3 M Hub Law Offices

I 1 .~11~_- _ _ 1 '1 é.1:..:;-1:} -I ,:_||'-“'3 !'_},‘:;.Iin‘ '- """_, "2\ "7;-n_\\.\1l.f_' . 1' : £1.31 61- 21,1 E,“ 1 1 11 31129

11M HUB LAW OFFICES 1 Ford Greene, Esquire 2 F California State Bar No. 107601 1 711 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard 3 1 San Anselmo, California 94960-I949 R Telephone: (415) 258-0360 41 11 Attorney for Defendant 511 GERALD ARMSTRONG

711

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

91 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

l 0 1

1 1 _ CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY NO. BC O52 395 INTERNATIONAL, a California l2 1 not-for-profit religious corporation: ARHSTRONG'S RESPONSES TO 11 C§I'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION 13 111 Plaintiffs, 14

U1 I 15 NJ;-I~4_1*_1-u1‘4_n-no-_'?__ GERALD ARMSTRONG; DOES 1 16 “ through 25, inclusive,

17 Defendants.

1 18 \u-Iﬁu-’\uu/\nuP\|-I\n-'\u-I5:-_I\na/\h—#\—/\h-/\u-/\-/\u-I

I Q 19 M TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD

20 ‘ PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiff Church of Scientology International

21 “ RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Gerald Armstrong

22 1 444 __lIlIlII.7__|Il1_4 SET NO: One.

24 " BEQﬂE§I_EQB_AQH1§§lQ§_HQi_l

cfl-rt‘‘As_ _‘__ During 1990 and 1991, you voluntarily provided aid and/or 25 4411‘ill!!!Lpi

26 1 advice to Bent Corydon and/or Corydon's attorney, Toby Plevin, in

1 1 27 11 the case of Beg; Corydon v, Church gf Scientology International, 1111 .11 1 28 1 et a1,, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. C 694401.

HUULAWOFFICES T:;_4' Fordﬁnenmilquirl 4; !SirFnn1:'IDnhBl-rd. I 1lAnltlun.O\ 94960 1 KI» ADHSSIOI (415)258-0369 Page 1 . ‘mum’: usvulszs to cars nmulsrs i i is ‘M K4 I CB1 363 Q

2,‘ EE§£QN5E TO REQQESTi§QR ADMISSIQN

31 gArmstrong objects to this request for admission on the

4% grounds that it is vague and ambiguous as to phrase "aid and/or

5 advice." If the phrase is given the widest of meanings

6 imaginable, or an unqualified meaning, then Armstrong submits an

7 unqualified admission.

8 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 2

9 In May, 1992, you voluntarily provided a declaration to Gary

10 M. Bright and/or Jerold Fagelbaum.

ll H RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 2 ii‘ 12 ,; Admitted. 13» REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 3 14, Gary M. Bright and Jerold Fagelbaum are attorneys for .51 defendants and counter-claimants David Mayo, Church of the New

15 ~15 Civilization, John Nelson, Harvey Haber, Vivien Zegal and DeDe 17w Reisdorf in the case of Religious Technology Center, et al. V. wl 18$ Robin Scott, et al., United States District Court for the Central W 19» District of California, Case No. CV 85-711 JMI (Bx).

20 h RESEQNSE TQ QQUESI FQB AQLQLSQIQN §Q, 3

21 H Armstrong lacks sufficient information to be able to admit of

22 \ deny this request. Armstrong objects to this request, moreover,

23 xi\ on the ground that it seeks information which is more easily I 24 P!\. available to Scientology than Armstrong. Scientology knows who ml 25 M the parties and attorneys of record are in its various 26 1: litigations, including the case cited in its request. All that 27 notwithstanding, and lacking no information to the contrary, ii 28 l Armstrong submits an unqualified admission.

3 l HUI LAW OFFICES Q 1 Fonl Grunt. bquin 711 Sir Franc! Duh IML E SmAn|n.'.mn.C.A 9-1960 ii (415)255-0360 Page 2 . m-s'm:I='s usmlszs 1:0 cars aznczsn rm Amﬂssxcr .';_ _» _. _ ‘ "01, -.- . - .-. A- ,1 5:--.-.1,-. ,Ao,-.51:-'-R» | -.-4-lg...-- M4,...»-v*>.»....--.._.. . i W ,' ,1‘ ., .7 3631 ﬁg-

., _ 3:1 'i ""!» ,--. _ .

1 1 1

4_:-__- REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 4 1 You worked as a paralegal for attorney Ford Greene since 2

3 August, 1991. RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION N0. 4 4 Armstrong objects to this request for admission on the 5 t term Armstrong admits 6 grounds that it is vague and ambiguous as to to the term

7 "paralegal." Nevertheless, omitting tha ,

8* that he has worked for Ford Greene since August, 1991, and is l' alified self—admitted paralegal. With that 9 intera ia, an unqu

10 understanding Armstrong submits an unqualified admission. REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 5 ll

12, You attended the convention of the Cult Awareness Network in

isi November, 1992. EST FO ISS H NO 5

14k RESPONSE TQ §§QQ 5 Lgﬂ IQ . Admitted. 15 lei naguasm roa ADMISSION no. e In November, 1992, you provided a videotaped interview to 17

18 Jerry Whitfield. RESPONSE TQ EQQUESE FOR ADHLSSLQN NO. 6 19 Admitted. 20E i 21, B3Q§§§1_§QB_BQ§1§§lQ§_§Q;_l

2 2* In June, 1993 you gave an interview to 7one or more reporters orter from 23% from Ngw§wgg3_magazine.

24, 1" zsn» Armstrong admits that he gave an interview to a rep , i 1 26i Ngwsweeg magazine, but lacks sufficient information to be able i 4* 7* know if said interview was in May or June of 1993. He Ii’!-"="""-==has ,*-\:_'.' é q__‘__‘_-. 2 Av _ . . 6 ’. 28§ diligent search but has no confirming facts otherwise"..'-1,;-.*"-==an’[email protected]'-:~_¢-:*».&f* 1, -I $5? -. -~= ='?5"-'\‘.1=\1 ‘.'i‘3¥¢ ~ 1’!‘="‘-"""'; .=. 1r'a“-‘- in 1 i -R5“ "‘-S‘ 1’.3- 1". -. = Q .‘.-‘ H flxfifiay--. , ‘ “.m;ifl)*¢€E: "'- Hill UNI QFFIG5 ,6 1' . , . a \-I ‘J, '9 " t 1 Fodfimnm i.nqu.'uI . _ Q‘ , : . ",4? 1". -I.‘-1. .,. -\. -.,,xY1.v-‘I:;-.._-I ‘"‘r_ _._._.__!_ ., K?Q’_ QIt‘-'--‘ -0 - p- —-___-__(‘| _ ' \ ‘4 _ . "*0 i -{L .—e .- _-_ ,__— _.- _ --fi___i _-e..-~-__\. _.-., _ .J- f _' .'.-_ -. - ._..1:.\»'.‘-=-'b¢.___0?J.|mma- ‘sam,_~h,-.>2;'11?\\_'#.J...,,.r~‘-wt_":;,. _ =: , ''- . T - - ‘ '=*- Fnnnl on-all ~ ~ ~- 1 1 _ I ""-<.-_-_m9£I'°'?=i'h‘i"'-‘"-'-' —¢-:-.-—- - - _ _ - flutocs-—— -- -—---.-- ~ -- ~,- -. gmmasaws-"-""':'-.3:' "-'11.------»:a.*7"-if-'9‘; .- , f

'*<..-'.-J--" 6»=‘- a.-.»3:-we-Bf-"-4*.‘-§‘.q.:!':‘‘5"-.-.r.=.'~'rt’ H’ 3632

ll way.

2 “, REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 8

3, In August, 1993, you gave an interview to one or more

4 in reporters from Entertainment Television.

5" RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. B

6 Armstrong admits that he gave an interview to a reporter from

7 1 Entertainment Television, but that said interview could have been 8} in July of 1993. with that as an understanding, Armstrong submits 9 an unqualified admission.

10g REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 9

ll, In August, 1993, you provided a copy of a manuscript entitled "ONE HELL OF A STORY An Original Treatment for Motion Picture 12g1 W, l3\ Purposes Created and Written by Gerald Armstrong to Entertainment

l4i Television.

l5\ RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 9

16 Armstrong admits that he provided "One Hell of a Story" to up Entertainment Television, but that said provision could have been

18$ in July of 1993. With that as an understanding, Armstrong submits

l9ﬂ an unqualified admission.

2 0 REQUEST E05 ADMISSION N0. IO

2 ll In June, 1993, you helped form a Colorado corporation called 22 "Fight.Against Coercive Tactics, Inc." (hereinafter, "FACTI").

23‘ l BE§2QE§E_IQ_BEQE§§I_EQB_ADB1ﬂ§IQE_BQi_lQ N

24%H Armstrong objects to this request for admission on the

2s, T grounds that it is vague and ambiguous as to the terms "helped and

I74!-lb 26* form." ‘H

~ 27 \ '1 REQUEST FOB ADQISSION NQ. 11 \

\ J‘ ,\ , 1: 28 \ From June, 1993 until June, 1994 you were the President of 1 HUILAWOFFICES Fordﬁruae. iqairl Wiii 711 SirFram:'IDrI.i-Illvd. W SllAmdn0.CA 94960 M (4i5)&-(Em Page 4 . naunmlrs us:-onszls 1:0 cars uqUIS'1'8 rm AIIIIS-SI£I I E 3 6 R 3

l FACTI.

2; RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 11 Denied. 3 ii

4 M REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 12

5% FACTI maintains and operates an electronic "library" in the

6‘ form of a computer bulletin board which contains, inter alia,

7 IL documents relating to plaintiff.

8 -RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 12 W 9 Armstrong lacks sufficient information to be able to admit or

10 deny this request. Aside from the fact that Armstrong has no

11 actual knowledge of anything Fight Against Coercive Tactics (Fact)

12 does, lacking facts to the contrary, Armstrong submits an 13 unqualified admission.i Ii 14¢ REQUEST FOB QQMISSIQN NQ, 1} 1l

15 i§7__r“4I~u-ur4i-u*1-It _nq;_ You provided documents to FACTI with the intention that those

16 1 T documents would become a part of its electronic library. Y 17 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION N0. 13

18 with the understanding that Armstrong does not know of the

19 existence of such a library, has never seen neither it nor one,

20 and understanding that by "intention" is meant "hope," Armstrong 21 i submits an unqualified admission. 22 M1 BEQH§§!;IQB_AQ!I§§IQN_§Qi_l1 ,11 i 1. 23 M In January, 1994, FACTI sent a mailing to hundreds of people 24 i requesting negative information about Scientology entities and 25 F related individuals "to assist ongoing litigation." I

26 BES2QNSE_IQ_BEQHE§I_EQB_AQHlﬂ§1QN_NQm_l1

27 x Armstrong lacks sufficient information to be able to admit or

28 I deny this request numerically. Armstrong objects to this request 11 HUD LAW OH-‘ICES hdfiwmfimh 1 711SitF:I:I.'ID|'allll'\i. SuAnnehm.CA 9-1960 (4151 258-Gill 1 Page 5 . in-nsncirs usrrlsls -no csrs nm0!8‘1'$ HI! M11581" M. .1: -2, | ,§{='4& Q; ".1? J. 2';1*-_-1 1-.1 ' ‘,4;2 .~.-is ._. ,1' 3F'?4 5 1 for admission on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous as to 2 the terms "negative information," entities" and "related 3 individuals." 4 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 15 5 In February, 1994, you voluntarily provided a declaration to ' 6 Graham Berry, Gordon Calhoun and/or Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois & 7 Bisgaard, attorneys for Uwe Geertz. 6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 15 9 Admitted 10 11 DATED: JulY 21, 1994 4...lI!!4' 12 y ~_...._ -tfjfil/Q 13 By: ,‘_.'-.4!-2...-M;-..i_&-_.._ I1 *~ AttorneyF02! GREENEfor Defendant . Q 14 GERALD ARMSTRONG \ 1 15 I .1 16 17 16

1.L 19 ,1‘ ¢ i 20 21 22 i 23 ____-....-—_-_i..-_.-—- ._.._.._.,._..,_._..._-_.--.-

1 24 i 25 i H l 26 1 1 27 26

‘L1;--144:-L HUMAWOFHCB FonlGmznn.i.|q\un i1Si|-FrucilDnlnBh~d- umnmmawwzﬂ ' ‘ (4;.5);g,5,33w ~* Page 6 . mcsrmlo s usmlszs to cs1 s uquxsrs rm mussxou . .- §._ 5. . '.',‘v“

‘ E:".1\f.-~‘°‘5\‘=.' alt‘-I1 1;-"qt y ~.=-1:“? - .'.‘.- P‘-.,_;'¢_ 5:6 we 3625

1? EERIFIQATIQE defendant in the above 2 My name is Gerald Armstrong and as 3 action have received for foregoing responses to CSI's requests for 4 *1 admission and as to the same hereby declare under penalty of 5 ,1 perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

6 Executed this 21st day of July, 1994 at San llmo, Z’ _ i

4 7 California. 8,

9 GERALD ARMSTRONG 10¢

lla

12$

13‘

1, 14¢

171

19 20

HUlLM¥OFFl€B FordG|uu:n.E.aq\n'n ll$irFrnn:nDnhlBML umnelnn. CA 94960 (415) 25!-{B60 Page '7 , imsnﬂivs usrmsns 1'0 cs1’: nmoxsrs rm AIIIISSIOI /‘ , u .1 e 1 i 3626 A...) % PROOF or SERVICE 2|y I om employed in the County of Marin, State of California. I 38N am over the age of eighteen years and am not a party to the above

4 1,, entitled action. My business address is 711 Sir Francis Drake 5 Boulevard, San Anselmo, California. I served the following

6 y documents: ARMSTRONG'S RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION AND FORM INTEROGATORY 7 ijl ‘ * on the following person(s) on the date set forth below, by placing 6) Q a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage 9% I thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States Mail at 101;! U San Anselmo, California: 11 y Andrew Wilson, Esquire 12 WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO 235 Montgomery Street, Suite 450 131 San Francisco, California 94104 1 14‘ LAURIE J. BARTILSON, ESQ. “ Bowles & Moxon 1 15, 6255 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 2000 | J Los Angeles, California 90028 16 , A M [X] (By Mail) I caused such envelope with postage thereon 17 fully prepaid to be placed in the United \ I E States Mail at San Anselmo, California. | 18

[ 1 (Personal I caused such envelope to be delivered by hand 1 19 Service) to the offices of the addressee. 1

i 1 20 [X] (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the 3 \1 laws, of the State of California that the above 21“ is true a - ~>~ -——~ 22, DATED; July 21, 1994 V

i 5 1 ‘n'y'~\ 1 I

25' —-all Jill ! 1

M O3 M- 27? 26, ll nun um omczs 1 Fenian-m.2q.un HF 11szrrm=inDrmm-4. h=nAndnn.('A94%0 pi ' ' (415)250-0360 Page 8 . insrum s usrclsrs 1-o cs: s nmunsts rm mnotssml