go to part 5

Q. DIDN'T YOU ASK BILL FRANKS, AT ONE POINT, TO GO CLEAN UP THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE?

A. NO, AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT'S A RIDICULOUS QUESTION AND SO FAR FROM THE MARK. Q. WHAT DID YOU ASK BILL FRANKS TO DO?

MR. HELLER: AT ANY TIME? ANYPLACE?

MS. PLEVIN: WITH RESPECT TO THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE.

MR. HELLER: IF ANYTHING.

THE WITNESS: YES, WHEN?

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. WITH RESPECT TO THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SPECIAL PROJECT WHICH WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING? A. NOTHING, NOT IN THAT CONTEXT.

Q. WAS D.D. REISDORF INSTRUCTED TO HAVE ANY ROLE IN CONNECTION WITH CLEANING UP THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE?

MR. HERTZBERG: BY WHOM?

MS. PLEVIN: TO MR. MISCAVIGE'S KNOWLEDGE, BY ANYONE.

THE WITNESS: INSTRUCTIONS? NO.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. DID YOU AT ANY TIME ASSIGN OR ASK VICKY AZANARAN TO TAKE ON ANY ROLE WITH REGARD TO THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE AND THE PROBLEMS THAT WERE PART OF THE SPECIAL PROJECT? A. NO. YOU'VE GOT -- YOU'VE GOT THIS MIXED UP. YOU'RE MIXING APPLES AND ORANGES.

MS. PLEVIN: OKAY.

(CONFERENCE BETWEEN COUNSEL AND WITNESS.)

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. WHAT WERE THE PROBLEMS THAT WERE HANDLED?

A. WHAT PROBLEMS --

Q. YES.

A. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE? YOU BET I HANDLED.

Q. YES YOU SAID, "THEM." NOW, WHAT WERE YOU REFERRING TO?

MR. HELLER: WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. THE TESTIMONY WASN'T, "YOU BET I HANDLED THEM." YOU SAID WERE THEY HANDLED, I BELIEVE, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THE RECORD SAYS. THERE'S A QUESTION PENDING. DON'T CHARACTERIZE THE RECORD. MS. PLEVIN: OKAY.

THE WITNESS: WHAT IS THE QUESTION? THAT I HANDLED?

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. YOUR TESTIMONY WAS THAT THEY WERE HANDLED, AND YOU USED THE PHRASE, "YOU BET THEY WERE HANDLED." WHAT IS YOUR KNOWLEDGE REGARDING HOW THEY WERE HANDLED --

A. AND --

Q. -- AND WHAT THEY WERE?

A. THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE -- WHICH ONE?

Q. WHAT THEY WERE AND HOW THEY WERE HANDLED. LET'S START WITH WHAT THEY WERE.

A. OKAY. AND TO CLARIFY -- OKAY, WHAT THEY WERE, THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE WAS OFF SOURCE.

Q. ANYTHING ELSE?

A. THAT'S A GOOD GENERAL DESCRIPTION. THAT IS THE MOST DIRECT, SUCCINCT ANSWER I COULD GIVE YOU THAT COVERS WHATEVER ELSE.

Q. AND THIS IS IN THE PERIOD AFTER A LARGE NUMBER OF GUARDIAN'S OFFICE PERSONNEL WERE INDICTED FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF FEDERAL CRIMES?

MR. HERTZBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED. HE HAS TOLD YOU THE DATE.

MS. PLEVIN: I'M PUTTING IT IN CONTEXT NOW, MR. HERTZBERG, NOT THE DATE.

MR. DRESCHER: IT'S TOTALLY IRRELEVANT.

MR. HERTZBERG: NO, YOU'RE TESTIFYING.

MS. PLEVIN: OKAY.

MR. HERTZBERG: DON'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED TWICE.

MS. PLEVIN: THE RECORD WILL STAND FOR ITSELF AND WE WILL PROCEED WITH MOTIONS TO COMPEL AS NECESSARY.

Q. ALL RIGHT. HOW WAS IT HANDLED? HOW WERE THE PROBLEMS HANDLED?

A. GUARDIAN'S OFFICE WAS DISBANDED.

Q. WHEN WAS IT DISBANDED?

A. 1981.

Q. WERE ANY OF ITS FUNCTIONS OR ZONES OF RESPONSIBILITY TRANSFERRED TO ANY OTHER ORG OR ENTITY OR CORPORATION?

A. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT.

Q. WELL, GUARDIAN'S OFFICE HAD CERTAIN FUNCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO LEGAL MATTERS, DID IT NOT?

A. I BELIEVE SO. I -- TO CLARIFY THAT, I BELIEVE SO, BUT I NEVER WAS IN THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE.

Q. OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OTHER ENTITY OR ORGANIZATION TAKING OVER THOSE FUNCTIONS?

A. JUST ONE SECOND. EXCUSE ME.

(CONFERENCE BETWEEN COUNSEL AND WITNESS.)

THE WITNESS: I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY TRANSFER OF THOSE FUNCTIONS.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE OF WHO OVERSAW THE DISBANDING OF THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE?

A. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

MR. LIEBERMAN: I THINK THE WORD "OVERSAW" IS A LITTLE UNCLEAR IN THAT QUESTION.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. WELL, THERE'S THE ACTIVITY OF DOING SOMETHING, AND THEN THERE'S A PERSON TO WHOM THE PERSON PERFORMING THAT ACTION MIGHT REPORT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHO OVERSAW IT AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE.

(CONFERENCE BETWEEN COUNSEL AND WITNESS.)

MS. PLEVIN: CONFERENCE WITH COUNSEL.

THE WITNESS: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YOU'RE ASKING ME THE QUESTION LIKE WHO OVERSAW IT. IT WAS AN EVOLUTION THAT TOOK PLACE.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. SO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE IN THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE EVOLVED INTO NOT RUNNING THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE ANYMORE?

A. NO, NO, NO. YOU MISUNDERSTOOD THERE. I SAID IT WAS AN EVOLUTION.

Q. I UNDERSTOOD THAT. WHO OVERSAW --

A. I DON'T MEAN THE EVOLUTION OF MAN OR THE EVOLUTION OF THE ORGANIZATION. I MEANT IT WAS AN EVOLUTION OF ACTIVITY.

Q. WHO OVERSAW THAT CHANGING PROCESS?

A. VARIOUS PEOPLE.

Q. INCLUDING WHO?

MR. HERTZBERG: DO YOU WANT HIM TO LIST EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT?

MS. PLEVIN: I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A DOZEN OR TWO, MR. MISCAVIGE.

THE WITNESS: I COULDN'T ANSWER ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WERE INVOLVED IN IT.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. YOU WERE INVOLVED IN IT, WEREN'T YOU?

A. OH, OF COURSE.

Q. AND DID YOU HAVE ANY SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN IT?

A. SOMEWHAT INITIALLY.

Q. OKAY. DID YOU DROP OUT OF THAT -- YOU SAY "INITIALLY." WOULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT?

A. YOU KNOW, OKAY, YEAH. I WAS A CATALYST. THERE YOU GO.

Q. OKAY. AND IN WHAT WAY WERE YOU A CATALYST?

A. WELL, JUST BY WHAT THE WORD MEANS. I INITIATED IT.

Q. AND WHAT POSITIONS DID YOU HOLD AT THE TIME YOU INITIATED THE DISBANDING OF THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE?

A. WHAT POSITIONS DID I HOLD?

Q. IN --

A. RELATIVE --

Q. LET'S START WITH THAT, RELATIVE TO THAT.

A. I -- I WAS ON NO POST THAT SAID, "GO AND DISBAND THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE."

Q. I'M SORRY. YOU SAID --

A. I HAD NO POST THAT HAD A POST RESPONSIBILITY OR DUTY TO GO AND DISBAND THE GUARDIAN'S OFFICE.

Q. WHAT POSTS DID YOU HAVE?

A. AT THAT TIME?

Q. YES.

A. SPECIAL PROJECTS OPS, I BELIEVE.

Q. AND WHO APPOINTED YOU TO SPECIAL PROJECT OPS?

A. GAIL IRWIN OR D.D. REISDORF. I BELIEVE IT WAS GAIL IRWIN. I'M -- THAT'S WHAT I THINK. IT WAS ONE OF THOSE TWO, BUT I'M QUITE SURE IT WAS GAIL.

Q. DO YOU KNOW WHERE GAIL IRWIN IS NOW?

A. NO.

Q. DO YOU KNOW WHERE SHE'S BEEN IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS?

A. NO IDEA.

Q. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU KNEW WHERE GAIL IRWIN WAS LOCATED?

A. 1981, I BELIEVE.

Q. I THINK YOU SAID SHE WAS A COMMODORE'S MESSENGER. IS SHE STILL A COMMODORE'S MESSENGER?

A. NO.

Q. IS SHE STILL, TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, INVOLVED IN ANY POSITION IN SCIENTOLOGY?

A. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "POSITION"?

Q. I MEAN POST.

A. NO.

Q. WHAT WAS THE PROJECT, "ALL CLEAR"?

A. THE PROJECT, ALL CLEAR, WAS A PROJECT TO -- IT WAS A LEGAL PROJECT, TO DEAL WITH LEGAL CASES.

Q. IN WHAT WAY? WHAT WAS THE GOAL?

MR. HERTZBERG: I'M GOING TO -- I AM GOING TO ALLOW HIM TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOESN'T DISCLOSE MATTERS DISCUSSED IN THE CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.

MS. PLEVIN: OF COURSE.

MR. HERTZBERG: IF YOU CAN, SUBJECT TO THAT QUALIFICATION, ANSWER IT, AND IF YOU CAN'T, IF THERE'S NO ANSWER OTHER THAN MATTERS THAT WOULD COMPROMISE THE PRIVILEGE, YOU'LL TELL COUNSEL.

THE WITNESS: OKAY.

MS. PLEVIN: COLLOQUY WITH COUNSEL.

(CONFERENCE BETWEEN COUNSEL AND WITNESS.)

THE WITNESS: THE ANSWER IS: I HAVE NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. THAT'S THE ANSWER.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. YOU HAD NO INVOLVEMENT WITH ALL CLEAR?

A. NO, I DIDN'T -- NO INVOLVEMENT WITH WHAT? YOU ASKED ME ABOUT PROJECT ALL CLEAR?

Q. I'M TALKING ABOUT PROJECT ALL CLEAR.

MR. HERTZBERG: NO, NO, NO, NO.

WAIT A MOMENT. MY RECOLLECTION IS YOU ASKED HIM ABOUT THE LEGAL -- MR. MISCAVIGE GAVE YOU TESTIMONY THAT THERE WAS A LEGAL ASPECT TO THE PROJECT, AND I BELIEVE HIS ANSWER WAS RESPONSIVE TO THAT QUESTION.

MS. PLEVIN: WOULD YOU GO BACK AND READ MR. MISCAVIGE'S ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT WAS THE PROJECT ALL CLEAR

(RECORD READ.)

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. NOW, IN WHAT WAY WAS IT DEALING WITH LEGAL CASES?

MR. HERTZBERG: ALL RIGHT. YOU MAY ANSWER, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOESN'T DISCLOSE CONFIDENCES IN THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.

THE WITNESS: OKAY. WHAT I KNOW OF PROJECT ALL CLEAR, AND TO MAKE IT CLEAR JUST HERE, I -- I PERSONALLY WAS NOT INVOLVED IN PROJECT ALL CLEAR, NOR DID I -- IN OTHER WORDS, I KNOW ABOUT THIS, BUT IT WAS A PROJECT PERSONNEL TO HANDLE THE LEGAL CASES OF SCIENTOLOGY WORLD-WIDE, TO THE END RESULT OF DEALING WITH ANY LEGAL PROBLEMS, AND IT WAS POST GUARDIAN'S OFFICE, AND I THINK THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. SO YOUR TESTIMONY THEN -- STRIKE THAT.

IT WAS NOT A PROJECT TO MAKE L.R.H. SAFE FROM LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR SCIENTOLOGY MATTERS? A. OF COURSE NOT.

MR. DRESCHER: POST A CONTINUING OBJECTION BASED ON RELEVANCE TO EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN ASKED SINCE WE CAME BACK FROM LUNCH. I JUST NOTE THAT HERE, AND THE UNDUE CONSUMPTION OF WASTING TIME -MS. PLEVIN:

Q. OKAY. AND YOU DID NOT SUPERVISE TERRY GAMBOA AND NORMAN STARKEY WITH REGARD TO THAT PROJECT? IS THAT YOUR TESTIMONY?

MR. HERTZBERG: CONTINUING OBJECTION.

MR. DRESCHER: HE DIDN'T TESTIFY TO

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. DID YOU SUPERVISE TERRY GAMBOA OR NORMAN STARKEY WITH REGARD TO THE PROJECT ALL CLEAR?

A. NO.

Q. DID YOU ASSIST THEM?

A. NO.

MR. HERTZBERG: LET ME -- LET ME TELL YOU, MISS PLEVIN, THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM I HAVE, AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE. THERE IS NO ALLEGATION IN THIS COMPLAINT THAT ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH A SO-CALLED PROJECT ALL CLEAR RESULTED IN ANYTHING BEING DONE TO MR. CORYDON.

I JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU FROM TIME TO TIME OF WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE THE GENERAL SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY THAT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE HERE. SO ALL THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT ALL CLEAR, WHO SUPERVISED WHOM IN TIMES, OR REMOTE, ARE REALLY A WASTE OF TIME, BUT LET US PROCEED.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. NOW, DO YOU KNOW WHO LYMAN STARKEY -- I'M SORRY -- LYMAN SPURLOCK?

A. YES.

Q. DO YOU KNOW OR CAN YOU RECALL TODAY WHAT CORPORATE POSITIONS HE HAS HELD FROM 1981 FORWARD? MR. HERTZBERG: WAIT A MINUTE.

BEFORE HE ANSWERS THAT, ARE YOU MAINTAINING THAT LYMAN SPURLOCK DID SOMETHING TO YOUR CLIENT?

MS. PLEVIN: LYMAN SPURLOCK IS IDENTIFIED IN THE COMPLAINT AS ONE OF THE PERSONS WITH WHOM AUTHORITY RESIDES IN SCIENTOLOGY.

MR. HERTZBERG: ALL RIGHT. I'M ASKING: ARE YOU MAINTAINING THAT LYMAN SPURLOCK DID ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO YOUR CLIENT, THAT HE DID ANYTHING? MS. PLEVIN: THE COMPLAINT STANDS FOR ITSELF. ARE YOU TELLING HIM NOT TO ANSWER?

MR. HERTZBERG: WELL, I'D LIKE --

I'M NOT, BUT I'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE RECORD BEFORE WE START.

MR. HELLER: LET'S HAVE A PROFFER OF RELEVANCE. WHAT IS THE PROFFER OF -- YOU KNOW, HOW TO SPELL HIS NAME YOU PUT IT IN THE COMPLAINT WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH BENT CORYDON? IF YOU SAY THE WORDS "ALTER EGO," IT DOES NOT HAVE TO RELATE TO YOUR CLIENT. THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE ALTER EGO THEORY IS THAT IT INURES TO THE PREJUDICE OF YOUR CLIENT INDEED YOU HAVE A RATHER STRANGE ALTER EGO TO BEGIN WITH. NOW, THERE IS SOME LEEWAY IN THAT, TO MAKE A DETERMINATION, BUT NOT LEEWAY TO ASK ANY QUESTION THAT YOU FEEL LIKE ASKING. I THINK MR. HERTZBERG IS WELL WITHIN HIS RIGHTS --

MS. PLEVIN: MR. HERTZBERG, I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE COULD HAVE -- INSTEAD OF HAVING THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE TALKING AT THE SAME TIME AND ALL WALKING AROUND CREATING A LOT OF CONFUSION, IF WE COULD NOT -- ARE YOU INSTRUCTING MR. MISCAVIGE NOT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION? I'LL GO ON, IF YOU ARE.

MR. HERTZBERG: WHAT IS THE PENDING QUESTION?

MS. PLEVIN: PLEASE READ BACK THE PENDING QUESTION. (RECORD READ.)

THE WITNESS: NO.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. IN 1982, DID YOU ATTEND -- IN OCTOBER OF 1982, DID YOU ATTEND A MEETING IN SAN FRANCISCO, KNOWN AS THE MISSION HOLDERS CONFERENCE? A. YES, I DID.

Q. DID YOU HAVE ANY ZONE OF RESPONSIBILITY IN TERMS OF PLANNING, OVERSEEING THAT CONFERENCE?

A. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT QUESTION MEANS.

Q. WHAT IS IT THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE QUESTION, MR. MISCAVIGE?

A. WHAT YOU MEAN.

Q. ALL RIGHT. LET'S BACK UP. YOU ATTENDED THAT CONFERENCE?

A. YES, I DID.

Q. AND YOU PARTICIPATED AS ONE OF THE SPEAKERS OF THAT CONFERENCE?

A. MASTER OF CEREMONIES, I BELIEVE.

Q. AND BEFORE GOING INTO THAT CONFERENCE, YOU WERE AWARE OF WHAT THE CONTENT OF CONFERENCE WAS GOING TO BE?

A. SOMEWHAT.

MR. HERTZBERG: YOU MEAN LIKE HE WAS GOING TO KNOW EVERYTHING THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN?

MS. PLEVIN: NO, WHAT THE AGENDA OF CONFERENCE WAS.

THE WITNESS: "AGENDA" MEANING WHO WAS GOING TO SPEAK? YES.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. AND ABOUT WHAT.

A. NOT EVERYTHING, NO.

Q. WAS ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THAT CONFERENCE TO ANNOUNCE TO THE MISSION HOLDERS, CHANGES IN THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTOLOGY? A. YES.

Q. OKAY. AND ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE PLANS, THE WORK THAT WENT ON PRIOR TO THE CONFERENCE IN DEVELOPING THOSE CHANGES?

A. FAMILIAR? WHY DON'T YOU DEFINE THAT FOR ME. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

Q. ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF THE --

A. AWARE --

Q. -- OF THE WORK THAT WENT ON, THE PROBLEMS THEY WERE ADDRESSING?

MR. HERTZBERG: YOU MEAN LIKE LEGAL MATTERS THAT ATTORNEYS WERE GIVING ADVICE ON, THAT TYPE OF THING?

MS. PLEVIN: I HAVEN'T SUGGESTED THAT. I AM TALKING ABOUT WHETHER HE WAS AWARE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON IN TERMS OF THE PLANNING FOR THAT -- FOR THE CHANGES THAT WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE CONFERENCE. THE WITNESS: CAN I JUST SEPARATE SOMETHING HERE?

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. PLEASE DO.

A. YOU HAVE "CONFERENCE" AND THE "CHANGES" CONNECTED. THEY DON'T CONNECT AT ALL.

Q. OKAY. WELL, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN EXPLORE THAT A LITTLE BIT. THEY WERE CHANGES THAT WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE CONFERENCE?

A. THAT'S RIGHT.

Q. OKAY.

A. THERE YOU GO. THERE YOU GO.

Q. NOW, AS TO THE CHANGES THAT WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE CONFERENCE, DID YOU PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THE STUDIES OR THE PLANNING THAT WERE PART OF THE EVOLUTION THAT LED TO THOSE CHANGES OF THE DECISION MAKING THAT LED TO THOSE QUESTIONS? MR. DRESCHER: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

MR. HELLER: ALSO AMBIGUOUS.

MR. HERTZBERG: WAIT. JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I THINK MR. DRESCHER'S OBSERVATION IS WELL TAKEN, YOUR QUESTION ASSUMES THAT THERE WAS A PLANNING. WHY DON'T WE LAY A FOUNDATION. I THINK IT WILL GO FASTER THAT WAY.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. THE TESTIMONY IS THAT THERE WERE CHANGES?

A. YES.

Q. OKAY. NOW, SOMEONE WAS INVOLVED, SOME PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED IN DECIDING THERE SHOULD BE CHANGES, OR THINKING ABOUT WHAT KINDS OF CHANGES THERE SHOULD BE, EXPLORING THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH?

A. RIGHT.

Q. WERE YOU INVOLVED IN ANY OF THAT?

A. WHAT THE PROBLEMS WERE?

Q. WITH THAT WHOLE COMPLEX, CONFERRING WITH OTHERS REGARDING THE PROBLEMS, CONSIDERING OPTIONS AND SO FORTH.

A. WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT, CONFERRING WITH OTHERS ABOUT THE PROBLEMS?

Q. YES.

A. SOMEWHAT, YES.

Q. AND WITH WHOM DID YOU CONFER?

A. ATTORNEYS.

Q. ON BEHALF OF WHAT ENTITY DID YOU CONFER?

A. AS A SCIENTOLOGIST, I DID.

Q. YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY POSTS THAT GAVE YOU THAT AUTHORITY?

A. TO TALK ABOUT PROBLEMS? I THINK ANYBODY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD COULD TALK ABOUT PROBLEMS, AND THAT'S HOW I ANSWERED THAT QUESTION. I WAS AWARE OF PROBLEMS. I MADE MY KNOWLEDGE KNOWN.

Q. DID ANYONE ASK YOU TO TAKE ON THAT RESPONSIBILITY?

A. OF MAKING MY PROBLEMS KNOWN? NO.

Q. DID ANYONE ASK YOU TO TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONFERRING WITH ATTORNEYS REGARDING WHAT -- LET'S CALL IT THE CORPORATE CHANGES?

A. DID I SAY THAT THAT'S WHAT I DID?

Q. YOU SAID --

A. YOU ASKED ME ABOUT THE PROBLEMS.

Q. YES.

A. AND I TOLD YOU I COMMUNICATED PROBLEMS.

Q. YES.

A. RIGHT.

MR. HERTZBERG: HE DIDN'T SAY HE TALKED ABOUT CORPORATE CHANGES.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. WHAT POSTS DID YOU HOLD AT THE TIME THAT YOU CONFERRED WITH COUNSEL?

MR. HERTZBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. DO YOU RECALL?

MR. HERTZBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED. IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. YOU DIDN'T HOLD ANY POSTS AT ALL; IS AT RIGHT, MR. MISCAVIGE?

MR. HERTZBERG: IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MS. PLEVIN: OKAY.

Q. DID ANYONE ASK YOU TO DISCUSS THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU DISCUSSED WITH COUNSEL?

MR. HERTZBERG: THAT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MS. PLEVIN: WITH COUNSEL. NO, HE HASN'T ANSWERED THAT QUESTION, MR. HERTZBERG.

MR. HERTZBERG: YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YOU'RE MISTAKEN. THAT SPECIFIC QUESTION WAS NOT ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. DID ANYONE ASK YOU TO MAKE THOSE ENQUIRIES?

A. INQUIRIES? I MADE KNOWN PROBLEMS THAT I UNIQUELY KNEW; NO, NOBODY ASKED ME TO MAKE THOSE KNOWN.

Q. AND DID YOU CONFER WITH ANY OTHER PERSONS REGARDING THOSE PROBLEMS PRIOR TO SPEAKING TO COUNSEL?

A. YES.

Q. WITH WHOM?

A. LOTS OF PEOPLE.

Q. DID L.R.H. ASK YOU TO CONFER WITH COUNSEL REGARDING PROBLEMS WITH THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE?

MR. LIEBERMAN: THAT IS ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MR. HERTZBERG: THAT'S ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE WITNESS: OKAY.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. HE DID NOT?

MR. HERTZBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MR. LIEBERMAN: HE TESTIFIED THAT NO ONE HAD.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. BESIDES CONFERRING WITH COUNSEL, DID PARTICIPATE IN ANY DECISION MAKING REGARDING ADOPTING COUNSEL'S RECOMMENDATIONS?

A. FOR WHAT?

Q. WELL, IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT PRIOR TO 1981, THERE WAS NO SUCH CORPORATION -- ACTUALLY I THINK IT WAS PRIOR TO 1982 -- I'M NOT ACTUALLY SURE -- THERE WAS NO CORPORATION KNOWN AS RTC, RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION?

A. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT INCORPORATION DATE OF RTC, SO I CAN'T ANSWER THAT.

Q. OKAY. BUT THE --

MR. DRESCHER: INCIDENTALLY, IT'S RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, NOT RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. BUT RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION WAS ONE OF THE CORPORATIONS THAT WAS FORMED IN THE MONTHS PRIOR TO THE OCTOBER 17 CONFERENCE AND WAS PART OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE OCTOBER 17, 1982 CONFERENCE; ISN'T THAT SO? MR. HERTZBERG: WHEN YOU SAY "FORMED," I MEAN, HE HAS JUST TESTIFIED THAT HE DOESN'T KNOW THE DATE OF INCORPORATION, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY "FORMED." I DON'T WANT MR. MISCAVIGE TO GET SANDBAGGED HERE.

MR. HELLER: IT'S COMPOUND, TOO.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. THE RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER WAS ONE OF THE NEW CORPORATIONS INCORPORATED AS A RESULT OF THE DISCUSSION OF PROBLEMS, THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED?

A. AS A RESULT OF MY DISCUSSION OF PROBLEMS?

Q. NO. AS A RESULT OF THE ACTIVITIES, THE STUDIES, THE WORK, THE DISCUSSIONS, THE CONFERENCES WITH COUNSEL THAT LED TO THE CORPORATE CHANGES WHICH WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE MISSION HOLDERS MEETING.

A. YES.

Q. AND CSI WAS SIMILARLY INCORPORATED AS A RESULT OF THOSE ACTIVITIES?

A. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS THE SAME ONES, BUT PRIOR TO THE MISSION HOLDERS CONFERENCE IN 1982?

Q. YES.

A. YES.

Q. OKAY. AND ASI WAS INCORPORATED AS A RESULT OF THAT SERIES OF DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIVITIES?

A. THAT SERIES OF DISCUSSIONS?

Q. YES.

A. AS A RESULT OF THAT, NO.

Q. AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME?

A. SOMEWHERE IN THAT TIME PERIOD, YES.

Q. OKAY. AND CSC, VARIOUS FUNCTIONS AND UNITS WITHIN CSC WERE TRANSFERRED OUT OF CSC TO OTHER ENTITIES AS A RESULT OF THOSE ACTIVITIES?

MR. HERTZBERG: ARE YOU TALKING NOW ABOUT SOME LEGAL -- LEGAL CORPORATE TRANSFER?

MS. PLEVIN: WELL, WE'LL TURN EXACTLY TO WHAT TRANSPIRED AT THE -- IN THE ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT WERE MADE OCTOBER 17, 1982. I DON'T THINK THIS IS A GREAT MYSTERY. I DON'T THINK THIS IS HITTING ANY TREMENDOUSLY ARCANE OR SECRET SPOTS OR LEGAL, YOU KNOW, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. THESE WERE ANNOUNCED AT THE OCTOBER 17, 1982 MISSION HOLDERS CONFERENCE.

MR. HERTZBERG: WELL, I MEAN, IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT, I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS AT ALL, BUT I'M NOT SUGGESTING ANYTHING ABOUT ARCANE OR ANYTHING ELSE. I AM TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS WITH A FOUNDATION THAT MR. MISCAVIGE IS CAPABLE OF RESPONDING TO, AND SO YOU ASKED A VERY GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER CERTAIN CORPORATE ENTITIES WERE TRANSFERRED OUT, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO PREDICATE FOR WHETHER HE MAY HAVE KNOWN ABOUT SPECIFIC CORPORATE ENTITIES AS OPPOSED TO LAWYERS OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT. IT'S -- I DON'T WANT HIM SPECULATING ABOUT --

MS. PLEVIN: I DON'T WANT HIM SPECULATING EITHER, MR. HERTZBERG. LET'S SEE IF CAN MAKE IT EASIER FOR MR. MISCAVIGE SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO GUESS.

THE WITNESS: OKAY.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. OKAY. AND IT MAY REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION TO LOOK OVER A TRANSCRIPT IF YOU WISH. I HAVE A TRANSCRIPT OF THAT CONFERENCE. DO YOU RECALL THAT MR. SPURLOCK --

A. I'LL HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT IF YOU WANT ASK ME A QUESTION.

Q. WELL, BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, LET ME ASK YOU: DO YOU RECALL WHETHER OR NOT MR. SPURLOCK PARTICIPATED ON THE AGENDA IN ANNOUNCING THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE CHANGES? A. YES.

Q. AND YOU INTRODUCED HIM?

A. WELL, I'D HAVE TO CHECK YOUR TRANSCRIPT, BUT I ASSUME SO, YES.

Q. YOU DON'T RECALL -- HOLD ON.

A. YOU GAVE ME TWO COPIES HERE. IS THAT ONE FOR HIM?

Q. FINE. BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE? AND IT'S QUITE LENGTHY SO I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO READ THE WHOLE THING, BUT HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A TRANSCRIPT OF THAT MEETING?

MR. HERTZBERG: OKAY. WAIT A MINUTE. IF YOU'RE ASKING WHETHER HE'S SEEN THE DOCUMENT BEFORE, HE -- WHATEVER THE LENGTH, HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT TO GIVE YOU AN ACCURATE ANSWER. IF YOU'RE ASKING HIM WHETHER HE EVER SAW A TRANSCRIPT OF THE MISSION HOLDERS CONFERENCE BEFORE, WHETHER THIS ONE IS ONE OR NOT, THAT'S A SEPARATE QUESTION.

MS. PLEVIN:

Q. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A TRANSCRIPT?

A. YES.

Q. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S TAKE A LOOK THIS DOCUMENT IN ANY EVENT.

A. OKAY.

MR. HERTZBERG: MISS PLEVIN, MAY I ASK ONE QUESTION OUT OF CURIOSITY? MS. PLEVIN: WHATEVER YOU WANT.

MR. HERTZBERG: WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER?

MS. PLEVIN: I'M SORRY?

MR. HERTZBERG: WHAT ARE THOSE --

MS. PLEVIN: THOSE ARE THE BATES STAMPED NUMBERS. THIS WAS PROVIDED TO YOU IN DOCUMENTATION. MR. HERTZBERG: THESE ARE YOUR BATES STAMPS.

MS. PLEVIN: YES.

MR. HERTZBERG: ALL RIGHT.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. I BELIEVE IT'S ON PAGE 3 THAT YOU INTRODUCED MR. SPURLOCK?

MR. HERTZBERG: WAIT A MINUTE. YOU MEAN ACCORDING TO THIS TRANSCRIPT?

MS. PLEVIN: ACCORDING TO THIS TRANSCRIPT.

MR. HERTZBERG: YOU WANT HIM TO READ NOW AND CONFIRM WHETHER THIS TRANSCRIPT REFLECTS THAT MR. MISCAVIGE INTRODUCED MR. SPURLOCK. MS. PLEVIN: WELL, IF IT REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION.

MR. HERTZBERG: BUT HE ALREADY TESTIFIED THAT HE INTRODUCED MR. SPURLOCK.

MS. PLEVIN: ALL RIGHT. NOW --

MR. HERTZBERG: DIDN'T HE ALREADY TESTIFY TO THAT?

MS. PLEVIN: EXCUSE ME, MR. HERTZBERG.

Q. THE LAST PARAGRAPH ON THAT PAGE, MR. MISCAVIGE, SAYS THAT MR. -- WARRANT OFFICER, LYMAN SPURLOCK IS THE CORPORATE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR; DO YOU SEE THAT? A. IS SHE ASKING ME OR YOU?

MR. HERTZBERG: SHE'S ASKING YOU.

MR. HELLER: DO YOU SEE IT?

THE WITNESS: YES, I SEE IT.

BY MS. PLEVIN:

Q. DO YOU RECALL INTRODUCING HIM IN THAT FASHION?

A. NO, I DON'T RECALL.

Q. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER HE HAD A POSITION THAT WAS ENTITLED "CORPORATE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR"?

A. I BELIEVE HE DID.

Q. WITH WHAT CORPORATION?

A. POSSIBLY NUMEROUS. I DON'T KNOW.

Q. AT THE SAME TIME?

A. NO, NO.

Q. OKAY. AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, WHICH IS OCTOBER OF 1982, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT POSITION YOU MAY HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO AND WHAT CORPORATION YOU MAY HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO?

MR. HELLER: IS THERE ANYTHING AT ALL IN EXISTENCE THAT MIGHT REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION? IS THAT THE QUESTION? OKAY. IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT. OBJECT ON RELEVANCE. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IF SOMETHING EXISTS THAT REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION? MR. HERTZBERG: YOU MAY ANSWER.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW.

qq


go to part 7