VS. CASE NO. 00-002750-CI-20

DELL LIEBREICH, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lisa McPherson, ROBERT MINTON and THE LISA MCPHERSON TRUST,

BEFORE: The Honorable W. Douglas Baird
Circuit Judge
PLACE: 315 Court Street
Clearwater, Florida
DATE: August 29 - August 30, 2002

REPORTED BY: Susan M. Valsechhi, RPR

Registered Professional Court Reporter
Sixth Judicial Circuit




Pages 193 - 291 (Excluding Index.)

(727) 443-0992


Post Office Box 1368
4 Clearwater, Florida 33757
(727) 461-1818
Attorney for Plaintiff
8 600 Peachtree STreet, NE, Suite 2400
Atlanta, Georgia 30308-2222
Attorney for Witness Samual Rosen
P.O. Box 24597
13 Tampa, Florida 33623
14 Attorney for Dell Leibreich
16 442 W. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 280
Tampa, Florida 33606
Attorney for Witness Michael Garko



1 P R O C E E D I N G S

3 (Thereupon, this transcript continues directly
4 from Volume I.)
5 MR. DANDAR: I have a few redirect.
8 Q. Mr. Rosen, isn't it true that you were sanctioned
9 $150,000 for making false representations to a federal
10 judge?
11 MR. HILL: Your Honor, outside the scope
12 of -- I guess I'm on direct -- cross.

13 THE WITNESS: Can I be allowed to answer that?
14 THE COURT: Yeah.
15 MR. HILL: I will withdraw the objection.
16 THE WITNESS: Are you talking about the
17 Schering Plough case?
19 Q. Yes.
20 A. Mr. Dandar, you well know, because you brought
21 this up in the past, and your co-counsel Mr. Merrett did -­
22 Q. He's not my co-counsel, Mr. Rosen.
23 A. -- my firm -- myself and my senior partner and our
24 client, Schering Plough, were sanctioned $100,000 in the
25 Federal District court In New Jersey for bringing what was


1 considered by the district court judge to be a frivolous
2 representation or claim for a TRO.
3 That judgment, as you know, was summarily and
4 unanimously reversed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals,
5 which issued a published decision saying not only was there
6 no basis to sanction us, but the representations we made to
7 the Court were borne out by the evidence.
8 So if that's the one you're referring to, sir,
9 I regret .that you would say that.
10 Q. The federal judge specifically held that you,
11 Samuel Rosen, made false representations to him; isn't that
12 true?
13 A. Her, Marian Trump-Berry. It's a her. She's a
14 her, I should say.
15 Q. Isn't that true?
16 A. Yes, she made that determination. The Third
17 Circuit said they weren't false.
18 Q. And you voluntarily dismissed that case, correct?
19 A. No, sir.
20 Q. That case was not voluntarily dismissed?
21 A. I think the case was resolved.
22 Q. Okay. If these meetings in New York City were so
23 cordial, except for the last day when Ms. Brooks exploded,
24 as you described -­
25 A. Yeah.


1 Q.-- what was it that the Church of Scientology was
2 requesting of Mr. Minton that he couldn't fulfill?
3 MR. HILL:Your Honor, vague.
4 THE WITNESS: You've lost me. I don't
5 understand the question.
7 Q. The man came to your office in New York City to
8 have a global settlement. Why didn't the global settlement
9 mature and take effect?
10 What was it that was stopping him from
11 finalizing a global settlement those two days in New York
12 City in your office?
13 MR. HILL: Objection, calls for speculation by
14 Mr. Rosen as to what was stopping Mr. Minton from reaching
15 a global settlement.
16 MR. DANDAR: If he knows.
17 THE COURT: Well, do you want him to
18 speculate?
19 MR. DANDAR: No. I want him to tell me if
20 he knows why Mr.Minton -- a
21 THE COURT: How would he know what F
22 Mr. Minton is thinking?
23 MR. DANDAR: If Mr. Jonas said something
24 in his presence.
25 MR. HILL: That was not the question.


1 MR. DANDAR: That's my question.
3 Q. Do you know, Mr. Rosen, why a global settlement
4 was not reached in New York City?
5 THE COURT: That's the same question you just
6 asked before. He doesn't know why somebody
7 chooses or not chooses to do something.
8 Why don't you ask him did somebody express
9 some opinion about why they couldn't reach a
10 settlement. Is that what you want to know?
11 MR. DANDAR: That's fine.
12 THE COURT: If somebody said something
13 about why they couldn't reach a settlement?
14 MR. DANDAR: Yes.
15 THE COURT: Anybody say anything about why
16 they couldn't reach a settlement?
17 THE WITNESS: No. I said, "I'm willing to
18 stay here the whole weekend and try to reach an
19 agreement."
20 THE COURT: You go down the hall, they
21 call up and say, "We're out of here. "
22 THE WITNESS: That was it.
24 Q. Mr. Rosen, isn't it true that the reason why they
25 said, "We're out of here," is that the Church of


1 Scientology insisted that Mr. Minton must obtain the
2 dismissal of the Lisa McPherson and the Wollersheim case
3 before there would be disengagement, and that's what caused
4 Ms. Brooks to explode and both of them to walk out of the
5 office?
6 MR. HILL: Objection, calls for speculation.
7 And this was already asked and answered, and Mr. Dandar
8 simply testified. It's improper, judge.
9 THE COURT: Sustained.
11 Q. Isn't it true in the deposition before this
12 cordial meeting on March 28th -- in the deposition of
13 October 2001 -- you, Mr. Rosen,were threatening Mr. Minton
14 with a RICO suit, tax evasion and money laundering?
15 MR. HILL: Objection, irrelevant. The issue
16 was what happened on March 28th and March 29th. And, Your
17 Honor, that's what you limited this inquiry to.
18 THE COURT: Sustained.
20 Q. Mr. Rosen, did Mr. Minton express to you his upset
21 with the fact that your client had scheduled his wife,
22 Therese for depositions in Boston in April?
23 A. I don't think I ever even knew about that, no. I
24 never even knew that that happened until you raised it
25 afterwards.


1 Q. How did you obtain or your client obtain a copy of
2 the UBS check that Mr. Minton was unable to obtain?
3 MR. HILL: Objection, Your Honor. Mr. Rosen
4 has already testified he never knew about the check until
5 after March 28th and 29th.
6 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I think I need to ask him
7 that question.

9 MR. DANDAR: I need to know how his client
10 obtained the check that Mr. Minton himself
11 could not obtain.
12 THE WITNESS: I will be happy to answer
13 the question, Your Honor; if you will let me.
14 THE COURT: I don't know why.
15 MR. ROSEN: I don't know why either, but
16 consider this part of my closing argument.

17 Mr. Dandar, you've made a statement that
18 you've made many times before that -- you just
19 won't listen.
20 You keep saying our client obtained the
21 bank checks, the Swiss bank checks, when
22 Mr. Minton couldn't.
23 Now, you may choose to belief that. I'm
24 telling you, it's the exact opposite. The way
25 we got the Swiss bank checks was after


1 Mr. Minton first disclosed them, long after
2 March 29th, we asked Mr. Minton -- or the
3 client did -- I didn't personally -- we need
4 copies of them.
5 And since they're bank checks, you don't
6 have them because it's not like your personal
7 check where the bank returns to you your
8 cancelled check with your monthly statement.
9 And we tried to get them simultaneously by
10 serving a subpoena on UBS, the Swiss bank.
11 Because one way or the other, we wanted
12 those checks, and we wanted the fronts of them
13 and the backs of them.
14 And Mr. Minton is the one who obtained the
15 checks because he bought the checks. They were
16 his Swiss bank account. And he's the one that
17 went to the bank and said, "They're my checks,
18 give me copies."
19 He supplied them to us, at which point we
20 said -- and we produced them at the hearing on
21 April 9th.
22 And I remember that I said to the client,
23 I think he only produced the fronts. Tell him
24 to go back and get the other photostats. I
25 want the backs. I want to see Ken Dandar's

1 name on them, on the endorsement.
2 But we had served a subpoena -- I think
3 Wally did -- on the bank, the UBS bank, to get
4 them.We didn't have to. Mr. Minton got them.
5 And if you're insinuating -- if you want
6 to repeat your insinuation that somehow my
7 clients or any attorneys associated with them
8 burglarized the offices of UBS in Geneva to
9 obtain these checks with your signatures on
10 them, go ahead and make it, sir.
12 Q. What financial institution of Mr. Minton's
13 supplied the money for the UBS checks?
14 MR. HILL: Objection, Your Honor. This is
15 far afield, and this is irrelevant.
16 MR. DANDAR: Judge, Mr. Minton pled the
17 Fifth Amendment to these questions before Judge
18 Schaeffer. Mr. Rosen seems to know the answer
19 to that question, and I would like to know if
20 he does.
21 THE COURT: Well, I'm sorry. I just don't
22 think it's relevant. I just don't care.
23 MR. DANDAR: Paragraph 5 of their Statement of
24 Issues delivered this week accuses me of suborning perjury.
25 MR. HILL: Objection, Your Honor. This is

1 colloquy, not questions. He has him on examination.
2 THE COURT: He's talking to me. What is it you
3 want?
4 MR. DANDAR: They accused me of suborning
5 perjury in May 2000 in his deposition saying
6 this is his money.
7 The only person that says it's his money
8 is Mr. Minton, but he pled the Fifth Amendment
9 to provide proof of that.
10 Mr. Rosen just said he knows it came from
11 a Swiss bank of Mr. Minton's. That's the first
12 time I've heard that. And he must know
13 something that Judge Schaeffer doesn't know and
14 Mr. Minton refuses to answer. So I would like
15 to ask him about that. That's part of their
16 allegations.
17 THE COURT: Well, we've known they've been
18 Swiss bank account checks for months.
19 MR. DANDAR: No, we know that the UBS
20 check is from a bank in Switzerland, but we
21 don't know whose money that is.
22 We don't know from what institution and
23 what account number that money came from and
24 was sent to the UBS check -- or UBS bank.
25 Mr. Rosen says he knows it's the Swiss

1 bank of Mr. Minton's. I don't know that. And
2 neither does Judge Schaeffer, since he pled the
3 Fifth Amendment. So I would like to know if
4 Mr. Rosen knows something.
5 MR. HILL: Can I be heard?
7 MR. HILL: Your Honor, we're in an unusual
8 proceeding where Counsel in a case is calling
9 opposing Counsel in a case.
10 And I took notes. And, Your Honor, I took
11 your comment in red so I wouldn't miss it.
12 In the beginning, you said that you were
13 going to allow Mr. Dandar to call Mr. Rosen to
14 the witness stand and you were going to limit
15 his examination to what happened on March 28th
16 and March 29th.
17 And you said, "If Mr. Rosen has nothing
18 significant to add that is different from the
19 testimony already provided, then there will be
20 sanctions." .
21 That's where we are. And Mr. Dandar feels
22 it coming down his back. And we are wasting
23 time.
24 THE COURT: Well, I agree.
25 And, you know, I asked you why you wanted


1 him up here, you told me, and now you're
2 getting into, you know, apparently some sort of
3 third-hand impeachment of a witness in some
4 other case. You know, that's not what we're
5 here about.
6 MR. DANDAR: It's not a third-hand
7 witness. It's my accuser.
8 THE COURT: He's a witness in this case.
9 But it's not about, you know, what's going on
10 in this case. It's about what's going on,
11 apparently, in some other case.
12 MR. DANDAR: It's the same issue.
13 THE COURT: Not to me it isn't. All
14 right?
15 MR. DANDAR: I have no other questions.
16 THE COURT: Good.
17 MR. HILL: No further questions, Your
18 Honor. Thank you for your indulgence.
19 THE COURT: All right. Let's take five
20 minutes.
21 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, might. we be
22 informed, just for scheduling purposes, of what
23 other witnesses Mr. Dandar has today and
24 tomorrow so we can prepare for them?
25 THE COURT: Who is next?

1 MR. DANDAR: If we get to go next, we're
2 calling Jesse Prince.
3 THE COURT: What do you mean if you get to
4 go next?
5 MR. DANDAR: You said they're going to be
6 able to reopen their case.
7 THE COURT: All they want to do is have
8 these exhibits put in. Some of them weren't
9 put in, even though they were introduced. And
10 these others, what are these?
11 MR. ROSEN: Volume II consists of two
12 kinds of exhibits, ones that we referred to and
13 even marked last time that I forgot to offer,
14 and the other ones are things that occurred
15 after April 30th when we rested.
16 For example, you will look at an
17 accounting of these funds in question that
18 Mr. Dandar filed down the hall with Judge Greer
19 in a probate court on the 31st of July.
20 So they're either what it seems that I
21 neglected to offer or they're items post April
22 30th.
23 THE COURT: Let me ask you this: Has
24 Mr. Dandar had an opportunity to review those?
25 MR. DANDAR: No.

1 MR. ROSEN: Yeah. We gave them to him
2 this morning before court started.
3 MR. DANDAR: I haven't had an opportunity
4 to review them, but let me do that tonight.
5 THE COURT: Okay. Do you have a copy of
6 them?
7 MR. DANDAR: Unfortunately, mine aren't
8 tabbed, so I have to go through them
9 page-by-page.
10 THE COURT: Do you want a tabbed copy?
11 MR. ROSEN: His have exhibit labels on
12 them. There's an exhibit label on each one.
13 MR. DANDAR: I will go through it tonight.
14 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, our intention is
15 rather simple. And that is, if Mr. Dandar
16 wants to make a relevance objection to this or
17 anything, that's fine.
18 I'm only concerned if he challenges the
19 authenticity. For example, there's a document
20 that bears his signature.
21 THE COURT: Well, let's not worry about it
22 until he's seen them. We'll talk about it.
23 MR. ROSEN: Okay. And if that's the case,
24 I will just have to deal with it on my case in
25 rebuttal.


1 THE COURT: Okay.
2 MR. DANDAR: Are we going to be able to
3 file excerpts of testimony that occurred before
4 Judge Schaeffer?
5 THE COURT: For what purpose?
6 MR. DANDAR: Well, like Ms. Yingling, she
7 testified about these meetings in New York. I
8 have no control to get her.
9 They voluntarily produced her in Judge
10 Schaeffer, so I would like to file all of her
11 testimony, along with her notes, concerning
12 that meeting in New York City.
13 There's also a person by the name of Brian
14 Haney who I have no subpoena power over that I
15 was able to catch him and subpoena him when he
16 was in Clearwater for Judge Schaeffer's
17 hearing.
18 And he has an agreement or something
19 prevents him from just flying down here on his
20 own, when he settled the case-involving a
21 public Scientologist, so I can't ask him to
22 come here.
23 And John Merritt is another one up in
24 Jacksonville; I have no subpoena power over
25 him.

1 Judge Schaeffer told me to call him and
2 have him come for her hearing. He obliged.
3 I've called him four or five times to come
4 down here for this hearing; I didn't even get a
5 return phone call. But he did testify before
6 Judge Schaeffer. It's on issues that are
7 relevant to this case.
8 THE COURT: Can't you try and subpeona
9 them?
10 MR. DANDAR: They're beyond a hundred
11 miles of the Court. The Court only has a
12 hundred-mile jurisdiction. It's beyond a
13 hundred miles of the Court.
14 But his testimony refutes four of the
15 paragraphs of their Statement of Issues that
16 was delivered this week.
17 MR. ROSEN: I'm sorry. I have to say
18 this, there's history that Mr. Dandar neglected
19 to tell you.
20 He first asked us in a letter about a week
21 ago or told us he wanted to submit the entirety
22 of the record before Judge Schaeffer to you;
23 that is, 70 volumes of testimony over 35 days
24 with I don't know how many exhibits. And he
25 asked if we would consent.


1 Mr. Pope wrote back to him and said, give
2 us -- if what you're doing is offering
3 testimony from the hearing and depositions,
4 give us the page and line of what you're
5 offering from this testimony, and we will
6 respond, because we may have, for example,
7 objections as to relevance.
8 Remember, the case before Judge Schaeffer
9 involves much more than just this
10 disqualification. She was trying, essentially,
11 a summary judgment on a wrongful death count.
12 So Mr. Pope wrote to Mr. Dandar, Monday, I
13 think it was, faxed him a letter, and said, you
14 want to introduce anything from the Schaeffer
15 hearing, give us the citations, just as you
16 would in a deposition, you know, page and line,
17 and we will tell you if we object to it or, as
18 you know, for fairness designations. In other
19 words, he's quoting one line, and the next line
20 the witness says, no, I change my mind.
21 So give us that, and we'll cooperate with
22 you.
23 So the last letter on the subject,
24 Mr. Pope's letter to Mr. Dandar, asked him to
25 do that. The response of Mr. Dandar is to

1 ignore it.
2 The last letter we got -- I think it was
3 Tuesday -- from Mr. Dandar says, "I want to
4 offer all of Yingling's testimony."
5 We said, "No, you can't do that. You've
6 got to give us page and line of what you're
7 offering. You're not offering colloquy. There
8 are pages of colloquy with Judge Schaeffer-with
9 the attorneys. You're not offering that.
10 "If you have testimony you want to offer,
11 give us page and line and we will respond."
12 And Mr. Dandar has refused to do that.
13 And that, as we understand it, and as
14 Mr. Pope advises me, because I rely on him, is
15 the right way to offer it.
16 MR. DANDAR: Judge Schaeffer asked the
17 witnesses on the stand a lot of questions. I'm
18 offering all of her testimony, including the
19 questions asked by Judge Schaeffer.
20 THE COURT: There must be some of her
21 testimony that you think is significant.
22 Are you telling me that there is not one
23 question that she's asked or one response that
24 is so insignificant that I don't have to read
25 it?


1 MR. DANDAR: No, I'm not saying that.
2 THE COURT: Well, then what's wrong with
3 saying, look, this is the part of her testimony
4 I want you to be aware of?
5 And if they claim that it's not in
6 context, I will read the context and see if it
7 is, you know.
8 But why should I have to read the entire
9 testimony if there's just a few comments or
10 answers or responses that you think are
11 significant?
12 MR. DANDAR: No. I would say 90 percent
13 of her testimony is significant. I would say
14 maybe even more than that, unfortunately.
15 And the other thing is, do you want to
16 read it or do you want us to present it and
17 read it in court?
18 THE COURT: I don't want you to read it.
19 I can read it.
20 MR. DANDAR: All right. I'm just asking
21 for your preference.
22 THE COURT: Well, if it's testimony that
23 was presented in another proceeding, then it's
24 admissible as long as it's relevant.
25 MR. DANDAR: In addition to saying,


1 however, that we intend to offer all of John
2 Merrett's and Monique Yingling's testimony, we
3 also said we would be reading Robert Minton and
4 Stacy Brooks' testimony as outlined in my
5 written argument to Judge Schaeffer, so they
6 have the specific page and line numbers
7 contained in my closing argument.
8 MR. ROSEN: There's not specific pages and
9 lines. It's hundreds of pages. How many days
10 was Mr. Minton on the stand?
11 MR. DANDAR: No. In my closing argument,
12 I put in the specific page numbers and line
13 numbers of testimony. I quote it, in fact.
14 THE COURT: Okay. The only part of Minton
15 that he's putting in is the part that he quoted
16 in his closing argument in front of Schaeffer.
17 Is that what you're telling me?
18 MR. DANDAR: Correct.
19 MR. ROSEN: I don't know what he's talking
20 about. I understand there wasn't any closing
21 arguments.
22 THE COURT: Was there a written argument?
23 MR. DANDAR: Yes.
24 THE COURT: So there's a written closing
25 argument that cites the pages of Mr. Minton's,


1 what, testimony in the record?
2 MR. DANDAR: Yes, and Ms. Brooks.
3 Mr. Shaw, the corporate representative, has all
4 of the closing documents -­
5 MR. ROSEN: I don't object if one of the
6 attorneys in that case has it. Are you talking
7 about a brief?
8 MR. DANDAR: I'm talking about a closing
9 argument, 157 pages.
10 MR. ROSEN: A written one?
11 MR. DANDAR: Yes.
12 MR. ROSEN: So if you're telling me
13 now -- because we've been asking for a
14 week -- that all you want is the particular
15 sections that you put in quotation marks from
16 Minton and Brooks, now we'll go back and, Your
17 Honor, we will tell Mr. Dandar what objections,
18 if any, we have to any of it.
19 MR. DANDAR: And, Judge, it's in my faxed
20 letter to Mr. Pope in response to his letter;
21 my letter to him was faxed on August 27th
22 saying exactly what I just told you.
23 THE COURT: All right. What about
24 Yingling's testimony; do you have any
25 objections to that?
1 MR. ROSEN: Yeah. I want to see it. I
2 mean, there were questions of her that were, as
3 I understand it -- I wasn't there -- that have
4 nothing to do with the issues before Your
5 Honor.
6 But more importantly, what it's being
7 offered for.
8 Is counsel Now going to make a
9 representation that anything that you heard
10 from the witness stand from the last witness is
11 inconsistent with what Ms. Yingling said?
12 THE COURT: I don't know.
13 MR. DANDAR: I am, I am.
14 THE COURT: Apparently he is.
15 MR. ROSEN: Well, why don't you specify
16 the sections, page and line, of Yingling's
17 testimony that you say is inconsistent.
18 THE COURT: If that's what it's being
19 offered for, why don't you point out what the
20 inconsistencies are.
21 MR. DANDAR: Okay. I will work on that
22 tonight.
23 THE COURT: Are you going to call your
24 witness now?
25 MR. DANDAR: Yes, I am, Jesse Prince. Is

1 he here? He's outside.
2 THE COURT: Swear to tell the truth, whole
3 truth, nothing but the truth, so help you God?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.
5 JESSE PRINCE, called as a witness, having been
6 duly sworn, testified as follows:


9 Q. Make sure you speak up. All right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. Please state your full name.
12 A. Jesse Prince.
13 Q. And, Mr. Prince, are you resident of Clearwater?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And how long have you lived in Clearwater?
16 A. Since February of 2000.
17 Q. Do you know a person by the name of Robert Minton?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. How long have you known Mr. Minton?
20 A. Since the summer of '98.
21 Q. And, Mr. Prince, were you formerly a member of the
22 Church of Scientology?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What was the highest office that you held?
25 A. Corporate office, secretary or vice president of


1 the Religious Technology Center. Treasurer, actually. I
2 think it was treasurer.
3 Q. Pardon me?
4 A. Treasurer.
5 Q. Did you have a title as -- did you have any other
6 title in Religious Technology Center?
7 A. Yes, I had several titles. My last title in
8 Religious Technology Center was Deputy Inspector General,
9 external.
10 Q. And in that position, generally speaking, what
11 were your duties?
12 A. I was responsible to ensure that the trademarks of
13 Scientology were properly licensed to the various church
14 organizations and to monitor and supervise the correct
15 usage of those trademarks from a Scientology perspective.
16 Q. Any of your duties, did they also include the
17 intelligence or investigation of perceived enemies of
18 Scientology?
19 A. Yes, they did.
20 Q. And what was your involvement in that?
21 A. To carry out Scientology's prime directive towards
22 persons that it perceives to be enemies or -- which is
23 basically to destroy them utterly if possible.
24 MR. ROSEN: I'm sorry, Your Honor. Could I
25 have that read back?

1 THE COURT: Do you want him to repeat it?
2 MR. ROSEN: Could he, please?
3 THE COURT: Do you want to repeat it? I
4 didn't quite get it either.
5 THE WITNESS: I think the question was
6 what was my responsibility in relationship to
7 persons that the Church of Scientology
8 perceives as enemies.
9 And my answer to that question was: My
10 ultimate responsibility, according to
11 Scientology's prime directive, is to destroy
12 them utterly.
13 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, could we have a
14 time reference as to what this witness -- I
15 have no idea what he's talking about.
16 THE COURT: Give us some time frame to
17 work with here.
19 Q. What years were you at Religious Technology
20 Center?
21 A. The fall of 1982 until January of 1987.
22 Q. And how many years were you a member of the Church
23 of Scientology?
24 A. Sixteen years.
25 Q. What was the last year of your membership as a

1 member of the Church of Scientology?
2 A. 1992.
3 Q. How is it that you came to know Mr. Minton?
4 A. Through Mrs. Brooks -- Ms. Brooks.
5 Q. And how did you know Ms. Brooks?
6 A. I met her while working in Scientology.
7 Q. What was she in Scientology?
8 A. I guess she did many different things in
9 Scientology, but she was a staff member, a Sea Org member.
10 She also worked at the Author Services which .is L. Ron
11 Hubbard's personal office for his affairs concerning his
12 writings.
13 Q. How did you get reacquainted with Ms. Brooks after
14 you left the Church of Scientology in 1992?
15 A. Through the internet.
16 Q. And how is it that you came to be acquainted with
17 Mr. Minton?
18 A. Mrs. Brooks introduced me to him. Ms. Brooks; I'm
19 sorry.
20 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, again, may I ask
21 for a proffer from Mr. Dandar as to what this
22 witness is possibly going to testify to that
23 has any relevance to the issues before the
24 Court?
25 It's nice that he sits here and takes pot

1 shots at his former religion, which he left in
2 '87. He was off post in '87.
3 MR. DANDAR: Is Mr. Rosen testifying now?
4 MR. ROSEN: We've defined the issues in
5 terms of the money and the perjury. Was
6 Mr. Prince a witness to any of those?
7 THE COURT: I don't know.
8 MR. ROSEN: Could we inquire?
9 THE COURT: I just thought this was
10 background information.
11 MR. DANDAR: It is, it is.
12 THE COURT: Go ahead.
14 Q. When you previously said that -- in your job with
15 the Religious Technology Center, the intelligence office,
16 how is it that the Church of Scientology would go about
17 destroying its enemies utterly?
18 MR. ROSEN: Objection, testimony going
19 back -- the man testified he left in '87.
20 THE WITNESS: I think I testified I left
21 in '92.
22 THE COURT: Sustained.
23 MR. DANDAR: Judge, we're going to show
24 documents from the Church of Scientology -­
25 THE COURT: I hope that they're

1 specifically related to Mr. Minton and to this
2 case.
3 MR. DANDAR: They're specifically related
4 to a pattern, a routine practice.
5 THE COURT: I'm not going to listen to
6 routine patterns and practices, okay?
7 We're not going to use a broad brush to
8 paint Mr. Minton or the church in this case.
9 If you've got some specific evidence
10 regarding activities that involve Mr. Minton in
11 this case that relate to your conduct which is
12 alleged to have occurred in this case, I want
13 to hear it.
14 I don't want to hear a general rant about
15 the problems with Scientology as you or any of
16 your witnesses perceive them.
17 I want to hear about the issues in this
18 case, which is whether or not you suborned
19 perjury and the other issues that were listed
20 that we're here about. .
21 We're not here to pass on Scientology as a
22 religion or as an organization or anything
23 else.
24 We're here to find out what you did. And
25 if this man knows anything about that, I want

1 to hear it.
2 MR. DANDAR: What I intend to do -- and if
3 you don't want me to do it, I can do it in a
4 proffer maybe later or during a break -- is to
5 proffer testimony from this person who has
6 personal experience in how they go about
7 destroying their enemies, including breaking
8 the law to do so.
9 And it's based upon not only his
10 experience, but their written policy which is
11 still in effect today.
12 THE COURT: I just want to hear about it
13 as regards Mr. Minton in this case.
14 MR. DANDAR: Okay.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 MR. DANDAR: All right.
18 Q. So, Mr. Prince, did there come a point in time
19 when Mr. Minton introduced you to me?
20 A. As I recall it, I met you through Ms. Brooks.
21 Q. Okay. What were the circumstances?
22 A. The circumstances were, as I recall them, Judge
23 Moody -- I think is who it was -- permitted the pre-clear
24 folders of the late Lisa McPherson to be viewed, and you
25 needed someone with experience in the practices of

1 Scientology to review those documents and explain them to
2 you.
3 Q. And after you reviewed those PC folders of Lisa
4 McPherson, did I then retain you as an expert consultant on
5 Scientology?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. ROSEN: This is leading, Your Honor.
8 MR. DANDAR: Just background.
9 MR: ROSEN: Let me cut you short. Is this
10 witness being offered as an expert?
11 THE COURT: No, I don't think so, no.
13 Q. Did I retain your services?
14 A. Yes, you did.
15 Q. And did you start -- do you remember when you
16 started working full time for me?
17 A. I believe it was the summer of 1999.
18 Q. All right. And in June of 1999 until -- how long
19 did you work for me full time?
20 A. I think maybe until the spring of 2000.
21 Q. Okay. Now, in addition to working for me full
22 time, did you have any type of social relationship with
23 Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. Can you describe that for the Court?


1 A. We were close friends.
2 Q. Well, what does that mean? What would you do
3 together?
4 A. Associate, freely associate, talk, travel, work
5 together.
6 Q. Did you travel with Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks to
7 Europe?
8 A. I've traveled with Mr. Minton in Europe. I have
9 never traveled to Europe with Ms. Brooks.
10 Q. Okay. Now, did there come a point in time when
11 Mr. Minton talked to you about giving me a check from a
12 Swiss bank?
13 A. Mr. Minton has never discussed with me giving you
14 a check from a Swiss bank. We've discussed checks, but the
15 source of those checks was never anything known to me.
16 Q. What happened after the spring, May of 2000, after
17 you finished working with me full time? Where did you go?
18 A. I worked at the Lisa McPherson Trust.
19 Q. Okay. And what was your position there?
20 A. A vice president.
21 Q. What did you do at the Lisa McPherson Trust?
22 A. Help persons who had been deceived or abused by
23 Scientology.
24 Q. Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Minton
25 about him causing a check to be given to me for $500,000?


1 A. Yes.
2 MR. ROSEN: Objection. Excuse me. Your
3 Honor, not only is this hearsay, this was
4 not -- this witness was -- excuse
5 me -- Mr. Minton was not confronted with this
6 in the hearing before you, and Mr. Dandar can't
7 say he just found out about it. This man is
8 his own consultant.
9 We're back to what I described as the Rule
10 of Queen's Bench. I mean, Mr. Dandar didn't
11 ask this question, anything about this, at the
12 time that Mr. Minton was here and on the stand.
13 MR. DANDAR: Judge, what I'm about
14 to -- well, they're making an allegation
15 against me on this one particular check.
16 The other check, of course, happened in
17 March of 2002, and it didn't involve any court
18 proceeding or deposition or anything.
19 But the one in May 2000,they're making an
20 allegation about that.
21 And what Mr. Minton told Mr. Prinoe in E
22 front of another witness, Ms. Brooks,is j
23 relevant to Mr. Minton's testimony before you.
24 THE COURT: Did you ask Mr.Minton about
25 that?
1 MR. DANDAR: I think I did. And if you
2 give me time, I will try to go ahead and find
3 that, but I believe -- if you will just give me
4 a minute here.
5 THE COURT: I just want to know if this is
6 impeachment or if you're just offering it as an
7 admission by Mr. Minton.
8 MR. DANDAR: It's actually both. It's, of
9 course, not impeachment of Mr. Prince. It's
10 the impeachment of Mr. Minton.
11 THE COURT: I didn't say it's the
12 impeachment of Mr. Prince. It's your witness.
13 You're not impeaching your own witness.
14 MR. DANDAR: No, I'm not.
15 THE COURT: If it's an admission on the
16 part of Mr. Minton, I've already ruled that
17 it's an exception, but I would appreciate it if
18 you would be a little more specific rather than
19 just the general question, "Did Minton ever
20 tell you about a check?"
21 Maybe you could be a little more specific,
22 narrow it down to a year and maybe a time.
23 MR. DANDAR: Okay. I will do that. All
24 right.
1 Q. Mr. Prince, did Mr. Minton ever have a
2 conversation with you about giving me a check during the
3 time frame of April and May of 2000, which was just a month
4 or two before the original trial date in the wrongful death
5 case?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And where did this conversation take place?
8 A. On the rooftop of a garage across the street from
9 the Lisa McPherson Trust.
10 Q. And where was the Lisa McPherson Trust located?
11 A. Downtown on Cleveland Street -- not Cleveland, but
12 Ft. Harrison was the front door, Waterson was the back
13 door, and it was right across the street from a parking
14 structure downtown.
15 Q. And what did Mr. Minton tell you on the rooftop of
16 this parking garage?
17 A. He explained to myself and Ms. Brooks that you
18 were going to receive the check, you did not know where it
19 came from, and he didn't tell us where it came from, but he,
20 said this check -- this check was being given to you -- I
21 believe he said -- you know, because he said this to me as
22 well about people in Europe that were contributing to this
23 case financially.
24 He said that this check was to take you to
25 trial and through trial.
1 Q. Why were you talking with him on the top of a
2 parking garage?
3 A. Because it was Mr. Minton's concern that -­
4 MR. ROSEN: Objection. Mr., Minton's
5 concern? This witness is now a mindreader?
6 THE COURT: Why is it relevant?
7 MR. DANDAR: It's relevant to Mr. Minton's
8 state of mind, which continues on until -­
9 THE COURT: Mr. Minton's state of mind at
10 the time he made those statements is not
11 relevant. What's important is the statements,
12 okay?
13 MR. DANDAR: It will be subsequently
14 relevant to the defense that I'm offering to
15 the Court of these false accusations.
17 Q. Why were you meeting on the top of the garage?
18 A. Mr. Minton had a concern that -­
19 MR. ROSEN: Objection, same statement.
20 Did Your Honor rule on that? I'm sorry. I
21 didn't hear.
22 THE COURT: Well, I guess I didn't. You
23 know, I guess you're going to have to establish
24 how he knows why it was they were meeting,
25 unless he just pulled it out of the air.

1 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, do I understand
2 this is a meeting two years ago in April of
3 2000?
4 THE COURT: I think it was-- is it May
5 2000? April or May?
7 Q. Mr. Prince, can you tell us more specifically when
8 it was?
9 A. It was April or May of 2000, as best as I can
10 recall.
11 Q. And your meeting on the top of the garage, do you
12 know why Mr. Minton chose to meet on the top of the garage
13 rather than inside the office of the Lisa McPherson Trust?
14 MR. ROSEN: Objection.
15 THE COURT: Sustained.
17 Q. Did Mr. Minton tell you why he wanted to meet on
18 the garage?
19 A. Yes, he did.
20 MR. ROSEN: Hearsay. This is not an
21 admission of -­
22 THE COURT: Overruled.
23 THE WITNESS: He told me that he had a
24 concern that Scientology had electronically
25 bugged the Lisa McPherson Trust, and so privacy

1 was an issue.
3 Q. Now, did he tell you whose money it was that I was
4 going to get from Europe?
5 A. As far as I recall about that, this was money from
6 people from Europe that were contributing -- that were
7 willing or able to contribute financially to the wrongful
8 death case.
9 Q. Did Mr. Minton ever express to you that it was his
10 money?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Now, subsequent to that, you continued to work at
13 the Lisa McPherson Trust?
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. And you stayed with the Lisa McPherson Trust until
16 when?
17 A. Until it closed. I'm sorry, until it closed this
18 year, earlier this year -- I take that
19 back -- September/Octoberish of last year.
20 Q. Of last year?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Okay. And did there ever come a point in time
23 during your association with Mr. Minton and especially in
24 the year of 2000/2001 where he explained to you or told you
25 about things that were happening to him or his wife or

1 daughters that he blamed the Church of Scientology for?
2 MR. ROSEN: Objection. That's precisely
3 what Your Honor ruled is not going to be
4 allowed in this. It's a general tirade against
5 the church.
6 MR. DANDAR: Judge, it goes to my defense
7 of what the Church of Scientology was doing to
8 Mr. Minton.
9 THE COURT:- No, no. It goes to the
10 general state of mind or the general attitude
11 that Minton had about the Church of
12 Scientology.
13 MR. DANDAR: That's correct.
14 THE COURT: Okay. That's not relevant
15 here. I want to know about what he knows
16 regarding the allegations regarding this money.
17 Give me some testimony about that. I want to
18 know about this stuff about subornation of
19 perjury, very important.
20 MR. DANDAR: I'm going to go right there
21 right now, but I hope you will let me go back
22 to this other area of state of mind of
23 Mr. Minton because that goes to my defense of
24 what happened to him in this year.
25 If you don't understand the history behind
1 it, it's just going to come out of the blue and.
2 it may not make any sense, but I'm going to go
3 right now to what happened this year.
4 THE COURT: You mean to tell me you're
5 going to make some sense out of this thing?
6 MR. DANDAR: I hope so.
7 THE COURT: I'll be waiting for that.
9 Q. So, Mr. Prince, you continued to work until when
10 this year for the Church of Scientology -- I mean the Lisa
11 McPherson Trust?
12 MR. ROSEN: Bless you.
13 THE WITNESS: I haven't worked for the
14 Lisa McPherson Trust, per se, this year.
15 Last year -- September/October -- was the
16 last time I actually worked in the Lisa
17 McPherson Trust.
19 Q. And who was paying you to work for the Lisa
20 McPherson Trust?
21 A. It came out -- I was paid through the Lisa
22 McPherson corporate account.
23 Q. And where did that money come from?
24 A. Primarily from Mr. Minton and donations from
25 people that we were able to help and others that were
1 concerned who donated money.
2 Q. Are you aware of any money going to the Lisa
3 McPherson Trust from unidentified people in Europe?
4 MR. ROSEN: Objection, Your Honor. What
5 does this have to do with anything?
6 MR. DANDAR: It's my last question on
7 this.
8 THE COURT: Go ahead and answer it.
9 THE WITNESS: I have only since become
10 aware since these proceedings starting that
11 that did happen.
13 Q. But while you were at the Lisa McPherson Trust,
14 you didn't know about that?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. Okay. Now, after the Lisa McPherson Trust
17 closed -- I think you said October of 2001 -- did you
18 continue to be paid by Ms. Brooks or Mr. Minton or someone
19 else?
20 A. Yes, I did continue to be paid by Mrs. Brooks.
21 Q. For what purpose?
22 A. Although the Lisa McPherson Trust itself was not
23 operating, there were certain things that needed to be
24 ended, completed, such as the sale of the building,
25 completing any persons that we had been helping or
1 assisting, solely that capacity.
2 Q. Did there come a point in time in the year 2002
3 when Mr. Minton asked you to come to my office?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. All right. Tell the Court what he told you, the
6 reason why.
7 THE COURT: You know, try to get these things
8 out a little bit more precise than just the
9 year.
10 MR. DANDAR: In February of 2002.
11 THE COURT: Maybe you can ask him, you know,
12 unless you would just like to testify and we
13 can just see if that's what he remembers also.
14 MR. DANDAR: No.
16 Q. Do you recall specifically the time frame when
17 Mr. Minton asked you to come see me this year?
18 A. Yes, it was in February of 2002. He asked me to
19 come to your office and have a talk with you about the
20 further financing of the Lisa McPherson wrongful death
21 case.
22 He specifically asked me to ask you or to
23 inform you that he knew that you needed more money, that he
24 was in contact with some people from Europe, and it was
25 going to take time, but in the meantime he asked that you

1 address or talk to certain individuals that he was
2 concerned about who were writing, from his perspective,
3 disparaging things about him on the internet, and he asked
4 me to ask you that if you had any ability to make that
5 stop, to please do so.
6 MR. DANDAR: Okay.
7 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, continuing
8 objection. Again, none of this was put to
9 Mr. Minton. This is classic, as I keep saying,
10 Queen's Bench.
11 THE COURT: Well, it would be if it was
12 being offered for impeachment, but it's not.
13 MR. ROSEN: I don't know what it's being
14 offered for if it's not impeachment of
15 Mr. Minton.
16 THE COURT: I'm sure it's all going to
17 become clear to us because Mr. Dandar has
18 already told me that it's all going to become
19 clear, so I'm going to wait for it to clear up.
20 All right?
22 Q. During January and February of 2002, did you ever
23 have any contact with Mr. Minton where you worried about
24 his mental health?
25 A. Yes, I did. He called me -- he was very concerned
1 about an incident that he explained to me was happening
2 with his wife and his children.
3 MR. ROSEN: Objection, Your Honor. Wife
4 and children? What does this have to do with
5 whether Mr. Dandar suborned perjury?
6 MR. DANDAR: It has to do with whether the
7 accusations against me are being motivated by
8 Mr. Minton to lie because he's being extorted.
9 THE COURT: So there's going to be
10 testimony about extortion?
11 MR. DANDAR: Within all of the
12 circumstances of the evidence that I present to
13 you, I believe strongly.
14 THE COURT: So I have to infer extortion
15 just from this and that and what else? I mean,
16 that's not what he's going to testify about?
17 MR. DANDAR: He's going to testify about
18 subsequent meetings with Mr. Minton after he
19 met with representatives of the Church of
20 Scientology.
21 THE COURT: Are those meetings with
22 Mr. Minton going to be relevant to what we're
23 about here?
24 MR. DANDAR: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Well, let's here about those.

2 Q. All right. Mr. Prince, did you meet with
3 Mr. -- first of all, did you attend -- no, start over.
4 Did you ever become aware - and when was the
5 first time -- of Mr. Minton meeting in private without his
6 attorney with the representatives of the Church of
7 Scientology here in Clearwater?
8 MR. ROSEN: Objection. There's no
9 evidence of that existing. I don't know what
10 he's talking about.
11 THE COURT: Well, maybe you ought to ask
12 him if he's aware of that at first.
14 Q. Are you aware of that, Mr. Prince?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. When is the first time you became aware of it?
17 A. The first time I became aware that Mr. Minton was
18 making -- having meetings with representatives of
19 Scientology was when he called me and told me about being
20 in contact with Mike Rinder.
21 Q. When was this?
22 A. This was in March of this year.
23 Q. Okay. And did he tell you why he was in contact
24 with Mike Rinder?
25 A. Yes, he did. He told me that he couldn't take the

1 pressure anymore.
2 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, I object to this.
3 What does this have to do with Mr. Dandar's
4 perjury or alleged perjury or subornation that
5 occurred years later?
6 THE COURT: Overruled. Let's get this
7 out.
9 Q. What did he tell you?
10 A. He told me that Scientology had threatened his
11 wife and children. He told me that he was deathly afraid
12 of coming into this court in front of this judge because he
13 had been assured he was going to jail.
14 He was also deathly afraid of appearing in
15 front of Judge Schaeffer's court for similar results of
16 possible incarceration.
17 He told me that he couldn't take it anymore,
18 Scientology had either threatened or possibly noticed his
19 wife for subpoena, discovery, and he was very despondent.
20 He said that he felt like killing himself, and he had to do
21 something to save his family.
22 Q. Well, why was he so worried or upset about his
23 wife being subpoenaed for deposition? Did he tell you why?
24 A. No, he didn't.
25 Q. Okay. Did there come a point in time when he told

1 you anything about the Church of Scientology obtaining any
2 information about him that he thought they would never
3 obtain?
4 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, what is this,
5 double hearsay now or triple hearsay?
6 THE COURT: Isn't there any way you can
7 ask a question that isn't leading?
9 Q. Well, I didn't suggest an answer to that. It's a
10 very broad question. I didn't suggest the answer to the
11 witness.
12 THE COURT: Did he have further discussions
13 with Mr. Minton after that?
15 Q. After Mr. Minton told you he was suicidal, did you
16 have any further discussions with Mr. Minton?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 He told me that he had contacted Mike Rinder
19 and they were arranging to fly to New York -- him and
20 Ms. Brooks, along with his attorney,-Steve Jonas -- to meet
21 with Scientology to see if they could stop the relentless
22 attack on Mr. Minton.
23 Q. Did Mr. Minton, in the years that you've known him
24 and in particular in 2000 and 2001 and 2002, did he ever
25 tell you that I suggested or requested that he lie under

1 oath?
2 A. No, he did not.
3 Q. Prior to March 28th, 2002, did you have any
4 conversation with Mr. Minton about Church of Scientology
5 finding or discovering information about him that he didn't
6 want them to know?
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. ROSEN: Same objection, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: Overruled.
11 Q. What is it?
12 A. Yes, Mr. Minton told me that somehow the Church of
13 Scientology had obtained a copy of a check, a $500,000
14 check, that he himself was unable to have or procure a copy,
15 of, and this check somehow proved perjury that he had
16 committed in court, and therefore he was concerned about
17 going to jail.
18 Q. When was this? When did you have this
19 conversation?
20 A. I would say approximately one week prior to March
21 28th of this year.
22 Q. Okay. After the 29th, Good Friday, of this year,
23 did you have any conversations with Mr. Minton?
24 A. Yes, I did. I had continuing conversations with
25 Mr. Minton. They informed me of when their flight time
1 was, when they were going to New York. They went to New
2 York, they met with Mr. Rosen. They met with Mr. Rinder.
3 Ms. Yingling was there. They informed me of what that
4 meeting concerned and what it was about,
5 Q. What did they tell you about the meeting?
6 A. They told me -- and I have written this up in an
7 affidavit, but they basically told me that Mr. Rosen and
8 Mr. Rinder expressly told them that if -- told Mr. Minton
9 and Ms. Brooks -- that if they ever expected to stop the
10 assault that they were currently under by Scientology to
11 stop, that they had to make the Lisa McPherson case go away
12 and to make the Lawrence Wollersheim case in California go
13 away.
14 Q. And did Mr. Minton express to you anymore detail
15 of how they wanted him to make the Lisa McPherson case go
16 away?
17 A. We did have further discussions about that, and he
18 told me that he expressed to Mr. Rosen and Mr. Rinder that
19 they had attempted earlier to get Mrs. Liebreich to drop
20 the case or get the case dismissed, and she had refused to
21 do that.
22 And he tried to explain to Mr. Rosen and
23 Mr. Rinder that because he was neither party, plaintiff nor
24 Defendant in the case, that he had no power nor authority
25 over those cases whatsoever, and they were asking him to do
1 something that he had no authority to do.
2 Q. Did Mr. Minton ever express to you any other plans
3 or any other demands that the Church of Scientology made on
4 him concerning how he could affect the Lisa McPherson case?
5 A. Yes. In further discussions after the New York
6 meeting, apparently Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks called me on
7 the phone and told me that Mr. Rosen and Mr. Rinder assured
8 them that they were going to jail, that too bad that they
9 couldn't get the cases dismissed.
10 Mr. Minton told me that Mr. Rosen and
11 Mr. Rinder mentioned to him -- well, no, Mr. Rinder
12 specifically mentioned to him -- that he was screwing
13 Mr. Minton, and he knew he was screwing him and he was
14 doing it to his face -- unlike Mr. Dandar who he said was
15 screwing Mr. Minton behind his back and his other friends
16 and Mr. Minton's other associates who were all screwing
17 Mr. Minton -- but Mr. Rinder made it clear that he wanted
18 Mr. Minton to know that he is screwing him and he's doing
19 it to his face.
20 Q. When was this conversation?
21 A. To the best of my recollection, that conversation
22 happened on the 29th of March of this year.
23 Q. All right.
24 A. At which point they then left New York.
25 Ms. Brooks was hysterical, at least she was when she was
1 talking to me on the phone, at the tone and tenor of the
2 meeting with Mr. Rosen screaming at the top of his lungs,
3 very intimidating to her, and they immediately left New
4 York that afternoon and were back in New Hampshire that
5 night.
6 Q. Who was screaming at the top of their lungs?
7 A. Mr. Rosen.
8 Q. At who?
9 A. Mr. Minton.
10 Q. This was on March 29th?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. So Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks went back
13 to New Hampshire?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. What else did they tell you?
16 A. Well, the next day after they arrived in New
17 Hampshire, Ms. Brooks called me and said, "Well, maybe
18 things aren't as bad as I thought they were," because
19 Mr. Rinder had called and said, "Well, I know that you
20 aren't able to get these two cases that we asked you to get
21 dismissed, but there are things that we can do, and this is
22 what we need to discuss."
23 And they informed me at that point that they
24 were bringing these meetings, instead of New York, to
25 Clearwater, and they were coming to Clearwater.
1 And I believe this was close to the date of
2 when there was a hearing in front of this court with this
3 judge. And they proceeded to -- they all came here to
4 Clearwater.
5 Q. Did you accompany Mr. Minton or Ms. Brooks to any
6 meetings with the Church of Scientology when they came down
7 to Clearwater in the beginning of April 2002?
8 A. No, I did not.
9 Q. When did you first learn that Mr. Minton had met
10 with a representative of the Church of Scientology in
11 Clearwater in April of 2002?
12 A. Again, this is just approximate. I think it was
13 maybe one week or maybe a little bit more, ten days, before
14 the hearing in front of this Court in front of this Judge
15 that they came down here to continue the negotiations with
16 Scientology for disengagement.
17 Q. Now, the hearing before Judge Baird, the first
18 hearing in April, was April the 9th of 2002. Were you at
19 that hearing?
20 A. Yes, I was.
21 Q. All right. Before that hearing -- that was on a
22 Tuesday. The 8th is a Monday. Sunday is the 7th.
23 Saturday is the 6th. Did you meet or see Mr. Minton during
24 that weekend?
25 A. Yes, I met with him several times. They were

1 staying at the Bay Harbor Hotel In Tampa, and they
2 were -- Mr. Minton expressed to me that he was meeting with
3 Scientology attorneys and principals, he and Ms. Brooks,
4 without their own attorneys being present. And he told me
5 that, basically, it was either going to be you die or he
6 dies.
7 Q. Who is "you"?
8 A. You, Mr. Dandar, is going to die.
9 And at that point, he explained to me exactly
10 what Mr. Rinder wanted to have happen of what they could do
11 to make these two cases go away.
12 Also during that time before, the hearing in
13 front of this Court, Ms. Brooks had instructed attorney
14 Daniel Leipold to withdraw my testimony from the California
15 case.
16 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, is there no end to
17 this hearsay? Now the witness is -- there's no
18 admission here. Now the witness is testifying
19 about what Ms. Brooks had said to some attorney
20 in California.
21 MR. DANDAR: Judge, this goes to what was
22 happening to Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks
23 simultaneously with the meetings with
24 representatives of the Church of Scientology.
25 It goes to their motive for what they

1 subsequently did before you on April the 9th
2 and April the 19th and April the 30th.
3 THE COURT: Well, I don't think the
4 objection is one of relevance so much as it is
5 one of hearsay.
6 Ms. Brooks is not a party and this is not
7 being offered to impeach any testimony that
8 she's given. It's just pure hearsay. It's him
9 telling you what Ms. Brooks said.
10 And, in fact, sometimes it's double
11 hearsay; it's Ms. Brooks saying what some third
12 person said. It's just so far into hearsay
13 that it's just ridiculous.
14 MR. DANDAR: The third person, Michael
15 Rinder, is an executive of the Church of
16 Scientology. He is the person that met with
17 Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks here in Clearwater.
18 THE COURT: That doesn't help the other
19 hearsay. Just because three or four people
20 back you get to someone that's a party, it
21 doesn't cure the problem with the hearsay in
22 between. This is Ms. Brooks saying what
23 somebody else said.
24 MR. DANDAR: Mr. Rinder, he's the
25 representative executive -­

1 THE COURT: I know. Why isn't it
2 hearsay?
3 MR. DANDAR: Because it's an admission of
4 a party.
5 THE COURT: She's not here testifying
6 about what Mr. Rinder said. He's testifying
7 what she said, which is hearsay.
8 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, it's worse than
9 that. Mr. Rinder is not even a party.
10 THE COURT: I know, even if you accept
11 that Mr. Rinder is somehow a representative of
12 one of the parties.
13 MR. ROSEN: He's a representative of the
14 Church of Scientology International. He holds
no position at Flag.
16 THE COURT: I don't care about that. What
17 I care about is that this is hearsay. We can't
18 cross-examine Ms. Brooks about what he now
19 claims she said, okay. And that's hearsay.
20 She's not-a party.
21 MR. DANDAR: Well, LMT is a party. She is
22 the president and sole owner of the LMT. That
23 is a party.
24 THE COURT: No, no. We're just not going
25 there. You could have subpoenaed her in here.


1 MR. DANDAR: I can't subpoena her. She
2 lives in Atlanta, Georgia, although she's under
3 a cooperation agreement with the Plaintiff.
4 THE COURT: I guess you could have gone
5 and gotten her testimony. She would have given
6 testimony, I bet you.
7 MR. DANDAR: She has given it before Judge
8 Schaeffer, and I will file it with the Court on
9 very specific subject matter.
10 THE COURT: Well, then, what's the
11 problem? Why do we need to proffer it with
12 this guy?
13 MR. DANDAR: Because what she said in
14 front of Judge Schaeffer is totally opposite of
15 what Mr. Prince is now saying. It's
16 impeaching.
17 THE COURT: All the more reason why it's
18 hearsay.
20 Q. Now, Mr. Prince, this conversation that you had,
21 let's just stick with Mr. Minton, okay?
22 A. Okay.
23 Q. Was that before or after the first hearing that
24 you attended with Judge Baird on April 9th?
25 A. The incidence that I was speaking about occurred
before the hearing in front of Judge Baird.
Q. Did Mr. Minton tell you anything about the meetings with Mr. Rinder and Ms. Yingling in Clearwater?
A. Yes, he did. He told me that it was because they weren't able to get the case dismissed any other way, that the strategy was to discredit you as a lawyer, to basically take you out, you know, ruin you, destroy you, you know, and that's their policies.
Q. Did Mr. Minton tell you what that would accomplish by destroying me?
A. Yes, it would get the case dismissed. He specifically told me that no other lawyer would dare touch the case after they see what has happened to you.
Q. Were there any other conversations that you had with Mr. Minton before April the 9th?
A. Yes. He showed me a letter that you sent to him concerning the blood of his children and wife being on your hands for not getting this case dismissed, the wrongful death case dismissed.
He showed me a response to that letter that you had written to him that he was responding in cooperation and coordination with Ms. Yingling, Mr. Rinder, which in and of itself contains some pretty outrageous lies concerning me personally, and I asked them to take that information out of the letter.


1 I asked Mr. Minton to specifically take that
2 out because it was a lie and to -- and they told me that
3 there was a list of things.
4 THE COURT: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I'm
5 lost. Go over this one more time, okay? You
6 met with Minton.
7 THE WITNESS: Several times.
8 THE COURT: I know that, but the time
9 we're talking about now that you're talking
10 about, okay?
11 And he showed you a letter, right?
12 THE WITNESS: Correct.
13 THE COURT: All right. Who was the letter
14 from?
15 THE WITNESS: Mr. Dandar.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Dandar's letter,
17 right?
19 THE COURT: Okay. And it was to
20 Mr. Minton.
21 THE WITNESS: Correct.
22 THE COURT: Okay. So what's the problem
23 with this letter? Tell me that.
24 THE WITNESS: The letter -- this is
25 information. This isn't an issue of problems.
1 This is information. He was showing me this to
2 show that he had informed or did -­
3 THE COURT: Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
4 He's showing you a letter from Dandar -­
5 THE WITNESS: To himself.
6 THE COURT: -- to him.
8 THE COURT: To show something else?
9 THE WITNESS: Because he was responding to
10 that letter. He was working on a response to
11 that letter, and I didn't know -- I mean, I had
12 nothing to relate it to. It was just
13 information.
14 THE COURT: So Minton was working on a
15 response.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes. He was working on a
17 response.
18 THE COURT: Okay. Now I got it.
19 THE WITNESS: And this response was being
20 done in conjunction with Ms. Yingling and
21 Mr. Rinder.
22 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, what basis is
23 there for that? This witness has said he never
24 even met with Rinder and Yingling.
25 THE COURT: Is that what Minton told you?
1 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.
2 THE COURT: Okay. He told you that he was
3 preparing a response to Mr. Dandar's letter,
4 along with Ms. Yingling and Mr. Rinder?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: Okay.
7 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I would like to have
8 this marked as our next exhibit. Is this
9 Number 5?
10 THE COURT: 6, I think. Okay.
12 Q. Mr. Prince, I will show you what's marked for
13 identification Defendant's Exhibit Number 6. See if you
14 can identify that.
15 A. Yes, this is the letter that he showed me at the
16 time.
17 THE COURT: Now, is this the letter from Dandar
18 to him?
20 MR. ROSEN: Is this being offered?
21 THE COURT: Yeah, Number 6.
22 MR. DANDAR: I would like to offer it into
23 evidence at this time.
24 MR. ROSEN: Voir dire, if I might.

2 Q. Mr. Prince, when Mr. Minton showed you this
3 letter, was it in this form exactly as it is before you
4 today?
5 A. No.
6 Q. It wasn't? Well, when he showed it to you, did
7 he give you a copy?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Well, how do you know that this is the same letter
10 that he showed you, that Mr. Minton showed you?
11 A. Because Ms. Brooks read it to me in its entirety,
12 and I have since seen it from these proceedings.
13 Q. You're trying to tell us, sir, that you can
14 testify from memory of a two-and-a-half-page letter? This
15 is not a letter. It doesn't have any letterhead, right?
16 A. I think the document speaks for itself.
17 Q. How about answering my question.
18 THE COURT: All right. So you didn't see
19 that. When you're talking about a letter, you
20 didn't see that, right?
21 THE WITNESS: Correct.
23 Q. The document that you say Mr. Minton showed you
24 was -- you said it was a letter, so I presume that
25 Mr. Dandar sends letters on his firm letterhead that says

1 Dandar & Dandar, right?
2 A. Mr. Rosen, I can hardly be responsible for your
3 assumptions.
4 Q. Don't be a wise guy, Mr. Prince. Just answer
5 the question.
6 THE COURT: Just wait a minute.
7 MR. ROSEN: Sorry, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: We're not here to cast about
9 aspersions to each other anymore than we have
10 to. I'm just trying to find out what he saw.
11 He didn't see that, apparently.
12 MR. ROSEN: Right.
13 THE COURT: You didn't see that. You saw
14 a letter.
15 THE WITNESS: Correct.
16 THE COURT: But that is not the letter.
17 THE WITNESS: I never saw it in this
18 format. I can't, as I sit here today, say that
19 I saw that.
20 THE COURT: So that's fine.
21 MR. ROSEN: I object to its introduction
22 into evidence.
23 THE COURT: Yeah, sustained.
24 MR. DANDAR: Okay.
25 THE COURT: I presume that Mr. Dandar has


1 a copy of the original letter.
2 MR. ROSEN: If he sent it, one would
3 assume so. One would also assume he would have
4 asked Mr. Minton when Mr. Minton was on the
5 stand before Your Honor, particularly since
6 this letter purports to be dated the 30th of
7 March.
8 MR. DANDAR: I will file that portion of
9 Mr. Minton's testimony before Judge Schaeffer.
11 Q. Mr. Prince, is it that you can't remember if it's
12 on letterhead form or e-mail form?
13 A. Mr. Dandar, the fact of the matter is, the letter,
14 as I testified to just moments ago, was read to me in its
15 entirety.
16 THE COURT: So you never saw a letter.
17 Somebody just read you what purported to be a
18 letter, right?
19 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I saw the letter
20 inasmuch as you can see this piece of paper in
21 my hand.
22 THE COURT: That's what I'm asking.
24 Q. So you didn't hold it in your hand, Mr. Prince?
25 You didn't hold it in your hand.

1 A. Correct.
2 Q. You were in the presence of Ms. Brooks?
3 A. And Mr. Minton, correct.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
6 Q. And she was reading it to you?
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. So how do you know this is what she read to you?
9 A. Because these are the same words that she spoke
10 from her mouth that I'm seeing on this piece of paper.
11 Q. What about this letter, what words jump out at you
12 to remind you --
13 MR. ROSEN: I object to this.
14 THE COURT: We're not going to testify to
15 a non-letter. It's just not going to happen.
16 You've either got it or you don't.
17 MR. DANDAR: I will testify about it
18 later.
19 THE COURT: Maybe, maybe not.
20 MR. DANDAR: This is it
21 THE COURT: That isn't anything. That's
22 somebody's re-creation.
23 MR. DANDAR: Well, I will testify about it
24 when it's my turn.
25 THE COURT: Well, if he can't identify it,

1 then I can't have you doing it.
2 MR. DANDAR: Not as an attorney. I can do
3 it as a witness.
5 Q. Mr. Prince, did Mr. Minton tell you anything else
6 prior to his appearance in the hearing on April the 9th?
7 A. Yes, he did. He told me that he was -- that the
8 negotiations with Scientology was going well, that because
9 of his cooperation, that he had been assured by Mr. Rosen
10 that he was not going to go to jail in front of Judge Baird
11 on the 9th of May because he was cooperating with them to
12 attack you.
13 Q. The 9th of May or the 9th of April?
14 A. The 9th of April. Sorry.
15 Q. Did he mention Mr. Pope at all?
16 A. No.
17 Q. As you sit here today, did anyone ever say that
18 Mr. Pope was involved in any of these meetings with
19 Mr. Minton?
20 A. No, not to my knowledge.
21 Q. Okay. Now, again, before April 9th, is there
22 anything else that Mr. Minton said to you?
23 A. Well, again, he was reading his response to this
24 letter.
25 Q. All right. The one that you didn't hold in your

hand and read?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay.
A. And he specifically said in the letter that I was withdrawing my testimony from the Wollersheim case in California and that I would not be a cooperating witness in the wrongful death case, at which point I corrected him in that I hadn't authorized anyone to withdraw any testimony in any cases, and certainly Mr. Minton or Ms. Brooks had no authority to speak for me in that regard.
And Mr. Minton informed me, well, it's just a draft; we can take that out.
The other part of it was that I was supposed to be brought into these negotiations, but I was also required to perjure myself and lie to attack you.
Q. And who told you this?
A. Mr. Minton.
Q. What did he tell you that you had to do -- what lies did you have to tell about me?
A. I had to say that you induced me to render an opinion that Mr. Miscavige of the Church of Scientology was fully aware of and participating in holding Lisa McPherson against her will to the point of her death to prevent anyone knowing Scientology's actual practices and how it affects the public.

Q. Did you reply to Mr. Minton?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you tell him?
A. I told him he was insane; that wasn't going to happen.
Q. Why is that?
A. Because it was the truth that I said, and it had nothing to do with you.
Q. What else did Mr. Minton tell you?
A. He told me that he needed me to walk with him down this road because this is what was going to bring peace into his life.
Q. And what did you reply to that?
A. I told him I would see how this goes along. I
told him, I'm with you. I love you. You're my friend. I don't understand how or why you have to attack Mr. Dandar -- who you've given -- I don't know -- over a
couple of million dollars to do this case - on Scientology's behalf and how if you didn't do that, either Mr. Minton was of the mind that he would be physically
dead, and if that didn't, in the alternative, you know, or you would be dead.
And he chose life. He chose to live. So in his mind, he has to destroy you.
Q. Okay. Before we get to April 9th, anything else


1 that Mr. Minton said?
2 A. He said that he was going in front of this court.
3 He had already worked out the deal. He was also supposed
4 to be deposed or something. So he's been -- he informed me
5 of at least three meetings that he had with Mr. Rosen,
6 Mr. Rinder and Mrs. Yingling with none of his attorneys
7 present.
8 And he also told me that he wanted it that way
9 because, you know, he was tired of fooling with attorneys,
10 he was done with the whole attorneys. He wanted to
11 structure everything that he was doing now with Scientology
12 counsel.
13 Q. All right. Now, do you have any recollection of
14 when this conversation took place before April 9th when he
15 testified?
16 A. Yes. As we nailed down earlier, Friday, Saturday
17 and Sunday before, the weekend before the actual hearing.
18 Q. All right. So you attended the first hearing
19 where Mr. Minton testified in front of Judge Baird?
20 A. Yes, I did.
21 Q. Were you in the courtroom?
22 A. Yes, I sat right back there.
23 Q. Okay. Did you stay for the whole hearing?
24 A. The instant Mr. Minton opened his mouth and
25 started lying, I got up and walked out in disgust.

1 Q. Well, why did you do that? Didn't you know he was
2 going to lie?
3 A. Yes, I knew he was going to lie.
4 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, is there something
5 relevant in our future?
6 THE COURT: I don't know.
7 MR. ROSEN: Counsel represented to you
8 this is not being offered for impeachment of
9 Mr. Minton; it's for some other purpose.
10 Somewhere in our future, are we going to learn
11 what that purpose is?
12 MR. DANDAR: Judge, the Church of
13 Scientology has met with Mr. Minton in private,
14 got him to come in here and testify falsely
15 under oath in front of you, and it's not
16 relevant as to what he says?
17 THE COURT: Are you testifying now?
18 MR. DANDAR: No, I'm arguing this.
19 THE COURT: Well, what are we arguing
20 about? Why is what he did when Mr. Minton
21 started testifying relevant?
22 MR. DANDAR: It's leading up to the April
23 12th and 14th meetings.
24 THE COURT: Why don't you just have him
25 talk about what happened when he met with

1 Minton, all right? Save the histrionics.
2 Okay?
3 MR. DANDAR: Well, if this witness knows that
4 Mr. Minton is lying under oath, isn't that not
5 relevant to the Court?
6 THE COURT: He said that, okay?
7 MR. DANDAR: All right.
9 Q. So after you left the hearing, Mr. Prince, when is
10 the next time that you saw Mr. Minton or talked to him?
11 A. Probably the next day. He came to my house. He
12 looked for me. And I just told him and Ms. Brooks that I
13 did not want to see them, period.
14 And I told them that they've come to where I
15 live, crapped all over the place and run back home. They
16 don't live here. I was very upset about it.
17 Q. You mean here being in Clearwater?
18 A. Clearwater, yes, Pinellas County.
19 Q. All right. Any other conversation with Mr. Minton
20 that day?
21 A. Oh, yes. You know, he said that the reason I felt
22 this way was because I didn't have all of the information,
23 and once they brought me into the circle with Scientology
24 that I would fully understand and thus would participate.
25 Q. Anything else?
1 A. Yes. He told me that he had to come back again
2 for court - I do believe it was the following week or
3 maybe another, the week after that, I'm not sure -- in
4 front of Judge Schaeffer for another criminal contempt
5 charge whereby he was represented by Mr. Bruce Howie.
6 And he told me that when he came down for that,
7 after that hearing, then we would meet again for the
8 purposes of enlightening me about the criminal activity
9 that was occurring and to, again, garner my cooperation.
10 Q. Okay. Where did this conversation take place?
11 A. Telephonically.
12 Q. Oh, all right.Did you have a --
13 MR. ROSEN: I'm sorry. I missed the date
14 of this. What date is this conversation?
15 THE COURT: It's between the two hearings,
16 as I understand it.
17 MR. ROSEN: The 9th and the 19th?
18 THE COURT: Yeah, yeah.
20 Q. Do you know how soon after the hearing of April
21 9th you had this telephone call with Mr. Minton?
22 A. The next day.
23 Q. All right. That's the 10th.
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. All right. So when is the next time you either

1 talked to Mr. Minton or saw him in person?
2 A. The next time I saw him in person was after the
3 hearing we had in front Judge Schaeffer for the contempt
4 where he got off on a technicality. And he wanted to meet
5 with me, and I agreed to meet with him. We met at a hotel
6 on Clearwater Beach.
7 Q. All right. Mr. Prince, the hearing with Judge
8 Schaeffer was April the 5th, before Judge Baird's hearing.
9 I want to make sure you're not confused on any dates in
10 time.
11 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor, what is this?
12 It's either impeachment or rehabilitation in
13 advance of impeachment. It's one or the other.
14 THE COURT: You've got to let him testify.
15 You can't be helping him out.
16 MR. DANDAR: I just want an accurate
17 record.
18 THE COURT: I know. Accurate according to
19 who? Accurate according to the testimony? All
20 right.
21 Again, if you just want to do the
22 testifying and let him assent to it, that's
23 fine.
24 MR. DANDAR: No.

1 Q. Okay, Mr. Prince, you recall meeting Mr. Minton at
2 a Clearwater hotel, you said?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Okay. What did he say?
5 A. I told him how disgusted I was of his and
6 Ms. Brooks' conduct, and I just understood none of it. And
7 I made it perfectly clear to him that in no way, shape or
8 form was I ever going to assist Scientology to destroy
9 another person.
10 And he proceeded to explain to me how he,
11 himself, was not sure about whether what he was doing was
12 right. He did not feel what he was doing was right.
13 The people that were encouraging him to do this
14 and that it was the right thing to do was Ms. Brooks,
15 Ms. Yingling, Mr. Rosen and Mr. Rinder.
16 He, himself, made it very clear to me that he
17 still did not feel what he was doing was right, but he did
18 not have any other possibility to end this engagement with
19 Scientology, so he was going with it.
20 Q. Did Mr. Minton ever confide in you what it was
21 that was causing him all of this pressure to go forward and
22 destroy me, as you previously said?
23 A. It centered around -- you know, this is something
24 that kind of evolved, because first when he explained to
25 me, as I've testified, it was the threat of going to jail,
1 it was the threat of his wife now becoming part of the
2 process.
3 Now he showed me a lawsuit that Scientology
4 filed and named him as a party against Gerald Armstrong
5 that ultimately asks for 80 million dollars.
6 He also held a stack of papers in his hand that
7 was maybe a couple inches thick, and he flipped through it,
8 and he said, "I just got this from Mr. Rosen today; this is
9 a draft of a RICO suit, and ultimately that suit with all
10 of the damages asks for 110 million dollars."
11 So he said, "Well, Jesse, let's do the math.
12 There's 80 million here. There's 110 million here.
13 They're adding my name onto the breach of contract case.
14 "You know, Ken already has a judgment against
15 that. So that's already like a couple of hundred million.
16 I'm the only person here with money. So who do you think
17 is going to take the brunt of this," is how he explained it
18 to me.
19 Q. And where did this conversation take place?
20 A. This took place at a hotel on Clearwater Beach.
21 Q. All right. Did you respond to him when he said
22 that?
23 A. I said, "Well, I see your point. I see that this
24 is relentless. I agree with you you're the only person
25 sitting here with money, you know, let's talk about this

some more."
And then at that point in time, the phone rang and he spoke to someone, and he said, "Well, just leave it at the front desk; I will come down and, get it," at which point we had a break.
You know, we also spoke about -- he says, "Look, Ken is really going to get into trouble about this check," and he mentioned how, you know, he had basically been instructed to perjure himself or lie about that.
And I reminded him that in May of 2000 how he took me and Ms. Brooks up on the parking lot structure and explained to me where this check -- you know, how this was happening and you didn't know and the people from Europe and on and on, for him to now have-a completely different story; I asked him, well, how do you reconcile what happened in May with what you're saying now, because Scientology is asking you to do it?
And he just kind of looked at me like I was crazy, and we went to dinner, at which point he went to the front desk and got a stack of paper that he told me was delivered by someone from Scientology, which was almost about 11 inches thick, that had specific places marked in it that Scientology wanted him to change his testimony that he had testified to before, and all of that testimony centered around attacking you, attacking your credibility,

1 attacking you as a lawyer.
2 Q. Did you see that stack of paper?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Was it -- were there little tabs on it where he
5 was supposed to look or yellow markings?
6 A. There were tabs, and it was highlighted, and he
7 opened it up and he flipped, and he said, "God, look at
8 this. I don't remember this. And they expect me to do
9 something."
10 And he was like, "Okay. We'll deal with that
11 later."
12 Q. And you and he went to dinner?
13 A. He and I and Ms. Brooks went to dinner.
14 Q. Did he say anything at dinner to you about this
15 case, about the Lisa McPherson case?
16 A. His only comment to me at that time was that he,
17 himself, was not certain that what he was doing would stop
18 Scientology's attack, blackmail, coercion on him. He was
19 not sure.
20 Because I specifically asked him -- I told him,
21 "You're like a dog on a leash now. How long are they going
22 to walk you like a dog? How much are you going to have to
23 do for them for this to stop?"
24 Q. What did he say?
25 A. He said he didn't know, but this is where it
1 began.
2 Q. Was this a pleasant dinner?
3 A. Hardly.
4 Q. How did it end?
5 A. None of us hardly ate. He said -- well, it ended
6 with I told him, "Look, I'm with you guys. You go back and
7 you tell Scientology I'll cooperate because you are my
8 friends. I'm going to cooperate about this. And the next
9 time we meet, I want to see Mr. Rinder's face so that I get
10 it from the donkey's mouth.
11 Q. And what did Mr. Minton say in response to that?
12 A. He said, okay, he'll see what he can do. So I
13 left that night tormented beyond belief, and I called the
14 next day Frank Oliver and asked him to call you.
15 MR. ROSEN: Objection. Your Honor, is there no
16 end to this?
17 THE COURT: This is hearsay.
18 MR. DANDAR: Well, I'm not asking him
19 what Frank Oliver said. It's what he said, the
20 witness.
21 THE COURT: I know. It's hearsay.
22 MR. DANDAR: Okay.
24 Q. After that dinner meeting that you just described
25 with Mr. Minton, did you have an occasion to meet. with me?


1 A. Yes. As I was about to explain, I -­
2 Q. No, don't explain. Did you meet with me?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. When did you meet with me?
5 A. I met with you that Sunday. I recall it was
6 Sunday. I met with them Saturday. I met with you Sunday
7 and I informed you of everything that I knew so far.
8 MR. ROSEN: Can we have a date?
9 MR. DANDAR: I'm getting there.
11 Q. Did you meet with me and handwrite a statement
12 about these things?
13 A. Yes, I did.
14 MR. ROSEN: Your Honor -­
15 MR. DANDAR: He wants to know the date.
16 Here is the document.
17 MR. ROSEN: I don't need a document. I
18 need a witness testifying as to what date it
19 was. Or you, Mr. Dandar, you're testifying.
21 Q. Do you recall the date of the Sunday meeting that
22 you met with me?
23 A. I'm pretty sure it's the exact date that I put
24 that document in your hand.
25 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I would like to have this

1 marked as our next exhibit, Number 7.
2 MR. ROSEN: There's no date on it, Judge.
3 It doesn't tell me the date of this meeting.
4 MR. DANDAR: Why don't you take a better
5 look at it, Mr. Rosen. Right at the bottom of
6 the last page there's a date.
7 THE COURT: May 1st.
8 MR. DANDAR: No, sir, the handwritten
9 statement itself.
10 THE COURT: This sworn statement says May
11 1st.
12 MR. DANDAR: Yes, that's correct, but I
13 thought Mr. Rosen was referring to the -­
14 THE COURT: This looks like an affidavit
15 to me.
16 MR. DANDAR: Right. There's an exhibit
17 attached to it. I'm going to direct the
18 witness's attention to the exhibit first.
19 THE COURT: Okay.
21 Q. Mr. Prince, let me show you Defendant's Exhibit 7
22 for identification.
23 A. Okay.
24 Q. First, can you identify the written document,
25 typed document?

1 A. Yes. This is a document/affidavit by myself.
2 Q. Attached to that affidavit is a handwritten
3 document. Do you see that?
4 A. Yes, I do.
5 Q. Can you tell the Court what that handwritten
6 document is?
7 A. This handwritten document is a result of the
8 meeting that I had with you before I was to meet with
9 Rinder, Yingling and Minton and Brooks to be brought into
10 this conspiracy to commit a fraud on the Court.
11 Q. Now, when were you supposed to meet with
12 Mr. Rinder?
13 A. This same date, the 14th of April.
14 Q. Okay. So who did you meet with before that?
15 A. I went with -- I met with Mr. Minton and
16 Ms. Brooks at a different hotel, the Radisson on Sand Key,
17 whereby Mr. Minton informed me that Judge Schaeffer thought
18 that I was basically an asshole and that she was going
19 to -- and Scientology was going to make sure that I got
20 personally put in jail; and unless I conceded to this
21 criminal act, this fraud that's been perpetrated on the
22 Court, that I myself ran the risk of going to jail.
23 And they told me that I had to walk with them,
24 you know, for us all to be safe. They assured me I would
25 be paid big money to do this. And it was important that I

1 specifically lie to the Court and say that you persuaded me
2 to write an earlier affidavit that I had
3 other things from his stack of documents that he was
4 provided by Scientology.
5 Q. And how did you reply to that?
6 A. I told him that he was in league with evil, that
7 it was ridiculous to even conceive this type of conduct
8 should even happen in a system of justice where, you know,
9 the real issue is that Lisa McPherson died.
10 Now suddenly we're supposed to alter the case
11 and suddenly say we're all liars and Scientology is
12 wonderful and, you know, make it go away, as Mr. Rinder
13 instructed Mr. Minton to do.
14 And I told them, I would rather be dead. I
15 would rather be a dead person, pissed on, before I would
16 concede to do that, and we parted our ways.
17 Q. Now, was this before or after you made this
18 handwritten document?
19 A. This is after.
20 Q. All right. Let's go up to the handwritten
21 document.
22 A. Okay.
23 Q. Where did you write this?
24 A. I wrote this in a bar in the International Plaza
25 Saturday morning -- Sunday morning. I'm sorry.

1 Q. All right. Who was present when you wrote this?
2 A. You were present, Mr. Lirot was present, my
3 girlfriend was present, Mr. Tom Haverty was present.
4 Q. Who is Tom Haverty?
5 A. He was also a person that handled security matters
6 and investigative matters in the wrongful death case for
7 you.
8 Q. Now, the instances of what Mr. Minton had told you
9 up until that point in time on April 14th, did you relay
10 that to myself and to Mr. Lirot and Mr. Haverty?
11 A. I related it to you, I related it to Mr. Lirot, I
12 related it to another attorney, Dennis de Vlaming, as well
13 as his brother, and -­
14 MR. ROSEN: Judge, can I ask what's this got to,
15 do with this case, number one, and, number two,
16 there's been no mention of Mr. Minton being
17 there. The witness is now testifying to what
18 he told Mr. Dandar?
19 THE COURT: Fair enough.
21 Q. Mr. Prince, is this handwritten document attached
22 to Exhibit 7 your handwriting?
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 Q. And subsequent to that handwritten document, did
25 you sign and actually type yourself the affidavit of April


1 2002 that's really at the end dated May 1st of 2002?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And in that affidavit, does that contain the
4 synopsis of all of the events of 2002
5 MR. ROSEN: Is there a question that can
6 be asked question that is not leading? Apart
7 from the fact that how could he ask a witness
8 on the stand to verify his own affidavit.
9 That's what in-person testimony is for.
10 THE COURT: I assume he's sworn to it.
11 MR. DANDAR: Yes, he did.
12 THE COURT: All right. So what's the
13 problem?
14 MR. DANDAR: I just want him to identify
15 the document.
16 THE COURT: He did that a long time ago.
17 MR. DANDAR: I would like to move Exhibit
18 7 into evidence.
19 THE COURT: Okay.
21 Q. Mr. Prince, does the affidavit contain any errors
22 in any of the dates?
23 A. Yes, it does.
24 Q. And what particular -­
25 MR. ROSEN: Errors? Rehabilitation in
1 advance of cross-examination, Your Honor?
2 I don't think I have ever made so many
3 objections in one trial in my entire life, but
4 is this ever going to end?
6 Continue, Mr. Dandar. How much longer
7 have you got, by the way?
8 MR. DANDAR: We're almost done.
9 THE COURT: That's good. It's almost five
10 o'clock.
12 Q. Oh, Mr. Prince, let me ask you a question while
13 you're looking for that.
14 So after you left the meeting with me and
15 Mr. Lirot and Mr. Haverty with your fiance, did you proceed
16 to have that meeting as you just previously described with
17 Mr. Minton?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. All right. Now, prior to coming in there and
20 talking to Mr. Minton, why were you going to see Mr. Minton
21 that day on April 14th?
22 A. Well, because, as I said earlier, Mr. Minton and I
23 had been close friends -- in my mind, anyway -- as well as
24 Ms. Brooks. I personally have 16 years experience in
25 Scientology, how it operates, what its policies are. I

1 knew what he was doing was wrong. I was trying to do
2 everything I could to relate to him, in personal
3 experiences that I've had, where I've gone into agreement
4 or a league with this people and what has happened to me as
5 a result.
6 And I told him surely nothing but death and
7 ruin lay ahead of him from his associating with these
8 people.
9 Q. And did you meet Mr. Rinder that night?
10 A. No, they wouldn't let me meet with him.
11 Q. Why?
12 A. Because I refused to lie.
13 Q. When you say, "They wouldn't let me meet with
14 him," who are you speaking about?
15 A. Mr. Minton, Ms. Brooks.
16 Q. Have you since met with Mr. Minton any additional
17 times after April 14th?
18 A. No.
19 MR. DANDAR: Judge, I would like to -- it's
20 five minutes to five -- ask the Court -- I
21 would either like to elicit testimony from
22 Mr. Prince with documents from the Church of
23 Scientology on their instructive -- the Church
24 of Scientology instructions to staff members
25 that are involved in intelligence work to

1 destroy their enemies.
2 You've said previously that you don't want
3 to go down that road, but I'm going to -- I
4 want to put a proffer on, and I would like to
5 do that first thing in the morning. It's very
6 relevant to what has transpired here.
7 THE COURT: Okay. I will let you proffer
8 it.
9 MR. DANDAR: Can I do that in the morning?
10 THE COURT: (Nods head up and down.)
11 MR. DANDAR: All right. Can we finish
12 for the day now?
13 MR. ROSEN: Is he passing the witness
14 other than the proffer?
15 MR. DANDAR: Other than the proffer;
16 that's right.
17 THE COURT: I presume you're going to have
18 a rather extensive cross-examination.
19 MR. ROSEN: It will be a while.
20 By the way, if Mr. Dandar is now finished
21 his direct examination, I come back to the
22 representation he made to you at the beginning
23 of this.
24 What is this being offered for if not
25 impeachment?


1 And you can save my cross-examination
2 because I will move to strike this entire
3 testimony.
4 THE COURT: No, I'm not going to strike
5 his testimony, and I think it's obviously being
6 offered to impeach the credibility of
7 Mr. Minton, to show bias on the part of
8 Mr. Minton regarding the testimony that he's
9 given. It's obvious why it's being offered.
10 That's no mystery.
11 MR. ROSEN: Well, Your Honor, my problem
12 is if it's being offered to impeach Mr. Minton,
13 then he should have been confronted with it
14 while he was here.
15 THE COURT: The Court will take that into
16 consideration, that along with everything else,
17 I will take into consideration in determining
18 the way that this has been handled, because
19 we've got a credibility issue, obviously.
20 We've got Mr. Minton and we've got
21 Mr. Prince and we've got Mr. Dandar, you know,
22 so, you know, I mean, we're like this
23 (indicating) and somebody is lying. Okay?
24 MR. ROSEN: Got you.
25 Can I ask one other question? So we


1 resume tomorrow morning. I just want to know
2 what our schedule is. I think we're scheduled
3 for nine o'clock tomorrow with my cross of this
4 witness. And what's next?
5 Mr. Dandar represented to you that we
6 would finish tomorrow, so I would like to know
7 what's coming after Mr. Prince.
8 MR. DANDAR: Did I represent that, Judge?
9 MR. ROSEN: Yeah, August 13th transcript.
10 THE COURT: Let's not argue about it. Are
11 you going to finish tomorrow? What have you
12 got? How many more witnesses?
13 MR. DANDAR: Well, I have a total of eight
14 witnesses.
15 And Mr. Minton's attorney is here. I have
16 no power or authority of subpoena power to
17 bring Mr. Minton in.
18 I would like Mr. Minton and Ms. Brooks to
19 show up tomorrow. Ms. Brooks is a party
20 through the Defendant LMT. Mr. Minton, of
21 course, is an individual party. I also have
22 several other witnesses to call.
23 THE COURT: Mr. Minton has been here.
24 MR. DANDAR: I understand.
25 THE COURT: And you were able to

1 cross-examine him. You didn't cross-examine
2 him about a lot of the stuff that you heard
3 today, but you cross-examined him about quite a
4 bit. So why do you want him back?
5 MR. DANDAR: There are things that came
6 out only in Judge Shaeffer's courtroom where
7 Mr. Minton admits under oath that he lied to
8 you and he lied in the deposition of April the
9 8th, and it has nothing to do with me.
10 THE COURT: Well, then, just get the
11 testimony and submit it.
12 MR. DANDAR: I will be glad to do that.
13 THE COURT: You know, what do you want me
14 to do?
15 MR. DANDAR: If you're going to look at
16 the testimony, I will submit the testimony.
17 That's fine.
18 THE COURT: Well, if you're not going to
19 have a witness here and there's sworn testimony
20 that's relevant, I guess I will look at it.
21 MR. DANDAR: I'm going to bring live
22 Teresa Summers, who is a former employee of the
23 Lisa McPherson Trust, to talk about statements
24 that Mr. Minton made to her.
25 THE COURT: Specifically regarding this

1 stuff, right?
2 MR. DANDAR: The issues of this case.
3 MR. ROSEN: Excuse me. Statements that
4 she says Mr. Minton made to her in 2002 about
5 checks and Swiss bank checks, right, in 2002?
6 MR. DANDAR: No, 2000, 2001 and 2002. The
7 allegation against me concerns 2000. Why am I
8 limited to 2002?
9 THE COURT: Well, the allegations, as I
10 recall them -- and it's been so long -- the
11 allegations are that basically during
12 discovery, the church was seeking to determine
13 how much and from what sources money had been
14 paid to support the defense of this case and
15 that Mr. Minton testified under oath regarding
16 the amount of money and where it came from.
17 And then it turned out that there was more
18 money that had not been testified to. And then
19 we had quite a bit of testimony about where
20 that money went and about personal loans to you
21 with no notes and no ties, but it was supposed
22 to be kind of for the estate, but not really,
23 and you could do anything with it, but you
24 really couldn't. I remember that kind of
25 testimony.


1 So we have testimony about your suborning
2 perjury on the part of Mr. Minton regarding
3 testimony he gave in a deposition and
4 apparently put in an affidavit, also correct,
5 and in an affidavit.
6 And then we've got testimony about the
7 source of these monies and whether you were
8 aware because you got up here and testified.
9 So now they've got some issues about that,
10 right?
11 MR. ROSEN: We got at least one of them
12 resolved.
13 THE COURT: Yeah? What's that?
14 MR. ROSEN: You know, one of the issues
15 you remember was Mr. Dandar's testimony before
16 you that the Swiss bank checks -- it wasn't
17 Minton's money and there was some mysterious
18 man in Switzerland.
19 THE COURT: Right.
20 MR. ROSEN: This is his testimony before
21 Judge Schaeffer. (Producing document to the
22 Court.)
23 MR. DANDAR: May I know what you're
24 handing the Court?
25 THE COURT: Well, this is the same


1 testimony he gave in front of me; isn't it?
2 MR. ROSEN: Now, after Judge Schaeffer
3 examined him for all of these pages, he finally
4 conceded, "Yeah, I guess it was Mr. Minton's
5 money."
6 THE COURT: I don't know.
7 MR. ROSEN: So I don't know why we're
8 continuing -­
9 MR. DANDAR: May I have on the record the
10 page and the date of the testimony that you
11 just handed the Court?
12 MR. ROSEN: It's Page 341 of the
13 transcript before Judge Schaeffer on June 4th,
14 2002.
15 MR. DANDAR: And who is testifying?
16 MR. ROSEN: You.
17 MR. DANDAR: I'm sure that's taken out of
18 context.
19 MR. ROSEN: Judge, he's going to call
20 Ms. Summers. What does he have for live
21 witnesses? I have a transcript where he told
22 you on August 13th -­
23 THE COURT: How many more live witnesses
24 do you intend to bring in?
25 Why are these televisions here? Somebody

1 made a big deal about getting televisions.
2 MR. ROSEN: We will need them tomorrow.
3 We're going to show a videotape on
4 cross-examination of one of his witness.
5 MR. DANDAR: I will object to relevance.
6 MR. ROSEN: Who are the other live
7 witnesses?
8 MR. DANDAR: It's so nice to see you
9 smile. My life is on the line here.
10 THE COURT: No, it's not.
11 MR. DANDAR: Well, anyway, Teresa
12 Summers, Peter Alexander, Frank Oliver. I had
13 a list, but I can't find it right now.
14 I also want to call Dan Leipold, the
15 attorney that Mr. Rosen faced in the
16 Wollersheim case, who will impeach not only
17 Mr. Rosen's testimony but also Mr. Minton's
18 testimony about requiring a complete dismissal
19 of the Wollersheim case in order for Mr. Minton
20 to be disengaged from the Church of
21 Scientology.
22 MR. ROSEN: Is Mr. Leipold coming here?
23 Is he here in Clearwater?
24 MR. DANDAR: No. I want to call him by
25 telephone.
1 MR. ROSEN: Oh, please, please.
2 MR. DANDAR: I was able to do that before
3 Judge Schaeffer.
4 MR. ROSEN: That's unfortunate, but we
5 object.
6 MR. DANDAR: It's the same party, Flag.
7 If not, I would file his testimony before Judge
8 Schaeffer.
9 THE COURT: Oh, boy.
10 Okay. Well, Mr. Rosen, I hate to tell you
11 this, but it does not appear to me that you're
12 going to be completed tomorrow.
13 MR. ROSEN: Well, Your Honor, my concern
14 is this: In order to induce you to give him an
15 adjournment and cancel a day that we had on the
16 22nd of August, in order to induce you to do
17 that, in spite of this conduct before Judge
18 Barton, Mr. Dandar represented to you that
19 these hearings would be over tomorrow.
20 And I think -- I'm not going to ask Your
21 Honor because it's the operation of your mind
22 to say anything, but I left it with an abiding
23 belief that it was based upon the
24 representation by Mr. Dandar that we would
25 finish tomorrow that you cut him the slack and


1 canceled August 22.
2 And that transcript says we will finish
3 this hearing tomorrow. In fact, it's even in
4 that sanctions motion we sent up' to Your Honor
5 where we asked for time limits.
6 Mr. Dandar cannot keep making these false
7 representations, because you know what's going
8 to happen next -- I've seen Your Honor's
9 calendar is such that we can't even resume
10 before the end of October.
11 And guess what you're going to hear then? E
12 "Well, I've got a trial before Judge Barton.
13 Oh, wait a minute. If I don't have one, I will
14 go set one up."
15 Then, "Oh, you can't do that. We have a
16 pretrial conference in the wrongful death case
17 before Judge Schaeffer on November 1."
18 And you will hear again, "I want you to
19 stop this case before the wrongful death case
20 is over," just as he asked Judge Schaeffer to
21 order you to stop this case. We've been down
22 this road, Judge. We have seen this. We have
23 a four-month interruption.
24 What's the matter, Mr. Prince?
25 THE WITNESS: Can I be excused? I don't

1 need to be here for this.
2 MR. ROSEN: He's making faces.
3 We've got a four-month interruption, and
4 he's just going to do it again.
5 MR. HILL: Mr. Rosen, get a representation
6 of what time Mr. Prince needs to be back
7 tomorrow.
8 THE COURT: Mr. Prince, you're to be back
9 here at nine o'clock tomorrow and you're under
10 the Rule. Do you understand that you cannot
11 discuss the testimony you've given with anyone?
12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
13 THE COURT: Do you understand that?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.
15 MR. DANDAR: So, Judge, I don't see why we
16 can't finish tomorrow. I don't know what he's
17 talking about.
18 THE COURT: Good.
19 MR. DANDAR: We don't have to worry about
20 it. We already called Dr. Garko. We called
21 Mr. Prince.
22 THE COURT: Yeah. We're going to be done
23 tomorrow. That's all I want to hear.
24 MR. DANDAR: I'm hoping. I don't know how
25 long his cross-examinations are.

1 MR. ROSEN: Judge, I hate to sound like a
2 broken record.
3 These witnesses testified before Judge
4 Schaeffer. The reason why I asked you to make
5 a proffer, Peter Alexander is going to testify
6 as follows:
7 "Mr. Minton complained to me in 2000, 2001
8 that Scientology was going after my family.
9 Can you believe this?"
10 He didn't even have a conversation with
11 Mr. Minton about any of the conduct of
12 Mr. Dandar. That is what his testimony is
13 before Schaeffer.
14 THE COURT: Well, all right. Listen,
15 we'll hear this tomorrow about this and so on.
16 I will let you proffer what you need to
17 proffer, but hopefully we can get done
18 tomorrow.
19 MR. DANDAR: I would like to get done
20 tomorrow, contrary to what Mr. Rosen states.
21 (Thereupon, the proceedings were adjourned
22 and continue to Volume III.)




4 )


6 I, Susan M. Valsecchi, Registered Professional

7 Reporter, in and for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, State of

8 Florida:

9 DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I was authorized to and

10 did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings and

11 that the transcript is a true and complete record of my

12 stenographic notes.

13 DATED this 1st day of September 2002, at

14 Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida.



18 Susan M. Valsecchi, RPR
19 Registered Professional Reporter