The Underground Bunker has learned that Judge Charlaine Olmedo and the LA District Attorney’s Office are both concerned about repeated contacts of the jurors in Danny Masterson’s second trial by members of Masterson’s legal team.
Masterson was convicted of two counts of forcible rape on May 31, 2023, and at that time Judge Olmedo issued a ruling sealing all information about the jurors, who had unanimously agreed on the two counts but were unable to come to a verdict on a third count.
Masterson was sentenced more than three months later on September 7, 2023 to 30 years to life in prison, but even before that sentencing date occurred, on July 5, 2023 one juror wrote to the court that she had been contacted by defense attorney Shawn Holley. She expressed confusion about whether she could talk to Holley, and she didn’t understand how Holley had figured out who she was.
"I was wondering how did she know my name and workplace information in order to get in contact with me?"
More recently, on July 22 of this year, the court received an email from another juror. "Some of the jurors have been visited at their homes by Danny Masterson's Appeal team. We thought our information was going to be sealed," the email said, adding, "We are concerned."
Then on September 16, Judge Olmedo was sent a longer email explaining one troubling contact in particular…
To: Judge Charlaine F. Olmedo
Subject: Danny Masterson Confidential Juror Information Leaked
Good morning, Judge Olmedo.
My name is [redacted]. I was Alternate Juror No. 8 on the second Danny Masterson trial. At 2:00 p.m. Sunday, September 15, 2024, I was contacted at my home by a representative of Danny Masterson's legal team.
I was doing yardwork in my front yard when a car pulled up, parked, and a woman got out and approached me. She asked if I was [redacted]. I said yes. She said she is a member of Mr. Masterson's habeas team and wanted to ask me some questions about incidents regarding parking and in the hallway in front of the courtroom that resulted in the jury being sequestered.
I declined to speak with her and asked her how she got my name. She said she got it from another juror and said, "So you decline to participate?" I told her I was declining and that I would be letting the juror know of this because juror information is confidential and there should be no contact with me by Mr. Masterson's legal team.
She held up a hand and started backing away and said, "Okay. Thank you," and returned to her car and drove away.
So I wanted to bring to your attention that a juror has given Mr. Masterson's legal team my name and phone number without my permission, and, as a result, I was contacted in person by a member of Mr. Masterson's legal team at my home on a Sunday afternoon.
[Signature redacted]
The next day, on September 17, Judge Olmedo issued a ruling that the defense team would have to go through the court in order to have any further contact with jurors. In a letter to both sides, she explained the legal situation and that the defense lawyers may have broken the law…
Since the discharge of the jury, I have been contacted by several jurors who have informed me of unwanted contact at their homes or work by members of the defense team and to inquire how the defense team obtained their identifying information...a review of the jurors' complaints received by this Court indicate that some of the jurors may have felt pressured by the defense team, that the jurors were not first advised that they had the absolute right to not discuss the case if they did not want to do so, and that the jurors did not want to be contacted by defense team and were troubled that they were approached at their homes. If true, such contact by the defense team may be violative of Code of Civil Procedure Section 206.
As a result, the District Attorney’s office last week filed a motion calling for an evidentiary hearing to get the details on what the defense team has been up to.
The People...respectfully request that this Court issue an Order to Show Cause and conduct a full hearing, pursuant to CCP Section 206, to consider the imposition of sanctions, if appropriate, for any unwanted, harassing or otherwise improper conduct by members of the defense team who have reportedly been contacting trial jurors and alternate jurors subsequent to the return of the verdict in this case on May 31, 2023.
Whoa.
The timing is interesting, because Masterson’s appeal brief is due this week after appellate lawyer Cliff Gardner asked for and received an extension until November 22.
And also, we can’t help thinking of a previous time that Danny Masterson’s attorneys got into hot water with Judge Olmedo. She ruled on June 7, 2023 that Masterson’s previous set of attorneys, Tom Mesereau and Sharon Appelbaum, had improperly leaked sensitive evidence in the case to Scientology’s attorneys, who then used that evidence to demand an internal investigation by the LAPD of detectives assigned to the Masterson case.
Also, repeatedly during our coverage of the Masterson prosecution, we found evidence of Scientology’s involvement with his defense, sometimes to the detriment of his case.
Was Scientology involved in the contact of jurors from the second trial? That’s something we’re interested to learn if Judge Olmedo does hold an evidentiary hearing to get to the bottom of what the defense has been up to.
Chris Shelton is going Straight up and Vertical
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 material for subscribers. Or, 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
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 a special podcast series…
Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news
Scientology considers it is above the law. These bottom feeding lawyers and their PIs charge large fees that then justify them intimidating the jurors which is against the law. Amazing that Scientology does not learn that every time they fair game someone they are adding more black marks to their already besmirched reputation.
Based on the email, a) the defense team lied about getting their information from another juror and they got it another way or b) they somehow found the one juror and did get (convinced) them to give over the others' PII. The latter seems less plausible.
Either way, I am surprised Shawn Holley was actively involved in this.