388 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
2
Civil Action No. 95B2143
3
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER,
4
Plaintiff,
5
vs.
6
F.A.C.T.NET, INC., et al.,
7
Defendants.
8
9
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
10 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
11
12
13 Proceedings before the HONORABLE JOHN L. KANE, JR.,
14 Judge, United States District Court for the District of
15 Colorado, commencing at 9:30 p.m., on the 12th day of
16 September, 1995, in Courtroom C401, United States Courthouse,
17 Denver, Colorado.
18
19
20
21
22
DEBORAH A. STAFFORD, Official Reporter
23 P.O. Box 3592
Denver, Colorado, 80294
24 (303) 5710530
25 Proceedings Reported by Mechanical Stenography
Transcription Produced via Computer
440
1 to be brief, but I want those, so I think you had better go
2 ahead and call your witnesses.
3 MR. COOLEY: Very well, Your Honor. Mr. Rinder.
4 (Michael Rinder was sworn.)
5 THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Your attention please. Please
6 be seated. State your name for the record and please spell
7 your last name.
8 THE WITNESS: Michael Rinder, RINDER.
9 DIRECT EXAMINATION
10 BY MR. COOLEY:
11 Q Are you an executive of the Church of Scientology
12 International?
13 A Yes, I am. I am a member of the board of directors of the
14 Church of Scientology International.
15 Q Are you the commanding officer of the are you a Sea
16 Organization member?
17 A Yes, I am.
18 Q And are you the commanding officer of the Office of
19 Special Affairs International?
20 A Yes, I am.
21 Q Did you know Mr. Vaughn Young during that 20year period
22 that he was a Scientologist?
23 A Yes, I did. I knew him for a number of years. I have
24 been in the Sea Organization since '73. And I had various
25 dealings with Mr. Young throughout that period in a number of
441
1 capacities in which he worked.
2 Q Now, Mr. Young has testified here to his version of a
3 contact between him and his wife on the one hand and you and
4 Michael Sutter on the other hand.
5 Will you now tell us what transpired in those
6 meetings over that sixday period?
7 A Well, I think I should begin with the first incident that
8 occurred which was some years after Mr. Young had left the
9 church. He contacted one of our counsel and said that
10 MR. KELLEY: Your Honor, that's hearsay.
11 THE COURT: Sustained.
12 BY MR. COOLEY:
13 Q Deal with your communications with Mr. Young and in his
14 wife's presence and what transpired at that meeting.
15 A All right. The first thing that happened was Mike Sutter
16 spoke to Stacy Young and told her that we were concerned that
17 there was some degree of upset between Stacy Young and her
18 husband with regard to the church. She said, please speak to
19 my husband.
20 MR. KELLEY: Your Honor, hearsay.
21 THE COURT: Sustained.
22 A Myself and Mike Sutter went down to visit Vaughn. Stacy
23 was living in Seattle at the time. Vaughn was living in
24 Corinna Del Mar (phonetic.) We went down to his house,
25 knocked on the door. He wouldn't come to the door. He was
442
1 sitting in the front. We went around to the front window and
2 I said, Vaughn, we want to talk to you. We have spoken to
3 Stacy. She asked us to come and see you to see if we couldn't
4 sit down and resolve matters, to resolve any upsets or
5 difficulties that you may have. He said he was unwilling
6 to talk, to begin with, that he wanted me to speak to his
7 attorney, and I said I would be happy to speak to his attorney
8 if he told me who it was. He got on the phone and put Graham
9 Berry on the phone, and his reference to me standing in the
10 bushes was he passed the phone out the window. And I spoke to
11 Graham Berry, who said that he didn't have a problem if we
12 spoke to Vaughn to see if we couldn't resolve any differences
13 that there may be. There then ensued some efforts to arrange
14 this meeting with Stacy in Seattle and Vaughn in Los Angeles.
15 Ultimately, what happened was Stacy arranged for us
16 to go to Seattle to visit her. The first meeting we had, the
17 first of those sixday period, we sat down, talked to him,
18 Stacy broke down and said that she was very upset with how
19 the how their life was going. She didn't want to continue
20 to be involved in this business of giving testimony against
21 the church because she felt that she was living a lie and that
22 her and her husband had been unhappy in their lives. Since
23 they had left the church, they had been unable to find
24 employment. That Vaughn in fact had refused to get a job,
25 that he had worked as a cab driver for a short period of time
443
1 but was unable to continue, and his cab somehow ran over his
2 leg and he became injured, that they had a few jobs trying to
3 write for various publications, that they had not worked out,
4 and that they were basically destitute. She said that she had
5 decided just like in Gone With The Wind, the movie, that she
6 was never going to be poor again. She said that she would
7 rather resolve matters than have to continue to live this life
8 of being at the behest of the people who wanted to attack the
9 church. Vaughn said that he was unwilling to give up that
10 lifestyle or give up that potential income source because it
11 was the only income source that he had. That he didn't have
12 any other way of making money, and that if they were going to
13 change what they were doing in their lives, that they needed
14 to find something else that they could become employed with in
15 order to make money to live.
16 These conversations went on for some time because
17 they had difficulty determining or figuring out what they
18 would be able to do if they weren't going to be testifying in
19 court cases. In the course of that, we discussed with them
20 what testimony they had given because both Vaughn and Stacy
21 had known myself and Mike Sutter for a long time, and we were
22 aware that much of what they had said in declarations, in
23 depositions, that they had been involved in was simply not
24 true or were twists of the facts. So we discussed with them
25 how that had come about, why they were doing that. Vaughn and
444
1 Stacy both said that because it was the only way they had of
2 making money. They had to provide testimony to those who
3 would pay them for it, and that if they didn't provide the
4 testimony that was wanted, then they wouldn't get paid.
5 We took out some specific examples with them such as
6 the matter of Steve Fishman who they had written a declaration
7 about claiming that he was a Scientologist. When we were
8 talking to them about that, they said we had to figure out how
9 to state things in a fashion that would create the impression
10 that something was a certain way even though the facts didn't
11 necessarily add up to that. By way of example specifically
12 they said that they had seen a video of Steve Fishman that he
13 had made and he had been describing the EMeter and that the
14 EMeter was a central part of anybody who is involved in
15 Scientology who claims to be an auditor as Steve Fishman did.
16 And on this video they had seen that Steve Fishman was unable
17 to describe or had misdescribed what the Emeter in fact was
18 and how it worked. And that as a result that they knew that
19 Steve Fishman was not in fact a trained Scientologist. But
20 that in any case what they had done and figured out how to
21 word things so they didn't exactly say that he was a
22 Scientologist but by implication created that effect.
23 MR. KELLEY: I object. This goes beyond what
24 Mr. Young was confronted with and given a chance to respond to
25 yesterday.
445
1 THE COURT: Overruled.
2 THE WITNESS: What then happened was Stacy and Vaughn
3 then said, Well, if you want us to get out of this business
4 quote unquote and Vaughn's exact words were "I am like a
5 Toyota car salesman, if I am no longer going to be Toyota car
6 salesman, I have to have some other form of employment." We
7 said, fine. We'll help find you a job. Then he said, We
8 would prefer that what we have is while we get our feet on the
9 ground, that you give us enough money to be able to survive,
10 so we can go back to college, so we can get our medical
11 expenses covered, so that we can take a vacation and so that
12 we can buy a farm. They had figured out this schedule how
13 much money that would entail. We said there is absolutely no
14 way that we could or would pay them any money to do this.
15 Especially in light of the fact that we weren't attempting to
16 settle litigation against them. There was no claim that they
17 had, they hadn't filed a suit. We said, look, we'll go back
18 to Los Angeles and see if we can find a job for you. Both of
19 them were interested in the field of animal rights. We then
20 checked around and contacted all sorts of people and actually
21 found three potential jobs for them in that field. They
22 wanted to move to Washington D.C. So we found jobs that
23 would allow them to be locate in Washington, D.C. if they
24 wished.
25 When we went back to Seattle after having found these
446
1 jobs, thinking that we had now resolved this problem, that
2 they would be very happy because now they would have gainful
3 employment, they wouldn't need to continue to be involved in
4 telling lies for pay and litigation that they were involved in
5 or future potential litigation. They then said we have spoken
6 to our lawyers. We don't want to do this any more. What we
7 want is $540,000. And the way they figured out $540,000 was
8 the cost of this farm, the cost of going back to school for
9 both of them, enough money for them to survive for two years
10 without having to work, enough to cover Stacy's medical
11 expenses because she had had a physical condition that had
12 occurred, which they did not have money to be able to cover.
13 We told them at that point that that was absolutely
14 ridiculous and that there was no way that we were going to pay
15 them any money. They then brought up the fact that there had
16 been other people who had left the church who had gotten loans
17 and perhaps it would be possible to arrange a small loan. We
18 said we are not sure if that's possible. We'll see if we
19 could arrange a loan. If we get you these jobs, you can then
20 go and start your life over in Washington, D.C., get a new job
21 and repay the loan. That was the point where they said, no,
22 we are not interested in doing this, and really that was the
23 end of the conversation.
24 Q Did you at any time ask either Vaughn or Stacy Young to
25 commit perjury for the church?
447
1 A No, sir.
2 Q Did you ask them to lie for the church in any way?
3 A Not at all.
4 MR. COOLEY: That's all.
5 CROSSEXAMINATION
6 BY MR. KELLEY:
7 Q Sir, when you visited Young, what was your position with
8 the organization at that time?
9 A Same as it is now.
10 Q As I understand it, you had made the decision, you and
11 Mr. Sutter, is it?
12 A That's correct.
13 Q Made the decision to contact these people and see if you
14 couldn't persuade them from their current ways which was to
15 testify against the church; is that right?
16 A No, not exactly. We had decided to contact them because
17 Mike Sutter and I had been involved with a number of other
18 people who had differences with the church. We had sat down
19 with them and been able to resolve them, and two of those
20 people in months preceding our contact with the Youngs had
21 said, well, we really wished that instead of having gone on
22 for a number of years engaged in a dispute with you, that we
23 had sat down and talked right from the beginning.
24 Q Was one of those people Vicki Aznaran?
25 A One of those people which?
448
1 Q That you resolved things with?
2 A Yes, certainly.
3 Q Did you resolve things with Vicki Aznaran?
4 A Did I? Yes.
5 Q Did that involve a payment of money, did it not?
6 A No, I am not sure. You are asking me if I paid Vicki
7 Aznaran money?
8 Q Did it involve a payment of much money by anyone to Vicki
9 Aznaran, yes or no?
10 A It involved resolving the disputes that they had and the
11 resolution of the litigation.
12 Q Sir, did it involve a payment of money to her?
13 A It settled their suit.
14 Q Did it involve a payment of money?
15 A I am not sure.
16 Q That's just something you don't know, one way or the
17 other?
18 A Certainly.
19 Q Now, at the time that you wanted to resolve things with
20 the Youngs, they were expert witnesses against you in
21 litigation in which Mr. Berry was involved; isn't that right?
22 A They weren't expert witnesses.
23 Q They were witnesses and consultants employed by Mr. Berry.
24 We can argue over whether they were experts or not. But they
25 were witnesses, were they not?
449
1 A Correct.
2 Q They were consultants retained by Mr. Berry?
3 A What I know, they were paid by Mr. Berry. Whatever their
4 relationship was, I am not sure.
5 Q And you made the decision to go up to Seattle to resolve
6 things with them, essentially reproselytize them and dissuade
7 them in the positions that they were taking in their testimony
8 that you claim were false; is that right?
9 A I wouldn't characterize it that way. I would characterize
10 it the way that I said to begin with, which was to which
11 was to attempt to resolve the differences or upsets that they
12 had.
13 Q Your testimony is you called Mr. Berry who had retained
14 them as consultants and said, we want to talk to these people
15 to try to resolve things. This is your opponent in the
16 litigation, and Mr. Berry said, fine; is that right?
17 A No. My best testimony is that I spoke to Vaughn and
18 Vaughn said that I won't talk to you. You have to talk to
19 Graham Berry.
20 Q Mr. Berry said it's fine. Go ahead. Go ahead and talk to
21 these people?
22 A Yes, he did, that's correct.
23 Q Then you spent six days talking with him up there in
24 Seattle; is that right?
25 A Yes. Well, there was a day or two where we went back to
450
1 Los Angeles.
2 Q Isn't it true in fact you offered them a large sum of
3 money to change their testimony?
4 A Absolutely not.
5 Q But in any event, it was you that sought the meeting and
6 you that went up there and talked with them for six days?
7 A Absolutely correct.
8 Q And it's your testimony that almost immediately these
9 people acknowledged regret and feelings of guilt over the
10 positions they had been taking?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And that was their position during those entire three
13 days was confessing to you that they had been taking
14 disingenuous positions in the litigation?
15 A That's correct.
16 Q Your organization has had public investigators following
17 these people, has it not?
18 A No.
19 Q And Scientologists are picketing their house; isn't that
20 true?
21 A I think that some Scientologists and other parents of
22 people who have a dispute the Awareness Network have been
23 doing so. I don't know that they are all Scientologists. And
24 the reason for them doing so has to do with the Youngs
25 involvement with the Awareness Network and kidnapping
451
1 children.
2 Q Did you tell the Youngs that there is nothing you wouldn't
3 do to protect Scientology?
4 A Absolutely not.
5 Q Sir, what's does the term "dead agent" mean in your
6 organization?
7 A The term dead agent it's not a term in our
8 organization. It's a term that comes from actually, I
9 don't know where it comes from. It's a term that describes
10 that when someone who has been found to be an agent for the
11 opposition is proven to be a liar, then, they no longer have
12 any credibility.
13 Q Isn't it then in fact someone that the Scientology
14 organization sets out to establish has no credibility through
15 false accusations and whatever it can dig up?
16 A I am not following your question.
17 Q Isn't a dead agent someone that Scientology decides that
18 it wants to try to discredit?
19 A No. A dead agent is someone who has been proven to be a
20 liar, and therefore, no longer has any credibility and is
21 therefore quote unquote a dead agent.
22 MR. KELLEY: Nothing further, Your Honor.
23 THE COURT: Thank you. Any redirect?
24 MR. COOLEY: No, Your Honor.
25 THE COURT: You may stand down. Thank you, sir.