STATE OF FLORIDA CITY OF CLEARWATER P INELLAS COUNTY
CITY OF CLEARWATER COMMISSION HEARINGS RE:
THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
Clearwater City Hall Clearwater, Florida Saturday, May 8, 1982
RIZMAN COURT REPORTING 18 TREMONT STREET BOSTON MASSACHUSETTS 02108 (617) 227-1686
City of Clearwater City Commission:
Charles LeCher, Mayor
Thomas Bustin, City Attorney
Anthony L. Shoemaker, City Manager
Rita Garvev, City Commissioner
Paul Hatchett, Vice Mayor
James Calderbank, City Commissioner
James Berfield, City Commissioner
Lucille Williams City Clerk
Sue Lamkin, City Clerk
Michael J. Flynn, Escruirc12 Union Wharf
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
Thomas Greene, Esquire
12 Union Wharf
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
Thomas Hoffman, Esquire
12 Union Wharf
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
12 Union Wharf
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
CITIZENS FREEDOM FOUNDATI1
WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA
* D. BOX 113
KENSINGTON, MARYLAND 207
I N D E X
LaVenda Van Schaick 7
Janie Peterson 77
Sharon McKee 158
Scott Mayer 162
Robert Dardano 288
Paulette Cooper 315
Edward Walters 348
John G. Clark, M.D 367
Brown McKee 396
E X H I B I T S
Number Description Page
45 Affidavit of Stephen Garritano 77
46 Affidavit of Carole Garrity 156
47 Affidavit of Stan Herrin 287
48 Documents, Project Owl 311
49 Documents, Operation Freakout 314
50 Documents on how to commit burglaries 314
51 Documents on evaluations of covert 314
52 Documents on drills 314
53 Organization Chart of the Church of 419
I N D E X - Continued
E X H I B I T S
Number Description Page
54 Document pertaining to the use of 419
55 Documents pertaining to the use of 419
56 A copy of the Judgment in the Article 419
or Device case
57 Documents, entitled ."Scientology Opera- 420
tions in Clearwater"
58 Documents on how to do criminal opera- 420
59 Affidavits 420
Clearwater, Florida may 8, 1982 Morning Session
MR. LeCHER: Commissioners, staff, consultants, members of the audience, those at home, welcome to the fourth
day of the hearings, the public hearings, with respect to Scientology. This will probably be our fourth and final day for
the City Commission. We do hope that the Scientologists will take advantage of their time, starting Monday, and
give their side of the issue and, also, their witnesses% We will be here Monday, anticipating
Before we start, I would like to -- I would like to start this meeting with a prayer given by Commissioi Jim Calderbank
and then, rise, for the Pledge of Allegiance led by Police Chief, Sidney Klein.
MR. CALDERBANK: Dear Father, we ask you for the strength and the ability to get through these very diffcult times.
We ask for your love and also your help ii deciding what is the best for the people and the citizens of the City of
We hope that we follow your way, and that every day we add a new challenge and we can meet it with grez minds
and with conviction. Amen.
MR. LeCHER: Okay.
(Whereupon, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited.)
MR. LeCHER: Mr. Flynn, do you have any comments you'd like to make before we start these proceedings?
MR. FLYNN: I do, Mayor.
Mayor LeCher and members of the Commission, I'd like to make some brief comments about some of the things I
stated'in my opening that are particularly applicable to the evidence today. And that -- these comments, ]Dasica'Lly,
relate to the purposes of these hearings wnlch are not prosecutorial. We're not here to collect criminal evidence
concerning the Church of Scientology in terms of trying to obtain indictments against individuals or of the
organization. what we're here to do is to determine whether or not there've been deceptive sales and trade practices
in connection with a number of different items of evidence that have been adduced already before this Commission
and will continue to be presented today.
And those, basically, involve: deception concerning Mr. Hubbard's background upon which members have relied or
would not have joined if they had known about it; confidentiality of auditing information; deception of purposes, goals,
and actions of the organization;
deception concerning the article or device warning in the case that I referred to in my opening, which we will .be
getting in today; and-deception concerning legal documents and the legal status of individuals who are entering or
leaving the Church, the conditions at the Fort Harrison, both as they actually exist and as they are represented to
individuals who are coming to the city; and some issues pertaining to the education of children.
With regard to all of those issues, it is important
to keep in mind that, in order to prove that the or
to present sufficient evidence be-core -this Cormission that those practices have been taking place, the policies of
the corporation have got to be examined and they have got to be examined over a long period of time to determine
whether they are sustained policies, policies that not only appear in writing but in practice. And the only appropriate
procedure for this Commission to follow to determine whether or not those practices -- or those policies are actually
practiced is to determine whether they're standardized and uniform. And the focus of that inquiry is whether or not
they have been taking place over a long period of time as applied to a different cross section of people by which this
Commission can draw
the inference that, in fact, they are uniform policies; they're uniformly practiced in many different locations, including
the City of Clearwater; and that they do involve - excuse me - they do involve the deceptive practices about which
this Commission is concerned.
MR. LeCHER: Thank you, Mr. Flynn.
Do you have a witness?
will you please be sworn in by -the Clerk?
LaVENDA VAN SCHAICK, a Witness
having first been duly sworn by a Clerk the City 0::
Clearwater, was examined and testified as Lollows:
MR. LeCHER: What is your name, please?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: LaVenda Van Schaick.
MR. LeCHER.: Miss Van Schaick, I'm going to ask you the same basic, five standard questions I will ask every
witness that we will hear in these proceedings.
Number one: Are you appearing today to testify under oath voluntarily?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I am.
MR. LeCHER: Have you been paid by anyone for your testimony, other than your expenses coming to Clearwater?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No.
MR. LeCHER: Do you have a lawsuit against the
Church of Scientology?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I do.
MR. LeCHER: Does the Church of Scientology have
a lawsuit against you?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Several.
MR. LeCHER: Several.
Has anyone suggested to you that you should state
anything but the truth or has anyone suggested that you
change your testimony for any reason?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: NIC.
MR. LeCHER: Thank you.
Would you like to make a statement or would you
like to go over what your story is?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I'd like to start -- I don't
want to get into the organization, basically, as to what
L. Ron Hubbard is because there's a lot of testimony
that'.s already been done on that.
Basically, what I want to get into is a brief
history. I started in Scientology when I was sixteen
years old. I started on staff when I was twenty-one
years o1d. Approximately, nine years of my life went
into Scientology. I currently do have a lawsuit against
Scientology and they have had several lawsuits against me
which are s till pending.
Fair Game: I've had my house bugged, my telephone bugged. I've had several episodes that have happened to me
since I started the lawsuit.
My origination of why I got basically into the lawsuit is because: one, the cover up of Quentin's death in Las Vegas,
which was L. Ron Hubbard's son, which is still a mystery; two, my brother-in-law shot his brains out with a gun.
There are other cases that are similar to that. Three, the misrepresentation of what, actually,, Scientology is doing.
MR. LeCHER: Would you like to expound on any of these particular points?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, basically, what I relied on
when I got into Scientology -- I thought it was like a Vista organization. I was recruited under the deception that we w
- ere going to do exploration in Egypt. I thought it was a scientific thing that we were involved in. The fraud that
Hubbard was a nuclear physicist and a scientist we were recruited in.
There was quite a few of us at that time that were going to' school at the University of Las Vegas, and we thought
that, basically, what the group was was like Vista, some kind of help organization that was doing
research in different areas. We didn't realize what we
were getting into.
MR. LeCHER: Can you tell us a little more about
the misuse of auditing
MS. VAN SCHAICK: The first day that I was
MR. LeCHER: -- severing family relations?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: The first day I started court
proceedings -- well, actually, before I started court
proceedings,-my PC folders were sent to the press, plus
all the information in my PC folders was sent as public
knowledge Zfor anyone to have access to. it has been a
lie since day one that your PC folders ar e confidential.
MR. LeCHER: Excuse me. What's a PC folder?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: PC folders -- any information
that you personally -- if you're upset with your husband,
something yo-u-,did when you were younger, something very -
it's anything personal that you have in your life that
you.wouldn't even, maybe, tell Mom and Dad. It's kind of
like sitting down and doing a confession to a Catholic
priest, and it's supposed to be very confidential. It is
not. It-is public information.
And that was another one of the originations that
actually started it. It is not something people that
are in Scientology get the idea that your PC folder is
confidential; it is not.
MR. LeCHER: What kind of relationship did this have on your family?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Divorce, split between the parents - of course, they had me disconnect from.my parents - a
child, who is now eleven and stabilized, who was very unstable, which is my daughter; relationships between my
family -- I was disconnected from my family for so many years, it took me a long time to kind of build it back up-
Oh, how I was made to disconnect is: I was taken by a lady named Pam Bevin to a room and put under auditing
processes with another gentleman, and it was like what you would be called kidnapped. And after thorough
processing and getting out of the room that I was in - an this was two weeks, no one else was there but these two
people - I disconnected from my entire family. I was told that this was the next process. I removed my money from
the bank accounts and gave them all the money that I had.
Oh, I signed waivers like most everyone else did, waivers that I would not attack, threaten, or sue Scientology.
Because I felt that my parents were enemies, I was
put through an auditing process to -- my parents were not the kind of people that I wanted around me. And I'd like to
also state, with that fact, my mother is a counselor and a psychologist and my father is a retired Methodist minister.
And my father had, when he was in the ministry, very briefly, a client come to him that was involved with Mayor
Cazares' set up, that told him
MR. LeCHER: That may be considered hearsay.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: All right.
We can't use that for legal reasons.
MR. LeCHER: That's a separate issue, and we're not here today to discuss that.
MR. FLYNN: It's not only a-question of hearsay, but it could be a question of confidentiality of the priest/penitent
privilege that is present in the State of Florida.
MR. LeCHER: We will not hear that.
Can you tell me something about living -- you were in Clearwater at one time, living here?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I was.
MR. LeCHER: Can you tell me about sanitary conditions and the -- they had children and adults, and tell me about
how -- what it was like to -- especially, young children, like infants, in the City of Clearwater
in the hotel, and conditions of the RPF and the EPF?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: At the time I was in Clearwater, there was a hepatitis epidemic that was being covered up,
MR. LeCHER: When was that, please?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: 1977.
Through 1976 and '77, people that were coming from California and the Las Vegas area to Clearwater were coming
back Very ill. And at that time I had no idea of why, until I got to Clearwater myself.
I was in Clearwater for eight weeks. The first day that I got to Clearwater, I became ill because of the food conditions
that they had in the hotel. 1. reported to what they call the Medical Officer, and noticed that downstairs people were
getting inoculations for different things. At that time, that second day -- I didn't know until, actually, about three
weeks later that there was actually a hepatitis cover up going on.
MR. LeCHER: All right, what-about the children?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Thechildren were kept -- my room
happened to be next to the nursery. And the nursery
was -- there were two young kids that were, like, thir
teen and fourteen that were watching the children.
Because I could hear crying -- the children were separate
from the parents and I could -- crying all night long. And being a mother, I made it a habit to look into those things.
There was -- the kids we re sick: there was flu, there was no -- there wasn't any kind of clean area. The conditions
were that all babies that were crying were left in one room to cry because they had reactive minds, and they were
considered suppressive babies. And ail ki that smiled and that were nice were left in another room. And -- which was
really kind of a horrible experience Jfoi me as a mother.
The other incident was another reason why they
moved most of the children off of the base at that time is there was a child -- because of where the parking lot was
situated at the back of the Fort Harrison, the children were right next to the parking lot. And a child got out of that
area and was killed behind that parking lot area., And that's when they made the decision that they had to move the
children: one, because of the publicity that -- and the children are still in the city somewhere.
At the time I was there they were making the big move of getting the children out of the Fort Harrison. And the
parents that had babies were very upset with the fact, because they only had an hour for lunch and would
not be able to see their children because where they were putting the children was an hour and-a-half- to two-hour
drive and they couldn't have that hour -- see, parents were allowed one hour for their children at lunchtime, and that
was it. And that hour meant that, by the time they got there and had to be back on post again, they couldn't see
So, the big upset was that the parents wanted to
do something about it, but they actually couldn't. There
wasn't -- it wasn't the parents got off -- when a lot off
the Sea' Org. members got off the ship, they started having
babies they were not allowed to have babies when
they were on the ship. And as a consequent, you had this
overpopulation of small children. There were at least
fifteen small babies that were ranged between three or
four weeks old and, I think, the oldest was, like, two
years old. And there were all young children in one con
MR. LeCHER: Why were the parents separated from their children? How can a -- I'm not sure I can understand a
suppressive infant. How do you know -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Parents -
MR. LeCHER: -- an infant is suppressive, simply because he cries?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah. Or they're going through' what's called a PTS; it's called Potential Trouble Source
Restimulation. And the way they audit the process is that there -- the child must have somebody suppressive if it's
not the parents, someone in the immediate area that is suppressive to the child. So, he is being restimulated. And
so, those children were put into separate rooms and just left to cry. And the basis of it is -- is that the children -- the
babies had to handle. their own type of thing.
And the reason the parents were split is because it's nothing but work, work, work at the Fort Harrison, and the time
that they saw their children was dinner break and that's it. And then, if they had liberty on Saturday. You're talking
about working fifteen, twenty hours a day,--and that's it. And there is no-human relationship between the parents,
basically. And then, they got separated and -- the idea is to separate you from your family. And if you have children
and you have that instinct.-. the children are little LRHs as some one previously said.
MR. LeCHER: As these children got to be five or six years old, did they attend school, at least the public school
system as we know it?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Some do, same don't.
MR. LeCHER: Did they ever, the authorities from the Board of Education, ever question or come by and check on
the educational opportunities or mandatory requirement for the children?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Not while I was there. And I did speak to kids that were the Commodore Messengers that had
not attended school.
And one of the things why they were removing the children from the area is so the city, particularly, couldn't keep a
handle on how many children were being born in Scientology, so, when they became school age, no one would be
able to find out whether they should be attending school or not.
MR. LeCHER: How was that small child killed that you said was killed in the back -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It was accidentally run over by a car;
MR. LeCHER: What about the RPF and the EPF? What was
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I mean, the two were at the Fort Harrison while I was there, and I saw every single part of the
The RPF was at -- in the stairwells, the floors, at
the very end, not on the upper floors because all the public was on the upper floors, but on the bottom floors at the
very far end. It's like a closet cubicle that ten to fifteen people were stacked up on each other. It smelled; it's like a
sweatbox it looked like a small concentration camp.
There was, basically -- I tried to talk to someone that was in the RPF - we were old friends - and he couldn't talk to
me. They're not allowed to talk, constant running, chipping paint -- at that time they were chipping paint off of
cement. And when they finished that, someone would come down and drop some more paint on the cement and
they would chip paint off of the cement And that was the big project at that particular time. It was how much paint
they could chip off the sidewalks. And this was their major project.
And as far as -- it didn't matter whether they were female or men, it was -- the same thing was going on. But the
conditions were really gross. No cleanliness, smelled bad. At that time they were wearing all green and I remember
that really stuck out in my mind - and dark blue to signify that we were not allowed as public people to talk to these
people. It was just one of the conditions.
We were screened when we came in, and we were told that anybody in the RPF was going through heavy
conditions' orders and were not allowed communication. I had been through a similar thing called EPF in Las Vegas.
So I'm very familiar with this whole process.
MR. LeCHER: You were here from almost the beginning -- from the beginning of the existence of the Church of
Scientology in Clearwater.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. I was in Las Vegas at the time that Clearwater was set up. I was not here at whe-n
Clearwater was -- began.
MR. LeCHER: -You say, "set up." That was
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I was in Las Vegas when when
the Fort Harrison was put here, we got orders in Las Vegas that Fort Harrison was here.
MR. LeCHER: I'll ask you the same question I asked at least one other. Maybe you can answer it.
.Why Clearwater and why did they come under the United Churches of Florida and not what they really are?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: One of the reasons is you have to look at the area. It's basically an elderly area, very quiet.
'They figure that the people over a certain age bracket would not stand up and oppose what they were doing. Plus,
the area is kind of, you know, a quiet,
little city, and they figured that no one in the city would make any kind of outcry. And that, if they did, you know,
they could deal with someone over fifty because they think,, you know, a few years down the line they were not
going to be here and they wouldn't really have to deal with it.
MR. LeCHER: They didn't realize that all these people were conservative in nature?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: They didn't realize the conservativeness that was really in the area.
MR. LeCHER: They thought they'd be quiet?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah. They didn't actually see that they would have any problems in this area.
MR. LeCHER: Okay
I have a lot more questions, but I would like to
ask my colleagues so they have a chance, too. Who did I
leave who do I start with this morning? Is it Mrs. Garvey?
MR. HATCHETT: I was the last one.
MR. LeCHER: You were the last one, all right, that I started with? Then, I'll start with you, Mr. Calderbank.
MR. CALDERBANK: LaVenda, thank you for coming. You're very courageous to come here.
On the bugging, you said that your phone was bugged?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, it was.
MR. CALDERBANK: Fair Game Policy?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It's called Fair Game. It's the same
MR. CALDERBANK: When was that?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, since '79, '80, and '81.
MR. CALDERBANK: '79, '30, and '81? How. do you know that they were bugged?
-%IS. VA-`7 SCHAICK:My husband was a cop.
MR. CALDERBAINK: And he swept the lines?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Mm-mm.
MR. CALDERBANK: Was it ever reported?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, it was reported several times. In fact, at one point in time in Boston we had the telephone
man just take the bugs out of the telephone
MR. CALDERBANK: Did they -- did the Church ever tell you that any of this was going on when you came in or while
you were a member?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, that they were bugging?
MR. CALDERBANK: Or that the GO was -- or where anybody was involved in this in the Church?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I am very aware of it because I
worked in the Hubbard Communication office, and I came in to publically tell -- but I was aware through my office of
There is a witness here that was in the Guardian's
Office when they did what's called Operation Shake and
Bake against me after I got out. She will be testifying
of actual Fair Game that they actually did. She was
still into Scientology at the time that they decided to
do Fair Game. This is very recent; this is not this
is in the last two years.
MR. CALDERBANK: Okay.And during your stay in Scientology, and when you first went in, you believed what you
had read about Mr. Hubbard?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: As being very sincere.
MR. CALDERBANK: You believed he was a scientist, a nuclear physicist -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, absolutely. We had a full
folder of background that he had a degree from, you know,
different places and that the guy was -- well, I looked
at him as an educated, qualified person. I realize that
what we'd gotten is falsified information.
MR. CALDERBANK: What was that?
MS VAN SCHAICK: Oh, basically, when we -- this is
quite a few years ago. They've gotten rid of most of
this information because since the cases have started
to be researched about L. Ron Hubbard's degrees. And we
found out it was -oh., in the early years in the brief
in the early years, we were told that Ron had a
degree as a physicist, that he was a scientist.,We
found -- I found out later, through doing a 'Lot of`
research on different universities, that the' information
that we were told -- that this Is not true, we
finally came up with an af-fidavit which he had part in
I believe it's called, and I may have to correct this
Sequoia University, that he had a degree that he gave
himself, which he was notoriously known for giving himself
his own certifications.
But we-were briefed out of the fact -- during those days we were getting -- in every single part of the old books, the
old Scientology books, you will find backgrounds on LRH of all these wonderful things that he did. If you notice the
new books that are coming out, it's no longer being printed because we became aware, by doing our research, that
he did not have these degrees that he professed to have. And those are being eliminated out of the front covers of
the books now. They are changing that
whole process, and we can put that into evidence if you want to see it; we have the old books here that show that he
was supposed to have all these Master degrees -
MR. LeCHER: Mr. Calaerbank, I'd like does that
MR. CALDERBANK: Yeah. This book was bought 5/6/82 and 'for the record, it's Exhibit 28, All About Radiation,
where it still has his background, bibliography, claiming his degrees and his education as the major selling point of
. MR. FLYNN: The witness is getting into some legal conclusions which would probably be better not to get into.
But in any event, when we tie all the evidence together at the end with regard to comparison between the old
biographies and the new biographies, the representations that are still made and the representations as they have
been changed, I believe the evidence will show that the inference of deception can be drawn from the fact that some
of the changes - and some changes that have not been made, such as holding himself out as a nuclear physicist on
the cover of the new books - will indicate to this Commission that the Church of Scientology has entered into a
process whereby they have attempted to alter the
lanquage to some degree to cover the basic facts. But
the inferences that people like Lavenda Van Schaick and
anyone coming to Scientology anyone coming to Clear
water can see is that he still has all those degrees,
althouqh some of the language has been ctianged.
And when we begin, at the end of these hearings, to draw legal conclusions from the evidence, we will point those
documants out to the Commission.
MR. CALDERBANK: 'Well, then, I guess to sum up Mr. Hubbard's background: Isn't his background a major point or
a major encoragement, representation, for you to spend money on courses?
MS. VAN SCHAICX: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: Did it, in your mind, give credence to the theories and the things that you were going to pay
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: Would you have spent that money if you had known that the book was written in three month
without research, this -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, I would not.
MR. CALDERBANK: Okay.
You talked about the auditing process and how it was used.
Were you told it was under confidence?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely. I found out that it was blackmail.
MR. CALDERBANK: Strictest confidence is how it was sold to you? And what was sold to you -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely. And it's absolutely blackmail.
MR..CALDERBANK: And vou said about disconnect, breaking up your family: Were any of these confidential facts
used in that process?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: they were
MR. CALDERBANK: Were there any scientific guarantees given to you about auditing as to what it could cure? Did
you -- was it sold to you as helping any of your problems?
MS. VAN.SCHAICK: Yes. And also medical at that time.
.. MR. CALDERBANK: Can you give me a specific medical problem?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Headaches.
MR. CALDERBANK: Headaches.
Did it cure your headaches?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. It gave me more headaches.
MR. CALDERBANK: When you -- when you were in
auditing, did the auditor ever tell you that it could no cure specifically tell you that it could not cure any medical
MS. V AN SCHAICK: In 1979, when my auditor found out that I was leaving Scientology, she made me aware that it
did not cure any kind of medical representations.
MR. CALDERBANK: But while you were spending money, before- in the previous years -
MS. VAN SCHAICR: it was after I ran out of money.
MR. CALDERBANK: After you ran out of money.
The waivers: Did vou understand them when vou signed them?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No.
MR. CALDERBANK: Did they make them out to you to be very legal documents?
MS. VANSCHAICK: Yes.
MR. CALDERBAINK: That would be upheld in a court of law if you left
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, not in that sense. Legal
documents as to -- basically, for me to go into the
Sea Organization, I had to sign a waiver. It was a conditional right to join staff in Las Vegas at that time.
Oh, yeah, this is really cute. I signed a billionyear contract and another contract and they're suing me
for contract deception.
MR. CALDERBANK: They're now trying to sue -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah. I'd like -- I wonder what their approach would be if I offered to go back on staff.
MR. CALDERBANK: So, you are now being threatened
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I'm being -
MR. CALDERBANK: on these waivers -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: sued for breach of contract that I signed.
MR. CALDERBANK: Now, you said that living conditions in the Fort Harrison, while you were there in '77, had a
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: How did you know it was hepatitis?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, one was in the innoculation that they were giving
MR. CALDERBANK: Who gave the innoculations?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: The Medical officer did it downstairs.
MR. CALDERBANK: Did you see any degrees on the wall?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. There -
MR. CALDERBANK: Did you see any certificates?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. Absolutely, she has none
whatsoever. She was not a nurse.
MR. CALDERBANK: What was her name?
MS.-VAN SCHAICK: I want to say Mary Jane, but it
was Mary Ann something.
MR. CALDERBAINK: Mary Ann something, okay.
And you also said there was an attempt to cover up
this epidemic from health officials in the city? How do
MS. VAN SCHAICK: AbSolUt_7,
MR. CALDERBANK: How do vou know that?
MS.- VAN SCHAICK: It's a cc-_'-ination of thinas.
Our SEE) ca:r,~_ -'-,ac- ;-CM -as '7t~qas .,;l -~- `ecazi t~s, an,-~
was put in an area where well-, She one, she dJLdn't
stay SED. She was put -- kind of confined over to anothe
area. At that time she had lost an extreme lot of weight
And I wasn't really aware of what the problem was until
I got to Clearwater. And I have seen hepatitis before.
MR. CALDERBANK: Okay.
You have firsthand
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. I know what hepatitis looks
like. I've seen people go through that condition of
extreme contagious hepatitis.
Ahd there was fifteen people downstairs in the
Medical Room at that time, and they were separating those
people where they put me in -- they wanted to make sure
that I.- I was a public person then - I didn't get any kind of contact with them at all. So, they were putting me in a
separate room, and these people were, like, quarantined. And they were stacked up against the walls. They were
just -- it was incoherent, not there, very ill.
MR. CALDERBANK: And how was the -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Because I had ended up in an Ethic situation, talking with Laura Anderson at that time the
Medical Officer at that time -- I had gotten a -- I don't_- know if it was food or the water; the water was very poor. I
had gotten an infection in my mouth-at that time. And the water that, apparently, was coming to my room was not
And the Medical Officer gave me alcohol and she told me to rinse my mouth out with alcohol and then swallow it.
And I can imagine what the effects would have luckily, I happened to take a whiff of the stuff before that occurred.
And that's when I got into the discussion of what was happening with Ron with the particular people. Of course, it's
And then, I heard rumor with other staff talking about it. They couldn't talk about it.
I found out later from someone that's involved in my litigation, legally, that that's exactly what was
occurring. It was my own guess.
MR. CALDERBANK: The Medical Officer, then, prescribed a treatment that you knew was harmful to you,
swallowing alcohol, denatured alcohol?
The children in Scientology
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. I'll answer that, yes.
MR. CALDERBANK: The children were supervised by a minor, a thirteen year-old, twelve
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Thirteen or fourteen year-old.
MR. CALDERBANK: And they had many children that they were taking care of?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: There was fifteen at that time.
MR. CALDERBAINK: Fifteen was
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Or more.
MR. CALDERBANK: Was this MS. VAN SCHAICK: I
MR. CAUDERBANK: -- their job?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: This was their job.
MR. CALDERBANK: And they had -- how long were they there supervising, approximately, these minors or
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, the kids were not allowed in any public areas: one, because they were dirty
MR. CALDERBANK: Dirty?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: -- and it was bad public rela
tions as far as people that were coming in and taking courses. And this was one of the real up.sets because you got
a mother that would come in and say, "Oh, well, where's the nursery at?" And, you know, she proceeded back into
the nursery to see how the Sea Org. children w ere doing, and it was a constant problem. Because being a mother,
they -- you know, living a normal life, just coming in as a pub'Lic person and seeing the conditions of the children
always was a continual upset on Flag, Clearwater.
MR. CALDERBANK: Would you characteize the living quarters as sanitary or unsanitary?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Very unsanitary. There was -there were diapers on the floor; the kids had -- the babies had
rashes from not being cleaned and changed on a regular basis; runny noses; most of them had flu. They were really
MR. CALDERBANK: And would you say these children were supervised by someone well trained in the area or by
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, I have to answer that honestly. I think that there was one fourteen year-old that was very
capable of handling the children. She had too many to handle, unfortunately.
MR. CALDERBAINK: You never saw a child go to school though, a public school?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, never.
MR. CALDERBANK: Why is that?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Because school is society.
MR. CALDERBANK: Is that what -- how would you refer to that as the Church's -- did the Church say that directly,
that the school is not good for their children?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: When my daughter was younger in Las Vegas, the only reason that she was sent to public
school was because the Dublic school System, in Las Vegas was required for the children in the Las Vegas area.
And the Guardian's Office, because they didn't want a stink at that time, said that we had to put our children in
school, or my daughter would have never attended school.
MR. CALDERBANK: So, you -- would it be a policy of the Church to prevent children from going to public schools?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Other than Apple Schools or schools that have to do with Scientology.
MR. CALDERBANK: Okay.
You mentioned Quentin Hubbard's death. You said there was some questionable surroundings about that.
Do any of those surroundings pertain to Clearwater
MS. VAN SCHAICK: He left Clearwater. He died in Las Vegas.
MR. CALDERBANK: And your brother-in-law, you mentioned that he got -- the R 245 process, and that your brother-
in-law was found shot to death?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: He was found dead in his room with a .45, with a gunshot with a gunshot wound to his head.
MR. LeCHER: Would you like to
MS. VAN SCHAICK: The result of David's death has never reaily been -- David was doing some different things for
the operation of the Guardian's Office in Las Vegas. And at the time that the police found him, he was found with a
.45 and a suicide note. He had written a letter to_my parents; he was married to my sister. And the last letter he
had written was how wonderful Scientology was, and he was doing a little mission and -- anyway, the result of
David's death put my sister under psychiatric care and things have been basically the same since then.
I don't think it will be probably the first or the last incident that will be uncovered through the next few years, and if
people really kind of wise up and look
at what's going on -- I think the only questions that could really be answered on Quentin or David's death would be
Artie Maren, and it would be really nice if Artie appeared at these hearings.
MR. LeCHER: Thank you.
Mr. Berfield, do you have any questions if you
are finished, Mr. Calderbank?
MR. CALDERBANK: Yes.
MR. LeCHER: Mr. Berfield.
MR. BERFIELD: Yes, ma'am. I have a couple of questions here: You said that you had a suit that was pending
against Scientology; is that correct?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: That's correct.
MR. BERFIELD: Did you sue them first or did they sue you first?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Who attacked who first? They attacked me first.
MR. BERFIELD: By "attacking," do
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Who sued first? I sued first.
MR. BERFIELD: We -- one of our local newspapers in this morning's newspaper, have kind of led to believe that
maybe we have not been drilling you people thoroughly enough to establish the authenticity of your statements.
I thought we had, personally. I think that our interest is so deep in Clearwater, but I must ask.this question, even
under extreme emotional conditions: Did you come because you wanted to be vindictive towards the Scientologists
or -- or what is your purpose in being here?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, absolutely not.
I care about the people that are down at the Fort Harrison. I would really like to see them straighten up their act. I
would like to see kids get an education, which I feel that they deserve. I would like to see the dirty tricks stopped.
And I genuinely would like for the people that are in the Fort Harrison to realize that people that are involved in my
case or their own personal cases genuinely care about what's happening with those people. And-basically, just
trying to let them know there are other things that-are going on.
A lot of times -- they don't want to find out about it unless a hearing like this actually happens. And because you
have so many different Scientologists in so many different areas that one may not be aware of what's happening in
Los Angeles or in other areas.
My intention was never to be vindictive against Clearwater. My intention was just to actually expose the
truth, and if they can handle the truth, fine.
MR. BERFIELD: Now, you earlier made some statements about misrepresentations; Mr. Calderbank went over them
But when you use the word "misrepresentation," what does that mean to you?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: They're representing themselves as a religious organization.
MR. BERFIELD: Exclude the religion.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: As far as auditing processes?
MR. BERFIELD: Yes, ma'am.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: -Auditing processes are supposed to be confidential; they are not. You walk -- you go in with
the attitude that you are -- that your personal life will be private. That is not true. Your personal life, once you leave,
is totally exposed to the press, exposed to other family members. It is an exposure to your husband an exposure to
anyone that wants to see it.
MR. BERFIELD: I realize I'm asking the opinion of a layperson, but, in your opinion, the living conditions at the Fort
Harrison -- is there a health problem there?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: There was a health problem when I was there. Whether there are -- is now I have not been to
the Fort Harrison in over three years now.
MR. BERFIELD: I also understand -- strike that.
These technologies: the Fair Game, the Blown Student, what have you -- the last time you had contact with
Scientology, were those still in effect?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely. They never changed from day one.
MR. BERFIELD: One of the biggest questions I've
been asked by people - and it would appear to be well
above average - what would cause a person tLo go into
MS. VAIN SCHAICK: I think all peopie that come in have an inner nature of genuine caring about other people I think
people that get in the organization usually are people that should go into the service or Vista or Red Cross or -they're people that I consider that have what's called a help instinct.
MR. BERFIELD: Okay.
MR. FLYNN: Mr. Berfield, I understood thatquestion to be calling for her opinion as to what she thinks the inner
reasons are and not to be a question of the type: what representations were made to her at the outset that induced
her to go in but her inner feelings that she experienced as one of the motivating factors.
MR. BERFIELD: That was a general question, and
the next one is going to be more specific as to what
motivated you to go into it?
MR. FLYNN: What representations did she
MR. BERFIELD: What representations -
MR. FLYNN: -- rely on or -
MS. VAN SCHIHAICK: Representations of how well,
L. Ron Hubbard's background and what the group stood for.
MR. BERFIELD: Now, you stayed in, roughly, nine years; is that correct?
MS.VAN SCHAICK: That's correct.
MR. BERFIELD: Somewhere along the line, did you come to the conclusion that these representations werenot
correct or true or
MS. VAN SCRAICK: That's when I got out.
MR. BERFIELD: Did this happen at the very end or did you have doubts along the line or what?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I don't understand the question.
MR. BERFIELD: Well
MS. VAN SCHAICK: You mean, did I doubt on and off
MR. BERFIELD: Yes.
MS. VAN SCHAICK:. -- down the line when I was in? Yes.
I didn't have the mental stability at that time to get out. I couldn't get out.
MR. BERFIELD: 'What do you mean you couldn't get out?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I was so indoctrinated with the whole group that I mentally couldn't bring myself to getting out. I
couldn't get out.
MR. BERFIELD: Could I interpret that that you're saying that they had control over your mind
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutelv.
MR. BERFIELD: the courses that you last -- you
audited courses here in Clearwater; is that correct?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I did.
MR. BERFIELD: Those courses that you last audited here or took here in Clearwater, how would you define those in
layman's terms? Were they true courses or were they misrepresented or what?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It's interesting. The courses I took here were what is called the Hubbard Communication Ethics
officer. And basically, what that is is to establish ethics in the community and to have-the organization run on a very
And I realized that, after I finished the whole course, that's not what was being represented in Clear
water. I took a course that was totally false.
MR. BERFIELD: Do you know the meaning of the word, "Dianetics"?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. Dianetics is through the mind. That's exactly what it is: it's through the mind. Through the
mind you get -
MR. BERFIELD: This is a little off the subject,
but it goes along the line. I noticed in the same morning's paper that I was reading, that the City of Austin, Texas
was requesting that they declare a day of Dianetics
Do you think Clearwater ought to declare a day of Dianetics? I mean
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Almost every other city has.
MR. BERFIELD:. Why?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, it's public relations. It' a great way to get the public interested in to what they
consider very good public relations, and get city and government officials thinking that they are very -- you
know, "We're just the nice guys." It's it's what's called a big scam, by promoting to agencies, special
politics, and press that they are the nice guys, when
they are not the nice guys.
MR. BERFIELD: I have just two other questions here I'd like to ask you.
You have heard some of.the testimony that has been given here; is that correct?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. BERFIELD: In your mind as a layman, do you fee that we have been fair in attempting to detect the truth about
MS. VAN SCHAICK:- Yes. I'd like to hear the other
side. I hope the other side comes and appears, I really
o. It -- it's I don't want this to be a one-sided
session. I hope that they do show up and they do appear.
But I want them it's too bad that they couldn't
let the staff of the Fort Harrison sit in on these proceedings. Of course, the staff is told not to read newspapers or
communicate with anyone that's left Scientology And I would really have liked the whole staff to have attended this
because I consider it a Committee of Evidence and I'm sure the staff would understand that.
MR. BERFIELD: One last question, and I ask this of everyone -- you answered the Mayor's question as to why
Scientology moved here.
But if you could tell the people of Clearwater just one thing or a short statement as to what they should be looking
at, what would you say to them?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Just be careful of the nice guy
that's smiling on the outside, extending his hand with good public relations, because You'll find out in the long run,
when your own personal life is ex I posed some way to that individual - and they have ways of finding out those
things - you will find out that it will be used against you.
MR. BERFIELD: When you use the word "nice guy," could you be just a little more specific?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I -- I'm talking about people that are currently in the Guardian's Office at the Fort Harrison.
They're creating an image of -- that they are going to be nice guys now. It's interesting that a religion has been not a
nice guy for a long time.
MR. BERFIELD: Well, let's stay away from -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: 'All right. Well, whatever, an organization has not been a -- they have not -- they have not
represented what they really are.
.I am glad that the hearing is here because there ar people that are out of Scientology that are trying to represent to
the press and to people exactly what they are. And it's, like, the only reason the witnesses are here at this time -we were in for a long time, we know how things are covered up, we know exactly what is going on. And no matter
how nice that they say they are being
as an organization, I believe that for about two days, and that's my extent of it. And it's just a nice front that changes
and it will go back to exactly what it has always been, no matter what kind of public relations that they put out to
press or put out to anyone else.
I have not seen that dramatic of a change in the organization, and I don't personally believe them. And anyone else
that does, that's entirely up to them.
MR. BERFIELD: Thank you.
MR. LeCHER: Just as an aside before Mrs. Garvey, we're hoping that Scientologists would participate in these -Scientologists are taping this entire four days. And I hope that they will show it to their people within the organization
at an opportune time and they bring them all up here from the Fort Harrison.
MS. VAN-SCHAICK: I doubt that staff will ever see this film -
MR. LeCHER: Well, they -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: -- other than the Guardian's Office. And that's really unfortunate. Other than when they're
splicing something, I doubt that staff will see this film.
MR. LeCHER: They are here and taping it verbatim.
MRS. GARVEY: Miss Van Schaick, you said you were here in Clearwater in '76?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Mm-mm.
MRS. GARVEY: What period, what month were you
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It was in the summer. It was let's see, it was May or June, just before it started to get real hot.
MRS. GARVEY: Okay, because there are a lot of hot months.
You left the organization in '79; is that -ight?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: That's right.
MRS. GARVEY: You made an interesting comment about that, when you came to Clearwater, you made a tour of
the Fort Harrison.
Why would you make a tour of the Fort Harrison? Is that your standard policy when you go someplace to make a
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I was ethics-trained in the organization, and standard policy from someone that's ethics-trained
is, basically, just to see what's going on in the area. It's the way I was programmed for so many years.
MRS. GARVEY: Well, I think it's interesting that you're the first one that ever really knew what was going
on. They never went beyond their room and their training it seems.
M'S. VAN SCHAICK: I -- yeah, I had kind of a freedom in the Fort Harrison, see, I had been in for years. And being
that I was taking an ethics course -
MRS. GARVEY: They didn't doubt that you would ever question
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah, that I would never question what was going on. Basically, they didn't think -- and
definitely that I would report it. I mean, the course that I was taking was ethics. So, someone's that taking those
kind of courses surely wouldn't go around to the press or anybody and expound on what's going on.
MRS. GARVEY: You also made comment that you were part of the Sea Organization. And yet, you came here as a
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah. I was in Sea Org. and
changed my contract because I was working for the Mission
of the Meadows. And when you work for a mission, you sign a regular contract instead of the Sea Org. contract.
MRS. GARVEY: Your billion-year contract -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Right. See, they cancelled our billion-year contracts in - this is going to sound outrageous Las
Vegas because we didn't have a ship we
could stick in the middle of the desert and do what we didn't have a ship. But we had to go to what was called
Project 0 at that time, and we had this little rowboat in this lake out in Lake Mead.
Anyway, they had to cancel our Sea Org. contracts in Las Vegas, basically, because we couldn't go through this
ship training because there was no ship. You can't put a ship in the desert.
MRS. GARVEY: Well, how do they go through this sea training in Clearwater?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Weil, they have the ship there. The objective was - is theA pollo and the Excalibur were here
in port at different times., and they were going to take each staff member from the Fort Harrison and go through
what's called this Project 0. Then, in Los Angeles, they also had the ships off port there. So, you could go through
regular sea training duty. But we weren't capable of putting a ship in the desert, so we had our Sea Org. contracts
MRS. GARVEY: What is -- so, if you were a public person, the living-conditions that you lived in were fine
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I had my own room to myself.
MRS. GARVEY: Did you go into any of the staff rooms or their living quarters?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: The only staff that I was in was Executive Staff.
MRS. GARVEY: Which would have been -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Would have been the same kind of quarters as mine. Either they had their own room -- other
than I walked into where the RPF was downstairs. That was -
MRS. GARVEY: That was a small, closet-type area with fifteen bunks, which vou said earlier?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah, people just stacked up sleeping.
MRS. GARVEY: What about -- was there anything in the garage at that time? We were told earlier that that's where
dorms were. Did you get to the garage?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: That was -- that was their dorm.
MRS. GARVEY: Oh, that long room. It only had fifteen. We were earlier told that it had fifty-four.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, in the dorms down -- see, each -- the way they have the rooms set up, the -- there was
different kinds of staff there. There was staff there just for public that had money. Then, there was staff for the staff.
And there was seven different orgs. at that time -- seven different organizations operating at that particular time.
MS. VAN SCHAICK.: right now.
MRS. GARVEY: Were through the years that you were there, what were you promised, or what guarantees were
you given when you continued auditing?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, basically, that I would. have no more problems.* That -- that's just a very simple basic.
MRS. GARVEY: Did vou have any encounter with a blown student?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I did.
MRS. GAR-VEY: Someone that was physically brought back?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. I have physically brought back people myself.
MRS. GARVEY: You have?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes.
MRS. GARVEY: You made comment
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I can't get into that.
MRS. GARVEY: I'm not I just okay.
You made comment that MS. VAN SCHAICK: I MRS. GARVEY: -- you were in the
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Okay.
I can testify to that.
MRS. GARVEY: You can?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah.
MRS. GARVEY: Okay.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I'm trying to stay away from my case.
There were several incidents where I had to go out
and get blown staff members because I handled that particular area, and whatever it took-at that time, you
know, if we had to bodily set the guy in the car to bring him back. And I brought back, oh, through the years,
probably -- I don' t know, maybe, different
where we had to stick somebody in a car to bring them
back to base.
MRS. GARVEY: What happened -- do you -- are you aware of what happened to that blown student, once he came
back to base?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: As far as basic, on RPF.
Are you talking about a student or a staff member?
MRS. GARVEY: Whoever that was
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, people that were public persons that maybe would leave the course or would not be there
for a while were not RPFed.
MRS. GARVEY: Okay. It was just staff; that was all?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: People with money were not RPFed. And that's the
MRS. GARVEY: Subjected to it.
What's the -- you mentioned you were in EPF.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It's the same as RPF. It's Estate Project Force.
We -- we laid carpet and painted walls.
MRS. GARVEY: Why were you in the EPF? -I'm just trying to establish whether this is a standard policy of the
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Briefly, because I had an upset with an executive in the organization, and -- well, I've been in
EPF several different instances.
The one that I can probably expound on the most was: I disagreed with the fact that Barbara Glass wanted to leave
my five year old locked up in the building by herself and leave her there. And I did it -- that was the first time -- that
was one of the last times I actually got EPF,, because I got in a fight with an executive officer because I refused to
let them lock my child up for any reason.
MRS. GARVEY: I can see why you blew.
Your husband isn't a Scientologist or
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, he's not.
MRS. GARVEY: He's not.
I can't think of anything else I was going to ask.
MR. LeCHER: Mr. -
MRS. GARVEY: Oh, freeloader's debt.
Were you charged a freeloader's debt when you left?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: It was something enormous. I think it was twenty-two thousand dollars I was charged after I
worked fifteen hours a day, seven days a week.
MRS. GARVEY: You were here in '77.
Did that not give you a feeling that there was something wrong?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. That actually reminds me of my experience in being at Clearwater. I knew definite ly
something was wrong.
MRS. GARVEY: But you still weren't able to leave?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Not until almost a year later. I didn't pull things really together until almost a year after that.
MRS. GARVEY: Thank you.
MR. LeCHER: Mr. Hatchett.
MR. HATCHETT: I only have two questions.
You spoke in terms of that child that was accidentally killed in the parking lot.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes.
MR. HATCHETT: Did you actually witness that yourself?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, I did not.
MR. HATCHETT: How close did you know that the evidence may have been true? Did someone tell you or -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Someone told me. And there was a lot of uproar at that -
MR. HATCHETT: Okay.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Just before I got there, there was a lot of uproar going on. And that's when the whole cnanae
came about that all the children had to be removed
from the Fort Harrison.
MR. HATCHETT: And where did they place them?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Good question.
MR. LeCHER: What was the question, Mr. Hatchett?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Where did they place the children
MR. HATCHETT: Where did they place the children
.MS. VAN SCHAICK: I
MR. HATCHETT: -- after they moved them from the
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I have no idea.
MR. HATCHETT: But you knew where yours was?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Mine was with me, thank God.
MR. HATCHETT: I mean, during this time.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Mine 'was not, thank God, in Clearwater at that time.
MR. LeCHER: Will you ask her if the death of the child was ever reported to the police?
MR. HATCHETT: Good question.
Was the death of the child ever reported?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I -- as far as I know, no.
MR. HATCHETT: To establish whether or not the
Guardian's Office was finally repulsed: When they used
Shake and Bake against you is that the correct term?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes. It's called Shake and Bake.
MR. HATCHETT: All right.
Did -- were you aware if this was a written policy?
MS. VAN SCHAICk: No, I wasn't aware of, really, Shake and Bake until somebody actually left the Guardian' office
that told me. I know what they had done to me. Shake and Bake was the name of what they were doing to me.
MR. HATCHETT: Can you describe what Shake and Bake is?
MS.- VAN SCHAICK: Well, I received two two
differentt incidents. One was a setup where I was
told by Pam Bevin that she had cancer, so I was to go and get prescriptions of pills at a motel for her cancer,
not realizing at the time that they were taking photographs of me outside the motel and that there was some people
upstairs in a room that looked like me that stayed in the motel to throw a big scene, like, there was an orgy
happening upstairs in the motel.
Now, that was not an incident that they completed because I became aware -- or it was, like, a few became aware
that in the motel that something was going on, there was a setup. So, we got people out there to the motel. Of
course, there was some Scientologists checked into the motel that disappeared right out. The just totally
disappeared out off the motel.
The other one was was that -- an incident when they sent a gentleman by the name of Barry Clingler. to me to say
things that might upset -- that my husband was having affairs, that my attorney was working with the CIA, that I
should get rid of my attorney. And I stole that document that he had written out from the Guardian's Office, which is
public evidence in my case.
Oh, by the way, Pam Bevin was my auditor and was also responsible -- she was also the person that was in charge
Of setting me up. It -- it's ironic that they stick your auditor, the person that you give all your personal information to,
as your key person to attack you
after you get out. They have all of your personal information about you.
I don't think that I'll be the last- case that they use that with.
MR. HATCHETT: Thank you.
MR. LeCHER: Do you have any questions, Mr. Shoemaker?
MR. SHOEMAKER: I just have one: It's my understanding that you were physically detained?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yes, I was.
MR. SHOEMAKER: Could you explain that a little bit, please, what happened?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I was brought to a room -
MR. SHOEMAKER: Can you give the date, please?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: What's the date? It was in 1974, February.
And the house I've since located. It's out in the middle of the desert in Las Vegas. It was Pam Bevin and another
guy; I still don't know the guy's name at that time.
Basically, I was stuck under heavy auditing processes.
MR. SHOEMAKER: Was there something leading up to this as to why
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Money. I had money in an account and they, basically, wanted the money I had in the
MR. SHOEMAKER: Were you -- you were actually locked up and were not allowed to Leave during this -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I was not allowed to leave. whether the front door was constantly locked twenty-four hours a
day, I could not answer you that question because I stayed in one room, the bedroom. So, I don't -- you know, I -- if -if it was or not, I was not coherent enough because I felt like I was really drugged out quite a period of time. I was-not
home at all.
MR.,SHOEMAKER: A while ago you made a comment about PR, or that that -- I think you said, "It was just PR,
public relations," relating to a question.
Did you--- are there procedures that are established relating to public relations in terms of how these things are dealt
with with people outside of the organization?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Any time there's bad press or an ex-Scientologist reporting the truth, they do a whole
campaign to show what a nice guy they are: open house, they clean up their act, basically. And until press and
when press dies down and other people like myself that are ex-Scientologists go back to their normal lives,
they say -- it's kind of like a joke to them.
It's -- we've done this -- I did this several times in Las Vegas with city officials there in Las Vegas Any time we had
kind of an upset, we'd go through a cleaning house and we'd remove our children to different places. And it happens
in every Scientology organization across the United States.
MR. SHOEMAKER: And you personally had firsthand knowledge of this occurring? mean, you actually participated
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I've done -- we've done a cleanup in Las Vegas.
And at the time that I was on Flag, they were doing a cleanup with the children, moving the children out of the area.
MR. SHOEMAKER: Thank you.
MR. LeCHER: Going back to that child that was run over, I have no reason to believe that it certainly was I'm sure it
was an accident, but you don't know that it was reported or you say you don't think it was reported to the police?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I don't know whether it was reported or not. The child was only, like, two years old.
MR. LeCHER: Do you know the name of the child?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah, but I'm afraid because of
MR. LeCHER: Okay.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I don't
MR. FLYNN: On this particular issue, for the
information of the Commission, we have been investigating
it for some time. I've had some conversations with one
or two city officials about it, and I can say that it
my office is currently investigating it. There is a
person who has some knowledge about the subject. And
at the time, however, our investigatory efforts are
MR. LeCHER: You contributed a lot of money and
the organization received a lot of money.
Do you-know what the money went for? Apparently,
you weren't -- they were not -- I will not speculate.
What did the money go for?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: What did it go to?
MR. LeCHER: They took in millions of dollars a
week, certainly, millions a year in Clearwater. Where
did all that money go?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: So L. Ron Hubbard could live
very comfortably and the executive staff could live very
comfortably. That's my assumption.
I haven't seen money go back to staff. And I'm sure that staff, currently, at the Fort Harrison, if they'd ever sit down
and look at their CGI, or their gross income, and ask themselves the question as to where really all this money is
going, they would probably if they -really studied their income policies really closely, they would find out that it's not
definitely going back to the staff, and it's not going back into what they think that it's going back into.
I would say it's going into people's pockets.
MR. LeCHER: Well, these allegations and -- or
question why did it take you so long to start raising
these questions in your own mind? Why did it take you so long?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: After nine years? I was indoctrinated with one thing, and you tend to believe that one thing.
The only thing I can say is I've been out for over three years now, and it's only three -- it's only until the last year I
can see my life is normal for me. It's a mental -- you become a mental cripple, and you're terrified with the fact that,
if you leave, your life will be exposed, I mean, kind of a public board.
There are things that people all personally hide, you know, whether it's their first kiss with a boyfriend or -- they -you all keep very personal and private things in your life. And those things are all given to your auditor.
And there's nothing that they could personally do to me. My life is public record. And it-Is like, how many people
sitting in this courtroom would like their life public record?
MR. LeCHER: Did you continue to receive auditing after you learned the information would be made Public?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, no. I have not received any auditing
MR. LeCHER: No. When you were within the organization and you knew that information could be used against you,
did you continue to receive auditing in spite of the fact you knew that?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. I wasn't aware until after I got out that my auditing was going to be used against me,
honestly. I don't think any person's really aware until they get out that their auditing is public information.
You get -- you're in the -- you don't believe anything. You couldn't possibly, if you're a staff member,.
believe anything other than that the group is great. And you don't believe that's true. You're conditioned and
brainwashed, and you aon't believe those things until they happen.
MR. LeCHER: Why did you disconnect from your family?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Because my parents were supposed to be suppressive people, as far as Scientology was
concerned. I found that my parents are the most sanest people that I have around me, currently.
Mr. LeCHER: With all these things going around in Clearwater, why didn't you call the -- well, I guess I can probably
answer the question: Why didn't you call the Board of Health? But, Apparently, you were upset about them and you
just believed -- I'm not going to speculate.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: That's a totally different issue. I did end up in an upset over that.
Another thing: Being in Clearwater and having my child in Las Vegas, it was not a very cool thing to get in a fight
with executives in Clearwater and have your child in a different place and start a Board of Health thing. `.And I was
too indoctrinated to realize the -- that I had citizenship. I didn't realize I was a citizen until three years ago.
MR. LeCHER: You didn't realize you were a citizen
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely. I've not been a citizen of the United States; I've been a citizen of Scientology.
MR. LeCHER: Oh, but you don't mean it that you're an alien?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No, I'm not an alien in that sense; no.
MR. LeCHER: Do you remember where the children
were kept when they were taken a mile and -- an hour and-
a-half ride from the Fort Harrison?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: No. They were at -- the children
were at Clearwater when I was there. They were setting up a different facility at that time, and the parents were upset
because the facility was being removed from the Fort Harrison,. Where the children ended up, only the parents at the
Fort Harrison could answer that.
MR. LeCHER: Okay.
MRS. GARVEY: Where were they kept at the Fort Harrison?
MR. LeCHER: Oh, at the Fort Harrison where were they kept? In the back -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: In the back, right behind the parking lot.
MR. LeCHER: Didn't the parents ever question that they don't want their children taken a mile -- an hour and-a-half
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Yeah. There were some parents that questioned that, and they got RPFed.
MR. LeCHER: Well
MS. VAN SCHAICK: There were parents that definite did question that. You know, notherhocd and fatherhood is
something that is a nazural instinct and thank God for it, because that's why a lot of us, as we got older, got the hell
out of there.
MR. LeCHER: What did it take you -- what were your
personal.things -- what did it take you to start raising
questions? What was the final straw that you just said: "I've
got-to start questioning; I've got to get out of this
MS. VAN SCHAICK: David's death.
.MR. LeCHER: David's death. That's your brother in-law?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Right.
MR. LeCHER: Now, you're a mother and I assume a good one' and all, but when you saw these children in such
deplorable conditions and living in such deplorable conditions, didn't that bother you? Why didn't you report it
somebody in authority in the county or city government ox police department in this county?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I had this huge ideal that I could straighten it out internally in the organization, that it could be
corrected as an internal problem.
With the training that I had, knowing policy and the way the operation of the organization runs -- was running at that
time, that I thought it would be better off to be handled internally and straighten things out. And that's -- was probably
my basic concept for a lot of years, and realizing nine years later that nothing really internally gets handled, that it
really doesn't. It's one game against another, one farce against another, and that the whole thing was a lie.
MR. LeCHER: Well, the whole organization -- in fact, these-hearings have had a very disquieting effect on the City of
Clearwater. If we had some sort of other forum in the future with other people that are currently involved in the Church
of Scientology who would like to come forward, do you think that would be worthwhile?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely. I think that through the years, you'll have more and more Scientologists leave the
consider myself a minor person that's left the organization compared to people that have been in twenty, thirty years
I think what would be interesting is.-- it's kind
of like you're only skimming the top of the -- the very
top. And there are things that are wrong -- people will
have no idea until five or ten years the other things that
we will find out and I find out will get documented as
we go on, that there were a lot of things that happened.
And there are a lot of things that still c-ome out.
And I don't know maybe we all ought to taka lie detector tests. I mean, they'll certainly belleve us then. That's what
the E-Meter is.
But -- I can't answer your question.
MR. LeCHER: Why would you participate in bringing someone back against their will? Didn't that bother you, either?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Policy.
MR. LeCHER: Policy, okay
Do you -- you, especially, your mind you felt
like your mind was being controlled, but -- how do you -
how was your mind controlled? By just -- by same thought
repetition, or -- how did they control your mind?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, you can look at Korean
brainwashing: no sleep, long hours. When you have some
one that -- all right. When you take someone and you
don't put him on a diet, a normal diet of food, and your
eating a diet of heavy starches, fifteen to twenty hours
a day, seven days a week no freedom, you know no
freedom to really enjoy what's going on in life.
I'm sure if I was at the Fort Harrison on staff now that Saturday would probably be a big thrill if I got liberty and could
see the beach. That you don't really have -- you're not capable -- you get so entwined in the organization: the
repetitions, the terminology it's like a secret terminology and it's like a little clique when you're in high school - and
you get caught up into that whole game and the constant over and over an over and over the same thing. It's just like
when your Dad says, "Tie your shoes, tie your shoes, tie your shoes." And-you tie your shoes.
MR. LeCHER: It seems to me that - I've asked this
of one other witness but - it seems that you're a house
divided against itself and I.don't know how you could
trust each other. I mean, if you're forced to work long
hours for little or no pay and your child is rarely with
you, and others participating like that, how in the world
do you learn to -- is the organization held together?
I mean, without trust and friendships and loyalties -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: They think that they all trust one*another, that they're working for one goal of mankind which is
a real fascinating thing. And if the staff really took a look at internally what's.going on -- I'm sure they've seen their
Go Dersonnel and their high executives -- they're the target ones, presently. And if the staff, presently, looked
around at ail their heavyweights that were there a year ago, they sure are not putting their names on any kind o.;_
policies and they're letting some dumb staff" members, as -ffar as I'M concerned, become the -
MR. CALDERBANK: The scapegoat?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: -- scapegoat, the kind -- the
guy that's going to end up in a Committee of Evidence is
the fool that puts his name -- the only thing I have to
say about it: Don't ever put anything in writing.
MR. HATCHETT: Why -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, make sure that you don't
put it in writing, because that was L. Ron Hubbard's
stable datum. And that's exactly how you get yourself
nailed.'-, Don't put it in writing, because you will -
they will you'll find out eventually it's used against
MR. LeCHER: Well, Mr. Walters was in for seventeen
years or more, two ladies were in for seventeen years,
you're in for nine years. When all these people leave,
who's left minding the store?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: When every
MR. LeCHER: How will they replace these people?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well -- so, what is -- what you're
really asking is -- when all the people leave, what they
will have is what we used to call in Ethics the psychotic
cases. They will be the guys that are left there at the
Fort Harrison. it will be very-interesting to see how
the Fort Harrison operates at that point in time.
Because I think that the able beings and I'm
seeing what's going on, and as far as I'm concerned, the able beings are getting out; they're not becoming the
scapegoats anymore. And the smart ones will get out. And what you will be left with is a lot of crippled, psychotic
kids that have no background, no -- their moral justice will be tied into -- it's like a Nazi German camp: spying, you
know, who can spy on who. And you will, probably, at that Doint in time have to have a lot of heavily trained people
that know how to help them.
MR. LeCHER: Will they be classified as good Germans?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Well, if they take a look at what's going on, that's exactly what's happening.
MR. LeCHER: I have no further questions. I think that we've been questioning you long enough.
Mr. -- do you have something you want to ask?
MR. CALDERBANK: Just -- just one more.
LaVenda, you're -- you were an auditor and you had a lot of professional knowledge in both giving and taking the
auditing in Scientology in their courses and in their background. As a professional opinion, then, would you feel
that public scrutiny of financial transactions
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: -- in the Church
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: -- would either prevent you from giving or prevent students from taking or impinge their freedom?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. CALDERBANK: It would absolutely not prevent them, or it's absolutely needed to further this ability to
MS. VAN SCHAI-CX: Do you mean as far as - I'm not sure if I understand - giving the money?
MR. CALDERBANK: Would the scrutiny of their financial transactions
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Would tl-ie scrutiny of what they'x doing color over their financial things?
MR. CALDERBANK: Would that have prevented you from giving
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Oh, if
MR. CALDERBANK: work as a staff member?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I had been aware of what they actually were -- what the high executives were doing with the
income and been aware of what was really going on, I surely wouldn't have been in Scientology
MR. CALDERBANK: That's
MS. VAN SCHAICK: -- as a staff member.
MR. CALDERBANK: But what I'm asking is: Would that have prevented you, financial scrutiny of the transactions,
would that have prevented you from taking your courses or giving your courses when you were a professional
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Would it have prevented me from giving the courses?
Mit. LeCHER: She has I think she's answered the question.
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I've answered the question, yes.
I would not do courses if I had known what was going on.
MR. LeCHER: I want to -- the attorney -
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I don't think -I understand it in
MR. LeCHER: I believe that you have in various ways, Miss Van Schaick.
Are you satisfied?
MR. CALDERBANK: I want to get back to the freedom of religion -
MR. LeCHER: We don't want to talk about freedom of religion. That's an
MS. VAN SCHAICK: I can't
MR. LeCHER: -- issue that we shouldn't get into.
I want to.ask this question for the City Attorney. He wants to know about this big scam that you mentioned in
publicity and Promotion. And how is this big scam accomplished? You mentioned something and called it a big
M8. VAN SCHAICK: Ten percent of their CGI has always been unaccounted for. And, basically, it's the gross
income and what you take off the top in the organization.
In each city there is a -- most of -- like, in Las Vegas there was a mission and then there was what's
called an org., or the main organization.
The mission holders, basically, were in control up until recently over monies that were going in and out of the
organization, which made a lot of mission holders very wealthy, until -- they have recently changed that. Orgs. were
taking all of their money and sending it on to Los Angeles and to Clearwater. And they were, basically, just the
workhorse -- it's like the lower working class of the whole organization is what, basically, the orgs. are.
And while the orgs. are taking all the people in and flowing the money process, the executives are li-ving pretty high
an the hog if they really-take a look.at what's going on.
MR. LeCHER: Would it be safe to assume that if an org takes in-.five hundred thousand dollars a week that fifty
thousand dollars would be going to someone else?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MR. LeCHER: Off the top? Okay.
Do you want to ask
MRS. GARVEY: One question.
MR. LeCHER: One question.
MRS. GARVEY: To your knowledge, is Clearwater
is Flag Base?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Absolutely.
MRS. GARVEY: So, all orders would come out of Clearwater? Whatever happens in the organization will come out
of Flag Base, which is Clearwater?
MS. VAN SCHAICK: Through Clearwater. Everything gets cleared through Clearwater. Clearwater is the seat of the
MR. LeCHER: Thank you very much for your testimony here
MR. CALDERBANK: Thank you, LaVenda.
MR. LeCHER: You're another very bright young woman. We admire you and thank you.
MR. FLYNN: At this time I will introduce the Affidavit of Stephen Garritano. And I'll read briefly from it. In order to
save some time, I'll skip over portions of it and read the pertinent portions into the record.
."My introduction to Scientology was in January of 1977 when the following representations were made to me
concerning the benefits of auditing in Scientology. Thes representations were that auditing was scientifically
guarantded to confer the following benefits," and then there is a number of them listed which I won't'read.
And then there's a statement about Mr. Hubbard's
background and representations and Mr. Garritano's reliance on them. "Based on the above representations, I joined
the Church of Scientology. After two and-a-half years experience as a Scientologist, I eventually discovered that the
above representations were false and made for the single purpose to entice the people to purchase auditing and
courses or join staff.
"In early 1979, 1 went to Flag Land Base in Clearwater, Florida. I contracted an illness which was later diagnosed as
hepatitis. I received an injection/hypodermic needle from a Scientologiat dressed in a white Uniform, which I was told
was a hepatitis vaccine. To my knowledge, this individual was not a medical doctor.
"I was later diagnosed by my father,' Dr. Garritano, in the Beth Israel Hospital in Boston, to have suffered from
hepatitis, mononucleosis, and strep throat.
"While in Clearwater, I observed the living conditions of staff members to be unsanitary. On one occasion I entered a
small room, which was constructed to facilitate one occupant, inhabited by a minimum of eight people. These
individuals slept in two triple bunks and two single beds.
"Conditions for those individuals imprisoned in the Rehabilitation Project Force, RPF, were unhealthy
and unsanitary. Those individuals were forced to live
and sleep in the garage."
It's signed, "Stephen Garritano," under the pains
and penalties of perjury.
If need be, Mr. Garritano, at some point, can be
called to testify.
(The Affidavit of Stephen Garritano
was marked as Exhibit No. 45, as of
MR. FLYNN: The next witness is Janie Peterson.
JANIE PETERSON, a witness herein,
having first been duly sworn by a Clerk for the City of
Clearwater, was examined and testified as follows:
MR. LeCHER: Your name is Janie Peterson?
MS. PETERSON: Yes.
MR. LeCHER: All right.
Miss Peterson, I'll ask you the same standard
questions I've asked all the other witnesses.
They are: Are you appearing today and testifying
under oath voluntarily?
MS. PETERSON: Yes.
MR. LeCHER: All right.
Are you -- have you been paid by anyone for your
testimony, other than expenses for coming to Clearwater?