Karen#1. It has always interested me as to why current or former high ranking SO personal have allowed themselves to be placed in the SP HALL or the "Hole" as it is known. Some of these individuals have not been seen in public in years. How can someone tolerate such? Is COB hiding them intentionally? Have some of the OG-SO higher ups had psychoic episodes and are no longer deemed worthy of being in control of themselves say within the public sector?

I know my mind would snap if I was exposed to this culture of anger,fear and intimidation on a daily basis.

We were thrilled to see Mat Pesch show up with these words:

To get a better understanding of imprisonment on the Freewinds one should Google Don Jason's story which can be found in the St Pete Times article as part of the Truth Rundown series. The person being held has no passport, no money, they are not allowed access to public and staff other than their guard, they sleep in a room with a magnetic lock on the door and they are watched on a camera inside their room. The gangway to the dock is always guarded by a security guard. If the prisoner does manage to go down one of the dock ropes (as Don did) they are chased down by multiple security guards and if they still manage to escape they are chased down to what ever country they make it to. I know of Sea Org children that were ordered (by Miscavige) to legally change their name and were sent to a foreign country just to ensure their parents could not find them. Motivation? To spite the parents for crossing Miscavige. To send a 17-year-old girl down in that engine room to work and live for 3 months is no joke. I too have been down there. You strip to your underwear and put on a boiler suit and a pair of boots as the oil and grease would ruin any clothes you would wear. The heat is extreme and you need to constantly drink water because you sweat non stop. The pounding of the engines is so loud that you have to yell to another from inches away to be heard.

When an attorney is not acting primarily as an attorney but, for instance, as a business advisor, member of the Board of Directors, or in another non-legal role, then the privilege generally does not apply.[4]
In the US, communications between accountants and their clients are usually not privileged. ... The mere fact that the practitioner is an attorney will not create a valid attorney-client privilege with respect to a communication, for example, that involves business or accounting advice rather than legal advice.
Footnote 4: North Pacifica, LLC v. City of Pacifica, 274 F.Supp.2d 1118, 1127 (N.D. Cal 2003); Handguards, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson, 69 F.R.D. 451, 453 (N.D. Cal 1975).

Monique’s professional areas of practice are, naturally,
federal tax controversies, federal taxation, income tax, tax
controversies, tax exempt organizations. She was admitted to
the bar in 1977 in California and the 9th Circuit Federal
Appeals Court, in 1982 to the US Claims Court, in 1983 to
the U.S. Tax Court, in 1984 to the District of Columbia
Courts, and in 1989 to the U.S. Supreme Court. She was
promoted to partner in the fall of 1985.

The "Church of Scientology International" calls Ms. Paris a "liar" and an "apostate." It refers to Ms. Paris' claims as "wholly irresponsible, ludicrous, sad, spurious, dishonest, ridiculous, unreliable, uncorroborated, and totally false." You can read the over-the-top Scientology denials

Ex-members, called apostates, are an acknowledged phenomenon with known, predictable patterns, as documented by sociologists and religious scholars. To quote just one, Bryan Wilson, Ph.D. of Oxford University in the United Kingdom:

“The apostate is generally in need of self-justification. He seeks to reconstruct his own past, to excuse his former affiliations, and to blame those who were formerly his closest associates. Not uncommonly the apostate learnt to rehearse an “atrocity story” to explain how, by manipulation, trickery, coercion, or deceit, he was induced to join or remain within an organization that he now forswears and condemns. Apostates, sensationalized by the press, have sometimes sought to make a profit from accounts of their experiences in stories sold to newspapers….”

“Academics have come to recognize the ‘atrocity story’ as a distinctive genre of the apostate and have even come to regard it as a recognizable category of phenomena.”

This happens with other groups as well and even in marriages or broken friendships. The one who leaves sometimes goes a long way to explain how bad the relationship was or tries to justify that he abandoned his friends. This is a social mechanism and sometimes quite fantastic to listen to, but not a good measure to find the truth.

Some former members might complain about "bad experiences" they had or claim to have had. So, obviously they decided not to do something about it and left the organization. Maybe it was not the right thing for them. Just as most other religious organizations Scientology does not hold members who do not want to be members. Scientology practices do not work properly if done under pressure or false premises. So who wants to go, should leave or help to remedy perceived wrongs. Ex-members who try to make a living as "experts" on the faith they abandoned are clearly not neutral and not a good source for anything related.

CoS likes to label an escaped critic as an "apostate" as though it was a magic word. They may base this on one stale academic who belittled and criticized apostates.

CoS likes to label an escaped critic as an "apostate" as though it was a magic word. They may base this on one stale academic who belittled and criticized apostates.
..................

11. Two of the things that organized scientology felt were of the most importance in order to avoid compliance with many laws that were contrary to Hubbard policy were the religious cloaking as covered above and a corporate restructuring to make it very difficult if not impossible for outsiders to ever get to the main assets of organized scientology and to ensure that the real leaders of organized scientology could be insulated from legal liability by hiding their real controls behind a myriad of corporate and other legal veils. It was considered both a defensive and offensive strategy to have such cloaking (religious and corporate) in place. Defensively it makes it very difficult for individuals or even governments to force legal compliance of the many types of laws as covered above. It also makes it almost impossible to hold those that really control organized scientology responsible legally or to get to the financial assets of organized scientology spread out around the world. Offensively, it gives organized scientology a “safe base” from which to attack critics and/or anyone it feels is its enemy. Hiding behind religious cloaking and corporate veils it can act as a victim when people point out its crimes and injustices calling them “religious bigots” and even scaring governments, many of whom are not supposed to get involved with “religious matters”. By calling policies by Hubbard or Miscavige that are otherwise abusive or contrary to law “religious scripture” it was hoped to avoid legal scrutiny of same.

12. Once religious cloaking was begun in earnest and many self serving documents were made and images created to reflect a religious image, it was considered vital to get “experts” to support the concept that organized scientology was in fact an organized religion., it’s policies “religious scripture”, etc. The entire intention behind the acquisition and use of such religious and legal scholars was to create and develop “evidence” to support the religious cloaking that could be used in courts and elsewhere where needed. While organized scientology today parades out various scholars that say they are “religious”, I can tell you that this scholar program was started in the Guardian’s Office and I worked on it as early as 1974. I worked on the obtainment of such scholars opinions personally and by supervising others to do same and I used such scholars opinions to obtain recognitions that organized scientology would not otherwise have obtained.

13. At no point where any scholars briefed on either the real controls of organized scientology or the reasons why religious cloaking was developed. Instead they tended to be briefed using the religious cloaking materials developed and/or by speaking with pre qualified, briefed scientologists who were told what to tell the scholars. If scholars wrote less than glowing reports of scientology being religious in nature, their opinions were discarded. For those who would write glowing reports supporting scientology’s “religious nature”, those reports were kept for further use in legal and/or PR matters.

14. An example of such usage by myself as the Legal Branch 1 Director of the United States Guardian’s Office has to do with organized scientology moving to Clearwater, Florida in I believe 1975. Organized scientology acquired property and moved into Clearwater, Florida using a phony front corporation called “Southern Land Development and Leasing Corporation” (SLDLC) as the “buyer” of the first building. An elaborate PR hoax was worked out in Hubbard’s area to hide the fact that organized scientology was moving in there by using the above front corporation and then saying that it was leasing the property it purchased to another phony front corporation called the United Churches of Florida (“UCF”). When the lies behind this were discovered it all blew up into a PR mess. One of the things needed was an approval to sell courses and other “Flag” services which in Florida required either a dealer’s license (to collect sales taxes for products/services sold) or an exemption from doing this known as a Consumers Certificate of Exemption as non profit. The problem for organized scientology was that this exemption was denied and they did not want to have to get a for profit dealers license.

After I wrote a program to get in the proper legal rudiments for organized scientology there, Hubbard wrote to me approving the program but saying he was worried about the Consumers Cert of Exemption, asking me to handle it. I did this by applying for the recognition this time using scholars opinions stating that scientology was a religion, organized scientology a church and thus qualified for the exemption. I applied in the name of the then president of the Church of Scientology of California as we decided it would be that corporation that would run flag operations in Clearwater, Florida. The exemption was approved and it was just another example of the success of our religious cloaking and then getting legal and theological scholars to study that cloaking and then state we were religious. There were many examples of how this was used.