The arrest of Scientologist and actor Danny Masterson, 44, on three counts of rape in Los Angeles sent shockwaves through Scientology’s Celebrity Centre in Hollywood and the Church itself. Part of the shock is that Scientology, despite its most malicious and sleazy efforts at intimidation, lies, and Fair Game could not escape the weight of the evidence against Danny Masterson. There was an abundance of evidence to criminally charge the actor.

The Celebrity Centre knew of Masterson’s alleged rapes long ago. According to Scientology policy, Church personnel would have security-checked Danny Masterson on the rape allegations. As a consequence of what was discovered during these sec-checks, the Church of Scientology would have very likely labeled Danny Masterson a “Type B” which stands for “Criminal.”

L. Ron Hubbard defined a Type B as follows:

b. Criminals with proven criminal records often continue to commit so many undetected harmful acts between sessions that they do not make adequate case gains and therefore should not be accepted for processing by organizations or auditors.

Hubbard was emphatic that Type B’s “should not be accepted for processing by organizations or auditors.” This could explain why Danny Masterson, who was born into the Church of Scientology, only reached Grade IV on Scientology’s Grade Chart. Ss we explain below, Masterson’s Grade IV was apparently cancelled by the Church. Thereafter, he went up to Grade III in 2001 and has remained there since 2001. The bottom line here is that Hubbard’s rules do not allow Masterson, or any other Scientologist, to go any further up the Bridge once they are classified a Type B. As Masterson was a celebrity and his family was in the Church, Masterson has been allowed to skate by for the last twenty years as what Hubbard called a “dilettante.”

In our view, the lawyers for Masterson’s victims need to ask if Masterson was indeed labeled a Type B. Celebrity Centre Commanding Officer David Petit would have knowledge of this as would auditor Angie LaClaire, David Miscavige, and many other officials within the Church of Scientology.

Hubbard’s Type B sec check questions that Danny Masterson would have been asked when he was on the e-meter:

B-1. Do you have a criminal record?
B-2. Have you committed any crimes for which you have not been caught?
B-3. Are you currently doing anything bad?
B-4. Do you have any debts to any persons antagonistic to Scientology?

Masterson would have also been asked dozens, or even hundreds, of other questions when Scientology was sec-checking him on the rape allegations.

See our previous article on Scientology’s infamous A-J sec check.

Danny Masterson’s published Scientology Service Completions (shown below) indicate that the actor only reached Grade IV in 1995. Masterson’s upward Bridge progress was then stopped and he never reached Clear. Masterson was born in 1976 so he would have been 19 years old in 1995. Was it during this time period that Masterson confessed to illicit sexual conduct with another Celebrity Centre public and he was declared Type B?

That Masterson did Grade II and Grade III in 2001 would indicate that Masterson’s prior grades were cancelled and he had to redo Grades II and III in 2001. Such cancellations occur when Scientologists, for example, persist in behavior forbidden by Scientology and this includes sexual practices. Grade II in Scientology deals with “overts and withholds” and so Masterson would have had to confess to all of his misdeeds.

The overarching point to notice here is that Masterson has been in the Church of most of his life and has never reached the State of Clear. In fact, per the record below Masterson has not done any Bridge action in Scientology since 2001. In 2012, Masterson did a Dianetics course. This is all suggestive of serious problems in which the Church would not allow him on course.

There are numerous examples over the decades of the Church of Scientology engaging in systematic harassment using PI’s and its own members. One example was clearly established in Rathbun v. Miscavige. In a Writ of Mandamus filed on February 14, 2014 David Miscavige’s attorneys candidly admitted that the Church of Scientology  (CSI), “through counsel, hired investigators in Texas to observe Mr. Rathbun’s attempts to impugn the religion’s integrity”:

The Church of Scientology International (CSI), is responsible for the overall ecclesiastical management, dissemination, propagation, and defense of the Scientology religion and Scientology churches. (MR1809 at ¶12E.). CSI’s Office of Special Affairs has, in accordance with Scientology doctrine, undertaken to protect Scientology trademarks from conversion or theft. (MR3427 at 151-52.)

When the Office of Special Affairs determined that Mr. Rathbun was “squirrelling”—a term used to describe one who distorts the Scientology scripture
and pretends to deliver it in altered form—CSI, through counsel, hired investigators in Texas to observe Mr. Rathbun’s attempts to impugn the religion’s ntegrity. (MR3413 at 95; MR3425 at 143-44; MR3426 at 147-48.)

CSI undertook this investigation because the Scientology religion requires steadfast protection of its scripture. As we will show, there is no evidence that Mr. Miscavige directed that activity. This suit, which began with an ex parte temporary restraining order, followed. Monique Rathbun alleges intentional infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference, and privacy-related claims against CSI; RTC; Mr. David Miscavige; investigators Steven Sloat and Monty Drake; filmmaker David Lubow; and Scientologist Ed Bryan. (MR1873.)

Plaintiff complains about (i) the actions of a group of Scientologists led by John Allender, who went to Texas in 2011 to produce a protest video documenting the Rathbuns’ conduct; and (ii) CSI-retained investigators looking into, among other acts, Marty Rathbun’s theft and use of trademarked Scientology technology and materials. (MR784-85 at ¶23; MR885-887 at ¶¶9-12; MR891-894 at ¶¶5-6, 8-9; MR899 at ¶¶5-7; MR 3444 at 57; MR3445 at 60.)

C. CSI, which can defend and satisfy any obligations related to this suit, generally appeared. CSI, Steven Sloat, Monty Drake, David Lubow, and Ed Bryan have generally appeared. (MR667, 686, 707, 1068, 1070.) CSI is fully capable not only of defending this suit, but also satisfying any obligations resulting from it. (MR1828 at ¶7F.) The generally appearing defendants, led by CSI, have sought dismissal under the anti-SLAPP statute, TEX. REM. CODE§ 27.001et seq., because Plaintiff’s claims relate to these defendants’ free-speech, petition, and association rights. (MR731.) The motion remains pending before the trial court.

The five-month siege of the Rathbun’s constituted a targeted harassment campaign ordered by CSI — and David Miscavige’s own attorneys admitted this. Public members of Scientology were also involved in the targeted harassment which included stalking and surveillance. Scientology’s Freedom Magazine and its STAND League have also engaged in targeted harassment. That Danny Masterson and OSA would conspire to target and destroy Masterson’s victims fits perfectly with L. Hubbard’s dictum:

The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that, then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN. And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN.

The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly. — L. Ron Hubbard, 1955. The Scientologist – A Manual on the Dissemination of Material.

Mike Rinder — Dealing with Critics of Scientology – The L. Ron Hubbard Playbook

As covered in our previous article Rape Culture Deja Vu: Scientologist Danny Masterson Echoes Bill Cosby we showed how accused rapist Masterson is following the same desperate and failed playbook used by now convicted and imprisoned rapist Bill Cosby.

— Both Masterson and Cosby have tried to argue that the women accusing them of are engaged in a money grab. It didn’t work for Cosby and it won’t work for Masterson. Cosby was convicted and is in prison. Masterson has been arrested and formally charged. He is looking at 45 years in prison if convicted.

— 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 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 a series of 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.

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

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.

Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey didn’t agree with Masterson. The actor posted a $3.3 million bond after his arrest:

David Miscavige’s 2014 Writ of Mandamus to a Texas court in 2014 was an emergency filing in which Miscavige’s attorneys sought to prevent him from deposed in Rathbun v. Miscavige. Miscavige’s attorneys argued that an “apex deposition” should not be allowed. We post this legal filing here as we expect the same thing to occur when Defendant Miscavige is finally served and a date scheduled for deposition in the civil cases against his fellow Scientologist Danny Masterson: