BB-31-b-122
PATRICK SARSFIELD HALLINAN
Hallinan & Blum
345 Franklin Street
San Francisco, California 94102
Telephone: (415) 861-1151
Attorney for Defendant
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
PEOPLES TEMPLE OF THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST, a nonprofit corporation, JEAN BROWN, and JAMES McELVANE, Plaintiffs,
v.
TIMOTHY OLIVER STOEN, Defendant.
No. 740531
DECLARATION BY DEFENDANT OPPOSING APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
(CCP § 527)
I, Timothy Oliver Stoen, declare:
1. I am the defendant herein. This declaration is made in opposition to plaintiffs’ application for a preliminary injunction.
2. Incorporated herein by reference are the following verified pleadings filed in this action on behalf of defendant:
a. Answer to Complaint;
b. Declaration by Stephen A. Katsaris, Opposing Application for Preliminary Injunction (“Katsaris Declaration”);
c. Declaration of Wade B. Medlock and Mabel M. Medlock, Opposing Application for Preliminary Injunction (“Medlock Declaration”);
—–
BB-31-b-123
d. Declaration of James Cobb, Jr., Opposing Application for Preliminary Injunction (“Cobb Declaration”).
3. I am an attorney admitted to practice law in the State of California.
4. As an attorney having a public trust, I am well aware of the rule pertaining to representation adverse to a former client. This rule has been stated by the California Supreme Court as follows:
The fact that an attorney has once acted in a professional capacity for a person does not preclude him from thereafter accepting a retainer to act adversely to his former client in a manner which has no reference to his previous employment ***.
Wutchumna Water Co. v. Bailey (1932) 216 C. 564, 571, 15 P.2d 505.
5. As an attorney I am well aware of another serious obligation, i.e., to represent “the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.” The California Legislature, in enacting Section 6068 (h) of the California Business and Professions Code, made this an express duty:
It is the duty of an attorney:
(h) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.
6. James Warren Jones, also known as Jim Jones, is a necessary witness to these proceedings. Jim Jones was the president of plaintiff PEOPLES TEMPLE, and kept himself totally aware of all its business, until leaving the United States for Guyana in June 1977. Aside from me, only he was in a position to
—–
BB-31-b-124
know whether I ever acquired, in any legal capacity or in any other capacity, any “confidential” or “secret” information connected with the subject matters of the three lawsuits mentioned in the complaint herein as filed by me. If Jim Jones were called to testify, and did so truthfully, you would testify that I was never consulted by PEOPLES TEMPLE on any subject matter connected with the aforesaid lawsuits, and that I never acquired, in any legal capacity or in any other capacity, from PEOPLES TEMPLE, or any authorized member thereof, any “confidential” or “secret” information connected with the aforesaid lawsuits. He would also testify that from September 5, 1976, until the present time I was never appointed, retained, or used as “counsel” for PEOPLES TEMPLE on any matter. He would also testify that I have never been retained or appointed as general counsel for PEOPLES TEMPLE even though, pursuant to a general requirement of PEOPLES TEMPLE, I donated my legal talents free of charge on routine matters, as a member of PEOPLES TEMPLE and not in an attorney-client capacity. He would also testify that from March 2, 1970, when I joined PEOPLES TEMPLE, until February, 1977, I had a full-time job as an assistant district attorney.
7. On June 12, 1977, I terminated all communication with plaintiff PEOPLES TEMPLE and its members. Since that date I have not visited or set foot in any PEOPLES TEMPLE building or facility. Since that date I have not had any consultations with, nor given any advice to (except to demand the return of my son), nor received any information from (except to receive threats),
—–
BB-31-b-125
plaintiffs PEOPLES TEMPLE or BROWN or McELVANE or any other member of PEOPLES TEMPLE.
8. In April and May of this year, 1978, I was approached by four oppressed victims of illegal and savage practices of plaintiffs PEOPLES TEMPLE, BROWN, and McELVANE. These victims were: Steven A. Katsaris, Wade B. Medlock, Mabel M. Medlock, and James Cobb, Jr. I did not in any way “solicit” any business or employment from any of them. I did not accept employment from them “out of spite” or any personal vendetta. Rather, upon being asked by each of these victims to file a lawsuit on his or her behalf, I researched each matter carefully and concluded that each had been greatly wronged, the liabilities of PEOPLES TEMPLE, BROWN, and McELVANE were clear beyond all reasonable doubt, and that the only question for a trier of fact was the amount of damages suffered. Accordingly, I thereupon filed the following three complaints, each of them verified by plaintiffs under penalty of perjury:
a. STEPHEN A. KATSARIS vs. JAMES WARREN JONES, PEOPLES TEMPLE OF THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST, et al. (“Katsaris lawsuit”); filed on May 16, 1978, in the Superior Court for the County of Mendocino, Civil Case Co. 39911;
b. WADE B. MEDLOCK and MABEL M. MEDLOCK, husband and wife, vs. JAMES WARREN JONES, PEOPLES TEMPLE OF THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST, JAMES McELVANE, et al (“Medlock lawsuit”); filed on June 7, 1978, in the Superior Court from the County of Los Angeles, Civil Case No. C 243292; and
—–
BB-31-b-126
c. JAMES COBB, JR., vs. PEOPLES TEMPLE OF THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST, JAMES WARREN JONES, JEAN F. BROWN, et al (“Cobb lawsuit”); filed on June 22, 1978, in the Superior Court for the City and County of San Francisco, Civil Case No. 739907.
A copy of the Katsaris lawsuit is attached to the Katsaris declaration. A copy of the Medlock lawsuit is attached to the Medlock declaration. A copy of the Cobb lawsuit is attached to the Cobb declaration.
9. I did not in any way use any “confidential” or “secret” information acquired from PEOPLES TEMPLE or any member thereof in preparing or filing any of the aforementioned lawsuits, nor will I be “called upon” to do so. This is clear from the Katsaris declaration, a Medlock declaration, the Cobb declaration, and an analysis of the dates alleged in the complaints for the unlawful acts of PEOPLES TEMPLE.
10. In the Katsaris lawsuit, the dates alleged for the unlawful acts of PEOPLES TEMPLE are:
First Cause of Action (Libel): May 10, 1978;
Second Cause of Action (Libel): April 12, 1978; and
—–
BB-31-b-127
Third Cause of Action (Slander): September 20, 1977.
11. In the Medlock lawsuit, the dates alleged for the unlawful acts of PEOPLES TEMPLE and McELVANE are:
First Cause of Action (Conversion/Extortion): February 13, 1977;
Second Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress): January 20, 1978; and
Third Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress): March 26, 1978.
12. In the Cobb lawsuit, the dates alleged for the unlawful acts of PEOPLES TEMPLE and BROWN are:
First Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress): March 14, 1978;
Second Cause of Action (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress): March 14, 1978 and April 18, 1978;
Third Cause of Action (Libel): March 14, 1978;
Fourth Cause of Action (Libel): May 10, 1978; and
Fifth Cause of Action (Libel): May 15, 1978.
13. An analysis of the dates of the respective causes of action show, then, that all except one occurred long after I severed my relationship to PEOPLES TEMPLE on June 12, 1977. The only exception is the act of conversion and extortion alleged by Wade and Mabel Medlock to have occurred on February 13, 1977, in Los Angeles, California. The truth is that I never consulted at any time with the Medlocks about the transfer of their properties to PEOPLES TEMPLE or anyone else. The truth is that I have never consulted with PEOPLES TEMPLE, BROWN, McELVANE, or any other member of PEOPLES TEMPLE about the transfer of the Medlock’s properties. I never saw or talked with either Wade Medlock or Mabel Medlock from September 5, 1976 (the last meeting of PEOPLES TEMPLE I ever attended in the United States and the last time I
—–
BB-31-b-128
visited PEOPLES TEMPLE in Los Angeles) until seeing them at a meeting of “Concerned Relatives” in Los Angeles on April 25, 1978.
14. The complaint for injunction herein alleges specific facts of misuse of confidential information solely with respect to the Katsaris lawsuit. (As the Points and Authorities make clear the failure of plaintiff to allege specific acts as to the Medlock lawsuit and the Cobb lawsuit means no injunction may legally issue as to them.) Declarant hereby refers to the answer to complaint, which shows that the allegations of paragraph VI of the complaint are totally false, perjured, and verified by a person in no position to know the truth or falsity.
15. Maria Katsaris, a member of PEOPLES TEMPLE, is a necessary witness in these proceedings. Aside from me, only she is in a position to know whether I advised her “in April or May, 1977” that she “should go to Guyana to avoid the possibility of her father’s instituting conservatorship proceedings against her.” Aside from me, only she is in a position to know whether in consultations with her I “obtained confidential information concerning her relationship with her father … and certain sexual advances made by her father towards her when she was a child.” These terribly serious charges constitute the only possible basis in the entire complaint for the issuance of an injunction, and ought not to be decided on the basis of hearsay, which is all Carol Stahl, as verifier of the complaint, and at best available to her.
—–
BB-31-b-129
If Maria Katsaris were called to testify, and did so truthfully, she would testify as follows: that I have not seen, consulted, or advised Maria Katsaris since leaving the United States on February 16, 1977; that she never mentioned to me ever any charge that her father molested her; she and I never discussed conservatorships; as she was in the United States during all of April and May, 1977 (while I was out of the United States during all that time).
16. Plaintiffs have included as Exhibit C-2 a so-called affidavit (unnotarized) signed by me which alleges that I was “unable” to sire a child and asked James Warren Jones to do so. Plaintiffs know that this document is totally false and spurious. (See birth certificate attached as Exhibit A; delivery room admission approval form attached as Exhibit B; urologist report attached as Exhibit C). Plaintiffs also know that this document is totally devoid of legal significance and that it could not be introduced in either of two custody proceedings, involving the same child, John Victor Stoen, both in California and Guyana, respectively. (In the California proceeding, both Jones and I were named as parties before the Superior Court for San Francisco, which issued its order on November 18, 1977, awarding me joint legal custody along with my wife.)
In 1972 I signed the document at Jones’ request as an act of trust and as a deterrent to my embarrassing the PEOPLES TEMPLE cause should I ever defect. As an idealist, I then believed that PEOPLES TEMPLE was the most promising organization to bring about
—–
BB-31-b-130
a utopian society. As a lawyer, I was well aware that there would be no legal effect to the document because it was signed after the birth of the child and because of the California law that a child born to husband and wife cohabiting together ” is conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage.” California Evidence Code, §621; California Civil Code, §7004 (a).
17. I left Georgetown, Guyana, on June 12, 1977, with the intention of returning in two to six weeks. I came to the United States to take a vacation and see my family and friends. In the first part of July I met with my estranged wife, Grace, and others who had left PEOPLES TEMPLE. They informed me of things that convinced me Jim Jones had changed and was no longer the person I previously esteemed. Shortly thereafter an article appeared in “New West” magazine criticizing the church and its practices. (A copy of this article is attached as Exhibit D and made a part thereof.) I realized the charges were substantially true and that I could no longer defend PEOPLES TEMPLE or Jim Jones. I also knew that my failure to defend the church would result in my being very much distrusted upon my return to Guyana. I realized that Jones was becoming increasingly ruthless and that it would be very difficult, maybe impossible, to go to Guyana and bring my son back safely.
My plan was to defend Jones and PEOPLES TEMPLE on individual points when I could in good conscience do so, which I did. (See Exhibit A of complaint.) I thought Jones would soon be returning to the United States from Guyana and that he would need my services
—–
BB-31-b-131
as an intermediary. I hoped he would see that I had remained loyal to the values (espoused by PEOPLES TEMPLE) of social justice, economic fairness, and racial brotherhood even though I was no longer a member. In return for my services and my remaining loyal to these values, Jones with, I thought, bring my son back without a court fight. Jones never returned.
In late October I decided I would have to fight Jones and PEOPLES TEMPLE in the courts to get my son. On November 18, 1977 I testified accordingly in the above-mentioned action. Even before that, as soon as I had made it clear to Jones that I was taking this route, a number of harassing events happened in my life, continuing up until the present, all of which I believe were caused by PEOPLES TEMPLE upon the instructions of Jim Jones.
I have not filed any lawsuit against plaintiffs because of any personal vendetta. I am, however, very much opposed to the practice of PEOPLES TEMPLE and Jim Jones. I believe that his members, including BROWN and McELVANE, are “mind-programmed” by Jones. I believe that Jim Jones has lost the capacity for self-criticism. I believe that he is willing to murder all 1100 people now living under his dictatorial control in Jonestown, Guyana. I believe Jim Jones and PEOPLES TEMPLE do not respect human rights or individual rights of any type, but that the collective is all-important. I believe that Jim Jones has delusions of grandeur and has a totally irrational and paranoid fear that everyone is out to get him. I do not wish Jim Jones or PEOPLES TEMPLE destroyed. What I want with all my heart is the return of my beloved son, John Victor Stoen. Secondly,
—–
BB-31-b-132
I want the 1100 people in Guyana living under the control of Jones to be given the choice to return home.
Notwithstanding my hatred for the practices of Jim Jones and PEOPLES TEMPLE, I have purposely remained rational and non-vindictive. I am aware of two cardinal principles: (1) “That which goes around comes around”, and (2) vindictiveness breeds counterproductive judgments. Therefore I am working through the Congress, the State Department, the Guyana courts, and the public to pressure Jones to return my son. I have no intention to file unmeritorious suits and thereby risk losing the momentum already established. In fact, I was at first reluctant to file any of these suits, but I did so recognizing my obligation as an attorney to defend the oppressed, and as a human being to expose wrongdoing.
—–
BB-31-b-133
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say:
I am a party to this action; the above document is true of my own knowledge, except as to the matters that are stated in it on my information and belief, as [and] as to those matters, I believe them to be true.
Executed on August 3, 1978, at San Francisco, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct.
/s/ Timothy Oliver Stoen
—–
BB-31-b-134 – b-142
[Exhibits A – D, described above]