We’re back from lunch for the short afternoon session today at Day 1 of the Danny Masterson retrial.
Once again, we’ve put together a pool report for a list of other journalists who asked us to send them a copy of our notes.
Those journalists have now received the notes, and we’re also going to share the report with our Substack community…
Back on the record at 1:47 pm.
A potential juror (#47) from this morning can't be back on Wednesday and wants to be released for medical reasons. Both sides stipulate to it.
The next set of potential jurors is brought into the courtroom.
Judge Olmedo greets them, and then asks them to stand to take their oath.
The clerk reads out the oath.
Judge now introduces them to the people in the courtroom, starting with the defense team.
Again, Cohen introduces Masterson, and he stands and holds his hand up for the potential jurors with a smile and then sits down. (In the first trial he actually said something, but not this time.)
After the prosecutors introduce themselves, Judge Olmedo again explains how important it is to speak clearly for the court reporter so the transcript is accurate.
How many of you have been through this process before? More than the morning, about half.
The judge explains to them that they will be filling out a questionnaire in the hallway, and that they be as honest, complete, and truthful as possible.
After they fill it out, they will come back Wednesday morning at 9 am.
The separation admonition: Don't talk about the case, don't research it.
She sends them out to the hallway to fill out the questionnaire.
Judge Olmedo orders Masterson back at 9 am.
She then explains to the attorneys that the issue with her other trial is that it has 30 counts and getting a verdict will take a while. But she can use another courtroom for certain things as she juggles the two cases.
They're talking a bit about the case, which involves the Mexican Mafia.
"That's much more typical of the cases I handle," Judge Olmedo says.
We spoke up and asked the court for a copy of the defense witness list that Cohen had mentioned. (He said it was the same, but we'd like to check to make sure.) Judge Olmedo says the court will make it available to the public information office, and they will determine whether or not to release it to us.
The judge leaves the courtroom.
The document is available on the 2nd floor clerk's office. Heading there now.
OK, got the document. Here is the witness list for the defense:
Dr. Daniel Buffington, a forensic toxicologist
Dr. Scott Fraser, a neurophysiologist
Dr. Mitch Eisen, a memory expert
Brie Shaffer, friend and assistant to Danny Masterson. (She was on both the prosecution and defense witness lists in the first trial and was called by neither.)
And, Hugh Martin Whitt, who the defense says, "will testify regarding Church of Scientology tenets, teachings and practices.”
Whitt is an OT 8 Scientologist.
He also happens to be stepfather to Claire Headley, and disconnected from her years ago for leaving Scientology.
So, the defense is planning to counter the prosecution's Scientology expert by calling her own stepfather as its Scientology expert.
Now that's hardcore.
OK, that's the end of today's report.
We’ll be doing a quick video that will go out on our Substack, and then we’ll be doing a YouTube video with Chris Shelton. Wow, and we have a lot to talk about.
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
Regarding the defense bringing in Claire's father to counter her expert testimony ...did it even occur to the defense that this will show the perfect example of disconnection and why speaking out is a real fear? I know they think this is clever and will throw Claire off her game, but actually I think it will turn into another foot bullet. And, oh ya, Claire will not be thrown off in the least.
Hardcore or just vindictive? Can’t make this stuff up.