---

Protest!

Quadruple picket and Berry letters
09 May 2001
hkhenson@pacbell.net

Tue., May 8, 2001 (This is being put out with minimal editing; a better version might come later.)

To catch my fans up on the last two days, I met Monday with Senior Probation Officer Garry Davis in Hemet. It was, to put it mildly, an interesting and productive meeting. I may do a detailed report on it later, perhaps for private distribution, but among other things I showed him how to use his excellent and very fast Internet connection to surf right into some of our favorite web sites. Mr. Davis has been in probation for 23 years and he told me my case was unique in his experience.

Jim Harr was talking to him on the phone later that day and reported that while he was on the phone Eliot Abelson had come in. Jim gave Mr. Davis a quick rundown on just who Abelson is (I hope he mentioned former Gambino lawyer) and his relation to this scientology business. Jim also mentioned that when he was at a Bar meeting recently this case was a hot topic of conversation and that while we were not looking backwards, a lot of lawyers had dropped in to the courtroom and watched bits of it.

Monday afternoon I picketed at the court and gave out another thick stack of flyers. Most of the people who didn’t take them said they knew and had an extremely bad opinion of scientology. After picketing from 1 pm to 2 pm, I filed the posted version of the motion to reconsider JNOV. None of the women behind the glass in the DA’s office have signs now. If it ever becomes an issue, the one next to the windows on the right took my motion. I asked her to stamp the original as proof they had a copy, but she wouldn’t. I don’t know if I should have any hopes of this motion going through or not, but it is material we can cite for the appeal.

Later that afternoon I said goodbye to Ida and drove over to Graham’s for consultation and a strategy meeting. Graham was incensed about a letter he was recently sent in discovery in the State Bar actions against him. I scanned it and it is attached below. Graham’s reply is below that. To put it mildly I was annoyed. Here we have a partner of Wager writing the State Bar trying--and succeeding!--to deprive me of counsel. I might add that by describing *Graham* as intimidating when engaged in a harmless and clearly protected First Amendment activity, they have badly damaged the DA’s argument that *I* was intimidating. I sure wish this letter had come to light before the trial.

I might make a suplimental declaration for my motion based on it. (Along this line, when Kristi was leaving a picket at the SF org with Arel Monday around 1 pm she asked Craig if she would see him later? referring to Craig’s picketing her house. Craig bristled and said that sounded like a threat to him. You need to see this to appreciate it. Craig is male, athletic, over 6 feet tall. Kristi is female (very!) and about the height as Ida.)

Wager, as I you may remember, was the lawyer forced by Judge Lachs to admit to criminal activity of buying testimony from Apodeca and being reimbursed by Moxon in a deposition.

I should scan the photo Gerner attached of Graham. The sign shows up perfectly with “Knowing how to Know is Knowing when to Blow!” and was taken from the guard shack at gold base.

Two things are clear from this letter and data points such as what Craig said to Kristi. Picketing is about 6 times as effective as we thought it was. We really need pay more attention to the negative stat points they get for pickets. It is driving the clams (on orders direct from (*)?) to burn money and political capital like mad and to engage themselves and their lawyers in escalating criminal activities against the picketers--to the point that law enforcement just has to get involved. It is possible the Slatkin business derives from the need for resources to go after the picketers.

And the *beauty* of this is that the stat points for pickets were almost certainly set by LRH policy and *can’t* be changed.

What should I do with this data? Why picket, of course. I borrowed a sign from Graham and went off to do a solo picket on the way home. (Graham would have come with me, but he was swamped with replies to demands sent by the State Bar. Besides, I suspect they get the same bad stats for any number of picketers and for any length of time.

So, off to Big Blue. I reached BB about 11:30. I *know* they did not know I was coming because I decided to picket BB first as opposed to one of the other orgs after I reached Hollywood and 101. I made one pass down LRH way which had about 4-5 people in view, including a security guard on a bicycle. They were *not* prepared for me to be there. There seems to be a big push on to recruit more Sea Org members running. Big “We come back, You may qualify!” signs.

Toward the south end of LRH way, two guys saw me coming and turned around. I didn’t go that far, crossed over and started back on the west side of LRH way. The security guy on the bike asked me if I was solo today. I said no, I had about 10,000 body thetans with me. He said, “That’s good.” (I guess better on me than him. :-) ) I asked him if he wanted a collection of my flyers and he said no, he thought he already had a complete collection. When I said I didn’t think he had this one, he asked if it was the latest and greatest. I said no, it was one of Kristi’s. I don’t know if others have been handing those out recently, but he seemed to know who Kristi was.

The security guard seemed willing to talk, so I asked him if he knew about Reed Slatkin. At first he said he had no idea of what this was about, so I filled him in that news reports said Slatkin--a Scientologist--had taken about a hundred scientologists for $250 million in a Ponzi scheme. The guard then made the oddest response, that they were proud of Slatkin. I thought I had not heard him right, so I asked if they were proud of Slatkin running a 250 million dollar scam on the scientologists? He indicted yes. I made a throw away comment about it being funny but this has got to be the response I would least expect. Does this make sense to those with a better understanding of the scn mind set?

I tossed my sign in my car, gave away a few more flyers to people walking by and left.

I had not bothered with breakfast, so I stopped at the nearby Wendy’s for an early lunch. After eating part of my sandwich, I drove over to Hollywood between the OSA building on Hollywood and Ivar and FOLO several blocks to the west. I parked my car, stuck money in the meter, and searched out every flyer I had. It was a considerable stack of Xenu flyers, Kristi’s “Is Scientology Breaking the Law?” and “Scientology Hurts People” and even a bunch of Poopsy Charmichael’s “Scientology Invalidates Life.” I walked north to Hollywood, and west to FOLA. I gave away a *remarkable* number of flyers.

The demand was so high that I just offered them without comment. People took them, and as usual several wanted to talk. I pointed them to the web site URLs on the flyers. By the time I reached FOLA (where I was arrested back in 1997) I had gone through most of the flyers I had with me. FOLA got a few minutes of picket on the corner. I could see a staffer desperately talking into a phone or radio.

I crossed Hollywood and walked back to the OSA building on the north side. Business was a little less brisk I think because people were favoring the shade on the south side. I offered a flyer to one group and, when they refused, I asked if they already knew. Boy, did they! One older woman told about family who had been involved and just gotten out. So I gave her a flyer which had the LMT URL on it and said for them to look up the phone number and give them a call. They really perked up when I said the LMT has helped get hundreds of thousands of dollars back from victims scientology has scamed.

When I reached Ivar, I crossed back to the south side of Hollywood and put in a few minutes picketing in the shade across from OSA. There was a cop in uniform standing in the door of the OSA building, so I guess they are copying the practice in Clearwater of hiring cops. My meter time was running out. I started back to my car, and who do I see crossing Hollywood? Eliot Abelson! I said “Fancy meeting you here!” He didn’t say anything. Eliot had his usual fixed smile, but his body language indicated he was not a happy camper. He crossed the sidewalk in front of me and went into a business with a paper tucked under his arm. I went back to my car.

I figured I would go north to Franklin and get on 101 there. But when I got over the freeway, it took a U turn to get on the freeway. “Why not?” I thought. So I parked and picketed the front of the Celeb Center, my fourth org of the day. It was 12:45. That was perhaps the most interesting picket, since a guy who is about to get on the net asked me for a flyer and related a long tale of years ago when he used to try to get people out. Perhaps we will see him soon. He rates as at least an SP4.

I gave CC about a 10 minute picket on the west side. One security guy came part way down from Franklin on a bike and turned around. Someone is shooting a movie in the CC. There was a security person out watching a generator parked near the west entrance. He was being worked over by a female scn who was making a try at getting him in with a WIS or some similar sort of glossy. I stopped and let him read both sides of my sign, “Scientology: cult of blackmail, bribery and fraud” and the other side, “Scientology, ‘Church’ with a body count.” He nodded. I yelled, “Don’t let them suck you in, it is worse than dope.” She gave up. That may be one for *my* stats.

As I was walking back to my car I noticed a white car with two guys in it, white shirts and patches on them, either real private security, or (more likely) Sea Org sorts with delusions of being PIs. Ah! I wonder if they are going to try to follow me? I wait till the traffic clears on Franklin both ways and pull a U turn to get going in the right direction. They pull out behind me. I make the first right to see if they will follow. They do! I do a another U turn and go back, to get their license number. I stop, they stop. I lean out the window and recite their license number, 3VER525 to them, they look glum. I turn right onto Franklin and right at the next street which has a light, cut left across the street and behind a gas station.

I park on the far side of the station where the car can’t be seen, jump out and look back at Franklin concealed by two layers of glass in the corner windows. There they are! waiting at the light looking around wildly trying to figure out where I went. The light changes and they are forced by traffic to go by the station. I wave. It looks like there is a second car which also gets caught in the traffic and goes on by. I jump back in my car and make a right onto Franklin and a right onto 101 North. I take the next exit, go under the freeway and head back south. There is a long ramp and it looks like I lost them. *That* was easy, but then I have had a lot of practice. I go south an exit or two and back north to Franklin a few blocks east of the CC then drive by wondering if I will pick them up again. No luck. I take the entrance onto 101 again and head north to home.

Keith Henson

*****************************

LAW OFFICES OF
MICHAEL G. GERNER
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

I 0 1 00 Santa
Monica Boulevard, Suite 800
Los Angeles,
Califomia 90067
Telephone: (310) 772-2207
Facs@le (310) 772-2208

miz,2ethicsi@msn.com

November 29,
2000


Brenda Bames, Special Investigator
State Bar of California
1149 S. Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015


Re: Graham E. Berry

Dear Ms. Bames:

This will memorialize our recent telephone conversation regarding the above respondent attorney whom your office is investigating/prosecuting. The information provided herein demonstrates continuing, and escalating, aggressive and threatening conduct of Mr. Berry toward my client.

Mr. Berry is representing a criminal defendant, Keith Henson, in the Superior Court of Riverside. Mr. Henson is charged with multiple counts of violations of Penal Code sections 422 (Terrorist Threats Death/GBI), 664 and 422.6 (Hate Crimes). Enclosed for your reference is the Court Docket in the case. Mr. Henson's criminal conduct was directed against the Church of Scientology.

The criminal prosecution of Mr. Henson is most vigorous, as it well should be. We invite you to interface with the prosecutor's office and review the court file in this matter. We do not know the facts and circumstances of Mr. Henson selecting Mr. Berry to represent him in the criminal case. Your office has previously observed the level of competency of Mr. Berry representing criminal defendants in your file SB Inquiry 99-1988 (Michael Hurtado). Please reference our correspondence provided regarding that matter.

We bring this matter to your attention because of the escalation in the conduct of Mr. Berry harassing the Church of Scientology, its personnel and members. As is common in criminal cases of stalking, terrorist threats, and hate ciimes, Mr. Henson is subject to protective/restraining orders regarding contact with the victim. Subject to that restraint, Mr. Berry has begun to show up at Church property to annoy and intimidate. Enclosed please find a copy of a photograph of him engaging in conduct which his client is precluded by court order from doing. Obviously, the message on Mr. Berry's sign is nonsense and without any discernible meaning. The notion of picketing is clearly a pretext to annoy and intimidate church personnel and members.

Brenda Barnes
November 29, 2000
Page Two .

We bring this situation to your attention to stress the urgency of filing the Notice of Disciplinary Charges on the complaints we have filed, before Mr. Berry's conduct reaches new levels of aggression and harm. During the pendency of the investigations by your office, you have observed this attomey's conduct toward my client become progressively more aggravated. Your office has before it, evidence of the troubled and unstable psychological and emotional state of this attorney. In light of the nature of Mr. Henson's crimes coupled with Mr. Berry’s obsessions, my client has growing concern for the safety of personnel, members and church property.

The conduct of Mr. Berry has escalated well beyond pursuing frivolous lawsuits against my client. We implore your office to proceed with the matters before it as expeditiously as possible. We stand ready to assist you in gathering any information surrounding the Henson crimes, you may deem appropriate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me for needed additional information attendant to the complaints we have previously filed with your office.

Very Truly Yours

Michael G. Gerner

cc: Donald R. Wagrr, Esquire
William W. Davis, Esquire

[Graham’s reply]

Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:18:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: GrahamEB@aol.com
Subject: Letter to State Bar with Gerner 11-29-00 enclosures
To: hkhenson@pacbell.net
Message-id: <7f.13f23125.2829e6cb@aol.com
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="part1_7f.13f23125.2829e6cb_boundary"

GRAHAM E. BERRY
3384 McLaughlin Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90066
Phone: (310) 745-3771
Fax: (310) 745-3772
grahameb@aol.com
May 8, 2001

By Fax: (213) 765-1318
Terrie Goldade, Esq.
Deputy Trial Counsel
The State Bar of California
Office of the Chief Trial Counsel Enforcement
1149 South Hill Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-2299

Re: Case No. 99-0-12791, Complainants: Michael Gerner, Esq., and Donald Wager, Esq.

[Real Parties In Interest: Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs; Kendrick L. Moxon, Esq; Helena Kobrin, Esq; Ava Paquette, Esq; Elliot Abelson, Esq.; Samuel D.Rosen, Esq; Donald Wager, Esq; Thomas Byrnes, Esq; Eugene Ingram]

Dear Ms. Goldade:

I have just received your letter dated May 8, 2001. Your continued arbitrary setting of dates, confirmed by your conduct over the past few days, is amazing. You now disregard service rules, which provide, in essence, that response periods run from reasonable date of receipt and not date of mailing. That is why five days and three days are added in State and Federal jurisdictions respectively. I will respond within the time period that the State Bar agreed to before Judge Marcus. I advise you that this may be an appeal point before the California Supreme Court and Federal Courts. Obviously, you have already decided to prosecute despite the continuing flaws in your case. Moreover, the Federal Courts may be ultimately involved in these proceedings because of issues of fundamental fairness such as due process.

Your refusal to provide access to recent communications between representatives and the Church of Scientology and you or your office is very disturbing. Wager has admitted under oath to criminal conduct involving the matters of which he has complained herein. He (and Gerner) filed this complaint, inter alia, alleging ironically that it was I who had improperly solicited the representation of Hurtado.The State Bar's own files contain the testimony of a number of witnesses evidencing that it was Wager, Moxon and Ingram who solicited Hurtado to try and obstruct justice. The State Bar's own correspondence evidences the refusal by almost the entire Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, for nearly eighteen months, to accept the shrill and fantastic allegations of the cult's representatives.

The cult then engaged in a demonstrable course of criminal conduct and breaches of civil rights in order to try and stop the worldwide picketing of their facilities. One of their prime targets was Keith Henson. Despite my withdrawal from actual and active legal practice, I had made several pro bono initial appearances (for arraignment and status) for Keith Henson while he obtained counsel in People v. Henson filed in September 2000. I also engaged in my own exercise of constitional rights by picketing the cult. The cult claims that anyone who opposes it has no constitional rights (ignoring the religious diversity intent of the Establishment Clause and the elimination of the Church of England as the official national religion). Accordingly, scientology and its hired guns carried out " fair game" against opponents such as Mr. Henson and me. Mr. Henson was recently acquitted of two of the three charges that the cult instigated against him (including misdemeanor terrorism).

[Graham got this wrong. In spite of being hamstrung by the motions in limineto the point we could not put on a defense, the jury hung on the two more serious charges. hkh]

What happened next is set forth on page 29 of my March 29, 2001, letter to Judge Marcus in this proceeding. In late October 2000, Scientology attorney Samuel D.Rosen of New York told a Riverside County Deputy District Attorney not to talk with me because they (he and the cult) were having me disbarred! Gerner (and Wager) then wrote their amazing November 29, 2000, letter to the State Bar. It included a photograph of me carrying a picket sign addressing the scientologists in their own argot outside their heavily guarded, para military international headquarters and punishment compound in Hemet, CA. At least two young women (ages 16 and 20) have been killed at that location in the past year, including the daughter of scientology in-house attorney Kendrick L. Moxon.

The file in this matter then found itself with you. You immediately decided to "investigate" and do what your peers had declined to do, i.e., proceed. Contrary to their written representations, when the November 29, 2000, letter was sent to your office, the cult's representatives knew I was not in actual and active legal practice, that I would be out of the country for the next six weeks and that I then intended to provide free consultancy services to Henson's trial attorney in the Riverside case. They successfully worked (with the assistance of the California State Bar) to ensure that Henson's attorney would be deprived of the benefit of my expertise, by ensuring that I was, and remain, pre-occupied with these proceedings (irrespective of factual, legal or moral merit).

Mr. Henson and others are now reviewing their options to now proceed before the Civil Rights Division of the U.S.Department of Justice and the California Supreme Court (in its original jurisdiction). From all appearances, the State Bar (through you) have either wittingly or unwittingly engaged in an apparent conspiracy to deprive Mr. Henson of important civil and human rights, inter alia, by depriving him and his counsel of the benefits of my special expertise in the Henson matters in Riverside County.

Federal and State law enforcement are now investigating aspects of the matters herein, as well as the Henson and related matters. They have been awaiting my active and extensive assistance. You continue to serve the cult's interests, and those attorneys being investigated by law enforcement, by keeping me fully engaged before the State Bar and unable to provide my expertise and knowledge to these growing and expanding criminal investigations.

I always understood (and was taught by the DA's Office training instructors) that a prosecutor's function was to seek truth and justice as opposed to just securing convictions. Obviously, securing a conviction is not necessarily compatible with truth and justice. By all appearances you seem hell bent on prosecution and conviction for personal reasons and clearly for the purpose of scientology "stats" [statistics], rather than seeking to do justice and serve the public interest. Indeed, you expressly concede your own personal agenda in your May 2, 2001, letter. So much so that there is an appearance of bias that leads me to consider seeking immediate California Supreme Court intervention and the disqualification of the State Bar as the investigator and prosecuting authority in this matter, and in those other matters about to be filed by me and other affected parties.

Accordingly, in these circumstances, your May 2, 7 and 8, 2000 letters are all the more incredible, particularly the final paragraphs of your May 2 and 8 letters.

Very truly yours,

Graham E. Berry

Cc: Honorable Michael D. Marcus
State Bar Court
1149 South Hill Street.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
FAX: (213) 765 1383Michael Nisperos, Jr., Esq.

---

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which copyrighted and wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank. The term "Scientology"® is trademarked to the Scientology crime syndicate. This information is provided in Fair Use for the public safety in the hopes that others don't fall for Scientology's related frauds. Return to The Pickets and Protests main index page Return to The Skeptic Tank's main index page.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank