§  What's New  ||  Search   ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §



Deponent: Kenneth David Long
Deponent's Fourth Affidavit
Sworn on 7th October 1987
In support of Plaintiff


1987 C No.6140



B E T W E E N :


- and -





I, KENNETH DAVID LONG of 1301 North Catalina, Los Angeles,

California 90027, United States, an executive employed in

the Legal Division of the Church of Scientology of

California, MAKE OATH and say as follows:-


1. I have been a member of the Church of Scientology for

11 years, and a member of the Church's staff for 7 years. I

am employed by the Church of Scientology of California

(hereinafter called "the Church") which is a non-profit

---page break---

making religious corporation registered in California since

1954. My duties for the past 5 years have required that I

work closely with and assist Church counsel in all phases of

litigation in the United States.


2. I have been deeply involved in the litigation of the case

of "Church of Scientology of California and Mary Sue Hubbard v.

Gerald Armstrong", Los Angeles Superior Court cases number C

420153, since the inception of that litigation on August 2, 1982.

During the course of my participation in that litigation, I

personally inventoried the materials surrendered pursuant to

court order to the Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court in

September, 1982 by Gerald Armstrong and his counsel. I also

attended almost every deposition and/or pre-trial proceeding held

in that case, and was present as an assistant to counsel

throughout each day of the trial proceedings in May and June,



3. While attending proceedings held in the instant matter on

Tuesday, October 6, 1987, I noted that the Court seemed to have

additional questions concerning the status of the documents in

the Armstrong case, and the relationship of the documents in

issue herein to said status. Responses to the court's questions,

to the content I have discerned them, follow hereinbelow.


4. The bottom line I wish to communicate is this: None of the

---page break---

documents or information currently at issue in this action are or

have been in the public domain as a result of proceedings in

other cases. The Church is requesting relief herein only as to

those documents and information which Mr Miller has obtained as a

direct result of Mr. Armstrong's breach of confidence.


5. Between February 1980 and December 1981, when he left the

Church, Mr. Armstrong was employed as, in effect, the librarian

or archivist responsible for Mr. Hubbard's personal documents.

The Church held such materials as Mr. Hubbard's bailee and, in

December 1981, the archives area held more than 30 file cabinets

of documentation. Mr. Armstrong was permitted by the Church to

furnish a large amount of these materials before leaving the

Church to author Omar V. Garrison, who was contracted at that

time to w{rite an authorized biography of L. Ron Hubbard. After

leaving this Church, between May and August 1982, Mr. Armstrong

took more than 5,000 pages, each of original and

photocopied documents from Mr. Garrison and furnished said

documents to attorneys suing the Church and Mr. Hubbard. Please

see Exhibit "KDL 27" attached to my second Affidavit, for Mr.

Armstrong's admission. These actions by Mr. Armstrong were the

later basis for the finding by the trial court that the Church

had proven a prima facie case of breach of confidence against Mr.

Armstrong. Please see the Memorandum of Intended Decision,

attached to my First Affidavit as Exhibit "KDL 18."

---page break---

6. After the Church brought suit against Mr. Armstrong, a

Temporary Restraining Order was issued on August 24, 1982.

Pursuant to that Order, Mr. Armstrong and his counsel surrendered

to the Clerk of the Court approximately 10,000 documents

contained in five boxes. I inventoried all of the surrendered

materials immediately upon their arrival with the court. These

doucments were placed under seal and then maintained under seal

thereafter by the Clerk pursuant to the preliminary injunction

issued on September 24, 1982. From this point onward, all such

documents were to be only in the possession of the court.

Evidence that Mr. Armstrong had failed to surrender all such

documents to the court, or had retained copies of any of the

documents surrendered to the court, would also be evidence of

contempt of court. As the court will note hereinbelow, such

evidence has been obtained.


7. The 10,000 documents in the possession of the court then

remained under seal, available for inspection only by the parties

to the Armstrong litigation and only for the purposes of that

litigation, from September 1982 until May 1984. In May 1984,

approximately 1,000 documents were taken from the 10,000 being

held by the Clerk, and those 1,000 documents were then introduced

into the trial of the Armstrong litigation as approximately 200

exhibits. The remaining 9,000 documents were held under seal

throughout the trial and until they were returned to the Church

in December 1986. At no time between September 1982 and December

---page break---

1986 were these 9,000 documents available to the general public,

or considered to be in the public domain. This fact is very

important since four of the seven documents at issue herein were

contained in these 9,000 documents which remained under seal at

all times. There is no legal way that Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Miller

and/or Mr. Newman could have possession of these materials.


8. Trial ended in the Armstrong case on June 8, 1984. Between

June 8 and June 20, 1984, the 200 exhibits were held by the trial

judge unavailable to anyone else, for his usein writing the

Memorandum of Intended Decision. No one other than court

personnel had access to those 200 exhibits. I know this to be

fact since I both maintained a watch over the area where the

documents were kept and verified with Ms. Rosie Hart, the trial

court's clerk, that no one was allowed access to these documents.

In issuing the Memorandum of Intended Decision, the trial court

ordered that 22 of the 200 exhibits were to remain sealed. Those

exhibits joined the other 9,000 documents, leaving just

approximately 178 exhibits affected by the following events.


9. On June 25, 1984, the first of what was to be a series of

orders temporarily staying the unsealing of the trial exhibits

was issued by the California court of Appeal. Please note

Exhibit "KDL 19" attached to my first Affidavit. In addition,

there is now produced and shown to me marked "KDL 34", a

chronological History of Major Armstrong Case Orderss, which I

---page break---

have personally prepared to assist counsel and the court.


10. In reviewing Exhibit "KDL 34" attached hereto, the Court

will no doubt note what appear to be "windows," or gaps between

the vacating of one order and the issuance of the next. These

"windows" are far more apparent than they were real. To begin

with, I maintained, along with my staff, a daily check with each

court in which a temporary stay order was pending in order to

ensure that I learned the minute a ruling was issued. So before

the trial court received any order vacating a sealing order,

the Church obtained another order sealing them up again. In

actuality, it took 3-5 days for the trial court to receive a

vacating order from the Higher Court and before recript I would

personally, hand deliver a new stay order. In addition, I also

had my staff maintain a watch over the area of the court where

these documents were kept during each so called "window" period

and no one viewed and/or copied the materials.


11. There was just a single incident when the 178 trial

exhibited were made available for public inspection, on December

19, 1984 and until midday on December 20, 1984. This occured

after an injunction issued by the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of

Appeals expired, and was then halted by the issuance of a

temporary restraining order on December 20th in the "Roes" case,

previously described in my Second Affidavit. I was physically

present at the court during the entire time that the documents

---page break---

were available for inspection by the public. I personally

observed that, with the exception of a UPI reporter who was

allowed only to view some of Mr. Hubbard's military records for

no more than 30 minutes, only Scientologists obtained access to

see the 178 trial exhibits. Additionally, I personally observed

and then verified with court personnel that no one, including the

reporter, were permitted copies of any of the exhibits. People

were permitted to view the documents only and not copy them.


12. Following the issuance of the "Roes" order on December 20,

1984, the 178 trial exhibits were never again unsealed. These

178 trial exhibits, the other tiral exhibits which had been left

sealed throughout, and the 9,000 documents nver entered into the

trial, were then returned to the Church in December 1986.


13. As is clearly shown by the above events, no one was ever

able to obtain copies of any of the 10,000 documents from the

trial court. This fact is the basis for my statements, in my

Second Affidavit, that Mr. Caven-Atack has perjured himself tto

this Court by claiming, in a sworn Affidavit filed herein, that

he obtained copies from the court. Mr. Caven-Atack's obvious

lack of specifics in his affidavit emphasizes this. Suspiciously

left out of his affidavit are the facts supporting Mr. Caven-

Atack's claim that he obtained the documents form the California

court. Nowhere does Mr. Cavan-Atack state when he was in

California, when he went into the court, signed the visitor's

sign-in log and the details of the actual copying. Mr. Caven-

---page break---

Atack is silent on these points obviously because he never went

to the court as verified by my conversation with the court clerk

and my review of the visitor's sign-in log. There can be no

doubt that the documents in issue herein, no matter through whom

they were funneled to Mr. Miller, originated from Mr. Armstrong,

in violation of court orders.


14. I have reviewed the Second Affidavit of Russell Francis

Miller, relating to certain letters from Mr. Hubbard to one Helen

0'Brien during 1953. The letter discussed by Mr. Miller at

paragraph 3 of his affidavit is not at issue in this action, it

is neither listed in the amended writ filed herein nor mentioned

in my Second Affidavit precisely because, as Mr. Miller

understands, it is a matter of public record. Mr. Miller

attempts to create confusion with this Court by the inclusion of

this particular letter.


15. At paragraph 4 of his Second Affidvait, Mr. Miller

references three other Helen O'Brien letters which are at issue

herein and states he obtained copies of these letters from Mr.

Ron Newman. These three letters are part of the 9,000 documents

which remained under seal in the court at all times and were

returned to the Church in December 1986. Mr. Ron Newman nor

anyone else could have legal possesssion of these letters since

they could not have been obtained from the Court. It is

interesting that Mr. Miller has "no idea" where Mr. Newman

---page break---

obtained these letters, an important fact which would obviously

be of interest to any researcher, author or anyone else receiving

these documents. Gerald Armstrong was the only person that had

these letters and he knowingly violated several court orders -

the August 24, 1982 court order to turn in all materials to

the court and the June 20, 1984 court order sealing the

documents. He obviously didn't keep them sealed since Mr. Newman

and Mr. Miller have copies and he didn't turn in all copies of

the letters when ordered, since as a condition of settlement Mr.

Armstrong turned in any materials he had concerning LRH or the

Church. I personally inspected the documents he turned in in

January 1987 and among them were the three Helen O'Brien letters,

letters that he was ordered to turn into the court.


16. In order to clarify for the Court the exact status of each

of the documents at issue herein, I have prepared a short Summary

of said documents. There is now produced and shown to me marked

"KDL 35" a copy of said Summary. As the Court will note, four of

the doucments in issue - the three O'Brien letters referred to

hereinabove and Mr. Hubbard's letter to Polly - have never been

trial exhibits. They have remained under seal at all times.

Three of the documents - two of Mr. Hubbard's boyhood diaries and

the letter to Mr. Hubbard from his mother were Armstrong trial

exhibits, but have also remained under seal as shown by the

attached Chronological History of Court Orders. The only source

for these documents, was not the trial court but Gerald Armstrong

---page break---


SWORN at 23/28
Fleet St, London

This 7th day of October 1987

Before me,

[Signed] Mark W. X Cooksley

Mark Cooksley
Solicitor of the
Supreme Court

[Signed] Kenneth David Long

This document in pdf format.

See also Armstrong Declarations of 03-15-1990 and 12-25-1990


§  What's New  ||  Search   ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §