Bill Franks to Dresher (from Lisa case)

From: "Jeff Jacobsen" <cultxpt@ev1.net>
Subject: Bill Franks to Dresher (from Lisa case)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 05:14:09 -0000
Message-ID: <vni491shfb7m1d@corp.supernews.com>

Dresher & Dreshery P.C.

23679 Calabasas Road
PMB 338
Calabasas, California 91302 - IS02

Dear Mr. Dresher, 23 May 02

Thank you for your letter, I appreciate the opportunity to correct some of the assumptions that you have made.

Firstly, you have thrown me into the category of anti-scientologist. I am not and have never been. I believe that Gerry Armstrong and others have made 2 life's career out of being an ex-scientologist. That does not apply to me and ample time has passed to prove my point. Since being asked to leave the church in late December of 1519 1 have made it a point., with an exception in the Christofferson case in Oregon in 85, to get on with things.

Since receiving the subpoena, I have done a little research as to who my predecessors were and find the names of Hana Eltringham Whitfield and Jesse Prince. Both these two have made a living at being ex scientologists. I have tried to stay away from anything that smells of such a "jihad".

Secondly, you are right in that I was served a subpoena, but you are wrong in saying that there was any "subterfuge" in this event. I was entrapped you might say and did not play any game so indicated. Factually, over the years, I have found myself coming to the Tampa/Clearwater area on business many many times- Your employers no doubt can vouch for this as about four years ago they chased me out of a public park opposite the Sand castle in Clearwater while sitting on the park bench making business calls.. Furthermore, when I received this subpoena, I was not a little pissed off and immediately drove to Dandees office to demand an explanation. As far as Greenway goes, I was discussing some real estate, or that is why I went to the restaurant I met her through Peter Alexander who I know you guys have a thing for, but believe me; It had no connection to whatever he is into.

Mr. Drescher, when Scientology and I parted ways twenty some odd years ago, a decision was made by me to go in a decidedly opposite direction. Consequently, I have limited my associations to people of non-scientology backgrounds. I do not have an ax to grind and do not want to be around those who do.

Finally, the subpoena was a surprise and indeed, I felt that I had been entrapped.

Suggestions that I am a party to this hearing that you mention or the Liebreich case- are far from the truth.

Ten years or so ago, I was subpoenaed in another one of these wacky suits.

I believe it was against the church and also Miscavage personally. Bent Corydon had me subpoenaed and I was advised that there was no legal remedy other than showing up. So I did indeed show at the depositions, however, my behavior and actions at the sessions, adequately displayed what I thought of the suits and the chicanery that got me into that situation of forcibly having to testify. So, Mr. Drescher, in twenty-one years I have avoided this kind of activity, with the above noted exception, why would I want to get into this now. You guys have proved the point that it is a loser to go against you in court or otherwise. Plus, I have no personal interest in it-absolutely none.

Thus I was not pulling your chain in my April note. Evidently, Dandar was telegraphing what he had in mind and had yet actually done- Furthermore., I have been so out of the church activities I do not know why I have been ordered to participate in this and I can't imagine what I could bring to the party.

When I received this subpoena I eventually got some legal advice other than ken Dandaft. I have been advised that I am now under court order. Since I have been doing business in Florida and have for some time I come down there with some frequency.

Do you have any suggestions? My indifference to this kind of movement against the church has been expressed dramatically over the years with my silence. I do not want to be involved.

This threat of yours just gives me another problem on top of the other one that Dandar has presented me with. I know you won't do it, but why don't you just throw some money at this thing and make it go away so that we can get back to better things. I am sorry for this young woman's fate, but there is no way that the church killed her or participated in her death. I don't know much about this case but I wonder why someone would try to pull me into such a case when I know that standard church procedure, as I knew it, would not have allowed this to happen. And that is all that I would have to say pertinent to this matter.

Bill Franks

P.S. I hope that the address label on your envelope to me is not indicative that I have made it to your mailing list.