remind readers about Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘stolen valor,’ because part of his legend were the tall tales he told about his experiences in the Second World War. Historian Chris Owen, a regular contributor here at the Bunker, took apart Hubbard’s war myths with his excellent 2019 book Ron the War Hero: The True Story of L. Ron Hubbard’s Calamitous Military Career, an updated and rewritten version of his 1999 work. Today we’re reprinting an excerpt of Chris’s excellent book, looking at Hubbard’s claims about being injured in war versus the actual record. Also, please see Chris’s amazing investigation into Hubbard’s disastrous command in Australia that resulted in several deaths caused by his bungling, as well as a newer series about Hubbard’s bogus medals by a military veteran.

“Blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back, at the end of World War II, I faced an almost non-existent future … I was abandoned by family and friends as a supposedly hopeless cripple and a probable burden upon them for the rest of my days. Yet I worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew about Man and his relationship to the universe.” — L. Ron Hubbard

Hubbard was referring to the supposedly miraculous discoveries he made through Dianetics and Scientology. Perhaps not surprisingly, his claims evolved over time. His claim to have been ‘crippled and blinded’ was written in 1965, a full twenty years after the end of the war. It was not until as recently as 1997 – a full half-century after the war – that the Church of Scientology provided any specific details about how Hubbard sustained his supposed injuries, which were claimed to have been sustained in combat. In an account almost certainly written by official Hubbard biographer Dan Sherman, “the muzzle flash of a deck gun had left [Hubbard] legally blind, while shrapnel fragments in hip and back had left him all but lame.” Oddly, Sherman told Scientologists in the same year that Hubbard had taken slivers of shrapnel in the chest instead.

Hubbard’s medical records show that at the outset of the war in 1941, he suffered from poor eyesight – photographs from the time show him wearing glasses – but was otherwise healthy. By July 1942, he had developed conjunctivitis and his eyesight had deteriorated somewhat. He also had hemorrhoids and later suffered from urethral discharges, which are a classic symptom of venereal disease. Hubbard recorded in his private papers that he had caught gonorrhea from a “very loose” girl named Ginger, which forced him to take sulfa to treat the infection. He picked up further ailments in the following three years. In December 1945, he listed his various ailments in a letter supporting a claim for a pension and disability benefits. He listed a catalog of problems, none of which could be described as a combat-related injury (and indeed, during his naval service Hubbard never claimed to have suffered a combat injury):

Malaria, Feb 42, Recurrent;

Left Knee, Sprain, March 1942;

Conjunctivitis, Actinic Mar 42 (eyesight Failing)

Sporad. Pain Left side and back, undiagnosed, July 42;

Ulcer Duodenum, Chronic, Spring 43;

Arthritis, R[igh]t Hip, Shoulder, Jan 45.

This matches fairly well with his statement to Scientologists in 1958 that he “wasn’t sick, I was just banged up.” In an early 1960s interview he stated that he had spent “the last year of my naval career in a naval hospital. Not very ill, but I had a couple of holes in me – they wouldn’t heal. So they just kept me.” By 1992, however, this had been transformed in Scientology’s account to Hubbard being “a man physically shot to pieces at the end of the war”.

At no point in the war was Hubbard ever in combat with an enemy. His service aboard the USS YP-422, a former trawler converted into a harbor patrol vessel, lasted barely a month before he was relieved of command. it took him no further than the waters immediately off Boston Harbor. The most warlike activity committed by YP-422 under Hubbard’s guidance was a 27-hour series of training exercises, during which a few practice rounds were fired to test the gun. There was no suggestion of enemy action, nor any reports of injuries sustained by any of the crew.

He did conduct what he believed was a lengthy action against two Japanese submarines – or a likely underwater magnetic deposit, according to the US Navy – when commanding the USS PC-815 in the Pacific the following year. In his own subsequent Battle Report, however, he stated that the crew had suffered “total casualties, 3, all very minor.” (He did not specify the type of injuries, but they were likely cuts and bruises resulting from operating the ship’s weapons). He did not include himself among the casualties. There was no suggestion from any of the vessels involved in the “battle” that they had received any enemy fire, or had been the victims of friendly fire. So he could not possibly have received shrapnel injuries aboard PC- 815, either.

The third vessel on which he served, the USS Algol, did travel to combat zones and received commendations, but this was well after Hubbard had left the ship. His service with the vessel was again quite brief, comprising nine months in a dockyard working on its conversion or undertaking sea trials subsequently. At no time during Hubbard’s service with Algol did the vessel see combat, nor was Hubbard ever recorded as having sustained an injury while aboard.

Hubbard’s hospitalization at Oak Knoll was due to the “Ulcer Duodenum, Chronic” that he mentioned in his December 1945 letter. Through the course of Hubbard’s medical examinations from March 1942 onwards, he made consistent complaints of eye problems, pains in his body – which he attributed variously to accidental injury or arthritis – and stomach problems, caused by his ulcer. A medical report from November 1945, just before the end of his active service, raised the possibility that he was suffering from what was then called Reiter’s Syndrome and is now known as reactive arthritis.

Conjunctivitis is a classic symptom of the syndrome. It presents early in the course of reactive arthritis and can recur periodically. The onset of reactive arthritis can be caused by an infection, most commonly the sexually transmitted disease chlamydia, but also from stomach infections and food poisoning. Hubbard was known for his prolific affairs – in August 1946, his fellow science fiction writer L. Sprague de Camp told Robert Heinlein that Hubbard had “six other gals who were all hot and & moist over him … How many girls is a man entitled to screw in one lifetime, anyway? Maybe he should be reincarnated as a rabbit.” If Hubbard’s eye problems were caused by a sexually transmitted disease, it would not have been the first time that his libido had got him into trouble.

Hubbard’s December 1945 list includes “Arthritis, R[igh]t Hip, Shoulder” which he said had begun in January 1945. The following year, he complained to the Veterans’ Administration that he had suffered a “chronic infection in my right hip [that] has lamed me.” He linked the ‘infection’ and arthritis to a “sudden transition from the tropics to the slush and icy cold of Princeton” that “caused rheumatic chills.” In fact, he had been transferred from Oakland, California – hardly the tropics – and his records show that at the time when he was under treatment at Oak Knoll, he got involved in a serious fight – hardly something of which a “cripple” could have been capable.

In the 1950s, Hubbard claimed that in July 1945 he was attacked by three enlisted men who were causing a disruption outside the hotel where he was staying as an outpatient. Because of his knowledge of judo, Hubbard was able to fight them off:

I said, “The shore patrol has been called, and if you boys are very smart you will get out of here quick.” I started to pass them and go on down the street, and one of them grabbed me by the arm and started poking me with his finger. Then one of them picked up a beer bottle, the other one swung me around with my back to the one with the beer bottle and the guy swung the beer bottle, aiming at my head. One of the things that I had been doing in trying to rehabilitate myself was carrying on with judo. I had gotten training in judo in 1941 before I went into the service, but up at the hospital it was just regular exercise. The judo instructor and I had had quite a bit of fun.

It was very instinctive to duck underneath this beer bottle as it was coming down, and that made the fellow with the beer bottle come over to the side with his wrist in reach, so what I did was break his arm automatically and throw him over his head into the man who was holding me. That guy went into a bumper and cut his face open and the fellow with the bottle went into him with a broken arm. The beer bottle fell on the pavement, and the third guy got up off the running board of the car where he had been sitting and came at me, so I just caught up the beer bottle and shoved it in his face… I am not trying to tell you what a great warrior I am, but that what that did for my morale was fantastic. I don’t think I would be alive today if I hadn’t handled those three men.

Hubbard went on to claim that the men had been court-martialed in a proceeding in which he was also involved. There is some evidence of this in his service file. An order in his file shows that on October 6, 1945, he was summoned as a prosecution witness to a general court martial scheduled for October 10 at the US Naval Receiving Station, San Pedro. He was to testify in a case involving Carpenter’s Mate Third Class Edmond Fain and Shipfitter Second Class Jacob J. Lauff. The details are not recorded on his file, but it is likely that the two men were involved in the fight, and were most likely charged with assaulting a superior officer.

Hubbard’s boasting to his followers does not seem to have been entirely truthful, however. His notorious “Affirmations,” written around 1946-47, suggest that he was trounced in the fight:

You are not a coward. Fist fighting had no bearing on your courage. You were ill when you were fought before. You did not understand the rules. You can whip anyone now and have no physical fear of hand to hand fighting. They who fought you before were knaves and fools. You would be merciless to them now. Nothing can stand up to your fighting now. You are strong and wonderful in combat. You never know fear or defeat. You refrain from fighting because you are too powerful.

So if Hubbard was content to acknowledge in the 1950s that he ended his war service with only mild ailments, why did he switch in the mid-1960s to making extravagant claims about severe injuries? The most likely explanation is that it was a marketing move.

At the time, Scientology’s claims were being systematically dismantled by the Anderson Inquiry in Australia, and Hubbard was gearing up to launch the next big thing in Scientology – the Operating Thetan levels. From Hubbard’s point of view, making big claims about Scientology’s miraculous effects on his own health would have been a good way of motivating his followers and getting them to buy into the premise of the OT levels.

It would have been a low risk for him: his service records were sealed during his lifetime and there was little danger that his false claims would be exposed. But when he died in 1986, researchers were able to show conclusively that his claims of war wounds were completely untrue. As former Church of Scientology spokesman Tommy Davis accurately put it: “the injuries that he handled by the use of Dianetics procedures were never handled, because they were injuries that never existed; therefore, Dianetics is based on a lie; therefore, Scientology is based on a lie.”

— Chris Owen

More highlights of Ron’s military career…

Nov 4, 2020: L. Ron Hubbard’s stolen valor: A new breakdown of his bogus medals by a military veteran

Nov 7, 2020: Medal by medal, Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘stolen valor’ is laid bare

Dec 9, 2021: Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in WW2: Notes from a prohibited war diary

May 29, 2023: Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard’s farcical first command

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewellery, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now

Once again we discussed the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders.

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

— The Proprietor

Read more

We’ve been meaning to give a shout out to Mother Jones journalist Anna Merlan, someone we’ve admired for a long time, for her great look at Scientology recently.

Did you see it? She wrote about how Scientology, which for a long time tended to neglect its social media presence, suddenly has a lot of younger staff members trying to promote Dianetics at places like TikTok and Instagram, with some pretty strange results.

We were happy to see that she interviewed Alex Barnes-Ross and the recently defected Amir Essalhi, who were both involved in publicity campaigns when they were in Scientology.

But it also reminded us that at least part of the current push for more videos is being directed by a man who tries to keep his deep Scientology involvement from his massive audience: Dr. Eric Berg, the chiropractor who has a huge following at YouTube for his nutrition advice.

We know this thanks to his son, Ian Rafalko, who shared with us leaks of Dr. Berg giving lessons to young Scientologists for how they could create accounts and make videos.

And Ian keeps sharing great stuff with us. He sent over this video that came out of the San Francisco org, and it features a very familiar face, Aaron Kyro, the skateboard guy we’ve written about numerous times…

Ian also sent us a new video from Scientologist actor Jason Dohring, who has also been part of the new Dianetics campaign, and who made this video about what would go on at the most recent Dianetics anniversary party in Clearwater, Florida…

We asked Ian for his thoughts about this new emphasis on social media and video…

The most I can say about this new strategy is that it is not directed towards the public. If they can pull in some public, great, but they are focused on creating an image for the second and third generation Scientologists, telling them that things are going great. But every piece of promotion lies about the production stats. It’s an open secret that no matter how dead your org is, if it’s new, David Miscavige will say it’s 10X the stats of last year.

So long as you just smile, embellish (or directly lie) and never ever acknowledge the elephant in the room, they convey an image of success to the public.

Also, don’t ask me why or how, but I think they are lessening their restrictions on who goes OT. From what I can see, people who would have previously been banned from the levels are now given the green light, and they can mass publish more Facebook photos about it.

I think Miscavige is nervous about how pervasive the bad PR is getting.

ACLU sues Clearwater on behalf of Save the Garden

We’ve been on the road the last few days, but we have been keeping an eye on things, and we are aware that the ACLU is suing the city of Clearwater for rejecting the 8,000 signatures gathered by the Save the Garden group, which is attempting to put a referendum on the ballot there that would change the way the city vacates streets.

We agree with the ACLU that the Clearwater clerk gave bad advice to the Save the Garden group about how it could gather signatures, and was wrong to reject what was submitted.

We’ll check in with Wise Beard Man soon about the various developments going on in that beleaguered town.

Katherine, Patty, and Phil join us on Group Therapy!

Today at noon Eastern subscribers will receive Episode 170 of our special podcast series, “Group Therapy.”

We discuss the week’s revelations with our gang of jokers and degraders, and this week we’re joined by Katherine Olson, Patty Moher, and Phil Jones!

It’s all the enturbulation you could want!

We’re offering this series as thanks to our subscribers for helping to support the work we do here at the Underground Bunker.

The HowdyCon agenda update!

We’re excited to announce Geoff Levin will be joining us as a speaker at this year’s HowdyCon. His documentary, Brothers Broken was recently released on all major streaming platforms and we’re looking forward to hearing from him in September.

The agenda has been updated to reflect Geoff’s addition to the line up, which you can view here.

Second release tickets will be available soon. If you missed out on the first round, make sure you join the waitlist to be first in the know.

And finally, HowdyCon 2026 is being organized in support of the Michael J. Rinder Aftermath Foundation. We’ll be holding a silent auction to raise funds and we’re looking for items Bunker readers would be willing to donate. Whether it’s an old e-meter or handmade jewellery, if you’d like to contribute send us an email.

Want to help?

Please consider joining the Underground Bunker as a paid subscriber. Your $7 a month will go a long way to helping this news project stay independent, and you’ll get access to our special podcast series…

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars discussing the week’s news, which drops each Sunday at noon.

Also, you can support the Underground Bunker with a Paypal contribution to bunkerfund@tonyortega.org, an account administered by the Bunker’s attorney, Scott Pilutik. And by request, this is our Venmo link, and for Zelle, please use (tonyo94 AT gmail). E-mail tips to tonyo94@gmail.com. Find us at Threads: tony.ortega.1044 and Bluesky: @tonyortega.bsky.social

For the full picture of what’s happening today in the world of Scientology, please join the conversation at tonyortega.org, where we’ve been reporting daily on David Miscavige’s cabal since 2012. There you’ll find additional stories, and our popular regular daily features:

Source Code: Actual things founder L. Ron Hubbard said on this date in history

Avast, Ye Mateys: Snapshots from Scientology’s years at sea

Overheard in the Freezone: Indie Hubbardism, one thought at a time

Past is Prologue: From this week in history at alt.religion.scientology

Random Howdy: Your daily dose of the Captain

Here’s the link for today’s post at tonyortega.org

And whatever you do, subscribe to this Substack so you get our breaking stories and daily features right to your email inbox every morning.

Subscribe now