The Danny Masterson Trial thread

'It was rape - and he was like a predator': Danny Masterson's accuser tells Los Angeles court the actor was 'like a drill sergeant' during 2003 assault at his home - and claims she felt 'fuzzy and numb' after drinking a glass of red wine he poured



  • Masterson, 46, has pleaded not guilty to raping three women at his Hollywood Hills home between 2001 and 2003
  • The actor and well-known Scientologist has been free on $3.3 million bail since his arrest in June 2020
  • The three women - Jane Doe 1, 2 and 3 - are testifying against Masterson at Los Angeles Superior Court
  • On Wednesday Jane Doe 2 gave a graphic account of her allegations, claiming he raped her in the shower in his home in 2003
 
New stuff...not about trial....but related.


It's a very old saying that "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Many years ago I was reading an editorial by science fiction author John Campbell where he makes the point that it's not power which corrupts, but immunity from consequences..

This is what's been happening with Danny for a long time, living in the Scientology bubble. His "ethics protection" has allowed him to behave badly without consequence, for a very long time, and he thought he could get away with it forever.
 
Expanding a bit on what I just said, I think that if you dig into his relationships going back into his teens, you would probably find bad behavior and a sense of entitlement there too.

Someone mentioned, up thread, that Danny hadn't shown any interest in auditing. This, I think, is key. The only power that Scientology has over you is their ability to deny you access to auditing, and to disconnect you from other Scientologists.

But what can Ethics do when they have someone who doesn't care about what Ethics can do? Someone whose income is not dependent on Scientology, whose circle of friends includes lots of non Scientologists, and who feels no need for anything Scientology can provide to him or try to withhold from him? Somebody who Scientology feels it needs (the value of celebrity) but who does not really need THEM?

Danny was a minor celebrity (as a child model) since 4, and became a significant celebrity in his teens as his acting career started taking off. Does anyone think he didn't have OSA covering for him from an early age? You think Danny maybe enjoyed being a teen in Scientology, being able to get away with bad behavior and having people being forced to put up with him (including his parents) because he was an "upstat" valuable "celebrity"?

I think Danny's main, perhaps only, interest in Scientology after he turned 18, and had an independent income from his career, was that it provided him with a supply of vulnerable Scientologist girls, who he could use and abuse, and who would be forbidden to "natter" about what he did to them.

And OSA knew this was Danny's price for continuing to be considered a Scientology celebrity. That the only way to keep him, was to have him be well supplied with compliant girls.

I think if you dig, you will find a LOT of women from his earlier days.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 19352

Like I said in my earlier post, I think if you dig enough, you will find that he's been behaving like this for a LONG time, and has gotten used to being able to get away with it.

What we are seeing is just a little bit of what's been going on, and I think the other celebrities have gotten similar leniency from "Ethics" for bad behavior.
 
They told her that her job was to provide him with sex on demand, in exchange for being allowed to live there.
A parishioner that I knew at my org (JC) explained that she and her husband were having troubles. He was an alcoholic and they were having a rolling upset for years, and since they were now in the flock, they went to ethics. JC said that the EO told her that in regards to sex, she should submit when her husband wanted it. That bothered her, and when I heard it, that bothered me as well. JC confided to me, she trusted me and she thought it odd. I did not do anything about it.

Sad to say that they have both passed away since that time.

Even sadder was the fact that her husband later came to me and told me that JC had been surfing anti-scn data on the interwebs late at night, and I sent her to ethics. She said that what she saw was bad about scn, and it had her very worried that we were all doing the correct thing.

Sorry JC, wherever you are, you were correct!!

They were huge contributors to the ideal org.
 
^^^^^^

Don't want to go too far afield here....but it looks from the above video.....that the Police Captain of the Hollywood LAPD ( Wilcox Station) and or the Detective Reyez was also involved in this case back in 2017. I guess it is not unusual....as that Detective takes the Sexual Cases....I suppose.


I guess the biggest hello is that the Sea Org liaison with the Chief of Police of the Hollywood Division LAPD.....Mr.Lecroix.....his wife Angie....is the one that interrogated all the Danny Masterson accusers.....

And that the Sea Org is saying they don't know where she is....

Such nasty stuff....

Probably lots of misspelled names here......sorry.
 
^^^^^^

Good one.

Just a thought.... In an Auditing Session...privileged. Worksheets go to the CS.......He/She looks em over and decided that a Sec Check or Ethics Officer should get involved.....

In that sense......it would seem to me that the Scientology had violated its own privileged information from a session....
 
^^^^^^

Good one.

Just a thought.... In an Auditing Session...privileged. Worksheets go to the CS.......He/She looks em over and decided that a Sec Check or Ethics Officer should get involved.....

In that sense......it would seem to me that the Scientology had violated its own privileged information from a session....
Yes, the legal groundwork for "priest penitent privilege" comes from Christianity and the fundamental need to keep confessions private, where making a priest reveal confessed information would damage the religion, and thus violate the First Amendment "free exercise" clause.

But, in Christianity, the confessions are kept private. Stuff confessed to a priest are not thereafter openly posted on a piece of goldenrod-colored paper on the church bulletin board.

Either a confession is truly private, or it is not, and if not then it does not seem to me that an argument can validly be made that it is "privileged".
 
Yes, the legal groundwork for "priest penitent privilege" comes from Christianity and the fundamental need to keep confessions private, where making a priest reveal confessed information would damage the religion, and thus violate the First Amendment "free exercise" clause.

But, in Christianity, the confessions are kept private. Stuff confessed to a priest are not thereafter openly posted on a piece of goldenrod-colored paper on the church bulletin board.

Either a confession is truly private, or it is not, and if not then it does not seem to me that an argument can validly be made that it is "privileged".


.
Of course what you are describing is a logical conclusion. However we are talking about Scientology here, so a different set of rules applies.

I have mentioned this once before but it bears repeating. . .

If the priest-penitent privilege came under scrutiny in the Masterson case (because the defense lawyers invoked it), there seems to be a very simple way for the cult to circumvent that problem. All they would need to do is to call an expert witness on the matter that could testify that there are "different categories of minister" within Scientology. Here's where the "lie and trick" gimmick comes into play. Scientology's position would be that EVERYONE who audited, sec checked or performed ethics handlings in the Masterson matter was in fact a minister.

To corroborate this position, they could describe and/or easily produce many dozens of calls to acton to Scientology VOLUNTEER MINISTERS within a few seconds of Googling the term. And they could do that within a few seconds online and show the prosecutors. And they could also call any number of Scientologists who have performed "VOLUNTEER MINISTER" services to help others in their time of trouble/tragedy with Scientology's religious rites (e.g. touch assist, contact assist, locations, et al).

I would assume that the point that the judge would be entirely unwilling to cross into determining what IS or IS NOT a legitimate religious designation or meaning of "minister" within the "religion" of Scientology. I would guess that is an easy call for the judge--to entirely avoid any intrusion into challenging Scientology's "freedom of religion". In other words, if an ethics officer or sec checker testifies that they are a MINISTER and can produce even one (1) photo of themselves in a promo piece wearing a yellow t-shirt or rain coat---in a photo op that has the words "Volunteer Minister" on it, well then, doesn't that end the legal debate. If Scientology calls them a MINISTER and the Scientologist calls themselves a MINISTER, how can the judge or prosecution claim their religious "beliefs" are otherwise?

I think the Scientology legal theory would be a slam dunk, particularly because the VOLUNTEER MINISTERS are using Scientology SCRIPTURE (HCOBs on touch assists, objective processes as well as "Assists" and "Auditing Processes" from the 871 page SCIENTOLOGY HANDBOOK.

513rjsigqdL._SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_FMwebp_.jpg

​

And for those who are curious to learn more, there are entire COS websites dedicated to their VOLUNTEER MINISTER use of Scientology's "religious technology" to offer spiritual aid and help to the needy.


- - - - - - -​

SCIENTOLOGY VOLUNTEER MINISTERS​
REAL HELP TO ANYONE, ANYWHERE​
​
​
Whether serving in their own communities or on the other side of the world, the motto of the Scientology Volunteer Minister is “Something can be done about it.” The program, created in the mid 1970s by L. Ron Hubbard and sponsored by the Church of Scientology International as a religious social service today constitutes one of the largest and most visible international independent relief forces.​
​
The Volunteer Minister’s mandate is to be “a person who helps his fellow man on a volunteer basis by restoring purpose, truth and spiritual values to the lives of others.” Hundreds of thousands, Scientologists and others, have been trained in person or online in a wide range of skills that use Scientology fundamentals to bring relief from physical, mental or spiritual suffering and improve any aspect of life—communication, study, marriage, parenting, dealing with stress, success in the workplace, achieving goals and many more.​
​
Additionally, a global network of volunteers form the permanent Volunteer Ministers Disaster Response Team that mobilizes in times of disaster caused by humans or nature, answering the call wherever needed. Collaborating with some 1,000 organizations and agencies, they have utilized their skill and experience in providing physical support and spiritual aid at hundreds of disaster sites.​
​
"OVER 46 million people helped by Scientology VOLUNTEER MINISTERS!"​
​
- - - - - - -​




daniel-okello-delivers-assist-kenya-prison-nerve-assist.jpg

"Laying on of Hands" healing (just like Jesus!)​
​
​
​
21-0615s2p-cos-stvincent2-696x522.jpg
​
"Holy Water" (just like Christian Baptism!) ​



images

Anointing of the sick, afflicted and
demon infested with sacred substance!

Bible Verse Mark 6:13



...​
 
Last edited:
Yes, the legal groundwork for "priest penitent privilege" comes from Christianity and the fundamental need to keep confessions private, where making a priest reveal confessed information would damage the religion, and thus violate the First Amendment "free exercise" clause.

But, in Christianity, the confessions are kept private. Stuff confessed to a priest are not thereafter openly posted on a piece of goldenrod-colored paper on the church bulletin board.

Either a confession is truly private, or it is not, and if not then it does not seem to me that an argument can validly be made that it is "privileged".
Well, yes. And in a Christian confession, it isn't recorded or written down and stored forever.
 
.

Well, yes. And in a Christian confession, it isn't recorded or written down and stored forever.

.

Another difference is that Jesus never told his followers to set up hate websites on on infidels who didn't believe he was their savior.

Also, Jesus never demanded that his followers each donate 177,430 Shekels ($50K) in exchange for an IAC* lapel pin.


..
* IAC - International Association of Christians


..
 
Well, yes. And in a Christian confession, it isn't recorded or written down and stored forever.
In Catholic confession, the priest does not generally even know who you are, because in the confessional booth he does not see you. He might recognize your voice, but to a prosecutor he can say "The confessing person was not known to me and I cannot identify him." And the prosecutor cannot prove otherwise.

20190604T0817-1916-CNS-CONFESSIONAL-PRIVILEGE-IMPORTANCE.jpg



 
..

In Catholic confession, the priest does not generally even know who you are, because in the confessional booth he does not see you.



That is also true in Scientology.

In a Scientology confession, the auditor does not know who you really are, because the preclear is (ultimately) in Ron's valence.

Sounds like the punchline to a joke. But it's not. LOL

..
 
Back
Top