In a criminal defense déjà vu, Scientologist Danny Masterson is repeating the same themes as a convicted rapist Bill Cosby. While Masterson is being sued for stalking and harassment, he is nevertheless using some of the same sleazy tactics as Cosby.

— Both Masterson and Cosby argue that the women accusing them of are engaged in a money grab. This is victim shaming. It didn’t work for Cosby and it won’t work for Masterson.

— Bill Cosby is presently seeking an appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in which he argues that five women who accused him of sexual assault should not have been allowed to testify at his criminal trial. In that trial, Cosby was found guilty of drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand in 2004. The appeals court allowed the five women to testify about Cosby’s prior “bad acts” as their testimony established a pattern of Cosby’s conduct over time.

Bills Cosby is seeking to break apart his accusers in order to cover up their testimony that goes to his consistent pattern of criminal conduct over time. Masterson is preemptively pursuing the same line of attack. In his demurrer, Danny Masterson argues that the lawsuit against him should be dismissed, in part, because the four women suing him are improperly joined. Masterson does not want four different women testifying about a common pattern of retaliation against them for having publicly accused Scientologist Masterson of rape. This Fair Game, it is alleged, was carried out by Masterson and/or agents of the Church of Scientology. Masterson’s strategy, like that of Cosby, is to argue that this group of accusers should not be allowed to testify together at trial. Hence, Masterson’s demurrer argues:

The Complaint amounts to a recitation of discrete events that each Plaintiff experienced separately at different times and at different places. There is not a single alleged act that all of the Plaintiffs experienced or suffered together… Each of Plaintiffs’ allegations concerning the occurrence of distinct events at different places and during different times requires unique evidence to prove their veracity. Each plaintiff must bear their own burden of proof with respect to their claims, and cannot trade off one another’s alleged harm… Plaintiffs’ improper misjoinder of claims and parties is highly prejudicial to Masterson.

Masterson here attempts to define a conspiracy, a pattern of harassment, as discrete events. This is as absurd as arguing that a Mafia family’s killings are unrelated because they took place at different times and places and happened to different people.

Both Cosby and Masterson are trying their cases in the media. In doing so, they are fighting the #MeToo movement and characterizing their victims as greedy women after a payday:

ThinkProgress – April 10, 2018:

The Hollywood Reporter – February 3, 2020:

Masterson’s accusers must endure the hellish Fair Game that the Church of Scientology is capable of engaging in. The women must fight Scientology’s attempts to force them into religious arbitration. Unlike Bill Cosby’s victims, Masterson’s victims are fighting a vicious $3 billion transnational criminal organization a/k/a the Church of Scientology. Masterson’s victims want justice; Masterson and his Cult want to destroy these women. It is not surprising that Danny “DJ Donkey Punch” Masterson is attacking his accusers as engaging in a shameless money grab.

Tony Ortega: Here’s Scientology actor Danny Masterson’s legal response to his rape accusers

THE TOM CRUISE WIRETAPPING PRECEDENT

Masterson argues that he cannot possibly be the “mastermind of an alleged coordinated harassment campaign”:

Without providing any factual basis for their claims, Plaintiffs allege that Masterson is the mastermind of an alleged coordinated harassment campaign, a strategy which by design would cause any jury to “evoke[s] an emotional bias against [Masterson] as an individual….

Masterson evades the central issue that he enjoys the protection and assistance of Scientology’s notorious Office of Special Affairs and Scientology leader David Miscavige. Indeed, the Church of Scientology, the Celebrity Centre, the Religious Technology Center, and Does 1-25 are named as defendants along with Danny Masterson. To this point, we cite the Church of Scientology’s covert campaign to wiretap Nicole Kidman on behalf of Scientologist Tom Cruise.

As we covered in our story How Did the Church of Scientology Wiretap Nicole Kidman? former Scientology enforcer Marty Rathbun made it happen at the order of David Miscavige:

In the HBO documentary Going Clear, former #2 Scientology executive Mark “Marty” Rathbun reveals that Tom Cruise drifted away from the Church of Scientology in the 1990’s.

During the fifteen month period when Cruise was making the 1999 Stanley Kubrick film Eyes Wide Shut  with then wife Nicole Kidman, Rathbun describes how Cruise was not in contact with Church leader David Miscavige for about a year.

This greatly displeased Miscavige who ordered Rathbun to recover Tom Cruise and bring him back into the Church of Scientology.

A Scientology analysis of the situation indicated that Kidman was the problem as she was not inclined to do any Scientology nor was she pushing her husband to do any.

According to Going Clear, Tom Cruise insinuated to Rathbun that Kidman should be wiretapped.

Rathbun relayed this to Miscavige who ordered it be done…

November 21, 2002: The FBI raids the office of Los Angeles private investigator Anthony Pellicano and finds C-4 plastic explosives and hard drives containing hundreds of hours of wiretapped phone conversations. These hard drives include conversations Nicole Kidman had with various people. The evidence seized by the FBI offers irrefutable evidence that Nicole Kidman was wiretapped. This confirms Rathbun’s statement that Kidman was wiretapped. However, there is no concrete evidence linking Pellicano to Scientology. Perhaps there is a grassy knoll situation here and a second wiretapper. Going Clear leaves the question hanging in the air.

It would take the FBI years to analyze the evidence seized in the raid on Pellicano’s office. In the interim, Pellicano is charged for illegal possession of C-4 plastic explosives.

October 2003: Pellicano pleads guilty to the explosives charge and is sentenced to thirty months in federal prison.

---

Anthony Pellicano. Photo: Hollywood Reporter

November 2003: Tom Cruise’s lawyer Bert Fields publicly acknowledges that he is the subject of an FBI investigation into Anthony Pellicano and wiretapping. Fields denies any wrongdoing. People wonder if Tom Cruise will be pulled into the Pellicano wiretapping investigation.

February 2006: Upon his release from prison on the explosives conviction, Pellicano is immediately re-arrested on 110 counts that include wiretapping, racketeering, conspiracy, witness tampering, and identity theft.

March 2006: NY Daily News reports that Tom Cruise was questioned by the FBI about Anthony Pellicano and the wiretapping of Nicole Kidman.

March 2006: The New York Post reports that Nicole Kidman was questioned by the FBI about her having been wiretapped by Pellicano.

April 2006: The FBI names Cruise’s divorce attorney Dennis Wasser as a person of interest in the Pellicano case. From The New York Times article of April 26, 2007:

The New York Times article concludes with attorney Kolodny remarking unfavorably upon the character of Mr. Pellicano; this while Tom Cruise’s divorce lawyer extolled the virtues of Mr. Pellicano:

---

July 2006: In an article about Pellicano, the New Yorker confirmed that Tom Cruise had hired Anthony Pellicano:

It was known, for instance, that Pellicano had been retained to work for Tom Cruise to suppress possible tabloid stories during his divorce from Nicole Kidman.

January 2009: Anthony Pellicano sentenced to fifteen years in prison.

December 2009: Michael Sapir sues Tom Cruise for $5,000,000. Sapir alleges that Cruise hired Pellicano to illegally wiretap his phone in 2001. From TMZ:

There is a long history between Cruise and Sapir. In 2001, Cruise sued Sapir for $100 million after Sapir claimed to have video evidence that Cruise “engaged in a homosexual relationship.” That lawsuit settled later that year. In the settlement, both parties issued a statement saying that no such tape existed.

In the latest suit, filed Friday in L.A. County Superior Court, Sapir claims Pellicano illegally wiretapped his phone during the time the 2001 lawsuit was active.

Sapir claims in the suit that Cruise, Fields and Pellicano were all in cahoots.

March 2013: Tom Cruise escapes the Sapir lawsuit when his attorney Bert Fields wins a motion for summary judgment. Hollywood Reporter:

…Sapir’s lawsuit against Cruise and Pellicano had other salacious tidbits. For example, Sapir also alleged that Pellicano taped recordings between Cruise and Nicole Kidman while the actors were going through their divorce.

But the lawsuit hasn’t survived.

On Monday, a Los Angeles Superior Court ruled from the bench that the allegations weren’t brought within the statute of limitations.

…Cruise joins Brad Grey as escaping Pellicano-related lawsuits thanks to the claims being time-barred. Many other lawsuits proceed, including one against Michael Ovitz for allegedly hiring Pellicano to intimidate Anita Busch. Recently, the same judge ruled that Ovitz has failed to show that he’s entitled to summary judgment on statute of limitation grounds.

The Scientology Mafia offers protection to Scientology celebrities. OSA can even make certain very difficult people problems go away. However, like all services offered by the Mafia, these services can be very expensive.

The Bottom Line: Former Church of Scientology executive Marty Rathbun stated that David Miscavige ordered him to wiretap Nicole Kidman at the behest of Tom Cruise. “Make it happen,” Miscavige told Rathbun. The FBI raided Pellicano’s office and found the wiretapped Kidman phone calls. Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs is capable of conducting covert criminal intrigues on behalf of itself and its members. Program Snow White demonstrated the magnitude of organized “spare no expense” criminal activity the Church of Scientology is capable of conducting.

Scientology’s Mafia — the Office of Special Affairs — is capable of harassing Masterson’s victims. This would be done to protect Scientology and Masterson. Masterson’s demurrer offers us the basis to link Masterson and the Church of Scientology in the acts of stalking and harassment:

…See People v. Sanchez, 63 Cal. 4th 411, 464 (2016) (In the criminal context, prejudicial association might exist if the characteristics or culpability of one or more defendants is such that the jury will find the remaining defendants guilty simply because of their association with a reprehensible person, rather than assessing each defendant’s individual guilt of the crimes at issue”).

Masterson’s demurrer notes that his demurrer is being heard with the Church’s:

To the extent applicable, Masterson joins in the Demurrer filed by Defendants Church of Scientology International and Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre on January 6, 2020, which is scheduled to be heard concurrently with this Demurrer.

If Masterson loses on his demurrer, then he proceeds to trial on the stalking and harassment lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs. This would allow co-defendants CSI, CC, RTC, and Captain Miscavige to be deposed in the plaintiffs lawsuit.

What would CSI, CC, RTC, and Captain Miscavige do if this happened? They can’t force Masterson’s individual case into religious arbitration as the plaintiffs signed no arbitration agreement with Masterson.

Masterson has said he will sue his accusers after the charges are dropped. However, in such a scenario this would subject Masterson to deposition and cross examination at trial on the underlying allegations of rape that brought about the plaintiff’s lawsuits for stalking and harassment. Again, this would also allow deposition of David Miscavige in a civil suit that is not subject to Scientology arbitration. We just don’t see David Miscavige allowing Danny Masterson to sue.

Both Cosby and Masterson are arguing, in a non-sequitur manner, that because allegations are old they must be meritless.

2014: Bill Cosby alleged a 40-year-old claim of a sexual assault was meritless. Cosby argued that the lawsuit filed against him by Judy Huth was nothing more than an attempt to extort money from him:

2020: Danny Masterson makes the same claims: The alleged sexual assaults happened 20 years ago. Masterson adds that the sexual assault allegations are a “publicity stunt” and a shameful money grab:

This lawsuit is nothing more than a publicity stunt orchestrated by Danny Masterson’s ex-girlfriends… Only after their wild and previously rejected allegations of sexual assault against Mr. Masterson rightfully fell on deaf ears, several of Mr. Masterson’s ex-girlfriends — some from nearly twenty ago — participated in an anti-Scientology television series. At the time, they insisted this “wasn’t about money,” yet after their criminal complaints went nowhere, they filed this fantastical lawsuit against Mr. Masterson and the Church of Scientology hoping to recover many millions of dollars. This lawsuit is not about justice, as Mr. Masterson’s exes disingenuously claim. It is a shameful money grab; plain and simple.

Masterson deceptively misstates the matter: The rape allegations against him fell on deaf ears within the Church of Scientology. Conversely, the LAPD and the Los Angeles District Attorney have the sexual assault allegations against Masterson under investigation. Their investigation into Masterson has not been closed or dismissed.

Compare Bill Cosby’s 2014 demurrer with Masterson’s 2020 demurrer. It looks like Cosby/Masterson attorney Andy Brettler did a cut and paste from his work on Cosby and charged Masterson for making some minor changes.

Cosby 2014 cites Blank v. Kirwan, C&H Foods, Hartford Ins. Co. and asks for terminating sanctions and costs in favor of Cosby:

Masterson 2020 cites Blank v. Kirwan, C&H Foods, Hartford Ins. Co and asks for terminating sanctions and costs in favor of Masterson: