Morning session, Day 9 (Day 5 of testimony), Danny Masterson retrial
Danny Masterson is wearing a slate-grey suit and lighter blue tie.
SARTORIAL SPLENDOR ALERT: Defense attorney Philip Cohen is barely pushing the splendor needle this morning with a brown three-piece suit, light pink shirt and slightly darker pink polka dot tie. As the anons would say, we are disappoint.
Masterson section: Bijou Phillips, Christopher, Jordan, and Carol Masterson. And family friend Chris Wadhams.
We're starting a bit later this morning (10:30 am), and our next prosecution witness is Cedric, husband to Jane Doe 3.
Jurors are brought in. Cedric is sworn in.
Deputy DA Ariel Anson: I have in my hand a photograph of a woman with blonde hair. Do you recognize this person?
Cedric: Yes.
Who is this person.
That's my wife.
Is that [Jane Doe 3]?
Yes.
When did you first meet her?
Around 2009.
After meeting then, did the two of you get married?
Yes.
When was that?
Around July 24th.
Of 2009?
Yes.
Are you still married today?
Absolutely.
You have children?
Twins. 10 years old.
Do you still love your wife?
Absolutely. She's the true north in my compass.
Did you see her after her testimony yesterday?
She was really overwhelmed by emotion. (Obj, stricken)
Did you talk about her testimony?
No.
Did you tell her what you were going to be testifying to today?
No.
When you first met, did you know her to be a member of the Church of Sci
She would keep it from me. I would see books and pamphlets lying around. (Obj, overruled)
Did you know her to be taking courses there?
No.
Were you a member?
No.
Had you taken any courses?
None at all.
Did you have some type of connection to the church at that point?
Other than seeing the pamphlets, I would ask her about it. She would get phone calls about getting back on course.
Did you take courses?
Yes, around 2010.
Did you consider yourself a member?
I was just taking courses.
When you first met, did you speak with her about Danny Masterson?
Yes. (Identifies him in the courtroom.)
When they were dating, did you know her?
No.
Did you know him then?
No.
Since she and you got a little more involved in Scientology in 2010, have you been to any events at the church with Masterson?
I didn't go there with him, but we were assigned seats behind his family at the Shrine, I don't remember the year.
Any interaction?
No, just his mother turning around and giving us a certain look.
But you didn't speak with him?
No.
Did you have a conversation
Yes, we did.
Where?
At a rental home in the Hollywood Hills.
Who was present.
Just my wife and I.
When?
I would say it was the daytime.
How did that begin?
I don't remember how it began.
During your relationship, sometimes a conversation about Masterson would come up.
Yes.
And would it come up based on her relationship with him?
It would tend to come up when I saw her using certain coping mechs and saw her deflate about her past. Still to this day, in her sleep, she grinds her teeth a lot and wakes up with bruises on her arms, and digs into her palm, and I would notice things like that about her. And closed off, like an automaton.
In this conversation, can you describe her demeanor?
Exactly like I was saying right now. You could see she was doing this and doing that with her fists as well.
(Anson describes how he held his fists.)
It was almost like she was trying to disappear.
(Continues the description.) What was your reaction to observing her like that.
I was concerned. And my intuition told me that something was wrong, and there was someone she was protecting. (Obj, overruled)
As the two of you were having that conversation, what did she tell you occurred with Masterson?
She had told me that one morning she woke up and she had pain in her anus and that she asked him what happened and he giggled like a child and said he did that against her will.
By "that" what did you mean.
Raped her. Put himself inside her while she was out. His penis. Into her anus.
How long did the conversation go on.
Must have been a good 20 minutes.
Did you have a reaction?
I did. I instantly felt like I had to protect. I felt this intuiting that God had put me on this earth to protect this woman. I was angry.
Did you have a physical reaction?
Yes I did, I said that was rape. I said it matter-of-factly, like I was surprised she didn’t realize it was rape. I remember she had a difficult time looking me in the eye. And she was talking about the good things he had done for her, that he had saved her.
Did she describe her symptoms?
It was very painful. She was having trouble walking. And I think she was in shock. (Obj, last portion stricken.)
Any type of symptoms beside pain?
No, she didn't, but I had assumed... (Obj, sustained)
When you were speaking to her, did she indicate to you if she was feeling disoriented or hungover? (Obj, overruled)
I feel like that's what I remember her saying.
Are you remembering every word she used in that conversation?
No, not every word. From the best of my recollection I'm taking out the things that struck me the most.
After this 2010 conversation, at some later point did you and she have another conversation or conversations surrounding an incident in which Masterson had hit her?
Yes.
When did that conversation occur?
I can't recall. There is a lot of detail with it.
In timing only, did it occur close to that 2010 talk or later.
It was closer to that talk about the other incident.
Just focusing on that incident where he hit her, what did she tell you occurred?
I remember her telling me that he was very aggressive in bed, that he had forced himself inside her, and she knew that the one area of his body that he would problem with was touching his hair. Apparently there was a no touching the face, no touching the hair rule, and so she went straight for the hair.
And what happened after she did that?
He struck her.
Aggressive in what way?
Him forcing himself on her.
Using what part?
His penis?
And what did he put it in?
Her vagina.
This conversation, what was her demeanor?
Like that of a child. She was scared. She was also angry.
Did you have a reaction? (Obj, overruled)
My physical reaction was of disbelief, and I couldn't believe someone could do this to you, and I was angry. Really angry.
In 2016, where you and she living?
Austin, Texas.
Do you know if in 2016, JD3 reported a crime to the Austin PD?
Yes, she did.
Are aware LAPD then got involved?
Yes.
Were you contacted by LAPD?
Me personally? No.
Back then?
Yes, back then, no.
In 2022 were you contacted by Det Vargas?
Yes, a short 15-minute conversation.
(Asks if they discussed December sodomy — yes. And the November incident?)
I probably didn't disclose all the details because there's an insane amount of it. I rounded it off right then and there.
Since she reported to Austin PD in 2016, have you noticed a change in her demeanor? (Obj, overruled)
Yes, all of the physical coping mechanisms have increased. She resembles someone who's been to war.
Do you believe you’ve been stalked and harassed?
Absolutely we've been stalked and harassed.
Do you believe that harassment is coming from the Church of Scientology?
I absolutely believe in my heart of hearts that the stalking and harassment comes from the Church of Scientology's policy called Fair Game.
When did it start?
The stalking and harassing started right after she reported to police in Austin.
You mentioned the policy of Fair Game.
It comes from the Church of Scientology, a policy they have (Obj, stricken)
In the courses you took, were you instructed or learned about the policy of Fair Game? (Obj, overruled)
I came across reading it and talking to other people and at the time the church has this policy of not engaging in “entheta,” which is not reading articles negative about the church. So while I was taking courses I was reading these articles. I laughed at it and thought it was ridiculous, but now I know it to be true.
What did you know about the policy?
If you're a critic of the Church of Scientology or its upstanding members who are being successful, they will do anything to get to you, to be silent, to ultimately as it says, get them to sue for peace.
You mentioned suing. Have you and JD3 started a lawsuit?
Yes, we're definitely suing them. The Church of Scientology, David Miscavige, and Danny Masterson.
Are there monetary damages being sought?
My children need a lot of therapy for this, so yeah we're suing for money. We have targets on our back, so yeah, we're suing for money.
Are you suing solely for monetary reasons?
We're suing to stop the harassemnt. We're suing so my children don't have to see strangers staring into the window.
No further questions.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Defense attorney Philip Cohen:
Cedric: You love your wife very much.
Yes.
You want to help her any way you can.
Yes.
And you have felt this through the course of your relationship.
Yes.
You indicated you married in June 2009?
I think it was July, I'm a typical man, I need reminders.
When did you meet?
It was 2009. A little before we got married. The courtship wasn't that long.
Do you have your phone with you? You apparently got married in June 2009, I'm curious when you met?
When you say a couple of months, April, May?
Maybe April?
When did you move in together?
Right away.
Within a few days of meeting?
I don't know if it was a few days or not
What does "right away" mean to you?
Maybe a month into it. The way I see proceeding quickly, that's normal to me.
Did she move in with you of her own free will?
I believe so, yes.
Those are two different answers. She moved in and married you of her own free will?
Yes.
In addition to suing for peace, there also are some monetary damages.
Yes.
And not just your lawsuit, but JD3. And other Jane Does?
Two Jane Does.
Three Jane Does in the case?
I believe so, yes.
And specific monetary damages, yes?
Yes.
Those include special damages?
Yes.
General damages?
Yes.
Treble damages?
I don't understand what treble damages are.
Have you seen your complaint, did you read it?
I looked at it, but some I do understand and some I don't. And we're not close to that, so when it comes to that I will look more closely then.
When was it filed?
I'm not exactly sure when it was filed.
Do you recall it being filed in the summer of 2019?
I guess I do recall that, yeah.
At the time it was filed, you could have asked your attorney about the damages?
Yes.
Do you recall that the complaint asks for treble damages?
I don't recall that. Can you define treble damages for me?
Sure...
(Judge Olmedo says she's going to step in and have Cohen pursue something else.)
Cohen: You testified in a prior proceeding, a few months ago.
Yes.
You testified previously, under oath, in October 2022, correct?
Yes.
You've also given a statement to Det Vargas also in Oct 2022.
Correct.
And you don't strike me as someone who is shy to speak your mind.
Fair to say.
When you were interviewed and testified, you spoke your mind?
Yes I did.
After speaking to Vargas, did you have contact info for him? If you wanted to get in touch with him, could you do so?
Yes.
As of Oct 2022, if you wanted to get in touch with Mueller or Anson, you could reach them?
Yes I could.
You said Mr. Masterson's mom — by the way is she here today?
Yes.
Recognize her?
Sure do.
You said sometime after 2010 you were at an event at Scientology with JD3, and you said that Mr. Masterson's mom had given you a certain look
Oh yes.
Since that look, have you ever made any mention of that look to Det Vargas?
No.
Have you mentioned that look to Anson?
No.
To Mueller?
No.
When you were interviewed previously did you mention it?
Nope, but I'm saying it now.
In the prior proceeding did you mention it?
No.
You spoke to your wife after her testimony?
Briefly.
You also said your children need money for therapy.
Absolutely they do.
Did you ever mention that to Vargas?
No.
Anson?
No.
Mueller?
No.
Testying previously?
No.
You said your wife wakes up with bruises on her arms. Did you mention that to Vargas?
No. But isn't now the time to tell the truth and the heavy detail that comes in? And sometimes I remember more things and I'm remembering them now.
Did you speak the truth to Vargas?
Yes.
Were you completely forthcoming to him?
Define "completely."
Answering as completely and fully as you can.
Yes.
When you testified, were you complete then?
Yes, but "complete" leaves a grey area. I think what you're requiring is filling in every gap, and I am not as skilled at these proceedings as you are.
(Judge: Next question)
When you talked to Vargas, that would have been the first interview that you ever gave to LAPD regarding this?
Yes.
The first that you gave to any law enforcement?
Yes.
And that would include Austin PD?
Yes.
When JD3 went in to Austin PD to make her initial report, did you go with her?
No, I did not.
Had you spoken to her about going in, before she went in?
Yes.
And you spoke after she came back?
Yes.
Back to Vargas. In 2022, you wanted to be truthful with him. You wanted to be complete with him. And you were.
Yes, to the best of my ability at the time.
Let's talk about that. Whatever you remembered, you told him?
Yes.
He gave you whatever time you needed?
Yes.
He didn't rush you off the phone?
No, he didn't.
What you then did was you provided him a complete response to the questions he asked? (Asked and answered) Do you know if your conversation was tape recorded?
I do not recall if it was.
There's a report prepared of it.
Yes.
Did you ever review it?
Yes, I did.
After you reviewed it, did you ever tell him, this portion is wrong?
No.
Did you ever say, I told you this but you left it out?
No.
Did you ever tell Mueller or Anson there was nothing missing?
There was nothing wrong. Nothing missing. I'm telling you what I'm telling you now, when I expand on the subject matter and I'm being truthful and honest.
So is your memory better today, April 28, 2023, than it was when you spoke to Vargas in October 2022 about a conversation that took place in 2010?
I think in these proceedings and hearing all the details, some stuff jogs my memory and this is go-time now, and so I'm saying it now.
This 2010 discussion that you had with JD3, you have a good recollection of that conversation?
As best as I can recall. It's 2010. It's quite a ways, a long time ago.
It is your position that you remember it well?
It is my position there are so many embarrassing details for her to cover, I remember what sticks out the most.
Did you previously state you have a good memory of 2010?
Sure.
How did that conversation come about?
I couldn't tell you how it came about.
Prior to that in 2010, had she told you that she was still friends with Masterson?
Yes.
So you already know she had a friendship with him?
I believe "friendship" would give it too much credit. They were friendly with each other and on good terms. That's my understandting of it.
When that talk began, or at some point during it, did she bring up the fact that she had a platonic relationship with him?
I don't know if she called it that, but that they were on really good terms.
Did you tell Vargas that at some time in 2010, you had a conversation regarding her platonic relationship with him?
Yes.
And that came about because she had spoken so highly of him?
I don't know if it came about because of that, but she did speak highly of him.
Did she then tell you that he had saved her from her prior job?
I guess I'd have to refresh my memory by reading it, but I guess so, yes.
Did you tell Vargas that he had saved her from her job?
Among other things.
Saved her from her religious upbringing?
Yes.
Southern Baptist?
I believe so, yes.
He had saved her from depression, and the medication for it?
Yes.
And this was all before any discussion of Dec 2001 and any anal sex, right?
Yes.
When you heard these things she was saying about him, did you get angry?
Maybe. Maybe because I saw it as sort of a justification of something she was afraid to tell me.
According to what you told Vargas, at this point in the conversation there's been no mention of anal sex. Would reviewing the report refresh your recollection?
Yes.
(Judge Olmedo has the jury go in the jury room while the document is being reviewed.)
Judge admonishes Cohen about the same thing she said to Mueller, that she is going to stop them from asking the same question different ways.
They talk about Scientology and civil lawsuit parameters regarding this witness, and she ways she will give the jury admonitions later.
(After the short break)
Cohen: You were going to look at a portion of Vargas's report. Does that help refresh your recollection?
Cedric: Yes.
So at some point, the conversation with JD3 turns argumentative and you get a bit angry.
Yes.
And that occurred before any discussion of anal sex in 2001.
Yes.
You got angry because you just found out that she was on good terms with Masterson.
Yes.
And that surprised you.
Yes.
You may have been a bit jealous?
Not jealous. What I could tell was that she was holding something back related to him.
She didn't say that?
No.
You didn't say that to Vargas.
Right.
In fact you were not accepting of her platonic relationship with him.
Yes.
She can be friends with anyone she wants to?
She sure can, she has a mind of her own.
And you told her you did not approve of this relationship.
Yes.
You're getting mad over this friendship.
I was getting mad because I could tell there was something she wasn't telling me.
Is there some arguing?
2010? While ago. There might have been.
Forget 2010. In 2022, did you tell Vargas there was an argument?
Yes.
JD3 then tells you she recalls an incident with Masterson some years prior?
Yes.
Did she tell you she recalled being unconscious?
Yes.
Is that what you told Vargas?
Probably not, no.
Do you tell him that JD3 said she felt she had passed out?
Yes.
And those were the words that you recalled her telling you in 2010?
Yes.
You wanted to be true to her words.
Yes.
Did she then tell you that she awoke feeling hungover?
That's where I'm wrong. That was my assumption.
Did you tell Vargas in Oct 2022 that JD3 told you that she had woken up feeling "hungover.”
Yes, I did.
Are you now telling me he wrote that down wrong.
No, I'm telling you I said it wrong.
So you did tell him that she told you she woke up hungover.
Yes.
When did you realize that you told him something that was not accurate?
When I reviewed my transcript.
From?
What I said to Vargas.
The report?
Yes.
When did you review the report?
I got a copy a couple of months ago.
It was before then.
Yes.
At a prior proceeding in Oct 2022.
Yes.
At any point since then have you reached out to anyone at LAPD that this term, “hungover,” you got it wrong.
I wouldn’t trust LAPD, but I didn't reach out to Vargas.
You do not trust Vargas?
I trust Vargas and the police investigating the police.
Why didn't you reach out to him and correct the word "hungover?" Did you reach out to Mueller, to Anson?
No.
Did you say anything to Mueller or Anson today about getting this word wrong?
No.
Is there anything else you think is wrong in Vargas's report?
No.
Just that one word?
Just that word. I believe I didnt expand on it like I can right now.
You mentioned on direct that JD3 had told you she had woken up feeling hungover and disoriented. (Asked and answered) Did you ever make mention to Vargas in 2022 that she wolk up feeling disoriented?
Yes, I'm sure I did. Something along those lines.
Would it help to refresh your recollection to review the report that she woke up feeling disoriented?
Yes, it would refresh my memory. (Reviews the report)
Did you tell Vargas in 2022 that JD3 said in 2010 she woke up feeling disoriented?
No.
Did you tell Vargas in relaying JD3's words, that she said Masterson had told her that he had anal sex with her while she was asleep?
Yes.
At any point did you tell Vargas that Masterson had said to her, you were unconscious?
No.
At any point did you tell him that Mastrerson said to her, I raped you?
No, but if you see what I said there, I said he was giggling and admitting to it. (Obj, sustained, please refrain from comments)
What you said was he had anal sex while she was asleep.
Yes.
Did you tell Vargas that JD3 at any point had said she was drugged?
No, I didn’t tell Vargas but I know from the conversation that she believed that.
So you're saying now that in 2010 she said she was drugged?
Yes.
And you never said that to Vargas in 2022?
I was in the middle of a tour when they asked me that. And I had to memorize a lot of stuff in the middle of a tour. And we're undergoing a lot of harassment, and I think it's a lot of stuff to memorize and I think it's pretty normal for a person to not remember every single thing.
So the reason you didn't tell Vargas was you were overwhelmed with many other things?
Yes.
Have you told him since 2022, told Mueller, that she said she had been drugged?
No.
Since Oct 2022, told Anson, JD3 told me she had been drugged?
No.
Did you ever make mention to Vargas that JD3 woke up really late in the morning or into the afternoon?
I don't know.
(Offers the transcript) Did you make mention to Vargas that JD3 told you she did not wake up until late in the morning or into the afternoon.
No.
She never told you that, correct?
I don't recall.
Did she tell you that at some point Masterson had held her down and raped her for some 30 minutes?
She did, but not in those exact words?
My question is, did you tell Vargas that?
No I did not.
Did you ever tell Vargas, hey I remember now, JD3 told me seperately about a 30-minute rape while she was held down?
I'm getting a little confused her. Can I read the transcript again?
You mean Vargas's report? Would that help refresh your recollection whether you've ever made any mention to him about a separate, 30-minute rape?
(Reviews it) No, I did not.
When you say I did not, you're referring to your Oct 2022 interview, you never mentioned some separate rape.
Yes.
My next question was, at any point, have you made mention of this 30 minute rape to Vargas?
No.
You said that at some point, JD3 told you about some other incident where he had hit her.
Yes.
Judge Olmedo: We'll actually take our lunch break at this point.
Thank you for reading today’s story here at Substack. 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 to 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.
Paid subscribers get access to two special podcast series every week…
Up the Bridge: A weekly journey through Scientology’s actual “technology”
Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news
"I think what you're requiring is filling in every gap, and I am not as skilled at these proceedings as you are." Excellent statement of fact that anybody on the stand could easily think but not be able to articulate as clearly. Good for Cedric.
Wow, just freakin wow. JD3 and Cedric give good testimony. Holly may knock away at the edifice that the prosecution built, but so far, the testimony favors conviction. A bovine can dream.....