From: Rev Dr David Gerard Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Xenu The Magazine: The lawyer's letter has arrived Date: 19 Oct 1995 10:11:14 GMT Organization: Prestige Elite(tm) Cross-Office Broadcasting Unit Lines: 97 Message-ID: <465882$rac@cougar.vut.edu.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.159.4.140 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit) Just got this through the fax today. I'll comment on it in the next article. I have no idea why it starts with point '6.' I did call and leave a message on their answering machine, asking about the missing points, so even tho' a fax is no more of an orthodox method of service than e-mail I won't argue that particular point. Well, looks like they want to pursue this one. Does this make me a genuine SP-5 yet, or is it just ANOTHER Clam Cluster (making me SP 4.04)? -- David. VANN FISHER & ASSOCIATES Barristers Solicitors And Consultants 19 October 1995 The Editors "No Name" Victoria University of Technology Ballarat Road FOOTSCRAY VIC 3011 Dear Sirs, Re: The Church of Scientology We act for the Church of Scientology which has provided us with a copy of the article written by Mr David Gerard in the recent inter campus edition of the Student Newspaper - Xenu. We are instructed to comment in relation to this article as follows: 6. At the beginning of the article Mr Gerard states that "he has nothing against Scientology per se" and that "(y)ou can do what you want. Not my business." Nevertheless, throughout, the article is filled with vitriolic comments which contradict these statements and are clearly derogatory of Scientology. 7. The statement that "... the Church of Scientology has spied on, terrorised and attempted to discredit critics of the Church, ..." is untrue; 8. The comments that the Church harasses individual respondents and systems administrators of the Internet newsgroup by making unfounded accusations and even threats to the person's safety, are untrue; 9. The comment that the Church runs frivolous copyright suits to ruin respondents financially is also untrue. Our client has the right to prevent unauthorised breach of copyright in its material whenever and wherever it occurs. Our client rejects that the simple protection of its copyright material can be labelled "copyright terrorism". In our opinion the article is clearly defamatory and an attempt to hold the Church up to ridicule. It is designed, notwithstanding Mr Gerard's claim at indifference, to imply that our client is involved in improper conduct in the protection of information and material which it is quite entitled to protect. The purpose of this letter is to place you on notice with respect to the allegations regarding our client. We have recommended to our client that it commence legal proceedings to seek declaratory relief and damages -- unless a clear and unequivocal apology to our client and a retraction of the matters referred to above are prominently published in the next edition of "No Name". We require, by 2.30 p.m. on Monday 23 October 1995, that: (a) the format and wording of an apology and retraction be submitted to this office for our approval; OR (b) you provide written notification that you have set aside an equal amount of space for the Church to provide its own responses to be published in full and without alteration in the next immediate edition of "No Name" and that the Church be advised of the deadline for such publication. In the event that you fail to provide either of the above prior to the deadline we are instructed to issue appropriate proceedings without further notice. Yours faithfully, VANN FISHER & ASSOCIATES [signature] per: Chris Ketsakidis