Another Narconon Stone Hawk victim speaks out

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Dave Touretzky

unread,
Feb 1, 2008, 11:52:41 PM2/1/08
to
Original posting: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Stop-Narconon/Personal/JeffZ/


Stop-Narconon.org: Jeff Z's Story

*Late November, 2007*
Looking for a drug rehab for my son, I found Narconon Stone Hawk on
the Internet, and contacted the owner, Per Wickstrom. My wife and I
don't have a lot of money; we couldn't afford Narconon's steep
price. But Per had a solution: he took our financial information, and
submitted credit card applications for us with Discover Card, Chase,
and Bank of America (for an American Express card). Discover Card
turned us down, but we got a $20,000 line of credit from Bank of
America. This was just enough to cover the combined cost of Narconon
plus another company that works with them, Intervention Services and
Technologies. The $20K total is less than what Narconon normally
charges, but it was all the credit card company would loan us, and Per
was willing to take what he could get.

*December 28, 2007*
On December 2 we took our son to Narconon Stone Hawk in Albion Michigan,
at 12:30pm. He called on Dec. 5 and begged me to please look more
closely at this place. He told me to look on Google. I told him I would.
By 3:00 am on December 6th we were on our way to pick him up from Stone
Hawk.

I have been trying to get some answers for how they are going to handle
this. I spoke with Jai (he has since resigned from the company as of
December 19), Michelle Darrell (Per Wicksrom's assistant), Sean Kelty
(my son's intake person), Kristene, and now Eric (Jai's replacement).
Everyone keeps giving us the run-around; no one will return our calls.

I had spoken with Eric last Thursday December 20th. He said he would
have to look into it and call me back. I called him back after an hour
he said he would send our $500.00 for medical and $40.00 student account
money in the mail that day. Now over a week has passed and no check. So
I called Eric today. His secretary, said Michelle Darrell takes care of
that. I called Michelle. After leaving a message and being very
persistent, I finally got to talk to her. She said, she needed us to
fill out a release form and have it notarized.She was supposed to e-mail
it, but I have not got that either. I tried to call Eric back and his
secretary said he was not accepting phone calls until further notice.

I called back after about 10 min. and talked to Michelle again. She said
that she would send the $540.00 check today. But she told me that Stone
Hawk would refund all but $15,900.00. Technically, Chris did not start
the program. He only went through 3 days at de-tox and spent part of 1
night at the Battle Creek facility. How can they justify this? If they
care about people as they say they do (and I stated this to Michelle),
why would they keep our money that we need to help Chris?

============================================================

1/8/08

Per,

This letter is in reference to Christopher Z. He arrived at the
Albion MI facility on 12/2/07 at about 11:30 am. On the morning
of 12/5/07 my wife and I picked Chris up at the Battle Creek, MI
facility. Chris at that time had only been to de-tox and had not
started any class or sauna treatments.

I know that we signed the contract stating that the program is
non refundable, but we should have educated ourselves a little
more before we took this step to help our son.

The reason I am writing this is to ask you to consider refunding
our money. Please keep reading. We put ourselves in a huge
financial bind when we did this, but from what we were told, it
would be worth the effort and this program was the best thing
for Chris. As we learned more about the program, we decided that
this was not the treatment we wanted for Chris. I know you don't
call it Scientology, but from what we gathered it is. This goes
against our beliefs and up-bringing and we don't want this
forced on Chris. We didn't know enough about the program before
we brought Chris to you. We made a mistake.

I did not write this to bash your program. I'm sure that your
program can help some people and that you have had some success
with it. We just feel this is not the right thing for our son.

We can't understand how you can justify keeping the entire
amount of the program when Chris was there less than 4 days and
had not technically started the program. We haven't been able to
talk much with anyone and haven't had our calls returned when we
leave messages. We have tried many times.

If you decide to not refund our money, we will have no other
resources to get Chris the help he desperately needs. We need
this money.

You are in the business of caring for people. Please understand
where we are coming from and consider our request.

Sincerely,

Jeff Z

============================================================

*January 14, 2008*
Per Wickstrom called Saturday in response to the letter I sent him
asking for a refund. We weren't home at the time and he left a message
that I was welcome to call him back. Today I called while on my lunch break.

He started off defending his program. I had mentioned the Scientology
practices in my letter, and he tried to make it clear that they do not
use Scientology. I told him that we did some research and found some
things that scared us. His response to that was "do you believe
everything you see on the internet?" He went on and suggested I "look at
the Catholic religion. They are all pedifiles. Don't you agree that you
would not go to another Catholic Church after reading this?" I replied
with "no because I know that they are not all that way". We went back
and forth for about 10 min. Then I mentioned the Vince Daniels radio
program. He asked if I had talked to Vince. He said Vince was fired for
falsifying information on the Internet. I don't know if this is true or
not, but he became more argumentative from this point on.

A lot more was said, but it was mainly Per defending his position as a
"business man" and what would I do if I were in his postion. He also
kept bringing up the contract that we signed. He stated that according
to the contract, he doesn't owe us a penny. I aggreed with that, but
since Chris was only there for less than 4 days I didn't feel he could
justify keeping all the money. His response was that "he has an open bed
for Chris, and he has alot of money invested for Chris. When Chris slips
and starts using again, we can bring him back and put him back in the
program and pay the remaining $15,000". I wanted to laugh. I told him
that Chris would not come back there.

In the end Per said he may be willing to give us something back to "help
the hurt". He said "I'm not going to give you $10,000 though". He
suggested I think about an amount that I feel is fair and call him back.

Is there anyone higher up than Per? Because he said that he doesn't have
the final say in this. I don't want to call him back with a dollar
amount and shoot myself in the foot so to speak. I don't guess his idea
for a fair amount and mine would be the same.

Tomorrow I am going to call [Pennfield Township Treaurer and Narconon
advisory board member] Barb Phillips and see what she has to say.

*January 15, 2008*
I called Barb Phillips today. She is still on the advisory board for
Narconon in Battle Creek. She said that her role is to enforce the codes
for their Conditional Use Permit. This requires them to maintain the
property, and not let "students" roam around the neighborhood
unsupervised. Basically the business should not affect the surrounding
comunity in a negative way. She has no involvement with the business end
of Narconon. She also said that one of their requirements is to keep in
contact with her. She said she has sent several e-mails over the past
few weeks to Jai and has recieved no replies. I informed her that Jai
has resigned his position at Narconon. She was surprised at this. She
said the last she knew, he was a happy little camper there.

She did not know why they could not give us a refund. Again she has no
involvement with the business end. Her only advice was that we would
probably need to hire an attorney. She then asked what happened there. I
told her a little about our experience. I pointed her to the
Stop-Narconon.org web site. She seemed shocked to hear what was going on
there. She was very interested and said she would definitely take the
time to look at the web site I poiinted out to her. I informed her that
there are many more web sites with peoples' bad experiences for her to
look at. She also told me she would bring this to the attention of her
supervisor. She asked if she could get my name and number so she could
call me if she found any help. I did not give her this information. I
told her I didn't feel comfortable enough yet because we were in the
early stage of this battle, and I don't want to compromise whatever
ground we have gained. I did however let her know I would stay in
contact with her.

We contacted the credit card company and started dispute proceedings
against. the charge made by Narconon. I don't know if this was the right
thing to do or not... The day that we picked up Chris at Narconon,
George Knight (who is the guy that came to our house for the
intervention) called. He asked how Chris was doing at Narconon. I told
him we picked him up this morning. I told him what happened. He asked
where we got the information that made us go get him. I told him and he
asked what the web sites were and siad he would look at them. In the
meantime he asked if I wouldn't mind talking to his supervisor Owen
because he knows other places we could take Chris. I agreed. Later Owen
called me and asked me what happened. I told him but he would not let me
elaborate about what we saw on the Internet. Whenever I tried he cut me
off. He told me about a place called XXX in Arizona. I told him that
while our money was tied up at Narconon we would not be able to send
Chris anywhere. I have not researched the XXX facility. I know we would
not be able to get Chris to go anyway.

By the way, Chris is doing well and staying clean. Since he only spent 3
days at Narconon he can't say much about the later starges of the
program, such as the sauna, but he remembers that the food looked and
tasted terrible. As soon as we got him out of there we stopped for
something to eat because he had eaten very little while he was there.

*January 24, 2008*
I have received a form from the bank to dispute the Narconon charge. I
wrote the letter they asked for and am going to mail it tomorrow. I'm
also filing fraud complaints with the Attorney General's office in both
my home state and the state of Michigan, and I plan to contact the
Michigan Department of Community Health to file a complaint with them as
well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://Stop-Narconon.org http://Narconon-Exposed.org

anothers...@hotmail.com

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 1:57:02 AM2/2/08
to
On Feb 1, 8:52 pm, Dave Touretzky <d...@ammon.boltz.cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> Original posting:  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Stop-Narconon/Personal/JeffZ/
>
Thanks for posting this.

So many stories like this. How can Narconon continue lying that there
its "treatment" has no ties to its scientology?

There is a financial trail linking it directly in scientologies own
filings with the IRS (if I recall correctly).

It seems that false representation is just one of the items on the
list regarding a fraud case here.

Anoncritic08

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 2:02:33 AM2/2/08
to
On Feb 1, 11:52 pm, Dave Touretzky <d...@ammon.boltz.cs.cmu.edu>
wrote:

Good luck to you, we all know who they really are and thank god you
were able to get your son out when you did! I personally believe it's
only a matter of time before there are deaths at narconon. They are a
cult brainwashing facility preying on the most vulnerable of people!
I urge everyone to write to the authorities to have them shut down!

Android Cat

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 2:59:18 AM2/2/08
to
Anoncritic08 wrote:

>> http://Stop-Narconon.org http://Narconon-Exposed.org
>
> Good luck to you, we all know who they really are and thank god you
> were able to get your son out when you did! I personally believe it's
> only a matter of time before there are deaths at narconon. They are a
> cult brainwashing facility preying on the most vulnerable of people!
> I urge everyone to write to the authorities to have them shut down!

I personally believe it's only a matter of time before there are deaths

*investigated* at narconon.

FIFY.

--
Ron of that ilk.

BigBeard

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 5:24:23 AM2/2/08
to

<anothers...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f42320ac-270b-41b9...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...


From the once secret Settlement Agreement with the IRS
(Reformatted slightly to make it easier to pick out the players):

"VIII. Definitions.

For purposes of this Agreement:

A. "Code" means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the
regulations thereunder, as amended from time to time.

B. "Entity" includes any corporation, limited liability company,
trust, association, committee, partnership, or unincorporated
organization, as well as any "person" (other than an individual),
as defined in Treas. Reg. sec. 301.7701-1 through -4.

C. An entity is a "Scientology-related entity" if that entity is
described in one or more of the paragraphs set forth below:

An entity is a Scientology-related entity if it is a signatory
to this Agreement or is identified in section III., paragraphs B.
or C. or section IV., paragraph D.2. of this Agreement or
Exhibits III-1 through III-35 of this Agreement.

An entity is a Scientology-related entity if it delivers
religious services to parishioners in a manner prescribed by the
works of L. Ron Hubbard and as authorized (directly or
indirectly) by Religious Technology Center, Church of Scientology
International or other entity described in another paragraph as a
Scientology-related entity.

Thus, for example,
all Class V churches,
Continental organizations,
CSFSSO,
CSFSO,
CSWUS,
Saint Hill or other advanced organizations and missions are
Scientology-related entities.

The publications organizations discussed at page 1-21 through
1-27 of the letter to John Burke, Monique Yingling dated June 29,
1992, (the "June Submission") and part of the Qualified Written
Material are Scientology-related entities.

Thus, for example,
Bridge Publications, Inc.,
and New Era Publications International ApS,
as well as their related subsidiaries or affiliates, are
Scientology-related entities.
Pages 1-21 through 1-27 are attached as Exhibit VIII-1 to this
Agreement.

The social benefit and other public benefit entities discussed
at pages 1-28 through 1-42 of the June submission along with all
subsidiaries, subordinate chapters, subordinate organizations, or
sublicensees thereof (e.g., organizations that are permitted to
use particular names, copyrights, service marks, and/or
technologies) are Scientology-related entities.

Thus, for example,
Citizens Commission on Human Rights,
National Commission on Law Enforcement and Social Justice,
Scientology Defense Fund Trust,
Association for the Better Living and Education,
Applied Scholastics Incorporated,
Narconon International,
The Way to Happiness Foundation,
and the Foundation for Religious Freedom are Scientology-related
entities.
Pages 1-28 through 1-42 are attached as Exhibit VIII-2 to this
Agreement.

Any entities subject to the ecclesiastical direction or general
guidance of Church of Scientology International or Religious
Technology Center, directly or indirectly, including but not
limited to any trusts, that hold assets (including but not
limited to intellectual property and mortgages) for any other
Scientology-related entity or for the advancement or protection
of the Scientology religion whether or not those entities were
discussed at pages 1-43 through 1-56 of the June submission are
Scientology-related entities.

This definition does not include the trust or estate of any
parishioner who has made an intervivos or testamentary transfer
of assets to the Church. This definition does not include
financial institutions that are not owned (directly or
indirectly) in whole or in part by any entity that otherwise
meets the definition of Scientology-related entity under another
subparagraph of this paragraph VIII. C. This definition does not
include (i) any fiduciary that is not a Scientology-related
entity or a Scientology-related individual (ii) the employee of
any such fiduciary, (iii) any escrow agent holding assets of a
Scientology-related entity under and escrow arrangement of a
strictly temporary nature, (iv) any trustee under a deed of trust
upon real property to secure the debt of a Scientology-related
entity (v) any person acting under the power of attorney to
Scientology-related entity, provided that any such fiduciary
described in (i) through (v) above, and is nor otherwise a
Scientology-related entity under paragraph of this section VIII,
paragraph C. Pages 1-43 through 1-56 are attached as Exhibit
VIII-3 to this Agreement.

Any entity directly or indirectly involved in, or related to,
the ownership and /or operation of the M.V. Freewinds including
those listed at pages 1-57 through 1-59 of the June submission
are Scientology-related entities.

Thus, for example,
the Foundation Church of Scientology Flag Ship Service
Organization,
Flag Ship Trust,
Transcorp Services S.A.,
San Donato Properties Corporation
and MCL Services N.V. are Scientology-related entities.
Pages 1-57 thorough 1-59 are attached as Exhibit VIII-4 to this
Agreement.

Any membership entity primarily composed of Scientologists,
whether or not listed on pages 1-60 through 1-62 of the June
submission, including but not limited to

the International Association of Scientologists,
Danish Association of Scientologists, and
European Association for Scientology,
along with any entities performing the operations of (or holding
the assents of ) such organizations
(including Foundation of International Membership Services
Administration N.V.,
Membership Services administration (UK) Ltd and
U.S. IAS Members' Trust), are Scientology-related entities.
Pages 1-60 through 1-62 are attached as Exhibit VIII-5 to this
Agreement.

Any entity that owns, (including, but not limited to, those
entities listed below in this subparagraph C.8.), (sub) licenses
to others to use, and/or has rights to (sub) license others to
use what has been described in the Qualified Written Material as
the Scriptures (the written and spoken words of L. Ron Hubbard on
Scientology and Dianetics) or any technology, copyright,
trademark or service mark held by RTC, CSI, CST, any publications
organization (described in paragraph C.3 above), the Estate of L.
Ron Hubbard or Author's Family Trust B, is a Scientology-related
entity.

Any other entity licensed to use, or otherwise granted permission
to use or employ, any copyright, service mark, or trademark that
has been, is now (or shall in the future) be held or owned,
directly or indirectly, by Religious Technology Center, Church of
Scientology International, the Estate of L. Ron Hubbard, Author's
Family Trust B or Church of Spiritual Technology, is a
Scientology-related entity.

Any taxable or for-profit entity of which one or more
Scientology-related entities and/or any of the trustees,
directors and/or officers of any entity defined as a
Scientology-related entity under this section VIII. paragraph C,
separately or together, owned or had a beneficial interest of
more than twenty-five percent is a Scientology-related entity.

In addition, any non-profit entity of which one or more
Scientology-related entities and/or any of the trustees,
directors and/or offices of any entity defined as a
Scientology-related entity under this section VIII. paragraph C,
separately or together, control the voting power of, or have a
beneficial interest of, more than twenty-five percent, is a
Scientology, related entity.

For purposes of this definition, any Individual or At-Large
member of the CTCC shall be considered an officer of a
Scientology-related entity. For purposes of subparagraphs 4, 8,
or 9, the term Scientology-related entity includes only those
entities that are under the ecclesiastical direction or general
guidance of CSI, directly or indirectly, and that are not owned
in whole or in part by any entity that otherwise meets the
definition of Scientology-related entity under another
subparagraph of this section VIII. paragraph C.. Thus, by the way
of example, the term Scientology-related entity generally does
not include (I) sublicensees of the World Institute of
Scientology Enterprises (hereinafter "WISE"), (ii) any entity
that would not otherwise be described above, except that it has
been licensed to publish or disseminate solely the fictional
works of L. Ron Hubbard, and (iii) licenses of Applied
Scholastics, Inc. that are not included as subordinate entities
under its group exemption, as provided in section III., paragraph
3.c and listed on Exhibit III-28 (or will be subordinate entities
in the future) . a. In general. The term Scientology-related
entity generally includes an entity whether formed under the laws
of the United States or of a country other than the United
States, except to the extent other provisions of this Agreement
expressly include only U.S. entities or expressly exclude
non-U.S. entities. "

The full agreement can be found at:
http://www.lisamcpherson.org/cos/irs.htm

Among other places.

BigBeard
Katana ko chi, SPsoo


barb

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 6:34:26 AM2/2/08
to

I'm wondering what the FUCK is wrong with the state Attorney General.
Now, Battle Creek is not only home to a big Narconon facility. It is
also the home of the Kellogg family, a powerful cereal dynasty. And at
least one of the Kelloggs is a Scientologist.

Things that make you go 'hmmm.'

--
barb
Chaplain, ARSCCwdne

buy my book!
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=1198812

read my page! (thanks, R. Hill!)
http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/graham1.html

visit my store!
http://www.cafepress.com/birdville

barb

unread,
Feb 2, 2008, 6:38:22 AM2/2/08
to

So much for that "70-80% success rate," huh? When Chris slips. Not if. WHEN.

Friendly Xenu

unread,
Feb 3, 2008, 11:34:52 AM2/3/08
to
Dave Touretzky <d...@ammon.boltz.cs.cmu.edu> wrote:

> He started off defending his program. I had mentioned the Scientology
> practices in my letter, and he tried to make it clear that they do not
> use Scientology.

The FBI can get involved in this since the crime was over $10,000.
The crime syndicate is committing fraud by claiming that they're not
Scientology. The FBI should be able to raid and arrest for this.

---
"Starbucks: drink the coffee. Don't break the windows." -- C
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972865,00.html?imw=Y

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages