Path: nwrddc01.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!207.115.63.142!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!newspeer2.tds.net!gail.ripco.com!news.lightlink.com!news2.lightlink.com From: Robert S. Minton <bob@minton.org> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Liebreich v CoS, Schaeffer Hearing re Prince, Shaw testifies re marijuana set up 1/2 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:05:49 -0500 Organization: Lightlink Internet Lines: 4266 Message-ID: <q3ef1ug94pjj0fblm1log1hismd9jd37b5@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.147.153.20 X-Original-Trace: 12 Dec 2001 15:06:22 -0500, 24.147.153.20 Xref: cyclone1.gnilink.net alt.religion.scientology:79519 X-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:07:49 EST (nwrddc01.gnilink.net)
1 1 2 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA 3 CASE NO. 00-5682-CI-11 4 DELL LIEBREICH, as Personal 5 Representative of the ESTATE OF LISA McPHERSON, 6 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. VOLUME 1 9 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, JANIS 10 JOHNSON, ALAIN KARTUZINSKI and DAVID HOUGHTON, D.D.S., 11 Defendants. 12 _______________________________________/ 13 14 PROCEEDINGS: Motions. 15 DATE: November 7, 2001, 9:11 a.m. 16 PLACE: Courtroom B, Judicial Buiding St. Petersburg, Florida. 17 BEFORE: Hon. Susan F. Schaeffer 18 Circuit Judge. 19 REPORTED BY: Donna M. Kanabay RMR, CRR, Notary Public, 20 State of Florida at large. 21 22 23 24 25
2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 MR. KENNAN G. DANDAR DANDAR & DANDAR 3 5340 West Kennedy Blvd., Suite 201 Tampa, FL 33602 4 Attorney for Plaintiff. 5 MR. KENDRICK MOXON and MS. HELENA K. KOBRIN 6 MOXON & KOBRIN 1100 Cleveland Street, Suite 900 7 Clearwater, FL 33755 Attorneys for Church of Scientology Flag Service 8 Organization. 9 MR. LEE FUGATE and MR. MORRIS WEINBERG, JR. and 10 ZUCKERMAN, SPAEDER 401 East Jackson Street, Suite 2525 11 Tampa, FL 33602 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 12 Organization. 13 MR. MICHAEL LEE HERTZBERG 740 Broadway, Fifth Floor 14 New York, New York 10003 Attorney for Church of Scientology Flag Service 15 Organization. 16 MR. RONALD P. HANES TROMBLEY & HANES 17 707 North Franklin Street 10th Floor 18 Tampa, FL 33601 Attorney for Janis Johnson 19 ALSO PRESENT: 20 Michael G. Garko, PhD 21 Mr. Allan Cartwright Ms. Lara Cartwright 22 Ms. Sarah Heller Mr. Ben Shaw 23 Mr. Peter Mansell Ms. Stephanie Skjelset 24 25
3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
4 1 INDEX TO PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS 2 PAGE LINE 3 Plaintiff's Motion for Severe Sanctions 6 7 BEN SHAW 19 6 4 DIRECT Mr. Dandar 19 9 Recess 84 1 5 Recess 157 23 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
5 1 THE COURT: Good morning. Now, let's see. We 2 have just a myriad of things scheduled for today. 3 I think what I'll do is -- I have the 4 plaintiff's third amended notice of hearing, and 5 somewhere up here I have the defendant's second 6 amended notice of hearing. Do you all have that 7 right handy? 8 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 9 THE COURT: What I think I'll do is this. I 10 think I'm going to take these motions up, and we'll 11 just do as much as we can. 12 And I'm going to start with the plaintiff's 13 motion for severe sanctions, because I believe they 14 actually set the hearing. That's the first thing 15 they have. So we'll take that up first. Then we'll 16 take up something that's been noticed by the 17 defendant, and back and forth, and see how far we 18 get. 19 I may put some time limits on you all because I 20 would like to get as much done as we can. 21 You should be advised that while I wouldn't 22 begin to tell you I've read every word of the 23 attachments, I've read some of them. I certainly 24 have read your motions and I've read some of the 25 attachments. So you don't have to tell me
6 1 everything. 2 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 3 THE COURT: You think an hour a side on this 4 will be enough? 5 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 6 THE COURT: All right. You're on the clock. 7 MR. DANDAR: And the reason why an hour a side 8 is -- because -- 9 First, the record, I'm Ken Dandar for the 10 estate of Lisa McPherson. 11 The plaintiff filed this motion for severe 12 sanctions, including the striking of answer and 13 defenses and pleadings of the defendant Flag, and 14 sanctions against its counsel, Kendrick Moxon, who's 15 a Scientologist and in-house counsel for 16 Scientology -- based upon -- he, Kendrick Moxon, the 17 attorney, who's here pro hac vice from California at 18 the pleasure of the court, and Ben Shaw, who 19 represents and is the corporate representative for 20 the defendant Flag, engaging in a felony act of 21 tampering with a witness, who is the plaintiff's 22 designated expert witness, Jesse Prince. And 23 Mr. Prince is in the courtroom today. 24 Mr. Prince is a former Scientologist. And he 25 was also an expert witness, when he was inside
7 1 Scientology, for Scientology. And he has special 2 knowledge of the practices of Scientology which are 3 pertinent to this case, which people on the outside 4 of Scientology would not understand unless it was 5 explained to them through the expertise of someone 6 such as Jesse Prince. 7 THE COURT: Can I stop you for just a minute? 8 You know how I do that to you all from time to time. 9 My recollection is that at some point in time 10 you either filed a pleading or perhaps stated in 11 open court that you were withdrawing him as an 12 expert. 13 MR. DANDAR: It's in my motion that I'm 14 withdrawing him as an expert only because he has 15 refused to participate any further in this case 16 because of the felony actions that happened against 17 him. 18 THE COURT: But you had not withdrawn him as an 19 expert previous to that? 20 MR. DANDAR: No. 21 THE COURT: Okay. 22 MR. DANDAR: What's also scheduled for today, 23 by the way, is the motion to add another expert on, 24 Hana Whitfield, who had been added on and she got 25 out and she came back in and -- I don't know --
8 1 THE COURT: And I believe there is a motion to 2 strike -- 3 MR. DANDAR: Right. 4 THE COURT: -- Mr. Prince as an expert. So 5 perhaps we can kind of deal with at least the motion 6 for severe sanctions, the motion to strike him -- 7 maybe that'll all be related. 8 MR. DANDAR: The reason why we can expedite the 9 motion for severe sanctions is because, on Monday 10 afternoon, when I was taking Mr. Shaw's deposition 11 here in St. Petersburg, and attempted to take 12 Mr. Moxon's deposition, but -- 13 THE COURT: Who is Mr. Shaw again? 14 MR. DANDAR: Mr. Shaw is the corporate 15 representative. 16 THE COURT: Good morning. 17 MR. DANDAR: I did take his deposition, got 18 some admissions. And I want to call him as my first 19 witness today. 20 They filed a response and had it delivered to 21 my office, which I saw yesterday, admitting in 22 writing that they did indeed retain these private 23 investigators, paid these private investigators, to 24 follow Mr. Prince around 24 hours a day, seven days 25 a week, and then hired a African-American private
9 1 investigator, Mr. Gaston, from Lake Wales, to go in 2 and violate the witness tampering statute; go in and 3 make friends with Mr. Prince undercover with a 4 fictitious name, and become a friend of Mr. Prince 5 and his fiance; go inside his home, acting like he's 6 just a friendly person with Mr. Prince; and then 7 bring in an undercover Largo police officer, Officer 8 Crosby, who I subpoenaed for today, and whose office 9 called me yesterday and said he won't be here 'cause 10 he has other things to do. But we have his trial 11 testimony and we have his deposition testimony. 12 And the gist of it is they admit all this. 13 So they say they're entitled to bring an 14 undercover private investigator in and make contact 15 with my expert witness and engage in criminal 16 activity with my expert witness, to use that 17 evidence in the hopes to get a felony conviction so 18 that they can then impeach him in this case. They 19 admit that. 20 If the court wants to go through the trial 21 transcripts of their investigators admitting that; 22 that Mr. Gaston the African-American private 23 investigator said, "My job was finished when he was 24 arrested." And that's in the transcript that's 25 filed before you. His job was to trick Mr. Prince.
10 1 He accomplished his goal. He's arrested. 2 And Scientology, in their response pleadings 3 filed on Monday, admit that indeed he was working 4 for them and Mr. Moxon, at the time all this was 5 going on, giving Flag daily reports on his 6 activities with Mr. Prince, in order to impeach him 7 in this case. 8 I can't find a case like that. I never heard 9 of such a thing. It's just so unethical and 10 outrageous -- that's why we can't find a case. 11 There are cases of lawyers getting disbarred 12 with tampering with witnesses by making verbal 13 threats. There is no case that I could find in any 14 jurisdiction that goes to the extent that they have 15 gone here. And it's so obvious. 16 That's why -- I see the video -- the TV here. 17 They want to put on a sideshow of Mr. Prince using 18 foul language, and because he uses foul language on 19 a picketing, then that gives them the right -- and 20 that's what's in their moving papers, their 21 response -- it gives them the right, the 22 entitlement, to send in a private investigator 23 undercover and make personal daily contact with him, 24 and then engage in criminal activity, as smoking 25 marijuana with him, which Mr. Prince states was
11 1 given to him, according to the -- the affidavit 2 filed with the court with my motion filed on behalf 3 of the estate -- "given to Mr. Prince at a sports 4 bar, after he became friendly with Mr. Gaston, by a 5 white male who had spent a considerable time in the 6 sports bar talking in private with Mr. Gaston, and 7 then approaches Mr. Prince to hand him a free 8 package of marijuana, enough to make three or four 9 joints." 10 The defense of entitlement to tamper with the 11 estate's expert witness is because they say, "He's a 12 drug user and we need to show the court he's a drug 13 user." 14 The problem with that position is that 15 Mr. Prince admitted on November 17th, 1999, in 16 volume 2 of 6 of his discovery deposition, on page 17 336 to 347, that he does smoke marijuana. Smoking 18 marijuana is not a grounds to impeach anybody. 19 Felony convictions are grounds to impeach. 20 And the witness testimony that we want the 21 court to consider, which we'll read to the court if 22 you find it necessary, is that the deposition of 23 Mr. Raftery, the head private investigator, and the 24 trial deposition of Mr. Raftery, the head private 25 investigator for Flag, as well as the police
12 1 officer, Officer Crosby, confirm that they were 2 telephoning Officer Crosby to get him to file these 3 felony charges. And after Mr. Prince was arrested, 4 they were more creative and were trying to get 5 Officer Crosby to file more felony charges such as 6 having marijuana within a thousand feet of a school; 7 dealing in crack cocaine, which there's no evidence 8 of, but they accused -- 9 That's how they got the officer involved in the 10 first place. They made false allegations to the 11 officer, saying Mr. Prince is a crack dealer, 12 Mr. Prince is a dealer of marijuana, his fiance is a 13 dealer of marijuana, and Mr. Prince is a dealer of 14 stolen auto parts. All of those were false. 15 Officer Crosby said there was no evidence of that 16 whatsoever. There's not any evidence that he sold 17 anything of an illegal substance. 18 What Officer Crosby saw, which is attached to 19 the motion, is a -- plants growing on the back porch 20 of Mr. Prince, which Mr. Prince, in his affidavit, 21 as well as fiance, said were thrown away. They just 22 appeared after they bought this home in February of 23 2000 and they threw it away. And it's proven that 24 they threw it away because when Officer Crosby comes 25 back the second time, he sees one little marijuana
13 1 plant growing out of a pot that has a rubber tree in 2 it. And he says there is nothing in the house 3 anywhere at any time suggesting to him that 4 Mr. Prince was engaged in cultivation, except for 5 this one small plant that was seized the next -- 6 three days later. There's a discrepancy about the 7 days because of the documents that are attached. 8 But that -- and then the cultivation charge was 9 dismissed by the State, and possession charges were 10 pursued. And the jury was hung because they knew 11 that Scientology engaged in this behavior to set up 12 Mr. Prince. 13 And when they had the admissions by the private 14 eyes that their job was to get this evidence so they 15 could get a felony conviction, finally, and have a 16 felony conviction to impeach Mr. Prince. 17 This is conduct which the court should not 18 condone in any way. There is no entitlement to 19 tamper with the witness. 20 So I'm going to leave it in your hands, Judge. 21 I'm ready to present evidence, in addition to 22 what's before you, with the -- well, to confirm the 23 trial transcript testimony that's already been filed 24 and the deposition testimony of the private 25 investigators and Officer Crosby, as well as
14 1 Mr. Prince. 2 Would you like to proceed with live testimony? 3 THE COURT: I'm going to let you decide if you 4 feel it's necessary. You do have your -- some 5 depositions attached and some trial testimony 6 attached. I don't believe there's anything attached 7 from Mr. Shaw. 8 MR. DANDAR: No. I had just filed his 9 deposition today. 10 THE COURT: Right. So I don't know whether you 11 want to present that or present Mr. Shaw as a 12 witness or -- 13 MR. DANDAR: Well, actually, we'll go ahead and 14 call Mr. Shaw, then. 15 MR. MOXON: Your Honor, we would object to any 16 live testimony today. This was not noticed for an 17 evidentiary hearing, one. 18 Secondly, as you've seen there, both of us have 19 submitted a great deal of testimony and exhibits. 20 They're something in the neighborhood of a hundred 21 exhibits. Inches and inches of testimony. I would 22 propose that we go ahead and go through this 23 hearing. If the court has any questions and feels 24 some evidentiary hearing is necessary, and live 25 testimony, then we can set it for one. We'd be
15 1 happy to do that if it's necessary. I think you'll 2 see, at the end of this hearing, it's not. 3 THE COURT: Well, I don't know that anybody has 4 to notice something for an evidentiary hearing. You 5 notice it for hearing. If they want to put on 6 evidence, I think that's their right. 7 MR. DANDAR: I reserved the whole day just in 8 the event -- 9 MR. WEINBERG: There's a few other issues that 10 arose -- 11 I'm Sandy Weinberg, your Honor. 12 THE COURT: Hi. 13 MR. WEINBERG: -- that arose in Mr. Shaw's 14 depo -- which I was not at, Mr. Moxon was -- which I 15 have now read, and I'm here today to serve as 16 counsel, I suppose, if there's testimony. But 17 Mr. Shaw was the corporate representative. These 18 individuals that there's all this testimony about, 19 that you have, the three investigators all testified 20 in the criminal case, at deposition, and at trial. 21 And that is in the record in front of you about this 22 issue. 23 Mr. Prince, who didn't testify at trial, but 24 his fiance/girlfriend did, in deposition testimony. 25 And that's in the record at issue.
16 1 Mr. Prince's deposition was attempted to be 2 taken by us prior to this hearing. And as you've 3 seen in our papers, he exercised the Fifth Amendment 4 as to most of the questions that have to do with the 5 issues here today, which create issues. 6 Mr. Shaw did testify in deposition, over our 7 objection. And the real objection was -- is that 8 because he's in a corporate representative or 9 because he deals with counsel and because the 10 investigators deal with counsel and the corporate 11 representative, that there are all kinds of work 12 product and attorney-client privilege issues that 13 arise. And during the deposition, the work product 14 and attorney-client objection was raised on a number 15 of occasions, as you might imagine, and it was 16 sustained on most of those occasions by Judge Beach. 17 And there are a series of cases out there that 18 deal with the issue as to whether it is appropriate 19 to subpoena for deposition trial counsel, Mr. Moxon, 20 as Mr. Dandar has done for the hearing today and 21 tried to take the deposition the other day, and also 22 people like Mr. Shaw, who's the corporate 23 representative, because of issues like this. 24 And we were -- I have in hand a motion to 25 quash, which we can hand up to you, that sets forth
17 1 in pretty simple terms what the cases say and what 2 the issues are. But to summarize the issues, you 3 know, it's a rare day where courts will allow the 4 other side to depose or to call as a witness 5 counsel. 6 THE COURT: We're not talking about -- 7 MR. WEINBERG: No -- 8 THE COURT: -- counsel. 9 MR. WEINBERG: -- we're not. But it's 10 essentially the same thing. Because the questions 11 that Mr. Dandar wants to ask Mr. Shaw -- which he's 12 already asked Mr. Shaw a few days ago. And you have 13 the transcript -- 14 THE COURT: Actually I don't have the 15 transcript. 16 MR. WEINBERG: Well -- but he has -- he filed 17 the transcript. 18 THE COURT: Okay. 19 MR. WEINBERG: Mr. Dandar did. 20 -- all address questions that -- that impact 21 the same issues that -- as if the lawyer was 22 testifying. Mr. Shaw testified, to the extent that 23 he could, but most of the areas that he was 24 questioned about invoke work product, 25 attorney-client issues.
18 1 And there is a -- what the cases say is it's 2 his obligation to demonstrate why it is necessary to 3 impinge on the other side like this when there is 4 all this other evidence that is available and other 5 ways to get the evidence, which I think he's done in 6 this case. And I really think that the evidence is 7 there. The record is there. And really, it's a 8 legal argument as to whether or not what Mr. Dandar 9 says is correct. 10 THE COURT: Then may I assume that the church 11 is willing to concede two things: That they hired a 12 private investigator to watch Jesse Prince 24 hours 13 a day, seven days a week; they also hired an 14 African-American to befriend him, and see what they 15 could find out? 16 MR. MOXON: No. Absolutely not. 17 MR. WEINBERG: That is not what Mr. Shaw said 18 in his deposition. 19 THE COURT: Then your objection is overruled 20 and we need to hear from Mr. Shaw. 21 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 22 MR. DANDAR: Call Mr. Shaw. 23 THE COURT: And we really don't need to hear 24 this -- I see a huge deposition there. Just these 25 couple of things you want to try to establish with
19 1 his testimony, all right? 2 MR. DANDAR: Well, it's 123 pages -- 24, with 3 the signature of the court reporter, but most of the 4 questions weren't answered because of the privilege. 5 _______________________________________ 6 BEN SHAW, 7 the witness herein, being first duly sworn, was examined 8 and testified as follows: 9 DIRECT EXAMINATION 10 BY MR. DANDAR: 11 Q State your name. 12 A Ben Shaw. 13 Q Are you a member of the Office of Special Affairs? 14 A The name of my office within the Church of 15 Scientology Flag Services Organization is the Office of 16 Special Affairs. 17 Q And your superior is Michael Rinder at the mother 18 church in Los Angeles, correct? 19 A At the Church of Scientology Flag Services 20 Organization, I don't have an immediate senior. Within the 21 ecclesiastical structure of the church, he is a -- somebody 22 that I report to, that's correct. 23 Q He is your senior, correct? 24 A Mr. Dandar, I think I just answered your question. 25 THE COURT: I understand.
20 1 MR. DANDAR: Do you? Okay. 2 BY MR. DANDAR: 3 Q And part of your duties as the head of the Office 4 of Special Affairs here in Clearwater for the Church of 5 Scientology is to monitor legal cases? 6 A I have -- in my office, I have all the legal 7 liaison functions regards to anything to do with litigation, 8 legal affairs, public affairs for the church, that's 9 correct. 10 Q When's the first time a private investigator was 11 assigned to watch Mr. Prince? 12 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to the form, your 13 Honor. 14 THE COURT: What's wrong with it? 15 MR. WEINBERG: I guess it's a leading question, 16 basically. 17 THE COURT: Overruled. 18 MR. DANDAR: Adverse party. 19 A There was never a private investigator assigned to 20 watch Mr. Prince. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q Okay. What was the assignment for any private 23 investigator, the first time, in reference to Mr. Prince? 24 A Okay. As I explained in my deposition, day before 25 yesterday, when -- I'll have to give you a little bit of
21 1 background. Otherwise the context will be out of context. 2 In approximately December of 1996, I came to 3 Clearwater specifically because of the situation with Lisa 4 McPherson, and I remained here because of that. And when I 5 arrived here, I originally met with counsel, Elliott 6 Abelson. And without going into any discussions between 7 myself and counsel, we decided to hire an investigator to 8 look into the facts of the case. 9 At that point in time, we hired Mr. Brian Raftery. 10 I looked into his credentials. I decided he was qualified 11 based on the fact that he had 22 years of experience in the 12 Drug Enforcement Administration; he was a retired marine 13 captain. And I -- on interviewing him, I told him very 14 specifically the rules of the game is that he follows the 15 law to the letter and does not deviate from that. 16 He then proceeded to investigate matters related 17 to the case. 18 Shortly following that, there was a marked 19 increase in incidents in the Clearwater area which were 20 direct physical assaults and harassment on church members 21 and on church property. This was probably in my estimation 22 as a result of extensive media coverage at the time related 23 to the case. Many of the threats specifically mentioned 24 that they were done because of Lisa McPherson's death. And 25 these included drive-by shootings; a man driving his truck
22 1 into the front of the church; bombs threatened to the 2 residential facilities of the church, and that -- that sort 3 of thing. That -- that type of activity occurred over the 4 next two years. 5 In approximately November of 1998, Mr. Prince 6 moved into Clearwater for the first time; apparently not 7 permanently, but he was here. 8 My first encounter with him was in November of 9 1998, when he showed up on the doorsteps of the church with 10 Mr. Minton, visibly inebriated, drunk -- 11 Q What city? 12 A In Clearwater. 13 Q Okay. 14 A This was approximately two months after he had 15 been on the front steps of the church in Boston, where 16 Mr. Minton was arrested for assaulting a church staff 17 member. At that time, they were both apparently drunk. 18 Q You were there? You were there? 19 A I had seen reports and I've seen videos. 20 MR. DANDAR: Move to strike. It's hearsay. 21 THE COURT: Sustained. 22 A In November of 1998, I was here, and I received a 23 report that -- 24 MR. DANDAR: Move to strike. That's hearsay. 25
23 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q I want to know what you personally -- 3 A I personally -- 4 Q -- observed -- 5 A No, I -- 6 MR. WEINBERG: Judge -- (Inaudible due to 7 multiple speakers.) 8 A I'm going to tell you -- 9 THE COURT: Excuse me -- 10 A You asked me a question -- 11 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor -- 12 A -- and I'm -- 13 (Multiple speakers.) 14 THE COURT: Excuse me. Wait. 15 When somebody says "objection --" 16 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. 17 THE COURT: -- you need to stop talking, 18 because the only way -- 19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir (sic). 20 THE COURT: -- the only way I can deal with 21 that is -- 22 THE WITNESS: You're right. 23 THE COURT: -- to hear what the lawyers have to 24 say, so -- 25 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 1 THE COURT: -- whenever you hear "objection," 2 just stop, okay? 3 MR. WEINBERG: Could I address one thing? 4 Part of the background that Mr. Shaw is talking 5 about, and already testified to the other day, is 6 the basis -- regardless of whether he was there or 7 not, is the basis -- what he's trying to explain is 8 the basis for why he chose to do what he did with 9 regard to Mr. Prince that is the subject of this 10 hearing. So that -- I know you struck his comment 11 as hearsay, but it's part of the -- it is part of 12 the -- 13 THE COURT: I think you're right. 14 MR. WEINBERG: -- basis of the -- 15 THE COURT: In retrospect, let me reconsider 16 that. He's allowed to testify to hearsay if he's 17 talking about the things that he learned, however he 18 learned them, and why he did what he did. This is 19 not a jury trial. This is why -- he's going to 20 explain to us, I guess, why he did what he did. 21 So I'll allow hearsay testimony. 22 BY MR. DANDAR: 23 Q Isn't it true -- 24 THE COURT: Even if it's not true. 25
25 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Isn't it true that Mr. Prince was never arrested 3 for a violent act in Clearwater? 4 A Okay. So carry on to finish my -- 5 Q Excuse me -- 6 A I actually hadn't finished my answer to your last 7 question. Can I finish it? 8 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I think he's going far 9 afield of my question, so -- 10 THE COURT: I'm going to let him go on you, but 11 I don't want you to go on and on and on. 12 THE WITNESS: Okay. I'll try and -- 13 THE COURT: Just try and wrap it up, if you 14 will. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. 16 A I'm trying to set the context of what occurred 17 when I -- in and around November of 1970 -- (sic), and 18 actually prior to that. 19 Prior to Mr. Prince arriving in here, I had 20 assigned a -- a -- Mr. Raftery to establish security for the 21 parishioners of the church, the church members and church 22 facilities, specifically to deal with the physical and 23 verbal threats and assaults that had been occurring. When 24 Mr. Prince arrived that was a continuation of that state of 25 affairs. I considered it serious, based on the fact of the
26 1 earlier physical assault that occurred on a staff member in 2 Boston. 3 Then -- 4 BY MR. DANDAR: 5 Q Could I just interrupt you -- 6 On Boston, I do have a question. 7 A Okay. 8 Q Was Mr. Prince arrested in Boston? 9 A He wasn't arrested. Mr. Minton -- 10 Q That's all. 11 A -- was arrested. He was with him. 12 Q Right. 13 Mr. Minton -- those charges ended up being 14 dismissed against him? 15 A No, they weren't. Actually, an injunction was 16 issued by the court for him to stay away from the church and 17 to inform the church prior to any approaching the church. 18 Q Okay. But Mr. Prince was not arrested. 19 A That's correct. 20 Q All right. 21 A He was with him at the time. 22 Q All right. Go ahead. See if we can finish this 23 up. 24 A In November of 1978 -- 1998, the incident which 25 occurred was, Mr. Prince arrived at the church, as I said;
27 1 he was about 10 feet from one of my staff, right in front of 2 the church, and he threatened a physical assault on the 3 founder -- on the ecclesiastical leader of the church. 4 Q Who was not present, correct? 5 A He's not present here, no. 6 Q No. He wasn't present when this -- 7 A Actually, I don't know. 8 Q -- alleged threat was made, correct? 9 A Actually, I don't know. 10 But to me, it didn't make any difference, because 11 the fact of the threat was quite serious. I took it 12 serious. 13 One of the reasons I've taken it serious is 14 because two months before I came to Clearwater, there was an 15 incident in Portland, Oregon, where a man -- 16 THE COURT: We don't need to hear about all 17 that. 18 THE WITNESS: Okay. 19 THE COURT: Honestly, you need -- I mean, a lot 20 of this stuff is in here. I'm hearing stuff I 21 already know. 22 THE WITNESS: Okay. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q All right. 25 A In that case --
28 1 Q So -- 2 A I will make it very short. 3 And you asked me how it came about that a private 4 investigator who had been hired by the church, Mr. Raftery, 5 who had been hired as a security consultant -- 6 Q Who else did you hire? 7 A I hired Mr. Raftery. And he was the one who was 8 in charge of security. And he was assigned to monitor all 9 the activities. 10 And when Mr. Prince, Mr. Minton and all these 11 people came down here, they were right -- 20 feet from the 12 church. They were certainly of concern to us. And that's 13 why we hired off-duty police officers to be outside the 14 church. Mr. Raftery was an auxiliary to that function, 15 which is security. And he was not assigned to watching 16 Mr. Prince seven days a week, 24 hours a day. That never 17 occurred. He was assigned to security. 18 Mr. Prince was actually, seven days a week, 24 19 hours a day, right in front of the church. And it took no 20 problem -- I could look outside my window -- 21 Q Okay. 22 A -- and monitor what he was doing. 23 Q So Mr. Prince didn't hide himself in Clearwater 24 and he was never arrested in Clearwater, correct? 25 A I do not know of any arrest of Mr. Prince in
29 1 Clearwater. 2 Q Okay. And how many private investigators, in the 3 year 2000, were assigned or directed to be involved in 4 surveilling Mr. Prince? 5 A As I said, there was no specific assignment to 6 surveil Mr. Prince. Mr. Raftery was in charge of the 7 investigators who are handling the security function. 8 Mr. Raftery, and I believe Mr. Fabrizio, who I had not 9 specifically discussed this with, who was also hired 10 separately by Mr. Moxon for a similar function, decided at 11 one point in time that -- to hire an investigator, because 12 of the fact that Mr. Prince was going to a high-crime area 13 in Clearwater, to observe what was happening in that area. 14 Q And that's Mr. Gaston. 15 A That was Mr. Gaston. 16 Q And he's an African-American. 17 A That's correct. 18 Q Just like Mr. Prince. 19 A That's correct. 20 Q All right. And the purpose to hire an 21 African-American like Mr. Prince is to get closer to 22 Mr. Prince, correct? 23 A No. That's not correct. Mr. Gaston was hired 24 because of the area where he was in, it would probably have 25 been safer for him being an African-American. And he was
30 1 assigned to watch what was happening. 2 He was approached by Mr. Prince. At that point in 3 time, the first contact, there was discussion of drugs. And 4 that was the -- that was the beginning of the contact. And 5 at that point in time, it was reported back to me by 6 Mr. Raftery what had occurred. I said, "Look, there's 7 illegal activity going on. Get the law enforcement 8 involved." 9 Q Isn't it true you didn't disagree that Mr. Gaston, 10 the black investigator, attempted -- before he actually made 11 contact with Mr. Prince, attempted to make contact with him 12 11 times -- 13 A No. 14 Q -- as he testified on page 370 -- 316 of his trial 15 testimony. 16 A Well, I'm not aware of that. If -- I'm not -- I 17 don't remember even reading that in the testimony. 18 He did not have the instructions to make contact 19 with Mr. Prince. That's my understanding. 20 Q Isn't it true that Mr. Gaston, on his twelfth 21 time, positioned himself in the sports bar where Mr. Prince 22 and his fiance were sitting so that he would have to walk by 23 him to leave the sports bar? 24 MR. WEINBERG: Objection, your Honor. What 25 Mr. -- there's no basis for Mr. Shaw to know this,
31 1 other than having read trial transcripts. And what 2 Mr. Dandar is doing now is reading from Mr. Gaston's 3 trial transcript, which is in the record. But as he 4 knows and as he established in the deposition, 5 Mr. Shaw's already said, "I didn't have any 6 communications with Mr. Gaston." 7 MR. DANDAR: Object. These are speaking 8 objections. 9 MR. WEINBERG: This is inappropriate -- 10 MR. DANDAR: He's giving the hint to the 11 witness on how to testify. 12 MR. WEINBERG: He's already asked the witness 13 this question. And this is an inappropriate 14 question. 15 THE COURT: I'm going to allow it. Overruled. 16 BY MR. DANDAR: 17 Q How many investigators, besides Mr. Gaston and 18 Mr. Fabrizio, were surveilling Mr. Prince in February of 19 2000? 20 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Asked and answered. 21 THE COURT: Sustained. 22 A I don't know how many investigators -- 23 MR. WEINBERG: Ben -- Ben, she just said -- 24 THE WITNESS: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear 25 that.
32 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Was it -- was it more than Mr. Fabrizio and 3 Mr. Gaston? 4 A Like I said, I don't know. Mr. Raftery was the 5 one who was assigned to the general function of security, 6 and he made the decisions who to use and how he used them. 7 Q And when Mr. -- when you found out that Mr. Gaston 8 had made personal contact with Mr. Prince -- of course you 9 knew that Mr. Prince was the estate's expert witness in this 10 case, correct? 11 A Well, I knew he was a -- designated by you as an 12 expert witness. And he had indicated, at some point in 13 time, that he was an employee of yours. 14 But the fact of the matter is that he was the one 15 who was picketing on a regular basis in front of our church, 16 making contact to witnesses in this case in front of our 17 church; making contact to employees, telling them that they 18 were murderers, telling them that they were -- 19 THE COURT: Are you trying to suggest that, 20 while you might have known he was listed as an 21 expert witness, you never believed he would be 22 allowed to testify as an expert witness? 23 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, no. Actually, I -- I 24 didn't -- he had never been accepted as an expert 25 witness.
33 1 What I'm trying to say is that my concern went 2 past the fact of whether or not he was a witness. 3 He was still there as a -- essentially, a threat 4 to -- 5 THE COURT: Okay. 6 THE WITNESS: -- security of the church. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q When Mr. Gaston -- when you found out he made 9 personal contact with Mr. Prince, did you give instructions 10 for him to cease and get away from Mr. Prince? 11 A No. What I did was I told Mr. Raftery that the 12 fact that there was a violation of the law involved, that he 13 should go to law enforcement. And in fact, that -- he did 14 go to law enforcement. He went to a Largo police officer. 15 And my understanding from Mr. Raftery -- again, I'm not 16 telling you 'cause I wasn't there, but Mr. Raftery told me 17 that the Largo police officer asked if Mr. Gaston would be 18 willing to work as a confidential informant for the police. 19 And at that point in time, I gave Mr. Raftery the 20 authorization to do that. And it proceeded from there under 21 the direction of law enforcement. 22 Q And even after that, you didn't tell Mr. Raftery 23 to stop Mr. Gaston from making contact with Mr. Prince. 24 A No. I told Mr. Gaston -- I mean, Mr. Raftery 25 that, essentially, to go to law enforcement, what they
34 1 wanted, they could have. 2 I also want to correct one mischaracterization 3 that I heard from you before about some daily meetings with 4 Mr. Gaston. I know this from the trial transcripts that 5 that's not accurate. That's how I know that. 6 Q You got -- you got daily reports on Mr. Gaston's 7 activities, didn't you? 8 A No. 9 Q Mr. Fabrizio did? 10 A No. As far as I know, he didn't. I mean -- 11 Q And when Mr. Gaston was acting as a confidential 12 informant, going inside the house of Jesse Prince and his 13 fiance, and going out with his fiance and Mr. Prince to 14 different areas around Clearwater, Mr. Gaston was being paid 15 by Mr. Fabrizio, who was being paid by the Church of 16 Scientology. 17 A He was originally hired by Mr. Fabrizio, who was 18 paid by the Moxon and Kobrin law firm, who are the attorneys 19 representing the church. The times and hours he spent on it 20 as a professional licensed investigator were paid by us. 21 Q Okay. And during the entire time that Mr. Gaston 22 the private investigator was with Mr. Prince, the -- was 23 about six months? 24 A I don't believe that's -- I don't know. Actually, 25 I haven't figured out the time. I think the dates are of
35 1 record in the case. 2 Q Well, Mr. Gaston testified in his deposition and 3 at trial, the criminal trial of Jesse Prince, the Church of 4 Scientology paid counsel to represent Mr. Gaston? 5 A I believe -- let's see. I'm trying to remember 6 who represented him. 7 Q It was Paul Duval Johnson. 8 A That's correct. We paid his fees. 9 Q And Helena Kobrin was also advising him during the 10 trial and at deposition? 11 A I believe Helena Kobrin represented somebody else, 12 another investigator. I don't know whether she was advising 13 him or not. 14 Q Well, you're aware that Ms. Helena Kobrin, of the 15 Moxon and Kobrin law firm, was present during the testimony 16 of the -- in the criminal trial of Jesse Prince, when the 17 private investigators working on behalf of the Church of 18 Scientology were testifying, is that true? 19 A Well, absolutely. She represents the church. And 20 I think Mr. Raftery was there testifying, and he had been an 21 employee, for security purposes, both from the -- by the law 22 firm and the church. So to me it makes complete sense that 23 she would be present. 24 Q Mr. Raftery has an office in Clearwater on Turner 25 Street, is that right?
36 1 A I believe so. 2 Q And that's a building that's owned by the Church 3 of Scientology? 4 A I don't know who owns -- I've never actually been 5 to his office. 6 Q Where does he usually -- 7 A I don't think it's owned by the church, but I 8 don't know. 9 Q Is he usually in your office, the OSA; Office of 10 Special Affairs? 11 A No. 12 Q And Ms. Kobrin and Mr. Johnson, with permission of 13 Judge Andrews of the criminal court, were giving hand 14 signals to the private investigators on when to plead the 15 Fifth Amendment during the trial testimony, isn't that 16 correct? 17 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to the form, your 18 Honor. 19 THE COURT: Sustained. 20 BY MR. DANDAR: 21 Q Are you aware that they were giving hand signals 22 to the private investigators? 23 A Well, I wasn't in the courtroom, Mr. Dandar. 24 Q Are you aware of it? 25 MR. WEINBERG: Well, Objection, your Honor. If
37 1 he wasn't in the courtroom -- 2 THE COURT: Yeah. And what does -- I'm sorry. 3 What is it you're trying to establish? 4 MR. DANDAR: Well, I'm just trying to establish 5 that these private investigators are not distant 6 third parties; these private investigators are 7 working full time for the Church of Scientology 8 during the time not only of their testimony but the 9 time that they're surveilling Mr. Prince. 10 THE COURT: Well, it seems to me you just asked 11 him whether or not Mr. Gaston was represented by 12 counsel, paid for by the church, and he indicated he 13 was. So I don't know why you really need to go 14 beyond that. 15 BY MR. DANDAR: 16 Q All right. Now, when you told Mr. Raftery in the 17 beginning to make sure he follows the law, you knew then 18 that a private investigator, in conducting surveillance, is 19 not permitted to make personal contact with the person he's 20 surveilling. 21 A I don't know what you're talking about. I mean -- 22 Q You don't know that? 23 A First of all, I'm not a licensed private 24 investigator, so I don't know what the rules are regulating 25 investigators. But I've never heard of that.
38 1 Q Before Mr. Gaston made contact with Mr. Prince, 2 did you know that he was going to do that? 3 A No. 4 Q How soon after he made his first contact with 5 Mr. Prince did you know that he did that? 6 A My best guess is within about a week. 7 Q Now, Mr. Prince used to be an expert for RTC, 8 Religious Technology Center part of the Church of 9 Scientology, is that correct? 10 A I don't know about that. I do know Mr. Prince was 11 a one-time employee. 12 Q Do you know that he testified in court cases for 13 the Church of Scientology? 14 A I -- I don't know that firsthand. I believe he 15 may have testified in one case. He worked in the legal 16 affairs section of the church many years ago. 17 Q Do you dispute Scientology's lawyers, Mr. Rosen, 18 in federal court, in Denver, Bridge Publication versus 19 FACTNetwork (sic); he told the court that Mr. Prince was the 20 number two worldwide leader or executive of the Church of 21 Scientology. 22 A Well, I haven't -- I wasn't in court, I haven't 23 seen his testimony, but I can tell you that is not accurate. 24 Q And out of the private investigators that you or 25 the Moxon law firm retained, how many of those investigators
39 1 reported to you? 2 A The only investigator I've dealt with is Brian 3 Raftery. As I told you, I originally, along with 4 Mr. Abelson, hired him. Ultimately, I hired the law firm of 5 Zuckerman Spaeder with Mr. Abelson, and Mr. Raftery went 6 along with that representation, then went further down that 7 line. But I have not dealt with anybody else. 8 Q Okay. And how -- which investigators dealt with 9 the Moxon and Kobrin law firm? 10 A Mr. Raftery has, and I believe Mr. Fabrizio. 11 Q Okay. Are there any other private investigators 12 that dealt with you or Mr. Moxon or Ms. Kobrin? 13 A That's -- 14 MR. WEINBERG: Excuse me, your Honor. With 15 regard to Jesse Prince, is what the question is? 16 THE COURT: Right. 17 MR. DANDAR: Right. 18 A I don't believe -- I don't know of any, no. 19 BY MR. DANDAR: 20 Q And isn't it true that Mr. Raftery works for the 21 Moxon and Kobrin law firm? 22 A Mr. Raftery -- sure. Yeah. He works for Moxon. 23 Q He's an employee. 24 A No. He's not an employee. 25 Q Well, are you aware --
40 1 A I -- 2 Q -- that Ms. Kobrin said he works for the law firm? 3 A Well, there's a difference between -- my -- in my 4 mind, there's a difference between somebody that's a 5 contracted employee as a professional and somebody -- I'm 6 sorry. Somebody who's on a contract, who's a professional, 7 and somebody who's an employee. 8 Q When Mr. Prince was arrested, did you continue to 9 use Mr. Gaston? 10 A When Mr. Prince -- 11 No. 12 Q Did Mr. Gaston -- 13 A Not that I know of, anyway. I mean, I -- 14 In other words, to clarify that, I've never had 15 any contact with Mr. Gaston, myself. He was hired by 16 Mr. Fabrizio. I don't know anything other than -- he's 17 done, actually, other than this case. 18 Q Mr. Fabrizio billed Moxon & Kobrin law firm for 19 services rendered by Mr. Fabrizio and Mr. Gaston, is that 20 correct? 21 A I believe that's the case, correct. 22 Q Okay. Were there any other private investigators 23 that Mr. Fabrizio billed the Moxon and Kobrin law firm in 24 addition to Mr. Gaston? 25 A I don't know of any.
41 1 Q Okay. And of course, the Moxon and Kobrin law 2 firm got their money to pay these private investigators 3 through Flag, correct? 4 A Well, we hired the law firm to represent us for 5 matters relating to this case and other matters. 6 Q Does Moxon and Kobrin law firm represent any other 7 entities other than Scientology organizations? 8 A I'm sure they do. 9 Q They're not in-house counsel? 10 A I don't know if you'd classify them in-house 11 counsel. They have offices here in Florida and they also 12 have offices in Los Angeles. 13 Q Do you know who advised Mr. Raftery that part of 14 the reason of the surveilling Mr. Prince was to get evidence 15 to use to impeach him in this large civil case? 16 MR. WEINBERG: Objection as to the form of that 17 question, your Honor. It's leading. 18 And I'm also -- to the extent that what he's 19 asking for is communications -- specific 20 communications with private investigators that he 21 has worked with with regard to this case, as we did 22 before, during his deposition, we assert a work 23 product privilege to that. 24 THE COURT: Well, I think that particular 25 question, as I heard it, just called for a yes or no
42 1 answer. Either he knows or he doesn't know. 2 MR. WEINBERG: That's true, except the question 3 is loaded up with a lot of substance to it. So if 4 you -- you know, it was, do you know who told the 5 investigator such and such? So if you -- if you 6 answer the question, you are -- you are in essence 7 revealing substance, because of the form of the 8 question. 9 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I'm not -- I'm dealing 10 under the exception to privilege, under the crime 11 fraud exception. The tampering with a witness 12 statute is a felony. They engaged in a felonious 13 act. There's a crime fraud exception. There's no 14 privilege. 15 THE COURT: Has there been any criminal charge 16 brought? 17 MR. DANDAR: No. 18 THE COURT: Then this must be something -- you 19 think it's a felony, but apparently the State 20 Attorney's office in this circuit -- 21 MR. DANDAR: Well, no one's -- 22 THE COURT: -- does not. 23 MR. DANDAR: No one's filed a complaint yet 24 with the State Attorney. 25 THE COURT: But obviously, the State Attorney
43 1 was in charge of this trial. And the State Attorney 2 is charged with bringing charges if he feels that 3 there's any evidence a crime has been committed, 4 right? I mean, I can tell you that that's right. 5 In other words, if Mr. McCabe knew that a crime had 6 been committed, it would be his obligation to go 7 forward -- 8 MR. DANDAR: I don't think -- 9 THE COURT: -- and charge a crime. 10 MR. DANDAR: I don't think that's a predicate 11 in this case, to depend on a third party as to 12 whether or not a crime's been admitted, to invoke 13 the crime fraud exception to the privilege. 14 THE COURT: He's not going to remember what the 15 question is. 16 I'm going to overrule your objection as to 17 whether or not the answer is yes or no to the 18 question. Based on what I hear his answer is, 19 then -- I'll see what the next question is, and I 20 may sustain the objection. 21 MR. DANDAR: I'll actually rephrase it. 22 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q Are you aware that Mr. Raftery and Mr. Fabrizio 25 both testified in the criminal trial of Jesse Prince that
44 1 part of their objective and goal in surveilling Mr. Prince 2 was to gather in evidence to use to impeach him in the large 3 civil case? 4 A Well, here's what I know about that, 'cause I'm 5 not sure -- I don't remember exactly the testimony at the 6 trial. I did read the transcripts a long time ago. 7 Here's what I know about that, and I can tell you, 8 is that, certainly at the point where I learned that 9 Mr. Prince was engaged in use of illegal drugs and I knew at 10 the time that he was alleged -- going to be an alleged 11 expert witness on the religion of Scientology, I considered 12 it of significance that his use of illegal drugs or engaging 13 in any other activities which were threatening or harassing, 14 or physical violence, that went directly to his credibility 15 as an alleged expert witness, particularly from my personal 16 views as a Scientologist; that we are -- we abhor the use of 17 illegal drugs. It's a -- very -- close to the central 18 beliefs of the church that one doesn't take drugs that 19 affect one mentally, and probably one of the most drug-free 20 communities in the world. And I considered that significant 21 to his qualifications as an expert witness. 22 Now, I'm speaking to you both as a Scientologist 23 and also as a member of the legal affairs office, which is 24 handling this case. And I considered that that was 25 significant.
45 1 And I certainly communicated -- 2 Well, I won't go any further than that. 3 Q My question is, do you disagree with Mr. Raftery's 4 trial testimony on page 401, that part of his assignment, 5 his goal, was to gather evidence to use to impeach 6 Mr. Prince in this case? 7 A I'm not disputing the fact -- he may have had that 8 concept in mind. I'm not sure that anybody told him that. 9 But he has been involved in the affairs in Clearwater for 10 many years, as I have; practically since I -- the same time 11 I came here, he was also involved in matters related to the 12 case. So I'm sure that he would have understood the 13 significance of it. 14 Q Isn't it true that Mr. Fabrizio, the private 15 investigator hired by Mr. Moxon or Ms. Kobrin, that law 16 firm, also testified in the criminal case that part of the 17 goal of his investigation was to gather evidence to use to 18 impeach Mr. Prince in the Lisa McPherson case? 19 A Again, I don't know exactly what he testified to 20 during the trial, but I'm sure it's in the testimony. I 21 can't tell you for sure. 22 Q Well, he did testify -- 23 Assume that's true. Do you know where he got that 24 information from or that understanding? 25 A Again, I don't know for sure. I don't know
46 1 whether somebody told him that specifically, but it 2 certainly would be something -- 3 You're asking me to speculate now. I'm 4 speculating that it's something that would have made sense 5 that he would have had in mind, if he was familiar with the 6 facts. 7 Q And Mr. Fabrizio was retained by Mr. Moxon, 8 correct? 9 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Asked and 10 answered -- 11 THE COURT: Sustained. 12 MR. WEINBERG: -- several times. 13 BY MR. DANDAR: 14 Q Mr. Fabrizio reported to Mr. Moxon, correct? 15 A You asked me that in my deposition. I'm not sure 16 how often he reported to him. I -- 17 Q But he did report to him. 18 A I know about two meetings that I had with 19 Mr. Fabrizio and Mr. Moxon. 20 Q Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Moxon 21 concerning the subject matter of Mr. Gaston's personal 22 contact with Mr. Prince? 23 MR. WEINBERG: Objection. Privileged. 24 THE COURT: Sustained. 25
47 1 BY MR. DANDAR: 2 Q Is Mr. Moxon a Scientologist? 3 A Absolutely. 4 Q Mr. Moxon was a -- on staff of the Guardian's 5 Office at one time in his membership? 6 MR. WEINBERG: Objection, your Honor. This is 7 intended, I believe, to libel and slander Mr. Moxon. 8 THE COURT: Why? 'Cause he's a Scientologist? 9 MR. WEINBERG: No. 10 THE COURT: He's not on trial for -- 11 MR. WEINBERG: He's going to -- 12 THE COURT: -- that. 13 MR. WEINBERG: -- something that -- that he 14 alleges occurred 20 years ago with regard to the 15 guardians, and it's slanderous, and it shouldn't be 16 testified about. 17 THE COURT: Does it have something to do with 18 this motion? 19 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 BY MR. DANDAR: 22 Q He was a member of the Guardian's Office? 23 THE COURT: I don't even know what the 24 Guardian's Office is. 25 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, the Guardian's Office
48 1 was a branch of the church that was disbanded in 2 around 1980. I knew Mr. Moxon at the time because I 3 was in the church then, as well in fact I was in the 4 Guardian's Office at that time. 5 I don't know much more than that because I 6 never met him before that. 7 BY MR. DANDAR: 8 Q Mr. Moxon was an unindicted coconspirator in the 9 federal criminal prosecution of the Scientology operation 10 known as Snow White -- 11 THE COURT: You know -- 12 MR. WEINBERG: Objection -- 13 THE COURT: You know -- 14 BY MR. DANDAR: 15 Q -- (inaudible due to multiple speakers) -- 16 THE COURT: -- counsel -- 17 BY MR. DANDAR: 18 Q -- federal officers? 19 THE COURT: -- first of all, you've got that in 20 the materials that you presented to me. If -- I 21 thought that you were going to call this man to 22 present some evidence that I don't have already 23 before me, that you've given me. 24 MR. DANDAR: Well, the way -- and I didn't want 25 to do that. Because the way you phrased it was you
49 1 left it up to me to present evidence. And I'm 2 worried -- I'm worried that you may look at evidence 3 in the file and say, "Well, you know, I can't 4 consider that because it's hearsay or it's not 5 authenticated," or something like that. 6 THE COURT: If I -- 7 MR. DANDAR: If that doesn't happen, then I 8 don't have to call him. 9 THE COURT: If I were to require you all to -- 10 both sides -- to call evidence or call these people 11 as witnesses and not consider the sworn affidavits 12 and the depositions under oath and the trial 13 testimony and the -- all the stuff that you've given 14 me, we'd be here for days and days and days on every 15 motion. Therefore, I do consider -- 16 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 17 THE COURT: -- everything that you attach -- 18 MR. DANDAR: All right. 19 THE COURT: -- and everything the church 20 attaches to theirs. 21 And if somebody wants to take exception with it 22 and say to me, "You ought not to consider that 23 because it's a big lie and it's not a good 24 transcript or it's a false transcript," then let me 25 know. Otherwise, I just -- you know, I just think
50 1 all of this stuff is stuff I should consider or you 2 wouldn't give it to me. 3 MR. DANDAR: Okay. And just to make sure, 4 Judge, so I don't have to ask this question, are 5 you -- are you accepting the quote in the St. Pete 6 Times of Michael Rinder, which is Mr. Shaw's senior, 7 that the purpose of this investigation was to 8 disqualify Mr. Prince? 9 THE COURT: No. I would never accept something 10 I read in the newspaper, of either the 11 St. Petersburg Times or the Tampa Tribune, as true. 12 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 13 THE COURT: I have been quoted, myself, on 14 numerous occasions; sometimes correctly, sometimes 15 incorrectly. I would not want to presume, 16 especially if somebody were to challenge it as 17 correct -- 18 I -- I will accept the newspaper article for 19 what it is. In other words, it's a story based 20 on -- but I will not accept a quote in there as 21 necessarily accurate. 22 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 23 BY MR. DANDAR: 24 Q Mr. Shaw, was the purpose of following Mr. Prince 25 and having Mr. Gaston make contact to -- an attempt to get
51 1 evidence to disqualify him in the Lisa McPherson case? 2 A That's incorrect. 3 And also, you've mischaracterized my earlier 4 testimony. Because Mr. Gaston was approached by Mr. Prince. 5 Q Well, let's just talk about contacting, all right? 6 After you found out he made personal contact, the 7 purpose of that was to get evidence that disqualified him as 8 an expert in the Lisa McPherson case, wasn't it? 9 A No. The most -- 10 Q That's a yes or no. 11 A The main purpose I had in my mind was the security 12 of the church. That's it. 13 Q Well, then, why is it that all the private 14 investigators who testified at the trial said the second 15 goal was to disqualify him as an expert in the case? 16 A Well, I believe I've explained that, Mr. Dandar, 17 because I said that my priority purpose was security. 18 Certainly, I had in mind the fact that he had been 19 designated as a possible expert witness, and I considered 20 this went directly to his possible credibility. 21 Q And smoking marijuana with Mr. Prince, as 22 conducted and done by Mr. Gaston, that has nothing to do 23 with the security of the church, does it? 24 A I don't believe that you properly characterized 25 Mr. Gaston's testimony. I've read it, and he indicated that
52 1 he acted as an undercover police officer would and simulated 2 smoking marijuana -- he simulated smoking marijuana. 3 Q And that's why he pled the Fifth Amendment? Do 4 you know why he pled the Fifth Amendment? 5 A No, I don't. 6 THE COURT: You are so far afield -- 7 MR. DANDAR: I'm sorry. 8 THE COURT: -- Counselor. 9 You can go ahead. You've got five more 10 minutes. So you want to take it up any way you want 11 to, that's the end of your hour. 12 MR. DANDAR: I'll call Mr. Prince. 13 THE COURT: Okay. Well -- 14 MR. DANDAR: Well, actually -- 15 I'll call Mr. Prince. 16 THE COURT: Do you all want to ask him any 17 questions? 18 MR. WEINBERG: No, your Honor. 19 THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir. You 20 may step down. 21 (Witness sworn.) 22 MR. DANDAR: Judge, some of my time was used up 23 by their arguments. 24 THE COURT: All right. I won't cut you off. I 25 won't let you go way far afield.
53 1 MR. MOXON: Your Honor -- 2 THE COURT: Yes. 3 MR. MOXON: -- before Mr. Prince -- I do object 4 to Mr. Prince testifying, in that I took his 5 deposition, pursuant to your order -- and remember, 6 a few weeks ago, we had a motion as to taking 7 Mr. Prince's deposition, which the court granted. 8 In that deposition, he asserted the Fifth 9 Amendment as to many of the underlying facts giving 10 rise to Mr. Dandar's motion, here. He asserted the 11 Fifth Amendment as to his -- to his drug use, to his 12 prior history, to various acts of criminality, to 13 his buying drugs with money provided to him by 14 Mr. Dandar and Mr. Minton. 15 16 THE COURT: I think it just depends on what it 17 is he has to say. Perhaps he's changed his mind and 18 he wants to testify to those things. If he does and 19 you need some time before cross examining him, I'll 20 give it to you. 21 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I'm not going to have him 22 testify, because you have his affidavit. 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MR. DANDAR: You can sit down. I'm not going 25 to ask to call you.
54 1 THE COURT: Oh, you're not going to call him? 2 MR. DANDAR: No. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 MR. DANDAR: Because it's in his affidavit. 5 THE COURT: Okay. Which is -- where is his 6 affidavit? What attachment is it? 7 I know you all -- both of you referred to it. 8 Here it is. It's attachment -- 9 MR. MOXON: It's Exhibit 5. 10 THE COURT: -- 5. 11 Okay. 12 MR. DANDAR: I'd like to call Kendrick Moxon. 13 THE COURT: We're not going to go there. Just 14 aren't going to there or I'm going to let them call 15 you. It isn't going to happen. 16 MR. DANDAR: Okay. Well, let me just tell 17 you -- well, I'm glad, partially, because they have 18 a motion to compel me to -- for deposition. So -- 19 THE COURT: Well, we'll -- we'll see, and we'll 20 see whether or not you get to take his deposition. 21 But I don't need his testimony in this courtroom to 22 make a decision on this issue. 23 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 24 THE COURT: You know, quite frankly, this issue 25 is probably much more simple than these great big
55 1 books make it appear. 2 If in fact -- this is my opinion, sort of, 3 having read this -- if in fact Mr. Prince would ever 4 have qualified as an expert witness to begin with, 5 then there's perhaps an issue as to whether or not 6 your case has been prejudiced if he hadn't been 7 withdrawn by you prior to all of this. If in fact 8 he wasn't and wouldn't qualify as an expert witness, 9 then it doesn't affect your case. 10 He may have a lawsuit for damages and all of 11 that, but that has nothing to do with this case. 12 That's another lawsuit that he'll have to bring -- 13 MR. DANDAR: Well, then I'll call him so you 14 can know his qualifications as an expert witness. 15 THE COURT: Well, I think that -- beyond that, 16 I think the obvious problem that you would have 17 had -- 18 First of all, my recollection, Mr. Dandar, is 19 that you did withdraw him as a witness at some other 20 time. I may be wrong, but I thought you did. 21 MR. DANDAR: No. 22 THE COURT: Okay. The man is very biased. You 23 can't call, as an expert witness in a civil lawsuit, 24 somebody as biased as Mr. Prince is. 25 An expert is supposed to be someone -- as a
56 1 matter of fact, it always, you know -- you know this 2 is true -- one of the reasons why a lawyer tries to 3 ask an expert witness how much they've been paid is 4 to try to show that there is bias in that witness. 5 And you know, then the other side gets up and says, 6 "Well, you've testified for this side and that." 7 An expert called before the court is supposed 8 to be a witness who will call the shots right down 9 the middle, who isn't biased, really, for one side 10 or the other. He may be hired by one side, and he's 11 usually put on the stand by one side, if hired by 12 that side because he has favorable testimony to that 13 side. But he's not biased. He's not somebody 14 that's going to testify -- somebody that hates the 15 other side. That person is not going to be able to 16 be qualified as an expert witness in a lawsuit, 17 whether it be a criminal cases or whether it be a 18 civil case. 19 I think the problem that you have here is I 20 don't know that you could ever have overcome their 21 challenge to Mr. Prince as an expert witness. 22 That -- you know, if you want to go there at some 23 point in time, we can do that. But -- 24 I mean, what I have seen in reading these 25 things is that Mr. Prince avowedly was out to -- he
57 1 did not like the Scientologists, had very harsh 2 feelings against them; perhaps for what was done to 3 him in the past, perhaps not. But he's very biased. 4 He's -- he's not impartial. And I don't think you 5 could have qualified him as an expert. 6 MR. DANDAR: Tampering with a witness does not 7 depend on the status of a witness, if he's an expert 8 witness or what he is. 9 THE COURT: And -- 10 MR. DANDAR: It's not -- 11 THE COURT: And as I said, tampering with a 12 witness is a criminal case. That is not for you to 13 bring in this -- in this suit. That's for 14 Mr. McCabe to bring, okay? 15 If your lawsuit has been prejudiced, that's a 16 matter that we'll deal with in this lawsuit, and 17 that's what I want -- the only thing I'm going to 18 deal with in this lawsuit is whether you've been 19 prejudiced. 20 If you couldn't have called him as an expert 21 witness, then whatever in the world happened, you're 22 not prejudiced by it. If in fact you do decide that 23 you want to call him as an expert witness and I 24 think that they've done wrong, I can sanction them 25 for the purpose of this lawsuit and not allow them
58 1 to go anywhere with that. 2 MR. DANDAR: Well, I -- 3 THE COURT: But I don't see how you get past 4 the idea that this man is terribly biased, based on 5 the expressions that he had made -- and granted, 6 they're vulgar; and granted, that doesn't 7 necessarily carry the day. But his own statements 8 that are recorded, that are clear -- they can't be 9 denied -- show huge bias against the church. I 10 don't see how you would ever have been able to call 11 him as an expert witness. Which is probably, you 12 know, perhaps why -- 13 I don't know. I won't go there. 14 But that's what you're going to have to 15 convince me of in this motion, is that you have 16 somehow been prejudiced because of what has 17 happened, you are unable to call him as a witness, 18 and he is a better expert witness for you than 19 somebody else, now that you're going to have call 20 him. 21 MR. DANDAR: Well, I can do that. I can do 22 that now. 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MR. DANDAR: Because he -- because -- you know, 25 I spent a considerable amount of money for his
59 1 expert witness fees, in looking over the PC folders 2 of Lisa McPherson, which you or I could not possibly 3 interpret because they're in a different language, 4 and only someone with an expertise that he has can 5 go in and interpret that and look over that. Plus 6 all of the other things that were surrounding Lisa 7 McPherson at the time that she died. I can't 8 understand that, as a layperson. That's why we need 9 someone like Mr. Prince, who they used as an expert 10 witness when he was inside Scientology. 11 They don't mention that in their papers. They 12 put down he was a maintenance man. I mean, talking 13 about slanderous. 14 But he was their number two -- 15 THE COURT: And if they've slandered him, he 16 has a right to bring a lawsuit for that. 17 MR. DANDAR: I'm not sure you can do it in 18 the -- in the court papers that are filed. If so, 19 then I guess I have a lawsuit too, because I'm 20 slandered all the time. 21 But in that file there, they slandered him. 22 But he was their expert witness. He quit. 23 He's -- 24 At the time that Lisa died, they were still 25 consulting him as an expert witness; paying him
60 1 $3,000 in December of '95, the month that she died, 2 as an expert witness. For them now to come in and 3 say, just because he left the church -- and he was 4 out of the church at that time, too -- he's no 5 longer qualified as an expert witness, is an 6 estoppel. They can't do that. Can't have it both 7 ways. 8 THE COURT: I can certainly stop him. I'm not 9 estopped from saying that someone is so biased and 10 so prejudiced against a party that they cannot 11 testify as an independent expert witness in my 12 courtroom. And based on what I know about 13 Mr. Prince, from the affidavits that I've seen, the 14 things he's said, the things he's done, I don't 15 think I would ever have allowed you to qualify this 16 man as an expert witness in my courtroom. 17 MR. DANDAR: Okay. Let's assume that's the 18 case. That does not give them the right to commit a 19 felony for this court to get evidence by going into 20 his home with an undercover private investigator -- 21 THE COURT: I agree with you. 22 MR. DANDAR: And I think that's something -- 23 THE COURT: And that may, in fact, be a 24 criminal charge. And if it is, then the proper 25 party to bring a criminal charge is Bernie McCabe.
61 1 And you all can report that to Mr. McCabe, and 2 Mr. McCabe can investigate it and decide whether to 3 bring a lawsuit. 4 He may have been -- he may have civil damages. 5 And I'm speaking now about Mr. Prince. If he 6 believes he has civil damages based on the actions 7 of the church or Mr. Moxon or anyone else, he has 8 the same right anybody else does to bring a civil 9 suit. 10 I'm not dealing with that. I don't have that 11 civil suit. I have this civil suit. And in this 12 civil suit, before I can enter sanctions of the type 13 that you suggest, which is, in essence, to strike 14 their case -- 15 MR. DANDAR: Well, there's more than that. I 16 want -- I want to be reimbursed for all the money I 17 paid Mr. Prince for the six or seven months he was 18 consulting with me, which they now destroyed because 19 they had him arrested for marijuana possession. 20 THE COURT: Well, that's not really true, is 21 it? Because he has -- he has been used as an expert 22 by you for affidavits and other things that I 23 presume a court took a look at. 24 MR. DANDAR: Well, Judge Quesada discounted it 25 when he signed the order for summary judgment on
62 1 false imprisonment prepared by Mr. Moxon. 2 And no, I did not use it except -- 3 THE COURT: Well, you used it to get to the PC 4 folders, didn't you? That was not in front of me, 5 but my understanding is -- 6 MR. DANDAR: Well -- 7 THE COURT: -- the only way you ever got these 8 PC folders was to use him as an expert witness. 9 MR. DANDAR: To -- to tell the court what they 10 were and what they were about. 11 THE COURT: Right. 12 MR. DANDAR: Why they were relevant. 13 THE COURT: Sure. And you prevailed. 14 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 15 THE COURT: And consequently -- I mean, we 16 may -- we may go there, as to whether or not anybody 17 has discounted his affidavit and you have been 18 denied something because of this -- this activity of 19 theirs. But I don't see it. 20 In other words, what I see the issue is here, 21 that you have a right to be upset; Mr. Prince has a 22 right to be upset if this is true. And -- but it 23 doesn't bring you the sanctions that you seek in 24 this case. 25 Because as I said, in my -- my -- the problem I
63 1 have is I'm not sure you could have ever used him as 2 a witness in this case. 3 This man has made terrible statements and 4 allegations against the church. I'm not saying 5 they're true or they're not true. What they are is 6 extraordinarily biased. And therefore, that isn't 7 what I look for when I look for an expert in this 8 court. I look for people coming in who will call 9 the shots like they see them. Doesn't mean they're 10 not going to testify for one side or the other, but 11 they're not going to be so full of hate, as is 12 obvious to me that Mr. Prince is, when it comes to 13 Scientology. That type of a witness is very 14 difficult for anyone to qualify as an expert. 15 MR. DANDAR: I think it's going to be hard to 16 find a former Scientologist with the expertise that 17 the case may require who doesn't have bad feelings 18 against Scientology. 19 THE COURT: It's one thing to have bad 20 feelings. It's another thing to say -- make the 21 kind of statements that Mr. Prince has made. And I 22 know this because of what I've read in the 23 deposition. 24 I mean, I don't know if you have any other 25 witness --
64 1 Who is it you're trying to qualify as -- you 2 wanted to reinstate somebody as an expert witness -- 3 MR. DANDAR: I want to reinstate Hana 4 Whitfield. But I can tell the court right now that 5 when it gets out that the Church of Scientology got 6 away with this, with Mr. Prince, I'm not sure I can 7 get Hana Whitfield to stay in the case. 8 THE COURT: What do you mean, they got away 9 with it? I told you that if they've committed 10 criminal charges, the State Attorney needs to bring 11 criminal charges. I can't and you can't. If in 12 fact what they have done is libel, slander, caused 13 him to have a cause of action, which he may very 14 well have, he needs to bring a lawsuit, and he needs 15 to get a lawyer, because a lawyer can more properly 16 bring that. And he needs probably to get an 17 independent lawyer. So they haven't gotten away 18 with anything. 19 The question is, is in this case, whether I'm 20 going to impose sanctions against them in this case, 21 the sanctions of the type that you suggest, which is 22 to, in essence, strike their case and enter a 23 judgment for the plaintiff. You've got to, at the 24 very minimum, prove that you could ever have 25 qualified him as an expert.
65 1 I mean, this is a guy -- I don't want to go 2 into all the vulgar stuff he said and the types of 3 things he said, but -- I mean, they're of record. 4 And -- and of the supposed ecclesiastical head of 5 this church -- I mean, he said some outrageously 6 vulgar things. 7 Do you think that anybody would -- any judge 8 would allow that man to testify as an expert 9 witness, an unbiased expert? No. I don't think 10 they would have. 11 And -- 12 MR. DANDAR: What's missing -- 13 THE COURT: And consequently, no matter what 14 bad deeds Scientology may have done -- and I'm not 15 saying they did or they didn't. But if -- assume, 16 for the sake of this, they did -- you've still got 17 to show some prejudice. So your prejudice is, 18 Mr. Prince will no longer testify as an expert and 19 therefore your case has been harmed, right? 20 MR. DANDAR: Right. 21 THE COURT: And therefore, some sort of 22 punishment ought to be rendered on them. 23 Well, number one, I can do that in a couple of 24 ways. Number one, I could say, "They aren't going 25 to be able to use any of this. Go ahead and call
66 1 Mr. Prince as an expert. I will restrain them from 2 getting into any of this stuff. And therefore, 3 he'll be free of all of that in his testimony." 4 That's one sanction I could impose. And I would 5 certainly be happy to do that. 6 But -- but you still have to get by the hump 7 that he is -- is remotely fair. 8 Now, I will grant you that it may well be that 9 Hana Whitfield has bad feelings toward Scientology 10 too, and anybody who's ever left the church may well 11 have those feelings. It's one thing to have 12 feelings that says, you know, "I was part of this 13 organization. They did me wrong, whatever. But I 14 still can testify fairly as to what this means or 15 what that means. And if they ask me a question, 16 I'll be truthful in answering that question," and in 17 having a witness that has slandered -- if you want 18 to use that word -- has spoken so viciously and has 19 acted so viciously -- 20 I don't know that Hana Whitfield's been out 21 there carrying and saying the types of things that 22 Mr. Prince has. If so, you may have problems with 23 her as well. 24 So I don't think that you can get over that 25 hump. And that's going to be your problem with
67 1 imposing the type of sanctions that you're asking 2 for in this case. 3 But by no means am I suggesting that 4 Scientology, if they have done something wrong, are 5 getting away with anything. 6 MR. DANDAR: The uniqueness about Mr. Prince is 7 that he was their expert, you know, 10 years ago or 8 something. The uniqueness about Mr. Prince is he 9 was involved in an isolation watch similar to Lisa 10 McPherson, and has that experience. And then the 11 other uniqueness about Mr. Prince is that his -- his 12 testimony does not come out of his head; it comes 13 out of the paper of the books written by Scientology 14 that need interpretation. 15 THE COURT: Well, then, call him. In other 16 words, call him. And I will agree that if you 17 establish to my satisfaction that these -- these 18 things have happened, that I will not let them take 19 advantage of him in any way, shape or form, and you 20 can still call him as your expert, if you can 21 qualify him as an appropriate expert. 22 That's another sanction I can impose. 23 MR. DANDAR: Okay. All right. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25 MR. DANDAR: All right. The other part of the
68 1 request is an injunction against Scientology or any 2 of their attorneys or their private investigators 3 from conducting any further interference or 4 harassment of the plaintiff's witnesses. 5 I mean, if they walk out of the courtroom -- 6 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Where is that? 7 MR. DANDAR: Page 5 of 25 -- or 28. Page 5. 8 THE COURT: Well, number one, you are 9 incorrect. They are allowed to contact a witness. 10 There is no prohibition that I'm aware of in the 11 rules that say you can't contact a witness. A 12 lawyer -- I was always allowed to go out and contact 13 a witness for the other side. They didn't have to 14 talk to me if they didn't want to. But I was 15 certainly allowed do go out and conduct my own 16 investigation, which included talking to another 17 side's witness. 18 MR. DANDAR: Not -- not someone who's 19 designated as the plaintiff's expert. 20 THE COURT: Why not? 21 MR. DANDAR: There's a difference -- 22 THE COURT: I mean -- 23 MR. DANDAR: -- there. 24 THE COURT: -- I used to go talk to the -- to 25 Joan Wood, who was always a plaintiff's expert
69 1 for -- and if she -- sometimes she'd talk to me and 2 sometimes she wouldn't. I'd pick up the telephone 3 and say, "Joan, I'm looking at your autopsy, blah, 4 blah, blah." I mean, is there -- is there something 5 unethical about that? 6 MR. DANDAR: She's the medical examiner. She's 7 a separate official in Pinellas County. 8 THE COURT: But she's an expert. 9 MR. DANDAR: And she's an expert as a medical 10 examiner. That -- that is totally different. 11 If I hired a -- car accident case, I hired an 12 orthopedic surgeon to come in and testify on why the 13 man lost his leg, he's my expert witness. 14 THE COURT: Right. 15 MR. DANDAR: They can't go talk to him. 16 THE COURT: They can't pick up the phone -- 17 MR. DANDAR: No. 18 THE COURT: -- and call him and say, "I'm 19 looking at your report here and I have a little 20 question; would you answer such and such?" 21 MR. DANDAR: Absolutely not. 22 THE COURT: Show me where the rules say that. 23 MR. DANDAR: I will. I'll get that for you. I 24 don't have that here now. 25 THE COURT: Okay.
70 1 MR. DANDAR: I just -- 2 THE COURT: Do you all agree with that? 'Cause 3 I don't know. Is that true? 4 MR. WEINBERG: No. Actually -- 5 THE COURT: Maybe there's some different rules 6 in civil that I'm not aware of. 7 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor, we actually did a 8 lot of research on it. And it is not clear, and the 9 bar rules aren't clear; nothing is clear as it 10 relates to experts. 11 As it relates to other witnesses, obviously 12 anybody can contact any other witness. 13 THE COURT: Right. 14 MR. WEINBERG: And it depends on the state; it 15 depends on the rule. 16 And I don't think Mr. Dandar is going to find a 17 case that says, in Florida, that you can't do that. 18 I don't think it's going to happen. 19 MR. DANDAR: The only case -- 20 THE COURT: Well, I will certainly do this: I 21 will certainly enter an injunction, if this needs to 22 be entered, telling -- telling both sides that they 23 are to abide by the rules, whatever they are. But 24 we're going to have to establish whether that's the 25 rule.
71 1 As far as them talking to any witness, a fact 2 witness, I don't think you're going to be able to 3 find anything that says they can't do that. 4 MR. DANDAR: I don't -- I'm not talking about 5 that. 6 THE COURT: Okay. 7 MR. DANDAR: That's right. 8 THE COURT: And so what we'll have to do today 9 before we leave is to establish whether or not the 10 rules prohibit them from speaking to an expert 11 witness. And if the rules do, then I will certainly 12 tell them that they are prohibited from speaking to 13 an expert witness of yours without contacting you 14 first and vice-versa. 15 But I didn't realize those are the rules, to be 16 honest with you. 17 MR. DANDAR: I'll find it for you. 18 THE COURT: Okay. 19 MR. DANDAR: I don't know if I can find it 20 today, as we sit here. I don't have my book with 21 me. 22 MR. WEINBERG: Your Honor -- I mean, as far as 23 the case -- I mean, no one is -- is suggesting, I 24 think, that anyone, even Mr. Dandar, is 25 communicating with experts about the case. That
72 1 isn't something that anybody has done or is 2 contemplating. I mean -- 3 MR. DANDAR: I -- 4 MR. WEINBERG: -- no -- 5 THE COURT: Well -- 6 MR. WEINBERG: No one has done that. 7 THE COURT: You really don't want to go there. 8 Because I'm not real keen on this whole scenario -- 9 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 10 THE COURT: -- frankly. You -- just don't go 11 there. This is not a pretty sight, and it's not 12 something I'm real happy with having to deal with at 13 all. 14 MR. WEINBERG: Okay. 15 THE COURT: But as I said, the fact of the 16 matter remains that while Mr. Prince may have a 17 civil lawsuit, and while there may indeed be 18 criminal charges that need to be brought, that 19 neither of those issues are issues I can deal with. 20 And if you feel that you still want to call 21 Mr. Prince as a -- as a -- as an expert in some 22 subarea or something, I'll -- I'll make sure that 23 this area is just simply not delved into. It would 24 be irrelevant anyway. And I'm not going to let them 25 ask him, "Do you smoke dope?" I'm not. Unless in
73 1 fact they can establish what the rules would 2 require, which is that either he's used marijuana 3 right around the time of the testimony or whether 4 he's so addicted that he couldn't remember his right 5 from his left hand because of drug abuse, or whether 6 he was using drugs at about the time that he's 7 testifying about. If they can't establish those 8 things, they don't get to ask anything about drug 9 use, okay? 10 MR. DANDAR: Well, that's the -- that's the -- 11 see, that goes again to the whole crux of why they 12 did what they did. 'Cause they know that. So they 13 wanted a felony conviction. The man doesn't have a 14 felony conviction anywhere. 15 THE COURT: Well, the State didn't even file a 16 felony charge. So as far as I'm concerned, whatever 17 it was that he is purported to have done -- number 18 one, he wasn't convicted; and number two, he never 19 was charged with a felony. 20 MR. DANDAR: I think he was charged with 21 cultivation. And then after that, it was reduced. 22 THE COURT: By the police. 23 But the State -- 24 MR. DANDAR: No, by the prosecutor. By -- the 25 prosecutor reduced the charge.
74 1 THE COURT: Well, you were tried in -- he was 2 tried in misdemeanor court. If he were charged with 3 cultivation -- 4 MR. DANDAR: At that time -- 5 THE COURT: -- he'd have been charged in 6 circuit court. 7 MR. DANDAR: At that time it was -- had been 8 reduced by the prosecutor just to possession. 9 THE COURT: Okay. Well, trust me, if they 10 filed a felony, then they no-informationed it. 11 Because this isn't a situation where there was a 12 felony charge and he entered a plea to a misdemeanor 13 for a deal. He went to trial on the charge. 14 MR. DANDAR: Right. 15 THE COURT: That means the charge was a 16 misdemeanor. If there was a felony, it was either 17 no-informationed or dismissed. 18 MR. DANDAR: Could I have him explain it? I 19 wasn't his lawyer. 20 THE COURT: Sure. 21 MR. DANDAR: Could you explain what happened? 22 MR. PRINCE: Yes, sir. 23 I was charged with felony cultivation of 24 marijuana. 25 THE COURT: For the plant.
75 1 MR. PRINCE: Yes. 2 THE COURT: Okay. 3 MR. PRINCE: I was arrested, I was jailed, I 4 posted a thousand-dollar bond. I waived my right to 5 a speedy trial because of what had happened, the 6 allegations about this case. 7 After Judge Andrews, in the courtroom -- 8 THE COURT: Judge Andrews is a county judge. 9 He would not deal with a felony. 10 MR. PRINCE: Well, it was -- it was then 11 dropped. 12 I was offered a program of PTI, program of -- 13 pretrial intervention program, which I refused. And 14 there was some kind of deal that was made between 15 Mr. DeVlaming and the prosecutor that if -- because 16 I didn't accept the pretrial intervention, that if I 17 waived my right to a speedy trial, it would get 18 dropped to a misdemeanor. Then it would be heard as 19 a misdemeanor in Judge Andrews' court. 20 But the original charge, which is clear on the 21 record, was felony cultivation. 22 THE COURT: Okay. But when I say he wasn't 23 charged, what I -- what I guess I mean to say is, 24 what a policeman brings somebody in for doesn't 25 count. What counts is what the prosecutor
76 1 ultimately charged him with. 2 So if they ever charged him with a felony, they 3 had to either no-information it or dismiss it in 4 some fashion. So -- 5 But I wouldn't let him go there. In other 6 words, I don't think that's relevant. I would not 7 let them go there. If you decide to use him as an 8 expert witness, we're not going to get into that. 9 We don't need to resolve this. Because I'll just 10 tell them, "You aren't going there," because I just 11 don't think that would be appropriate. 12 But you are still going to have to overcome the 13 problem, to call him for anything, that I just told 14 you. I can't help the fact that this man has made 15 these types of statements that he has made about the 16 church and the religious leaders. They're very 17 hostile and very biased. And to be honest with you, 18 Counsel, I would be, frankly, quite surprised if you 19 would ever try and put him before a jury, knowing 20 that every single bit of that would be stuff that 21 they would absolutely have the right to cross 22 examine him on. And you know that. 23 MR. DANDAR: That's all out of context. You 24 don't know what was going on before. 25 THE COURT: Doesn't matter. They have a right
77 1 to explore any expert witness's bias. 2 So even if you jump over the hurdle and 3 convince me at some point in time that he is 4 unbiased enough where I should allow him to testify 5 as an expert, and I do, you understand that they 6 will be able to get into, on cross examination, 7 every bit of that stuff that shows his bias. 8 Because they would be allowed to, and there would be 9 nothing -- if I tried to stop it, I'd be committing 10 error. 11 MR. DANDAR: We would be able to show the full 12 tape -- 13 THE COURT: The full text -- 14 MR. DANDAR: -- of the whole thing. 15 THE COURT: -- absolutely. 16 But in the meanwhile, your -- your expert isn't 17 going appear as a pretty witness -- 18 MR. DANDAR: Right. 19 THE COURT: -- to a jury. Not in Pinellas 20 County. A very conservative community. 21 MR. DANDAR: But Judge, my -- my request on 22 paragraph F on page 5 requests the injunction to 23 prohibit them from further harassing Mr. Prince in 24 any way, and any other expert witness that the 25 plaintiff has.
78 1 THE COURT: You have a problem with that? 2 MR. MOXON: Yes, your Honor. I have a lot I 3 could say to refute what Mr. Dandar has asserted 4 here today. A lot is not accurate. I could tell 5 you this: There was never any communication with 6 Mr. Prince with respect to any issue, any 7 conceivable issue in this case, whether it was 8 direct or indirect or anything else. And -- 9 THE COURT: Okay. But -- 10 MR. MOXON: -- we have -- 11 But I think what wouldn't be a bad idea is for 12 both sides to say, "Fine. We won't communicate with 13 any expert on any side, even for purpose of 14 scheduling. We'll do that through the counsel, and 15 we'll do it that way." There will be no direct or 16 indirect communication. 17 THE COURT: Well, what he has asked -- and it 18 seems like a reasonable request to me -- is that 19 you, involved in the middle of this lawsuit, agree 20 not to harass any of his witnesses. 21 MR. MOXON: Well, the only trouble I have with 22 that, your Honor, is that his witnesses haven't been 23 harassed. I mean, I could put on lots of evidence, 24 for example -- 25 THE COURT: Well, if they haven't been, you
79 1 have nothing to worry about. 2 MR. MOXON: Well, let -- let me just give you a 3 full response. 4 THE COURT: Okay. 5 MR. MOXON: Is that I have lots and lots of 6 evidence that Mr. Dandar's side has been harassing 7 and intimidating our witnesses. Indeed, that's the 8 counterclaim. 9 THE COURT: Well, then why don't we enter an 10 order preventing both sides from harassing any of 11 the witnesses until this is over? 12 MR. DANDAR: Because I -- the estate has not 13 engaged in this activity. 14 MR. MOXON: Well -- 15 MR. DANDAR: They engaged in this activity. It 16 should be an injunction against them. Because the 17 estate should not -- it -- be enjoined from doing 18 something it never participated in. 19 It's never done it. We've never hired private 20 investigators to follow anybody, harass any of their 21 witnesses that they accuse us in this frivolous 22 counterclaim of outrageous allegations -- we've 23 never done that. 24 THE COURT: I -- I think the problem I have, 25 Counsel, with entering it against one side and not
80 1 the other, is I don't know -- I don't know, 2 frankly -- 3 Where -- where is it that -- 4 You want to strike all the defense pleadings. 5 Well, that's far too severe. Even if he was a 6 perfectly pure expert witness -- you know how the 7 courts feel about striking somebody out of court. 8 So that would be the same as an entry of default. 9 Cost expended by the plaintiff to Mr. Prince 10 for his expert services to date. That's touchy, 11 because some of his expert services have obviously 12 been used by the plaintiff to their benefit to 13 prevail on certain things. So we'll have to reserve 14 ruling on that. 15 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 16 THE COURT: Punitive damages. That might be 17 appropriate if he brings a civil lawsuit, and he'll 18 have to address that in a civil lawsuit. 19 Attorneys' fees -- again, I'm going to reserve 20 on that, because we'll have to wait and see whether 21 or not there's any entitlement; and if so, what, on 22 that. 23 And isn't that what we've done in all that 24 stuff, sort of? 25 And permanent injunction preventing anyone --
81 1 isn't that you? Oh. Acting on behalf of any entity 2 of Scientology from conducting any type of 3 surveillance, including contacting, following, 4 bugging, burglary, or gathering any information in 5 any manner of anyone involved in this matter aligned 6 in any way -- 7 Awfully -- 8 MR. DANDAR: Verbose. 9 THE COURT: Verbose. 10 Again, that's too broad. Because they do have 11 the ability to contact witnesses. I don't think I 12 can prohibit them from surveilling somebody. I 13 think they have a right to surveil witnesses under 14 certain circumstances. I'd have to know what they 15 were. But you know, surveillance tapes are taken -- 16 MR. DANDAR: Yeah. 17 THE COURT: -- in civil cases. 18 MR. DANDAR: They can surveil people under the 19 law. 20 They're not allowed to do what has happened to 21 Mr. Prince. It's -- it is not permitted under any 22 circumstance. And that's what I'm asking for, to 23 enjoin them from continuing to make contact with any 24 expert witness designated by the plaintiff. 25 THE COURT: Okay. Well --
82 1 MR. MOXON: Your Honor -- 2 THE COURT: We're going -- I'll tell you what 3 we're going to do here now. 4 They haven't had a chance to even present their 5 side, so the -- before I enjoin them from doing 6 anything, I'd better hear from them. So you've had 7 your say and -- 8 But -- but you understand where I'm coming 9 from. Mr. Prince has got some problems being able 10 to qualify as an expert witness. 11 If you decide you want to use him, I will tell 12 you right now, and I will tell you all right now, 13 your chances of using any of this stuff for 14 impeachment, for cross examination, in any way, 15 shape or form, is -- is improbable. Now, you would 16 have to really persuade me of something that I don't 17 think you can. And the only thing I can think of is 18 that if Mr. Prince was high as a kite when he was 19 testifying -- 20 MR. MOXON: Mm-hmm. 21 THE COURT: -- and you could establish that, or 22 if you could establish that his continued drug use 23 was so intense that his testimony -- well, he was 24 unable to tell what he was testifying about. So you 25 know, you're not apt to be able to use any of that
83 1 testimony. 2 MR. DANDAR: Are -- are you ruling that only if 3 he was an expert witness could there be a 4 sanctionable tampering with a witness? 5 THE COURT: No. But I'm ruling based on the 6 confines of your motion, which was that he was an 7 expert witness, correct? 8 MR. DANDAR: Well, that's what -- 9 Yes. 10 THE COURT: Right. 11 But now I think they want to have an 12 opportunity to present their side of it, which I 13 will permit them to do. 14 MR. DANDAR: Is there -- is there reason to 15 present their side -- 16 Oh, on the injunction part. 17 THE COURT: Just on the injunction part. 18 MR. DANDAR: All right. 19 THE COURT: I mean, I think you've already 20 prevailed on the other part. 21 (A discussion was held off the record.) 22 THE COURT: Court reporter needs to change 23 paper; it's a good time to take a break. We'll be 24 in recess for 15 minutes. 25 Limit yourself to the injunction.
84 1 (A recess was taken.) 2 THE COURT: Crazy, but -- and as you well know, 3 I'm probably well- -- better known as a criminal 4 judge than a civil judge. Therefore, I'm much more 5 familiar with the Criminal Rules of Procedure. 6 Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, 3.220, 7 sub I, which is what I was referring to, it says, 8 "Except as is otherwise provided, as to matters not 9 subject to disclosure or restricted by protective 10 order, neither the counsel for the parties nor other 11 prosecution or defense personnel shall advise 12 persons having relevant, material information, 13 except the defendant, to refrain from discussing the 14 case with opposing counsel or showing opposing 15 counsel any relevant material; nor shall they 16 otherwise impede opposing counsel's investigation of 17 the case." 18 So having been a criminal lawyer and -- and 19 more of a criminal judge, that was really grounds 20 for sanctions if a lawyer even suggested to somebody 21 that they not talk to opposing counsel. 22 Now, they had their ways, and a lot of times, 23 when you'd go and try and talk to somebody, they 24 wouldn't. But you certainly had the right to go out 25 and do that.
85 1 So perhaps the civil rules are different. But 2 that's what I was referring to. 3 MR. DANDAR: Okay. Could I just clarify one 4 thing, Judge -- 5 THE COURT: Yes. 6 MR. DANDAR: -- so I can understand, before you 7 get to the junction part? 8 On the tampering-with-witness statute, of 9 course, there's no -- there's no prerequisite that 10 it only concerns expert witnesses. It concerns any 11 witness. And the two predicates to find a violation 12 of that statute is, any conduct which is indirect or 13 direct, which is misleading, for the purpose of 14 getting a witness to withhold testimony. 15 Now, Mr. Prince refuses to testify for me, 16 which he has informed me which is part of my motion, 17 whether he's a fact witness or an expert witness. 18 That statute has been violated. That is a fraud 19 upon this court. That invades the whole judicial 20 process if you permit a defendant to interfere with 21 a party's designated witness, whether it's a fact or 22 an expert witness, by trying to engage in criminal 23 conduct to get evidence to impeach him at trial. 24 That's conduct that I'm asking the court to clarify 25 for me that -- and I think you already said it
86 1 was -- you didn't like what happened. 2 But why doesn't that invoke the inherent power 3 of the court to enter appropriate sanctions, 4 whatever those sanctions may be? It may not be as 5 severe as you said, striking pleadings, a default. 6 But some sanctions, I believe, are in order, so this 7 conduct doesn't happen again. And that's why I'm 8 asking for the injunction. 9 Because I have Hana Whitfield, who's already 10 told me because of what happened to Jesse Prince, 11 now she's extremely reticent to get involved in this 12 case. She's filed two affidavits on the PC folders 13 of Lisa McPherson, which were considered, I believe, 14 by the court in opposition to the defendant's motion 15 for summary judgment, on outrageous conduct. 16 But that's why we're asking for that 17 injunction. 18 But I just wanted you to clarify for me -- 19 you're not saying there's no improper behavior by 20 Mr. Moxon or Mr. Shaw in reference to what they did 21 with Mr. Prince; you're concerned with the fact 22 that -- whether or not the plaintiff will be 23 prejudiced because you don't know if Mr. Prince will 24 qualify as an expert witness. 25 I'm telling you that 914.22 has nothing to do
87 1 with whether or not a party is prejudiced. There's 2 two -- if you do something to get some witness to 3 withhold testimony, that's a felony, period. It 4 doesn't matter if he's a fact or an expert witness. 5 THE COURT: And so we've already established 6 that, that there may be a criminal -- there may be 7 criminal charges that ought to be filed. But what 8 would I do about that? 9 MR. DANDAR: Well, I -- what I'm telling you is 10 they used your court -- they came into your 11 courtroom and they committed these acts to impeach 12 him in your courtroom. And you, under the case law, 13 have the inherent power, no matter what type of 14 improper conduct it is, to sanction. I mean, 15 Mr. Moxon is only here at the pleasure of the court, 16 since he's not a member of the Florida Bar. 17 Testimony establishes that he's part of this 18 engaging in this conduct, which is a felony. And 19 Mr. Shaw represents the corporate defendant. He's 20 engaged in this conduct. And they not only 21 encouraged it after they found out that it was done, 22 they encouraged it to continue on. And they all 23 come out in the newspaper and say, "Yeah, we did 24 this to impeach him, to show how bad he is." 25 That's not the way the judicial system runs,
88 1 and that's a violation of the inherent power of this 2 court. It invades our judicial system. 3 And I have case law -- 4 THE COURT: There's no question about that. 5 By the way, though, I haven't heard any 6 testimony -- and maybe it's in the affidavit. I'm 7 not sure I've read the whole affidavit -- where 8 Mr. Prince says he won't testify. 9 MR. DANDAR: It is. 10 THE COURT: Okay. 11 MR. DANDAR: It's our last paragraph, I 12 believe. 13 And he's still in the courtroom, if you want 14 him to testify on that. 15 THE COURT: Where is it again that you say he 16 indicates in here he won't testify? 17 MR. DANDAR: Well, Exhibit Number 5 -- 18 THE COURT: Right. 19 MR. DANDAR: -- on paragraph 23, where he says 20 that he advised me that he must withdraw as an 21 expert for the estate because of the fear he has 22 concerning his fiance and her two children, minor 23 children. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25 MR. DANDAR: And that's why -- I just want the
89 1 court to clarify that it doesn't matter if the 2 person's a fact witness or an expert witness. This 3 is improper conduct. That's why we're seeking 4 sanctions. We'll leave it up to you what those 5 sanctions are. But we hope that part of those 6 sanctions would be an injunction, permanent 7 injunction against Scientology to stay away from any 8 of the plaintiff's designated witnesses, 9 specifically Hana Whitfield and Jerry Whitfield, who 10 I just received an affidavit this morning, who they 11 apparent sent someone down there to talk to them in 12 August of 2001, knowing that we filed the -- her 13 affidavit in this case. 14 I mean, they're again contacting someone whose 15 affidavit we filed as an expert witness in this 16 case, making these salacious allegations now against 17 Hana Whitfield. That's why we're asking for this 18 injunction. 19 THE COURT: I don't know what you're talking 20 about, salacious allegations against Hana Whitfield. 21 I haven't heard them say anything about Hana 22 Whitfield. I thought we were talking about Jesse 23 Prince. 24 MR. DANDAR: Well, I have this affidavit. They 25 just signed, notarized it this morning, handed it to
90 1 me. 2 MR. HERTZBERG: I'm going to argue the Hana 3 Whitfield matter. 4 I'd like to -- 5 THE COURT: Let counsel -- 6 MR. HERTZBERG: I thought that was a separate 7 argument. 8 THE COURT: It is. 9 MR. DANDAR: But it's the reason why we want an 10 injunction as part of the sanctions, to prevent them 11 from contacting witnesses they know are designated 12 by the estate as the estate's witness. 13 THE COURT: Let counsel see a copy of the 14 affidavit. 15 MR. MOXON: See, this is a perfect example, 16 your Honor, of what Mr. Dandar is doing. There's an 17 affidavit from a woman who said that her family was 18 encouraged and solicited by Hana Whitfield to pay 19 Hana Whitfield $5,000 to convince her to leave the 20 church. Mr. Hertzberg will deal with this at some 21 length. 22 Hana Whitfield is somebody who for years -- 23 THE COURT: I don't want to hear about Hana 24 Whitfield. I have enough trouble dealing with Jesse 25 Prince.
91 1 Give him a copy of that affidavit. 2 MR. DANDAR: They handed that to me. 3 MR. MOXON: Yeah. We've got it. 4 MR. HERTZBERG: It helps us more than 5 Mr. Dandar could imagine. We'll address it later. 6 THE COURT: Let's address Hana Whitfield later. 7 MR. DANDAR: Okay. So -- 8 THE COURT: I will assume, Mr. Moxon, unless 9 you call Mr. Prince to the stand and he says 10 otherwise, that he will not testify because of the 11 actions conducted during this whole episode 12 involving this marijuana business. 13 MR. MOXON: Well, your Honor, I -- in fact, I 14 have provided a good bit of testimony from other 15 associates of Mr. Prince, saying that that's not the 16 reason why he's not testifying. 17 He's not testifying, he told the other 18 vice-president of LMT, because -- 19 THE COURT: Where is that? 20 MR. MOXON: That's at -- 21 THE COURT: I told you I didn't read all of 22 your attachments. 23 MR. MOXON: It's -- Exhibit 46 is Ms. Summers' 24 deposition. 25 Ms. Summers is a person who is identified at
92 1 LMT as their other vice-president. They have two 2 vice-presidents, one of them is Mr. Prince, the 3 other one is Ms. Summers. 4 And in Ms. Summers' deposition, she refuted the 5 assertion that he was leaving the case because of 6 impeachment over his drug arrest. And she said that 7 Prince told her very, very recently that he was 8 getting out of the case. And he didn't mention that 9 he was leaving because he was allegedly set up by 10 drugs. That's at page 91 of Exhibit 46. That's her 11 sworn testimony. 12 And Mr. Dandar, of course, was there. He 13 didn't mention Ms. Summers' deposition to you, when 14 she refuted the -- the assertions of Mr. Prince. 15 And then, at page 90, she also specifically 16 says that Prince told her he was pulling out 17 because, quote, the death case and LMT were becoming 18 all entwined. Part of it, he felt, was because he 19 was doing both things, and he thought -- this is 20 what I understood -- was to leave the death case so 21 he could continue, you know, with the LMT, and that 22 he would continue with that work. 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MR. MOXON: Now, there's -- obviously, there's 25 a lot of money problems with LMT. You've heard some
93 1 of the testimony concerning the transfers from 2 Europe and the money going to Mr. Minton, and that 3 Mr. Minton has pled the Fifth as to the payments to 4 Mr. Prince. He's pled the Fifth as to his 5 coordination of Mr. Dandar for improper payments to 6 Mr. Prince; Ms. -- Stacy Brooks, who's the president 7 of LMT, also pled the Fifth as to these payments and 8 the money problems. 9 And LMT, apparently, is now gone. I don't know 10 if you're -- if the court saw the article in the 11 St. Petersburg Times a couple days ago -- 12 THE COURT: I did. 13 MR. MOXON: -- which said they all packed up. 14 In fact, Ms. Brooks has left. She sold her 15 house and left. The two other employees have moved 16 out and left. There's -- nobody's been there. 17 Mr. Prince, apparently, is the sole person that's 18 left allegedly representing LMT, but the owner, 19 Mr. Minton, has said, "We're gone. We're out of 20 here." 21 So what's really happened here, is that there's 22 an excuse; that Mr. Minton has been hiring these 23 people for a long time, really, to harass the 24 church. And that is that -- that's the central 25 allegation in our counterclaim, is that a man with
94 1 unlimited funds, unlimited funds to pay Mr. Dandar, 2 unlimited funds to pay his witnesses, have paid them 3 a great deal of money, and imports people down here 4 to Clearwater to harass church members, including 5 witnesses in this case. 6 I've got a few video clips, for example, that 7 you've never seen -- 8 THE COURT: All right. 9 MR. MOXON: -- of Mr. -- Mr. Prince outside, 10 attempting to talk to witnesses. One of the -- 11 In fact, one of our declarants, Paul 12 Kellerhals -- 13 THE COURT: I'm sorry? One of who? 14 MR. MOXON: One of our witnesses, Paul 15 Kellerhals, who's an eyewitness to Lisa McPherson's 16 matter; he was the head of the team that was helping 17 to watch Ms. McPherson during the time that she was 18 staying at the church. 19 THE COURT: And he's talking to him? 20 MR. MOXON: Yeah. He's talking to him. He's 21 harassing him. In fact, Mr. Dandar's there with one 22 of these demonstrations with Mr. Prince at one 23 point. 24 But the central point here is there's a great 25 deal of evidence, and it is the central issue of our
95 1 counterclaim, that they've been hiring people, 2 including Mr. Prince, to come to Clearwater 3 specifically to harass and intimidate witness; 4 standing outside the dining hall, yelling at them 5 telling them come to LMT. "Leave the church. Come 6 to us. We'll protect you. We'll pay you. 7 We'll --" 8 And this is the same time, by the way, that 9 he's allegedly working for Mr. Dandar, is -- 10 Mr. Prince is out doing all these things, 11 threatening people; threatening David Miscavige, who 12 he's identified on his witness list; threatening 13 Mike Rinder, who he's calling on Mr. Dandar's 14 witness list. Indeed, Mr. Prince has even 15 threatened me, threatened Mr. Lieberman; he's -- 16 THE COURT: Some of those affidavits are in 17 your -- 18 MR. MOXON: Yes, they are. 19 And I didn't want to repeat all this, but 20 Mr. Dandar stood up again and was telling the court 21 these other issues. They're just not accurate. 22 I mean, I could give you hours -- walk through 23 each of these exhibits and give you other 24 information and other video clips to tell you what 25 was really happening here with respect to
96 1 Mr. Prince. 2 And he's really one off, in terms of an alleged 3 expert. I obviously agree with the court, that he 4 could never qualify as an expert, and indeed he 5 never was an expert. He was never, ever designated 6 as an expert by the church. That's just wrong. He 7 once testified in a copyright infringement case some 8 years ago, as a fact witness for the church. This 9 was back in, I think, 1986. But he was never 10 designated as an expert. It's just not true. 11 In any event, as you've heard, we had some 12 very, very serious security concerns which give rise 13 to the protection of our own witnesses. And we'll 14 address that. And we've been taking discovery on 15 it. And at some point, as we've sought in our 16 counterclaim, we will be seeking an injunction with 17 respect to -- with respect to some of these matters. 18 But as to LMT, they've been the people who have 19 been trying to actually intimidate and talk to the 20 church witnesses. And so if there is any 21 injunction, if there is one at all, obviously, it's 22 got to be mutual. I don't think there is one, 23 because the rules specifically prescribes what can 24 and can't be done. There's rules of law with 25 respect to communication of witnesses, and there's
97 1 rules with respect to counsel, concerning 2 communication of witnesses. You're not supposed to 3 communicate with them that are matters at issue in 4 the case or for which they're being represented. 5 And that never happened to Mr. Prince. And 6 there's not a shred of evidence in this record that 7 Mr. Prince was ever communicated with concerning any 8 matter at issue in this case. 9 But you might be interested to know that, very 10 recently, our -- our primary witness, Dr. Baden, 11 who's our -- our forensic expert and our -- kind of 12 our coordinating forensic expert, was contacted by 13 Mr. Garko? 14 THE COURT: By whom? 15 MR. MOXON: Mr. Garko, this gentleman who's 16 comes to every hearing with Mr. Dandar. 17 THE COURT: Who is Mr. Garko? What does he do? 18 MR. MOXON: He's some sort of a -- 19 THE COURT: Paralegal? 20 MR. MOXON: I don't know. We've never 21 gotten -- 22 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, who is this man? 23 MR. DANDAR: Dr. Michael Garko is a jury trial 24 consultant for me. 25 THE COURT: Oh, okay.
98 1 MR. MOXON: And Mr. Dandar has even hired, or 2 attempted to hire, our expert economic consultant 3 Joyce Eastridge. 4 And so obviously, from time to time, there are 5 communications. If Mr. Dandar is asking that no 6 communication be to any expert, well, he should file 7 this motion against himself. Why is he contacting 8 our expert, Joyce Eastridge? You know, it shouldn't 9 happen that way. 10 I think that in terms of a -- an injunction -- 11 THE COURT: I don't get it. Why are the civil 12 rules so different from the criminal rules? What's 13 wrong with your picking up the phone and calling an 14 expert and saying, "When would you like me to 15 schedule your deposition?" 16 MR. MOXON: I never thought it was a problem. 17 In fact, I contacted one of Mr. Dandar's experts for 18 that exact purpose. I called and left a message and 19 said, "When can we schedule a deposition?" And 20 Mr. Dandar filed a motion to recuse me, to 21 disqualify me, before Judge Moody. And Judge Moody 22 told him that was silly. 23 But that has happened time and again. 24 And as you heard from Mr. Dandar -- and he 25 makes is a slur against me, that I'm a
99 1 Scientologist. Of course. Right. I'm very proud 2 to be a Scientologist. And I came into this case 3 because, in 1998 and 1999, when I was happily 4 practicing law in California, this case was a mess, 5 and there were horrible inflammatory allegations 6 about the Scientology religion that were being made, 7 and it was very clear that he was bringing issues 8 into the case about the Scientology religion and 9 trying to try the Scientology religion. 10 I came out here in January of 2000 solely 11 because I'm an experienced attorney and the only one 12 who was an actual Scientologist, besides my partner, 13 who has a lot of experience in dealing with these 14 issues and can actually explain, if necessary, to 15 the court what actual Scientology practice is. It's 16 nothing -- nothing -- compared to what Mr. Dandar 17 says. And it's just -- the assault on the church 18 that's happened in this case, before your Honor was 19 involved in it, was pretty horrifying. And that's 20 why I'm here. And Mr. Dandar has been attacking me 21 constantly in motion after motion, to try to get me 22 somehow removed or -- or punished. 23 But to go back to Mr. Prince very briefly, 24 because I'm not going to go into all this 25 testimony -- I would love to. I would like to
100 1 refute the bald allegations that he's made. I'm not 2 going to do it unless the court expresses an 3 interest in it. 4 THE COURT: Well, I do want to know if I am 5 correct in that. I don't -- I remember seeing it 6 briefly in your motion, but is there not -- I did go 7 back and look at "expert witness" under the civil 8 rules, and it doesn't seem to suggest what I 9 suggested; that there's some bare threshold that has 10 to be met that says that somebody's so biased it 11 would be inappropriate to allow them to testify as 12 an expert. I didn't see that. 13 Is there some case law to that effect? 14 MR. MOXON: Yes. In the motion that I filed 15 last week, which was the motion to strike Jesse 16 Prince because Mr. Dandar claimed he withdrew him -- 17 but he's done this frequently and he keeps reneging 18 on it. It's probably that huge thing over there. 19 I've got another one I can -- I can give the 20 court -- 21 THE COURT: This is it. 22 MR. MOXON: All right. You see, this is one of 23 our other issues as to why Jesse Prince actually is 24 not here. 25 Back in May and June, we filed this big motion
101 1 before Judge Quesada, to strike Jesse Prince as a 2 witness altogether, for all these myriad reasons, 3 including that he's utterly disqualified; that he's 4 not neutral; that he was under a prior contractual 5 agreement not to do this; the threats that he's 6 made, and a number of legal reasons. And we 7 submitted in there substantial case law indicating 8 why Jesse Prince could never ever, ever testify as a 9 witness, including -- 10 THE COURT: An expert witness. 11 MR. MOXON: Yes. As an expert witness. 12 Including his neutrality issue. 13 Well, I submit that the real reason was -- 14 THE COURT: I guess maybe -- I don't know. 15 I've just never seen anybody called as an expert -- 16 somebody that anybody call as an expert, somebody 17 that would be so prone to cross examination on bias 18 as would, I know -- just from what I know of 19 Mr. Prince -- maybe that's it. 20 Because experts -- generally, a lawyer wants an 21 expert to come across as an expert; as somebody 22 who's going to give reasonably fair, impartial 23 testimony. And you know, granted, experts are 24 impeached, and they're impeached regularly. They're 25 shown to be biased regularly. But not to the extent
102 1 that I would presume that Mr. Prince could have been 2 shown to be biased. 3 And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with 4 that. I'm just saying he's allowed to have his 5 opinions. But he would have been -- if he did 6 qualify to testify, he would have been a real risk, 7 it would seem to me, to put him on the stand in 8 front of a jury. 9 MR. MOXON: Well, that's -- that's very 10 logical. And I'm sure, if -- to ask that question 11 in that way, he answers it; is that no -- no 12 attorney who -- you know, who is looking -- looking 13 analytically at how a jury would perceive this 14 witness, would ever put on somebody like Mr. Prince. 15 And that's why it would be unusual. 16 Obviously, an attorney normally -- 17 THE COURT: But does the law say that if 18 somebody could show that somebody was so unneutral 19 that they are not qualified? 20 MR. MOXON: Sure it does. Yeah. 21 THE COURT: Could you give me that case? 22 MR. MOXON: Yeah. 23 THE COURT: At least cite it to me so I could 24 read it. 25 MR. MOXON: It's -- what we've attached here is
103 1 an appendix. The big tab says "appendix"? 2 THE COURT: Yes. 3 MR. MOXON: That was the motion we filed before 4 Judge Quesada, which he said would have to be taken 5 up with you. 6 And we -- starting at page 24, we have a legal 7 discussion about a good bit of this. 8 THE COURT: Okay. Let me suggest that the way 9 that you -- that I would like for you to proceed is 10 this: 11 If you wish to refute the assertions about 12 the -- that have been made here, you may do that. 13 If -- 14 But it would seem to me that one of the things 15 that would be helpful to me in deciding what 16 sanctions, if sanctions are appropriate -- might be 17 appropriate -- would be whether or not Mr. Prince 18 could have qualified as an expert in the first 19 instance. Because if he couldn't have, that would 20 seem to me to make a great difference in all of the 21 areas of sanctions that might could be imposed. 22 So you want to address your motion to exclude 23 him as a witness, or do you want to address first of 24 all that you've done nothing wrong? 25 MR. MOXON: I want to address first that I've
104 1 done nothing wrong -- 2 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. 3 MR. MOXON: -- and that no one's done anything 4 wrong. 5 THE COURT: Go ahead. 6 MR. MOXON: I submitted this extensive brief as 7 to why he would never qualify as a witness, and I've 8 made some reference to it and didn't repeat it in 9 our papers. 10 However, as we've indicated, we have done 11 nothing wrong. 12 THE COURT: Okay. You can go there if you 13 like. 14 MR. MOXON: All right. 15 First I guess you need to focus on what it is 16 that Mr. -- Mr. Dandar is alleging was done wrong. 17 And I guess he's saying, really, in sum -- if you 18 take away all the chaff, what he's saying was done 19 wrong is somebody, quote, set up Mr. Prince. If 20 you -- 21 Do you agree that that -- that's kind of the 22 gist of his claim? 23 24 THE COURT: Well, I think it's a little more 25 than that. I think the gist of it is that you hired
105 1 somebody to set him up; that you in essence 2 entrapped him; you did it knowingly; and you did it 3 with a purpose in mind. And the purpose in mind was 4 to see to it that he couldn't either testify or that 5 he would be impeached by a felony conviction. I 6 think that's the gist of it. 7 MR. MOXON: Well, there's been no evidence to 8 any of those points. There's been -- the only 9 evidence is that Barry Gaston was a private 10 investigator who was hired by a private investigator 11 that we retained for security purposes. That's the 12 only testimony. 13 THE COURT: What about the trial testimony? 14 MR. MOXON: The trial testimony is -- indicates 15 that Barry Gaston didn't even know who the client 16 was when he first communicated with Jesse Prince. 17 He wasn't even told who the client was. 18 He was supposed to do what every private 19 investigator does, which is to -- just to observe 20 this guy, observe him and see what his habits and 21 routines are. He was sent to an area in the 22 Greenwood area, a high-drug, high-crime area, where 23 Jesse Prince hangs out. And he -- he went there a 24 number of times just to see him, to observe him. 25 And Jesse Prince approached him in this bar.
106 1 And this investigator saw Prince using drugs. 2 He saw him using drugs outside; he saw what he 3 thought was Prince using cocaine; he saw Prince's 4 girlfriend, what he believed using crack. And he 5 was instructed just as Mr. Shaw indicated, to go to 6 the police. At that point he was sent to the 7 police. 8 And we said, "Fine. The police want to make 9 him a confidential informant, we've got no problem 10 with that whatsoever. He's committed these crimes. 11 We know that he's been lying in the cases about us. 12 We know that he's committed criminal acts. We know 13 he's got a huge drug history; very, very extensive 14 drug history. We know he's been paid to come here 15 and harass people. And if the police want to 16 further investigate it and use our investigator as a 17 confidential informant, they're welcome to do so." 18 In fact, in the criminal trial before Judge 19 Andrews they had a little bit of a different 20 position here. In the trial before Judge Andrews, 21 when they were trying to -- 22 THE COURT: They, who? 23 MR. MOXON: Mr. Prince. Mr. Prince and his 24 counsel, Mr. DeVlaming, was asserting that 25 everything Mr. Prince did was done as a police
107 1 operative because they were trying to ascribe 2 whatever Mr. Gaston they claimed did wrong to the 3 police so they could suppress the evidence or 4 somehow get some relief in a criminal case. 5 I'm not a criminal attorney. I don't know what 6 relief they thought they could get, except that 7 there's a motion -- an order on a motion to dismiss 8 I'll hand the court -- I guess that was it. A 9 motion to dismiss the information -- by Judge 10 Andrews, when he says -- and this is the facts, his 11 finding -- "A confidential informant working for the 12 Largo Police Department befriended the defendant and 13 began to partake in drug possession and possible 14 drug use with the defendant at his residence. The 15 defendant, Jesse Prince, supplied all of the drugs 16 on each of the several occasions they're used. The 17 confidential informant suggests that he simulated 18 drug use to maintain his cover but never actually 19 inhaled any marijuana." 20 And that's exactly what Detective Crosby also 21 testified to. 22 And then the court concludes in the statement 23 of facts, "The defendant alleges this conduct was 24 pursuant to police authority and so outrageous it 25 denied him his due process." But there they're
108 1 saying everything he did was as a police informant. 2 Now they're saying it was all part of the church. 3 But the fact of the matter is -- and we're 4 up-front about it. Mr. Shaw testified to it and we 5 put it in our papers -- that he was retained in part 6 by Mr. Fabrizio to look into -- 7 THE COURT: Who is he, now? There's so many 8 "he's." 9 MR. MOXON: Mr. Gaston. 10 THE COURT: Mr. Gaston. Okay. 11 MR. MOXON: And I'll -- and the reason why he 12 was asked to look into Mr. Prince as part of an 13 overall security investigation, with respect to 14 threats against church members and -- and 15 parishioners, is because he had made so many 16 threats. Mr. Prince made threat after threat after 17 threat. We took his threats seriously. We took 18 them very seriously. 19 There have been many, many instances of 20 violence against the church and against its 21 parishioners here in Clearwater. There have been 22 many instances of threats, bomb threats, murder 23 threats. 24 I don't know if you had an opportunity to read 25 the affidavit of Paul Kellerhals that's attached to
109 1 our papers -- 2 THE COURT: I don't think I did. 3 MR. MOXON: Well, the affidavit of Paul 4 Kellerhals is attached at Exhibit 3, your Honor, to 5 our opposition papers. And as indicated in there -- 6 I can summarize some of it for you if you like -- 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 MR. MOXON: -- he -- Paul Kellerhals is the 9 head of the security -- internal staff of the 10 church; head of security, and also a witness in this 11 case whose deposition Mr. Dandar took. 12 Many threatening calls were made to the church 13 phones, accusing it of murder, murdering 14 Ms. McPherson. There were a number of arson threats 15 and bomb threats made anonymously, both by telephone 16 and by mail, resulting in the evacuation of staff 17 and parishioners of the buildings that were under 18 construction; anonymous threats made to kill church 19 staff. 20 At one point, there was this bomb, this acid 21 bomb, that was thrown onto church property -- 22 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I object. There's nothing 23 to tie Mr. Prince in to any of these allegations. 24 This is outrageous. They're just hearsay statements 25 and no connection with him.
110 1 MR. MOXON: I'm telling you why this 2 investigation started, what we're doing here. 3 THE COURT: Go ahead. 4 MR. MOXON: An acid bomb was thrown onto church 5 property and exploded. This is a thing that you -- 6 you fill a big, like, a milk jug full of acid, and 7 you put aluminium in it, aluminum foil, and it -- 8 you know, you cork the top, and it creates a 9 chemical reaction and it blows up, splattering acid 10 all over. That happened. 11 There was an anonymous terrorist threat that 12 explosives had been placed in the church because of 13 some jihad. This is long before September 11th. 14 This is over a year ago. 15 And one of the bomb threats made reference 16 to -- to Bob Minton. That's Exhibit 4 of our 17 papers. It said he had met with Bob Minton, and -- 18 and made these bomb threats and said a bomb was 19 placed in the church. 20 Buses have been vandalized, windows broken, 21 drivers intentionally swerving towards the busses. 22 At one point, there's -- one of the busses -- 23 somebody was harassing them by laying in wait for 24 them with this bright strobe light. And when the 25 bus driver would come nearby, they'd flash this
111 1 strobe in the bus driver's eyes. This happened a 2 number of times, and they eventually changed their 3 routes and contacted the police to have the police 4 out there to catch the guy. To obviously blind the 5 bus drivers. 6 One of Flag's staff members was shot and 7 terminally injured when doing a tour in Portland. 8 This is one of the things that Mr. Shaw began to 9 make reference to. Another one of the staff members 10 was shot and her -- her unborn child, her fetus, 11 killed. And this was, again, something that's the 12 same kind of -- this person was inflamed by the same 13 Internet allegations, allegedly. And he's been 14 convicted, of course, and he's in jail. But the man 15 poured gas on the floor, too, and tried to light it. 16 Then after -- we had this -- 17 So that's -- that's preceding all this. 18 And then we come to 1999. Mr. Prince is hired 19 by Mr. Minton. Prince is going all over the area 20 threatening people, making these disgusting 21 comments, and allegedly acting for Mr. Dandar. 22 At the time that he's got his person, his 23 agent, working for him, much the same way, you might 24 say, as investigators working for us, Mr. Prince is 25 going around talking to witnesses and making these
112 1 threats. Completely out of control. 2 But after Mr. Minton purchased this building 3 two doors down from the church, this whole thing 4 escalated. These guys were out there all the time. 5 I -- let me show you just a couple of video 6 clips. 7 THE COURT: All right. 8 MR. MOXON: And I'll show you. 9 (A discussion was held off the record.) 10 THE COURT: You can just say that a video is 11 being played. 12 Can you make a copy of this video available for 13 the record? 14 MR. MOXON: Sure. 15 MR. DANDAR: I'd like to have a copy, as well, 16 your Honor. 17 I also object to this, because I'm not sure 18 what this has to do with Mr. Prince and the 19 injunction request. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 MR. MOXON: I'll show you. 22 MR. DANDAR: It's an injunction on behalf of 23 the estate. 24 THE COURT: Well, I think that what it has to 25 do with it is this: It is the church's contention
113 1 that they were not setting up Mr. Prince to impeach 2 him in this trial; that they were investigating and 3 surveilling him because he was a security threat to 4 the church. 5 MR. DANDAR: Judge, Mr. Shaw's own testimony 6 today, and his deposition, as well as the trial 7 transcript of the private investigators, all admit 8 that they went in to make -- and made contact with 9 him over many months because they wanted to get 10 evidence to impeach him in the civil case. 11 THE COURT: Well, now, see, you and I obviously 12 heard things differently. 13 What I heard, when Mr. Shaw was up here making 14 his explanation, before he got to your actual 15 question, was an explanation as to why this whole 16 thing occurred. And what I heard him say is that it 17 all occurred because of security problems, including 18 Mr. Prince, and that Mr. Prince was a security 19 problem, had made threats against the church, 20 threats against the parishioners, threats against 21 the ecclesiastical leaders, I believe was one of his 22 terms. And because of that, they felt they needed 23 to surveil him. And I heard that. 24 MR. DANDAR: That was part of it, though. 25 The other part was, they wanted to get evidence
114 1 to impeach him in this case, and which is found in 2 the trial transcript of their head investigator and 3 their second investigator, Mr. Fabrizio. And 4 Mr. Gaston himself said, "As soon as I had 5 Mr. Prince arrested, my job was done." 6 MR. MOXON: This is not accurate, your Honor. 7 MR. DANDAR: That's all in the trial transcript 8 in front of you. 9 MR. MOXON: I -- 10 THE COURT: Counsel, I understand that you have 11 a side to present, but they have a different side to 12 present. 13 MR. DANDAR: I understand. 14 But when you said there was no evidence, I just 15 wanted to point out to the court, the trial 16 transcripts are quoted in the plaintiff's motion for 17 sanctions -- 18 THE COURT: Who said there was no evidence? 19 MR. DANDAR: I thought you just said there was 20 no evidence they were trying to get evidence to 21 impeach him in this case. 22 THE COURT: No, no, no, no. I didn't say that. 23 I said I heard something different from 24 Mr. Shaw this morning, and what I heard was that 25 this all started because of the belief that
115 1 Mr. Prince was a security risk. 2 MR. DANDAR: That's what he said. 3 But when it got into Mr. Gaston contacting him, 4 it was to gather evidence to impeach him in this 5 case. 6 THE COURT: Well, see -- 7 MR. MOXON: That's not -- 8 THE COURT: That's what some of your affidavits 9 say, but that's not what the witness said today from 10 the witness stand. 11 MR. DANDAR: I know. But I'm asking you to -- 12 to look at the trial transcript -- 13 THE COURT: I will. 14 MR. DANDAR: -- of Mr. Raftery and Fabrizio and 15 Gaston. 16 THE COURT: I absolutely will. 17 But I also have heard, at your request, 18 testimony this morning which seems to say something 19 different, or at least suggests there was another 20 reason. And now he wants to present his case, and 21 I'm going to allow it. 22 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 23 MR. MOXON: So I want to go back for a moment 24 now to November of 1998. 25 November of 1998 is the time that Jesse Prince
116 1 is first allegedly hired by Mr. Dandar. That's when 2 he first makes, you know, an appearance through 3 something in this case. And Mr. Prince puts a 4 statement on the -- 5 Well, he's -- actually testifies, first of all, 6 in this other case, this FACTNet case, which is a -- 7 this was a copyright infringement case in which the 8 church sued this group called FACTNet, which was 9 also owned by Robert Minton, for copyright 10 infringement. 11 Minton hired Mr. Prince as a fact witness and 12 he testified as a fact witness. And his 13 deposition -- 14 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Who hired him? 15 MR. MOXON: Mr. Minton. 16 THE COURT: Okay. 17 MR. MOXON: And part of his testimony in that 18 case is -- this is when he was questioned. And I 19 quote -- 20 This is Exhibit 11, by the way. 21 "Question: So long as you don't quit and 22 continue to assist FACTNet --" that's Minton's 23 company, "-- then all of your expenses are going to 24 be paid; all your living expenses, right? 25 "Answer: Exactly.
117 1 "Question: Let's see if I've got this straight 2 now. You reached an agreement that as long as you 3 continue to cooperate and assist in this case, 4 you'll be paid all your expenses, including 5 walking-around money. Have I said that right, now?" 6 Answer from Mr. Prince: "Not quite, sir, but 7 you nearly did. And I can clarify it for you if you 8 like. 9 "You went wrong in limiting it to this case. 10 Because there's other cases that are going on 11 against Scientology that I might be able to help in 12 as well. There's other activities that I do that 13 are projected to do, beyond just working on this 14 particular case." 15 Then he was asked, "If I wanted to offer you 16 money to testify to something, no matter how much 17 money it was -- if I offered you a million dollars, 18 I couldn't buy your testimony, right?" 19 And he says, "You know, there's a possibility 20 you could, if you're doing something to get rid of 21 Scientology and other cults. Maybe you could entice 22 me that way." 23 And then Mr. Prince posted on the Internet a 24 public statement on the Internet that -- this was 25 leading in from the copyright case. He said, "Judge
118 1 Cane lit a fire under Scientology's copyright 2 protection. I'm planning on sitting in front of 3 that fire and watch it burn, burn, burn. I've been 4 executing several confidential projects to quicken 5 the final solution for the Scientology cult problem. 6 At this point, there's nothing that can be done to 7 stop the wheels from turning. Soon all will 8 appreciate just what is being done." 9 And then he's -- and then he's hired by 10 Mr. Dandar, and he appears with Mr. Minton in 11 Boston. 12 This is a clip from a lengthy video. 13 Number 8. 14 (A videotape was played.) 15 MR. MOXON: Yeah. Well, so that's Mr. Prince. 16 And then he cut his hair the next month and he 17 came to the church, where he was with Mr. Minton out 18 behind the church. 19 This is number 4-A. 20 In this incident, they're immediately behind 21 the Ft. Harrison Hotel. And you notice that Third 22 Reich sign he's holding. And there's music in the 23 background. The church tried to, you know, drown 24 out Mr. Minton and Mr. Prince screaming out there. 25 And some staff members came out and tried to get him
119 1 go away. And it all -- eventually it resulted in 2 Mr. Minton being -- that's the time Mr. Minton was 3 arrested when Mr. Prince was encouraging all this. 4 And I'm sure Mr. Dandar says, "Well, there was 5 words on both sides." And there were words on both 6 sides. People at the church were pretty darn upset 7 about it. 8 In any event, here is the next month behind the 9 church in Clearwater. 10 4-A. 11 (A videotape was played.) 12 MR. MOXON: This is Mr. Minton, by the way, 13 this next picture. 14 (Videotape still playing.) 15 MR. MOXON: Anyway, that was his witness. 16 Now, thereafter, he -- he continued to make 17 statements about what he was going to do, and some 18 kind of threatening statements. 19 Number 06 -- and this is right in front of 20 cameras. We've got people out there with cameras to 21 record this, that are trying to, you know, 22 encourage -- obviously, encourage him to go away, 23 standing there with a camera. 24 But he's -- as his expert, has this to say. 25 This is directly next to the Ft. Harrison on the
120 1 sidewalk next to it. 2 (A videotape was played.) 3 MR. MOXON: That sign, by the way, he's 4 holding, is a picture of Lisa McPherson. And along 5 both sides are names of church members who are on 6 Mr. Dandar's witness list; people that he's deposed. 7 And the sign says something like, you know, "People 8 that murdered Lisa McPherson. Responsible people." 9 But he's walking around the church -- 10 MR. DANDAR: Could we see that sign? I don't 11 think that's accurate. 12 MR. MOXON: Sure. I'll get you another copy of 13 it. 14 MR. DANDAR: I object. These are excerpts. 15 You know, we don't hear what the Scientologists are 16 saying to Mr. Prince to provoke him. 17 THE COURT: If you want to put the rest of it 18 in, Counselor, you can. 19 MR. DANDAR: I don't think this is necessary. 20 MR. MOXON: And -- 21 04. 22 You can see Mr. Dandar, even, with him while 23 someone's standing outside the church with a sign. 24 And this is on a Saturday or Sunday. I forget 25 which. But there's services going on. There are a
121 1 lot of people in the church. The church is full. 2 And Mr. Dandar is out there with Mr. Prince. And 3 another guy has a sign saying, "Honk if you hate 4 Scientology," trying to create as much noise and 5 furor as possible, and just, you know, upsetting 6 everybody. 7 (A videotape was played.) 8 MR. MOXON: That's directly across the street 9 from the church. 10 Here's another one, where Mr. Prince is 11 actually right in front of the church, right in 12 front of the front door, walking back and forth 13 under the awning of the Ft. Harrison. 14 This is number 13. 15 (A videotape was played.) 16 MR. MOXON: And this next one -- 17 Number 12. Go ahead and put it on. 18 -- he's talking to Paul Kellerhals, who is one 19 of the witnesses in this case. 20 (A videotape was played.) 21 MR. MOXON: Video goes all over the place, 22 but -- 23 (Videotape still playing.) 24 MR. MOXON: PK's his nickname. 25 (Videotape still playing.)
122 1 MR. MOXON: In any event, there was a security 2 investigation going on. Because not only because of 3 all the other threats, but because of what was 4 happening here. 5 The church was, in a sense, under siege here in 6 Clearwater. Mr. Minton moved down here and hired 7 all these people. These people that you saw walking 8 around there are all employees. He hired them to 9 come down. And as Mr. Minton says in another video 10 I don't have here today, "We're going to be down 11 here 365 days a year." 12 Well, they were, for a while. They're 13 apparently gone now, because he decided he's out of 14 money or because the testimony in this case has been 15 too difficult for him. 16 But even prior to this, Mr. Prince made some 17 very violent threats. 18 I've attached an -- Exhibit 10, an excerpt -- 19 I'm sorry. Exhibit 11 -- an excerpt from 20 Mr. Prince's deposition where he individually 21 threatened David Miscavige, the ecclesiastical 22 leader, with guns. He said -- 23 See, he was removed from any position of 24 authority whatsoever in 1987. He was a -- he was a 25 major drug user, Mr. Prince was, a drug user and was
123 1 involved in a lot of petty criminal offenses. He'd 2 been arrested a number of times. He'd been arrested 3 for -- I don't know if you'd call it sexual 4 knowledge with a minor, and he fled, and there was a 5 warrant issued. He was apparently never tried on 6 that. He was arrested for DWI. He was arrested for 7 streaking once. And he -- I believe he was 8 convicted of that; of breach of the peace. He was 9 arrested another time for DWI. 10 But he made these threats. 11 And they say -- after he was removed by David 12 Miscavige from any position, told that he could no 13 longer have any position of any authority for his 14 trust and inability to understand Scientology and 15 basic practice, he said, "I came back to David 16 Miscavige's office with those guns, and I said, 17 'Which one of you wants to F with me now? 'Cause 18 I've got guns here, and bodies are going to start 19 dropping.'" 20 And he was allowed to stay on, obviously, after 21 he was removed. And he was a -- he was a janitor 22 and making copies of videotapes for a few years. 23 But he reverted to other violent activities. 24 I've attached a number of affidavits here from 25 people that -- eyewitnesses that saw Mr. Prince, who
124 1 were assaulted by him or saw him assault others, in 2 Exhibits 14 through 17. 3 But when he left, he was assisted to get back 4 to -- to secular life, and given a -- a loan. He 5 never repaid it, but that's fine. He was given a 6 loan to get back. And he was also assisted to get a 7 job with a Scientologist in Minnesota, in a company 8 called G&B Promotions. 9 And at G&B Promotions, he got into a lot of 10 trouble because of his -- his drug abuse and 11 harassment of staff, and an assault of staff. And 12 he tried to stay there. He was going be fired. And 13 he -- he wrote up a -- did an actual write-up of 14 things that he did wrong. He says, "These are the 15 things I did wrong. I want to come back. I don't 16 want to leave. I don't want to be fired." 17 And Ms. Hanson, who was the owner of the 18 company, was a Scientologist. Not too many of the 19 other employees were. A few were. But they 20 understood each other and said, "Look, you write 21 this all up and you essentially get it off your 22 chest, and I'll let you stay." 23 And he wrote up astounding things, just 24 astounding things, of drug abuse, encouraging other 25 staff to take drugs, of stealing company money to
125 1 buy drugs. 2 And this was presented to him, by the way, at 3 his deposition, and he pled the Fifth to all of this 4 stuff. 5 So he was seen as a violent man who couldn't be 6 trusted. 7 When he left that company, by the way, he also 8 went kind of berserk, the way he did in 1987, and 9 threatened people. And the police were called. And 10 he destroyed some property and broke pictures in the 11 company he was working. 12 So as Mr. Shaw testified, this investigation 13 was initiated, really, as a security precaution. 14 Mr. Dandar obviously wasn't going to protect us, 15 wasn't going to have his person he called an expert 16 witness stop doing these things. These matters were 17 brought to Mr. Dandar's attention, and he always 18 just belittled them, saying, "You don't know the 19 whole story. Nothing ever happened." 20 That same video that you saw of Mr. Prince 21 in -- outside of Boston, that was showed to Judge 22 Moody years ago. And Mr. Prince -- and Mr. Dandar, 23 rather, wouldn't do anything about it. He says, 24 "I'm not going to change him. He's got a right to 25 exercise his First Amendment rights, and when he's
126 1 doing these other things, he's not working for me. 2 He's working for LMT then." 3 So bear in mind that in February of the year 4 2000 is when this whole thing started. In February 5 of 2000, Mr. Minton gave Prince $50,000. And he 6 used that to buy a -- for a down payment on a house. 7 And his girlfriend, Deneen Phillips, then moved 8 down. And they moved in together here in Largo in 9 February of 2000. She testified that at that time 10 he was working for LMT, flat out. He wasn't working 11 for Mr. Dandar. He was only working for LMT. 12 And I asked Jesse Prince at his deposition, in 13 fact, when he was working at LMT and when for 14 Mr. Dandar, and he refused to specifically say. All 15 he said, "Well, it was early in 2000; sometime early 16 in 2000 I went to work for LMT." Prior to that, of 17 course, he was a director and, quote, volunteering 18 at LMT while he was working for Mr. Dandar. But the 19 money came from the same place. Mr. Minton gave all 20 the money to Mr. Dandar; Mr. Minton gave all the 21 money to LMT. And so he was getting a salary at 22 both places. 23 So at the time that this whole thing even 24 started, according to the testimony -- and there's 25 nothing to refute it, here. It's in the record --
127 1 he wasn't even working for Mr. Dandar. And there's 2 nothing to refute that he was represented by 3 counsel. 4 I asked Mr. Minton (sic) if he was represented 5 by John Merrett during this time only because 6 Mr. Dandar said that he was represented by him. And 7 Mr. Prince said, "I don't know. I don't remember 8 when he was representing me. I've got no idea," and 9 refused to answer anything more specifically. 10 So a predicate as to their whole case that 11 somehow this person, who was a witness and who was 12 represented by counsel, doesn't exist in the record. 13 At this point in time he was working for LMT. 14 So it's -- if you step back from this, we've 15 got Mr. Dandar saying, "He's -- he's within the area 16 of my protection as a witness. You can't do 17 anything about this man. Don't touch him. He's my 18 witness." And at the same time, Mr. Prince is on 19 salary for Mr. Minton, working at LMT, coming out to 20 the street, holding signs with our staff members on 21 them, yelling and catcalling at staff members -- 22 I've got dozens of other clips like this -- you 23 know, cursing at them, making these vile threats 24 against the ecclesiastical leader and other people. 25 And he's saying, "Well, I'm really working for
128 1 LMT now." And Mr. Dandar says, "Well, don't worry 2 about it. He's just working for LMT." 3 So at the same time that we're being now 4 accused of doing something wrong with respect to 5 trying to resolve this problem, this madman in our 6 midst, this madman who comes down, who moves to 7 Clearwater, who's paid here to harass staff and 8 harass the leaders, and even their counsel -- 9 he's -- Mr. Dandar says, "He's not working for me. 10 He's working for LMT. And he can do whatever he 11 wants." 12 Now, we finally went to Judge Penick with some 13 of this. And -- and you may know that there was -- 14 there was lengthy hearings before Judge Penick to 15 try to stop Minton and these people from harassing 16 the church. And Judge Penick issued an injunction 17 against them, which specifically included 18 Mr. Prince. And there wasn't any complaint there, 19 that we were -- by trying to get an order against 20 Prince, we were somehow harassing his witness, 21 because Judge Penick obviously saw through that and 22 he issued this. 23 Now, there's some -- there's another little 24 clip here I want to show you, which happened later. 25 See, as Mr. Prince gets a little more, you know --
129 1 like you see him today; he's wearing a suit and tie. 2 He appeared outside the church dining hall. There's 3 a dining hall which is in the same block as LMT. We 4 have a large building at the corner of Cleveland and 5 Ft. Harrison, the old bank building. And that's now 6 some administrative offices and a dining hall. And 7 every staff member goes in and out of there three 8 times a day. We've got a big cafeteria in there. 9 And that's where Minton and Prince would stand 10 outside there and harass the members as they're 11 going by, and telling them, "Come to LMT." You 12 know, "We'll take care of you." You know, "You can 13 get out of Scientology. Come down to us." And a 14 lot of these people are witnesses, incidentally. 15 But here's a little clip February of 2000 when 16 Mr. Prince, now making a -- 17 You know which number that is? 18 MS. HELLER: 5. 19 (A videotape was played.) 20 MR. MOXON: Right behind him was the LMT -- 21 that brown roof coming out and immediately next to 22 him was the church facility. 23 So this is the expert witness that we're 24 seeking to protect here. 25 "He's going down." Our ecclesiastical leader
130 1 is going down. 2 These other people are threatened. And we have 3 to do something about it. We have to at least 4 investigate to find out what's going on with this 5 guy. We have to. It would be just incredibly 6 irresponsible of counsel, Mr. Shaw, the church 7 generally, given all these threats, given all these 8 actual acts of violence, that -- to do nothing, to 9 at least watch this guy. 10 So Mr. Raftery would periodically watch him. 11 He would have other people periodically watch him. 12 Gaston was watching him. 13 But there was never any communication with him 14 about any issue in this case. And I repeat, because 15 this is very important, there's no allegation in 16 Mr. Dandar's papers and in Mr. Prince's affidavit or 17 anywhere that there was ever any communication with 18 him about anything relating to this case. 19 Obviously, he wasn't represented for the purpose 20 of -- by anybody or by Mr. Dandar because of his 21 drug use. 22 And as soon as there was this drug use, as soon 23 as this appeared, Mr. Gaston was instructed -- that 24 is, he was -- Mr. Fabrizio was instructed and 25 Mr. Raftery was instructed and relayed to
131 1 Mr. Gaston -- "Go to the police." That's exactly 2 what Mr. Shaw said, and there's nothing to refute 3 that. "Go to the police." 4 So his acts that Mr. Dandar's complaining about 5 are really acts of the police. He's a confidential 6 informant of the police. What he really should do, 7 if he wants to get an injunction, is enjoin the 8 police from investigating Mr. Prince. Because he -- 9 although I admit Mr. Gaston was being paid 10 indirectly through our investigator -- of course he 11 was, because he was continuing to watch him. But he 12 was not acting for us. We said -- we turned him 13 over to the police and the police were running this 14 guy. 15 So that was the investigation. 16 I hope that answers the court's question, the 17 first question as to what happened with respect to 18 Mr. Gaston and Mr. Crosby. 19 By the way, Mr. Crosby, this police detective, 20 contrary to what Mr. Dandar told you, the very first 21 time he walked into Mr. Prince's house -- which was 22 right in the beginning -- he was introduced to 23 Prince. He went into his area, and the first thing 24 that Mr. Prince did was offer him marijuana. And 25 Detective Crosby and his confidential informant,
132 1 Mr. Gaston, according to Mr. Crosby's report and 2 according to Mr. Crosby's affidavit -- 3 And by the way his incident report is Exhibit 4 38. That's Detective Crosby's incident report. 5 He says in the very first meeting he offered 6 him marijuana, rolled a joint, which Prince and his 7 girlfriend smoked while Crosby and Gaston simulated. 8 Then immediately Prince took him out back and showed 9 him his marijuana plants. And he said at that point 10 there was five marijuana plants, about a foot tall, 11 in Mr. Prince's back yard. And Mr. Prince was 12 referring to them as his pets, and showing the 13 detective how he was cultivating them and how easy 14 it is to grow them and how he was pulling them out 15 in the sun. And Mr. Prince's girlfriend was telling 16 the police how she was running drugs from Tennessee, 17 and she had narcotics packed on her body, and 18 showing how she did it. 19 In a later report from Officer Crosby, a couple 20 months later, he says he went to Prince's house, and 21 he saw three to four marijuana plants that, at this 22 point, were two to three feet high. 23 So this allegation that Mr. Prince is just 24 pulling up -- these marijuana plants were just 25 somehow appearing; he was pulling them up and
133 1 throwing them away, and he didn't have anything to 2 do with it, is -- is not very credible, given his 3 history and given the fact of the sworn testimony of 4 Officer Crosby, Detective Crosby, that he's growing 5 them; they're three feet high in his back yard, and 6 he's growing them and telling him about them. 7 And when Ms. Phillips was given immunity to 8 testify, she admitted that, you know, they were 9 using drugs; they were using drugs before Gaston and 10 then afterwards; and they had rolling papers in 11 their house. 12 I've listed a number of questions that I asked 13 Mr. Prince at his deposition concerning his drug use 14 which indicate that -- you know, he pled the Fifth 15 as to all this. 16 So this goes to this other central issue of, 17 was he, quote, set up. How can there be a set-up of 18 someone who's doing the drugs? Nobody told 19 Mr. Prince to keep these plants and water them. 20 Even if he alleges he didn't plant them, fine. I 21 don't know who planted them. 22 In one of the reports for Mr. Gaston that 23 Mr. Dandar has, he said the very first time he came 24 there, to Mr. Prince, Prince alleged to him that 25 they were there when he moved into the house. Well,
134 1 that may be. That may be. But no one told Prince 2 to roll a joint and stick it in his mouth or smoke 3 it. Nobody told him to offer drugs to an undercover 4 police officer. Nobody told him to show these drugs 5 to the -- to the police officer. There's no set-up. 6 And the set-up motion was denied. This, quote, 7 set-up motion was denied by Judge Andrews, finding 8 there was no evidence any set-up. Absolutely none. 9 So if that's already been resolved by Judge 10 Andrews, where he saw all the testimony, he heard 11 all the witnesses, heard the witnesses at trial, had 12 the deposition testimony, and he said, "There's no 13 set-up. I'm denying your motion to dismiss --" and 14 he specifically instructed the jury that there was 15 no set-up. 16 Do you have that exhibit handy? 17 I can give you a copy of the trial transcript 18 where he specifically instructed the jury they were 19 to disregard any allegation that there was any kind 20 of manufacturing of evidence. 21 It's actually Exhibit -- it's Exhibit 1 to my 22 paper, on page 463. Judge Andrews is instructing 23 the jury. "Ladies and gentlemen, you are to 24 disregard the last statement. At this point, there 25 is no evidence that the Church of Scientology
135 1 ordered anyone to manufacture any evidence to make 2 someone appear criminal." 463, starting at line 16. 3 THE COURT: My recollection, when I read that, 4 is he was not advising the jury at that time; that 5 was in the course of some testimony where there was 6 an objection made. 7 MR. MOXON: Exactly. Precisely. It wasn't a 8 final jury instruction. 9 THE COURT: Right. 10 MR. MOXON: Yeah. 11 So the underlying thesis for the motion is 12 inaccurate. It's extremely inaccurate. 13 And for that reason, and for the other reasons 14 that the court expressed, that there shouldn't be -- 15 there couldn't be any violation here, because 16 Mr. Prince could never possibly qualify as an expert 17 witness. 18 The central purpose of this was not because he 19 was an expert witness; the central purpose of it was 20 because he was a threat. True, he was lying about 21 the church; true, he was hired -- and we knew -- all 22 of us knew, on the defense side; all of us knew in 23 the church that what Mr. Prince was saying in his 24 affidavits were just horrendous lies, and that 25 nobody could possibly believe any of this. But it
136 1 put the religion at issue, as Mr. Dandar is paying 2 him for this and Mr. Minton is paying him at the 3 same time that Mr. Dandar is, to make these. And as 4 Mr. Prince said, "Hey, as long as you keep paying 5 me, I'm happy to testify. As long as there's some 6 way to, quote, get rid of the cult of Scientology, 7 end quote, I'm happy to testify." 8 He's a paid fact witness. He's never been an 9 expert, never will be an expert. 10 We have -- we have set forth some other 11 authorities in our paper, and other bases, to show 12 why investigating witnesses is obviously permitted 13 and it's expected to be done by attorneys. It's 14 expected to be done. Any attorney worth his salt is 15 going to investigate a witness. 16 There was never any intention to communicate 17 with him about any matter in this case. For 18 Mr. Prince to now say, "Well, because I got caught, 19 I got caught in a crime," for which he pleads the 20 Fifth and for which his girlfriend admits he was 21 culpable, that that's, quote, harassment, and that 22 was the reason -- and, "Because I was caught, I have 23 to withdraw from this case, because it was so 24 embarrassing to me --" 25 It's just disingenuous, your Honor. The weight
137 1 of the evidence is clear that Mr. Prince, one, 2 couldn't testify, and he's withdrawn for far more 3 mundane and far more logical reasons. He couldn't 4 help their case. Too much is known about him. And 5 he's leaving. This whole group is leaving the area. 6 He's not going to be paid anymore. 7 And that's what he -- that's what he told the 8 other people at LMT when he had the opportunity to 9 tell them the truth. Never said anything about 10 leaving because of this. 11 I submit that this is something that was 12 created by Mr. Dandar and Mr. Prince. 13 And in fact, Mr. Prince admitted in his 14 deposition that -- his very carefully worded 15 affidavit that he did, where he tried to avoid 16 saying what drugs he was using or not, was in 17 conjunction with Mr. Dandar. They drafted it 18 together. 19 And another point that's, I think, dispositive 20 of this issue, that he was withdrawn because of 21 his -- this drug problem: On June 21st, 2000, an 22 affidavit was filed by another attorney, paid by 23 Mr. Minton, who had a case in California, where he 24 designates Jesse Prince as an expert. And he 25 says -- 2001. I'm sorry -- where he says that
138 1 Prince is going to testify concerning Scientology 2 and the Scientology's founder and the Scientology 3 auditing and the cure of physical, mental and 4 emotional illness. The same issues that are at 5 issue here. 6 May I approach? 7 THE COURT: You may. 8 MR. MOXON: I submit this utterly refutes the 9 assertion that he was not going to testify. He's 10 still designated as an expert in that case; as a 11 witness in that case. 12 And by the way, the -- the defendant here, the 13 Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, is 14 also a defendant in that case. 15 He hasn't been withdrawn, your Honor. 16 THE COURT: Do you want this back? 17 MR. MOXON: So now to answer the question that 18 the court originally asked is, what about an 19 injunction? 20 I think the law already allows for the scope of 21 what counsel and a party are permitted to do or not 22 permitted to do with respect to investigation of a 23 witness or communication with a witness. I didn't 24 think that this issue was going to come up, and so I 25 didn't provide evidence in any of my papers, as to
139 1 the harassment of church witnesses, although no 2 church witnesses obviously have never been 3 convicted, much less arrested or accused of criminal 4 conduct like Mr. Prince has. 5 The harassment of church witnesses has been -- 6 has been pretty extreme. Really pretty extreme. 7 I'll give you another example: Two of our 8 witnesses are Flag staff members that have had 9 actions filed against them; that is, complaints, 10 anonymous complaints filed against them with police 11 authority. One for child abuse, which is a 12 completely false allegation, and was investigated by 13 the police and found to be false. Other one is the 14 LMT -- Mr. Prince and Ms. Brooks and Mr. Minton 15 brought the children of another one of the church 16 staff here to Clearwater and put them in the media 17 and filed complaints about them. These are grown 18 children of one of the staff members. 19 So there's been some real problems and 20 harassment from them. We haven't sought an 21 injunction because we have Judge Penick's order and 22 we have our counterclaim as to intimidation of 23 witnesses, which we'll bring at a proper time. 24 So if there is an injunction, which I don't 25 think there should be, it should simply be that both
140 1 sides be required to follow the law; and if there's 2 an injunction, which I don't think there should be, 3 or an order from the court, we're certainly willing 4 to stipulate that the parties in the case are not to 5 communicate with designated experts, named experts 6 of either side, and leave it at that. 7 But any finding that there's anything that we 8 did that was -- that was improper here, I believe, 9 would be, you know, just very inappropriate; very, 10 very inappropriate, and against the weight of the 11 evidence. 12 Does the court have any questions? 13 THE COURT: I have a couple questions for 14 Mr. Dandar. 15 MR. MOXON: All right. 16 THE COURT: Mr. Dandar, I was -- as I was 17 listening to Mr. Moxon, I was looking for the parts 18 of the trial testimony that you referred to, and I 19 think I have found it in Mr. -- Rafferty (sic)? Is 20 that his name? 21 MR. DANDAR: Yes. 22 THE COURT: -- Mr. Rafferty, where he 23 indicates, really, what both of you said. Of 24 course, it just depends on who's doing the talking. 25 He says, "What was the objective in
141 1 investigating Mr. Prince? 2 "Yes. 3 "Question: All right. And what was that 4 objective? 5 "Answer: There were several. We were 6 basically concerned about the security of the 7 measures of the congregation and the staff, and also 8 we were attempting to obtain information that would 9 impeach his credibility with respect to future 10 litigation." I found that on 401. 11 On 384, I found where he said, "The primary 12 reason I was surveilling Jesse Prince was his 13 history of the violence. He's repeatedly been in 14 either attacks, verbal, physical attacks on members 15 or parishioners of the church. So the first reason 16 I would be observing him and keeping track of him 17 and his associates was for that purpose. The second 18 purpose was that I did know, in fact, that he was 19 involved in a very large civil suit. 20 "Question: Okay. 21 "And that he is listed as an expert to testify 22 about the procedures and practices --" 23 Let me -- then we go through some objections. 24 And then the question continues, "You just said 25 that it involves a large lawsuit. Do you know what
142 1 position Mr. Prince has in that lawsuit? 2 "No. I really don't know exactly what his 3 position would be, no. 4 "Question: The word 'expert witness' does not 5 sound familiar to you at all, Mr. Rafferty?" 6 "Answer: If you're telling me that's his only 7 function, then I have heard that, yes, sir." 8 And then he goes on about who he reported to. 9 And he indicates throughout that he reported to 10 either Mr. Moxon or the church -- directly to the 11 church liaison. 12 Is there anyplace else in his testimony -- 13 That's as far as I got. 14 MR. DANDAR: Well, page 401 is really the crux, 15 where he says that, you know, part of his goal is to 16 gather information to impeach his credibility in the 17 litigation. And he strategized that goal with 18 either Mr. Moxon's law firm or with the church 19 members. 20 THE COURT: Okay. That is, so that we can read 21 it into the record, "Okay. Did you have a meeting 22 to make a decision on --" 23 Well, I guess I've got to go back up to line 24 13. 25 "Specifically, did it have to do with a
143 1 wrongful death case, the Lisa McPherson case? 2 "Answer: Quite frankly, I'm not sure. 3 "Question: Did you have to make a decision on 4 strategy; that is, how you could accomplish this 5 goal of gaining this information?" 6 This is the information of impeaching his 7 credibility. 8 And then answer, a question, "With whom? 9 "Question: Well, either a meeting with Moxon's 10 law firm or with church members or anything like 11 that. 12 "Answer: With Kendrick Moxon, yes. 13 "Question: Okay. And in your discussion with 14 him, was it be determined that it would be best to 15 find an African-American private investigator to 16 help you?" 17 And then that's the end. 18 MR. DANDAR: Right. 19 THE COURT: I don't have anymore -- 20 MR. DANDAR: That's the one -- Mr. Raftery. 21 THE COURT: Okay. And what -- 22 MR. MOXON: That's actually not even 23 Mr. Raftery he's quoting, your Honor. 24 THE COURT: It isn't? 25 MR. MOXON: No.
144 1 MR. DANDAR: Who am I quoting? 2 MR. MOXON: It's Mr. Fabrizio. 3 Anyway, the next page specifically goes on to 4 refute other things that he was talking about. 5 Anyway -- fine. 6 THE COURT: I don't know -- 7 MR. MOXON: I don't have a problem -- 8 THE COURT: I'm looking here -- Counselor -- I 9 don't know. Maybe they -- man didn't know his name. 10 On 381, it says, "Question: Tell us your name. 11 Line 6, "Answer: My name is Brian Joseph 12 Rafferty." 13 MR. DANDAR: Right. It's in my transcript that 14 way too, Judge. 15 MR. MOXON: I can hand you the excerpt where it 16 starts Mr. Fabrizio, your Honor. The part that you 17 were just reading there follows. I don't think it 18 matters. Just to point out that it's not 19 accurate -- 20 MR. DANDAR: It doesn't matter, because they're 21 both working for Mr. Moxon and Mr. -- 22 THE COURT: Right. But I think -- 23 MR. DANDAR: -- Shaw -- 24 THE COURT: I think this is what I was reading 25 from. Page 384 -- page 381 starts Mr. Rafferty's
145 1 testimony. I was reading from page 384 -- there was 2 no interruption -- where he's talking about, 3 "Primary reason why I was surveilling was his 4 history of violence," and all of the stuff I just 5 reiterated. 6 MR. DANDAR: Right. 7 MR. MOXON: That's correct. 8 THE COURT: Okay. Now 401 -- 9 MR. DANDAR: That does appear to be 10 Mr. Fabrizio. 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 MR. DANDAR: And it doesn't matter. They're 13 both -- 14 THE COURT: Okay. Now, let's get this record 15 straight, here. 16 MR. DANDAR: All right. 17 THE COURT: So the first thing I quoted where 18 there were two -- the primary reason, and then there 19 was another, is Mr. Rafferty. And then where I 20 referred to page 401 and started reading about that 21 that was the trial testimony of Mr. -- 22 MR. DANDAR: Fabrizio. 23 THE COURT: -- Fabrizio. 24 MR. DANDAR: Correct. 25 THE COURT: Okay.
146 1 MR. DANDAR: And he's the one who hired -- 2 THE COURT: And he says the same thing -- 3 MR. DANDAR: Yeah. 4 THE COURT: -- that basically, there were two 5 purposes of the investigation; one was to keep tabs 6 on him -- 7 MR. DANDAR: Right. 8 THE COURT: -- because they were afraid of 9 him -- 10 MR. DANDAR: Right. 11 THE COURT: -- and the other was to obtain 12 information for impeachment. 13 MR. DANDAR: Right. 14 And you know -- 15 THE COURT: Is there anything further in either 16 of those testimonies that you want me to read? 17 Because I -- like I told you all about the outset, I 18 really didn't have a chance to read all of the 19 attachments. I read the motions and some of the 20 attachments. 21 MR. DANDAR: In reference to that testimony, 22 no. Except that, you know, it's -- they're not 23 doing this on their own; they're doing this and 24 they're reporting back to either a member of the 25 church or to Mr. Moxon. They're not, just
147 1 willy-nilly, doing this because they felt like doing 2 it. 3 We have no problem with anyone surveilling 4 someone they think is dangerous under the private 5 investigator law of Florida, which means you are not 6 seen -- you are not seen and you are, you know, at a 7 distance. 8 We do have a problem when they come into the 9 man's home; they befriend him. And -- and we do 10 have the testimony of the officer, saying that's 11 what he was told. He was told that they -- they 12 hired a black investigator so he could befriend 13 Mr. Prince and get into his home and conduct his 14 surveillance there. 15 MR. MOXON: I'd like to get -- 16 MR. DANDAR: And Mr. Moxon -- 17 MR. MOXON: -- a reference. 18 That's not accurate, your Honor. 19 MR. DANDAR: Oh, sure. I'll give you a 20 reference. I'll be glad to. 21 MR. MOXON: I'd like to see that. 22 MR. DANDAR: It's the deposition testimony of 23 Officer Crosby, which is found on page 5, saying 24 that they had another investigator becoming his 25 friend; they were trying to get the officer
148 1 interested in this because -- and they -- and so 2 they made up charges that he's a crack cocaine 3 dealer and a heroin dealer and a marijuana dealer. 4 And that's -- 5 THE COURT: Who -- who did that? 6 MR. DANDAR: That's what Mr. Raftery did to 7 Officer Crosby, on page 5 of Officer Crosby's 8 deposition testimony. 9 THE COURT: Is that in my record here? 10 MR. DANDAR: It should be in your record. 11 THE COURT: And what page would it be on? 12 MR. DANDAR: If it's not, I would be happy to 13 supplement that. 14 MR. MOXON: This doesn't say that, your Honor. 15 MR. DANDAR: On page 5 -- 16 THE COURT: Just 'cause you all filed this 17 stuff doesn't mean -- when I get a motion that's 18 this thick, and it's got this many attachments, I 19 don't go strolling through your record to look for 20 other stuff. I'm lucky to read what you attach. 21 MR. DANDAR: Can I read it to you then? 22 THE COURT: Yes. 23 MR. DANDAR: Page 4, line 13, the question was, 24 "What did he say? 25 "Answer --"
149 1 THE COURT: What -- and now who is he, again? 2 MR. DANDAR: Raftery. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 MR. DANDAR: To Officer Crosby. 5 Wait a minute. 6 "He had a private investigator Raftery that was 7 doing an investigation and had --" 8 THE COURT: Then again, who was the he? Who 9 was he? 10 MR. DANDAR: That's true. Hold on. It's 11 someone from -- 12 Let's see. 13 On page 4, line 4, "Question: Was there a time 14 when you were contacted concerning an investigation 15 involving a citizen named Jesse Prince? 16 "Answer: Yes. 17 "Question: Who contacted you? 18 "Answer: It was originally Officer Desjardins. 19 I mean, I was in -- in narcotics, so he made the 20 contact to me. 21 "Question: And what did he say?" Another 22 officer. 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MR. DANDAR: "That he had a private 25 investigator, Raftery, that was doing an
150 1 investigation and had information for me. 2 "Question: And did you meet with this man 3 named Raftery? 4 :Answer: Yes. 5 "Question: And was it at the police 6 department? 7 "Answer: Yes. 8 "Question: And feel free to look at your 9 report. I've already been given a copy. Do you 10 remember the date you met with Raftery? 11 "Answer: No. 12 "Question: Do you remember roughly the 13 substance of the conversation that he had with you? 14 "Answer: Yes." Top of page 5. "He said that 15 a black male by the name of Jesse Prince is dealing 16 drugs, and that he has been hired by the 17 Scientologists to investigate him." 18 Now this is between Raftery and Cross. 19 THE COURT: "And he said a black male named 20 Prince was doing drugs." 21 MR. DANDAR: "Dealing drugs." 22 THE COURT: "Was dealing drugs." Okay. 23 MR. DANDAR: "And that he," Raftery, "has been 24 hired by the Scientologists to investigate him. 25 "Question: And did you do anything to check
151 1 that out or did you just -- or did you accept that 2 as -- at face value? 3 "Answer: He had told me that they had been 4 observing him; they have another investigator that 5 is becoming his friend, and the other investigator 6 has told him that he has seen some stuff going on 7 with the smoking of marijuana and everything." 8 Let's see. 9 Question, line 21, page 5: "Did he tell you 10 that one of his other investigators was going to 11 contact you about Mr. Prince or about making a case 12 involving Prince? 13 "Answer: Yes. That was the investigator that 14 was becoming friends with Prince. 15 "Question: I mean, did Raftery tell you, 'I'm 16 going do be introducing you to this man so you can 17 make a case if there is one?' 18 "Answer: Right. Yes. 19 "Question: And did you have any further 20 conversation with Raftery? 21 "Answer: Numerous times." 22 Line 17, "Contacted me frequently." 23 Question on page 7, line 19, "Did Mr. Raftery 24 tell you things concerning Mr. Prince's alleged drug 25 activities that turned out to be unsubstantiated;
152 1 for example, that he was selling cocaine or dealing 2 heavy narcotics or anything like that? 3 "Answer: That was brought up, and I never 4 found anything to be done like that. But I only met 5 Mr. Prince on two separate occasions, and that was 6 enough. 7 "What types of things did Raftery tell you 8 about Mr. Prince? 9 "Answer: That he was more into the drug trade 10 and about selling and using of cocaine and 11 marijuana. 12 "Answer (sic): Did he leave (sic) you to 13 believe that this investigation would somehow result 14 in an arrest of dealing in drugs or in particular 15 hard drugs like cocaine? 16 "Answer: Yes. I thought it was going to go 17 further. 18 "Question: Were you at any time told this case 19 had nothing more to do with than relatively small 20 marijuana plants growing at his house? 21 "Answer: No. I figured that out myself when I 22 got there. 23 "Question: That's at the end? 24 "Right." 25 Page 9, "Question: Did you ever substantiate
153 1 that that was true --" 2 I'm sorry that doesn't make sense. Let me back 3 up. 4 Line 5 on page 9, "Tell me about, now, your 5 dealings with Gaston. Approximately when did you 6 meet him, and what did he inform you? 7 "Answer: I probably talked to him before this 8 date on the telephone, but I have documented on 9 April 7th that I met with the informant Gaston and 10 discussed Jesse Prince. He stated that he met with 11 Jesse, became his friend, and that he was seen 12 dealing in cannabis and snorting cocaine. 13 "Question: This is what Gaston told you? 14 "Answer: Right. 15 "Question: Did you ever substantiate that that 16 was true? 17 "Answer: No. He never dealt or did cocaine in 18 front of me." 19 THE COURT: Okay. Is that -- 20 MR. DANDAR: No. That's -- that's what I 21 wanted to -- 22 THE COURT: Okay. 23 MR. DANDAR: -- tell the court. 24 And on -- make sure I'm reading from the same 25 thing, your Honor.
154 1 Page 39, line 8 of the deposition of Officer 2 Crosby, the question was asked, at line 4 on page 3 39, "Was there any background information given to 4 you by Gaston or Raftery?" 5 This is Crosby talking. 6 "Answer: Gaston never really gave me any 7 background, no. Gaston was just a private 8 investigator, and wherever he lives. And he was 9 called in, like he said, because he's black and he 10 can become friends with Jesse. You know, I mean, 11 Raftery probably has a bunch of white guys working 12 for him, so that's why he was called in. He says, 13 quote, I'm just here to become his friend and 14 introduce you, close quote. He tried to stay out as 15 much as possible. Raftery was the one that called 16 and checked on the status and all that." 17 MR. MOXON: Bear in mind, your Honor, this is 18 Detective Crosby allegedly saying what somebody else 19 told him. 20 THE COURT: Right. 21 MR. MOXON: What Raftery allegedly -- what 22 Raftery allegedly told Crosby that Gaston allegedly 23 told Raftery. 24 MR. DANDAR: Page 40 -- 25 MR. MOXON: You should read her page 23,
155 1 Mr. Dandar. 2 MR. DANDAR: -- line 20, "Did Raftery tell you 3 anything more, backgroundwise, about Jesse Prince? 4 "Answer: He probably did, but I didn't really 5 write anything down or take it from heart. From day 6 one, when they told me who these people were that 7 were involved and what's going on, I just wanted to 8 get rid of this case as quick as possible. You 9 know, a California detective called me about Jesse 10 Prince being arrested --" 11 "Question: Why would somebody from California 12 call? 13 "Answer: He got me. He got the arrest 14 affidavit and everything on his desk Monday morning. 15 "Answer: This case --" "Question: This case? 16 "Answer: Mh-hmm. And he called me up and said 17 that he just found out about Jesse Prince and the 18 case. And I said, 'How do you know?' I believe a 19 warrant was served on Friday night, Friday or 20 Saturday. I don't know what that -- what the day 21 was. It was August 11th. Whatever August 11th is. 22 But it was never over the weekend. And when he came 23 to work that morning, he got a whole pamphlet on 24 Jesse. 25 "Question: About the arrest?
156 1 "Answer: Yeah." 2 Just want to point out a few things. 3 THE COURT: No. Actually, I've heard all the 4 argument I need on this point. 5 What I want to do is, I want to take a lunch 6 break. And what I want to do when I come back is I 7 want to hear the church's motion to exclude 8 Mr. Prince as a witness. And if there's something 9 you really want to bring out, you can bring it out 10 in response to their motion. 11 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. DANDAR: Well -- 14 THE COURT: And -- 15 MR. DANDAR: It's in response to what Mr. Moxon 16 said about -- 17 THE COURT: All right. 18 MR. DANDAR: -- Dr. Garko contacting Dr. Baden. 19 I mean, Dr. Garko's in the business of jury 20 trial consultant. And that was on the murder case 21 in Tampa. Has nothing to do with this case. And 22 part of his function is to contact expert witnesses 23 for attorneys on cases. So it's -- clearly, there 24 can't be -- 25 And they want to equate that with what they did
157 1 inside Jesse Prince's home. I think the court could 2 see through that transparent argument, that that's 3 not the case. 4 Joyce Eastridge is an accountant that I use on 5 many cases. They happened to hire her first, and I 6 found that out when I called her up to work on this 7 case three or four years ago. So that certainly 8 isn't the same thing as sending in a private 9 investigator into a witness's home. 10 And I did accuse Mr. Moxon of violating the 11 rules when he contacted my psychiatrist, who he was 12 scheduling -- 13 THE COURT: I don't -- 14 MR. DANDAR: -- to -- 15 THE COURT: -- want to talk about 16 psychiatrists. I want to talk about -- 17 MR. DANDAR: Okay. 18 THE COURT: -- this motion that I've got. 19 MR. DANDAR: All right. 20 THE COURT: All right. We're going to take a 21 lunch break. It's 20 after. We're going to take a 22 break until 1:30. 23 (A recess was taken.)