Subject: Re: The whole Fishman thing From: Julie Mayo Date: 1996/06/11 Message-Id: <4plbdq$nh4@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 8 Jun 1996 02:29:09 GMT, hoyos@millenium.texas.net (Hoyos) wrote: >Diane Richardson (referen@neont.com) wrote: > >: Well, in a number of them (I'm thinking of Paulette Cooper and Vicki >: Azanaran, for example), money played a large part in th decision. >: That's pressure enough for some people. > >: Diane Richardson >: referen@neont.com > >I wonder, Diane, if you went through the kind of hell Paulette Cooper >went through for a decade, if you would not be willing to sign some sort >of declaration like this? And I wonder if you'd have had the moral >fortitude to turn down a settlement, in exchange for turning over the >rights to your book. I wonder. Of course, we'll never know, and you can >thank God for that, because you probably won't ever be harassed like that >by the cult. In my opinion, the real problem lies in the fact that the CofS is allowed to get away with such incredible dirty tricks. Paulette Cooper SHOULD NOT have had to stand the decade of harassment. People should not have to flip flop in the end, nor write false or misleading declarations to "settle". Paulette also shouldn't have written a declaration which said Hubbard wasn't the managing agent. He certainly was the managing agent in 1982. I saw the voluminous amount of orders from him myself. Every type of activity was being managed by him, down to ordering the SU, (Gilman Hot Springs), staff be put on $5.00 pay per week. It is awfully difficult to keep up even with the bare necessities of tooth paste and soap and so forth on $5.00 per week. I remember the dispatch well -- because that is exactly how much I got per week for months after that. (When Miscavige put me on the RPF, it was reduced to $2.50 per week, but many times I didn't get anything at all.) I don't know who the CofS/RTC lawyer was when Paulette Cooper settled, but my question is how is it that lawyers can negotiate settlements that require false or misleading declarations? Isn't this unethical for a lawyer? IANAL, but I thought there was something about lawyers being officers of the court and having some type of responsibility for truth and justice? I'm not being facetious here, I'd really like to know what the responsibilities for the lawyer are in the case of declarations generated out of settlements. It is a repeating situation with "confidential" CofS settlements, that declarations are done which reverse earlier testimony. And I think in most, or possibly all, of the situations these declarations aren't just bought with money. They are also bought by the promise of no more harassment. Julie Mayo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMb4jXqUzTdUDYOWNAQHIRwP/fsUvuKMpdBrB3xxB9PHvYvXzwk/vYebQ LDRweXqvNDtyuPQB0lfXEcSNcRwj2cscihy+Z9rNoJDpQk2gNgZgF//v+EVui1QK UlRycEH3A3e/f9zQTzL1bive+g3IiIYABHcyEDwktjxWedB3squDFG9uT5H9GaGN vScoVhfSjF0= =ycHo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----