Subject: Re: LaVenda Van Schaick -- are you out there? From: Julie Mayo Date: 1996/05/16 Message-Id: <4nfmep$psu@light.lightlink.com> Sender: electra@light.lightlink.com Organization: Art Matrix - Lightlink Electra Gateway v2.4 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 15 May 1996 21:00:22 GMT, referen@neont.com (Diane Richardson) wrote: >av282@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Martin G. V. Hunt) wrote: > > >>Sherilyn (Sherilyn@sidaway.demon.co.uk) writes: >>> In article <4n6sm4$p4r@freenet-news.carleton.ca>, "Martin G. V. Hunt" >>>> >>>>What the court finds is not very trustworthy where the cult is concerned. >>> >>> But you trust the court when it rules against the cult, eh? > >>Of course! Actually, I find I am losing whatever small amount of faith >>I had in the legal system over the seemingly endless baratrous abuse of >>it by the cult. If the system worked right, some time after the 1,000th >>frivolous lawsuit the cult would be banned from seeking retribution in >>the courts. > >I'd just like to interject one small point here, Martin. It was >Steven Fishman's decision to plea bargain rather than go through >a trial. Steven Fishman could have presented his evidence that his >membership in the "Church" of Scientology[tm] predated his criminal >activities. He chose not to do that; that was *his* decision, not the >"Church" of Scientology's[tm]. > >This case was the People of the United States v. Steven Fishman, not >the Church of Scientology v. Steven Fishman. > >[snip] > >>>>I would rather believe Steve and his book; if you can find any factual >>>>errors in it, please let us know. >>> >>> I believe the Mayos have pointed out one or two descriptions of people >>> and details of location and organization that don't match up well with >>> their own recollections. How significant this is I cannot say. > >>Yes, I saw what Julie and Dennis had to say; it seems some of those >>errors are a little larger than life, if they are correct. I was posted in Clearwater from 1975 until mid 1980. (I never saw Lyman there once.) I was posted in Gilman Hot Springs from mid 1980 until Feb. 1983. I saw Lyman and his wife regularly, both at meals and in the course of my staff duties. Further, Steve's description of him is incorrect. Lyman was heavy in 1980-1982. He wasn't thin. Also the conversations attributed to Lyman are out of character. When I knew Lyman Spurlock he was a well-mannered individual. Lyman is also well educated: he graduated from UC Berkeley and has a degree is in accounting. In 1982 Lyman received correspondence from L. Ron Hubbard concerning setting up CST and the tech preservation project. I saw some of the correspondence at Gilman Hot Springs in the office of SENIOR C/S INT. Lyman also had correspondence from L. Ron Hubbard concerning setting up a separate corporation for SNR C/S INT, in reference to the long April 1982 letter to David Mayo from L. Ron Hubbard in which LRH stated that SNR C/S INT office should be in a separate corporation. Lyman Spurlock personally came into the office of SNR C/S INT and conferred with David regarding this correspondence, in my presence. I was SNR C/S INT Assistant and my desk was in the same office as David's. In Lonesome Squirrel Steve Fishman says he attended a meeting in around March 1982 in which "ASI" was discussed and how ASI was going to preserve tech. That was never ASI's function. ASI was a for-profit corporation that was to act as Hubbard's literary agent, and collect royalties for him. COST was the corporation that was set up to preserve the tech. The first time I saw correspondence regarding COST was sometime after April 1982. >I have never seen Dennis Erlich's credibility questioned on this >newsgroup, except by Scientologists[tm], of course. He has gained a >reputation for honesty and truthfulness here, and I'd venture to say >I'm not the only person who thinks this way. > >Although Julie Mayo is a newcomer, everything she has posted thus far >appears to be direct, to the point, and without any effort to dodge >questions or evade issues presented to her. > >I am *far* more willing to believe with confidence what Julie Mayo >asserts and Dennis Erlich confirms than I am to believe Steven >Fishman. Both Julie and Dennis were at Flag when the events Fishman >describes purportedly occurred. They have nothing to gain by lying or >making Fishman out to look the fool. > >>A small >>error in the spelling of a name or an exact date of an event, OK; >>making up whole departments which don't exist and staffing them with >>people who weren't there is going a bit far, I think. > >Additionally, both Julie and Dennis state unequivocally that the G.O. >was out of existence at the time Steven Fishman claims he was acting >as an agent in their behalf. This should be something readily >confirmable: did the G.O. exist in 1981 as Steven Fishman claims? >When was the G.O. abandoned and OSA formed to take its place? > The G.O. was taken over by the CMO INT in 1981. This was a major change, because before this the Guardian's Office had always previously been autonomous to the Sea Organization, directly under Mary Sue and L. Ron Hubbard. However, many of the existing Guardian's Office staff were retained and they continued to do dirty tricks, but now it was under the direction of David Miscavige and the RTC. For example, Gary Klingler and Kurt Weiland had been G.O. staff and they were retained by OSA formed by RTC. In1984 they were sent on a mission to harass and disrupt the AAC in Santa Barbara. The post title that Steven Fishman gave for Lyman Spurlock couldn't have existed because it combines Sea Org and Guardian's Office in one title. ("Sea Org Special Combat Information Center of the B1 Intelligence Unit of the Guardian's Office") That never existed. [snip] > >Diane Richardson >referen@neont.com > Julie Mayo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMZtRyKUzTdUDYOWNAQEAmgQApj22cn1HrjDj7DZzFaSMQWRMWDE+gJGK hJLT705avqhKPRdPfKdy2ayQP2+v+uHfJx3mlw9x0EC/5cQJOLwAXhs0gqJYFLqk JlUFRanox6xAQ+GxbVlllrG68tupj/fP2TrufD5E/oDmlHv9DZ/zD/RB5xOiyOj4 Taxh95yHKRE= =GERK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----