Gerry Armstrong--Declaration of Michael Flynn 07-31-1986

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

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL FLYNN

I, MICHAEL J. FLYNN, hereby state and declare as

follows:

1) I am an attorney and a member of the Massachusetts

Bar. Since 1979 I have represented numerous individuals

involved in litigation with the Church of Scientology, including

Paulette Cooper, LaVenda Van Schaick, Gerald Armstrong and

others.

2) LaVenda Van Schaick was my first Scientology

client. Her complaint included claims for fraud, breach of

contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress,

violation of the Federal RICO Statute and other claims. There

is little doubt that LaVenda was a victim of Scientology and was

the subject of substantial Scientology harassment. Nonetheless,

she was a difficult client to represent for several reasons.

First, she had a highly selective memory. She seemed to

remember only what she wanted to and we had a difficult time

obtaining the full story from her. She is also prone to

exaggeration and distortion. In researching her tort claims, we

sometimes found out that what actually occurred was the exact

opposite of what she told us.

3) LaVenda's emotional state was also very delicate.

Although she had suffered serious Scientology harassment, she

believed that everything bad that had happened to her since she

left the organization was attributable to Scientology agents.

She was very emotional and prone to breaking down when

questioned about the details of her case. In 1981, after about

a year and a half of litigation, she could no longer stand the

pressure of being in Boston and returned to Florida to live with

her parents. She then had what appeared to be a nervous

breakdown and was unable to work for about a year. Despite our

urging, Ms. Van Schaick never sought professional help.

4) In early July 1982, Ms. Van Schaick returned to

Boston for her deposition. This was the first time she had been

back to Boston since leaving for Florida. The deposition was

scheduled for the 4th of July weekend and I only attended the

first morning of the deposition, Saturday, July 3, 1982. David

Banash, an associate of my co-counsel, Wayne Hollingsworth,

handled the remainder of the deposition while I and my family

went to Lake Placid for the holiday. I do not remember if I

returned to Boston before LaVenda's deposition was completed and

she returned to Florida.

5) At about the same time, Gerry Armstrong began to

send me documents concerning L. Ron Hubbard and the Church of

Scientology. Many of these documents were similar or identical

to other documents I had already collected regarding Hubbard and

Scientology. I received about three boxes of materials from Mr.

Armstrong. These materials at all times were kept in my office

in front of my couch. I don't recall any Armstrong documents

being stored in the small office next to my office nor in other

parts of our offices at 12 Union Wharf. Nor were there ever 20

boxes of documents.

6) When LaVenda came to Boston for her deposition, I

probably showed her some of the Armstrong documents and told her

who Mr. Armstrong was. I do not recall permitting LaVenda to

browse through the documents on her own and do not believe I

would have allowed her to do so. The documents, however, were

plainly available to anyone who had access to my office, and if

my office were open she would have had no problem examining the

materials.

7 ) In August 1982, more than a month after LaVenda's

deposition, the California Superior Court ordered us to return

all of the documents Mr. Armstrong had given to me. My staff

and I put together all of the documents we could find and sent

the documents, in their original boxes, to the Los Angeles

Superior Court. As I have stated in my prior Declarations, we

complied to the best of our ability with the Temporary

Restraining Order entered by this Court with regard to the

Armstrong documents. We intended to fully comply with that

order and I am aware of no violation of the Sealing Order,

deliberate or inadvertent, by anyone in our office. To the best

of my knowledge, all of the documents Mr. Armstrong sent me were

sent to the Los Angeles Superior Court.

8) LaVenda returned to Boston in December 1983 for a

///

continuation of her deposition. This too was a hysterical

affair, with LaVenda frequently breaking down in the middle of

the examination, sometimes for no particular reason. My

co-counsel and I had to fight each day to get her to return to

the deposition.

9) She returned again in March 1984 for a court

ordered mental and psychiatric examination pursuant to

Fed.R.Civ.P. 35. LaVenda refused to cooperate in taking the

basic psychological tests, and was hostile and abusive to the

doctors. After an evidentiary hearing, the Magistrate in

LaVenda's case found that she had "deliberately and wilfully

attempted to obstruct discovery" and had made a sham and mockery

out of the entire proceeding." Magistrate DeGiacomo recommended

that LaVenda's case be dismissed as a sanction for her

deliberate obstruction. A copy of Magistrate DeGiacomo's

recommendation is annexed as Exhibit 1 to my deposition. Judge

Garrity agreed that LaVenda had deliberately intended to

obstruct discovery, but disagreed with the sanction. LaVenda

was required to pay for the costs of a re-examination. Since

LaVenda had no money, I paid the money for her. A copy of Judge

Garrity's Order is annexed as Attachment 2.

10) In September 1984, LaVenda returned once again to

Boston for re-examination. At that time, we no longer had any

Armstrong documents in our possession, so LaVenda could not

possibly have examined them. I have never had numerous boxes of

documents scattered across the floor of my office or the floor

of the office next to mine. Nor have I ever had boxes labelled

"Armstrong Case".

11) The conversation that LaVenda described in

Paragraph 10 of her Affidavit never occurred. Except for Court

documents and public records, I have never received any

materials from the Internal Revenue Service. I have never

reviewed any financial documents for them. At no time do I ever

recall discussing any financial documents concerning the Church

of Scientology with LaVenda. I do not recall allowing LaVenda

to copy any materials in September 1984, and I do not believe

that I discussed documents with her at all. When LaVenda

returned to Boston in September 1984 we were very concerned

about making sure she could get through the second psychiatric

examination. Most of the time I spent with her related to

preparing her for the examination. I had her see Dr. John

Clark, a psychiatrist, who I thought might be able to assist her

in handling the stress of the examination. I have no memory of

LaVenda seeing any documents during this visit and I am certain

that she could not have copied 3500 pages.

12) I never requested David Banash to obtain documents

from LaVenda that I had previously given to her. Nor did I ever

call LaVenda and ask her to return documents. I, in fact, never

knew that she had any Armstrong documents. I do know, that if

she did obtain any Armstrong documents from my office, she could

only have obtained them before any sealing order was entered. I

never received any package in the mail from LaVenda containing

any Armstrong documents.

13) In June 1985, LaVenda returned to Boston for trial

of her case. We discussed many things during that weekend in

preparation for trial. At no point did LaVenda tell me that she

had any of the Armstrong documents in her possession. The day

before we were scheduled to go to trial, June 9, 1985, LaVenda

decided to settle the case. LaVenda, my co-counsel, LaVenda's

family and I had lengthy discussions regarding whether we should

go to trial or not. The pros and cons of going forward were

debated at length and the decision was not an easy one.

Nonetheless, once LaVenda decided to settle the case she was

extremely happy. She was very content to have the matter

resolved and she was pleased with the amount of money she,

herself, would be receiving. Both her father and myself

compromised the amount of money LaVenda owed us in order to make

sure there was sufficient money for LaVenda. She willingly

accepted the amount and returned to Florida extremely happy.

14) A few days after the settlement, LaVenda called me

to let me know that she was very happy with the settlement and

to thank me. The next few times she spoke with persons in our

office she seemed happy and content. She told us she was

planning to buy a house with her settlement proceeds and the

future looked rosy. Shortly thereafter, however, LaVenda's

calls became more demanding and suspicious. She wanted a

detailed accounting of the expenses in her case, which we sent

to her. She seemed unhappy that so much money had been spent on

her case, but did not make any specific complaints. She then

let us know that she was now unhappy with the settlement and she

felt the case should have gone to trial. She believed she

should have received more money. She also let us know that she

was having a lawyer review the documents we prepared and that,

for some reason, she no longer trusted us.

15) It became apparent that LaVenda quickly went

through the money she received in settlement of her case. The

deal to buy a house fell through. She began moving around a

great deal again. She began to make hysterical calls to my

office, claiming that she was being harassed worse than ever and

hoping that we too were being harassed because we had settled

her case against her will. This later claim was ridiculous.

16) The conversation LaVenda claims occurred in August,

1985 never happened. I never requested has to return any

documents, nor did I ever tell her she could go to jail if she

possessed any documents. As I have stated before, I had no

indication at that time that LaVenda even had any Armstrong

documents. In fact, during this time, I am not certain I had a

way to get in touch with Lavenda. She began to move around a

lot and our office did not have her telephone number.

17) One Saturday afternoon in June 1986 I received

call from Gerry Armstrong, who was working as a paralegal in our

office. Mr. Armstrong told me that LaVenda had called and

claimed she had Armstrong documents which she was going to

expose to the press. LaVenda had left a number and I called her

back. She repeated the threats she had made to Mr. Armstrong to

me. I told her that the allegations were false, that she never

received any Armstrong documents from me under improper

circumstances. I told her I suspected the Scientologists had

put her up to this and then I told her that I assumed she was

being paid for making up these false stories. Indeed, the

similarity between the false tales LaVenda was manufacturing and

the perjurious claims made by Paulette Cooper in the affadavits

Scientology purchased from Cooper made it plain that no mere

coincidence was involved. I told LaVenda that she could say

whatever she wanted and file whatever she felt she had to file.

I also let her know, however, that if I discovered that she had

been paid for perjury, I would notify the appropriate law

enforcement agencies.

18) It is very ironic the Church of Scientology is now

relying upon LaVenda's affidavits. For years, the Church of

Scientology publicly claimed that LaVenda was a liar and that

her affidavits could not be trusted. Annexed is Attachment 3 to

my Affidavit is a Guardian's Office program relating to

LaVenda. The first page makes it clear that the Guardian's

Office itself considered LaVenda to be a "chronic liar". I am

also enclosing a copy of a press release the Guardian's Office

circulated in response to LaVenda's Affidavit filed in her

case. The release accuses LaVenda of theft, dishonesty and

other crimes. Its entire import is that LaVenda's affidavits

cannot be trusted under any circumstances.

19) LaVenda has been unstable, mercurial and

emotional. Nonetheless, I believed she had been harmed by the

Church of Scientology and my co-counsel and I did our best to

try and help her. We recognized, however, that her instability

made her an unpredictable client, at best, and one who could not

be trusted with sensitive information. While we kept her

informed with the progress of her lawsuit, neither my colleagues

nor myself would trust her with sensitive information. I cannot

believe any of my co-counsel would ever violate a court order

and have no reason to suspect any of them have. Nonetheless,

the last person any of us would give sensitive information to

would be LaVenda Van Schaick due to her unpredictability.

20) Similarly, the allegation that I or my co-counsel

may have sold sealed Armstrong documents to Der Spiegel or other

media outlets is ridiculous. Since I began litigating against

the Church of Scientology, Church employees have stolen 20,000

documents from my trash, have infiltrated my office with phony

clients, have placed me under extensive surveillance by their

own Guardian's Office members and by private detectives hired by

them, and have even tried to frame me for the forgery of a 2

Million Dollar check. For years I have suspected my telephone

is being tapped. The Church of Scientology has made it clear

that they want to eliminate me from this litigation by any means

whether through disqualification motions, lawsuits filed against

me, or framing me for crimes. Under such circumstances, I would

have to be insane to violate a court order for money,

particularly by giving sealed documents to media outlet where

there would be very few other sources for the documents. I have

never given any sealed documents to any media organizations, nor

would I allow any of my associate attorneys to do so. My office

has documents sealed in other Scientology cases and we have

always taken the greatest care to insure those documents are not

disseminated. In this case, of course, when we do not even

possess the Armstrong documents, it would have been impossible

for us to sell sealed documents to Der Spiegel.

I DECLARE UNDER THE PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY

UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING IS

TRUE AND CORRECT.

EXECUTED THIS 31ST DAY OF JULY 1986, IN BOSTON,

MASSACHUSETTS.

Signature Michael J. Flynn Declaration of 07-31-1986

See also:
Armstrong Declaration of 08-02-1986
Judge Breckenrige Minute Order of 08-18-1986
See how the cult is continuing to use Van Schaick's perjurious declaration in its CLameleon Intel Op

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