Plaintiff's Exhibit #15B in Dandar disqualification hearing

September 7, 2001

Stacy Brooks
C/O 33 North Fort Harrison Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33755

Dear Stacy:

Please be advised that I am severing all professional ties with you, Bob Minton
and the Lisa McPherson Trust effective September 6, 2001. The events of the past
few weeks have convinced me, as have others with whom I have consulted, that the
actions of both you and Bob have placed me in danger of being criminally
culpable in what appear to be shady business practices. In detail:

1) The revelation in your recent deposition that $800,000 was donated to the LMT
from foreign sources and then every penny of that money was delivered to Bob
Minton is very difficult to make sense of.  For at least the past six months, I
have been told by you that all of the LMT funding came from Bob Minton. As you
know, in that period of time I twice received my salary past due, which caused
me considerable stress. My most recent pay check, for August, was delivered not
through the normal pay channels but by a check drawn on your personal account.
At the time that you gave me my check, was September 5,  you told me I was now
an independent contractor.

I cannot make sense of this. If Bob was the sole source of LMT funding, and our
salaries came from the LMT account, how then can he be given $800,000 from this
account and then turn around and claim that there is no money to pay our
salaries? Why was none of that money placed into an account to cover salaries or
other LMT expenses?
I have been struggling with this since I first learned of it. The only
explanation you have given is that you were repaying Bob. It is not a very
viable explanation. The whole deal looks shady and though I could previously
have claimed ignorance of the facts as an excuse for continuing to work with
you, that is no longer the case. I now know the facts and I find the entire
thing falls below a level of honesty with which I am comfortable and I believe
that my knowledge will make me an accessory to any sort of crime that may have
been committed.

2) Your stated purpose of dissolving the LMT as a corporation so that you and
Bob do not have to testify as to financial matters also places me, and all of
the other staff members at risk. The argument that you just don't want
Scientology to know about the finances takes on new meaning in light of item
number 1.  It also brings up the question of the validity of the LMT if it can
be dissolved at once in order to protect you and Bob, once again with little
care for employees.

3)  Before I left the office Thursday, you called me and suggested that I make
the file containing the Quirino report accessible only to me. You instructed me
to telephone Bob, after checking with John Merrett, and tell him to install a
password that only I knew so that he could no longer access the file. I believe
your purpose in doing this was to protect Bob. I also believe that doing this
would put me in a precarious position and quite frankly I am sick of being
placed in the line of fire to protect Bob.

4)  On Wednesday, September 5, I was going into deposition at the behest of     
Scientology. LMT attorney, John Merrett, was representing me. Mr. Merrett did
not see fit to meet with me regarding this deposition until 6:00 p.m. the
evening before. At that time, he stated I would not have to go through with the
deposition because he had found a law that said as long as a request for
protective order was in the works, I didn't have to depose until that order was
ruled upon. He advised that I would simply write a statement, he would present
it to the court and we would leave. You asked him what would we do if that
didn't happen and he replied: "Get another attorney."

Of course, when we went to the deposition Mr. Merrett was advised of his error.
In fact, when he presented my statement and said we would reschedule the
deposition, Mr. Moxon immediately presented printed material -- laws -- that
refuted my ability to put off the deposition. Mr. Moxon stated that he was
prepared for the argument, which is more than I can say for Mr. Merrett. In
fact, when Mr. Moxon asked Mr. Merrett what law he was using, Mr. Merrret simply
said "It's in the Rules of Civil Procedure." Did Mr. Merrett have the law he was
referring to? No.

The Scientology attorney's presented a thick book, which was the said "Rules of
Civil Procedure," which John flipped through. He didn't even know where to
locate the law he was citing. It was most embarrassing and I was of course
deposed. It is only by the Grace of God that it went well and also the fact that
Judge Beach limited the questions regarding files to case witnesses.

The fact that it went well does not make up for the fact that Mr. Merrett was
unprofessional and unprepared and dead wrong to boot.

I had previously spoken to you about my reservations about Mr. Merrett
representing me, and you convinced me that I had no other choice. Well, this is
unacceptable to me and it leaves me in the untenable position of having to hire
my own attorney for any future actions against me due to my involvement with the
LMT, and there will be future actions. This is going to cause a great financial
hardship to me.

6)  Which brings me to another point. How is it that I was working very hard for
the LMT, doing a very good job and at work every day at 9:00 a.m. (or shortly
thereafter) and yet I wasn't getting paid. This while Mr. Merrett receives a
stipend of $250,000 as does an attorney in France. This, while Mr. Minton gives
$50,000 to Gerry Armstrong and takes $800,000 from the LMT?

I would like to point out that Mr. Merrett was vacationing in Europe at a time
when we needed him very much, and that some other people were not working for
the LMT even though they received huge sums of money to do so. Also, thousands
and thousands of dollars were spent from LMT coffers for Jesse's trial, and
employees then go unpaid. I think your regard for me and the welfare of my
children is more than obvious from these and other actions.

7)  You have stated to me in the past that if Scientology ever succeeded in
getting an order to jail you or Bob for contempt that you would leave the
country. How, then, do you expect me to continue working with either of you as
an independent contractor?

8)  In addition, during the most horrendous times of stress at the LMT, namely
the past four to five weeks, you saw fit to stay in New Hampshire in order to
protect yourself. I would also like to remind you that the week before my
scheduled deposition you told me on the phone that not only were you not
returning to Clearwater, but that you were thinking of having John Merrett join
you in New Hampshire. I had to remind you that I was being deposed soon and
would need his representation.

9)  In August, I began the process of purchasing a condominium. I discussed this
at length with you three times, and all three times you told me that my
employment was stable and I could proceed. In addition, during one of those
discussions you specifically told me that Bob Minton had not bought your house
for you and that you had put a down payment of your home $20,000 - money not
from Bob.

I now know that Bob did indeed buy your house for you and you have now told me
that you made a down payment of 20% of the purchase price. You told me that
purchase price was $260,000. That means your down payment was $52,000.

If Bob bought your house, big deal. Why did you lie to me about that? And, why
did you three times advise me that the LMT was stable and I should go ahead and
buy a condo if, as you stated in our meeting of Thursday Sept. 6, Bob had been
telling you for months that he didn't think he could continue covering salaries?

In sum, I believe that the following is true: there are financial activities
involving the LMT and Mr. Minton that appear to be of a criminal nature and you
have placed me at personal risk by hiding this information, insisting that
nothing wrong has gone on so that I defended your position, withholding my pay
while giving LMT money to Mr. Minton who then said he did not have the money to
cover salaries, and through your actions involving me in litigation while not
providing me adequate counsel.

In addition, you have again and again withdrawn your support of myself and other
staff members in order to stay in New Hampshire and take care of Bob.

In addition Bob and Jesse were involved with bringing money into the country
illegally and you have never discussed this matter with me. You must know that
this sort of activity placed me and the other employees at risk. If Bob is not
being honest with his  money, which there is now ample evidence to prove, I
would like to have known so that I could have chosen an appropriate course of
action sooner.

In view of all of the above I will be hiring an attorney to represent me as
regards an appropriate severance package from my employment at the LMT and in
future dealings with LMT / Scientology litigation.

I am very sorry this all ended this way. It is a shame that you utilized my
personal feelings and friendship for you and Bob and falsely presented the goals
of the LMT to garner my support while at the same time withholding relevant
facts as to your activities. I am interested in fighting Scientology's corrupt
practices and in helping those victimized by it. I believed that is what the LMT
was all about. It now appears I was wrong.

I will have my attorney contact you immediately.


Teresa S. Summers


This exhibit was referenced during these sessions:
Stacy Brooks Transcripts // May 16 2002 - PM session
Testimony of Jesse Prince // July 11, 2002. Morning Session

Return to Dandar disqualification hearing documents ndex