Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1991, Page 48
The plaintiff‟s divine retribution argument was a last-ditch attempt to satisfy the
threat requirement (emphasis added).48
Molko‟s attorney, Ford Greene, sees this view as in line with the Molko decision, which
established that the brainwashing theory itself does not require a showing of force or threat
of force as a necessary element of a thought reform regime.49 However, the claim of false
imprisonment must be supported by such evidence.
In Molko, the allegations of fraudulent inducement to join the Moonies had been an essential
element of the emotional distress claim. Here, there was no misrepresentation or
concealment of the cult‟s identity from Robin, so there was no fraudulent inducement to join
the cult or expose herself to coercive persuasion. The court found Robin had not been
subjected to anymore outrageous behavior than a member of any cloistered religious group.
The evidence was sufficient, however, to support liability for this claim as to the mother,
“since the Krishnas recklessly disregarded the probability that their conduct would cause the
daughter‟s parents emotional suffering.”50 The essence of actionable conduct here was a
conspiracy to assist Robin in hiding from her parents. Robin‟s mother‟s claim was based on
that assistance and not, as the defendants maintained, on the activities that led to Robin‟s
conversion, which the court held to be constitutionally protected religious activities.51
The Wollersheim Case
Last year the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of Wollersheim v. Church of
Scientology,52 a decision that upheld a damage award for the ex-Scientology member
seeking relief but which contained language that may provide difficulties in future lawsuits
by ex-cult members.
Larry Wollersheim was a manic-depressive for most of his life, an important fact of which
the Church of Scientology was aware. From 1972 through 1979 he became heavily involved
in Scientology and underwent rigorous encounter sessions known as “auditing”53 aboard a
ship owned by the group. When he tried to escape, he was forcibly restrained and made to
continue the sessions in spite of his feeling that he “was dying and losing (his) mind.” One
psychiatric expert witness in the trial noted that his was one of several events underlying
and causing Wollersheims‟s mental illness. Scientology also pressured him to “disconnect”
from his family.
Convinced that auditing was causing him psychiatric problems, Wollersheim decided to risk
becoming a target of Scientology‟s “freeloader debt” and “fair game” campaigns, which are
aimed at discouraging defectors,54 Risk became reality when Wollersheim left the group:
Scientologists initiated a campaign to ruin his photography business. Wollersheim went
bankrupt and ended up in psychiatric care.
In his complaint, Wollersheim alleged fraud, and negligent and intentional infliction of
emotional injury.55 The trial court summarily decided Scientology is a religion and auditing is
a religious practice.56 After hearing the evidence, the trial judge dismissed the fraud count
but allowed both emotional injury counts to go to the jury, which awarded the plaintiff $30
million in damages.
The appellate court upheld the finding of intentional infliction of emotional injury but
reversed the finding of negligent infliction of emotional distress. Further, it found the trial
court correctly ruled that Wollersheim‟s claims were subject to the discovery exception to
the statute of limitations.57 The court then reduced the damage award to $2.5 million,
finding $30 million excessive considering the evidence at trial that the Church of
Scientology‟s net worth is $16 million. Wollersheim claimed that the group‟s true net worth
is closer to $250 million but he failed to prove it at trial.
The plaintiff‟s divine retribution argument was a last-ditch attempt to satisfy the
threat requirement (emphasis added).48
Molko‟s attorney, Ford Greene, sees this view as in line with the Molko decision, which
established that the brainwashing theory itself does not require a showing of force or threat
of force as a necessary element of a thought reform regime.49 However, the claim of false
imprisonment must be supported by such evidence.
In Molko, the allegations of fraudulent inducement to join the Moonies had been an essential
element of the emotional distress claim. Here, there was no misrepresentation or
concealment of the cult‟s identity from Robin, so there was no fraudulent inducement to join
the cult or expose herself to coercive persuasion. The court found Robin had not been
subjected to anymore outrageous behavior than a member of any cloistered religious group.
The evidence was sufficient, however, to support liability for this claim as to the mother,
“since the Krishnas recklessly disregarded the probability that their conduct would cause the
daughter‟s parents emotional suffering.”50 The essence of actionable conduct here was a
conspiracy to assist Robin in hiding from her parents. Robin‟s mother‟s claim was based on
that assistance and not, as the defendants maintained, on the activities that led to Robin‟s
conversion, which the court held to be constitutionally protected religious activities.51
The Wollersheim Case
Last year the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of Wollersheim v. Church of
Scientology,52 a decision that upheld a damage award for the ex-Scientology member
seeking relief but which contained language that may provide difficulties in future lawsuits
by ex-cult members.
Larry Wollersheim was a manic-depressive for most of his life, an important fact of which
the Church of Scientology was aware. From 1972 through 1979 he became heavily involved
in Scientology and underwent rigorous encounter sessions known as “auditing”53 aboard a
ship owned by the group. When he tried to escape, he was forcibly restrained and made to
continue the sessions in spite of his feeling that he “was dying and losing (his) mind.” One
psychiatric expert witness in the trial noted that his was one of several events underlying
and causing Wollersheims‟s mental illness. Scientology also pressured him to “disconnect”
from his family.
Convinced that auditing was causing him psychiatric problems, Wollersheim decided to risk
becoming a target of Scientology‟s “freeloader debt” and “fair game” campaigns, which are
aimed at discouraging defectors,54 Risk became reality when Wollersheim left the group:
Scientologists initiated a campaign to ruin his photography business. Wollersheim went
bankrupt and ended up in psychiatric care.
In his complaint, Wollersheim alleged fraud, and negligent and intentional infliction of
emotional injury.55 The trial court summarily decided Scientology is a religion and auditing is
a religious practice.56 After hearing the evidence, the trial judge dismissed the fraud count
but allowed both emotional injury counts to go to the jury, which awarded the plaintiff $30
million in damages.
The appellate court upheld the finding of intentional infliction of emotional injury but
reversed the finding of negligent infliction of emotional distress. Further, it found the trial
court correctly ruled that Wollersheim‟s claims were subject to the discovery exception to
the statute of limitations.57 The court then reduced the damage award to $2.5 million,
finding $30 million excessive considering the evidence at trial that the Church of
Scientology‟s net worth is $16 million. Wollersheim claimed that the group‟s true net worth
is closer to $250 million but he failed to prove it at trial.
