Subject: Prosecutor defends charges
Prosecutor defends Scientology charges
Circumstances in the death of church member Lisa McPherson are described
in court as disturbing and bizarre.
By THOMAS C. TOBIN
ST. PETERSBURG -- Filing criminal charges against the Church of
Scientology in Clearwater was an unusual step, a top Pinellas prosecutor
conceded Thursday.
But he added the charges were made necessary by the unique circumstances
surrounding the 1995 death of Scientologist Lisa McPherson while in the
care of church staffers.
"This is the first time in my 23 years that I've seen anything quite as
bizarre or disturbing as the way this decedent was treated,"
Pinellas-Pasco Assistant State Attorney Doug Crow said.
His remarks came during the first of many hearings in a case that began
Nov. 13, when the Church of Scientology's Clearwater branch was charged
with abuse of a disabled person and practicing medicine without a license.
A trial has been set for March 6 next year, and is expected to last two to
five weeks.
Crow was responding to statements by Scientology lawyer Sandy Weinberg,
who suggested to Chief Judge Susan F. Schaeffer that the charges by
Clearwater police were "religiously motivated." The department has
investigated Scientology off and on since the church made Clearwater its
spiritual headquarters in 1975.
"There must be a reason for (the prosecution)," Weinberg said. "We don't
think it's based on the facts."
Never before in U.S. history has a church been charged for the actions of
its members, Weinberg said. He said the Catholic Church, for example, has
never been held criminally responsible for the sexually improper actions
of some priests.
McPherson, 36, died in the care of church staffers who watched her for 17
days inside the Fort Harrison Hotel, a Scientology retreat in downtown
Clearwater. She was taken there to recover from a mental breakdown because
Scientology strictly prohibits its members from receiving psychiatric
care.
The church contends the staffers were conducting an "introspection
rundown," a Scientology procedure in which people presumed psychotic are
placed in quiet, dark isolation to calm down before receiving Scientology
counseling. McPherson was highly combative during much of her stay.
Weinberg called the "introspection rundown" a religious practice that is
protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
But Crow argued there was nothing religious about some of the methods
church staffers employed during the isolation, including forcing food and
medicine down McPherson's throat, sometimes with a large syringe as they
held her down. Crow also noted that she tried to fight her way out of
isolation, that her non-Scientologist relatives were never notified, and
that she was taken to a hospital too late.
In documents filed this week, the church concedes the actions of its
staffers were negligent and against Scientology policy. They were
practicing a constitutionally protected religious rite, the church says,
they just didn't practice it correctly.
Judge Schaeffer signaled she would look favorably on the religious
argument as both sides prepare for trial.
Many religions believe in the laying on of hands to cure people, Schaeffer
said. "In fact, I grew up in one." The judge said she was raised in the
First Church of God. She said her mother claimed to have been spiritually
cured several times.
Crow countered, saying there were many ways to get McPherson the mental
health care she needed without violating the Scientology's religious
beliefs. One would have been to take her to a doctor sooner, he said.
The church took no steps to rule out the possibility that McPherson's
problems were physical, he said.
"They are making diagnoses that they're not entitled to make," Crow said.
"These are people who have no training to make those decisions."
But the judge cautioned that Crow's argument could run counter to the
Constitution. "I don't want to be trying a case that's going to involve
stepping on someone's religious beliefs," she said.
McPherson, it could be argued, consented to her treatment at the Fort
Harrison by virtue of belonging to the church, Schaeffer said.
Crow countered, saying: "Neither individuals nor corporations have a
religious right to engage in practices that violate criminal law."
The hearing offered a preview of the months ahead as the church mounts a
defense that will revolve around a variety of constitutional issues.
Sitting in the courtroom near Scientology's Los Angeles-based executives
was the church's top First Amendment lawyer, Eric M. Lieberman of New
York.
The hearing ended with a minor legal victory for the church.
Weinberg said the charges were vague and did not make clear how the
alleged crimes were committed. Schaeffer asked Crow to craft a document
that would clarify.
Further facts
about this criminal empire may be found at
Operation Clambake and FACTNet.
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
From: rkeller@netaxs.com (Rod Keller)
Date: 14 May 1999 11:03:49 GMT
St. Petersburg Times, published May 14, 1999
Click here for some additional truth about the Scientology crime syndicate:
XENU.NET
This web page (and The Skeptic Tank) is in no way connected with
nor part of the Scientology crime syndicate. To review the crime syndicate's
absurdly idiotic web pages, check out www.scientology.org or any one of the
many secret front groups the cult attempts to hide behind.
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.