Basic HTML Version
PASTOR GENERAL'S REPORT, July 25, 1980
PagE 5
to analyze and critique the AP newswire copy, according to a spokesman.
Newscaster Bill Cooper from KPCC in Pasadena stated, "We chose Ambassado
for our quarterly seminar because of its outstanding beauty and archi
tecture." Mr. Cooper was the organizer for the AP meeting and is a regu·
lar correspondent at Mr. Rader's press conferences.
--Editorial ServicE
LEGAL FRONT UPDATE
State Court Activity: On Tuesday, July 22, Los Angeles Superior Court
Judge Robert Weil heard several matters concerning the lawsuit's dis
covery process which must be completed before the case can move on to
the trial phase. The individual Church defendants in the case, as well
as the Church, college and foundation, have been ordered to produce
certain documents and answer questions submitted by the Attorney General.
Now the court has also ordered that they tell the Attorney General in
advance where the documents are, and how many pages pertain to each--r-
At the same hearing the Church was again denied permission to question
the Attorney General, dissidents and others who could illuminate the
basis for the charges which have engaged the Church's time, talent and
resources for these many months. This ban on the Church's discovery has
been in effect for a year now and the state claims this is merely en
forcement of "priority" in discovery. Nevertheless, the Church's attor
neys are convinced that this is just a ploy to punish the Church for not
cooperating with the rape of its constitutional rights.
This stay has effectively put the lid on our posing hard and searching
questions to the malefactors while they procede to claim the right to
obtain mountains of Church documents in the hope of finding some scrap
of evidence of "wrongdoing." And so the case moves along haltingly,
still based on nothing more than "information and belief," which is
legalese for "rumor and gossip."
Federal Court Decision: In January 1979 the Church filed a $700 million
dollar lawsuit against the state and certain state officials. The follow
ing press release from the Church, dated July 24, will bring you up to
date concerning a very positive development which could have far reaching
implications:
Yesterday we received the decision of the United States Court of
Appeal for the Ninth Circuit in our civil rights action against the
State of California and Messrs. Younger, Deukrnejian, and Tapper.
As you may recall, the lower federal court had dismissed that action
on abstention grounds--that is, it had refused to interfere with the
state court action--and had even refused to let us amend our com
plaint to include additional facts which, we believe, would render
abstention inappropriate. In our briefs and oral argument to the
Ninth Circuit, we articulated many of these additional facts.
Simply put, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the refusal to let us amend
our pleading was erroneous, and remanded the case to the district
court to allow amendment. Especially significant were the court's
observations that (1) if we amend our pleadings to allege facts
demonstrating that the state action was brought in bad faith, we