By: Michael Hess
Re: Wollersheim v. Scientology [by Elvis Cole]
* Area : ALT.SOCIETY.CIVIL-LIBERTIES (ALT.SOCIETY.CIVIL-LIBERTIES)
From: anon-remailer@xs4all.nl (Name withheld by request)
Organization: Mail to Usenet Gateway
In Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology, 212 Cal.App.3d 872,
260 Cal.Rptr. 331 (2d Dist. 1989), the Court of Appeal considered
the appeal by the Church of Scientology from the jury verdict and
trial court judgment in favor of Larry Wollersheim. The Court
of Appeal opinion details the reprehensible actions the Church of
Scientology took against Mr. Wollersheim. As delineated below,
these actions included the disclosure and wrongful use of private
information divulged during confidential auditing sessions, "fair
game," the imposition of onerous "freeloader debt," and even
physical restraint to coerce and intimidate Mr. Wollersheim.
The Court of Appeal stated:
"Construing the facts most favorably to the
judgment, as we must, respondent Larry Wollersheim was
an incipient manic-depressive for most of his life.
Appellant Scientology and its leaders were aware of
Wollersheim's susceptibility to this mental disorder:
What appellant did to him during and after his years
in Scientology aggravated Wollersheim's mental
condition, driving him into deep depressive episodes
and causing him severe mental anguish. Furthermore,
Scientology engaged in a practice of retribution and
threatened retribution -- often called "fair game" --
against members who left or otherwise posed a threat
to the organization. This practice coerced
Wollersheim into continued participation in the other
practices of Scientology which were harming him
emotionally.
Wollersheim first became acquainted with
Scientology in early 1969 when he attended a lecture
at the "Church of Scientology of San Francisco."
During the next few months he completed some basic
courses at the San Francisco institution. He then
returned to his home state of Wisconsin and did not
resume his Scientology training for almost two years.
When Wollersheim did start again it was at the
appellant, Church of Scientology of California,
headquartered in Los Angeles. From 1972 through 1979
Wollersheim underwent "auditing" at both the basic and
advanced levels. In 1973 he worked several months as
a staff member at the Church of Scientology Celebrity
Center located in Los Angeles. In 1974, despite his
repeated objections, Wollersheim was persuaded to
participate in auditing aboard a ship maintained by
Scientology. While on the ship, Wollersheim was
forced to undergo a strenuous regime which began
around 6 a.m. and continued until 1 a.m. the next
morning. Further, Wollersheim and others were forced
to sleep nine deep in the ship's hold. During his six
weeks under these conditions, Wollersheim lost fifteen
pounds.
Wollersheim attempted to escape from the ship
because he felt he "was dying and losing [his] mind."
His escape was thwarted by Scientology members who
seized Wollersheim and held him captive until he
agreed to remain and continue with the auditing and
other religious practices taking place on the vessel.
One of the psychiatric witnesses testified
Wollersheim's experience on the ship was one of five
cataclysmic events underlying the diagnosis of his
mental illness and its cause.
At another stage Scientology auditors convinced
him to "disconnect" from his wife and his parents and
other family members because they had expressed
concerns about Scientology and Wollersheim's continued
membership. "Disconnect" meant he was no longer to
have any contact with his family.
There also was evidence of a practice called
"freeloader debt." "Freeloader debt" was accumulated
when a staff member received Church courses, training
or auditing at a reduced rate. If the member later
chose to leave, he or she was presented with a bill
for the difference between the full price normally
charged to the public and the price originally charged
to the member. Appellant maintained a "freeloader
debt" account for Wollersheim.
During his years with Scientology Wollersheim
also started and operated several businesses. The
most successful was the last, a service which took and
printed photographic portraits. Most of the employees
and many of the customers of this business were
Scientologists.
By 1979, Wollersheim's mental condition worsened
to the point he actively contemplated suicide.
Wollersheim began experiencing personality changes and
pain. When the Church learned of Wollersheim's
condition, Wollersheim was sent to the Flag Land Base
for "repair."
During auditing at Flag Land Base, Wollersheim's
mental state deteriorated further. He fled the base
and wandered the streets. A guardian later arranged
to meet Wollersheim. At that meeting, the guardian
told Wollersheim he was prohibited from ever speaking
of his problems with a priest, a doctor or a
psychiatrist.
Ultimately Wollersheim became so convinced
auditing was causing him psychiatric problems he was
willing to risk becoming a target of "freeloader debt"
and "fair game." Evidence was introduced that, at
least during the time relevant to Wollersheim's case,
"fair game" was a practice of retribution Scientology
threatened to inflict on "suppressives," which
included people who left the organization or anyone
who could pose a threat to the organization. Once
someone was identified as a "suppressive," all
Scientologists were authorized to do anything to
"neutralize" that individual -- economically,
politically, and psychologically.
After Wollersheim left the organization
Scientology leaders initiated a "fair game" campaign
which among other things was calculated to destroy
Wollersheim's photography enterprise. They instructed
some Scientology members to leave Wollersheim's
employ, told others not to place any new orders with
him and to renege on bills they owed on previous
purchases from the business. This strategy shortly
drove Wollersheim's photography business into
bankruptcy. His mental condition deteriorated further
and he ended up under psychiatric care."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 878-80, 260 Cal.Rptr. at 335-36.
Based on these facts, the Court of Appeal held:
"There is substantial evidence to support the
jury's finding [in favor of Wollersheim's claim for
intentional infliction of emotional distress]. First,
the Church's conduct was manifestly outrageous. Using
its position as his religious leader, the Church and
its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing
"auditing" although his sanity was repeatedly
threatened by this practice. (See pp. 892-894, post.)
Wollersheim was compelled to abandon his wife and his
family through the policy of disconnect. When his
mental illness reached such a level he actively
planned his suicide, he was forbidden to seek
professional help. Finally, when Wollersheim was able
to leave the Church, it subjected him to financial
ruin through its policy of "fair game."
Any one of these acts exceeds the "bounds usually
tolerated by a decent society," so as to constitute
outrageous conduct. In aggregate, there can be no
question this conduct warrants liability unless it is
privileged as constitutionally protected religious
activity. (See pp. 883-886, post.)
Second, the Church's actions, if not wholly
calculated to cause emotional distress, unquestionably
constituted reckless disregard for the likelihood of
causing emotional distress. The policy of fair game,
by its nature, was intended to punish the person who
dared to leave the Church. Here, the Church actively
encouraged its members to destroy Wollersheim's
business.
Further, by physically restraining Wollersheim
from leaving the Church's ship, and subjecting him to
further auditing despite his protests, the Church
ignored Wollersheim's emotional state and callously
compelled him to continue in a practice known to cause
him emotional distress.
Third, Wollersheim suffered severe emotional
distress. Indeed, his distress was such that he
actively considered suicide and suffered such
psychiatric injury as to require prolonged
professional therapy. (See Fletcher v. Western
National Life Ins. Co. (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 376, 397
[89 Cal.Rptr. 78, 47 A.L.R.3d 286] [severe emotional
distress "may consist of any highly unpleasant mental
reaction such as fright, grief, shame, humiliation,
embarrassment, anger, chagrin, disappointment or
worry"].)
Finally, there is substantial evidence the
Church's conduct proximately caused the severe
emotional distress. Wollersheim's bankruptcy and
resulting mental distress was the direct result of the
Church's declaration that he was fair game.
Additionally, according to the psychiatric testimony
auditing and disconnect substantially aggravated his
mental illness and triggered several severe depressive
episodes.
In sum, there is ample evidence to support the
jury's verdict on Wollersheim's claim for intentional
infliction of emotional distress."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 881-82, 260 Cal.Rptr. at 336-37
(brackets added).
Based on the evidence, the Court of Appeal further found
that:
"Scientology, unlike most other religions or
organizations claiming a religious purpose, uses
various sanctions and the threat of sanctions to
induce continued membership in the Church and
observance of its practices. These sanctions include
"fair game," "freeloader debt" and even physical
restraint. There was nothing in the evidence
presented at this trial suggesting new recruits and
members undergoing lower-level "auditing" were subject
to sanctions if they decided to leave. Nor was there
evidence these recruits or "lower level" auditors
would be aware any program of sanctions even existed
and thus might be intimidated by it. But there was
evidence others, like Wollersheim, who rose to higher
levels of auditing and especially those, like
Wollersheim, who became staff members -- the rough
equivalent of becoming a neophyte priest or minister
-- were aware of these sanctions and what awaited them
if they chose to "defect." Thus, their continued
participation in "auditing" and the other practices of
Scientology was not necessarily voluntary.
Wollersheim was familiar with the whole spectrum
of sanctions and indeed was the target of some during
and after his affiliation with Scientology. He first
learned of one of these forms of retribution, "fair
game," in 1970. He also knew that, despite the
Church's public rejection of the fair game practice,
it continued to use fair game against targeted
ex-Scientologists throughout the 1970's. Under
Scientology's "fair game" policy, someone who
threatened Scientology by leaving the church "may be
deprived of property or injured by any means by a
Scientologist . . . . [The targeted defector] may be
tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."
Wollersheim feared "fair game" would be practiced
against him if he refused further auditing and left
the Church of Scientology. As described in the
previous section, those fears proved to be accurate.
Scientology leaders indeed became very upset by his
defection and retaliated against his business.
But "fair game" was not the only sanction which
Scientology held over Wollersheim's head during his
years as an "upper level" auditor and occasional staff
member. Scientology also used a tactic called
"freeloader debt" as a means of coercing Wollersheim's
continued participation in the church and obedience to
its practices. "Freeloader debt" was devised by
Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard as a means of
punishing members who, inter alia, chose to leave the
Church or refused to disconnect from a suppressive
person.
"Freeloader debt" was accumulated when a staff
member received Church courses, training or auditing
at a reduced rate. The Church maintained separate
records which listed the discounts allowed. If the
member later chose to leave, he or she was presented
with a bill for the difference between the full price
normally charged to the public and the price
originally charged to the member.n2 A person who
stayed in the Church for five years could easily
accumulate a "freeloader debt" of between $ 10,000 and
$ 50,000. Wollersheim was familiar with the
"freeloader debt" policy as well as the "fair game"
policy. He also knew the Church was recording the
courses and auditing sessions he was receiving at the
discounted rate. The threat of facing that amount of
debt represented a powerful economic sanction acting
to coerce continued participation in auditing as the
core religious practice of the Church of Scientology.
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 893-94 , 260 Cal.Rptr. 344-45
(footnote omitted).
The Court of Appeal further explained:
"There also was evidence Wollersheim accepted
some of his auditing under threat of physical
coercion. In 1974, despite his repeated objections,
Wollersheim was induced to participate in auditing
aboard a ship Scientology maintained as part of its
Rehabilitation Project Force. The Church obtained
Wollersheim's attendance by using a technique dubbed
"bait and badger." As the name suggests, this tactic
deployed any number of Church members against a
recalcitrant member who was resisting a Church order.
They would alternately promise the "bait" of some
reward and "badger" him with verbal scare tactics. In
the instant case, five Scientologists "baited and
badgered" Wollersheim continuously for three weeks
before he finally gave in and agreed to attend the
Rehabilitation Project Force.
But these verbal threats and psychological
pressure tactics were only the beginning of
Wollersheim's ordeal. While on the ship, Wollersheim
was forced to undergo a strenuous regime which began
around 6 a.m. and continued until 1 a.m. the next
morning. The regime included mornings of menial and
repetitive cleaning of the ship followed by an
afternoon of study or coauditing. The evenings were
spent working and attending meetings or conferences.
Wollersheim and others were forced to sleep in the
ship's hole. A total of 30 people were stacked 9 high
in this hole without proper ventilation. During his
six weeks under these conditions, Wollersheim lost
fifteen pounds.
Ultimately, Wollersheim felt he could bear the
regime no longer. He attempted to escape from the
ship because as he testified later: "I was dying and
losing my mind." But his escape effort was discovered.
Several Scientology members seized Wollersheim and
held him captive. They released him only when he
agreed to remain and continue with the auditing and
other "religious practices" taking place on the
vessel.
One of the psychiatric witnesses testified that
in her opinion Wollersheim's experience on the ship
was one of five cataclysmic events underlying her
diagnosis of his mental illness and its cause. As the
psychiatrist reported, following this incident,
Wollersheim felt the Church "broke him." In any event,
this episode demonstrated the Church was willing to
physically coerce Wollersheim into continuing with his
auditing. Moreover they were willing to do so even
when it was apparent this practice was causing him
serious mental distress and he preferred to cease or
at least suspend this particular religious practice.
Not only was the particular series of auditing
sessions on the ship conducted under threat of
physical compulsion, but the demonstrated willingness
to use physical coercion infected later auditing
sessions. The fact the Church was willing to use
physical coercion on this occasion to compel
Wollersheim's continued participation in auditing
added yet another element to the coercive environment
under which he took part in the auditing process.
There was substantial evidence here from which
the jury could have concluded Wollersheim was
subjecting himself to auditing because of the coercive
environment with which Scientology had surrounded him.
To leave the Church or to cease auditing he had to run
the risk he would become a target of "fair game," face
an enormous burden of "freeloader debt," and even
confront physical restraint. A religious practice
which takes place in the context of this level of
coercion has less religious value than one the
recipient engages in voluntarily. Even more
significantly, it poses a greater threat to society to
have coerced religious practices inflicted on its
citizens."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 894-95, 260 Cal.Rptr. 345-46.
Similarly, the Court of Appeal concluded:
"Here Scientology used coercion -- "fair game,"
"freeloader debt," and in this instance, at least,
physical restraint, along with the threat one or more
of these sanctions will be deployed -- to prevent its
members from leaving the Church."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 896, 260 Cal.Rptr. at 346.
The Court also found that the Church disclosed
confidential information divulged during auditing sessions
and used it against Mr. Wollersheim:
"There is substantial evidence Wollersheim
divulged private information during auditing sessions
under an explicit or implicit promise the information
would remain confidential. Moreover, there is
substantial evidence Scientology leaders and employees
shared this confidential information and used it to
plan and implement a "fair game" campaign against
Wollersheim."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 899, 260 Cal.Rptr. at 349.
After finding that the jury awarded $30 million in
compensatory and punitive damages was excessive, the Court of
Appeal concluded:
"The judgment as to the cause of action for
intentional infliction of emotional injury is modified
to reduce the compensatory damages to $ 500,000 and
the punitive damages to $ 2 million. In all other
respects the judgment is affirmed."
Wollersheim, 212 Cal.App.3d at 907-908, 260 Cal.Rptr. at 355.
The Church of Scientology appealed this decision twice to
the United State Supreme Court, and twice to the California
Supreme Court. The Church of Scientology lost all of those
appeals. The decision is now final. For anyone who doubts this,
the full citation and subsequent history of the case is:
Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology, 212 Cal.App.3d 872,
260 Cal.Rptr. 331 (2d Dist. 1989), review denied,
(Cal. Oct. 26, 1989), review denied, mot. granted, 495 U.S. 902,
110 S.Ct. 1920, 109 L.Ed.2d 284 (1990), cert. denied,
495 U.S. 910, 110 S.Ct. 1937, 109 L.Ed.2d 300 (1990), vacated,
remanded, 499 U.S. 914, 111 S.Ct. 1298, 113 L.Ed.2d 234 (1991),
on remand, 4 Cal.App.4th 1074, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 532 (2d Dist. 1992),
reh'g denied, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 532 (Cal.App. 2d Dist. 1992), review
granted, 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 182 (Cal. 1992), review dismissed, cause
remanded, (Cal. July 15, 1993), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1216,
127 L.Ed.2d 562 (1994).
-- Elvis Cole
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
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.