Jane Doe 3 Lawsuit Against Scientology: Complaint

Filing # 95934563 E-Filed 09/18/2019 04:50:11 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 11TH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION
Case No.:
JANE DOE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG

SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC., a Florida
corporation; CLEARWATER ACADEMY,
INC., a Florida corporation; THE CHURCH
OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, a
California corporation; RELIGIOUS
TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a California
corporation; and DAVID MISCAVIGE, a
California resident;
Defendants.
_____________________________________/
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
INTRODUCTION
This case is brought against the Defendant Organizations of Scientology; its leader, David
Miscavige; and Clearwater Academy, a Scientology school, for the continued sexual abuse that
Jane Doe suffered at the hands of Defendants’ employees, members, agents, and/or
representatives, and, thereafter, because the Defendants conspired to and did cover up those
crimes. When Jane Doe came forward to make Defendants’ crimes known to the public, the
Defendants continued their conspiracy against Plaintiff and systematically stalked, harassed,
invaded her privacy, and intentionally caused her emotional distress to silence and intimidate her.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Jane Doe is a female whose name is not contained in this Complaint to
protect her privacy and identity as she incurred injuries and damages of a sensitive nature as a
result of Defendants’ intentional acts, described below. Information which could identify Jane
Doe is not contained herein. Plaintiff may be contacted through her counsel. There exists good
cause for Plaintiff to use a pseudonym due to the harmful effect of the public disclosure of her
identity and the harm inflicted by the Defendants upon her, including the harm inflicted upon her
while she was a child. Plaintiff fears physical and mental reprisals if her identity is revealed. She
has not engaged in any action to compromise her anonymity or failed to take action which would
preserve her anonymity. Plaintiff’s undersigned counsel will provide the identity of Plaintiff to all
Defendants. As such, Defendants suffer no prejudice as a result of concealing her identity in the
Complaint.
2. Defendant Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, Inc. (“Flag Service”)
is a Florida corporation with its principal place of business in Clearwater, Florida.
3. At all times material, Robert Potters, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida
33756, is and was the Registered Agent for Flag Service and may accept service of process under
Florida Statutes section 48.091.
4. Defendant Clearwater Academy, Inc. (“Clearwater Academy”) is a Florida
corporation with its principal place of business in Clearwater, Florida.
5. At all times material, Jim Zwers, 801 Drew Street, Clearwater, Florida 33755, is
and was the Registered Agent for Clearwater Academy and may accept service of process under
Florida Statutes section 48.091.
2
6. Defendant The Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) is a California
corporation with its principal place of business in California.
7. Defendant Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) is a California corporation with
its principal place of business in California.
8. Hereinafter, when referring to Flag Service, CSI, and RTC collectively, the phrase
“Institutional Defendants” will be used.
9. Defendant David Miscavige is and was a resident of California.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
10. Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in Florida because, among other
things, they reside in Miami-Dade County, Florida; engage in substantial and not isolated business
activity on a continuous and systematic basis in the State of Florida; and/or operate, conduct,
engage in, or carry on a business or business venture in this State, or have an office or agency in
this State.
11. Venue is proper in Miami-Dade County, Florida pursuant to Florida Statutes
section 47.051, as Defendants CSI and RTC, who do business in this state, reside and/or have
agents and representatives in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
FACTUAL HISTORY
12. The Institutional Defendants, along with a network of organizations that operate
under their control, make up what is known to the public as “The Church of Scientology” or
“Scientology.”
13. Defendant Miscavige, known as “Chairman of the Board,” is the leader of “The
Church of Scientology.” Defendant Miscavige directs, operates, supervises, and/or controls the
Institutional Defendants, including their suborganizations or divisions, and Clearwater Academy.
3
14. The Institutional Defendants own and/or operate Defendant Clearwater Academy.
15. The senior hierarchy of Scientology organizations, including, but not limited to the
RTC, CSI, and Flag Service are staffed and operated by an organization known as the Sea
Organization (“Sea Org”). The Sea Org is comprised of Scientology’s most dedicated members.
16. The RTC is tasked with ensuring that all Scientology organizations and members
comply with Scientology policies.
Reporting Crime is Forbidden
17. Whether discovered during auditing, described in detail below, or otherwise,
Defendants forbid members from contacting police to report a crime committed by any member.
The Institutional Defendants instruct their employees, members, and agents that reporting such
instances to law enforcement is considered a “high crime” and subjects the employee, member,
and/or agent to punishment. This policy was also carried out by Clearwater Academy at the
direction of the Institutional Defendants.
18. The Defendants instruct their members and agents that:
Police and courts offer an open-armed opportunity to the vicious and

corrupt to establish themselves in a position of safety while
satisfying their strange appetites of perverted viciousness toward
their fellow man. . . . Justice systems thereby become a sort of cancer
which erode every splendid ambition and achievement of the decent
citizen. . . . “Justice” apparently cannot be trusted in the hands of
Man. . . . Who is Public Enemy #1 today? The FBI! Its obvious
target is every opinion leader and public-spirited group in America!1
19. The Institutional Defendants instruct their employees, members, and agents that the
only answer to a crime being committed by its employees, members, and agents, including rape or
other sexual abuse, is found in the practices directed by the Defendants, not law enforcement or
5
L. Ron Hubbard, INTRODUCTION TO SCIENTOLOGY ETHICS (1972).
4
the court system. Victims (and all others) are expressly prohibited from contacting law
enforcement.
20. To prevent employees, members, and agents from contacting authorities when any
crime is revealed, witnessed, or suspected, the Institutional Defendants and Defendant Miscavige
require the phones within certain facilities to be incapable of dialing 911.
The Defendants Punish Those Who Report Crimes
21. Defendants do not treat victims of sexual abuse as victims at all. Instead, one who
suffers sexual abuse (whether an adult or a child) is assumed to have done something to incite or
invite such abuse.
22. Historically, when a member has complained of suffering sexual abuse, this
disclosure has resulted in the member being forced to confront or apologize to his or her abuser.
23. There is a department within CSI known as the Office of Special Affairs (“OSA”).
OSA is the legal, public relations, and intelligence network of CSI. One or more network
representatives from OSA are employed at every Scientology organization across the world.
24. OSA and its operations were and are directed by Defendant Miscavige.
25. The Defendants, through OSA, utilize what Scientology calls “Fair Game” tactics
to attack, harass, embarrass, humiliate, destroy, and/or injure individuals who Defendants declare
to be a “suppressive person” or “SP.”
26. Defendants declare anyone who flees or speaks out against Scientology a
suppressive person and direct employees, members, and agents to subject them to such Fair
Gaming as described more fully below.
5
Sea Org
27. One of the Institutional Defendants’ suborganizations is the Sea Organization, or
“Sea Org.”
28. Unbeknownst to members before contracting to work for the Sea Org, once
contracted, members are forced into difficult and illegal labor conditions, constantly under a threat
of punishment and paid only a small amount of money that makes it difficult for them to break
free. Sea Org members are forced to work an average of 100 hours per week, without lawfully
required breaks, and are given only a small weekly allowance instead of fair wages.
Human Trafficking within the Sea Org
29. The Sea Org, in large part, functions by way of human trafficking, including the
trafficking of children.
30. Defendants engage in the forced labor of adults and children in the Sea Org.
Defendants have made billions off the backs of men, women, and children who are trafficked and
forced to work 100 hour weeks for far below the minimum wage with little to no free time or
vacation under the threat of severe punishment for failure to perform their work duties.
31. Defendants have long engaged in a practice of separating children from their
parents, including, but not limited to, Sea Org members. In doing so, Defendants assume the
responsibility of in loco parentis.
32. Many times, children Sea Org members are sent to and/or transferred between the
Defendants’ facilities in Florida, California, and elsewhere under the guise of false promises where
they are forced to live without much, if any, adult and/or adequate supervision and required to
work long days and weeks without much, if any, time off and for little money. Child Sea Org
members are neglected and abused, physically and mentally, and are routinely placed in isolation.
6
33. Child Sea Org members often have their food rationed and/or limited.
34. Child Sea Org members often must perform jobs that expose them to a high risk of
danger such as removal of asbestos, welding, construction/working on scaffolding, chemical
exposure, etc. and are often required to do so without necessary safety equipment.
35. Child Sea Org Members often have restricted and limited sleep due to the hours
and duties they are required to fulfill.
36. Child Sea Org members are unable to attend school and receive adequate education
due to the work requirements of the Sea Org and the threat of punishment for failure to perform
adequately.
37. Child Sea Org members are coached to lie and or/conceal information, including
information concerning the abuses within Scientology, to the public, authorities, family, and non-
Scientologists.
38. All of the aforementioned abuses above occur to child Sea Org members into
adulthood, as long as they remain a Sea Org member.
39. Should a Sea Org member flee to escape these abuses, whether a child or adult,
Defendants require any member of Defendants’ organization who is related to, friends with, or an
associate of someone who flees or speaks out about the abuses in Scientology to immediately
disassociate from that person. This policy is known as “disconnection.”
40. In other words, once an individual Sea Org member defects or flees Defendants’
grip or speaks out about the abuses within Scientology, that person’s family members and friends
who remain in Scientology must completely and unwaveringly disassociate from them. This means
separation of parents from children, relatives from relatives, friends from friends, and divorce in
the instance of spouses.
7
41. To summarize, personal freedoms are restricted, families are separated, and severe
punishments are utilized to maintain complete control over the forced workers, including children,
in the Sea Org. The Defendants control and direct Sea Org members (as well as Scientology
members as a whole) through brain washing and the destruction of their independence and self-
control. Sea Org members, including children, are isolated from the outside world, their access
to information is heavily monitored, controlled, and limited, and Sea Org members are subjected
to physical, verbal, psychological, emotional, and/or sexual abuse and/or assault.
The Practice of Auditing
42. Members, including children, are required to be “audited” repeatedly and
continuously while a member of Scientology. Auditing sessions may occur daily and involve
several hours of being forced to reveal explicit, personal details regarding daily thoughts, activities,
etc.
43. During an “auditing session,” a member meets with an “auditor,” who is generally
a higher-ranking Scientologist and often a Sea Org member. The “auditor” has the member hold
two metal rods commonly referred to as “cans” of an “electropsychometer” or “e-meter.” An e-
meter, is designed to “measure[] the mental state or change of state of a person and thus is of
benefit to the auditor . . . [to] locate areas to be handled.”2 As Hubbard said and Defendants
maintain, “an e-meter is better known as a ‘lie detector’ and is used to ascertain truth of background
and conduct.”3 During these “auditing” sessions the “auditor” takes copious notes on what the
2
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INT’L, http://www.whatisscientology.org/html/Part14/Chp50/pg1020-
a.html (last visited Aug. 12, 2019).
3
Hubbard Commc’ns Office Bulletin from L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology Founder, regarding
Security Check[s] (Feb. 3, 1960).
8
individual reports. These notes are then placed in a folder and maintained by Scientology
permanently.
44. Defendants require all members to undergo this extensive and expensive process
regardless of their age. This includes children of any age.
Fair Game
45. The Defendants utilize what Scientology calls “Fair Game” tactics to attack, harass,
embarrass, humiliate, destroy, and/or injure individuals who Defendants declare to be a
“suppressive person.”
46. The Defendants declare anyone who flees or speaks out against Scientology a
suppressive person and directs members and agents to subject them to such Fair Gaming. Members
of Scientology are directed, by the Defendants, to, among other methods, deprive that individual
of property, injure that person by any means, and/or destroy that individual. It is specifically
directed by the Defendants that if a member of Scientology does any of the above to a “suppressive
person” and/or enemy, they will not be disciplined in any fashion.
47. Many individuals who wish to leave the control, membership, or employ of the
Defendants are forced to flee or attempt escape as leaving of their own free will is often not an
option, as was the case of Plaintiff herein.
48. For children who grow up in Scientology as well as child Sea Org members who
remain in Scientology into adulthood, this threat of being “destroyed” by Defendants’ Fair Game
tactics, along with knowing your family and friends will cease all contact with you should you
leave, having little to no education, money, tangible goods, etc. traps them into ever being able to
leave or speak up/report abuse within the Defendants’ organization.
9
49. In fact, in a further effort to prevent members, including Sea Org members, from
leaving or speaking out about the abuses in Scientology, Defendants, through their employees and
agents or otherwise, upon becoming aware of a Sea Org members’ desire to flee or leave, require
members to submit to videotaped statements wherein the member is forced to describe their time
in Scientology and the Sea Org as nothing but delightful. Defendants also will force individual
members to sign waivers agreeing not to sue the Defendants for anything.
50. Defendants will also require family members (who remain in Scientology) of
individuals who flee and/or speak out against the abuses in Scientology to submit to videotaped
statements wherein the sole purpose of the video is to speak badly and defame the individual who
has fled or spoken out.
51. Per Defendants’ directives and the Fair Game policy, anyone who flees
Scientology, any critic of Scientology, or person who reports or speaks out about the abuses
occurring within Scientology, must be silenced by whatever means necessary. Defendants instruct
members to damage the person’s professional reputation, file frivolous lawsuits, and harass and
surveil “the enemy.”
52. A person who is declared an enemy of Scientology is Fair Game for relentless and
cruel behavior. A person who is Fair Game “[m]ay be deprived of property or injured by any means
by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or
destroyed.”4
53. Defendants instruct their agents, employees, members, and representatives, that
pursuant to Scientology’s creator, Ron L. Hubbard’s, mandates, they are to disseminate
information that will damage the individual’s professional and private reputation regardless of the
4
Allard v. Church of Scientology, 58 Cal. App. 3d 439 n.1 (Ct. App. 1976).
10
truth of the information disseminated. Defendants have created dozens of websites dedicated to
defaming, intimidating, and harassing those they determine are enemies of Scientology.
Defendants’ policies and procedures encourage and/or instruct followers to “ruin [the individual]
utterly.”5
54. Defendants have solicited estranged family members of alleged “suppressive
persons” to publicly insult and harass them.
55. Courts have repeatedly acknowledged the existence of this policy. The Defendants
have a “history of seeking retribution against [their] perceived enemies.”6
Scientology’s Abuse of Plaintiff Jane Doe
56. Jane Doe was born into Scientology on September 19, 1994.
57. Jane Doe attended Clearwater Academy.
58. Clearwater Academy is a Scientologist school serving Pre-K to 12th grade.
59. During her years there in grades K1 and part of K2, Jane Doe was repeatedly
sexually assaulted by an employee of Clearwater Academy.
60. This abuse included, but was not limited to:
a. Multiple instances when the employee forced Jane Doe and other young
girls to perform sexual acts on each other;
b. Multiple instances when the employee masturbated in the presence of Jane

Doe and ejaculated on Jane Doe; and
5
L. Ron Hubbard, A Manual on the Dissemination of Material, THE MAGAZINE OF DIANETICS AND
SCIENTOLOGY, Mar. 1955, at 157.
6
See also Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology, 212 Cal. App. 3d 872, 880, (Ct. App. 1989), cert.
granted, judgment vacated sub nom. Church of Scientology of California v. Wollersheim, 499 U.S.
914 (1991) (“Scientology is a hierarchical organization which exhibits near paranoid attitudes
toward certain institutions and individuals—in particular, the government, mental health
professions, disaffected members and others who criticize the organization or its leadership.
Evidence also was introduced detailing Scientology's retribution policy, sometimes called “fair
game.”).
11
c. At least once instance when the employee forced his penis into Jane Doe’s
mouth.
61. Jane Doe reported this abuse to other employees of Clearwater Academy on
multiple occasions and no action was taken to remove the employee from the school.
62. Even after Clearwater Academy was made aware of the abuse, the abuse continued.
63. Other employees of Clearwater Academy would facilitate the abuse by calling Jane
Doe from her classroom and sending her to be alone with her abuser.
64. After this time, when Jane Doe was only eleven years old, she was sent by
Scientology to live in Caracas, Venezuela, without her parents.
65. During this time, when Jane Doe was twelve years old, Jane Doe was violently
sexually assaulted on the premises of the Caracas Org by the adult son of wealthy, high-ranking
scientologists.
66. Jane Doe immediately reported this incident to her auditor. Jane Doe’s auditor got
extremely angry at Jane Doe, instead of her attacker, and subjected her to punishment as a result
of the report.
67. Specifically, the Institutional Defendants “sentenced” Jane Doe to three months of
hard, physical labor. Other members were ordered not to speak to Jane Doe during this time. The
Institutional Defendants issued a “non-enturbulation” order against Jane Doe, which is a form of
punishment warning Jane Doe that she was at risk of losing good standing with Scientology
because of her actions of “bringing-in” (or causing through her own actions) the sexual assault.
68. After Jane Doe completed her “sentence,” she was sent back to Clearwater,
Florida, where she then became a member of the Sea Org at the age of fourteen. During her time
as a member of the Sea Org, Jane Doe was subjected to long hours of difficult physical labor for
little to no wages.
12
69. For a brief time, Jane Doe was out of the Sea Org, before she was recruited back in
by the Institutional Defendants’ agent and employee, Senior Persof of the Hubbard
Communication Office, Katherine Richie.
70. Katherine Richie arranged to become Jane Doe’s guardian with the approval of the
Institutional Defendants. Once Jane Doe was under the control of Katherine Richie, Katherine
Richie groomed Jane Doe to enter into a sexual relationship with her and Richie began sexually
abusing Jane Doe, who was still a minor.
71. The Institutional Defendants’ agents and employees knew or should have known
that Katherine Richie was abusing Jane Doe and should have prevented such abuses from
occurring, but they did not.
72. Eventually, in 2018, Jane Doe escaped from Scientology. After that time, the
Institutional Defendants have launched a fair-gaming campaign against Jane Doe. The
Institutional Defendants’ fair game attacks include, but are not limited to, tampering with Jane
Doe’s vehicle, including cutting her brake lines; vandalizing her property; following her;
surveilling her; and conducting hundreds of spam/crank phone calls to Jane Doe’s phone.
73. At all times material, Defendants controlled and/or had the right to control the
physical conduct of their employees, agents, members, and/or representatives.
74. Any statutes of limitations relating to any cause of action in this complaint were
suspended until Plaintiff’s escape from Scientology, and for a reasonable time period after, because
she could not have reasonably discovered the wrongfulness of Defendants’ conduct or any of her
causes of action, legal rights, or pursue any remedy due to the psychological trauma and abuse,
linguistic and cultural isolation, inability to access services, physical abuse, debilitating fear from
Defendants’ threats and harassment, and other barriers caused by Defendants’ unlawful conduct.
13
COUNT I
SEXUAL BATTERY AGAINST
CLEARWATER ACADEMY INTERNATIONAL
75. Plaintiff incorporates and references the averments contained above as though fully
set forth herein.
76. Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member, and/or representative
committed a sexual battery upon Plaintiff when he intentionally penetrated Plaintiff’s mouth with
his penis against Plaintiff’s will and without her consent.
sexually abused Plaintiff on school property.
used his position of authority with Clearwater Academy to manipulate and intimidate Plaintiff, a
minor at the time of the sexual battery.
had access to and the opportunity to abuse Plaintiff because of his official position and duties with
Clearwater Academy.
80. Plaintiff reported the sexual battery to other Clearwater Academy employees on
multiple occasions, but no action was taken to remove the employee and the sexual batteries
committed by Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member, and/or representative
upon Plaintiff continued.
81. Defendant Clearwater Academy is vicariously liable for the sexual battery
committed by its employee, agent, member, and/or representative because the employee, agent,
member, and/or representative committed the sexual battery in the course and scope of his
14
employment and for the benefit and interest of Defendant Clearwater Academy and in keeping
with Clearwater Academy’s teachings and instructions.
member, and/or representative was assisted in accomplishing the sexual battery upon Plaintiff by
and through the existence of his employee/employer relationship with Defendant Clearwater
Academy.
83. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee,
agent, member, and/or representative’s sexual battery of Plaintiff and for which Clearwater
Academy is vicariously liable, Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries.
84. Defendants are therefore liable to Plaintiff for all damages to which Plaintiff may
be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not limited to, bodily injury and resulting
pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, medical
treatment, medical expenses, and loss of income.
85. Plaintiff reserves the right, upon the proper showing of record evidence, to amend
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendant Clearwater Academy’s
employee, agent, member, and/or representative’s intentional, wanton, and willful acts, and gross
negligence, for which Clearwater Academy is vicariously liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against Defendant Clearwater
Academy, together with the costs of this action and such further relief as the Court deems
appropriate. Plaintiff further demands trial by jury of all issues triable as of right.
COUNT II
SEXUAL BATTERY AGAINST FLAG SERVICE AND/OR
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
15
set forth herein.
87. Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI’s employee, agent, member, and/or
representative, Katherine Richie, committed a sexual battery upon Plaintiff when she intentionally
began sexually abusing and having a sexual relationship with Plaintiff while she was a minor.
Specifically, Plaintiff was 14–15 at the time of the sexual relationship and abuse and Katherine
Richie was older than 24 years of age.
88. As a minor at the time of the relationship and abuse, Plaintiff did not anticipate or
understand the consequences of her actions and could not consent to the sexual abuse and/or
relationship.
representative, Katherine Richie, committed the sexual abuse on property controlled, managed,
and operated by Defendant CSI.
representative, Katherine Richie, used her position of authority with Flag Service and/or CSI to
manipulate and intimidate Plaintiff, a minor at the time of the sexual battery.
representative, Katherine Richie, had access to and the opportunity to abuse Plaintiff because of
her official position and duties with Flag Service and/or CSI.
92. Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI knew or should have known that Katherine
Richie was sexually abusing Plaintiff and should have prevented such abuses from occurring, but
did not.
16
93. Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI are vicariously liable for the sexual battery
committed by their employee, agent, member, and/or representative, Katherine Richie, because
she committed the sexual battery in the course and scope of her employment and for the benefit
and interest of Defendants Flag Service and CSI and in keeping with Flag Service and CSI’s
teachings and instructions.
94. Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI are vicariously liable for the sexual battery
committed by their employee, agent, member, and/or representative, Katherine Richie, because
she was assisted in accomplishing the sexual battery upon Plaintiff by and through the existence
of her employee/employer relationship with Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI.
95. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI’s employee,
agent, member, and/or representative, Katherine Richie’s, sexual battery of Plaintiff and for which
Flag Service and/or CSI are vicariously liable, Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries.
96. Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI are therefore liable to Plaintiff for all damages
to which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not limited to,
bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the
enjoyment of life, medical treatment, medical expenses, and loss of income.
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendants Flag Service and/or CSI’s
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against Defendants Flag Service
and CSI, together with the costs of this action and such further relief as the Court deems
17
COUNT III
BATTERY AGAINST CLEARWATER
ACADEMY INTERNATIONAL
set forth herein.
committed a battery upon Plaintiff when he intentionally masturbated in her presence and
ejaculated on her, against Plaintiff’s will and without her consent.
committed this battery upon Plaintiff on school property.
used his position of authority with Clearwater Academy to manipulate and intimidate Plaintiff, a
minor, at the time of the battery.
had access to and the opportunity to abuse Plaintiff because of his official position and duties with
Clearwater Academy.
103. Plaintiff reported the battery to other Clearwater Academy employees on multiple
occasions, but no action was taken to remove the employee and the batteries committed by
Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member, and/or representative upon Plaintiff
continued.
104. Defendant Clearwater Academy is vicariously liable for the batteries committed by
its employee, agent, member, and/or representative because the employee, agent, member, and/or
representative committed the batteries in the course and scope of his employment and for the
18
benefit and interest of Defendant Clearwater Academy and in keeping with Clearwater Academy’s
teachings and instructions.
105. Defendant Clearwater Academy is vicariously liable for the batteries committed by
its employee, agent, member, and/or representative because the employee, agent, member, and/or
representative was assisted in accomplishing the batteries upon Plaintiff by and through the
existence of his employee/employer relationship with Defendant Clearwater Academy.
106. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee,
agent, member, and/or representative’s batteries of Plaintiff and for which Clearwater Academy is
vicariously liable, Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries.
COUNT IV
VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 800.101
AGAINST CLEARWATER ACADEMY INTERNATIONAL
19
set forth herein.
110. At the time that Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member,
and/or representative committed the sexual batteries upon Plaintiff, he was an authority figure who
was employed by, volunteering at, or under contract with Clearwater Academy.
111. At the time that Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member,
and/or representative committed the sexual batteries upon Plaintiff, Plaintiff was a student at
Clearwater Academy.
violated Florida Statutes section 800.101 when he engaged in sexual and/or lewd conduct with
Plaintiff, as described above.
113. Florida Statutes section 800.101 establishes a duty to protect students in schools,
including private schools, from authority figures at those schools who engage in or solicit sexual
and/or lewd conduct with a student.
114. Plaintiff belongs to the class of individuals that Florida Statutes section 800.101
was intended to protect.
115. Plaintiff suffered injury of the type that Florida Statutes section 800.101 was
designed to prevent, to wit she was a student subjected to sexual battery at the hands of a school
authority figure, as a result of Defendant Clearwater Academy’s employee, agent, member, and/or
representative’s violation of Florida Statutes section 800.101.
116. Defendant Clearwater Academy is thus negligent per se and liable to Plaintiff for
all damages to which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not
20
limited to, bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of
capacity for the enjoyment of life, medical treatment, medical expenses, and loss of income.
member, and/or representative committed the batteries in the course and scope of his employment
and for the benefit and interest of Defendant Clearwater Academy and in keeping with Clearwater
Academy’s teachings and instructions.
118. Defendant Clearwater Academy is vicariously liable for the sexual batteries
member, and/or representative was assisted in accomplishing the batteries upon Plaintiff by and
through the existence of his employee/employer relationship with Defendant Clearwater
Academy.
COUNT V
NEGLIGENCE AGAINST CLEARWATER
ACADEMY INTERNATIONAL
set forth herein.
21
121. At all times material, Clearwater Academy owned, operated, managed, controlled,
and/or maintained a school serving grades pre-kindergarten through twelfth and had a duty to
supervise and protect from harm students attending Clearwater Academy.
122. At all times material, Plaintiff was a student at Clearwater Academy, which was
exclusively for the children of Scientology employees, agents, servants, members, and/or
representatives.
123. At all times material, Clearwater Academy owed a duty to its students to operate,
manage, control, and/or maintain the school in a reasonably safe manner and to protect students,
including Plaintiff, from unreasonable risk of physical and mental harm.
124. At all times material, Clearwater Academy had an additional duty to exercise due
care in hiring, training, retaining, and/or supervising its employees, agents, servants, members,
and/or representatives who were involved with the care, instruction, and supervision of students.
125. Clearwater Academy breached the aforementioned duties and/or negligently and
carelessly failed to discharge the aforementioned duties by, among other things:
a. failing to protect Clearwater Academy’s students, including Plaintiff, from

the unreasonable risk of physical and mental harm;
b. failing to hire employees, agents, servants, members, and/or representatives

that were appropriately qualified to teach, care, monitor, and supervise
students, including Plaintiff;
c. failing to appropriately investigate employees, agents, servants, members,

and/or representatives prior to hiring them and/or allowing them to interact
with, supervise, and care for students;
d. failing to properly supervise its employees, agents, servants, members,

and/or representatives and ensure that, among other things, its employees,
agents, servants, members, and/or representatives were following proper
policies and procedures and were adequately caring for, monitoring,
instructing, and/or supervising the students entrusted to their care, including
Plaintiff;
22
e. failing to investigate students’ claims of sexual battery, including Plaintiff’s
claims;
f. failing to prevent sexual batteries upon students, including Plaintiff, even

after obtaining direct knowledge that such batteries were taking place;
g. failing to discharge, reassign, and/or remove certain of its employees,

agents, servants, members, and/or representatives from its premises even
after Plaintiff reported to other Clearwater Academy employees, agents,
servants, members, and/or representatives the sexual battery she was
subjected to on multiple occasions at the hands of Clearwater Academy
employees, agents, servants, members, and/or representatives.
126. Clearwater Academy had actual notice that its employees, agents, servants,
members, and/or representatives were unfit because Plaintiff informed Clearwater Academy that
she was subjected to sexual battery on multiple occasions at the hands of Clearwater Academy
employees, agents, servants, members, and/or representatives. It was unreasonable for Clearwater
Academy to retain the subject employees, agents, servants, members, and/or representatives after
these instances of sexual battery were made known to it.
127. As a direct and proximate result of Clearwater Academy’s negligent hiring,
retention, and supervision, and/or of the negligence that is vicariously attributed to it, Plaintiff
suffered serious and permanent injuries.
128. Defendant Clearwater Academy is therefore liable to Plaintiff for all damages to
which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not limited to, bodily
injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the
intentional, wanton, and willful acts, and gross negligence.
23
COUNT VI
BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AGAINST
CLEARWATER ACADEMY
set forth herein.
131. Defendant Clearwater Academy owed Plaintiff a fiduciary duty due to the trust and
confidence existing between them as student and school. Plaintiff relied upon, trusted, and reposed
confidence in Defendant Clearwater Academy, and Defendant Clearwater Academy accepted
Plaintiff’s trust and confidence.
132. Based upon this relationship of trust and confidence, Defendant Clearwater
Academy had a duty to act in the best interest of Plaintiff.
133. Defendant Clearwater Academy breached that duty when it failed to act with the
utmost good faith, fairness, and honesty towards Plaintiff and/or with the highest and finest loyalty
towards Plaintiff.
134. Specifically, Clearwater Academy breached its fiduciary duty when Clearwater
Academy failed to protect Plaintiff from the batteries inflicted upon her by Clearwater Academy’s
employees, agents, servants, members, and/or representatives, for whom Clearwater Academy is
vicariously liable, even after Clearwater Academy acquired direct and actual knowledge that such
batteries were occurring.
135. As a direct and proximate result of Clearwater Academy’s breach of the fiduciary
duty it owed Plaintiff, Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries.
24
136. Defendant Clearwater Academy is therefore liable to Plaintiff for all damages to
which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not limited to, bodily
injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the
intentional, wanton, and willful acts, and gross negligence.
COUNT VII
VIOLATIONS OF THE FLORIDA RACKETEERING
AND INFLUENCE CORRUPTION ACT AGAINST
FLAG SERVICE, CSI, RTC, AND DAVID MISCAVIGE
set forth herein.
139. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige are all engaged, individually
and collectively, as part of the entity known as the “Church of Scientology.” The Church of
Scientology constitutes an “enterprise” as that term is defined in Florida Statutes, section
895.02(5).
140. Plaintiff brings this claim against Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige under Florida Statutes, sections 895.01, et seq., and 772.101, et seq.
141. Plaintiff is a “person” with standing to sue as used in Florida Statutes, section
772.104.
25
142. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige, with criminal intent, engaged
in criminal human trafficking activity when they committed, attempted to commit, conspired to
commit, solicited, coerced, and/or intimidated others, including Scientology members, agents,
employees, representatives, servants, affiliates, and/or personnel, to solicit, harbor, entice, recruit,
coerce, maintain, and/or obtain Plaintiff for the purpose of exerting control over Plaintiff and
subjecting her to forced labor and services in the Sea Org for their financial benefit.
143. While Plaintiff was a Scientology member, Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC,
and Miscavige engaged in at least two instances of the above-described human trafficking conduct,
forcing Plaintiff and other Sea Org members into grueling physical labor and otherwise exploiting
them. Each instance of forcing Sea Org members to perform physical labor for financial gain was
facilitated or endorsed, directly or indirectly, by Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige or on their behalf under the same or similar interests, with the same or similar intent to
exploit the Scientology members’ work for financial gain, to achieve the same results of cheap
manual labor designed to subordinate Plaintiff and other similarly situated members through the
same or similar methods of coercion, duress, and control. The pattern of human trafficking was
performed with the same or similar accomplices facilitating the trafficking activity and the
enterprise promoted and relied on the same or similar recruitment tactics, i.e., the methods of
coercion, duress, and other unlawful means previously described, against the same victims—
unsuspecting, innocent members of Scientology and the Sea Org, like Plaintiff.
144. The last of such above-described human trafficking incidents occurred within five
years after a previous instance of human trafficking activity by Defendants Flag Service, CSI,
RTC, and Miscavige.
26
145. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige, with criminal intent, conspired
and/or endeavored to receive and/or derive proceeds, directly and/or indirectly, from the above-
described pattern of human trafficking activity, including the trafficking of Plaintiff.
146. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige, with criminal intent, did in
fact receive and/or derive proceeds, directly and/or indirectly, from the above-described pattern of
human trafficking activity, including the trafficking of Plaintiff.
147. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige, conspired and/or endeavored
to be employed by and/or associated with the Church of Scientology for the purpose of conducting
and/or participating, directly or indirectly, in the above-described pattern of human trafficking
activity, including the trafficking of Plaintiff.
148. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige, are employed by and/or
associated with the Church of Scientology to conduct and/or participate, directly or indirectly, in
the above-described pattern of human trafficking activity, including the trafficking of Plaintiff
149. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige’s human trafficking, as described in the paragraphs above, Plaintiff has suffered
significant damage to be determined at trial.
150. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige are therefore liable to Plaintiff
pursuant to Florida Statutes section 772.104.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against these Defendants,
together with the costs of this action and such further relief as the Court deems appropriate.
Plaintiff further demands trial by jury of all issues triable as of right.
COUNT VIII
FALSE IMPRISONMENT AGAINST FLAG SERVICE,
CSI, RTC, AND DAVID MISCAVIGE
27
set forth herein.
152. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige unlawfully and without legal
authority restrained and deprived Plaintiff of her liberty against her will and without her consent.
153. Plaintiff was not free and/or did not reasonably believe she was free to leave the
place where Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige restrained her and there was no
reasonable means of escape available to Plaintiff.
154. The unlawful restraint and deprivation of Plaintiff’s liberty imposed by Defendants
Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige was intentional and was unreasonable and unwarranted
under the circumstances.
155. When Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige prevented Plaintiff from
leaving the place where Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige restrained her, and/or
forced her to return to that location, they were acting with the knowledge that Plaintiff’s restraint
would, to a substantial certainty, result.
Miscavige’s false imprisonment, as described in the paragraphs above, Plaintiff has suffered
significant damage to be determined at trial.
for all damages to which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not
28
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige’s intentional, wanton, and willful acts, and gross negligence.
COUNT IX
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
set forth herein.
160. Defendants’ wrongful conduct described herein was intentional, outrageous, and/or
reckless, and Defendants intended their behavior when they knew or should have known that
Plaintiff would suffer severe emotional distress as a result thereof. In fact, Defendants specifically
intended that their wrongful conduct cause Plaintiff severe emotional distress.
161. Defendants’ wrongful conduct described herein served no legitimate purpose and,
instead, was outrageous in that it went beyond all bounds of decency and the conduct was shocking,
atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
162. Defendants’ wrongful conduct was carried out with malicious motive and includes
but is not limited to the following:
a. refusing to protect Plaintiff from sexual battery and abuse when they had
direct knowledge that such batteries and abuse were being committed upon
Plaintiff and while Plaintiff was a minor and unable to prevent the batteries
and abuses herself;
b. tampering with Plaintiff’s vehicle, including cutting her brake lines;
c. vandalizing Plaintiff’s property;
29
d. following, shadowing, spying, eavesdropping, stalking, and surveilling
Plaintiff; and
e. conducting hundreds of spam/crank phone calls to Plaintiff’s phone.
163. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ outrageous conduct, as described
in the paragraphs above, Plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress.
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendants’ intentional, wanton, and
willful acts, and gross negligence.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against Defendants, together
with the costs of this action and such further relief as the Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff further
demands trial by jury of all issues triable as of right.
COUNT X
INVASION OF PRIVACY AGAINST DEFENDANTS FLAG SERVICE, CSI,
RTC, AND DAVID MISCAVIGE
set forth herein.
167. Plaintiff is and was a private person and, at the time of many of the wrongful acts
described herein, a minor.
30
168. Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and Miscavige regularly, repeatedly, and with
malicious motive invaded Plaintiff’s right to privacy by intruding on her physical and mental
solitude by, without Plaintiff’s consent, doing the following, among other things:
a. tampering with Plaintiff’s vehicle, including cutting her brake lines;
b. vandalizing Plaintiff’s property;
c. following, shadowing, spying, eavesdropping, stalking, and surveilling

Plaintiff; and
d. conducting hundreds of spam/crank phone calls to Plaintiff’s phone.
169. In so doing the acts described above, Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige acted in a vicious and malicious manner not reasonably limited to a legitimate purpose.
Miscavige’s invasion of Plaintiff’s privacy, as described in the paragraphs above, Plaintiff has
suffered significant damage to be determined at trial.
for all damages to which Plaintiff may be entitled under applicable law, which include, but are not
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendants Flag Service, CSI, RTC, and
Miscavige’s intentional, wanton, and willful acts, and gross negligence.
COUNT XI
31
CIVIL CONSPIRACY AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
set forth herein.
174. Defendants knowingly, willfully, with malicious motive, and by coercion through
numbers conspired and agreed among themselves to engage in unlawful acts, including but not
limited to: (1) obstructing justice by withholding the facts of the sexual assaults inflicted upon
Plaintiff from civil authorities; (2) physically and constructively invading Plaintiff’s privacy;
and/or (3) intentionally inflicting emotional distress upon Plaintiff. The conspiracy continues to
this day.
175. In furtherance of said conspiracy and agreement, Defendants engaged in overt and
wrongful acts, including but not limited to information suppression, coercion, deception, stalking,
harassment, surveillance, threats, vandalism, theft, and/or fraud.
176. Defendants’ actions, set forth in the preceding paragraphs and incorporated herein,
were in violation of Plaintiff’s rights and committed by Defendants in furtherance of the
aforementioned conspiracies and agreements. Moreover, each of the Defendants lent aid and
encouragement and knowingly financed, ratified, and/or adopted the acts of the other.
177. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conspiracy, as described in the
paragraphs above, Plaintiff has suffered significant damage to be determined at trial.
32
the Complaint to seek punitive damages resulting from Defendants’ intentional, wanton, and
willful acts, and gross negligence.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against Defendants, together
with the costs of this action and such further relief as the Court deems appropriate. Plaintiff further
demands trial by jury of all issues triable as of right.
Date: September 18, 2019. PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.

SunTrust International Center
One SE Third Avenue, Suite 2300
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 358-2800
Fax: (305) 358-2382
By: /s Ricardo M. Martinez-Cid

RICARDO M. MARTÍNEZ-CID
Florida Bar No. 383988
Email: RMCTeam@podhurst.com
LEA P. BUCCIERO
Florida Bar No. 84763
Email: RMCTeam@podhurst.com
-&-
Brian D. Kent, Esq.

Gaetano D’Andrea, Esq.
M. Stewart Ryan, Esq.
Helen L. Fitzpatrick, Esq.
Lauren Stram, Esq.
LAFFEY, BUCCI & KENT, LLP
1435 Walnut Street, Suite 700
Philadelphia, PA 19102
(215) 399-9255/Fax: (215) 241-8700
(Pro Hac Vice admission pending for
all attorneys)
-&-
Jeffrey P. Fritz, Esq.

SOLOFF & ZERVANOS, P.C.
1525 Locust Street, 8th Floor
33
(215) 732-2260/Fax: (215) 732-2289
(Pro Hac Vice admission pending)
-&-
Marci Hamilton, Esq.

University of Pennsylvania7
Fox-Fels Building
3814 Walnut Street
(215) 353-8984/Fax: (215) 493-1094
-&-
Robert W. Thompson, Esq.

Kristen A. Vierhaus, Esq.
THOMPSON LAW OFFICES, P.C.
700 Airport Boulevard, Suite 160
Burlingame, CA 94010
(650) 513-6111/Fax: (650) 513-6071
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
7
This address is solely for delivery purposes. It does not indicate support for any lawsuit or case by the
University of Pennsylvania.
34

Jane Doe 3 Lawsuit Against Scientology: Complaint

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Jane Doe 3 Lawsuit Against Scientology: Complaint

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Filing # 95934563 E-Filed 09/18/2019 04:50:11 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 11TH

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

2. Defendant Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, Inc. (“Flag Service”)

is a Florida corporation with its principal place of business in Clearwater, Florida.

Florida Statutes section 48.091.

4. Defendant Clearwater Academy, Inc. (“Clearwater Academy”) is a Florida

corporation with its principal place of business in Clearwater, Florida.

Florida Statutes section 48.091.

corporation with its principal place of business in California.

7. Defendant Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) is a California corporation with

its principal place of business in California.

“Institutional Defendants” will be used.

9. Defendant David Miscavige is and was a resident of California.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

11. Venue is proper in Miami-Dade County, Florida pursuant to Florida Statutes

agents and representatives in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

Institutional Defendants, including their suborganizations or divisions, and Clearwater Academy.

comply with Scientology policies.

Reporting Crime is Forbidden

17. Whether discovered during auditing, described in detail below, or otherwise,

direction of the Institutional Defendants.

18. The Defendants instruct their members and agents that:

Police and courts offer an open-armed opportunity to the vicious and

require the phones within certain facilities to be incapable of dialing 911.

The Defendants Punish Those Who Report Crimes

invite such abuse.

to be a “suppressive person” or “SP.”

Gaming as described more fully below.

27. One of the Institutional Defendants’ suborganizations is the Sea Organization, or

Human Trafficking within the Sea Org

responsibility of in loco parentis.

danger such as removal of asbestos, welding, construction/working on scaffolding, chemical

and duties they are required to fulfill.

adulthood, as long as they remain a Sea Org member.

disassociate from that person. This policy is known as “disconnection.”

the instance of spouses.

to physical, verbal, psychological, emotional, and/or sexual abuse and/or assault.

The Practice of Auditing

42. Members, including children, are required to be “audited” repeatedly and

two metal rods commonly referred to as “cans” of an “electropsychometer” or “e-meter.” An e-

regardless of their age. This includes children of any age.

embarrass, humiliate, destroy, and/or injure individuals who Defendants declare to be a

person” and/or enemy, they will not be disciplined in any fashion.

option, as was the case of Plaintiff herein.

leave or speak up/report abuse within the Defendants’ organization.

has fled or spoken out.

surveil “the enemy.”

pursuant to Scientology’s creator, Ron L. Hubbard’s, mandates, they are to disseminate

54. Defendants have solicited estranged family members of alleged “suppressive

persons” to publicly insult and harass them.

have a “history of seeking retribution against [their] perceived enemies.”6

Scientology’s Abuse of Plaintiff Jane Doe

57. Jane Doe attended Clearwater Academy.

58. Clearwater Academy is a Scientologist school serving Pre-K to 12th grade.

sexually assaulted by an employee of Clearwater Academy.

60. This abuse included, but was not limited to:

b. Multiple instances when the employee masturbated in the presence of Jane

Scientology to live in Caracas, Venezuela, without her parents.

Communication Office, Katherine Richie.

abusing Jane Doe, who was still a minor.

occurring, but they did not.