Monique Yingling – Miscavige’s personal attorney

Alternate titles:

1. Tag Team III

2. Roadkill III

3. Who let the dogs out?  III

4. Another underhand pitch

5. What happened to the gnat spray?

6….

Zuckert Scoutt & Rasenberger, L.L.P. – ATTORNEYS AT LAW

September 11, 2009

BY FEDERAL EXPRESS AND EMAIL

Mark Charles Rathbun

Dear Marty:

I have read your internet posting of September 9, 2009 to Robin Scott in which you ascribe words and conduct to me you know are false.  You are lying. Not only do you ascribe false words to me, you also ascribe false words to Mike Rinder. This conversation never took place and you know it. The fact that you would knowingly lie about a conversation Bill Walsh and I were both party to only strengthens our conviction that you are lying about all of your other allegations. You need to correct the record and retract this and all your other false statements. You have made it abundantly clear in your recent posting that your allegations are all about you and your position in the anti-Scientology community and having nothing to do with the truth.

Sincerely,

Monique E. Yingling

cc: Michael John Rinder

40 responses to “Monique Yingling – Miscavige’s personal attorney

  1. Dear Monique

    I am so flattered that you, and no doubt your clients, are reading our recent postings. I’ve been involved in this process for forty years now. You join a long list of attornies who have seen the C of S as a cash cow worth milking – so many of you that I’m happy to say that I have forgotten all their names – they come and go.

    Sooner or later you will realise that you represent the anti-Scientology community; we are the pro-Scientology community. That is the truth, like it or not, my dear.

    Have a nice weekend!

    Sincerely

    Rev Robin Scott MA(Oxford)

    • Holy cats! You mean they know about me too!

      I thought Monique Yingling was not a Scientologist. In which case, not knowing what Scientology actually is, how could she be a credible source for what ‘anti-Scientology’ is.

      It would seem a puzzle, wrapped in an enigma, garnered with a conundrum. The mind boggles. (Some minds, not all.)

      Since I can’t find this Sept 9/09 post in the threads, I’ll have to take Monique’s word for it.

      Wait a minute, do I? Well what do you know, I AM a Scientologist and no I don’t. Thanks LRH. Monique, for all the money you’ve been paid by DM, you should get on lines, read actual LRH materials, get up the Bridge and then you’ll see for yourself who is who and who in fact is the Anti-Social Personality, the Anti-Scientologist. Of course, taking the money to defend him might preclude the ethics necessary to make the case gain. THAT is the real puzzle for you.

      Marty, myself, many others, have no such dilemma. We are sure of what we’ve gained in Scientology and we know who is who in this little game. It’s a whole lot easier to see when you take the blinders off.

  2. Hey Marty!
    Congratulations! These are the Signs of Success!! When you are winning the Lawyers start howling! If you weren’t impinging do you think an EXPENSIVE DM lawyer would be trying to discredit you? I think not. But joking aside, for years we bought the line given to us by Mgmt that were being attacked because we were expanding. I’m now finding out that we are being attacked because of Mgmt’s overts on Scientologists. What a reverse vector!

  3. Pingback: Monique E. Yingling letter to Rathbun - Why We Protest | Activism Forum

  4. Hey Monique

    So you’re worried about a conversation you had with someone but you’re not worried about the allegations of physical abuse being perpetrated by your clients?
    Wow what a way to look out for your clients interests. Some lawyer.lol

  5. Only the truth hurts Scientology.

  6. Wow Marty you know what’s going to happen next.

    Helena Kobrin is going to send a cancel poodle to your ISP and you’ll probably become the most popular blog on the internet🙂

  7. My, my, my! DMonique Yingcavige is certainly being emphatic here! In any case, DMonique and Tombert have all effectively lost by starting with all of this finger-pointing. Once the finger-pointing starts in public it means that all hell has broken loose in private. My prediction: The CoS side is going to start leaking to the media and the critics about each other in order to undercut each other. Nobody on the CoS side actually wants to be associated with DM and his brutality. People are going to want to get some distance from Dave. Once that happens, Dave goes into free fall. People around Dave are going to start cutting their losses the bigger this thing gets. BFG’s book is due out soon and is just gets better and better for our side after that. I have no idea why DM’s inner circle is nattering online with Marty, but if it makes them happy why not? It is good reading for Marty’s enormous audience.

    /////

  8. Which post is Dingaling ramble about?

    • She got the date wrong. It’s a comment in the Sep 8th post wherein Marty basically says he witnessed Yingling attempting to buy off Mike Rinder and failing miserably.

      Maybe she’s upset at the alleged failure. 🙂

      Michael A. Hobson

  9. Marty, looks like you struck a nerve. If Yingling is concerned about her reputation, she should get a new client. You would think she would realize, after a while, that ALL of the current PR and legal flaps were directly caused by the actions of her client – his complete disregard for human rights and decency, and his lust for power and domination.

  10. Dear Ms. Yingling:

    Prove it.

    Jane

  11. Lets see – if Bill and Monica were sent by Davie all the way to Denver to meet Mike Rinder in a hotel and it wasn’t to intimidate, blackmail or bribe him, what else could it be?
    Wish him good luck?
    Finally get the answer as to why he shook Tom De Vocht’s hand?
    See if Mike could get Davie a deal on his next car?

    • Youch, Monique, that ones gonna leave a mark. Maybe you can get DM to give you a session to see how to handle such marks. IF it doesn’t do what we Scientologists call ‘as-is’ that is, disappear, gone, outta there with no dregs of mis-emotion either, then you’ll have some better idea of just who is practicing what here.

      Me personally, none of the marks DM attempted to inflict exist. I’m a Scientologist. He isn’t. He’s an anti-Scientologist, and that isn’t just propaganda by redefinition of words.

      Go ahead, pick up the materials on the characteristics of a Suppressive Person, do an inventory of DM, compare him to a Social Personality, say, LRH.

      Spot the differences, you’ll be well on your way to a saner life. Like us.

  12. TruthAboutScientology

    The persons, who profit most from this whole scam and keep it alive are unethical mafia lawyers like Monique Yingling, Elliot Abelson, Monqiue Wadstet etc. They are the people on the very top of the pyramid scheme.
    Millions of donation money go to these people every year. These are the people, who secretly run Co$ and David Miscavige is only their puppet.

  13. I am an old-time Scn who has been off-lines for years.

    Marty what your blog is helping me to understand is why I felt so uncomfortable with my Church. I always thought it was ‘me’, my case, my withholds, etc. Something was wrong with me.

    With your help and others who have told their stories, I know why I felt the way I did. And lo and behold there are thousands of others who felt the same way! I had no idea.

    Thanks you for what you are doing. You have helped to revitalize my belief in Ron’s tech.

    • Monique, OSA, all those out there wondering what this is about,

      Disturbed’s getting rehabbed, getting back on the horse, getting on with his road to truth. THAT’s what this is all about. That’s what we are all about, and that’s all of it.

      Well done Disturbed, welcome back mate.

      • Disturbed,

        Time to get a new handle🙂

        • Jim, you beat me to it.

          • Mrs Yingling,

            I believe the present skirmishes are part of what you believe to be a correct strategy to make the best interest of your customer/s.

            I am writing this msg to you to suggest a few points that, IMO, may help you and your customer:

            You may as well attack Mr. Rathbun, threaten to sue him or any of the others on this blog for that matter, but is this going to really SOLVE the issues relating to your client?

            I mean, even if you were to stop Mr. Rathbun (and that has yet to be established), another one would stand up and then another and then another. This has been the story with scientology in the last few years. Headley, then Rathbun, then Rinder, then another, then another, then another…

            Hasn’t the time come to help your customer SOLVE this issue of criticism against the C. of S. and himself once and for all?

            I believe that if your customer continues to follow just a legal strategy, in the end he is going to lose. Of course, he may win or defer some more court cases, but do you really believe such a strategy may eventually win?

            You see, I came to believe, that with a legal strategy you are handling the effects and not the causes. You may, of course , take care of the “Rathbun problem”, but what about the next problem down the line that is being created? Even if you were to “handle” Rathbun, please realize that “a new Rathbun problem” is most likely already in the making inside the C of S.

            I don’t know you but through a search in the internet I have come to know that you are part of a reputable law firm. I believe you and I know that your customer has a PR issue to deal with and unless he ACTUALLY takes care of it, life is not going to get easier.

            I’ve been a parishioner of the church of scientology for many years. Contributed millions of dollars and years of hard work paid in most cases 50 cents an hour. How do you believe I feel when I come to know that your client has built an office space for the RTC spending 70 millions dollars? Disturbed at the least. How do you think I feel when I see that your customer has promoted or condoned, at the least, a practice of separating spouses? How do you think I may feel when I see your customer more interested in catering to the needs of a movie star rather than to the needs of the very people that gave an important part of their life to the movement of scientology?

            All the above actions may well be within the legal boundary (I am not a lawyer, I don’t know) but ARE THEY ETHICAL? Unless your customer starts to really address the issues like the above, you and I know that even if you won all legal cases for him from now on, the problem is not going to go away. I am sure that you have considered this.

            So I believe that right now we are facing a dilemma:

            a) Continuing to go the legal way for your customer and fending off all the attacks that are being created internally.

            or

            b) Do what I believe to be the right thing: advise your customer to start to “clean up his act” on the ethical side of things. Of course defending him while doing this, but in the meantime be FIRM about the fact he has to clean up his house. But REALLY and not by “putting lipstick on a gorilla…” if you allow me to use a PR slang.

            I believe a consultant should not just clean up the messes created by its customers but, from time to time, should also be firm with them so they stop creating messes in the first place.

            Mrs Yingling I urge you to consider following the second route. Not only things will start to get better for your client, but I believe you may find that second route more fulfilling, on a personal basis.

            At the end I am convinced that, down deep, even you don’t like separating spouses or having people work for 50 cents an hour…

            Respectfully

            Paolo

  14. This is exciting! Monique and the other liars are helping to revitalize and create a new group of on purpose Scientologists (TM?) who want to put ethics in on the enemy force mongers. I have had years of the heavy ethics and paranoia and never knew why I was getting it on my lines. I know now and will help to get the message to as many others as I can. My highest ARC for all those who are forwarding this purpose!

  15. I agree wholeheartedly with disturbed. I had given up on scientology all together and thought it was me – after reading Marty’s posts and the success stories! These are the success stories that I used to see and experience in the 70’s when it was safe and accessible to all. Even in the early 80s Asho and AO in PAC were crawling with people – there was excitement in the air and local businesses thrived little restaurants like NY George and George’s General store thrived just on the ammount of people and traffic – there were other small businesses that did great because PAC was so full of people. Auditing was accessible to all because ASHO had thousands of students on the BC and others co-audited. Now walk around PAC observe the businesses George’s – gone restaurants? What happened to the Thai place and hoggin’ out and the Casablanca sandwich place – gone!

  16. Thanks for your comment Jim.

    It is good to be back

  17. Say what ever you want about Miscabich, but Yingling wants to keep her reputation untarnished when DM goes down in FLAMES. Any data about her trying to silence victims will reflect very badly on her future career as a high paid lawyer.

  18. Everyone, everyone, please calm down. Sit down in your chairs. It’s a simple misunderstanding. Mr. Yangavige is speaking “lawyer.” Let me translate and clarify for everyone what she is saying because this is just a failure to communicate! What she was saying, was this:

    “Marty, Jeeze — if you tell everyone what I said, not only will I lose my sweet spot that I’ve had ALL THESE YEARS sucking on the neck of Scientology parishioners and you don’t know how juicy… errahhahggghphrm!!! &$%#@@ — sorry, I just choked on a whole throatful of blood! (Cough, ca, ca, ca…) went down the wrong pipe, I guess… woo-hoo… lost my train of thought… Okay, as I was saying (gulg, glug, sluuurp)… I’m so hungry! Just ravenous! GET IN MA BELLY GALLONS OF BLOOD! …okay, not only, Marty, am I apt to lose my position as Chief Leech… Lecher… LEGAL (damnit!) Counsel, I could end up debarred for blood-sucki… BEING in violation of my leechgal… what I’m trying to say is, Marty, okay… please. I mean, come on, (beeeeelch!) (BEEEELCH!) Jesus!

    “Look, I gotta keep my mouth on the artery cause if I take if off, the blood just spurts out all over the place. I mean, someone’s gotta suck the blood out of it. I’ve lost my train of thought again…

    “But look, just because I’m getting drenched in Scientology blood, THAT DOESN’T mean I’m not a Scientologist… I mean, okay, what I meant to say was it doesn’t color my judgement! Okay? Not counting “red” as a color. But justice is blind, right? and I’m certainly color blind to that, okay. You probably don’t think I’m making sense here.

    “MARTY, I’m speaking out against the truth, because who’s going to do it if I don’t? So I’m speaking out, though I’m not and never have been a Scientologist, so who is more qualified to speak against the truth than who is not anyone left to speak out for to of? As to for on… above in… for near as… &$%#@@ now I’m just getting tangled up in small common words. You see, it’s not easy to speak against the Truth, that’s why I’m doing it. It takes lots of motivation and that costs money. Loads and loads and loads of it each week. No one is more motivated to speak against the truth than me and I’m proud of that.

    “Besides the money doesn’t come from those little individual Scientologists in their little lives, each giving their small share, but they really get it from the credit card companies. See the regs raise their credit limits and that gives us more. And often the Scientologists just cave in or die before they pay it bac… don’t… okay, I know what you’re thinking, I’m not “just suckling at the aorta of Dave Miscavige’s gigantic Ponzi love child that he got by selling his soul to the devil and I wanted in on it, too…” How DARE you! What kind of a leech do you think I am?

    “Lemme just take like 10 gulps here… [pause]

    “This is hard and I’m getting really confused here. OMG, I’m so hungry! (glug, glug, sluuuuurp)

    “Okay. Marty, COME ON, even professional lawyers have to make a buck, there’s nothing wrong with being a lawyer. And if you add up all the money I’ve been paid over the years… never mind, don’t do that.

    “My point is, really what I’m trying to say, is Marty, look. I didn’t know I was hurting all these Scientologists. I didn’t know anything about Miscavige beating people, forcing staff to abort their children, (hey, could that have anything to do with why huh, Norman and Guillaume, Marc, Greg, Sue Wilhere, Bloomburger and all the other traitors can’t remember Miscavige ever doing anything wrong except nursing injured sparrows back to life…) suppressing Scientology, and in general being a raving weapons-grade horse’s ass, unless there’s some other way to put it that is more foul and thus more accurate and descriptive than the words I’ve used here… and now that you’re exposing what I’ve been up to, how I’ve been helping a fiend all these years… Marty… pleeese…. it hurts.

    “I’ll could not just lose my job, I could be debarred if the whole truth came out… plus, I can’t give the money back because I already spent it.”

    “Sincerely,
    Monique Yingavige”

  19. Jim thanks for your nice comments.

    I salute all the brave souls who are speaking their truth and viewpoints.

    I don’t have to believe all I read on this blog, but I do demand the right to observe and make my own determination.

    What I now realize is I am no longer afraid. I am not afraid of the Church, it’s ethics, being declared, or barred from the rest of the OT levels.

    What I am afraid of, is losing my honor, integrity, and courage. I lost it once, and I won’t lose it again.

  20. Hi Thoughtful,
    That had to be one of the funniest things I have ever read! I laughed my ASS OFF!!

  21. Marty – an observation;
    For me one of the worst arbitraries that took place was forbidding SO members to create on the 2D – not allowing us to have children.
    It took me a long time to come to this conclusion, but here it is: Gulliaume has 2 beautiful daughters who he and Vanella estranged. They sent them to Italy never to see them again. Date coincident to that event taking place is when all SO members are forbidden to have children. Coincidence? Do you think DM asked him to give up his two daughters (I knew them – they were awesome) and GL loved them, it was a tremendous overt to estrange them, yet that’s what he did! And then the BS rule depriving all SO members from having kids…
    To set the record straight LRH used to promote new mothers read the OODs from the Apollo. It is a dynamic that has been completely suppressed.

    • Quite right, Bolivar – unbelievable overt against the 2D – and the main reason why my wife and I left the SO in the first place – for the sake of our children.

      Mary Sue used be extremely supportive of the 2D, and health issues generally.

      Love, Robin

    • Simon – you are right. Guillaume – like everyone else – pretty much had to disconnect from their children when Dear Leader decided 2Ds were verboten.

      • In 1983 while I was in the Sea Org at ASHO Day, a CMO Int Missionaire threatened to declare me ‘SP’ for having a relationship with my wife, a non-Sea Org member who was a Scientologist in good standing. I laughed in his face and told him, “Go ahead and do whatever you like.” And I walked away.

        I had a choice and exercised my power of choice.

        You say, “Guillaume – like everyone else – pretty much had to disconnect from their children when [DM] decided 2Ds were verboten.”

        Guillaume had a choice.

        He followed the order of a psycho.

        Where is the integrity in *that*?

  22. Bravi Paolo! Well said indeed.

  23. We must all remember who we’re talking to….an attorney. As long as there is money to be made she will continue to milk the church for what she can. I believe she hopes there is more litigation because it’s all “billable hours”. Ninety-nine percent of lawyers don’t have scruples or a concious to play on so I feel all of these messages to her are falling on deaf ears. I think she’s got a good savings account going and plans to ride this out to the end. She’ll probably have enough to retire on by the time DM goes to prison. I don’t think she cares what this is doing to her reputation because she won’t have to worry if she can retire on the proceeds.

  24. Dear Ms Yingling:

    First and foremost: what you barking about lady? You have no legal grounds to send someone a “shut up” letter, as I’m sure you are aware Mr. Rathbun has his right to free speech (1st ammendment). Why so serious over a blog?

    and to Marty… bringing new meaning to the truth setting people free. Good job in leading by example.

  25. Oh dear Monique how far will you go to protect the slavemaster.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s