OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION
18000 CRIMINAL COURTS BUILDING
210 WEST TEMPLE STREET
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90012 -3275
(213) 974-7437
IRA REINER, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
April 25, 1986
Rev. Ken Hoden
Rev. Kathleen Gorgon
Rev. Heber Jentzsch
Mr. John Peterson
Mr. David Butterworth
Church of Scientology
1301 N. Catalina
Los Angeles, California 90012
Gentlemen:
In re S.I.D. CASE NO. C85-0054
In your letters dated May 1 and July 19, 1985, you asked that
this office investigate your allegations that:
1. Chief Daryl Gates of the Los Angeles Police Department,
Agents Al Lipkin and Al Ristuccia of the Internal Revenue
Service, Gerald Armstrong, and Michael Flynn have committed
the crime of conspiracy to obstruct justice.
2. Internal Revenue Service Agents Al Lipkin and Al Ristuccia
additionally "aided and directed" the commission by Gerald
Armstrong of violations of Penal Code Sections 182
(Conspiracy), 134 (Preparing False Evidence), and 653f
(Solicitation of the commission of certain crimes).
3. Gerald Armstrong additionally prepared false documentary
evidence in violation of Penal Code Section 134; committed
extortion in violation of Penal Code Section 518; and
solicited commission of the crimes of burglary, receiving
stolen property, and forgery, in violation of Penal Code
Section 653f.
Rev. Ken Hoden,et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Two
4. Michael Flynn additionally aided Gerald Armstrong in his
violations of Penal Code Section 182, conspiracy, and Penal
Code Section 653f, solicitation of burglary, receiving
stolen property, and forgery.
Following his receipt of your letters, Steven A. Sowders, Head
of the Special Investigations Division, met personally with
Rev. Jentzsch and Rev. Hoden to discuss your complaint. I have
since reviewed the voluminous materials you submitted in support
of your charges, and I have spoken at length on the telephone
and in person with church members John Peterson and David
Butterworth. In our several conversations, I informed both
Mr. Butterworth and Mr. Peterson that in order intelligently to
evaluate the Church of Scientology's allegations, I would need
further information. In addition to the documents already
provided, I asked them to provide me with:
(1) A complete description of the events to which the submitted
documents relate, including:
(a) the time, date, and place of each event;
(b) the names of all persons present;
(c) the circumstances in which the event occurred;
(d) the name of each speaker and identifying information
about him.
(2) A description of the manner in which the recording or other
source information was obtained.
(3) A statement from the person who obtained the recording or
other data, identifying him, describing the manner in which
he obtained it, and setting forth the manner in which he
could authenticate any recording and any transcript involved.
(4) An explanation of the relevance of the conversations and
other materials cited to the allegations of criminal conduct.
I further requested that they furnish any other evidence they
might have in support of the Church of Scientology's allegations.
I particularly requested documentation setting forth the specific
facts in support of the allegations recited above. I asked that
they provide the date, time, and place of each alleged event, and
the name, address, and telephone number of each witness.
Rev. Ken Heden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Three
In response, I received from Mr. John Peterson a letter dated
September 27, 1985, which letter I discussed on October 3, 1985,
with Mr. Butterworth. Thereafter, following many attempts on
my part to schedule a meeting with either Mr. Peterson or
Mr. Butterworth or both of them, on December 10, 1985, they
came to my office and conferred with Investigator Alan Tomich
and me.
In that meeting, I reiterated my need to know the date, time,
and place of each alleged event, and the name, address, and
telephone number of each witness. I further asked whether the
Church of Scientology had any additional evidence in support
of its allegations. Messrs. Peterson and Butterworth responded
that they had submitted to this office all the evidence that
they had.
I explained to them that, in order to decide whether a
prosecutable crime had been committed, we had to interview
those persons who had observed the events that were alleged to
constitute the criminal conduct; and that in order to interview
those persons we needed to know who they were and where we could
find them. In response, Mr. Peterson repeated the suggestion
he made in his letter of September 27, 1985, that we interview
Eugene Ingram, who had videotaped certain events which,
Mr. Peterson said, were the basis of his allegations. He declined,
however, to identify, beyond the name "Joey," the persons other
than Gerald Armstrong who appear on the tapes.
It was my understanding that Messrs. Peterson and Butterworth
intended to review the matter and that they would subsequently
forward the requested witness information to me. Their response
was a letter dated December 15, 1985, which contained a witness
list comprised of the names of the persons the Church of
Scientology has accused plus another I.R.S. agent and two
police officers. He furnished no further information.
I responded to Mr. Peterson in a letter dated January 16, 1986,
in which I summarized our December 10 meeting. In it, I also
asked Mr. Peterson to permit Investigator Tomich to interview
Mr. Eugene Ingram (whom Mr. Peterson, as an attorney, apparently
represents), and I again requested that Mr. Peterson supply us
with the information outlined above.
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Four
In response, I received from Mr. Peterson a letter dated
March 18, 1986. In it, he denied that he and Mr. Butterworth
had intended, after the December 10 meeting, to provide further
information, and he declared that we had received all the data
he felt we needed.
It appears, then, that no further evidence in support of your
allegations is forthcoming; and based on Mr. Peterson's
statement on December 10, 1985, that I had understood and
accurately summarized the evidence the Church of Scientology
had submitted, it appears that the assertions of fact described
below constitute in its entirety the evidence in support of
your allegations of criminal conduct.
Allegation 1:
That Chief Daryl Gates conspired to obstruct justice.
Evidence:
The allegation of "planting a 'wire tap' on Michael Flynn" was
referred to Chief Gates1 by Assistant City Attorney Lewis N.
Unger on April 17, 1985.2 On April 23, 1985, Chief Gates
publicly rebuked Officer Phillip Rodriguez and Investigator
Eugene Ingram for video taping Gerald Armstrong. Within hours,
Investigators Lipkin and Ristuccia were seen, apparently by
Rev. Heber Jentzch, leaving Parker Center. There has allegedly
been no effort to do anything about "Mr. Armstrong's crimes."4
Chief Gates also initiated an investigation "into the police
officer and private investigator" (July 19 letter, p. 6).
Allegation 2:
That Internal Revenue Service Agents Al Lipkin and Al Ristuccia
conspired with Gates, Armstrong, and Flynn to obstruct justice
and that they "aided and directed" Gerald Armstrong in the
commission of violations of Penal Code Sections 182, 134, and 653f.
Evidence:
John G. Peterson declared under penalty of perjury5 that
"Armstrong showed he was being used by the Internal Revenue
Service to gather information." In support of that declaration,
Mr. Peterson included "excerpts from the videotape" which
indicated that "GA" mentioned Al Ristuccia and gave Al Lipkin's
telephone number to "J".
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Five
Agents Lipkin and Ristuccia visited Officer Phillip Rodriguez
and allegedly attempted to "strong arm" him. Agents Lipkin
and Ristuccia stated that, on April 18, 1985, they interviewed
Rodriguez, who admitted signing an authorization letter. The
agents considered Rodriguez evasive and sought police assistance
in obtaining his cooperation. The agents were seen leaving
Parker Center on April 23, 1985.
Armstrong told " J" that he had told Lipkin some people might
want to talk to him, and that he had told Lipkin to go after
Peterson.
Allegation 3:
That Gerald Armstrong conspired with Michael Flynn, Daryl Gates,
Al Lipkin, and Al Ristuccia to obstruct justice; prepared false
documentary evidence; committed extortion; and solicited the
commission of the crimes of burglary (Penal Code Section 459),
receiving stolen property (Penal Code Section 496), and forgery
(Penal Code Section 470), in violation of Penal Code Section 653f.
Evidence:
John Peterson declared that Armstrong conspired with a "church...
staff member," was "used by... the Internal Revenue Service to
gather information," "explained to the conspirators plans for
attacking the church...and...Hubbard," and had a videotaped
conversation with "J" which demonstrates his involvement with
the government.
"GA" told "J" to type the completed staff work on the policy
and bring it in, that "issues can be created," but he was "not
really saying create incrimination (sic) evidence-but just
to write about the speculation." He also said, "They can never
tell where the issue came from." He wanted the lawsuits to end
so that he could get his "global settlement."10
Armstrong told " J" about a "good-looker" named Carol. He said
"the way to the man's mind is through his cock" and "that's
definitely the way to get to the top." He wrote a note which
reads in part, "Establish available route for holding the cock
of someone in ASI/WDC/etc."11
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Six
Armstrong allegedly wrote and handed over to someone on November
9, 1984, a "shopping list" of information which he asked a
"church member to purloin." "GA" told "J" "something should
be done so that they can capitalize on getting stuff...into
writing and...unstabilizing the whole PI, attorney apparatus."
He asked if "J" could get money to Peterson and told "J" to
check the finance records. He said, "if we can get anything
on Ingram (or) Peterson (or) finance records (or) other PI's
(or) operation 'X'..., it's all vital."
Armstrong asked for specifics on payments to Ingram, and told
"J" he should find what payments went to attorneys.
The handwritten list read in part, "1. Plan on Van Schaick...4.
Anything on Hubbard or Don/ 5. Anything on upcoming legal
battle... 8. Get me an original of an LRH Ed (current) or
other issue type which could be from Hubbard. 8a. Same for
WDC. Create one, get it distributed and get an assessment.
Any partial that gives UP or ORG."12
He also told " J" he had given one "fanatic" document "to the
Feds" and was giving them another.13
Armstrong told " J" on November 9, 1984, that he could type
"things and duplicate them and make them look exactly the
same" and that "we could set up a press and...produce issues..."
He thought, "shouldn't I get some I HELP materials (?)". He
wanted to know "how they're run off, what the type face is
like..., - because we can simply create these;... - I can
create documents with relative ease ...."
"J" suggested changing some documents. "GA" responded that
"a lot of things can be done", but he did not propose to "be
stuffing things into their comm basket." He later commented
that something could be pasted and photocopied.14
Allegation 4:
That Michael F Flynn conspired to obstruct justice, and aided
Gerald Armstrong in the crimes of conspiracy (Penal Code
Section 182) and solicitation of burglary, receiving stolen
property, and forgery (Penal Code Section 653f).
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Seven
Evidence:
In April, 1985, Flynn contacted the United States Attorney
in Boston, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Los Angeles
Police Department. Flynn's attorney, Raul Martinez then made
allegedly false accusations of wire tapping.
Flynn told the Los Angeles Police Department that "Cooley"
had had a video recording and a letter signed by Officer
Rodriguez authorizing such a recording. By letter, Attorney
Raul Martinez, representing Mr. Flynn, asked the City Attorney
to investigate. The City Attorney forwarded the letter to
Chief Gates.15
John Peterson declared under penalty of perjury that evidence
indicated that Michael Flynn was directing Gerald Armstrong
in order to steal documents, plot forgeries, steal legal
strategies, implement a plot to seduce and blackmail a
Scientologist, and conspire to suborn perjury.16
The "Van Schaick" case, referred to in Armstrong's "shopping
list", was settled by Attorney Flynn.
* * *
As Mr. Peterson has noted, I have spent a considerable amount
of time reviewing and comprehending the materials you have
submitted to this office. For the reasons set forth below,
I do not find that those materials contain sufficient evidence
of the commission of any of the alleged crimes to justify the
further investigation of those allegations.
At the outset, I should like to point out the following
regarding Mr. Peterson's letter dated September 27, 1985 and
my subsequent communications with him. 1) Mr. Peterson told
me that "the interviews took place in Griffith Park during...
November, 1984." He has not otherwise responded to my request
for a complete description of the events to which the documents
related, including times, dates, places, names, circumstances,
and identifying information, (See Request #1, above.)
2) Mr. Peterson told me that "tapes are not in dispute" and
that details of the taping should be sought from Gene Ingram.
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Eight
But when Investigator Tomich sought to follow his advice, Mr.
Peterson asserted he was Mr. Ingram's attorney, and he refused
to permit Investigator Tomich to interview him.
In his letter of March 18, 1986, Mr. Peterson refused further
to respond to my requests for a description of the manner in
which recordings and other source information were obtained;
and for a statement from the person who obtained the information
(some of it apparently recorded, some of it apparently from
other sources) identifying that person and describing the
acquisition of the information, documents, or tape, and the
manner in which it could be authenticated (proved to be what
it purports to be). (See Requests Nos. 2 and 3, above.)
3) He submitted " data on the background of Jerry Armstrong"
and the other documents referred to in the footnotes to this
letter, in which he highlighted those portions he considered
relevant to the allegations. He has not otherwise explained
the relevance of the submitted materials to the allegations
of criminal conduct. (See Request #4, above.)
4) He told me that the individuals speaking on the video tapes
are "responsible witnesses who can be produced if necessary."
Beyond submitting a list of the names of the persons you have
accused and three of their associates, he has not otherwise
responded to my requests that he document the specific facts
which prove the commission of the crimes alleged, including the
particular details about each event and the names, addresses,
and telephone numbers of the witnesses (See the paragraph
following request #4, above).
* * *
A conspiracy to obstruct justice is an agreement between two
or more persons to do an act or omit to do an act, as the
result of which justice or the due administration of the laws
is obstructed or perverted. To convict a person of that crime
the prosecution must prove that he made such an agreement with
the specific intent to commit or omit the necessary act and
that, while he was a member of the conspiracy, he or a
co-conspirator committed an overt act in furtherance of the
object within the prosecuting jurisdiction (in our case, Los
Angeles County).
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Nine
Assuming that the factual allegations are true, and that Daryl
Gates did receive from Michael Flynn a wiretapping complaint;
did rebuke Officer Rodriguez and Investigator Ingram; and did
initiate an investigation into possible criminal conduct by
Rodriguez and Ingram; that Gerald Armstrong did have the above
described conversations with "Joey" about Al Lipkin and
Al Ristuccia; that Lipkin and Ristuccia did interview Rodriguez,
did consider him evasive, did seek Los Angeles Police Department
assistance in obtaining Rodriguez's cooperation, and did visit
Parker Center on April 23, 1985; that Armstrong told "Joey" to
type staff work in order to create issues and that he did all
the other things alleged (talked to "Joey" about "Carol,"
told
"Joey" that "they" should destablilize the "PI, attorney
apparatus," told "Joey" to check financial records, wrote and
delivered the "shopping list," and gave documents "to the Feds")
and that Michael Flynn both personally and through his attorney
contacted the United States Attorney, the Internal Revenue
Service, and the Los Angeles Police Department to complain about
the tape recording, the actions of Officer Rodriguez, and
other matters; and that he settled the "Van Schaick" case; we
are unable to find in any of those allegations any evidence
which would support an allegation that Chief Gates, Agent Lipkin,
Agent Ristuccia, Mr. Armstrong, or Attorney Flynn agreed with
anyone to commit or omit any act which might pervert or obstruct
justice or the due administration of the laws.
No factual details (time, place circumstances, names of witnesses,
etc.) have been submitted to support many of the conclusions that
have been alleged. Thus there is no evidence that "there has
been no effort to do anything about" crimes allegedly committed
by Mr. Armstrong; that the Internal Revenue Service Agents
attempted to "strongarm" Officer Rodriguez; that Mr. Armstrong
conspired with a church staff member and explained to the
conspirators his plans for attacking the church and Mr. Hubbard;
that Mr. Armstrong wrote a "shopping list" of information and
asked someone to "purloin" it; or that Michael Flynn made false
accusations of wiretapping.
Therefore, the evidence of which we have been apprised of a
conspiracy to obstruct justice is insufficient to warrant
further investigation by this office.
To convict a person of the crime of preparation of false
documentary evidence, the prosecution must prove that he in fact
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Ten
made the document, that it was false, and that he intended it
to be produced as true for a deceitful purpose in a proceeding
authorized by law.
Even assuming that it can be proved by competent, admissible
evidence that Gerald Armstrong told "Joey" to type staff work
and that "issues can be created," that "they can never tell
where the issue came from," and that he wanted the lawsuits
to end so that he could get his "global settlement"; that
Armstrong wrote and gave to someone the "shopping list"; that
he told "Joey" he wanted to get "stuff...into writing" and
to
"unstabliz(e)" the "apparatus"; that he said getting records
was "vital"; that he said he could type and duplicate things
and create documents and set up a press and produce issues,
that he wanted to know about a type face, that a lot of things
could be done and that something could be pasted and photocopied;
none of this, taken alone, constitutes evidence that Mr. Armstrong
in fact created a single false document or that he intended that
such a document be produced for any purpose in any legal proceeding.
Further, in the documents submitted to us, Mr. Armstrong is quoted
as stating that he was not advocating the creation of incriminating
evidence and that he did not propose to "be stuffing things into
their comm baskets."
We are aware of no other evidence which might lend criminal
significance to the statements of Mr. Armstrong. We can find,
therefore, no basis for a further investigation of the allegation
that Penal Code Section 134 has been violated.
Extortion (Penal Code Section 518) is the obtaining of property
from another with his consent, induced by a wrongful use of
force or fear. The fear may be induced by a threat to injure
a person or property, or to accuse the victim or a relative of
crime, or to impute to any of them a deformity, disgrace, or
crime, or to expose a secret affecting any of them. Penal Code
Section 524 makes it a felony to attempt to commit extortion.
Assuming that it can be proved that Gerald Armstrong expressed
the views alleged regarding the "way to the man's mind" and
that he wrote the note referring to "ASI" and "WDC", that does
not appear to us to be evidence that he or anyone obtained or
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Eleven
attempted to obtain property from anyone by means of any threat.
We therefore find no basis for further investigation of the
allegation that Gerald Armstrong committed extortion.
The solicitation of another person to commit or join in the
commission of burglary, receiving stolen property, or forgery
is a felony, the proof of whose commission requires the
testimony of two witnesses or of one witness plus evidence of
corroborating circumstances. To convict a person of solicitation,
the prosecution must prove that he asked another person to commit
a crime with the specific intent that it be committed.
The solicitation of burglary requires a request that one enter
a building or other specific place (See Penal Code Section 459)
intending to commit larceny or a felony; the solicitation of
receiving stolen property requires a request that one receive
property that one knows has been stolen; the solicitation of
forgery, a request that one, with the intent to defraud, sign
without authority another's name or counterfeit his handwriting,
or make any of the false documents specified in Penal Code
Section 470, or knowingly utter such falsified document,
signature, or handwriting.
Assuming that the allegations are true that Gerald Armstrong
told "Joey" to type staff work, that "issues can be created."
that "something should be done so that they can capitalize on
getting stuff into writing," that "if we can get anything on
Ingram (or) Peterson (or) finance records..., it's all vital,"
and that "Joey" should find what payments went to attorneys;
and, further assuming it to be true that Armstrong gave "Joey"
a list which specified "plan" or "anything" " on"
certain matters
and stated "get me an original ...issue type"; that he told "Joey"
he had given and would give documents "to the Feds," that he
could duplicate things and create documents, and that something
could be pasted and photocopied; these allegations nonetheless
do not constitute evidence that Mr. Armstrong, with the requisite
intent, asked anyone to commit the crime of burglary, receiving
stolen property, or forgery. We therefore find no basis for
further investigation of the allegation that Gerald Armstrong
violated Penal Code section 653f.
A person aids and abets the commission of a crime if, with
knowledge of the perpetrator's unlawful purpose and with the
intent to encourage or facilitate the commission of the crime,
he aids, promotes, or instigates its commission.
Rev. Ken Hoden, et al.
April 25, 1986
Page Twelve
The documents submitted to us indicate that Gerald Armstrong
gave "Joey" Al Lipkin's telephone number, that he told " Joey"
that he had told Lipkin some people might want to talk to him,
that he told "Joey" that he had told Lipkin to go after Peterson,
and that he mentioned Al Ristuccia to "Joey". The allegations
regarding Michael Flynn are described above.
None of those allegations is itself evidence of any unlawful
connection between those men and Mr. Armstrong. Further, since
we have been presented with no significant evidence of any
unlawful conduct on the part of Mr. Armstrong, we do not find
that there is sufficient evidence to warrant further investigation
of the allegations that Al Lipkin, Al Ristuccia, or Michael Flynn
aided and abetted the commission of any crime.
In addition to the lack of evidence set forth above, it must
also be noted that, lacking knowledge of the manner in which
the video tape recordings were obtained, we do not know whether
their acquisition violated either United States or California
law. If it violated federal law, material thus acquired even
if relevant - which it does not appear to be -might be
inadmissible in evidence.
For all of the reasons described above, we have concluded that
there is no evidence in support of the allegations of criminal
conduct on the part of Daryl Gates, Al Lipkin, Al Ristuccia
, Gerald Armstrong, and Michael Flynn. Accordingly, we shall
take no further action in this matter, and our file is closed.
Very truly yours,
IRA REINER District Attorney
CURT LIVESAY
Assistant District Attorney
By [signed]
ROBERT N. JORGENSEN
Deputy District Attorney
jeb
c: Chief Daryl Gates, L.A.P.D.
Ron Townsend, I.R.S.
Al Lipkin, I.R.S.
Al Ristuccia, I.R.S.
Gerald Armstrong
Michael Flynn
[page break]
FOOTNOTES
1. This is set forth in a document entitled "6. Obstruction
of Justice".
2. See Exhibit 7 attached to "6. Obstruction of Justice."
3. See Exhibit 11 attached to "6. Obstruction of Justice."
4. See Number 1, above.
5. See document entitled "5. Conspiracy."
6. See Number 1, above.
7. See document entitled "2. Soliciting... ."
8. See document entitled "1. Soliciting... ."
9. See Number 5, above.
10. See document entitled "4. Preparation of False Documentary
Evidence."
11. See document entitled "3. Extortion."
12. See document entitled "1. Soliciting... ."
13. See Exhibit 1 page 16.
14. See document entitled "2. Soliciting... ."
15. See Number 1, above.
16. See Number 5, above.
17. See Number 8, above.
18. During our December 10 meeting, Messrs. Peterson and
Butterworth identified "J" as "Joey".