LA Times on Scientology interference in Danny Masterson case: The document

[Prosecutors Reinhold Mueller and Ariel Anson. Photo: Meghann Cuniff]

Great piece today from James Queally at the Los Angeles Times, who put together a number of different strands regarding Scientology’s interference in Danny Masterson’s criminal trials.

Some of those allegations should be very familiar to readers of the Underground Bunker, including the stunning sharing of prosecution evidence with Scientology’s attorneys (which resulted in sanctions from the court), and their meetings with LAPD Chief Moore.

One thing we want to make a little more clear from the LA Times piece: The allegations of harassment of a prosecutor that is referred to as a “declaration by attorney Simon Leen” is actually from the new proposed complaint that Danny Masterson’s victims are asking the court to accept in their 2019 (not 2017) lawsuit against Masterson and the church.

A hearing is scheduled for May 29 for Judge Upinder Kalra to consider whether to allow the new complaint, which includes adding another victim as a plaintiff (actress Tricia Vessey), and also proposes to add racketeering charges against Scientology.

The allegations of Scientology harassment of a prosecutor in Masterson’s criminal case comes in a section about Scientology interference with the case in general, and we thought you’d want to see the entire section. (We’ve bolded the paragraph about a prosecutor being harassed, whom, Queally very compellingly reports, is actually DDA Reinhold Mueller.)

We also want to point out another very telling example of Scientology trying to interfere with the Masterson case that wasn’t in the LA Times piece. In February 2022, several months before Masterson’s first trial, there was a bizarre scene at LA Superior Court when Scientology attorney William Forman tried to intervene in a hearing that was supposed to be about Danny Masterson’s attempt to get his rape charges thrown out.

Although that motion by Masterson had nothing to do with the church, Forman showed up and complained that Judge Charlaine Olmedo had said some things in court that offended his client. From our story about that hearing:

Forman said the church wanted Judge Coen to find that it was improper for Olmedo to conclude what she did from the Ethics book, and asked him to overturn the finding that Scientology’s doctrine prevents Scientologists from reporting crimes to police

Judge Coen wasn’t amused, and told Forman it wasn’t the proper venue for considering Scientology’s doctrines, and ignored him. He also upheld Judge Olmedo’s ruling and the case continued on to trial in her court later that year.

And a year before that, of course, there was the infamous courtroom scene when Masterson’s first defense attorney, Tom Mesereau, taking direction from Scientology attorney Vicki Podberesky, disastrously tried to use Scientology’s ethics book in cross-examination of Masterson’s victims.

Karin Pouw’s hilarious denials to the LA Times notwithstanding, there is years of evidence of Scientology’s interference in Danny Masterson’s prosecution, and James Queally has now added even more, and frightening, evidence of the lengths that the church was apparently willing to go to harass the prosecutors and victims.

Here’s the section from the proposed new complaint in the Bixler lawsuit about that interference that Masterson’s victims are asking Judge Upinder Kalra to allow…

Defendants’ Attempts To Obstruct Masterson’s Criminal Trial and Violation of Court Orders

439. Defendants sought to protect their reputation by preventing Defendant Masterson from being tried for raping Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and Plaintiff Bixler or, failing that, to engineer Masterson’s acquittal.

440. The above-described behavior was calculated, at least in part, to dissuade Plaintiffs from testifying at Defendant Masterson’s criminal trial, and to dissuade other witnesses from testifying against Defendant Masterson or other Scientologists in order to benefit Scientology and all Defendants.

441. When the LAPD began investigating Plaintiffs’ allegations of rape and sexual assault against Defendant Masterson, Masterson’s friend and Defendants’ agent Michelle Miskovich contacted a number of potential witnesses to instruct them to not cooperate with the investigation.

442. In an attempt to intimidate and prevent certain witnesses from testifying, Defendants’ agents sent threats to potential witnesses in Masterson’s criminal trial. For example, a known Scientologist agent contacted a potential witness and asked the witness about the witness’s stance on the Masterson investigation. When the witness indicated they would be cooperating with the investigation, the Scientologist agent told the witness that Scientology would “release the Kraken.” That witness was later subjected to a campaign of harassment by Defendants similar to what Plaintiffs suffered.

443. In an effort to prevent the testimony of one of the LAPD Detectives who had worked on the Masterson investigation and who was expected to testify in Masterson’s criminal trial, Defendants subjected the Detective to a campaign of harassment and intimidation.

444. Defendants’ efforts were partially successful. One witness initially refused to speak with the authorities because she was afraid of reprisals by Defendants and their agents. Eventually, this witness had preliminary and limited conversations with authorities, but, after Scientology agents contacted her to “congratulate” her on having moved into a new home with her two children, the witness was too terrified to further cooperate with investigators or to testify against Defendant Masterson and refused to do so.

445. Plaintiff Vessey testified at the first Masterson criminal trial but refused to testify at the second criminal trial because she was terrified of reprisals by Defendants and their agents.

446. Another witness—who did testify at the second Masterson criminal trial—suffered from panic attacks leading up to her testimony caused by fear of reprisals by Defendants and their agents. Leading up to her testimony, this witness repeatedly heard a clicking noise on her phone consistent with a method of wiretapping known to be used by Scientology.

447. Having failed to dissuade Plaintiffs from exercising their rights to petition and to access the justice system, Defendants attempted to interfere with the proper conduct of the Masterson trial.

448. In an attempt to derail Defendant Masterson’s criminal trial, Defendants and their agents engaged in a campaign of harassment and intimidation directed at one of the prosecutors assigned to Defendant Masterson’s trial. That prosecutor’s home and car windows were broken, the prosecutor’s home electronics were tampered with, and Defendants’ agents surveilled the prosecutor.

449. After a mistrial was declared in Defendant Masterson’s first criminal trial, the People of the State of California retried Masterson for the rapes of Plaintiffs Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and Bixler.

450. Defendants attempted to derail the second criminal trial of Defendant Masterson by filing baseless accusations against the detectives and the prosecutors in the Masterson case and timed those accusations in a manner designed to interfere with the retrial of Masterson. As the court in Masterson’s criminal trial found, during Masterson’s second trial:

On April 24, 2023, twelve (12) letters on Church of Scientology International letterhead addressed to Chief Moore of the Los Angeles Police Department asked for criminal investigations to be opened into the actions of the investigating detectives . . . particularly the lead detectives, Detectives Myape (formerly Reyes) and Vargas., for failing to follow up on the Church of Scientology’s claims that 1) the victims in this case filed numerous false police reports regarding harassment and stalking and 2) that the lead detectives testified in a manner that was biased against the Scientology Organization. In a subsequent email to the District Attorney’s Office, Vicki Podbersky [an attorney representing Defendant Church of Scientology International] referenced meeting with Chief Moore regarding these complaints on the April date. Although the alleged offending testimony necessarily occurred approximately seven months earlier in the first trial (as the detective witnesses had not yet testified in the second trial), Vicki Podberesky only made this complaint while the retral was in progress and just days before Detective Myape was scheduled to testify in the second jury trial. As a result of Vicki Podberesky’s actions taken on behalf of the Church of Scientology International, Detective Myape expressed concern to the trail deputy district attorneys. . . .

THE COURT FINDS that the Church of Scientology International, by and through its attorney Vicki Podberesky, has attempted to involve itself in the criminal proceedings before this Court and the retrial in the above-captioned case by filing pleadings in the criminal case to which it had no standing and by making complaints that it should have more appropriately made months earlier, but certainly not in the middle of the retrial. Detective Myape was scheduled to testify just days after Church of Scientology International’s attorney met with Chief Moore to lodge complaints about the Detective. THIS COURT FURTHER FINDS that the timing of this complaint, based on the long delay of time between Detective Myape’s testimony in the first trial and when the complaint was actually made while the retrial was in fact in progress, was calculated.

THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that while the retrial was in progress, the Church of Scientology International, by and through its attorney Vicki Podberesky, also filed a complaint against the trial deputy district attorneys (Reinhold Mueller and Ariel Anson) for claims that have no legal basis and are in fact contradictory to this Court’s actual evidentiary orders. Vicki Podberesky, in her email complaint to District Attorney Supervisors, complained that the trial deputies were putting forth testimony regarding harassment and stalking (the subject matter of the related civil suit) which they knew to be false. Pursuant to the Court’s orders of October 4, 2022, and March 28. 2023, as well as the express admonitions given by the Court to both juries during the first trial and the retrial, testimony about harassment and stalking was not received for the truth of the matter asserted but rather to judge the credibility of the witnesses and to evaluate their state of mind. Thus, the truth or falsity of those claims was legally irrelevant for the purpose for which the testimony was admitted. This ruling was made by the Court and known and available to not only all counsel, but the general public at large. This ruling is also premised on basic principles of statutory authority and evidentiary caselaw. Thus, THIS COURT FURTHER FINDS that the Church of Scientology International’s complaint to the District Attorney Supervisors made against the trial deputies while the retrial was in progress, was demonstrably false.

451. During Defendant Masterson’s criminal trials, Defendant Masterson and his agents also violated court orders and applicable law prohibiting the sharing of discovery material obtained in the criminal case by sharing that discovery with other Defendants. As the court found:

THE COURT FINDS that the first criminal defense team, Thomos Messereau and Sharon Applebaum, shared criminal discovery provided by the People in the abovecaptioned case pursuant to Penal Code Section 1054 et. seq. with a party to the related civil litigation, the Church of Scientology International and attorney Vicki Podberesky. THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that the sharing of this information by Thomas Messereau and Sharon Applebaum with the Church of Scientology International and attorney Vicki Podberesky is both a violation of this Court’s specific directives and orders and also a violation of the provisions of Penal Code Section 1054 et seq., the California Constitution, and Marsy’s Law. . . . THE COURT FINDS that the Church of Scientology International, by and through its attorney Vicki Podberesky, was aware of all of this Court’s rulings. findings and orders. Vicki Podberesky has had a long-standing order for transcripts of all court proceedings in the instant case since this matter has been assigned to this Court. In addition, numerous attorneys from Vicki Podberesky’s law firm have been attending almost all of the court proceedings in the above-captioned case.

---

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.

---

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…

Up the Bridge: A journey through Scientology’s actual “technology”

Group Therapy: Our round table of rowdy regulars on the week’s news