GRAHAM E. BERRY
3384 McLaughlin Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90066
Phone: (310) 745-3771
Fax: (310) 745-3772

grahameb@aol.com

March 29, 2001

Honorable Michael D. Marcus
State Bar Court
1149 South Hill Street.
Los Angeles, CA 90015

RE: Graham E. Berry, State Bar No.128503
Early Neutral Evaluation Conference: April 3, 2001 at 2 pm.

[Real Parties In Interest: Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs; Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq.; Helena Kobrin, Esq.; Ava Paquette, Esq.; Elliot Abelson, Esq.; Samuel D.Rosen, Esq.; Barbara Reeves, Esq., Michael Turrill, Esq.; Gerald Chaleff, Esq.; Donald Wager, Esq.; Michael Gerner, Esq.; Thomas Byrnes, Esq.; Jerry L. Bregman, Esq.; Gary Soter, Esq.; David Chodos, Esq.; Eugene Ingram, Miguel Hurtado, Michael Hurtado, et al.]

Dear Judge Marcus:

The purpose of this letter is to provide you with initial information relevant to the State Bar’s letter to you dated March 20, 2001. As you will come to learn, the underlying matters involve ten years of litigation against the Church of Scientology in over 15 different cases. The underlying matters are complicated, intertwined and involve, as against me, the Real Parties In Interest commission of demonstrable and corroborated bankruptcy fraud, insurance fraud, frauds upon other courts, blackmail, bribery, solicitation, maintenance and champerty, perjury, use of a third person, wire tapping, obstruction of justice, false criminal reports, false state bar reports and other misconduct almost too numerous to list. Indisputably, complainant Wager [Gerner], and the other Real Parties In Interest, have committed a number of RICO predicate acts in the connection with the underlying matters of which they complain! For clarity and the convenience of others who may have occasion to read this, and humbly offered with no disrespect intended, I find that at times it is more convenient to write in the third person. I greatly appreciate your forbearance with regard to this matter.

Because of the complexity of the underlying matters, and in order to provide you with appropriate and accurate explanation about what has been committed and by whom, I had requested that the State Bar calendar this conference for after your imminent, brief absence from the court. However, the State Bar is clearly under pressure from the Church of Scientology to make an example of me as a deterrent to other counsel accepting cases against it. Indeed, from the mistakes, mischaracterizations and misrepresentations in the draft State Bar complaint it would appear that scientology representatives might have drafted this complaint. See generally, Keith Henson’s motion to disqualify Riverside District Attorney. The scientology enterprise calls this " . . . putting the heads of critics and their counsel on a pike." It is written scientology policy and dogma. Accordingly, the State Bar has refused the additional briefing time I requested. Consequently, I shall make my submissions by way of several letters. This is the first such letter and will merely outline the history of the underlying matters giving rise to these proceedings. My subsequent letter(s) will address the specifics of the draft Notice of Disciplinary Charges ("NDC") and the myriad of mitigating factors and other considerations.

Because you have not been personally involved in these matters, this letter and the events herein may strike you, as they would any rational law-abiding person, as the paranoid ravings of a person who ought to be writing mystery novels and not the cool and rational explanations of an attorney with many years of experience in pleading his cases. Nevertheless, I can assure you that this is not so. The facts outlined herein are demonstrable, if incredible, and I beg your forbearance as you work through all of this material, even as your ability to accept these events as having actually occurred may well stretch it to the limit! The experience of dealing with all of this complex and convoluted material is, I am certain, much like Alice’s experience in Wonderland.

Although even the Bard in all his creativity would have had difficulty in imagining the situation in which I now find myself, he nevertheless characterized it, as well the Real Parties In Interest part in this situation, when he wrote the immortal and oft repeated words, "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

Indeed, as you will read, the defamatory Cipriano "pedophilia" falsehoods criminally procured by certain of The Real Parties In Interest continue to be published continuously and worldwide. As you will also learn, these matters involve a continuing and unbroken conspiracy to deprive me of certain constitutional, civil and human rights guaranteed to every citizen. In that regard, I have refused to roll over in the face of continuing, or easily continued, wrongs against me. The defense of justification in Church of Scientology related legal matters (or more relevantly, one’s self-defense in litigation against the Church of Scientology) was expressly accepted in Church of Scientology v. Armstrong, 232 Cal.App.3d 1060,1067 (1991). See generally: United States v. Kattar, 840 F2d 118,125, (1st Cir.1988); Church of Scientology v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 83 U.S. Tax Ct.Rpt., 381, 429 - 442 (1984); Van Schaick v. Church of Scientology, 535 F.Supp.1125, 1131,n.4 (U.S.D.C. Mass. 1982); Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim, 42 Cal.App.4th. 628, 648-649, 49 Cal.Rptr. 2d 620 (1996); Hart v. Cult Awareness Network, 13 Cal App. 4th 777, 16 Cal Rptr 705(19___); Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology, 212 CalApp. 872, 888-891,260 Cal Rptr 331 (1989); Allard v. Church of Scientology, 58 Cal.App.3d 439,443n.1,129 Cal Rptr. 797 (1976); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, 57 Ore.App. 203 (1983).

In essence, as you will see, from the history of these matters, and from sworn documents filed during the various relevant proceedings, the genesis of these matters commenced in late 1993 during Church of Scientology v. Fishman & Geertz, USDC Case No. 93 - 3843 - HLH. That was when Tim Bowles, Esq., then of Bowles & Moxon, admitted on the record, to US District Court Judge Harry Hupp, that his law firm was "investigating" me. Moxon & Kobrin, successor partners to Bowles & Moxon, and Ingram, Abelson, Drescher and CSI, ignored the federal judge’s admonition to, "Stop it." As Detective Petz can testify about Abelson and as the various Hurtado family members have already testified, in early 1999 Moxon and Ingram both stated that they had been after me for a very "long time". Indeed, Michael Hurtado testified that the only reason he sued me was Moxon, Ingram and Wager’s use of the first Cipriano declaration as their "evidence" of "pedophilia".

The subsequent history of these matters is also well documented. For example, see Defendant Graham E. Berry’s Brief re Plaintiff’s Claims of Privilege filed in: Hurtado v. Berry, LASC Case No. BC 208227; the entire court file in Moxon v. Berry, USBC CD CA Case No. LA 99 - 32264 ER, Adv. Case No. AD99 - 02616 - ER; the Rule 60(b) motion in Pattinson v. Miscavige, USDC CD CA Case No. 98 - 3985 CAS; and the counterclaims in the Hurtado v. Berry and Moxon v. Berry Adversary actions.

One month before trial, on February 6, 2001, Hurtado/Church of Scientology unilaterally and voluntarily dismissed Hurtado v. Berry in California state court and now requests that I stipulate to plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal of the identical original verified complaint in federal court. They did so rather than receive an inevitable ruling that the communications between the church, Moxon & Kobrin, Abelson, Wager, Byrnes, Hurtado, Paquette and others (such as complaining scientology attorney Michael Gerner, Esq.) were not subject to the attorney client or work product privileges because of the crime fraud exception. Obviously, that ruling would have been extended to include the Paul, Hastings; Orrick, Herrington; Williams & Connolly, and other law firms. In addition, the Real Parties In Interest would have had to produce Eugene Ingram for deposition and to comply with various other discovery refusals and failures on their part. Thus, they dismissed the verified suit one month before trial. There were no mitigating factors.

Indeed, it is now clear and convincing, from the evidence on the court records of numerous federal and state cases, that the Real Parties In Interest (who include those listed above) have engaged in the most unimaginable and horrendous criminal, civil and unethical conduct toward me (and others). This outrageous conduct was perpetrated in a now transparent conspiracy to apply the Church of Scientology’s Fair Game policies and practices to me. This criminal and civil conspiracy includes numerous RICO predicate acts, which have now been corroborated by overwhelming oral and documentary testimony. Indeed, one of non - party complainant Michael Gerner’s co-counsel (Donald Wager, Esq.), who co -signed many of Gerner’s numerous letters to the State Bar herein, has confirmed some of this serious criminal activity in his own recent deposition testimony (e.g., that he, Moxon & Kobrin, and the church solicited and paid money for perjury in legal proceedings underlying these matters before the State Bar which has consistently ignored evidence of similar unlawful conduct by certain of the Real Parties in Interest herein.) The ultimate outcome of this and the preceding matters is now clear and certain. However, the Real Parties In Interest representing the Church of Scientology have finally convinced the State Bar that I, the victim of all of this attorney criminality, should be the counsel who is disciplined and actually suspended.

Of course, there will also be my own prospective litigation, at the very least against the individual lawyers, law firms, investigators and other individuals engaged in what has occurred since Complainants’ "investigation" of me commenced back in 1993. Such a demonstrable, continuing conspiracy tars each of the Real Parties In Interest listed above. Unlike Moxon & Kobrin and the church, the Real Parties In Interest will not have to have these serious repercussions explained to their respective law firms and insurance carriers. In that regard, all of them may be liable even if some of them will be claiming that they are less liable than others (such as Gary Soter and David Chodos who apparently terminated their involvement after the discovery abuse and vexatious litigant rulings in the Berry cases.) Others (such as Wager, Bregman, Gerner and Byrnes) joined later. Some actually engaged in criminal conduct and others only in civil or unethical conduct. One or two may be able to claim plain ignorance as a defense. Others may have vicarious and agent liabilities. However, it will be for the courts (criminal and civil as well as the State Bar) to determine issues relating to the allocation of liability, responsibility and damages. Indeed, it may be the various malpractice insurance carriers (to the extent that there is coverage) for the Paul, Hastings and other lawyer defendants that seek contribution from the scientology enterprise.

Notwithstanding, it is crystal clear that Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Abelson and Ingram are involved for the entire duration of the conspiracy and related criminal, civil and unethical conduct directed toward me. The damning testimony even includes the testimony of one of Hurtado’s own lawyers in the identical, but now dismissed, state court case. There, Donald Wager, Esq., has recently testified to making illegal payments to a prisoner in exchange for false testimony against me, and to being reimbursed by Moxon (who we know was reimbursed either by CSI or IAS). Remarkably, Wager is currently a local criminal defense lawyers’ association president! The matter is about to be exposed in the media. The damning testimony also includes the unimpeached testimony of at least ten other witnesses and over sixty exhibits in the state court Hurtado v. Berry case (LASC Case No. BC 208227). What is also troubling is the utter failure to amend the verified federal pleadings in the Hurtado v. Berry case. Clearly, they have long had notice of the continuing perjury and utterly false allegations, filed under the names of Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette and Bregman. In case the significance of this is not readily apparent, only this week the Acting U.S.Customs Commissioner properly stated in the press that " there is no crime more revolting to law enforcement than the sexual exploitation of children." For nearly eight years, and on the basis of the Cipriano, Apodaca and Hurtado perjuries, the Real Parties have been publishing and filing allegations that I am a pedophile .The allegations mirror scientology dogma for handling their perceived enemies such as myself, who has successfully represented a number of those they have sued and sought to destroy.

Elliot Abelson, Esq., has recently said that it was a fatal mistake for Ingram, Moxon & Kobrin, Jerry Bregman, Donald Wager and Thomas Byrnes to solicit, file and prosecute the Hurtado v. Berry federal and state cases. Indeed, this Church of Scientology, Ingram, Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Rosen, Abelson, Byrnes, Wager, Gerner et. al., seven-year attack on me only gets worse and worse for all those involved. Even for those who have had very limited roles and knowledge of the relevant overall church operation, project or mission being carried out in the underlying matters. Every day, statutes of limitation are tolled by the continuing wrongful conduct that merely aggravates the ultimate damage awards to me. In that regard, I am enclosing an article regarding the Casey Hill v. Church of Scientology case. The sizable award made to Mr. Hill in that case was in Canada! Here in California the cult and its various counsel clearly have not ceased the type of conduct and Fair Game practices responsible, in part, for the $30 million jury awards in the Christofferson and Wollersheim cases. That sort of damning evidence, along with all of the various financial statements of the Real Parties In Interest who are ultimately sued, will send potential punitive damages sky high.

The wrongful manner in which certain of the Real Parties In Interest misused Cipriano, Apodaca and Hurtado during the underlying Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/ Miscavige, (Moxon/Abelson) cases is now established beyond any reasonable doubt. Certainly, it is established to the clear and convincing standard required for punitive damages. This wrongful conduct, directed specifically at me, and committed by the generously paid army of lawyers, from nearly a dozen different law firms across the nation, has driven me from professional practice, home, health and society. This was just as the church’s Fair Game practices, carried out by the Real Parties In Interest, intended.

Consequently, driven from my career of nearly thirty years, my home and my ailing and elderly vehicle, I am now writing a book on the events and people that comprise the background of the incredible matters before you. Previous and ignored Sate Bar complainants such as Dr. Uwe Geertz, Keith Henson, Arel Lucas, Jane Scott and others are waiving confidentiality in connection with the matters they have unsuccessfully sought state bar action upon. The book is to be entitled Surviving Scientology - A Vexatious Litigant? A television documentary team has requested a June meeting with me. I intend to have the book completed within a year. I then intend to write further books including a history of scientology’s abuse of the legal system entitled Scientology - Church of Fair Game; a history of the church entitled Scientology: The lives, lies and legacies of L. Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige; and my own version of What is Scientology? It is for that reason that I have said I will not settle with the cult and its various complicit counsel. They have taken my career, life (figuratively, if not yet literally), assets and retirement prospects. Writing about how that happened is my only remaining prospect for an appropriate retirement. A summary of the conspiracy and other wrongful conduct by certain parties among the Real Parties In Interest is now set forth below.

Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Abelson, Rosen and Ingram have consistently alleged that their activities, directed against me, are to protect the church from harassment. However, Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Abelson, Rosen and Ingram know, or ought to have known, that this defense was resoundingly rejected in Allard v. Church of Scientology of California, 68 Cal. App. 3d 439, 129 Cal. Rptr. 797 (CT at 1976) cert. denied, 97 S. Ct 1101 (1977) where it was held as follows:

The defendants’ [the Church of Scientology’s leaders] contention that they committed the crimes of which they stand convicted in order to protect their church from government harassment collapses when one reviews a sample of the remaining documents seized by the FBI during the execution of the two Los Angeles search warrants. If anything, these documents establish beyond question that the defendants, their convicted codefendants, and their unindicted co-conspirators [which included Commodore Hubbard and current Scientology counsel Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq.], as well as their organization [the Church of Scientology], considered themselves above the law. They believe they had carte blanche to violate the rights of others, frame critics in order to destroy them, burglarize private and public offices and steal documents outlining the strategy of individuals and organizations that the church had sued. The church filed these suits for the sole purpose of financially bankrupting its critics and in order to create an atmosphere of fear so that critics would shy away from the First Amendment Rights secured them by the Constitution. The defendants and their cohorts [such as unindicted co-conspirator Moxon] launched vicious smear campaigns, spreading falsehoods against those they perceive to be enemies of Scientology in order to discredit them and, in some instances, to cause them to lose their employment . . . To these defendants and their associates, however, anyone who did not agree with them was considered to be an enemy against whom the so-called ‘Fair Game’ doctrine could be invoked. . . (emphasis added)

. . . It is interesting to note that the founder of their organization, unindicted co-conspirator, L. Ron Hubbard, wrote in his Modern Management Technology that, ‘ . . . truth is what is true for you,’ and ‘illegal’ is that which is, ‘contrary to Scientology policy’ and not pursuant to Scientology's ‘approved program.’ Thus, with the Commodore's blessing they could wantonly commit crimes as long as it were in the interests of Scientology. These defendants rewarded criminal activities that ended in success and sternly rebuked those that failed. In view of this, it defies the imagination that these defendants have the unmitigated audacity to seek to defend their actions in the name of religion. (emphasis added)

Mr. Bregman jointly filed the Hurtado v. Berry federal court complaint of the very same unindicted co-conspirator, Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq., and certain of the other Real Parties In Interest. CSI, Wager and Byrnes were involved in the identical state court case. Abelson and Ingram were also extensively involved throughout. It appears that it was Wager who recruited Gerner (the actual non - party complainant herein) to badger the State Bar into having me removed as being one of less than a handful of counsel nationwide who have been willing to litigate against the Church of Scientology. See generally, J.P. Kumar, "Fair Game: Leveling the Playing Field in Scientology Litigation" (copy enclosed herewith). I am also enclosing copies of the Gerner and Wager correspondence to the Sate Bar. Clearly, these letters (full of false representations) are not written in the usual manner of a dispassionate, objective and personally uninvolved counsel - a fact that the State Bar seems unwilling to acknowledge. Indeed, it has long been rumored among various members of the California Bar that shockingly, if regrettably not surprisingly, the Church of Scientology has operatives within the State Bar to ensure that opposing counsel are harassed and scientology counsel remain undisciplined!

The evidence establishes that Moxon is, in essence, an in-house attorney for the Church of Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs ("OSA"). The evidence (much of it corroborated) clearly and convincingly establishes that what follows, in so far as the Berry, Hurtado, Moxon, Barton, Pattinson, Henson, Jeavons and Anders cases are concerned, is correct.

Seven years ago, the Los Angeles Daily Journal published a lead article under the headline "Church Calls It Quits." The Church of Scientology had dismissed its defamation lawsuit against former adherent Steven Fishman and his Florida psychologist Uwe Geertz. The church had sought at least $1 million in damages against each of the two defendants for their comments in the May 6, 1991, issue of Time Magazine, "Scientology; Thriving Cult of Greed and Power." The complaint in the Fishman case alleged that Fishman and Geertz had falsely claimed that Fishman was ordered by church officials to kill Dr. Geertz and then commit suicide in the wake of Fishman’s arrest in a fraudulent financial scheme that had allegedly involved the church. I had successfully represented Dr. Geertz and assisted Steven Fishman who was representing himself. "Besides serving as a legal setback, the action in the case may also hinder Scientology’s pursuit of a related libel lawsuit against Time Magazine," the Daily Journal commented. It did and Time Magazine’s successful motion for summary judgment was recently affirmed on appeal. According to the Daily Journal article," Scientology had claimed in its 34-page motion to dismiss its lawsuit," that it, "always has been willing to litigate to achieve justice, but when it is told it must subject its parishioners and anybody associated with it in any way to such blatant harassment and sacrilege [it] cannot pursue its claims."

The Daily Journal article went on to say that these claims resulted from my Christmas "raid" at Scientology’s Celebrity Center where Kelly Preston-Travolta, Juliette Lewis, Isaac Hayes and Maxine Nightingale were served with deposition subpoenas. Actor Charles Durning who had been appearing as Santa Claus and who is not a scientologist was also served. Despite the appeals of the some of LA’s leading entertainment law firms, John Travolta and the other Scientology celebrities were ordered into immediate deposition along with Scientology leader David Miscavige and the church’s entire senior management team. Actor Tom Cruise twice threatened to sue me in connection with testimony concerning Nicole Kidman and him and their activities at the church’s heavily armed desert fortress near Hemet, California. Actor John Travolta has long been involved in some of the matters set forth herein. Both Cruise and Travolta are scientology spokespersons. The related, unsuccessful church litigation (involving five cases) cost an aggregate of approximately $20 million.

The Church of Scientology openly blamed me for its retreat in the Fishman-Geertz case and set about employing its controversial fair game policy, which says that anyone interfering with scientology could be "tricked, lied to or destroyed," for his or her actions. Among other things, the filing of the Fishman declaration attaching the church’s confidential trade secret scriptures ("OT I - VIII") set the stage for a series of high profile Internet lawsuits alleging thousands of purported copyright violations. Since the Fishman-Geertz case the church’s fortunes, irrespective of what you have been led to believe, have never been the same.

I have paid dearly for the defense of my various clients by being sued by Moxon and others on behalf of the Church of Scientology. Over the past seven years I have been driven from my career, my home and car, and into the Bankruptcy Court where the Church of Scientology, Moxon & Kobrin, Rosen, Hurtado and Barton still pursue me. In the process, they wrongfully obtained a vexatious litigant ruling against me, as well as multiple sanctions awards based thereon, and made/instigated over thirteen successive attempts to have me professionally disciplined as well as at least three different attempts to have me arrested for contrived offenses.

Kendrick Moxon of the church’s in-house law firm, Moxon & Kobrin, spearheaded scientology’s persecution of me. At various times he was joined by then LA Police Commission Chairman Gerald Chaleff of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe; Samuel D. Rosen, Barbara Reeves, Michael Turrill of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker; Gary S. Soter of Wasserman, Comden & Casselman; David Chodos and James Martin of Simke Chodos; as well as Jerry Bregman, Esq.; Donald Wager, Esq.; Michael Gerner, Esq.; and Thomas S. Byrnes, Esq. The efforts of Moxon’s "chief investigator", Eugene Ingram, and various of these lawyers culminated in Moxon and Wager’s 1999, filing of Hurtado v. Berry in Los Angeles Superior Court as well as in federal court. Through CNA, my malpractice insurance carrier, I hired Edith Matthai and Kim Sellars of Los Angeles’ Robie & Matthai to defend me. (Ms. Matthai has just commenced a term as President of The Southern California Association of Defense Counsel.)

To reiterate, so that there is no confusion as to what has happened (and to quote scientology’s founder L. Ron Hubbard, "The number of times through the material equals certainty"), recently (February 6, 2001), Moxon and Byrnes suddenly and unilaterally dismissed the Hurtado v. Berry state court lawsuit less than one month before trial. However, the Hurtado dismissal came as Moxon unsuccessfully tried to replace discovery referee Hon. Stephen Lachs and while Moxon awaited the outcome of a motion to compel the deposition of his chief "investigator" Eugene Ingram and an almost certain ruling that the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege applied at the least to communications between the Moxon & Kobrin lawyers, Elliot Abelson, Donald Wager, Thomas Byrnes, Miguel Hurtado, Michael Hurtado, Anthony Apodaca, Robert Cipriano and the Church of Scientology. Clearly, communications between them and Michael Gerner would also have been ruled non - privileged because of the crime-fraud exception (Cal. Evidence Code § 956). Facing inevitable defeat at trial, the Church of Scientology, through its pawn, Hurtado, again in the eleventh hour, attempted to cut its losses, hoisted the white flag of surrender and fled from the battlefield.

The evidence in the Hurtado v. Berry case is unusually damning because it is corroborated by a lawyer’s testimony/confession (a Los Angeles Criminal Bar Association President), over ten different witnesses as well as over sixty different documents - many of which bear Moxon’s own signature and handwriting. It includes multiple incidents of blackmail, bribery, extortion, witness tampering, subornation of perjury, perjury, wire tapping, obstruction of justice, frauds upon various courts, attorney misrepresentations and lies to various courts, false criminal complaints, false state bar complaints and possible judicial corruption. The evidence trail commences in late 1993, and constitutes an unbroken continuum of criminal, tortious and unethical conduct through to the present day. Complainant Wager [Gerner] commenced his involvement back in 1994, when he sought out my friend and previously engaged expert R. Vaughan Young as a potential expert in prospective litigation, now known to have been bogus. This was a pretext for trying to turn Young against me. Mr. Young memorialized this by contemporaneous letter to Wager. Later, Wager would recruit his office neighbour Michael Gerner, to file the pending State Bar complaints against me. Wager co-signed many of the several dozen Gerner letters urging exigent State Bar action against me. In addition, numerous phone calls were made and photographs of me were even provided to the State Bar!

The Gerner/Wager State Bar complaint related, among other things, to an attempted levy under the fraudulently obtained Barton $28,000 prevailing party costs’ order issued against me in Barton v. Berry, following my February 1999, discovery default described above. Wager and Gerner then engaged in almost daily pressure upon numerous, different State Bar officials to have me disbarred. Their unrelenting pressure upon the bar was built upon misrepresentation and distortion, until finally they managed to move the Gerner/Wager complaint file to a State Bar official who agreed to commence a disciplinary proceeding against me, despite the horrendous circumstances into which Gerner’s and Wager’s principals had intentionally driven me. Undeterred by Wager’s recent confession under oath, Gerner arrogantly continues to pursue aggressively his principals’ state bar attempts to "utterly destroy" me by "whatever means possible". Thus, Moxon and the church continue the conduct for which they were so scathingly condemned in, among other decisions, the Allard opinion quoted above.

The evidence in Hurtado v. Berry is shockingly reminiscent of John Grisham’s novels such as The Firm and The Street Lawyer. In 1994, the Church Of Scientology, through Moxon & Kobrin and their investigator Eugene Ingram, set about fabricating evidence that I was a pedophile. This was done in accordance with the teachings, examples and policies of church founder L. Ron Hubbard. Former New York resident, Robert Cipriano, has repeatedly testified that Ingram, impersonating an LAPD detective, blackmailed him into signing a declaration falsely alleging that I had molested between 40 and 60, 14 to 16 year olds during one six month period. Unable to produce anything more than the allegations, Moxon explained that all of the alleged victims were, "Street hustlers who must have died of AIDS!" Scientologist Russell Shaw posted the Cipriano declaration, to the worldwide Internet. The original publication was by a scientology front group, The CAN Reform Group, which included the same Glenn Barton herein. Scientology also had the fabricated first Cipriano declaration, distributed worldwide to most of my friends, business and professional associates, even to judges and politicians. Astoundingly, the scientology enterprise even leafleted the wipers of every car within a three-bock radius of my home!

At the time the church, Bowles & Moxon, and Ingram commenced their "investigation" of me in 1994, I was about to become, and later did become, an equity partner in the large Los Angeles law firm of Lewis, D’Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard and had had an eight year average of over 2,300 billable and 2,700 aggregate hours per year. I had represented the Disciplinary Committee of the United States District Court for the Central District of California in its high profile District Court and Ninth Circuit proceedings against Stephen Yagman, had been involved in various celebrity law suits and was representing former attorney James Tierney in proceedings involving Brian Wilson and Mike Love of the Beach Boys. I had been involved in defending some of the biggest legal malpractice cases of the previous decade and was rocketing up the Lewis, D’Amato partnership ladder. I was in a long-term relationship, owned my own home, my car and had healthy retirement prospects and dreams.

Then, Moxon and Ingram obtained the perjured Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration and through people such as Barton, Chait, Casselman and Shaw, published it on the Internet (where, incredibly, it remains published today!). Lewis, D’Amato employees read the first Cipriano declaration on the Internet, discussed it among themselves and mentioned it to me. Correctly, pedophilia is one of the most serious crimes in society and pedophiles properly wear a permanent scarlet letter. My denials aside, I felt that I would never escape the destructive "where there’s smoke, there’s fire" attitude. As a member of the gay community, I am particularly sensitive to being baselessly and permanently labeled a pedophile.

For those and other reasons, I resigned from the Lewis, D’Amato law firm and joined the Musick, Peeler & Garret law firm as an equity partner. Subsequently, scientology private investigators spent several days waiting in the reception area of the firm. They were waiting in vain for the firm’s senior partners to meet with them. They said they had an envelope containing information about me and had to personally deliver it. They delivered their packages to many of Musick, Peeler’s clients, partners and former partners. This type of harassment was a factor in my ultimate decision to resign my partnership in the Musick, Peeler & Garret law firm and seek redress against the scientology enterprise. The redress that I sought and received is described both above and below. The perpetual risk of scientology doing this in the future, whether through Chodos, Moxon, Ingram or other agents makes it impossible for me to seek employment with another law firm, even when treatment of my consequential severe depression has been successfully completed.

As set forth in the pleadings in the Cipriano, Barton and Miscavige, (Moxon /Abelson) cases, Ingram and other Moxon & Kobrin/church representatives were provided with packages of defamatory materials about me. The perjurious Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration was the central piece in these packages and resulting visits. The packages were provided to, and visits made to, most of my friends, clients, partners, firms’ clients, political contacts, judges, educational officials and others. The "investigation" extended across the US (it was particularly active in Los Angeles and New York, places in which I am a member of the bar), Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand (places where I have either lived or practiced law or both). Ingram’s "investigations", and those of the numerous other firms of private investigators hired by Bowles & Moxon/Moxon & Bartilson/Moxon & Kobrin, did cause many of my friends and others to fear what he might do with their own employers unless they "disconnected" from (severed contact with) me. The annual fundraiser I had co-sponsored is no longer held. Ingram had made a false police report against 17 of the attendees. Many of the attendees were judges, local politicians and lawyers. Accordingly, the Bowles & Moxon/Moxon & Bartilson/Moxon & Kobrin/Ingram "investigation" of me has almost totally destroyed my network of college (high school in the US) and university friendships, other friendships and acquaintances, professional and peer relationships. Thus, my professional, social, recreational, charitable and political activities have been nearly eliminated, as was the collective intention of certain of the Real Parties In Interest.

Indeed Ingram, as well as Beverly Hills attorney Jeffrey W. Steinberger and State Assemblyman Baldwin of San Diego, called a television and press conference, apparently in an unsuccessful effort to have the LAPD arrest me for the pedophilia which was falsely alleged in the first Cipriano Declaration and to try and protect the publication of the defamation through the litigation privilege. Church representatives (e.g. Farny, Ingram, Moxon, Edwin Richardson and others) made over thirteen unsuccessful complaints to the New York and California Bar Associations. Amazingly, only this month, Moxon & Kobrin, through their agent, Ingram, stated that they knew highly personal details about my friend Jane Scott’s life (and mine) and attempted to defame me to my friend, Jane Scott’s, closest friend. Clearly, this was done in an effort to have Ms. Scott "disconnect" from me, thus furthering Moxon & Kobrin’s seven year application of the scientology enterprises’ Fair Game policies and practices as directed against me. Obviously, this was done for the purpose of "destroying" me in accordance with church/client directives, but in breach of applicable Rules of Professional Conduct.

Eventually in early 1998, goaded on by church operatives, I sued Cipriano and various church representatives (including Isadore Chait, Donna Casselman, Russell Shaw and Glenn Barton) for defamation and other torts. These were the Berry v. Cipriano, Barton, Miscavige, (Moxon and Abelson) cases. Despite being percipient witnesses, culpable parties and announced eventual defendants, Moxon and Ingram solicited the legal representation of Cipriano (and probably the representation of other clients and defendants such as Barton, Chait, Shaw and Casselman) and paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, for personal and business expenses, for a IRS § 501(c)(3) "charity" which Cipriano and Moxon & Kobrin established (in consultation with members of the Paul, Hastings law firm) to have Cipriano maintain and embellish the original blackmailed perjury alleging my pedophilia. The various multiple layers of conflicts of interest and ethics breaches were never discussed with Cipriano. Moxon ignored Cipriano’s April 1998, request that the case be settled immediately.

Several years earlier, Moxon had engaged in similar conduct and breaches when he solicited the representation of Jason Scott through whom he conducted the Church of Scientology’s successful scheme to bankrupt and take-over the Cult Awareness Network. The church itself has written policies permitting and encouraging Moxon [and all scientologists] to lie to protect the "greater good" of the Church of Scientology and him [Moxon] as an individual scientologist!)

New York attorney Samuel Rosen, Barbara Reeves and Michael Turrill of the large Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker law firm were retained to take a lead role in the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige litigation. Together, Moxon and Paul, Hastings had the case moved to Hon. Alexander H. Williams. Cipriano has testified that Moxon claimed Judge Williams was a "friend" of the church. Just before the vexatious litigant hearing in August 1999, it became clear that the judge’s fiancée also worked for defendant Church of Scientology International itself. Indeed she worked for the very same branch of the church that employs Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Abelson and Ingram! Additionally, the Paul, Hastings firm, had just employed the judge’s most recent law clerk.

The church defendants were also represented by the Los Angeles firms of Wasserman, Comden & Casselman (Gary S. Soter, Esq.) and Simke Chodos (David Chodos, Esq. and James Martin, Esq.), William T. Drescher, Esq., and Elliot Abelson, Esq. In addition, the Washington, DC, law firm of Williams & Connolly (Gerald Feffer) and MoniqueYingling, of yet another Washington, DC, law firm, represented the church defendants. Gerald Feffer is also personally well acquainted with Judge Williams. From the first day it was known that Moxon and Abelson were to be the subjects of subsequent Civ.Code § 1714.10 motions to add them as co-conspiring defendants. Moreover, they were also percipient and material witnesses. These ethical and tactical issues did not deter Moxon from being a lead defense counsel and this most certainly was not disclosed to his client, Cipriano. Indeed, papers were filed confirming that Moxon knew he would eventually be sued for the publication of the first Cipriano declaration.

Paul, Hastings and Moxon & Kobrin pursued a brutal and crushing motion and deposition strategy in the Berry cases. Paul, Hastings’ client was Glenn Barton, a Church of Scientology staff member earning approximately $50 per week. Moxon now represents Barton. Barton was alleged to be one of a group of scientologists responsible for initially and continuously posting the highly defamatory Cipriano declaration to the Internet. Rosen, billing nearly $500 per hour, headed a team of at least four expensive Paul, Hastings attorneys. I was required to pay crippling private judge’s fees despite my lack of means. Judge Williams was "persuaded" that the defendants had discovery "priority". I was precluded from taking depositions until Paul, Hastings and Moxon had completed theirs. I was unable to take a single deposition during this defense onslaught. I was also ordered to, "just sit there and take it," by the judge who permitted me to be deposed for over 14 days. He ordered me to answer over 2,000 interrogatories, to produce many dozens of boxes of documents and to permit numerous other depositions. Meanwhile, I was afforded virtually no discovery. There was even testimony, by a former Paul Hastings’ employee, that certain attorneys in the Paul, Hastings law firm had been paying to have court documents back-dated. Remarkably, Judge Williams ignored it. However, several non-church defendants (including Dr. Mathilde Krim and Lewis, D’Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard) settled with me for an aggregate sum of $100,000.

Moxon, Wager, and Ingram, aided by Cipriano, then procured a transvestite "street hustler", Anthony Apodaca, and videotaped him falsely alleging that I had hired him to engage in sadomasochistic sexual practices with me. The Paul, Hastings law firm also tried to use Apodaca to testify in the Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) case. When Moxon introduced this videotape in my deposition in the Berry v. Hurtado state court case, I denied ever having seen Apodaca before. In Apodaca’s deposition, in the Hurtado v. Berry case, Anthony Apodaca also denied ever having seen me and claimed that a lawyer had come to LA County Jail and had given him $300 and other benefits to testify falsely against me. Recently, prominent Santa Monica criminal defense attorney and LA Criminal Bar Association President, Donald Wager, Esq., testified that it was he who went to the LA County jail to pay Anthony Apodaca the $300 and that he believed that Moxon, who represents the Church of Scientology, reimbursed him.

I was forced by the overwhelming, judicially sanctioned discovery barrage to dismiss the litigation, (and ultimately as against Moxon and Abelson as well), before Apodaca’s deposition could be taken in the Berry/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) cases. These dismissals provided much of the contrived basis for the Chaleff/Moxon/Rosen/Chodos erroneous vexatious litigant ruling - effectively preventing me from ever again suing, in pro per, the church as well as Moxon, Ingram, etc., for procuring and permanently publishing the Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration; thereby effectively ending my legal career and ultimately leading to the loss of my home and vehicle.

Meanwhile, during the Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) case, Paul, Hastings and Moxon had insisted that I provide the identities of various pro bono clients and that I testify as to whether I had had sex with any of them. I am an openly gay man who, when forced to, testified that I had had a sexual relationship with then 24-year old, Michael Hurtado, who I had subsequently represented on several misdemeanors. Ingram took that testimony to Hurtado’s parents. He then took Hurtado’s parents to Wager’s law office to meet with Wager and Moxon as well as with him. Mr. and Mrs. Hurtado were shown the first Cipriano declaration and were persuaded that I was a "pedophile" who may have "molested" their irrefutably adult son, Michael.

Without even discussing the claims with their son, Mr. and Mrs. Hurtado agreed to retain Moxon and Wager to sue me. Later, Moxon and Wager met with Michael Hurtado himself, told him that there was money to be made, and had him agree to go along with the plan. Michael Hurtado has testified that he relied solely upon the first Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration in agreeing to be part of Moxon’s, Wager and Ingram’s solicitations to sue me. The inconsistencies between his two verified complaints, his discovery responses and deposition were minor compared with the total contradiction of material allegations by numerous other, unrelated witnesses.

According to testimony, my phones were then unlawfully tapped and my calls unlawfully taped. Paul, Hastings and Moxon compelled me to provide discovery as to my malpractice insurance coverage. Paul, Hastings tried to use Apodaca against me in deposition. Hurtado, at the solicitation of Moxon, was also expected to testify in the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton cases. Again, Rosen, Reeves and Turrill of Paul, Hastings were demonstrably involved.

However, when I was forced into a voluntary dismissal of the Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) case, and into bankruptcy, Moxon and Wager immediately filed Hurtado v. Berry in state court and Moxon and Jerry Bregman, Esq., subsequently filed the same case as an adversary action in the Federal Bankruptcy Court. These attorneys then made a $700,000 settlement demand upon my insurance carrier, CNA. Thus, they engaged in both bankruptcy fraud and attempted insurance fraud!

Later, Wager withdrew from the state court Hurtado litigation and was replaced by Thomas S. Byrnes, Esq. Subsequent lesser settlement demands followed until Moxon and Thomas Byrnes, Esq., voluntarily and unilaterally dismissed the State court Hurtado case last month. The Hurtado litigation is still pending in Federal Bankruptcy Court where Moxon, Bregman and Paul, Hastings have been pursuing adversary actions against me based upon the orders obtained through criminal fraud in the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) cases. Bregman has never properly withdrawn from his representation and involvement against me. He just "dropped out"!

After Moxon and Wager filed Hurtado v. Berry in state court, Wager, Abelson and Ingram met with Detective Petz of the West Hollywood Sheriff’s Department and made a false criminal complaint seeking my arrest and indictment over the Hurtado allegations. After an investigation, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office declined to proceed with an indictment and prosecution of me. Wager also used Hurtado’s perjury to make a motion to the Santa Monica court to change Hurtado’s drug diversion plea. The motion papers then "disappeared" from the Santa Monica Court files! Upon review of the Wager motion on Hurtado’s behalf, the presiding judge properly referred the allegations (albeit perjurious) to the State Bar. This triggered yet another scientology instigated California State Bar complaint against me.

The "disappearance" of Hurtado’s motion from the court’s files as described above is deserving of further comment in light of the fact that, remarkably and undoubtedly not coincidentally, other court files relating to these matters have also "disappeared" from the court’s files! In Berry v. Cipriano I filed a motion for contempt and for terminating sanctions against Moxon for his repeated use of a fraudulently altered document. Twice I filed this motion and twice it "disappeared". Considering the sworn testimony of the former Paul, Hastings employee previously delineated herein, I find these seemingly unrelated events remarkably coincidental.

Cipriano also testified that in December 1998, while the Hurtado/Ingram, Wager, Moxon and Abelson shenanigans were occurring, that Moxon was also having improper communications with my then law partners Stephen J. Lewis and Christian Scali. Suddenly and surprisingly on December 31, 1998, they dissolved the firm. Wager was already billing Moxon for his representation of Hurtado, with whom he had not yet even met!

In early January 1999, as I faced a solid month of depositions and discovery responses, Judge Williams permitted my two former partners to withdraw from representing me on only four days’ notice. I was not permitted significant discovery relief. Paul, Hastings started harassing and threatening me with the depositions of Apodaca and Hurtado. Overwhelmed by events, and the abusive discovery demands and orders, I was unable to timely respond to Judge Williams’ satisfaction. Moxon filed a successful motion to terminate the Chait portion of the Barton case on the basis of my alleged discovery abuse (being unable to respond to the unceasing avalanches of written discovery and demands for revised responses to literally thousands of interrogatories). Paul, Hastings said, on behalf of Barton, that they would be next to file a motion to terminate on the basis of my alleged discovery abuse. Judge Williams granted the Moxon motion for terminating sanctions (and later, on the same basis, Moxon’s and Chaleff’s vexatious litigant petition). Almost immediately, Moxon and Wager filed the Hurtado v. Berry cases.

At this juncture, Barbara Reeves, Esq., then of the Paul, Hastings law firm, persuaded me that scientology’s leader, David Miscavige, wanted to engage in "serious settlement discussions." However, she made it clear that Miscavige would not talk without my voluntarily dismissing (without prejudice) the Miscavige/Moxon portion of the Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige cases. I did so. In spite of my acquiescing to her request, no serious discussion was held in connection with any settlement. However, and clearly the point of the entire exercise, scientology then had sufficient dismissals with which to make a specious motion that I should lose certain of my civil rights upon the erroneous argument that I am a vexatious litigant for filing and pursuing the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) and Pattinson v. Miscavige/Church of Scientology cases. Perhaps not so coincidentally, Ms. Reeves and Mr. Terrill resigned from the Paul, Hastings law firm shortly afterwards.

Moxon & Wager then served the Hurtado v. Berry lawsuit on me as I took to my feet, in Pattinson v. Miscavige to argue against a successful Paul, Hastings and Moxon & Kobrin Rule 11 Motion relying heavily upon the sanctions rulings obtained from Judge Williams in the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) cases. The case never progressed beyond the complaint. Subsequently, they also relied upon the later vexatious litigant ruling of Judge Williams. Thus, upon the basis of their crimes and fraud upon the court in Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) they ultimately persuaded Judge Snyder to sanction me with the $56,000 that the church had paid Paul, Hastings, to briefly represent Moxon in the Pattinson v. Church of Scientology case. Astoundingly, this is the basis for the pending Moxon v. Berry Adversary proceeding in bankruptcy court! Judge Snyder’s Rule 11 order expressly relied upon, and quoted the language of, Judge Williams’ vexatious litigant ruling and hearing comments. Additionally, Paul, Hastings on behalf of Barton, obtained a $28,000 costs order against me from Judge Williams. This is the same Barton who has participated in the continuing worldwide publication of the original and perjurious Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration. [During the same time period, Barton (and scientology investigator Edwin Richardson) physically attacked and then made a citizen’s arrest of my client, Keith Henson. Barton, who was then a LAPD scientology "chaplain", was subsequently dismissed, following a complaint by Mr. Henson, from the LAPD.]

Moxon then took over the representation of Barton and started pursuing me with bank levies to collect the Barton $28,000 costs’ order. In other words, Moxon had obtained the original Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration full of admitted perjury by blackmail. Ingram, Barton, Chait and Shaw published it world wide as did Miscavige through the church. Then when I sued, Moxon successfully drove me out of the lawsuit using further blackmail, bribery and other serious criminal, tortious and unethical conduct. Thus, Moxon engaged in serious crimes and, with the active assistance of various of the Real Parties In Interest such as Rosen/Reeves/Terrill, Soter and Chodos/Miller, perpetrated a fraud upon the court and then obtained a fraudulent, tainted judgment for his co-conspirators’ defense costs. Next, with the assistance of Chaleff, he used that fraudulently obtained judgment to have me declared a vexatious litigant and to pursue me for defense costs arising from terminations procured by crime and fraud upon both the courts and upon me. Indeed, Moxon unabashedly continues to use these "fruits of the poisonous tree" to engage in unlawful conduct to "punish" me as an "enemy" of the Church of Scientology.

Moxon’s then five-year crusade to "utterly destroy" me by any means possible has taken its toll on me and I would be a liar if I were to suggest that it had not. I was, and am, under medical treatment (commencing mid-1998) for severe depression and I was previously drinking heavily. By January 1999, the church - Moxon & Kobrin and their hired guns such as Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker; Williams & Connolly; Ingram and others had totally and maliciously overwhelmed me in every sense of that word. Indeed, the concept of "overwhelm" is a significant part of the written church policies that were used to attempt to "utterly destroy" me and to "cause [my] professional demise." On April 25, 1999, my friend and some-time legal assistant, Jane Scott, intervened with regard to my abuse of alcohol, and I sought help from Alcoholics Anonymous. I have been free of alcohol ever since.

In the meantime, in June 1999, Moxon no longer needed Cipriano and stopped paying for all of his living and business expenses. Cipriano realized that Ingram, Moxon, Barton, Chait and the church had exploited him. He came to me and confessed the truth to me. He wrote a long declaration, corroborated by various financial and other documents, detailing the frauds, crimes and obstruction of justice that Moxon and Paul, Hastings engaged in order to force me out of the Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) cases and to incur the resulting costs and other sanctions’ orders against me for having sued Cipriano, Barton and Miscavige. Moxon. Paul, Hastings and the rest of the attorney army accomplished this on the eve of my filing of a Civ.Code § 1714.10 motion to add Moxon and Abelson as named defendants.

Subsequently, Cipriano was taken into Moxon’s "custody". At Mr. Cipriano’s request, Jane Scott and I rescued him moments before Moxon’s agents arrived to take him "away". The idea that he was going to be taken away by Moxon’s agents was a concept that truly terrified Mr. Cipriano! The Church of Scientology then hired LA Police Commission Chairman Gerald Chaleff of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe to argue a Petition to Declare [me] to be a Vexatious Litigant for having sued Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige (and shortly Moxon/Abelson).

Kendrick Moxon, Samuel Rosen, David Chodos and Gary Soter also joined in Gerald Chaleff’s contrived and aerobic vexatious litigant motion. This was the only appearance in the entire litigation by Gerald Chaleff, Esq., and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. Cipriano also filed opposition to the Petition of his former lawyers, Moxon and Soter. They continued on against the written opposition of their former client, Cipriano. Indeed to this day, Moxon has not returned Cipriano’s files in spite of the fact that Cipriano has repeatedly demanded their return. In fact, on behalf of Cipriano, I made several requests for the return of his files. At no time did I engage in any conflicts of interest; I represented Mr. Cipriano only for the very limited and unsuccessful purpose of getting his files returned from the Moxon & Kobrin firm (and others).

Cipriano and I filed a motion to recuse Judge Williams, in part, because it had just been learned that Judge Williams’ fiancée worked for Moxon’s actual client, the moving party, Church of Scientology International. Earlier it was understood to be Bridge Publications, Inc., which employed her. Judge Williams refused either to recuse himself or to follow the mandatory procedure for the handling of such motions. Observers remarked that it was "a hangin’ court hell bent upon a lynchin’" just to satisfy certain influential lawyers. Judge Williams refused to allow Robert Cipriano to participate in this proceeding despite it being in Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson). The judge did this despite notices being filed and accepted in connection with Cipriano’s written termination of representation by Moxon & Kobrin and Wasserman, Comden & Casselman. Over the objections of their former client, Cipriano, they were permitted to proceed with their Petition to have me declared a vexatious litigant!

Judge Williams said that he had read the new (August 6, 1999) Cipriano declaration (detailing the massive crimes and frauds upon the court) and that it was "irrelevant". In declaring me to be a vexatious litigant, Judge Williams stated that he was in his "final term", had been "re-elected" and was, " . . . like a federal judge in a state court." In short, Judge Williams ignored criminal acts procuring a false statement that instigated a legitimate lawsuit. Judge Williams then declared me to be a vexatious litigant for seeking relief based upon those same criminal and civil violations of the law. As if to underscore the clearly erroneous decision unappealable as of right, Judge Williams said, "It is not what you did but they way in which you did it." However, it must be noted that that is not the applicable statutory standard.

I appealed [Berry v. Cipriano, B134724 Div.7]. The Court of Appeals ignored my complying brief, expressly extended time to respond, and then prematurely dismissed the appeal before the extension date. Suffering from severe depression, overwhelmed, losing faith in what I had previously presumed to be the integrity of judges and lawyers, unable to afford even the transcript and copying costs on appeal, I had little choice but to accept the outrageous situation, at least momentarily.

Meanwhile, Moxon and Rosen of Paul, Hastings were using Judge Williams’ vexatious litigant order, and excerpts from the judge’s transcribed "comments" to convince other courts to issue sanctions and costs awards against me. In so doing, they were using a criminally and fraudulently procured result in Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) as the basis for misrepresentations to other courts that I should be similarly treated there. It is hard to imagine more reprehensible violations of F.R. Civ. P. Rule 11, CCP§ 128.7 and the Rules of Professional Conduct - not to mention a variety of serious crimes and torts. Moxon even provided a declaration for use in a case in which he had absolutely no involvement or participation, arguing that I should also be sanctioned there (Anders v. Northwestern Mutual Life). Again, Moxon cited the various remarks and attacks by Judge Williams upon me, as well as remarks and attacks made on the basis of misrepresentations to Judge Williams by Chaleff, Rosen, Chodos and Moxon himself. Indeed, Chaleff’s representations were not made on the basis of any personal knowledge. Curiously and no doubt significantly, Moxon identified Chaleff as his own [Moxon’s] lawyer!

All of this crushing litigation, by so many high priced, high powered national law firms on scientology’s payroll, had pushed me into personal bankruptcy. Kendrick Moxon, Helena Kobrin, Eva Paquette and Samuel Rosen of Paul, Hastings, then pursued me in Bankruptcy Court. Moxon, Barton and the Church of Scientology all filed adversary actions vigorously seeking non-dischargeability of the costs and sanctions orders that had been obtained as a result of crimes and frauds in the scientology-related Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson), Pattinson and Jeavons cases. Their litigation costs have vastly exceeded, by many multiples, the aggregate value of those ill-gotten claims. Clearly they seek to profit from their own misconduct.

The Bankruptcy Court has already ruled that the Moxon and Church of Scientology costs/sanctions awards are non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. However, it did so before the newly discovered evidence in the just-dismissed Hurtado v. Berry case. Moxon/Paquette/Barton now seek a similar ruling with regard to Barton’s expenses in the Berry v. Cipriano/Barton/Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson) litigation. Clearly, either the tax - exempt Church of Scientology International or the group-exempt International Association of Scientologists paid these expenses, in relation to the commission of massive serious criminal and civil misconduct.

As Tony Ortega noted in his New Times LA article, "Double Crossed", in the December 16-22, 1999, edition, Kendrick Moxon, had a serious problem explaining the source(s) of the funds used to commit these massive crimes and torts as well as a clear problem explaining exactly how it was that Michael Hurtado had found him and his firm amongst the thousands of lawyers in Los Angeles County.

. . . But when Moxon was asked about the [Cipriano exhibits], he balked, refusing to answer questions about why he sent $20,000 on Cipriano’s behalf [to erase his criminal record] or about where the money came from …

Moxon refused to answer New Times questions about how he became Hurtado’s attorney. New Times LA, "Double Crossed", December 16 - 22,1999.

Hurtado, the church’s "pawn", has fared badly since joining forces with Moxon, Paquette, Abelson, Kobrin, Wager, Byrnes and Ingram. Hurtado has had numerous subsequent arrests and imprisonments. Currently, he is back in LA County Jail, to serve a three year sentence, after the revocation of his five year probation term arising from being arrested while passed out drunk in a woman’s bedroom closet holding a butcher’s knife, while awaiting her return. Additionally, Moxon’s "investigator", Ingram, tried to intimidate Hurtado’s victim into not testifying against Hurtado. Ingram’s actions cost the victim her job, but she steadfastly refused to be intimidated and refused to drop her prosecution of Hurtado.

Ingram, Abelson, Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Rosen, Wager and Byrnes (as well as others) have now cost me my career, condominium, car and comradeship. Few want Moxon’s "investigator", Ingram, to visit their employers and provide copies of the now demonstrable perjurious and defamatory Cipriano "pedophilia" declaration and related materials which they still circulate about me even after their having been recanted. Amazingly, Moxon, Kobrin and Paquette continue to pursue me before the Bankruptcy Court and the State Bar, relying on what are clearly the "fruits of the poisonous tree" and therefore frauds upon the various courts.

In terms of recent events, when Real Parties In Interest dismissed the Hurtado v. Berry state court case rather than receive a ruling that the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege applied, Elliot Abelson stated that they should never have filed the Hurtado v. Berry litigation. Nevertheless, that was what they and their clients had chosen to do. In addition, Ingram would finally have to testify about the seven-year Church of Scientology/Ingram/Moxon & Kobrin operation to professionally and personally destroy me after scientology’s crushing defeats in their litigation against Joseph A.Yanny, Esq., Steven Fishman and Dr. Uwe Geertz and subsequently other cases that scientology had filed against critics.

Temporarily driven from the law, I took a job with a then-client, hi-tech start-up, Lumin-oZ, LLP. I no longer work for Lumin-oZ. I became concerned that there had been fraud perpetrated upon the minority stockholders, and that the company’s founder, who at that time was my friend, had misappropriated over $150,000. At the same time, Abelson, who works with Moxon at OSA, paid the founder of Lumin-oZ a visit. I was fired. Abelson then telephoned me, gloated that I had been fired and said that scientology wanted me back in New Zealand "where your [my] talents would be better appreciated." I cannot sue to recover the $28,000 that Lumin-oZ owes me in unpaid salary because Chaleff, Moxon, Chodos and Rosen had me declared a vexatious litigant, which severely limits my access to the courts. Realistically, that is an order from which one cannot easily appeal. Moxon, Kobrin, Paquette, Barton and the church are now trying to obtain these Lumin-oZ monies owed me. I remain under treatment for temporary and partially disabling depression.

As if all of this were not already bad enough, recently, in late October 2000, Moxon’s oft co-counsel, Samuel D. Rosen of Paul, Hastings commented to a Deputy District Attorney (Riverside, CA) with whom I was discussing a case, "Don’t talk to Berry. We’re [scientology/Paul Hastings, etc.] having him disbarred." The case I was discussing was the Henson case (the ninth that the Church of Scientology has instigated against Mr. Henson). Rosen of Paul, Hastings and Gerald Feffer of Williams & Connolly are both involved in the instigation and prosecution of this bogus criminal case against Mr. Henson in Hemet, CA [Case No. HEM 014371], and have intervened personally with the Riverside County District Attorney. Several local investigating sheriffs have reported in writing that there was no evidence to support such a prosecution, nevertheless, with correspondence from Gerald Feffer and in court "coaching" by Samuel Rosen, the District Attorney’s office has pursued it. Prosecution for alleged misdemeanor terrorism is now proceeding! Last month, Mr. Henson was acquitted in another church/Moxon & Kobrin "harassment" case in Clearwater, Fl.

Rosen’s record of using the legal system to harass his clients’ litigation opponents is also well documented. In Unique Concepts, Inc. and Baslow v. Brown, et. al., 115 F.R.D. 292 (DC SDNY 1987) Hon. Milton Pollack stated he had,

. . . reviewed the transcript of the…deposition attempt; it is hard to find a page on which Rosen does not intrude on the examination with a speech, a question to the examiner, or an attempt to engage in colloquy distracting to the examiner. Rosen’s constant interruptions continue throughout the transcript; his silencing of the witness and obstructive demands for explanations from the examiner rendered the deposition worthless and an exercise in futility.

The judge’s scathing comments did not end there, "Rosen’s conduct was harassing, wasteful, vexatious, and ruined the usefulness of the December 30th deposition. It was a sad and embarrassing display of professionalism." Finally, the noted jurist concluded, "This Court finds that Rosen’s conduct was undertaken in bad faith, intended to harass and delay, and reflected a willful disregard for the orderly process of justice."

In Schering Corporation v. Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, 124 F.R.D. 580 (DC NJ 1989), the court also held that Rosen had made false and misleading representations to the court and had subjected the court and the other parties to unnecessary expense, procedural and other burdens and through that brought "everyone to their knees." Id. 590. Indeed, the court held, ". . . it bears mention that there was nothing inadvertent about what was represented to [the court by Rosen] and what transpired as a result."

The court imposed monetary sanctions totaling $150,000 upon Rosen and his co-counsel holding that, "Rosen, an individual clearly responsible for the contents of the bulk of those papers and for the oral representations made to this court, may be sanctioned pursuant to Rule 11." Id.594.

In Cury v. Philip Morris USA, 1195 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14798 (DC SDNY 1995), the Senior District Judge granted a motion in limine to exclude the deposition of a non-party witness from trial because of Rosen’s deposition misconduct, which deprived opposing counsel of an adequate opportunity for cross-examination. Rosen’s behavior during many weeks of depositions and hearings in the Berry cases and Pattinson cases reflects the circumstances and findings in each of these three cases.

Indeed, one might rightfully question what is the objective justification for bringing a $500 per hour New York intellectual property counsel, who travels expensively, into numerous California cases that do not involve his intellectual property specialty? Clearly, he led the obstruction and travesty of justice that occurred in the Berry v. Cipriano, Barton, Miscavige/(Moxon/Abelson cases (and in other semi - related litigation).

Now that I have finally obtained the damning Hurtado v. Berry evidence that I have been long awaiting, I can proceed to attempt to undo many of the adverse rulings that Moxon the others of the Real Parties In Interest obtained through crime and fraud upon the courts. Indeed, there are clear federal, criminal RICO violations by certain of the Real Parties In Interest herein. Further corroboration of the matters herein is also set forth in the 1994 through 1999, declarations of Robert Vaughan Young, Stacy Brooks, Andre Tabayoyan and Gary Scarff. These deponents separately and independently testified that they were offered money to recant prior truthful declarations and fabricate testimony against me. Not coincidentally, Abelson was directly involved as was Moxon’s then law partner, Timothy Bowles, Esq. Young and Brooks were offered over $200,000 each. Mr. Scarff, along with his coach Abelson, were videotaped recanting and fabricating testimony. Mr. Tabayoyan was both threatened with physical harm and offered $25,000 for the prospective alteration of his testimony. OSA Chief, Michael Rinder, and senior Church of Scientology official Michael Sutter were also directly involved. Many individuals, from various states, who were "visited" by Moxon & Kobrin’s agent, "investigator" Ingram, and other private investigators hired by Moxon & Kobrin, have also executed corroborating declarations. Ingram has also been the subject of arrest warrants issued by at least three different states. One warrant was issued for impersonating a peace officer, just as he is known to have done in his blackmailing of Robert Cipriano as detailed above. As I have already explained above, writing for publication, about the scientology enterprise, and about what Real Parties In Interest and their co-conspirators have done to me, and suing for malicious prosecution and abuse of process are my only remaining prospects for an appropriate retirement.

As a result of the misconduct of the Real Parties In Interest herein, my home is now in very advanced foreclosure. I did have the opportunity for an advantageous sale, but Moxon & Kobrin’s and Paquette’s Barton v. Berry Adversary Bankruptcy proceeding, and the consequent closing complications and delays, caused the cancellation of escrow. As a result, I shall lose approximately $70,000 in equity and approximately $350,000 in mortgage payments and remain liable on the second mortgage of approx.$20,000.

Should you have any questions, or require additional comments and/or explanations, please do not hesitate to contact me as may be appropriate. In the meantime, I shall prepare and submit my response to the specifics of the pending NDC.

                           Very truly yours,





                            Graham E. Berry



Enclosures: Draft Answer to Draft Complaint.
                    Resume.
                    Copy of New Times Los Angeles
                    Copy of media report re Casey Hill, Esq v. Church
of Scientology decision
                    Copy of J.P. Kumar: "Scientology, Leveling the
Playing Field"
                    Copy of Keith Henson motion to recuse Riverside
District Attorney
                    LAPD press statement re Ingram
	        Copy of March 29, 2001, Letter to Palmer Brown Madden,
Esq.

cc: Terrie Goldade, Esq.
       Deputy Trial Counsel
       State Bar of California.









And without enclosures:

        Judy Johnson, Esq.            Executive Director
        Michael Nisperos, Jr.Esq   Chief Trial Counsel
        Fran Bassios, Esq.             Acting Chief Trial Counsel
        William W. Davis, Esq.     Special Assistant to Chief Trial
Counsel
        Terry St. Bernard, Esq.      Deputy Trial Counsel
        Jan Oehrle, Esq.                 Deputy Trial Counsel
        Russell Weiner, Esq.          Deputy Trial Counsel
        Ms. Brenda Barnes             Special Investigator
        Mr. Brian Rowsey              Special Investigator

The President and Members of the Board of Governors of the State Bar
of California.