Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 1 ======== UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, Plaintiff, RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INT., HELENA K. KOBRIN, WARREN MCSHANE, EUGENE MARTIN INGRAM, DAVID MISCAVIGE, VERA WALLACE, THIERRY DUCHAUNAC, THOMAS R. HOGAN, ANDREW H. WILSON, DOES 1-7, Cross-Defendants vs. GRADY WARD, Defendant ) ) ) ) No. C-96 20207 RMW (EAI) FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant, Grady Ward, an individual, responds to the plaintiff's verified complaint as follows: 1. A general denial, with the exception of jurisdiction and venue described in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the complaint; residency of Grady Ward described in paragraph 5 of the complaint; paragraph 17 of the complaint, except that Grady Ward avers that all such use was well within the "fair use" guidelines of the Copyright Act; paragraph 23 of the complaint, except that Grady Ward's avers that plaintiff's objections were intended to intimidate lawful criticism and commentary protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution; with respect to paragraphs 6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 of the complaint defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of any allegations contained, and on that basis denies each and every allegation contained therein. 2. FOR A FIRST SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 2 ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 3. FOR A SECOND SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of laches. 4. FOR A THIRD SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: Plaintiff's claims are barred on the equitable grounds of unclean hands. 5. FOR A FOURTH SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: This answering defendant is informed and believes, and upon such basis alleges defendant has not infringed copyright pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 106. 6. FOR A FIFTH SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: This answering defendant is informed and believes, and upon such basis alleges that plaintiff's claims are wholly barred by the doctrine of fair use. 7. FOR A SIXTH SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: This answering defendant is informed and believes, and upon such basis alleges that plaintiff's is barred under the doctrine of copyright misuse. 8. FOR A SEVENTH SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO ALL PURPORTED CLAIMS: This answering defendant is informed and believes, and upon such basis alleges tat the documents claimed by plaintiff's to be trade secrets are not trade secrets because (a) plaintiffs have failed to undertake reasonable efforts to maintain the secrecy of the their alleged trade secrets and (b) the works are generally known. Wherefore, with respect to the plaintiff's claims, answering defendant prays as follows: That plaintiff take nothing by reason of their complaint; that judgment be rendered in favor of defendant; That defendant be awarded the costs of suit incurred in defense of this action; For other such other and further relief as the Court deems proper. COUNTERCLAIMS FACTS 1. On information and belief, the defendant alleges that the Racketeering "enterprise," as used in 18 U.S.C. S 1961(4), is the cluster of corporations, fellowships, and committees, known as "Scientology." This enterprises includes at least the following organizations: Founding Church of Scientology; Church of Scientology International; Religious Technology Center; Church of Spiritual Technology; Missions of Scientology, governed by Scientology Missions International; Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International; Class IV churches [local organizations such as the Church of Scientology of Portland or the Church of Scientology of San Francisco]; Continental Liaison Offices [known as CLOs]; Saint Hill Organizations; Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization; Flag Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 3 Land Base; Flag Estates Org; Flag Command Bureaux [including Compilations Unit, LRH Artist, International Training School, New World Corps, Strategic Book Marketing Unit]; International Hubbard Ecclesiastic League of Pastors [known as IHELP]; Sea Organization Officer Council; the American Saint Hill Organization; Advanced Organization Los Angeles; Golden Era Studios; Watchdog Committee; the Commodore's Messenger Organization International; the Executive Director International; the Senior Executive Strata; the International Network of Computer Organized Management; World Institute of Scientology Enterprises; Golden Era Productions; Office of Special Affairs International; Bridge Publications; URN Public Relations International; Household Unit; Inspector General Network [comprised of the Trademark Integrity Division and the Qualifications Division]; the United States Scientology Films Trust; International Scientology Films Trust; Author Services Inc., Cancorp, Religious Research Foundation; International Association of Scientologists; Church of Scientology Religious Trust. The best known explication to the defendant of the labyrinthine organization of the enterprise is contained in the decision Church of Spiritual Technology v. The United States (No. 581-88T, United States Claims Court, 26 Cl.Ct. 713; 70 A.F.T.R. 2d (P-H) 5233; 1992 U.S. Cl. Ct.). The defendant alleges that David Miscavige as the Chairman of the Board and the "ecclesiastical head" of scientology is the managing agent for the entire enterprise for scientology, including the plaintiff RTC which in turn stands at the head of the scientology corporate chain, the Church of Scientology International stands below RTC at the head of all international Churches of Scientology and other international affairs. Independent missions and organizations of scientology are linked financially and by control by the system of exclusive trademarks and other intellectual property licenses and the "ecclesiastical authority" of plaintiff RTC. The principal unifying factor of all the separate units of the scientology enterprise is the writings of deceased science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard as interpreted and enforced by David Miscavige and plaintiff RTC.(Exhibit 1.) 2. Predicate act, wire fraud: the defendant is informed and on that basis believes that Helena K. Kobrin, attorney and agent for the plaintiff and the scientology enterprise did, on or about January 11, 1996, issue the computer command known as a RMGROUP in order to destroy the Internet discussion group alt.religion.scientology throughout the United States and the world and did thereby deprive the defendant of the intangible right to honest service of receiving and viewing postings and cross-postings from such a forum to the collateral Internet newsgroups that he subscribed to such as comp.org.eff.talk. Beyond the denial of the intangible right to honest service, detrimentally relying upon Kobrin's fraudulent RMGROUP caused the defendant to spend time and money to restore and verify the integrity of his Internet newsfeeds and Internet database that the defendant uses in his business. This act by Helena K. Kobrin constitutes a violation of 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4) (Exhibit 2.). Helena K. Kobrin also libeled the defendant when she asserted publicly that Netcom had "sent a warning to the infringer" (Exhibit 3.) when in fact the defendant had not infringed and Netcom did not in fact accuse the defendant of infringing. 3. Predicate act: wire fraud, obstruction of justice. Helena K. Kobrin, as attorney and agent for the plaintiff and the racketeering enterprise, committed wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. S 1343, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), by wrongfully accusing me of violating the Lanham Act (Exhibit 4.). The defendant Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 4 and other's detrimental reliance upon her false statement caused me out-of-pocket expense to determine the law, refer to archives for my original posting and to refute her statement and damage to be discovered to my business. She also committed obstruction of justice by delaying the production of evidence that tends to confirm that RTC Chairman David Miscavige was in fact the person who threatened the defendant's children in an e-mail message (Exhibit 5.); 4. Predicate act, wire fraud: a lawful writing of Grady Ward was fraudulently destroyed using a forged CANCEL computer command by, on information and belief, a person or persons acting in active concert and participation with the plaintiff or the scientology enterprise, thereby depriving Grady Ward of the intangible right of honest service as well as the tangible loss of that writing and the cost of rewriting and re-posting to the Internet. This person or organization violated 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4)( Exhibit 6.) 5. Several hundred further predicate acts of wire fraud: persons unknown acting as agents or in concert and participation with the plaintiff and the scientology enterprise did fraudulently forge hundreds of separate computer CANCEL commands and did fraudulently submit them by wire to interstate commerce in order to destroy the Internet postings of others whom the forgers claim were "infringing copyright." In one case as documented infra, the identity of the fraudulent canceler was authenticated by the plaintiff as an intelligence agent of the plaintiff, "Vera Wallace." These commands, forged in the name of the original writer, destroyed those writings made by individuals to the Internet discussion group alt.religion.scientology, thus depriving the defendant as well as other individuals the intangible right of honest service and the tangible property of such postings and the expense of researching what was fraudulently destroyed and re-creating and re-posting such works, if possible. In particular by causing the detrimental reliance upon these forged cancellations, these forgeries were the proximate cause of damage to the defendant's Internet news spool integrity and the defendant had to expend time and money to seek out and restore the lawful postings thus fraudulently removed from archives and database services. The dates, times, forger non-de-plume(s) and the victim message identification are shown with particularity in (Exhibit 7.) Note the similar reasons cited by the person or persons unknown and the RMGROUP issued by agent for the plaintiff, Helena K. Kobrin. As further evidence of agency note that in (Exhibit 8.) Helena K. Kobrin attempts the prevent the defendant from ascertaining the true identities of the fraudulent cancelers by objecting "on behalf of" the unknown perpetrators to a subpoena issued by the defendant under Rule 45 of the F.R.C.P. The distinct violations include 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4); 6. Predicate act, mail fraud: the defendant has been informed and on that basis believes that on May 10, 1995 a man later positively identified as Eugene Martin Ingram, a long time investigator and agent for scientology attorney Elliot Abelson, the plaintiff, the plaintiff's chairman of the board David Miscavige, and the enterprise of scientology, did commit mail fraud in a scheme to defraud my mother and myself of certain photographs of the defendant's wife and children, to fraudulently persuade the defendant's mother that the agent of the plaintiff was in fact a long-lost friend of defendant Grady Ward, and by using the U.S. Mails to return the photographs after the theft by deception was reported to municipal authorities to further Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 5 defraud the defendant and his mother by lulling them into a false sense of security and to forestall their complaint to federal authorities. The envelope returning the photographs had no return address nor did it contain any identifying note, as if someone were attempting to fraudulently conceal the source of the stolen material. The fraud caused the damage to Ward's property of lost of privacy in his family photographs and out-of-pocket expenses in Ward's and Ward's mothers detrimental reliance upon the false statement by Ingram that he was "Jack Hoff" of "Portland, Oregon" to investigate and refute that statement. The distinct violations by Ingram as an agent of the racketeering enterprise and/or the plaintiff and its attorneys, includes 18 U.S.C. S 1341 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d) . (Exhibit 10, 11) 7. Predicate act, bank fraud, wire fraud affecting a financial institution, witness tampering, conspiracy: the defendant is informed and on that basis believes that on or about September 11, 1996 a person as an agent of the enterprise of scientology using the modus operandi of the plaintiff's investigators did commit bank fraud and wire fraud by obtaining account information of the defendant and his wife from the bank of the defendant's wife, Felicity Wasser by deceit. The plaintiff later admitted the link between itself and the unlawful acts. (Exhibit 12.) Note that immediately following this fraud, a subpoena by the plaintiff was attempted to be served on the defendant's wife and, inter alia, her bank account information was demanded. (Exhibit 13.) This bank fraud was committed by persons working in concert and participation with the plaintiff and the scientology enterprise in order to intimidate her and the defendant and to corroborate, refute, prepare, or change her anticipated testimony at deposition. According to the declaration of the bank officer who detrimentally relied upon the false statements of the caller, the fraudulent caller inquired as to the existence of an account of Grady Ward, using his Social Security number, and thus violated Ward's privacy, and by causing Ward's detrimental reliance upon the fraud caller's statement caused him the expense of conferring and traveling to the bank to discover the extent of damage and to attempt to prevent further damage to his business and property by reviewing and changing bank accounts and means of access. This person, Doe 6, and plaintiff RTC an organization as an agent of the racketeering enterprise violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1344, 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 8. Predicate act, wire fraud: In a similar vein, the defendant's telephone company was defrauded and the defendant's intangible right to honest service was abrogated by a fraud with an identical modus operandi when the details of the defendant's telephone bills were obtained by deceit. (Exhibit 14.) Just as in the bank fraud, the defendant was then later asked to provide his phone records in his deposition. (Exhibit 15.) Once again, this wire fraud was apparently committed to obtain information so that the plaintiff or the scientology enterprise could corroborate, refute, prepare, or affect the defendant's later testimony at deposition. This fraudulent act proximately violated the defendant's privacy and cause his tangible expense of telephone tolls, postage and other expenses to remedy this fraud and to attempt to prevent future intrusions and property damage to the defendant. This person, Doe 7, plaintiff RTC as organization as an agent of the racketeering enterprise violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 9. Predicate act, wire fraud: The defendant has been informed and on that basis believes that on May 8, 1995, his publisher, Maria Nakem of the Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 6 Austin Code Works of Austin, Texas, received a telephone call from a man identifying himself as Eugene Martin Ingram ("Gene Ingram") who proceeded to fraudulently slander the defendant, asserting untruthfully that the defendant had been involuntarily terminated from Apple Computer, Inc. in order to interfere with the defendant's business relationship and thereby cause injury to the defendant contrary to 18 U.S.C. 1343 et seq. During Volume 3 of the deposition of Grady Ward, Helena K. Kobrin did attempt to excuse the behavior of Eugene Martin Ingram by saying that Mr. Ingram had made a "sincere error." This statement tends to further corroborate the agency relationship between Mr. Ingram and the plaintiff and the scientology enterprise. It is believed that Eugene Martin Ingram takes direction directly from the chairman of the board of the plaintiff RTC, David Miscavige. The defendant's business was damaged to the extent of several thousand to tens of thousands of dollars -- to an extent to be discovered -- and that he suffered out-of-pocket expense in discovering, documenting and attempting to ameliorate this fraud. The defendant detrimentally relied upon the statement of Eugene Martin Ingram forcing him to verify the employment information at Apple Computer, Inc. Further validating the account by Maria Nakem and the statement of RTC counsel Helena K. Kobrin was the Rule 45 subpoena issued by RTC to Apple Computer, Inc. trying to verify the false statement by Ingram that I had been involuntarily terminated. Eugene Martin Ingram, employed by and an agent of the RTC and the scientology enterprise through its attorneys, thus violated 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 10. That the plaintiff is working in concert and participation its agents within the enterprise of scientology in furtherance of its fraudulent schemes is demonstrated as follows: 11. On or about April 4, 1995, an agent of the plaintiff who nominally is employed by the separate corporate entity Church of Scientology San Francisco, Jeffrey George Quiros, did commit the crime of trespass at the defendant's home in Arcata, California. Mr. Quiros traveled to Arcata, California to communicate to the defendant at the behest of lawyers for the plaintiff and/or the scientology enterprise. Note that the Church of Scientology San Francisco, while a separate corporate entity within the scientology enterprise, worked hand in glove with the plaintiff, RTC. (Exhibit 16.) 12. The investigator and agent identified in the predicate act of wire fraud against the defendant and his mother is known by the plaintiff to be wanted for similar crimes in the state of Florida. (Exhibit 17.) 13. "Vera Wallace", whose identifying "footer" (Exhibit 18.) was submitted and authenticated as an Exhibit by the plaintiff and subsequently by the defendant (Exhibit 19.) explicitly links herself as an intelligence agent to both the plaintiff, RTC, and the plaintiff's other agent perpetrator, Eugene Martin Ingram in an Internet post to alt.religion.scientology. (Exhibit 20.) Significantly, "Vera Wallace" while acting an as intelligence agent for the plaintiff and/or the scientology enterprise authored one of the fraudulent CANCEL messages in addition to the fraudulent CANCEL messages exhibited in paragraph 4 of this Answer. The purported justification for Vera Wallace's cancel was identical to the purported justification of the other person(s) issuing the fraudulent cancels. This is a "smoking gun" linking the plaintiff directly to the pattern of wire fraud and other racketeering activity on the Internet and to the unlawful harassment and mail fraud and racketeering perpetrated by plaintiff's agent Eugene Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 7 Martin Ingram. By forging a cancel message as an agent of the plaintiff or the scientology enterprise, Vera Wallace violated 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4). 14. The defendant is informed and on that basis believes that Eugene Martin Ingram has indulged in criminal planning and execution multiple times during his employment with the plaintiff, with the plaintiff's explicit knowledge. (Exhibit 21.) 15. The defendant is informed and on that basis believes that Eugene Martin Ingram has also been linked to harassment of other participants on the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology. (Exhibit 22.) 16. The defendant is informed and on that basis believes that Eugene Martin Ingram has been a long time associate of the Church of Scientology, the plaintiff, and other related enterprises. (Exhibit 23,24,25.) 17. The defendant is informed and on that basis believes that the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff and managing agent for the scientology enterprise, David Miscavige, is aware and directs many of the fraudulent covert operations (Exhibit 26.) David Miscavige is also identified in an e-mail threatening my children with harm (Exhibit 27.) While counsel Hogan did say that it was "ridiculous to suggest" that Mr. Miscavige originated this threat, neither he nor plaintiff categorically denied David Miscavige's authorship. The identity of the poster as David Miscavige was confirmed in a subpoena issued by the plaintiff. (Exhibit 28.) The defendant detrimentally relied upon the message from Mr. Miscavige to his tangible damage and expense by increasing security as his home where he and his wife and children live. David Miscavige as a managing agent for the scientology enterprise has violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1513, 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(b), (c) and (d). 18. The plaintiff and the scientology enterprises working in concert and participation have a long history, up to the current day, of fraudulent schemes involving a variety of crimes and venues. (Exhibit 29,30,31.) The defendant has been informed that twenty-seven members of the Church of Scientology are currently on trial for several felony offenses in Lyon, France. (Multiple guilty verdicts brought on November 22, 1996) (Exhibit 32.). In case after case, top ranking members such as Mary Sue Hubbard and Heber Jentszch of the Church of Scientology have been indicted or convicted of felonies. This creates the strong inference that the entire Church organization including the plaintiff and all other scientology corporate apparatus are merely fronts for a continuing criminal racketeering enterprise of world-wide proportion. Thus even though the bulk of the crimes committed to the detriment of the defendant are "garden variety" frauds and deceits, the scope and duration of the racketeering activities of scientology are equal to some of the more notorious crime families intended to be the target of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization statute. The Stipulation of Evidence in the case of United States v. Mary Sue Hubbard, Crim. #78-401 (D.C.D.C 1978), or Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim, (96 C.D.O.S. 733), or Founding Church of Scientology v. Webster, (802 F.2d 1448 D.C. Cir. 1986), describe in detail the criminal acts and modus operandi typical of the members of the racketeering enterprise of scientology. Particularly insidious is the frequent corruption and conspiracy of attorneys associated with the racketeering enterprise and the consequential corruption of the Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 8 fundamental legal process in litigation involving the scientology enterprise. 19. This fraudulent and harassing behavior is in fact an organic ingredient in the corruption of the entire scientology enterprise as it has "scriptural" importance to the members of scientology. The racketeering behavior is not just the vagaries of disparate individuals within Scientology. (Exhibit 33.) 20. Predicate act: tampering with a witness, obstruction of justice contrary to 18 U.S.C. S 1503 : On October 25, 1996 plaintiff attorney Thomas R. Hogan in furtherance of a conspiracy to obstruct justice sent the defendant and the courtroom deputy of Judge Ronald M. Whyte a fraudulent letter alleging that a certain Exhibit A. filed by the defendant was thought to be a forgery by the plaintiff, Religious Technology Center (Exhibit 34.). Upon the defendant's information and belief, ten days after that event, the authorities in Sweden discovered the theft and substitution of those same documents by a person whose description matches one Thierry Duchaunac, a U.S. citizen identified on Swedish Television as a member of scientology "Office of Special Affairs" in Washington and member of the racketeering enterprise, who had traveled to Sweden at the behest of that enterprise to commit thefts and thus attempt to disrupt this instant litigation and affect the testimony of the defendant or the legal perception of the Judge. (Exhibit 35.) The false affidavit relating to the lodging of the NOTs property as a public common paper in Sweden of lawyer Pers Magnusson, a Swedish attorney for the plaintiff and an agent of the enterprise of scientology, was discovered and documented.(Exhibit 36.) The nexus of the above acts was to knowingly mislead the court and the defendant about the legal availability of the NOTs and to continue to falsely accuse the defendant of tampering with evidence. 21. Predicate act: tampering with a witness, obstruction of justice contrary to 18 U.S.C. S 1512. The defendant alleges that Warren McShane, president of RTC, met with Johan Wevers, a resident of the Netherlands on or about September 18, 1996 in order to intimidate and silence him from testifying to what he had already admitted - that he was the person responsible for the "Vorlon" publication of the NOTs property onto the Internet. Along with Julia Rijnvis, PR coordinator of scientology in The Netherlands, and Simone Pelkmans, one of their Dutch lawyers. The nexus of the intimidation was intended to hinder and prevent Mr. Wevers testimony to the end that the fiction that the defendant Grady Ward was responsible for the public dissemination of the NOTs property could be maintained to the benefit of the plaintiff and the detriment of the defendant in this litigation. By continuing to accuse defendant Grady Ward of being the persona "Vorlon" even after the plaintiff knew that it was not, Mr. Thomas R. Hogan and the plaintiff RTC also participated in this conspiracy to tamper with a witness, corrupt the record and maintain a indefensible and fraudulent position in his pleadings before this court in violation of 18 U.S.C. S 1962(d). (Exhibit 37, 38.) These acts were the proximate cause of expense to the defendant of responding to the fraudulent briefs and legal assistance overseas to attempt to document and ameliorate the tampering and fraud. 22. Predicate act: tampering with a witness, obstruction of justice contrary Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 9 to 18 U.S.C. S 1512, and 18 U.S.C. S 1503. The defendant alleges that on January 24, 1997, attorney Andrew H. Wilson for the Church of Scientology International, distinct as a corporate entity from the plaintiff RTC but a member of the enterprise of scientology, did use the U.S. Mails to unlawfully threaten and attempt to hinder the lawful giving of testimony in this litigation. (Exhibit 39,40). Mr. Wilson knew that the witness he tried to intimidate on behalf of Church of Scientology International and the enterprise of scientology was the subject of a subpoena issued by the defendant. Since Mr. Thomas R. Hogan, the lead counsel for plaintiff RTC was the only individual that the defendant had sent the notice of subpoena under F.R.C.P. Rule 45, the defendant also alleges that Thomas R. Hogan, Religious Technology Center, the Church of Scientology International, and Andrew H. Wilson to have conspired to violate 18 U.S.C. S 1512 contrary to 18 U.S.C. S 1962(d). Detrimental reliance upon these acts did cause the defendant the expense of attempting to ameliorate this tampering and fraud by investigating and necessitating further court filings. CAUSES OF ACTION 23. All facts above are considered incorporated into this section. 24. RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, as principal corporate agent for the racketeering enterprise of scientology in charge of investigation and intellectual property and licenser of the so-called "Advanced Technology" to Churches of Scientology use the above described pattern of racketeering activity to financially by monopolizing the exclusive sublicenses of its intellectual property to constituent Churches of Scientology and has invested income from a pattern of racketeering activities described above by its agents and attorneys, has used income from the racketeering enterprise to conspire with other parties to violate R.I.CO. predicates as described above and thus has violated at least two R.I.C.O. predicate acts 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1341, U.S.C. S 1343, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(a), (b), (c) and (d). 25. CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, as principal corporate agent of the scientology enterprise connecting United States scientology and scientology elsewhere in the world, has used and invested racketeering income as described above, principally to use its agents to unlawfully intimidate witnesses to testify to the probable financial benefit of scientology and thus to violate at least two R.I.C.O. predicate acts 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1341, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(a), (b), (c) and (d). 26. Helena K. Kobrin, as a paid agent and attorney for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to violate 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4) as well as libel with actual malice under California law. 27. Eugene Martin Ingram, as a paid agent and investigator for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1341, 18 U.S.C S 1343, Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 10 and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d) and slander with actual malice under California law. 28. David Miscavige, as a paid agent and Chairman of the Board for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1513, 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(b), (c) and (d). 29. "Vera Wallace" as an agent for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, (possibly pseudonymously) violated 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4). 30. Thierry Duchaunac as a paid agent and for the plaintiff RTC and the Office of Special Affairs and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1503, 18 U.S.C. S 1341 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 31. Thomas R. Hogan, as a paid agent and attorney for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C S 1503, 18 U.S.C. S 1341 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 32. Warren McShane, as a paid agent and President for the plaintiff RTC and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 33. Andrew H. Wilson as a paid agent and attorney for the Church of Scientology International and the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1503, 18 U.S.C. S 1341 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). 34. Does 1, 2, 3 as agents of the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1343 et seq., and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d), 18 U.S.C. 2701(a)(2) and California Penal Code S 502(c)(1) and S 502(c)(4). 35. Does 4, 5, 6, 7 as agents for the enterprise of scientology agreed to enter into the affairs of the scientology enterprise to commit at least two R.I.C.O predicate acts described above, violated 18 U.S.C. S 1512, 18 U.S.C. S 1544, 18 U.S.C. S 1343, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1961(1)(B), 18 U.S.C. S 1962(c) and (d). JURISDICTION 36. This Court has jurisdiction because of statutes involving a federal Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 11 question with right of civil recovery and statutes of the state of California based on pendant events and occurrences. PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR THE CAUSE OF ACTION: 37. A permanent injunction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. S 1345 or other enabling statutes to forbid the plaintiff from unlawfully harassing the defendant or his family or committing further fraudulent acts to the detriment of the defendant and his family; Damages according to proof at trial; Exemplary and punitive damages; Reasonable attorney's fees and costs; Such other relief as is determined to be just and proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant hereby demands a trial by jury for all claims and counterclaims in this action. VERIFIED ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM The defendant Grady Ward declares under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements derived from his personal knowledge and the attached exhibits are true and correct to the best of his knowledge. DATED: February 3, 1997 __________________________________ Grady Ward, pro se, in forma pauperis On January 27, 1997, in PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Exhibit 9a.), the plaintiff admitted to "interview[ing] Ward's mother _ pretending to be as friend of Ward's. Ward's mother did give the investigator some recent photos, which the investigator returned." (Plaint. Resp. to O.S.C. at 6:22-24). The plaintiff admitted to controlling the investigator who committed this act in their January 27, 1997 PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Exhibit 11.) "The second investigator apparently obtained the account information and recent activity in the bank account of Ward's wife at Humboldt Bank. _ When RTC learned that the investigator had indirectly obtained such information, it directed that he be terminated from any participation in investigating Ward, and he was. McShane Dec. S 16." (Id., at 5:18-25) However, RTC did not report this crime to authorities when it "discovered" it and it continues to shield the identity of the allegedly culpable party in its pleadings. The plaintiff admitted in their January 27, 1997, in PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Exhibit 11.) that the same investigator was used to obtain photographs from the defendant's mother under false pretenses as was the person who telephoned the Austin Code Works. This person was positively identified by the defendant's mother as Eugene Martin Ingram and Maria Nakem of the Austin Code Racketeering Counterclaim Filed in RTC v Ward C96-20207 N.D.C. Page 12 Works reported to the defendant that he identified himself as "Gene Ingram." "The investigator made telephone inquiries of Austin Code Works_" (Id., at 6:16-17) 23 FIRST AMENDED ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL No. C 96-20207