Episode 69: Claire Headley on Committees of Evidence
December 14 Episode 69: Claire Headley on Committees of Evidence
We talk to our old friend and Aftermath OG Claire Headley again this week, this time to discuss Committees of Evidence. What are they exactly, our personal experiences convening, participating and being victims of them, and how they differ from arbitration.
Listen Now
View Documents (18)
The Headley's on The Aftermath
Season 1 episode 5
View Online
Blown for Good
View Online
The "Arbitration Agreement"
The language from the scientology service Enrollment Agreement that requires “religious arbitration” in the event of a dispute
The Committee of Evidence PL
View/Download Document
Earlier Blog Post #1
Concerning Scientology “Religious Arbitration”
View Online
Blog Post #2
Scientology “Religious Arbitration” — Giving Kangaroo Courts a Bad Name
View Online
Blog Post #3
More on Scientology “Religious Arbitration”
View Online
Blog Post #4
Shameful Scientology “Religious Arbitration” Destroying Justice
View Online
Blog Post #5
A Scientology Committee of Evidence is NOT Arbitration
View Online
The Ethics Review PL
View/Download Document
Scientology List of Crimes
View/Download Document
List of High Crimes
View/Download Document
The Justice of Scientology PL
View/Download Document
A New Hope for Justice
View/Download Document
Justice Rosenbaum dissent
View Online
Committee of Evidence
Example of a Bill of Particulars for a Committee of Evicdence
View/Download Document
Headley Appellate decision excerpt
9 Comments
You guys talk about the abuse from DM. But it’s always towards men .. Did/ does he abuse physically the higher up woman?
Also, did/does he make higher ups physically abuse other higher ups?
See Debbie Cook testimony in San Antonio court case when scientology sued her….
Leah, please keep us updated about your “High School” transcript issue. I sure hope they don’t make you take a GED exam at this point. Good Luck! Love the show. Thank you.
Hi guys,
Love the show.
Wow, you guys really buried the lead here. Let’s say Beth sues Steven for damages relating to a sexual assault. Beth is the plaintiff in that case. If Steve says, “actually, we both have signed documents agreeing to Scientology arbitration. We have to do that first.” Beth goes before the committee of evidence and is investigated as a suppressive person.
Beth is now the defendant!!
And no mater the example this is going to be the case. Anyone who brings a civil mater against Scientology, at arbitration, will be the one ACCUSED of high crimes.
This is a huge problem.
Further, the issue is no longer who raped whom, but whether Beth was right to bring a Scientology mater before the civil courts.
However fair or not fair a committee of evidence may be, it can’t be a substitute for civil court, because it doesn’t address the same matter. It isn’t just that they call rape something else, or look at it from a different, religious slant. It’s that the arbitration doesn’t address the matter of the rape at all. It’s all about the accusers behaviour as an SP.
Otherwise awesome episode, thanks for the good work.
Regarding “arbitration”, what % of arbitrations find in favor of the plaintiff? One would assume that a certain number of complaints would be found to be valid. If the answer to that is zero or close to it, would that not signal to the courts that it is not a valid process and that bias exists?
Hi Guys!
I have another question….
What is ‘the hole’? Where is it? What is it like? What do you have to have done to get sent there? When you are there, what is it like? What do you do? What was the naughty thing/s you did Mike to get sent there? 😉 what happened to you there?
Thanks
Claire
Can’t wait for the knowledge report episode!
Question for a listeners episode: obviously if this brings up any trauma please do not feel the need to use this question, because I can only imagine what kind of duress you would have been under at the time, but you’ve both mentioned the ‘shit’ you make up during Scientology auditing and I’d love to know if you have any stories that you made up to satisfy the meter during your time in. Anything you remember thinking ‘I can’t believe I’m about to say this’ or anything you thought was silly coming out of your mouth but felt obliged to say? Maybe you made something up just to see the auditor’s reaction? I’m so curious!
Love to you both, thanks for doing this!
In listening to this episode I noticed that Claire said that her mother had signed her over to Scientology at age 16. Doesn’t that have to go through the courts and why didn’t the court question this? Thank you.
Love you guys!
Rosemarie
I’m curious. I am not a lawyer but couldn’t a lawyer bring up the Supreme Court ruling or opinion (or whatever it is called) that stated that Scientology is not a religion? Wouldn’t that stop any religious claim made by the Church of Scientology in court and wouldn’t that lift all religious protections granted by the IRS?
Maybe my thinking is too simple but the IRS should not trump the Supreme Court.