Jeffrey Augustine, referring to me, writes on Ex-Scientologist Message Board:
Gerry has protested for decades that he was illegally recorded by OSA operatives in Griffith Park. And yet when Corey Andrews illegally recorded Karen, Gerry quickly posted the illegal recording on his blog. This makes Gerry a staggering hypocrite and fraud in my book. He screams about injustices done to him while he is a scofflaw; a fugitive from justice; and has now acted in concert with others as an accessory to a crime, to wit:
California’s wiretapping law is a “two-party consent” law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to “confidential communications” — i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989)… In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
I am only addressing here the matter of Corey Andrews recording Karen de la Carriere’s call to him, and my actions in response to this recording being published. It is necessary to say that Augustine has hated me for many years, or at least acted as hating me, and has targeted me with defamatory black PR attacks. He has libeled me in multiple contexts, and collaborates with other people who have, also for years, hated and smeared me to silence or destroy me.
There are numerous things in Augustine’s attacks that merit confronting. I am only dealing here, however, with two related calumnies: 1. his false accusation that in the de la Carriere-Andrews recording matter I am an accessory to the crime of wiretapping; and 2. the fake conclusion that because I protested the Scientologists and their coconspirators’ unlawfully recording me in 1984, my actions regarding the recording of the 2019 de la Carriere call (when it was recorded, Augustine says, I “quickly posted the illegal recording on [my] blog”) make me a “staggering hypocrite and fraud.”
Who YouTubed the recording Andrews made of de la Carriere’s call to him I don’t know. Relevantly, it was not me. But even if it had been me, it is irrelevant to the charge of my being an accessory to the crime of wiretapping. I must emphasize that I am not an attorney and that nothing I say should be considered legal advice or legally definitive.
It is also sensible to know — which I have not withheld in what I’ve authored or published over many years — that I consider that the US justice system, and the US’s laws and legal procedures in virtually every jurisdiction, have been corrupted, and where once there was an expectation or at least hope of justice, now there are injustice and hopelessness. The Scientologists, first under Scientology inventor and director L. Ron Hubbard, then under cult head David Miscavige, and as “independents,” and the Scientologists’ collaborators, who include an inordinate number of lawyers, have been significant contributors to the generation of justice system corruption in US jurisdictions and abroad.
If I had instructed Andrews to record de la Carriere’s call to him, or told him how to go about it, this could conceivably have constituted an accessorial offense. I did not know of Corey Andrews, however, when he recorded the subject call, or even when he passed the recording to others. I also have not seen where he knew of me when he recorded the call, or transmitted the recording to other persons, who posted it.
From Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition:
Accessory. Anything which is joined to another thing as an ornament, or to render it more perfect, or which accompanies it, or is connected with it as an incident, or as subordinate to it, or which belongs to or with it.
Adjunct or accompaniment. Louis Werner Saw Mill Co. v. White, 205 La. 242, 17 So.2d 264, 270. A thing of subordinate importance. Aiding or contributing in secondary way or assisting in or contributing to as a subordinate. Gilfoil v. Greenspon, La.App., 216 So.2d 829, 831.
Criminal law. Contributing to or aiding in the commission of a crime. One who, without being present at the commission of a felonious offense, becomes guilty of such offense, not as a chief actor, but as a participator, as by command, advice, instigation, or concealment; either before or after the fact or commission; a particeps criminis. Model Penal Code, § 2.06.
One who is not the chief actor in the offense, nor present at its performance, but in some way concerned therein, either before or after the act committed. One who aids, abets, commands, or counsels another in the commission of a crime. See also Abettor; Aid and abet; Accomplice.
Andrews, I believe, is in New York, which is a “one-party consent” jurisdiction. That is, in New York State, any one party, with his or her own consent may record any communication in which he or she is a party. In view of the now-known fact, however, that, without our consent, the US Intelligence Community has for decades at least been recording all of our communications they wanted, which was generally everything, the party-consent rule, whether one or all, is moot, or fakery, or both.
Although Andrews, with only his own consent, recorded de la Carriere’s call in a one-party consent state, Ms. De la Carriere might very well have originated her call in California, which, as Augustine observes, is an all-parties consent state. Regarding “confidential communications” between a one-party consent state and an all-parties consent state, the current law holds, I believe, that the all-parties state’s more restrictive statutes take precedence. So conceivably, absent any other facts or context, de la Carriere, might have a California claim against Andrews.
California Penal Code § 632 (c) states:
For the purposes of this section, “confidential communication” means any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive, or administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded. (bold mine)
I have reasonably expected for many years that my e-communications, including telephone calls, were being overheard and recorded. There is nothing I can do to alter that expectation, and nothing I can do to prevent the persons or entities who overhear or record my e-communications from doing so. I have had no reasonable expectation of confidentiality or privacy in such communications for just as long. I am aware that the key entities that have been overhearing and recording my communications collaborate with the Scientologists. Edward Snowden’s 2013 leak of NSA global surveillance documents, was proof of what many people like me had known for years.
The US Intelligence Community entities, of course, do not view a huge percentage of the persons whose communications the USIC are overhearing or recording as enemies or threats, in the way they view me as an enemy and threat. It is unreasonable that I should have an expectation of confidentiality in any of my e-communications, and it is just as unreasonable that persons communicating to me should have any expectation of confidentiality in their e-communications to me. I think I have been abundantly clear about this for many years. See even this open letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin that mentions these facts:
I am writing publicly because I have virtually no privacy in my communications to you, nor any expectation of privacy. Also, making this patently public will obviate any accusation of collusion. https://gerryarmstrong.ca/letter-to-president-putin/
A lot of people, even years into the e-age, speak, write and act as if nothing has changed since it became known that all their e-communications were being overheard and recorded. They speak and write as if they can make such communications confidential by saying they are. Some people even use confidentiality or privacy, where none exists, for control purposes or to generate fake ethical superiority.
The overhearers and recorders are not going to stop overhearing and recording. They know that a societal shift from the expectation of privacy and confidentiality to the unshakeable realization that e-communications were being overheard or recorded, could be system-altering. That’s why USIC head DNI James Clapper lied to Congress about the NSA collecting any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans. It’s why courts apparently are still treating e-privacy or e-confidentiality, including in telephonic communications, as if these concepts exist as they once existed. There has been a relatively successful social engineering campaign to get populations to accept the overhearers and recorders as not present since they act silently and invisibly.
A step in the overhearers and recorders’ campaign to maintain the privacy delusion in the public’s mind and institutions is the acceptance of the overhearers and recorders as intelligent and good, doing their honorable best to protect good people from bad people, the enemy. I do not have the “luxury” of accepting this narrative; but even if I did, it does not alter the fact that professional overhearers and recorders overhear and record my communications, and I have no reasonable expectation of them not being overheard and recorded.
Unlike almost everyone else, I am in a very long and active war with the Scientologists and their collaborators, all of whom treat me as the enemy. The relevant Scientology scripture directing how they are to wage their war on the enemy like me is HCO Policy Letter of 16 February 1969, Reissued 24 September 1987, “Battle Tactics.” http://suppressiveperson.org/1969/02/16/hcopl-battle-tactics/
The Scientologists and their collaborators have targeted me as the enemy in different places, countries, courts, groups, media, etc. for thirty-eight years.
It could be argued that because the people who consider me the enemy overhear and record my communications, I have a duty in this war to record my communications myself. Obviously Corey Andrews, if he’s more or less as he appears to me to be, is now also an enemy target of the Scientologists and their collaborators. Consequently, he might also arguably have a duty to similarly make such a record to defend himself, his family, associates and cause. His forwarding of his recording also might be privileged because, arguably, de la Carriere was inducing him to do something she even suggested was unlawful. Again, I am not a lawyer.
Importantly, there is no logical way that I am an accessory to any crime in Andrews’ recording of de la Carriere’s call to him, or in my republication of the already-published recording, or in my posting of a transcript of the recording. Augustine is lying, and serving the antisocial purposes of the Miscavigeite Scientologists and their collaborators. In this matter, I am in a position similar to Julian Assange. He published documents, and I published documents, even documents whose authors might not want published, which, in endless circumstances, is perfectly legal. To prosecute Assange, however, the US Federal Government claims that he assisted Chelsea (Bradley) Manning to unlawfully obtain the documents he published. That is why Augustine, knowingly, baselessly and libelously, claims I am an accessory to the creation of the subject recording.
On or about December 29, 2019, I learned of Andrews’ recording of de la Carriere’s call to him, which had been posted to YouTube. Caroline transcribed the recording, and on December 31 posted her unofficial transcript to our “Scientology Research” site: https://scientology-research.org/transcript-telephone-call-between-karen-de-la-carriere-and-corey-andrews-ca-mid-2019/
I wrote a note I called “Karen de la Carriere briefing on trickling or dribbling,” in which I explained or discussed bits of the content in her call. I posted my note, along with a copy of the recording, also on December 31. http://gerryarmstrong.ca/karen-de-la-carriere-briefing-on-trickling-or-dribbling/
I did not make any effort to disseminate my note’s publication. Some persons might have referred or linked to it on one forum or another, but I have no record of such posts. I did advise de la Carriere and Mike Rinder that I had posted my note and the transcript:
From: Gerry Armstrong
Sent: December 31, 2019 4:59 PM
To: Karen de la Carriere; Mike Rinder
Subject: Note and transcript
Dear Ms. de la Carriere and Mr. Rinder:
FYI, I posted a note about the recorded call to Corey Andrew, which was recently leaked: https://gerryarmstrong.ca/karen-de-la-carriere-briefing-on-trickling-or-dribbling/
Also I posted an unofficial transcript of the call: https://scientology-research.org/transcript-telephone-call-between-karen-de-la-carriere-and-corey-andrews-ca-mid-2019/
I also mentioned Mr. Rinder in my note.
I believe that the first response to my note was an email from Stefani Hutchison on January 12:
From: Stefani Hutchison
Sent: January 12, 2020 8:24 AM
To: [Gerry Armstrong]
Subject: Fighting Scientology
My name is Stefani and I am a writer, author of the book Scientology for Never Ins, a blogger at Azhlynne’s Blog on WordPress and I run a twitter account dedicated to exposing the lies and abuses of Scientology.
Recent events, ignited by Corey Andrews, an unstable young man who has a history of attacking people for no reason, have concerned me greatly.
You are one of the BIG fighters in this battle and your words have weight. So when I saw that you’d weighed in on the sneakily, illegally obtained recording made by Corey and given to John McGhee I have to say I was shocked.
I have read the transcript of that recording multiple times, (https://scientology-research.org/transcript-telephone-call-between-karen-de-la-carriere-and-corey-andrews-ca-mid-2019/) and frankly I fail to see the alleged smoking gun proving that Karen De La Carriere has done anything wrong.
Corey Andrews showed up on twitter about a year ago, he contacted me a few times and I responded. With no warning he sent me an ugly message one morning attacking me because I was apparently not retweeting his posts as often as he’d wanted. After I blocked him, he turned on several other people in the same way. Corey never has taken the time or spent the effort to create anything of his own. His only “work” was in retweeting the words and works of other people. He wanted attention and praise but does not want to expend the energy to actually work for it.
Karen took Corey under her wing. She was kind and supportive to him, even going so far as to making him an admin on FB. She did NOT, in spite of rumor to the contrary, pay him any money monthly to obey her every command. Corey’s sole employment was as a janitor at his cousin’s children’s camp. When the camp closed, Corey was out of a job and struggling. Out of kindness Karen sent him $200 to help him get by. This was only done one time.
As no good deed goes unpunished, eventually Corey once again got angry with Karen for the same thing he attacked me (and others) for- not retweeting his tweets enough to suit him. Not long after he attacked her for this the recording was released, that video was created and the ugliest, nastiest type of cyber bullying I have ever seen commenced.
Gary, as someone familiar with Scientology’s Fair Game policy, as someone who knows what OSA is capable of, how is this situation at all any different from the way COS treats the people they don’t like? This was a page taken directly from Hubbard’s policy bulletins and it is NOT OK.
Karen, despite the fact that some may not care for her, did not deserve to be public ripped to pieces over rumor and innuendo. The only thing that recording shows is Karen once again supporting, helping and encouraging Corey, who has yet to ever create something original of his own. She told him he was a great poster on social media, she offered him…rather it could be said that she led the boy by the nose to…important information concerning OSA and attempted to inspire him to use it in order to gain more followers and increase his standing online.
The only thing she asked of him was not to post the link she trusted him with as she, herself, had been asked not to post it. That is not unreasonable. Nor is it in any way sneaky, sketchy or unethical.
This situation, taken up by someone with your credibility and stature in this anti Scientology movement, went far, far beyond simply attacking a woman who did not deserve to be treated in such a manner. There were civilian casualties, so to speak, as well. Friends were forced to take sides and relationships were damaged. People other than the target of this Fair Game campaign were hurt.
I do not presume to know what your relationship is with those involved in this ugly mess. If you do not like, agree with or support Karen De La Carriere that is certainly your right. We can’t all like everyone. There will always be disagreements. However rather than embracing the very tactics perfected and wielded by Scientology and the OSA, thus giving the watching cult a jolly laugh at our expense, would not the better, less damaging course of action simply be to move on? We can all do our part in this fight without destroying those around us.
Scientology aside, simply from a human standpoint, Karen did not deserve what Corey and John, along with John’s followers, did to her. She was publicly attacked, called “cunt”, “whore”, “bitch” and more. No woman should be subjected to such ugly speech.
Especially when there is no real foundation for any of it.
I have begged John to give me ANY proof to back up his rumors and hearsay against Karen. The only thing I have been pointed to is that recording.
That recording has nothing within it to support such a disgusting, damaging attack. I would ask you to read the transcript and please point me to anyplace that suggests otherwise.
Frankly, if you take a look on twitter, where John and his followers launched the majority of their attacks on Karen, you will see that in the end, it was not John McGhee who came out looking good. People are disgusted with what he and Corey have done.
If you have some sort of verifiable, unbiased proof to lend credence and justification to your support of this OSA worthy crushing of the character of another person then I beg you to show me. No one has been able to so far.
If this is a personal vendetta, a case of simple dislike then all well and good. But that does not justify this entire situation.
I ask you, as someone who firmly believes in the truth and in facts, to please help me to understand someone of your position taking up another’s campaign to publicly destroy a woman’s reputation in the name of hearsay, rumor and the unfounded third party twisting of facts. Karen may be disliked or disagreed with but she did not deserve this treatment.
I emailed Hutchison back:
From: Gerry Armstrong
Sent: January 12, 2020 9:24 AM
To: ‘Stefani Hutchison’
Subject: RE: Fighting Scientology
Thanks for this quite detailed communication.
It would make a better record, and permit a full response from me, if you provide your first-hand knowledge of or any other evidentiary support for the important fact claims you’ve made.
Please post your email and any evidence you have publicly and send me a link. Obviously this is an important public discussion and should stay there.
2-46298 Yale Road
Chilliwack, BC V2P 2P6
PS: If possible, can you please send me a copy of your book.
Hutchison emailed me:
From: Stefani Hutchison
Sent: January 12, 2020 11:30 AM
To: Gerry Armstrong
Subject: Re: Fighting Scientology
I would be happy to give you what I have. However you must now understand that once bitten, twice shy. I will not be drawn into anything that may be designed to once again attack Karen. I will not be used as a tool in anyone’s Fair Game campaign.
If you sincerely want to address this situation fairly then I will work with you with everything I have. If you are simply hoping to gain the ability to, like John McGhee just did, twist the truth into something it isn’t just to hurt someone I want no part of it.
I wish to be clear here: I do not know Karen or Jeffrey in any capacity other than through Twitter and FB. Until less than a year ago, I didn’t even realize they were married.
The interactions I have had with them have given me no reason to suspect or doubt them. I was offered an admin position by Karen but had to refuse it because my plate is already full. At no time in that conversation was I offered even the suggestion of payment for my participation. In the year that I have interacted with her she has been kind and supportive of me but never has she attempted to instruct me what to do, who to believe, or what to say in my blogs. As a matter of fact she actually gave me written Carte Blanch to post whatever I wished on either of her FB groups.
When I heard of the rumor surrounding her alleged auditing I asked her directly. We spoke on the phone (I did not record the call) and I spoke to both Karen and Jeffrey. They both are in the dark where such an accusation may have arisen from and both adamantly deny that any auditing in any form is conducted by Karen or on her order. She does not charge anyone for such services. Neither of them ever had the “friend of a friend showed up at Karen’s home to be told by Jeffrey to be quiet because she was auditing” experience. There is nothing but third party hearsay to support this rumor and both of the targets of it vehemently deny it. Given everything Karen has been through at the hands of Scientology including the loss of her son, it flies in the face of common sense and reason that she would then continue to embrace the fundamental practices that embody the cult that did her and continues to do her, such harm. This is just not believable and unless there is proof, a picture from a PI of Karen with the Cans in her hand, a receipt from services rendered or even one credible person who could step forward and announce they were audited by Karen De La Carriere then basic human reason says she must be given the benefit of the doubt.
Again, as for the allegation that she paid Corey J Andrews $200/month to be her lackey when I confronted one of McGhee’s defenders she insisted that I ask Karen directly so I absolutely did:
If this were not true, then how would she know about the details of Corey’s employment, that he was a janitor and that the camp was run by his cousin?
I will for now also provide you with several screen shots of my own interaction with Corey Andrews as a token of trust. As you will see he turned to me looking for approval and advice when he was dealing with a Scientologist on Twitter. With no major interactions in between, other than out publicly on the threads, his next private contact with me was a scathing message attacking me for not retweeting his posts. I was blindsided.