Scientologists Allowed to Commit Crimes?
by Chris Owen
| From | Chris Owen <chriso@lutefisk.demon.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Scientologists allowed to commit crimes? |
| Date | 1998/10/10 |
| Msg-ID | <nL$LARAtDrH2EwNx@lutefisk.demon.co.uk> |
| Newsgroups | alt.religion.scientology |
[Links added. -k]
I came across a curious inconsistency in Introduction to Scientology Ethics (by L. Ron Hubbard, naturally). The very first item on the list of offences considered to be "Suppressive Acts" is:
"Any felony 1 (such as murder, arson, etc.) against person or property.
1. felony: a major crime"
IANAL, but isn't there a lesser category of crimes, namely trespasses? Hubbard evidently is does not mean "felony" to mean crime in general, as he defines it quite specifically to mean the most serious criminal offences. So why, in that case, does he not prohibit all criminal offences rather than just one specific category? Also, if memory serves me right, aren't acts of petty harassment generally treated as trespasses for remedy primarily through the civil rather than criminal courts? One of those things which make you think "hmmm".
This hairsplitting is not just of theoretical interest: there exists (I have a copy somewhere) a memo from the Guardian Office's chief lawyer, a Charles Parselle, discussing exactly what the difference is between a felony and a trespass. That was major interest to the leaders of the GO's intelligence bureau, as they were at that time engaged in grossly felonious espionage against the US Government and many other public and private organisations. 11 of the GO's leaders, including Mary Sue Hubbard, were subsequently convicted for the felony of criminal conspiracy.
However, as Kady's excellent GO Roundup has shown, many of those named as unindicted co-conspiritors or actually jailed continue in positions in or associated with Scientology. Under Hubbard's own Ethics rules, their criminal convictions mean that they must be "declared suppressive and expelled with full penalties". Mary Sue Hubbard was indeed said to have been expelled, according to statements attributed to Scientology spokesmen which were printed in British newspapers in 1981. But I have never heard of or seen any SP Declarations related to the GO criminals.
SPs can rejoin Scientology, but they must undertake five actions:
"Cease all attacks and suppressions";
Make a public announcement, published widely, "to the effect that they realize their actions were ignorant and unfounded and stating where possible the influences or motivations which caused them to attempt to suppress or attack Scientology";
Pay off all debts owed to Scientology entities;
Undertake, at the discetion of the International Justice Chief, an "amends project" which must be "an action which is clearly and undeniably of benefit to mankind";
Resume training at the lowest levels and work their way up again, at their own expense.
I have never, ever seen or heard of any public announcements from any of the GO criminals relating to their activities, despite the fact that (a) they clearly are SPs under Hubbard's rules and (b) just as clearly, many of them are still involved with Scientology. This suggests one of two things: either the Scientology leadership is making a special exception, or they do not regard those convicted of the GO's crimes as being felons.
I rather doubt the former; whatever else one may say of the current leadership, they have been very firm on the need to protect and uphold Hubbard's sacred "Tech". The latter is much more likely, especially as Scientology's current explanation of the GO debacle is that "the Guardian's Office was infiltrated and set up to fail" (see "The President of the Church of Scientology Answers Your Questions" on http://www.scientology.org). Infiltrated by whom? Statements from David Miscavige, amongst others, strongly suggest that the leadership believes that the exposure of the GO — and remember, the real crime of the GO was not that it committed felonies but that it got caught — was due to infiltrators from the Internal Revenue Service. So in that scenario, those convicted for the GO's crimes were in fact innocent and set up by a secret US Government conspiracy against Scientology. No need for Ethics in that case!