DECLARATION OF GERALD ARMSTRONG
I, Gerald Armstrong, declare and state that:
1. I was a Scientologist and held many positions in many sectors of
Scientology, hereinafter referred to as "the organization," from 1969 to 1981.
I have been involved in organization litigation as a witness, defendant,
plaintiff and paralegal from 1982 until the present. I have testified in three
trials and in depositions in ten organization cases approximately forty-seven
days. I have authored over twenty-five declarations concerning L. Ron
Hubbard, Scientology practices and the litigation. I am by trade a
philosopher, writer and artist. In 1986 I founded a church which now has
many members internationally.
2. I am the defendant and cross-complainant in the case of
Church of Scientology of California v. Armstrong Los Angeles Superior Court
No. C420153. A decision in that case was rendered after a lengthy bench
trial by Judge Paul Breckenridge, Jr. on June 20, 1984. The California
Court of Appeal opinion, No. B025920, issued July 29, 1991, affirming the
Superior Court's decision, has recently been filed in this case as an exhibit to
the Aznarans' oppositions.
3. In December 1986 I entered into a settlement agreement with the
organization, a copy of which is filed herewith as Exhibit [1]. The organization
did not honor the agreement, however, but has continued a program of
threats and attacks to this day. I have detailed what I knew of these threats
and attacks up to March 15, 1990 in my declaration of that date. The
circumstances at the time of the settlement and a rebuttal of various
organization attacks are contained in a declaration I executed on December
25, 1990. I can supply these declarations to the Court if it so wishes.
4. I make this declaration to respond to various allegations about me
made by the organization in its papers recently filed in this case.
5. Organization attorney Laurie Bartilson states that my aid to
attorney Ford Greene in preparing the Aznarans' recently filed oppositions to
organization motions "violated this Court's orders and the Local Rules."
(Defendants' Opposition To Ex Parte Application To File Plaintiffs' Genuine
Statement of Issues [sic] Re Defendants' Motions ( 1 ) To Exclude Expert
Testimony; and (2) For Separate Trial On Issues of Releases and Waivers;
Request that Oppositions Be Stricken; hereinafter "Opp To Ex P", p.2,3.) I aid
Mr. Greene and the Aznarans out of my own free will and my sense of right
and wrong. If I am ordered by any lawfully constituted court to cease
rendering such aid I will.
6. Ms. Bartilson states that I "[am] employed by Joseph Yanny on this
very case."(Opp To Ex P p.4) I am not.
7. Ms. Bartilson states that for me "to now have switched [my] aid to
Greene's office further taints all (emphasis in original) of the papers filed by
Greene..."(Opp To Ex P p.5) It doesn't, because there was not and is not any
taint.
8. Ms. Bartilson states that my aiding Mr. Greene "is grounds for [his]
disqualification."(Opp to Ex P p.5) It isn't; but if this Court were so to order
me, I will comply.
9. Ms. Bartilson suggests that Mr. Greene should be disqualified
because I am "a paralegal formerly employed by defendant's lawyers." (Opp
To Ex P p.5) I have never been employed by any organization lawyer.
10. Ms. Bartilson declares that "[she has] been informed by private
investigators hired by [her] law firm that [I] was present at Ford Greene's
offices many times from August 3, 1991 through at least August 21, 1991,
2
often for hours and days at a time." (Opp To Ex P p.9, para 4) I was outside
the United States from August 3 until August 10, and not in Marin County
where Mr. Greene's office is located until August 13, 1991. Filed herewith as
Exhibit [2] are copies of my boarding passes for my flights from San Francisco
to Johannesburg, South Africa on July 19 and 2 0, returning August 9 and 10.
11. Organization attorney William Drescher states that "[a]s [I am]
Yanny's paralegal on this case, [my] near affiliation as an assistant to Ford
Greene is truly outrageous." (Supplemental Memorandum In Support of
Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Complaint With Prejudice; hereinafter "Supp
Memo," p.4) I am not Mr. Yanny's paralegal on this case, and my affiliation
with Mr. Greene is wholly peaceful, lawful, decent, helpful, respectful, and
humorous.
12. Mr. Drescher states that "Yanny's involvement in this case
continues, this time through a different "extension"--the improper activities
of Yanny's paralegal, Gerald Armstrong." (Supp Memo p.5) I am not Mr.
Yanny's paralegal. I answered his call for help during the period he was
attorney of record in this case. I spent parts of two days on July 15 and 16
in Mr. Yanny's office during which time the only "work" I did was to write
two declarations, one of which was also used by Mr. Greene. Mr. Yanny gave
me no instructions or suggestions at any time to pass on to Mr. Greene or to
anyone else involved in the Aznaran litigation. I am not Mr. Yanny's
"extension" into this case. This organization's actions in attempting to deny
their victims, the Aznarans, not only legal representation but support to the
Aznarans' legal representatives is what is improper.
13. Mr. Drescher states that in 1984 I was " plotting against the
Scientology Churches and seeking out staff members who would be willing to
assist [me] in overthrowing Church leadership." (Supp Memo p.5) The
3
organization is not a church. Organization operatives David Kluge and
Michael Rinder sought me out and gained my trust through a close friend
whom the organization coerced into participating in an operation to attempt
to entrap me. The organization operatives stated that they wanted to reform
the organization and rid it of its criminal activities and they asked me to
help. They said they wanted to save Scientology from its criminal
leadership. They stated they were operating secretly within the
organization for fear of, inter alia, being killed. They used my willingness to
communicate and to help to attempt to enveigle me into the commission of a
crime. When that failed, the organization simply twisted my refusal to
participate in the suggested criminal act into further accusations.
14. Mr. Drescher states that "[t]he Church obtained information about
[my] plans and, through a police-sanctioned investigation, provided (me] with
the "defectors" [I] sought." (Supp Memo p.5) That the organization and its
lawyers have told this lie so many times in so many jurisdictions over so
many years has not made it any more true now than when they concocted
the plot. I was videotaped. The videos are still embarrassing to me because
I use foul language. What I say does not mean what the organization and its
lawyers say it means. A private investigator (who, during this period
threatened to put a bullet between my eyes) obtained a false authorization
from an LAPD officer, who was himself suspended six months for his
participation in the crime. The organization did not obtain information
about my plans; it created the whole operation, including what my " plans" were to
be.
15. Mr. Drescher states that "[o]n November 30, 1984 [I] met with one
Michael Rinder, an individual whom [I] thought to be one of [my] " agents"
(but-who in reality was loyal to the Church" (parens in original). (Supp
4
Memo p.5) I never considered Rinder my agent, nor did I consider that I
had any agents. Rinder was not loyal to the "church." He was being operated
by what the operatives called the "criminal leadership."
16. Mr. Drescher states that "the conversation [was] recorded with
written permission from law enforcement." (Supp memo p.5) It wasn't. The
Chief of the LAPD denied authorizing the illegal operation, and the officer
was suspended for his 'permission."
17. Mr. Drescher quotes some out-of-context statements from my
November 1984 meeting with Michael Rinder and avers that they meant
that I was recommending that the group of "reformers" did not need "actual
evidence of wrongdoing to make allegations in Court against the Church
leadership." (Supp Memo p.5) My answer to Rinder is out of frustration
because he appeared to be unable to understand that a complaint contains
allegations, and the proof of the allegations is achieved through
documentation and testimony, including even the well-known fact of the
organization's long history of destruction of evidence, obtained through the
litigation up to the end of trial. Elsewhere and in other conversations I
discussed with the "reformers" what was actually known and documented,
and which could be alleged in the complaint they insisted they wanted to
file. I discussed with the 'reformers" an inventory of criminal acts for which
we knew the organization was responsible. They included burglary of state
and federal offices, theft, obstruction of justice, blackmail, assault, civil rights
violations, immigration fraud, tax fraud, attempted entrapment of Federal
judges, framing of my own attorney Michael Flynn, the use of preclear folder
information against all Scientologists, all the acts which flowed from " " fair"
game," and the use of their charitable corporation funds to carry out these
criminal acts.
5
18. Organization attorney Eric Lieberman states that "the utter
disregard of the truth that the Aznarans have made the trademark of their
litigation effort, bears the unmistakable signature of Gerald Armstrong,
whose theory of litigating against Churches of Scientology, as captured on
videotape in 1984, is not to worry about what the facts really are, but
instead to choose a state of "facts" that should survive a challenge by the
Church and "just allege it."" (Reply In Support of Defendants' Motion For
Summary judgment Based On the Statute of Limitations; hereinafter "Reply
Stat Lim," p.2,3) This is not true. It is simply further exploitation of the
fruits of the organization's covert actions against me: the illegal 1984
videotape regarding what the organization calls the "Armstrong Operation."
Until I started to help Mr. Greene, I had nothing to do with the Aznaran case,
which was filed in April 1988, except for my help to Mr. Yanny described in
paragraph 12 above. I have given no facts to the Aznarans, nor any legal
strategy. Besides the declarations I have written, all of which are now
before this Court, I have written not one word in any of the filed papers. My
help to Ford Greene in all of the papers recently filed has been in
proofreading, copying, collating, hole-punching, stapling, stamping,
packaging, labeling, air freighting and mailing. Mr. Greene and I have had
several conversations during this period, some of which certainly concerned
the litigation.
19. Mr. Lieberman states that "[i]t is clear that [my] influence and
philosophy permeates the Aznaran's oppositions." (Reply Stat Lim p.3) I
pray that that is true, because my philosphy in litigating against the
organization is to tell the truth, have the faith that, no matter what lies the
organization tells or operations it runs or how threatening the organization
appears to be, truth will prevail; that, no matter how the organization
6
perverts the law, manipulates courts, testifies falsely, fights unfairly, wields
religion as a sword and then a shield and abuses the legal process, justice
will, if fought for honorably, triumph.
20. Mr. Lieberman states that [o]n August 19, 1991 [I] admitted to
one of defendants' counsel that [I ] was at Greene's office "helping out.""
(Reply Stat Lim p.3) I admitted no such thing. I was doing nothing even
faintly improper which would require admission. I have been completely up
front about my being in Mr. Greene's office and helping him. It is the
organization which has skulked around and engaged in improprieties which
it should admit to. I was so shocked when I discovered the organization
operatives videotaping me on August 2 0 that I wrote Mr. Lieberman to
protest the harassment. When I found the operation continuing on August
21 I again wrote Mr. Lieberman, and called his office, advised one of his
associates of the operation and pleaded that it be called off. Copies of my
letters are filed herewith as Exhibits [3]and [4]. Mr. Lieberman has not
answered my letters, has not mentioned them in his papers, which he signed
on August 26, but has escalated the attack on my character and intentions.
The operation has continued at least until August 30. Because of its form
and nature, and because of my knowledge of organization operations and its
philosophy of opportunistic hatred, I believe that this operation does not
have as its major goal the proof that I am helping Mr. Greene. I believe its
goal is intimidation and the assembly of intelligence information for future
acts.
21. Mr. Lieberman states that "the real thrust of the Aznarans'
Opposition is ....the "just allege it" philosophy of Yanny's paralegal, Gerald
Armstrong." (Reply Stat Lim p.33) I am not Mr. Yanny's paralegal, and "just
allege it" is really the organization's litigation theory. L. Ron Hubbard
7
established the Guardian's Office and then the Office of Special Affairs to
carry out his way of litigating.
"In the face of danger from Governments or courts ......
If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or
any organization, always find or manufacture (emphasis added)
enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace." L.
Ron Hubbard, Policy Letter of 15 August, 1960 "Dept of Govt
Affairs." (Exhibit [5] )
22. Mr. Lieberman states that "[my] "helping out" while the Opposition
was concocted not only reveals the continuing taint of Yanny's involvement
with this case, it establishes the guiding principle that resulted in [the]
Opposition..." (Reply Stat Lim p.34) Not one thing, not the ability to
proofread, photocopy, collate, hole-punch, staple, package, label, air freight
or mail that I did in connection with the preparation of the Aznarans'
oppositions, did I learn from Mr. Yanny. Not the ability to spot and confront
organization operatives did I learn from Mr. Yanny. Not the ability to write,
nor any fact or idea or word in any declaration did I learn from Mr. Yanny. I
have been the target of "fair" game since I left the organization in 1981, and
understand its philosophy. I know the organization's litigation theories and
practices and I understand the psychopathology of L. Ron Hubbard and why
he and his organization came to be viewed by Courts as paranoid and
schizophrenic. There is nothing Mr. Yanny could possibly tell me which
would surprise me or be additional to what I know about this organization.
Mr. Yanny has provided no "guiding principle" whatsoever. The organization,
by making and maintaining fair game as its guiding principle, established the
guiding principle in this litigation. The fair game doctrine will dog the
organization as long as there are honest and free men or until the
8
organization, not denies its existence, but completely and sincerely
repudiates it.
23. Mr. Lieberman states that "[my] philosophy of litigation is that
facts and the truth are irrelevant and that all that is required to prevail is to
allege whatever needs to be alleged." (Reply Stat Lim p.34) I have survived
all the cross-examination and depositions by the organization, the
documentation attacks by the organization, the character assassination by
the organization, the use of my preclear folder information, the operations,
the threats, the assaults, because truth is relevant. Although there
undoubtedly is some memory loss over the past twenty-two years, and
although there may even be some discrepancies in forty-seven days of
sworn testimony, I have survived examination and cross-examination
because I have, as much as is humanly possible, told the truth. I have said
what I have known, known when I didn't know something, and stated my
opinions as opinions. It is my opinion that one honest man can confront and
vanquish a dishonest organization, no matter how big or how organized.
Gratefully there are a few honest men to make the work lighter.
24. Mr. Lieberman states that "[t]he Aznarans' desperation to defeat
this motion is so profound that they resort not only to the "just allege it"
litigation philosophy of Joseph A. Yanny's paralegal assigned to this case,
Gerald Armstrong, but also to enlisting Armstrong's help in this cynical, say-
anything-you-have-to approach to the truth." (Reply In Support of
Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment Pursuant To the First
Amendment; hereinafter Reply First Am, p. 2 ) I am not Mr. Yanny's
paralegal, and I am not assigned to this case. The desperation which
resulted in the enlisting o my help had a purely logistical basis. Mr. Greene
faced a mountain of organizational motions which required oppositions, and
9
no time to do them. He has no employees but a secretary who comes in a
couple of evenings a week sometimes and sometimes on Saturdays. He
needed simple office backup in the form of proofreading, photocopying,
collating, hole-punching, etc. I am blessed with those simple office skills,
and I have a knowledge of the subject matter and the cause in which Mr.
Greene labors. I am aware of the awesome disparity of resources between
Mr. Greene and the army of law firms, lawyers, paralegals, secretaries, and
organizational legal machinery of his opposition. I am aware of the
organization's policies and practices of neutralizing or eliminating the legal
support of its enemies. How could anyone resist a call to help in this
situation? It was not a conspiratorial thought that plunked me down over a
year ago within running distance of the Hub Law Offices and sporting the
same zip code. What it was was merely making the inevitable not only
funny but easier.
25. Organization attorneys have made much of the fact that Joseph
Yanny has been enjoined from representing me in litigation. adverse to the
organization. (Op To Ex P p.10; Supp Memo p.4) He is, of course, its former
attorney. I have been working with Mr. Greene since August 17. I have not
seen nor heard one word of Mr. Yanny's influence in this case, beyond the
fact that the organization just alleged it.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California and the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on September 3, 1991 at Sleepy Hollow, California.
[signed]
G. Armstrong
10
Exhibit [1]
Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement
12-06-1986
Exhibit [2]
Copies of Armstrong's boarding passes [.pdf]
Exhibit [3]
Letter to Lieberman 08-21-1991
Exhibit [4]
Letter to Lieberman 08-22-1991
Exhibit [5]
HCO Policy Letter of 15 August 1960 DEPT OF GOVT AFFAIRS © 1960 L. Ron
Hubbard