The Real Value of the Scientology
v. Armstrong Case
On October 19, 2005 the California Court of Appeal issued a decision
granting Scientology’s petition to have the jail sentences and fines reinstated
against me that Marin County Superior Court Judge Lynn Duryee had dispensed
with at a trial on April 9, 2004.
The Court of Appeal’s decision orders 28 days in jail and $3600 in fines
for 14 utterances. The decision also orders a $1000 fine for around 133 more utterances.
Since I made the 14 utterances, and also since I made the 133 utterances, I
have made countless thousands more utterances. Conceivably the Court’s decision
could lead to my being imprisoned for life, and perhaps several lifetimes.
An utterance is anything I say or write expressing my religious beliefs about
my religious experiences in relation to the Scientology religion. For everyone’s
well being it is impossible to stop uttering utterances that relate in some way
to my religious beliefs.
I have a number of legal options, but they really depend on finding an attorney.
My immediate task without a lawyer is to petition for rehearing to the same appellate
panel that issued the decision. The petition will have my law related thoughts
that I’m not including here.
I certainly don’t in any way agree with the result. In addition to the
jail times and fines, the Court of Appeal’s decision keeps me in a defensive
posture and elevates the threat of other attacks. It’s a shame really because
the Court had an opportunity to turn the war around for the Unterdrückerischen
I do not believe that any court in the U.S. can lawfully do what the California
Courts have done for Scientology to crush me, in multiple cases and over more
than a decade. I believe that there will always exist a need and a lawful right
that cannot be contracted away to have such use of the law ruled unlawful, until
it is ruled unlawful. So I am given yet another reason that calls for me to speak
The Court of Appeal’s decision, although positioned in the narrowest
of contexts as justifiable punishment to be inflicted on me, in the broad real
context, is simply the most recent act, in Scientology’s long record of
aggressive, willful acts in furtherance of its long criminal conspiracy to deprive
me of my human rights.
Scientology head David Miscavige is well aware of this, so the Court’s
decision has only increased organization paranoia and eruptivity, and consequently
increased as well the multi-channel threat to Caroline and me. The opinion in
reality solves nothing for Miscavige and only makes his and Scientology’s
atrocious socio-legal situation worse.
You can be sure that he celebrated the big win against me. He might have feted
the whole Scientology legal team that brought him home the bacon, and maybe he
gave Moxon a crystal goblet or a golden plaque. To have me resent to jail, after
I had escaped their trap, is a big win for Miscavige and Moxon and virtually all
Scientologists. It could be the kind of a big win that some of those big winners
sometime would wish they hadn’t won, but for now all Scientologists world
wide are reveling in their big win getting Gerry Armstrong jailed for uttering
the truth about Scientology.
As valuable as the Scientology v. Armstrong
case may be to Miscavige and his Scientologist followers, it has even greater
value to people around the world who oppose Scientology fraud, lies, aggressiveness
and criminality in their countries. The case proves some basic charges against
Scientology, and makes this proof with a wealth of documentation. Pastor Thomas
Gandow and the Dialog Zentrum Berlin
have enabled Caroline and me to make virtually every document filed in the case
immediately available on my web site.
The Scientology v. Armstrong case is the best example of what the
actual intentions of Miscavige and the Scientologists are in the global human
rights arena. Scientology makes a lot of noise about being a “human rights”
organization, and being in the forefront of the “human rights” struggle.
It has a “human rights” presence on the Internet, and an international
network of “human rights” offices. The Scientology v. Armstrong
case shows, however, that Scientology’s human rights claims are a total
The case, and no less now with the recent Court of Appeal decision, shows that
every organizational piece of Scientology, and all their directors, officers,
employees, volunteers, agents and lawyers, are contracted to seek the destruction
of human rights. Even being known for destroying rights because of their contract
and actions to destroy my rights is more desirable for Miscavige and the Scientologists
than actually canceling the contract and stopping the destructive actions.
What Miscavige and the Scientologists are doing to me is in violation of not
only international human rights charters, but in violation of U.S. Civil Rights
criminal statutes. Since the vast majority of my religious expressions for which
Scientology wants me imprisoned and financially ruined were expressed in Canada,
Europe or Asia, the organization’s actions to jail and ruin me for those
expressions are in flagrant violation of the U.S.’s
International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The U.S. Federal Government’s
refusal to do anything to restrain Scientology’s religious persecution actions
against me on U.S. soil, which result in religious persecution for religious activities
on other countries’ soil, also shows the IRFA to be a fraud.
The Scientology v. Armstrong case has become the best example for
educating people about the organization’s “Suppressive
Person” doctrine. Although the Court of Appeal’s decision omits
any mention of the SP doctrine, a wealth of material about the doctrine was filed
in the case and is a part of both the appellate and trial court records. The more
that Miscavige and the Scientologists do to crush me, the more light is shone
on this noxious and violent doctrine.
The Scientology v. Armstrong case is also the most well documented
proof over more than 23 years of the enforced hypocrisy and criminality among
Scientologists, and shows why it is prudent to not believe or trust their statements
and activities. Scientology’s “creed,”
which the Scientologists rely on to make them a “religion,” states:
We of the Church believe:
That all men of whatever race, color, or creed were created with equal
That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and
That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives;
That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity;
That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense;
That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist or support
their own organizations, churches and governments;
That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to
write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the
opinions of others;
And that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these
rights, overtly or covertly.
The Armstrong case shows, however, that virtually no Scientologists
world wide believe in these publicly stated beliefs, or even act as if they believe
these beliefs. The case proves the proverb: In Scientology, lying is a sacrament.
The case shows that Scientologists are contracted to violate their creed. Scientologists
are compelled to destroy my God-given rights to speak freely, practice my religion
freely and support my own church freely. Scientologists are compelled to destroy
my rights to my own defense, to my sanity and to my life. If Scientologists did
not seek to destroy my basic human rights, in violation of international human
rights charters and Scientology’s own creed, the Scientologists respecting
their creed would be declared “Suppressive Persons,” and the remaining
Scientologists would be compelled to destroy their basic human rights.
The Scientology creed also states:
And we of the Church believe that the laws of God forbid man:
To destroy his own kind;
To destroy the sanity of another;
To destroy or enslave another's soul
The Scientology v. Armstrong case already demonstrates beyond rational
argument that Scientologists seek to destroy others’ sanity and seek to
destroy or enslave others’ souls. Since Scientologists are universally contracted
and forced to violate their own creed in every other tenet, it is not reasonable
or responsible to think they will stop short of killing. Murder, of course, is
the inevitable end of the SP doctrine.
The extraordinary value that the Scientology v. Armstrong case has
at this time in Scientology’s history was hard won, at considerable personal
risk and loss. The risk and loss of course give the case even more value, so it
is a Godsend to everyone, me included, who fight back against Scientology in its
war on us.
Please use the case to engage and confront Scientology organizations and Scientologists
wherever they are willing to engage around the world. Use the case to confront
them about their human rights claims, their creedal hypocrisy and untrustworthiness.
Use it to engage and confront the U.S. State Department and its missions and personnel
around the world for their support and promotion of Scientology. Use the case
to engage the media and to involve government officials in your own areas and
countries in the Scientology problem and particularly the Suppressive Person doctrine.
#1-45950 Alexander Avenue
Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 1L5