LETTER TO The Honorable Judge David Ashworth Re Case No. CI-16-08472 LANDMARK HUMAN RIGHTS TORTURE CASE March 22, 2017

Landmark Human Rights Torture Case
Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Freedom From Covert Harassment &

Surveillance,
Registered in Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentetainmentgroup.com
[email protected]
717-528-2200
MARCH 22, 2017
The Honorable Judge David Ashworth

Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas
Lancaster County Courthouse
50 N. Duke Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
The Honorable Judge Lawrence Stengel

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Federal Courthouse
601 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Re: Case No. CI-16-08472 Preliminary Injunction for Pain Relief

Dear Judge Ashworth,
I attempted to call your law clerk yesterday, Tuesday March 21, 2017 several times with no
answer or no voice mail regarding the above case and issues. The Lancaster County Court
Administrator gave me the number of (717) 299-8055.
I am copying Judge Stengel on this letter because of our past affiliation, Larry was a
teacher when I attended Lancaster Catholic High School, and our respective roles in the Lisa
Michelle Lambert case; and due to the fact that I have seen Judge Stengel on several occasions in
the past few years. The last being at church at the Lancaster Regional Hospital at the 9:00 am
mass on Sunday morning.
To the point, on Monday evening I preregistered and attended the Trust, Transparency and
the News on at Elizabethtown College and had to walk in with a cane due to the severity and
escalation of pain in my lower torso. At home I have been using a walker. This is all outlined in
the above injunction, filed on September 22, 2016 titled Preliminary Emergency Injunction
for EMERGENCY Relief: In-Home Spa and Pain Medications Attached is the docket
report and the case just sits in the Lancaster County Prothonotary without any
adjudication. I even had to file a Judicial Complaint with the Pennsylvania Judicial
Conduct Board, case no. 2016-788, again, that case sits with no determination as of yet.
THE PAIN IS SO EXCRUCIATING THAT SOME OF THE TECHNIQUES BRING ME TO TEARS.
AND ALL THE WHILE SOME SICK AND PERVERTED INTELL OPERATIVE BROADCASTS
THIS OVER A CLOSED CIRCUIT CHANNEL FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES. See the
book Satellite Terrorism in America by Dr. John Hall for reference.
LETTER TO JUDGE DAVID ASHWORTH Page 1 of 904 Wednesday March 22, 2017
The following is part of the injunction, it reads:
[In April of 2016 the PLAINTIFF communicated with Medicare requesting the benefit of
an in-home-therapy-spa. The PLAINTIFF had a hot tub since 1996 and found it to be of
tremendous help in alleviating pain and allowing more flexibility which in turn allowed
for more stretching and exercising. In 2012 the PLAINTIFF sold his outdoor hot tub.
Medicare informed the PLAINTIFF that such benefits are routinely awarded and
instructed the PLAINTIFF to petition HUMANA Insurance through the PLAINTIFF'S
Medicare Supplemental Insurance Policy. On April 22, 2016 the PLAITIFF was visited
by a Nurse from the firm MEDICAL MATRIX, which is a third party vendor for HUMANA
INSURANCE that provides an In-Home Consultation to update any the medical files of
the insureds and provide any services that may be needed. The Medical Matrix Nurse
promised to submit a request for the In-Home-Spa that the PLAINTIFF had specifically
researched for to accommodate the upstairs bathroom. Nothing had happened since
the visit so on June 21, 2016 the PLAINTIFF filed a 100 page MEDICAL CLAIM with
authentic medical files to support the claim. Again, after numerous attempts, HUMANA
refuses to acknowledge the CLAIM. During the current period of Medicare Policy
Exchanges, the PLAINTIFF will seek another Medicare Supplemental Plan.
The Lancaster City Police Department, specifically Detective Clark Bearinger, has
been engaged in a slander campaign of mass proportions since 2010, which included
several false arrests. There was an overt and obvious intent to derail all of the civil and
criminal claims in federal and state courts that the PLAINTIFF has filed since 2005.
These efforts include fabricated allegations of mental illness and fabricated activities
used on numerous involuntary psychiatric commitments, or 302 petitions. It is these
efforts and the illegal and criminal involuntary psychiatric commitments which the
MEDICAL-COMMUNTIY-AT-LARGE uses to refuse the prescriptions of pain medications
resulting in a mass torture campaign and a criminal conspiracy to commit a landmark
case of obstruction of justice.
Since 2005 the PLAINTIFF (Stan J. Caterbone) has been prescribed opiod pain
medications from a variety of physicians and medical facilities. They include the following:
1. Lancaster General Hospital
2. Lancaster Regional Medical Center
3. Dr. Anthony Mastropietro Family Practice
4. Dr. Brian Sullivan, Abbeyville Family Practice
5. Patient First Urgent Care, Butler Avenue Office
6. MedExpress, Rohrerstown Road Office
7. Lancaster Plastic Surgery Center
The PLAINTIFF (Stan J. Caterbone) has used the following treatments and therapies to
counter the pain and suffering in the back and groin areas with success:
Spa Therapies, hot tubs and whirlpool baths
1. Message Therapies
2. Laser-Light Therapies
3. Stretching and basic excising
4. Walking
5. Bicycling
The PLAINTIFF (Stan J. Caterbone) currently uses the following medical devices and
aids in his home:
1. Handicap Rails for basement toilet
2. Toilet Seat Riser in upstairs bathroom
3. Tommy Copper back and knee braces
4. Standard Walker
5. PennDOT Handicap Placard
6. Elevated Computer on Desk to stand while using the computer
7. Shoe Inserts
8. 2 - 3ft pickers used to retrieve objects without bending over
9. Memory Foam Adjustable Bed with Vibrating at the lower and upper regions
Irreparable Harm: The irreparable harm and injure that has resulted from the above
circumstances includes but is not limited to the following:
1. EXCRUCIATING PAIN AND SUFFERING ON A DAILY BASIS.
2. Loss of personal property and real estate.
3. Loss of opportunity to secure personal property, business assets, and court
related assets, information, and evidence; including when sleeping (rape
drug rohypnol).
4. Loss of protection from law enforcement at every level; local, state, and
federal.
5. Loss of relationships including family; friends; and professional.
6. Loss of time and loss of life as a normal person would know it.
7. Loss of freedom of movement in Downtown Lancaster Entertainment
Venues and Constant and Never Ending Threats of Physical Harm,
Harassment, Over-Charging on Cost of Goods, intimidation, discrimination,
and barring from entering public places and entertainment venues,
violations of intellectual property rights, and obstruction of justice.
8. Loss of freedom of movement; complainant has been denied every
opportunity to secure his personal and business assets at 1250 Fremont
Street, Lancaster, Pennsylvania making it impossible to travel or leave for
any amount of time without fear of harm.
9. Loss of freedom of movement may constitute false imprisonment and may
invoke the federal habeas corpus laws of freedom.
10.Loss of female companionship, and under constant mocking for it.
11.Loss of business opportunities.]
Of late, the perpetrators, whomever they are, have escalated the pain and torture by
implementing the following:
1. They have jammed my antenna making it impossible to even receive the free
Antenna TV channels, making me find alternatives to watching the news and other
TV shows, which makes it difficult to rest and fall asleep without television.
2. The have damaged my memory foam adjustable bed, which I purchased over a year
ago; the bed adjusts in 3 places and vibrates, which provides some relief for the
pain.
3. They have jammed my ATT Hotspot, making it impossible to stay connected to the
internet, which makes me leave home to find available WIFI connections then
they jam those connections making it impossible to stay connected longer than 30
minutes or so.
4. The have escalated the home break-ins and the damage to real property, while at
the same time corrupted just about every financial account and transaction this
results in the loss of financial reserves and demands valuable time in preparing and
filing complaints with the proper authorities, not to mention the time it takes to
document these events.
5. In May of 2015 my cash reserves and savings totaled $59,500.00 (See Attached
Lancaster City Homeowners Rehabilitation Program Application), today that amount
is under some $7,500.00.
6. Since 1987 there has been a concertive and overt campaign to drain savings, cash
from stock and real estate sales, and inheritances by simply thru collusion and
civil/criminal conspiracy eliminating any forms of income and vandalizing and
stealing real property - immediately following the deposits of the respective monies.
This has occurred in 1988 after the sale of FMG, Ltd., stock proceeds; 1998 after
the savings of income from Pflumm Contractors, Inc.,; in 2001 after the inheritance
from my Dad, Samuel Caterbone, Jr., in 2005 after the deposit of credit card
advances; and now after the deposits from lump-sum social security and savings
from social security disability income and the proceeds from the foreclosure of 220
Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, PA (2007). All told some $232,000.00 has been
extorted.
I have been subject to this torture, harassment, extortion, and obstruction of

justice program since 1987 AND YET AS A NATION WE DENEGRADE AND FORMALLY
PROTEST AND SANTION MANY COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD FOR TREATING ITS
PEOPLE WITH SIMILAR INHUMANE OTROCITIES FAR LESS THAN WHAT I AM FORCED TO
ENDURE ON A DAILY BASIS.
FOR THE RECORD, COINTELPRO IS NOT A LEGAL PROGRAM, AND TORTURE IS NOT
ALLOWABLE OR LEGAL IN ANY U.S. SPONSORED EXPERIMENTATION PROGRAM. I AM
CURRENTLY LITIGATING THESE VERY SAME ISSUES IN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS,
NOT WITHSTANDING THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE CAMPAIGN TO DENY MY FAIR
ACCESS TO DUE PROCESS OF THE LAW.
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS VERIFY AND CONFIRM THE PRECEEDING. SEE THE
ATTACHED.
Respectfully,
_______________________
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

Freedom From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-528-2200
Notice and Disclaimer: Stan J. Caterbone and the Advanced Media Group have been slandered, defamed, and
publicly discredited since 1987 due to going public (Whistle Blower) with allegations of misconduct and fraud
within International Signal & Control, Plc. of Lancaster, Pa. (ISC pleaded guilty to selling arms to Iraq via
South Africa and a $1 Billion Fraud in 1992). Unfortunately we are forced to defend our reputation and the
truth without the aid of law enforcement and the media, which would normally prosecute and expose public
corruption. We utilize our communications to thwart further libelous and malicious attacks on our person, our
property, and our business. We continue our fight for justice through the Courts, and some communications
are a means of protecting our rights to continue our pursuit of justice. Advanced Media Group is also a
member of the media. Reply if you wish to be removed from our Contact List. How long can Lancaster County
and Lancaster City hide me and Continue to Cover-Up my Whistle Blowing of the ISC Scandel (And the Torture
from U.S. Sponsored Mind Control)?
ACTIVE COURT CASES

J.C. No. 03-16-90005 Office of the Circuit Executive, United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals -
COMPLAINT OF JUDICIALMISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY re 15-3400 and 16-1149; 03-16-900046 re ALL
FEDERAL LITIGATION TO DATE
U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 16-6822 PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI re Case No. 16-1149
MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-3284; Case No. 16-1149 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle
Lambert;15-3400 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert;; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 16-4014 CATERBONE v. United States, et.al.; Case
No. 16-cv-49; 15-03984; 14-02559 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert; 05-2288; 06-4650, 08-02982;
U.S. District Court Middle District of PA Case No. 16- 2513 INJUNCTION; Case No. 16-cv-1751
PETITION FOR HABEUS CORPUS
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board Case No. 2016-462 Complaint against
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Judge Leonard Brown III
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Case No. 353 MT 2016; 354 MT 2016; 108 MM 2016 Amicus for Kathleen Kane
Superior Court of Pennsylvania 3575 EDA 2016 Amicus for Kathleen Kane; Summary Appeal Case No.
CP-36-SA-0000219-2016, AMICUS for Kathleen Kane Case No. 1164 EDA 2016; Case No. 1561 MDA 2015;
1519 MDA 2015; 16-1219 Preliminary Injunction Case of 2016
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 16-05815 Injunction; Case No. 16-08472 INJUNCTION re
Pain Meds; Case No. 15-10167 Film Commission; Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349, CI-06-03401
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case No. 17-10615; Case No. 16-10157
Stan J. Caterbone

Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-528-2200
MARCH 21, 2017
STAN J CATERBONE & ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

INTERNET LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS AND ALLEGATIONS
6. 7 SOCIAL MEDIA SITES
7. 23 NEW LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS, March 13, 2017
8. 84 INTERNET LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS, February

14, 2014


1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-528-2200
ACTIVE COURT CASES

U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 17-867 CATERBONE v. NSA, et.al., Preliminary
Injunction for EMERGENCY RELIEF; Case No. 16-4014 CATERBONE v. United States, et.al.; Case No. 16-
cv-49; 15-03984; 14-02559 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert; 05-2288; 06-4650, 08-02982;
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA FEDERAL PRIVATE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, March 8, 2017.
Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Appeal from 17-10615
STAN J. CATERBONE & ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

SOCIAL MEDIA SITES
_________________________
8. STAN J. CATERBONE'S WEBSITE www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
9. STAN J. CATERBONE'S YOUTUBE CHANNEL -

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWqz_swlj5dsEvufnsJjRSQ
10.STAN J. CATERBONE'S TWITTER PAGE - https://twitter.com/SCaterbone
11.STAN J. CATERBONE'S SCRIBD PAGE FOR DOCUMENTS -

https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
12.STAN J. CATERBONE'S LINKDIN PAGE - https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?

id=429457751&trk=nav_responsive_tab_profile_pic
13.STAN J. CATERBONE'S AUDIO RECORDINGS ON YOURLISTEN.COM

http://yourlisten.com/Stan.Caterbone
14.STAN J. CATERBONE'S AUDIO RECORDINGS ON SOUNDCLOUD -

https://soundcloud.com/stan-caterbone?
utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=twitter
23 NEW LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS
12.Case No. 17-cv-867-EGS Preliminary Injunction for Emergency Relief

MOTION TO FILE EXHIBIT TITLED LETTER TO HUNTINGTON BANK ANDREW
GRIMMIT re Liquidation Offer March 21, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/342581480/Case-No-17-cv-867-EGS-Preliminary-
Injunction-for-Emergency-Relief-MOTION-TO-FILE-EXHIBIT-TITLED-LETTER-TO-
HUNTINGTON-BANK-ANDREW-GRIMMIT-re-Liquidati
13.LETTER to HIGH INDUSTRIES re MARRIOTT BAR THREATS, HARASSMENT,

THEFT OF MONIES March 13, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341731227/Letter-to-High-
Industries-Re-MARRIOTT-HOTEL-BAR-Threats-Harassment-Theft-of-
Monies-March-13-2017
14.FEDERAL PRIVATE CRIMINAL NOTARIZED COMPLAINT Filed in U.S.

EASTERN DISTRICT COURT March 12, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341681228/FEDERAL-PRIVATE-
CRIMINAL-NOTARIZED-COMPLAINT-Filed-in-U-S-EASTERN-DISTRICT-
COURT-March-12-2017
15.History of the Internet - DARPA and Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media
Group March 12, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341681178/History-of-the-Internet-
DARPA-and-Stan-J-Caterbone-and-Advanced-Media-Group-March-12-2017
16.WIKILEAKS CIA DATA DUMP re 100 NAMED TARGETED INDIVIDUALS OF

MIND CONTROL
https://www.scribd.com/document/341681162/TARGETED-INDIVIDUAL-
TESTIMONIES-AND-LISTS-Our-Selected-Witnesses-by-WIKILEAKS-March-
10-2017
17.CHAPTER 11 CASE No. 10615 NOTICE OF APPEAL TO JUDGE RICHARD

FEHLINGS ORDER OF FEBRUARY 28, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341519915/Chapter-11-17-
10615REF-NOTICE-OF-APPEAL-TO-U-S-DISTRICT-COURT-FOR-THE-
EASTERN-DISTICT-OF-PENNSYLVANIA-OF-JUDGE-RICHARD-FEHLINGS-
ORDER-of-February-28
18.02101-NT-000214-2016 ORDER BY LANCASTER COUNTY COMMON PLEAS

JUDGE MERRIS SPAHN GRANTING IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION
https://www.scribd.com/document/341298288/STAN-J-CATERBONE-MJ-
02101-NT-0001214-2016-re-NOISE-TOO-LOUD-ORDER-by-JUDGE-
MERRILL-SPAHN-IN-FORMA-PAUPERIS-GRANTED-APPEAL-DOCKETED-
February-22-201
19.STAN J. CATERBONE AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP INVOICES AND

STATEMENTS OF MARCH 8, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341298279/Advanced-Media-Group-
INVOICES-and-STATEMENTS-for-March-8-2017
20.NOTARIZED ENOUGH IS ENOUGH DECLARATION BY STAN J. CATERBONE

MARCH 5, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/341018022/NOTARIZED-ENOUGH-IS-
ENOUGH-by-Stan-J-Caterbone-on-March-2-2017-and-Case-No-CI-16-
08472-EMERGENCY-INJUNCTION-FOR-PAIN-MEDICATIONS-March-5-2017
21.LETTER TO MATHEW HAVERSTICK, ATTORNEY FOR SCOTT MARTIN re

MARTINE v. LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFF MARK REESE FOR IMPEACHMENT
https://www.scribd.com/document/340996107/Stan-J-Caterbone-
LETTER-to-Matthew-H-Haverstick-re-MARTIN-v-Reese-CI-17-04626-March-
5-2017
22.STAN J. CATERBONE NEW CASE IN U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT IN

EASTERN DISTRICT CASE No. 17-867 CATERBONE v. NSA, et.al.,
PRELIMINARY INJUCTION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF
https://www.scribd.com/document/340923402/STAN-J-CATERBONE-
NEW-CASE-Case-No-17-cv-00867-EGS-Preliminary-Injunction-for-
EMERGENCY-RELIEF-in-U-S-EASTERN-District-of-Pennsylvania-March-4-20
23.KATHLEEN KANE APPEAL CASE IN SUPERIOR COURT OPINION OF

MONTGOMERY COUNTY COURT OF MARCH 2, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/340823932/Superior-Court-of-
Pennsylvania-Case-No-3575-EDA-2016-MONTGOMERY-COUNTY-OPINION-
AND-STAN-J-CATERBONE-AMICUS-March-2-2017
24.STAN J. CATERBONE LETTER TO PENNSYLVANIA STATE LEGISLATORS re

ANTI-STALKING PROPOSED LEGISLATION OF MARCH 3, 2017
LETTER-TO-THE-PENNSYLVANIA-STATE-LEGISLATORS-March-3-2017
25.STAN J. CATERBONE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FOR LANCASTER COUNTY

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CASE CI-17-00206 SAVAGE v. Dave Brown re
LAMBERT BOOK
https://www.scribd.com/document/340736354/LANCASTER-COUNTY-
COURT-OF-COMMON-PLEAS-Cases-No-CI-17-00206-SAVAGE-v-BROWN-et-
al-re-AFFIDAVIT-of-ENOUGH-IS-ENOUGH-March-2-2017
26.NOTORIZED DECLARATION TITLED ENOUGH IS ENOUGH BY STAN J.

CATERBONE ON MARCH 1, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/340618722/ENOUGH-is-ENOUGH-by-
Stan-J-Caterbone-on-March-1-2017
27.LETTER TO TARGETED INDIVIDUAL ABBE EDISON OF PITTSBURG, PA re

ADVISE ON COUNTER TECHNIQUES
https://www.scribd.com/document/340479872/LETTER-TO-ABBE-
EDISON-February-27-2017
28.CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY CASE No. 17-10615 MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION OF JUDGE RICHARD FEHLINGS DISMISSAL OF
FEBRUARY 26, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/340479838/Chapter-11-17-
10615REF-MOTION-FOR-RECONSIDERATION-OF-JUDGE-FEHLINGS-ORDER-
OF-FEBRUARY-16-2017-February-26-2017
29.PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE COMPLAINT No. 055746172-

0101 re GEICO COMPLAINT FOR ACCIDENT OF FEBRUARY 28, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/340354393/PENNSYLVANIA-
DEPARTMENT-OF-INSURANCE-COMPLAINT-re-STAN-J-CATERBONE-GEICO-
CLAIM-NUMBER-055746172-0101-030-with-AFFIDAVIT-February-25-2017
30.STAN J. CATERBONE LANCASTER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CASE

No. CI-08-13373 PREACIPE TO ADD DEFENDANTS MASON PFLUMM et.al.,
February 25, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/340354387/Lancaster-County-Court-
Case-No-08-CI-13373-re-PRAECIPE-TO-ADD-DEFENDANTS-February-25-
2017
31.PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE COMPLAINT No. 055746172-

0101 re GEICO COMPLAINT FOR ACCIDENT OF FEBRUARY 28, 2017 WITH
NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT
https://www.scribd.com/document/340278864/PENNSYLVANIA-
DEPARTMENT-OF-INSURANCE-COMPLAINT-re-STAN-J-CATERBONE-GEICO-
CLAIM-NUMBER-055746172-0101-030-with-NOTARIZED-AFFIDAVIT-
February-25-20
32.STAN J. CATERBONE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FOR LANCASTER COUNTY

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CASE CI-17-00206 SAVAGE v. Dave Brown re
REQUEST FOR APPEARANCE AND AMICUS BRIEF
https://www.scribd.com/document/339729747/STAMPED-VERSION-
LANCASTER-COUNTY-COURT-OF-COMMON-PLEAS-Cases-No-CI-17-00206-
SAVAGE-v-BROWN-et-al-REQUEST-FOR-APPEARANCE-and-AMICUS-BRIEF-
Febr
33.STAN J. CATERBONE LETTER TO PENNSYLVANIA STATE LEGISLATORS re

ANTI-STALKING PROPOSED LEGISLATION OF FEBRUARY 15, 2017
LETTER-TO-THE-PENNSYLVANIA-STATE-LEGISLATORS-February-15-2017
34.STAN J. CATERBONE'S PHOTO INVENTORY OF 1250 FREMONT STREET

HOME, LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA OF FEBRUARY 14, 2017
1250-FREMONT-STREET-LANCASTER-PA-INVENTORY-February-14-2017
84 INTERNET LINKS OF EVIDENCE OF ALL CLAIMS
1. ERIC COHEN AND ROBERT BERUBE, Federal Public Defender for Esteban Santiago, Ft.
Lauderdale Shooter, INVOICE AND FEE SCHEDULE January 20, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/337072519/ERIC-COHEN-Federal-Public-
Defender-for-Esteban-Santiago-Ft-Lauderdale-Shooter-INVOICE-AND-FEE-
SCHEDULE-January-20-2017
2. STAN CATERBONE NAMED AMICUS FOR KATHLEEN KANE Superior Court of

Pennsylvania Case No. 3575 EDA 2016 FRIDAY JANUARY 20, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/337120127/STAN-CATERBONE-NAMED-
AMICUS-FOR-KATHLEEN-KANE-Superior-Court-of-Pennsylvania-Case-No-3575-EDA-
2016-FRIDAY-JANUARY-20-2017
3. WHISTLEBLOWERS KAREN STEWART AND STAN CATERBONE A Candid Discussion of

Electronic Harassment Protocols, January 11, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336256943/WHISTLEBLOWERS-KAREN-
STEWART-AND-STAN-CATERBONE-A-Candid-Discussion-of-Electronic-Harassment-
Protocols-January-11-2017
4.The Surreptitious Reincarnation of COINTELPRO with the COPS Gang-Stalking

Program
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/surreptitious-reincarnation-cointelpro-cops-
program-stan-caterbone
5. Video: Media Blacks Out Edward Snowdens Talk On COINTELPRO & History Of Mass
Surveillance
http://www.mintpressnews.com/video-media-blacks-out-edward-snowdens-talk-
on-cointelpro-history-of-mass-surveillance/224222/
6. Letters: Snowden deserves pardon by John and Bonnie Raines, Philadelphia of the
Citizens Commission to Investigate the FBI in 1971
http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20170119_Letters__Snowden_deserves_pa
rdon.html
7. Legal Implications of the Soviet Microwave Bombardment of the U.S. Embassy

https://www.scribd.com/document/336787302/Legal-Implications-of-the-1959-
Soviet-Microwave-Bombardment-of-the-U-S-Embassy-January-17-2017
THE COMPUTER HACKER WANTS THIS FREE SPACE

SO HAVE AT IT - ASSHOLE
8. Congressman Robert Walker Pleading July 7 1991 Important

https://www.scribd.com/document/270267368/Congressman-Robert-Walker-
Pleading-July-7-1991-Important
9. That time the CIA was convinced a self-proclaimed psychic had paranormal abilities
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/01/19/that-time-
the-cia-was-convinced-a-self-proclaimed-psychic-had-paranormal-abilities/?
postshare=8421484844095309&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.b487b6ae00e7
10. Obama's most enduring legacy may be the establishment of the modern US
surveillance state
http://www.businessinsider.com/obamas-most-enduring-legacy-the-modern-us-
surveillance-state-2017-1
11. The Extortion of 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, Pa by COINTELPRO PROGRAMS
January 17, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336832214/The-Extortion-of-220-Stone-Hill-
Road-Conestoga-Pa-by-COINTELPRO-PROGRAMS-January-17-2017
12. AMG LEGAL SYSTEMS PROTOTYPE Mastered on April 16, 1991 at Commadore Inc.,
January 17, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336787897/AMG-LEGAL-SYSTEMS-
PROTOTYPE-Mastered-on-April-16-1991-at-Commadore-Inc-January-17-2017
13. Stan J. Caterbone, Controller of Pflumm Contractors, Inc., 1993 to 1998 January 17,
2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336787739/Stan-J-Caterbone-Controller-of-
Pflumm-Contractors-Inc-1993-to-1998-January-17-2017
14. Sam Lombardo and Raolph Mazzochi Charlotte Street Proposal by Advanced Media
Group and Stan J. Caterbone January 17, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336787416/Sam-Lombardo-and-Raolph-Mazzochi-
Charlotte-Street-Proposal-by-Advanced-Media-Group-and-Stan-J-Caterbone-January-
17-2017
15. B2B Consulting From 1999 to 2002 January 16, 2017

https://www.scribd.com/document/336787303/B2B-Consulting-From-1999-to-2002-
January-16-2017
16. 1999 Excelsior Place Business Plan by Stan J. Caterbone January 16, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336719627/1999-Excelsior-Place-Business-Plan-
by-Stan-J-Caterbone-January-16-2017
17. Stan J. Caterbone AIM MUTUAL FUNDS Consulting From 1999 to 2002 January 16,
2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336738750/Stan-J-Caterbone-AIM-MUTUAL-
FUNDS-Consulting-From-1999-to-2002-January-16-2017
18. Pro Financial Group Brochure and Eastern Regional Free Agent Camp by Stan J.
Caterbone January 16, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336704842/Pro-Financial-Group-Brochure-and-
Eastern-Regional-Free-Agent-Camp-by-Stan-J-Caterbone-January-16-2017
19. STAN J. CATERBONE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP JOINT VENTURE WITH DALE HIGH
January 15, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336637179/56-STAN-J-CATERBONE-ADVANCED-
MEDIA-GROUP-JOINT-VENTURE-WITH-DALE-HIGH-January-15-2017
20. Institutional Investors Mortgage Banking Business Development of 1987 January

15, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336637178/58-Institutional-Investors-Mortgage-
Banking-Business-Development-of-1987-January-15-2017
21. 1987 JOINT VENTURE - Tony Bongiovi, Power Station Studios, and Flatbush Films
with Stan J. Caterbone January 15, 2017
https://www.scribd.com/document/336637176/55-1987-JOINT-VENTURE-Tony-
Bongiovi-Power-Station-Studios-and-Flatbush-Films-with-Stan-J-Caterbone-January-
15-2017
22. STAN J. CATERBONE'S Financial Management Group, Ltd., Anti-Trust Litigation File
of October 17, 2015
https://www.scribd.com/document/336637173/57-STAN-J-CATERBONE-S-Financial-
Management-Group-Ltd-Anti-Trust-Litigation-File-of-October-17-2015
23. FALSE IMPRISONMENT AND ILLEGAL INTERROGATIONS by U.S. Intelligence

Agencies November 12, 2016
https://www.scribd.com/document/329761557/FALSE-IMPRISONMENT-AND-ILLEGAL-
INTERROGATIONS-by-U-S-Intelligence-Agencies-and-U-S-Sponsored-Mind-Control-
EVIDENCE-November-2-2016
24. Letter REQUEST for COMMUTATION of the Sentence of Lisa Michell Lambert to
President Obama, November 15, 2016
25. Stan J. Caterbone and Conflicts With the Trump Administration - Monday November
14, 2016 | False Claims Act | Military
26. STAN J. CATERBONE and the DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE Documents and Evidence of
Conspiracy to .... Saturday November 12, 2016
27. Feds Probe Fulton Bank and 3 Other Subsidiary Banks of Fulton Financial With Stan
J. Caterbone Civil Actions and Mind Control Research of Monday November 9, 2016 |
28. Robert Gates
29. Letter to James Comey, Director of FBI Re Cointelpro Used to Obstruct Justice
Monday November 28, 2016 | Federal Bureau Of Investigation | Central Intelligence
Agency
30. VITALLY IMPORTANT - LETTER and DOCUMENT to Cappello & Noel, LLP of Santa
Barbara, CA Friday November 25, 2016
31. Report of Douglas F Gansler/Kathleen Kane on Misuse of Commonwealth Email

Systems November 22, 2016 Published by ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP |
32. Pro Se Legal Representation In The United States | Motion In United States Law
33. Lancaster Mayor Rick Gray Says There is Room for Improvement in Police
34. Communication - CATERBONE v. Lancaster City Police Bureau, et.al., November 22,
2016 | Central Intelligence Agency
35. Chapter 12 - ROHYPNOL AND SATELLITE and Chapter 11 - NEIGHBORS FROM HELL,
from Satellite Terrorism in America, by Dr. John Hall Copyright 2009
36. | J. Edgar Hoover | Federal Bureau Of Investigation
37. JIM GUERIN, FOUNDER OF ISC, FAREWELL LETTER OF 1989 December 26, 2016 |
Justice | Government
38. CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON Candidate for JUDGESHIP and His 1987 EFFORT FOR MY
GUARDIANSHIP Friday December 16, 2016
39. ANOTHER LANCASTER COVER-UP THE SALE OF THE MASONIC HALL IN THE CITY OF
LANCASTER, by The Advanced Media Group, December 15, 2016 | Fraternal Service
Organizations
40. Usage Statistics for www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com TOTALS and MONTHLY

From May of 2016 to January 2017 - January 10, 2017
41. My Friend and Colleague Soleilmavis Liu of China a Victim of Mind Control Living in
China Who Started Peacepink- August 28, 2016
42. TD Ameritrade TRADEKEEPER PROFIT-LOSS FOR 2004 TRADES and 2017 FULTON
STOCK January 9, 2017
43. POLICE INCIDENT REPORTS OF PHYSICAL ASSAULTS FOR STAN J. CATERBONE 2005
TO 2016 January 6, 2017
44. Judiciaries
45. UPDATED STATEMENT OF FACTS re CATERBONE v. Lancaster City Police Department

US District Court Case 08-cv-08982 December 28, 2016
46. Section 504 Of The Rehabilitation Act | Rehabilitation Act Of 1973
47. UPDATED - EXCLUSIVE Transcripts of Whistleblower Testimonies as Targeted

Individuals of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and Related Hearings and Lectures,
December 27, 2016
48. Torture
49. Stan J. Caterbone on Twitter: "I'm reading FALSE IMPRISONMENT AND ILLEGAL
INTERROGATIONS by U.S. Intelligence... on @Scribd! https://t.co/T3D9nIYvMt
#ReadMore"
50. Lancaster County Court Case No. 08-CI-13373 re PRAECIPE TO ADD DEFENDANTS
COMEY AND TRUMP REMOVE OBAMA January 23, 2017
51. INVOICE AND Letter to James Comey, Director of FBI Re Pro Se Billings Invoice
Wednesday November 30, 2016
52. Kathy Harrison (KATHLEEN HARRISON NAMED IN SAVAGE SUIT v. Dave Brown)
Email Re Bi Polar March 10, 2005
53. The Surreptitious Reincarnation of COINTELPRO with the COPS Gang-Stalking

Program - Lancaster City Police Strategic Plan, August 24, 2016
54. LANCASTER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Cases No. CI-17-00210 and CI-17-
00206 BOWMAN and SAVAGE v. BROWN, et.al.,
55. REQUEST FOR APPEARANCE and AMICUS BRIEF January 25, 2017.pdf | Amicus
Curiae | National Security Agency
56. Family of Karlie Hall files suit against Millersville University, others; calls death
preventable January 25, 2017 | Law Reference | Government
57. Stan J. Caterbone Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case Filled in Forms January 27, 2017
58. U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT ISSUANCE LETTER FOR NEW CASE NO. 17-10615-ref To
Judge Fehling Friday January 27, 2017
59. Stan J. Caterbone Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case No. 17-10615 Judge Fehling Filed On
January 27, 2017 - CASE FILE | Plea | Defamation
60. Lancaster County Court Case No. 08-CI-13373 EXHIBIT re THE DONALD TRUMP
PRESIDENCY and STAN J. CATERBONE as of January 28, 2017 - electronically filed |
Federal Bureau Of Investigation | Nasa
61. ACCIDENT REPORT NO. 1701-029468 LANCASTER CITY POLICE OFFICER REPPERT
SATURDAY JANUARY 28, 2017
62. Lancaster County Court Case No. 08-CI-13373 PRAECIPE TO AMEND COMPLAINT
January 29, 2017 - FILED ELECTRONICALLY January 29, 2017
63. Stewart Baker - Wikipedia
64. 16-cv-2513 Preliminary Injunction for Emergency Relief in Middle District NOTICE
OF APPEAL TO USCA THIRD CIRCUIT January 26, 2017 | Defamation
65. Homeowners Rehab Application File of June 8, 2015 - COINTELPRO EXTORTION

MODEL RESULTS January 30, 2017
66. Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se, U.S.C.A. Third Circuit BRIEF STATEMENT OF JUDICIAL
MISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY of February 1, 2017
67. PLAINTIFF Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION FOR EMERGENCY

RELIEF EASTERN DISTRICT of PENNSYLVANIA With IFP and Civil Cover Sheet - on
February 2, 2017
68. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case 17-10615REF SUBMITTALS FOR FEBRUARY 3 - February

2, 2017
69. Jeremy Scahill on Donald Trump and the Military-Industrial Complex - Truthdig
In an interview with acTVism, the investigative journalist also discusses the
70. significance of the Ramstein Air Base in Germany. - 2017/02/02
71. Pennsylvania State Police Liquor Control Enforcement Formal Complaint AGAINST
DOWNTOWN LANCASTER BARS, August 12, 2016 | Lawsuit | United States Courts Of
Appeals
72. Case No. CI-16-08472 EMERGENCY INJUNCTION FOR PAIN MEDICATIONS -

Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas September 21, 2016 - CRIMINAL ACT OF
TORTURE |
73. Torture LAW and the United States - Wikipedia by Stan J. Caterbone and ADVANCED
MEDIA GROUP, February 4, 2017
74. CI-16-08472 DOCKET SHEET February 3, 2017 and Torture LAW and the United
States - Wikipedia by Stan J. Caterbone and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, February 4,
2017
75. LIP News - CORRUPTION IN THE LANCASTER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT AND LNP -
February 4, 2017
76. LETTER to Andrew Wallet re Britney Spears Conservatorship February 4, 2017
78. 16-Cv-2513 Preliminary Injunction for EMERGENCY RELIEF in Middle District ORDER
by JUDGE KANE TRANSFER to EASTERN DISTRICT PHIL January 31, 2017
79. Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board LETTER Re 2016-788 (Asworth) 2016-789

(Reinaker) February 2, 2017
80. Chapter 11 17-10615ref REORGANIZATION PLAN February 7, 2017 | Bankruptcy |

Chapter
81. Chapter 11 17-10615REF STAN J. CATERBONE CHAPTER 11 REORGANIZATION PLAN

and DISCLOSURE STATEMENT February 7, 2017
82. Third Circuit Senior Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, who is President Donald
Trump’s older sister, decided this week to go inactive on the bench, relinquishing
her staff and chambers despite being scheduled to hear cases this year.
83. STAN J. CATERBONE June 18, 2008 US District Court Case 08-02982 CATERBONE v.
Lancaster City Police Bureau, et.al., CASE FILE | Complaint
84.STAN J. CATERBONE MJ-02101-NT-0000470-2017 DUTIES AT STOP SIGN - MOTION

TO DISMISS February 12, 2017
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
THE ACTS COMMITED AGAINST ME, STAN J. CATERBONE ARE ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL!
PROTHONOTARY OF LANCASTER COUNTY
Katherine Wood-Jacobs George Alspach
Prothonotary Solicitor
STANLEY J CATERBONE
Case Number
vs.
CI-16-08472
LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL (et al.)
PROTHONOTARY DOCKET ENTRIES

09/22/2016 COMPLAINT FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE, IN PRO SE
09/22/2016 CAPTION ENTRY IS: STANLEY J. CATERBONE VS. LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL; ABBEYVILLE
FAMILY MEDICINE; PATIENT FIRST URGENT CARE; SOUTHEAST MEDICAL; MEDEXPRESS
URGENT CARE; LANCASTER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND THE LANCASTER CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT
10/03/2016 MOTION FOR A 30-DAY CONTINUANCE, FILED
10/03/2016 EXHIBIT FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE IN PRO SE
10/31/2016 CASE ASSIGNED TO JUDGE ASHWORTH
11/15/2016 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, FILED
February 03, 2017
THIS IS HOW THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER KEEPS ME CRIPPLED

AND TORTURES ME - BY JUDGE DAVID ASHWORTH REFUSING
TO MAKE A RULING ON THIS CASE - CLASSIC TORTURE BY DEFINITION
CI-16-08472 INJUNCTION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF Page 1 of 16

(c) CountySuite Prothonotary, Teleosoft, Inc.
Saturday February 4, 2017
Torture and the United States - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_and_the_United_States
Torture and the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Torture and the United States includes documented and alleged cases of torture both inside and outside the United States by members of the U.S. government,
the U.S. military, U.S. law enforcement agencies, U.S. intelligence agencies, U.S. health care services, and other U.S. public organizations.
While the term "torture" is defined in numerous places, including dictionaries and encyclopedias of various nations or cultures, this article only addresses the
legal definition of the term, under the codified and case law of the United States of America.[nb 1] After the U.S. dismissed United Nations concerns about
torture in 2006,[1] one UK judge observed 'America's idea of what is torture ... does not appear to coincide with that of most civilized nations'.[2] A two-year
study by U.S. independent group The Constitution Project concluded that it was "indisputable" that U.S. forces had employed torture as well as "cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment" in many interrogations; that "the nation's most senior officials" bear ultimate responsibility for allowing and contributing to the spread
of these techniques, and that there is substantial evidence that information obtained by these methods was neither useful nor reliable.[3]
Contents
1 Legislation, regulation, and treaties regarding torture
1.1 Prohibition under domestic law
1.1.1 Bill of Rights
1.1.2 18 U.S.C. 2340 (the "Torture Act")
1.1.3 Military Commissions Act of 2006
1.1.4 U.S. Army Field Manuals
1.2 Prohibition under international law
2 Historical practices of torture
2.1 Slavery
2.2 Lynching
2.3 "Third degree"
2.4 World War 2
2.5 Torture abroad during the Cold War
2.6 Torture (Countries With U.S. training) Post World War II to 1975
2.6.1 U.S. intelligence training manuals
3 Domestic torture in modern times
3.1 Domestic police and prisons
3.1.1 Police brutality
3.1.2 Prisoner abuse
3.2 Border Patrol and immigration detention
4 Torture abroad
4.1 Khalid el-Masri
4.2 Forms of torture and abuse
4.3 Application of Fifth Amendment to overseas torture
4.4 Torture, interrogation and prisons in the War on Terror
4.4.1 "Stress and duress"
4.4.2 Legal analyses
4.4.3 Authorization and methods of torture and abuse
4.5 Secret detention facilities
4.6 Torture and extraordinary rendition
4.7 Protests
5 United Nations Convention Against Torture
5.1 History of U.S. Accession
5.2 Ratification
5.3 Evidence of violations
6 U.S. case law on the convention
6.1 Burden of proof
6.2 In re M-B-A
6.3 Defining "torture"
6.4 Matter of J-E
7 See also
8 Notes
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Legislation, regulation, and treaties regarding torture

Torture is illegal and punishable within U.S. territorial bounds. Prosecution of abuse occurring on foreign soil, outside of usual U.S. territorial jurisdiction, is
FEDERAL TORTURE
CI-16-08472 INJUNCTION
LAWSFOR EMERGENCY RELIEF
Page 2
1 of 16
14 Saturday February 4, 2017
1 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
difficult.
Prohibition under domestic law
Bill of Rights
It is debated as to whether or not torture as a punishment falls under the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States
Constitution. The text of the Amendment states that:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held since at least the 1890s that punishments which involved torture are forbidden under the Eighth Amendment.[4]
18 U.S.C. 2340 (the "Torture Act")
An act of torture committed outside the United States by a U.S. national or a non-U.S. national who is present in the United States is punishable under 18
U.S.C. 2340 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2340). The definition of torture used is as follows:
As used in this chapter
(1) torture means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain
or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) severe mental pain or suffering means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures
calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or
application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3) United States means the several states of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and
possessions of the United States.
Military Commissions Act of 2006
In October 2006, the United States enacted the Military Commissions Act of 2006, authorizing the President to conduct military tribunals of enemy combatants
and to hold them indefinitely without judicial review under the terms of habeas corpus. Testimony coerced through humiliating or degrading treatment would be
admissible in the tribunals. Amnesty International and numerous commentators have criticized the Act for approving a system that uses torture, destroying the
mechanisms for judicial review created by Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and creating a parallel legal system below international standards.[5][6][7] Part of the act was an
amendment that retroactively rewrote the War Crimes Act, effectively making policy makers (i.e., politicians and military leaders), and those applying policy
(i.e., Central Intelligence Agency interrogators and U.S. soldiers), no longer subject to legal prosecution under U.S. law for what, before the amendment, was
defined as a war crime, such as torture.[8] Because of that, critics describe the MCA as an amnesty law for crimes committed during the War on Terror.[9][10]
U.S. Army Field Manuals
In late 2006, the military issued updated U.S. Army Field Manuals on intelligence collection (FM 2-22.3. Human Intelligence Collector Operations
(http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm2-22-3.pdf), September 2006) and counterinsurgency (FM 3-24. Counterinsurgency (http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir
/army/fm3-24.pdf), December 2006). Both manuals reiterated that "no person in the custody or under the control of DOD, regardless of nationality or physical
location, shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, in accordance with and as defined in U.S. law."[11] Specific
techniques prohibited in the intelligence collection manual include:
Forcing the detainee to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner;
Hooding, that is, placing hoods or sacks over the head of a detainee; using duct tape over the eyes;
Applying beatings, electric shock, burns, or other forms of physical pain;
Waterboarding;
Using military working dogs;
Inducing hypothermia or heat injury;
Conducting mock executions;
Depriving the detainee of necessary food, water, or medical care.[12]
Prohibition under international law
Torture in all forms is banned by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which the United States participated in drafting. The United States
is a party to the following conventions (international treaties) that prohibits torture, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions (signed 1949; ratified 1955), the
American Convention on Human Rights (signed 1977), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (signed 1977; ratified 1992), and the United
Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (signed 1988; ratified 1994). It has neither signed nor
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 3
2 of 16
2 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
ratified the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.[13] International law defines torture during an armed conflict as a war crime. It also
mandates that any person involved in ordering, allowing, and even insufficiently preventing and prosecuting war crimes is criminally liable under the command
responsibility doctrine.
Historical practices of torture

Slavery
People living as slaves were regulated both in their service and when walking in public by legally authorized violence. On large
plantations, slave overseers were authorized to whip and brutalize noncompliant slaves. Slave codes authorized, indemnified or
even required the use of violence and were long criticized by abolitionists for their brutality. Slaves as well as free Blacks were
regulated by the Black Codes, and had their movements regulated by patrollers, conscripted from the white population, who were
allowed to use summary punishment against escapees, which included maiming or killing them.
Lynching
Lynching was a public act of murder, torture, and mutilation carried out by crowds, primarily against African Americans. A form of
mob violence and social control, usually involving (but by no means restricted to) the illegal hanging and burning of suspected
criminals, lynch law cast its pall over the Southern United States from the mid-19th to the mid-20th centuries. Victims were usually
black men, often accused of acting uppity towards (being insolent), assaulting, having sex with, or raping white people.
The documented murders of 4,743 people who were lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968 were not often
publicized. It is likely that many more unrecorded lynchings occurred during and after this period which influenced The Great Peter, aka Gordon, a
Migration of 6.5 million African Americans away from southern states. A 1970s lynching site found in Noxubee County, slave from Louisiana,
Mississippi, a location central to regional mob violence, belies the continuation of lynching as a torture method. 1863. The scars are a
result of a whipping by
Most lynchings were inspired by unsolved crime, racism, and innuendo. 3,500 of its victims were African Americans. Lynchings his overseer, who was
took place in every state except four, but were concentrated in the Cotton Belt (Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas and subsequently discharged.
Louisiana).[14] Forms of violence and torture also included genital mutilation, strangulation, maiming and the severing of limbs. It took two months to
Both police and lawmakers, and later federal agents, were frequently complicit in lynching while affiliated with Ku Klux Klan recover from the beating.
groups, releasing prisoners to lynch crowds and/or refusing to prosecute the participants in a public act of murder. Despite
numerous attempts to do so, federal anti-lynching legislation was consistently defeated.[15]
"Third degree"
The use of "third degree interrogation" techniques in order to compel confession, ranging from "psychological duress such as prolonged confinement to extreme
violence and torture", was widespread and considered acceptable in early American policing.[16]:47 In 1910 the direct application of physical violence in order
to force a confession became a media issue and some courts began to deny obviously compelled confessions.[17]:42 In response to this, "covert third degree
torture" became popular, since it left no signs of physical abuse. The publication of the Wickersham Commission's "Report on Lawlessness in Law
Enforcement" in 1931 highlighted the widespread use of covert third degree torture by the police to force confessions, and led to a subsequent decline in its use
over the 1930s and 1940s.[17]:38
World War 2
During World War II, the U.S. military interrogated high-level Nazis at a secret camp, "P. O. Box 1142," outside Washington D.C. The interrogators did not use
physical torture, but did use psychological tricks, like threatening to turn the prisoner over to the Soviets.[18]
Some captured German U-boat crewmen were subjected to "shock interrogation" techniques, including exhausting physical exercise and beatings, after their
capture during Operation Teardrop.
After the war, in 1948, the United States Air Force invited German Luftwaffe interrogator Hanns Scharff to brief them on his interrogation techniques, which
did not use physical means to obtain information.
Torture abroad during the Cold War
American officials were involved in counter-insurgency programs in which they encouraged their allies, such as the ARVN to use torture, and actively
participated in it, during the 1960s to the 1980s. From 1967 to at least 1972, the Central Intelligence Agency coordinated the Phoenix Program, which targeted
the infrastructure of the Communist National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam ("Viet Cong"). The program killed 26,000 Viet Cong and captured over
60,000.[19] Critics of the program assert that many of those identified by the program as Viet Cong members were actually civilians, who when captured
suffered torture by the South Vietnamese Army, under CIA supervision.
American trainers and intelligence coordination officials supported the internal security apparatus of the regimes of South America's southern cone as those
regimes carried out kidnappings, "disappearances", torture and assassinations during the 1970s and 1980s as part of Operation Condor.[20][21][22] Similar
support was provided to right-wing governments of Central America, particularly in the 1980s. Numerous participants in these abuses were trained by the U.S.
Army School of the Americas.[23] Americans were present as supervisors in the Mariona Prison in San Salvador, El Salvador, well known for a wide variety of
forms of torture.[24] One author, Jennifer Harbury, focussing on Central America, concluded that "A review of the materials leads relentlessly to just one
conclusion: that the CIA and related U.S. intelligence agencies have since their inception engaged in the widespread practice of torture, either directly or
through well-paid proxies."[25]
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 4
3 of 16
3 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
In 2014, a report by Brazil's National Truth Commission asserted that the United States government was involved in teaching torture techniques to the Brazilian
military government of 1964-85.[26]
Torture (Countries With U.S. training) Post World War II to 1975
Torture Countries identified by Amnesty International.[27]

Torture Country U.S.-trained Military/Police U.S. military Aid (19461975) $US(1979)
Greece 14,144 2,794,900,000
Portugal 2,997 361,900,000
Spain 9,872 920,200,000
Turkey 18,900 4,576,400,00
Indonesia 4,757 218,200,000
Philippines 15,245 805,800,000
South Korea 32,479 6,542,300,000
South Vietnam 35,788 16,490,500,000
Iran 10,807 1,412,500,000
Saudi Arabia 1,380 295,900,000
Morocco 2,209 138,700,000
Tunisia 636 62,400,000
Venezuela 5,341 142,200,000
Uruguay 2,537 85,900,000
Paraguay 1,435 26,400,000
Peru 6,734 193,500,000
Nicaragua 4,897 25,500,000
Mexico 738 14,300,000
Haiti 567 4,200,000
Guatemala 3,030 39,300,000
Dominican Republic 3,705 38,200,000
Colombia 6,200 154,800,00
Chile 6,328 216,900,000
Brazil 8,448 603,100,00
Bolivia 3,956 56,600,000
Argentina 3,676 230,300,000
Source: The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism, Chomsky N, Herman ES, Spokesman (1979), ISBN 0-89608-090-0, pg 361.
U.S. intelligence training manuals
The Torture Manuals was a nickname for seven training manuals that had excerpts declassified to the public on September 20, 1996, by the Pentagon.
One was the 1963 CIA document, KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation, which describes interrogation techniques, including, among other things,
"coercive counterintelligence interrogation of resistant sources." The CIA techniques involved were used in the CIA's Phoenix Program in South Vietnam.
Eventually the CIAs psychological methods were spread worldwide through the U.S. Agency for International Developments Public Safety program and U.S.
Army Mobile Training Teams.[28]
Other manuals were prepared by the U.S. military and used between 1987 and 1991 for intelligence training courses at the U.S. Army School of the Americas
(SOA). The manuals were also distributed by Special Forces Mobile Training teams to military personnel and intelligence schools in Colombia, Ecuador, El
Salvador, Guatemala, and Peru.
The manuals advise that torture techniques can backfire and that the threat of pain is often more effective than pain itself. The manuals describe coercive
techniques to be used "to induce psychological regression in the subject by bringing a superior outside force to bear on his will to resist." These techniques
include prolonged constraint, prolonged exertion, extremes of heat, cold, or moisture, deprivation of food or sleep, disrupting routines, solitary confinement,
threats of pain, deprivation of sensory stimuli, hypnosis, and use of drugs or placebos.[29]
In a July 2002 memo sent to the Pentagon's chief lawyer by the military's Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, or JPRA, the military agency that provided advice
on harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects, not only referred to the application of extreme duress as "torture" but warned that it would
produce "unreliable information".[30][31]
See also Office of Public Safety.
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 5
4 of 16
4 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
Domestic torture in modern times
Domestic police and prisons
Police brutality
In more modern policing, police brutality has involved torture. Police officials have generally described these cases as
aberrations or the actions of criminals in police uniform, as New York City Police Commissioner Howard Safir described the
attack on Abner Louima.[32] Police brutality critics, such as law professor Susan Bandes, have argued that such a view is
erroneous and that it "allows police brutality to flourish in a number of ways, including making it easier to discount individual
stories of police brutality, and weakening the case for any kind of systemic reform."[33]
In the 1970s and 80s the Chicago Police Department's Area 2 unit under Commander Jon Burge repeatedly used electroshock,
near-suffocation by plastic bags and excessive beating on suspects. The City of Chicago's Office of Professional Standards
(OPS) concluded that the physical abuse was systematic and, "The type of abuse described was not limited to the usual beating,
but went into such esoteric areas as psychological techniques and planned torture."[34]
In 1997, Abner Louima was sodomized with a plunger by New York City police.[35] The officer was convicted and sentenced to Prisoners at a whipping post
30 years in prison in a Delaware prison, c.
1907.
In May 2006 in Geneva, Switzerland the United Nations Committee against Torture released a report, which took note of the
"limited investigation and lack of prosecution" in connection to accusations of torture in Areas 2 and 3 of the Chicago Police
Department and called on American authorities to "promptly, thoroughly and impartially" investigate the accusations, and provide
the committee with more information.[36][37]
In 1983 Texas sheriff James Parker and three of his deputies were convicted for conspiring to use waterboarding to force
confessions. The complaint said they "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This
generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the
prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."[38] The sheriff was sentenced to ten
years in prison, and the deputies to four years.[38][39]
In September 1997, two former officers from the Adelanto Police Department, San Bernardino County, California, were jailed for
two years on federal charges, after pleading guilty to beating a suspect during questioning and forcing another man to lick blood off
the floor in 1994.[40]
Water torture in Sing
According to the Innocence Project, about 25 percent of wrongfully convicted innocent people were coerced into making false Sing, New York, 1890.
confessions or false incriminating statements.[41] Most of the victims were threatened by the terror of harsher sentences if they
remained non-compliant.
Prisoner abuse
In 2005, a Channel 4 documentary "Torture: Americas Brutal Prisons" showed video of naked prisoners being beaten, bitten by
dogs, and stunned with Taser guns and electric cattle prods.[42] In one case a prisoner is strapped to a restraint chair and left for
sixteen hours; two hours after being unshackled he dies from a blood clot. In another, mentally ill prisoner Charles Agster is Human rights critics have
suffocated to death. Another prisoner is found with a broken neck, broken toes and internal injuries following an argument with called the use of restraint
guards; after one month in a coma he dies from septicaemia. Fire extinguisher sized canisters of pepper spray are used to cover chairs at Guantanamo
prisoners with chemicals, and they are then left, resulting in second degree burns. Photos are shown of Frank Valdes, a convicted Bay for force-feeding a
killer on Death Row, who was beaten to death after writing to local Florida newspapers with allegations of prison officer corruption form of torture.
and brutality. Many of the segments in the documentary were several years old, e.g. from 1996, and were originally released to
lawyers seeking justice for the victims of the offenses shown. Several Lawsuits was filed against the Prison which resulted in the
Inmates . Other prison officers involved in the incidents were suspended from duty or discharged of their employment.
A 2010 memoir by Wilbert Rideau, an inmate at Angola Prison from 1961 through 2001, states that "slavery was commonplace in Angola with perhaps a
quarter of the population in bondage" throughout the 1960s and early 1970s.[43] The New York Times states that weak inmates served as slaves who were raped,
gang-raped, and traded and sold like cattle. Rideau stated that "The slave's only way out was to commit suicide, escape or kill his master."[43] Herman Wallace
and Albert Woodfox, members of the Angola 3, arrived at Angola in the late 1960s and became active members of the prison's chapter of the Black Panther
Party, where they organized petitions and hunger strikes to protest conditions at the prison and helped new inmates protect themselves from rape and
enslavement.[44] C. Murray Henderson, one of the wardens brought in to clean up the prison, states in one of his memoirs that the systemic sexual slavery was
sanctioned and facilitated by the prison guards.[45]
From the year 2000 onwards, the Supermax facility at the Maine State Prison was the scene of video-taped forcible extractions that Lance Tapley in the Portland
Phoenix wrote "look[ed] like torture."[46] Additionally, audio recordings were made of the torture of Lester Siler in Campbell County, Tennessee. Officers
involved in the incident were convicted in court and sentenced to 25 years in prison
Border Patrol and immigration detention
The U.S. Border Patrol interdicts people crossing the border and maintains checkpoints and carries out raids in border regions. Human Rights Watch has
documented severe human rights abuses by the Border Patrol, "including unjustified killing, torture, and rape, and routine beatings, rough physical treatment,
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 6
5 of 16
5 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
and racially motivated verbal abuse."[47]
Detained immigrants, including refugees seeking asylum, at the Esmor Inc. facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey, rebelled after practices of verbal and physical
abuse, humiliation and corporal punishment. After the uprising, two dozen of them were beaten, stripped, forced to crawl through a gauntlet of officers, and
made to chant, America is number one.[48]
A report by the Justice Department Office of the Inspector General on the experience of 762 post-9/11 detainees found confirmed the physical and verbal abuse
of detainees. On arrival at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York, the detainees were slammed face first into a wall against a shirt with an
American flag; the bloodstain left behind was described by one officer as the print of bloody noses and a mouth. Once inside they were threatened with
detention for the rest of their lives, verbally abused, exposed to cold, deprived of sleep, and had their hands, cuffed arms, and fingers severely twisted.[49]
Torture abroad
Khalid el-Masri
In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court deferred to state secrets privilege when they refused to hear the case of Khalid el-Masri, who was kidnapped and tortured by
the CIA under the Bush administration on December 21, 2003.The ACLU said that torture included methods of "forced anal penetration".[50][51]
Forms of torture and abuse
Certain practices of the United States military, civilian agencies such as the CIA, and private contractors have been condemned both domestically and
internationally as torture. A fierce debate regarding non-standard interrogation techniques exists within the U.S. civilian and military intelligence community,
with no general consensus as to what practices under what conditions are acceptable.
These practices have resulted in a number of deaths. According to Human Rights First, at least as many as 8 detainees have been tortured to death in U.S.
custody in Iraq and Afghanistan.[52] The aversion of some military personnel forced to administer torture has been so strong, that one soldier, Alyssa Peterson,
is believed to have committed suicide to avoid further participation.
Application of Fifth Amendment to overseas torture
In 1999, a U.S. court found that the Fifth Amendment does not apply in the case of overseas torture of aliens. Jennifer Harbury, a U.S. citizen whose husband
Efran Bmaca Velsquez had been tortured and murdered by CIA officials in Guatemala, complained that these actions violated her husband's Fifth
Amendment right not to be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law. On December 12, 2000, the Court of Appeals for the District Court of
Columbia rejected this claim, citing a lack of jurisdiction, since the events were planned and controlled in the United States, but the actual torture and murder
occurred in Guatemala, a location where the U.S. did not exercise "de facto political control".[53]
Torture, interrogation and prisons in the War on Terror
"Stress and duress"
In 2003 and 2004 there was substantial controversy over the "stress and duress" methods that were used in the U.S.'s War on Terrorism, that had been
sanctioned by the U.S. Executive branch of government at Cabinet level.[54] Similar methods in 1978 were ruled by ECHR to be inhuman and degrading
treatment, but not torture, when used by the United Kingdom in the early 1970s in Northern Ireland. CIA agents have anonymously confirmed to the
Washington Post in a December 26, 2002 report that the CIA routinely uses so-called "stress and duress" interrogation techniques, which human rights
organizations claim are acts of torture, in the U.S.-led War on Terrorism. These sources state that CIA and military personnel beat up uncooperative suspects,
confine them in cramped quarters, duct tape them to stretchers, and use other restraints that maintain the subject in an awkward and painful position for long
periods of time.[55] The phrase 'torture light' has been reported in the media and has been taken to mean acts that would not be legally defined as torture.
Some techniques within the "stress and duress" category, such as water boarding, have long been considered as torture, by both the United States government
and human rights groups.[56] In its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, the U.S. State Department has described the following practices as
torture:
stripping and blindfolding of prisoners (Egypt)

subjecting prisoners to prolonged sun exposure in high temperatures and tying of hands and feet for extended periods (Eritrea)
sleep deprivation and "suspension for long periods in contorted positions" (Iran)
sleep deprivation and solitary confinement (Jordan)
prolonged standing and isolation (Turkey)[57]
Legal analyses
In June 2004, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times obtained copies of legal analyses prepared for the CIA and the Justice
Department in 2002. These documents developed a legal basis for the use of torture by U.S. interrogators if acting under the directive of the President of the
United States. The legal definition of torture by the Justice Department tightly narrowed to define as torture only actions which "must be equivalent in intensity
to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death," and argued that actions that inflict any
lesser pain, including moderate or fleeting pain, do not necessarily constitute torture.
It is the position of the United States government that the legal memoranda constituted only permissible legal research, and did not signify the intent of the
United States to use torture, which it opposes. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has complained about this prominent newspaper coverage and its
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 7
6 of 16
6 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
implications.[54]
However, many influential U.S. thinkers also believe that Rumsfeld himself is a major part of the problem, quote the New York Times
columnist Bob Herbert:
... there is also the grotesque and deeply shameful issue that will always be a part of Mr. Rumsfeld's legacythe manner in which American troops
have treated prisoners under their control in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantnamo Bay, Cuba. There is no longer any doubt that large numbers of
troops responsible for guarding and interrogating detainees somehow loosed their moorings to humanity, and began behaving as sadists, perverts
and criminals.
Bob Herbert, [58]
The Bush administration told the CIA in 2002 that its interrogators working abroad would not violate U.S. prohibitions against torture unless they "have the
specific intent to inflict severe pain or suffering," according to a previously secret Justice Department memo released on 24 July 2008. The interrogator's "good
faith" and "honest belief" that the interrogation will not cause such suffering protects the interrogator, the memo adds. "Because specific intent is an element of
the offense, the absence of specific intent negates the charge of torture," Jay Bybee, then the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, wrote
in the memo. The 18-page memo is heavily redacted, with 10 its 18 pages completely blacked out and only a few paragraphs legible on the others.
Another memo released on the same day advises that "the waterboard" does "not violate the Torture Statute." It also cites a number of warnings against torture,
including statements by President Bush[59] and a then-new Supreme Court ruling "...which raises possible concerns about future U.S. judicial review of the
[interrogation] Program."
A third memo instructs interrogators to keep records of sessions that use "enhanced interrogation techniques." The memo is signed by then-CIA director George
Tenet and dated January 28, 2003.
The memos were made public by the American Civil Liberties Union, which obtained the three CIA-related documents under Freedom of Information Act
requests.[60]
Authorization and methods of torture and abuse
The Post article continues that sensory deprivation, through the use of hoods and spraypainted goggles, sleep deprivation, and selective use of painkillers for at
least one captive who was shot in the groin during his apprehension are also used. The agents also indicate in the report that the CIA as a matter of course hands
suspects over to foreign intelligence services with far fewer qualms about torture for more intensive interrogation.[55] (The act of handing a suspect to another
organization or country, where it is foreseeable that torture would occur, is a violation of the Convention against torture; see torture by proxy.) The Post reported
that one U.S. official said, "If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job."[55]
Based on the Justice Department analyses, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld later approved in 2003 the use of 24 classified interrogation techniques for use
on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, which after use on one prisoner were withdrawn. In court filings made public in January 2007, FBI agents reported that
detainees at Guantanamo Bay were: chained in a fetal position to the floor for at least 18 hours, urinating and defecating on themselves; subjected to extremes
of temperature; gagged with duct tape; held in stress positions while shackled; and subjected to loud music and flashing lights.[61][62] Senior administration
officials have repeatedly denied that torture is being conducted in the detention camps at Guantanamo Bay. However, the Bush administration explicitly
endorsed the use of interrogation techniques such as waterboarding in memos to the CIA,[63] and one Pentagon official has publicly admitted that torture was
conducted at Guantanamo Bay.[64]
Manfred Nowak, United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture, said that numerous cases of torture ordered by U.S. officials and perpetrated by U.S. authorities
are well documented.
"We possess all the evidence which proves that the torture methods used in interrogation by the U.S. government were explicitly ordered by former
U.S. defence minister Donald Rumsfeld...Obviously, these orders were given with the highest U.S. authorities' knowledge." [65]
Allegations emerged that in the Coalition occupation of Iraq after the second Gulf war, there was extensive use of torture techniques, allegedly supported by
American military intelligence agents, in Iraqi jails such as Abu Ghraib and others. In 2004 photos showing humiliation and abuse of prisoners leaked from Abu
Ghraib prison, causing a political and media scandal in the U.S. and the whole world.
Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State ultimately told the CIA the harsher interrogation tactics were acceptable,[66][67] In 2009 Rice stated, "We never tortured
anyone." [68]
On February 14, 2010, in an appearance on ABC's This Week, Vice-President Dick Cheney reiterated his support of waterboarding and enhanced interrogation
techniques for captured terrorist suspects, saying, "I was and remain a strong proponent of our enhanced interrogation program."[69]
Pressed by the BBC in 2010 on his personal view of waterboarding, Presidential Advisor Karl Rove said: Im proud that we kept the world safer than it was,
by the use of these techniques. Theyre appropriate, theyre in conformity with our international requirements and with U.S. law. [70]
Secret detention facilities
Both United States citizens and foreign nationals are occasionally captured outside of the United States and transferred to secret U.S. administered detention
facilities, sometimes being held incommunicado for periods of months or years. Overseas detention facilities are known to be or to have been maintained at
least in Thailand, the Philippines, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Cyprus, Cuba,
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 8
7 of 16
7 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
Diego Garcia, and unspecified South Pacific island nation(s). In addition, individuals are suspected to be or to have been held in temporary or permanent U.S.
controlled facilities in Indonesia, El Salvador, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Israel, Denmark, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Hungary, Germany, and
Scotland. There are also allegations that persons categorized as prisoners of war have been tortured, abused or humiliated; or otherwise have had their rights
afforded by the Geneva Convention violated.
Torture and extraordinary rendition
Extraordinary Rendition is the apprehension and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one country to another.[71]
The term "torture by proxy" is used by some critics to describe situations in which the CIA[72][73][74][75] and other U.S. agencies have transferred suspected
terrorists to countries known to employ torture, whether they meant to enable torture or not. It has been claimed, though, that torture has been employed with
the knowledge or acquiescence of U.S. agencies (a transfer of anyone to anywhere for the purpose of torture is a violation of U.S. law), although Condoleezza
Rice (then the United States Secretary of State) stated that:[76]
the United States has not transported anyone, and will not transport anyone, to a country when we believe he will be tortured. Where appropriate,
the United States seeks assurances that transferred persons will not be tortured."
Whilst the Obama administration has tried to distance itself from some of the harshest counterterrorism techniques, it has also said that at least some forms of
renditions will continue.[77] Currently the administration continues to allow rendition only "to a country with jurisdiction over that individual (for prosecution of
that individual)" when there is a diplomatic assurance "that they will not be treated inhumanely."[78][79]
The U.S. program has also prompted several official investigations in Europe into alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council
of Europe member states. A June 2006 report from the Council of Europe estimated 100 people had been kidnapped by the CIA on EU territory (with the
cooperation of Council of Europe members), and rendered to other countries, often after having transited through secret detention centres ("black sites") used by
the CIA, some located in Europe. According to the separate European Parliament report of February 2007, the CIA has conducted 1,245 flights, many of them
to destinations where suspects could face torture, in violation of Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture.[80]
Following the 11 September 2001 attacks the United States, in particular the CIA, has been accused of rendering hundreds of people suspected by the
government of being terroristsor of aiding and abetting terrorist organizationsto third-party states such as Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, and Uzbekistan. Such
"ghost detainees" are kept outside judicial oversight, often without ever entering U.S. territory, and may or may not ultimately be devolved to the custody of the
United States.[81][82]
Protests
On April 30, 2009, 62 members of Witness Against Torture, led by Carmen Trotta[83] were arrested at the gates of the White House demanding that the Obama
administration support a criminal inquiry into torture under the Bush administration and release innocent detainees still held at Guantanamo. The protesters
wearing orange jumpsuits and black hoods, were arrested, and charged with "failure to obey a lawful order" when they refused to leave the White House
sidewalk.[84][85]
Protests have been held regarding the issue of torture and its legality as lately as 2015.[86]
United Nations Convention Against Torture

History of U.S. Accession
The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was adopted on 10 December 1984 at the
thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations.[87][nb 2] It was registered, and came into force, on 27 June 1987 in accordance with Article
27(1) of the Convention.[88]
The United States signed the Convention in the spring of the following year, officially declaring at the time of its signature on 18 April 1988[88] that
The Government of the United States of America reserves the right to communicate, upon ratification, such reservations, interpretive
understandings, or declarations as are deemed necessary.
Thereafter, the United States formally notified the United Nations and its member states, a few months prior to its ratification, that [89]
...nothing in this Convention requires or authorizes legislation, or other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the Constitution of
the United States as interpreted by the United States.
Ratification
The U.S. ratification itself, on 21 October 1994, came some six years after the spring 1988 signature and was subject to numerous (A) reservations, (B)
understandings and (C) declarations. These can be read verbatim at the UN treaty website[88] and are parsed here as follows:
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 9
8 of 16
8 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
A. Reservations: The U.S. made two reservations in connection with its ratification.
(1) The U.S. would only be bound to prevent the "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" that are addressed by Article 16 of the
Convention[87][nb 3] to the extent the term "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" was synonymous with the "cruel, unusual and
inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States".[90]
(2) Pursuant to treaty option, the U.S. is not bound to resolve questions by international arbitration, but it "reserves the right specifically to agree to follow
this or any other procedure for arbitration in a particular case."[91]
B. Understandings: The U.S. announced certain interpretive understandings, "which shall apply to the obligations of the United States under this
Convention:"
(1) Regarding the definition of certain terms in the Convention,

(a) "Torture"[nb 4] must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain. Furthermore, "mental pain" refers to prolonged mental
harm resulting from either
(1) the intentional infliction of severe physical pain;
(2) the administration of mind altering drugs;
(3) the use of other procedures that are also "calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;"
(4) the threat of imminent death; or
(5) the threat that another person (e.g. a spouse or relative) will imminently be subjected to the foregoing.
(b) "Torture" must be an action against a victim in the torturer's custody.
(c) "Sanction"[nb 5] includes judicially imposed sanctions and other enforcement actions authorized by United States law or by judicial
interpretation of such law.
(d) "Acquiescence"[nb 6] requires that the public official, prior to the activity constituting torture, be aware that such activity is imminent, thereafter
violating his or her duty to prevent such activity.
(e) A non-compliance with applicable legal procedural standards[nb 7] does not per se constitute torture.
(2) Article 3 forbids deporting a person "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture." The
U.S., attempting to avoid the difficulty of interpreting "substantial grounds for belief," interprets the phrase to mean "if it is more likely than not that he
would be tortured." This is essentially the preponderance of evidence test.
(3) Article 14 requires a State Party to provide, in its domestic legal system, a private right of action for damages to victims of torture. The U.S.
understands this to apply only for torture committed within territory under the jurisdiction of that State Party.
(4) The U.S. does not consider this Convention to restrict or prohibit the United States from applying the death penalty consistent with the Constitution of
the United States.
(5) The Convention will only be implemented by the United States "to the extent that it exercises legislative and judicial jurisdiction over the matters
covered by the Convention." In other words, the Convention per se is not U.S. law. By itself, it has no legal effect within the U.S. or upon its
representatives. Rather, the Convention imposes an obligation[nb 8] on the U.S. to enact and implement such domestic laws as will cause it to come into
conformity with the requirements of the Convention. This understanding is echoed in the declaration below.
C. Declarations: The U.S. declared that the provisions of Articles 1 through 16 the Convention are not self-executing.
Evidence of violations
By transferring military detainees to Iraqi control, the U.S. appears knowingly to have violated the Convention Against Torture. The Convention proscribes
signatory states from transferring a detainee to other countries "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected
to torture." The U.S. had received reports of more than a thousand allegations, many of them substantiated by medical evidence, of torture in Iraqi jails. Yet U.S.
authorities transferred thousands of prisoners to Iraqi custody, including almost 2,000 who were transferred to the Iraqi government as recently as July 2010.[92]
U.S. case law on the convention

Burden of proof
In the U.S., an alien seeking protection against deportation under Article 3 of the Convention[nb 9] must establish that it is more likely than not that he will be
tortured in the country of removal.[nb 10][93] Thus, the alien seeking to stop his deportation bears the burden of proof (or risk of non-persuasion) to show that
torture is "more likely than not" to occur in the destination country.
In re M-B-A
In re M-B-A, a 2002 decision by the BIA,[94] concerned a 40-year-old Nigerian woman who was facing a deportation order due to a drug conviction in the US.
She claimed that if returned to Nigeria, she would be imprisoned and tortured as a result of her U.S. conviction.
In her December 1999 hearing before the immigration judge, she presented evidence of Nigeria's Decree No. 33, which authorized imprisonment in her
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page
Page10
9 of
of14
9 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
situation. When asked how she knew she would be tortured, she said that some years ago, she had spoken with a Nigerian friend,[nb 11] who had been convicted
of a U.S. drug offense and then returned to Nigeria in 1995. The friend had told her that her family had to bring money to the jail for protection, that she slept on
the floor and that "you probably get raped" by the guards because they have authority to do "whatever they can do." The friend remained in jail for 2 months
until the family paid a bribe. M-B-A did not know if the friend had seen a judge before being incarcerated, or if the friend had been raped in the prison.
M-B-A also presented evidence that she had a chronic ulcer, asthma and suffered from depression; that she was on medication but had no one to help her with
medicine if she ended up in jail; that her father was deceased and her mother lived in the UK and that she had no relations to help her in Nigeria, aside from an
uncle who had sexually abused her as a child. She claimed she would be beaten and raped in prison by the guards and that most women suffered this treatment,
and that her ex-fiance (who lived in Nigeria) would bribe prison guards to beat her.
The full Board of Appeals[nb 12] considered the question of whether M-B-A had carried her burden of proof in showing that it was more likely than not that she
would be tortured by a public official upon her return to Nigeria.
In a close 7-6 decision, the Board found that M-B-A had not demonstrated that it was more likely than not that she would be imprisoned in Nigeria on the basis
of Decree 33. She did not present any evidence on the question of the extent to which the Decree was enforced, or against whom it was enforced. Her own
evidence about enforcement was either (a) her own speculation or (b) based on the conversation with her friend's experience during a different Nigerian
regime.[nb 13] The Board stated
she has [not] met her burden of [establishing] that it is more likely than not that her return to Nigeria would result in her detention or imprisonment.
. . . [She] must provide some current evidence, or at least more meaningful historical evidence, regarding . . . enforcement of Decree 33 on
individuals similarly situation to herself. . . . [Her] case is based on a chain of assumptions and a fear of what might happen, rather than . . .
demonstrating that it is more likely than not that she will be subjected to torture. . . .
Accordingly, the BIA held that M-B-A should be deported.
There were two separate dissenting opinions,[nb 14] both of which agreed with the enunciated standard of proof to be used ("more likely than not"), but
disagreed over the question of whether the burden had been met by M-B-A. Judge Schmidt's dissent cited the U.S. State Department's report on Nigeria's prison
system, reported that one area of abuse in Nigerian prison was the intentional withholding of medical aid or medication. He found on the basis of this report that
such withholding (for purposes of e.g. gaining bribes or inflicting punishment) was common in Nigeria and that death from such actions was common. He did
not, however, address the majority's assertion that M-B-A had failed to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she would be imprisoned in the first
place under Decree No. 33, apparently taking this for granted.[nb 15]
Defining "torture"
"Torture" within the meaning of the Convention (and 8 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 208.18)[93] is an extreme form of cruel and inhuman treatment and
does not extend to lesser forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.[93][95][nb 16]
For an act to constitute torture it must satisfy each of the following five elements in the definition of torture:[95]
the act must cause severe physical or mental pain or suffering

the act must be intentionally inflicted
the act must be inflicted for a proscribed purpose
the act must be inflicted by (or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of) a public official who has custody of the victim
the act cannot arise from lawful sanctions
Matter of J-E
Thus, in the U.S. immigration case of Matter of J-E-, 23 I&N December 291 (BIA 2002)(ID 3466), the indefinite detention of criminal deportees by Haitian
authorities did not constitute "torture" where there was no evidence that the authorities intentionally and deliberately detained deportees in order to inflict
torture. Likewise, substandard prison conditions in Haiti did not constitute "torture" where there is no evidence that the authorities intentionally created and
maintained such conditions in order to inflict torture.[95]
J-E was a Haitian who had entered the U.S. illegally and who was later convicted of selling cocaine. The Government sought to deport him, but J-E claimed that
he would be imprisoned and tortured if he were returned to Haiti. Therefore, he argued, Article 3 of the Convention prevented his being deported. The Board set
out the five-part test for torture and noted that
While the Convention Against Torture makes a clear distinction between torturous and non torturous acts, actually differentiating between acts of
torture and other bad acts is not so obvious. Although not binding on the United States, the opinions of other governmental bodies adjudicating
torture claims can be instructive.
The Board thereupon considered Ireland v. United Kingdom, 2 Eur. Ct. H.R. 25 (1978), where the European Court held that suspected terrorists who were
subjected to wall standing, hooding, a constant loud and hissing noise and who were deprived of sleep, food and drink by the British Army were subjected to
"inhuman and degrading treatment" but not to "torture." It was admitted by all parties that J-E would be indefinitely detained upon return to Haiti. Deportees
were held by police in holding cells for weeks before release. However, the State Department report (relied upon by all parties) confirmed that the Haitian
government used this policy as a warning and a deterrent, to try to prevent deportees from committing crimes in Haiti.
Thus, Haiti's detention policy in itself appears to be a lawful enforcement sanction ... to protect the populace from criminal acts by Haitians who are
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 11
10 of 16
10 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
forced to return to the country after having been convicted of crimes abroad. ... this policy is a lawful sanction and, therefore, does not constitute
torture.... [Also] there is no evidence that Haitian authorities are detaining criminal deportees with the specific intent to inflict severe physical or
mental pain or suffering. Nor is there evidence that the procedure is inflicted on criminal deportees for a proscribed purpose, such as obtaining
information or a confession.... Haiti's detention practice alone does not constitute torture within the meaning of the regulations.
J-E contended that in any case, the combination of indefinite detention with the admittedly substandard conditions of Haitian prison constitute torture. However,
the Board noted that the Convention required that "torture" required a "specific intent" by the accused country in order for torture to result:
Although Haitian authorities are intentionally detaining criminal deportees knowing that the detention facilities are substandard, there is no
evidence that they are intentionally and deliberately creating and maintaining such prison conditions in order to inflict torture. ... the Haitian prison
conditions are the result of budgetary and management problems as well as the country's severe economic difficulties.... there is no effective
delivery system [for food]... we cannot find that these inexcusable prison conditions constitute torture within the meaning of the regulatory
definition.
Finally, J-E maintained that mistreatment was common in Haitian prison and that he would be subjected to such mistreatment, and that constituted torture. The
Board found that there was, in Haiti,
Beating with fists, sticks and belts ... by far the most common form of abuse. However [there are] other forms of mistreatment, such as burning
with cigarettes, choking, hooding and ... severe boxing of the ears, which can result in eardrum damage.... there were also isolated allegations of
electric shock...[and] withholding medical treatment.
The Board considered all the evidence submitted and concluded that it showed that isolated incidents of torture did occur in Haitian detention facilities.
However, this evidence was not sufficient to demonstrate that it was more likely than not that J-E would be subjected to torture upon his detention. There was no
evidence that the torture was persistent or widespread; or that the Haitian government used torture as a policy; or that there was no meaningful international
oversight.[nb 17]
The Board accordingly heldin yet another 7-6 opinion with substantial dissenting opinionsthat J-E had failed to carry his burden of showing that the
admitted mistreatment was so pervasive that it therefore was more likely than not that he would be tortured in a Haitian jail, as opposed to being subjected to
cruel and inhuman acts that, while despicable, were less than torture within the meaning of the applicable law. Most of the actions reported against Haiti, the
Board decided, were sanctioned under Article 16 the Convention as acts that were "cruel and inhuman" and that State Parties were obliged to correct, but
nevertheless did not constitute "torture" within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention.
J-E's appeal to the BIA was therefore dismissed and the deportation order remained in effect.
See also
Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse
At the Center of the Storm book by former CIA head George Tenet
Human Rights Record of the United States
International humanitarian law
Lexical definition
Precising definition
Universal jurisdiction
Use of torture since 1948
Water cure (torture)#Philippine-American War
Other human rights issues in the United States
Tramp chair, 19th-century torture device used by American police

United States war crimes
United States and state terrorism
United States and state-sponsored terrorism
Unethical human experimentation in the United States
Notes
Footnotes
1. See article on precising definition. 4. The term "torture" is legally defined in Article 1(1) of the Convention, as
2. The United States was one of the primary sponsors of a Convention to prohibit follows:
torture and to protect human rights.Report (http://www.state.gov/www/global
/human_rights/torture_intro.html); See In Matter of J-E, discussed herein.
3. These Article 16 acts are, by definition, not torture, but rather acts which For the purpose of this Convention, the term "torture" means any
evidence cruelty or inhumanity but which nevertheless do not rise to the level of act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental,
"torture" under the Convention. is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining
from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing
him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected
of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 12
11 of 16
11 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, 10. See Understanding number 2 attached to the U.S. ratification of the Convention,
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of establishing the preponderance of evidence rule for the US.
or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other 11. She suggested that she had spoken to this person by telephone sometime in
person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or 1995, more than four years before she was giving her testimony.
suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful 12. The Board consists of up to fifteen immigration law specialists, who sit as
sanctions. immigration appellate administrative law judges. The Board is a part of the
executive branch of the U.S. Government, rather than the judicial branch; it is
not an "Article III" court under the U.S. Constitution, but rather a type of
However, the U.S. has declared that the Convention is not self-executing and administrative court within the executive branch. Its decisions are subject to
therefore the Convention's definition does not directly apply in U.S. law. The appeal to a U.S. Court of Appeals.
U.S. has implemented the Convention definition through its Code of Federal 13. In May 1999 the military regime in Nigeria was replaced with a civilian regime
Regulations. under President Obasanjo. Note 2 of decision.
5. The term "sanction" is used in Article 1. 14. A total of six judges dissented, four of them joining in one of the dissenting
6. The term "acquiescence" is used in Article 1. opinions.
7. For instance, a failure to promptly inform a suspect that he has a right to see a 15. The majority decision does not address the question of the likelihood of torture
lawyer, free of charge if he is indigent. within prison; instead, it finds that M-B-A did not show, by the required
8. This "obligation" might itself only be enforceable in the court of world opinion evidence standard, that she would be imprisoned at all, which rendered the
or through United Nations resolution against the US. question of treatment within prison as moot.
9. Article 3 provides that 16. This does not imply that such "lesser" forms can be committed by governments
with impunity. Article 16 the Convention, for example, imposes on each State
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a Party an obligation to try to prevent such "lesser" forms of cruel treatment, even
person to another State where there are substantial grounds for though they do not rise to the level of torture. But only such severe actions that
believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. do rise to the level of "torture" are grounds for preventing deportation under the
terms of Article 3 of the Convention.
2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, 17. The Board noted that the Haitian government cooperated with the Red Cross in
the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant delivering aid and allowed a Miami Herald reporter access to the prisons (part of
considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the the newspaper story was used by J-E as his evidence in the hearing).
State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass Furthermore, the U.S. had urged the Haitian government to discontinue the
violations of human rights. indefinite detention practice and the President of Haiti had visited jails and had
pardoned several women there, due to the awful conditions.
As noted, the U.S. opted to interpret the vague language of "substantial grounds"
in article 3(1) as synonymous with the preponderance of evidence standard
found in the common law; the "preponderance" standard has been subject of
ample decided cases in the US, creating plenty of judicial precedent.
References
1. "UN calls for Guantnamo Bay to close". The Guardian. 16 February 2006. 10. Military Commissions Act of 2006
Retrieved 22 May 2012. Why The Military Commissions Act is No Moderate Compromise
2. Norton-Taylor, Richard; Goldenberg, Suzanne (17 February 2006). "Judge's (http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20061011.html) By Michael C. Dorf,
anger at US torture". The Guardian. Retrieved 26 January 2011. FindLaw, October 11, 2006
3. The Constitution Project (2013), The Report of the Constitution Project's Task The CIA, the MCA, and Detainee Abuse (http://writ.lp.findlaw.com
Force on Detainee Treatment (http://detaineetaskforce.org/). Retrieved 25 April /mariner/20061108.html) By Joanne Mariner, FindLaw, November 8,
2013. 2006
4. In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 447 (1890) ("Punishments are cruel when they Europe's Investigations of the CIA's Crimes (http://writ.news.findlaw.com
involve torture or a lingering death."). /mariner/20070220.html) By Joanne Mariner, FindLaw, February 20,
5. Amnesty International, Rubber stamping violations in the "war on terror": 2007
Congress fails human rights (http://web.amnesty.org/library/index Nat Hentoff (December 8, 2006). "Bush's War Crimes Cover-up". Village
/ENGAMR511552006), 27 September 2006. Voice. Archived from the original on 2009-08-13. Retrieved 2007-04-02.
6. Martin Scheinin, U.N. Expert on Human Rights and Counterterrorism The John McCain Charade (http://www.commondreams.org/views06
Concerned that Military Commissions Act is Now Law in United States /1001-23.htm) by Robert Kuttner, the Boston Globe, October 1, 2006
(http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01 Republican Torture Laws Will Live in History (http://www.alternet.org
/13A2242628618D12C12572140030A8D9?opendocument), 27 October 2006, /rights/42414/) By Larisa Alexandrovna, AlterNet, October 2, 2006.
U.N. Press Release 11. FM 2-22.3. Human Intelligence Collector Operations (http://www.fas.org
7. Jeremy Waldron, The Rule against Torture as a Legal Archetype /irp/doddir/army/fm2-22-3.pdf), 6 September 2006, p. 5-20.
(http://www.vanderbilt.edu/alumni/email/InBrief/2006Spring 12. FM 2-22.3. Human Intelligence Collector Operations (http://www.fas.org
/charney_lecture_06.html), Charney Lecture, 2006 /irp/doddir/army/fm2-22-3.pdf), 6 September 2006, p. 5-21.
8. No longer punishable under U.S. law 13. Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (http://www.oas.org
Thoughts on the "Bringing Terrorists to Justice Act of 2006" /juridico/English/Treaties/a-51.html)
(http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060922.html) John Dean, FindLaw, 14. Dahleen Glanton, "Controversial exhibit on lynching opens in Atlanta" May 5,
September 22, 2006 2002, Chicago Tribune. Reproduced online (http://web.archive.org
The Military Commissions Act of 2006: A Short Primer - Part Two of a /web/20050311100917/http://www.deltasigmatheta.com/archiv13.htm) on the
Two-Part Series (http://writ.news.findlaw.com/mariner/20061025.html) site of deltasigmatheta.com, archived on the Internet Archive March 11, 2005.
By Joanne Mariner, FindLaw, October 25, 2006 15. Robin D.G. Kelley, "'Slangin' Rocks ... Palestinian Style,'" chapter 1 of Police
Why The Military Commissions Act is No Moderate Compromise Brutality, Jill Nelson (ed.), 2000.
(http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20061011.html) By Michael C. Dorf, 16. G. Daniel Lassiter (2004). Interrogations, Confessions, and Entrapment.
FindLaw, October 11, 2006 Springer Science+Business Media. ISBN 0-306-48470-6.
9. Pushing Back on Detainee Act (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061016/ratner) 17. "From coercion to deception: the changing nature of police interrogation in
by Michael Ratner is president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, The America". Crime, Law and Social Change. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 18.
Nation, October 4, 2006 1992.
18. Strickler, Laura (December 9, 2014). "Secret WWII camp interrogators say
torture wasn't needed". CBS News. Retrieved 2016-10-13.
19. Counterinsurgency Lessons from Vietnam for the Future (http://usacac.army.mil
/CAC/milreview/English/MarApr06/Andrade-Willbanks.pdf), (PDF), Military
Review, MarchApril 2006
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 13
12 of 16
12 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
20. J. Patrice McSherry. Predatory States: Operation Condor and Covert War in 47. Human Rights Watch, World Report, 1993
Latin America (https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780742536876). Rowman & 48. Human Rights Watch, Locked Away: Immigration Detainees in Jails in the
Littlefield Publishers, 2005. p. 36 (https://books.google.com United States, September 1998. Dan Frosch, "Detention Center Blues," In These
/books?id=tSDg6xa4z2YC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q&f=false). ISBN Times, June 14, 2004.
0742536874 49. U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, The September 11
21. Greg Grandin (2011). The Last Colonial Massacre: Latin America in the Cold Detainees: A Review of the Treatment of Aliens Held on Immigration Charges in
War (http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago Connection with the Investigation of the September 11 Attacks, June 2003.
/L/bo11643711.html). University of Chicago Press. p. 75 Supplemental Report on September 11 Detainees Allegations of Abuse at the
(https://books.google.com/books?id=6FivSpNY2fkC&lpg=PP1& Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York, December 2003.
pg=PA75#v=onepage&q&f=false). ISBN 9780226306902 50. ACLU petition, 2006 (https://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/safefree
22. Walter L. Hixson (2009). The Myth of American Diplomacy: National Identity /elmasri_iachr_20080409.pdf). (PDF) . Retrieved on 2012-05-28.
and U.S. Foreign Policy (http://yalepress.yale.edu 51. Burke Hansen. Supreme Court denies cert in el-Masri rendition case
/book.asp?isbn=9780300119121). Yale University Press. p. 223 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/09/el_masri_state_secrets/). The Register
(https://books.google.com/books?id=DNId6HxkzQwC&lpg=PP1& (2007-10-09)
pg=PA223#v=onepage&q&f=false). ISBN 0300151314 52. Human Rights First Releases First Comprehensive Report on Detainee Deaths in
23. "Graduates of the School of the Americas include military officers and leaders U.S. Custody (http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/media/2006_alerts
implicated in torture and mass murder in Guatemala, El Salvador, Chile, /etn_0222_dic.htm), 2006-02-22, Human Rights First, Press Release
Argentina and Haiti, among other Latin American countries." Miles Schuman, 53. "Application of Fifth Amendment to Overseas Torture of Alien". The American
"Abu Ghraib: the rule, not the exception (http://soaw.org Journal of International Law. 95 (3). July 2001.
/newswire_detail.php?id=429)," Globe and Mail (Toronto), May 14, 2004. 54. Torture Policy (cont'd) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles
24. Miles Schuman, "Abu Ghraib: the rule, not the exception (http://soaw.org /A56753-2004Jun20.html) Editorial in the Washington Post 21 June 2004
/newswire_detail.php?id=429)," Globe and Mail (Toronto), May 14, 2004. 55. Dana Priest and Barton Gellman, "U.S. Decries Abuse but Defends
25. Harbury, Jennifer (2005), Truth, Torture, and the American Way: The History Interrogations (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-
and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture (https://books.google.com dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A37943-2002Dec25&
/books?id=ZIcZjlj1hLEC& notFound=true)" Washington Post, December 26, 2002; Page A01
dq=%22Truth,+Torture,+and+the+American+Way%22&printsec=frontcover& 56. "The United States has long considered waterboarding to be torture and a war
source=bn&hl=en&ei=vOg5SqaRE5arjAeEvvGhDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result& crime." Human Rights Watch, "U.S.: Vice President Endorses Torture
ct=result&resnum=6), Beacon Press ISBN 978-0-8070-0307-7 (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/10/26/usdom14465.htm)," October 26, 2006.
26. Adam Taylor (10 December 2014). Brazils torture report brings a president to 57. Human Rights Watch, "Descriptions of Techniques Allegedly Authorized by the
tears (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/12/10 CIA (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/21/usdom12071.htm)," November
/brazils-torture-report-brings-a-president-to-tears/). The Washington Post. 2005.
Retrieved 12 December 2014. 58. Much of what has happened to the military on Donald Rumsfeld's watch has
27. Amnesty International,Report on Torture [US edition, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, been catastrophic (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/23/opinion
1975], and specific AI country reports. /23herbert.html?ex=1270785600&en=37bef79604f97228&ei=5090&
28. James Hodge and Linda Cooper, "Roots of Abu Ghraib in CIA techniques partner=rssuserland) by Bob Herbert New York Times 23 May 2005
(http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004d/110504/110504a.php)," 59. Bush, George W. (2001-11-13). "President Issues Military Order on Detention,
National Catholic Reporter, November 5, 2004. Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism".
29. Lawg.org (http://www.lawg.org/misc/Publications-manuals.htm) White House. Retrieved 2009-04-25.
30. JPRA Operational Concerns Over Application of Various Means of Induced 60. Previously secret torture memo released (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS
Duress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/JPRA- /07/24/cia.torture/index.html), July 24, 2008, CNN.com
Memo_042409.pdf), (PDF), July 25, 2002, hosted by the Washington Post 61. FBI, FOIA document (http://foia.fbi.gov/guantanamo/detainees.pdf)
31. Document: Military Agency Referred to 'Torture,' Questioned Its Effectiveness 62. Mark Tran, "FBI files detail Guantnamo torture tactic
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04 (https://www.theguardian.com/guantanamo/story/0,,1981955,00.html),"
/24/AR2009042403171_pf.html), April 24, 2009, the Washington Post Guardian, January 3, 2007.
32. Safir on ABC Good Morning America, August 18, 1997; quoted in Human 63. Joby Warrick, CIA Tactics Endorsed In Secret Memos
Rights Watch, "New York (https://www.hrw.org/reports98/police/uspo99.htm)", (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10
Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States, /14/AR2008101403331_pf.html), Washington Post Staff Writer, October 15,
1998. 2008; A01
33. Susan Bandes, Tracing the Pattern of No Pattern: Stories of Police Brutality 64. "Pentagon official says 9/11 suspect was tortured". Associated Press.
(http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v34-issue2/bandes.pdf), 34 Loyola Law Review, 2001. 2009-01-14. Retrieved 2009-01-14.
34. Paige Bierma, Torture behind bars: right here in the United States of America 65. Call to Try Bush (http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/02/02), Inter
(http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1295/is_n7_v58/ai_15533722), The Press Service, February 2, 2009
Progressive (http://progressive.org/about), July 1994. 66. As Bush Adviser, Rice Gave OK to Waterboard Fox News, April 22, 2009
35. Justin Volpe plead guilty and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. "Policeman in (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/22/timeline-released-senate-shows-
torture case changes plea to guilty (http://www.cnn.com/US/9905 condoleezza-rice-okd-waterboarding/)
/25/police.torture.02/index.html)," CNN, May 25, 1999. "Volpe receives 30-year 67. Senate Report: Rice, Cheney OK'd CIA use of waterboarding CNN, April 23,
sentence for sodomy in Louima brutality case (http://www.courttv.com/archive 2009
/national/louima/121399_volpe_sentence_ctv.html)," Court TV, December 13, 68. April 30, 2009, "Rice Defends Enhanced Interrogation" by Glenn Kessler
1999. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/Politics,)
36. Davey, Monica (2006-05-20), "Judge Rules Report on Police in Chicago Should 69. " 'This Week' Transcript: Former Vice President Dick Cheney". This Week. ABC.
Be Released", New York Times February 14, 2010. Retrieved February 27, 2010.
37. "Report of the Committee against Torture, Thirty-sixth session" (PDF). United 70. http://www.timesonline.co.uk, March 13, 2010, "Karl Rove says water torture is
Nations. May 2006. justified - and a source of pride" by Giles Whittell
38. Evan Wallach (2007-11-02). "Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime". Washington 71. Michael John Garcia, Legislative Attorney American Law Division. Renditions:
Post. Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec
39. Eric Weiner (2007-11-03). "Waterboarding: A Tortured History". National /RL32890.pdf) 8 September 2009; link from the United States Counter-
Public Radio. Terrorism Training and Resources for Law Enforcement web site
40. Amnesty International, Rights for All (http://web.amnesty.org/library/index (http://www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/leg/index.html)
/engAMR510351998), 1 October 1998. 72. Charlie Savage (17 February 2009). "Obama's War on Terror May Resemble
41. "False Confessions". The Innocence Project. Retrieved June 6, 2012. Bush's in Some Areas". The New York Times. Archived from the original on
42. "Torture cases". Channel 4. 2016-07-23. Retrieved 2 January 2010.
43. Oshinsky, David (June 11, 2010). "Book Review - In the Place of Justice - By 73. "Background Paper on CIA's Combined Use of Interrogation Techniques
Wilbert Rideau". The New York Times. (https://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/082409/olcremand/2004olc97.pdf)".
44. "Southern Injustice". Mother Jones. Retrieved 2013-12-15. 30 December 2004. Retrieved 2 January 2010.
45. Butler, Anne, and C. Murray Henderson. Dying to Tell. Center for Louisiana 74. "New CIA Docs Detail Brutal 'Extraordinary Rendition' Process
Studies, 1992. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/28/new-cia-docs-detail-
46. Lance Tapley, Torture in Maines prison (http://www.portlandphoenix.com bruta_n_271299.html)". Huffington Post. 28 August 2009. Retrieved 2 January
/features/top/ts_multi/documents/05081722.asp), Portland Phoenix, November 2010.
1117, 2005.
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 14
13 of 16
13 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
75. Fact sheet: Extraordinary rendition (https://www.aclu.org/safefree 84. Anti-torture activists arrested at White House (https://www.google.com
/extraordinaryrendition/22203res20051206.html), American Civil Liberties /hostednews/ap/article
Union. Retrieved 29 March 2007 (English) /ALeqM5jgOLS9bxJ4L58oWKMKWbwnxKURhwD97T0ISO0)
76. "Remarks of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Upon Her Departure for 85. 62 Arrested at White House Protest (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/139275
Europe, 5 Dec 2005". U.S. State Department. Retrieved 17 August 2012. /62_arrested_at_white_house_protest/)
77. "Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool 86. Vibes, John (January 20, 2015). "Nationwide Protests Against Torture Planned
(http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/01/nation/na-rendition1)". LA Times 1 For Jan 31 In The US #EndTorture". The Daily Liberator.
February 2009. Access 21 November 2011. 87. Official Text of Convention (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm)
78. Erdbrink, Thomas (1 September 2011). "N.Y. billing dispute reveals details of 88. Convention Status (http://treaties.un.org/Pages
secret CIA rendition flights". The Washington Post. /ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&id=129&chapter=4&lang=en)
79. "Renditionsand Secrecy Around ThemContinue". 2011. Retrieved 89. Convention Status - footnote 12 (http://treaties.un.org/Pages
7 October 2011. Panetta's clarification of current US "Rendition policy". /ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&id=129&chapter=4&lang=en)
80. Resolution 1507 (2006). (http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents 90. Yee (2004) p. 208 (https://books.google.com/books?id=gpqa9smhWqcC&
/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1507.htm) Alleged secret detentions and unlawful pg=PA208#PPA208,M1), Footnote 18. cites Convention Against Torture, Annex
inter-state transfers of detainees involving Council of Europe member states] I,I.
81. Mayer, Jane. The New Yorker, 14 February 2005. "Outsourcing Torture: The 91. Yee (2004), p. 208, Footnote 18. cites Convention Against Torture, Annex I,I(2).
secret history of America's 'extraordinary rendition' program.". Retrieved 92. Al Jazeera, 2010 October 24, "The Secret Iraq Files: The War US Turned Blind
20 February 2007. Eye to Torture; Leaked Documents on Iraq War Contain Thousands of
82. According to former CIA case officer Bob Baer, "If you want a serious Allegations of Abuse, But a Pentagon Order Told Troops to Ignore Them,"
interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you http://english.aljazeera.net/secretiraqfiles/2010/10/20101022161828428516.html
send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappearnever to see them 93. CFR Provisions (http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&
againyou send them to Egypt." The CIA's Rendition Flights to Secret Prisons: tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title08/8cfr208_main_02.tpl)
The Torture-Go-Round (http://www.CounterPunch.org/rajiva12052005.html) By 94. 23 I&N December 474 (BIA 2002) (ID#3480), available at USDOJ.gov
Lila Rajiva in CounterPunch, 5 December 2005 (http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/efoia/bia/Decisions/Revdec/pdfDEC/3480.pdf)
83. Arthur Delaney (30 April 2009). "Anti-torture Protestors Arrested in Droves 95. In the Matter of J-E- (http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/nfvol23.html),
Outside the White House". Huffington Post. Retrieved 17 December 2009. volume 23, case 3466 (http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/efoia/bia/Decisions/Revdec
/pdfDEC/3466.pdf) (BIA decisions).
Yee, Sienho (2004). International crime and punishment: selected issues', University Press of America, ISBN 9780761828877
Further reading
Cecilia Menjivar, Nestor Rodriguez (eds.): When States Kill: Latin America, the U.S., and Technologies of Terror, Austin: Texas University Press, 2005
Alfred W. McCoy: A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, From the Cold War to the War on Terror, Henry Holt, 2006, ISBN 0-8050-8041-4
Kristian Williams, American methods: torture and the logic of domination, South End Press, 2006, ISBN 0-89608-753-0
US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program, 2014 (http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/study2014/sscistudy1.pdf)
External links
Four memos on torture (http://publicservice.evendon.com/DOJMemosM.htm), released April 16, 2009, in response to a Freedom of Information Act
lawsuit
Senate Armed Forces Committee Report on Torture (http://publicservice.evendon.com/SenateTortureReport1M.htm), released April 22, 2009
Periodic reports of the United States to the Committee Against Torture (CAT) (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/index.htm)
Warrant to Torture?: A Critique of Dershowitz and Levinson (http://acdis.illinois.edu/publications/207/publication-
WarranttoTortureACritiqueofDershowitzandLevinson.html), ACDIS Occasional Paper by Jonathan Allen, published by the Program in Arms Control,
Disarmament, and International Security (ACDIS), University of Illinois, 2005
Convention Status (http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&id=129&chapter=4&lang=en)
Newsweek: Inspector General Report Reveals CIA Conducted Mock Executions (http://www.democracynow.org/2009/8
/24/newsweek_inspector_general_report_reveals_cia) - video report by Democracy Now!
'The Past is a Foreign Country?' Obama and the Torture Files (http://www.iss.europa.eu/nc/actualites/actualite/article/the-past-is-a-foreign-country-
obama-and-the-torture-files/) by Alexandra Barahona de Brito, Opinion, May 2009 European Union Institute for Security Studies
Human Rights First; Tortured Justice: Using Coerced Evidence to Prosecute Terrorist Suspects (2008) (http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/08307-
etn-tortured-justice-web.pdf)
Human Rights First; Leave No Marks: Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and the Risk of Criminality (http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/07801-
etn-leave-no-marks.pdf)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Torture_and_the_United_States&oldid=763176186"
Categories: Torture in the United States Crime in the United States Political history of the United States Violence in the United States
This page was last modified on 1 February 2017, at 18:58.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of
Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
FEDERAL TORTURE
Page 15
14 of 16
14 of 14 2/4/2017 1:33 AM
File & ServeXpress Basic https://secure.fileandservexpress.com/Basic/authorize.asp?dowhat=print...
File & ServeXpress Transaction Receipt

Authorized by: Stan Caterbone Submitted by: Stan Caterbone
Pro Se Pro Se
Transaction ID: 60163633
Transaction Option: File in an Existing Case Authorized: Feb 4 2017 1:38AM EST
Court: PA Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas
Case Type: General Civil Action Case Class: Civil
Case Number: CI-08-13373 Case Name: ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP VS DUKE ST BUSINESS CENTER
Transaction Document List
Document Stat. Conversion Review
Document Title Public/Sealed Pages Original
Type Fee Status Status
Torture LAW and the United States - Wikipedia by Stan J. Caterbone and No request for Original
Statement $0.00 Converted 14 Pending
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, February 4, 2017 seal File
Review History For Document: Torture LAW and the United States - Wikipedia by Stan J. Caterbone and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, February 4, 2017
Review Reason Reviewer Document Access
Reviewer Date Document Title
Status Description Comment Type Type
Document Torture LAW and the United States - Wikipedia by Stan J. Caterbone and
Pending 02/04/2017 Statement Public
created ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, February 4, 2017
Product/Service Fee Sales Tax Total
Filing $7.00
(14 Pages Submitted)
Total File & ServeXpress charges for Transaction 60163633: $0.00
CI-16-08472 INJUNCTION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF

Page 16 of 16 Saturday February 4, 2017
1 of 1 2/4/2017 1:41 AM
Preliminary Injunction for EMERGENCY RELIEF
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LANCASTER COUNTY
Stan J. Caterbone
Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
CIVIL ACTION LAW

_______________________________________________________________________________
In Re: STANLEY J. CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP,

PLAINTIFF
v.
Lancaster General Hospital

Dr. Brian Sullivan, Abbeyville Family Medicine
Patient First Urgent Care
Southeast Medical Center at Brightside Church
Medexpress Urgent Care
Dr. Anthony Mastropietro, Medical Director, Lancaster Regional Medical Center
Lancaster Regional Medical Center
Lancaster City Police Department
Detective Clark Bearinger, Lancaster City Police Department
DEFENDANTS
Case No. CI- _____________
Preliminary Emergency Injunction for EMERGENCY Relief:

In-Home Spa and Pain Medications
___________/S/____________

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Page 1 of 813 September 22, 2016
Preliminary Injunction for Emergency Relief
Stan J. Caterbone

Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FILING - FOR PAIN MEDICATIONS - Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas
Preliminary Emergency Injunction for Relief September 22, 2016
1. Cover Page - FOR PAIN MEDICATIONS - Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas
Preliminary Emergency Injunction for Relief September 21, 2016
1. PLAINTIFF ACTIVE COURT CASES
2. BACKGROUND OF CASE
3. Irreparable Harm
4. Jurisdiction for Injunction
5. Relief Sought
6. Declaration by the PLAINTIFF Stanley J. Caterbone
7. Statement by the PLAINTIFF Stanley J. Caterbone
8. ORDER
9. EXHIBIT PAGE
2. EXHIBITS - FOR PAIN MEDICATIONS AND TREATMENTS - Lancaster County Court

of Common Pleas Preliminary Emergency Injunction for Relief September 21,
2016
3. June 22, 2016 Claim to Humana Insurance for In-Home-Therapy-Spa

1. 1. January 29, 2016 MedExpress Medical File
2. January 29, 2016 - Smithgall Pharmacy Oxecotin Prescription from
MedExpress
1. January 29, 2016 MedExpress Medical Discharge Instructions and
Diagnosis
4. 2. October 7, 2015 Patient First Emergency Visit for Back and Groin Pain
5. 3. March 23, 2016 - MedExpress Medical File - Visit for Back and Groin Pain
1. March 23, 2016 - MedExpress Discharge Instructions with Percoset
Prescription
6. 4. May 10, 2016 - MedExpress Prescription for Oxycodone

1. May 10, 2016 - MedExpress Medical File - Visit for Back and Groin Pain
7. 5. Private Criminal Complaint v. Patient First Urgent Care and Southeast Medical
Clinic for Medial Malpractice
8. A. May 25, 2010 - Lancaster General Hospital No-Trespass Notice and Patient
Termination Notice
9. B. August 5, 2015 - Approved PERMANENT Penn DOT Handicapp Placard

Application

10.6. September 11, 2009 -MEDICAL FILE from Dr. Sullivan of Abbeyville Family
Health for Back Pain
11.7. December 11, 2015 - Medical File from LGH Plastic Cosmetic Surgery Group re
Cyst Removal
1. C. LGH Plastic Cosmetic Surgery Group Listing Current Medications Including
Vicodin
12.D. January 2008 - Article by Expert Cheryl Welsh Titled "CIA "No Touch" Torture
Makes Sense Out of Mind Control Allegations
13.8. MedExpress Pain Visit and Prescriptions for Pain on Saturday August 19, 2016
DR. WOULD NOT EVEN INTERVIEW ME
14.9. June 10, 2016 - Lancaster Regional Medical Center Pitt Bull Attack at 1252
Fremont St. Emergency Room Medical File of June 10, 2016
1. PHOTOS
2. Lancaster Regional Medical Center EMERGENCY ROOM MEDICAL FILE
3. HYDROCODENE PRESCRIPTION
15.E. TABLE OF CONTENTS: EXCLUSIVE Transcripts of Whistleblower Testimonies of

Targeted Individuals and U.S. Sponsored Mind Control Published by Advanced
Media Group September 17, 2016
1. 1. Background of Stan J. Caterbone as a Targeted Individual
2. 2. In Contravention of Conventional Wisdom CIA No-Touch Torture Makes
Sense, by Cheryl Welsh 2008
1. Table of contents
2. Introduction
3. I. A university professor uncovers CIA no touch
4. II. The beginnings of CIA no touch torture and how it
5. III. What is no touch torture?
6. IV. An example of no touch torture
7. V. The long history of U.S. Torture
8. VI. CIA Cold War neuroscience-based mind control
9. VII. CIA Cold War nonlethal weapons research
10.VIII. Why CIA no touch torture has been so successful
11.IX. All three programs are state tools for neutralizing
12.X. Mind control allegations by a Korean War POW,
13.XI. The banal and bizarre techniques of no touch
14.XII. The three key behavioral components of no touch
15.XIII. Torture as a kind of total theater
16.XIV. A comparison of no touch torture to mind
17.XV. The phenomenology of the torture situation
18.XVI. Comparing no touch torture techniques of
19.XVII. Conclusions: what everyone can agree on
16.3. Allstate Sworn Testimony of Stan J. Caterbone TRANSCRIPT Volume 2 and

Volume 1 July 12, 2016
17.4. Transcript of the Richmond City Council Public Hearing of May 19, 2015 Passing
a City Resolution 5-2 to Ban Spaced-Based Weapons in Support of the Many
Targeted Individuals Suffering Symptoms of the City.
18.News Articles of Richmond City Council Resolution To Ban Spaced Based Weapons

19.5. Karen Stewart, NSA Whistleblower and Targeted Individual

1. Transcript "There is no doubt that NSA is now run by sycophants and
sociopaths "
2. The Interview: EXCLUSIVE: Former NSA Employee Speaks Out on its
Corruption by Karen Stewart
3. NSA Whistleblower Comes Out of the Shadows Into the Light by Karen
Stewart
4. Second Interview
20.6. Julianne McKinney, US Army Intelligence Officer, Whistleblower, and Targeted

Individual
1. Transcript Of Greg Szymanskis Interview With Julianne Mckinney
21.7. Dr. Nick Begich, Author and Expert Researcher of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
1. October 1, 2015 Nick Begich Lecture at the Covert Harassment Conference
in Berlin, Germany
22.8. Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group Executive Summary

1. 1. Advanced Media Group Anti-Harassment Legislation and Executive
Summary
2. 2. Letter from Pennsylvania Representative Mike Sturla re Organized
Stalking Bill of June 8, 2009
3. 3.PRESS RELEASE - Stan J. Caterbone Anti-Stalking Proposed Legislation
4. 4. Cover Page for Executive Summary
5. 5. Executive Summary
6. 6. Updates for Executive Summary October 10, 2015
7. 7. History of Federal Whistleblowing Case and Targeted Individual
8. 9. The Courts and the United States Legal System
9. 10. Family History
10.11. The Public Record
11.12. Is Lancaster County Ground Zero for U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
12.13. Affidavit of Joinment of October 10, 2015
13.14. 29 FALSE ARRESTS RECORD Since 1987
14.15. 28 ILLEGAL NO TRESPASS NOTICES
15.16. Stan Caterbone's Notarized Affidavit for FFCHS September 16, 2010
Redacted Version
16.17. Stan Caterbone's Detailed Victimization Affidavit of 2010
17.18. Samuel P Caterbone US Sponsored Mind Control Affidavit 1996
18.19. Sammy A. Caterbone Affidavit of US Sponsored Mind Control 1991
23.9. 1975 TESTIMONY FROM DIRECTOR OF CIA STANSFIELD TURNER for the 1975
United States Senate Select Hearings on Mkultra
1. MKultra Part 1.pdf
10.MKultra Part 10.pdf

24.10. Proposed U.S. Government Settlement for TI via Change.org Petition by Stan
J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group March 17, 2016 with Affidavit and Kane
Op Ed Letter Sent to President Obama
1. Letter re Good Old Boys Coup of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen
Kane's Attorney General Office
2. Stan J. Caterbone Affidavit
3. Bill Keisling of Newslanc.com "Palace Coup - What the Kathleen Kane
Prosecution is Really About"
25.F. PACTS [People Against Covert Torture & Surveillance, International, Formerly
FFCHS] TARGETED INDIVIDUALS TESTIMONIALS
1. Introduction
2. Table of Contents
3. Background
4. Bio-Electromagnetic Weapons
5. Gang Stalking
6. Testimonials
7. FEDERAL STATUTES
8. 2015 City of Richmond Califonia Resolution Banning Spaced Based
Weapons
9. Letters


In-Home Spa and Pain Medications
AND NOW, on this 21st day of September, 2016 I, STANLEY J. CATERBONE and ADVANCED
MEDIA GROUP, Plaintiff's, appearing pro se, and In Forma Pauperis, do hereby file a Preliminary
Injunction for EMERGENCY Relief according to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1531(a). In determining whether a
preliminary or special injunction should be granted and whether notice or a hearing
should be required, the court may act on the basis of the averments of the pleadings or
petition and may consider affidavits of parties or third persons or any other proof which
the court may require. Pa. R. Civ. P. 1531(a). The decision whether or not to grant a
hearing on an emergency injunction is therefore left to the sound discretion of the court;
the mere filing of a motion by the plaintiff does not automatically entitle him to a
hearing.
Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 126 Liberal Construction and Application of Rules, which states "the
rules shall be liberally construed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every
action or proceeding to which they are applicable. The court at every stage of any such action or
proceeding may disregard any error or defect of procedure which does not affect the substantial
rights of the parties.
Date: September 22, 2016
___________/S/____________


1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
ACTIVE COURT CASES FOR STAN J. CATERBONE, PRO SE LITIGANT
1. J.C. No. 03-16-90005 Office of the Circuit Executive, United States Third Circuit
Court of Appeals - COMPLAINT OF JUDICIALMISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY re 15-
3400 and 16-1149; 03-16-900046 re ALL FEDERAL LITIGATION TO DATE
2. U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-3284 Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
Appeal; Case No. 16-1149 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert;15-3400 MOVANT for
Lisa Michelle Lambert;; 16-1001; 07-4474
3. U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 16-4641 Petition for Habeus
Corpus; Case No. 16-cv-4014 2005 Conitued Case; Case No. 16-cv-49 Chapter 11
Appeal; 15-03984; 14-02559 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert; 05-2288; 06-4650,
08-02982;
4. U.S. District Court Middle District of PA Case No. 16-cv-1751 PETITION FOR
HABEUS CORPUS
5. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board Case No. 2016-462

Complaint against Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Judge Leonard Brown III
6. Pennsylvania Supreme Court Case No. 495 MAL 2016 Caterbone v. Lancaster County
Residents; Case No. 496 MAL 2016 Caterbone v. Lancaster City Police Dept.; Case No.
353 MT 2016; 354 MT 2016; 108 MM 2016 Amicus for Kathleen Kane
7. Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 16-MD-1219 Preliminary Emergency

Injunction; AMICUS for Kathleen Kane Case No. 1164 EDA 2016; Case No. 1561 MDA
2015; 1519 MDA 2015; 16-1219 Preliminary Injunction Case of 2016
8. Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349,
CI-06-03401
9. U.S. Bankruptcy Court for The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case No. 16-10157
BACKGROUND OF CASE
For the past 11 years the pain attacks have been regular and consistent with pain levels of
10 out of 10. The PLAINTIFF has been treated by conventional medical providers since 2005. In
1987 the PLAINTIFF began experiencing back spasms and back pain in 1987. In August of 1987
the Avalon Police Department had pulled the PLAINTIFF over and a black plastic film container was
confiscated and tested for containing illegal drugs. The PLAINTIFF had declared the pills were over-
the-counter muscle relaxers for pain and suffering due to back pain purchased at a drug store. The
pills were tested and found to be the over-the-counter muscle relaxers the PLAINTIFF had declared.
Most recently, as of last week the PLAINTIFF has been treated with Laser Therapy and Adjustments
by Dr. Paul Newhart, a chiropractor with a practice in Leola, Pennsylvania. The PLAINTIFF has been
a patient since 2005. From 2010 to 2015 the PATIENT had been using his inventory of pain
medications that were not used in 2009 and 2010. The last time pain medications were prescribed
to the PLAINTIFF was on June 10, 2016 in the EMERGENCY ROOM of the Lancaster Regional
Medical Center when the PLAINTIFF was purposefully and maliciously attacked by the pitt bull of
the hostile residents of 1252 Fremont Street, which was a successful effort to stop the PLAINTIFF
from continuance the construction and installation of a screened-in-porch and renovated fence and
yard. All efforts have been ceased since that date and building materials sit unused.
In 2009 the PLAINTIFF, after again experiencing harassment by medical staff at Mastropietro
Family Medicine, visited the ABBEYVILLE FAMILY PRACTICE on Abbeyville Road in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania. The medical staff notified the PLAINTIFF that two (2) Family Physicians were
accepting patients; Dr. Brian Sullivan and Dr. Denise Copley. The PLAINTIFF selected Dr. Denise
Copley and an appointment was made for a physical and medical review after waiting for the
medical file to be transferred from Mastropietro and Associates. Upon arrival for the physical to
start the treatment of pain, the ABBEYVILLE FAMILY PRACTICE refused to honer the original
agreement and made the PLAINTIFF be treated by Dr. Brian Sullivan (Irish).
In 2009 Dr. Brian Sullivan was prescribing Vicodin at 60 tablet prescriptions as needed for
pain. Most of the prescriptions were refiled by a phone call. Then on March 22, 2010 after
harassing treatment by the medical staff and Dr. Sullivan the PLAINTIFF legally and with merit tape
recorded an office visit to review the treatments for the daily pain and suffering the PLAINTIFF was
experiencing on a daily basis. Dr. Brian Sullivan tried desperately to dispute the fact of symptoms
and illnesses of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control, which was already supported and verified by the
Social Security Administration in the Award of Benefits the year before, 2009. The PLAINTIFF in an
effort to counter the libel and slander campaign, posted the recording on his WORDPRESS blog.
THE LANCASETER GENERAL HOSPOITAL retaliated by filing a formal NO TRESPASS NOTICE to the
PLAINTIFF that includes any or all facilities owned and operated by the LANCASTER GENERAL
HOSPITAL, which includes most FAMILY DOCTORS in or around the City of Lancaster. The
PLAINTIFF filed a civil action v. Lancaster General Hospital in 2006 that is still not adjudicated in
the legal
Lancaster sense.
County Court of Common Pleas Page 4 of 813 September 22, 2016
In 2016 the PLAINTIFF was prescribed opiod pain medications for pain and
suffering in the back and groin area on January 29, 2016; March 23, 2016; May 10, 2016
and finally June 10, 2016 by the Lancaster Regional Medical Center. The MedExpress
facility has been prescribing opiods (Vicoden and Hydrocodene) on a regular basis but
had ceased to continue the prescriptions for no reasons in July and August of 2016. The
visits were used to harass and torture the PLAINTIFF by refusing to adhere to the
HYPOCRATIC OATH OF DO NO HARM. THE PLAINTIFF HAS EXTENSIVE DOCUMENTATION
INCLUDING PAIN LOGS WHICH DETAIL THE PAIN AND THE DOSES OF THE OPIOD
MEDICATIONS. Due to the PLAINTIFF's efforts to minimize change in tolerance of the
medications, the PLAINTIFF uses a strategy of only taking pill doses and uses other
counter measures to offset the change in tolerance which leads most patients to needing
higher doses over time which then leads to addiction problems. Muscle Relaxers were
also prescribed but DO NOT provide the pain relief needed and have a side effect of a
sedative nature.
In 2009 the PLAINTIFF, appearing pro se, applied for Social Security Disability Benefits for
symptoms and illnesses related to U.S. Sponsored Mind Control. Included in the application and
Approval process was the submittal of medical files and declarations regarding the pain and
suffering of pain the groin and back. The PLAINTIFF's case was reviewed by the Office of
Vocational Assessment and in August of 2009 the Social Security Administration AWARDED benefits
and declared the PLAINTIFF disabled as of December of 2005. A check for $21,456.00 was
awarded for retroactive benefits back to April of 2008, according to federal law. The PLAINTIFF is
considered a CHRONIC case according to Social Security Administration Police which is evidenced
by the fact that a BENEFICIARY REVIEW is only conducted every seven (7) years, whereas all other
beneficiaries are reviewed ever three (3) years. The first review for the PLAINTIFF was conducted
in 2015, which is seven (7) years from the 2008 date of benefits. The PLAINTIFF contains some
200 pages of authentic documents as evidence.
In 2015 the PLAINTIFF applied for and was granted a PERMANENT HADICAPP
PLACARD from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for pain and suffering of
groin and back pain. The Placard does not renew until September of 2020 and was
signed by Dr. Paul Newhart of Leola.
In April of 2016 the PLAINTIFF communicated with Medicare requesting the

benefit of an in-home-therapy-spa. The PLAINTIFF had a hot tub since 1996 and found it
to be of tremendous help in alleviating pain and allowing more flexibility which in turn
allowed for more stretching and exercising. In 2012 the PLAINTIFF sold his outdoor hot
tub. Medicare informed the PLAINTIFF that such benefits are routinely awarded and
instructed the PLAINTIFF to petition HUMANA Insurance through the PLAINTIFF'S
Medicare Supplemental Insurance Policy. On April 22, 2016 the PLAITIFF was visited by
a Nurse from the firm MEDICAL MATRIX, which is a third party vendor for HUMANA
INSURANCE that provides an In-Home Consultation to update any the medical files of the
insureds and provide any services that may be needed. The Medical Matrix Nurse
promised to submit a request for the In-Home-Spa that the PLAINTIFF had specifically
researched for to accommodate the upstairs bathroom. Nothing had happened since the
visit so on June 21, 2016 the PLAINTIFF filed a 100 page MEDICAL CLAIM with authentic
medical files to support the claim. Again, after numerous attempts, HUMANA refuses to
acknowledge the CLAIM. During the current period of Medicare Policy Exchanges, the
PLAINTIFF will seek another Medicare Supplemental Plan.
The Lancaster City Police Department, specifically Detective Clark Bearinger, has
been engaged in a slander campaign of mass proportions since 2005, which included
several false arrests. There was an overt and obvious intent to derail all of the civil and
criminal claims in federal and state courts that the PLAINTIFF has filed since 2005.
These efforts include fabricated allegations of mental illness and fabricated activities
used on numerous involuntary psychiatric commitments, or 302 petitions. It is these
efforts and the illegal and criminal involuntary psychiatric commitments which the
MEDICAL-COMMUNTIY-AT-LARGE uses to refuse the prescriptions of pain medications
resulting in a mass torture campaign and a criminal conspiracy to commit a landmark
case of obstruction of justice.
Since 2005 the PLAINTIFF has been prescribed opiod pain medications from a variety of
physicians and medical facilities. They include the following:
1. Lancaster General Hospital
2. Lancaster Regional Medical Center
3. Dr. Anthony Mastropietro Family Practice
4. Dr. Brian Sullivan, Abbeyville Family Practice
5. Patient First Urgent Care, Butler Avenue Office
6. MedExpress, Rohrerstown Road Office
7. Lancaster Plastic Surgery Center
The PLAINTIFF has used the following treatments and therapies to counter the pain and
suffering in the back and groin areas with success:
1. Spa Therapies, hot tubs and whirlpool baths
2. Message Therapies
3. Laser-Light Therapies
4. Stretching and basic excising
5. Walking
6. Bicycling
The PLAINTIFF currently uses the following medical devices and aids in his home:
1. Handicap Rails for basement toilet
2. Toilet Seat Riser in upstairs bathroom
3. Tommy Copper back and knee braces
4. Standard Walker
5. PennDOT Handicap Placard
6. Elevated Computer on Desk to stand while using the computer
7. Shoe Inserts
8. 2 - 3ft pickers used to retrieve objects without bending over
9. Memory Foam Adjustable Bed with Vibrating at the lower and upper regions
Irreparable Harm: The irreparable harm and injure that has resulted from the above
circumstances includes but is not limited to the following:
1. EXCRUCIATING PAIN AND SUFFERING ON A DAILY BASIS.
2. Loss of personal property and real estate.
3. Loss of opportunity to secure personal property, business assets, and court related
assets, information, and evidence; including when sleeping (rape drug rohypnol).
4. Loss of protection from law enforcement at every level; local, state, and federal.
5. Loss of relationships including family; friends; and professional.
6. Loss of time and loss of life as a normal person would know it.
7. Loss of freedom of movement in Downtown Lancaster Entertainment Venues and

Constant and Never Ending Threats of Physical Harm, Harassment, Over-Charging on
Cost of Goods, intimidation, discrimination, and barring from entering public places
and entertainment venues, violations of intellectual property rights, and obstruction
of justice.
8. Loss of freedom of movement; complainant has been denied every opportunity to

secure his personal and business assets at 1250 Fremont Street, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania making it impossible to travel or leave for any amount of time without
fear of harm.
9. Loss of freedom of movement may constitute false imprisonment and may invoke the
federal habeas corpus laws of freedom.
10. Loss of female companionship, and under constant mocking for it.
11. Loss of business opportunities.
There are six essential prerequisites that a party must establish prior to obtaining a Preliminary
Emergency Injunction For Relief:
1) that the injunction is necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable harm that cannot be
adequately compensated by damages;
2) that greater injury would result from refusing an injunction than from granting it, and,
concomitantly, that issuance of an injunction will not substantially harm other interested parties in
the proceedings;
3) that a preliminary injunction will properly restore the parties to their status as it existed
immediately prior to the alleged wrongful conduct;
4) that the activity it seeks to restrain is actionable, that its right to relief is clear, and that the
wrong is manifest, or, in other words, that it is likely to prevail on the merits;
5) that the injunction it seeks is reasonably suited to abate the offending activity; and,
6) that a preliminary injunction will not adversely affect the public interest
RELIEF SOUGHT BY PLAINTIFF
The Complainant seeks immediate relief from the above in the form of A COURT
ORDER FOR MEDEXPRESS TO CONTINUE THE PRESCRIPTIONS OF PAIN MEDICATIONS
AND AN ORDER FOR HUMANA TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATION OF THE IN-HOME-SPA.
Date September 22, 2016
______/S/____________


1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
DECLARATION: I, Stanley J. Caterbone, Targeted Individual or TI, residing at: 1250

Fremont Street, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 17603, do hereby state that I am at least 18 years
of age, that I am a citizen or a legal resident of the United States of America, that I am of sound
mind, and that I am the person whose signature follows on this Preliminary Emergency Injunction
for Relief. The purpose of this document is (1) to advise the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas as well as state and local officials of the participation of the residents of Lancaster County in
organized stalking and/or electronic and mind manipulation torture being committed against me
and (2) to request a cease and desist order of their participation of the activities described herein.
Our Government is responsible for protecting its citizens from elements that
covertly harass, torment, murder, and cause victims to commit suicide through
organized stalking and remote electronic torture. Yet, unbiased research indicates that
certain elements of Government either engage in these activities or protect those who perform
them. I seek the complete dismantling of any officially-sanctioned covert Government torture
programs, and organized stalking and harassment programs and the passage of legislation
specifically outlawing that high-tech torture, and the full prosecution of any person, regardless of
his rank or position, who has violated my civil rights and my most basic human rights. The
assaults on my mind, body, person, property, intellectual property, and business interests have
been occurring for 29 year(s) and include, but are not limited to the following
victimization's:
1.Blanketing my dwelling and surroundings with electromagnetic energy.

Bombarding my body with debilitating electronic and mind manipulation effects.
Directed Energy Weapons Causing Severe Pain to Body and Brain. Began in at least
2005 and still continuing, with complaints to Freedom From Covert Harassment and
Surveillance, FFCHS in 2009, and in cited in various state and federal court cases over the past
several years. Attacks causing severe artificial pain most likely from Directed Energy Devices
synchronized with telepathic harassment and organized stalking and harassment have been
logged and reported to law enforcement and medical professionals since 2008. Prior to 2008
the attacks were experienced and reported to medical professionals but the sources were not
known. Also reported attacks of pain to a family physician, emergency room personnel and
psychiatrists.
2.Invading my thoughts via remote sensing technologies. Was sent an autonomous

email in 1998 introducing the term remote viewing. Various technologies and tactics are being
used to create emotional signatures that induce various emotional states; a systematic
complete hacking of my mind.
3.Making me mentally hear others' voices through the microwave hearing effect.
Synthetic and/or Mental Telepathy. First started to experience telepathy/synthetic
telepathy in 2005 with full-time 24/7 connection during the same time to present. When full-
time telepathy started a male conducted interrogations lasting several hours at a time
concerning a wealth of subjects including ISC/CIA Knowledge. Cannot disconnect from
continuous conversations at all times with one female person. The handlers know everything I
know and experience in real time. During 2006 and 2007 have been telepathic with some 10 or
more persons, both male and female for short durations. Can recall most conversations and
subject matter with identities of who they said they were. Interrogation type harassment is still
being used telepathically to harass and for some sleep deprivation. Made first complaints to
DARPA, the FBI, and U.S. Senator Arlen Specter in 2007. Some conversations by the persons
that are telepathic with me elude to some program similar to the DARPA datalog program
where they record your entire life. Everything that you try to do on a daily basis is subject
matter for conversation and harassment. Interference with thought, harassment, and
interrogation is used often times with electromagnetic weapon attacks to the brain or body.
4.Depriving me of sleep due to neurological intervention. Mostly Experienced Sleep

Deprivation Techniques during periods of time in 2008 to 2010. Mostly with attacks of pain
from Directed Energy Weapons to back, neck, head (brain); and heart on a few occasions; and
with harassment from telepathy.
5.Introducing poisonous gas and radiation toxins into my home. First experienced toxic
gases (Chloroform?) in heavy doses in 2006-2007. Made complaints to the Lancaster City
Police Department and the Southern Regional Police. Experienced attacks that would cause
dizziness at home, in automobile and in public. Was informed it was being released through a
distribution system the size of fishing line. To counter attacks used cotton in nostrils and gas
mask. In 2009 experienced attacks of what is said to be sleeping gas, when attacked could not
open eyes. Took Pictures during some attacks.
6.Having me stalked en masse on foot and in vehicles. vandalizing my home and/or

car. Gang Stalking or Organized Stalking began in 1987 and continues today. It includes
strangers using gestures such as finger under eye; various forms of harassment; and public
mobbing. Complaints have been filed in 1987; 1992;1998 and 2005 to 2010. Complaints were
made to various public officials and local, state, and federal agencies as mental duress. The
terms organized stalking, gang stalking, targeted individual, etc., was not learned until a few
years ago. The organized stalking and harassment followed in several states, some while
traveling from Lancaster, Pennsylvania to California. Tracking technologies may have been used
and most likely are still being used. Police were involved in most places.
7.Tapping (Bugging) my phones. Complaints of phone tapping/tampering were made to
New Jersey Bell in 1987 with a service call to Stone Harbor, New Jersey to check lines and
phones. The same was done by a Bell Atlantic repairman in Conestoga, Pennsylvania in 1998.
In 2004 a complaint with a report number was filed with the Pennsylvania Attorney General
Office in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Agent Amy Zelnick) regarding interference with phone calls
and impersonations by perps intercepting and rerouting calls. Computer Hacking complaints
were filed to local authorities in the County of Lancaster and the Cyber Crime unit of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation in 2005 to 2010.
8.Blacklisting me in the labor market. Filed complains of employment discrimination with

the Pennsylvania Attorney General in 2006 and the Lancaster County Human Relations
Commission in 2008.
9.Workplace mobbing. Experienced in 1987 at Financial Management Group, Ltd., American

Helix of High Industries in 1991 and Pflumm Contractors, Inc., in 1997/1998. Filed complaints
and logs as mental duress and harassment. Was forced out of all 3 organizations as a result of
the mobbing and harassment.
10.Public Mobbing. Public type mobbing and organized stalking and harassment was
perpetrated heavily in the years 2005 to 2010 in the following places: The Lancaster County
Courthouse, The Lancaster County Public Library, the Pennsylvania Career Link, and the
Millersville University Library and University Offices. I was given suspicious and illegal No
Trespass Notices in some 18 public places in Lancaster County in the years 2005 to 2009
without just cause. I was complaining of stalking and harassing in most all of those public
places. The Lancaster County Public Library and the Millersville University took away my access
to a computer after my personal computers were vandalized and/or hacked inoperable. Fulton
Bank took away my safe deposit box. Others included my church of worship, various bars and
restaurants and one attorneys office. Complaints have been filed regarding the same in courts
and with various authorities.
11.Attempted Murder. Experienced with an attempt of vehicular homicide in 1991 after

National News Media reported ISC/CIA-NSA connection of Arms to Irag. The incident
involved a vehicle changing lanes and direction and heading directly toward me in the wrong
direction running me off the road, narrowly missing a tree. I Filed the incident in federal courts
and used as a motion to seal federal case no. 05-2288 in 2005 in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
12.Pet Killing. Cat was killed in 2005 with complaints to the Lancaster County Humane
Shelter and the Southern Regional Police Department.
13.Illegal Entries of Home/Properties. First in 1987 in Stone Harbor, New Jersey, then
again in 1991; 1997-1998; and most serious in 2005 to 2010. Filed Police Reports and
insurance claims, most with the Southern Regional Police Department of Conestoga,
Pennsylvania , State Farm and Harleysville Insurance Companies.
14.Illegal Repossessions. Airplane in 1987 containing legal and business files.

Home/Property and Contents in 2006 also containing legal and business files and documents.
15.Physical Assaults. One attack and filed complaint with police report in Los Osos California
in 2005 and one in the City of Lancaster. Police reports were filed and obtained for both.
16.False Arrests. Experienced 7 in 1987 and more than 20 in 2005 and 2006 in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. The false arrests
were charges that were all dismissed prior to court hearings.
17.False Imprisonments. Spent 7 to 10 days in Lancaster County Prison in 1987 with all
charges dismissed and again for some 60 days in 2006 with all charges dismissed. The 60 Days
of imprisonment of 2006 was triggered with a false report of missing a bail supervision meeting,
which was confirmed to be false in court; however bail was maliciously and purposefully
reinstated as secured instead of unsecured. The appropriate appeal was filed which secured my
release after some 60 days of false imprisonment. There were no charges that resulted in any
convictions.
18.Psychiatric Abuses with False Suicide Allegations from Perpetrators/Stalkers. One

in 1987 resulting in a forced hospitalization for several hours by police in Stone Harbor, New
Jersey. And one again in February of 2005 resulting in police restraining me in my home and
abusing me. This one was a fraudulent and phony email sent to police by a perp. The
Southern Regional Police had to vacate after the email was proven to be a fraud.
19.Vandalism to Property. First in 1987 in Stone Harbor, New Jersey, then again in 1991;
1997-1998; and most serious in 2005 to 2010. Filed Police Reports and insurance claims, most
with the Southern Regional Police Department of Conestoga, Pennsylvania and Harleysville
Insurance Company. 3 computers have been rendered inoperable since 2005 along with various
electronics equipment; dvd recorders; printers; household items; appliances; etc., Most
insurance claims have been paid. In the past years a wave of purchased items, online and in
stores, were received broken or the wrong item and all had to be returned. Some included
items to secure my property, and others included computer related items, others were
household and clothing items.
20.Gas Lighting. The illegal entering of home and causing psychological duress by moving
items and or hiding items. First reported in 1998 to the Conestoga Police and continued to
present. Clothing was also manipulated and altered. The term gas lighting was only learned
in 2010, although it was reported to police as harassment by neighbors of friends. The daily
draining of my hot tub was also used as a psychological warfare tactic and used to run up utility
bills. Numerous complaints were made to police in 2008 to 2010.
21.Thefts of Property. As evidenced by various police complaints, insurance claims, and

incident reports.
22.Vandalism to Car/Truck. Since 2005 have experienced years of gas siphoning, battery
outages, letting air out of tires, and wetting of inside of floor mats as psychological warfare
tactics by perps and stalkers. Made numerous complaints the Lancaster City Police
Department.
23.Toxic Chemical Causing Running Nose. Experienced on regular basis in 2009 when in
public places. Was not in conjunction with cold/flu symptoms. Research states it is a tactic
used in organized stalking.
24.Computer Hacking. Computer Hacking complaints were filed to local authorities in the
County of Lancaster and the Cyber Crime unit of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2005 to
2010. Numerous complaint numbers have been secured. Complaints of cell phone hacking was
also reported in 2010. Websites and blogs were regularly hacked and sometimes taken off-line.
Electronic calenders, court documents, and financial records were often hacked causing many
problems of the years, including having to withdraw civil complaints.
25.Cyber Stalking. Most in 2005 to 2010. Complaints to Microsoft legal counsel, Yahoo
Message Board, and the FBI Cyber Crime Unit.
26.Interference/Delay/Theft of U.S. Mails. First reported to U.S. Postmaster of mail

tampering and illegal changing of address in 1987. In 2008 to 2009 have made several more
complaints to the U.S. Postmaster Inspector General who claim to have begun investigations.
Some caused missed court hearings and other missed appointments and or meetings.
27.Electromagnetic Weapons Causing Severe Muscle Spasms/Cramps. First

experienced in 2006 to present. One experience in 2006 was while I was in my hot tub and the
pain and cramp was so severe in my left calf muscle (you automatically bend over to rub it out,
which placed my head underwater) I had to crawl out of the hot tub before almost drowning.
28.Electromagnetic Weapons Causing Sexual Stimulation. First experienced in 2005.
29.Forced Hospitalizations. Forced Hospitalizations in 1987 (2) one for 6 hours and one for
5 days; 2006 one for 3 days; 2009 one for several hours while in intensive care for emergency
surgery; and 2010 one for 8 days. Filed complaints to Citizens Commission for Human Rights in
1991 and 2008.
30.Manipulation and Theft of Documents. Numerous thefts and manipulation of all legal
and business documents both in paper and in electronic format have occurred since 1987.
Microfiche/Microfilming began in 1987 and other measures to secure documents have been
ongoing to present. Numerous complaints have been filed with law enforcement since 1987.
Statement: I have been a Targeted Individual, TI, and Victim most likely since 1987. In 1987 I
blew the whistle (public Allegations and Complaints to State and Federal Authorities regarding
Fraud during merger negotiations with British Defense Contractor Ferranti International) on an
international defense contractor named International Signal & Control, or ISC, who was selling
arms (Everything from Telemetry Systems to Cluster Bombs) to Iraq via South Africa and was
convicted of a $1 Billion dollar Fraud in 1992 by the United States Attorney and several other
federal agencies. See ABC/News 20/20 and Nightline in 1991. They were founded and
headquartered in my hometown of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. I was a shareholder and was solicited
by a top ISC Executives (Convicted as a Mastermind of the Billion Dollar Fraud) to help finance
some of their operations through an affiliate called United Chem Con.
ISC was a Department of Defense (DOD) Contractor and a partner with United States
Intelligence Agencies since it's beginnings in the early 1970's. One of it's first contracts was
Project X with the National Security Agency or NSA of Ft. Meade, Maryland. Former Secretary of
the Navy, Bobby Ray Inman was on the Board of Directors of ISC and was also on the Board of
Directors of Science Applications International Corporation, or SAIC. SAIC was a huge defense
contractor that was the recipient of the Defense Intelligence Agency, or DIA, program on Remote
Viewing, which SAIC named Project Stargate. It was reported that Bobby Ray Inman declined the
nomination for Secretary of Defense under the first Clinton Administration because of the ISC and
Trecor scandals. In the early 1990's I was a subcontractor on a project for the Defense Advanced
Research Project Agency, or DARPA, with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or
NIST called TIMIT. The project developed speech corpora for the development of computer based
speech recognition systems. I was also involved in the bidding of other Department of Defense
contracts dealing with information technologies. In 1998 I was stalked and approached by an
employee of the National Security Agency, or NSA in York, Pennsylvania who said my problems
were not with the NSA, but the good ole boys. In 2005 I was detained by 2 Defense Intelligence
Agency, or DIA officers in a museum on a military base in Austin, Texas and was questioned and
interviewed regarding my civil actions filed in federal court for several hours. I was released and
told to stay off of all military bases. My brother, a Family Physician in Austin Texas had to verify my
travel plans and the fact that I was staying with him prior to my release.
My father alleged he was part of U.S. Navy experiments in the 1940's and experienced
synthetic telepathy in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's as outlined in memos and documents he had
authored; and from my personal conversations with him prior to his death. Ms. Amy Fuchs of the
Disclosure Project confirmed that he was most likely given an ET experience via synthetic
telepathy. He died a suspicious death in 2001 when he, like me experienced pain and was not able
to walk. He summoned me to his New York City apartment on Memorial Day Weekend of 2001 to
help him navigate his apartment and get him food. Six weeks later he died of an alleged form of
lung cancer.
Lancaster County Unfortunately
Court of Commonthe timing of
Pleas his16
Page death
of 813is even more suspicious in that he had
September 22, 2016
just received his $70,000 payout from his inheritance of his Mother, Mary Caterbone,
who had passed in 2000. HE HAD LIVED A LIFE OF DESTITUTE SINCE 1980! This is
consistent with how lethal these weapons can be.
My brother was in the U.S. Air Force in the late 1960's and I allege was a victim of the LSD
experiments relating to MKULTRA in the late 1960's and a victim of murder (Suspicious Suicide with
tainted medical reports) in Santa Barbara California in 1984; The PLAINTIFF had filed Notarized
Complaints to the California Attorney General in 1991. He made a declaration type statement prior
to his death that he got bad LSD while in the U.S. Air Force.
Organized stalking and harassment began in 1987 following the public allegations of fraud
within ISC. As far back as the late 1980's I thought that my mind was being read, or "remotely
viewed". During the times that legal Counsel and attorneys were solicited in 1987, 1991, and 1997
Organized Stalking and Harassment and other forms of attacks experienced by Targeted Individuals
were severely increased. In 2005 the U.S. sponsored mind control turned into an all-out assault of
mental telepathy; synthetic telepathy; and pain and torture through the use of directed energy
devices and/or electromagnetic weapons. This assault was no coincidence in that it began
simultaneously with the filing of the federal action in U.S. District Court, of CATERBONE v.
Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288.
This targeting has ruined every aspect of my life and must be stopped as much as
possible by eliminating the residents of the County of Lancaster Pennsylvania from participating.
___________/S/____________

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
Court of COMMON PLEAS OF LANCASTER COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION LAW

______________________________________________________________________________
In Re: STANLEY J. CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP,
Plaintiffs
Case No. CI-______________
ORDER
The Plaintiff's Stanley J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group are requesting your honor to
expeditiously prepare an ORDER that provides the immediate and expeditious relief requested in
the PRELIMINARY EMERGENCY INJUNCTION FOR RELIEF dated _____________________.
___________________________________
J.
Dated: _________________________________
_/S/____________


1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT re Preliminary Injunction for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Stan J. Caterbone

Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
June 21, 2016
Humana Correspondence Office

P.O. Box 14601
Lexington, KY 405124601
Re: Purchase and Installation for Whirlpool Bath To Alleviate Back Pain
Dear Claims Department,
On April 22, 2016 a nurse arrived at my home with photo identification for my third party
Medical Matrix health review. The nurse became annoyed and started to harass me. She kept
trying to get me to terminate the meeting without continuing the health review, which I did not
do. In our meeting I discussed my need for whirlpool spa treatments to help alleviate my back
pain. I reported to her that I once had an outdoor hot tub that worked miracles for my back pain
and recently contacted the company that sells and installs the step-in whirlpool spas. She
promised me that she would pass this information along to Humana and they would contact me.
A few weeks ago I called Humana and the customer service representative disclosed that
there was no record of my Medical Matrix Health Review in your records. In addition, I called the
Medicare hotline and they disclosed that it is very likely that you would cover the purchase and
install of a whirlpool spa for my bathroom. Enclosed is my documentation for your review and
considerations for my claim. I have included medical reports, prescriptions of pain medications,
and product specifications. The whirlpool spa that I selected is the only available spa that will fit
in my bathroom. My home was built in 1952 and is a 1000 sq. ft. row home in Lancaster, Pa.
The purchase price is $3,674.00. If need be, I could do the install. Please contact me as
soon as possible with your reply.
Respectfully,


1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Page

Page20
1 of
of668
667
813 September 22,
21, 2016
C6032 Elite Combination Bathtub | Watertech Whirlpools and Airbaths http://watertechtn.com/product/c6032-elite-combination-bathtub/
EMERGECNY RELIEF
$3,674.00
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster County Court
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page
Page21
25of
of668
667
89
813 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
1 of 4 6/8/2016 3:34 PM
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page
Page22
36of
of668
667
89
813 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
Contact us
2 of 4 6/8/2016 3:34 PM
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page
Page23
47of
of668
667
89
813 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
Contact us
3 of 4 6/8/2016 3:34 PM
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

Page24
5 of
of668
667
813 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page
Page25
69of
of668
667
89
813 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page26
10of
7 of
of668
667
813
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page27
11of
8 of
of668
667
813
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page28
12of
9 of
of668
667
813
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page29
10
13of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page30
11
14of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page31
12
15of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page32
13
16of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page33
14
17of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page34
15
18of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page35
16
19of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page36
17
20of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 22,
20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Page 37

18 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
Case 5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Document 47-1 reFiled
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
Injunction 29EMERGENCY
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page38
Page 65
1964of
21 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page39
Page 66
2065of
22 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster CountyComplaint
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page4017of
21
23 49
of813
667
668
89 Wednesday, January
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page4118of
22
24 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

23 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page43
Page 69
2468of
25 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page44
Page 70
2569of
26 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page45
Page 71
2670of
27 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page46
Page 72
2771of
28 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page47
Page 73
2872of
29 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page48
Page 74
2973of
30 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page49
Page 75
3074of
31 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page50
Page 76
3175of
32 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EXHIBIT 05/01/16
Preliminary Pagefor
of 67
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Medical
Medical File
File for
for
Humana/Medicare
Lancaster for
CountyMatrix
Matrix
Matrix
Medical
CourtMedical
Medical
Whirlpool Appt.
NursePleas
of Common
Documentation Page
Page51
Page 77
3276of
33 of106
of 142
667
668
813
89 Friday,
Friday, April
April 22,
September
June 20, 2016
21,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

33 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EXHIBIT re Preliminary Injunction for EMERGECNY
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page53
34
34of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page54
35
35of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page55
36
36of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page56
37
37of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page57
38
38of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page58
39
39of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page59
40
40of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page60
41
41of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Humana/Medicare
Whirlpool
of Common
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page61
42
42of
of813
667
668
89 September
June 20,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

43 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA PRIVATE
EMERGECNY RELIEF
COUNTY OF: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
Magisterial District Number:
January 27, 2016 at 6:53am
MDJ Name: Hon . COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

VS.
Address:
DEFENDANT:
NAME and ADDRESS
Southeast Medical Clinic at Brightside Church
Telephone: ( ) Hershey Avenue
Lancaster, PA 17603
Patient First Urgent Care
Docket No.: Butler Avenue
Lancaster, PA 17601
Date Filed:
OTN:
(Above to be completed by court personnel) (Fill in defendants name and address)
Notice: Under Pa.R.Crim.P. 506, your complaint may require approval by the attorney for the Commonwealth before it can be
accepted by the magisterial district court. If the attorney for the Commonwealth disapproves your complaint, you may
petition the court of common pleas for review of the decision of the attorney for the Commonwealth.
Fill in as much information as you have.
Defendants Race/Ethnicity Defendants Sex Defendants D.O.B. Defendants SID (State Identification Number)
White Black Female Not Available

Asian Native American Male Not Available
Hispanic Unknown
Defendants A.K.A. (also known as) Defendants Vehicle Information Defendants Drivers License Number
Plate Number State Registration Sticker (MM/YY) State
None Known
I, Stanley J. Caterbone 1250 Fremont Street, Lancaster, PA 17603

(Name of Complainant-Please Print or Type)
do hereby state: (check appropriate box)
1. x I accuse the above named defendant who lives at the address set forth above
I accuse the defendant whose name is unknown to me but who is described as
I accuse the defendant whose name and popular designation or nickname is unknown to me and whom I have
therefore designated as John Doe
with violating the penal laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at Southeast Medical Clinic, Hershey Ave.
(Place-Political Subdivision)
Lancaster, PA 17603 and Patient First Urgent Care on Butler Avenue, Lancaster, PA 17603
in Lancaster County County on or about January 21, 2016
Participants were: (if there were participants, place their names here, repeating the name of the above defendant)
Dr. Theresa Jerrel of Patient First and Douglass Leahman, MD of Southeast Medical Clinic at
Brightside Church, Hersehy Avenue, Lancaster. Both did refuse to provide adequate medical care
and refuse to prescribe pain medications, the reason for the visits while also HARASSING ME!
AOPC 411A-10 Page 1 of 2

Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page
Page 44
631 of
43 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Defendants Name: PRIVATE

Docket Number: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
2. The acts committed by the accused were:

(Set forth a summary of the facts sufficient to advise the defendant of the nature of the offense charged. A citation to the statute allegedly violated, without more,
is not sufficient. In a summary case, you must cite the specific section and subsection of the statute or ordinance allegedly violated. The age of the victim at the
time of the offense may be included, if known. In addition, social security numbers and financial information (e.g. PINS) should not be listed. If the identity
of an account number must be established, list only the last four digits. 204 Pa.Code 213.1 - 213.7. )
I have been seen by both Dr. Theresa Jerell and by Southeast Medical Clinic prior to
January 21, 2016 for the sole purpose of continuing my pain medications that were
previously prescribed by Dr. Brian Sullivan of Abbeyville Family Clinic. Dr. Sullivan
prescribed a regime of Naproxen and Hydrocodene, as evidenced on the Lancaster General
Hospital Plastic Surgery Visit Summation of December 11, 2015. Both Dr. Jarell and
Dr. Leahman not only refused to provide pain prescriptions, but the also engaged in
a whosale methodology of harassment akin to torture, given the severity of pain that
I am experiencing.
It is even more concerning that in the summer of 2015 I started this attempt at gaining
pain medications to treat the severity of pain that I am experiencing. It is now,
January
27, 2016 and I am still trying to find a remedy to my pain. On a scale of One to Ten,
as
often asked by the medical community, my pain is at least a ten. My pain gets so bad
that at nights I cannot walk and must use a walker. On several tript to Harrisburg, to
continue my efforts at getting Pennsylvania Legislative Support for my proposed
Anti-Stalking and Harassment Legislation, I had to turn around and go home for not
being able to walk.
The fact that Lancaster General Hospital is an ACTIVE DEFENDANT in an OPEN Case in both
state and federal courts, and considering thier NO TRESPASS NOTICE of 2010 that DENIES
ME ACCESS AND TREATMENT AT ANY LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL AFFILIATED MEDICAL FACILITY
Demonstrates that the only intention is to PROVIDE A MEANS OF DEALING WITH THE
PAIN FROM TORTURE WITHOUT ADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE, WHICH CAN BE CONSTRUED AS ATTEMPTED
MURDER, at some level of the law.
All of which were against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and contrary to the Act of
Assembly, or in violation of and to be completed at a later time
(Section) (Subsection)
of the
(PA Statute)
3. I ask that process be issued and that the defendant be required to answer the charges I have made.
4. I verify that the facts set forth in this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge or information and
belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of Section 4904 of the Crimes Code (18 Pa.C.S. 4904)
relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
January 27, 2016 /S/ Stanley J. Caterbone
Date Signature of Complainant
Office of the Attorney for the Commonwealth Approved Disapproved because:
(Name of Attorney for Commonwealth-Please Print or Type) (Signature of Attorney for Commonwealth) (Date)
AND NOW, on this date , I certify that the complaint has been properly completed and verified.
(Magisterial District) (Issuing Authority)

SEAL
AOPC 411B-10 Page 2 of 2

Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page64
Page
Page 452 of
44 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

46 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page66
Page
Page 473 of
45 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page67
Page
Page 484 of
46 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page68
Page
Page 495 of
47 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page69
Page
Page 506 of
48 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page70
Page
Page 517 of
49 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page71
Page
Page 528 of
50 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page72
Page
Page 539 of
51 of49
667
668
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

54 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page7410of
55
52 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page7511of
56
53 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

57 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page7712of
58
54 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page7813of
59
55 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page7914of
60
56 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8015of
61
57 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

62 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8216of
63
58 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8317of
64
59 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8418of
65
60 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8519of
66
61 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8620of
67
62 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

68 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8821of
69
63 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page8922of
70
64 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9023of
71
65 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9124of
72
66 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

73 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
" # " $% & '& ( ) * +

*
, *
* *- * . *
( /
* *
* **
* *- * *
* ( * .
0 1 234456 #& " * +! *
" 7( 8 * 296
!
" # $ %& ' %
( ( )
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9325of
74
67 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
& *
) +
) & * ( +
) ,
-) ' +
-) & .)/)
- ) !*
- ) ( +
- ) *
0) + 1
( 2 +
(
0) 3 * 4 "5 % 6+ ( 7%
/ + + * 8 *
0 ) & * *1 9
0 ) & * +
0 ) &
0 -) +
0-) & +
0- ) + 9
+
0- ) :(
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9426of
75
68 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 3
EMERGECNY RELIEF
* * * ; * *
< ( <(
= ; * ** > " # +
. ** (
& * * 344?
& *
2 6
* *
* * *
* * ,
3445
#& +* ( *
. @
* A
. * * * *
& B /
* C
. * .
C *
B
& * / * *
=
>. * D54 " = 7( A 8

7 8 " &
# +A * *
A " 1 ,
. * #" '
" / ( +
* & * .
> . ' <( (
' D % > *
, & = #(
B = * +
C . * C
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9527of
76
69 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, :
EMERGECNY RELIEF
E & '
* #* + *
" 344F #& < , * D- " +

( . . * # + )
3G9 ( ! # )% 7 * * 8 -
, C " . *
" DDF H +
) +
< * * * 344? ! "#

# " ! "' * '
* " ' # + B " B
# * . + *
# * <( AE"+
" # + # + * *
* * #" *
. * + )* * *
* . D54
" $ % &
# + & " ' #

+ * *
B C **
B * * " > *
B #* I
" +
#% + B *
# +
* # + &
. .
* * )
-J ; =#
& * * *
. ' *- +
& B *# +
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9628of
77
70 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 9
EMERGECNY RELIEF
& < * ( *, 1 2 (,1 6 <
* E 2 E6 * . **
7 (,1 E8 *
2 * &6 *
* **
& * * *-
* . -
* K . *
& B * & &

*- . -
%
&
& (,1 E ** & A

< % * & & *
* **
** * -
& ** **
* *
* * " .
&
( * * &
& A < % *
& ! ! & !
:4 344F
. (,1 E
E *
* * &" 2 * 6
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9729of
78
71 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, G
EMERGECNY RELIEF
)& * (
+
& * ** *1 * *
D94 L ) 2 * 6
DG4 & 344G ' % & () $
1 H *
B * # 7 8
* ) *
" * ; - ' * * ( *
" *, > ; A * 1 ( *
> " * + 2H 3 D6
# + =
A DG4 D?3 " -

** *
* / *
"* C * * . "
* - . * .
B *
. *
*
" -* .
' , M
* * * *
# - +2 " &
36
* * <(
B * B * " '
D?: L ' DF: ,
; 1 ( C' 344: * " B
; * -
2 " & 96
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9830of
79
72 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, ?
EMERGECNY RELIEF
) ,
. # + =
& " ' * # + *

# + # *- * +
* * **
1 * *
. *
*
& * * B
*- * *
- . * * 2 " & 9-G6
" 3449 1 ! #& *
*
* * +2 " & D6
-) ' +
& $* ; / F 3445 $
+ , #& E ( ! 1 H " " ' ( " +
L ( . # + =
& 7L ( 8 / *
* ) *
** *
*
* * . '
' * * *
*
' B * L;E
' " *
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page9931of
80
73 49
of813
667
668
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 5
EMERGECNY RELIEF
-) & .)/)
& * " " -
" &
* B " "
" # + -
- * C C $+ ,!
& 3445 ' & - & "# "
<( & * . *
. =
& / D9F 1 , 7 8
** ; C * &
* * )
; & J
#H ; " + 2 ?9-G6
( " ** , *
* 2 ??6
& # +)
( 5 E * - &
"
" " * *
* " ** B
) " * *
& * E
, "
7& " 8 * *
D?5 . I
< E ' " *

* / * &
; " **
> ( *
2 9F36
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 32of
Page100
81
74 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, F
EMERGECNY RELIEF
- ) !*
( " - D54
* 3D D5D #E "
* - >** ! " D54 ( + =
* " ( * &
" ' -
D54
* " -
C L-<H&1 -
E -
/ ' )** *1
& )1 C D?4 E
> H * * #* +
& / *
* & *
C H ( * > " &
" -*
DG4 * - . D?4 .
* * )1 * -
/ L-<H&1 /
" 9 DF5 C H ( *
$ . $ = #>. C 2%">16
** B
L<H&1 " * DG4 +
( D5D #( * & "
+ * * * * 2* 6 B & "
# * ** B
+ E #7 8 * * +
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 33of
Page101
82
75 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, D
EMERGECNY RELIEF
- ) ( +
% * " ( *
* ( N) DD9
/ =# ; - '
* <( ' ; ' & * - =
" * D?4 + E , -
1 9G
0 1 2$ &.
* *
% &) < ( *
# - + - &
* ** * *
( B * .
* A
& 2 "
6
* - C *
2 -* B
- * B 6* ** &
*
* * C CC
* * "
* -
& ** * *
* ** ,
* B & * * *
" * *
- * I
1 * * / * *
-
* * ** N **
"
* *
= . .
& *
* . * C
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 34of
Page102
83
76 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 4
EMERGECNY RELIEF
- ) *
. =
" !" /
* *
> !< *
3 1 ! *
: !" * '
9 ! " ' #
+ I *
* .
2 ! 36
& -
* * C
* 344G ! , / 3 # # (. 453 -
, 1 ( *
* ;
* & * * & *
!# C * **
* +
) * # +# +
# +
* " B /
/ # + B
( ? 3445 / ; -
" &6 1 7/7 &6 ! # -
6 $ $ $ , # *<(
* C +
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 35of
Page103
84
77 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
& ! *# *
+ # A . " +
7& 8# * * * * *
C )
* * ! *
* "
*
* / * .
* * & +
0) + 1
( 2 +
(
E # + B *
* C
% " ' * -
# + * *
C &
* '
*
* *
& *# + -
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 36of
Page104
85
78 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 3
EMERGECNY RELIEF
0) 3 * 4 "5 %
6+ ( 7% / + + *
8 *
& . * * *
&
*# +
& . " # +
-
& DF9 " &I 4 * ) > 17

8 * L ) =
" DG4 &

** > 1* B
" *
& ( C 1 * > 1
H H I , . H * ( <
" # +& 1
* * DG4
H " **
N 4 *> 1
. B . H > 1* B
& H L *
3 * 1 ( DDF J A
; &I , * *
*# +( =
" % DG9 " *

# & +* * E *
( "
L;E
H * . *
" .
) %% / # * "
1A ; @+ % DFG E E
*( * * *
& *
E #" " *
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 37of
Page105
86
79 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, :
EMERGECNY RELIEF
+ : D5? 6 ! # ( (
+ 1 * =
& * "
&
** -
# + #(
2 6
+
# * *
*
+
: 1 * $+ ,! #& ( ; +
. " B " 9
344G 1
2& * E &I I O F?::96
* * * ; E "'
. " -
, * * ; E
#* + #" * ** +
. E
* " B
E *
/ ' "
* * >
7) 8 ' *
" * / E
" 9F *E *
& * * ** * ; (
, '
( " 7 *
8
) * * " * * B
M * * *
* * '
) H
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 38of
Page106
87
80 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 9
EMERGECNY RELIEF
(
*; "' * * B
* B
" ' ' . ** &

" ' '
** ' * ** '
& " '
0 )& * *1 9
B ; ;
. * * = *
** #
* *
+ . =
* * ; *; ( 344: <(
* " B ; 1 ( C *
" * *
*- *
> ! *
2 / 6
( / ! / * 2
* 6
" !" * :4
* ! >. * *
M H H !< *
I /
( !< * 2 6
2 D6
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 39of
Page107
88
81 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, G
EMERGECNY RELIEF
0 )& * +
# + =
& "
* B *
<= ( " DG4 , *

/ 9F * / *
7 ** 8# / '
+
< ( *- * E " H , **
H , * *- *
DG4
* " * L;E' B
* *
<> A M (
* . % , C
*
7 8
*
* * 2 " &
9 ! :3-::6
E / ' D?4 * 44
* 34 -,
*
2 ! ::6
& * " B . .
. & *
. * *- *
- )
E / ' % "
# * * + # .
*
** +2 ! F-D6
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 40of
Page108
89
82 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, ?
EMERGECNY RELIEF
. " # + =
" * * ; '
** * .B ) -
J * ** # *
. +& / #
*
+
& * B !#
* *
@+ 2 ! 4- 6
0 )&
-J . B * *
# * + #
+& * . # +*
=
-J * *
* .
' *-
& * ** * .
* & *
* **
* ** E
* .
*
# . C
* + * # * * +
# ' * +
< * *
* # +
/ / K *
/
* * 2 ! 46
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 41of
Page109
90
83 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 5
EMERGECNY RELIEF
0 -) +
& * &" *
, ; % C *
$ ) DF4 &I - %
DD? . * # +&
. * - * =
H ; % # +
% (
) *
I ; ' *
' >. - *
% * > *
* 34 . ! 4
8 % ' DG5 % '
> *
* * =
* =
# * +
* * C
* -
& *
% - * & # +
&" *
# + C
& *% ' DD? * *

=
I / * -*
* *
,
* "
* **
( I #& 7
8 " +(
* / &
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 42of
Page110
91
84 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, F
EMERGECNY RELIEF
# +A .
' C
> *
* "
I &I H * B
.
B -
*
& C B
& B B
* * (
# * +* # + * *
'
0-) & +
# *
* @+ -J *
# * =+
* =
3 * =
: # + * =
9 #* + * - *
# . +=
G * * #
+=
? # C
+
& * * * *
" #
B * * '
. * +&
# + # *
* +2 ! 4- 6
" -J "
* &" #
+ -J B 6 * "
( &"
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 43of
Page111
92
85 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, D
EMERGECNY RELIEF
-J
B 36 * &
*
&" # + :6 96 ?6 -
J B G6 * * #
+ &"
. #
* B * + *
-J ' B ?6 # C
+ &"
. - *
*
0- ) + 9
+
& **
&" # + B
* * * A ' =
& C " ' * #

+ # *- * +
* * **
& * * B *-
* *
- . * * 2 G6
& ** * * * =
* * '
* *
&" * &
*% ' =#
B - * +A
' =
& " ' # +

1 * *
. *
* 2 " &
9-G6
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 44of
Page112
93
86 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 34
EMERGECNY RELIEF
* # . * *- * +
& * .
& * .
& ** * * * * &"
&" .
* & * *
' &" &" *
* * &" &
* *- *
( ' * * *% '
B * *- * " &"
=
" DD5 ( * / (
> 1
( E "
DDG " * % & *
* " " / *
& * "
*
* "
& * & * * "
* * B *
/
7" 8 . *
*
&" "
* *# +
& * *
& # +
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 45of
Page113
94
87 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 3
EMERGECNY RELIEF
0- ) :(
, B * .
@ *<(
& *
** * . &
<(
** * !
* *
DG4 * B
& 344F ( ' *
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 46of
Page114
95
88 49
of668
667
813
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22, 33
EMERGECNY RELIEF
PROTHONOTARY OF LANCASTER COUNTY
Katherine Wood-Jacobs George Alspach
Prothonotary Solicitor
STANLEY J CATERBONE
Case Number
vs.
CI-06-03349
LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL (et al.)
PROTHONOTARY DOCKET ENTRIES

04/10/2006 COMPLAINT FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PLAINTIFF, PRO SE
04/10/2006 CAPTION ENTRY IS: STANLEY J. CATERBONE (MA) VS LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL, (M7)
ET AL
04/28/2006 AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PRO SE. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
OF SAME.
04/28/2006 AMENDED CAPTION ENTRY IS: STANLEY J. CATERBONE VS DR. EMILY PRESSLEY, PSYCHIATRIC
DEPARTMENT AND LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL.
05/16/2006 PRAECIPE-ENTER APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS, DR. EMILY PRESSLEY AND
LANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL. FILED BY MEGAN R. FORD, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
OF SAME.
01/12/2007 MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED BY: STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PRO SE. CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE OF THE SAME.
04/03/2007 JUDGMENT-NON PROS PRAECIPE FOR JUDGMENT OF NON PROS ENTERED AGAINST
PLAINTIFF PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1037(B), FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PLAINTIFF.
04/12/2007 PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS TO COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE 1028 (A)(1)
AND RULE 1028(A)(4) OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. FILED BY: MEGAN R.
FORD, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF THE SAME.
04/13/2007 PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE
1028(a)(1) AND RULE 1028(a)(4) OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE WITH
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. FILED BY: MEGAN R. FORD, ESQ. (SENT TO BUSINESS JUDGE
MADENSPACHER APRIL 17, 2007)
04/16/2007 JUDGMENT-NON PROS PURSUANT TO PA.R.C.P. 1037(B) FILED BY STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PRO
SE.
04/18/2007 ORDER ISSUING RULE FILED. AND NOW, UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ATTACHED
DEFENDANTS' PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE
1028(a)(4) OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, IT IS THIS 18 DAY OF APRIL,
2007, HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. A RULE IS ISSUED UPON PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO THE RELIEF REQUESTED PURSUANT TO THE PRELIMINARY
OBJECTION UNDER RULE 1028(a)(1). 2. PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE AN ANSWER TO THE
PRELIMINARY OBJECTION UNDER RULE 1028(a)(1) WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS OF THE DATE OF
THIS ORDER. (SEE FILE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). BY THE COURT: MICHAEL J.
PEREZOUS, JUDGE. CC'S W/236 NOTICE TO: CHRISTOPHER W. MATTSON, ESQ. (2)
04/23/2007 MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
TO AMEND COMPLAINT. FILED BY: MEGAN R. FORD, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF THE
SAME.
04/24/2007 ADDENDUM TO COMPLAINT. FILED BY: STANLEY J. CATERBONE, PRO SE. CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE OF THE SAME. (SEE FILE OF CI-06-07330 FOR ENTIRE DOCUMENT).
04/30/2007 MOTION OF DEFENDANTS TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S PRAECIPE FOR JUDGMENT OF NON PROS.
FILED BY: MEGAN R. FORD, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF THE SAME.
04/30/2007 MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE PRAECIPE FOR
JUDGMENT OF NON PROS. FILED BY: MEGAN R. FORD, ESQ. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF THE
SAME.
Private Criminal
Humana/Medicare
Court reCommon
Whirlpool
of Pain Meds
Documentation
Pleas Page
Page 47of
Page115
96
89 49
of668
667
813
89
(c) CountySuite Prothonotary, Teleosoft, Inc.
Wednesday, January
June 27,
September 20, 2016
21,
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

Page116
97 of
of668
667
813 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

Page117
98 of
of668
667
813 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

Page118
99 of
of668
667
813 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

100 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

101 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

102 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF

103 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

104 of 813
667
668 September 22,
21, 2016
Gmail - Attacked by Pitbull at 1252 Fremont While Working on my Fence https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=acf0584318&view=pt&sear...
EMERGECNY RELIEF
Stan Caterbone <[email protected]>
Attacked by Pitbull at 1252 Fremont While Working on my Fence

15 messages
Stan Caterbone <[email protected]> Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:13 PM

To: Adrian Soh <[email protected]>, Barbara Hough Roda <[email protected]>, Barbara Sheppard <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Bernie Schriver <[email protected]>, Bob Kauffman
<[email protected]>, Bonnie Lee <[email protected]>, Capitol Copy <[email protected]>, Cheryl Welssh
<[email protected]>, Chris Hausner <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Dave Hickernell
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Derrick Robinson
<[email protected]>, Derrick Robinson <[email protected]>, Derrick Robinson <[email protected]>, Diana Crone
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "E: Philep Wenger" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, James Walbert <[email protected]>, jere sullivan
<[email protected]>, Jim Doran <[email protected]>, Jim Warner <[email protected]>, Jimmy Karpathios
<[email protected]>, John Garofolo <[email protected]>, Ken Rhoades <[email protected]>, Kristen Ost
<[email protected]>, Kristi Aurand <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Laura Wagner-
Miller <[email protected]>, "LB, Legal" <[email protected]>, Lynn and Marie <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, Marylinn Gerber <[email protected]>, michael mc donald <[email protected]>, Mike
Caterbone <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Nancy Eshelman <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, Office Max <[email protected]>, Officer Binderup <[email protected]>, Pam Stehman
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Peter Anders <[email protected]>, Peter
Anders <[email protected]>, Phil Caterbone <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
Richard Cosmore <[email protected]>, Robert Yeagley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Sector 9 <[email protected]>, Senator Leach
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Stan
Caterbone <[email protected]>, Stan Caterbone <[email protected]>, "Stan J. Caterbone" <[email protected]>, Steve
Caterbone <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Tony Bongiovi <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
The punks at 1252 Fremont Street were all outside in the back yard when I started to work. My laborer, Norm showed up and then they all of a
sudden disappeared. I had to go into the backyard of 1252 to undo the temporary fence I erected yesterday. I open the gate, close it behind me and
the BLACK PITBULL and YORKIE come running out of the house attacking me. The punks set it all up by leaving when they knew full well that I
would be coming into the yard to work on the fence. THAT IS THE SECOND TIME HE BIT ME, THE FIRST TIME THEY LET HIM OUT AND HE
CAME IN MY YARD AND SNAPPED AT ME JUST MISSING MY FINGER!
ONE DAY WHEN I WAS WORKING THE PUNKS PUT A BROWN PITTBULL IN THE YARD SO I COULD NOT WORK!
Yesterday, the bitch offered to move an old freezer so I could work on the fence. I said "no, that is alright, I can get it myself". That is the first time I
talked to the bitch since she chased me in my front lawn last fall because I blew the leaves and some floated into her pile of leaves on her front lawn.
THE BITCH DOES NOT OWN 1252 FREMONT STREET, AND AFTER I SET THE POSTS AND INSTALLED THE FIRST SECTION OF FENCE,
ME AND THE OWNER, DAVE SHRECK, DISCUSSED MY PROJECT AND HE GAVE ME HIS PERMISSION TO ERECT AND INSTALL THE
FENCE. THAT WAS PROBABLY 4 WEEKS AGO!
ARE THE DOGS LICENSED? AND WHOS' ARE THEY? LIKE MOST PEOPLE IN THAT HOUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHO LIVES THERE AND
WHO DOES NOT!
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page105
124
1 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 22,
10, 2016
21,
1 of 28 6/10/2016 2:22 PM
Gmail - Attacked by Pitbull at 1252 Fremont While Working on my Fence https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=acf0584318&view=pt&sear...
EMERGECNY RELIEF
/S/ Stan J. Caterbone

Advanced Media Group
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
Linkedin Professional Networking Profile (click here)
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant, and the Advanced Media Group are victims of U.S. Sponsored Mind
Control and has been engaged in litigation in both Federal and State courts seeking financial and social remedies and a resolution of his Civil
Liberties and his Constitutional Rights. These communications are our way of defending and protecting those rights. In 1987 Stan J.
Caterbone, while managing the financial firm the he founded, Financial Management Group, Ltd., Stan J. Caterbone became a Federal
Whistleblower when, as a shareholder, he claimed fraud and misconduct within the international arms dealer and local start-up International
Signal & Control, Plc., Some 4 years later ISC was indicted and plead guilty to the 3rd largest fraud in U.S. history, some $1 Billion, and for
selling arms to Irag via South Africa. In June of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone became the Movant in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania case No. 5:14-cv-02559-PD for the Habeus Corpus Petition of Lisa Michelle Lambert. The case is now before the U.S. Third
Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 15-3400.
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page106
125
2 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 22,
10, 2016
21,
2 of 28 6/10/2016 2:22 PM
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page107
126
3 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page108
127
4 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page109
128
5 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page110
129
6 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page111
130
7 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page112
131
8 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page113
132
9 of
of17
667
668
813 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page133
114
10 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page134
115
11 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page135
116
12 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page136
117
15 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page137
118
16 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGENCY RELIEF
Pitt Bull Attack

Lancaster County
at 1252
CourtFremont
of Common
St. Pleas Page
Page138
119
17 of 813
17
667
668 September
June 10,
21, 2016
22,
EMERGECNY RELIEF
CHAPTER
DIVIDER

120 of 813
668 September 22,
21, 2016
Published by the Advanced
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Group and Injunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUPFreedom

From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
EXCLUSIVE Transcripts of Whistleblower Testimonies as

Targeted Individuals of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and
Related Hearings and Lectures
Published by Advanced Media Group September 17, 2016
______________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Background of Stan J. Caterbone as a Targeted Individual
2. In Contravention of Conventional Wisdom CIA No-Touch Torture Makes

Sense, by Cheryl Welsh 2008
3. Allstate Sworn Testimony of Stan J. Caterbone TRANSCRIPT Volume 2 and

Volume 1 July 12, 2016
4. Transcript of the Richmond City Council Public Hearing of May 19, 2015
Passing a City Resolution 5-2 to Ban Spaced-Based Weapons in Support of the
Many Targeted Individuals Suffering Symptoms of the City.
5. Karen Stewart, NSA Whistleblower and Targeted Individual
6. Julianne McKinney, US Army Intelligence Officer, Whistleblower, and

Targeted Individual
7. 8. Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group Executive Summary
8. Dr. Nick Begich, Author and Expert Researcher of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
9. 1975 TESTIMONY FROM DIRECTOR OF CIA STANSFIELD TURNER for the 1975
United States Senate Select Hearings on Mkultra
10. Proposed U.S. Government Settlement for TI via Change.org Petition by Stan
J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group March 17, 2016 with Affidavit and
Kane Op Ed Letter Sent to President Obama
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
of Common Pleas Page
Page140
120
121
1 ofof548
667
668
813 Saturday September 22,
17, 2016
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Stan J. Caterbone

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
__________________________________
EXCLUSIVE Transcripts of Whistleblower Testimonies as
Targeted Individuals of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and
Related Hearings and Lectures
________________________________
June 2, 2016
BACKGROUND
Stan J. Caterbone's International Signal & Control or ISC Whistleblowing History and Mind
Control Relationships are outlined in the following statements and declarations, which have already
been proven and verified and have never been specifically contested in any court of law:
Stan J. Caterbone was a Federal Whistleblower in 1987 regarding ISC
The 29 False Arrests and Prosecutorial Misconduct that Stan J. Caterbone was subject to in 1987
through 2015 was an effort to cover-up the allegations made by Stan J. Caterbone in the Spring and
Summer of 1987 after the Meeting of June 23, 1987 with ISC and United Chem Con Executive Larry
Resch.
The ISC Fraud and Sales of Arms to Iraq Story by the ABC News Nightline with Ted Koppel and the
Financial Times of London in May, July, and September of 1991 was most likely initiated or was
corroborated by Lancaster Newspapers reporter Thomas Flannary.
Thomas Flannary's mysterious death in February of 2004 was either murder or was a cover story to
hide the fact that he was a CIA operative used to control the flow of information, disinformation, and
propaganda. It is highly subject that he began his career with Lancaster Newspapers in 1987 and is not
a native Lancastrian.
The ISC merger was not completed until December of 1987, 3 months after the False Arrests of Stan
J. Caterbone.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page141
121
122
2 ofof548
173
183
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The official meeting with the Pennsylvania Securities Commission Agent Howard Eisler in September of
1987, which was solicited by Agent Eisler was an effort to illegally interrogate Stan J. Caterbone without
a legal subpoena.
In the months after the June 23, 1987 meeting with ISC Executive Larry Resch Stan J. Caterbone had
personally solicited a vast array of local, state, and federal officials, including the FBI and Congressman
Robert Walker, PA State Representative Gibson Armstrong for assistance in the retaliation and slander
campaign that was in progress. There is credible linkage between the ISC Scandal, U.S. Sponsored
Mind Control, Stan J. Caterbone's family VICTIMIZATION of the same, and the participation of
LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
The Zook Murder Appeal proves that Lancaster County Detective Michael Landis, Judge James Cullen,
and Judge Farina of the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas were all involved in U.S. Sponsored
Mind Control before 2004 and before Stan J. Caterbone went public with his VICTIMIZATION of U.S.
Sponsored Mind Control.
Bobby Ray Inman, former director of the National Security Agency (NSA) was on the Board of
Directors of ISC and was involved in U.S. Sponsored Mind Control Technologies through his company
S.A.I.C. Corporation. Bobby Ray Inman would later be selected by Former President Bill Clinton for his
Director of Defense, but would later remove himself due to allegations and public scrutiny for his role in
the ISC scandal.
In the Fall of 1991 Robert Gates was nominated for Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
and during his televised confirmation hearings the was subject to brutal array of questions concerning
his participation in the ISC scandal. He went on to be nominated and later would serve both the Bush
Administrations and the Obama Administrations as Secretary of Defense until resigning in 2011.
There have been at least 3 documented attempts on the life of Stan J. Caterbone; 1987, 1991, and
2004, all attempts at vehicular homicide. Thomas P. Caterbone's passing in 1996 was the result of a
wrongful death claim by Fulton Bank. Samuel A. Caterbone was most likely an KULTRA murder tactic in
Santa Barbara, California on December 25, 1984. Samuel P. Caterbone was most likely the result of an
MKULTRA murder tactic on July 20,2001 in New York city.
The above finding of facts and evidence corroborates a vast conspiracy and criminal enterprise that
violates both civil and criminal RICO statutes and antitrust statutes.
The above would constitute treble damages for Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group in U.S.
District Courts, specifically in the Eastern District for Pennsylvania Case No. 05-2288, 06-4650, 14-
02559, and other related cases; and Case No. 08-13373 in the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page142
122
123
3 ofof548
173
183
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
In Contravention of Conventional Wisdom

CIA no touch torture makes sense
out of mind control allegations
By Cheryl Welsh
January 2008
Cheryl Welsh was invited to speak about mind control allegations at a recent
workshop on ethics and interrogations by the workshop director, Jean Maria Arrigo PhD.
Dr. Arrigo commented on this article:
In CIA No Touch Torture Makes Sense Out of Mind Control Allegations,

Cheryl Welsh provides a valuable overview of methods common to
neuroweapons research and torture interrogation. Her essay is informed by
the multitude of self-identified, experimental targets of neuroweapons
researchers whom she represents. Scholars and journalists who are only able
to track neuroweapons research and interrogation methods through
government documents have biased the consensus reality in favor of
government authorities who deceive the public. We owe thanks to Cheryl
Welsh and her colleagues for their pioneering efforts to penetrate government
deception through the phenomenology of self-identified victims of
neuroweapons.
Jean Maria Arrigo, PhD, is an independent social psychologist and oral historian whose
work gives moral voice to military and intelligence professionals. See, for example,
Arrigo, J.M & Wagner, R. (2007). Torture Is for Amateurs: A Meeting of Psychologists
and Military Interrogators. [Special issue]. Peace and Conflict, 11 (4).
Dedicated to the courageous and kind-hearted

Peggy Fagan of Houston, Texas,
who is enduring the new scientific version of torture.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page143
123
124
4 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 1
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Table of contents
Introduction
I. A university professor uncovers CIA no touch torture
II. The beginnings of CIA no touch torture and how it spread
III. What is no touch torture?
IV. An example of no touch torture
V. The long history of U.S. torture
VI. CIA Cold War neuroscience-based mind control research
VII. CIA Cold War nonlethal weapons research
VIII. Why CIA no touch torture has been so successful
IX. All three programs are state tools for neutralizing the enemy
without killing; for intelligence operations and counterinsurgency
warfare
X. Mind control allegations by a Korean War POW, (prisoner of war),

a Soviet political prisoner and Abu Ghraib detainees
XI. The banal and bizarre techniques of no touch torture
XII. The three key behavioral components of no touch torture
XIII. Torture as a kind of total theater
XIV. A comparison of no touch torture to mind control allegations
XV. The phenomenology of the torture situation
XVI. Comparing no touch torture techniques of sensory disorientation

and self inflicted pain to mind control allegations
XVII. Conclusions: what everyone can agree on
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page144
124
125
5 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 2
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Introduction
After the horrific pictures of prisoners being tortured at Abu Ghraib were displayed in front pages of
newspapers around the world, the United States maintained that the U.S. government does not
torture; Abu Ghraib was about a few bad officers. Evidence now proves that CIA no touch torture
and worse were ordered by the executive branch and approved by top military officers. Surprisingly
this scandal has much in common with another national security issue, neuroweapons, commonly
referred to as mind control.
The field of neuroethics should begin now, according to bioethicist Dr. Jonathan Moreno in his 2006
book Mind Wars, Brain Research and National Defense. The influential book was reviewed in
Nature and JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association). Most neuroscientists agree that
advanced neuroweapons are over a half century away but the ethics of the new weapons need more
planning than occurred for the atomic bomb. Moreno began the first chapter of his book describing
the growing numbers of allegations of illegal government mind control targeting. He immediately
dismissed them as conspiracy theory nut cases. A 2007 Washington Post Magazine article,
Thought Wars followed suit. So why should anyone read further given these credible and highly
respected expert opinions?
Much of what the public should know about the issue has gone unreported or uninvestigated. For
example, after over a half century of classified research, not one publicly known neurological weapon
has been deployed. This raises more questions than it answers. Putting aside the major and
undebated points of the consensus position, the mind control allegations do sound crazy and on this
singular point, most people, including experts and news reporters refuse any closer examination.
Clearly, understanding why the mind control allegations sound so crazy would have significant
consequences.
Two analogies help clarify the major problems for the mind control issue, secrecy and the lack of a
thorough, impartial investigation;
Excerpt of a 1970s congressional hearing uncovering illegal CIA activities; [Senator Frank]
Church, ... persisted in blaming the plots [assassinations] on the CIA. The agency, he said, was
a rogue elephant on a rampage. For proof, he pointed to the lack of documentary evidence
that any president had ever approved an assassination. Former CIA director Richard Helms
countered that it was absurd to expect to find such evidence. I cant imagine anybody wanting
something in writing saying I have just charged Mr. Jones to go out and shoot Mr. Smith, he
testified. The Agency, he insisted, had simply carried out the wishes of the executive.
Even today, experts dont understand how the U.S. secrecy system works. Similar to the torture
scandal, until there is a national security scandal about neuroscience weapons, the public will
remain uninformed about a serious public issue.
During a dairymans strike in 19th century New England, when there was suspicion of milk
being watered down, Henry David Thoreau wrote; Sometimes circumstantial evidence can be
quite convincing; like when you find a trout in the milk. Mind Wars and the Washington Post
Magazine article examined the growing numbers of crazy sounding mind control allegations.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page145
125
126
6 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 3
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
But unlike Thoreaus account, the publications only reported the convincing circumstantial
evidence of finding a trout in the milk and dismissed the suspicions without a fair or
impartial investigation. As a result, the mind control allegations made no sense.
Update: In the 2008 book The Commission, the Uncensored History of the 9-11 Investigation,
Philip Shenon explained that explicit, very classified kill orders are now put in writing. On page
254 Shenon wrote: MONs [memorandum of notification] were top-secret orders prepared by the
White House to authorize covert operations abroad by the CIA. ... there was an explicit, if highly
secret, order given by Clinton to the CIA in late 1998 to kill bin Laden.
I. A university professor uncovers CIA no touch

torture
University of Wisconsin professor Alfred McCoy wrote the 2006 book, A Question of Torture, CIA
Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror. Its a compelling account of McCoys search
for understanding the CIAs no touch torture techniques used in the war on terror and the Iraq
War. McCoy shows how information extracted by coercion is worthless and makes the case for a
legal approach, long and successfully used by the U.S. Marines and the F.B.I. McCoy documents
why CIA no touch torture is a revolutionary psychological approach and is the first new scientific
innovation after centuries of torture. Interrogators had found that mere physical pain, no matter
how extreme, often produced heightened resistance. Of course, the old brutal forms of physical
torture are still around, for example torture in Argentina in the 1970s described in the classic,
Prisoner Without a Name, Cell without a Number by Jacobo Timerman.
McCoy pieced together what no touch torture is and how it was spread globally. The CIAs new no
touch torture works by attacking and destroying the basis of personal identity. McCoy found that
the techniques were bizarre, simple, even banal and yet devastatingly effective. McCoy discovered
that the techniques had been scientifically proven in decades of CIA cold war research. Evidence of
several government manuals helped prove that the techniques were disseminated from Vietnam
through Iran to Central America.
No touch torture techniques sound strangely similar to mind control allegations. A comparison of
no touch torture to mind control allegations raised the possibility that mind control allegations
could be based on the well researched psychological theory for no touch torture. Torture victims
exhibit symptoms similar to psychotic processes and organic disorders and experts say this is not
mental illness but an outcome of the psychological component of torture. Psychotherapist Otto
Doerr-Zegers, who has treated Chilean victims tortured under General Augusto Pinochet stated;
The psychological component of torture becomes a kind of total theater, a constructed unreality of
lies and inversion, in a plot that ends inexorably with the victims self-betrayal and destruction. ...
This is similar to the technique of street theater that mind control victims described in the
Washington Post Magazine article. As torture victims are not mentally ill, mind control victims
would not be mentally ill but rather have undergone and are undergoing a traumatic situation
comparable to torture, such as the alleged illegal targeting with government mind control weapons.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page146
126
127
7 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 4
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The UCDavis Center for the Study of Human Rights in the Americas (CSHRA) and the UCDavis
Center for Mind and Brain (CMB) further explain what psychological torture is and its effects on
torture victims.
[CSHRA and CMB] have initiated a collaboration to investigate theneurobiology of

psychological torture. ...Psychological torture (henceforthPT) is a set of practices that are
used worldwide to inflict pain or suffering without resorting to direct physical violence.
PT includes the use of sleep deprivation, sensory disorientation, forced self-induced pain,
solitary confinement, mock execution, severe humiliation, mind-altering drugs and
threats of violenceas well as the exploitation of personal or cultural phobias.
The psychiatric sequelae of PT are severe. They include delirium, psychosis, regression,
self-mutilation, cognitive impairment, and anxiety disorders, including post-traumatic
stress disorder. Neuroscience research on these and related mental disorders continues
to establish their neurobiological underpinnings, thus challenging the popular view that
PT is not physical, not serious, and perhaps not even torture at all.
The CSHRA and the CMB launched their collaborative efforts by holding The First
UCDavis Workshop on the Neurobiology of Psychological Torture. The goal of this
workshop was to bring together researchers and practitioners from different specialties
and research groups in order to set off a unified, long-term, research program on the
ways in which PT affects the human central nervous system in an effort to understand it
in relation to the more traditional forms of physical torture, and to establish clearly
articulated ethical, legal, and medical descriptions of this set of practices. It is expected
that these descriptions will help treat, document, and deter PT.
Supplemented by studies on the social, historical, and ethical ramifications of PT, the
presentations made at The First UCDavis Workshop on the Neurobiology of
Psychological Torture have been bound into The Trauma of Psychological Torture, a
volume to be published by Praeger on June 30, 2008.
Please note that numerous torture experts, including CSHRA and CMB have completely shunned
suggestions to investigate mind control allegations or to consider the issue. But this information may
be helpful to the therapists of TIs (targeted individuals of mind control) who are coping with mind
control targeting.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page147
127
128
8 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 5
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
II. The beginnings of CIA no touch torture and how it

spread
The science of psychological torture began because of fears of Russian brainwashing of defendants in
the 1940s Moscow show trials and the Korean War POW (prisoners of war) brainwashing scare in
the 1950s. The 2005 book, World as Laboratory, Experiments with Mice, Mazes, and Men by
Rebecca Lemov described government psychological research for determining whether the
Communists had developed new techniques of brainwashing. Almost all [scientists] who were
assigned to study the phenomenon of POW collaboration ended up in short order working for the
CIA via one of its various cut-outs, conduits, and false fronts, such as the Society for the
Investigation of Human Ecology, the Geschickter Fund for Medical Research, and the Scientific
Engineering Institute, or in one of its own laboratories. (Lemov, 219) McCoy described the research
behind no touch torture and how it spread globally;
From 1950 to 1962, the CIA became involved in torture through a massive mind-control
effort, with psychological warfare and secret research into human consciousness that
reached a cost of a billion dollars annually, a veritable Manhattan Project of the mind. ...
If we trace a narrative thread through a maze of hundreds of experiments, the CIA
research moved through two distinct phases, first an in-house exploration of exotic
techniques such as hypnosis and hallucinogenic drugs, and, a later focus on behavioral
experimentation by contract researchers, several of the most brilliant behavioral
scientists of their generation ...
While this Agency drug testing led nowhere, CIA-funded behavioral experiments,
outsourced to the countrys leading universities, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc., produced
three key findings that contributed to the discovery of a new form of torture that was
psychological, not physical, ... perhaps best described as no-touch torture. (McCoy
outline, 2)
Across the span of three continents and four decades, there is a striking similarity in U.S.
torture techniques, both their conceptual design and specific techniques, from the CIAs
1963 Kubark interrogation manual, to the Agencys 1983 Honduras training handbook,
all the way to General Ricardo Sanchezs 2003 orders for interrogation in Iraq. ...
Guantanamo perfected the three-phase psychological paradigm by attacking cultural
identity and individual psyche. (McCoy outline, 14)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page148
128
129
9 ofof548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 6
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
III. What is no touch torture?

McCoy explained what no touch torture is;
The CIAs psychological paradigm for no touch torture fused two new methods,
sensory disorientation and self-inflicted pain, whose combination, in theory, would
cause victims to feel responsible for their own suffering and thus capitulate more readily
to their torturers. Refined through years of practice, sensory disorientation relies on a
mix of sensory overload and sensory deprivation via banal procedures, isolation then
intense interrogation, heat and cold, light and dark, noise and silence, for a systematic
attack on all human stimuli. The fusion of these two techniques, sensory disorientation
and self-inflicted pain, creates a synergy of physical and psychological trauma whose sum
is a hammer-blow to the existential platforms of personal identity. (McCoy outline, 4-5)
In 2004, the Red Cross reported: The construction of such a system. ... cannot be
considered other than an intentional system of cruel, unusual and degrading treatment
and a form of torture. (McCoy outline, 9)
IV. An example of no touch torture

Democracy Nows Amy Goodman interviewed journalist Jane Mayer about her August 8, 2007 New
Yorker article, The Black Sites: A Rare Look Inside the C.I.A.s Secret Interrogation Program.
Mayer described detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his experience with no touch torture;
There, he [Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] was subjected to a kind of a weird routine that
someone described to me as kind of Clockwork Orange sort of thing, where he was put in
goggles that blacked out the light and earmuffs of some sort that blocked out sound and
deprived of any normal routine, such as meals or anything that would allow him to know
what time of day it was or really have any kind of marker in his existence. And its a
program thats developed of sort of psychological terror, in a way, to kind of make people
feel that they are completely dependent on other people, have no control over their lives,
and its something that, the technique, that really comes out of the KGB days, way back in
the Cold War. And apparently its something the CIA has put a lot of research into over
time.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page149
129
130
10 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 7
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
V. The long history of U.S. torture

The history of CIA torture runs parallel to CIA neuroscience-based mind control research and also
CIA nonlethal weapons research. This is important because mind control allegations include
descriptions of techniques that sound like all three CIA programs. It is possible that the related cold
war CIA no touch torture, nonlethal weapons and neuroscience-based mind control programs have
co-mingled for intelligence purposes. Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporter and author
Tim Weiner wrote the 2007 book Legacy of Ashes, History of the CIA. Weiner described the CIA
torture programs and the U.S. secret detention centers around the world. This is a brief excerpt of
the extensive programs;
The project dated back to 1948, when Richard Helms and his [American intelligence]
officers in Germany realized they were being defrauded ... The agency had set up
clandestine prisons to wring confessions out of suspected double agents. One was in
Germany, another in Japan. The third, and the biggest, was in the Panama Canal Zone.
Like Guantanamo, ... It was anything goes. ... (Weiner, 64-5)
Senior CIA officers, including Helms, destroyed almost all the records of these programs
in fear they might become public. (Weiner, 66)
The agency, as Cheney said that morning, went over to the dark side. On Monday,
September 17, President Bush issued a fourteen-page top secret directive to Tenet and
the CIA, ordering the agency to hunt, capture, imprison, and interrogate suspects around
the world. It set new limits on what the agency could do. It was the foundation for a
system of secret prisons where CIA officers and contractors used techniques that
included torture. One CIA contractor was convicted of beating an Afghan prison to death.
This was not the role of a civilian intelligence service in a democratic society. But it is
clearly what the White House wanted the CIA to do. ...
[The CIA] had participated in the torture of captured enemy combatants before,
beginning in 1967, under the Phoenix program in Vietnam. ...
Under Bushs order, the CIA began to function as a global military police, throwing
hundreds of suspects into secret jails in Afghanistan, Thailand, Poland, and inside the
American military prison in Guantanamo, Cuba. It handed hundreds more prisoners off
to the intelligence services in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Syria for interrogations.
(Weiner, 482)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page150
130
131
11 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 8
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
VI. CIA Cold War neuroscience-based mind control

research
Some CIA neuroscience-based mind control research is known to have continued into the 1970s and
is still classified today. A January 29, 1979 Washington Post article entitled Book Disputes CIA
Chief on Mind-Control Efforts: Work Went on Into 1970s, Author Says, reported;
Despite assurances last year from Central Intelligence Director Stansfield Turner that the
CIAs mind-control program was phased out over a decade ago, the intelligence agency
has come up with new documents indicating that the work went on into the 1970s,
according to a new book. John Marks, the author of the book, said the CIA mind-control
researchers did apparently drop their much publicized MK-ULTRA drug-testing
program. But they replaced it, according to Marks, with another super secret behavioral-
control project under the agencys Office of Research and Development.
The ORD program used a cover organization set up in the 1960s outside Boston headed
by Dr. Edwin Land, the founder of Polaroid, who acted as a figurehead, said Marks in
his book. The project investigated such research as genetic engineering, development of
new strains of bacteria, and mind control. The book identifies the Massachusetts
proprietary organization headed by Land as the Scientific Engineering Institute. The
CIA-funded institute was originally set up as a radar and technical research company in
the 1950s and shifted over to mind-control experiments in the 1960s with the exception
of a few scattered programs. According to Marks, however, the ORD program was a full-
scale one and just as secret as the earlier MK-ULTRA project.
In a March 14, 1987, Nation magazine editorial, Louis Slesin, editor of the trade publication,
Microwave News, wrote; Experts agree that nonionizing electromagnetic radiation (NIER) can
affect behavior, but the question is whether the radiation can be harnessed and used on people at a
distance. With its MKULTRA program the CIA began looking for the answer in the early 1950s.
Slesin described that in the 1979 book, Search for the Manchurian Candidate, The CIA and Mind
Control by John Marks, Marks filed a freedom of information act (foia) request. The CIA replied
that it had a roomful of files on electromagnetic and related techniques to alter behavior and
stimulate the brain. But, [the agency] refused to release the papers, and they remain classified.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page151
131
132
12 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 9
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
VII. CIA Cold War nonlethal weapons research

Nonlethal weapons are another outcome of CIA behavior control research. Steven Aftergood wrote
about the initial stages of nonlethal weapons in the September/October 1994 Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists; Details about programs to develop so called non-lethal weapons are slowly emerging
from the U.S. governments secret black budget. ... The concept of non-lethal weapons is not new;
the term appears in heavily censored CIA documents dating from the 1960s. Dr. Barbara Hatch-
Rosenberg described nonlethal weapons on page 45,
Non-lethal weapons may violate treaties
Development of many of the proposed weapons described on these pages has been
undertaken by NATO, the United States, and probably other nations as well. Most of the
weapons could be considered pre-lethal rather than non-lethal. They would actually
provide a continuum of effects ranging from mild to lethal, with varying degrees of
controllability. Serious questions arise about the legality of these expensive and highly
classified development programs. Four international treaties are particularly relevant ...
The Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (also known as the Inhumane Weapons
Convention).
Many of the non-lethal weapons under consideration utilize infrasound or

electromagnetic energy (including lasers, microwave or radio-frequency radiation, or
visible light pulsed at brain-wave frequency) for their effects. These weapons are said to
cause temporary or permanent blinding, interference with mental processes,
modification of behavior and emotional response, seizures, severe pain, dizziness, nausea
and diarrhea, or disruption of internal organ functions in various other ways. In addition,
the use of high-power microwaves to melt down electronic systems would incidentally
cook every person in the vicinity.
Typically, the biological effects of these weapons depend on a number of variables that,
theoretically, could be tuned to control the severity of the effects. However, the precision
of control is questionable. The use of such weapons for law enforcement might constitute
severe bodily punishment without due process. In warfare, the use of these weapons in a
non-lethal mode would be analogous to the use of riot control agents in the Vietnam War,
a practice now outlawed by the CWC. Regardless of the level of injury inflicted, the use of
many non-lethal weapons is likely to violate international humanitarian law on the basis
of superfluous suffering and/or indiscriminate effects.
In addition, under the Certain Conventional Weapons Convention, international

discussions are now under way that may lead to the development of specific new
protocols covering electromagnetic weapons; a report is expected sometime next year.
The current surge of interest in electromagnetic and similar technologies makes the
adoption of a protocol explicitly outlawing the use of these dehumanizing weapons an
urgent matter.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page152
132
133
13 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 10
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
VIII. Why CIA no touch torture has been so successful

McCoy explained;
CIA Paradigm: In its clandestine journey across continents and decades, this distinctly
American form of psychological torture would prove elusive, resilient, adaptable and
devastatingly destructive, attributes that have allowed it to persist up to the present and
into the future. ...
1. Elusive: Unlike its physical variant, psychological torture lacks clear signs of abuse
and easily eludes detection, greatly complicating any investigation, prosecution, or
attempt at prohibition.
2. Resilient: Psychological torture is shrouded in a scientific patina that appeals to

policy makers and avoids the obvious physical brutality unpalatable to the modern
public.
3. Adaptable: In forty years since its discovery, the Agencys psychological paradigm
has proved surprisingly adaptable, with each sustained application producing
innovations. ...
4. Destructive: Although seemingly less brutal than physical methods, the CIAs no
touch torture actually leaves searing psychological scars. Victims often need long
treatment to recover from a trauma many experts consider more crippling than
physical pain. (A Question of Torture, 12)
These characteristics also apply to nonlethal weapons and neuroscience-based mind control. All
three are emerging state tools of the future and can neutralize the enemy by controlling the behavior
of the enemy. A 2005 book entitled, Torture, Does it Make Us Safer? Is It Ever OK? was co-
published with Human Rights Watch. Some general reasons for why governments use torture as a
state tool include the following. Governments torture because it is a way to obtain coerced
confessions. The confessions can be used for propaganda purposes. Torture serves a variety of state
purposes: to terrorize certain elements of the population, to instill a climate of fear in the public
more generally, and to break key leaders and members of these groups, uncovering their networks.
Other purposes of torture are to obtain intelligence by any means, annihilate subversives and
eliminate the enemy.
Counterinsurgency warfare is taking place in Iraq and major newspapers have reported on the many
detainees that have consistently alleged being subjected to no touch torture techniques. As
reported in the September 16th, 2007 Sacramento Bee, General David Petraeus co-wrote the
Counterinsurgency Field Manuel-U.S. Army Field Manual on Tactics, Intelligence, Host Nation
Forces, Airpower, which Newsweek said, is highly touted as the basis upon which the surge of U.S.
forces this year would be organized.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page153
133
134
14 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 11
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The book Torture, also included a description of counterinsurgency warfare, in which torture was a
principal weapon and was developed during the French experience in Indochina and Algeria.
[The] genesis of this new kind of warfare is the idea that the enemy takes the form of an
invisible political organization hidden among the civilian population. One can know its
leaders and its structure only by waging a war of information: by arresting masses of
civilian suspects, interrogating them, and, if necessary, torturing them. ... In the modern
era, ... the science of torture and similar abusive treatment has developed to break the
physical and mental resistance of subjects before they expire or go mad and thus become
useless as sources of information. ... Torture is still about domination.
IX. All three programs are state tools for neutralizing

the enemy without killing; for intelligence operations and
counterinsurgency warfare
By comparing mind control allegations to no touch torture techniques and the very classified
nonlethal weapons program, the purpose of the bizarre sounding mind control allegations begins to
make sense. Neuroweapons include the CIAs still classified neuroscience-based mind control
research, no touch torture and nonlethal weapons. All three are emerging state tools of the future
that can reliably neutralize the enemy psychologically or without killing. The old, politically
unacceptable methods of brutal physical torture and killing wont be eliminated but surreptitious,
scientifically proven, alternative methods are available to achieve an even greater national security
advantage. All are ideal for counterinsurgency warfare, psychological operations and intelligence
operations. The characteristics of no touch torture, nonlethal weapons and neuroscience-based
mind control make them more inhumane than the atomic bomb.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page154
134
135
15 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 12
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
X. Mind control allegations by a Korean War POW,

(prisoner of war), a Soviet political prisoner and Abu
Ghraib detainees
Three relevant examples out of the numerous available provide a general overview of the decades of
mind control allegations and weapons. The details are compelling and rarely reported by
mainstream press and illustrate why a comparison of no touch torture to mind control allegations
is so applicable. The examples share the same Cold War history with CIA no touch torture,
neuroscience-based mind control and nonlethal weapons programs.
1. The 1984 BBC TV documentary Opening Pandoras Box described EMR [electromagnetic
radiation] remote mind control developments and a claim of mind control by a Korean POW;
In the 1950s, intelligence agencies were interested in changing mental states. The
theory is that brain waves can be tuned to a different EMR frequency and can
change moods and character. ... A CIA memo stated that they were looking for
behavior control to enhance consciousness.
The Soviets had realized the same thing. Dr. Ross Adey, famous EMR researcher at
Loma Linda Veterans Hospital, examined the Lida machine, from the Soviet Union.
It was described as a machine to rearrange consciousness. The Russians claimed
to use it for treatment of emotional disorders in the 1950s. Dr. Adey stated that the
Lida machine is now obsolete. It used coiled wire inside ear muffs which acted like
an antenna and emitted 1/10 sec pulses of EMR. Dr. Adey demonstrated that
excited animals rapidly quiet down when exposed to the Lida EMR frequencies.
There was one account that the Lida machine was used during the Korean war for
brainwashing American Prisoners.
2. An interview of an alleged Russian victim, Andre Slepucha, was reported in a 1998 ZDF
German TV documentary. He described what seems to be the first reported victim of some type
of microwave hearing. Slepucha stated;
In November 1954 I came into contact with what today is referred to as

Psychotronic Treatment for the first time. Back then they took me out of the
concentration camp where, under Stalin, I had been imprisoned as a political
prisoner, and brought me into an isolation cell in the KGB prison which was located
in the Lubyanka. After an approximately two week long continuous occupation of
the cell I suddenly experienced in the morning strong sounds in the head, very
strong acoustic and visual hallucinations.
On the CNN news broadcast, Special Assignment by Chuck DeCaro, Weapons of War, Is there
an RF Gap? November 1985, Dr. Bill van Bise, electrical engineer, conducted a demonstration
of Soviet scientific data and schematics for beaming a magnetic field into the brain to cause
visual hallucinations. The demonstration on reporter Chuck DeCaro was successful. Dr. van
Bise stated, In three weeks, I could put together a device that would take care of a whole
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page155
135
136
16 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 13
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
town. A December 13, 1976, Federal Times article, Microwave Weapons Study by Soviets
Cited described the alleged Russian capability of microwave hearing;
The Defense Intelligence Agency has released a report on heavy Communist

research on microwaves, including their use as weapons. Microwaves are used in
radar, television and microwave ovens. They can cause disorientation and possibly
heart attacks in humans. Another biological effect with possible anti-personnel uses
is microwave hearing. Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be
originating intracranially (within the head) can be induced by signal modulation at
very low average power densities, the report said. According to the study,
Communist work in this area has great potential for development into a system for
disorienting or disrupting the behavior patterns of military or diplomatic
personnel.
3. Jon Ronson, author of the New York Times reviewed book, The Men Who Stare at Goats
wrote about alleged mind control experiments on Iraqi detainees. In an interview on April 14,
2005 at the Politics and Prose book store in Washington DC., Ronson discussed his book.
(Tape available from Cspan, Book TV at www.booktv.org. Videotape # 186334)
And from the former detainees from Guantanamo Bay that Ive interviewed it
seems exactly the same things are going on there. I said to a man called Jamal al-
Harith how do you feel, you know how did you feel at Guantanamo Bay and he said
felt like a laboratory rat. And he said, I felt they were trying stuff out on me. ...
And one example is with Barney the purple dinosaur. When it was announced a
year ago that they were rounding up prisoners of war in Iraq and blasting them
with Barney the purple dinosaur, it was treated as a funny story, because, by all the
major news networks in America, you know... the torture wasnt that bad. ... It was
disseminated as funny because who wants to replace a funny story with, as Eric
[Olson] once said to me, with one thats not fun. ...
I was given seven photographs of a detainee who had just been given the Barney
treatment as they called it. It was 48 hours of Barney with flashing strobe lights
inside a shipping container in the desert heat. ...
... The current chief of staff of the Army is a man called General Pete Shoemaker. ...
Hes well known to have an interest in these paranormal esoteric military pursuits.
... So now is the time when I know that these ideas go to the very top [levels of the
military].
One of the things you spoke of, the one that I have knowledge of is the frequencies.
You can follow a trail of patents like footprints in the snow and the patents
sometimes vanish into the world of military classification. And theres many
patents bought up by a man called Dr. Oliver Lowry. ...
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page156
136
137
17 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 14
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
So we know that these patents have been bought up by the military. ... And the
detainees of Guantanamo Ive spoken to speak of being blasted withfrequencies, put
inside music, high and low frequencies, masked with music.
...I think theres no doubt theyre experimenting with this stuff. To add to that
controversial suggestion. I think theres a good chance that even though theyre
trying this stuff out, its not necessarily true that it works. A lot of this stuff doesnt
work. This may or may not work. I dont know.
XI. The banal and bizarre techniques of no touch

torture
Psychological techniques used at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and secret prisons have included
extremes of the following; manipulation of time, loud music, strobe lights, odd sounds, hooding, ear
muffs, heat and cold, light and dark, isolation and intensive interrogation and most importantly,
creative combinations of all these methods which otherwise might seem, individually, banal if not
benign. As McCoy explains;
After a visit from the Guantanamo chief General Miller in September 2003, the U.S.
commander for Iraq, General Ricardo Sanchez, issued orders for sophisticated
psychological torture. As I read from those orders, please listen for the combined sensory
disorientation, self-inflicted pain, and attacking Arab cultural sensitivities.
Environmental Manipulation: Altering the environment to create moderate discomfort

(e.g. adjusting temperatures or introducing an unpleasant smell) ...
Sleep Adjustment: Adjusting the sleeping times of the detainee (e.g. reversing the
sleeping cycles from night to day).
Isolation: Isolating the detainee from other detainees. ... 30 days.
Presence of Military Working Dogs: Exploits Arab fear of dogs while maintaining security
during interrogations ...
Yelling, Loud Music, and Light Control: Used to create fear, disorient detainee and
prolong capture shock. Volume controlled to prevent injury ...
Stress Positions: Use of physical posturing (sitting, standing, kneeling, prone, etc.)
(McCoy outline, 9)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page157
137
138
18 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 15
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
XII. The three key behavioral components of no touch

torture
McCoy described the principles underlying no touch torture;
Through covert trial and error, the CIA, in collaboration with university researchers,
slowly identified three key behavioral components integral to its emerging techniques for
psychological torture.
Discovery #1 Sensory deprivation In the early 1950s ...Dr. Donald Hebb found that he
could induce a state akin to psychosis in just 48 hours. ...after just two to three days of
such isolation [sitting in a cubicle ..with goggles, gloves and ear muffs on.] the subjects
very identity had begun to disintegrate.
Discovery #2 Self-inflicted pain ...Albert Biderman, Irving L. Janis, Harold Wolff, and
Lawrence Hinkle, advised the agency about the role of self-inflicted pain in Communist
interrogation. ...During the 1950s as well, two eminent neurologists at Cornell Medical
Center working for the CIA found that the KGBs most devastating torture technique
involved, not crude physical beatings, but simply forcing the victim to stand for days at a
time, while the legs swelled, the skin erupted in suppurating lesions, the kidneys shut
down, hallucinations began.
Discovery #3 Anyone can torture ...Finally, a young Yale psychologist Stanley Milgram,
...conducted his famed obedience experiments, asking ordinary New Haven citizens to
torture on command and discovering that, in contravention of conventional wisdom,
anyone could be trained to torture. ...[Milgram] did controversial research under a
government grant showing that almost any individual is capable of torture, a critical
finding for the agency as it prepared to disseminate its method worldwide. (McCoy
outline, 4, Question of Torture, 32-33)
By the projects end in the late 1960s, this torture research had involved three of the 100
most eminent psychologists of the 20th century-Hebb, Milgram, and Janis, as well as
several presidents of the American Psychiatric Association and the American
Psychological Association. (A Question of Torture, 33)
That notorious photo of a hooded Iraqi on a box, arms extended and wires to his hands,
exposes this covert method. The hood is for sensory deprivation, and the arms are
extended for self-inflicted pain. ... Although seemingly less brutal than physical methods,
no-touch torture leaves deep psychological scars on both victims and interrogators. One
British journalist who observed this methods use in Northern Ireland called sensory
deprivation the worst form of torture because it provokes more anxiety among the
interrogatees than more traditional tortures, leaves no visible scars and, therefore, is
harder to prove, and produces longer lasting effects. (Question of Torture, 8-9)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page158
138
139
19 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 16
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
McCoy explained how CIA no touch torture changes its victims;
Insights from the treatment of Chilean victims tortured under General Augusto Pinochet
s regime offer a point of entry into this complex question. Psychotherapist Otto Doerr-
Zegers found that victims suffer a mistrust bordering on paranoia, and a loss of interest
that greatly surpasses anything observed in anxiety disorders. The subject does not
only react to torture with a tiredness of days, weeks, or months, but remains a tired
human being, relatively uninterested and unable to concentrate.
These findings led him to a revealing question: What in torture makes possible a change
of such nature that it appears similar to psychotic processes and to disorders of organic
origin? (Question of Torture, 10-11)
XIII. Torture as a kind of total theater

Doerr-Zegers explained that techniques of torture work by creating deception, distrust, fear,
disorientation, a kind of total theater that leaves the victim disoriented and emotionally and
psychological damaged. The similarity of the explanation below to street theater found in mind
control allegations is remarkable;
As Doerr-Zegers describes it, the psychological component of torture becomes a kind of

total theater, a constructed unreality of lies and inversion, in a plot that ends inexorably
with the victims self-betrayal and destruction.
To make their artifice of false charges, fabricated news, and mock executions convincing,
interrogators often become inspired thespians. The torture chamber itself thus has the
theatricality of a set with special lighting, sound effects, props, and backdrop, all
designed with a perverse stagecraft to evoke an aura of fear. Both stage and cell construct
their own kind of temporality. While the play both expands and collapses time to carry
the audience forward toward denouement, the prison distorts time to disorientate and
then entrap the victim. As the torturer manipulates circumstances to maximize
confusion, the victim feels prior schemas of the self and the world ... shattered and
becomes receptive to the torturers construction of reality.
Under the peculiar conditions of psychological torture, victims, isolated from others,
form emotional ties to their tormentors that make them responsive to a perverse play
in which they are both audience and actor, subject and objectin a script that often
leaves them not just disoriented but emotionally and psychologically damaged, in some
cases for the rest of their lives. (A Question of Torture, 10)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page159
139
140
20 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 17
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
XIV. A comparison of no touch torture to mind

control allegations
The Washington Post Magazine article included interviews of several TIs, or targeted individuals of
mind control, as some call themselves. Highly acclaimed author Gloria Naylor is most recognized for
her novel Women of Brewster Place, starring Oprah in a 1980s TV mini-series. Naylor wrote the
novel 1996, about her personal experience of mind control targeting and street theater. The article
also included an example of drug-induced paranoia for comparison;
Like Girard, Naylor describes what she calls street theater, incidents that might be
dismissed by others as coincidental, but which Naylor believes were set up. She noticed
suspicious cars driving by her isolated vacation home. On an airplane, fellow passengers
mimicked her every movement, like mimes on a street.
Voices similar to those in Girards case followed, taunting voices cursing her, telling her
she was stupid, that she couldnt write. Expletive-laced language filled her head. ...
Naylor is not the first writer to describe such a personal descent. Evelyn Waugh, one of
the great novelists of the 20th century, details similar experiences in The Ordeal of
Gilbert Pinfold. Waughs book, published in 1957, has eerie similarities to Naylors.
Embarking on a recuperative cruise, Pinfold begins to hear voices on the ship that he
believes are part of a wireless system capable of broadcasting into his head; he believes
the instigator recruited fellow passengers to act as operatives; and he describes
performances put on by passengers directed at him yet meant to look innocuous to
others.
Waugh wrote his book several years after recovering from a similar episode and realizing
that the voices and paranoia were the result of drug-induced hallucinations.
The psychological terror and mistrust bordering on paranoia of torture victims is remarkably similar
to the mind control alleged by Naylor and the drug-induced paranoia of Waugh. The street theater
described by most TIs also appears similar to the paranoia of mental illness and most people think
street theater sounds crazy.
The addendum of Naylors novel 1996 included this description of some of the most commonly
reported mind control symptoms;
Victims are subjected to various kinds of harassment and torture, twenty-four hours a
day, seven days a week, for years on end. Most believe that some type of technology can
remotely track, target, and control every nerve in their bodies. Heart and respiration rate
can speed up and slow down, and stomach and bowel functions are regulated. Illnesses
and all types of pain can turn on and off in an instant. Microwave burns are reported.
Sleep deprivation is common and dreams are manipulated. Victims say, They [whoever
is targeting them] can see through my eyes, what I see. Sometimes victims describe
seeing the images of projected holograms. Thoughts can be read. Most victims describe a
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page160
140
141
21 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 18
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
phenomenon they call street theater. For example, people around the victim have
repeated verbatim, the victims immediate thoughts, or harassive and personalized
statements are repeated by strangers wherever the victim may go.
Emotions can be manipulated. Microwave hearing, known to be an unclassified military

capability of creating voices in the head, is regularly reported. Implanted thoughts and
visions are common, with repetitive themes that can include pedophilia, homophobia
and degradation. Victims say it is like having a radio or TV in your head. Less frequently,
remote and abusive sexual manipulation is reported. Almost all victims say repetitive
behavior control techniques are used and include negative, stimulus-response or
feedback loops.
The counterintuitive and bizarre torture techniques are discernible within the mind control
allegations. The mind control techniques seem to be psychological techniques to disorient the victim
and cause him to feel completely controlled, dependent and at the mercy of his torturers. Similar to
the kind of total theater for torture, street theater is almost certainly a part of the process of
breaking ones personality to gain behavior control over that person.
XV. The phenomenology of the torture situation

What in torture makes possible a change of such nature that it appears similar to psychotic
processes and to disorders of organic origin? Doerr-Zegers found the answer lies in the
psychological, not physical, phenomenology of the torture situation;
1. an asymmetry of power;
2. the anonymity of the torturer to the victim;
3. the double bind of either enduring or betraying others;
4. the systematic falsehood of trumped-up charges, artificial lighting, cunning
deceptions, and mock executions;
5. confinement in distinctive spaces signifying displacement, trapping, narrowness
and destruction; and
6. a temporality characterized by some unpredictability and much circularity, having
no end. ...
Thus, much of the pain from all forms of torture is psychological, not physical, based
upon denying victims any power over their lives. In sum, the torturer strives through
insult and disqualification, by means of threats ... to break all the victims possible
existential platforms. Through this asymmetry, the torturer eventually achieves
complete power and reduces the victims to a condition of total or near total
defenselessness. (Question of Torture, 10-11)
In torture, a torture situation is created according to Doerr-Zegers. In mind control allegations,

there is a similar phenomenology of a mind control situation. TIs describe this as an electronic
prison. Doerr-Zegers described the torture technique, 1) an asymmetry of power. In torture, the
torturer has complete power and the victim is completely powerless. Similarly, TIs are targeted
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page161
141
142
22 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 19
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
remotely and are completely powerless to stop the targeting. Doerr-Zegers described the torture
technique, 2) the anonymity of the torturer to the victim. Torture victims do not know their torturer
and similarly, there is the anonymity of the remote targeting in the mind control situation.
Most TIs described street theater or seemingly staged events which matches 3), 4) and 6). Doerr-
Zegers described torture technique, 5) confinement in distinctive spaces signifying displacement,
trapping, narrowness and destruction. Although TIs are not physically imprisoned, most victims
describe the experience as very debilitating and compare it to mental rape, an electronic prison, or
total destruction of the quality of their lives. Mind control poses a severe restriction on their former
lives. Doerr-Zegers technique 6) a temporality characterized by some unpredictability and much
circularity, having no end is also similar to sensory deprivation in mind control allegations. TIs
routinely report the simple but extremely repetitive and negative, stimulus-response and feedback
loops of their environment.
XVI. Comparing no touch torture techniques of

sensory disorientation and self inflicted pain to mind
control allegations
The psychological effects achieved by torture and alleged mind control are similar. Mind control
targeting tactics described by most TIs seem to contain the underlying no touch torture techniques
of sensory disorientation and self inflicted pain. For comparison, here is McCoys description;
To summarize, the CIAs psychological paradigm fused two new methods, sensory
disorientation and self-inflicted pain, whose combination, in theory, would cause
victims to feel responsible for their own suffering and thus capitulate more readily to
their torturers ... The fusion of these two techniques, sensory disorientation and self-
inflicted pain, creates a synergy of physical and psychological trauma whose sum is a
hammer-blow to the existential platforms of personal identity. (McCoy outline, 5)
The intended effect of sensory disorientation for torture would be similar for mind control; to create
an environment of radical uncertainty to enhance the break down of the persons will and
personality. Most alleged cases of mind control describe the considerable repetition of seemingly
innocuous and banal stimuli in the TIs environment, as if engineered by computer. The addendum
of Naylors book included this description; Almost all victims say repetitive behavior control
techniques are used and include negative, stimulus-response or feedback loops. For comparison,
here is McCoys description;
The CIAs sensory disorientation became a total assault on all senses and sensibilities,
auditory, visual, tactile, temporal, temperature, and survival. Refined through years of
practice, sensory disorientation relies on a mix of sensory overload and sensory
deprivation via banal procedures, isolation then intense interrogation, heat and cold,
light and dark, noise and silence, for a systematic attack on all human stimuli. (McCoy
outline, 4-5)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page162
142
143
23 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 20
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
McCoy described the photos of the hooded detainee with the arms extended for self-inflicted pain.
The torturer forces the prisoner to stand with arms extended and the prisoner has no control over
his situation. The prisoner still has a sense of guilt at causing his own pain by his extended arms.
This intended effect of self inflicted pain for torture seems to be similar to mind control. TIs who are
remotely targeted with physical pain cannot escape. Although TIs go to extremes in trying to escape
the physical targeting, they are unsuccessful. The psychological trauma is inflicted by the sense of
causing ones own pain. Many TIs report that the targeting causes TIs to become isolated from
friends, families and in many cases TIs are unable to work. This common reaction to targeting seems
to be a type of self-inflicted psychological pain.
Carole Sterlings description of targeting is also found in the addendum of Naylors book and seems
to illustrate the techniques of sensory disorientation and self-inflicted pain. It is a typical TI
description;
In 1997, Carole Sterling wrote a letter to the editor of the Star Beacon. She described her
alleged targeting with EMR weapons technologies that within months, led to her suicide.
Dear Star Beacon, I am writing about something that happened to me which goes back to
December 1995. I went to a conference in Nevada. The day following the last night at the
conference, I noticed that I had an injection mark on the base of my spine which was
sore. Then the nightmare started three days after my return to Washington, D.C. ... It
totally scrambled my brain, leaving me unable to think properly, simply functioning on
sheer shock and horror, with total incomprehension of what was going on. It actually was
debilitating. The room felt like a torture chamber. This forced me out of my home. I
believe that the technology used, be it some type of a frequency assault, some sort of
directed energy, in addition to whatever was injected in me, has caused damage to my
brain. [I have] been living with this debilitating and excruciating pain for the last eight
months so far.
TIs describe both psychological and physical targeting similar to torture. It seems logical to surmise
that the successful psychological theories of no touch torture would cross over to more technically
based remote, advanced mind control programs. This becomes a significant step forward in
understanding the mind control issue. The mind control allegations are the secret in plain sight.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page163
143
144
24 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 21
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
XVII. Conclusions: what everyone can agree on

Hard questions need to be asked of the experts. Who now controls the neuroscience weapons
research and how advanced is it? As a result of U.S. secrecy, an educated guess is all that is possible.
The public deployment of advanced remote neuroscience weapons will be a world changing event,
affecting the lives of this generation and the next. The weapons involve national security, science,
history, U.S. politics and geopolitics. Most importantly the weapons encompass human nature, good
and evil and suffering. Most people are in agreement about one fact: unlike the atomic bomb, there
has been a total lack of public input for neuroscience weapons and policy even though the research
began in the 1950s and is still classified. Again, this raises more questions than it answers.
This article will be published in March 2008. See www.huntergatheress.com A special thank you to editor, Joan DArc for
her encouragement and suggestions.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
Page164
144
145
25 of
of548
667
668
17, 2016
21, 22
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Stan J. Caterbone Testimony
1
1 EXAMINATION UNDER OATH OF

STANLEY J. CATERBONE
2 (VOLUME II)
7 TAKEN BY: ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
8 BEFORE: DIANE A. SMITH, REPORTER

NOTARY PUBLIC
9
DATE: JUNE 28, 2016, 9:25 A.M.
10
PLACE: LANCASTER BAR ASSOCIATION
11 28 EAST ORANGE STREET
LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA
12
13
14 APPEARANCES:
15 MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN

BY: CHRISTOPHER M. REESER, ESQUIRE
16
FOR - ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page145
146
165
26
1 of
of548
34
667
668
813 Saturday September
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2
1 WITNESSES
2 NAME EXAMINATION
3 STANLEY J. CATERBONE
4 BY: MR. REESER 3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page146
147
166
27
2 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3
1 STANLEY J. CATERBONE, called as a witness, being
2 duly sworn, testified as follows:
3 EXAMINATION
4 THE WITNESS: I wanted to try to give you some
5 background about why people are doing this to me.
6 MR. REESER: Okay.
7 THE WITNESS: Here's one of the first things.
8 This is a book written by the Chief of Police ex-wife.
9 BY MR. REESER:
10 Q Chief of Police of Lancaster?
11 A Lancaster, yes. She accused him of domestic
12 abuse, and I've had the book for over a year. And the
13 other thing is this book here. I have the only live case
14 right now to get her out of prison.
15 Q And why don't you read the title of the book.
16 A Love, Murder and Corruption in Lancaster County,
17 My Story by Lisa Michelle Lambert and David Brown. I
18 communicate with Dave Brown a couple times a week.
19 Q Who is David Brown?
20 A Her attorney that wrote the book. Now if you're
21 not familiar with this case, there were three teenagers
22 that were involved in a murder back in 1992. In 1997, a
23 federal judge named Stewart Dalzell released her saying
24 there was so much prosecutorial misconduct in the case that
25 she was actually innocent. Now Pennsylvania appealed it,
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page147
148
167
28
3 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
4
1 and they had to have another PCRA hearing in front of Larry
2 Stengel. Well, he found -- he reversed everything
3 essentially, and she went back to prison.
4 Now last June, I filed an Amicus on her behalf as
5 to move it in the case. And I currently have a 3rd Circuit
6 appeal case to get her out of prison. Now the case was so
7 controversial that 38,000 people signed a petition from
8 Lancaster to impeach the judge. Of course, they lost.
9 They never impeached him. But in 1997, the attorney that
10 represented her had some dealings with me. Her name is
11 Christina Rainville.
12 Now essentially my Amicus is based on a premise
13 that I suffered the same prosecutorial misconduct that she
14 suffered. Now you couple that with the fact that I'm the
15 federal whistleblower for International Signal Control, the
16 firm selling arms to Iraq to a Black Ops Program with the
17 CIA and the NSA -- I blew the whistle in '87 -- they were
18 indicted in '91 -- and the fact that I'm a victim of mind
19 control, there's ample reason and sufficient evidence of
20 why people break into my house and steal my things and
21 break my things.
22 Now I presented transcripts from Nick Begich, who
23 is a renowned expert in mind control, Karen Stewart, who is
24 a former NSA whistleblower who suffers the same
25 symptomatology as me, and Julianne McKinney, who is a
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page148
149
168
29
4 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
5
1 former intelligence officer of the U.S. Army. They all
2 suffer the same symptoms that I do. In addition, Social
3 Security has been paying me disability benefits since 2008
4 for mind control.
5 Q Do you have a copy of the Disability
6 Determination?
7 A Sure, I have it in here.
8 Q Can I take a look at it?
9 A Yeah, it might take me a couple minutes to find
10 it.
11 Q Sure.
12 A This injunction was filed yesterday at 4:24 p.m.
13 in the Lancaster County Courthouse. I have 191 pages of
14 documentation with SSA. Here is my letter, award letter.
15 Now through the application process, I applied in April of
16 '09 and received a check for $21,000 in August. I was pro
17 se. There were not psychiatric examinations.
18 Q May I take a look at that as you're talking?
19 A Yes. And there were no medical reports. It was
20 all awarded on my documentation of mind control symptoms
21 and illnesses. What they did was -- I applied in April of
22 '09. They awarded me benefits in August of '09 and paid me
23 back one year, retroactive one year. They can only do it
24 one year. But they declared me disabled in December of
25 '05, which is when I declared that I became full-time
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page149
150
169
30
5 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
6
1 telepathic and under harassment with electromagnetic
2 weapons. That's what the '05 date is.
3 Q So I see, you know, the letter saying that you
4 became disabled under our rules on December 1, 2005.
5 A Right.
6 Q It doesn't say anything as to why.
7 A No, they don't do that. They only -- what they do
8 is they give you an award letter and it either says
9 physical or mental, nothing beyond that because of HIPAA.
10 But if you go through all the documentation I have of the
11 entire process, you'll notice that there's no medical
12 reports submitted. And I begged them -- in fact, I went to
13 Joe Pitts' office to try to get them to give me a
14 psychiatric evaluation because I thought it was required.
15 They wouldn't give me one. So it's impossible for it to be
16 for mental illness, impossible. It's just not.
17 Q You don't have a document anywhere from the Social
18 Security Administration that says we've determined that
19 you're disabled because of this condition?
20 A They don't do that. It's either mental or
21 physical. If I had one, I'd present it.
22 Q Yeah. It seems to me I've seen things to the
23 contrary where there's been a determination that somebody
24 is disabled --
25 A Well, they didn't give me any.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page150
151
170
31
6 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
7
1 Q -- for a particular reason.
2 A Now my father collected disability. He was a
3 victim of MKUltra.
4 Q What is that?
5 A That's where mind control came from, a CIA
6 program. It started in the '50s.
7 Q Okay. Why was he a target?
8 A You'll have to ask them.
9 Q I mean I understand what you're telling me about
10 your role as a federal whistleblower but --
11 A He was Navy, a very intelligent person. He was a
12 member of the Air Gunners Squadron, which I have
13 documentation from him that he left, which is like a
14 special option. And he graduated with honors from their
15 school. So that could be why.
16 Q What I'd like to do is go back to what we were
17 doing before and discuss the items that were on Exhibit 1
18 that was marked at the first examination. Before I get
19 started with that, two things. One, have you brought any
20 of the receipts from the items that were damaged or the
21 replacement items that you purchased?
22 A Can you guarantee me you're going to pay the
23 claim?
24 Q No.
25 A No.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page151
152
171
32
7 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
8
1 Q Okay. Second, I don't have the ability to make
2 that guarantee. I mean I could say yes and I --
3 A I'm not going to waste my time.
4 Q All right.
5 A I didn't have to do it for previous insurance
6 claims like this. So I'm not going to do it for this one.
7 Q All right. Second, you had sent me an email I
8 think indicating that you had other items to add?
9 A Every day. Seriously, every day. I'm hoping this
10 injunction takes care of everything. So we'll see.
11 Q I'm not sure it has anything to do with this claim
12 but --
13 A It has everything to do with everything.
14 Q All right. And you filed --
15 A Let me read you the relief I'm requesting,
16 emergency relief.
17 Q Filed in the 3rd Circuit you said?
18 A No, Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
19 Q Oh, okay.
20 A I filed one in '09, and the judge ruled on it. So
21 I'm hoping she will on this one.
22 Q What is the docket number?
23 A I didn't get one yet. I just filed it yesterday.
24 Q Okay.
25 A I'll read it. Relief sought by Plaintiff. The
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page152
153
172
33
8 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
9
1 Complainant seeks immediate relief from the above in the
2 form of sanctions and fines for those guilty of extortion
3 and embezzlement and those withholding accounts
4 receivables. Complainant seeks immediate relief from the
5 law enforcement agencies that continue abuse of process.
6 Complainant seeks immediate relief from public officials
7 for obstructing justice and due process. Complainant seeks
8 relief inasmuch as the Courts are able with regards to the
9 harassment and torture from those known of such crimes.
10 The Complainant seeks relief from stalking and
11 harassing neighbors and requires law enforcement to make
12 sure households can identify all occupants and prove they
13 are entitled to the lease and/or deed. The Complainant
14 seeks relief by awarding the Complainant his pro se
15 billings invoice. The Complainant seeks relief by awarding
16 the Complainant summary judgment in all cases filed before
17 the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas in retaliation
18 for the arrogance of both the local law enforcement
19 community and the judicial system for the systematic abuse
20 of process and the extreme nature of the obstruction of
21 justice, which in itself is responsible for putting the
22 Complainant's life in harm's way on a daily basis. Date,
23 June 27th, 2016.
24 Q All right. Changing gears. Going back to the
25 list here of items that you've submitted. I think we left
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page153
154
173
34
9 of
of548
34
667
668
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
10
1 off talking about the cost of repairs for your computers
2 which were hacked. So we talked about that. And we're
3 going to move onto the next item, which is a wet dry vac.
4 A Okay.
5 Q Tell me about that.
6 A Let's see what they did to that one. Oh, they
7 burnt the motor out.
8 Q Okay. When did that happen?
9 A Oh, boy, that happened fairly recently. That
10 happened -- because I just replaced it. I'm going to say
11 March. Now the wet dry vac I bought when I built my house
12 on Stonehill Road in Conestoga in 1995. Now the one I
13 replaced it with was a compact unit. The one that was
14 broken was full-sized. I think it was, like, a two horse
15 power motor. The one I replaced it with I think was $69.
16 I think the original price of the one I bought -- I want to
17 say it was 150. It was a Craftsman, the original one.
18 Q It was 21-years-old?
19 A Yeah, yeah.
20 Q Okay. Did you use it on a regular basis?
21 A Oh, yeah.
22 Q And one day you started -- you tried to use it and
23 it didn't work?
24 A Yeah, worked the day before and then it didn't
25 work.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page174
154
155
35
10of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
11
1 Q Okay. Cordless phone, tell me about that.
2 A I guess it was February. I have magicJack. Are
3 you familiar with that?
4 Q No.
5 A It's where you use the internet for your phone.
6 Q Like a Voice Over --
7 A Yeah.
8 Q -- what do they call that -- VOI?
9 A Only it's different in that they give you a module
10 that you connect to your computer.
11 Q All right.
12 A Now what I did was -- they came out with a new
13 version where you connect it to your Comcast router so that
14 instead of -- before with the old version, you had to have
15 the computer on for the phone to work. So I switched over.
16 I upgraded to the new version and connected it to my
17 Comcast server. So that means the magicJack is live 24/7.
18 So I went to Radio Shack and bought a new cordless phone.
19 Well, it lasted a month and doesn't work anymore.
20 Q Did you take it back?
21 A No.
22 Q Why not?
23 A Just too busy. What I do on that line -- I
24 forward it anyway to my cell phone number, and I was using
25 it just, you know, sporadically.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page175
155
156
36
11of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
12
1 Q I would think after a month they would -- they
2 would replace it?
3 A They probably would. I'm just too busy, just
4 priorities. I mean I could probably take it back now and
5 replace it.
6 Q I would think so. Cable boxes and modem.
7 A Oh, boy, what a mess that was. Okay. Let's see.
8 I guess in February or March I went to upgrade all my cable
9 boxes. And at the same time, somebody from Comcast told me
10 that if I hook up to Comcast Business I would get a more
11 secure internet connection and a faster connection. So I
12 hook up to Comcast Business on a 60 day trial. They send
13 me a box, a new -- or, in fact, no, they came out and
14 installed it -- a new router. And after two weeks, they
15 reversed everything and said no, it's not more secure. So
16 I disconnected it. Then I went to Comcast and upgraded all
17 my cable boxes, but they never worked. I mean I was going
18 back and forth to Comcast two or three times. Service
19 techs would come out. They couldn't find the problem. So
20 I don't know if people put chips in them. I don't know if
21 they just sabotaged them or what.
22 Q You don't know why they're not working?
23 A Comcast doesn't even know why. They couldn't
24 even -- I'd get billed for HBO for three months, and I
25 never had HBO. I mean it wouldn't work. And I kept
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page176
156
157
37
12of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
13
1 getting on the phone with customer service spending two
2 hours -- one time two and a half hours, and it still didn't
3 work. They still couldn't fix it.
4 Q Okay. How long ago was that?
5 A That was probably two months ago, three months
6 ago, after the first of the year, probably the second
7 quarter.
8 Q Are they still trying to fix the problem?
9 A I stopped trying. I mean I just -- you know.
10 Q Okay. The 100 dollar cost to replace, is that
11 just the value of the cable boxes and the modems or modem?
12 A Yeah, I guess what they did is they billed me.
13 Comcast Business billed me. They all billed me. I mean,
14 yeah, that's basically what it is.
15 Q They billed you more because it was a business --
16 A Oh, yeah -- no, they billed me because they would
17 not accept the return of the modem. I couldn't return it
18 then, and they wouldn't pick it up.
19 Q Do you have any written correspondence between
20 yourself and Comcast over the issue?
21 A Yeah, I have notes. I have -- yeah, I have emails
22 I guess, yeah.
23 Q Do you have any of them with you?
24 A No.
25 Q Would you be willing to forward those to me?
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page177
157
158
38
13of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
14
1 A Yeah, I can dig those up, something pertaining to
2 that. I mean I forget exactly. But it was a mess. I even
3 think I recorded the one tech that came to my door. He got
4 smart with me. I had to throw him off my property.
5 Q I'm probably going to butcher the pronunciation of
6 this. Is it Sakrete or Sakrete?
7 A Oh, Sakrete, yeah. Listen what they did. I
8 had -- I was putting post holes -- putting posts in my back
9 yard for a six foot wooden fence. And what these kids next
10 door were doing was they were going and wetting the bags,
11 ruining the whole bag. Now that's not the issue. Do you
12 know how heavy Sakrete is when it's hardened cement?
13 Q Yeah, I got a sense for that.
14 A I had to break it up and put it in buckets and
15 take it out to the alley.
16 Q So basically they ruined the bags?
17 A Oh, yeah.
18 Q Made them unusable?
19 A Yeah.
20 Q All right. And you have $12 there?
21 A Yeah.
22 Q Is that $4 a bag or --
23 A Yeah. That's not the half of it. They filled in
24 the holes before I could -- I had to dig the holes out two
25 or three times.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page178
158
159
39
14of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
15
1 Q When you say they, again who is they?
2 A I assume it's the people next door. They are the
3 ones who sic the pit bull on me that I had to go to the
4 hospital for two weeks ago.
5 Q Oh, gees.
6 A Oh, yeah.
7 Q Are you all right?
8 A I had to go to the ER and take antibiotics for 10
9 days.
10 Q Okay. The next item I have is just miscellaneous
11 clothes, $100?
12 A Yeah, they are always ruining my clothes.
13 Q Ruining them or stealing them?
14 A Both.
15 Q When you say ruining them, what do you mean by
16 that?
17 A They'll put spots on them so I can't wear them,
18 the shirts, or they'll shrink them. They've done that. My
19 slippers they make big. So I can't wear those. I mean all
20 kinds of tricks.
21 Q I'm sorry? They made --
22 A Slippers big. So I can't wear them.
23 Q They made them big.
24 A If you -- I have those three experts I mentioned.
25 They all talk about -- the first thing they do in these
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page179
159
160
40
15of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
16
1 programs is break into your house, and it's impossible,
2 impossible to find out how they get in.
3 Q And I think we talked about this last time you
4 were here. You don't have any signs of forced entry?
5 A Forced entry?
6 Q Yes, a broken window --
7 A No ---
8 Q -- a broken door.
9 A -- in '87, I did. Well, I had forced entry by the
10 Lancaster City Police last July on a 302 warrant.
11 Q Yeah, you told me about that.
12 A But other than that, forced entry, no, no. Signs
13 of entry, but not forced.
14 Q When you say signs of entry, you define that by
15 the fact things were missing?
16 A Moved, missing, lights on that were off or off
17 that were on, things like that. The other night my
18 porch -- you know, if I go out in the evening, I'll leave
19 my front porch light on. Well, I came home and it's off
20 and, you know, hard to get in, you know, to see your key
21 hole and things like that. It's harassment.
22 Q The next item you have is vapor electronic
23 cigarettes?
24 A Oh, yeah, now they help you reduce smoking regular
25 cigarettes.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page180
160
161
41
16of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
17
1 Q These are the E-Cigs?
2 A Yeah, but they are the pens with cartridges. They
3 are expensive. They are not the ones you buy in the store
4 like at Turkey Hill or something. These are the ones
5 that -- they are three in one. You can smoke waxes, oils
6 or dry herbs. Now what I get is, like, six milligrams of
7 nicotine. It's in liquid form. They stole my fifth one I
8 think, I think one after that.
9 Q All from home?
10 A Oh, yeah, yeah, all from home, yeah, five of them.
11 Q I mean that sounds like the kind of thing -- I
12 mean I'm famous for leaving things behind at restaurants.
13 A Oh, no, no, no, no, no, I don't leave this behind.
14 No, no, they were stolen.
15 Q Same thing, you don't know when they got in, how
16 they got in, but they are just not there anymore?
17 A Well, I mean in 2009 -- let me give you an
18 example. Okay. This is what I used to do. I used to
19 document daily in journals all the incidents that I'm
20 describing. I did that for about a year, very detailed,
21 every day. In 2010, I said I have enough documentation.
22 That's it. I mean it's a full-time job. I can send you
23 those. I mean I have those in PDF form.
24 Q Yeah.
25 A I can send you those. I mean I can email those to
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page181
161
162
42
17of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
18
1 you.
2 Q It looks like this is something that's filed with
3 the Court?
4 A This whole thing is the emergency injunction.
5 Q All right. Well, I mean that should be available
6 online.
7 A I'd say three days.
8 Q This is filed with the prothonotary --
9 A Yes.
10 Q -- in Civil Court?
11 A Yeah, I can show you the stamped pages. I just
12 had to make copies. My toner mysteriously went out, and
13 I'm waiting for a cartridge to be delivered today. But if
14 you page to the left, you'll see the three pages that were
15 stamped.
16 Q That's not what I was supposed to get there.
17 A There you go. If you swipe it -- no, it's up and
18 down. There is four pages stamped there.
19 Q Yeah, it just has the time stamp on it. It
20 doesn't have the docket number.
21 A No, yeah, they didn't -- I guess I could have
22 maybe got them to give me a docket number, but they didn't.
23 You know, I didn't push it.
24 Q All right.
25 A Here you can see the -- there's the state cover
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page182
162
163
43
18of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
19
1 sheet.
2 Q Yeah, they didn't stamp it with a docket number
3 either.
4 A This is the civil cover sheet.
5 Q Okay.
6 A And this is the first page of the injunction.
7 Judge Margaret Miller ruled on mine in '09 and
8 essentially -- it was similar to this. And essentially
9 what she said was that I didn't provide her enough evidence
10 for her to rule in my favor. In a nutshell, that's what
11 she said. Plus she said she didn't really believe I was a
12 victim of mind control. But this time it's a lot different
13 because I got corroborating witnesses.
14 Q Okay. Who are the corroborating witnesses?
15 A Dr. Nick Begich. He's an expert in mind control
16 technologies.
17 Q Where is he out of?
18 A Alaska. His father was killed by the Hoover
19 Administration. He was a U.S. congressman.
20 Q What was the last name again? I'm sorry.
21 A Begich, B-e-g-i-c-h. Now his brother just
22 finished a term in Congress last year in the Senate.
23 Anyway, his father back in -- I forget what year it was --
24 was traveling with the Speaker of the House, Wayne Boggs,
25 and they were both killed in a plane accident. And they
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page183
163
164
44
19of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
20
1 were raising hell about Hoover with his CoIntel Program.
2 So anyway, Nick Begich began doing research on the HARP
3 Installation in Alaska, which is a 180 antenna array that
4 is the focus or the basis for electromagnetic weapons.
5 It's called HARP. Now back about eight years ago, he
6 convinced the European Parliament to ban electromagnetic
7 weapons. So he's a renowned expert. Now I have a
8 transcript of his lecture in October of 2015, and he gave a
9 lecture during the Covert Harassment Conference in Belgium.
10 I think it was Belgium.
11 Q Okay. Do you have other witnesses?
12 A Yes, then I have Karen Stewart.
13 Q You mentioned her.
14 A Karen Stewart is a former NSA whistleblower.
15 Q National Security Agency when you say NSA?
16 A Yeah, yeah. She blew the whistle in 2004. Now
17 she just emailed me three weeks ago. I emailed some
18 information, and she emailed me back and said thank you for
19 it. Anyway, she -- essentially what happened was she
20 determined that some weaponry that was being used over in
21 Afghanistan and Iraq wasn't performing up to standards.
22 And she more or less drew attention to it to the U.S.
23 Military, and somebody took credit for her work. And she
24 became an NSA whistleblower. Then she started having the
25 same problems I did, people breaking in her house,
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page184
164
165
45
20of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
21
1 electromagnetic weapon attacks, things like that.
2 Now the NSA is critical for two reasons. I blew
3 the whistle on ISC, the Lancaster firm selling arms to
4 Iraq. Their first program -- their first contract in 1973
5 was with the NSA. Bobby Ray Inman, who was the former
6 director of the NSA, was on their board of directors. He
7 also owns a company that deals in mind control. In 1994,
8 Bill Clinton nominated him to be the Secretary of Defense,
9 and he withdrew because of the ISC scandal. Plus on March
10 9th, the NSA took me into custody, false imprisoned me for
11 an hour and a half and had eight security police
12 interrogate me for no reason.
13 Q Of this year, March of this year?
14 A Yeah, down in Fort Meade.
15 Q Where is Fort Meade?
16 A That's the NSA.
17 Q Is Fort Meade in Colorado?
18 A Maryland.
19 Q Oh, I'm sorry.
20 A Dogs at my car, handcuffed me, interrogated me and
21 then told me I couldn't go down to Washington, D.C. and
22 told me I wasn't allowed on federal property anymore, which
23 was a lie. I walked away and essentially made a fool out
24 of them.
25 Q Karen Stewart, where is she located?
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page185
165
166
46
21of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
22
1 A Well, she worked down in Fort Meade, Maryland, but
2 she since -- after she blew the whistle and started having
3 symptoms, she moved to Florida -- I believe that's where
4 she's at now -- with family.
5 Q Okay. I got a little sidetracked there. Let me
6 bring you back to the next item, which is HVLP tips. Are
7 they related to the cigarettes?
8 A No, no, that's a high-volume,low-pressure paint
9 sprayer. What they did was -- I bought a used one at the
10 Reuse It Store off of Pitney Road out near Greenfield
11 Industrial Park. And I brought it home, and I put -- tips
12 come with it, so different velocities for the paint, like
13 smaller and larger. It comes with three tips. It had an
14 instruction manual and brushes to clean it. So I put
15 everything in a clear plastic bag to keep it all together.
16 I went to use the sprayer, and the bag was gone. So I had
17 to go out and buy a brand-new HVLP. It cost me $119. The
18 one I bought -- I think I paid 60 for it.
19 Q Okay. You have a quantity lost two and then
20 estimated cost to replace 45. What did you lose two of?
21 A Tips. Yeah, what they did was they put the small
22 tip in. So I'm trying to spray stain for my fence, and,
23 you know, you need the larger tip. But I said 45. I
24 thought I could replace the tips, but you can't. So I had
25 to replace the whole thing.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page186
166
167
47
22of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
23
1 Q Okay. I don't mean to be redundant. So I'm just
2 going to ask you --
3 A That's all right.
4 Q -- a blanket question here if it applies to all of
5 these items here, and I'll show it to you. For all these
6 items, you don't have -- or you're not willing to produce a
7 receipt. Correct?
8 A Only if you give me a guarantee that you're going
9 to pay the claim.
10 Q And I've told you I can't do that.
11 A Okay.
12 Q None of these items have been reported as lost or
13 stolen or damaged to the police. Correct?
14 A To the police?
15 Q Yes.
16 A I'm in this injunction accusing the police of
17 trying to kill me. No, I mean I can't.
18 Q All right. And none of these items --
19 A That's what abuse of process is. It's when the
20 police do not take your complaints.
21 Q And for any of these items, you do not have -- you
22 can't tell me specifically who it was who stole it or broke
23 it or whatever the case may be?
24 A No.
25 Q All right. I'm not going to keep asking that
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page187
167
168
48
23of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
24
1 question.
2 A I can -- I can tell you this. Since 2006, the
3 neighbors at 1252 Fremont Street have been engaged in a
4 constant harassment and threat campaign no matter who is in
5 that house.
6 Q Has there been a change in --
7 A Oh, yeah, three times.
8 Q Is it a rental house?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Do you know who the current residents are?
11 A No, they don't tell me the truth, no. I mean I
12 filed a private criminal complaint against them in the
13 County D.A.'s Office this year. They are Spanish. They
14 harass me. They are the ones who sic the dog on me. That
15 happened June 10th. I went to Lancaster Regional Medical
16 Center on College Avenue. Dr. Westphal gave me antibiotics
17 and 10 Vicodin. Now he wanted me to go through rabies
18 shots, but I didn't do it. I said the dog wasn't rabid. I
19 have the hospital report.
20 Q The next item is a staple airgun?
21 A Right. They stole my staple airgun.
22 Q That was theft. That wasn't damaged. That was
23 theft?
24 A Yeah, theft. That was theft.
25 Q When was that?
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page188
168
169
49
24of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
25
1 A This all -- this all happened when I started
2 erecting the new six foot fence and a screened-in porch in
3 my back. And I started construction March 10th.
4 Q So sometime after March 10th?
5 A Yeah.
6 Q And I don't know if I asked you about the HVLP
7 tips. But when were those taken?
8 A I'm going to say in May.
9 Q Of this year?
10 A Yeah.
11 Q I also don't think I asked you about the five
12 vapor electronic cigarette cartridges.
13 A Okay. I bought my first one -- let me see. I'd
14 say that was all after January 1st. Yeah, they were all
15 after January 1st. I bought one downtown at Puff N' Stuff.
16 I bought one at the convenience store on Manor or
17 Millersville Pike, Hershey Avenue.
18 Q In doing the math here, it looks like they go for
19 about 50 to $60 a piece?
20 A Yeah, some are -- that's the minimum. I think the
21 last one I bought was $79. That's the minimum price.
22 Q Okay. The next one is a belt for $9. Are we
23 talking about, you know, a belt to hold your pants up, that
24 kind of belt?
25 A Yeah, yeah.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page189
169
170
50
25of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
26
1 Q Stolen, damaged?
2 A Stolen.
3 Q When?
4 A Within the past two months.
5 Q The next one is a 36 inch by 100 feet --
6 A Oh, yeah.
7 Q -- black screen?
8 A That was to do my screened-in porch. I had to
9 replace it.
10 Q Stolen?
11 A Stolen. In fact, I just bought that -- I replaced
12 that probably a month ago.
13 Q I'm sorry? You just replaced the screen for the
14 screened-in porch?
15 A Yeah, it's a roll. It's 100 by --
16 Q Right. I'm familiar with them. So it was on the
17 roll. Somebody just took the roll?
18 A Yeah, it was in a plastic bag, yeah, plastic
19 sleeve, yeah, took the whole roll.
20 Q Okay. And the last one is one pair of work
21 gloves?
22 A Yeah.
23 Q I know what work gloves are.
24 A Yeah. Now here's what they do. A lot of times
25 they'll steal it and then a week later they'll return it.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page190
170
171
51
26of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
27
1 I mean they play games like that. It's psychological
2 warfare along with the theft and damages.
3 Q Were any of these items ever returned to you?
4 A Some. Some were. Then they'd steal them again.
5 I mean I can't keep track. It's hard to keep track of it.
6 Q Okay. As of today, are -- here, I'll show you the
7 list. Tell me if any of those items are in your
8 possession.
9 A Let's see. Well, some of these are damaged. I
10 wished they returned the vapor electronic cigarettes. Now
11 the work gloves they did return. I found where they put
12 them.
13 Q So they are in your possession at least as of
14 today?
15 A Yes, they are. I don't know if they'll stay
16 there.
17 Q Now is there anything that you would like to add
18 to supplement to this list?
19 A As far as the list or evidence or what?
20 Q No, as far as the list of items.
21 A Yeah, I could -- you know, I can update, yeah. I
22 can send them to you.
23 Q Of anything that you would add to that list, would
24 they all have been items in which were lost or damaged --
25 stolen or damaged in the same way as the items that we've
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page191
171
172
52
27of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
28
1 discussed?
2 A Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. I got tired of making --
3 keeping lists. But I -- well, let me do it now. Let me
4 think. Let me see. We talked about the new vapor pen.
5 Okay. Here is a for instance. I went to -- this
6 morning -- I produced an exhibit, a DVD, a disk with this
7 case to the Courts. So I have to make a copy today for
8 myself. The DVD recorder doesn't work on my computer.
9 That happened this morning. Yesterday -- oh, this morning
10 I found that two day's worth of photos in my phone were
11 missing from my computer. Yeah, you know, the list goes on
12 and on. I mean there is nothing -- I'm trying to think of
13 anything substantial because I probably -- well, the toner
14 cartridge. What happens is I have a copier. And when the
15 toner gets low, it will give you a warning that you need to
16 soon replace your toner. Well, I'm producing this
17 document. And at the 611th page, it says black ink toner
18 out, but it never gave me the warning. So they have the
19 capability of actually hacking into my copier because it's
20 a wireless copier. So I had to order a new ink cartridge.
21 Q Now you did mention -- and I don't mean to cut you
22 off. Is there anything else that you want to talk about?
23 A No.
24 Q All right. Now you did mention that you had
25 submitted two similar claims to other insurers?
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page192
172
173
53
28of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
29
1 A Yeah, yeah.
2 Q Tell me about those.
3 A They were in '05 I was paid and '06. It's when
4 I -- okay. It's when I lived at 220 Stonehill Road,
5 Conestoga, PA. The claims were about -- I think they were
6 about the same, somewhere around $6,000. I produced a
7 schedule similar to this, and they paid from that schedule.
8 Now what they did was the one they paid the claim, but they
9 inflated the depreciation value. So I filed a complaint
10 with the Pennsylvania Insurance Commission. Now in 2006 --
11 no, 2007 or 8, after I moved to 1250 Fremont Street, I
12 tried to file a claim. But my brother blocked me from
13 filing that on my mother's property casualty policy. So I
14 would have filed another claim.
15 Now the insurance companies, they have a database
16 of all the insurance claims that are paid out. Are you
17 familiar with that?
18 Q No.
19 A Yeah, there's a database that actuaries use. I
20 don't know how you access it or what. The other thing is I
21 have a correspondence from the Southern Regional Police
22 Department in 2006 -- 5 or 6 regarding all my complaints to
23 them about incidents regarding vandalism and thefts. Now
24 Southern Regional Police covered Conestoga Township back
25 then. Now I went to try to find -- I know I had paperwork
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page193
173
174
54
29of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
30
1 on the claims. I had copies of the checks, copies of the
2 claims, but I can't find them in my computer.
3 Q Do you remember who the insurers were?
4 A Harleysville was for one, maybe both of them, you
5 know. And they were the same type of claims.
6 Q Theft or damaged or --
7 A Just like this, yeah. I tried to find them. I
8 have backup disks now. Unfortunately, there is -- I have
9 three laptop drives and two external hard drives from 2005
10 and 6 that are in my safety deposit box. I ordered
11 equipment so that I could more or less connect those drives
12 to my computer and read them, but the equipment would come
13 and it won't work. So I have them stored. But, you know,
14 until I'm more secure with the computer hacking, I can't do
15 anything with them. But I'm sure the claims are in there
16 even though they took them from my current drive.
17 Q Okay. I don't think I have any more questions for
18 you. Is there anything that you'd like to add to this?
19 A No. If you could tell me what you want other than
20 the receipts.
21 Q There was a letter sent to you I believe sometime
22 between the first examination and the second examination.
23 A I couldn't find it. I tried to find it this
24 morning. That's why I asked you what time. They stole
25 that.
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page194
174
175
55
30of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
31
1 Q I don't think I have --
2 A I think I have a hard copy, but I didn't want to
3 root through my file. I tried to find it on my computer
4 and I couldn't find it. Did you email it or did it come in
5 letter format because I scan everything?
6 Q I believe I was emailed a copy of it, but I
7 think -- I assume it was sent to you in letter format.
8 A Are you talking about the one form Allstate --
9 Q Yes.
10 A -- or the one from you?
11 Q No, no, the one from Allstate.
12 A I have that.
13 Q That's what I'm talking about.
14 A Yeah, I have that. That's right. Yeah, I have
15 that.
16 Q They want a document filled out and --
17 A Right.
18 Q -- forwarded back to them.
19 A Was I supposed to bring that today?
20 Q It would have been helpful, but it's not
21 mandatory. If you could get it back to Mr. Eisenhard. You
22 don't have to send it to me.
23 A Okay.
24 Q Other than that, you know, I don't know that there
25 was -- whatever Allstate had requested. The only thing I
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page195
175
176
56
31of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
32
1 was looking for were the receipts.
2 A Okay.
3 MR. REESER: Okay. And we're done. Thank you
4 very much.
5 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
6 (Whereupon, the examination concluded at 10:12
7 a.m.)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page196
176
177
57
32of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
33
1 COUNTY OF DAUPHIN :
SS
2 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
3 I, Diane A. Smith, a Notary Public, authorized to
4 administer oaths within and for the Commonwealth of
5 Pennsylvania, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the
6 testimony of Stanley J. Caterbone.
7 I further certify that before the taking of said
8 examination, the witness was duly sworn; that the questions
9 and answers were taken down stenographically by the said
10 Reporter-Notary Public, and afterwards reduced to
11 typewriting under the direction of the said Reporter.
12 I further certify that the said examination was
13 taken at the time and place specified in the caption sheet
14 hereof.
15 I further certify that I am not a relative or
16 employee or attorney or counsel to any of the parties, or a
17 relative or employee of such attorney or counsel, or
18 financially interested directly or indirectly in this
19 action.
20 I further certify that the said examination
21 constitutes a true record of the testimony given by the
22 said witness.
23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
24 this 11th day of July, 2016.

_______________________________________________
25 Diane A. Smith, Reporter
Notary Public
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page197
177
178
58
33of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
34
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Allstate
U.S.
Lancaster
Sponsored
Sworn
County
Testimony
Mind
Court
Control
Page
Page198
178
179
59
34of
of548
667
668
813
June 22,
28, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1
EXAMINATION UNDER OATH OF
STANLEY J. CATERBONE
TAKEN BY: ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
BEFORE: DIANE F. FOLTZ, RMR

NOTARY PUBLIC
DATE: JUNE 9, 2016, 9:15 A.M.
PLACE: LANCASTER COUNTY BAR

ASSOCIATION
28 EAST ORANGE STREET
LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA
APPEARANCES:
MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN

BY: CHRISTOPHER M. REESER, ESQUIRE
FOR - ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page179
180
199
60
1 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2
1 WITNESSES
2 NAME EXAMINATION
3 STANLEY J. CATERBONE
4 BY: MR. REESER 3
10
11
12 EXHIBITS
13
14 CATERBONE EXHIBIT PRODUCED AND MARKED
15 1. LIST OF ITEMS 13
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page180
181
200
61
2 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3
1 STANLEY J. CATERBONE, called as a witness, being
2 duly sworn, testified as follows:
3 EXAMINATION
4 BY MR. REESER:
5 Q Could you state your name, please?
6 A Stanley J. Caterbone, C-a-t-e-r-b-o-n-e.
7 Q Would you mind if I called you Stan or Stanley?
8 A Stan.
9 Q Stan, okay. And my name's Chris Reeser. You can
10 call me Chris.
11 A All right.
12 Q I'm not a real formal guy. I have been asked to
13 take a statement from you relative to an insurance claim
14 which I understood to have occurred as a result of
15 something on April 3rd of 2016, but by some correspondence
16 that I received from you, my understanding is that is not
17 the date of loss.
18 A No. That date is the date that I started the
19 spreadsheet --
20 Q Okay.
21 A -- of the items lost or vandalized.
22 Q All right. This statement is part of the process
23 of collecting information and evaluating the claim.
24 Allstate's policy, as does just about any insurance
25 company's policy, provides that part of the duty of an
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page181
182
201
62
3 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
4
1 insured is to give an examination under oath --
2 A Okay.
3 Q -- at the request of the insured -- at the
4 request of the insurer, so that is what this is.
5 A I've had --
6 Q Go ahead. Go ahead.
7 A I've had -- I've collected on two or three
8 policies with the same types of claims, and I've never been
9 put under oath --
10 Q Okay.
11 A -- on the record.
12 Q So noted.
13 A Okay.
14 Q And I'll ask you about that.
15 A And I don't mind under oath.
16 Q All right.
17 A I just, you know --
18 Q All right. Well --
19 A -- have never experienced it.
20 Q Okay. Well, a first time for everything. This
21 is --
22 A Sure.
23 Q This is part of what the insurer is allowed to
24 ask of their insured.
25 A Oh, I don't mind at all.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page182
183
202
63
4 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
5
1 Q Okay. Great. So I'm going to ask you some
2 questions about that.
3 A Okay.
4 Q I usually when I take these statements -- and
5 I've taken a couple of them -- have some information about
6 the claim. I have very little information about this
7 claim.
8 A Okay.
9 Q So --
10 A Can I give you a brief history --
11 Q Go.
12 A -- to put it in perspective?
13 Q Yeah. Go.
14 A I am a federal whistleblower. I blew the whistle
15 on International Signal Control or ISC in 1987. They were
16 indicted in 1991 for a billion dollar fraud and selling
17 illegal arms to Iraq. Now, I was a shareholder, and in
18 1987 they --
19 Q I'm sorry. You were a shareholder in ISC?
20 A Yes. They solicited me to finance some
21 operations. So I'm a legitimate, bona fide whistleblower.
22 Q Okay.
23 A Now, since -- I've been trying to get into
24 courts, hired various attorneys from '87 all the way up.
25 In 2005 I entered the federal court system as a pro se
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page183
184
203
64
5 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
6
1 litigant. I filed my own claims.
2 Q Okay.
3 A Okay. Now, here's what happened. I became a
4 victim of organized stalking, electronic harassment or mind
5 control technologies. Now, what happens is -- and I'll
6 show you some expert testimony -- is that what they do is
7 they break into your home, vandalize, steal, move things
8 around. And since '05 I've collected on two or three
9 policies making the same types of claims. Now, these
10 losses are not a single-day loss. They happen over a
11 period of time.
12 Q Okay.
13 A And I can't give you dates as far as when what
14 was taken, when that was taken, but that's just a
15 background for your reference as far as this is not an
16 ordinary claim.
17 Q When you say they, who is they?
18 A Well, I don't know, you know. It's impossible to
19 say. It could be neighbors. It could be police. It could
20 be agents. It could be anybody.
21 Q But you believe that they are all in conspiracy
22 to punish you because of your activity as a federal
23 whistleblower?
24 A I'm going to refer you to documents to explain
25 that. As a victim of electronic harassment and gang
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page184
185
204
65
6 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
7
1 stalking, the victim -- part of the victimization is that
2 they break into your home.
3 Q Okay. But you don't know who the they is?
4 A Well, of course not.
5 Q Have you ever seen anybody in the act?
6 A I have one person on a security camera video.
7 Q Okay.
8 A That was in 2006.
9 Q And was there an insurance claim related to that?
10 A Not to that particular person, no.
11 Q All right.
12 A But there was a claim that year. Harleysville
13 paid me once or twice, and there was another one. But
14 unfortunately I'm also the victim of computer hacking.
15 These are all the reports from the past year on Geek Squad
16 and other companies reviewing and analyzing and fixing my
17 hard drives after they've been hacked.
18 Q Okay.
19 A I filed about, oh, boy, since '06 or '07 probably
20 about four or five IC3 reports with the FBI.
21 Q I don't know what an IC3 report is.
22 A It's an online complaint regarding anything
23 fraudulent online to the FBI.
24 Q Okay.
25 A I've had face-to-face meetings with the FBI
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page185
186
205
66
7 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
8
1 probably about 15 times.
2 Q Locally?
3 A Philly and Harrisburg.
4 Q Is there a particular agent that you meet with?
5 A No. No.
6 Q Could you tell me the names of any of the agents
7 that you meet with?
8 A No.
9 Q Okay.
10 A I can verify the meetings, I mean.
11 Q What -- what's the reason for the meetings?
12 A Complaints --
13 Q Okay.
14 A -- about people, what they're doing to me.
15 Q You said you're a victim of electronic
16 harassment. Now, I understand what computer hacking is.
17 A Okay. Electronic harassment.
18 Q What have been the other forms?
19 A They use microwave technology, microwaves to
20 alter your brain state. It causes extreme -- they can
21 cause extreme pain in any part of your body. They can
22 create synthetic telepathy. They can essentially kill you
23 with the weapons.
24 Now, in the 1950's the Russians used it against
25 our -- the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, the same weapons. Now,
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page186
187
206
67
8 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
9
1 in the 1970's there was what's called the Church Committee.
2 The CIA had to come clean on these programs. They were
3 supposed to have stopped them, but they didn't, and that's
4 -- there's Senate testimony. The Director of the CIA back
5 then was Stansfield Turner. He testified before the
6 Senate, and they admitted to all the programs that I'm
7 describing.
8 Q Okay.
9 A MKUltra was the main program.
10 Q How do you know that?
11 A How do I know what?
12 Q I mean, how do you know you're a victim of
13 microwave technology to alter your brain waves?
14 A Some nights I can't walk. The pain is that bad.
15 What do you mean how do I know?
16 Q I mean, I don't know.
17 A Don't get smart with me, or I'll walk out this
18 door.
19 Q I don't know. I'm not being smart. I'm trying
20 to understand this.
21 A Okay.
22 Q How do I -- you know, how do I know I'm not?
23 A Do you ever complain about it?
24 Q I mean, I have pain. I don't know why I have
25 pain. I just -- I'm trying to understand.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page187
188
207
68
9 of
of51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
10
1 A Listen, yesterday I filed 300 pages in the
2 Pennsylvania Supreme Court on a case against Lancaster City
3 Police and the county residents.
4 Q Okay.
5 A There are -- there is expert testimony in here
6 from, one, an NSA whistleblower named Karen Stewart who
7 will back up just about everything I say. The second is
8 from a Julianne McKinney who is a former Army intelligence
9 officer. The third is from a renowned expert named Nick
10 Begich whose father was killed by someone in the Hoover
11 Administration. There are transcripts in here. You can
12 read them.
13 Q Okay.
14 A You can learn all about it.
15 Q May I have this?
16 A No. You can make a copy.
17 Q Okay.
18 A Or I can give you it in electronic format. I
19 have a PDF around my neck. I'll give you a copy.
20 Q Well, I see that it's a Petition for Allowance of
21 Appeal which means that it's --
22 A I'm appealing a Superior Court decision to the
23 Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
24 Q Okay.
25 A I'm a very successful litigator by the way.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page208
188
189
69
10of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
11
1 Q How --
2 A I'm the amicus for Kathleen Kane in her criminal
3 case in the Superior Court in Philadelphia. I'm also the
4 movant for Lisa Michelle Lambert.
5 Q Okay.
6 A I've got three Third Circuit cases now that are
7 awaiting decisions.
8 Q And this is an appeal from the Lancaster County
9 Court of Common Pleas. I assume it went then to the
10 Superior Court?
11 A I took it to the Superior Court, right.
12 Q Okay. And what happened there?
13 A They dismissed it --
14 Q Okay.
15 A -- two weeks before oral arguments. Oral
16 arguments were scheduled for May 24th.
17 Q Okay.
18 A They were scheduled since January. Both cases
19 were arguably -- I mean, maliciously dismissed two weeks
20 before oral arguments. They didn't want me to appear
21 before them.
22 Q Okay. Give me some background. I mean, you said
23 you worked -- maybe I misheard you. Did you work for ISC?
24 A No.
25 Q Okay. You were a stockholder?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page209
189
190
70
11of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
12
1 A Yes. Gib Armstrong sold me the stock in 1983.
2 Q Okay.
3 A He was a stockbroker back then. Do you know who
4 he is? Former Pennsylvania Senator.
5 Q Yeah, I'm familiar with the name. Are you
6 employed right now?
7 A No, I'm -- I collect Social Security disability
8 for symptoms and illnesses related to U.S. mind control,
9 documented, verified.
10 Q Huh.
11 A They've been paying me since '08.
12 Q Okay. Do they -- do they pay you by the month
13 for that? Is it --
14 A You never heard of Social Security disability?
15 Q I have.
16 A Yeah.
17 Q Okay.
18 A My first check was for $21,000. They paid me. I
19 applied in '09. They declared me disabled in December of
20 '05 when I declared I was full-time telepathic, but they
21 could only pay me back one year. So they paid me back '08
22 to '09 in one check, and then I've been getting monthly
23 checks ever since.
24 Q Okay. Well, let's talk about this claim a little
25 bit.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page210
190
191
71
12of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
13
1 A Okay.
2 Q I'm going to have this marked as Exhibit 1.
3 A I have a new one here.
4 Q Okay. Well, why don't you -- why don't we mark
5 -- can I take that, or do you need that?
6 A Yeah. No. This is for you.
7 Q Okay. We won't mark the one I have.
8 A Here. That's updated. Every day I have stuff
9 missing.
10 MR. REESER: Okay. Do you want to put a sticker
11 on there?
12 (List of items produced and marked Exhibit No.
13 1.)
14 BY MR. REESER:
15 Q All right. Now, I'm just going to go through
16 these items that you have --
17 A Yeah.
18 Q -- listed in order from top to bottom. You're
19 making a claim for a dishwasher?
20 A Right.
21 Q Is this a dishwasher that was in your home?
22 A Yeah, but you know -- I'm trying to think what
23 year that was actually broken. That might predate this.
24 Scratch the dishwasher off of that.
25 Q The dishwasher is not being claimed, correct?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page211
191
192
72
13of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
14
1 A Yes. Yes, let's take that off.
2 Q All right. And I should ask you this beforehand.
3 I kind of lost track. Your brief or your petition that was
4 filed to the Supreme Court listed an address of 1250
5 Freemont Street. That's -- that's your home address?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Okay. Does anybody else live there with you?
8 A No.
9 Q All right.
10 A In fact, I sent a copy of the deed in with the
11 claim.
12 Q I believe I saw that, which I think there were a
13 number of grantees.
14 A My brothers.
15 Q Okay. But none of them live there?
16 A No.
17 Q And they wouldn't be insured under the Allstate
18 policy?
19 A Yeah, they're listed as other insureds.
20 Q Okay.
21 A Yeah.
22 Q Okay. Do any of these items -- are they owners
23 of any of the items?
24 A No. I purchased the policy for everybody.
25 Q Okay. Front and back door locks?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page212
192
193
73
14of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
15
1 A Right.
2 Q Tell me about that.
3 A Okay. In July of 2015 -- yeah, July, 2015, the
4 benevolent Lancaster City Police Department served me with
5 a 302 petition, but what they did was they broke into my
6 house, smashed in the front door. Now, they were supposed
7 to pay for all the locks and the door, but they didn't.
8 So I had to get a new front door, and I had to
9 get all the locks changed in the front and back door,
10 rekeyed.
11 Q Okay. 302 petition?
12 A Mental health warrant.
13 Q All right.
14 A I've had about eight of them. That's what they
15 do. That's part of the slander campaign.
16 Q What do they --
17 A That's pretty routine.
18 Q What do they claim?
19 A Well, I'm mentally ill. I make all this up.
20 Q Okay.
21 A That's their -- that's their defense.
22 Q Is there a form of mental illness that they try
23 to pin on you?
24 A Oh, yeah.
25 Q What?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page213
193
194
74
15of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
16
1 A Which one do you want? What year?
2 Q Oh, there's been more than one?
3 A Bipolar, schizophrenic, delusional disorder, you
4 name it.
5 Q Okay. Were you hospitalized or
6 institutionalized --
7 A Oh, yeah.
8 Q -- as a result -- as a result of this one, the
9 one in July?
10 A Oh, yeah, Fairmont.
11 Q For how long?
12 A Oh, that was about five -- eight days, I guess.
13 Q And how did that end?
14 A They always -- they give me a hearing. Then they
15 have to release me.
16 Q Okay.
17 A They're always pretty much the same. It started
18 in '87. The first one was was somebody called up the Stone
19 Harbor Beach Patrol. My resume's in there. But in 1987 I
20 was making a movie with Tony Bongiovi who owns Power
21 Station Studios, one of the world's most famous recording
22 studios.
23 In 1987 we're making a movie. I rented a home
24 for an office down in Stone Harbor. We were going to shoot
25 the movie in New Jersey on the boardwalk. Somebody called
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page214
194
195
75
16of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
17
1 the Stone Harbor Police Department and said I was running
2 to the beach to kill myself, totally made up, fabricated.
3 That's how it all started with the mental illness.
4 Q Okay. So going back to the door for a second --
5 A Okay.
6 Q Smashed in your front door?
7 A Oh, yeah, with -- like a drug raid. I stood
8 there and took pictures of them as they came through.
9 Q Do you actually have the pictures?
10 A Oh, yeah, it's part of it.
11 Q Part of?
12 A The -- they're in here. Oh, let me see. Where
13 are they? No, they're in this one. This one. No. These
14 are black and white. They're hard to see, but the next two
15 pages. Totally illegal what they did. The only way, the
16 only reason you could do that is if someone -- is if you
17 knew that someone was in there with a gun to their head. I
18 was in -- I was in the upstairs window talking to them
19 trying to get them to get away from me quite honestly.
20 Q Okay.
21 A I filed a lawsuit against Lancaster City Police
22 in '08. It's a federal lawsuit. In fact, that's part of
23 one of the documents I have here.
24 Q Is that still ongoing?
25 A I withdrew without prejudice because of the
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page215
195
196
76
17of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
18
1 computer hacking, so I can re-file, go back to it any time
2 I want.
3 Q Okay.
4 A Most of my lawsuits I withdrew without prejudice.
5 I just couldn't litigate with all the hacking.
6 Q Can -- do you have any photographs that show the
7 damage to the door? I mean, I see a door that's open. I
8 see a police officer --
9 A Yeah.
10 Q -- apparently standing there.
11 A Yeah. Yeah, I do.
12 Q Okay.
13 A In fact, I bought the door at the Habitat reuse
14 it store. But what happened was they charged me like $400
15 to change all the locks. Wizard Lock did it.
16 Q Do you have -- do you have the receipt for that?
17 A Yeah, I could dig that up.
18 Q You don't have it with you right now?
19 A No.
20 Q You bought the door -- I'm sorry -- Habitat?
21 A For Humanity.
22 Q Habitat? I'm a little hard of hearing.
23 A Habitat for Humanity.
24 Q Oh, Habitat for Humanity.
25 A The reuse it store.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page216
196
197
77
18of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
19
1 Q Reuse it.
2 A Out on Old Philadelphia Pike back behind
3 Greenfield. The door looks brand new, I mean, a better
4 door than was on there.
5 Q The door, the replacement door you bought there?
6 A Yeah.
7 Q What about the original door, was that -- had
8 that been there for years?
9 A No, that was done in 1996. My mother was part of
10 the Lancaster City Homeowners Rehab or Revitalization or
11 Rehab Program where if you qualify, they'll come in and
12 rehab your home, bring it up to code and put a seven-year
13 lien on your house for the cost of the improvements. Each
14 year 10 -- 10 or 15 percent comes off, so if you stay in
15 the house for 7 years, it's all free.
16 Q I see.
17 A So the doors are part of that.
18 Q Okay.
19 A '96 at the time.
20 Q And you may have said this. I apologize if I
21 didn't get it. How much did you actually pay for the door
22 that -- the replacement door?
23 A $20.
24 Q $20?
25 A Yes.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page217
197
198
78
19of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
20
1 Q But it cost you 400 to get the locks replaced?
2 A Yeah. Yeah.
3 Q And that was done again by?
4 A Wizard.
5 Q Wizard.
6 A Locks.
7 Q And you can get me the receipt?
8 A Yeah.
9 Q And my question about that was going to be did
10 you report this to the police, but I guess given the
11 circumstances --
12 A Here's the situation. I've -- I've been
13 reporting to the police ever since it started, but usually
14 they're part of the program. They won't take my
15 complaints. I mean, I had to sue them. That's why I had
16 to sue them.
17 Q Okay.
18 A I have letters which are a part of the documents
19 going to the police explaining the vandalism and the
20 break-ins that they won't, you know, report on or
21 investigate or...
22 Q And this happened July of '15?
23 A July 8th, I think, yeah, 2015.
24 Q July 8th, 2015, okay. Was there any other damage
25 done, physical damage to your house done --
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page218
198
199
79
20of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
21
1 A No.
2 Q -- as a result of that incident?
3 A Just the door.
4 Q Okay. The next one I have on your list is an
5 Apple Video iPod.
6 A Right. What they did was I can't -- the menu
7 button doesn't work. Now, that iPod I bought back in 2006,
8 '05 or '06.
9 Q Okay.
10 A I since bought a replacement for it.
11 Q All right. You bought -- this particular Apple
12 Video iPod you bought in '05 or '06?
13 A Yeah.
14 Q Where did you buy it at?
15 A I might have bought it at a Best Buy in Florida.
16 Q Okay. Do you remember what you paid for it?
17 A Boy, 3, $400 probably.
18 Q Okay. And then when did you --
19 A It's when they first came out, so the video iPods
20 were expensive.
21 Q Yeah. This wasn't an iPhone. This was --
22 A No.
23 Q -- just an iPod?
24 A Right, video iPod.
25 Q And then you noticed a problem with it when?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page219
199
200
80
21of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
22
1 A The button, you can't push the button, the main
2 button.
3 Q Okay. When did you discover that?
4 A Oh, boy. Let me think. That was probably in the
5 fall of '15.
6 Q Okay. Did you take it to --
7 A No.
8 Q -- Best Buy or a repair store?
9 A No, you can't. No. No.
10 Q Why not?
11 A Why?
12 Q I mean, if I had a problem with my iPhone and
13 I --
14 A I'm not going to pay to get it fixed.
15 Q Okay.
16 A I bought a replacement.
17 Q Okay. Why is that -- I'm not -- I don't
18 understand why that's part of the insurance claim.
19 A Because it was in my house and the house is
20 covered by the insurance.
21 Q I mean, how do you know it just didn't -- I mean,
22 things wear down over time. I mean --
23 A I'm telling you the truth. If you don't believe
24 me, that's fine, but don't -- don't harass me with
25 questions.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page220
200
201
81
22of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
23
1 Q I'm here to ask you questions, sir. I'm just
2 trying to get an understanding as to -- things wear out.
3 A I told you what happened.
4 Q Okay.
5 A They broke it.
6 Q They broke it?
7 A Yes, someone broke it.
8 Q All right.
9 A It's funny. One day the button works, and the
10 next day it doesn't.
11 Q Okay. Bluetooth headset for phone.
12 A Right.
13 Q How old --
14 A I've had probably three stolen.
15 Q Oh, it was stolen?
16 A Oh, yeah.
17 Q Okay. When?
18 A I don't remember. In the past year. I had three
19 or four stolen. I had to buy replacements.
20 Q Okay. Well, you list $60, and that sounds about
21 what the value of a new Bluetooth would be.
22 A Oh, no. No. That's for three of them, I think.
23 Q Oh, okay.
24 A Does it say three beside there?
25 Q No, it doesn't. Well, no. It says item number,
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page221
201
202
82
23of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
24
1 but they're consecutive. I'm assuming that's not -- that's
2 not a quantity.
3 A Oh, didn't the quantity print out? Let me see
4 that. Oh, the quantity didn't print out. No. That should
5 be three.
6 Q All right.
7 A I paid like 20 bucks apiece for them up at Radio
8 Shack. Maybe I didn't put the quantity in.
9 Q Do you have the receipts for them?
10 A I'm not going to dig up all these receipts. I'm
11 really not. I'm a busy guy. I can't be -- you know, this
12 is harassment.
13 Q Does that mean you don't have them, or you're
14 just not going to -- you're not going to dig them up?
15 A I'm not going to take the time to dig them up.
16 Q Okay.
17 A I have all my receipts. I have my tax returns
18 back to '80, '82.
19 Q Okay.
20 A I document everything. I'm an expert in
21 information technologies.
22 Q Where in your house --
23 A I have worked all over the world for the record.
24 I did defense contracts, optical publishing. I was one
25 of -- I was one of four companies in the late '80's, early
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page222
202
203
83
24of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
25
1 '90's that could manufacture CD-ROMs, me alone. I know my
2 business.
3 Q Okay. Where in your house were the headsets that
4 were stolen?
5 A Where did I have them?
6 Q Yeah. In the bedroom, living room?
7 A It depends where I was. What do you mean?
8 Q Where were they stolen from?
9 A Most likely either the bedroom which is in the
10 basement. Yeah, the bedroom. Yeah.
11 Q Was there any sign of unlawful entry?
12 A No, never is. You'll read, the experts tell you
13 about that.
14 Q And I assume there was no report to the police
15 about these --
16 A I can't report to the police anymore.
17 Q Okay. Is it fair to say that with regard to any
18 of these items you haven't -- so I don't have to keep
19 asking you this, that you didn't report it to the police?
20 A They get emails from me, but, no, there's no
21 official report.
22 Q All right.
23 A The last official report I made was two thousand
24 -- was July 8th of 2015. I went down to the police again
25 to report the computer hacking, and that night at 11:30
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page223
203
204
84
25of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
26
1 they signed the mental health warrant on me --
2 Q Okay.
3 A -- and gave me a bogus incident report.
4 Q All right. The Bluetooth headsets, the three of
5 them were taken after that?
6 A After what?
7 Q After the 302 petition.
8 A Let me think. Yeah. Yeah.
9 Q Okay. You don't have any idea who it was who
10 took them?
11 A If I did I'd give you a name and report that to
12 everybody.
13 Q Okay. The hammer drill.
14 A Yes. They broke it. I'd say March 9th I started
15 my -- I'd say in March, 2016. I'm putting on a new
16 screened-in porch on my back and a six-foot fence. One day
17 it worked. The next day it didn't. So I had to go out and
18 buy a replacement.
19 Q How old was it?
20 A I bought that one -- that's about the second or
21 third one they broke. That one I bought on eBay in
22 probably -- when did I buy that one? Maybe '08.
23 Q Do you still have it?
24 A No.
25 Q Did you throw it out?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page224
204
205
85
26of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
27
1 A Yeah.
2 Q All right. You didn't take it someplace to see
3 if it could be fixed?
4 A No.
5 Q What did you buy it for, how much?
6 A How much?
7 Q How much.
8 A Oh, boy. That was a DeWalt. New they're like --
9 I don't know -- $300 I think, 280. I probably paid -- I
10 think I paid 60 something for that, somewhere around $60 --
11 Q Okay.
12 A -- on eBay.
13 Q And then did you buy a replacement for it?
14 A Yeah.
15 Q What did that cost?
16 A The replacement I bought at -- oh, the tool store
17 out there next to the off-track betting. What's the name
18 of it? Harbor Tools.
19 Q Harbor Freight?
20 A Harbor Freight. I paid I think 60 for the hammer
21 drill.
22 Q Okay. But you have -- you have 100 listed here,
23 so --
24 A What is it? Maybe it was 100.
25 Q Maybe 100?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page225
205
206
86
27of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
28
1 A Maybe.
2 Q Okay. Reciprocating saw.
3 A Yeah. What they did was they rigged it so that
4 the blade doesn't stay in. You can't use it. It just --
5 Q When you turn it on it comes out?
6 A Well, when you use it, it comes out when you're
7 sawing.
8 Q Okay.
9 A You can't -- you can't tighten it. It used to
10 work, but it stopped. That replacement I bought -- I think
11 I bought that at Lowe's.
12 Q The one, the one that's broken or the one, the
13 replacement one?
14 A The replacement.
15 Q Where did you buy the one that's broken?
16 A Harbor Tools.
17 Q Harbor Freight?
18 A Harbor Freight.
19 Q Okay. Just so we're on the same page. When did
20 you buy that?
21 A Oh, boy. Let's see. I might have bought that in
22 '06. '05. '05, '06.
23 Q Okay. Did you use that on a regular basis or
24 just once in a while?
25 A What do you mean on a regular basis?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page226
206
207
87
28of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
29
1 Q Did you use it once a week? Did you use it --
2 A No. No. No. No.
3 Q Okay.
4 A No. No. Reciprocating saws I probably used less
5 than any other tool actually.
6 Q I mean, a couple times?
7 A But if I have a project I might use it a lot in a
8 two-week span.
9 Q Yeah. I mean, some people are do-it-yourself,
10 fixer-upper kind of people, and some people --
11 A Well, I used to have a contracting business in
12 college.
13 Q All right.
14 A Stan Caterbone Painting and Renovating.
15 Q But you bought this in '05, '06? I mean, I'm
16 assuming --
17 A Right.
18 Q -- you were out of college by then.
19 A I'm just saying I have experience. I'm not just
20 a do-it-yourselfer.
21 Q Well, no. My -- some people do a lot of work
22 with their tools, and other people --
23 A Oh, I do.
24 Q -- don't.
25 A I do.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page227
207
208
88
29of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
30
1 Q Okay. And that's what I'm getting at. I'm
2 trying to understand.
3 A I do.
4 Q I don't.
5 A Okay.
6 Q So I could have something for ten years, and it
7 doesn't get any use at all.
8 A No. I understand.
9 Q And some people have it --
10 A I use my tools.
11 Q -- for ten years, and they use it every day.
12 A I use my stuff.
13 Q Fair enough. And you got a replacement at
14 Lowe's, and you have $100 here. Is that about what you
15 paid for the replacement?
16 A Uh-huh.
17 Q Do you have the receipt?
18 A Yeah.
19 Q Okay. Is it fair to say you're not going to dig
20 that up?
21 A No. No. I'm not going to do that.
22 Q Okay.
23 A I didn't have to for the other claims. I'm not
24 going to do it for your company.
25 Q Okay. IPhone 5C, was that stolen?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page228
208
209
89
30of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
31
1 A Broken.
2 Q When?
3 A In fact, I got scammed on that, the 5C, the end
4 of last year. Here's what happened. They broke it, right,
5 so I put it on eBay to sell it so someone could reprogram
6 it, the software. I assumed the software was what was
7 broken on it because it functioned, everything, but the
8 software was not functioning. Okay.
9 So I put it on eBay. Right. Somebody bought it.
10 They hacked my PayPal account. So someone said that they
11 paid me with electronic funds. Well, PayPal doesn't use
12 electronic funds. PayPal you use your account to transfer
13 the money. Right.
14 Q Like a Visa account?
15 A What's that?
16 Q Or a PayPal account. Oh, a PayPal account.
17 A PayPal account.
18 Q Okay.
19 A So what they did was they filed a claim saying
20 that I never sent them the iPhone. I wasn't going to send
21 it until I got -- until I verified the money was in my
22 account.
23 Q Uh-huh.
24 A But because my PayPal account was hacked, I
25 couldn't access my PayPal account. Right. Now, in my
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page229
209
210
90
31of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
32
1 PayPal account I had a cash balance of like $400. So eBay
2 went and awarded them judgment. In eBay terms I'm saying
3 judgment.
4 Q Uh-huh.
5 A So they took the $150 or whatever selling price
6 out of my account, so I'm out the phone, plus the $150.
7 Q Okay.
8 A So they scammed me. All my accounts are hacked.
9 I file -- in all the courts I have electronic filing
10 privileges, Third Circuit, U.S. District Court, all the
11 state courts, the local courts. Right. My PACER account
12 which is the system where you file electronically --
13 Q I'm familiar with PACER.
14 A -- I've been hacked since, oh, boy, November. So
15 I got to run down to Philly every two weeks --
16 Q Okay.
17 A -- to get my dockets, just to get dockets for all
18 my cases.
19 Q Let me go back. I'm -- you lost me on the phone
20 at some point.
21 A Okay.
22 Q You had the phone. You were looking to sell the
23 phone?
24 A Right, after it was unusable to me.
25 Q After it was unusable. Why was it unusable to
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page230
210
211
91
32of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
33
1 you? Because there was a software problem?
2 A It just didn't -- it wouldn't function for me.
3 Q Okay. How old was the phone?
4 A So I replaced it. I went to Samsung. I got out
5 of Apple. I had too many problems with Apple.
6 Q How old --
7 A Apple wouldn't fix it. Apple wouldn't do this.
8 They were harassing me on every -- I called customer
9 service about it, and they had harassed me, and I had to
10 report that, so I said the hell with it. So I went to
11 Radio Shack, and under Sprint's program they would pay your
12 old phone off if you're on a contract. So I went and now I
13 have a Samsung.
14 Q How old was the phone at the time that you tried
15 to sell it through eBay?
16 A A couple months old.
17 Q Okay.
18 A Five months old I think.
19 Q Was it under any warranty program with Apple
20 or --
21 A I had a warranty through Verizon, but I had to
22 cut them out.
23 Q I don't follow you.
24 A I had to get off of Verizon.
25 Q Okay. So the phone wasn't fixable; you tried to
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page231
211
212
92
33of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
34
1 sell it; you got scammed on the PayPal?
2 A Yeah.
3 Q And eBay basically ruled against you?
4 A Yeah, I can't even access eBay. I can't buy
5 anything on eBay anymore.
6 Q Okay.
7 A I'm hacked, every -- all my online accounts.
8 Q Okay.
9 A Banking, bank accounts, PayPal, eBay, PACER. I
10 filed complaints with the FBI, the Pennsylvania Attorney
11 General's Office, everybody.
12 Q When did this happen?
13 A What happen?
14 Q The phone, the attempt to sell the phone.
15 A I think January.
16 Q Of this year?
17 A Yes, '16. I think January.
18 Q Did you file a complaint with the Attorney
19 General's Office or --
20 A Oh.
21 Q About this situation?
22 A I file complaints with them all the time.
23 Q Okay.
24 A Like I say, I am the amicus for Kathleen Kane in
25 Superior Court Case 1164 EDA 2016. I filed an amicus brief
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page232
212
213
93
34of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
35
1 May 3rd, so I'm a party to the case now. They have to file
2 everything to me.
3 Q Okay.
4 A Service me everything.
5 Q And I understand, you know, that process to some
6 extent, but what does it have to do with this? I mean, if
7 it has relevance, I'm all ears. I just don't know.
8 A Okay. In 1998 I had a meeting with an agent from
9 the NSA. I was complaining again about things, and he told
10 me, he said, listen, Stan. He goes it's not us. He said
11 it's the good old boys. This was in 1998.
12 Now, when Kathleen Kane started in the press,
13 she's been saying that the good old boys are behind her
14 problems. So November 12th I wrote her a letter, and I
15 stated for the record what the NSA agent told me about the
16 good old boys and how it relates to what she was saying.
17 Q Uh-huh. Okay.
18 A She replied back the next day, said she'd keep my
19 information on file. Ever since then from November till a
20 month or so ago I'd go up there every two weeks and deliver
21 documents to Strawberry Square to the Attorney General's
22 Office.
23 Q Okay. Tell me about the screen door locks.
24 A I finally thought, you know what, I'll put screen
25 door locks on on my screen doors.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page233
213
214
94
35of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
36
1 Q Uh-huh.
2 A It didn't stop anything. They'd break them.
3 They'd work. They wouldn't work.
4 Q Are they still there?
5 A I had to replace one or two of them.
6 Q Did you do that yourself?
7 A Oh, yeah.
8 Q Do they work now?
9 A Yes. Well, supposedly. I mean, one time they
10 didn't work.
11 Q Okay. Where did you buy the replacements?
12 A Lowe's.
13 Q For $30 it looks like?
14 A Yeah. Is that what's on there?
15 Q Yes. Okay. When did you replace them?
16 A That was within two months ago.
17 Q Okay. Sleepy's foam mattress. I'm sorry. Foam
18 memory mattress.
19 A Here's the situation with that. On the record,
20 I've been suffering from back pain since '87. Since I'd
21 say '98 I've been going to the doctors on and off for it.
22 Last year I got a handicapped placard, and in the process I
23 used my medical reports regarding my back. So I got a
24 handicapped placard, and I got a long-term placard which
25 means it doesn't renew until 2020.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page234
214
215
95
36of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
37
1 Q Okay.
2 A Now, what they were doing is that aside from the
3 electromagnetic weapons, people were using some type of
4 device to put under my seats and under my bed that causes
5 excruciating pain.
6 Now, since '05 I was going up and getting laser
7 treatments to Leola Family Health Clinic in Leola.
8 Q Did you say Leola?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Thank you.
11 A Now, the doctor there, the chiropractor, he's the
12 one that signed off on my handicapped placard.
13 Q Okay.
14 A He verified that if they -- they could be using
15 magnets. It can throw my back out to cause pain. So
16 that's what the Sleepy's is for.
17 Q All right.
18 A Now, whether -- I mean, well, go ahead. You ask
19 the questions.
20 Q Have you actually found magnets?
21 A No.
22 Q All right. You're not sure where they are within
23 the mattress?
24 A I'm not sure. No, I'm not. No. I'm not sure
25 how they do it, but they used to do it to my bicycle seat,
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page235
215
216
96
37of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
38
1 my car seat, my bed. Now, some nights I'm fine in the bed.
2 Other nights...
3 Q And you know when they're doing it based upon
4 when you have the pain?
5 A Yes, it's the only way I know.
6 Q Okay. What's the nature of your back problem?
7 Herniated disc, do you have a degenerative condition?
8 A No.
9 Q Do you have -- I mean, you're going to a
10 chiropractor. Is he -- is he treating you for anything?
11 A I was getting laser treatments, but it stopped
12 being effective.
13 Q Okay.
14 A So now the only treatment really is I'm applying
15 to Medicare. I'm trying to get a whirlpool bath put in my
16 house. I'm trying to get them to pay for that. And pain
17 medicines.
18 Q Okay. And what's the diagnosis other than -- I
19 mean, are you -- something other than back pain I presume?
20 A I have that in here, I believe.
21 Q I'm going to get myself some more coffee over
22 there. Would you like any coffee or water?
23 A Water would be good.
24 Q I assume there's water in that pitcher. If not,
25 I can go out and get you some.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page236
216
217
97
38of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
39
1 A Let me see what document I have right here.
2 MR. REESER: And off the record.
3 (Off the record.)
4 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't bring my medical file
5 with me.
6 BY MR. REESER:
7 Q Okay. That's all right. I mean, if you know.
8 A If I know what?
9 Q If you know the answer to that question.
10 A What was the question?
11 Q The question was what's the medical diagnosis?
12 A Oh, it's a medical term. I can't.
13 Q That's fine. If you don't -- if you don't know,
14 that's fine as well.
15 A I went to -- okay. January 29th medical -- Med
16 Express Urgent Care issued me pain medications. March 23rd
17 they issued me pain medications, all for back. May 10th
18 they issued me pain medications.
19 In 2009 I was receiving pain medicines from
20 Dr. Sullivan at the Abbeyville Family Clinic on Abbeyille
21 Road for back pain, severe. It gets severe. I have to use
22 a walker some nights.
23 Q I think you said you went to Leola Chiropractic?
24 A Yeah, Leola Family Health Clinic. Family Health
25 Clinic.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page237
217
218
98
39of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
40
1 Q That's not a chiropractor. That's a medical
2 doctor?
3 A No, he's inside there. It's a -- it's a facility
4 where they have different doctors.
5 Q Okay.
6 A Dr. Newhart, Paul Newhart, he was giving me laser
7 treatments. I saw an article in the paper in '05 or '06 I
8 guess it was about laser therapy. Now they're using it for
9 the NFL. But it was effective for a while, and then it
10 stopped being effective a couple years ago, so I stopped.
11 Q When did you buy the bed?
12 A I bought the bed three months ago.
13 Q Where did you buy it at?
14 A Sleepy's, Manor Shopping Center.
15 Q Okay.
16 A Now, I put the bed on there. You understand why
17 I put it on there? Now, if you went and saw the bed, you
18 wouldn't think anything's wrong with it, but I'm putting it
19 on to document just what I'm telling you.
20 Q Okay. You still use the mattress?
21 A Oh, yeah. Yeah, because it's a memory foam with
22 a -- it vibrates. It moves in three different positions,
23 the head, the mid-section, and for my back it's great.
24 Q Queen size, king size?
25 A Full.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page
Page238
218
219
99
40of
of548
51
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
41
1 Q Is that smaller than queen?
2 A Yeah, not by much though.
3 Q So if you're not having the back issues --
4 A Perfectly normal.
5 Q Then it's perfectly -- okay.
6 A Yeah.
7 Q All right. And $2,300, is that what you paid for
8 it?
9 A Yeah.
10 Q Okay. Laptop computers.
11 A Oh, which ones?
12 Q How many do you have?
13 A How many did I have? How many are broken? How
14 many's listed on there?
15 Q There's no number there.
16 A Let me see. I don't know why those quantities
17 aren't in there.
18 Q Yeah.
19 A Let me see. The policy goes -- the policy goes
20 back to '11, so it would have been one, two -- that would
21 be right. Two.
22 Q Okay.
23 A Two laptops, 400 bucks apiece. That's about
24 right.
25 Q What kind of laptops, what brand?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page239
100
219
220
41 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
42
1 A Oh, boy. HP. What was the last one? Compaq.
2 Q What happened to them?
3 A They just sabotage them. They fry the hard
4 drives and everything. They just fry them. Viruses
5 usually. That's what this document is. It's all in there.
6 Q So they've crashed as a result of the viruses?
7 The hard drives have crashed?
8 A Oh, yeah. Yeah.
9 Q Have you looked into replacing the hard drives?
10 A It is -- cost, it's not effective. It's not --
11 it's not worth it because by the time you pay to do that,
12 it's already outdated technology, so you're going to have
13 an old processor. You know, it just doesn't --
14 Q No, I -- I understand. The economics of it
15 sometimes --
16 A So what happened, so in August of last year, the
17 last laptop I replaced, I got a one-year service for Geek
18 Squad. I've been in there about 20 times.
19 Q The laptops --
20 A Fixing -- fixing the one I have.
21 Q Okay. These aren't -- the ones that the Geek
22 Squad's fixing, they're not the HP or the Compaq?
23 A Oh, no. No.
24 Q Okay.
25 A That's a Lenovo I have now.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page240
101
220
221
42 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
43
1 Q The HP and the Compaq, how old were those?
2 A Within a year, a year old.
3 Q When did they crash?
4 A Well, the last one crashed August of 2015. The
5 one before that was probably -- let's see. Compaq, '15.
6 Maybe 2012. Probably two thousand and -- maybe '13. Maybe
7 2013.
8 Q Did you make any report to your insurance agent
9 or to Allstate about the one that crashed in '13 before --
10 A No.
11 Q -- last month?
12 A No. I do -- no, this is the way I do this. I do
13 it in bulk. It's too time consuming. I'm too busy with
14 litigation. I'm too busy trying to defend myself and
15 everything else, too busy documenting things I have to
16 document.
17 Q Okay. The next item you have is cost to repair
18 computers from hacking.
19 A Right.
20 Q Which -- are you talking about the same
21 computers?
22 A Yeah.
23 Q The --
24 A I went to -- I went to other services after Geek
25 Squad was not performing their service effectively.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page241
102
221
222
43 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
44
1 Q Let me hold you up for a second now. We talked
2 about the HP and the Compaq, and then you said you bought a
3 warranty in August to have a different computer serviced
4 by --
5 A A Lenovo.
6 Q -- the Geek Squad?
7 A Right.
8 Q Denovo?
9 A Lenovo.
10 Q Lenovo?
11 A L-e-n-o-v-o.
12 Q Is that the one that you're making the claim to
13 have repaired?
14 A I had that serviced, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I had it
15 done by the people on Harrisburg Pike there. He just
16 moved, right there at The Grille there, near the campus. I
17 forget what his name is.
18 Q Near F&M you mean?
19 A Yeah, The Campus Grille. He had a computer
20 repair shop in there, but he just moved. I think he moved
21 out to Liberty Place or somewhere.
22 Q And you paid $400 for that?
23 A No. That was -- to the repair?
24 Q Yeah.
25 A Let me see. Cost to repair computers from
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page242
103
222
223
44 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
45
1 hacking. I guess that's cumulative over the past four
2 years.
3 Q Okay.
4 A That's probably what that is. A Plus on Columbia
5 Avenue. Here's what happened. Last year I made a formal
6 complaint to the Lancaster DA's Office. Okay. I met with
7 the detective. He goes, well, Stan, he goes, listen. He
8 goes you're going to have to do something for me. You're
9 going to have to go get a private firm, analyze your
10 computer and get a report. I did that, paid for it, never
11 seen the detective since.
12 Q Okay.
13 A He never returned my calls. He never -- I guess
14 I called him out on it. I guess he thought, you know, I
15 wasn't going to do it, or it was going to come back saying
16 there wasn't a virus in it or it wasn't hacked, but he was
17 wrong, so he flew the coop from me.
18 Q So the $400 is cumulative --
19 A Yes.
20 Q -- for three different computers?
21 A Three or four.
22 Q And this would be over how many years span?
23 A Three or four years.
24 Q Okay. Do you have the bills for any of those
25 repairs?
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page243
104
223
224
45 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
46
1 A A lot of them are in here.
2 Q I'm sorry?
3 A A lot of them are in here.
4 Q Okay. Could you send me copies of them?
5 A No.
6 Q Why not?
7 A You can see them right now.
8 Q Oh, sure.
9 A I'm getting tired. I had a long week, so let's
10 wrap this up.
11 Q I'm about two-thirds of the way through these
12 items.
13 A Let's make it another day then for the rest.
14 I've had enough.
15 Q Okay.
16 A We can reschedule another time. And I take it
17 I'll get a copy of the transcript?
18 Q I'll get you a copy of the transcript.
19 A Great. You don't mind breaking, do you?
20 Q I would prefer to keep going.
21 A No, I can't. I'm up since 4 o'clock most
22 mornings, so this is enough for me.
23 Q Can you show me where those receipts are that
24 we've just talked about?
25 A Let me see.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page244
105
224
225
46 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
47
1 Q Save you and me some time.
2 A Okay. Here's one. That's $160.
3 Q In the folders that you're looking at right now,
4 are those copies of your receipts?
5 A These are the copies of the reports from the
6 technical people.
7 Q Okay.
8 A The Geek Squad was a one-time fee. Okay. Here's
9 A Plus. Okay. Here's A Plus. Now I got to find the
10 receipt. This is what they wrote. That's on Columbia
11 Avenue. Okay. Let's see. Here's my receipt for the tech
12 service, the Geek Squad. Here's my receipt for the actual
13 computer. Can I have those receipts back? I want to put
14 them where I got them. I don't want the stuff mixed up.
15 Q How can I get a copy of those receipts?
16 A Just take them right now and get them.
17 Q Ask them to copy them, you'd be all right with
18 that?
19 A Sure. Sure.
20 Q Do you have other receipts for any of these other
21 items?
22 A I have 30 years of receipts.
23 Q Here, I mean here in this building. Do you have
24 them with you?
25 A I don't know.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page245
106
225
226
47 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
48
1 Q Could you -- there was another one in there that
2 I was looking at. It was on an 11 -- 8 and a half by 11
3 piece of paper.
4 A Here, that was $160. Let's see. Let me go
5 through there quick and see if I can get the receipts.
6 Here's a receipt. This is a Verizon. What Verizon did was
7 they changed my SIM card thinking that would stop the
8 hacking, but it didn't. This is a receipt, but it's not
9 for -- that's just an in-take. These are the IC3 reports.
10 Let's see if the receipt's in here. Geek Squad. No,
11 they're all the receipts I have.
12 Q Okay.
13 A I believe. I mean, as far as the computers are
14 concerned.
15 Q And then there's no receipts in these documents?
16 A Receipts for what?
17 Q Any of these items that we're talking about.
18 A I don't know.
19 Q Okay.
20 A I don't know.
21 Q I'll make copies of these.
22 A I did not peruse all these files for receipts.
23 Q Would you like -- would you like me to make a
24 copy of that for your records?
25 A No, I gave it to you.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page246
107
226
227
48 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
49
1 Q Okay.
2 A I'm going to have to trust you. I got people
3 changing documents on me all the time.
4 (Off the record.)
5 BY MR. REESER:
6 Q Okay.
7 A Do you want to take these and copy them and bring
8 them back?
9 Q Or I can mail them back to you. Sure.
10 A Well, aren't we going to continue this?
11 Q Actually what I have to do is I have to report
12 back to Allstate, and they let me know if they want me to
13 continue it or not.
14 A Okay. You can take them then. Yeah, that'd be
15 fine. Mail them back.
16 Q Okay. And you will not --
17 A You're going to get educated. You're going to be
18 a changed man, trust me.
19 Q You will not do the continuation, assuming we
20 have one, in the courthouse?
21 A Why?
22 Q Because it's free.
23 A Why don't we do it at Allstate's office, Allen's
24 office?
25 Q Okay. I'll see if I can arrange that.
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page247
108
227
228
49 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
50
1 A Or we can do it at my house. You can come to
2 1250 Freemont Street. It's nice there. It's fixed up.
3 It's nice. I have no problem with that.
4 Q All right.
5 A I had enough of that courthouse.
6 Q Okay. So it's about 20 after 10:00 roughly.
7 A How long did this last?
8 Q Roughly an hour. I don't know what time we
9 started.
10 A That's pretty good.
11 Q So you want to adjourn for the day?
12 A Yeah.
13 MR. REESER: Okay. Very good.
14 (The examination under oath was adjourned at
15 10:19 a.m.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page248
109
228
229
50 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
51
1 COUNTY OF DAUPHIN :
2 : SS
3 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
4 I, Diane F. Foltz, a Notary Public, authorized to
5 administer oaths within and for the Commonwealth of
6 Pennsylvania, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the
7 testimony of Stanley J. Caterbone.
8 I further certify that before the taking of said
9 statement, the witness was duly sworn; that the questions
10 and answers were taken down stenographically by the said
11 Reporter-Notary Public, and afterwards reduced to
12 typewriting under the direction of the said Reporter.
13 I further certify the said statement was taken at the
14 time and place specified in the caption sheet hereof.
15 I further certify I am not a relative or employee or
16 attorney or counsel to any of the parties, or a relative or
17 employee of such attorney or counsel, or financially
18 interested directly or indirectly in this action.
19 I further certify that the said statement
20 constitutes a true record of the testimony given by the
21 said witness.
22 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
23 this 13th day of June, 2016.
24
_______________________
25 Diane F. Foltz, RMR
Notary Public
Stan Sponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
J. Caterbone
County
Mind
Under
Court
Control
Oath
Page249
110
229
230
51 of 51
548
667
668
June22,
17,
21,
9, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Stan J. Caterbone

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
Richmond City Council

May 19, 2015
Richmond City Council Public Hearing of May 19, 2015
Passing a City Resolution 5-2 to Ban Spaced-Based
Weapons in Support of the Many Targeted Individuals
Suffering Symptoms of the City
Transcribed for Advanced Media Group, Originally published:
May 19, 2015
Richmond, California City Council hears from victims and advocates and votes in support of the Space
Preservation Act and the Space Preservation Treaty to permanently ban spaced-based weapons.
Jovanka Beckles Council Member Introduced This Resolution
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page250
111
230
231
4 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL BANS SPACED-BASED WEAPONS
COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 19, 2015
Mayor: One is to adopt a resolution in support of the Space Preservation Act and the Spaced-Based
Treaty to permanently ban Space-based weapons. And we have 15 speakers for this item.
Council Member Beckles, would you like to introduce this?
Beckles : I would. You know I think what I would like to do is just kind of rehash the statement of this
issue for those that dont have the agenda in front of them. The city of Richmond is a welcoming and safe
area for all of our residents. We have led the way in so many initiatives that protect and provide the rights
for all of our residents to feel safe. And so its imperative that Richmond adopt this resolution in order to
stand in solidarity with residents who claim to be under assault with spaced-based weapons that should be
outlawed by the Space Preservation Act.
Now, the thing about this is that were not trying something new here. This is in support of what is already
there at the federal level. So we say as a council we support this treaty thats already in affect and we also
support our residents who are feeling attacked by certain kinds of weapons. And so the purpose of this
resolution is to show support for our residents that identify themselves as targeted individuals by
supporting the Space Preservation Act thats been passed by Congress and the Space Preservation Treaty
to permanently ban spaced-based weapons.
Now, many targeted individuals believe they have been personally attacked by weaponry that should be
outlawed by the Space Preservation Act. Some years ago one of the residents who is going to talk now, I
met with her. I met with many of them, to talk about this issue. Ive also spoken with our police
department. The representative from the department was Captain Gagan to figure out how law
enforcement can support these individuals, first of all, by at least listening and not assuming, and actually
just taking reports of incidences that are reported. And the police department was open to that, and is
open to that, and are willing to work with our residents in helping them to feel safe. Because its important
that we all feel safe living in our city. And in our city we have put forth our best effort to listen and respect
the voices and wisdom and experiences of our residents.
And so I dont intend to ignore it and Im hoping that my colleagues on this (unclear word) wont ignore,
but support those who suspect they have been exposed to these types of inhumane attacks with the intent
to cause them great emotional and bodily harm. And Im encouraged by these residents, these citizens of
Richmond, who stood up to protect these other residents here. Id like to encourage other officials at the
local, state and national level to explore methods to expand support to all residents. And as many as
you can see those of us with an agenda in front of us, and those who dont have an agenda in front of
you, who may be watching, or the livecast on the web, is that there is no financial impact to this. This is
not going to cost anything and its not going to hurt anyone to pass it. But it certainly would continue to
cause emotional distress to those who are being targeted if we dont pass this. And I urge you to support
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page251
112
231
232
5 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
all of our residents in the city.
Mayor: Do we have questions from council members? Okay, Vice Mayor.
V Mayor: Just real quickly. You mentioned that this was passed by Congress. Can you tell me when that
happened because Im trying to look it up now and I thought that was just introduced in 2001 and never
was
Beckles: Actually, Ms Anderson can probably answer that question. When was it passed at the federal
level, Ms Anderson?
Anderson: 9/10/2002. Space Preservation Act, former Congressman Dennis Cosenich had introduced
this bill.
Vice Mayor: But was that

Mayor: Were sort of getting out of our process here. I think that (word unclear) do you have other
questions?
Vice Mayor: Well, Im looking at the sheet that youre looking at. It looks like thats when the Burkley
City Council passed a resolution, not when Congress passed the law. Im looking on line at the House
website. And I know that theres, I understand that theres been multiple versions of this so I dont know if
its been passed or not. But from what it looks like here, it doesnt look like that version was passed by
Congress, so I dont know if it was. But I understand the Burkley City Council passed it on 9/10 of 2002.
Mayor: Other questions from the council?
Mayor: So I had a couple of questions. Im looking at the resolution and it talks about the Space
Preservation Act. Can you tell me what act that was? Theres never been a Space Preservation Act passed,
right?
Beckles: It wasnt passed. It was brought forward by the Representative, the Congressman at the time.
Because there were some, you know how it goes in Washington, theres just a lot of power play. So it
never gotbut it did get passed in 2002 in Burkley. So were making ours similar to the one that was
passed in Burkley.
Mayor: Well it doesnt say anything about Burkley here. All it says is the Space Preservation Act. Are you
talking about the resolution Burkley passed or are you talking about one of the two resolutions that
Representative Cosenich introduced in 2001 and 2002?
Beckles: Well because that one didnt pass were just making reference that it was brought forward by
Dennis Cosenich, and of course politics being the way they are, it did not pass. So this is, Im making
reference to and using the Burkley model as an example of ours.
Mayor: Which one of the Cosenich resolutions did the Burkley model refer to?
Anderson: HR3616. House Resolution 3616.
Mayor: I didnt hear you, what?
Anderson: House Resolution 3616.
Mayor: 3615.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page252
113
232
233
6 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Anderson: 3616. 1. 6.
Mayor: The research I did on this, that resolution was substantially different than HR2977.
Anderson: Yes sir.
Mayor: And significantly it omitted any references to chem trails, particle beams, electromagnetic
radiation, plasmas, extremely low frequency or ultra-high frequency energy radiation and mind control
technology. So, the question I have is, it seemed to me, it was your intent to include all these in it, right?
So if you go with HR3616 and we approve this, it will not include any of these things I named. Was that
your intent?
Beckles: That was not my intent. My intent, and working with staff, of course, it helped put this together,
because we know that we get help with our staff. The intention was to include all of the things that people
are feeling, yeah, that people are feeling the pressures of and feeling the attacks of, and so I think thatI
dont know how much of this issue that Burkley had in theirs. But I think that to include these, and this is
the resolution saying we support this treaty, this act. Then Id like to have it in there. Because again, to
me its important that we defend, that we support and that we protect our residents. And so if these are
the things that residents are saying theyre feeling, then it should be in there.
Mayor: Well, all Burkley did, and Im looking at the Burkley resolution, and it just says, It is the will of
the council and the city of Burkley that the US Senate and House of Representatives enact, and the US
President sign and enforce the Space Preservation Act. But Im confused because there were actually two
Space Preservation Acts introduced and I think if were going to do this right, we need to define which one
were going to support. Because theyre different.
Beckles: Youre absolutely right. And I want the best one to move forward as well, and Im sure that the
residents want the best one and so.
Mayor: Which one is the best one?
Anderson: HR2977.
Mayor: So that would be HR2977.
Anderson: Yes.
Beckles: Which is the one that includes
Anderson: Everything.
Mayor: Ok, so, with that in mind, I dont have any more council people... oh I do too. Council Member
yeah, Ive got a bunch; Council Member Martinez and Council Member McLaughlin.
Martinez: Yes, I wanted to change the language to say that we endorse the intent of the act since the
act is not actually in place.
Mayor: The intent of which act?
Martinez: The intent of the second act.
Mayor: The second one is HR3616.
Beckles: Are you talking about HR2977 which includes all that, right? Which includes the chem trails. Is
that right?
Mayor: Thats my understanding of it.
Beckles: Is that right, Council Member Martinez?
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page253
114
233
234
7 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Martinez: Is that the revision? Right.
Mayor: Council Member McLaughlin.
McLaughlin: Actually I did some research on this too. Apparently Representative Cosenich didnt read
fully the first resolution that was brought forward in his name. He brought it forward based on some
recommendations. And when he realized it was drawn out to the level that it was, he pulled it. And he
brought forward the second one, which is 3616, which I think is more general.
Many of us remember, just to share some input going back, many of us remember in the 80s, Ronal
Reagan brought forth the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was later dubbed Star Wars, you know, thats
where this all came from. Basically, it was to put weapons technology into space as a global shield, as a
supposed defense against China and the Soviet Union. It was later seen as infeasible. And many others..
many people saw this as the idea to put weapons in spacewas insane. And I happen to think it was a
crazy idea, as did the population at large.
Then the Clinton administration in 1993 morphed it into the Ballistic Missile Defense. Later in 2002, which
is currently now the Missile Defense Agency. But also, along the way, in 2002 Dennis Cosenich introduced
this bill, and its the second one that he fully introduced, 3616, which basically called for a ban on spaced-
based weapons. And then it was, I think it was just introduced, a co-sponsor was Representative Barbara
Lee, and at a certain point, this Space Preservation Act that was just introduced was brought to the UN
and the Space Preservation Treaty was linked with it. And actually the UN had previously addressedset
upestablished, I guess the basis for this treaty by saying they wanted a permanent ban on spaced-based
weapons that passed in the United Nations that passed 156 to 0. Then Burkley supported the 2002 the
Space Preservation Act and I believe also, the Space Preservation Treaty.
So thats what Council Member Beckles is referring to in terms of the resolution that shes brought
forward. I dont know how anyone can not support not having weapons in space when it has been
supported by the UN and also been supported, clearly stated by many experts that its infeasible this
original Ronald Reagan plan to dub this Star Wars.
I think the resolution is fine as it is. It basically says that the residentsthe well-being of our residents is
of importance to us and it also, it doesnt state pro or con in terms of what individuals are saying. But it
just refers to the fact that our residents deserve to be protected. And in general it states that spaced-
based weapons are something that the city of Richmond does not support. (applause)
Mayor: Okay, so would you call the public speakers?
Anderson: Speakers are Amy Anderson, Jesse Beltrand, Dr. John Hall, Dr. Edward Spencer, Ben
Colonson, Lisa Becker and Derrick Robinson.
Beckles: Amy Lee Anderson.
Anderson: Yes
Mayor: Could you come over here to the podium to speak, please?
Anderson: Good evening Council Members, Council Beckles. I really want to thank you for not deviating
your plan because I went on your Facebook and I saw why you came in office and you never deviated your
plan. You said that you wanted to first put the community first and from you doing that, I want to thank
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page254
115
234
235
8 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
you first. And secondly, as a psychologist, a child psychologist, I want to thank you for putting up with
some of those pains I have suffered along this way. But I am here in happiness, in a moment of greatness.
I have a perfect city. Nowhere in the United States, no targeted individual can get this kind of support
that I have gotten. We just needed just one person, one city. And because of that, you all are our heroes,
and we want to thank you. And I can go on and say much much.
But we are dying within because the technology is so sophisticated. Its hard for someone who has no
experience to fathom it. It is so sophisticated. So what we are saying to you all is please let us help you
understand enough, as someone outside looking in to our lives. Because were in pain, we are tortured
and we are humiliated every day in our lives because our lives have taken on a path. We dont even know
how or why we have this type of people on this planet who would harm in this type of way. And I just want
to thank you all. And you, Mayor, for you being in the cityworking in the service. Being in the service. For
others to do this, I know that should sadden you. (applause)
Jesse Beltrand: Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor and City Council Members. My name is Jesse Beltrand.
Im the president of the International Center Against the Use of Covert Technologies. Our organization was
formed in 2010 in Sacramento California for the purpose to bring awareness to the general public and
legal systems around the world about serious human rights abuses with regards to the utilization of
remote influencing technologies. My colleagues and co-speakers today, hopefully well get John Hall, who
was the author of Guinea Pigs, Technologies of Control, which have been sent to each of you and signed. I
also have Dr. Edward Spencer, whos a Neurologist from the Yale School of Medicine and Ben Colonson who
is a PHD in psychology, and therapist, and co-author of a book about PTSD. I myself am a retired
Sacramento City Fire Paramedic and a recent graduate of HMI and do provide therapy to victims.
In 2010 I met Dr. Hall and when meeting him I discovered this phenomenon and asked, Why isnt
anything being done about this? He said its because of the symptomology. If everyone went to traditional
medicine and complained about what they were experiencing, they would be railroaded into the mental
health institutions. The fact of the matter is, this is affecting all demographics of society: the poor, the
rich, the elite. I see victims on a monthly basis and hear from hundreds of people every week. I currently
have over 23,000 correspondences from victims not only within, here in the United States, but around the
world.
What we have discovered is that there are hot pockets within the United States where there are victims
that are being exposed to these types of technologies. And as our speakers continue to speak they will
explain to you how that has developed. Currently the hot spots are New York, Florida, Chicago, Texas, and
California. Unfortunately, in California, the East Bay has the highest amount of victims that we have
collected in our database, within our study within our organization. This is why we are currently here
today.
Beckles: Your time has expired Sir.
Beltrand: Okay, thank you.
Beckles: Dr. John Hall. Dr. John Hall.
Beltrand: Dr. Hall is unable to be reached so were going to have Dr. Spencer here.
Spencer: Mr. Mayor, City Council, thank you. Thank you for attacking this very difficult problem. And
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page255
116
235
236
9 ofof183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
there are a lot of people around the world, especially in Europe, where I attended a counsel just recently,
in November, who thank you. Im a retired neurologist. I attended Stanford University, Yale University and
a residency at the University of California in San Francisco.
Ive studied this sort of problem for a period of time. And its been a mystery to me why medicine in
general does not approach this and study the multitude of documents that are out there. But this is the
case. And I wont answer this for you, because this is an ongoing study, ongoing problem. This is really
intense technology. Essentially what might be described as EEG heterodyning. The entire electrical activity
of the human brain can be captured in this super computer and certainly processed and then put back into
someone else. Imits science fiction. But unfortunately, its not science fiction. So naturally this is
difficult. So the technology is incredible. But basically this is a moral problem. Ethical problem. This is a
violation of the golden rule, any ethics, anything thats decent. And this is a major thing to consider. Its
also a violation of our constitutional rights. So thats an important thing to keep in mind.
To bring it back down to Richmond, I know there are a lot of targeted individuals here, and the police
encounter them. And cant understand this and help them. The medical community is hobbled by not
having a differential diagnosis. And many of the psychiatric disorders, they should say rule out
psychotronic disorders, but they dont. So they cant face it at all. Thank you.
Beckles: Ben Colonson
Colonson: I thank you all. Two minutes. Okay, lets go. Thank you all for your endurance. I see you listen
to a lot of humans. Im gonna talk really fast with two minutes to go. I am a psychologist. I have
evaluated many targeted individuals who have previously been diagnosed as delusional and psychotic and
my job is to deconstruct those diagnoses. Because of the methods of my colleagues that can actually
detect advanced nano-technology present in their bodies both through frequency emissions and
lymphaticbasicallylike when you fire a bullet theres a trajectory and the police can determine the
trajectory. There are chemical tests to do that. I was just gonna, very quickly, since its two minutes, this
is this months issue of Smithsonian Magazine that says, The Future is Here: Brain to Brain
Communication is Real. Targeted Individuals report synthetic telepathy, voices in their skull, people
putting thoughts in their head, things that up until now weve been told are complete delusion and lock
em up. But you know, the capabilities exist.
This is the National Nanotech Initiative. The last 15 years budgets of a billion and a half dollars just by the
federal governments non-black budgets. We dont know what they spend on the black budgets. Doing
experimental programs showing how nano sensors in people can give us much more data about humanity.
These technologies can be used for great good but they have apparently also been used for tremendous
evil in non-consensual human experimentation. There is great documentation on this.
I do think its a little unfortunate, that confusion about the Space Preservation Act. There arethe systems
SCADAS, theyre called. The acronym stands for Supervisory Control And Data Systems Systems. They
include a component of satellite communication from a central command post as well as components
inside the human beings, or targeted individuals. So although there is a component of these weapons
systems, and they are clearly weapons systems by the major nations on earth, theres an arms race on for
the mind at this time. Control of the human mind. The Human Brain Initiative is part of it. If I only have
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page256
117
236
237
10 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
two minutes I have to stop there. I hope you will listen to these people. They are suffering greatly as non-
consensual experimentees.
Beckles: A question, really quick, to the speaker. Could you repeat the names of those two references
that you gave, the magazines? Can you give me the names of those again, please?
Colonson: The first one, the current issue of the Smithsonian Magazine. A main stream magazine, which
in this months issue, says communicating brain to brain. And this is merely what they are releasing
publicly. The majority of the most advanced weapons systems are classified and we dont know the full
capabilities. This is just the supplemental to the presidents budget, this years Nanotechnology Initiative.
And what I didnt get to say in my two minutes is the National Registry of Environmental Professionals,
which certifies people to do all kinds of environmental quality testing, has just certified SCADAS,
Supervisory Control And Data Administration Systems, as something that needs to be studied for its
environmental impact on the environment in general. And I am part of the HSCADAS task force, how
these SCADAS systems are impacting human beings. And there are thousands of reports from targeted
individuals that crimes are being committed against them. And my intention in coming here tonight was to
support their claims so that law enforcement, with as much
Mayor: I think she asked you the names of the magazinesso
Beckles: Thank you very much. Lisa Becker.
Becker: Hi. Good evening. My name is Lisa Becker and I came here from Racine, Wisconsin. I have been
a victim of this technology for 14 years. I have been tortured for 14 years. My justice department has
failed me. My executive branch has failed me. My senators have failed me. My congressmen have failed
me. You are the only people in this country who have had the courage to even put this on the agenda.
Thats why I flew all this way to thank you, and to address you. This is torture. And it is enslavement. And
any one of these people can tell you the same thing. We have suffered desperately. And Im sorry if Im
emotional. But Im very tired. But if you wont save us, save yourselves. Because I promise you, this will
come back to every one of you. Every one of us in this country are going to be tapped into these computer
systems and you are gonna see what this feels like. Do something now while you still can. Thank you.
Council Member: I have a question. Could you be more specific in terms of how you feel that youve
beenthe injustice.
Becker: You mean in terms of the justice department failing me?
Council Member: Well in terms of your being a victim.
Becker: You mean in what Im feeling?
Council Member: Yeah, explain a little bit to me how you perceive yourself as being.
Becker: Sure, well I have actual photographs of burns on my body. When I went to my doctor, the
response was, Well how do I know you didnt do that to yourself? How do you address that? Ive passed
two psychological evaluations. Not one but two. The one physician said, Youre sound as a bell. I have no
idea whats going on with you. When I go to sleep, when I go to try to sleep, I feel like Im being lit up
like a Christmas tree. I feel like every cell in my body just bouncing out of my body. I cant even describe
it. I get electric shock up my rectum. I get electric shock up my nose. Ive woken up with burns on the
end of my tongue. Ive had burns on the palms of both my hands. I vibrate. I vibrate. I can barely hold a
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page257
118
237
238
11 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
piece of paper without quivering. Does that answer your question?
Council Member: Im trying to find out whats the source.
Becker: The source are these exotic weapons. They talk about, in 2977, they talk about the space
weapons, spaced-based weapons. Basically in that document they talk about exotic weapons. Thats what
were talking about. And the fact of the matter is they did complete that global surveillance network. My
cousin worked for the defense department. She worked on the global mapping of that system. And when I
told her what I was going through, all she could say was, Youre on your own. Well, I figured that out. I
figured that out. If you would please, I urge you to pass this. I realize you cant enforce it, but if you
would pass it, it might give other communities the courage to do the same thing and show our defense
department we are not the enemy. We are not to be attacked. We are not terrorists. Most of us are
defenseless women.
Mayor: Okay, thank you.
Becker: Thank you.
Beckles: Our next speaker is Derrick Robinson, followed by Laquisha Baker, Dolores Hall, Kim, Alex,
Elizabeth Adams, Robert Swegan. Please come forward. Derrick Robinson.
Robinson: Good evening everyone. Im Derrick Robinson. In regards to the Space Preservation Act that
is before you, many of us have travelled here to say thanks very much for listening and responding to so
many that have come to you over the past couple of years. This is a momentous occasion for our
organization and for humanity. You are one of the very few governing authorities that has considered the
danger of psychotonic technologies. Research in this area has been ongoing since the 50s by government
agencies, corporations, criminal elements, and religious cults, etc. But, only since the arrival of the
internet, has this holocaust been made known to thousands of people who have found that they are
victims of psychotonic technologies. And that they have been sereptisciously victimized by them. And as
the devices proliferate and the public becomes more aware of these covert activities, legislation on a local
and national level will be needed to address the concerns with regard to a vulnerable society. Your
resolution today would be a giant step forward in ensuring the health, safety and well-being for all people.
Thank you.
Beckles: Laquisha Baker
Baker: Hello to all the legislators, and city hall, Javanka, my girl Amy over there. I have been a
Richmond resident 40 plus years. Ive seen two of my friends try and fight this fight. But their minds are
gone and theres no coming back. My mother was a Black Panther. They killed her. She was only 58 years
old. And Im just happy at this moment that somebody in our town, our city, has opened the doors for
many people who couldnt make it, didnt make it, and were survivors of it. And I just want to say thank
you.
Beckles: Dolores Hall.
Hall: I did not know you were going to call me to speak. But I will share. I head up the Los Angeles
Freedom from Covert Harassment Group. Its a support group. And I have about 300 people that is in that
group. And I get over 400 emails on a weekly basis of people asking me to help them, begging me, please
help. No one will listen to me. I am 65 years old and as I walk here, up to this podium, Im in so much
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page258
119
238
239
12 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
pain. I have burns all over my body. Theymy doctor I had treated with for 16 years, my legs swelled up
from the electric magnetic frequencies hitting me on my legshe told me to go to the hospital. And when I
went to the hospital they were supposed to put an IV in me. They sent me to the mental ward because
they said I did this to myself. I would never hurt me. I have been a victim since 2007. You cant see this
horrific electric hitting you. Electric is invisible. You take a remote control to turn your tv, turn on your
television. It hurts so bad. I want to thank you for opening your minds and your time today. I am a retired
legal investigator. I have asked all my friends, I have very prominent friends, to help me. They cant do
anything about this. It is way, way over our heads. They say its the shadow government. It is people that
cannot be touched. Please help us.
Beckles: Kim, next speaker.
Buckner: Hello, my name is Kimberly Buckner and I have been a targeted individual for a very long time.
The things that Ive experienced due to being targeted, they have been unreal. However, I can attest that
they are very real indeed. My life has been destroyed in every possible way and every day has been a
struggle for me. I am very grateful to be before you today due to Amy Andersons due diligence and to
everyone else involved. I thank you council members for giving us targeted individuals a chance to speak
and to be heard. And I pray that these atrocities will soon be brought to an end. But we need your help.
Thank you.
Beckles: Alex
Rafter: Good evening, my name is Alec Rafter. I am an NYU graduate and have spent much of my time
working in a financial holding company in San Francisco. I have been a targeted individual for eight years
six months. Im from Lafayette, California, which is in this county. I am here to support and corroborate
what these other speakers are trying to convey. This technology exists and is being used on a mass scale.
It is torturous, brutal and inhumane. It happens everywhere I go. People dont understand the capabilities
of this technology. The person I came with here tonight was being shocked and stabbed in this very room
with a directed energy weapon while waiting to speak with the council. My ears are getting frequency
tinnitus while I was sitting here waiting for you as well as technology called voice to skull Dr. Alan Frey.
Like I said, this happens everywhere I go in Northern and Southern California. Ive been tortured all day,
all night, minute after minute, year after year after year. We need your help and support to stop this, to
save us, and to prevent this from happening to others. Please support banning these so called spaced-
based weapons. Thank you very much.
Beckles: Robert Swegan
Swegan: Good evening. My name is Robert Swegan. I live in Modesto California. Im here tonight after
being targeted for 12 years with direct energy weapons, voice to skull. I wake up in the middle of the
night in excruciating pain. Theres nobody I can call. Theres nobody to help me. You know, sometimes I
have suicidal idealization because theres no one to help. You know, Ive been diagnosed schizophrenic,
delusional, at 53 and 57 years old. Im a graduate of junior college with a degree in counseling and human
service. I commend you people for what youre doing here. I want toIm here to support my friends. And
I know this has been very difficult for me and my family. My familyI have 4 children. One is in prison
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page259
120
239
240
13 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
right now. I suspect he was here for about 45 minutes. And others will not even talk to me. My familys
been fragmented. I dont tell anybody whats happening to me anymore. Its a dark secret with me. I
cannot explain to people whats happening. The police in Modesto are at least talking to me now. Theyre
not taking me down to the mental health facility. I thank you very much for listening to me.
Beckles: Marilyn Languist
Languist: Good evening Mayor and Council Members. Marilyn Languist, Richmond resident. I want to
thank Ms Anderson for bringing this topic forward and for bringing so many speakers. I urge you to adopt
this resolution. As has been said, the original Space Preservation Act was originally introduced by
Congressman Cosenich, co-sponsored by Congresswoman Barbara Lee and Congressman Pete Stark of the
Bay Area. And this concept was also voted on and supported unanimously by the United Nations to
prohibit weaponization of space and spaced-based weapons. These are clearly not good for anyone on
earth and not good for anyone in Richmond. You have to be aware that there are a lot of exotic weapons
research programs going on. Some of them covert, some of them not covert. A former Richmond resident
sent me a lot of emails last year about a public comment period for allowing US military testing of directed
energy weapons in the Olympic peninsula in the state of Washington, which is of great concern. In terms
of the types of weapons that are affecting these individuals, before you judge the targeted individuals, I
would suggest that you listen to them, take the time to really listen deeply to their experience. Try to put
yourself in their shoes for a moment. If you can believe them, then please do what you can to support
them. If youre not sure, then I urge you to take the precautionary principle, when in doubt error on the
side of extra protection for those who are vulnerable. So please do adopt this resolution. Thank you.
Beckles: Sylvia Gray White
White: Good evening. My name is Sylvia Gray White, a very long time Richmond resident. Tonight Im so
thankful and happy that our city is looking up, waking up and standing up. Approval of this agenda item
will make an impact on the whole world and will help us to restore our mother earth and our health. The
heavy metal toxins falling down on us daily from the chem trails are done by our military without our
approval and knowledge. Lead is one of the many chemicals in the chem trails even though our
government banned it decades ago. Banned it from paint, toys, even bullets, and other manufacturing
processes. This toxin has really negatively impacted my life. Lead is very toxic and there are no safe
levels. It displaces the calcium in your bones among many other illnesses, particularly with children. The
level of lead in my body has drastically increased in the past 3 years. Ive gotta get the lead out. We need
to stop this constant daily abuse of our universal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If you
cant feel good, you cant live good. I am not the only one breathing this pollution. If you breathe, youre
breathing it too. We have rights. Stand up for them! Now in order to stand Ive got to use a cane. But I
still can stand and will stand up for whats right.
Beckles: Our last speaker is Elizabeth Adams.
Adams: First and foremost Id like to pass this cell phone around. This is what electronic burns look like.
This is my 6 year old grand-daughter who has been targeted since birth. So can I just walk around and
show this to you?
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page260
121
240
241
14 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mayor: Give it to the clerk.
Adams: This was taken less than 30 days ago at Eden hospital. Thats when you hear of the victim speak
of being electronically burned. That is my 6 year old grand-daughter. I am 59 years old. I have 6
grandchildren and 2 great grandchildren. I first and foremost want to say that I thank God for every one
of you. And I mean literally from the bottom of my heart. I thank him for each one of you and I thank him
for the blessings that hes gonna bring your way just for addressing these issues. These issues are beyond
the average eye. The average eye cant even see it. So its not even worth even talking about in that
sense. I have sent each and every one of you information. Everything that I sent you is just what you
need to know. But theres one more thing left: your local fusion center. You need to do some deep
research into your local fusion center. Just look it up on line. That is where you will find information, ill
activities of some sort, that is going on withinIm not going to say city government because I cant
pinpoint it. But you need to look into your local fusion center. Secondly, mental health of children(timer
beeping).May I finish just two minutes please?
Mayor: No, I think we need to give everybody the same amount of time. Thank you.
Adams: Okay, no problem.
Beckles: That was the last speaker.
Mayor: (lady asked to speak) Maam, you know, if you didnt sign up you cant speak. Okay, I have Vice
Mayor Meyers.
Vice Mayor: I was just gonna briefly say that the weaponization of space as the history that was so
eloquently described by Council Member McLaughlin is something that I think is extremely immoral and we
should not be, as a nation, engaging in and so Im gonna support this resolution based on that.
Mayor: Do we have any other speakers? Okay, hearing none, do we have a motion?
Beckles: I can make a motion. I share that we adopt the resolution thats put before us.
Mayor: Motion of second?
Beckles: Pinplay has something
Mayor: Oh, Councilman Pinplay
Pinplay: I just want to address for a second this whole idea about weaponization of space and there
seems to be this assumption that just because Ronald Reagan supported Star Wars, its automatically
become some unmitigated evil. The context in which it was considered a problem was simply because
there was this perception that Star Wars or any kind of strategic defense initiative could not be made
foolproof. And it could not be made foolproof because the opponent, particularly a very well-armed
opponent like the Soviet Union could launch like tens of thousands of dummy missiles at any one point
and so it would be almost impossible to intercept all of them and to distinguish the nuclear missiles from
the dummy missiles. And the understanding was that it would be that there could be a problem created
because based on the overestimation of the effectiveness of Star Wars, namely that America might think
that it was too effective and therefore, go for a first strike and knock out all the Soviet weapons. Or, on
the other hand, the Soviets might feel it was too effective and go for a preemptive strike beforehand. And
it was only in that specific cold war context that Star Wars was considered a horrible idea. Actually, Star
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page261
122
241
242
15 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Wars is not a particularly bad idea, the whole idea is that you can knock out someones weapons before
they enter your air space, in fact, long before they enter your air space. And this, for example, was
practiced more than 20 years ago, in the Gulf War, when the Patriot system modification of this was used
when the Patriot system knocked out some of the Iraqi missiles that were launched at Israel. And it is not
just a perfectly valid system, it is actually a particularly useful system, in the time that we have now
where there are nations that are not quite as well armed as the Soviet Union used to be in the 1980s.
Which may not have the capability to launch tremendous numbers of missiles at any one time. And, in
fact, this is a fairly useful system to have. And so this automatic knee jerk reaction that because Reagan
supported Star Wars and at the time it was considered a bad idea and so for that purpose it is considered
a bad idea forever, I just think this is a wrong understanding of the system. And I just wanted to mention
that.
Mayor: So we have Council Member McLaughlin next.
McLaughlin: So, I justthe reason I was interrupting because I dont think we should get into it. Thats
kind of way off base. I was just giving the history of this in general. I will say that there were some of us
in the 80s that were talking about a nuclear freeze like to stop the arms war rather than weapons in
space. You know, I think space should be for exploration and good things to learn, scientifically. Not for a
weapons trace.
Mayor: Wait, no, were not having anything from the audience. Council Member Martinez.
Martinez: Yes, just last week on 60 Minutes there was a special on the reintroduction to the arms war,
with people trying to develop missiles to take out communication satellites. But any kind of war effort is
wrong. And we need to do whatever we can to stop all war efforts. Now when I was in university in the
1980s for humanities class, I did a paper on a science fiction novel. What I actually did was, I took all of
the predictions in this science fiction novel, and then I went to magazines and newspapers, and I was
surprised to find that every single prediction in this science fiction novel, that was written 20 years earlier,
had already come true. And they were happening there, then, in 1980. So its easy for me to see that
things which are wrong can happen because we have the wrong mindset. We have the mindset which is a
war mindset and this proposition that was put forth by Cosenich was to change our attitudes towards one
of seeking peace, and thats why Im endorsing it.
Mayor: Okay, Vice Mayor.
Vice Mayor: Well, I want to say that I do think this debate is, it is on topic, because the debate on Star
Wars is sort of, was part of what initiated this. And what I would say, and its been said, that any sort of
in my viewthe idea that we dont have enough tools to kill each other here on earth and so that we need
to start doing it in space, that just is simply immoral. And you know, it may be that some wars are
unavoidable. That may be true. But whatever we can do to get our country to move away from that mind
set and move away from utilizing new methods of war, we should support. And so thats why I support this
resolution.
Mayor: Okay, if theres nobody else, lets vote. Wait. Council Member Pinplay.
Pinplay: So the motion before us, does that include things like chem trails and stuff, or no?
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page262
123
242
243
16 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mayor: Well, let me, I think hes bringing up a good point, because, Im really confused. I think that the
resolution itself is very simple. It simply says, the city of Richmond thereby supports the Space
Preservation Act and companion Space Preservation Treaty to ensure that individuals will not be targets of
spaced-based weapons. So I see that. All the testimony Ive heard tonight is about targeted individuals.
And so, I mean, Im confused. Is this about spaced-based weapons or is it about targeted individuals? And
if individuals are targeted, whos targeting them and why? I just dont understand it.
Beckles: Its simple enough. Its saying that, on the thereforeas you read, we are supporting this Space
Preservation Act and companion Space Preservation Treaty and the reason were doing this is that
individuals will not be targets of spaced-based weapons, which is what theyre saying. All this stuff is high
technology, itsand sothats what were adopting here. And you know, whether you believe it or not, one
thing that was very clear, and Ive met with folks a lot around this issue, and some of them Im just
hearing tonight. And even the ones I heard tonight, just out of compassion for folks that are saying help
us, and us supporting this, by adopting this resolution, I think it sends out a message that, you know, we
sympathize with you, we support you, and the very least we can do is just pass this resolution to make
sure that you feel the support and love and sympathy that you deserve. Its simple, it reads right there
Mayor. Thats all were trying to pass. Whats there before you. Thats all were trying to pass. Dont
complicate it. Its simple, so vote it yes or no.
Mayor: I sympathize with everyone who is suffering some kind of affliction. But on the other hand, you
know, in 1967, the US adopted, or the President signed the treaty on the principles guarding the activities
of states in the exploration and use of outer space including the moon and other celestial bodies. So the
US government has acted on this, and they have, within that particular treaty, is a ban on using outer
space for military purposes. So, I just dont understand what were talking about. Are we talking about the
weaponization of space? Are we talking about chem trails? Are we talking about individuals who are being
targeted? If so, by whom and why? I mean, you know, Im just a dumb city council person and this is way,
way over my head. And I frankly think that its sort of way out of the purview of what this city council
could be taking up.
Weve got real problems here. Weve got potholed roads, weve got a budget thats out of balance, weve
got crime, weve got greenhouse gases. Weve got all these things to worry about and here Im being
asked to support a resolution that deals with things like chem trails and particle beams and plasmas and
mind control technologies. I just dont know enough about it. If I were an expert Id probably take a side,
but Im not. And so for that reason Im just not gonna support it. Maybe some time Ill learn more and be
more oriented
Beckles: Id like to call the questions.
Mayor: Council Member Bates
Bates: Well, it is confusing. Im gonna support the resolution for the simple reason that weve voted on
lot of dumber ideas than this resolution represents. And again, we know that we dont control the
universe, we dont control Congress. So this is the least of my worries. So, Im gonna support it. Now call
for the questions.
Mayor: Does anybody else want to talk about it? Okay, lets just vote.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page263
124
243
244
17 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Beckles: Council Member Pinplay? No. The motion passes 5-2 with Council Member Pinplay voting no,
and Mayor Butt voting no.
Bates: One reason I voted for it was there wasnt one speaker in opposition of it.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page264
125
244
245
18 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Richmond council passes resolution supporting ban on space-based wea... http://richmondstandard.com/2015/05/richmond-council-passes-resolutio...
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Facebook
Twitter More
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page265
126
245
246
19 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
1 of 1 6/5/2016 6:44 AM
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article....
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Richmond: Space weapons resolution prompts requests to

investigate
By Karina Ioffee [email protected]
East Bay Times
Posted:Mon Jun 01 18:42:20 MDT 2015
RICHMOND -- A city resolution banning space weapons within city limits has prompted dozens of calls to the Richmond Police
Department in recent days to ask the agency to investigate the alleged use of chips, bugs and other devices for mind and body
control.
On May 19, the City Council approved a resolution supporting the Space Preservation Act and Space Preservation Treaty
permanently banning "space-based weapons," such as microchips planted in people's bodies and micro waves that supporters
believe are used by nefarious sources to harm them.
The resolution was written by Councilwoman Jovanka Beckles, who works as a mental health specialist for Contra Costa County,
and aimed at "making all Richmond residents feel safe," she said.
"I don't intend to ignore the concerns from residents who say they have been exposed to these attacks that have caused them great
emotional and bodily harm," Beckles said.
The fallout has prompted worries that Richmond, which is working hard to remold its image in recent years, will be dismissed as
slightly off by the news media and other municipalities.
" I am trying to figure out how we can use this newfound fame to help market Richmond, much as desolate eastern Nevada has
used the Extraterrestrial Highway to lure tourists to an otherwise deserted stretch of desert highway," joked Richmond Mayor Tom
Butt in a recent online posting.
But the issue actually started last June, when Richmond police Capt. Mark Gagan was asked by Beckles to meet with residents who
said they were being targeted by space technology. Eager to show the department was sensitive to residents' concerns, Gagan
agreed.
"My desire was how to better serve this population from a public safety standpoint," said Gagan, a 20-year veteran with the
department. "There are people who have a huge amount of stress, anxiety and fear. These issues have public safety implications
no matter how far-fetched they seem."
The meeting had the best of intentions. But it appears to have also motivated conspiracy theorists who began to see the city as an
ally. Gagan began receiving invitations to speak at conferences organized by the "targeted individuals" community, and a rumor
started that the city had a task force devoted to uncovering government conspiracies. One organization even gave Gagan a
"humanitarian award" for his work on the issue.
"People were thrilled that someone was finally listening to them," Gagan said.
Since that meeting, he estimates that he's received more than 100 calls from people from as far away as Ireland who say they want
Richmond police to investigate their particular situations. Gagan always takes the time to explain that the department looks at facts
and has so far found no evidence to support concerns raised by callers.
"We try to refocus the conversation, and if they are local, get them into a managed program of medication and supervision," Gagan
said.
Contact Karina Ioffee at 510-262-2726 or [email protected]. Follow her at Twitter.com/kioffee
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page266
127
246
247
20 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
1 of 1 6/5/2016 6:47 AM
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUPFreedom From

Covert Harassment & Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
CORROBORATING EXPERT AND FORMER NSA WHISTLEBLOWER

KAREN STEWART
DISCLOSURE OF ELECTROGAGNETIC WEAPONS USED TO KILL CERTAIN

TARGETED INDIVIDUALS DURING APRIL 10, 2016 RADIO INTERVIEW
THE DISCLOSURE
Karen Stewart graduated from Florida State University in 1979 with a BS degree in German Language
and a minor or co-major equivalent in Fine Art. She worked for NSA (National Security Agency) from
1982 to 2010. Her resume will follow.
Her video interviews can be seen on the following YOUTUBE links:
Wheel of Freedom (WUA) 4/4/16 Ex-NSA Karen Stewart
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExpCL27ft10
NSA whistle blower Karen Stewart exposes targeted Individuals, 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ravXai6nfMg
On March 9, 2016 I was detained and falsely imprisoned by no less than 8 NSA Security Police
on the barracks of the Headquarters of the NSA at Ft. Meade Maryland. I was handcuffed, and
interrogated for over an hour, while my car was dog sniffed and searched. I was ordered to return to
Lancaster rather than continue on to Washington, D.C., and was ordered not to enter any federally
owned property again. The following is a video of my statement:
Statement and Video of False Imprisonment re Handcuffed and Interrogation for an hour at NSA
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page267
128
247
248
21 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Headquarters (National Security Agency at Ft. Meade, Maryland) by 8 NSA Police officers on March 9,
2015 Recorded on March 11, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeXlaQn5Nhs
Karen Stewart's resume at the NSA is as follows: I Worked various projects over the years, not
just USSR/Russia, but various countries researching/reporting on foreign military status and alliances,
weapons development and proliferation, the Chernobyl disaster and aftermath, the fall of the Iron
Curtain and changing relations among newly liberated countries, economic and diplomatic
developments of certain target countries. I researched and wrote a series of intelligence reports in
support of Operation Iraqi Freedom that kept secret Russian countermeasures sold to Iraq from
wreaking havoc on the American invasion. This ultimately is what got me fired because I questioned
why my work was used to promote another employee who had no experience with but, was credited
with my work .
The following transcript of an interview by Karen Stewart in which she describes the lethal
electromagnetic weapons and her experience on being on the receiving end was taken from the article
titled NSA Whistleblower Comes Out of the Shadows Into the Light and can be found at:
http://canadafreepress.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-comes-out-of-the-shadows-into-
the-light
The article was written by Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives and published March 28, 2016. The byline is
as follows: In February, 2014 I published an interview of an NSA Whistleblower. This is a follow-up to
that column. Due to recent threats to her person and other exigent circumstances, the Whistleblower
has decided to come out of the shadows and into the light. I am honored that she again chose me to
write her story.
KAREN STEWART'S TRANSCRIPT
First of all, the case STEWART V. NSA is a righteous lawsuit, (brought in 2010) meaning it is a
clear case of employer abuse of power and position to an egregious and even premeditated criminal
level meant to circumvent whistleblower protection laws like the No Fear Act. Simply put, I asked the
NSA Inspector General (IG) to investigate why my award-winning intelligence report series supporting
Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003) was used to promote an entirely different woman twice (2004 & 2005)
one who had nothing to do with my reports whatsoever, and was a known incompetent, but had
methodically sexually compromised many of the male managers within the Weapons & Space (W&S)
Directorate. Instead of following correct procedure, the IG and NSA Security decided to cover up the
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page268
129
248
249
22 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
infraction by attacking me. Threats were made to paint my complaint as paranoid and to fire me for a
non-existent mental illness if I did not drop my effort to get credit for and the promotion for my own
work, given to the wrong woman. These threats quickly took shape as false accusations against me by
the guilty personnel obviously coached by Security, manifested with stalking harassment masquerading
as an investigation by NSA Security goons from 2006-2009. In late 2010, despite all evidence
showing my innocence from ridiculous and impossible charges, I was fired by an NSA Kangaroo court
with a predetermined agenda. My EEOC appeal (lawsuit) had been accepted for adjudication and the
judge had ordered no adverse action until its adjudication but NSA ignored his orders.
I moved from Columbia, Maryland back to my familys hometown of Tallahassee, Florida in 2011.
All was quiet until February 2015 when I instructed the law firm I had hired to subpoena evidence from
the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles identifying a burglar (a now retired NSA Executive) who had
broken into my home very shortly after I had tried to make my 2006 Inspector General request for an
investigation, and stolen extra house, car, and mail keys as well as illegally bugging (burst bug) our
home and phone/internet to facilitate further harassment and likely search for blackmail material (no
luck for them there).
After the subpoena, I began noticing Security types in Tallahassee following me and photo-
stalking me by March/April. Their license plates suggested Naval Security Group from Pensacola and
NSA Security personnel from Georgia (Augusta) and Texas (San Antonio). A quick check with the Leon
County Sheriffs Department, specifically Duty Officer deputy Canon, confirmed that NSA also had
personnel land at a private airport and deputies had escorted them the the Phipps property north of
Lake Jackson (near where I now live) for a secret exercise, just before the second round of stalking
harassment began. The sequence of events seems to have been for NSA Security to contact the Naval
Security Group in Pensacola, Florida (Headquartered at Ft. Meade, Maryland along with NSA) to initially
stalk and photograph me under ridiculous false pretenses until NSA could send its own Security
personnel to Tallahassee. Once there, under guise of authority, it appears that NSA enlisted the help of
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and its civilian group, InfraGard, made up of
civilians recruited from their Ride-Along programs. As usual, NSA personnel fabricated some big lie as
to why the civilians should actively and passively stalk and harass me, and despite quite obvious
questions about why laws and due process were to be completely suspended in my case, the group
eagerly jumped at the opportunity for hundreds to gang up on one person (for Federal money, I may
add).
Thus, under NSA tutelage and FDLE auspices, suddenly I was a cast-iron target, meaning
multiple people covered me wherever I was, whatever I did. Cars were even stationed near my home
overnight on rotating shifts, beeping to each other when changing shifts but also for my benefit. NSA
also sought out willing neighbors to augment their snooping and harassment efforts, which could be
anything from hosting an NSA Security goon for accessibility to my property, both home (to bug and
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page269
130
249
250
23 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
monitor short-distance transmissions) and car (to install and switch out vehicle GPS trackers to
facilitate car stalking and impeding as harassment. ) Those were the active participants, others not
assigned to me on a certain shift were ordered to quickly text in to a special site the big bad threat to
report my location and time I was there. People even snooped in my shopping carts to be able to tattle
to someone about what I was doing, what I was buying. (God help us, she bought bananas!!! Save the
children!).
This was annoying enough but I tried to ignore it because I thought NSA once again was going
for the usual See, shes paranoid, reporting harassment every day now just dismiss her lawsuit!
But I did report acts of harassment that caused physical damage such as hit and run,
purposely sideswiping my car, (This is exatly what happened to the PETTITIONER on May 9,
2016 enroute to MEDEXPRESS for pain medications) and botching the placement/removal of
a GPS tracker under my rear spoiler that destroy my spoiler. (They feared my mechanic
would find their tracker so they botched its removal the night before my appointment). I
even made fun of my stalkers when I could, using my hobby art shop on a popular internet
site to create bumper magnets making fun of them. After all, they were mostly nave,
unsophisticated boobs who desperately imagined that they were little James Bonds and that
the greatest existential threat to their country was a woman waiting for her lawsuit to be
decided, living in Tallahassee, walking her dogs, visiting friends.
In late November 2015, however, NSA apparently decided that I was not sufficiently
being intimidated by their civilian confederacy of dunces to back off my lawsuit to recover
my stolen salary and stolen retirement at the appropriate pay level. In 2009 I had
researched gang-stalking and discovered it was a real and growing phenomenon, but when
electrical harassment was mentioned, I could not really grasp the concept and wondered
about its existence. But I was to find out first hand in November 2015 that it does exist and
is a horrific crime against humanity.
NSA and its operatives started using small, mobile devices called Directed Energy
Weapons (DEWs) against me and my family in the night. These mobile weapons emit
multiple types of electrical emanations from ultrasonic, to microwaves modulated to radio
frequencies, to other kinds of wave variations I cant say I understand yet. Now, with the
help of certain mercenary and morally depraved neighbors, the effort is almost 24/7 now
with the intention being torture and slow-kill. These types of weapons over a lengthy time,
cause cancer, autoimmune disease, heart attacks, seizures, strokes, etc. It is the perfect
stealth murder weapon for a corrupt government.
At this point, when we leave the house, a criminal base of stalkers has been enlisted
by NSA to follow us and aim the DEWs at us wherever feasible to increase exposure in order
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page270
131
250
251
24 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
to speed up death, with the help of the InfraGard dimwits still texting in my location like
good little sheeple.
The Leon County Sheriffs Department as well as the Tallahassee Police Department
are dragging their feet, making excuses, denying any such thing exists, or insulting me when
I try to enlist their help to come up with a strategy to combat this new crime before I or
one of my family is dead. They cant quite grasp the fact that this is domestic terrorism and
nothing protects the police or any official from this new weapon held and wielded by
criminals. Yet, plenty of recruits in their ranks have experience using the mobile DEWs in
Iraq. It is very interesting to me that the Naval Security Group headquartered at Ft. Meade
with NSA, is also called the Silent Warriors because they specialize in the use of Directed
Energy Weapons. Im sure the Naval Security Group base in Pensacola has many on hand
and may have even gotten a request from NSA to borrow a few for their secret exercise in
Tallahassee.
Clearly, NSA is of the opinion that you do not have Constitutional Rights unless they
say you do. If they use this to get rid of an inconvenient lawsuit such as mine instead of
simply settling for a tenth of the cost of harassment, then they must feel confident they
can murder anyone, anywhere, for any reason and get away with itincluding any leader or
politician.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page271
132
251
252
25 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
There is no doubt that NSA is now run by sycophants and sociopaths
EXCLUSIVE: Former NSA Employee Speaks Out on its

Corruption Karen Stewart
By Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives February 20, 2014
3 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
At the very least, for the past few months to a year it has become increasingly evident thatalthough
not allmany agencies of the US Federal government have become increasingly dirty, perverse and
corrupt and require a deep and thorough cleaning.
The US Secret Service has previously been exposed as including claims of involvement with
prostitutes, leaking sensitive information, publishing pornography, sexual assault, illegal wiretaps,
improper use of weapons and drunken behavior and the IRS was caught and admitted to denying
Obamas political enemies (aka TEA Party, Christians, religious Jews, conservatives) their Constitutional
rights while allowing progressive groups (aka Liberals, Leftists, Marxists, Maoists, Socialists,
Communists) theirs. Andlove him, hate him or fall somewhere in-betweenEdward Snowden shone a
very bright light on the unconstitutional domestic mega-spying of one of these clandestine agencies
the National Security Agency. Thus far, under Obamas increasingly iron rule, few-to-no members of
these agencies have even been indicted by Congress for their blatant crimes against the American
people.
The NSA appears to have begun as a patriotic organization that was geared toward protecting the USA
and its citizens. Whether or not that was its original intended purpose is a subject for discussion and
speculation. However, portions of the NSA seem to have devolved into something very sinister. Todays
interview will concentrate on this agency.
NSA Analyst. Due to a number of substantive reasons, this former Analysts identity cannot be divulged
at this time and will be referred to as W. I have, however, confirmed this individuals prior employment
and credentials via a well-known NSA Whistleblower. The information disseminated to me, amongst
other things tells a sordid story of corruption and how employees are silenced into submissionvia fear
within the agency,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page272
133
252
253
26 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The Interview
Sher:Thanks so much for being with me, today, in order to provide essential additional information to
the public on how many of their tax dollars are really being spent. You were employed by the NSA for
over two decades. Would you tell the readers what initially attracted you to the agency as well as how it
has deteriorated over time?
Karen Stewart: Like many people from families with a strong history of serving our country, coming
out of college, I looked to find a way to best utilize my particular interests and talents in service to my
fellow Americans. The mission of the NSA it seemed to me, was to stop threats coming to our shores.
Its charter clearly targeted foreign nationals on foreign soil who did or could intend us harm. That
appealed to me as a righteous endeavor and honorable tack for my life to take.
Sher: Youve shared with me how the NSA deals with its employees who bring legitimate complaints to
their superiors. How thoroughly intimidating and threatening are their behaviors toward those who balk
at their adverse treatment? Would you give a few examples?
Karen Stewart: Apparently the nature of NSA Security degenerated under General Michael Hayden,
the previous Director of NSA (DIRNSA), who promoted a very questionable mid-level Security manager
to a power position within Security. Hayden had originally been tasked to eviscerate NSA since a very
shallow and short-sighted Congress believed that the fall of the Iron Curtain meant no danger existed
anywhere anymore that required the existence of a robust NSA presence. There evolved, under him, a
gratuitously vicious bully mindset that employees were to be intimidated at any opportunity not only to
drive them out of NSA but to cut back on people reporting problems that made NSA look bad, especially
problems involving upper management.
Under Hayden and his successor, General Keith Alexander, the filing of complaints to or requests for
investigations by the NSA EEO or the OIG (Office of the Inspector General) were often inexplicably
blown off despite adequate evidence or the presence of willing witnesses. Then the person who had
filed the complaint would be subjected to an out of cycle reinvestigation interview with Security as
well as polygraph exam, wherein the tone of the Security person was not neutralas it should bebut,
hostile with far-fetched or even ridiculous non-issues presented as potentially problematic. This was a
Security shot across the bow to warn the person that he had crossed the line by filing the complaint. If
he pursued the complaint, Security would lean on his managers to heavily discourage him from doing
what he thought was proper and was indeed a protected action under the law. If he persisted, did his
own amateur investigation, or told coworkers about the situation, he might be called down to Security
multiple times and accused of being paranoid and delusional based on his complaint, and his job
threatened.
The worse the infraction reported, especially if a high level manager looked to be involved, the more
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page273
134
253
254
27 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
severe the reaction by Security. In cases of egregious wrong-doing by a manager, Security would
review the personnel files, medical files, and financial statements to find anything they could use to
threaten or blackmail him with, or pretend to misinterpret some tidbit of information as something it
was not.
Some people were forced to sign admissions of guilt of preposterous misinterpretations of facts in order
to keep their jobs, thereby killing their credibility and complaint. When nothing was found in such files
that could be used, a false accusation of espionage or leaking classified materials ginned up by Security,
was used to justify a Security intrusion into the persons home to search for blackmail material, further
assess the interests and personality of the targeted individual (TI), and plant bugs and abscond with an
extra set of keys for further intrusions. The more the person objected to being bullied, the more heavy-
handed Security became, insisting that hostility toward them indicated wrong-doing on the TIs part.
Thus the TI would become harried and harassed for a crime he never committed, if it ever
even was committed, and to repeated accusations by Security Psych services of a non-
existent mental illness, more than adequately supported by years of internal, psychological
evaluations stating he was mentally sound (Paranoia with delusions is rare and certainly
never occurs overnight, but that does not deter a Security psychologist attack dog, whose
favorite mode of attack employs reference to this malady).
The more a person stood his ground, the more personal it became to Security, which then
became dedicated to the personal destruction of the TI. Under the pretext of the fake
accusation of espionage or leaking classified information, Security would slander the
individual with his coworkers, work friends and managers to isolate him and apply yet more
pressure. Many backed away from supporting the TI in fear for their careers and maybe even
freedom. Certainly this sent a message to the workforce in the TIs area that NSA Security
was at its essence, a rogue, unaccountable and psychotic entity that was to be greatly
feared.
Once NSA Security had decided upon the removal of the TI for failing to be sufficiently
cowed, then false evidence was given to the FBI liaisons assigned to NSA. This would
engender a fraudulent FISA warrant, which loosed FBI surveillance and investigators upon
the person for a few weeks or months, further slandering him to his work and social circles
and thereby putting pressure on him by their constant presence. When the FBI would find no
basis for the accusation, they would drop the case and move on. However, at that point,
Security would send in their own personnel sans warrant, to overtly stalk and harass the TI ,
24/7.
In some instances, Security has even gone into the persons

neighborhood to recruit snitches and augment harassment with
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page274
135
254
255
28 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
hostile civilians convinced the TI is an enemy of the state, based

on baseless Security slander.
Intrusions would be made into his home to remove gathered evidence or

move things around as a psychological ploy and his car would be secretly
GPSd to facilitate vehicular stalking and aggressive driving games. There
have even been reports of pet murders by poisoning as an escalation of the
harassment with the inferred threat that perhaps it could be the TIs child or
himself next. The harassment is essentially elevated until the TI either
breaks and assaults a harasser or complains to Security about the insane
and sadistic, not to mention criminal way in which he is being mistreated.
This is what Security planned for and is ready to jump on as their
springboard to terminating his employment.
His security clearance is immediately pulled, he is warehoused in a menial job until adequate paperwork
and a back-story can be fabricated or forged to falsely present a termination due to mental instability or
illness, and the person is fired. Of course there is an appeals process, but it is thoroughly corrupted. No
matter how much evidence supports the victim and how little supports NSA, NSA always wins these
cases where it is clear the person was targeted for dismissal. Of course, this does nothing but embolden
more degenerate or criminal behavior while making it clear that the person reporting evil will be
considered the problem, and that in reality no labor laws or whistle protection laws can actually protect
an NSA employee, because real watch dog entities dont exist within NSA and state and Federal
authorities routinely turn a blind eye to the reported abuses even as they become more criminal and
seditious.
I shake my head at sycophant, disingenuous politicians who claim Edward Snowden could have or
should have gone through proper internal authorities to report the abuses and criminal acts being
committed within NSA. Would that be to the thoroughly corrupted, attack dog-watch dog entities, or the
thoroughly oblivious or compromised politicians responsible for oversight who are in fact, in the NSAs
pocket due to bribery, blackmail or stupidity?
Sher: The NSA seems to suffer from the some of the same maladies as did the recent outing of the
Secret Service. Without becoming too specific, would you give us a general idea as to advancement for
sexual favors that have occurred within the agency? How defeating is that to employees who are simply
working to protect the country while their bosses are indulging in sexual liaisons with lower level
employees?
Karen Stewart: In my career, promotions were always hard to come by, meted out perhaps every
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page275
136
255
256
29 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
five years if you were a good or exceptional worker, but male managers discovered that they held the
keys to paradise in regard to attractive or even acceptable women willing to take shortcuts. These
were the women who would make promotions in stunningly rapid succession with little to no
accomplishments - of their own, that is. While others killed themselves with years of grueling shift work
or even multiple dangerous foreign assignments only to find themselves evaluated as a 3.6 on a scale
of 5, when an attractive, morally loose recent college graduate would receive a 4.8 for essentially
alphabetizing a shelf of reference books her first 6 months on the job. This made many, many people
bitter and certainly sent the wrong signal to the hardest workers and the most talented. Though many
stopped being as dedicated to their jobs, others did indeed press ahead and worked tirelessly knowing
their reward was the mission accomplished and not likely appropriate recognition. Capable men
despaired of receiving deserved promotions and women almost feared being promoted for exceptional
work, fearing they would be assumed to be one of the typically incapable promotion bimbos among the
bloated management. Expertise and knowledge became commodities to guard and not share with new
workers, fearing you would not reap the benefits of your own work. This of course created a situation
where expertise and insight must be gained and regained from scratch, losing precious time training up
area or target experts to the detriment of the mission.
It was very discouraging to see immature or degenerate bosses spending their time flirting and chasing
skirts, the very same people who were charged with competently reviewing your work, (keeping
apprised of the big picture so people felt free to specialize their research), and whose responsibility it
was to accurately and honestly represent their people before promotion boards. But the atmosphere of
secrecy, the strict laws about divulging names of NSA employees or anything that occurred there,
emboldened certain men to believe that their wives and families would never know of their
indiscretions, and turned work time into play time for them. And now apparently young males are also
being pursued as sexual toys. One has to wonder what is being missed in the realm of highly perishable
intelligence leads by distracted managerial incompetents.
Sher: As an additional example of NSA intimidation, one of the things youd said may be shared is your
experience with the 3 Amigos. Would you tell us about them?
Karen Stewart:There were three eccentric looking older males who were often seen in the NSA OPS1
cafeteria together, whom we also got to know by word of mouth, as master electricians well-versed in
computer science. They were nicknamed by some in the analyst field as Rasputin, Santa, and Choo
Choo or the engineer, due to their highly unusual appearances and dress. One eye witness being
harassed on yet another NSA Security retaliatory witch hunt, reported seeing one of these men at her
home, on her property, when she discovered indications that her home had been broken into, her cable
box broken into, and her phone hacked, leaving tell-tale clicking sounds at regular intervals whenever
she used her phone. Any phone tap done by warrant is done at the carriers hub under their auspices
and will not click, only illegal hack jobs click. She noted him not only as a trespasser being
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page276
137
256
257
30 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
somewhere he should not have been, but recognized him by his highly unusual appearance from work.
When she attempted to look him up in the NSA data base by career specialty, she found that what
should have been his photo, which should have been a source of pride since he was of the rank to be a
Flag Badger (Manager whose rank is senior enough to garner a photo with the American flag in the
background), was instead a photo of a desert animal called a Meercat indicating that he wanted his
identity hidden from the general NSA population.
Sher: With regards to many who have said that the NSAs collection of meta-data on all forms of
communication between legal citizens of the USA is unconstitutional, also indicated is the fact that not
one terrorist act has been stopped by said collection. It appears good old-fashioned police work is what
still gets the perp. In your opinion, is this accurate?
Karen Stewart: I think it is indeed true that the meta data collection ruse within the USA distracts
from tried and true research and investigation, which the latter method apparently DID INDEED
uncover the 9/11 plot months before it happened, well in time to have prevented it, according to two
separate analysts with whom I have spoken, one just two days after 9/11 as he broke down and
sobbed his heart out, repeating We could have saved them! We could have saved them! But they
wouldnt let us report it!, and the other several years later, who maintained the same story of being
threatened and forbidden to report any warning about 9/11, then being harassed and fired for a non-
existent mentally illness. However, it is a good means to track your political enemies and detractors and
their affiliates within the US - for future reference? It would appear much more for the self-preservation
and expansion of NSA as the ubiquitous Orwellian Big Brother than for the protection of the USA. With
the power the NSA wields, it could easily influence border control issues and immigration issues to
make us not as susceptible to terrorist intrusions and infiltrations, but that would undermine their
power grab and expansion within the US, something never intended at NSAs creation - and for good
reason.
Sher:As a former long time employee of the NSA, what do you believeif anythingcan be done to
correct the problems within the agency?
Karen Stewart:There is no doubt that NSA is now run by those sycophants and sociopaths who are
the least desirable to have in any position of such sensitivity and trust and are purging NSA ranks of
people with integrity. Compromising activity that would rightfully cost you your clearance, is now
viewed as intrinsic perks of the job once you reach a certain pay grade. These lesser leaders have
turned NSA into an American Gestapo Wanna-Be agency. NSA lost its way with non-serious super grade
playboys not mature enough for the responsibility of the job of managing and directing NSA,
compounding the problem by promoting sycophants to protect their backs as well as lightweights with
whom to have sexcapades behind office doors, but in that group also has risen opportunistic
sociopaths and psychopaths attracted to more and more power, any way they can get it, and by
conniving and ruthlessness have blown past incompetent, distracted management to change the very
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page277
138
257
258
31 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
nature of the NSA from watchman to the American people to jack booted prison guard.
If the Legislative Branch is possessed of anyone with the least bit of courage and common sense, they
would demand super clearances for those on the Intelligence Oversight Committees so that years or
decades of abusive behaviors, kingdom building, or even crimes can not continually be swept under the
rug by telling these particular politicians, You dont have the need to know, just trust us. Obviously,
they cannot be trusted. An appointment to that Committee would of course have to become much more
exclusive, requiring a thorough vetting as any job with a Top Secret clearance should. But to deal with
the toxic management at NSA now, I would require every Flag Badger and Security manager to account
for himself and what he adds to the mission. If he is pork, retire him or require him to laterally transfer
to another agency. Before that however, I would require that every single Flag Badger and every
Security group manager take a polygraph by non-NSA affiliated or non-NSA sympathetic sources to
account for the millions of dollars wasted on their vicious and illegal war on NSA employees who
dutifully report fraud, waste, abuse as well as sexual predation and treason. Those who are found to be
guilty of such things as falsifying accusations against innocent employees; fabricating false witnesses
and evidence; engaging in illegal acts of breaking and entering; falsifying FISA warrant justifications;
lying to the FBI about a targeted victims criminality; falsifying psychological assessments; subverting
lie detector exams by screaming at the targeted subject during or just before the exam to create false
impressions of guilt; hiding or destroying exonerating evidence supporting their victims claims;
intimidating or roughing up witnesses; coordinating or participating in criminal stalking and harassment
activities, illegal break-ins, illegal wire taps, organizing and paying civilian groups under the table to
augment harassment of targeted employees, and lastly, conspiring to effect or cover up any or all of
these actions. And any NSA employee in that group who pleads the 5th, should be fired and stripped of
his retirement since this type of betrayal rots a country from within. NSA must be recreated, and
returned to the stated task in their founding charter of focusing on foreign enemies overseas.
Sher: W, so much of the information youve provided is truly astounding! Thanks so much for being
with us today and I hope youll be available for another should ongoing events require one.
Click to view 3 Comments
Sher Zieve is an author and political commentator. Zieves op-ed columns are widely carried by multiple
internet journals and sites, and she also writes hard news. Her columns have also appeared in The
Oregon Herald, Dallas Times, Sacramento Sun, in international news publications, and on multiple
university websites. Sher is also a guest on multiple national radio shows.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page278
139
258
259
32 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1NSA Whistleblower Comes Out of the Shadows Into the Light Karen Stewarty
By Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives March 28, 2016
0 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
AddThis Sharing Buttons

Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to PrintShare to EmailShare to PinterestMore AddThis Share
options
In February, 2014 I published an interview of an NSA Whistleblower. This is a follow-up to that column.
Due to recent threats to her person and other exigent circumstances, the Whistleblower has decided to
come out of the shadows and into the light. I am honored that she again chose me to write her story.
Her name is Karen Stewart Karen Stewart
BIO
Education
Freshman year - Schiller College, Strasbourg, Fr.

Sophomore - Senior years, graduated from Florida State University (79)
BS in German Language and a minor or co-major equivalent in fine art
Work History: 1982-2010 NSA (National Security Agency

Underwent initial retraining from 1982 - 83, on the job training to become a linguist in a needed foreign
language (chosen to train in depth in Russian since my college major, German was not in demand but I
had also studied Russian and French with good results).
Worked various projects over the years, not just USSR/Russia, but various countries
researching/reporting on foreign military status and alliances, weapons development and proliferation,
the Chernobyl disaster and aftermath, the fall of the Iron Curtain and changing relations among newly
liberated countries, economic and diplomatic developments of certain target countries. I researched and
wrote a series of intelligence reports in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom that kept secret Russian
countermeasures sold to Iraq from wreaking havoc on the American invasion. This ultimately is what
got me fired because I questioned why my work was used to promote another employee who had no
experience with but, was credited with my work.
Note...Due to the Top Secret nature of the work, the above summary is slightly vague, by design.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page279
140
259
260
33 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The Interview
Sher: Karen, thanks for taking the time to speak with me and its so good to have you back and this
time under your name! As a Whistleblower, what finally made you decide to come out from the
shadows?
Karen: I always intended to link my name with my story because it is a story that needs to be told, but
since I have a lawsuit against NSA (technically an appeal of an unlawful, employer action, i.e. my
termination at the 28 point year of my career for trying to request an investigation by the NSA
Inspector General), sitting under a gag order demanded by NSA, on the docket at the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in Baltimore, I could not do so without risking the
adjudication going against me for that reason alone. However, in 2015 NSA Security made the decision
to yet again engage in a massive slander campaign against me in my new location, thus breaking its
own gag order so I feel no compunction to be held to a standard required by the EEOC judge at NSAs
request that NSA itself clearly holds in utter contempt.
Sher: Since we last talked, a lot has happened with you. You have refused to drop your discrimination
lawsuit against the NSA and have shared with me that the agency has stepped up its efforts against
youpersonally.
Youre now being stalked by what appear to be NSA operatives. Is that correct? As you reported to me
they, also, seem to be using electronic emanation technology to both stop and damage you. I believe
former NSA employee and Whistleblower Russel Tice reported on this, also. This is really deep dark
side information. Would you tell the readers what theyre doing to you, [possibly] others and why?
Karen: First of all, the case STEWART V. NSA is a righteous lawsuit, (brought in 2010) meaning it is a
clear case of employer abuse of power and position to an egregious and even premeditated criminal
level meant to circumvent whistleblower protection laws like the No Fear Act. Simply put, I asked the
NSA Inspector General (IG) to investigate why my award-winning intelligence report series supporting
Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003) was used to promote an entirely different woman twice (2004 & 2005)
one who had nothing to do with my reports whatsoever, and was a known incompetent, but had
methodically sexually compromised many of the male managers within the Weapons & Space (W&S)
Directorate. Instead of following correct procedure, the IG and NSA Security decided to cover up the
infraction by attacking me. Threats were made to paint my complaint as paranoid and to fire me for a
non-existent mental illness if I did not drop my effort to get credit for and the promotion for my own
work, given to the wrong woman. These threats quickly took shape as false accusations against me by
the guilty personnel obviously coached by Security, manifested with stalking harassment masquerading
as an investigation by NSA Security goons from 2006-2009. In late 2010, despite all evidence
showing my innocence from ridiculous and impossible charges, I was fired by an NSA Kangaroo court
with a predetermined agenda. My EEOC appeal (lawsuit) had been accepted for adjudication and the
judge had ordered no adverse action until its adjudication but NSA ignored his orders.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page280
141
260
261
34 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
I moved from Columbia, Maryland back to my familys hometown of Tallahassee, Florida in 2011. All
was quiet until February 2015 when I instructed the law firm I had hired to subpoena evidence from the
Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles identifying a burglar (a now retired NSA Executive) who had
broken into my home very shortly after I had tried to make my 2006 Inspector General request for an
investigation, and stolen extra house, car, and mail keys as well as illegally bugging (burst bug) our
home and phone/internet to facilitate further harassment and likely search for blackmail material (no
luck for them there).
After the subpoena, I began noticing Security types in Tallahassee following me and photo-stalking me
by March/April. Their license plates suggested Naval Security Group from Pensacola and NSA Security
personnel from Georgia (Augusta) and Texas (San Antonio). A quick check with the Leon County
Sheriffs Department, specifically Duty Officer deputy Canon, confirmed that NSA also had personnel
land at a private airport and deputies had escorted them the the Phipps property north of Lake Jackson
(near where I now live) for a secret exercise, just before the second round of stalking harassment
began. The sequence of events seems to have been for NSA Security to contact the Naval Security
Group in Pensacola, Florida (Headquartered at Ft. Meade, Maryland along with NSA) to initially stalk
and photograph me under ridiculous false pretenses until NSA could send its own Security personnel to
Tallahassee. Once there, under guise of authority, it appears that NSA enlisted the help of the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and its civilian group, InfraGard, made up of civilians
recruited from their Ride-Along programs. As usual, NSA personnel fabricated some big lie as to why
the civilians should actively and passively stalk and harass me, and despite quite obvious questions
about why laws and due process were to be completely suspended in my case, the group eagerly
jumped at the opportunity for hundreds to gang up on one person (for Federal money, I may add).
Thus, under NSA tutelage and FDLE auspices, suddenly I was a cast-iron target, meaning multiple
people covered me wherever I was, whatever I did. Cars were even stationed near my home overnight
on rotating shifts, beeping to each other when changing shifts but also for my benefit. NSA also sought
out willing neighbors to augment their snooping and harassment efforts, which could be anything from
hosting an NSA Security goon for accessibility to my property, both home (to bug and monitor short-
distance transmissions) and car (to install and switch out vehicle GPS trackers to facilitate car stalking
and impeding as harassment. ) Those were the active participants, others not assigned to me on a
certain shift were ordered to quickly text in to a special site the big bad threat to report my location
and time I was there. People even snooped in my shopping carts to be able to tattle to someone about
what I was doing, what I was buying. (God help us, she bought bananas!!! Save the children!).
This was annoying enough but I tried to ignore it because I thought NSA once again was going for the
usual See, shes paranoid, reporting harassment every day now just dismiss her lawsuit! But I did
report acts of harassment that caused physical damage such as hit and run, purposely sideswiping my
car, and botching the placement/removal of a GPS tracker under my rear spoiler that destroy my
spoiler. (They feared my mechanic would find their tracker so they botched its removal the night before
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page281
142
261
262
35 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
my appointment). I even made fun of my stalkers when I could, using my hobby art shop on a popular
internet site to create bumper magnets making fun of them. After all, they were mostly nave,
unsophisticated boobs who desperately imagined that they were little James Bonds and that the
greatest existential threat to their country was a woman waiting for her lawsuit to be decided, living in
Tallahassee, walking her dogs, visiting friends.
In late November 2015, however, NSA apparently decided that I was not sufficiently
being intimidated by their civilian confederacy of dunces to back off my lawsuit to
recover my stolen salary and stolen retirement at the appropriate pay level. In 2009
I had researched gang-stalking and discovered it was a real and growing
phenomenon, but when electrical harassment was mentioned, I could not really
grasp the concept and wondered about its existence. But I was to find out first hand
in November 2015 that it does exist and is a horrific crime against humanity.
NSA and its operatives started using small, mobile devices called Directed Energy
Weapons (DEWs) against me and my family in the night. These mobile weapons
emit multiple types of electrical emanations from ultrasonic, to microwaves
modulated to radio frequencies, to other kinds of wave variations I cant say I
understand yet. Now, with the help of certain mercenary and morally depraved
neighbors, the effort is almost 24/7 now with the intention being torture and slow-
kill. These types of weapons over a lengthy time, cause cancer, autoimmune
disease, heart attacks, seizures, strokes, etc. It is the perfect stealth murder
weapon for a corrupt government. At this point, when we leave the house, a
criminal base of stalkers has been enlisted by NSA to follow us and aim the DEWs at
us wherever feasible to increase exposure in order to speed up death, with the help
of the InfraGard dimwits still texting in my location like good little sheeple.
The Leon County Sheriffs Department as well as the Tallahassee Police Department are dragging their
feet, making excuses, denying any such thing exists, or insulting me when I try to enlist their help to
come up with a strategy to combat this new crime before I or one of my family is dead. They cant
quite grasp the fact that this is domestic terrorism and nothing protects the police or any official from
this new weapon held and wielded by criminals. Yet, plenty of recruits in their ranks have experience
using the mobile DEWs in Iraq. It is very interesting to me that the Naval Security Group headquartered
at Ft. Meade with NSA, is also called the Silent Warriors because they specialize in the use of Directed
Energy Weapons. Im sure the Naval Security Group base in Pensacola has many on hand and may
have even gotten a request from NSA to borrow a few for their secret exercise in Tallahassee.
Clearly, NSA is of the opinion that you do not have Constitutional Rights unless they say you do. If they
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page282
143
262
263
36 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
use this to get rid of an inconvenient lawsuit such as mine instead of simply settling for a tenth of the
cost of harassment, then they must feel confident they can murder anyone, anywhere, for any reason
and get away with itincluding any leader or politician.
Sher: Why in the world do you think the NSA simply didnt settle the suit? With all of the
documentation you have, it seems that they are guilty of the discrimination and could have spent far
less of the taxpayers money to simply pay you off and make it go away. They would, also, have
avoided this coming out into the open. Are they that arrogant and Narcissistic?
Karen: This has truly NEVER made any sense to me or any of my friends, even those who worked at
NSA. NSA could have investigated, claimed a mistake had been made and retroactively promoted me
without even addressing the unethical behavior of W&S personnel. Instead, the IG refused to
investigate, illegally of course, but I could not have made him do his job. Plus, the guilty were
instructed to blame me for what turned out to be the first leak by ex-NSA executive Thomas Drake,
despite the fact that I had no access to, knowledge of or training in the type of material he leaked
(computer technology) and he was identified as the source of that leak six months before I was fired.
The polygraph section of Security actively tried to sabotage my polygraph exams in response to the
false counter-accusation by inappropriately screaming and threatening me, making it impossible to pass
a polygraph, which ruined my first polygraph in this regard though I passed the next two of the three
given in reaction to the false accusation.
The EEOC is capped at $300,000 actual damages, no punitive allowed. My intention was to get the lost
difference in my wages as a GS-12 when I should have been a GS-14, and to get the appropriate level
of retirement. Yet, clearly, NSA has spent millions organizing and paying civilians (and greasing the
palms of crooked law enforcement) to harass, bully, intimidate,and quite obviously viciously slander
me.
Do they engage in such psychopathic behavior because they can? Because they simply have no real
oversight? The operational head of NSA Security is indeed rumored far and wide to be an actual
psychopath who is obsessed with paintings of Dantes Inferno.
A coworker who worked in NSA Human Resources says she remembered when the resumes of
inappropriate people (criminals, perverts, mentally unstable) were automatically thrown away but
suddenly when General Hayden, a former NSA Director, promoted this particular man, the resumes of
thieves, moral degenerates, etc., were then coveted by Security. She said that she was so upset that
she had to find a different job. I did read an opinion on the Anti-polygraph site that NSA Security
leadership, and hence all of Security in essence, could be said to suffer from Dark Triad personality
disorder, which is a dangerous combination of such things as (malignant) narcissism, sociopathy, etc.
Their egos are such that they are obsessed with winning at all costseven fighting to keep a known
false accusation from being proven false by their victim, because they exist in their own projected
narrative. They exist in their own lies and cannot stand being exposed. This means they follow their
own agendas. What is good for NSA Security leadership, even at the cost of NSA or the USA. Their
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page283
144
263
264
37 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
allegiances are to themselves. This has made me wonder, of late, if the woman who Security protected
instead of reprimanding or firing for sexually compromising W&S management was not a Security plant,
meant to do just that. And, in so doing, was NSA Security procuring a means to blackmail these
managers for themselves or another entity, perhaps foreign?
Sher: You have multiple photos and even drawings youve made of you stalkers. Youve also indicated
to me that the NSA has been in touch with your local law enforcement. Said law enforcement is siding
with the NSA against youa private citizen. What do your attorneys have to say about these?
Karen: At the beginning of my search for a law firm to take my case, Melville Johnson PC informed me
that I had potentially two cases, in 2009, an employment law case and a criminal case. I could only
afford to pursue the employment case since I was facing illegal termination on false pretenses within a
few months. While my lawyers have recorded the information about the new assault campaign by NSA
in Florida, thus far their pleas with the EEOC for some kind of response because their client is now in
physical danger have been completely ignored.
What has been going on in Florida is entirely criminal and could be a separate lawsuit, to even include
law enforcement in regard to their depraved negligenceif not complicity. But, at the moment, I am
concerned with surviving the relentless Directed Energy Weapons assaults. If I do not, then my family
will have to consider a wrongful death lawsuit against NSA, FBI (that refuse to get involved because
NSA is involved), and the FDLE, the TPD and Leon County Sheriffs Department as well as certain
complicit neighbors accepting a new riding mower or new carpeting in exchange for helping NSA
murder an inconvenient person who actually thought she had any Constitutional, human, or Civil
Rights.
Sher: With regards to your lawsuit, what are your current plans?
Karen: Good question. Reporting and recording the new barrage of assaults has whittled deeply into
my retainer. This was hard enough to maintain after spending about $110,000, thus far, and often
countering ridiculous and frivolous legal shenanigans by NSA to waste my money. With an outrageously
unresponsive EEOC, which may indeed be a complete and obscene sham for show, one wonders why
continue with the pretense that we exist as a nation of laws? Clearly, we do not.
The government has no desire for a level playing field to impede its quest for complete tyranny. We are
now a nation of wolves and sheeple. Im sure that after getting wind of this article, NSA will come to
the EEOC with big crocodile tears claiming they need to win by default because I broke the gag order
after they themselves spent millions, bald-faced lying to thousands of civilians, law enforcement and
(apparently) the FBI about me, invoking National Security Letters to swear them to secrecy and to hide
the true nature of their faux secret exercise in Tallahasseei.e., enticing a foolish community to stalk,
harass and commit murder for Big Brother.
But, God forbid the victim would speak out!
It truly sickens me that I spent my career trying to protect and serve my fellow Americans when not
only my government but these unworthy mercenary, sociopaths have stabbed me in the back. Some of
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page284
145
264
265
38 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the stalkers have even been Iraqi War veteranssome of whom might not have returned alive without
my reports.
I cant think a lot about the lawsuit with each nocturnal assault leaving me wondering if I or one of my
family will not wake up tomorrow. Im sentenced to death for being a patriot. What a country. I read
Psalm 91 & 94 nightly, praying God will want to erase this growing evil from our country. But, I also
remember that Ruth Graham said a while ago, if God doesnt judge America, Hell have to apologize to
Sodom and Gomorrah.
Americans are just not the people they and we used to be and, therefore, our leaders are either
apathetic cowards who tolerate evil or potentially monsters like NSA Securitywho show that they can
be and are not responsible to anyone but themselves.
Is NSA Security even able to be reined in anymore? Or would any potential leader be found dead of a
microwave induced heart attack if he tried to? Someone ought to care but I may not be around long
enough to see it.
Sher: Thanks you so much for all youve done and I sincerely hope and pray youre wrong, Karen. Its
individuals like you who founded the United States of America on Godly principles and an unwavering
sense of ethics.
*Karen may be contacted for interviews at [email protected]
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page285
146
265
266
39 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
StanJ. Caterbone
Surveillance,
1250Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-669-2163
Greg Szymanskis Interview

With Julianne McKinney
Microwave Harassment and Mind Control
Transcribed for Advanced Media Group,
05/28/16
This interview contains information from Julianne McKinneys book Microwave Harassment and
Mind Control Experimentation, 1992, as well as current conditions world-wide. Years of
interviews turned Gregg Szymanski from skeptic to believer in the secret world of electronic
harassment, as harassment against Julianne McKinney has turned potentially lethal. They are
taking a stand to help TIs, Targeted Individuals, many civilians, escape this cruel harassment.
Julianne: Okay. I have seen evidence of a closed circuit TV and it seems to be some form of major
source of entertainment and perhaps instruction for the individuals participating in this harassment. I
dont know who runs it. I have seen aspects of that on a large screen TV across the street on which I
saw surveillance films of a TI being harassed, obviously, in an office environment. Gang stalked. Shows
brain scans and is otherwise a very sophisticated, sleek, communications operation. Why would it be
used? As I said either for entertainment, for creating a sense of unity, or for identifying persons, TIs,
who are to be harassed on the street. I mean, obviously you cant harass someone if you dont know
what that person looks like. So its a means of communicating to the perpetrators, perps, what the TI
looks like.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page286
147
266
267
40 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
TRANSCRIPT OF GREG SZYMANSKIS INTERVIEW WITH JULIANNE MCKINNEY

ON MICROWAVE HARASSMENT AND MIND CONTROL
Published May 28, 2016
Greg Szymanski: (Also) I have a guest whos never given a radio interview before. Her name is
Julianne McKinney. For those of you who dont know who she is, she is an expert in electronic
harassment and surveillanceformer military background. And those of you who have followed this
story on my show, many may know who she is and the importance she has in this field.
Were just going to lay some very solid credibility to what weve been talking about. So this interviews
quite important and I want you to remember that, as we go along, shes a very, very well-read person.
Were gonna get to that in a minute. The problem on the use of electronic weaponry on a person was
when I was working in a law office. The law office I was working for severaloh a number of years ago,
the law office I worked for prided in taking cases that were difficult. And I listened to a person tell me
about the facts regarding the use of electronic weaponry. And I had a discussion with somebody else at
the law firm and we came to this conclusion causation causation causation Greg, remember that
element. Its going to be awfully difficult to link whats happening to the person. The injuries they were
alleging, to actually the person, or the defendants, that were doing it.
So it was a case, Ill be very honest with you, that I was very skeptical over. But, as a journalist, I
started to interview a number of people, and I would like to say that this issue, after a number of years,
has come up to one of the top of my list as a problem in this country.
I talked to hundreds of people all around the country that are experiencing things that are just
unbelievable. And from a standpoint of the law, you want to get justice for these people. You hate to
see their lives destroyed, and you hate to see what happens, to a person thats been harassed. But the
biggest problem is its very difficult to pinpoint whats going on.
I have a guest today who is an expert in this field. You, the public, may not know who she is. But those
of you who have been targeted and listen to my show know very well. Shes never been interviewed
before and I feel honored that shes here. Her name is Julianne McKinney. Shes had an extensive
career in the US Army as an Area Intelligence Case Officer till 1990.
Upon her return to civilian life Julianne became a member of the Association of National Security
Alumni. That is an organization of former intelligence officers dedicated to exposing excesses by the US
Intelligence Services. Julianne became the director of the Electronic Surveillance Project under their
auspices as such she authored the publication Microwave Harassment and Mind Control
Experimentation in 1991. She kept that electronic surveillance project going for four years, funding it
with her own personal funds, obtained by her military benefits and pay.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page287
148
267
268
41 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Julianne did not copy write her work and it is out in the public domain for the public good. Microwave
Harassment and Mind Control Experimentation, the public has taken her hard copy publication and
uploaded it to several thousand domain sites over the past 15 years. It is respected as one of the most
important publications on this subject. And with that, Id like to say hello, Ms. McKinney, how are you
today?
Julianne McKinney: Please dont call me Ms. McKinney (laugh).
Greg: Okay, can I say Julianne?
Julianne: Yes, Julianne.
Greg: Now, youre an expert in surveillance and electronic harassment. The first question I have is
that, in your observation, is there a wider scale of surveillance of average people, people with no threat
to national security, in your estimation?
Julianne: I would say that most of us targeted are not, and never have been, a threat. I think that
what happened initially, when these operations began probably 30 years, ago people were singled out,
perhaps, because of some affiliation, either direct or indirect, with the United States government, and
invited attention. But they were not singled out as being a threat; they were singled out as being
lucrative targets of experimentation.
In the past 15 years, since shutting down the Electronic Surveillance Project, primarily to seek
employment, which I did seek, and did obtain, I had occasion to observe many, many, many instances
of individuals in the corporate environment being singled out and targeted simply because they were
convenient targets of opportunity. And, I have to comment on something I heard you say
Greg: Okay
Julianne: Early on you referred to the difficulty of establishing causation in order to pursue these
claims.
Greg: That, I might add, that was made is a legal sense, based on the fact that we were nave people,
not really understand I have to be honest with youI had not understood the problem back then,
and felt it would be a difficult problem, based on the fact of how the crime was committed and knowing
how to pin that crime on someone. Go ahead.
Julianne: I understand the legal implications, certainly. There is enough literature, on the internet and
elsewhere, that establishes the existence of these weapon systems. To pinpoint, for purposes of
prosecution, to pinpoint their existence would be difficult and the position I take is that rather than
pinpoint for prosecution purposes, easy enough to single them out by electronic means to destroy
them. But I guess thats taking the matter a little far left field.
I think, frankly, we still face, until congress establishes laws that forbid the use of these technologies
for involuntary experimental purposes, that were going to get absolutely nowhere in attempting to
prosecute.
Greg: Okay, listen, I need to take a break Julianne. And well be back in three minutes on the
Investigative Journal.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page288
149
268
269
42 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Julianne: Okay.
Greg: Okay, back for the second half hour. My guest is Julianne McKinney. Shes an expert on
surveillance and electronic harassment. And Julianne, I gave you an introduction at the beginning of the
show.
Julianne: Yes
Greg: A brief introduction. But I think our listeners would like to know your background and why
youre qualified to make these statements. I think its important.
Julianne: Okay.
Greg: If you could do that for us.
Julianne: Well, I would take exception to the term expert in these weapons systems.
Greg: Okay.
Julianne: I certainly have had experience with them, having, for approximately the past 40 years,
been on the receiving end of this type of harassment. Expertise in surveillance comes with my
employment in the intelligence field. I understand what constitutes surveillance and am capable of
immediately spotting the surveillance and I can see, as in the case of gang stalking, a subject that you
have addressed on prior occasions. I can see those who I label as covert want-to-bes fumbling through
what they think are covert activities and Id find it really rather amusing if it werent so perverted in the
ultimate objective.
Im not certain what more I can add. I do have experience with these weapon systems. Ive had
sufficient opportunity over these past many years to observe the progressive threat of these
harassment operations. And Im talking specifically about electronic weapon systems.
Greg: Well, youve been a voice - I mean a strong voice - for warning people of these systems for at
least the past 10 years regarding the installation of specialized electronic equipment and utilities. What
are these electronics and what are their capabilities?
Julianne: Their capabilities, generally, are to inflict pain in a highly focused fashion, and to alter
mental states. Certainly, when you have a frequency aimed at your brain, your mental functions tend to
alter. In amplified form, theyre sufficient, the frequencies are. They have the capacity to kill. Though
thats one reason the department of defense refers to them as less than lethal rather than non-
lethal weapons. As a matter of fact, the Department of Defense has gone so far to eliminate them, to
remove them from the category of even less than lethal weapons to bury them in the category of
electronic weapons trying to make them a little bit blacker.
Greg: Now is this protocol of surveillance and harassment seemingly patterned after a government
protocol now applied to the general civilian population?
Julianne: Its difficult to pinpoint everything on the US government exclusively because these are
global operations.
Greg: Okay.
Julianne: The pattern the protocols, are virtually identical on a global scale so someone is
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page289
150
269
270
43 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
overseeing the entire activity. The government obviously is complicent because otherwise these
operations would not be allowed to exist. Why? Its hard to say. Whether its for testing electronic
weapon systems for future use under combat conditions or whether ultimately there's a holocaust. (no-
intelligible) Its hard to say.
Greg: Well, you know what I find interesting.how people who arent aware of this problem cant
believe its happening to begin with. And I try to mentionI have run stories about the Duplessis
Orphans. Its a program thats been verified, that the government actually used money in Canada and
the United States to do medical testing on children, on adults. Ive talked to people on the POW issue,
one Dr. Joe Douglas, who has documented how, that our government has done allowed foreign
governments to do illegal experimentation on POWs. So why would people think that they wouldnt
allow it on just average citizens? Just in your mind. Do you have an answer for people?
Julianne: Why wouldnt they allow it?
Greg: Yeah, my thing is that they do it, theyre doing it. But some people that deny it cant believe
that our government would do something like this.
Julianne: I find, even among the community of, I hate using slang terms, but the term TI is common,
referring to targeted individuals. Those are people who know they are on the receiving end of electronic
weapon systems. And even amongst TIs, there is a perception in certain areas that our government
wouldnt do this; a case of not recognizing reality. First of all if this were not being done by our
government, congress would step in because of the hundreds of complaints they have received,
thousands of complaints, no doubt, over the past 10-15 years, from citizens who recognize whats going
on. Congress, back in the early 90s, late 80s, took the position that anyone complaining about these
systems were imagining things because they simply didnt exist. In two years, by 1992, they were off
the drawing boards, and in fact, being fielded and conveyed to law enforcement agencies.
Congress recognizes that these weapon systems exist and funds them, and knows, as a result of
appropriate briefings, what the bio-effects can be. Yet they have passed no legislation prohibiting their
use under unconstrained experimental circumstances.
Thats number 1. Number 2, given the nature, given the nature, given that the systems draw on
existing power grids, it would be necessary for the FCC at a minimum, and the Department of Energy,
as a minimum, give some oversight and control over what is going on. Though obviously, those with
Congress, the FDA and the Department of Energy, the FCC and the Department of Energy are
knowledgeable and yet unwilling to do anything about it. So, there is complicity, but the question is,
whos knitting, and submitting, the US government, allowing these operations to take place?
Greg: Now from your experience, how intense is this surveillance of targeted individuals? And tell us
about the ways that the targeted that this is accomplished.
Julianne: From what I have observed, first of all I should explain that the standard that I address this
in Microwave Harassment and Mind Control Experimentation, it was a pattern that was unfolding as I
was dealing with other targeted individuals whothat contacted me. It was a pattern of harassment
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page290
151
270
271
44 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
which indicated that there had been some surveillance going on, some monitoring of their private lives.
There had been entry into their houses. There was systematic harassment. And then, ultimately, as part
of a softening up process, and then ultimately, electronic harassment, which followed; which would
include the inducement of auditory input, which is now being referred to as Z2K.
In answer to your question (laugh) Im not certain if I I think Im probably missing the point there,
but in order to target someone, it requires that that person be put under surveillance, so that their
personality traits, their capacity to inter- relate with people, their capacity for corruption or non-
corruption, that seems to be a critical point. And even their religion factors into it.
Following a period of harassments, they are singled out for preliminary stages of harassment which
includes gang stalking, entry of their private homes or apartments, followed by gradually intensified
and ultimately extremely intensified electronic harassment. This is the pattern that has unfolder over
and over and over.
Greg: And so, when you, I guess what Im getting atthats a very good answer. Youre seeing a
pattern amongst these individuals. I guessyeahis there any pattern about how they choose them?
Julianne: I cant speak for men. But it appears that quite a few of the women who have been singled
out appear to be somewhat, too independent; perhaps too intelligent. Tend to live alone or tend to
pursue professional careers. Theres a heavy predominance of those types of women in the TI
community, the community of targeted individuals. Men are in a smaller proportion and seem to be
those who have a propensity to fly off the handle. Have a sense of self-esteem and pride that seems to
invite targeting. And I did mention a curious predominance of a certain lack of religion amongst TIs, as
opposed to a certain predominance of a particular religion amongst those who are participating in these
operations.
Greg: Now you mentioned this was a global problem. Have you communicated with people from across
the Atlantic regarding whats going on in other countries? Is it similar to here?
Julianne: Its virtually identical, virtually identical. When I was running the electronic surveillance
project I was in extensive correspondence with people overseas and patterns were the same. The
nature of the gang stalking and harassment were the same.
Greg: Now, when youre talking about specific numbers I know youreyouve been following this for
years and years and years. Is there any way that you can give our listeners a kind of an idea of how
wide spread this problem is in terms numbers in our country and compared to maybe overseas?
Julianne: I would say that the person who has realized what is going on is just a drop in a bucket. The
persons whom I have seen being targeted are completely unaware of whats happening. So those who
are complaining of this are, as I said, the tip of the iceberg. I would say this is very, very, widespread.
But I cannot under the circumstances come up with any figures. Many, many, many thousands, no
doubt, are involved. But I would say that the bulk of them are running to their doctors and taking
totally unnecessary prescription drugs to cure ailments that dont exist.
Gregg: I guess that you have to ask this question even though its very difficult to answer. And you
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page291
152
271
272
45 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
mentioned, you said it earlier. But I really have to ask it because its on my mind and I know its always
in the back of everyones mind when they think of this problem. Why?? What is the major reason, I
mean, outside of just pure experimentation Im interested; for example, lets say that they have
targeted 100 people in Oklahoma. What do they, first of all, why are they doing it? Is it for, basically, a
blanket statement controlling the population? Orand, what do they do with this information once they
get it?
Julianne: I dont think they do anything with the information once they get it, other than to establish
a harassment protocol which will follow that targeted individual for the rest of his or her life. Why are
they doing it? I see a number of reasons. First, I dont know if youve done any research on the
phenomenon of capturing a percentage of the population in order to install a dictatorship. There is
always a percentage of the population, roughly 20% or so, that will buckle and throw whatever
constitutions might exist into the toilet and eagerly join the efforts at destroying the remainder of the
population.
Part of the problem or part of the objective they are seeking obviously is testing the latest and greatest
in electronic weaponry and other forms of technologies. A part of it is to control and choreograph those
who are involved in these harassment operations on the dispensing end. And it would appear that those
being targeted are simply objects who I see as ultimately being disposable. In other words, I think that
once full control is established over a major percentage of the population, and enough of the population
is silenced and unwilling to stick their necks out, that we inevitably would be heading toward a
holocaust.
Greg: The question, if I was, for example, lets say we have a person, who suspects, and lets just for
hypothetical purposes, say this person is being targeted, okay? Now, tell our listeners, because Ive
always wondered this myself, okay. Im sitting in my house and I see around me theres telephone
poles, there may be a tower in the distance that I dont see that handles the cell phones. Theres of
course a grid of electric going on around me. Ive talked to people and I try to say, how does this get
into your house? And I wanted to get your opinion, if a person is targeted, how basically are they
beginning to intrude their premises, and violate their constitutional rights, not only their rights ofnot
only trespassing on their property? Go ahead. How would that happen?
Julianne: Now, are you talking about, how would the frequencies impact upon them and how would
they first become aware of it? Or how would they first become aware of the fact that their privacy has
been violated?
Greg: Well no, I guess I didnt explain the question right. I wanted to know how they physically, are
doing it? I mean are they using a cell tower? Are they using a truck thats in the distance? How is this
being transmitted into the home to target the person and to use this weaponry on them, from your
experience?
Julianne: Well, first of all, in order to target a person you have to be able to see that person. And
while they may not be able to, they may, on entering the house, plant miniature cameras, miniature
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page292
153
272
273
46 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
microphones, as a means of, for their monitoring a person. But that is not necessarily the means by
which they hone in on a person. There are plenty of technologies that allow for the imaging of a person
that might be sitting in a chair, as you mentioned you might be.
Using infrared imagery techniques, for example, they can capture your image by monitoring the
concentration of heat emanating from your body using certain acoustical frequencies, they can detect
mass. And using sophisticated computer software, they can convert those images to likenesses on
computers, which conceivably could be used in a software program that could be connected to an
electronic weapon system. And in that context I should point out that, while devices draw on the
existing power grid, and while theyyes indeed, they do involve microwave towers
Sounds like youve got a commercial coming on
Greg: Yes we do, and thank you for making my job easier. Well be back in 3 minutes on the
Investigative Journal.
First, Ive put this in the top 3 of my stories that I believe are important, that the American people need
to deal with, because as Ms. McKinney, who is a, I consider her an expert. She would only say shes an
authority. But let me tell you, Julianne, you are an expert in this. The reasons could be, like she said at
thebefore we went into the break, and a total testing of our population to see, basically, perhaps
maybe there is a holocaust in the future or a dictatorship in the future. And they want to see how
people react to it. That may be a simplistic way to look at it. Not a simplistic way that Julianne looked at
it but my way of explaining it.
But lets get back to some of the things here, the last few minutes that are important. What can you tell
us, Julianne, about the microwave energy on citizens in terms of the existence of such a program and
the nuts and bolts of what they do?
Julianne: Microwave energy is only one aspect of the entire electromagnetic frequency spectrum.
Microwaves can be lethal depending upon how theyre used. Obviously in order to achieve appropriate
effects on people, they have to be pulsed, because otherwise the individual would be cooked from the
inside out. The objective of using microwaves as opposed to other electromagnetic frequencies would
be to inflict extremes of pain to cause thermal heating. Thats a common complaint which leaves a hot
spot on the scull. Again, primarily, just to inflict extremes of pain. I was just wondering, we kind of
skipped over or didnt quite complete a preceding topic.
Greg: Oh, go ahead, go ahead. Youve got free reign.
Julianne: You were talking about the use of the electrical grid throughout the country, the use of
microwave towers, the use of devices affixed to poles that are connected to power lines. But what
wasnt addressed, what you havent mentioned, is also that these weapon systems are used by
neighbors surrounding persons who have been singled out as targets of opportunity.
Greg: Are they solicited to do this or what?
Julianne: Thats something that Ive been pondering for some time. Again, what Ive noticed is, there
seems to be a predominant, particular religion that makes it particularly easy for them to cooperate.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page293
154
273
274
47 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Greg: Well listen, lets talk about that after the break, a short break, and then Ive got something to,
some business I have to take care of for 3 4 minutes. Then well get back for our 2 nd hour with
Julianne McKinney. Well take some calls. Back in 2 minutes on the Investigative Journal.
(In this section there seemed to be jumping around, like maybe the video was edited or there was
some problem with the recording.)
by some of the Tis and thats Targeted Individuals.
That song rose to number one without any publicity on the internet. And that song called TI, well play
that again Dr. McKinney. I think it hits the nail on the head. I mean theres a lot of people out there
suffering. And I know youre one person, an authority in this field. And for my guests who are just
picking us up this hour, Dror excuse me, Julianne McKinney is a very highly regarded person in the
field of electronic weaponry, and surveillance in studying this issue. Shes a former area Intelligence
Case Officer until 1990 in the Army. And her credentials can be found, will be found, you can go to
RBNLive.com and go to my archives in the Investigative Journal and read about that. Shes well
qualified. Shes still with us this hour. And Dror excuse me, I keep calling you Dr. and you should be.
Julianne: (Laugh) Im not a Dr., thank you. Dr. Americus.
Greg: Dr. Americus. You know, thats funny. I have a doctorate in law. And nobody ever calls me that
and I hate being called that, a doctor. But Im interviewed on a Tehran TV station once every blue
moon, couple months, and they refer to me as Dr. Szymanski. And its nice to hear once in a while. Ill
be honest with you. Every two months is good enough. Otherwise they just call me the jerk on the
radio, which is better.
But, lets go from here. Youre adding such credibility to this story, adding credibility in my mind as I
speak. Because, Ive talked to hundreds of these people and was a doubting Thomas in the beginning. I
must mention that. I did not think it existed, and that was years ago. I thought people were either
insane, or crazy, or trying to get attention. But you know something? I will admit I was totally wrong
with that initialI guessthe look at the situation and have come around to fully believe in most of the
people I talk to and really sympathize with their suffering as I see their lives being ripped apart.
Are there any things you can dowere going to get into a few more things here as far as the technical
aspects of this but what can targeted individuals do to get some peace in their life? I mean thats one
thing theyre looking for. Is there anything they can do?
Julianne: (prolonged silence)
Greg: Difficult question there.
Julianne: Its very difficult to advise targeted individuals how to acquire peace. These frequencies can
be blocked or deflected. All of these frequencies I have found, some may contest this, but I have found
can beare vulnerable, and are subject to deflection. And the pain can be immediately (word unclear),
if not halted all together. Finding peace by writing to members of congress or to state legislators might
not be a better alternative because you will be treated as something worthy of the circular basket. They
just wont intervene. Writing to the various agencies and calling a meeting with them serves no useful
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page294
155
274
275
48 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
purpose either because they will say there are no laws prohibiting these types of activities. They cant,
say for example, the FBIand I was given this statement on a number of occasions.there are no laws
prohibiting experimentation with these weapon systems. Youre talking to the wrong people.
So my advice would be to do what you can to secure your premises, because so long as your house is
or apartment is being entered, you are susceptible to, in addition to being targeted by electronic
weapons, there is a potential for having drugs put in your food. And Im not exaggerating there.
Greg: I had a few targeted individuals I talked to send me some questions that Id like to ask you.
Julianne: Certainly.
Greg: And the one was Are targeted individuals also broadcast around the country via closed circuit
TV? And, What purpose does this serve? Im fully in the dark on this question, but, go ahead.
Julianne: Okay. I have seen evidence of a closed circuit TV and it seems to be some form of
major source of entertainment and perhaps instruction for the individuals participating in
this harassment. I dont know who runs it. I have seen aspects of that on a large screen TV
across the street on which I saw surveillance films of a TI being harassed, obviously, in an
office environment. Gang stalked. Shows brain scans and is otherwise a very sophisticated,
sleek, communications operation. Why would it be used? As I said either for
entertainment, for creating a sense of unity, or for identifying persons, TIs, who are to be
harassed on the street. I mean, obviously you cant harass someone if you dont know what
that person looks like. So its a means of communicating to the perpetrators, perps, what the
TI looks like.
Greg: Okay, now, before I get to some more, I want to put out that call for people to call. I got a
couple emails. A lot of times Tis dont want to go public. And theyve sent me some emails. I want to
get to one in a minute. But one question I have for you is, how can people gather evidence to support
their beliefs that this is happening to them? Many people will say, well its only a lack of sleep. I mean,
you have a sleep disorder. Maybe theres a problem with your joints, I dont know. It could be anything
that the answers are when you suspect youre being targeted. What kind of evidence do you tell people
to gather to support their beliefs that this is actually happening to them.
Julianne: Well, when youre gathering evidence, obviously you have an objective in mind and that
generally is legal. What you want to do with that evidence. Theres really nothing you can do with it. So
in the absence of that, the main thing is to try to protect yourself and to alleviate the pain that youre
experiencing. Collecting the evidence, if you were to go to, frankly, Id strongly recommend that you
keep your faculties together and avoid going to see psychiatrists and psychologists, because the pattern
that is evolving is that they are highly complicit of these operations.
And if you go to a medical doctor, you do not talk about it because medical doctors, many, are also
involved. What you do when you see a doctor is that you define your symptoms and get a very clear
statement that, well, we cant figure this out. Well, thats a clear indication that it is not indigenous,
its not part of your system. Its not coming from within you, so obviously something is happening from
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page295
156
275
276
49 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
outside. If they prescribe drugs and yet cant find the ecology, the basis for your disease, dont take
those drugs.
Greg: Now earlier we were talking about the fact that they may, whoevers doing this, youve
delineated, youve led a good course into whatyoure tracking these people. But what I was getting at,
we never got to the point where ifyou mentioned something about a religious group that may be
targeted. What did you mean by that?
Julianne: The way I dont.well let me put it this way. Im not out to start a religious war. I have
found over the years that the persons involved, both in gang stalking.Ive made it a point to get to
know these people. Ive had to necessarily. Im not the type to
Greg: Youre talking about the perpetrators or the targets?
Julianne: The perpetrators.
Greg: Okay
Julianne: As well as theIve been drawing distinctions. And what Ive found is that the perpetrators
appear to belong predominantly to one particular religion; whereas the targeted individuals do not
belong predominantly to that particular religion.
Greg: And what is the particular religion of the perpetrators?
Julianne: Right. So, at this stage, again, Im not particularly enthused about the idea of starting a
religious war. And I have challenged other TIs to get out there and become acquainted with, and get to
know, the people who are harassing them, to draw those distinctions themselves, because Im not
going to be making brash claims. This is something Ive observed over the past 10 years.
Greg: Thats fair enough. And maybe, perhaps, I could talk to you about it just for my own knowledge
off the air.
Julianne: That would be fine.
Greg: And I will keep your name out of it at that point and let people know what the targeted group
may be and what the other group may be.
Julianne: There is a religious influence but thats not to say these people arent just being used as
puppets by some broader interest.
Greg: Very good point. Can you stick with us one more segment of 5 minutes?
Julianne: Okay.
Greg: Were interviewing Julianne McKinney, our last segment. Juliannes an authority in the use of
surveillance and electronic weaponry. And this is an email question, kind of a technical one from a TI.
Let me read this to you. Perhaps you can answer it. Are the protocols for each individual modified based
to custom tailor it for the specific targeted individual? And if so, how does this process work?
Julianne: Yes indeed they are modified. There is a basic protocol that the perpetrators begin with. But
the TI contributes to the modification. A good example of that would be, if someone. Im trying to
think of a good example. If the TI feels the need to cooperate, even in the most subtle fashion, with the
persons who are harassing him or her, he or she will modify his behavior, in pathlobean condition, which
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page296
157
276
277
50 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
alters the protocol. Theyre constantly, targets are constantly monitored, and if they respond
emotionally to a particular trigger, that will be built into the protocol. If the target displays a certain
sense of guilt or embarrassment about a subject, that will be built into the protocol. Its an ongoing
process. And one thing I want to emphasize is no TI should look for a reason as to why this is going on.
Its a serious, serious mistake. I know I did that myself when they started on me and over the years I
came up with probably 6 different excuses.
Greg: Is it still going on with you?
Julianne: Oh yes. Not to the degree that it was before but certainly in very lethal form.
Greg: Now, how has this hampered your life?
Julianne: Its come close to being lethal on a number of occasions. I deal, I dealt with gang stalking
head on and I essentially put that to rest. I deal with.Ive developed a means for communicating with
perps directly and made them feel like the trailer trash that they are. So gang stalking is not one of
their favorite activities in my case. So the primary activity now is to see what I can survive in the way
of an induced brain aneurism or stroke or a heart attack.
Greg: I just had a caller who doesnt want to get on the air but wants to know, does moving help;
moving your location?
Julianne: Running, if youre talking about moving to a completely new location, no. This country is
wired to the hilt for immediate transfer. Your protocol follows you wherever you go so its a waste of
time. Moving about physically in place will not change anything. Other than, if you make a 180 degree
turn you will notice the targeting will suddenly stop because the weapon systems are programmed to
focus on a particular area of your anatomy. So if you turn, the targeting will suddenly end. If you turn
back itll hit you again.
Greg: Interesting. Now, going full circle in the last 2 minutes here, in 1991 you published Microwave
Harassment and Mind Control Experimentation. This has been passed around the internet and over
thousands of domain sites over the past 15 years. Can you tell us how someone can get ahold of this
publication to be informed?
Julianne: Its not copy-writed. All they need to do is plug in my last name, McKinney, and type in the
title Microwave Harassment and Mind Control Experimentation and innumerable sites will appear and
just read it from there. It will give you a good insight into what the pattern is when harassment begins.
Greg: Now, let me just spell your name for people that are going to do that. Thats MCKINNEY
McKinney. And then its Microwave Harassment and Mind Control Experimentation for an authority in
the field.
I guess since 1981, have you seen.I guess a question I wanted to ask, from 2001, have you seen any,
from the time of 911, has there been an increase in the last 4or 5 years, with this type of, that youve
seen, in the number of people contacting you. Has it been more wide spread since 911?
Julianne: Not since 911. WhenI would say back in the early 90s Ive seen a tremendous expansion
of these activities since the early 1990s. And it has moved forward in consistent fashion. Its become
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page297
158
277
278
51 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
ever more sophisticated and ever more wide spread. There was no sudden burst or flurry of activity
since 911.
Greg: And you have no help whatsoever with the political arena in this. Correct? Politicians will not
touch this with a 10 foot pole?
Julianne: Thats right. And even those who purport to be liberally inclined, and Im speaking about
members of the democratic party, will not touch it, because quote unquote, and they know, they know
whats going on. They dont they simply dont have the funds to be able to pursue it. All sorts of
humma humma excuses will be furnished for not pursuing something like this. Before you close.I hear
the music in the background.
Greg: We can stay another minute if you want.
Julianne: Okay.
Greg: Why dont you come back for 2 minutes on the other side of the break and then well finish up.
Okay?
Julianne: Okay.
Greg: Okay, back with Julianne McKinney and 3 minutes on the Investigative Journal. You wanted to
say something at the break.
Julianne: I did. I want to thank you very, very much for taking on this subject. There are so few in the
media, as a matter of fact, youre the only one I know of, who has the guts to address it.
Greg: And you know, it really doesnt just in defense of every other media person. I dont think its
guts, in a sense, maybe it is. I dont consider myself having guts in this issue. I consider it to be an
issue that you need to take time to understand it. And thats what I would recommend to the people in
the media that havent touched this issue. If it isnt being down right censored by someone above you,
at least take the time to talk, Ill spend time talking to you about it. Because it took me a little time to
figure it out. And, Ill tell you what, its people like you that need to be applauded because its your
efforts that are bringing this to the forefront. Youre laying the credibility on the line. But I thank you
anyway for your kind words.
And with that, I wanted to say goodbye to you. And were going to have to move on. And well have you
on again to talk about this. And thank you so much.
Julianne: And thank you so much.
Greg: And that was Julianne McKinney. And she is an authority in the use of electronic weaponry and
microwave weaponry and she was with us for the last hour and a half.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page298
159
278
279
52 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Dr. Nick Begich Author and Expert Researcher

of Electromagnetic Weapons
Biography
Dr. Nick Begich is the eldest son of the late United States Congressman
from Alaska, Nick Begich Sr., and political activist Pegge Begich. He is well
known in Alaska for his own political activities. He was twice elected
President of both the Alaska Federation of Teachers and the Anchorage
Council of Education. He has been pursuing independent research in the
sciences and politics for most of his adult life. Begich received Doctor of
Medicine (Medicina Alternitiva), honoris causa, for independent work in
health and political science, from The Open International University for
Complementary Medicines, Colombo, Sri Lanka, in November 1994.
He co-authored with
Jeane Manning the
book Angels Don't Play This HAARP; Advances in
Tesla Technology. Begich has also authored Earth
Rising - The Revolution: Toward a Thousand
Years of Peace and and his latest book Earth
Rising II- The Betrayal of Science, Society and
the Soul both with the late James Roderick. His
latest work is Controlling the Human Mind - The
Technologies of Political Control or Tools for Peak
Performance. Begich has published articles in
science, politics and education and is a well
known lecturer, having presented throughout the
United States and in nineteen countries. He has been featured as a guest on thousands of radio
broadcasts reporting on his research activities including new technologies, health and earth science
related issues. He has also appeared on dozens of television documentaries and other programs
throughout the world including BBC-TV, CBC-TV, TeleMundo, and others.
Begich has served as an expert witness and speaker before the European Parliament. He has spoken on
various issues for groups representing citizen concerns, statesmen and elected officials, scientists and
others. He is the publisher and co-owner of Earthpulse Press. He served as Tribal Administrator/Village
Planner for the Chickaloon Village Council, a federally recognized American Indian Tribe of the
Athabascan Indian Nation for five years and served four years as the Executive Director of The Lay
Institute of Technology, Inc. a Texas non-profit corporation. Currently Begich consults for tribal
organizations, private corporations and others in a number of research areas.
Dr. Begich is a single person with five adult children, and four grandchildren.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page299
160
279
280
53 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 1
RELIEF
2016
1 Covert Harassment Conference

1-2 October 2015, Berlin, Germany
2
3 DR. NICK BEGICH

Mind Control: A Brave New World together with HAARP -
4 The Update
5 DR. BEGICH: Hello, and thank you for being
6 here and thank you to Peter and the rest of the team for
7 putting this together.
8 Everyone hears me okay, yes? In the back?
9 Okay. Good.
10 All right. I want to give a little bit of
11 background in terms of my interest in these areas. For
12 those that don't know my family story, it really goes
13 back quite a ways.
14 My father was in the United States Congress in
15 the early 1970s during the Nixon Administration. He was
16 lost in a plane with Hale Boggs. Some of you may
17 remember this if you've got a little bit of gray hair.
18 Hale Boggs was our House majority leader at the time,
19 one of the most powerful people in the United States
20 Congress. He was also a Warren Commissioner. He had a
21 strong dislike for J. Edgar Hoover, because he basically
22 read everybody's mail, tapped everybody's phones,
23 including the United States Congress, and then,
24 essentially, blackmailed political leaders to follow
25 whatever script he laid out.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page300
161
280
281
54 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 2
RELIEF
2016
1 Boggs was a pretty outspoken individual. At
2 the time -- it was just before the second election of
3 Richard Nixon -- Boggs came to Alaska to work on my
4 father's campaign, which would have been his second term
5 in the United States Congress.
6 Boggs, before they flew out on October 16th,
7 three weeks before the second election of Richard Nixon,
8 began to talk about this scandal brewing in Washington,
9 DC. In fact, that very scandal, had it unfolded a
10 little bit differently -- for those that remember, the
11 planes disappeared.
12 Three weeks later, Nixon's elected for his
13 second term. It wasn't too much long after that that
14 the Watergate scandal broke. Agnew was thrown out of
15 office. Ford moved up. Then Nixon resigned. Ford
16 moved up again. For those that don't remember,
17 Rockefeller then slid into the Vice President's slot.
18 And then one of the old Manson women from the Charles
19 Manson days tried to assassinate Ford, which would have
20 put Rockefeller in the White House.
21 What would have otherwise happened, most
22 likely, the election would have taken place. Nixon
23 would have won. Agnew and Nixon would have been thrown
24 out at the same time. The Democrats would have
25 controlled the Congress. The Speaker of the House would
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page301
162
281
282
55 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 3
RELIEF
2016
1 have elevated to the Presidency. The Democrats would
2 have been in control. But the opposite, of course,
3 happened and history tells us a lot about what really
4 happened there.
5 Twenty years later there was a report, an
6 investigative report by a publication called "Roll Call"
7 in Washington, DC. That report was looking into all of
8 these various Congressional deaths. You know, plane
9 crashes are kind of the hazard of political leadership,
10 it seems like.
11 But in researching that, what they found in the
12 FBI files were a couple of telexes -- this goes before
13 FAX machines -- and telexes coming from California into
14 Washington, DC reported that two people had been found
15 at a crash site. Those sources were later looked at by
16 the FBI to determine whether they were credible. A
17 follow-up telex came through saying, yes, they were.
18 That plane was never recovered. There were no survivors
19 officially; yet 20 years later, we find out, in fact,
20 there were.
21 So I know about conspiracies. Conspiracies are
22 conversations that happen in a room like this when
23 there's a bunch of people standing on the outside who
24 might not agree with us. But the reality is, even in
25 the political life, even at the highest levels, things
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page302
163
282
283
56 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 4
RELIEF
2016
1 happen. Things happen that aren't easily explained.
2 Maybe a few decades go by before the truth is finally
3 revealed.
4 So I have a strong motivation foundationally in
5 terms of how I approach controversial issues. I don't
6 do it with fear. I've been doing this work for over 20
7 years. Fear isn't part of the equation. In fact, that
8 is the absolute adversary for getting anything
9 accomplished on this planet.
10 My interest in these areas started with HAARP.
11 And how many in this room do not know anything about
12 HAARP?
13 Okay. Well, that's a lot better than it used
14 to be. All right. It used to be the other way around.
15 Twenty years of this work and the work of others have
16 kind of brought this into the public.
17 So the first image -- I'm going to use HAARP as
18 sort of the backdrop as I move into the mind control,
19 mind effects-related technology. This is just an image
20 in my part of the world. I come from Alaska. I don't
21 know if -- maybe I've come the farthest for this
22 presentation. But I appreciate being here and I
23 appreciate the opportunity to inform people about this
24 subject.
25 So HAARP is a large array, a field of antennas
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page303
164
283
284
57 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 5
RELIEF
2016
1 in Alaska, currently 180 antennas. They're
2 approximately 20 meters tall. They have a cross dipole,
3 which you can see, which is the very top of these
4 antennas. And what these are designed to do is focus or
5 concentrate radiofrequency energy into a relatively
6 small space.
7 If you think about the energy of a flashlight,
8 for instance, or a torch, as they say here in Europe, I
9 shine that against the wall, the beam starts out small,
10 and then it broadens as you get further away from the
11 source.
12 The same is true with radiofrequency energy.
13 You can think about it as an inverted funnel starting
14 here at the transmitter and then spreading out and
15 getting thinner and thinner, less dense, which is why
16 the further you get away from radio broadcast antennas,
17 the weaker and weaker the signal.
18 With HAARP, the opposite occurs. They have
19 figured out a way through what's called cyclotron
20 resonance, which would be focusing or concentrating the
21 energy. So if you could visualize it, it would look
22 like sort of a cork-screwing kind of motion that got
23 smaller and smaller as you move further and further away
24 from the transmitter.
25 So it concentrates that energy or focuses that
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page304
165
284
285
58 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 6
RELIEF
2016
1 energy so you can manipulate it in various ways. And so
2 the HAARP array, which was originally designed by a
3 gentleman, Bernard Eastlund, who's now deceased, was
4 intended to do a number of things as a weapons
5 application. This is the earlier version when it was
6 half the current size of the transmitter in Alaska. You
7 can see the field of antennas. In this case there were
8 90 antennas in the array.
9 And here's another image as they expanded the
10 array to 180. And another image showing the array.
11 Now, they also upgraded the technology pretty
12 substantially over the years. So it became much more
13 efficient. So with a much smaller system you create
14 much bigger effects.
15 So what does it do? Essentially, it's sending
16 energy or focusing energy up into an area known as the
17 ionosphere, which in this image in miles -- I apologize
18 for that -- is approximately 37 miles to 620 miles out
19 into space.
20 Now, this is a highly energized area. If you
21 think about radiofrequency signals or shortwave signals,
22 they would come from the earth, they'd bounce off of us,
23 and then bounce back down to the earth to transmit over
24 large distances.
25 The ionosphere also is an area that can be
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page305
166
285
286
59 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 7
RELIEF
2016
1 disturbed by solar radiation, radiation from the sun.
2 When it becomes destabilized, it interferes with
3 terrestrial communications of every kind.
4 So part of the idea in this technology was to
5 learn how to stabilize the ionosphere during these
6 periods or deliberately disrupt the ionosphere to
7 interfere with communications on a global basis.
8 Now, what caught my interest when I first
9 looked at this issue of HAARP was a very short article
10 in a publication, an Australian publication, that talked
11 about this big system in Alaska.
12 Now, I come from a family that's pretty
13 politically engaged. Besides my dad being in the
14 Congress, my younger brother just finished a term in the
15 United States Senate. My family's been involved in
16 politics a very long time.
17 Alaska is a very big region, but we're a really
18 small population; 700,000 people in our entire region.
19 And when you think about big projects, you know, you
20 think you know something about them.
21 Well, I'm reading about this project in my
22 state in a journal in Australia and I'm going, you know,
23 why doesn't anybody know about this?
24 And so I decided I would go in and look into
25 this issue independently. And I did. I picked up maybe
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page306
167
286
287
60 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 8
RELIEF
2016
1 30 articles and papers, design specifications, some
2 things, and with friends encouraging me to publish, I
3 published the first article that I had written on HAARP
4 back in 1994. So it's been a very long time ago.
5 What also caught my interest was the idea that
6 they were primarily utilizing, in some applications,
7 extremely low frequency signals or ELFs. These are
8 signals that can be biologically active, can affect us
9 as human beings and in very specific ways.
10 And in particular, certain applications of the
11 technology -- and this gives you sort of a graphic
12 illustration of the focus. These view graphs, actually,
13 were given to me by the inventor, Bernard Eastlund,
14 prior to his passing. And we utilized them in our
15 publications and in some of our work. So this gives you
16 kind of a graphic showing the radiofrequency from the
17 array, moving up into the ionosphere and focusing that
18 energy.
19 His initial concept was to create a global
20 shield, to be able to utilize the natural magnetic field
21 lines that surround the earth, be able to punch energy
22 into this and then create this kind of global shielding
23 effect. And the idea was that any electronic device
24 piercing that energy would be disrupted, like
25 satellites, intercontinental ballistic missiles,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page307
168
287
288
61 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 9
RELIEF
2016
1 virtually any electronic device that ran into this field
2 of energy that was being amplified would be destroyed.
3 Now, one of the other interesting parts of
4 this -- and this kind of shows that, again, utilizing
5 one of Eastlund's graphics. So you can see like a field
6 line and then you see this cork-screwing energy going
7 around it. That energy naturally is occurring from the
8 southern polar regions into the northern polar regions.
9 And, in this case, they actually couple -- actually
10 utilize the energy on the ground to couple with the
11 natural energy, and then coming from the north to the
12 south, create this cork-screwing effect, which
13 accelerates the electrons and then creates this global
14 shield.
15 Now, that was his initial concept. And as a
16 concept, it caught the attention of a number of people
17 and eventually got funding from the Congress, initially
18 at 30 million, and over the last few decades now over
19 almost 300 million, which in dollars is not a lot of
20 money, but when you consider, this is sort of the
21 pinnacle of billions of dollars spent in ionosphere
22 research over many decades.
23 What caught my attention in terms of the
24 technology of Eastlund -- I'm going to skip some of
25 these that are not so relevant -- was the idea that you
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page308
169
288
289
62 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 10
RELIEF
2016
1 could manipulate the ionosphere -- and I'll use this as
2 a better example. So one of the thoughts was that if
3 you could punch or pulse energy into the ionosphere --
4 so think about this energy going up and, like, a hammer
5 ringing a bell. Every time it hits that ionosphere, the
6 ionosphere itself vibrates and then it begins to send a
7 signal in the ELF range. So you have a high frequency
8 signal going up, punching the ionosphere, the ionosphere
9 which is energized then acts as a broadcast antenna in
10 the sky bringing back an ELF signal to the earth, and in
11 this case covering an entire hemisphere.
12 Now, ELF signals, extremely low frequency
13 signals, are very long wavelengths. They penetrate the
14 earth and sea. They're utilized for communication with
15 submarines, as an example, the depth, because short
16 wavelengths won't penetrate the earth and sea. They're
17 also used for what's called earth-penetrating
18 tomography, which in simple language or by analogy would
19 be like x-raying the earth or looking into the earth for
20 underground structures.
21 But one of the side effects of ELF is the
22 entrainment effect on the human mind. Because ELF
23 signals will lock onto in what's called a frequency
24 following response. And you can use a lot of different
25 techniques to create a frequency following response.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page309
170
289
290
63 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 11
RELIEF
2016
1 You can use flickering light, you can use binaural beat,
2 which I'll explain in a few minutes. You can use
3 electromagnetic fields such as this, or even the power
4 grid itself can be modulated in such a way to create a
5 signal that the human body will join with, will couple
6 with, and begin to follow. It doesn't take a great deal
7 of energy to accomplish this.
8 This is the one that triggered my real interest
9 in HAARP, because this is the one that everybody kind of
10 ignored and said, oh. In fact, the HAARP planners said,
11 well, if ELF has a biological effect, it's a side
12 effect. It's an unintended consequence. We heard that
13 phrase earlier today. But I don't believe that. I
14 believe that it's an intended consequence. It's
15 intended to grade populations in very specific ways.
16 Now, this book was mentioned by my friend
17 earlier today, "Between Two Ages", by Zbigniew
18 Brzezinski. And why this is an important book, it was
19 written, actually, in 1973, when Brzezinski was at
20 Columbia University. This is before he became National
21 Security Adviser to President Carter. This is around
22 the time that Kissinger and he and others were starting
23 to think about the Trilateral Commission organizing this
24 think tank, so to speak.
25 Now, find this book. I really encourage you to
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page310
171
290
291
64 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 12
RELIEF
2016
1 find this book and read it, because it is not a
2 prediction of what will come with technology. It's the
3 blueprint, in fact. You can read this.
4 When I first read it -- he writes in a pretty
5 convoluted style. It's a little difficult even in
6 English to understand. But I really encourage you to
7 read it because he predicted the economic changes that
8 took place, the political changes that took place in the
9 world over the last 40 years with a great deal of
10 accuracy. And some will say it really wasn't the
11 prediction. It was the plan.
12 If you look within this text between Pages 54
13 and 56, you'll see a section that's dedicated to the
14 kind of technologies we're talking about today, a mind
15 control technology. And what Zbigniew referenced was a
16 guy named J. F. Gordon MacDonald. And he was a
17 geophysicist at UCL. He wrote a book -- or, actually, a
18 chapter in a book and the chapter was called, "How to
19 Wreck Your Environment", which this is before Earth Day,
20 okay, so he could get away with that. It was 1969 when
21 that book was actually published. But what he said that
22 caught Zbigniew Brzezinski's attention was, he said, if
23 we could ever figure out how to electronically stroke
24 the ionosphere in just the right way, we could return a
25 signal to the earth that would influence the behavior of
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page311
172
291
292
65 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 13
RELIEF
2016
1 people over huge geographic areas.
2 Now, that's a pretty profound thing. But we
3 didn't have a way to stroke the ionosphere in 1969. But
4 we did by the 1990s. And that was, in fact, and is, in
5 fact, the HAARP system that can accomplish this.
6 So the idea was -- and it was kind of, in a
7 gross sort of way, primitive, if you will, but what the
8 intention was, was that if you could pulse the
9 ionosphere, return this ELF signal to the earth, you
10 could agitate the population in very specific ways. You
11 could make them passive, less aggressive, or the
12 opposite by just amplifying that signal. And I'll
13 explain a little bit of that as we go on.
14 The other person that comes out in the last
15 presentations, Jose Delgado, and this book he wrote,
16 "Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a Psychocivilized
17 Society". And this is, again, a 1960s book. Those
18 images that you saw in just this short video clip of
19 Delgado's work, there is a good section in this text as
20 well showing that.
21 But in those days they used implants. They had
22 to physically put something in the brain. And what Jose
23 Delgado originally did -- he was actually educated in
24 electrophysiology at the University of Madrid. He
25 graduated in 1950. Electrophysiology, as a degree
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page312
173
292
293
66 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 14
RELIEF
2016
1 field, thinking about it in 1950, now 65 years ago, most
2 people don't even realize that's an area of higher
3 education today, much less that far back.
4 One of my mentors, Raul Makayla (phonetic), he
5 actually graduated University of Madrid in 1958, and his
6 area of interest was, essentially, the same, biomagnetic
7 and electric fields, effects on human physiology, and he
8 spent his career studying that.
9 Delgado, at Yale University, he initially was
10 mapping the brain of primates and humans by stimulating
11 various portions of the brain to figure out what was
12 responsible for what kind of activity. And then he
13 began to utilize the implants in those dramatic ways in
14 those film clips with the charging bull and he throws
15 the switch and the bull stops, to demonstrate that you
16 could take a creature from passive to highly aggressive
17 to passive to highly aggressive, just like flipping on
18 and off the lights in your living room.
19 What Delgado discovered by the mid-'80s is that
20 you didn't need any implants. You just needed to
21 manipulate the energy itself. And you didn't need a
22 great deal of energy.
23 Now, we've heard -- I forget the amount of
24 energy surrounding us now. Was it a quintillion? I
25 believe it was 18 zeros after the one that we heard
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page313
174
293
294
67 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 15
RELIEF
2016
1 earlier. Back when I wrote the HAARP book in '94, just
2 radiofrequency energy alone, it was 200 million times
3 more around us every day than nature created in 1994.
4 Now, when you think about it, what did Delgado
5 discover? He discovered that one-fiftieth of the amount
6 of energy in the natural background noise of the earth
7 was sufficient to manipulate the behavior of human
8 beings if you could hit the right frequencies, if you
9 could hit those window frequencies that stimulated that
10 kind of activity.
11 Now, if you think about this -- again, by
12 analogy, think about dialing through the radio stations
13 on a radio. In between the stations you get the white
14 noise, the static, you get no clear signal. But when
15 you have resonance between the transmitter and the
16 receiver, then you get a nice, clear signal.
17 The same is true in our physiology. Whether
18 you're looking at stimulating or affecting a specific
19 element in the body, molecules in the body, cell
20 structures or organ structures or even the human mind,
21 it's about manipulating the underlying energy.
22 When you think about medical science in terms
23 of how the fork in the road is and how this kind of
24 applies to why don't we know more about this today,
25 well, there's lots of literature now. 25,000 sources, I
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page314
175
294
295
68 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 16
RELIEF
2016
1 think we heard quoted earlier today. 25,000 sources
2 talking about the energy interactions with the human
3 body. That is a lot of information.
4 But what happened in medical science? A lot of
5 people that went into life sciences, they were really
6 good in the chemistry, a little weak in the math, so
7 they went to life sciences. People who were a little
8 better in the math, they went to physics. And then once
9 upon a time, these two came together and we got
10 biophysics, which is really the root of real health
11 science. If you really want to get to the meat of it,
12 you've got to get to the energetic interactions that
13 create chemical reactions that then manifest in the
14 body.
15 And that's what we kind of miss in so much of
16 our medicine. We followed a pharmaceutical model as
17 opposed to an electromagnetic model. In the '30s, prior
18 to World War II, that fork in the road was being
19 explored pretty aggressively, the energetic models. But
20 they were somehow lost in that shuffle and we ended up
21 with the pharmaceutical industry, and the results of
22 that, I think we can all not be quite so proud of.
23 In terms of where the technology is going and
24 where a lot of the science is going, it will be
25 electromedicine that cures most of what we call
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page315
176
295
296
69 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 17
RELIEF
2016
1 incurable. It will also be that which enhances or
2 debilitates human consciousness itself.
3 Now, Jose Delgado, when he figured out that you
4 didn't need implants, you just need to manipulate the
5 energy itself, this became kind of the essence of sort
6 of where everything went from there.
7 But I want to roll back a little bit, a little
8 bit back in time, and talk more about the evolution of
9 mind control as technology starting with the work at
10 Harvard University of a gentleman, Estabrook, who was
11 working in the Harvard hypnotherapy labs in the 1920s.
12 You can look Estabrook up. Look him up at the Library
13 of Congress and you'll see his list of publications, and
14 I recommend that you do that.
15 What he decided was that you could create what
16 we would call today a Manchurian candidate. You could
17 take certain individuals, put them in a very, very deep
18 state of hypnosis and then over a period of time train
19 them so they would be like this super spy that you could
20 send into another country and they'd hang out for a year
21 or two, but if they got captured, they wouldn't really
22 remember any of their former self, and then when they
23 came back, in this case, into the United States, that we
24 would then give them the appropriate suggestions and
25 then extract the intelligence from them.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page316
177
296
297
70 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 18
RELIEF
2016
1 And this is what Estabrook was working on. By
2 the 1930s, a lot of his work was being classified and he
3 continued to work in this field up through the 1960s.
4 His last book -- and I always like to read the last
5 thing someone writes, you know, because it tells you a
6 lot about, sort of, the conclusions and there are things
7 that you might discard bits and pieces as science
8 enlightens you and your experience enlightens you. And
9 what he talked about in that last book were the
10 experiments he was involved in using LSD and other
11 hallucinogenics in mind control, which he actually
12 talked about in a favorable sense.
13 And for those of you that remember, the CIA was
14 heavily involved in this in the 1960s and, in fact, the
15 whole area pre-1960s going back even to the Korean War,
16 which is sort of my next mark on the timeline.
17 The Korean War, we had prisoners, patriotic
18 young Americans come back from war and they're handing
19 out Communist leaflets on street corners, and the term
20 or the phrase brainwashing came into being. That's
21 where it came from. It came from that series of events
22 after the Korean War.
23 The idea of being able to manipulate people's
24 behavior and change them so profoundly became of
25 interest to the predecessor of the Central Intelligence
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page317
178
297
298
71 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 19
RELIEF
2016
1 Agency and then later the Central Intelligence Agency.
2 And what they looked at were lots of different ways to
3 manipulate human behavior.
4 Now, when I was researching my first book with
5 Jeane Manning, "Angels Don't Play This HAARP", I was
6 looking for a good source document that would speak to
7 this, because you always read about this in secondary,
8 tertiary sources. And so I'm in a book room, a big
9 surplus book room, and I'm telling this guy that I know,
10 I really need this source. And as I'm having this
11 conversation, I reach unconsciously behind me into a box
12 and I pull out this book.
13 This is a really interesting one. This is
14 actually a presidential report. This is a report that
15 was commissioned at the time, 1975, to look at the
16 abuses of the CIA. Now, this came out of the Church
17 Committee reports, which were Congressional hearings
18 that took place in the early '70s to investigate the
19 abuses of the Central Intelligence Agency, the kind of
20 abuses that we read about today, because nothing really
21 changed. Supposedly, this was to change things.
22 Now, what's in this report? The LSD
23 experiments were in this report. The idea the Central
24 Intelligence Agency was domestically infiltrating civil
25 rights groups, antiwar groups, people that, essentially,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page318
179
298
299
72 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 20
RELIEF
2016
1 opposed the government within the United States, which
2 was not part of their mandate, in fact, was illegal.
3 The fact that they were reading people's mail, utilizing
4 unwitting victims and experiments for mind control. All
5 of this came out in this report in 1975. And yet, the
6 CIA continues to do it even to this day.
7 Think about the kinds of activities that have
8 been reported pretty widely over the last few years,
9 whether it's digging through garbage to blackmail other
10 diplomats, which is something our Intelligence community
11 does, whether it's to send pallet loads of money into
12 countries like we did in Afghanistan to bribe officials
13 as a way of doing business, or whether it's to
14 assassinate people with drones, kidnap people and
15 torture them.
16 Now, most of us don't know people like this,
17 but this is the government that I unfortunately have
18 guiding my country right now. It's a government of
19 criminals. Now, people want to talk about, oh, this
20 couldn't happen here.
21 It has happened here. It's happened for
22 decades in the United States. This report by the
23 President's Commission touches the very tip of that
24 iceberg.
25 This is another document. This is -- this guy,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page319
180
299
300
73 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 21
RELIEF
2016
1 Captain Tyler, he later became a colonel and retired.
2 He was involved in pretty much the sort of esoteric side
3 of some of the government research. This book -- this
4 chapter out of this book is called, "Low-Intensity
5 Conflict and Modern Technology". It was prepared by
6 Maxwell Air Force Base in 1984. And it was talking
7 about a large -- a variety of technologies.
8 But in this particular one, if you look at,
9 certainly, the subject lines, you have stimulation of ,
10 bones* generation, healing of fractures, treatment of
11 disease, healing of wounds. You look at behavior
12 modification in animals. You know, some of these things
13 that are listed here were kind of under the mysterious
14 category. They couldn't really explain what was
15 happening in 1984.
16 But the idea was to stimulate research in these
17 fields. So a number of things happened. A lot of money
18 started to flow into these areas. One of the reports
19 that came out in the 1980s as a result of some of this
20 was the Radiofrequency Dosimetry Handbook. It was a
21 big, thick handbook. It was produced by the University
22 of Utah under contract to the United States Air Force to
23 determine the radiofrequency dosages that were required
24 to override every vital organ of the human body, whether
25 it be the heart, the liver, the lungs, the kidneys, just
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page320
181
300
301
74 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 22
RELIEF
2016
1 sort of preempt their natural function to be able to do
2 it remotely.
3 And the idea was to take that leap of
4 technology and begin to apply it into weapon systems.
5 Mind control. "The Economist". Cover story. Some of
6 you will remember this one. This is 2002, I believe.
7 Yeah, 2002. And what this cover story was about was
8 about the ethics of mind control. Not saying, hey, does
9 it exist or doesn't it exist? It's just saying it's
10 here right now. We really need to be debating whether
11 we should advance this technology, whether we should
12 limit this technology. "The Economist" is certainly a
13 credible publication. Not too much happened from this
14 story.
15 This is -- unfortunately, it's not showing up.
16 November -- you can get this one on my website. I'll
17 give you my website, because this is a very important
18 document. The Navy set up a new set of regulations for
19 human experiments. It was approved in 2006. You know,
20 in history, that's like tomorrow and yesterday, right?
21 It's, like, now. And in this they specifically call out
22 mind control experiments and who has the authority to
23 approve them. And the persons with the authority to
24 approve them is under secretaries of the Navy in the
25 case of Navy Intelligence or Naval research.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page321
182
301
302
75 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 23
RELIEF
2016
1 Now, it's not just CIA. Naval Intelligence
2 does this work. The Marines have a section on
3 non-lethal weapons that this falls under. The Air Force
4 has the electromagnetic directorate, which is working in
5 an area called controlled effects, which deal, again,
6 with mind control and physiological effects on human
7 beings. In fact, they publish a publication called
8 "Technology Horizons". I believe it's the June 2004
9 issue. You can look it up. The cover story is on
10 controlled effects.
11 Now, what are controlled effects? The first
12 effect is attacking hardware; you know, like equipment,
13 like machines, to be able to interfere with the flow of
14 electrons through circuits to disrupt those machines to
15 operate. Not using bombs and bullets and the things of
16 history, but using energy itself to manipulate hardware.
17 The second sort of level of controlled effects
18 talked about in that article is the idea of manipulating
19 the software, the systems that run those systems, so
20 that you can disrupt the software, then you disrupt the
21 hardware, and things collapse.
22 And the third leg of controlled effects is the
23 human operator. And what they say in this particular
24 article produced by the electromagnetic director of the
25 Air Force is that we can target or create the illusion
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page322
183
302
303
76 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 24
RELIEF
2016
1 of all of the senses in the human body; sight, sound,
2 touch, taste, to give people complete memory sets,
3 complete experiential sets that you wouldn't be able to
4 distinguish the synthetic from the real.
5 Now, think about that for a moment. What does
6 that do to court testimony in 20 years if this becomes
7 the norm? They're now talking about using this for
8 post-traumatic stress syndrome folks, people coming back
9 from warfare. This just sort of cleans up the garbage
10 of the mind and gets rid of that stress. Some people
11 think that's a great idea. Personally, I think that's
12 the biggest mistake we could ever make. Because
13 whatever those servicemen and women were engaged in --
14 what used to happen in warfare -- what happened in World
15 War II when everybody came back, they said, I don't ever
16 want to see my children in these things, I don't want to
17 see my grandchildren in these things. Wars need to be
18 put down, not amplified.
19 When you take the human factor out of warfare
20 and it becomes like a videogame, then our willingness to
21 withdraw from direct conflict no longer happens.
22 And think about where our military science has
23 gone. In fact, I want to mention another very important
24 publication. It was produced by the US Army War College
25 in the early 1980s. It's called the "Revolution of
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page323
184
303
304
77 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 25
RELIEF
2016
1 Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War". And this
2 particular paper was talking about revolution of
3 military affairs. What is that exactly?
4 This is a leap as important as the introduction
5 of gunpowder in the middle ages in Europe, as important
6 as atomic weapons in the last century. And that's how
7 they characterize it. And what this is is the leap
8 where we move from ordinance, from bullets, bombs,
9 things that rip tissue and tear things up, to
10 electromagnetic weapon systems that keep sort of the
11 hardware intact, but debilitate the human operator to
12 the point of being combat ineffective. Or conversely,
13 enhance the possibilities within our own combatants
14 while degrading the abilities of others.
15 There's simple ways that you can achieve this.
16 You can introduce to the battlefield certain elemental
17 compounds that in small background amounts would not be
18 considered dangerous. Let me give you iodine as an
19 example. We all need a certain amount of iodine in the
20 body to maintain thyroid function. But if you have too
21 much iodine, you'll get poisoned. You'll die. You'll
22 get sick.
23 So what can you do? You can send a signal in
24 that resonates the very same signal strength and
25 frequency as iodine, you can send that signal in and the
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page324
185
304
305
78 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 26
RELIEF
2016
1 body will begin to react as if its gotten this massive
2 load of iodine and show all the symptoms of iodine
3 poisoning. You check the thyroid; check the blood, it's
4 not there. Mystery illness.
5 Something as simple as that for manipulating
6 large populations, not necessarily with their consent
7 and not necessarily with clear knowledge, and nothing
8 shows up in the background that would say why this
9 poison actually exists that would account for this. A
10 simple way.
11 One of the other ways that this technology can
12 be exploited is really quite simple. There was an
13 article produced by "Parameters", which is a military
14 publication. "Parameters". You can look it up. It's
15 the -- I believe it was the Fall 1998, but you can look
16 up the article name called, "The Mind has no Firewall".
17 It's a very important article. This article talked
18 about all the various ways in which you could introduce
19 mind effects or mind control technologies using modern
20 technology today. And the original article was actually
21 written in a military journal called "Orienteer"
22 published in what is now Russia.
23 What's interesting about this is it said you
24 could use any electromagnetic carrier, whether it be
25 radio, TV, the Internet, now cell phones; but,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page325
186
305
306
79 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 27
RELIEF
2016
1 essentially, any of these carriers, you can modulate a
2 signal on them that will manipulate behavior of segments
3 of the population.
4 And the Russians demonstrated this in a couple
5 of different ways. There was a program. It was called
6 "Undercurrents". It aired in the CBC, which is the
7 Canadian Public Broadcasting System. "Undercurrents"
8 did two really interesting stories that I got to
9 participate in. One was on HAARP and the other was on
10 mind control. And on the mind control story that they
11 did -- this was a very popular program in Canada at the
12 time and this particular segment was their highest rated
13 that they had ever run. And they had folks that came in
14 who were involved in the "Star Wars" initiative during
15 the Reagan Administration that couldn't talk about what
16 they did in the White House, but they could talk about
17 what they observed in Russia.
18 And one of the things that they talked about
19 was the idea that you could -- you could create, sort
20 of, this white noise and on this white noise carry a
21 signal. And so they put out this message, bring us
22 cake. And Russians at tea time, you know, they eat
23 these little cakes? I guess you do that in other parts
24 of Europe as well.
25 And so at the appointed time they began to
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page326
187
306
307
80 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 28
RELIEF
2016
1 broadcast this. And workers from within that building
2 and on the street were bringing cake into the meeting
3 room without really knowing why they were doing it.
4 They just felt like doing it. Well, that was, in fact,
5 what they were programmed to do.
6 Now, this goes back. We're talking about
7 15-year-old technology. And when you think about sort
8 of where did it go from there, in 2006, there were a
9 couple contracts left by DARPA, which does research for
10 the defense industry in the United States. And DARPA
11 used to be run by a guy named Tony Tether. Tony Tether
12 was a good friend of Ben Eastlund's.
13 Now, what they were doing then was, they had
14 left two contracts to the University of California for
15 what's called electronic telepathy. Okay. Electronic
16 telepathy. The idea of reading another person's mind at
17 a distance by analyzing the emanations coming from this
18 area, being able to analyze that and determine and
19 interpret what it is. And then the other half of the
20 contract was to create complex signals to see if you
21 could transfer that array, so to speak, of signals into
22 another person's consciousness and whether they would
23 perceive the same images.
24 Now, there was work done by Elizabeth Rauscher
25 and her late husband, Bill Van Bise, in this very same
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page327
188
307
308
81 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 29
RELIEF
2016
1 area. In fact, I have a copy of their unpublished paper
2 where they actually built an electronic circuit where
3 they could take a person in one room and a person in
4 another room, attach this person to that circuit and
5 this person to that circuit, and then, you know, the
6 psychic card where they show the triangles, the squares
7 and the circles and the little squiggly lines, a hundred
8 percent accurate with nine test subjects who had never
9 experienced consciously in any way any sense of
10 extrasensory perceptions or psychic perceptions. They
11 did it with hardware, transferring thoughts from one to
12 the other.
13 Now -- which tells me it's probably a little
14 more simple than what DARPA's doing. But when Ben
15 Eastlund was doing work on HAARP and he was doing other
16 work for DARPA at the time and we had talked about him
17 in our first publication, and then actually after
18 publication became friends, and Ben Eastlund's attitude
19 was, you know, some things just shouldn't be done. And
20 one of the things that he had been working on was
21 whether modification technologies, which he was at that
22 time and when we first met, making that technology
23 available to the military. And after some dialogue with
24 us and others, he decided there's certain technologies
25 that are not safe in the hands of military.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page328
189
308
309
82 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 30
RELIEF
2016
1 At one point along the course I began doing
2 quite a bit of work on this whole mind effects issue.
3 And I caught the attention of a woman, Dorothy Lay.
4 Now, Dorothy is one of the heirs to the Lay, as in
5 Frito-Lay and PepsiCo Corporation. So a very wealthy
6 family. Dorothy was very interested in this technology
7 specifically as it applied to victims.
8 And so she approached me at one point and asked
9 if I would become a member of her board of directors for
10 a non-profit that she was setting up to deal with these
11 kinds of technologies. And I've got to think about
12 whether I should tell you the rest of this story, and I
13 think I will, because why not?
14 So I have this thing, intuition. All of us
15 have it. I used to not pay as much attention to it as I
16 do today. When my intuition tells me something, I
17 listen, because when I really think about it, it's never
18 been wrong. Neither has yours, if you really think
19 about it. Or maybe you don't think about it and just
20 start acting on it.
21 So my intuition said -- and this was a very
22 difficult time for me in 2002. In 2002, I had been
23 betrayed by a very good friend, economically was
24 bankrupt in the middle of this work, because I started
25 this work in '94. Economically was being crushed. And
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page329
190
309
310
83 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 31
RELIEF
2016
1 at that point I was deciding whether I was going to stay
2 in this work at all.
3 And I'm going through a bunch of my files and I
4 see this file and it's marked Lay. And I remember this
5 person had contacted us needing some information and we
6 provided it. And we never charge for that. I mean, the
7 way we operated is, I sold books. And people like you
8 bought my books. And they allowed me to do this work.
9 I didn't write for grants where somebody could
10 manipulate me and control me and tell me what to say. I
11 didn't go out and find some publisher that would edit
12 out my work. I risked my own money. I published my
13 book. And then I asked people to help me by supporting
14 that work by buying that book. And I tell you, I made
15 two and a half million dollars and I spent that two and
16 a half million dollars over 20 years doing what I'm
17 doing right now.
18 A VOICE: Thank you.
19 (Applause.)
20 DR. BEGICH: And the whole idea was just to
21 educate. I didn't deal with victims. Okay. And the
22 reason I didn't was because I felt that that was putting
23 the cart before the horse. We first need to educate
24 people that the technology is real, that this could
25 really happen to people and from that foundation, and
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page330
191
310
311
84 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 32
RELIEF
2016
1 that became the foundation of my work in this.
2 So Dorothy calls me on the phone and she says,
3 will you be on my board? And I talked to her for about
4 an hour. At the end of the hour, I said, no, I can't be
5 on your board.
6 She said, well, why not?
7 I said, because my intuition is telling me I
8 really can't be on your board.
9 And she goes, well, I deserve more than that.
10 I said, okay. I don't know your board members,
11 I don't know who your board is, but something in here is
12 saying there's a problem there and I don't want to be
13 associated with them.
14 (Applause.)
15 DR. BEGICH: So it was a couple of months later
16 I got the call back. Because I told her also, I said,
17 you have millions. You have the ability. Go research
18 what they say they're doing. Go see if it's really
19 being done and find out for yourself. Do your due
20 diligence again.
21 And she did. A couple months later she came
22 back and she said, you were right. They were defrauding
23 me a number of ways. I've cleared out my board. It's
24 just me now and my attorney. Will you be on my board?
25 Now, bear in mind, I'm in a pretty desperate
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page331
192
311
312
85 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 33
RELIEF
2016
1 situation economically. At the time I have five
2 children at home. I've got people to take care of. I
3 have an economy that I've got to manage. And I tell
4 Dorothy, no, I can't be on your board.
5 She says, well, why not?
6 I said, well, I need to meet you first in
7 person, eyeball to eyeball. I said, we're going to talk
8 for three days. We're not going to talk about your
9 foundation. I want to know everything I'm ever going to
10 read about you and your family in the newspaper. I want
11 you to have the same knowledge level of me. And I want
12 to know what your world view is before I join with you
13 in achieving that world view, because you have the means
14 and I have the willingness if that world view is shared.
15 So we spent a few days. We decided that I
16 could do this. And for four years I worked with her.
17 And we put together, as her major effort was, a
18 conference on mind effects. But it wasn't open to the
19 public. It was closed to the public. And it was to
20 bring some key people together to have a conversation
21 that would be open and free.
22 And one of those people I invited was Ben
23 Eastlund, who by then I'd gotten to know, had watched
24 what he had done in terms of his career. He was well
25 connected with DARPA at the time.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page332
193
312
313
86 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 34
RELIEF
2016
1 And I called him and I said, you know, Ben,
2 would you consider participating in this conference?
3 And he said, you know, if you had asked me this
4 seven or eight years ago, on a scale of one to ten, ten
5 being the relevance and importance of this, and one
6 being irrelevant and unimportant, I would have given
7 this a one or a two. He goes, but -- he goes, every
8 time I talk to Tony Tether or others at DARPA, nobody's
9 laughing about mind control anymore and it's a nine or a
10 ten and, yes, I'll participate in your conference.
11 The next person I asked was Garth Nicolson.
12 Does that name ring any bells for anybody? Okay. Garth
13 Nicolson was a full professor, I believe it was Texas
14 A&M. He taught medical students. He taught over a
15 thousand medical students. He was the guy that blew the
16 whistle on Gulf War Syndrome and testified in our
17 Congress six times before his wife was fired as a
18 molecular biologist from Texas A&M. And he was tenured;
19 they couldn't fire him. But they definitely harassed
20 him, because he was one of the first courageously enough
21 to step up to the plate and complain about what had been
22 happening in the Gulf War; we depleted uranium and some
23 of the other technologies that were being applied there.
24 Well, the best thing that ever happened to him
25 was he got out of the university system. He formed a
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page333
194
313
314
87 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 35
RELIEF
2016
1 nonprofit to deal with chronic disease. And he was
2 somebody that I watched maintain his course under really
3 difficult circumstances. So he was invited to that
4 conference.
5 I invited the daughter of my mentor, Raul
6 Makayla. She's an electrophysiologist. She serves on
7 one of the boards in Russia that regulates medical
8 applications of lasers. She's an electrophysiologist.
9 Quite brilliant. We invited her.
10 We invited Rosalie Bertell. Does anyone
11 remember Rosalie Bertell? Okay. A few. Rosalie's
12 passed. Also deceased now. She was a mathematician,
13 physicist, biologist. She taught higher mathematics to
14 doctoral students at Berkeley. She was also a nun.
15 It's kind of an odd combination. She was the lead
16 statistician to go in to Bhopal for the World Health
17 Organization after that huge chemical disaster. But she
18 was considered one of the top people in the world for
19 dealing with victims of radiological experiments,
20 including electromagnetic radiation. She actually took
21 some of our work and added to it and published a book on
22 the HAARP system and its effect on human beings on this
23 sort of broad scale. So we had invited Rosalie, who had
24 been through some really difficult times as well, rose
25 out of her own ashes and maintained her ethical
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page334
195
314
315
88 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 36
RELIEF
2016
1 platform.
2 The other person we invited was Alexander
3 Kaivarainen. Does anybody recognize that name? He was
4 the former head of the USSR Academy of Science
5 Biophysics Department for ten years. And this is the
6 area that really gets into the meat of what we're
7 talking about here today. Now, what got -- Alex, I
8 believe, is deceased now also. You know, all these
9 guys, you know, they're a lot older than me and they
10 keep dying of old age. But Alex got his stimulation in
11 science at a young age watching a demonstration of the
12 paranormal, ESP, telepathy, these kinds of things in
13 Russia when he was a teenager. And it just really
14 caught his interest.
15 When I met Alex, he was in his 60s and he was
16 the brightest top five physicists on the planet,
17 recognized by institutions around the world. And what
18 he had determined is that there were rational reasons
19 for why these things manifested. So he was invited to
20 this conference and actually presented a paper giving
21 the mathematics and the physics that lends itself to
22 these extrasensory possibilities, these things that the
23 military now calls anomalous human capabilities. We
24 used to call it extrasensory perception or ESP, but now
25 they give it a new name because there's a lot of
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page335
196
315
316
89 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 37
RELIEF
2016
1 connotations with that that kind of get you discredited
2 in certain segments of the scientific community.
3 So I want to talk -- roll back again a little
4 bit -- I want to talk about binaural beat, which I had
5 mentioned earlier in this presentation. And I jump
6 around a little bit. It's kind of my style. I used to
7 not even use these things, but I think people feel more
8 comfortable using them.
9 The binaural beat. We can't hear these really,
10 really low frequency signals, because the human ear
11 doesn't quite work that way. Below a certain frequency,
12 the human ear won't hear.
13 Now, a gentleman by the name of Robert Monroe
14 developed a method using binaural beat where you could
15 send in a signal within the range of human hearing, say,
16 at 15,000 Hertz or pulses per second or cycles per
17 second, coming in one ear at, say, 15,000, another
18 signal coming in the other ear at, say, 15,007. Within
19 the cranium they will cancel each other out and leave a
20 beat frequency of seven, the difference between the two.
21 15,000, 15,007. The beat frequency becomes seven Hertz,
22 seven pulses per second, which happens to be in the
23 upper Theta range, and this is where the brain then
24 drives to.
25 At the same time that that occurs, you get a
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page336
197
316
317
90 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 38
RELIEF
2016
1 hemispheric balance, a distribution of energy across
2 both hemispheres of the brain, the analytical side and
3 the creative side and working together. This is
4 actually how human beings are supposed to function.
5 This is how young children predominantly function, with
6 more of a balance between the hemispheres, where the
7 energy is more balanced. And then we educate them.
8 And with young girls, who we say are more
9 intuitive and have this other operation of the brain,
10 and young boys are more analytical, and now we kind of
11 treat everybody the same so we kind of dumb them all
12 down to the same level. But when you look at young
13 children and you look at where their brain activity is
14 and between 3 and, say, 5 or 6 years old, they have
15 this predominant brain frequencies or a lot of Theta
16 brain frequencies coming in and then some ELF and then
17 higher frequency ranges.
18 Now, what is Theta? Theta states if we're in a
19 Theta state, we're kind of like in that dream-like state
20 between awake and asleep where you're consciously aware
21 of your dreams. That's where 3 to 5 year olds spend a
22 good deal of their time. That's why their imaginations,
23 as we call it, are so active. And we keep saying, oh,
24 don't pay attention to that, don't pay attention to
25 that. This was our first attempt to shut down the
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page337
198
317
318
91 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 39
RELIEF
2016
1 intuitive combinations of the way the brain is actually
2 supposed to work.
3 In fact, for those who have a Christian
4 background, you know Jesus Christ himself said, look at
5 the little children, watch what they do. You know, I
6 think I heard somebody say something about this earlier,
7 little children come to the table kind of innocent with
8 a view of the world that's quite different than the rest
9 of ours. But the brain activity of children is unique
10 and we begin to take that out of them in the structure
11 of the way we educate.
12 So what Robert Monroe -- he was actually a
13 radio engineer. He owned a bunch of radio stations. He
14 had this really weird experience. It's an OBE, an outer
15 body experience, that he had that kind of threw him.
16 You know, it didn't make any sense to him. So he
17 began -- he also noticed that in the background there
18 was this kind of noise that he perceived.
19 So he began to experiment and he created this
20 technique for binaural beat. He developed a whole
21 series. In fact, he actually got US patents on a
22 binaural beat. This is an image taken out of one of
23 those US patents from 1994, and this is showing the
24 brain before the activity, before turning on the
25 Hemi-Sync, and this is after, showing a more even
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page338
199
318
319
92 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 40
RELIEF
2016
1 distribution in a more rhythmic pattern in the
2 brainwaves as you see in the upper right-hand corner.
3 Let me roll back again so you can kind of see
4 the comparison. Normal brain, kind of disorganized
5 activities happening all through the brain, and then a
6 coherent signal creating a hemispheric balance and an
7 optimization of brain potential.
8 So what did he do with this? He developed a
9 whole series of things; audio input technology,
10 essentially, to manipulate behavior, but where you're in
11 control of that manipulation. So you want to quit
12 smoking, you get his CD on quit smoking. It affects the
13 brain in such a way, becomes compelling, very affective.
14 Sleep disorders can be addressed in this way.
15 They have someone be able to relax, meditation,
16 concentration, accelerated learning. A whole array of
17 things can be done. And they did this by working with,
18 over the course of many, many, many, many years, and now
19 his daughter doing the work of working with thousands of
20 people to determine which signals actually created which
21 effects and then developing technology that they could
22 place in the hands of individuals to make the choice on
23 how to use it.
24 Now, that's kind of an interesting way of
25 looking at technology. It was my area of interest, in
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page339
200
319
320
93 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 41
RELIEF
2016
1 the beginning of all of this work, was not looking for
2 the dark side of all of this, but in the mid-'80s I got
3 very interested in light and sound stimulation of the
4 brain that capitalized on sound signals and flickering
5 light for brain entrainment. Entrain the brain where
6 the brain will follow that external signal or what's
7 called FFR, frequency following response. So very
8 little energy.
9 Let me roll back to Delgado again.
10 One-fiftieth of the amount of energy the earth creates
11 is sufficient to move your brain into very specific
12 states. Dialing that radio up, if you will. This is
13 just another technique for altering brain activity that
14 might be beneficial, but you're in control of it, not
15 somebody else.
16 I'm going to skip some of these just because
17 they're not so relevant. And I'm going to close the
18 images and let me just go back into the whole dialogue
19 of this, mind effects.
20 When I think about sort of where do we go with
21 this conference, when we put that conference together
22 with the Lay Institute, our purpose was to put together
23 these really good thinkers to try and see if we could
24 create a synergy between them.
25 And when I first got interested in doing
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page340
201
320
321
94 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 42
RELIEF
2016
1 something actively in science, it wasn't about HAARP and
2 it wasn't about mind control. The role that I thought I
3 would play -- and I was working in a government office
4 at the time, and it was -- my friend said, you make your
5 living with your left foot. Because I could make my
6 living, but the rest of my creativity could be engaged
7 elsewhere and me working in bureaucracy was really a bad
8 match.
9 But the point was, my youngest son, when I was
10 getting really frustrated with my work, said, change
11 channels.
12 You know, I'm thinking about this, because I
13 had just given him this discussion about creativity was
14 like changing the channels on the TV set, right, and so
15 he's feeding it back, time to change the channels, Dad.
16 So I thought about it. And what I decided I
17 would do is -- I read independently in science over 20
18 years. I had read some really compelling things from,
19 say, one guy in one branch of science. I thought, boy,
20 if this person could ever meet that person, you could
21 really see something happen.
22 And the first paper I actually ever presented
23 in science, I was 19 and it was at another obscure
24 conference that I ended up in on biorhythm research.
25 And my paper was contrasting at that time the Soviet
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page341
202
321
322
95 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 43
RELIEF
2016
1 method of research versus the US method. Now, the US
2 method was compartmentalization, separate. You know,
3 distill things down to the smallest subspecialty and
4 then push these people into a corner and let them do
5 this bit of the research. And then you've got nine
6 other people over here and ten other groups over there
7 and fifteen groups over there, and somewhere all of this
8 stuff comes together and it gets really sloppy. Okay.
9 It's sloppy because there's a lot of repetition; it's
10 very expensive.
11 Now, the Russians, Soviets at the time, they
12 didn't have the money for that kind of research, to
13 spread it out that way, and they used a very different
14 method. They took experts from all of these different
15 fields, even though they didn't seem like they should
16 connect. They put them in the same room to work
17 together to develop science. That's why when you look
18 at the exposures that we had seen earlier, what are the
19 regulatory exposures of electromagnetic fields, the
20 Russians in the '90s and the '80s were a thousand times
21 more stringent than they were in the US.
22 Well, why was it? Because they had actually
23 made the observations that we hadn't made and actually
24 connected the dots in a way to say, hey, this is
25 dangerous. That doesn't mean they followed their own
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page342
203
322
323
96 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 44
RELIEF
2016
1 regulations, because they probably didn't. They did
2 whatever was expeditious there. But at least they
3 recognized the physiological responses to
4 electromagnetic fields and the fact that you could
5 manipulate it.
6 What was discovered by a guy named Allan Frey,
7 he was looking at microwaves, and he discovered that
8 there's this flickering effect, but it only occurred
9 when you pulse-modulated the signal. And if you look
10 at -- I heard earlier, it's always scalars. It's always
11 scalars. It's not vectors. It's not electromagnetic
12 fields as we think about them.
13 But if you look at the ones that affect human
14 psychology and physiology, if you look at those signals,
15 they have a very quick rise time and a very fast drop.
16 They're like the punch, like punching that ionosphere to
17 create the ELF. It's like those signals. Those
18 modulations on these other carriers are meant to trigger
19 that effect by you entraining to that pulse, that
20 firing, or some submodulation being carried on a general
21 carrier.
22 Now, if you remember the first Gulf War, the
23 first Bush War, and you remember how the Iraqi Army just
24 sort of gave up. The fourth largest Army in the world
25 just like school children on their first fire drill
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page343
204
323
324
97 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 45
RELIEF
2016
1 throwing their hands up and surrendering, you know,
2 thousands of guys to a few dozen. What was that about?
3 Now, I speculated on this. And then it was
4 Scottish media that later reported on this and said it
5 was Project Solo, which was a project operated by the
6 United States. And what we did is we had this C-130
7 flying over the country at the time and it was taking
8 and piggybacking the signal on the radio broadcast going
9 into the region that were broadcasting the Muslim music
10 and prayers.
11 So all these guys are in their bunkers
12 listening to their favorite radio station. Unbeknownst
13 to them, the subsignals being played on that broadcast
14 created anxiety, high levels of anxiety and fear. And
15 then you watched this Army just collapse under this.
16 And that was kind of the -- in my view, the
17 first test of could you really do this, could you do it
18 in this adversarial environment.
19 And one of my friends joked, hey, it's the
20 perfect Republican weapon, right? You can keep all the
21 hardware in place, but totally wipe out the population.
22 Zbigniew Brzezinski said, in between two ways,
23 it doesn't matter if it's Republicans or Conservatives.
24 They just use different rationale for accomplishing
25 their political ends. On the conservative side, the
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page344
205
324
325
98 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 46
RELIEF
2016
1 Neocon side, it might be the fascination with gadgetry
2 and new technology, as Zbigniew Brzezinski said, and on
3 the liberal side it might be the idea that we're doing
4 this for your own good. The government is here, right?
5 And we've all heard that before.
6 The fact of the matter is, when you start
7 thinking about mind control technologies as a concept,
8 the idea that someone believes that they can interfere
9 with your free will, this is something that most
10 religions in the world say God won't even do. Yet, men
11 think this is their appropriate direction in technology,
12 to interfere with the way consciousness flows.
13 Now, think about for a moment what are the
14 things that -- what is the easiest way to manipulate
15 consciousness? The easiest way, the simplest way.
16 Create an environment of anxiety and fear. Because what
17 happens at that point is you cannot reach your higher
18 states of consciousness.
19 If you look at Monroe, rhythmic patterns in the
20 Hemi-Sync as an example, higher states of consciousness
21 are associated with those rhythmic patterns within the
22 brain; not that incoherent scattering of death and
23 information and energy.
24 So if you create a certain environment of fear
25 and anxiety and you look at an EEG monitor and the brain
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
Page345
206
325
326
99 of
of183
173
548
667
668
813 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 47
RELIEF
2016
1 activity of an individual, you see it's kind of
2 scattered in patterns. One person is experiencing
3 higher emotions; love, compassion. You begin to see
4 rhythmic patterns.
5 Another simple way of seeing is something that
6 you can actually measure. Take two people that are in
7 love and they -- you know the saying, and I looked into
8 her eyes, right? If you actually gaze into the eyes of
9 another individual and hold that gaze, you'll begin to
10 mirror each other's brain activity in a pretty unique
11 way. Your breathing will even synchronize if you do it
12 long enough. Two people's breathing begins to
13 synchronize. Their energy fields begin to synchronize.
14 And at the same time, their awareness, their
15 intuitions elevate and their rhythmic patterns in the
16 brain can be seen. If you can create an environment of
17 fear -- think about the advertising you see on
18 television. It's all about how you smell, how your
19 breath is, you know? It's all these things to make you
20 uncomfortable.
21 Think about the 6:00 news. Now, we heard
22 someone talk about the 6:00 news and how that kind of
23 works. You come home from a hard day at work. Most
24 people sit down in front of the television set. They're
25 already fatigued. They begin to watch the television.
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
of Common Pleas Page 346
100 of 813
207
326
327 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 48
RELIEF
2016
1 And then their spouse hollers, it's time for dinner;
2 it's time for dinner. How many of you've been there,
3 right? Nobody's listening. No one's hearing. Because
4 they're in a light trance-like state.
5 Now, if you look in a dark room -- the
6 television is here -- look behind you at the white wall
7 and look at the flicker rate. If that flicker rate is a
8 coherent signal within a certain range through the optic
9 nerves, your brain will lock onto that signal. If you
10 monitor the brain activity at that time, you'll drop
11 into this highly-suggestive state and now you listen to
12 the advertising.
13 Now, every school of psychology teaches
14 frequency following response today and that you can
15 create these kinds of effects. Would they apply in
16 advertising? Of course they would. That's why
17 advertising works so well. It works because it's
18 convincing and compelling.
19 When you look at the 6:00 news, would somebody
20 utilize that in broadcasting the news of the latest
21 propaganda from whatever source it's coming from? I
22 would speculate -- today I would speculate and say yes.
23 When you think about how simple it is to create
24 that agitation. There was a person at Valencia
25 University who published a paper in 1995 talking about
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
101 of 813
208
327
328 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 49
RELIEF
2016
1 this whole concept. And what he said back then was you
2 could create a complex signal, broadcast it out over a
3 large area that just created the sense that something's
4 not right. Unease.
5 And then you go watch the 6:00 news and they
6 indict some specific ethnic group, maybe it's Muslims,
7 and then a certain amount of that anger gets diverted
8 that way. Well, in a day where a lot of things are
9 decided on the laser edge of populations, on majorities,
10 this is a very, very powerful tool and one quite simple
11 tool to apply in the modern world.
12 When you think about news feeds today, how much
13 is really investigative reporting and how much of it is
14 just spitting out somebody's press release, right? Very
15 little investigative reporting today because it's
16 expensive, because it's not immediate, and when you look
17 at the news media today, it's almost immediate and most
18 of it is just meant to entertain. It's not meant to
19 inform.
20 You know, freedom of the press, it used to have
21 something to do with keeping an informed public so we
22 could make good decisions and we could govern as a
23 public. Today we debate the media as freedom of speech.
24 Say whatever you want, say it however you want, but
25 nobody takes responsibility and we have the neutered
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
102 of 813
209
328
329 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 50
RELIEF
2016
1 neutral news. And if you really believe it's neutral,
2 come on.
3 Everybody who assigns a story to a reporter
4 knows that reporter's biased. The editors have bias.
5 It comes out in the news and what gets published and
6 what doesn't. How many stories about mind control hit
7 the news? Occasionally. The economists might pick it
8 up. Somebody might pick up a little bit, a piece of it.
9 But no one has really taken it on as a topic and
10 consistently pursued it.
11 Yet, when you think about modern technology and
12 the resolution -- now, we've been talking about things
13 that have happened in the past, and somebody even
14 mentioned this, MK-ULTRA is a program -- you've heard it
15 alluded to. That was the CIA's program. It had 144
16 subprojects under it.
17 Most of the records surrounding that were
18 shredded by a guy named Gottlieb, who was responsible
19 for that at the Central Intelligence Agency during the
20 Church Committee hearings. We never really got the
21 truth back then. But the resolution, the ability to do
22 this, has become increasingly refined as our technology
23 has advanced.
24 When you think about technological advances,
25 one of the things I read says that technology from the
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
103 of 813
210
329
330 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 51
RELIEF
2016
1 invention of the wheel to where we are today, it doubles
2 about every nine to ten months. Wow. Think about it.
3 Invention of the wheel to where we are today, ten months
4 from now we're going to double that, and then we're
5 going to keep doing that.
6 It used to be every five years in the 1980s,
7 and it kept shrinking as our computing power increased
8 and our ability to manipulate large amounts of data
9 increased.
10 Now, a super computer, think about a super
11 computer. A super computer will do somewhere, when I
12 was doing this work, about 280 teraflops a second, which
13 at that time would be like six billion people on the
14 planet with hand calculators doing a calculation every
15 60 seconds for 60 hours to do what that super computer
16 could do in a second.
17 Well, the next evolution -- some think it's
18 already here -- are the quantum computers. What will
19 the quantum computer do? A quantum computer in one hour
20 will do what a super computer does in a trillion years.
21 It's back to this analogy of how much EMF do we have out
22 there.
23 Well, think about the same kind of
24 amplification and computing power. You look at privacy
25 as a concept. It doesn't exist in the world today,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
104 of 813
211
330
331 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 52
RELIEF
2016
1 right? Virtually everything about us is catalogued,
2 tracked, whether it's your GPS on your phone, whether
3 it's your phone conversations -- in the United States,
4 every piece of mail is photographed for who it went to
5 and who sent it.
6 When you think about your telecommunications,
7 your Internet connections, Google, AT&T, Verizon, all of
8 them have violated the very essence of what personal
9 privacy is all about.
10 Because today, in the 21st Century, we need a
11 revolution, an evolution of what privacy is all about.
12 Because you, experiencing the victimization of this
13 technology, are the pinnacle of the abuse. But everyone
14 is subject to abuse of personal privacy.
15 You used to think about it, it would start and
16 end in our physical doorway in our home. It has nothing
17 in your home compared to what is in data banks stored on
18 every single human being in this room.
19 Now, people say, oh, don't worry about it. We
20 don't have the ability to collect. We don't have the
21 resolution to look into it. Quantum computers will give
22 that resolution. Whichever government finds quantum
23 computing first will be able to hack through every
24 security code for every system on the planet within
25 hours. They'll be able to predict with so much accuracy
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
105 of 813
212
331
332 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 53
RELIEF
2016
1 by collecting all that data and analyzing that data, it
2 will almost seem a spiritual event.
3 But it will only be accurate up to a certain
4 point. And then there will be a little bit of a flaw.
5 And over time that flaw will amplify to where it's big
6 flaws. But we'll rely increasingly on these systems to
7 guide our world, to guide our ideas, our philosophy, and
8 how we pursue the world.
9 The Internet. What people think about that is
10 the world wide mind of the 21st Century. PBS, our
11 Public Broadcasting System, did a special called "The
12 World Wide Mind". And they say within 100 years -- and
13 I say within 20 years or even now -- maybe it already
14 exists now -- but within 20 years that you'll be able to
15 connect the physical minds of all of the people on the
16 planet in a world wide mind.
17 Now, that might appeal to some. It doesn't
18 really appeal to me from the standpoint of technology.
19 I think we already have that on a certain level. I
20 think we already are connected on a certain level. Our
21 belief systems limit our ability to access that level,
22 but I believe it's here.
23 And I've seen enough demonstrations of it. You
24 know, all those scientists I had in that room for that
25 mind effects conference, the part that really blew me
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
106 of 813
213
332
333 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 54
RELIEF
2016
1 away that I didn't expect was what they really centered
2 on was the idea -- and this was Rosalie Bertell, the nun
3 and physicist, and she said that the next leap is going
4 to be the leap where we realize or we recognize or we
5 remember our extrasensory perceptions, our anonymous
6 capabilities as human beings and that becomes the next
7 evolution of the human kind.
8 And what suppresses that is fear and anxiety,
9 because you cannot reach those cases of consciousness as
10 long as you're in fear and anxiety. And anyone who
11 purports or is a victim of these technologies, do you
12 have anxiety, do you have fear? Of course you do. Do
13 you have the ability to reach those higher states of
14 consciousness in that condition? It's physiologically
15 not possible.
16 So when you think about entire populations,
17 whether it's religion injecting fear or whether it's
18 government injecting fear or as my friend used to say,
19 you know, the king keeps you poor and the church keeps
20 you dumb, kind of was the early idea when you think
21 about how things evolved in Europe several hundred years
22 ago.
23 When you think about modern technology on the
24 backdrop of that concept, what's changed? Nothing's
25 changed. It's just the same deal. You know, 6,000 wars
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
107 of 813
214
333
334 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 55
RELIEF
2016
1 in 4,000 years, most of them over religion; let me give
2 you a clue, God doesn't need any help killing anybody.
3 God can probably do it himself or herself.
4 The fact of the matter is, the idea that people
5 would just be evil on -- and I think I heard earlier
6 today that the psychopaths are in the minority. I
7 believe they are. I think really evil-to-the-core
8 people, they're out there, but they're not this mass.
9 Most people do things because they believe they're
10 right, and then they want to impose their rightness on
11 other people.
12 And this is kind of a mistake and then we end
13 up in this conflict between ideas without being fair and
14 recognizing people's right to disagree. And I heard it
15 said earlier, certain things you can't say in Germany.
16 Certain things you can't say in a movie theater, too.
17 You know, you can't yell fire. Now, it makes good
18 sense. You don't want to yell fire in a movie theater.
19 Some would say what we're doing here is yelling
20 fire in a movie theater because we're letting people
21 know what we know, what we've concluded from a good deal
22 of research.
23 You know, my books are written, every page at
24 the bottom of each page are the footnotes. Some of you
25 find that distracting. Personally, I want to know where
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
108 of 813
215
334
335 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 56
RELIEF
2016
1 the information came from as I'm reading it, not a week
2 later as I'm contemplating it. I want to know the
3 source.
4 And so in the publications that I've written,
5 1600 source documents, reviews out of a matrix of a
6 hundred thousand that we had available to us, more or
7 less. 20,000 have made it into my archives and 1600
8 have made it into four books on technology dealing with
9 mind effects, dealing with HAARP, dealing with personal
10 privacy issues. A lot of the things go unreleased in
11 the last four years.
12 You can look at my publications from 1999 and
13 2000, and you'll see the same things, because the old
14 literature showed enough to come to those conclusions.
15 When I testified in the European Parliament in
16 the '90s, at their invitation -- and this was another --
17 a good side story for technology. A gentleman by the
18 name of Thomas Spencer, he was from the UK, he was a
19 Parliamentarian at the time, and he was the Chairman of
20 the Environmental Subcommittee of the European
21 Parliament. And he had contacted me. Somebody had
22 given him the book on HAARP and he was very interested
23 in this. So we had a conversation. And at my expense,
24 I flew to Brussels and spent a few days with him talking
25 about the issue and brought with me a couple feet of
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
109 of 813
216
335
336 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 57
RELIEF
2016
1 unclassified documents for his research team to take a
2 look at.
3 What happened then is he moved in the European
4 Parliament -- he was a Conservative, by the way, and he
5 moved into a Foreign Affairs Chairman, a very powerful
6 position, an ideal position for dealing with the things
7 that we were dealing with at the time.
8 So we -- at his invitation, I came over to
9 testify in front of the group on security and
10 disarmament in the European Parliament on HAARP and on
11 non-lethal weapons, the kinds of things we've been
12 talking about today, the manipulation of human beings.
13 Now, they do it a lot differently than we do it
14 in the US. In the US, when you have public hearings,
15 the public actually gets to come. In the European
16 Parliament, the public meeting is you have to have an
17 invitation to come. So that's kind of different. You
18 know, I hadn't really thought much about that.
19 And they also -- they can also do things behind
20 closed doors, which, you know, we theoretically can't do
21 in the United States. You can't have a meeting without
22 the public invited or the media invited.
23 So what happened the night before the hearing
24 is the Committee met with myself, one of the other
25 people testifying, and a member of the press and we
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
110 of 813
217
336
337 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 58
RELIEF
2016
1 spent five and a half hours in a non-official meeting to
2 talk about these issues, so that when we actually gave
3 our testimony the following day, they would have
4 formulated a set of questions to give us the opportunity
5 to follow along. So it was a great way to do it,
6 because then they at least had a good base of knowledge.
7 Now, in that private meeting we demonstrated a
8 technology using infrasound where you could transfer
9 sound through electrodes attached to the skin where you
10 would perceive that proverbial voice in the head. We
11 demonstrated that to the Parliamentarians in that closed
12 session.
13 And then we went into the hearing the following
14 day. And it was Rosalie Bertell, which is where I met
15 her, testifying on our side. It was -- I can't remember
16 the gentleman's name, but he was from a group called
17 GRIP in Brussels that does research on weapon systems
18 particularly and he had done his Master's thesis on
19 HAARP, and so he was there.
20 We had someone from the International Red Cross
21 that had done work on non-lethal weapons and was a
22 specialist in this particular area. And then I was
23 there.
24 We each got 15 minutes to present. And then I
25 got an hour of questions from the committee in the open
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
111 of 813
218
337
338 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 59
RELIEF
2016
1 hearing where I had the opportunity to talk about some
2 of these things. And right around that time there had
3 been this incident in Japan where children watching a
4 cartoon that had a certain flicker rate had caused over
5 700 children to go to the hospital with epileptic
6 seizures. Now, remember, non-ionizing radiation is not
7 a problem, right? A flicker of the TV caused 700 kids
8 to go into the hospital.
9 Now, some say that was by design. Some say
10 that was by accident. But it was a perfect illustration
11 for talking about non-ionizing radiation in the European
12 Parliament because they had all read that story. It was
13 fresh.
14 The other thing demonstrating infrasound,
15 something that had never been demonstrated, to my
16 knowledge, in that type of a meeting, to show that you
17 could actually transfer sound without necessarily
18 involving the ears.
19 Now, there's another technology that was
20 advanced by a guy named Woody Norris -- he won the
21 Lemelson Prize at MIT for this particular technology,
22 and I believe the year was 2004. You can look up Woody
23 Norris -- and his was using acoustic heterodyne where he
24 could send in two signals from two different sources,
25 point them at an individual in the crowd, and they would
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
112 of 813
219
338
339 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 60
RELIEF
2016
1 hear this voice in their head and nobody else would hear
2 it.
3 Well, he won a half a million dollars for that
4 prize, organized a company called ATCO. You can look
5 them up. They're a public company. And he sold that
6 technology to the military for perimeter protection.
7 You know, where they could have these sort of alarm
8 systems so when the protestors got too close they'd hear
9 these warning signs that nobody else was hearing.
10 Now, you think about that for a moment.
11 Imagine -- this is why the European Parliament got
12 interested, because we used this illustration. Now,
13 imagine a national leader standing up in front of a
14 group and all of a sudden they hear voices in their head
15 that nobody else hears. That's the end of that guy,
16 right? I mean, he's out of there. And that's exactly
17 what that technology can do. And that was one
18 demonstration.
19 Now, some have said that you can pulse modulate
20 on a single beam and create the same effect or utilize
21 something like HAARP, not so much for voice in the head,
22 but for certainly changing emotional state of large
23 segments of the population.
24 When we looked at all of this, we even looked
25 back -- you know, where else could this have been used?
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
113 of 813
220
339
340 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 61
RELIEF
2016
1 And there was a device in Vietnam called the Lida
2 machine, L-i-d-a. A guy who researched this was a guy
3 named Ross Adey, who is, unfortunately, also deceased.
4 Ross Adey was brilliant and was utilized by the
5 government, by private sector as an expert in these
6 kinds of areas.
7 Well, he was asked to look at -- this
8 particular device had been captured during the Vietnam
9 War. It was a Russian device. And it created the
10 entrainment effect using flickering light and sound.
11 And they used it for interrogating prisoners by putting
12 them into that, like, trance-like state and then
13 extracting intelligence from them. Now, that's the
14 1960s. Again, this is low resolution, low technology.
15 As computing powers increased, as our knowledge
16 in human physiology has increased, as our knowledge of
17 the electromagnetic nature of human beings has
18 increased, the ability to manipulate large segments of
19 the population comes easily achieved, either as a side
20 effect or unfortunate disaster of our technology.
21 You mentioned Swiss Re, Swiss Re Insurance.
22 Swiss Re Insurance wrote a paper on Electrosmog. I
23 believe it was 2002. And they said to the insurance
24 industry then, don't insure electromagnetic field
25 effects because it will result in a bigger lawsuit than
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
114 of 813
221
340
341 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 62
RELIEF
2016
1 Firestone on their tires or the smoking industry,
2 because the knowledge is here and now and nobody insures
3 that risk.
4 Lloyd's of London insures anything, but they
5 won't insure that risk. Nobody does. Because insurance
6 companies don't like to lose money. It's as simple as
7 that. And yet the telecom industry on cell phones --
8 before cell phones were invented, the University of
9 Washington had investigated those very same frequencies
10 on chick embryo studies and determined they were
11 harmful. Cell phones didn't exist then.
12 Then cell phones come out and everything's safe
13 all of a sudden. That same guy that did that research
14 says, now, wait a minute, we did all this research.
15 This is a dangerous thing. But the telecom industry is
16 a powerful adversary.
17 So it went to the Congress. You remember this.
18 There was a guy in Florida. Brain cancer. Big
19 controversy. It ended up in the Congress. Congress
20 said, we need a study. So the industry says, oh, we'll
21 pay for the study. They spend 25 million dollars on the
22 study.
23 I can't remember the guy's name who did it, but
24 he eventually published a book because his findings
25 were, hey, this is dangerous. All right. He issues his
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
115 of 813
222
341
342 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 63
RELIEF
2016
1 report. They figured, hey, they got him. You know,
2 they got the 25 million into his queue. He got to spend
3 it all on these projects. He got to make some money
4 himself. Hey, he's our man.
5 Well, he wasn't. This guy actually had some
6 integrity, and I apologize for not recalling his name.
7 A VOICE: George Carlo.
8 DR. BEGICH: Which one is it?
9 A VOICE: George Carlo.
10 DR. BEGICH: George Carlo, that's correct. And
11 he wrote a book called, "Cell Phones", a very important
12 book.
13 And when it comes to children, one of his
14 observations was -- he had the simple observation of
15 damage to skulls. You know, you have a four-year-old, a
16 five-year-old, 400 percent more energy transfers to the
17 skull into the brain than an adult. Ten-year-old,
18 twelve-year-old, approximately 200 percent.
19 This is one of the main reasons why you don't
20 want children using cell phones or, even worse, the
21 portable phone in the home because it's even less
22 efficient with the battery and the energy with even more
23 leakage. And what do we do? Try and find a hard line
24 phone today where you actually pick it up and talk into
25 it. You can't even find them anymore. They're almost
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
116 of 813
223
342
343 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 64
RELIEF
2016
1 impossible to find.
2 When you look at what we have learned about
3 human physiology and the effects of electromagnetic
4 fields on the human physiology, it is the revolution in
5 science that will collapse the pharmacuetical industry
6 one day. And one day we're going to wake up and
7 recognize that the pea in the soup of electromagnetic
8 radiation has been the cause and the root to most of the
9 chronic disease we see on the planet today.
10 When you combine that with that concept that I
11 used, that example of iodine, everyone has a little bit,
12 now you have these complex interactions, 5,000 new
13 chemicals are introduced or compounds introduced to the
14 public every year without really any serious studies,
15 and then you add this on top of it, and now you have a
16 very toxic world. And then you take the technology of
17 manipulation from the propaganda of World War II to the
18 downloading of that. What does the military hope to
19 achieve? They want to be able to train military
20 personnel with a download. Blap. There's your 12
21 years' worth of education. Now, let's go on.
22 And now here's the thing. Think about that
23 kind of education. No critical thinking involved. Just
24 programming. It's like writing to a disk. No critical
25 thinking involved. Who controls that? Curriculum
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
117 of 813
224
343
344 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 65
RELIEF
2016
1 controls the way in which our society goes. This is the
2 risk.
3 What about evidence in courtrooms when you can
4 create a synthetic memory or wipe one out? What does
5 that do to a Democratic Republic or a Democracy where
6 people have the power? That power has been taken from
7 us as we become increasingly transparent to governmental
8 agencies and they become increasingly opaque.
9 It is the opposite of what should be occurring.
10 There shouldn't be a camera in every household. There
11 should be a camera in every government office. Because
12 the technology's there. We should be able to dial in
13 and look at what our employees are doing, right?
14 Wouldn't you like to be able to dial up your
15 Congressional office and see that conversation they're
16 having in real time? And why shouldn't we be able to do
17 that? What do they have to hide?
18 You know, you think about government and you
19 start saying that and, you know, the only people
20 protected from that kind of intrusion in the US are
21 federal employees. They have a higher level of
22 protection than the average citizen within the country
23 that I live in. For what?
24 And when you think about government, everyone
25 points to the politician. I can tell you, most
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
118 of 813
225
344
345 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 66
RELIEF
2016
1 politicians are ignorant. In fact, most political
2 parties in the United States the preference is to have
3 people that are -- they look like the news announcer,
4 but they couldn't think their way out of a phone booth,
5 right? We don't even have a phone booth anymore, but
6 they couldn't think their way out of one. Because they
7 want people that are smart enough to look good, but not
8 smart enough to think on their own. That's the ideal
9 politician for political parties, because they can be
10 told what to do.
11 Look at how much money is being spent in
12 political outcomes. Huge amounts of money. Some people
13 have pointed and looked at, like, Australia to mandatory
14 voting. Everybody votes now.
15 Worst possible thing that you could ever do.
16 And here's why: When the population doesn't vote, who
17 pulls the lever? Those that are informed, right? So
18 maybe 20 percent of the population votes, but at least
19 they're informed. They've educated themselves.
20 If you force people to vote to keep their
21 driver's license, their medical benefits, or whatever
22 social programs you've got running and you say, you will
23 vote, now who decides what they vote on? Whoever can
24 buy the 30-second or one-minute ad on TV that influences
25 them. The moment they walk into the booth, they go, ah,
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
119 of 813
226
345
346 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 67
RELIEF
2016
1 and pull the lever. Now we have a dangerous situation.
2 A very dangerous situation.
3 Democracy is something that each of us have to
4 claim internally. The change that people are looking
5 for in this group happens by a change in consciousness,
6 by us recognizing what we are as human beings,
7 recognizing the potential that we have. Because you
8 know what these government programs yielded? Everybody
9 points to the fear side of the equation. But what they
10 really discovered was that every single soul, every
11 human being has this anomalous capability.
12 Now, imagine if we could awaken those
13 capabilities, could you hide anything? I mean, if
14 people could literally look into the mind of another
15 person, that makes a politician pretty vulnerable,
16 wouldn't it?
17 That is the next evolution that I believe is
18 happening and it's the only evolution, the only
19 revolution that can change the way things are. It
20 starts with human consciousness. It starts with what we
21 believe to be right and true and beginning to act on it.
22 Not from a foundation of fear, but a foundation of
23 confidence.
24 You know, somebody asked me once, what do you
25 think about faith? I said, faith is what you know to be
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
120 of 813
227
346
347 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 68
RELIEF
2016
1 right and true and you step into it on the idea that you
2 can achieve it. You believe it.
3 So many people I've seen in this work, they
4 keep jumping into things beyond their belief. They
5 don't believe they can achieve it. They try it anyway
6 and they fail, and they keep failing. And people who
7 are doing good work otherwise step back, do what you can
8 do with confidence, do what you can do with knowledge,
9 don't wait for a group to form. The group's already
10 here. It's called the human race. Act on what you know
11 to be right and true. If you make a mistake, clean it
12 up, learn from it, and move forward.
13 When you look across this room and you look at
14 all these folks with a little bit of gray hair, and
15 you've got the gray hair not by all of those great
16 things that happened in your life, but by the real
17 disasters that happened in your life. You know, you
18 think about bad news is a stimulation for good news.
19 People ask me, you know your father's
20 disappearance, disappeared off the face of the earth,
21 that must have been a horrible thing. Yeah, it was at
22 the time. I consider it the most important event in my
23 life because it altered my course.
24 The worst things in our lives alter our course,
25 change our direction, activate that higher potential
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
121 of 813
228
347
348 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright 69
RELIEF
2016
1 that cause us to rise out of the ashes of our apathy and
2 our defeats and stand on our feet again and move
3 forward.
4 The pain that people experience today is the
5 catalyst for the solutions tomorrow, whether we like it
6 or not, whether it's falling down as a two-year-old or
7 standing up as an adult. If we stand up on the basis of
8 our ethics, on the basis of our values, and we
9 reinvigorate and let go of the fear and recognize what
10 we are as creative beings, we have the potential to make
11 change.
12 And with that, I'll open it to questions.
13 (Applause.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control
County
Transcripts
Mind
Court
Control
122 of 813
229
348
349 173
183
548
667
668 SaturdaySunday,
September
June22,
17,
21,
5, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGroup
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
10
18
7
11of
123
230
349
350
369 1of
of
1of
of
51
172
173
174
of
51
176
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Tuesday,
Saturday March
December
15,
Sunday,March
April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! "# $
%" "&##'( #$
!"
# $ " " ! #!" ! ! % &! ' ! # ( ' )
* + , ) -
#- ) . - / * ) '
) 0 /- -
/ * . - . 0 ) - - 0 ) #- /
/- . - * - 0 1 /
* ) 0 0 . - 0 - 2 *
) 3 . 0 . /
- 0 ) . 4 * . 5678 0 )
. / 9::; ' - - 9::; /
- 0 - 0 / .1 0 - -
- 0 ) - ) <
)
) * * + + ,, -
* . /+ / , - * ,! + 0
1 , ! 2 3 + ,
- 344/// 4 5
6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
7- , , - * , - , / * * 3
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
11
29
8
22
124
231
350
351
3701of
2of
of
2of
1
of
51
172
173
174
of
51
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
10
12
39
33
125
232
351
352
3712of
3of
of
3of
of
51
172
of
51
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
% "
% "
/
4 4 2 1
12! 1 3
" # $ "% $ $ $ & ' $ ($ "

' " & % $ ) $% $ % ) ) " % "
($ ) ' $ ' ) $% $ "" " "& %
!& ! ) "
# $ %" " "% ) " %% ) ) $

* % +, " # -
. ' * %& # & & & ) - ! & $

# &"
& ) " #' % ) $ % '" & $

* % +, "
# $ "% %% '$ "
" !
+ % / 0$
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
10
11
13
444
126
233
352
353
3723of
4of
of
4of
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
8 * 9 : * ; < *+ ; ) .
- 7 (
#- 0 - =8 * 9 : * ; < *+ ; )
. >>>
* !
& *
5, #- . - .- ) - - #- "
) )= - 0 - .- - 0 .
- ) - )-
9, 0 ( / 5697 > - ) 0 ) - .-
? 0 - ) - - .- - 0 - ? )
- - - - . - . 0 - .- ?- 0
0 - ) .- - .- 0 4 0 >
@, #- ) ) - 0 . - / - - 0 - -
) - - 0 2 #- 0 . ) -
- - 0 0 ) 0 0 - .
A,#- . 0 0 . - . ) - < -
@ ) - < . # - B 0 ) - 0
" . . # 0 . 0 - 2 .
- < ) ) ) -
.& !
# - . ) - /- ) ) 3
. 0 - . . /
) ) - ) / .C * . - . 0 - - 0 2
- 0) - < 4
$ 8 * 9 : *
) /0 / ) 0 ) / / ) 0
- - /- 0 * - / - - -
) ) - - ) - ) )- - 00 ) 0 - . )
- 0 ) . 4 * . - 0 0 ) 2 0 -
0 - - +D 5 :::, - - ) 0 0
0 0 )
) / 0 + , /- - 0 .
2 - )) - . - - + ,
. - 0 - - - 0 0 - ) / -
)
B - ) - ?- ? 0 . . * / . / ) )
) - 0 0 4 -
0 . - - . 0 E
EE
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
11
12
14
555
127
234
353
354
3734of
5of
of
5of
2
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
B - ) - ? ) ? 0 / 0 .
) 0 - / - . )
/ - - 0 . )? ) ?
B - ) - ? - ? 0 / - . -
) 0 - .- - ) 00 - 0
) 0 ) / 00 0
0 / - - - - - . ) - - )
) - - ) - ) ) - - ) 0
0 / - - - - - /- - .
) - - ) ) - - ) - ) ) - - ) 0
- - ) - -
- - #- ) 0 * . - - -
- / - -
0 . )? - ?
B ) - - 0? 00 ? 0
- - 0 ) F 0 - . -
-
#- . - . . - ) ) 0
/ - - 0 - 0 ) 5: 0 - -
) - . - - . - ) . - )
- ) ) - - ) ) - ) ) - 0 -
- 00 ) 0
B ) - ? 00 ) 0 ? 0 -
. )) / - - . - /- .
- - - /- / - - F0 - . - - -
? ! - , -
/- / ) - 00 0 /- - / - .
2 - / - - ) - - 0 0
/ . 0 ) 00 * - )
- ) . /- - ) - 0
/- - 0 3 00 ) -
- . ) 00 ) F ) - -
- - ) ) - - / ) ) -
- 00 ) 0 G ) - - 0 0 ) F
B - ) - ? 00 ) 0 ? 0 /- - 0 .
- . )) / - - .
- /- . - - - /- / - - F0 - .
- - -
?! 00 ? 0 - -
0 ) F0 - . - -
8 - * + *
+ , ! /- / - - 0 *
0 ) 00 / - - - -
. . - - - ) 2 -
0 0 ) - - ) 0 . )
0 0 - . - - - 0
. ) -
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
12
13
15
666
128
235
354
355
3745of
6of
of
6of
3
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
+ , ! /- 0 * - 0 *
0 ) 00 / - - - -
/- - ) 0 0 * . - -
. ) 0 0 - . - - -
0 . ) -
! /- 0 * - 0 *
0 ) 00 / - - - - -
) / * . ) 0 0 - ) ) 0 - -
+D 5 :::, 0 0 ) ) 0 - -
- ) 0 0 - . - - -
0 . ) - #- ) - ) - ) / .
0 F C
+5, #- 0 . 2 -
0 ) - )) - . - - -
+9, #- 0 * - 0 * 0 )
00 / - - - - - )
/ * . 0 - 5: 0 9A=- /- - ) 0
0 * . - - - -
0 - / * ) ) 0 0 /- ) 0
- ) 0 - / - /- 0 - - - - -
. . . 0 - - . . . . 0 -
+ , )) 00 ) - 0 0 - 00 /-
- - / 0 )) 00 )
00 0 0 . - 0 0 - 00
/- - 00 00 / . ) / -
+ , + , + , + , /- - . / - 0 *
- 3 . ) 0 - - + , + ,
+ , . -
+), ) . - F 0 ) )
- - 0 ) - -
.
+., B ) - - 0 ? 00 ?
0 - - 0 ) F 0 - .
- -
+/ - *+ /
/- - ) . 4 * . - 0 00
- ) - / - - 4 . / - -
0 0 ) ) / - ) ) F .
- +D5: :::,
B - ) - 0 - . / ) -
) .
. 0 + 0 . 0 0
0 . 0 F 0 / ) 3 +! B, / ) 3 +< B,
. , . - * / . 0 )
) . - 2 1 0 . . . + - . ) - -
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
13
14
16
777
129
236
355
356
3756of
7of
of
7of
4
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
0 - - - 0 / = . ) = =
= 0 . 0 . - - .
. ) - ) 0) / 0
0 . 0 0 ) - 1 F . - 0 .
. - )
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
14
15
17
888
130
237
356
357
3767of
8of
of
8of
5
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
!
" # #
$ # ! " %
& # ' " ( # ) * ()+
"
, - ." ! %
/ # "" # "
, %/ #
0 " %
1 ( # ) 1 ( #
- ! . # "
%2 3 # %4
" 5%1% "
%4 "' %
#
" !" "
0 % ()
! # %
() 6 7 8 0 # " # "
%9 & : ' "
# ' " %
-4, " # # "
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
Page
15
16
18
999
131
238
357
358
3778of
9of
of
9of
8
of
51
of
51
172
173
174
176
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
.' %
' # # !
# " "
" %'
() ;
" %
<= 0 " %
# " 9 (
" 5%1% " " !
%
( - !; . " ()
( , ! ! " >?
-1 @ . # # % @ #
" 511 @ # " ; ,
# "" # ( %
1 @ ( - ,
" % 5%1% ( 4 A 1
4 1 ) %
() # ;
# 5%1% # # " "
" " % 0 #
%B " #
# %
-4 , " #
. 0 %
, %
- 0 " C 4 $
. %- #
%' # " C%% ,
4 %.
) 7 ) - # . ' ,
" %
-: 5 1 # .)
% -@ ; %' " %@
%4, "
$ " , %.
D $ , !
2 ) $&
, 1 C% E
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
PagePage
10
16
17
19
10
10
132
239
358
359
378910
10
of
of
9of
of51
172
173
174
176
50
of
51
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " # $ % & '(

) *
+ &$ # $'' ,-
* & ./0 1/.2
" #
3 ! 34 0 3 " 0 # &
$* #& ' ) * " " "
& $ 5 " ) & ' $ ) # 3
$ " .678 0 ' " " ) & ) '
) $ 0 & " ' $*0 3 0 & '
0 0 & ' ) $ ' & $& '
& 9$* " : 0 &0 ' ;, &
* "$ , < " ) $ ,0 ' =. > " ' "#
$ ) & $ ) 1/.2 & ' # & $
) & ) ,# & 24.;9&#9/12269 ) ? $ *$
) 3 & 3 ' ! & ) ! &$ $ )
** 0 .29<;//
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 11
17
18
20
11
10
11
111
133
240
359
360
379 11
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " #$ $ % &
' ( )' %
%) *++
!
" # # $ % " "
# &
' ( ( ) ' *
)' + , - .$
"# - / #
0 * ( 1
2 (34 ( (
( 5 #$ ' ( 6 0 * 7 8 ' ( 69
(922 ( 2 2
* (
( 2' + (
! " ! # $ % &
' % ( )% " * ) %
+ ' ',% " - "% . % . -
/0
! "## $" %& %' ( )*+*
' #% , - +. *+ /
' % , 0! ) * . *++
' , 0! ) . *++
0$
& 1 !%
2 $
$ !%$
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 12
18
19
21
12
11
12
212
134
241
360
361
380 12
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
)( )*+,
)*+, "%- " & &. !"& "&/ % 0 ! .

. " ! $ ! " ! % . 3 . ! .
% . " . 3 $ " 4 " ! )
4 ) " % *+ + ) ' 35 .! 0 ! ) " *+ /. 0$
& 1 !% ! "
! " ) ! 5 6 % '$ 1 7$
% ) % ! ! ) ! 3 %! ) ! 8 " "! $ 5)
" ! " *+ + ) . !
$ !%$ 3 ""9 !
)' 35 $
& ) 0$ ! : 3 ; : ! ; "
% ) " < ! ) ! ! . < ! ) 1 5! $
" = " < ! ) - 7 3
% $ 8 10 "% 2 ! / $ 10 /$ 8 !
"" <(> ( 0$ & 1 !%$ .
< )4 ' % 3 $ ! ! 0$ !
" ! " % . ! !
6 ! . 5! ! " . 4 ) ) 1 ? -""
@ @ . 4 ) 4 . 4 ) 1 ). #$ $
. " ! < ! ) ' )? -"" $ ! ! .
*+ / 1 3 A! % " % 8 B ! %!
3 $ - * % $
" )3 )*+, "%- " 4 # 1"& / 5" )*+6 2 -" #

%0 # " / / -' /# /!5" " 1-"% #" +67*),,8 / 5" /# %/! %
9 % 5" # "% /# %/! 9 " #' . / 9 "% 9/ / $ 1/! # 5" ! #" &$"
/ 1 & 4 # 0%"#/&/ $ #/ !" / :# 9/ / $ / )*+6 2 4"."% 5" " / / 4 # -"
-" $% "& & 5" ! #" 4 # # "& ; %/#&/! / 4 - #"& "4 & ! 10" / $
"./&" !" % ! 5"%" 9 5" 1/! # 4 # 9/ "& ! %" 5 &"9/!/" !' 4/ 5 &/%"!
4/ "## ! %% - % / 5" % #"! %/ /#! & ! & !" !" 9 /# /!5" "
1-"% 9 ! 4 % / $ 5" %' 4 # 9/ "& 5 # $$"# "& 5 5" # 10" "%
/!" "0 % 1" " $ $"& / # % "$' 9 < % 01" = 5 " & 5" 9 % "
1 %&"% / +88+ 5/# 4 & 9! %#" 4 4% $9 &" 5 ! /1 -" 9/ "& -' 5"
5 4 9 1/ ' 5" ! #" /# 4 -"9 %" 5" 5/%& /%! / % 9 00" # #" +,>
36** 5"%" %" 5%"" ?3@ A "# / # 5 5" 5/%& /%! / 1 ' % " B 45" 5"% 9%""
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 13
19
20
22
13
12
13
313
135
242
361
362
381 13
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
/# /!5" " 1-"% % $% 5"% 5"% 2 -" # %0 # & 45" 5"% $% 11 %'
&$1" "%- "/ !/./ ! / #/ - 5# " & 9"&"% ! % #
3 . 0! ) . *+ /. ' 3 5 " "

4 " ! )4 ) $ 0$ ! )
! 5 6 % 4 % $ 6 .
%" 1" % $% 1 - ) < ! ) ! " 4 $
0$ ! " ! " ! $ ! ! .
% % % ! % . ( ) C! "
< ! ) ! " 4 $ - ! ! B. *+ / 0$ "
! 3 4 " 4 ) % ) 5 < " 4 ) % !
" .4 ) $ !% D ! ! " ! "
EB++$++$
- 0! ) . *+ / 4 % " ' 35 .
-"" . -"" 5 !%. * ! " % $ %
" ! ! ) " $ < ) 4
' % % " " ! " < & <
. ) ! ) 3 " */+ 8 !
" F+* % $ % ) < ! ) ' )
! ! $ % ! 4 " = ) < ! ) ! "
4 $
- ! ! . *+ / ( ) C! " = " " <

! ) ! " 4 . > $ /9+B /$ C! ) 0! 0 "" )
. " ! $ %% . &' /B . % !% ! "
4 ) $
. ) % *B. *+ / 0$ (
4 . . " ! $ ! " ! ! "
#$ $ 4 %! 3 $
*+ / 0$ " ! < ! )
! )9 9 ! C ! ) ! ) )% $
! ) ) !%% ) 8% 0! & @ ). ) . '$
0 6 $ ! ) )% ) !%% ) % %
7 @ 3 . ! 4$ 0$ $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 14
20
21
23
14
13
14
414
136
243
362
363
382 14
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
% " *+ / 0$ 7 ) " %% 8 ) D/
! % " " . ! 4$ $ % "
B$ % % /&" /! % ! 4$
0$ $ % " 4$ . " 0$
. 3 ) 3 ) B+? $ . "
! 4$ 0! ) *+. *++ " " ! . ! ! $
) +? '$ 4 % . . ) >
! "6 . > 6 . '$ $. " " % ! )
" 3 " % (=5->( " )$ 4
" ) " . ! 4$ . 0 $. 3 % $
! ) "
% % ! )" ) 3 #$ $ % & $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 15
21
22
24
15
14
15
515
137
244
363
364
383 15
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2
0$ %! "" !
. ) ) " $ " ! #
"" G0 1! % ) . "
F " . 0$ 8 ! 0! *F. .
! ** ) ) )$ ! C ! % ).
& 1 !%. < $. &1. < $. ! ! " %!
"" ! $ ! ) . " ! 0 1! . ""
% % ! ) E 5 ' ! 8% !
" ! ! " A 6! $ 6 . ). % .
"! %! !% ! 9!%
" 0$ " 8 ) $ ! 3 "
# ! " ) " . .
$ ! ) " ! H ! % % )H H
% ! % % )H ! % %! H
! 9 ) % ! $ ) " = 9 9
3 ! " ! $ > . 0$
% ! 3 % " 8 ** ) $
! % % ) 7 ! " ! % $
0$ % ) " $
' % " ' " '-' % #
? ) +? $ - " ? " 4 C I >
! ) ) > " $& .& ) $
! ). " " % " %!

7
- 5/%& ?3%&@ %$"# "10 '"% ! ) " < . 4 ) .

/.+++ % ) $
1"# "%/ 9 &"% & % %

7 ! ) "< .4 ) $
5" C "%% / ! & F 9 " ! #

" *$
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 16
22
23
25
16
15
16
616
138
245
364
365
384 16
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
" " %! "" % ,

" %$" 2 D #5. " #$ $ 4 . ' "
) $
-"% "#. " ' " ) !

) "' " $
--' ' 1 . " 5 " ' " . " ' " > .
! ) ) & = 7 $
"E &"% 2 /$. " #$ $ ) " . ) 5 "

' J
#"05 ! &". " 4 ) 6 ! " = % "

%% % " #
$
% # %& " C %& " & # %/"#. C ! %

" ! ! ) A & (
! ! #$ $ $
" ! . % " #$ $
4 -"" $
% F " " 1
5 . H % E " " ?
! $
"4#C / !/ /1"# F % 5 > @ %%

G " % H H ! A
) " ' " =
1 " A$
"4# )*C)* ) G "" !

6! A ! ) . ) " " 4 1! " .
) ! " ) ! A )
$
- 0! ) * " 0$ ! " <

) 0 % = " ! . &1. < $. K
H 5 3. $. " $ 0 %
= ! ) ! "! 0$ ? !
$
% . "%/ >+88*>**(6 < ! ) ! " 4 .

< ) 0 % = % 3. ? 9 !
! . ) " 0$ $
% . "%/ 9 +9++ D < ! ) ! " 4 . 0

1! % E $ / ! ! 5 3.
< . ! )$
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 17
23
24
26
17
16
17
717
139
246
365
366
385 17
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
% . "%/ 9 +9++ D < ! ) ! " 4 .
5%/# 05"% &"%5/ " 6 . # K 5 ! 3 . % 0
1! $ *++/ % # % & % 4
' % +/9 9** #$ $ ' ! " ( ' "
4 ) (=5->( $ < ! )4 . $ $.$
% . "%/ 9 +9++ D < ! ) ! " 4 .

4 % ) 0 % % 0 1! . *++
0 % % < ) ! " % ! ) #$ $
% 4 ! 7% 3$
2 >
> ) "" !
. ! " " ! H 8 H %! !% H
! H H 9 ! ! % % ) H
) H " H " % H
!% ! ! ! % $ " "
! )$ ) % %! ". !% ! B C! )
$ 3 $ "
! = - ! % 7 " % % $
% ! " 3 . ! !%
. ! % $ " % " "
% % 9!%,
) ) 0$ ) ) )
% $
) " $
) ! % % $
(8 E7 $
@ % ! " )% " !% % $
) " " " . ! . " )

" " $
% ! ! ) " < ! ) !) % "

! ). " . $.
) 3 % ) ) ) ! )
) "" " C! %! ! $
% #$ $ ) . . . 8
) G % " ! $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 18
24
25
27
18
17
18
818
140
247
366
367
386 18
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
) " ! $
2 2
) . " ! *++/ ) " ) ) 3 % !

" ! 3 C! $ '! ) 0$
) ) . " " % " "
% $ ) " > L 3 ) 5 ' "
! !% " 8 5 % 7
) 7 $ 6 . ) "! " %
! ) % $ ! % 8 ! .
! % " % #$ $ . " .
! ! ) $ 5 = %! 4 )
' % " ' " . > . ) !
"! $ ! " C! ! % 3 )! %
! $
6 *++/ 0$ %% %
% ". ! ) ! . # ' ! " (
' "4 ) (=5->( $ < ! ) 4 . $ $. $ +/9 9
** $ 5/# ! #" /# # / #" "& & 5 # -"" 4/ 5&% 4 -' 0 / /99
"%- " / ! -"% 9 )**F 9 "% # !!"##9 % / $ / 5" 5/%& /%! / % 9
00" # ?*(>66(6@ / "0 "1-"% 9 )**F 5" ! #" 4/ -" ! / "& 0 5" #"! %/ '
9 "./&" !" & 5" !" #" & &"#/# 9 -# % ! / 9 ; # /!" & & " 0% !"## - & )
B. *++/ ! ! 4 % . 0$ " ! $
- 3 # 5 3 !% ) ! " ( 4 ) = .
4 ) . %% % . 0$ " % " % !
% 5 3 !% ) . $ +/9*F+/ $
" # ) ! )
! " % 3 % " ! C! 9 - 7 3
' ( ) ' % . ! " ! " % )
& $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 19
25
26
28
19
18
19
919
141
248
367
368
387 19
of
of
ofof
of 51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
D B G H B
D
- 7 3 " %! "" !
$ 7 3 ! ) %
! $ " 3 +? 0$ 3 .
M ) M$ " " " ) 3 .
. % 3 . )% . % ) $ . ! "
4 % ) = . = % < & < < !
! . ! ! $
! ! *++/$ . ! 8 "
% $ = ) % ! ! )
! ! $
*++/ #$ $ % ! 9 ! ! "
% )H ) % )H % ! ! ! " )
% ! ! ) " " A! ) ) $
! ! ! ) " " "
#$ $ ' ! . (=5->( $ < ! ) 4 . $ $. +/9 9** $
! " ) 0$ % )$
"" %% " ) 0$
*DG % % ) "
@ & ! $ 0$ % F) ) " %
! ! $ & #$ $ "! % . 5! ! "
#$ $ )? -"" "! $ ! "
" $
*++B " *++ 0$ 8

% )H H H %
&@ #< = ? ! % $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 20
26
27
29
20
19
20
142
249
368
369
38820
1020
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2
" ) ! % % ! ) " < ! ).
4 ) . ! % " . " ) ) " 0$ 3
" ,
5"% 1 " "%- " %$. 7 % ! " )
! " ! 3 ) ! )
! $ 6 3 " 5 & & )
% $ 6 !% ! 7 ! 3
$
% 5"% 1 " "%- ". !"" " )

" . 7 % . " )3 " ) " $
% 5"% 5 1 # D "%- ". !"" " )

. 0$. 5 % & ' . !
" ) ! ) $
"%- ". !"" " 5% & ' . & ' %

! 3 ) % "
! )$ ! 3 . ) !
) ! %) % 3
$ 6 ) % " ) ! " "
! ! ! ! $
5" 1/ ' 2/# %' " ! 3 B+? ! . 0 $.

" " 0$ . 3 ! %
! # > ) ! $ ! .
0 $. 3 ) % ! " &@ #< = " ? ! % $ 6 . !
$ . 3 ) % " < ' 8% " &@ #< = $ 0$
3 )% " % % ) ' % " ' " . ! ' =4
' " ) ' $ " " 0$ ? !
" ) " ) . ) " !
% . ! H H "" ! % % H
! H 3 9 % ) " % " &@ #< = " ?
! % $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 21
27
28
30
21
20
21
143
250
369
370
38921
1121
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
" " " " ) ),
1 " "%- " % ? 5"%@ > ) " DF DB

! " 1! 0 3 . $ 6 8 %
! G < 6 . % %
% $ 6 )G ! $ " > ). !
! "! ) ! . " ) "
$ 6 % ) & 43 .
% % $ 5) " % ! .
" ) " #$ $ ) % $ 6
! ! 3 ) +? $ 6 !"" " 7
3 . ) % " $ 5 3 B+? .
. ! ) % % $ ! 4$ . 0 $. )
" $ ! 4$ . 0 $. )
3 %)$ ( 3 %) (8% ! % "
&@ #< = $ . % ) ! < )
4 ' % < ! ) ! " 4 $ F ! 4$
. 0$ " " * 3 " . $. 3
! $ 3 0 & & %%
. " " E +$++$ 3 ! <
) 0 " E*++$++ M % M $
) $ ! 4$ . 0 $. ) % )4
0! 0 $ 6 . ! ! * . F " . 0! 0
-='(= " % M ) "
! ) " < . 4 ) M$ 4 0! " < ! ) ! "
4 ) ) " ! " < ! ) " " * 3 "
% $ " ) " " ) % ).
& 1 !%. < $. L ! " " )0 @ -?5
% $ ! . 0 $. " ! ! 3
" " " ! . % ! . . "
" " ) " . " ! " )$ L ! "
$ - ! & ) . *++ ! 4$ 0 $. " )
" ? & ) $ 3 " E +.+++$++$
% > " *+++$ 3 . & ' ) 3
" *++ . > L 3 ) % " $ 6 % "
! $ " 8 B 3 ! ! ! $ %
0! & @ ). " "" " #$ $ ) " #$ $
% & . % ! 3 : )
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 22
28
29
31
22
21
22
144
251
370
371
39022
1222
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " ) " ; % % $ ! )" ?
! . ! $
1 " "%- " ? % 5"%@ # B +$

. 0$ ! # 1 " ! . !
$ " % " < ' 8% . &@ #< = $ 7 "
- *F. " " )1 ! C .
! " " ) 1 0 ! ) D. *$ 5)
" . ! $ 0$ " M < 'M
% $ "' */. D. 0$
A! " " ! . " " ! % ) ! )
% " $ ) 5 . " 5
4! 1! ? -"" . "" 3 ) ! " ! %
! $ ! $ 8 % !
< 6 $ " % ) ) " % .
! " ! ! " > $
5 " . 4 ) . ! % ! " ) ) $ "
< 1 6 % " . ! % "! 3 " $
! !% " " $ 7 %
"< '" 3 7 3 $
5 1 # "%- " ? % 5"%@ ! " ! ! 5 3

! " ! ! $ ! 5% ' &
' % 99 77 8 3 ) " ! B$
! 5 3 " ! 3 E *.+++ "
" ! % 0! " /$ "!
! 5 3 " " "! # ' ! "
( ' " 4 ) (=5->( $ < ! ) 4 . $ $. +/9 9** $
#< -> 5 >@ 4$ . "
) "! 3 ) $ 4$
8 % $ 4 ) " < 6 . 3 & .
6 ! 4 . 4 % ( $ " 0$4$ & 3 )
3 & $ 4$ ) ! "!
% ! " C " 0 ' 4 " #
$ 0 ' 4 " " 4 5 3. )
0 1! $ 4 5 3. ) " *F*F > ' 43 .
. 4 ) . ) 0$ $ ! "
" A! ) 8 % . % " % " &$ @
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 23
29
30
32
23
22
23
145
252
371
372
39123
1323
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
@ . 8 ! " < > % % " ! " < 6
$
"%- " /# %"1 " ./"4"% ? " # " 4 ' / @. % .

" 8 % % ! % " "
! $ % " #$ $ % ! . !
% $ < ). 0$ % . %
! " ! ) %% % .
! 8% " ! $ " "
3 ) 3 ) $ 0$ *9 % & 4 <
6 . " 3$ 0$ 5
" ! ) " O $ 0$ 8
%! . 3 " "! ! /.
! & # ). ! !
+$ 0$ 8 % " ! ) ! % . "
& 1 !%. < $. 3 ) 5 " 4
! M' & MH ! & 1 !%. < $$ -
) . % 7! " ! . 0$ % " "
% ) % "" % " . )
$ ! " ! $ & 1 !%. < $.
E*+.+++ B " %% 8 ) E ++.+++ ) .
% " 8 " " ? ! A! )$
5" 1" 5" 5 5/# %' & 5" !%/1/ %"! %&# % )" .
! ! % %
) " $ - * ) A! 3 ) %! & 6 6 )
= ,
" > "./"4 5" 4 %& J " #/ B &" #/ #B " ! B ) "
! ) % " . " % ) " " )
" . " "" . % %% " "
M ! M$ ) 8 ) )$
4 > "./"4 5" 3 -%/! "& /!/&" "$ / # " " , ! !
+ J . 5! 6 % % & ) ! ) > 0 ) H ! ) J . *++/
) @ ) ( ! = 4 ' % H 0! ) . *++ " F+*
) < )4 ' % < 1 6 % $
5" %/1/ "! %& ) . ) 0$ F "
H" % ! % ! )
%% ! ) " < . 4 ) H " 0$ %%
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 24
30
31
33
24
23
24
146
253
372
373
39224
1424
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
% % " $ ! % " *++ (=5->(
$ ! ) " < . 4 ) #$ $ ' ! " ( ' "
4 ) $
2
4! = % " ! " 8 #$ $ ! H
4 ) ! H < ! ) ! " 4 $ D+.+++
% " ! " ) " % )
"" $ #$ $ ! < ! ) ! "
4 ! " ! H F.+++ H
" > '9=-& "
8 " ! " ) 0$ & 1 !%.
% "" $ 0$ ++ ! 3 ! " . .
! $
4 ) # % ) % H' % " "

< ! ) -"" H < = ( 8 H < ! )
8 H ! ) 5 " H < 6
% H & # ) % H " 0$ .
! " $
% 1 " "%- " 1' -% 5"%. #

H < 6 % H & # ) % H
! ) H 5 ! ) 1! 4! ' " H
% % ! % " $
% 1 " "%- " 1' 9 5"%. # > . <

6 % H ! ) H < ! )
-"" H < = ( 8 H < ! ) 8
H ! . $. % H = ( ' & H
< ! ) ! " 4 H " ! % %
! % "
D 7
$ !%$
$" "" $
% ,GG $ $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 25
31
32
34
25
24
25
147
254
373
374
39325
1525
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2 D
PP /# /10 % " 5 # 9 5/# 4%/ / $ "1 " /"4/ $ 5 # %"!" '
-"" ! 11"%!/ /K"& -' ! %0 % " 1"%/! & !"% / % " ,** ! 10 /"# %"
#/ $ "1 " /"4"%# # ! # # 9 % %" & '#/# & 1 % " 9 %"! # # 5/# /#
9 " 5" ". / 9 1 # "!5 $/"# - % 9 5" "0 % 1" 9 "9" #"
0 "!%" "E0"%/1" # & 5" %"# / $ "!5 $/! &. !"1" # ! # '
#"!%" /." 9 % # $ 5/# 5 # %"!" ' -"" #"& / # %' 9 5" " "./#/
&% 1 J "&/ 1J 5/# # #" # ' 8 )**F 5 & %"! %&"& % &/ /."
-% &! # D2 # # 4/ 5 $ "# 5 4 # " 9 5" " &/ $ 5'#/!/#
% "& "1 " /"4"% & "E0"% 5 "# /9/"& 5/# # 1" /
' , 0! ) * . *++
0$
& 1 !%
2 $
$ !%$
5" 9 4/ $ %" $"% / #"%./!"7
$ !%$ % $
$ $ G !%+
$" 3$ G
$ $ G
$ $ $ G% " G 0
%,GG $) ! ! $ G !%
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 26
32
33
35
26
25
26
148
255
374
375
39426
1626
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
"0 "1-"% ( )**8
0$
& 1 !%
*/+
< .4 ) B+F
' 3=
6 !
4$-$ 5 8 +**
.- D/*+
4 9 ++9/ 9/B
8 9 BB9DFF9D +
, " 2" " $
"7 # ' 9 ! # "% " #' . / % & G"% 9 % %$ /K"& / $ &

."% %."/ !"L
' 3.
&) % ! $ ' 3. ) !% ! <

& 6 3. C! " " $ ) ! 3
) ! )$ ! ! ) " ! "! ? " " .
! ) ! 3 8% ! ! "! $
) ) " H 7 3 !
< $ = . < " M ! M
! )$ M . " ) % B/
< ) Q 3 < ) " 7 $M
. ) !, ) +/ $
< ) ! 7 " " " 7 3

? 8% " < $
) < $' 6 "6 ! % !
G $ " )$ > +? C
! % ' 6 6 8 ) % )G & 1 !%$
6 8 !" ! ) % ) & 1 !%
'9=-& " 6 8$ " "! " '9=-& !" !
# 3 $ *++/ " .
( = ." ) 3 % ! " 6 G .
$
> . ) ! < ! )$ 5 3 +?
" < . K .
. " ! . " ! A$
3 " " $
3 < > % % K .
$
3 " 1 <9 > 5 "- F .

" $ #$ $ ' % " 0! #$ $ 4
" 4 % ! ! ! E 5
' ! $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 27
33
34
36
27
26
27
149
256
375
376
39527
1727
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3 " 4 * " 1 <9 5 $

> % ). < ) % ) = %! $ < "
! ) ! ! ! " " ! )$ <
" " " & $< 1 $5!
)M %M$ 1 6$ 5! ) %
. " ! > )M M % K
. $ " % " @ %% 5 > >
A ! )$ %
) ! " > $ *++B9 9* B+ " ( ' "& . ! ' $
> . = 1 . % ) ) " # ' " ' % .

% < $ " . ! % " =
1 ? " % " " ' "
) $ " ) ! " " %% 8 ) ,++,++ ) ! 3 "
A! " &! 3 3 = 1 )
" #$ $
%% " ! ! ! "
A$ -" ! . " $
= 1 < ! ). " "

" . & ) F. *++ $ 0 > ! ! & %.
< ! )$ 6 " & %$
> . ? ) ! 5 > > & ) *F. 8 % > .

> ! ) ),
M ). " ). 3 D$ ? > ! ) ). !% 9
#$ $ ! 3 % % % C I. "
% ! " ? > $ ! " ! %
" ! "" "" " % "1 6 % $ ! ). >
! % ! 3 3 $ ) % ) 1
) $ " . % ) % "" 8 0 $
@ ) % $ 1 ! 9 ! $ $$$ 5! % %%
4 . %% " ! " ? % . #$ $ "
% ) )9 ! 4 $ 5! ! %% .
. ). ! " $ ) +? . ! " ")
"" % $ . %% ! ) ! "
% ! 8 ) ). 8%
" " ! " ? % $ ) 8 ) "
! ! $5 D. " ). 8 ! . ! ).
! "" $M L ! $ % " & ) *F.
5 > G> $
> . 1 6$ 5! " $ M6 " F/ ) . "

0 ! ) F+. B 0 ! ) *+. $R**S 3 ) " .
! ) 3 ! ?
! ! 7 ) . 5! %
)? $R*FS % ) ' . 5! ! ) " 0 )
4 4 9 . ! % ) "
% R*DS ! .M
3% $
> . 5 ) = ) . " > ). ' " > ! ) ) > .

" ' " K . ! ) % " &
! )$ " %% % " ) ,
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 28
34
35
37
28
27
28
150
257
376
377
39628
1828
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
M $ $ $ $ F 4 % ) .
? < )?$ %% %
" . ! " " ) " $
5 ) = ) 5 " ' " . $M
) 0 4 . 4 & %) B$ D. " 5 ) = )
A! " 5 ? " ' " ).
% ! ) 3 $
" 9 M M " % ) )
%% 8% $M ) 3% . $
> . " > )% ,

1 6$ 5! . " 4 " # ." ' " $
0 1! .4 ! " K $
5 ) = ) . " ' " > ! ) ) > ' "
K . $
&) " . ! 4$ .0$
6 " . ! 0$ . $
1 > ). " = C! . ! $
1 $ 5! " > )$
0
$
> 8 0 1! ? ) 3 ! *$ 6 0 %
. " 4 % $ 3 3 ) ! ! 0 % . 0 1!
0 % = . ( A$. " < . )" ) " ) 3
$ ! " % *. *++/ " % 4 ! 4 3
7 < ). 4 ' 3 )? " " ""$
< )? 1 0! ) " 3 -% 4
! ) ! $
> ! 8 0! )
" *++/ ) * " ' "
)$ ) & ) &! ! . %
% $ ) . '$ 4 % $ ) )
" $ ! ! * " ' % " ' " ' "
) ! ) 6 - ) 3
" ) ) $ ) ! % " ) ?
& 4 ) 3 !% " $ ) ! ! "
(=5->( $ < ! ) 4 . $ $. > $ *++/9 9+* " #$ $ '
! " ( ' " 4 ) $ ) "" )
" $
*++B % > 8 ! )
%% ! " ) < "
8 $ ' 6 6 1 !% " % 1 "
! 4 3$ 6 ! ! 3 % " 3
8% $ ! " ) ) % 3 5 ) $
! ) . " " $ !
! . " . 3 $ !
) % $
&) " ) ! 5 4" ! . $.
! % )" 3 !% ) F. ! .= 5 .
!% C! + " . 3 " > $
" D /$
" $ 39 9% $
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 29
35
36
38
29
28
29
151
258
377
378
39729
1929
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
0$
& 1 !%
2 $
$ !%$
$ !%$ % $
$ $ G !%+
$" 3$ G
$ $ G
$ $ $ G% " G 0
%,GG $) ! ! $ G !%
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 30
36
37
39
30
29
30
152
259
378
379
39830
2030
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " #$ %
%& ' % % (( ' ) #$ % %& % % #$ %& %
% #$ % " #$ % ) * ) %# ' + %
' % ( ' # ) ' & # % '! % % $ ! ( !
! % ' % $ ' %' # % '( *',
" * & % ' # '# # % ! " ! % ( ' # %

" ( % $ ( '' % "' # ( ( " "# )
* ' & " ( - $ ' % % # ' ' ' ( * %'
* ' * ! & ' ( ./01 * % * ' ' #$ & ! !
) ' & ' "' ! 2( " ' 3 3 4 ./05 * ' %
" $# ' ' 3 $ % ! * #% & $ ( & ' ( "
% "' 6 * ' & & % ( #% * ! ' '' * #% % #%
% " ! ( " & ' ( " ( # * ' ( " ( * #' '' '
( # ( 7 "$ + #((" % 8 $ ' % ' % '
% (( %$ ( '' ' ( ! " #$ % ! & %) *
#% ' " % '' ' '' * & '# ' & ! + ' %
" ' ' " 8 798 ! %#' ' + $ :: % + ' + ' # 6
)( #"" ' 3 ;' ' ;' #' '' ) $
% '' % ) " ) ' ( #' 7 ' " " % % + $ :: '
" % '' ' ( ' & # ) < * ! !* "
"" % ( " ( %' % & '
* ! ' '' * #% % # ! % ( " % '

* #% % & " %$ ' < !" & ! ' =
' '% % ! % % !% #" "$ ' " %
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 31
37
38
40
31
21
30
31
153
260
379
380
39931
31
of
of
ofof
51
172
173
174
176
of
51
41
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Saturday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
October
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
10,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 32
38
39
41
32
31
32
154
261
380
381
40032
32
of
of
ofof
51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 33
39
40
42
33
32
33
155
262
381
382
40133
33
of
of
ofof
51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 34
40
41
43
34
33
34
156
263
382
383
40234
34
of
of
ofof
51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " #
$% &
' ( )! *+ ,
-''.#!' /0 12. )! /01- . !#!-/ 1

1!/ !1.230/. !/4 !45!/ .4 ".4-! #206)
5 ) ! ' 4
! 71 5 & !
4 +( $ %
0 8 ' 9
! "
# $ % & ' " '
()" * " ) ! + !!
, 4 ) ) 4 ) - & & ! *
.//0 1
. . 2 - ( 4 ! (0 -& , ! # .//0
2 3 ( '' ' 0 & ( ) 3
4 5 .//6 - & , ! #
7 ' / ( - ( & # .//6 ' '
! * 5 ! !)8 % 5
& ((! ' 4 ' ./,0
0 2 1 ( " ( ' ( # ( !
.//6 ' 4 ' ./,0
6 ! : 2 3 ( ' 5 # & 5 &
( ! ' ' .//6
9 5 / (' % .//: ' 4 '
: " 2 ( ' ( & #
% .//: ' 4 ' ./,0
; 5 ( ' ( * 5 .//: *
< 8 ' 4 '
,/ 3 ; (' ( & ) .//: ' 4 '
,, ' ' 4 3 ( )= 1
# .//; , ! #
,. ! 3 < 2 3 (' ( # .//; ' 4 '
,2 " 6 # " 6 ( " (
( * ! # * .//;
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGroup
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 35
41
42
44
35
35
157
264
383
384
40335
35
of
of
ofof
51
172
173
174
176
of
51
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Tuesday,
Saturday March
December
15,
Sunday,March
April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
17,
12,
15,
5, 2015
21,
22, 2016
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
,7 1#-& & < (' ( " ( * ./,/ ' 4 '

,0 ' 4 2 3 (' ( > 1 * ./,/ '
4 '
,6 " < (' ( 1 & $ ( !
1 4 ./,/ ' 4 '
,9 0<; < 3 (' (# .0 ./,/ # & ) ' 4 '
,: & 3 (& & ( # .6 ./,/ & 4 &
8
=' # ; (% & % #1 # .0 ./,/ 1 5
& 4 + $& & # !
5
$ 1 & 2 3 ( : ./,0 8 )
$ " 6 ( =( $ %( # $
!
1 +
$$ 5 / ( * .//,0 % 8
$, ' 4 3 ( ./,0 ?
$> 3 ( '' ' 0 #

% ./,, /0 ..::
4 5 $& 1 !
$% ? ) " * ./,0
,.0. 4 &
$+ ) '@ 3 (/ 0 3 ( ' .2 ./,0
+ 1 !8# ( '" 5 > (
1 & + (
! 1
$* " & 3 0 4 ./,6
! ! ( !
1
$A 6 & & ' & # ; ./,6
'& + 3 4 # # +
1!
$& 4 4
1 @ # ,0 ./,6
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control
CountyGroup
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Control Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page 36
42
43
45
36
3636
158
265
384
385
404 of
of
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
5151
173
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Tuesday,
Saturday March
15,
Sunday,March
April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June 2016
12,
15,
5, 2016
17,
21,
22,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 37
43
44
46
37
36
37
159
266
385
386
40537
2737
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 38
44
45
47
38
37
38
160
267
386
387
40638
2838
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 39
45
46
48
39
38
39
161
268
387
388
40739
2939
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! " # " $% &
! " #
$ %
"&# '
$ ( %
' ( " ") " * ) ! " ! + " * " ,

! , "" ! " ! " ! " ! , ,
+ " - ! ! )
*
% ( *
(
%
! .
/"0 ! , * 1 ! + 2"3
4 - 1 " " 1 , ! !
4 1 , ! ! ) ** ! "
! 5 6 ) " " # 4 4 + &,,-
. . $ / ..$/
&,,0
% % 1 2 1
%
&,, 3 &,, %
4 %
%
& , , " " " !, " 5

00 6
7 8 9
%
: 7 - 8, 9 , "2 ! " , , , ! 1 , ** !
, ! : 7 ) , . 4 ;
&,,- ( &<;= 5 (
> $;$ ? $
! % % 4
1 &,,@ &,,= ,
$ >
A 1 B3 .+
&,,=
1 B3 2
>
%
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 40
46
47
49
40
39
40
162
269
388
389
40840
3040
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
< ) * " ) ! A 24
1 ! ' &,, &, , A %
1 2 5 % % " #9 9
- ! ) " " " ; " , . 4

4 "$ C# &,,@(&,,= A D $
3 1 B 3 24 %
5
! %
% &,,0 4 % %
! %3 %
@ < " - "" * ,! " + , :

! * % E % 0 =
9 9
$ 0 =9 00&9 00 &,,- &, , $
!
% %
! %
D 3 $ ! % %
3
= )) /4 0 ), " $ ;
F G + 0 = / F G %
! + $ 3 00 &,,<
3 * E
3 3 " H %#
$ / %
$ D $ $ . +
&,,- &, ,
4 !- " , - .
3 * &,,@ D $ / B
$ &,,
0 6 -) ! 24 0 = . A * D
/ 4 / 00 3 $ 00=; 00 .
5 :
, # ! 7 3 %
&,,- &, , ! D $
$ ! D $ 3 D 3 $ D % A
D E 7F ! 8F
D $ &,,- &,,0 >
% ! D $
3 D A %
; % . + % %
4 E
$
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 41
47
48
50
41
40
41
163
270
389
390
40941
3141
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
) 7 24 00
F F A $;$ (F 7 8 !
.
,-(&& &,,- 1 $
2 1 3
& # = $ % &,,- D $ /
B 3 1
: 5 " * < :# ) " . 0 = / F G

00 9 00=( 00 9 &,,- &, , . 3 B
B 3 1 $ 3
. / $
< > ) "" "" " 0 =

/ ;3 $ &,,@
- #, " ! "" " E % D E $

&,,- $ D 3
@ " " " 24 = 0 = &, &,,- &,,@

$ 3 D $ $ $ 3 !
= " ) " " = , D $ 3 0 =

@, &,,@ ! @, 1
&,,@
9
!
@, !
#" !, ! " "1 , " ! "* # ) ": - " E

0 = / F
G . &,,-
! !
B 3
0 " # ) . 0 = / F G 00 9
00=( 00 9 &,,- &, , . 3 B
B 3 1 $ 3 /
$ : &,,-
' 9 9 9 9 9 A
&, ( " , !
. 00 $ 3
$ ! 7 8
&, , !
F &,, &, ,
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 42
48
49
51
42
41
42
164
271
390
391
41042
3242
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
& , * " *# ) F ) $
&& " : !- &,,- 4
% A D $ 3 1
&: ;! , ! " > ? " 24 &,,0

5 > ; B
%
&< ) < !- $ / %
$ D $ $ . + &,,-
&, , F $ %
&, , 5 % % (
2 %
&- - A &,,- &, , $ A )

A + .+ $ $
&@ * ! : : , * * @ 7 " . 3
0 = &,, &,,0
3 *
&= 5 ! ! 6 ) " " 7 "! ) " ": )" .

4 &,,@ E 4 &,,@
"
#
& 5 ! !6 ) " " ; . 4 &,,-
&0 ! < ") + " . / 0 = "&# @

- 9 &,,@ : 9 &,,0
9 &, , . $ $ / B
00 &,,
:, 7 ) , * * ! " F
0 =
A ;A 0 =
F 0 =
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 43
49
50
52
43
42
43
165
272
391
392
41143
3343
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3 ! ! 6 0 = 0 =
" $ . .
+ 1 $ . #
I $ $ "2
! $ + # ' J +
. 00&
+$;F &,;&, F 00 ! '
D 3 $ 24
"$ A + 1 . #
$ $ $ 1 1 "1E1# $
K 0=,K
E K 3 > L F F . A
A . F + B + 1 $
+ 1 $ $
$ 1
1 B 6 $ 3 >
+ B 1 $
$ ! 00,K
> 1 B 3 > 1 B3 F
! F ! ! A ! ! >
1 1
00 % F F
) % 3 F 7 8
&,,- & 1 1
! 4 '
A
. 3 ! 4
A F 4 0<,K 4
0=,K 0 ,K 00,K
9 A .
1 3 > % 2! 4
/ &,, F ) %$ A .
0@,K D 1 4 A? D!B
0@,K " # +
$ 0 <9 F $ $ * 00 /
7 D 18
.
E % 0 =
$ % 0 ,K M
M 1 $ 0 = 00
00= E % / % 4 !
&,,- (
9 9
; !
1 $ $ !2B+EF2
D $ 3 ,-( (&&
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 44
50
51
53
44
43
44
166
273
392
393
41244
3444
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
# ") ! "
7! N (
O O
N
.
!
5 4 (
F 5 (
G A 8
A' , ? * ? 1 * " " * #" !, " " , , * 7 "
!, A ,
( > " !, '! B $C * #" !, D ! " &
73 "
# (
K ; 2
.
" #( K !
; 5
7 ! 8 9 9 9 9
9 9 %
! % (
% '
5
% !
7A 8 ! $ ' O 7D .2 (
8 ! 8 *
O
% 8
' + ( -
7 (
' % (
! % % %
4 %
K
K M M M % M
% (
K 8
' + - 6 "
7E %
' N %( (
4 (
; ! (
(
7 8 (
7 8
87 - 7 > !,
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 45
51
52
54
45
44
45
167
274
393
394
41345
3545
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
! * , " 1"
! , * 1 3
@ E ! DD ! 1 * )) )
@ E ! DD -
B &. @ DD
B @ . DD ") ! " , " *" * ( ! ") "
"
B @ & DD ) "
B @ . DD ) * , " ! * 1
B @ & DD ) ! * " *
B @ $ DD ") ! 7
B @ DD 7
B @ E DD "!
" * *
. @ EB& DD ! * ) * , "
. @ EB DD ") ! 1 ,! * , "
& @ & B DD 6, " 1 ) ! "
B @ DD 5 " ! !
B @ & DD 1 "": !
B @ DD ) 1 , 1 "": !
B @ & DD > " 1 "": !
B @ DD ' " ! ! " ! * ! * " "
B@ E DD ) ; !" * , " ) ) " !

) * 1 ,"
B@ % DD *) F ) ! , ! ) F
"E # PPPPPPP " %#
>7 '?
% 4 %
" Stan J. Caterbone

# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
F " Stan J. Caterbone

# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
1 June 19, 2015

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Pennsylvania
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP $
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Lancaster
19
PPPPPPP June
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 15
&,PP
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Stan J. Caterbone - I was a notary from '94-'98 F 3 24 Don't Know When
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
SJC I
. . $ / I $ Q &, , "!
&, , . . $ / I #
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 46
52
53
55
46
45
46
168
275
394
395
41446
3646
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 47
53
54
56
47
46
47
169
276
395
396
41547
3747
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP Page 35 of 41 06/10/2007
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 48
54
55
57
48
47
48
170
277
396
397
41648
3848
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP Page 36 of 41 06/10/2007
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 49
55
56
58
49
48
49
171
278
397
398
41749
3949
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 50
56
57
59
50
49
50
172
279
398
399
41850
4050
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Advanced
Stan
15-03984
Stan
Mind
U.S. J. Caterbone
J.Motion
Lancaster Medi
Media
Caterbone
Sponsored
Control Group
CountyGrop
Group
For
Executive
Reconsideration
Executive
Press
Press
Executive
Transcripts
Mind
Court Summary
Release
ControlRelease
Summary
Summary
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page 51
57
58
60
51
50
51
173
280
399
400
41951
4151
of
of
ofof
of51
172
173
174
176
of
51
50
51
51
51
173
183
548
667
668
813
41 Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
SaturdayTuesday,
March
December
15,
March
Sunday,
Saturday, April
2016
September15,
3/15/2016
June
October 2016
17,
12,
15,
11,
21,
22, 2015
2016
5, 2015
10,
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Cover Page Page 1 of 2
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

Contents | Feedback | Search
DRCNet Home | Join DRCNet
DRCNet Library | Schaffer Library
Historical References
General Histories | Ancient History | 1800-1850 | 1860 | 1870 | 1880 | 1890
1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE
AND THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
HEALTH AND SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN
RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
____________
AUGUST 3, 1977
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
281 of 813
400
401 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 1 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/cover.htm 1/22/2009
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Cover Page Page 2 of 2
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence

and Committee on Human Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 1977
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office
Washington, D.C. 20402
Stock No. 052-070-04357-1
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
282 of 813
401
402 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 2 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/cover.htm 1/22/2009
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Staff Page Page 1 of 2
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE

ON INTELLIGENCE
(Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d sess.)
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman

BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona, Vice Chairman
BIRCH BAYH, Indiana

ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Illinois
WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY, Maine
WALTER D. HUDDLESTON, Kentucky
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware
ROBERT MORGAN, North Carolina
GARY HART, Colorado
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York
CLIFFORD P. CASE, New Jersey
JAKE GARN, Utah
CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland
JAMES B. PEARSON, Kansas
JOHN H. CHAFE, Rhode Island
RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana
MALCOLM WALLOP, Wyoming
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Ex Officio Member

HOWARD H. BAKER, JR., Tennessee, Ex Officio Member
WILLIAM G. MILLER, Staff Director

EARL D. EISENHOWER, Minority Staff Director
AUDREY H. HATRY, Chief Clerk
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
283 of 813
402
403 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 3 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/staff.htm 1/22/2009
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Staff Page Page 2 of 2
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., New Jersey, Chairman
JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia

CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin
THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri
ALAN CRANSTON, California
DONALD W. RIEGLE, JR., Michigan
JACOB K. JAVITS, New York
RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania
ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Vermont
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
S.I. HAYAKAWA, California
STEPHEN J. PARADISE, General Counsel and Staff Director

MARJORIE M. WHITTAKER, Chief Clerk
DON A. ZIMMERMAN, Minority Counsel
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman
CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island

GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin
HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., New Jersey
(ex officio)
RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania
JACOB K. JAVITS, New York
JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
LAWRENCE HOROWITZ, Professional Staff Member

DAVID WINSTON, Minority Counsel
(II)
Table of Contents
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
284 of 813
403
404 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 4 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/staff.htm 1/22/2009
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Prepared Statement of CIA Director Stansfield Tur... Page 1 of 6
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
Prepared Statement of Admiral Stansfield Turner, Director of

Central Intelligence
Mr. Chairman: In my letter to you of July 15, 1977, I reported our recent discovery of seven boxes
of documents related to Project MKULTRA, a closely held CIA project conducted from 1953-
1964. As you may recall, MKULTRA was an "umbrella project" under which certain sensitive
subprojects were funded, involving among other things research on drugs and behavioral
modification. During the Rockefeller Commission and Church Committee investigations in 1975,
the cryptonym became publicly known when details of the drug-related death of Dr. Frank Olsen
were publicized. In 1953 Dr. Olsen, a civilian employee of the Army at Fort Detrick, leaped to his
death from a hotel room window in New York City about a week after having unwittingly
consumed LSD administered to him as an experiment at a meeting of LSD researchers called by
CIA.
Most of what was known about the Agency's involvement with behavioral drugs during the
investigations in 1975 was contained in a report on Project MKULTRA prepared by the Inspector
General's office in 1963. As a result of that report's recommendations, unwitting testing of drugs
on U.S. citizens was subsequently discontinued. The MKULTRA-related report was made
available to the Church Committee investigators and to the staff of Senator Kennedy's
Subcommittee on Health. Until the recent discovery, it was believed that all of the MKULTRA
files dealing with behavioral modification had been destroyed in 1973 on the orders of the then
retiring Chief of the Office of Technical Service, with the authorization of the DCI, as has been
previously reported. Almost all of the people who had had any connection with the aspects of the
project which interested Senate investigators in 1975 were no longer with the Agency at that time.
Thus, there was little detailed knowledge of the MKULTRA subprojects available to CIA during
the Church Committee investigations. This lack of available details, moreover, was probably not
wholly attributable to the
-5-
destruction of MKULTRA files in 1973; the 1963 report on MKULTRA by the Inspector General
notes on page 14: "Present practice is to maintain no records of the planning and approval of test
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
285 of 813
404
405 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 5 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/Hearing02.htm 1/22/2009
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
programs."
When I reported to you last on this matter, my staff had not yet had an opportunity to review the
newly located material in depth. This has now been accomplished, and I am in a position to give
you a description of the contents of the recovered material. I believe you will be most interested in
the following aspects of the recent discovery:
How the material was discovered and why it was not previously found;
The nature of this recently located material;
How much new information there is in the material which may not have been previously
known and reported to Senate investigators; and
What we believe the most significant aspects of this find to be.
To begin, as to how we discovered these materials. The material had been sent to our Retired
Records Center outside of Washington and was discovered sent to our Retired Records Center
outside of Washington and was discovered there as a result of the extensive search efforts of an
employee charged with responsibility for maintaining our holdings on behavioral drugs and for
responding to Freedom of Information Act requests on this subject. During the Church Committee
investigation in 1975, searches for MKULTRA-related material were made by examining both the
active and retired records of all branches of CIA considered at all likely to have had association
with MKULTRA documents. The retired records of the Budget and Fiscal Section of the Branch
responsible for such work were not searched, however. This was because financial papers
associated with sensitive projects such s MKULTRA were normally maintained by the Branch
itself under the project file, not by the Budget and Fiscal Section. In the case at hand, however,
the newly located material was sent to the Retired Records Center in 1970 by the Budget and
Fiscal Section as part of its own retired holdings. The reason for this departure from normal
procedure is not known. As a result of it, however, the material escaped retrieval and destruction
in 1973 by the then-retiring Director of the Office as well as discovery in 1975 by CIA officials
responding to Senate investigators.
The employee who located this material did so by leaving no stone unturned in his efforts to
respond to FOIA requests. He reviewed all listings of material of this Branch stored at the Retired
Records Center, including those of the Budget and Fiscal Section and, thus, discovered the
MKULTRA-related documents which had been missed in the previous searches. In sum, the
Agency failed to uncover these particular documents in 1973 in the process of attempting to
destroy them; it similarly failed to locate them in 1975 in response to the Church Committee
hearings. I am convinced that there was no attempt to conceal this material during the earlier
searches.
Next, as to the nature of the recently located material, it is important to realize that the recovered
folders are finance folders. The bulk of the material in them consists of approvals for advance of
funds, vouchers, accountings, and the like -- most of which are not very informative as to the
nature of the activities that were undertaken. Occasional project proposals or memoranda
commenting on some aspect of a subproject are scattered throughout this material. In general,
however, the recovered material does not include status reports or other documents relating to
operational considerations or progress in the various subprojects, though some elaboration of the
activities contemplated does appear. The recovered documents fall roughly into three categories:
First, there are 149 MKULTRA subprojects, many of which appear to have some connection
with research into behavioral modification, drug acquisition and testing or administering drugs
surreptitiously.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
286 of 813
405
406 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 6 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Second, there are two boxes of miscellaneous MKULTRA papers, including audit reports and
financial statements from "cut-out" (i.e., intermediary) funding mechanisms used to conceal CIA's
sponsorship of various research projects.
Finally, there are 33 additional subprojects concerning certain intelligence activities previously
funded under MKULTRA which have nothing to do either with behavioral modification, drugs,
and toxins or with any other related matters.
We have attempted to group the activities covered by the 149 subprojects into categories under
descriptive headings. In broad outline, at least, this presents the contents of these files. The
activities are placed in the following 15 categories:
-6-
1. Research into the effects of behavioral drugs and/or alcohol:
17 subprojects probably not involving human testing;
14 subprojects definitely involving tests on human volunteers;
19 subprojects probably including tests on human volunteers. While not known, some of these
subprojects may have included tests on unwitting subjects as well;
6 subprojects involving tests on unwitting subjects.
2. Research on hypnosis: 8 subprojects, including 2 involving hypnosis and drugs in combination.
3. Acquisition of chemicals or drugs: 7 subprojects.
4. Aspects of magicians' art useful in covert operations: e.g., surreptitious delivery of drug-related
materials: 4 subprojects.
5. Studies of human behavior, sleep research, and behavioral changes during psychotherapy: 9
subprojects.
6. Library searches and attendance at seminars and international conferences on behavioral

modification: 6 subprojects.
7. Motivational studies, studies of defectors, assessment, and training techniques: 23 subprojects.
8. Polygraph research: 3 subprojects.
9. Funding mechanisms for MKULTRA external research activities: 3 subprojects.
10. Research on drugs, toxins, and biologicals in human tissue; provision of exotic pathogens and
the capability to incorporate them in effective delivery systems: 6 subprojects.
11. Activities whose objectives cannot be determined from available documentation: 3
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
287 of 813
406
407 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 7 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
subprojects.
12. Subprojects involving funding support for unspecified activities connected with the Army's
Special Operations Division at Fr. Detrick, Md. This activity is outline in Book I of the Church
Committee Report, pp. 388-389. (See Appendix A, pp. 68-69.) Under CIA's Project MKNAOMI,
the Army Assisted CIA in developing, testing, and maintaining biological agents and delivery
systems for use against humans as well as against animals and crops. The objectives of these
subprojects cannot be identified from the recovered material beyond the fact that the money was
to be used where normal funding channels would require more written or oral justification than
appeared desirable for security reasons or where operational considerations dictated short lead
times for purchases. About $11,000 was involved during this period 1953-1960: 3 subprojects.
13. Single subprojects in such areas as effects of electro-shock, harassment techniques for
offensive use, analysis of extrasensory perception, gas propelled sprays and aerosols, and four
subprojects involving crop and material sabotage.
14. One or two subprojects on each of the following:
"Blood Grouping" research, controlling the activity of animals, energy storage and transfer in
organic systems; and
stimulus and response in biological systems.
15. Three subprojects canceled before any work was done on them having to do with laboratory
drug screening, research on brain concussion, and research on biologically active materials to be
tested through the skin on human volunteers.
Now, as to how much new the recovered material adds to what has previously been reported to
the Church Committee and to Senator Kennedy's Subcommittee on Health on these topics, the
answer is additional detail, for the most part: e.g., the names of previously unidentified
researchers and institutions associated on either a witting or unwitting basis with MKULTRA
activities, and the names of CIA officials who approved or monitored the various subprojects.
Some new substantive material is also present: e.g., details concerning proposals for
experimentation and clinical testing associated with various research projects, and a possibly
improper contribution by CIA to a private institution. However, the principal types of activities
included have, for the most part, either been outlined to some extent or generally described in
what was previously available to CIA in the way of documentation and was supplied by CIA to
Senate investigators. For example:
Financial disbursement records for the period 1960-1964 for 76 of the 149 numbered MKULTRA
subprojects had been recovered from the Office of Finance by CIA and were made available to the
Church Committee investigators in August or September 1975.
The 1963 Inspector General report on MKULTRA made available to both the Church Committee
and Senator Kennedy's Subcommittee mentions electro-shock
-7-
and harassment substances (pp. 4, 16); covert testing on unwitting U.S. citizens (pp. 7, 10-12); the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
288 of 813
407
408 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 8 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
search for new materials through arrangements with specialists in universities, pharmaceutical
houses, hospitals, state and federal institutions, and private research organizations (pp. 7, 9); and
the fact that the Technical Service Division of CIA had initiated 144 subprojects related to the
control of human behavior between 1953-1963 (p. 21).
The relevant section of a 1957 Inspector General report on the Technical Service Division was
also made available to the Church Committee staff. That report discusses techniques for human
assessment and unorthodox methods of communication (p. 201); discrediting and disabling
materials which can be covertly administered (pp. 201-202); studies on magicians' arts as applied
to covert operations (p. 202); specific funding mechanisms for research performed outside of CIA
(pp. 202-203, 205); research being done on "K" (knockout) material, alcohol tolerance, and
hypnotism (p. 203); research on LSD (p. 204); anti-personnel harassment and assassination
delivery systems including aerosol generators and other spray devices (pp. 206-208); the role of
Fort Detrick in support of CIA's Biological/Chemical Warfare capability (p. 208); and material
sabotage research (p. 209). Much of this material is reflected in the Church Committee Report,
Book I, pp. 385-422. (See Appendix A, pp. 65-102).
The most significant new data discovered are, first, the names of researchers and institutions who
participated in the MKULTRA project and, secondly, a possibly improper contribution by CIA to
a private institution. We are now in possession of the names of 185 non-government researchers
and assistants who are identified in the recovered material dealing with the 149 subprojects. The
names of 80 institutions where work was done or with which these people were affiliated are also
mentioned.
The institutions include 44 colleges or universities, 15 research foundations or chemical or

pharmaceutical companies and the like, 12 hospitals or clinics (in addition to those associated
with universities), and 3 penal institutions. While the identities of some of these people and
institutions were known previously, the discovery of the new identities adds to our knowledge of
MKULTRA.
The facts as they pertain to the possibly improper contribution are as follows: One project
involves a contribution of $375,000 to a building fund of a private medical institution. The fact
that a contribution was made was previously known; indeed it was mentioned in a 1957 Inspector
General report on the Technical Service Division of CIA, pertinent portions of which had been
reviewed by the Church Committee staff. The newly discovered material, however, makes it clear
that this contribution was made through an intermediary, which made it appear to be a private
donation. As a private donation, the contribution was then matched by federal funds. The
institution was not made aware of the true source of the gift. This project was approved by the
then DCI, and concurred in by CIA's top management at the time, including the then General
Counsel who wrote an opinion supporting the legality of the contribution.
The recently discovered documents give a greater insight into the scope of the unwitting drug
testing but contribute little more than that. We now have collaborating information that some of
the unwitting drug testing was carried on in safehouses in San Francisco and New York City, and
we have identified that three individuals were involved in this undertaking as opposed to the
previously reported one person. We also know now that some unwitting testing took place on
criminal sexual psychopaths confined at a State hospital and that, additionally, research was done
on knock-out or "K" drug in parallel with research to develop pain killers for cancer patients.
These, then are the principal findings identified to date in our review of the recovered material. As
noted earlier, we believe the detail on the identities of researchers and institutions involved in
CIA's sponsorship of drugs and behavioral modification is a new element and one which poses a
considerable problem. Most of the people and institutions involved are not aware of Agency
sponsorship. We should certainly assume that the researchers and institutions which cooperate
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
289 of 813
408
409 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 9 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
with CIA on a witting basis acted in good faith and in the belief that they were aiding their
government in a legitimate and proper purpose. I believe we all have a moral obligation to these
researchers and institutions to protect them from any unjustified embarrassment or damage to
their reputations which revelation of their identities might bring. In addition, I have a legal
obligation under the Privacy Act not to publicly disclose the names of the individual researchers
without their consent. This is especially true, of course, for
-8-
those researchers and institutions which were unwitting participants in CIA-sponsored activities.
Nevertheless, recognizing the right and the need of both the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence and the Senate Subcommittee on Health to investigate the circumstances of these
activities in whatever detail they consider necessary. I am providing your Committee with all of
the names on a classified basis. I hope that this will facilitate your investigation while protecting
the individuals and institutions involved. Let me emphasize that the MKULTRA events are 12 to
25 years in the past. I assure you that the CIA is in no way engaged in either witting or unwitting
testing of drugs today.
Finally, I am working closely with the Attorney General and with the Secretary of Health,
Education and Welfare on this matter. We are making available to the Attorney General whatever
materials he may deem necessary to any investigation he may elect to undertake. We are working
with both the Attorney General and the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare to determine
whether it is practicable from this new evidence to attempt to identify any of the persons to whom
drugs may have been administered unwittingly. No such names are part of these records, but we
are working to determine if there are adequate clues to lead to their identification; and if so, how
to go about fulfilling the Government's responsibilities in the matter.
Next: Testimony of CIA Director Stansfield Turner

Previous: Opening Remarks
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
290 of 813
409
410 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 10 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Testiomony of Philip Goldman and John Gittinger, ... Page 1 of 18
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
Testimony of Philip Goldman, Former Employee, Central

Intelligence Agency
Mr. GOLDMAN. I am Philip Goldman.
Senator INOUYE. And you are a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Over 10 years ago.
Senator INOUYE. And you were employed at the time when MKULTRA was in operation?
Mr. GOLDMAN. There were some MKULTRA's in operation at the time I was there.
-51-
Senator INOUYE. And Mr. John Gittinger, are you a former employee of the Central
Intelligence Agency?
Testimony of John Gittinger, Former Employee, Central

Intelligence Agency
Mr. GITTINGER. I am.
Senator INOUYE. Are you still an employee?
Mr. GITTINGER. No.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
291 of 813
410
411 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 11 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator INOUYE. Were you a member of the Agency at the time MKULTRA was in
operation?
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you. Senator Kennedy.
Senator KENNEDY. I want to welcome both of you to the committee. If we could start with
Mr. Goldman. Were you the project engineer for the safe houses in either San Francisco or
New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I know of no safe house in San Francisco.
Senator KENNEDY. How about in New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I knew of one facility that was established there, but I didn't know anything
of its operation.
Senator KENNEDY. Were you a monitor on any testing of drugs on unwitting persons in San
Francisco?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we have a classified document here that was provided by the
Agency that lists your name as a monitor of the program and I would appreciate it if you
would look--
Mr. GOLDMAN. I think the misunderstanding arises because I was project officer.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, would you take a look at that?
[Mr. Goldman inspected the document.]
Mr. GOLDMAN. This document as it states is correct. However, my--
Senator KENNEDY. That document is correct?
Mr. GOLDMAN. As far as I see on the first page, the project. But my--
Senator KENNEDY. Well, could I get it back, please.
That would indicate that you were a monitor of the program.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was in charge of disbursing the moneys to Morgan Hall.
Senator KENNEDY. To whom was that?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To the individual whose name was listed at the top of that document.
Senator KENNEDY. And you knew that he was running the project in San Francisco?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
292 of 813
411
412 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 12 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GOLDMAN. I knew he was the person who was in charge out there.
Senator KENNEDY. All right.
Mr. GOLDMAN. But I had no knowledge nor did I seek knowledge of actually what he was
doing, because there would be other things involved.
I did receive--
Senator KENNEDY. What were you doing?
-52-
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was collecting -- I had to be sure that all the receipts that ever were turned
in balanced with the moneys that were paid out to see that everything was run all right. There
was no illegal use of funds as far as we could determine by the receipts and cash.
Senator KENNEDY. So even though the Agency document indicates that you were a monitor
for the program, one of the few monitors of that particular program which you mentioned for
San Francisco and Mill Valley, Calif., you described your responsibility only as a carrier of
money, is that correct?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I would say as a disburser or carrying out -- seeing that the moneys were
handled properly. There was within that -- I don't know what's done or what he did do in
conjunction with other people.
Senator KENNEDY. Were you responsible for the disbursement of all the funds?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was responsible for turning over the check to him.
Senator KENNEDY. And what did you know of the program itself?
Mr. GOLDMAN. The only thing I knew of the program was what he furnished us in terms of
receipts and that sort of thing. I didn't indulge or concern myself in that.
Senator KENNEDY. You still wrote, and I'll let you examine it -- it's a classified document --
but you wrote a rather substantive review of the program in May of 1963, talking about the
experiments, the factual data that had been collected, covert and realistic field trials, about the
necessity of those particular -- and talked about the effectiveness of the various programs, the
efficiency of various delivery systems. That doesn't sound to me like someone who is only--
Mr. GOLDMAN. Well, if you would refresh my memory, if I could read this I would
certainly agree with whatever is said there, if it was written.
Senator KENNEDY. I am trying to gather what your role was. You've indicated first of all
that you didn't know about -- you knew about a safe house in New York; now we find out that
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
293 of 813
412
413 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 13 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
you're the carrier for the resources as well and the agent in San Francisco. We find out now
that the CIA put you as a monitor. You're testifying that you only were the courier, and here
we have just one document, and there are many others that talk about the substance of that
program with your name on it and I am just trying to find out exactly what role you were
playing.
Mr. GOLDMAN. The only thing I can tell you about this and I am drawing completely on
my memory is that this individual who was in charge out there conducted these things and
reported them back to the Agency. I didn't participate in any of them. All I know was that he
furnished me with receipts for things that were done and told of the work that they had done.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that document covers more than receipts.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes, it tells of what -- they had conducted work out there.
Senator KENNEDY. It describes, does it not? Read the paragraph 2.
Mr. GOLDMAN. "A number of covert"--
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you can't read it, it's a classified document, and I don't know why,
quite frankly, but it relates to the substance
-53-
of those programs and your name is signed to the memorandums on it. I am not interested in
you trying to review for us now what is in the document, but I think it would be unfortunate if
we were left with the opinion that all you were was a courier of resources when we see a
document with your name on it, signed, that talks about the substance of the program. And
what we're interested in is the substance of the program. We have the recent documents that
were provided by the Agency, which do indicate that you were at least involved in the
substance, and I'm just trying to find out whether you're willing to tell us about that.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I am perfectly willing to tell you everything that I can remember.
Senator KENNEDY. But you can't remember anything.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I can't remember the substantive parts of these, things, I really can't.
Senator KENNEDY. Of the program that was taking place.
Do you have any greater familiarity with what was happening in New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, no.
Senator KENNEDY. And you have the same function with regards to New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. The same function with regard to New York.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
294 of 813
413
414 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 14 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. Did you ever go to San Francisco?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. Did you meet with the agent in charge?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And why did you meet with him?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To discuss some of the receipts and things that were there to find out if
these were indeed true expenditures and to find out if everything was going along all right for
the work that was being done.
Senator KENNEDY. What work was being done?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, the reports of these things and whatever was being done. I don't know
who he reported to but he did report to somebody.
Senator KENNEDY. You travel out there to find out about the work that's being done, and
what does he tell you, that the work is being done well and--
Mr. GOLDMAN. He told me that the work that they were doing was going along,
progressing satisfactorily, but to be very frank with you--
Senator KENNEDY. But he didn't tell you what the work was?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To be very frank with you, Senator, I cannot remember the things that
happened back in those days. I've been away from the company -- from the Agency for over
10 years, and that is even farther back than that, and that was just about the time when I first
engaged in this, so it was my first--
Senator KENNEDY. Did they disburse a series of $100 checks, to your recollection?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I don't recollect it, but if you have it there, then they did.
Senator KENNEDY. Did you know Dr. Gottlieb?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
-54-
Senator KENNEDY. How did you know Dr. Gottlieb?
Mr. GOLDMAN. He had been head of the division when I was recruited.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
295 of 813
414
415 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 15 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. Did you talk to him about these programs? Did you have anything to do
with him during this period of time?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I didn't have anything to do with him until I would say probably in the
sixties.
Senator KENNEDY. And can you tell us what you had to do with him then?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Just what you see there, on the papers.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that is the request for the money and he approves it.
Mr. GOLDMAN. That is the request for money and he approves it, and I am quite sure that I
probably discussed with him whether the work was going along all right, whether his reports
were being turned in, and whether he was satisfied with the way things were going and did he
have any complaints about the way other people were requesting him, but I did not engage
myself in anything he was doing.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, did you get the impression that Gottlieb knew what was going
on?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I didn't ask.
Senator KENNEDY. But you told him that your impression that what was going on even
though you didn't know what was going on, was going on well, I guess? [Laughter.]
Mr. GOLDMAN. I told Gottlieb what you saw in there was that the things appeared to be
going along all right. I was repeating and parroting back the words that were given to me
while I was there.
Senator KENNEDY. What was the money being spent for, do you know?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No; I can't recall that, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Would you remember if we told you it was red curtains and can-can
pictures--
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Floral pictures and the rest.
Senator KENNEDY. Recorders.
Senator KENNEDY. Recorders and two-way mirrors.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Wait, hold on. You're slipping a word in there now.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
296 of 813
415
416 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 16 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. But you would have authorized those funds, would you not, since you
were the--
Mr. GOLDMAN. Did you say two-way mirrors?
Senator KENNEDY. Yes.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Where?
Senator KENNEDY. In the safe houses.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Where?
Senator KENNEDY. San Francisco.
Mr. GOLDMAN. No.
Senator KENNEDY. How about New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. You remember now that you approved expenditures for New York?
-55-
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. What were those expenditures for?
Mr. GOLDMAN. That was a transfer of money over for the use in an apartment in New York
by the Bureau of Narcotics. It was for their use.
Senator KENNEDY. Do you have any knowledge of what was going on in the apartment?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, sir, other than I know that it had been used, according to the
information that I have been given, it was used by the Bureau of Narcotics to make meetings
with individuals who they were interested in with regard to pushing dope -- not pushing dope,
but selling narcotics and that sort of thing.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, I am sure you had many responsibilities and it's a long time ago,
but the Agency does indicate that you were project monitor for that particular program.
Mr. GOLDMAN. That's correct.
Senator KENNEDY. Your own testimony indicates you went out to review the expenditures
of funds to find out whether they were being wisely used, that you came back and talked to the
project director, Mr. Gottlieb, to give him a progress report about what was going on out there.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
297 of 813
416
417 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 17 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes, sir, I did.
Senator KENNEDY. All those things are true, and yet you draw a complete blank in terms of
what was the project itself. That's where the record is now.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I did not go out there to review the projects nor did I come back and talk
with Mr. Gottlieb and review what I had observed in terms of any projects that they -- that is,
other parts of the Agency might have in operation there. I simply reported back those things
which were told to me by the individual out there who -- and I carried them back and they --
are contained in the report that you have in front of you, word for word, just as it was given to
me.
Senator KENNEDY. The report that you examined here is a substantive report on the
particular program and project. And I don't think anyone who wasn't familiar with the project -
- this is a personal evaluation -- could write a report on the substance of it without knowing
about it. Now, that's mine. Maybe you can't remember and recollect, and that's--
Mr. GOLDMAN. No; everything I put down in there is things that I was told while I was out
there, and if there was any ancillary information involved in there I can tell you I just don't
remember that. I really don't.
At the time -- that was some years ago. At the time -- a lot of time has passed since then and I
have made quite sure that if I could recollect it at all, I would do it. If you have some papers
and you want me to certify whether yes, this is so or that is so, I can do that, but I can't recall it
mentally.
Senator KENNEDY. You just certified the principal. There are others up here.
I would like to go to Dr. Gittinger.
Mr. GITTINGER. It's Mr. Gittinger.
Senator KENNEDY. How long did you serve with the Agency?
-56-
Mr. GITTINGER. Twenty-six years.
Senator KENNEDY. Excuse me?
Senator KENNEDY. Twenty-six years.
And at some point you moved into the operational support side, is that correct?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
298 of 813
417
418 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 18 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And did you know Sidney Gottlieb?
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. And did he inform you about the research projects involving LSD?
Senator KENNEDY. It is my understanding that you were also aware of some of the drug
testing projects conducted on unwitting subjects on the west coast using the Bureau of
Narcotics people in the operation. Is that true?
Mr. GITTINGER. I was.
Senator INOUYE. Excuse me. Would you speak into the microphone? I cannot hear you.
Mr. GITTINGER. Sorry.
Senator KENNEDY. Do you know which drugs were involved in those tests?
Mr. GITTINGER. LSD. And I can't remember for sure much of the others. What is the
substance of marihuana, cannabis, is that right, that can be delivered by other than smoking?
Senator KENNEDY. Cannabis?
Mr. GITTINGER. There had been some discussion of that; yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And was heroin also used?
Mr. GITTINGER. Heroin used by CIA?
Senator KENNEDY. No. In the west coast operation.
Mr. GITTINGER. Absolutely not.
Senator KENNEDY. Now, to your knowledge, how were the drugs administered to the
unwitting subjects?
Mr. GITTINGER. I have no direct knowledge.
Senator KENNEDY. Why did you go to the safe houses?
Mr. GITTINGER. It's a very complicated story. Just in justification of myself, this came up
just, day before yesterday. I have not really had enough time to get it all straightened in my
mind, so I ramble.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you take your time and tell us in your own words. We've got
some time here.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
299 of 813
418
419 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 19 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Testiomony of Philip Goldman and John Gitting... Page 10 of 18
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. My responsibilities which would involve any of the period of time that
you were talking about really was not directly related to drugs at all. I was a psychologist
charged with the responsibility of trying to develop as much information as I could on various
cultures, overseas cultures, anthropological type data, if you follow what I mean. I was also
engaged in trying to work out ways and means of assessing people and understanding people.
I originally became involved in this through working on Chinese culture, and over a series of
time I was introduced to the problem of brainwashing, which is the thing that really was the
most compelling thing in relationship to this, and became charged with the responsibility of
trying to find out a little bit about interrogation techniques.
-57-
And among other things, we decided or I decided that one of the best sources of interrogation
techniques would be trying to locate and interview and become involved with experienced
police interrogators in the country and experienced people who had real practical knowledge
of interrogation. The reason for this is that we had become pretty well convinced after the
experience of the brainwashing problems coming out of China, that it was the techniques of
the interrogators that were causing the individuals to make confessions and so forth in
relationship to this, rather than any kind of drugging and so forth. So we were very much
interested in interrogation techniques, and this led to me being introduced to the agent in the
west coast, and I began to talk to him in connection with these interrogation techniques.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Now, that is the agent that ran the tests on the west coast on the
unwitting people. That's where you come in, correct?
Mr. GITTINGER. If I understand -- would you say that again?
Senator KENNEDY. The name Morgan Hall has been -- that is the name that has been used.
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And that is the agent that you met with.
Mr. GITTINGER. That is right.
Senator KENNEDY. And you met at the safe house.
Senator KENNEDY. Whom did you meet with in the safe house?
Mr. GITTINGER. This is the part that is hard for me to say, and I am sorry that I have to. In
connection with some work that we were doing, we needed to have some information on
sexual habits. Morgan Hall provided informants for me, to talk to in connection with the sex
habits that I was interested in trying to find information. During one period of time the safe
house, as far as I was concerned, was used for just these particular type of interviews. And I
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
300 of 813
419
420 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 20 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
didn't see the red curtains.
Senator KENNEDY. Those were prostitutes, were they?
Senator KENNEDY. How many different times were you there that you had similar--
Mr. GITTINGER. I couldn't possibly say with any certainty on that. Four or five times.
Senator KENNEDY. Four or five times.
Mr. GITTINGER. Over -- you remember now, the period that I'm talking about when I
would have any involvement in this is from about 1956 to 1961. So it's about a 4- or 5-year
period which is the only time that I know anything about what you are talking about here
today.
Senator KENNEDY. Did Morgan Hall make the arrangements for the prostitutes to meet
with you?
Senator KENNEDY. Did the interviews that you had have anything to do with drugs?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, as I tried to explain earlier when this was being discussed a little bit
beforehand, again I think it is pretty hard for most people now to recognize how little there
was known about drugs at the period of time that we are talking about, because the
-58-
drug age or the drug culture comes later on. Consequently, those of us who had any
responsibility in this area were interested in trying to get as much information as we could on
the subculture, the subculture drug groups, and obviously the Bureau of Narcotics represented
a means of doing this. Consequently, other types of things that were involved in discussions at
that time would have to do with the underground use of drugs. When I am talking about this I
am talking about the folkways in terms of unwitting use of drugs. Did these people that I was
talking to have any information about this and on rare instances they were able to tell me
about their use, and in most cases this would largely turn out to be a Mickey Finn or
something of that sort rather than anything esoteric.
I also was very much interested because we had relatively little information, believe it or not,
at that time, in terms of the various reactions that people were having to drugs. Therefore,
these people were very informative in terms of they knew a great deal of information about
reactions.
Senator KENNEDY. At least you gathered -- or am I correct in assuming that you gathered
the impression that the prostitutes that you had talked to were able to slip the drugs to people
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
301 of 813
420
421 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 21 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
as I understand it. Did you form any impression on that?
Mr. GITTINGER. I certainly did not form the impression that, they did this as a rule or--
Senator KENNEDY. But they bad the knowledge.
Mr. GITTINGER. They had the knowledge or some of them had had knowledge of this
being done. But again, as it turned out, it was largely in this area of knockout drops.
Senator KENNEDY. Looking back now did you form any impression about how the Agency
was actually testing the broad spectrum of social classes in these safe houses? With the large
disbursal of cash in small quantities, $100 bills and the kinds of elaborate decorations and
two-way mirrors in the bedrooms and all the rest, is there any question in your own mind what
was going on in the safe houses, or the techniques that were being used to administer these
drugs?
Mr. GITTINGER. I find it very difficult to answer that question, sir. I had absolutely no
direct knowledge there was a large number of this. I had no knowledge that anyone other than
-- than Morgan Hall was in any way involved in the unwitting administration of drugs.
Senator KENNEDY. But Gottlieb would know, would he not?
Mr. GITTINGER. I believe so, yes, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Could we go into the Human Ecology Foundation and talk about that
and how it was used as an instrument in terms of the support of research?
Senator KENNEDY. Could you describe it to us? Could you describe the Human Ecology
Foundation, how it functioned and how it worked?
Mr. GITTINGER. May I tell something about how it evolved, which I think is important?
Senator KENNEDY. Sure.
Mr. GITTINGER. The Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, so-called, was
actually a -- I am confused here now as to whether I should name you names.
-59-
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we're not interested in names or institutions, so we prefer that you
do not. That has to be worked out in arrangements between Admiral Turner and the
individuals and the institutions.
But we're interested in what the Foundation really was and how it functioned and what its
purpose was.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
302 of 813
421
422 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 22 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, it was established to undertake research in the general area of the
behavioral sciences. It definitely had almost no focus or interest in, say, drug-related type of
activities except in a very minor way, because it was largely set up to attempt to gain a certain
amount of information and to fund projects which were psychological, sociological,
anthropological in character. It was established in the sense of a period of time that a lot of us
who are in it wish we could do it over again, but we were interested in trying to get together a
panel of the most representative high-level behavioral scientists we could to oversee and help
in terms of developing the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology type of program.
The Agency in effect provided the money. They did not direct the projects. Now, the fact of
the matter is, there are a lot of innocent people who received the Society for the Investigation
of Human Ecology money which I know for a fact they were never asked to do anything for
the CIA but they did get through this indirectly. They had no knowledge that they were getting
CIA money.
Senator KENNEDY. Over what period of time did this take place?
Mr. GITTINGER. As far as I was concerned , it was the period of time ending in 1961. 1
believe the Human Ecology fund finally phased out in 1965, but I was not involved in this
phasing out.
Senator KENNEDY. Can you give the range of the different sort of individual projects of the
universities in which it was active?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, it would have as many as -- I am very fuzzy on my memory on the
number of projects. It is over 10, 20, 30.
Senator KENNEDY. After it made the grants, what was the relationship of the Agency with
the results of the studies? The Foundation acquired the money to make the grants from the
Agency, and then it made the grants to these various research programs.
Senator KENNEDY. And that included eight universities as well as individual researchers?
Senator KENNEDY. Then what follow-up was there to that, sir?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, in every sense of the word, the organization was run exactly like
any other foundation, and it carried with it the same thing in terms of making certain that the
people that they had given money to used it for the purpose for which it had been granted, that
they had access to any of the reports that they had put out, but there were no strings attached to
anybody. There wasn't any reason they couldn't publish anything that they put out.
Senator KENNEDY. What, sort of budget are we talking about here?
Mr. GITTINGER. I honestly do not remember. I would guess we are talking in the realm of
about $150,000 a year, but don't hold me to that, because I don't know.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
303 of 813
422
423 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 23 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-60-
Senator KENNEDY. What is your view about such funding as a professional person, in terms
of compromising the integrity of a university, sir?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, obviously, sir, insofar as today there is no question about it. I will
have to say at the time that we were doing this there was quite an entirely different kind of an
attitude, and I do know for a fact that we moved to start towards phasing out the Society for
the Investigation of Human Ecology and the Human Ecology Fund for the very reason that we
were beginning to recognize that it was moving into an area but this would be compromised.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that is commendable, both your attitude and the reasons for it, but
during that period of time it still was involved in behavior research programs, as I understand
it.
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes, sir. On its own, in connection with this, it participated again, and
these again were not CIA-directed projects, but these were all things which would
theoretically contribute to the general knowledge at the time where the things like the study of
the Hungarian refugees -- obviously, the study of the Hungarian refugees who came to this
country after the Hungarian revolt was a very useful exercise to try to get information about
the personality characteristics of the Communists and so forth.
Senator KENNEDY. Were there other foundations that were doing similar kinds of work?
Mr. GITTINGER. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. You believe--
Mr. GITTINGER. You mean, CIA, other CIA?
Senator KENNEDY. Right.
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, my answer is in the sense that I know of no other CIA foundations,
no. There were, of course, other foundations doing similar kinds of work in the United States.
Senator KENNEDY. Have you heard of the Psychological Assessments Foundation?
Mr. GITTINGER. I certainly have.
Senator KENNEDY. What was that? What function did that have?
Mr. GITTINGER. Now, this was bringing us up to a different era. I believe the functions of
that organization have nothing whatsoever to do with the things that are being talked about
here while I was associated with it.
Senator KENNEDY. Rather than getting into the work, it was another foundation, was it not?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
304 of 813
423
424 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 24 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
It was another foundation supported by the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. What, the Psychological Assessment?
Mr. GITTINGER. No, sir, it was not.
Senator KENNEDY. It did not get any support at all from the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. Oh, yes, sir. It did get support, but it was a business firm.
Senator KENNEDY. It was a business but it got support from the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. It got money from it, but it definitely was not in MKULTRA or in any
way associated with this.
-61-
Senator KENNEDY. All right. I want to thank you for your helpful testimony, Mr. Gittinger.
It is not easy to go back into the past. I think you have been very fair in your characterizations,
and I think it is quite appropriately indicated that there are different standards now from what
they were 25 years ago, and I think you have responded very fairly and completely to the
inquiries, and I think with a good deal of feeling about it.
You are a person who is obviously attempting to serve the country's interest, so I want to
thank you very much for your statement and for your helpful timeliness.
Mr. GITTINGER. Thank you, sir.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Case?
Senator CASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry that I had another committee that I had
to complete the hearing with this morning before I got here.
I shall read the testimony with very great interest, and I appreciate your testimony as I have
heard it. I would like to comment just on one point, and that is, it relates to a story in the press
yesterday about part of this program involving the funding of a grant at a foreign university. I
would like to elicit from you a comment as to the additional sensitivity and difficulty that that
practice involves from your standpoint as a scientist, as well as a citizen, if you will.
Mr. GITTINGER. I will say it was after the fact thinking. It was utter stupidity the way
things worked out to have used some of this money outside the United States when it was CIA
money. I can categorically state to my knowledge, and I don't claim a complete knowledge all
the way across of the human ecology functions, but to my knowledge, and this is unfortunate,
those people did not know that they were getting money from CIA, and they were not asked to
contribute anything to CIA as such.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
305 of 813
424
425 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 25 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator CASE. It would be interesting to try to examine this by turning the thing around and
thinking what we would think if this happened from a foreign official agency to our own
university. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Schweiker.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Goldman, I wonder if you would tell us what your training and educational background is?
Dr. GOLDMAN. I have already given a biography for the record.
Senator SCHWEIKER. I have not seen it. Who has it? Is it classified? We may have it for
the record, but may I ask you to briefly describe your training and background for us now? I
hope it is no secret.
Dr. GOLDMAN. Well, I was told if I was asked this to say that. I was told that by your staff
people, but I have no objection to telling you. I am a resident from Pennsylvania, southwest
Pennsylvania, Lancaster County. I went to Penn State, and I am in nutrition.
Senator SCHWEIKER. In what?
Dr. GOLDMAN. Nutrition.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Were you in charge of a section or segment of the CIA in your past
capacity?
Dr. GOLDMAN. During the time I was with that organization, I was in charge of one small
section of it, one small segment of it; yes.
-62-
Senator SCHWEIKER. What was the function or purpose of that section that you headed?
Dr. GOLDMAN. To provide support for the other parts of the division.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Where in the chain of command would that put you in relation to Dr.
Gottlieb?
Dr. GOLDMAN. Pretty far down the line.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Mr. Gittinger, I would just like to ask you a few questions. We
appreciate your frankness and candor with the committee, and we realize this is a very difficult
area to go into. I am not quite clear on two matters that were raised earlier. First, were the safe
houses we were talking about here used on occasion by the prostitutes you referred to?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
306 of 813
425
426 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 26 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. I really have not the slightest idea.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Were the prostitutes used in any way to slip the customers drugs for
observation purposes?
Mr. GITTINGER. Not to my direct knowledge.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Would you have been in a position to know the answer to either of
these questions?
Mr. GITTINGER. May I say, probably not, and may I make an aside to explain a little bit of
this, please, sir?
Senator SCHWEIKER. Mr. Gittinger, a moment ago you mentioned brainwashing

techniques, as one area that you had, I guess, done some work in. How would you characterize
the state of the art of brainwashing today? Who has the most expertise in this field, and who is
or is not doing it in terms of other governments?
During the Korean war there was a lot of serious discussion about brainwashing techniques
being used by the North Koreans, and I am interested in finding out what the state of the art is
today, as you see it.
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, of course, there, has been a great deal of work on this, and there is
still a great deal of controversy. I can tell you that as far as I knew, by 1961, 1962, it was at
least proven to my satisfaction that brainwashing, so called, is some kind of an esoteric device
where drugs or mind- altering kinds of conditions and so forth were used, did not exist even
though "The Manchurian Candidate" as a Movie really set us back a long time, because it
made something impossible look plausible. Do you follow what I mean? But by 1962 and
1963, the general idea that we were able to come up with is that brainwashing was largely a
process of isolating a human being, keeping him out of contact, putting him under long stress
in relationship to interviewing and interrogation, and that they could produce any change that
way without having to resort to any kind of esoteric means.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Are there ways that we can ascertain this from a distance when we
see a captive prisoner either go on television, in a photograph, or at a press conference? In
other words, are there certain signs that you have learned to recognize from your technical
background, to tell when brainwashing has occurred? Or is that very difficult to do?
Mr. GITTINGER. It is difficult to do. I think it is possible now in terms of looking at a

picture of somebody who has been in enemy hands for a long period of time. We can get some
pretty good ideas of what kind of circumstances he has been under, if that is what you mean.
-63-
Senator SCHWEIKER. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
307 of 813
426
427 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 27 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Before adjourning the hearings, I would like to have the record show that Dr. Goldman and
Mr. Gittinger have voluntarily cooperated with the committee in staff interviews, that they
appear this morning voluntarily, and they are not under subpoena.
Gentlemen, I realize that this experience may have been an unhappy one and possibly a
painful one. Therefore, we thank you very much for participating this morning. We also
realize that the circumstances of that time differed very much from this day, and possibly the
national attitude, the national political attitude condoned this type of activity. So, we have not
asked you to come here as persons who have committed crimes, but rather in hope that you
can assist us in studying this problem so that it will not occur once again. In that spirit we
thank you for your participation, and we look forward to working with you further in this case.
Thank you very much.
Senator KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I would like also to thank the witnesses. These are
difficult matters, and I think all of us are very grateful.
Senator SCHWEIKER. I think the witnesses should know that though it may not always
seem that way, what we are trying to do is to probe the past and look at the policies of the past
to affect the future. I think our emphasis really is on the future, not the past, but it is important
that we learn from the past as we formulate policies and legislation for the future, I hope that
all of the witnesses who did come before us voluntarily this morning, including Admiral
Turner respect the fact that we are questioning the past to learn about the future. I think it
should be looked at in that light.
Senator KENNEDY. I think that is the spirit in which we have had these hearings. It seems to
me that from both these witnesses and others, Gottlieb knows the information and can best
respond, and we are going to make every effort in the Senate Health Committee to get Mr.
Gottlieb to appear, and we obviously look forward to cooperating with Senator Inouye and the
other members of the committee in getting the final chapter written on this, but we want to
thank you very much for your appearance here.
Senator INOUYE. The hearing will stand in recess, subject to the call of the Chair.
[Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the hearing was recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.]
Appendix A: Testing and Use of Chemical and Biological Agents by the

Intelligence Community
Appendix B: Documents Referring to Discovery of Additional MKULTRA
Material
Appendix C: Documents Referring to Subprojects
Table of Contents
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
308 of 813
427
428 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 28 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
Testimony of Philip Goldman, Former Employee, Central

Intelligence Agency
Mr. GOLDMAN. I am Philip Goldman.
Senator INOUYE. And you are a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Over 10 years ago.
Senator INOUYE. And you were employed at the time when MKULTRA was in operation?
Mr. GOLDMAN. There were some MKULTRA's in operation at the time I was there.
-51-
Senator INOUYE. And Mr. John Gittinger, are you a former employee of the Central
Intelligence Agency?
Testimony of John Gittinger, Former Employee, Central

Intelligence Agency
Mr. GITTINGER. I am.
Senator INOUYE. Are you still an employee?
Mr. GITTINGER. No.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
309 of 813
428
429 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 29 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator INOUYE. Were you a member of the Agency at the time MKULTRA was in
operation?
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you. Senator Kennedy.
Senator KENNEDY. I want to welcome both of you to the committee. If we could start with
Mr. Goldman. Were you the project engineer for the safe houses in either San Francisco or
New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I know of no safe house in San Francisco.
Senator KENNEDY. How about in New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I knew of one facility that was established there, but I didn't know anything
of its operation.
Senator KENNEDY. Were you a monitor on any testing of drugs on unwitting persons in San
Francisco?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we have a classified document here that was provided by the
Agency that lists your name as a monitor of the program and I would appreciate it if you
would look--
Mr. GOLDMAN. I think the misunderstanding arises because I was project officer.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, would you take a look at that?
[Mr. Goldman inspected the document.]
Mr. GOLDMAN. This document as it states is correct. However, my--
Senator KENNEDY. That document is correct?
Mr. GOLDMAN. As far as I see on the first page, the project. But my--
Senator KENNEDY. Well, could I get it back, please.
That would indicate that you were a monitor of the program.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was in charge of disbursing the moneys to Morgan Hall.
Senator KENNEDY. To whom was that?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To the individual whose name was listed at the top of that document.
Senator KENNEDY. And you knew that he was running the project in San Francisco?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
310 of 813
429
430 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 30 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GOLDMAN. I knew he was the person who was in charge out there.
Senator KENNEDY. All right.
Mr. GOLDMAN. But I had no knowledge nor did I seek knowledge of actually what he was
doing, because there would be other things involved.
I did receive--
Senator KENNEDY. What were you doing?
-52-
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was collecting -- I had to be sure that all the receipts that ever were turned
in balanced with the moneys that were paid out to see that everything was run all right. There
was no illegal use of funds as far as we could determine by the receipts and cash.
Senator KENNEDY. So even though the Agency document indicates that you were a monitor
for the program, one of the few monitors of that particular program which you mentioned for
San Francisco and Mill Valley, Calif., you described your responsibility only as a carrier of
money, is that correct?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I would say as a disburser or carrying out -- seeing that the moneys were
handled properly. There was within that -- I don't know what's done or what he did do in
conjunction with other people.
Senator KENNEDY. Were you responsible for the disbursement of all the funds?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I was responsible for turning over the check to him.
Senator KENNEDY. And what did you know of the program itself?
Mr. GOLDMAN. The only thing I knew of the program was what he furnished us in terms of
receipts and that sort of thing. I didn't indulge or concern myself in that.
Senator KENNEDY. You still wrote, and I'll let you examine it -- it's a classified document --
but you wrote a rather substantive review of the program in May of 1963, talking about the
experiments, the factual data that had been collected, covert and realistic field trials, about the
necessity of those particular -- and talked about the effectiveness of the various programs, the
efficiency of various delivery systems. That doesn't sound to me like someone who is only--
Mr. GOLDMAN. Well, if you would refresh my memory, if I could read this I would
certainly agree with whatever is said there, if it was written.
Senator KENNEDY. I am trying to gather what your role was. You've indicated first of all
that you didn't know about -- you knew about a safe house in New York; now we find out that
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
311 of 813
430
431 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 31 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
you're the carrier for the resources as well and the agent in San Francisco. We find out now
that the CIA put you as a monitor. You're testifying that you only were the courier, and here
we have just one document, and there are many others that talk about the substance of that
program with your name on it and I am just trying to find out exactly what role you were
playing.
Mr. GOLDMAN. The only thing I can tell you about this and I am drawing completely on
my memory is that this individual who was in charge out there conducted these things and
reported them back to the Agency. I didn't participate in any of them. All I know was that he
furnished me with receipts for things that were done and told of the work that they had done.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that document covers more than receipts.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes, it tells of what -- they had conducted work out there.
Senator KENNEDY. It describes, does it not? Read the paragraph 2.
Mr. GOLDMAN. "A number of covert"--
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you can't read it, it's a classified document, and I don't know why,
quite frankly, but it relates to the substance
-53-
of those programs and your name is signed to the memorandums on it. I am not interested in
you trying to review for us now what is in the document, but I think it would be unfortunate if
we were left with the opinion that all you were was a courier of resources when we see a
document with your name on it, signed, that talks about the substance of the program. And
what we're interested in is the substance of the program. We have the recent documents that
were provided by the Agency, which do indicate that you were at least involved in the
substance, and I'm just trying to find out whether you're willing to tell us about that.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I am perfectly willing to tell you everything that I can remember.
Senator KENNEDY. But you can't remember anything.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I can't remember the substantive parts of these, things, I really can't.
Senator KENNEDY. Of the program that was taking place.
Do you have any greater familiarity with what was happening in New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, no.
Senator KENNEDY. And you have the same function with regards to New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. The same function with regard to New York.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
312 of 813
431
432 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 32 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. Did you ever go to San Francisco?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. Did you meet with the agent in charge?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And why did you meet with him?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To discuss some of the receipts and things that were there to find out if
these were indeed true expenditures and to find out if everything was going along all right for
the work that was being done.
Senator KENNEDY. What work was being done?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, the reports of these things and whatever was being done. I don't know
who he reported to but he did report to somebody.
Senator KENNEDY. You travel out there to find out about the work that's being done, and
what does he tell you, that the work is being done well and--
Mr. GOLDMAN. He told me that the work that they were doing was going along,
progressing satisfactorily, but to be very frank with you--
Senator KENNEDY. But he didn't tell you what the work was?
Mr. GOLDMAN. To be very frank with you, Senator, I cannot remember the things that
happened back in those days. I've been away from the company -- from the Agency for over
10 years, and that is even farther back than that, and that was just about the time when I first
engaged in this, so it was my first--
Senator KENNEDY. Did they disburse a series of $100 checks, to your recollection?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I don't recollect it, but if you have it there, then they did.
Senator KENNEDY. Did you know Dr. Gottlieb?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
-54-
Senator KENNEDY. How did you know Dr. Gottlieb?
Mr. GOLDMAN. He had been head of the division when I was recruited.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
313 of 813
432
433 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 33 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. Did you talk to him about these programs? Did you have anything to do
with him during this period of time?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I didn't have anything to do with him until I would say probably in the
sixties.
Senator KENNEDY. And can you tell us what you had to do with him then?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Just what you see there, on the papers.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that is the request for the money and he approves it.
Mr. GOLDMAN. That is the request for money and he approves it, and I am quite sure that I
probably discussed with him whether the work was going along all right, whether his reports
were being turned in, and whether he was satisfied with the way things were going and did he
have any complaints about the way other people were requesting him, but I did not engage
myself in anything he was doing.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, did you get the impression that Gottlieb knew what was going
on?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I didn't ask.
Senator KENNEDY. But you told him that your impression that what was going on even
though you didn't know what was going on, was going on well, I guess? [Laughter.]
Mr. GOLDMAN. I told Gottlieb what you saw in there was that the things appeared to be
going along all right. I was repeating and parroting back the words that were given to me
while I was there.
Senator KENNEDY. What was the money being spent for, do you know?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No; I can't recall that, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Would you remember if we told you it was red curtains and can-can
pictures--
Senator KENNEDY. Floral pictures and the rest.
Senator KENNEDY. Recorders.
Senator KENNEDY. Recorders and two-way mirrors.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Wait, hold on. You're slipping a word in there now.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
314 of 813
433
434 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 34 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. But you would have authorized those funds, would you not, since you
were the--
Mr. GOLDMAN. Did you say two-way mirrors?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Where?
Senator KENNEDY. In the safe houses.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Where?
Senator KENNEDY. San Francisco.
Mr. GOLDMAN. No.
Senator KENNEDY. How about New York?
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. You remember now that you approved expenditures for New York?
-55-
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. What were those expenditures for?
Mr. GOLDMAN. That was a transfer of money over for the use in an apartment in New York
by the Bureau of Narcotics. It was for their use.
Senator KENNEDY. Do you have any knowledge of what was going on in the apartment?
Mr. GOLDMAN. No, sir, other than I know that it had been used, according to the
information that I have been given, it was used by the Bureau of Narcotics to make meetings
with individuals who they were interested in with regard to pushing dope -- not pushing dope,
but selling narcotics and that sort of thing.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, I am sure you had many responsibilities and it's a long time ago,
but the Agency does indicate that you were project monitor for that particular program.
Mr. GOLDMAN. That's correct.
Senator KENNEDY. Your own testimony indicates you went out to review the expenditures
of funds to find out whether they were being wisely used, that you came back and talked to the
project director, Mr. Gottlieb, to give him a progress report about what was going on out there.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
315 of 813
434
435 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 35 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes, sir, I did.
Senator KENNEDY. All those things are true, and yet you draw a complete blank in terms of
what was the project itself. That's where the record is now.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I did not go out there to review the projects nor did I come back and talk
with Mr. Gottlieb and review what I had observed in terms of any projects that they -- that is,
other parts of the Agency might have in operation there. I simply reported back those things
which were told to me by the individual out there who -- and I carried them back and they --
are contained in the report that you have in front of you, word for word, just as it was given to
me.
Senator KENNEDY. The report that you examined here is a substantive report on the
particular program and project. And I don't think anyone who wasn't familiar with the project -
- this is a personal evaluation -- could write a report on the substance of it without knowing
about it. Now, that's mine. Maybe you can't remember and recollect, and that's--
Mr. GOLDMAN. No; everything I put down in there is things that I was told while I was out
there, and if there was any ancillary information involved in there I can tell you I just don't
remember that. I really don't.
At the time -- that was some years ago. At the time -- a lot of time has passed since then and I
have made quite sure that if I could recollect it at all, I would do it. If you have some papers
and you want me to certify whether yes, this is so or that is so, I can do that, but I can't recall it
mentally.
Senator KENNEDY. You just certified the principal. There are others up here.
I would like to go to Dr. Gittinger.
Mr. GITTINGER. It's Mr. Gittinger.
Senator KENNEDY. How long did you serve with the Agency?
-56-
Senator KENNEDY. Excuse me?
Senator KENNEDY. Twenty-six years.
And at some point you moved into the operational support side, is that correct?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
316 of 813
435
436 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 36 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And did you know Sidney Gottlieb?
Senator KENNEDY. And did he inform you about the research projects involving LSD?
Senator KENNEDY. It is my understanding that you were also aware of some of the drug
testing projects conducted on unwitting subjects on the west coast using the Bureau of
Narcotics people in the operation. Is that true?
Mr. GITTINGER. I was.
Senator INOUYE. Excuse me. Would you speak into the microphone? I cannot hear you.
Mr. GITTINGER. Sorry.
Senator KENNEDY. Do you know which drugs were involved in those tests?
Mr. GITTINGER. LSD. And I can't remember for sure much of the others. What is the
substance of marihuana, cannabis, is that right, that can be delivered by other than smoking?
Senator KENNEDY. Cannabis?
Mr. GITTINGER. There had been some discussion of that; yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And was heroin also used?
Mr. GITTINGER. Heroin used by CIA?
Senator KENNEDY. No. In the west coast operation.
Mr. GITTINGER. Absolutely not.
Senator KENNEDY. Now, to your knowledge, how were the drugs administered to the
unwitting subjects?
Mr. GITTINGER. I have no direct knowledge.
Senator KENNEDY. Why did you go to the safe houses?
Mr. GITTINGER. It's a very complicated story. Just in justification of myself, this came up
just, day before yesterday. I have not really had enough time to get it all straightened in my
mind, so I ramble.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you take your time and tell us in your own words. We've got
some time here.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
317 of 813
436
437 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 37 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. My responsibilities which would involve any of the period of time that
you were talking about really was not directly related to drugs at all. I was a psychologist
charged with the responsibility of trying to develop as much information as I could on various
cultures, overseas cultures, anthropological type data, if you follow what I mean. I was also
engaged in trying to work out ways and means of assessing people and understanding people.
I originally became involved in this through working on Chinese culture, and over a series of
time I was introduced to the problem of brainwashing, which is the thing that really was the
most compelling thing in relationship to this, and became charged with the responsibility of
trying to find out a little bit about interrogation techniques.
-57-
And among other things, we decided or I decided that one of the best sources of interrogation
techniques would be trying to locate and interview and become involved with experienced
police interrogators in the country and experienced people who had real practical knowledge
of interrogation. The reason for this is that we had become pretty well convinced after the
experience of the brainwashing problems coming out of China, that it was the techniques of
the interrogators that were causing the individuals to make confessions and so forth in
relationship to this, rather than any kind of drugging and so forth. So we were very much
interested in interrogation techniques, and this led to me being introduced to the agent in the
west coast, and I began to talk to him in connection with these interrogation techniques.
Senator KENNEDY. OK. Now, that is the agent that ran the tests on the west coast on the
unwitting people. That's where you come in, correct?
Mr. GITTINGER. If I understand -- would you say that again?
Senator KENNEDY. The name Morgan Hall has been -- that is the name that has been used.
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. And that is the agent that you met with.
Mr. GITTINGER. That is right.
Senator KENNEDY. And you met at the safe house.
Senator KENNEDY. Whom did you meet with in the safe house?
Mr. GITTINGER. This is the part that is hard for me to say, and I am sorry that I have to. In
connection with some work that we were doing, we needed to have some information on
sexual habits. Morgan Hall provided informants for me, to talk to in connection with the sex
habits that I was interested in trying to find information. During one period of time the safe
house, as far as I was concerned, was used for just these particular type of interviews. And I
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
318 of 813
437
438 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 38 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
didn't see the red curtains.
Senator KENNEDY. Those were prostitutes, were they?
Senator KENNEDY. How many different times were you there that you had similar--
Mr. GITTINGER. I couldn't possibly say with any certainty on that. Four or five times.
Senator KENNEDY. Four or five times.
Mr. GITTINGER. Over -- you remember now, the period that I'm talking about when I
would have any involvement in this is from about 1956 to 1961. So it's about a 4- or 5-year
period which is the only time that I know anything about what you are talking about here
today.
Senator KENNEDY. Did Morgan Hall make the arrangements for the prostitutes to meet
with you?
Senator KENNEDY. Did the interviews that you had have anything to do with drugs?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, as I tried to explain earlier when this was being discussed a little bit
beforehand, again I think it is pretty hard for most people now to recognize how little there
was known about drugs at the period of time that we are talking about, because the
-58-
drug age or the drug culture comes later on. Consequently, those of us who had any
responsibility in this area were interested in trying to get as much information as we could on
the subculture, the subculture drug groups, and obviously the Bureau of Narcotics represented
a means of doing this. Consequently, other types of things that were involved in discussions at
that time would have to do with the underground use of drugs. When I am talking about this I
am talking about the folkways in terms of unwitting use of drugs. Did these people that I was
talking to have any information about this and on rare instances they were able to tell me
about their use, and in most cases this would largely turn out to be a Mickey Finn or
something of that sort rather than anything esoteric.
I also was very much interested because we had relatively little information, believe it or not,
at that time, in terms of the various reactions that people were having to drugs. Therefore,
these people were very informative in terms of they knew a great deal of information about
reactions.
Senator KENNEDY. At least you gathered -- or am I correct in assuming that you gathered
the impression that the prostitutes that you had talked to were able to slip the drugs to people
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
319 of 813
438
439 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 39 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
as I understand it. Did you form any impression on that?
Mr. GITTINGER. I certainly did not form the impression that, they did this as a rule or--
Senator KENNEDY. But they bad the knowledge.
Mr. GITTINGER. They had the knowledge or some of them had had knowledge of this
being done. But again, as it turned out, it was largely in this area of knockout drops.
Senator KENNEDY. Looking back now did you form any impression about how the Agency
was actually testing the broad spectrum of social classes in these safe houses? With the large
disbursal of cash in small quantities, $100 bills and the kinds of elaborate decorations and
two-way mirrors in the bedrooms and all the rest, is there any question in your own mind what
was going on in the safe houses, or the techniques that were being used to administer these
drugs?
Mr. GITTINGER. I find it very difficult to answer that question, sir. I had absolutely no
direct knowledge there was a large number of this. I had no knowledge that anyone other than
-- than Morgan Hall was in any way involved in the unwitting administration of drugs.
Senator KENNEDY. But Gottlieb would know, would he not?
Mr. GITTINGER. I believe so, yes, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Could we go into the Human Ecology Foundation and talk about that
and how it was used as an instrument in terms of the support of research?
Senator KENNEDY. Could you describe it to us? Could you describe the Human Ecology
Foundation, how it functioned and how it worked?
Mr. GITTINGER. May I tell something about how it evolved, which I think is important?
Senator KENNEDY. Sure.
Mr. GITTINGER. The Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, so-called, was
actually a -- I am confused here now as to whether I should name you names.
-59-
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we're not interested in names or institutions, so we prefer that you
do not. That has to be worked out in arrangements between Admiral Turner and the
individuals and the institutions.
But we're interested in what the Foundation really was and how it functioned and what its
purpose was.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
320 of 813
439
440 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 40 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, it was established to undertake research in the general area of the
behavioral sciences. It definitely had almost no focus or interest in, say, drug-related type of
activities except in a very minor way, because it was largely set up to attempt to gain a certain
amount of information and to fund projects which were psychological, sociological,
anthropological in character. It was established in the sense of a period of time that a lot of us
who are in it wish we could do it over again, but we were interested in trying to get together a
panel of the most representative high-level behavioral scientists we could to oversee and help
in terms of developing the Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology type of program.
The Agency in effect provided the money. They did not direct the projects. Now, the fact of
the matter is, there are a lot of innocent people who received the Society for the Investigation
of Human Ecology money which I know for a fact they were never asked to do anything for
the CIA but they did get through this indirectly. They had no knowledge that they were getting
CIA money.
Senator KENNEDY. Over what period of time did this take place?
Mr. GITTINGER. As far as I was concerned , it was the period of time ending in 1961. 1
believe the Human Ecology fund finally phased out in 1965, but I was not involved in this
phasing out.
Senator KENNEDY. Can you give the range of the different sort of individual projects of the
universities in which it was active?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, it would have as many as -- I am very fuzzy on my memory on the
number of projects. It is over 10, 20, 30.
Senator KENNEDY. After it made the grants, what was the relationship of the Agency with
the results of the studies? The Foundation acquired the money to make the grants from the
Agency, and then it made the grants to these various research programs.
Senator KENNEDY. And that included eight universities as well as individual researchers?
Senator KENNEDY. Then what follow-up was there to that, sir?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, in every sense of the word, the organization was run exactly like
any other foundation, and it carried with it the same thing in terms of making certain that the
people that they had given money to used it for the purpose for which it had been granted, that
they had access to any of the reports that they had put out, but there were no strings attached to
anybody. There wasn't any reason they couldn't publish anything that they put out.
Senator KENNEDY. What, sort of budget are we talking about here?
Mr. GITTINGER. I honestly do not remember. I would guess we are talking in the realm of
about $150,000 a year, but don't hold me to that, because I don't know.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
321 of 813
440
441 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 41 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-60-
Senator KENNEDY. What is your view about such funding as a professional person, in terms
of compromising the integrity of a university, sir?
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, obviously, sir, insofar as today there is no question about it. I will
have to say at the time that we were doing this there was quite an entirely different kind of an
attitude, and I do know for a fact that we moved to start towards phasing out the Society for
the Investigation of Human Ecology and the Human Ecology Fund for the very reason that we
were beginning to recognize that it was moving into an area but this would be compromised.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, that is commendable, both your attitude and the reasons for it, but
during that period of time it still was involved in behavior research programs, as I understand
it.
Mr. GITTINGER. Yes, sir. On its own, in connection with this, it participated again, and
these again were not CIA-directed projects, but these were all things which would
theoretically contribute to the general knowledge at the time where the things like the study of
the Hungarian refugees -- obviously, the study of the Hungarian refugees who came to this
country after the Hungarian revolt was a very useful exercise to try to get information about
the personality characteristics of the Communists and so forth.
Senator KENNEDY. Were there other foundations that were doing similar kinds of work?
Mr. GITTINGER. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. You believe--
Mr. GITTINGER. You mean, CIA, other CIA?
Senator KENNEDY. Right.
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, my answer is in the sense that I know of no other CIA foundations,
no. There were, of course, other foundations doing similar kinds of work in the United States.
Senator KENNEDY. Have you heard of the Psychological Assessments Foundation?
Mr. GITTINGER. I certainly have.
Senator KENNEDY. What was that? What function did that have?
Mr. GITTINGER. Now, this was bringing us up to a different era. I believe the functions of
that organization have nothing whatsoever to do with the things that are being talked about
here while I was associated with it.
Senator KENNEDY. Rather than getting into the work, it was another foundation, was it not?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
322 of 813
441
442 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 42 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
It was another foundation supported by the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. What, the Psychological Assessment?
Mr. GITTINGER. No, sir, it was not.
Senator KENNEDY. It did not get any support at all from the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. Oh, yes, sir. It did get support, but it was a business firm.
Senator KENNEDY. It was a business but it got support from the Agency?
Mr. GITTINGER. It got money from it, but it definitely was not in MKULTRA or in any
way associated with this.
-61-
Senator KENNEDY. All right. I want to thank you for your helpful testimony, Mr. Gittinger.
It is not easy to go back into the past. I think you have been very fair in your characterizations,
and I think it is quite appropriately indicated that there are different standards now from what
they were 25 years ago, and I think you have responded very fairly and completely to the
inquiries, and I think with a good deal of feeling about it.
You are a person who is obviously attempting to serve the country's interest, so I want to
thank you very much for your statement and for your helpful timeliness.
Mr. GITTINGER. Thank you, sir.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Case?
Senator CASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry that I had another committee that I had
to complete the hearing with this morning before I got here.
I shall read the testimony with very great interest, and I appreciate your testimony as I have
heard it. I would like to comment just on one point, and that is, it relates to a story in the press
yesterday about part of this program involving the funding of a grant at a foreign university. I
would like to elicit from you a comment as to the additional sensitivity and difficulty that that
practice involves from your standpoint as a scientist, as well as a citizen, if you will.
Mr. GITTINGER. I will say it was after the fact thinking. It was utter stupidity the way
things worked out to have used some of this money outside the United States when it was CIA
money. I can categorically state to my knowledge, and I don't claim a complete knowledge all
the way across of the human ecology functions, but to my knowledge, and this is unfortunate,
those people did not know that they were getting money from CIA, and they were not asked to
contribute anything to CIA as such.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
323 of 813
442
443 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 43 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator CASE. It would be interesting to try to examine this by turning the thing around and
thinking what we would think if this happened from a foreign official agency to our own
university. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Goldman, I wonder if you would tell us what your training and educational background is?
Dr. GOLDMAN. I have already given a biography for the record.
Senator SCHWEIKER. I have not seen it. Who has it? Is it classified? We may have it for
the record, but may I ask you to briefly describe your training and background for us now? I
hope it is no secret.
Dr. GOLDMAN. Well, I was told if I was asked this to say that. I was told that by your staff
people, but I have no objection to telling you. I am a resident from Pennsylvania, southwest
Pennsylvania, Lancaster County. I went to Penn State, and I am in nutrition.
Senator SCHWEIKER. In what?
Dr. GOLDMAN. Nutrition.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Were you in charge of a section or segment of the CIA in your past
capacity?
Dr. GOLDMAN. During the time I was with that organization, I was in charge of one small
section of it, one small segment of it; yes.
-62-
Senator SCHWEIKER. What was the function or purpose of that section that you headed?
Dr. GOLDMAN. To provide support for the other parts of the division.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Where in the chain of command would that put you in relation to Dr.
Gottlieb?
Dr. GOLDMAN. Pretty far down the line.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Mr. Gittinger, I would just like to ask you a few questions. We
appreciate your frankness and candor with the committee, and we realize this is a very difficult
area to go into. I am not quite clear on two matters that were raised earlier. First, were the safe
houses we were talking about here used on occasion by the prostitutes you referred to?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
324 of 813
443
444 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 44 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. GITTINGER. I really have not the slightest idea.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Were the prostitutes used in any way to slip the customers drugs for
observation purposes?
Mr. GITTINGER. Not to my direct knowledge.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Would you have been in a position to know the answer to either of
these questions?
Mr. GITTINGER. May I say, probably not, and may I make an aside to explain a little bit of
this, please, sir?
Senator SCHWEIKER. Mr. Gittinger, a moment ago you mentioned brainwashing

techniques, as one area that you had, I guess, done some work in. How would you characterize
the state of the art of brainwashing today? Who has the most expertise in this field, and who is
or is not doing it in terms of other governments?
During the Korean war there was a lot of serious discussion about brainwashing techniques
being used by the North Koreans, and I am interested in finding out what the state of the art is
today, as you see it.
Mr. GITTINGER. Well, of course, there, has been a great deal of work on this, and there is
still a great deal of controversy. I can tell you that as far as I knew, by 1961, 1962, it was at
least proven to my satisfaction that brainwashing, so called, is some kind of an esoteric device
where drugs or mind- altering kinds of conditions and so forth were used, did not exist even
though "The Manchurian Candidate" as a Movie really set us back a long time, because it
made something impossible look plausible. Do you follow what I mean? But by 1962 and
1963, the general idea that we were able to come up with is that brainwashing was largely a
process of isolating a human being, keeping him out of contact, putting him under long stress
in relationship to interviewing and interrogation, and that they could produce any change that
way without having to resort to any kind of esoteric means.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Are there ways that we can ascertain this from a distance when we
see a captive prisoner either go on television, in a photograph, or at a press conference? In
other words, are there certain signs that you have learned to recognize from your technical
background, to tell when brainwashing has occurred? Or is that very difficult to do?
Mr. GITTINGER. It is difficult to do. I think it is possible now in terms of looking at a

picture of somebody who has been in enemy hands for a long period of time. We can get some
pretty good ideas of what kind of circumstances he has been under, if that is what you mean.
-63-
Senator SCHWEIKER. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
325 of 813
444
445 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 45 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Before adjourning the hearings, I would like to have the record show that Dr. Goldman and
Mr. Gittinger have voluntarily cooperated with the committee in staff interviews, that they
appear this morning voluntarily, and they are not under subpoena.
Gentlemen, I realize that this experience may have been an unhappy one and possibly a
painful one. Therefore, we thank you very much for participating this morning. We also
realize that the circumstances of that time differed very much from this day, and possibly the
national attitude, the national political attitude condoned this type of activity. So, we have not
asked you to come here as persons who have committed crimes, but rather in hope that you
can assist us in studying this problem so that it will not occur once again. In that spirit we
thank you for your participation, and we look forward to working with you further in this case.
Thank you very much.
Senator KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I would like also to thank the witnesses. These are
difficult matters, and I think all of us are very grateful.
Senator SCHWEIKER. I think the witnesses should know that though it may not always
seem that way, what we are trying to do is to probe the past and look at the policies of the past
to affect the future. I think our emphasis really is on the future, not the past, but it is important
that we learn from the past as we formulate policies and legislation for the future, I hope that
all of the witnesses who did come before us voluntarily this morning, including Admiral
Turner respect the fact that we are questioning the past to learn about the future. I think it
should be looked at in that light.
Senator KENNEDY. I think that is the spirit in which we have had these hearings. It seems to
me that from both these witnesses and others, Gottlieb knows the information and can best
respond, and we are going to make every effort in the Senate Health Committee to get Mr.
Gottlieb to appear, and we obviously look forward to cooperating with Senator Inouye and the
other members of the committee in getting the final chapter written on this, but we want to
thank you very much for your appearance here.
Senator INOUYE. The hearing will stand in recess, subject to the call of the Chair.
[Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the hearing was recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.]

Material
Table of Contents
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
326 of 813
445
446 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 46 of 258
1977 Senate MKULTRA Hearing: Appendix A--Testing and Use of Chemical and Biolog... Page 1 of 43
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
APPENDIX A
XVII. Testing And Use Of Chemical And Biological Agents By The
Under its mandate [1] the Select Committee has studied the testing and use of chemical and
biological agents by intelligence agencies. Detailed descriptions of the programs conducted
by intelligence agencies involving chemical and biological agents will be included in a
separately published appendix to the Senate Select Committee's report. This section of the
report will discuss the rationale for the programs, their monitoring and control, and what the
Committee's investigation has revealed about the relationships among the intelligence
agencies and about their relations with other government agencies and private institutions
and individuals. [2]
Fears that countries hostile to the United States would use chemical and biological agents
against Americans or America's allies led to the development of a defensive program
designed to discover techniques for American intelligence agencies to detect and counteract
chemical and biological agents. The defensive orientation soon became secondary as the
possible use of these agents to obtain information from, or gain control over, enemy agents
became apparent.
Research and development programs to find materials which could be used to alter human
behavior were initiated in the late 1940s and early 1950s. These experimental programs
originally included testing of drugs involving witting human subjects, and culminated in tests
using unwitting, nonvolunteer human subjects. These tests were designed to determine the
potential effects of chemical or biological agents when used operationally against individuals
unaware that they had received a drug.
The testing programs were considered highly sensitive by the intelligence agencies
administering them. Few people, even within the agencies, knew of the programs and there is
no evidence that either the executive branch or Congress were ever informed of them. The
highly compartmented nature of these programs may be explained in part by an observation
made by the CIA Inspector General that, "the knowledge that the Agency is engaging in
unethical and illicit activi-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
327 of 813
446
447 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 47 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/AppendixA.htm 1/22/2009
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[1] Senate Resolution 21 directs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities to investigate a number
of issues:
"(a) Whether agencies within the intelligence community conducted illegal domestic activities (Section 2 (1)
and (2));
"(b) The extent to which agencies within the intelligence community cooperate (Section 2 (4) and (8));
"(c) The adequacy of executive branch and congressional oversight of intelligence activities (Section 2 (7) and
(11));
"(d) The adequacy of existing laws to safeguard the rights of American citizens (Section 2 (13))."
[2] The details of these programs may never be known. The programs were highly compartmented. Few records
were kept. What little documentation existed for the CIA's principal program was destroyed early in 1973.
(65)
-66-
ties would have serious repercussions in political and diplomatic circles and would be
detrimental to the accomplishment of its missions." [3]
The research and development program, and particularly the covert testing programs,
resulted in massive abridgments of the rights of American citizens, sometimes with tragic
consequences The deaths of two Americans [3a] can be attributed to these programs; other
participants in the testing programs may still suffer from the residual effects. While some
controlled testing of these substances might be defended, the nature of the tests, their scale,
and the fact that they were continued for years after the danger of surreptitious
administration of LSD to unwitting individuals was known, demonstrate a fundamental
disregard for the value of human life.
The Select Committee's investigation of the testing and use of chemical and biological agents
also raise serious questions about the adequacy of command and control procedures within
the Central Intelligence Agency and military intelligence, and about the relationships among
the intelligence agencies, other governmental agencies, and private institutions and
individuals. The CIA's normal administrative controls were waived for programs involving
chemical and biological agents to protect their security. According to the head of the Audit
Branchof the CIA, these waivers produced "gross administrative failures." They prevented
the CIA's internal review mechanisms (the Office of General Counsel, the Inspector General,
and the Audit Staff) from adequately supervising the programs. In general, the waivers had
the paradoxical effect of providing less restrictive administrative controls and less effective
internal review for controversial and highly sensitive projects than those governing normal
Agency activities.
The security of the programs was protected not only by waivers of normal administrative
controls, but also by a high degree of compartmentation within the CIA. This
compartmentation excluded the CIA's Medical Staff from the principal research and testing
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
328 of 813
447
448 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 48 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
program employing chemical and biological agents.
It also may have led to agency policymakers receiving differing and inconsistent responses
when they posed questions to the CIA component involved.
Jurisdictional uncertainty within the CIA was matched by jurisdictional conflict among the
various intelligence agencies. A spirit of cooperation and reciprocal exchanges of
information which initially characterized the programs disappeared. Military testers withheld
information from the CIA, ignoring suggestions for coordination from their superiors. The
CIA similarly failed to provide information to the military on the CIA's testing program. This
failure to cooperate was conspicuously manifested in an attempt by the Army to conceal
[3] CIA Inspector General's Survey of TSD, 1957, p. 217.
[3a] On January 8, 1953, Mr. Harold Blauer died of circulatory collapse and heart failure following an
intravenous injection of a synthetic mescaline derivative while a subject of tests conducted by New York State
Psychiatric Institute under a contract let by the U.S. Army Chemical Corps. The Committee's investigation into
drug testing by U.S. intelligence agencies focused on the testing of LSD, however, the committee did receive a
copy of the U.S. Army Inspector General's Report, issued on October 1975, on the events and circumstances of
Mr. Blauer's death. His death was directly attributable to the administration of the synthetic mescaline
derivative.
-67-
their overseas testing program, which included surreptitious administration of LSD, from the
CIA. Learning of the Army's program, the Agency surreptitiously attempted to gain details
of it.
The decision to institute one of the Army's LSD field testing projects had been based, at least
in part, on the finding that no long-term residual effects had ever resulted from the drug's
administration. The CIA's failure to inform the Army of a death which resulted from the
surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting Americans may well have resulted in the
institution of an unnecessary and potentially lethal program.
The development, testing, and use of chemical and biological agents by intelligence agencies
raises serious questions about the relationship between the intelligence community and
foreign governments, other agencies of the Federal Government, and other institutions and
individuals. The questions raised range from the legitimacy of American complicity in
actions abroad which violate American and foreign laws to the possible compromise of the
integrity of public and private institutions used as cover by intelligence agencies.
A. THE PROGRAMS INVESTIGATED
1. Project CHATTER
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
329 of 813
448
449 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 49 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Project CHATTER was a Navy program that began in the fall of 1947. Responding to
reports of "amazing results" achieved by the Soviets in using "truth drugs," the program
focused on the identification and testing of such drugs for use in interrogations and in the
recruitment of agents. The research included laboratory experiments on animals and human
subjects involving Anabasis aphylla, scopolamine, and mescaline in order to determine their
speech-inducing qualities. Overseas experiments were conducted as part of the project.
The project expanded substantially during the Korean War, and ended shortly after the war,
in 1953.
2. Project BLUEBIRD/ARTICHOKE
The earliest of the CIA's major programs involving the use of chemical and biological
agents, Project BLUEBIRD, was approved by the Director in 1950. Its objectives were:
(a) discovering means of conditioning personnel to prevent unauthorized extraction of

information from them by known means, (b) investigating the possibility of control of an
individual by application of special interrogation techniques, (c) memory enhancement, and (d)
establishing defensive means for preventing hostile control of Agency personnel. [4]
As a result of interrogations conducted overseas during the project, another goal was added -
- the evaluation of offensive uses of unconventional interrogation techniques, including
hypnosis and drugs. In August 1951, the project was renamed ARTICHOKE. Project
ARTICHOKE included in-house experiments on interrogation techniques, conducted "under
medical and security controls which would ensure
[4] CIA memorandum to the Select Committee, "Behavioral Drugs and Testing," 2/11/75.
-68-
that no damage was done to individuals who volunteer for the experiments. [5] Overseas
interrogations utilizing a combination of sodium pentothal and hypnosis after physical and
psychiatric examinations of the subjects were also part of ARTICHOKE.
The Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI), which studied scientific advances by hostile
powers, initially led BLUEBIRD/ARTICHOKE efforts. In 1952, overall responsibility for
ARTICHOKE was transferred from OSI to the Inspection and Security Office (I&SO),
predecessor to the present Office of Security. The CIA's Technical Services and Medical
Staffs were to be called upon as needed; OSI would retain liaison function with other
government agencies. [6] The change in leadership from an intelligence unit to an operating
unit apparently reflected a change in emphasis; from the study of actions by hostile powers
to the use, both for offensive and defensive purposes, of special interrogation techniques --
primarily hypnosis and truth serums.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
330 of 813
449
450 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 50 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Representatives from each Agency unit involved in ARTICHOKE met almost monthly to
discuss their progress. These discussions included the planning of overseas interrogations [8]
as well as further experimentation in the U.S.
Information about project ARTICHOKE after the fall of 1953 is scarce. The CIA maintains
that the project ended in 1956, but evidence suggests that Office of Security and Office of
Medical Services use of "special interrogation" techniques continued for several years
thereafter.
3. MKNAOMI
MKNAOMI was another major CIA program in this area. In 1967, the CIA summarized the
purposes of MKNAOMI:
(a) To provide for a covert support base to meet clandestine operational requirements.
(b) To stockpile severely incapacitating and lethal materials for the specific use of TSD
[Technical Services Division].
(c) To maintain in operational readiness special and unique items for the dissemination of
biological and chemical materials.
(d) To provide for the required surveillance, testing, upgrading, and evaluation of
materials and items in order to assure absence of defects and complete predictability of
results to be expected under operational conditions. [9]
Under an agreement reached with the Army in 1952, the Special Operations Division (SOD)
at Fort Detrick was to assist CIA in developing, testing, and maintaining biological agents
and delivery
[5] Memorandum from Robert Taylor, O/DD/P to the Assistant Deputy (Inspection and Security) and Chief of
the Medical Staff, 3/22/52.
[6] Memorandum from H. Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director, Scientific Intelligence, to the Deputy
Director/Plans (DDP) "Project ARTICHOKE," 8/29/52.
[8] "Progress Report, Project ARTICHOKE." 1/12/53.
[9] Memorandum from Chief, TSD/Biological Branch to Chief, TSD "MKNAOMI: Funding. Objectives, and
Accomplishments." 10/18/67, p. 1. For a fuller description of MKNAOMI and the relationship between CIA
and SOD, see p. 360.
-69-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
331 of 813
450
451 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 51 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
systems. By this agreement, CIA acquired the knowledge, skill, and facilities of the Army to
develop biological weapons suited for CIA use.
SOD developed darts coated with biological agents and pills containing several different
biological agents which could remain potent for weeks or months. SOD developed a special
gun for firing darts coated with a chemical which could allow CIA agents to incapacitate a
guard dog, enter an installation secretly, and return the dog to consciousness when leaving.
SOD scientists were unable to develop a similar incapacitant for humans. SOD also
physically transferred to CIA personnel biological agents in "bulk" form, and delivery
devices, including some containing biological agents.
In addition to the CIA's interest in biological weapons for use against humans, it also asked
SOD to study use of biological agents against crops and animals. In its 1967 memorandum,
the CIA stated:
Three methods and systems for carrying out a covert attack against crops and causing severe
crop loss have been developed and evaluated under field conditions. This was accomplished
in anticipation of a requirement which was later developed but was subsequently scrubbed
just prior to putting into action. [9a]
MKNAOMI was terminated in 1970. On November 25,1969, President Nixon renounced the
use of any form of biological weapons that kill or incapacitate and ordered the disposal of
existing stocks of bacteriological weapons. On February 14, 1970, the President clarified the
extent of his earlier order and indicated that toxins -- chemicals that are not living organisms
but are produced by living organisms -- were considered biological weapons subject to his
previous directive and were to be destroyed. Although instructed to relinquish control of
material held for the CIA by SOD, a CIA scientist acquired approximately 11 grams of
shellfish toxin from SOD personnel at Fort Detrick which were stored in a little-used CIA
laboratory where it went undetected for five years. [10]
4. MKULTRA
MKULTRA was the principal CIA program involving the research and development of
chemical and biological agents. It was "concerned with the research and development of
chemical, biological, and radiological materials capable of employment in clandestine
operations to control human behavior." [11]
In January 1973, MKULTRA records were destroyed by Technical Services Division

personnel acting on the verbal orders of Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, Chief of TSD. Dr. Gottlieb has
testified, and former Director Helms has confirmed, that in ordering the records destroyed,
Dr. Gottlieb was carrying out the verbal order of then DCI Helms.
MKULTRA began with a proposal from the Assistant Deputy Director for Plans, Richard
Helms, to the DCI, outlining a special
[9a] Ibid. p. 2.
[10] Senate Select Committee, 9/16/75, Hearings, Vol. 1.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
332 of 813
451
452 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 52 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[11] Memorandum from the CIA Inspector General to the Director, 7/26/63.
-70-
funding mechanism for highly sensitive CIA research and development projects that studied
the use of biological and chemical materials in altering human behavior. The projects
involved:
Research to develop a capability in the covert use of biological and chemical materials. This
area involves the production of various physiological conditions which could support present
or future clandestine operations. Aside from the offensive potential, the development of a
comprehensive capability in this field of covert chemical and biological warfare gives us a
thorough knowledge of the enemy's theoretical potential, thus enabling us to defend
ourselves against a foe who might not be as restrained in the use of these techniques as we
are. [12]
MKULTRA was approved by the DCI on April 13, 1953 along the lines proposed by ADDP
Helms.
Part of the rationale for the establishment of this special funding mechanism was its extreme
sensitivity. The Inspector General's survey of MKULTRA in 1963 noted the following
reasons for this sensitivity:
a. Research in the manipulation of human behavior is considered by many authorities in

medicine and related fields to be professionally unethical, therefore the reputation of
professional participants in the MKULTRA program are on occasion in jeopardy.
b. Some MKULTRA activities raise questions of legality implicit in the, original charter.
c. A final phase of the testing of MKULTRA products places the rights and interests of U.S.
citizens in jeopardy.
d. Public disclosure of some aspects of MKULTRA activity could induce serious adverse
reaction in U.S. public opinion. as well as stimulate offensive and defensive action in this
field on the part of foreign intelligence services. [13]
Over the ten-year life of the program, many "additional avenues to the control of human
behavior" were designated as appropriate for investigation under the MKULTRA charter.
These include "radiation, electroshock, various fields of psychology, psychiatry, sociology,
and anthropology, graphology, harassment substances, and paramilitary devices and
materials." [14]
The research and development of materials to be used for altering human behavior consisted
of three phases: first, the search for materials suitable for study; second, laboratory testing on
voluntary human subjects in various types of institutions; third, the application of
MKULTRA materials in normal life settings.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
333 of 813
452
453 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 53 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The search for suitable materials was conducted through standing arrangements with
specialists in universities, pharmaceutical houses, hospitals, state and federal institutions, and
private research organi-
[12] Memorandum from ADDP Helms to DCI Dulles, 4/3/53, Tab A, pp. 1-2. [13] I.G. Report on MKULTRA,
1963, pp. 1-2. [14] Ibid, p. 4.
-71-
zations. The annual grants of funds to these specialists were made under ostensible research
foundation auspices, thereby concealing the CIA's interest from the specialist's institution.
The next phase of the MKULTRA program involved physicians, toxicologists, and other
specialists in mental, narcotics, and general hospitals, and in prisons. Utilizing the products
and findings of the basic research phase, they conducted intensive tests on human subjects.
One of the first studies was conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health. This study
was intended to test various drugs, including hallucinogenics, at the NIMH Addiction
Research Center in Lexington, Kentucky. The "Lexington Rehabilitation Center," as it was
then called, was a prison for drug addicts serving sentences for drug violations.
The test subjects were volunteer prisoners who, after taking a brief physical examination and
signing a general consent form, were administered hallucinogenic drugs. As a reward for
participation in the program, the addicts were provided with the drug of their addiction.
LSD was one of the materials tested in the MKULTRA program. The final phase of LSD
testing involved surreptitious administration to unwitting nonvolunteer subjects in normal
life settings by undercover officers of the Bureau of Narcotics acting for the CIA.
The rationale for such testing was "that testing of materials under accepted scientific
procedures fails to disclose the full pattern of reactions and attributions that may occur in
operational situations." [15]
According to the CIA, the advantage of the relationship with the Bureau was that
test subjects could be sought and cultivated within the setting of narcotics control. Some subjects
have been informers or members of suspect criminal elements from whom the [Bureau of
Narcotics] has obtained results of operational value through the tests. On the other hand, the
effectiveness of the substances on individuals at all social levels, high and low, native American
and foreign, is of great significance and testing has been performed on a variety of individuals
within these categories. [Emphasis added.] [16]
A special procedure, designated MKDELTA, was established to govern the use of

MKULTRA materials abroad. Such materials were used on a number of occasions. Because
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
334 of 813
453
454 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 54 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
MKULTRA records were destroyed, it is impossible to reconstruct the operational use of

MKULTRA materials by the CIA overseas; it has been determined that the use of these
materials abroad began in 1953, and possibly as early as 1950.
Drugs were used primarily as an aid to interrogations, but MKULTRA/MKDELTA materials

were also used for harassment, discrediting, or disabling purposes. According to an Inspector
General Survey of the Technical Services Division of the CIA in 1957 -- an inspection which
did not discover the MKULTRA project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD to
unwitting, nonvolunteer
[15] Ibid, P. 21.
[16] Ibid., pp. 11-12.
-72-
subjects -- the CIA had developed six drugs for operational use and they had been used in six
different operations on a total of thirty-three subjects. [17] By 1963 the number of operations
and subjects had increased substantially.
In the spring of 1963, during a wide-ranging Inspector General survey of the Technical
Services Division, a member of the Inspector General's staff, John Vance, learned about
MKULTRA and about the project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD to
unwitting, nonvoluntary human subjects. As a result of the discovery and the Inspector
General's subsequent report, this testing was halted and much tighter administrative controls
were imposed on the program. According to the CIA, the project was decreased significantly
each budget year until its complete termination in the late 1960s.
5. The Testing of LSD by the Army
There were three major phases in the Army's testing of LSD. In the first, LSD was
administered to more than 1,000 American soldiers who volunteered to be subjects in
chemical warfare experiments. In the second phase, Material Testing Program EA 1729, 95
volunteers received LSD in clinical experiments designed to evaluate potential intelligence
uses of the drug. In the third phase, Projects THIRD CHANCE and DERBY HAT, 16
unwitting nonvolunteer subjects were interrogated after receiving LSD as part of operational
field tests.
B. CIA DRUG TESTING PROGRAMS
1. The Rationale for the Testing Programs
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
335 of 813
454
455 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 55 of 258
1977 Senate MKULTRA Hearing: Appendix A--Testing and Use of Chemical and Biol... Page 10 of 43
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The late 1910s and early 1950s were marked by concern over the threat posed by the
activities of the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and other Communist bloc
countries. United States concern over the use of chemical and biological agents by these
powers was acute. The belief that hostile powers had used chemical and biological agents in
interrogations, brainwashing, and in attacks designed to harass, disable, or kill Allied
personnel created considerable pressure for a "defensive" program to investigate chemical
and biological agents so that the intelligence community could understand the mechanisms
by which these substances worked and how their effects could be defeated. [18]
Of particular concern was the drug LSD. The CIA had received reports that the Soviet Union
was engaged in intensive efforts to produce LSD; and that the Soviet Union had attempted to
purchase the world's supply of the chemical. As one CIA officer who was deeply involved in
work with this drug described the climate of the times: "[It] is awfully hard in this day and
age to reproduce how frightening all of this was to us at the time, particularly after the drug
scene has become as widespread and as knowledgeable in this country as it did. But we were
literally terrified, because this was the one material that we
[17] Ibid, 1957, p. 201.
[18] Thus an officer in the Office of Security of the CIA stressed the "urgency of the discovery of techniques
and method that would permit our personnel, in the event of their capture by the enemy, to resist or defeat
enemy interrogation." (Minutes of the ARTICHOKE conference of 10/22/53.)
-73-
had ever been able to locate that really had potential fantastic possibilities if used
wrongly." [19]
But the defensive orientation soon became secondary. Chemical and biological agents were
to be studied in order "to perfect techniques... for the abstraction of information from
individuals whether willing or not" and in order to "develop means for the control of the
activities and mental capacities of individuals whether willing or not." [20] One Agency
official noted that drugs would be useful in order to "gain control of bodies whether they
were willing or not" in the process of removing personnel from Europe in the event of a
Soviet attack. [21] In other programs, the CIA began to develop, produce, stockpile, and
maintain in operational readiness materials which could be used to harass, disable, or kill
specific targets. [22]
Reports of research and development in the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China,
and the Communist Bloc countries provided the basis for the transmutation of American
programs from a defensive to an offensive orientation. As the Chief of the Medical Staff of
the Central Intelligence Agency wrote in 1952:
There is ample evidence in the reports of innumerable interrogations that the Communists were
utilizing drugs, physical duress, electric shock, and possibly hypnosis against their enemies.
With such evidence it is difficult not to keep from becoming rabid about our apparent laxity. We
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
336 of 813
455
456 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 56 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
are forced by this mounting evidence to assume a more aggressive role in the development of
these techniques, but must be cautious to maintain strict inviolable control because of the havoc
that could be wrought by such techniques in unscrupulous hands. [23]
In order to meet the perceived threat to the national security, substantial programs for the
testing and use of chemical and biological agents -- including projects involving the
surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting nonvolunteer subjects "at all social levels,
high and low, native American and foreign" -- were conceived, and implemented. These
programs resulted in substantial violations of the rights of individuals within the United
States.
[19] Testimony of CIA officer, 11/21/75, p. 33.
[20] Memorandum from the Director of Security to ARTICHOKE representatives, Subject: "ARTICHOKE
Restatement of Program."
[21] ARTICHOKE memorandum, 7/30/53.
[22] The Inspector General's Report of 1957 on the Technical Services Division noted that "Six specific
products have been developed and are available for operational use. Three of them are discrediting and
disabling materials which can be administered unwittingly and permit the exercise of a measure of control over
the actions of the subject."
A memorandum for the Chief, TSD, Biological Branch to the Chief, TSD, 10/18/67, described two of the
objectives of the CIA's Project MKNAOMI as: "to stockpile severely incapacitating and lethal materials for the
specific use of TSD and "to maintain in operational readiness special and unique items for the dissemination of
biological and chemical materials."
[23] Memorandum from the Chief of the Medical Staff, 1/25/52.
-74-
Although the CIA recognized these effects of LSD to unwitting individuals within the United
States, the project continued. As the Deputy Director for Plans, Richard Helms, wrote the
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence during discussions which led to tile cessation of
unwitting testing:
While I share your uneasiness and distaste for any program which tends to intrude upon an
individual's private and legal prerogatives, I believe it is necessary that the Agency maintain
a central role in this activity, keep current on enemy capabilities the manipulation of human
behavior, and maintain an offensive capability. [25]
There were no attempts to secure approval for the most controversial aspects of these
programs from the executive branch or Congress. The nature and extent of the programs
were closely held secrets; even DCI McCone was not briefed on all the details of the
program involving the surreptitious administration of LSD until 1963. It was deemed
imperative that these programs be concealed from the American people. As the CIA's
Inspector General wrote in 1957:
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
337 of 813
456
457 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 57 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Precautions must be taken not only to protect operations from exposure to enemy forces but
also to conceal these activities from the American public in general. The knowledge that the
Agency is engaging in unethical and illicit activities would have serious repercussions in
political and diplomatic circles and would be detrimental to the accomplishment of its
mission. [26]
2. The Death of Dr. Frank Olson
The most tragic result of the testing of LSD by the CIA was the death of Dr. Frank Olson, a
civilian employee of the Army, who died on November 27, 1953. His death followed his
participation in a CIA experiment with LSD. As part of this experiment, Olson unwittingly
received approximately 70 micrograms of LSD in a glass of Cointreau he drank on
November 19, 1953. The drug had been placed in the bottle by a CIA officer, Dr. Robert
Lashbrook, as part of an experiment he and Dr. Sidney Gottlieb performed at a meeting of
Army and CIA scientists.
Shortly after this experiment, Olson exhibited symptoms of paranoia and schizophrenia.
Accompanied by Dr. Lashbrook, Olson sought psychiatric assistance in New York City from
a physician, Dr. Harold Abramson, whose research on LSD had been funded indirectly by
the CIA. While in New York for treatment, Olson fell to his death from a tenth story window
in the Statler Hotel.
[24] Even during the discussions which led to the termination of the unwitting testing, the DDP turned down
the option of halting such tests within the. U.S. and continuing them abroad despite the fact that the Technical
Services Division had conducted numerous operations abroad making use of LSD. The DDP made this decision
on the basis of security noting that the past efforts, overseas had resulted in "making an inordinate number of
foreign nationals witting of our role in the very sensitive activity." (Memorandum for the Deputy Director of
Central Intelligence from the Deputy Director for Plans, 12/17/63, p. 2.)
[25] Ibid., pp. 2-3.
[26] I.G. survey of TSD, 1957, p. 217.
-75-
a. Background. -- Olson, an expert in aerobiology who was assigned to the Special

Operations Division (SOD) of the U.S. Army Biological Center at Camp Detrick, Maryland.
This Division had three primary functions:
(1) assessing the vulnerability of American installations to biological attack;
(2) developing techniques for offensive use of biological weapons; and
(3) biological research for the CIA. [27]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
338 of 813
457
458 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 58 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Professionally, Olson was well respected by his colleagues in both the Army and the CIA.
Colonel Vincent Ruwet, Olson's immediate superior at the time of his death, was in almost
daily contact with Olson. According to Colonel Ruwet: "As a professional man... his
ability... was outstanding." [28] Colonel Ruwet stated that "during the period prior to the
experiment... I noticed nothing which would lead me to believe that he was of unsound
mind." [29] Dr. Lashbrook, who had monthly contacts with Olson from early 1952 until the
time of his death, stated publicly that before Olson received LSD, "as far as I know, he was
perfectly normal." [30] This assessment is in direct contradiction to certain statements
evaluating Olson's emotional stability made in CIA internal memorandum written after
Olson's death.
b. The Experiment. -- On November 18, 1953, a group of ten scientists from the CIA and
Camp Detrick attended a semi-annual review and analysis conference at a cabin located at
Deep Creek Lake, Maryland. Three of the participants were from the CIA's Technical
Services Staff. The Detrick representatives were all from the Special Operations Division.
According to one CIA official, the Special Operations Division participants "agreed that an
unwitting experiment would be desirable." [31] This account directly contradicts Vincent
Ruwet's recollection. Ruwet recalls no such discussion, and has asserted that he would
remember any such discussion because the SOD participants would have strenuously
objected to testing on unwitting subjects. [32]
In May, 1953, Richard Helms, Assistant DDP, held a staff meeting which the Chief of
Technical Services Staff attended. At this meeting Helms "indicated that the drug [LSD] was
dynamite and that he should be advised at all times when it was intended to use it." [33] In
addition, the then DDP, Frank Wisner, sent a memorandum to TSS stating the requirement
that the DDP personally approve the use of LSD. Gottlieb went ahead with the experiment,
[34] securing the ap-
[27] Staff summary of Vincent Ruwet Interview, 8/13/75, p. 3.
[28] Memorandum of Col. Vincent Ruwet, To Whom It May Concern, no date, p. 2.
[29] Ruwet Memorandum, p. 3.
[30] Joseph B. Treaster, New York Times, 7/19/75, p. 1.
[31] Memorandum for the Record from Lyman Kirkpatrick, 12/1/53, p. 1.
[32] Ruwet (staff summary), 8/1.3/75, p. 6.
[33] Inspector General Diary, 12/2/53.
[34] Ibid. Dr. Gottleib has testified that he does not remember either the meeting with Helms nor the Wisner
memorandum. (Gottlieb, 10/18/75, p. 16.)
-76-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
339 of 813
458
459 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 59 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
proval of his immediate supervisor. Neither the Chief of TSS nor the DDP specifically
authorized the experiment in which Dr. Olson participated. [35]
According to Gottlieb, [36] " a "very small dose" of LSD was placed in a bottle of Cointreau
which was served after dinner on Thursday, November 19. The drug was placed in the
liqueur by Robert Lashbrook. All but two of tie SOD participants received LSD. One did not
drink; the other had a heart condition. [37] About twenty minutes after they finished their
Cointreau, Gottlieb informed the other participants that they had received LSD.
Dr. Gottlieb stated that "up to the time of the experiment," he observed nothing unusual in
Olson's behavior. [37a] Once the experiment was underway, Gottlieb recalled that "the drug
had a definite effect on the group to the point that they were boisterous and laughing and
they could not continue the meeting or engage in sensible conversation." The meeting
continued until about 1: 00 a.m., when the participants retired for the evening. Gottlieb
recalled that Olson, among others, complained of "wakefulness" during the night. [38]
According to Gottlieb on Friday morning "aside from some evidence of fatigue, I observed
nothing unusual in [Olson's] actions, conversation, or general behavior." [39] Ruwet recalls
that Olson "appeared to be agitated" at breakfast, but that he "did not consider this to be
abnormal under the circumstances." [40]
c. The Treatment. -- The following Monday, November 23, Olson was waiting for Ruwet
when he came in to work at 7:30 a.m. For the next two days Olson's friends and family
attempted to reassure him and help him "snap out" of what appeared to be a serious
depression. On Tuesday, Olson again came to Ruwet and, after an hour long con-
[35] Dr. Gottlieb testified that "given the information we knew up to this time, and based on a lot of our own
self-administration, we thought it was a fairly benign substance in terms of potential harm." This is in conflict
not only with Mr. Helms' statement but also with material which had been supplied to the Technical Services
Staff. In one long memorandum on current research with LSD which was supplied to TSD, Henry Beecher
described the dangers involved with such research in a prophetic manner. "The second reason to doubt
Professor Rothland came when I raised the question as to any accidents which had arisen from the use of LSD-
25. He said in a very positive way, 'none.' As it turned out this answer could be called overly positive, for later
on in the evening I was discussing the matter with Dr. W. A. Stohl, Jr., a psychiatrist in Bleulera's Clinic in
Zurich where I had gone at Rothland's insistence. Stohl, when asked the same question, replied, 'yes,' and added
spontaneously, 'there is a case Professor Rothland knows about. In Geneva a woman physician who had been
subject to depression to some extent took LSD-25 in an experiment and became severely and suddenly
depressed and committed suicide three weeks later. While the connection is not definite, common knowledge of
this could hardly have allowed the positive statement Rothland permitted himself. This case is a warning to us
to avoid engaging subjects who are depressed, or who have been subject to depression.'" Dr. Gottlieb testified
that he had no recollection of either the report or that particular section of it. (Sidney Gottlieb testimony,
10/19/75, p. 78.)
[36] Memorandum of Sheffield Edwards for the record, 11/28/53, p. 2.
[37] Lashbrook (staff summary), 7/19/75, p. 3.
[37a] Gottlieb Memorandum, 12/7/53. p. 2.
[38] Edwards memorandum, 11/28/53, p. 3.
[39] Gottlieb memorandum. 12/7/53, p. 3.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
340 of 813
459
460 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 60 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[40] Ruwet memorandum, p. 3.
-77-
versation, it was decided that medical assistance for Dr. Olson was desirable. [41]
Ruwet then called Lashbrook and informed him that "Dr. Olson was in serious trouble and
needed immediate professional attention." [42] Lashbrook agreed to make appropriate
arrangements and told Ruwet to bring Olson to Washington, D.C. Ruwet and Olson
proceeded to Washington to meet with Lashbrook, and the three left for New York at about
2:30 p.m. to meet with Dr. Harold Abramson.
At that time Dr. Abramson was an allergist and immunologist practicing medicine in New
York City. He held no degree in psychiatry, but was associated with research projects
supported indirectly by the CIA. Gottlieb and Dr. Lashbrook both followed his work closely
in the early 1950s. [43] Since Olson needed medical help, they turned to Dr. Abramson as
the doctor closest to Washington who was experienced with LSD and cleared by the CIA.
Ruwet, Lashbrook, and Olson remained in New York for two days of consultations with
Abramson. On Thursday, November 26, 1953, the three flew back to Washington so that
Olson could spend Thanksgiving with his family. En route from the airport Olson told Ruwet
that he was afraid to face his family. After a lengthy discussion, it was decided that Olson
and Lashbrook would return to New York, and that Ruwet would go to Frederick to explain
these events to Mrs. Olson. [44]
Lashbrook and Olson flew back to New York the same day, again for consultations with
Abramson. They spent Thursday night in a Long Island hotel and the next morning returned
to the city with Abramson. In further discussions with Abramson, it was agreed that Olson
should be placed under regular psychiatric care at an institution closer to his home. [45]
d. The Death. -- Because they could not obtain air transportation for a return trip on Friday
night, Lashbrook and Olson made reservations for Saturday morning and checked into the
Statler Hotel. Between the time they checked in and 10:00 p.m.; they watched television,
visited the cocktail lounge, where each had two martinis, and dinner. According to
Lashbrook, Olson "was cheerful and appeared to enjoy the entertainment." He "appeared no
longer particularly depressed, and almost the Dr. Olson I knew prior to the experiment." [46]
After dinner Lashbrook and Olson watched television for about an hour, and at 11:00, Olson
suggested that they go to bed, saying that "he felt more relaxed and contented than he had
since [they] came to New York." [47] Olson then left a call with the hotel operator to wake
them in the morning. At approximately 2:30 a.m. Saturday, November 28. Lashbrook was
awakened by a loud "crash of glass." In his report on the incident, he stated only that Olson
"had crashed through the closed window blind and the closed window and he fell to his death
from the window of our room on the 10th floor." [48]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
341 of 813
460
461 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 61 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[41] Ibid., p. 4.
[42] Lashbrook memorandum, 12/7/53, p. 1.
[43] Staff summary of Dr. Harold Abramson interview, 7/29/75, p. 2.
[44] Lashbrook memorandum, 12/7/53, P. 3.
[45] Abramson memorandum, 12/4/53.
[46] Lashbrook memorandum, 12/7/53, p. 3.
[47] Ibid., p. 4.
[48] Ibid.
-78-
Immediately after finding that Olson had leapt to his death, Lashbrook telephoned Gottlieb at
his home and informed him of the incident. [49] Gottlieb called Ruwet and informed him of
Olson's death at approximately 2:45 a.m. [50] Lashbrook then called the hotel desk and
reported the incident to the operator there. Lashbrook called Abramson and informed him of
the occurrence. Abramson told Lashbrook he "wanted to be kept out of the thing
completely," but later changed his mind and agreed to assist Lashbrook. [51]
Shortly thereafter, uniformed police officers and some hotel employees came to Lashbrook's
room. Lashbrook told the police he didn't know why Olson had committed suicide, but he
did know that Olson "suffered from ulcers." [52]
e. The Aftermath. -- Following Dr. Olson's death, the CIA made a substantial effort to ensure
that his family received death benefits, but did not notify the Olsons of the circumstances
surrounding his demise. The Agency also made considerable efforts to prevent the death
being connected with the CIA, and supplied complete cover for Lashbrook so that his
association with the CIA would remain a secret.
After Dr. Olson's death the CIA conducted an internal investigation of the incident. As part
of his responsibilities in this investigation, the General Counsel wrote the Inspector General,
stating:
I'm not happy with what seems to be a very casual attitude on the part of TSS representatives
to the way this experiment was conducted and the remarks that this is just one of the risks
running with scientific experimentation. I do not eliminate the need for taking risks, but I do
believe, especially when human health or life is at stake, that at least the prudent, reasonable
measures which can be taken to minimize the risk must be taken and failure to do so was
culpable negligence. The actions of the various individuals concerned after effects of the
experiment on Dr. Olson became manifest also revealed the failure to observe normal and
reasonable precautions. [53]
As a result of the investigation DCI Allen Dulles sent a personal letter to the Chief of
Technical Operations of the Technical Services Staff who had approved the experiment
criticizing him for "poor judgment... in authorizing the use of this drug on such an unwitting
basis and without proximate medical safeguards." [54] Dulles also sent a letter to Dr.
Gottlieb, Chief of the Chemical Division of the Technical Services Staff, criticizing him for
recommending the "unwitting application of the drug" in that the proposal "did not give
sufficient emphasis for medical collaboration and for the proper consideration of the rights of
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
342 of 813
461
462 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 62 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the individual to whom it was being administered." [55]
[49] CIA Field Office Report, 12/3/53, p. 3.

[50] Ruwet Memorandum, p. 11.
[51] CIA Field Office Report, 12/3/53, p. 3.
[52] Ibid.
[53] Memorandum from the General Counsel to the Inspector General. 1/4/54.
[54] Memorandum from DCI to Chief, Technical Operations, TSS, 2/12/54.
[55] Memorandum from DCI to Sidney Gottlieb, 2/12/54.
-79-
The letters were hand carried to the individuals to be read and returned. Although the letters
were critical, a note from the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence to Mr. Helms
instructed him to inform the individuals that: "These are not reprimands and no personnel
file notation are being made." [56]
Thus, although the Rockefeller Commission has characterized them as such, these notes
were explicitly not reprimands. Nor did participation in the events which led to Dr. Olson's
death have any apparent effect on the advancement within the CIA of the individuals
involved.
3. The Surreptitious Administration of LSD to Unwitting NonVolunteer Human Subjects by

the CIA After the Death of Dr. Olson
The death of Dr. Olson could be viewed, as some argued at the time, as a tragic accident, one
of the risks inherent in the testing of new substances. It might be argued that LSD was
thought to be benign. After the death of Dr. Olson the dangers of the surreptitious
administration of LSD were clear, yet the CIA continued or initiated [57] a project involving
the surreptitious administration of LSD to nonvolunteer human subjects. This program
exposed numerous individuals in the United States to the risk of death or serious injury
without their informed consent, without medical supervision, and without necessary follow-
up to determine any long-term effects.
Prior to the Olson experiment, the Director of Central Intelligence had approved
MKULTRA, a research program designed to develop a "capability in the covert use of
biological and chemical agent materials." In the proposal describing MKULTRA Mr. Helms,
then ADDP, wrote the Director that:
we intend to investigate the development of a chemical material which causes a reversible non-
toxic aberrant mental state, the specific nature of which can be reasonably well predicted for
each individual. This material 'could potentially aid in discrediting individuals, eliciting
information, and implanting suggestions and other forms of mental control. [58]
On February 12, 1954, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency wrote TSS officials
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
343 of 813
462
463 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 63 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
criticizing them for "poor judgment" in administering LSD on "an unwitting basis and
without proximate medical safeguards" to Dr. Olson and for the lack of "proper
consideration of the rights of the individual to whom it was being administered." [59] On the
same day, the Inspector General reviewed a report on Subproject Number 3 of MKULTRA,
in which the same TSS officers who had just received letters from the Director were quoted
as stating that one of the purposes of Subproject Number 3 was to
[56] Note from DDCI to Richard Helms, 2/13/54.

[57] The 1963 IG Report, which described the project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD, placed
the project beginning In 1955. Other CIA documents reveal that it was in existence as early as February 1954.
The CIA has told the Committee that the project began in 1953 and that the experiment which led to Dr.
Olson's death was part of the project.
[58] Memorandum from ADDP items to DOI Dulles, 4/3/53, tab A, p. 2.
[59] Memorandum from DCI to Sidney Gottlieb, 2/12/54; and memorandum from DCI to Chief of operations,
TSS, 2/12/54.
-80-
"observe the behavior of unwitting persons being questioned after having been given a
drug." [60] There is no evidence that Subproject Number 3 was terminated even though the
officers were unequivocally aware of the dangers of the surreptitious administration of LSD
and the necessity of obtaining informed consent and providing medical safeguards.
Subproject Number 3, in fact, used methods which showed even less concern than did the
OLSON experiment for the safety and security of the participants. Yet the evidence indicates
the project continued until 1963. [61]
In the project, the individual conducting the test might make initial contact with a
prospective subject selected at random in a bar. He would then invite the person to a
"safehouse" where the test drug was administered to the subject through drink or in food.
CIA personnel might debrief the individual conducting the test, or observe the test by using a
one-way mirror and tape recorder in an adjoining room.
Prior consent was obviously not obtained from any of the subjects. There was also,
obviously, no medical prescreening. In addition, the tests were conducted by individuals who
were not qualified scientific observers. There were no medical personnel on hand either to
administer the drugs or to observe their effects, and no follow-up was conducted on the test
subjects.
As the Inspector General noted in 1963:
A significant limitation on the effectiveness of such testing is the infeasibility of performing

scientific observation of results. The [individuals conducting the test] are not qualified scientific
observers. Their subjects are seldom accessible beyond the first hours of the test. The testing
may be useful in perfecting delivery techniques, and in identifying surface characteristics of
onset, reaction, attribution, and side-effect. [62]
This was particularly troublesome as in a
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
344 of 813
463
464 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 64 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
number of instances,... the test subject has become ill for hours or days, including hospitalization
in at least one case, and the agent could only follow up by guarded inquiry after the test subject's
return to normal life. Possible sickness and attendant economic loss are inherent contingent
effects of the testing. [61]
Paradoxically, greater care seems to have been taken for the safety of foreign nationals
against whom LSD was used abroad. In several cases medical examinations were performed
prior to the use of LSD. [64]
[60] Memorandum to Inspector General from Chief, Inspection and Review, on Subproject #3 of MKULTRA,
2/10/54.
[61] IG Report on MKULTRA, 1903.
[62] Ibid., p. 12.
[63] Ibid. According to the IG's survey in 1963, physicians associated with MKULTRA could be made
available in an emergency.
[64] The Technical Services Division which was responsible for the operational use of LSD abroad took the
position that "no physical examination of the subject is required prior to administration of [LSD] by TSS
trained personnel. A physician need not be present. There is no danger medically in the use of this material as
handled by TSS trained personnel." The Office of Medical Services had taken the position that LSD was
"medically dangerous." Both the Office of Security and the Office of Medical Services argued that LSD
"should not be administered unless preceded by a medical examination... and should be administered only by or
in the presence of a physician who had studied it and its effect." (Memorandum from James Angleton, Chief,
Counterintelligence Staff to Chief of Operations, 12/12/57, pp. 1-2.
-81-
Moreover, the administration abroad was marked by constant observation made possible
because the material was being used against prisoners of foreign intelligence or security
organizations. Finally, during certain of the LSD interrogations abroad, local physicians
were on call, though these physicians had had no experience with LSD and would not be told
that hallucinogens had been administered. [65]
The CIA's project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting human
subjects in the United States was finally halted in 1963, as a result of its discovery during the
course of an Inspector General survey of the Technical Services Division. When the
Inspector General learned of the project, he spoke to the Deputy Director for Plans, who
agreed that the Director should be briefed. The DDP made it clear that the DCI and his
Deputy were generally familiar with MKULTRA. He indicated, however, that he was not
sure it was necessary to brief the DDCI at that point.
On May 24,1963, the DDP advised the Inspector General that he had briefed the Director on
the MKULTRA program and in particular had covered the question of the surreptitious
administration of LSD to unwitting human subjects. According to the Inspector General, the
DDP said that "the Director indicated no disagreement and therefore the testing will
continue." [66]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
345 of 813
464
465 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 65 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
One copy of an "Eyes Only" draft report on MKULTRA was prepared by the Inspector
General who recommended the termination of the surreptitious administration project. The
project was suspended following the Inspector General's report.
On December 17, 1963, Deputy Director for Plans Helms wrote a memo to the DDCI, who
with the Inspector General and the Executive Director-Comptroller had opposed the covert
testing. He noted two aspects of the problem: (1) "for over a decade the Clandestine Services
has had the mission of maintaining a capability for influencing human behavior;" and (2)
"testing arrangements in furtherance of this mission should be as operationally realistic and
yet as controllable as possible." Helms argued that the individuals must be "unwitting" as
this was "the only realistic method of maintaining the capability, considering the intended
operational use of materials to influence human behavior as the operational targets will
certainly be unwitting. Should the subjects of the testing not be unwitting, the program
would only be "pro forma" resulting in a "false sense of accomplishment and readiness." [67]
Helms continued:
[65] Physicians might be called with the hope that they would make a diagnosis of mental breakdown which
would be useful in discrediting the individual who was the subject of the CIA interest.
[66] Memorandum for the Record prepared by the Inspector General, 5/15/63, p. 1.
[67] Ibid., p. 2.
-82-
If one grants the validity of the mission of maintaining this unusual capability and the
necessity for unwitting testing, there is only then the question of how best to do it.
Obviously, the testing should be conducted in such a manner as to permit the opportunity to
observe the results of the administration on the target. It also goes without saying that
whatever testing arrangement we adopt must afford maximum safeguards for the protection
of the Agency's role in this activity, as well as minimizing the possibility of physical or
emotional damage to the individual tested. [68]
In another memo to the Director of Central Intelligence in June, 1964, Helms again raised
the issue of unwitting testing. At that time General Carter, then acting DCI, approved several
changes in the MKULTRA program proposed by Mr. Helms as a result of negotiations
between the Inspector General and the DDP. In a handwritten note, however, Director Carter
added that "unwitting testing will be subject to a separate decision." [69]
No specific decision was made then or soon after. The testing had been halted and, according
to Walter Elder, Executive Assistant to DCI McCone, the DCI was not inclined to take the
positive step of authorizing a resumption of the testing. At least through the summer, the
DDP did not press the issue. On November 9, 1964, the DDP raised the issue again in a
memo to the DCI, calling the Director's attention to what he described as "several other
indications during the past year of an apparent Soviet aggressiveness in the field of covertly
administered chemicals which are, to say the least, inexplicable and disturbing." [70]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
346 of 813
465
466 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 66 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Helms noted that because of the suspension of covert testing, the Agency's "positive
operational capability to use drugs is diminishing, owing to a lack of realistic testing. With
increasing knowledge of the state of the art, we are less capable of staying up with Soviet
advances in this field. This in turn results in a waning capability on our part to restrain others
in the intelligence community (such as the Department of Defense) from pursuing operations
in this area." [71]
Helms attributed the cessation of the unwitting testing to the high risk of embarrassment to
the Agency as well as the "moral problem." He noted that no better covert situation had been
devised than that which had been used, and that "we have no answer to the moral issue." [72]
Helms asked for either resumption of the testing project or its definitive cancellation. He
argued that the status quo of a research and development program without a realistic testing
program was causing the Agency to live "with the illusion of a capability which is becoming
minimal and furthermore is expensive." [73] Once again no formal action was taken in
response to the Helms' request.
[68] Memorandum from DDP Helms to DDCI Carter, 12/17/63.

[69] Memorandum from DDP Helms to DCI, 6/9/64, p. 3.
[70] Ibid., 11/9/64, p. 1.
[71] Ibid., pp. 1-2.
[72] Ibid., p. 2.
[73] Ibid.
-83-
From its beginning in the early 1950's until its termination in 1963, the program of
surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting nonvolunteer human subjects demonstrates
a failure of the CIA's leadership to pay adequate attention to the rights of individuals and to
provide effective guidance to CIA employees. Though it was known that the testing was
dangerous, the lives of subjects were placed in jeopardy and their rights were ignored during
the ten years of testing which followed Dr. Olson's death. Although it was clear that the laws
of the United States were being violated, the testing continued. While the individuals
involved in the Olson experiment were admonished by the Director, at the same time they
were also told that they were not being reprimanded and that their "bad judgment" would not
be made part of their personnel records. When the covert testing project was terminated in
1963, none of the individuals involved were subject to any disciplinary action.
4. Monitoring and Control of the Testing and Use of Chemical and Biological Agents by the
CIA
The Select Committee found numerous failures in the monitoring and control of the testing
and use of chemical and biological agents within the CIA. [74] An analysis of the failures
can be divided into four sections: (a) the waiver of normal regulations or requirements; (b)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
347 of 813
466
467 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 67 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the problems in authorization procedures; (c) the failure of internal review mechanisms such
as the Office of General Counsel, the Inspector General, and the Audit Staff; and (d) the
effect of compartmentation and competition within the CIA.
a. The Waiver of Administrative Controls. -- The internal controls within any agency rest on:
(1) clear and coherent regulations; (2) clear lines of authority; and (3) clear rewards for those
who conduct themselves in accord with agency regulations and understandable and
immediate sanctions against those who do not. In the case of the testing and use of chemical
and biological agents, normal CIA administrative controls were waived. The destruction of
the documents on the largest CIA program in this area constituted a prominent example of
the waiver of normal Agency procedures by the Director.
These documents were destroyed in early 1973 at the order of then DCI Richard Helms.
According to Helms, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, then Director of TSD:
... came to me and said that he was retiring and that I was retiring and he thought it would be a
good idea if these files were destroyed. And I also believe part of the reason for our thinking this
was advisable was there had been relationships with outsiders in government agencies and other
organizations and that these would be sensitive in this kind of a thing but that since the program
was over and finished and done with, we thought we would just get rid of the files as
[74] Section 2(9) of S. Res. 21 instructs the Committee to examine: the "extent to which United States
intelligence agencies are governed by Executive Orders, rules, or regulations either published or secret."
-84-
well, so that anybody who assisted us in the past would not be subject to follow-up or questions,
embarrassment, if you will. [75]
The destruction was based on a waiver of an internal CIA regulation, CSI 70-10, which
regulated the "retirement of inactive records." As Thomas Karamessines, then Deputy
Director of Plans, wrote in regulation CSI-70-10: "Retirement is not a matter of convenience
or of storage but of conscious judgment in the application of the rules modified by
knowledge of individual component needs. The heart of this judgment is to ensure that the
complete story can be reconstructed in later years and by people who may be unfamiliar with
the events." [76]
The destruction of the MKULTRA documents made it impossible for the Select Committee
to determine the full range and extent of the largest CIA research program involving
chemical and biological agents. The destruction also prevented the CIA from locating and
providing medical assistance to the individuals who were subjects in the program. Finally, it
prevented the Committee from determining the full extent of the operations which made use
of materials developed in the MKULTRA program. [77]
From the inception of MKULTRA normal Agency procedures were waived. In 1953, Mr.
Helms, then Assistant Deputy Director for Plans, proposed the establishment of MKULTRA.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
348 of 813
467
468 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 68 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Under the proposal six percent of the research and development budget of TSD would be
expended "without the establishment of formal contractual relations" because contracts
would reveal government interest. Helms also voted that qualified individuals in the field
"are most reluctant to enter into signed agreements of any sort which connect them with this
activity since such a connection would jeopardize their professional reputa-
[75] Richard Helms testimony, 9/11/75, p. 5.
Many Agency documents recording confidential relationships with individuals and organizations are retained
without public disclosure. Moreover, in the case of MKULTRA the CIA had spent millions of dollars
developing both materials and delivery systems which could be used by the Clandestine Services; the
reconstruction of the research and development program would be difficult if not impossible, without the
documents, and at least one assistant to Dr. Gottlieb protested against the document destruction on those
grounds.
[76] Clandestine Services Institution (CSI) 70-10. When asked by the Select Committee about the regularity of
the procedure by which he authorized Dr. Gottlieb to destroy the MKULTRA records, Helms responded:
"Well, that's hard to say whether it would be part of the regular procedure or not, because the record destruction
program is conducted according to a certain pattern. There's a regular record destruction pattern in the Agency
monitored by certain people and done a certain way. So that anything outside of that, I suppose, would have
been unusual. In other words, there were documents being destroyed because somebody had raised this specific
issue rather than because they were encompassed in the regular records destruction program. So I think the
answer to your question is probably yes." (Helms testimony, 9/11/75, p. 6.)
[77] Even prior to the destruction of documents, the MKULTRA records were far from complete. As the
Inspector General noted in 1963:
"Files are notably incomplete, poorly organized, and lacking in evaluative statements that might give
perspective to management policies over time. A substantial portion of the MKULTRA record appears to rest in
the memories of the principal officers and is therefore almost certain to be lost with their departures." (IG
Report on MKULTRA, p. 23.)
-85-
tions". [78] Other Agency procedures, i.e., the forwarding of document, in support of
invoices and the provision for regular audit procedures, were also to be waived. On April 13,
1953, then DCI Allen Dulles approved MKULTRA, noting that security considerations
precluded handling the project through usual contractual agreements.
Ten years later investigations of MKULTRA by both the Inspector General and the Audit
Staff noted substantial deficiencies which resulted from the waivers. Because TSD had not
reserved the right to audit the books of contractors in MKULTRA, the CIA had been unable
to verify the use of Agency grants by a contractor. Another firm had failed to establish
controls and safeguards which would assure "proper accountability" in use of government
funds with the result that "funds have been used for purposes not contemplated by grants or
allowable under usual contract relationship." [79] The entire MKULTRA arrangement was
condemned for having administrative lines which were unclear, overly permissive controls,
and irresponsible supervision.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
349 of 813
468
469 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 69 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The head of the Audit Branch noted that inspections and audits: led us to see MKULTRA as
frequently having provided a device to escape normal administrative controls for research
that is not especially sensitive, as having allowed practices that produce gross administrative
failures, as having permitted the establishment of special relationships with unreliable
organizations on an unacceptable basis, and as having produced, on at least one occasion, a.
cavalier treatment of a bona fide contracting organization.
While admitting that there may be a need for special mechanisms for handling sensitive
projects, the Chief of the Audit Branch wrote that "both the terms of reference and the
ground rules for handling such special projects should be spelled out in advance so that
diversion from normal channels does not mean abandonment of controls.
Special procedures may be necessary to ensure the security of highly sensitive operations. To
prevent the erosion of normal internal control mechanisms, such waivers should not be
extended to less sensitive operations. Moreover, only those regulations which would
endanger security should be waived; to waive regulations generally would result in highly
sensitive and controversial projects having looser rather than stricter administrative controls.
MKNAOMI, the Fort Detrick CIA project for research and development of chemical and
biological agents, provides another example where efforts to protect the security of agency
activities overwhelmed administrative controls. No written records of the transfer of agents
such as anthrax or shellfish toxin were kept, "because of the sensitivity of the area and the
desire to keep any possible use of materials like this recordless." [81] The
[78] Memorandum from ADDP Helms to DCI Dulles, 4/3/53, Tab. A, p. 2.
[79] Memorandum from IG to Chief, TSD, 11/8/63, as quoted in memorandum from Chief, Audit Branch.
[80] The memorandum suggested that administrative exclusions, because of the importance of such decisions,
should require the personal approval of the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence on an individual case basis.
Present CIA policy is that only the DCI can authorize certain exemptions from regulations.
[81] Sidney Gottlieb testimony, 10/18/75, Hearings, Vol. 1, p. 51.
-86-
result was that the Agency had no way of determining what materials were on hand, and
could not be certain whether delivery systems such as dart guns, or deadly substances such
as cobra venom had been issued to the field.
b. Authorization. -- The destruction of the documents regarding MKULTRA made it difficult

to determine at what level specific projects in the program were authorized. This problem is
not solely a result of the document destruction, however. Even at the height of MKULTRA
the IG noted that, at least with respect to the surreptitious administration of LSD, the
"present practice is to maintain no records of the planning and approval of test
programs." [82]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
350 of 813
469
470 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 70 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
While it is clear that Allen Dulles authorized MKULTRA, the record is unclear as to who
authorized specific projects such as that involving the surreptitious administration of LSD to
unwitting nonvolunteer human subjects. Even given the sensitive and controversial nature of
the project, there is no evidence that when John McCone replaced Allen Dulles as the
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency he was briefed on the details of this project and
asked whether it should be continued . [83] Even during the 1963 discussions on the
propriety of unwitting testing, the DDP questioned whether it was "necessary to brief
General Carter", the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence and the Director's "alter ago,"
because CIA officers felt it necessary to keep details of the project restricted to an absolute
minimum number of people. [84]
In May of 1963, DDP Helms told the Inspector General that the covert testing program was
authorized because he had gone to the Director, briefed him on it and "the Director indicated
no disagreement and therefore the testing will continue." [85] Such authorization even for
noncontroversial matters is clearly less desirable than explicit authorization; in areas such as
the surreptitious administration of drugs, it is particularly undesirable. Yet according to
testimony
[82] IG Report on MKULTRA, 1963, p. 14.
[83] According to an assistant to Dr. Gottlieb, there were annual briefings of the DCI and the DDP on
MKULTRA by the Chief of TSD or his deputy. However, a Nay 15, 1963 Memorandum for the Record from
the Inspector General noted that Mr. McCone had not been briefed in detail about the program. Mr. McCone's
Executive Officer, Walter Elder, testified that it was "perfectly apparent to me" that neither Mr. McCone nor
General Carter, then the DDCI, was aware of the surreptitious administration project "or if they had been
briefed they had not understood it." (Elder, 12/18/75, p. 13.) Mr. McCone testified that lie "did not know"
whether he talked to anyone about the project but that no one had told him about it in a way that "would have
turned on all the lights." (John McCone testimony, 2/3/76, p. 10.)
[84] According to Elder's testimony, "no Deputy Director, to my knowledge, has ever been briefed or was it
ever thought necessary to brief them to the extent to which you would brief the Director."
[85] IG Memorandum for the Record. 5/15/63.
On the question of authorization of the covert testing program, Elder testified as follows:
"But my reasonable judgment is that this was considered to be in the area of continuing approval, having once
been approved by the Director."
The theory of authorization carrying over from one administration to the next seems particularly inappropriate
for less visible, highly sensitive operations which, unless brought to his attention by subordinates, would not
come to the attention of the Director.
-87-
before the Committee, authorization through lack of agreement is even more prevalent in
sensitive situations. [86]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
351 of 813
470
471 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 71 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The unauthorized retention of shellfish toxin by Dr. Nathan Gordon and his subordinates, in
violation of a Presidential Directive, may have resulted from the failure of the Director to
issue written instructions to Agency officials. The retention was not authorized by senior
officials in the Agency. The Director, Mr. Helms, had instructed Mr. Karamessines, the
Deputy Director of Plans, and Dr. Gottlieb, the Chief of Technical Services Division, to
relinquish control to the Army of any chemical or biological agents being retained for the
CIA at Fort Detrick. Dr. Gottlieb passed this instruction on to Dr. Gordon. While orders may
be disregarded in any organization, one of the reasons that Dr. Gordon used to defend the
retention was the fact that he had not received written instructions forbidding it. [87]
In some situations the existence of written instructions did not prevent unauthorized actions.
According to an investigation by the CIA's Inspector General TSD officers had been
informed orally that Mr. Helms was to be "advised at all times" when LSD was to be used. In
addition TSD had received a memo advising the staff that LSD was not to be used without
the permission of the DDP, Frank Wisner. The experiment involving Dr. Olson went ahead
without notification of either Mr. Wisner or Mr. Helms. The absence of clear and immediate
punishment for that act must undercut the force of other internal instructions and regulations.
One last issue must be raised about authorization procedures within the Agency. Chemical
agents were used abroad until 1959 for discrediting or disabling operations, or for the
purpose of interrogations with the approval of the Chief of Operations of the DDP. Later the
approval of the Deputy Director for Plans was required for such operations. Although the
medical staff sought to be part of the approval process for these operations, they were
excluded because, as the Inspector General wrote in 1957:
Operational determinations are the responsibility of the DDP and it is he who should advise
the DCI in these respects just as it is he who is responsible for the results. It is completely
unrealistic to consider assigning to the Chief Medical Staff, (what, in effect, would be
authority over clandestine operations.) [88]
Given the expertise and training of physicians, participation of the Medical Staff might well
have been useful.
Questions about authorization also exist in regard to those, agencies which assisted the CIA.
For instance, the project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting non-
volunteer human subjects was conducted in coordination with the Bureau of Narcotics and
Dangerous Drugs. There is some question as to the Commissioner of Narcotics' knowledge
about the project.
[86] Mr. Elder was asked whether the process of bringing forward a description of actions by the Agency in
getting approval through the absence of disagreement was a common one. He responded, "It was not
uncommon.... The more sensitive the project the more likely it would lean toward being a common practice,
based on the need to keep the written record to a minimum."
[87] Nathan Gordan testimony, 9/16/75, Hearings, Vol. 1.
[88] 1957 IG Report.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
352 of 813
471
472 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 72 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-88-
In 1963, the Inspector General noted that the head of the BNDD had been briefed about the
project, but the IG's report did not indicate the level of detail provided to him. Dr. Gottlieb
testified that "I remember meeting Mr. Anslinger and had the general feeling that he was
aware." [89] Another CIA officer did not recall any discussion of testing on unwitting
subjects when he and Dr. Gottlieb met with Commissioner Anslinger.
In a memorandum for the record in 1967 Dr. Gottlieb stated that Harry Giordano, who
replaced Mr. Anslinger, told Dr. Gottlieb that when he became Commissioner he was "only
generally briefed on the arrangements, gave it his general blessing, and said he didn't want to
know the details." The same memorandum states, however, that there were several
comments which indicated to Dr. Gottlieb that Mr. Giordano was aware of the substance of
the project. It is possible that the Commissioner provided a general authorization for the
arrangement without understanding what it entailed or considering its propriety. A reluctance
to seek detailed information from the CIA, and the CIA's hesitancy to volunteer it, has been
found in a number of instances during the Select Committee's investigations. This problem is
not confined to the executive branch but has also marked congressional relationships with
the Agency.
c. Internal Review. -- The waiver of regulations and the absence of documentation make it
difficult to determine now who authorized which activities. More importantly, they made
internal Agency review mechanisms much less effective. [90] Controversial and highly
sensitive projects which should have been subject to the most rigorous inspection lacked
effective internal review.
Given the role of the General Counsel and his reaction to the surreptitious administration of
LSD to Dr. Olson, it would have seemed likely that he would be asked about the legality or
propriety of any subsequent projects involving such administration. This was not done. He
did not learn about this testing until the 1970's. Nor was the General Counsel's opinion
sought on other MKULTRA projects, though these had been characterized by the Inspector
General in the 1957 Report on TSD as "unethical and illicit." [91]
There is no mention in the report of the 1957 Inspector General's survey of TSD of the
project involving the surreptitious administration of LSD. That project was apparently not
brought to the attention of the survey team. The Inspector who discovered it during the IG's
1963 survey of TSD recalls coming upon evidence of it inadvertently,
[89] Gottlieb, 10/18/75, p. 28.
[90] The IG's report on MKULTRA in 1963 stated:
"The original charter documents specified that TSD maintain exacting control of MKULTRA activities. in so
doing, however, TSD has pursued a philosophy of minimum documentation in keeping with the high sensitivity
of some of the projects. Some files were found to present a reasonably complete record, including most
sensitive matters, while others with parallel objectives contained little or no data at all. The lack of consistent
records precluded use of routine inspection procedures and raised a variety of questions concerning
management and fiscal controls."
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
353 of 813
472
473 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 73 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[91] CIA, Inspector General's report on TSD, 1957, p. 217.
-89-
rather than its having been called to his attention as an especially sensitive project. [92]
Thus both the General Counsel and the Inspector General, the principal internal mechanisms
for the control of possibly improper actions, were excluded from regular reviews of the
project. When the project was discovered the Executive Director Comptroller voiced strong
opposition to it; it is possible that the project would have been terminated in 1957 if it had
been called to his attention when he then served as Inspector General.
The Audit Staff, which also serves an internal review function through the examination of
Agency expenditures, also encountered substantial difficulty with MKULTRA. When
MKULTRA was first proposed the Audit Staff was to be excluded from any function. This
was soon changed. However, the waiver of normal "contractual procedures" in MKULTRA
increased the likelihood of "irregularities" as well as the difficulty in detecting them. The
head of the Audit Branch characterized the MKULTRA procedures as "having allowed
practices that produced gross administrative failures," including a lack of controls within
outside contractors which would "assure proper accountability in use of government funds."
It also diminished the CIA's capacity to verify the accountings provided by outside firms.
d. Compartmentation and Jurisdictional Conflict Within the Agency. -- As has been noted,
the testing and use of chemical and biological agents was treated as a highly sensitive
activity within the CIA. This resulted in a high degree of compartmentation. At the same
time substantial jurisdictional conflict existed within the Agency between the Technical
Services Division, and the Office of Medical Services and the Office of Security.
This compartmentation and jurisdictional conflict may well have led to duplication of effort
within the CIA and to Agency policymakers being deprived of useful information.
During the early 1950's first the BLUEBIRD Committee and then the ARTICHOKE
Committee were instituted to bring together representatives of the Agency components
which had a legitimate interest in the area of the alteration of human behavior. By 1957 both
these committees had fallen into disuse. No information went to the Technical Services
Division (a component supposedly represented on the ARTICHOKE Committee) about
ARTICHOKE operations being conducted by the Office of Security and the Office of
Medical Services. The Technical Services Division which was providing support to the
Clandestine Services in the use of chemical and biological agents, but provided little or no
information to either the Office of Security or the Office of Medical Services. As one TSD
officer involved in these programs testified: "Although we were acquainted, we certainly
didn't share experiences." [93]
[92] Even after the Inspector came upon it the IG did not perform a complete investigation of it. It was
discovered at the end of an extensive survey of TSD and the Inspector was in the process of being transferred to
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
354 of 813
473
474 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 74 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
another post within the Agency.
[93] Testimony of CIA officer, 11/21/75, p. 14.
-90-
QKHILLTOP, another group designed to coordinate research in this area also had little
success. The group met infrequently -- only twice a year -- and little specific information
was exchanged. [94]
Concern over security obviously played some role in the failure to share information, [95]
but this appears not to be the only reason. A TSD officer stated that the Office, of Medical
Services simply wasn't "particularly interested in what we were doing" and never sought
such information. [96] On the other hand, a representative of the Office of Medical Services
consistently sought to have medical personnel participate in the use of chemical and
biological agents suggested that TSD did not inform the Office of Medical Services in order
to prevent their involvement.
Jurisdictional conflict was constant in this area. The Office of Security, which had been
assigned responsibility for direction of ARTICHOKE, consistently sought to bring TSD
operations involving psychochemicals under the ARTICHOKE umbrella. The Office of
Medical Services sought to have OMS physicians advise and participate in the operational
use of drugs. As the Inspector General described it in 1957, "the basic issue is concerned
with the extent of authority that should be exercised by the Chief, Medical Staff, over the
activities of TSD which encroach upon or enter into the medical field," and which are
conducted by TSD "without seeking the prior approval of the Chief, Medical Staff, and often
without informing him of their nature and extent." [91]
As was noted previously, because the projects and programs of TSD stemmed directly from
operational needs controlled by the DDP, the IG recommended no further supervision of
these activities by the Medical Staff:
It is completely unrealistic to consider assigning to the Chief, Medical Staff, what, in effect,
would be authority over clandestine operations. Furthermore, some of the activities of
Chemical Division are not only unorthodox but unethical and sometimes illegal. The DDP is
in a better position to evaluate the justification for such operations than the Chief, Medical
Staff. [98] [Emphasis added.]
Because the advice of the Director of Security was needed for "evaluating the risks involved"
in the programs and because the knowledge that the CIA was "engaging in unethical and
illicit activities would have serious repercussions in political and diplomatic circles," the IG
recommended that the Director of Security be fully advised of TSD's activities in these areas.
Even after the Inspector General's Report of 1957, the compartmentation and jurisdictional
conflict continued. They may have had a sub-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
355 of 813
474
475 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 75 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[94] The one set of minutes from a QKHILLTOP meeting indicated that individuals in the Office of Medical
Services stressed the need for more contact.
[95] When asked why information on the surreptitious administration of LSD was not presented to the
ARTICHOKE committee, Dr. Gottlieb responded: "I imagine the only reason would have been a concern for
broadening the awareness of its existence."
[96] CIA Officer, 11/21/75, p. 14
[97] IG Survey of TSD, 1957, p. 217.
[98] Ibid.
-91-
stantial negative impact on policymaking in the Agency. As the Deputy Chief of the
Counterintelligence Staff noted in 1958, due to the different positions taken by TSS, the
Office of Security, and the Office of Medical Services, on the use of chemical or biological
agents, it was possible that the individual who authorized the use of a chemical or biological
agent could be presented with "incomplete facts upon which to make a decision relevant to
its use." Even a committee set up by the DDP in 1958 to attempt to rationalize Agency
policy did not have access to records of testing and use. This was due, in part, to excessive
compartmentation, and jurisdictional conflict.
C. Covert Testing On Human Subjects By Military Intelligence Groups:

Material Testing Program EA 1729, Project Third Change, and Project
Derby Hat
EA 1729 is the designator used in the Army drug testing program for lysergic acid
diethylamide (LSD). Interest in LSD was originally aroused at the Army's Chemical Warfare
Laboratories by open literature on the unusual effects of the compound. [99] The positive
intelligence and counterintelligence potential envisioned for compounds like LSD, and
suspected Soviet interest in such materials, [100] supported the development of an American
military capability and resulted in experiments conducted jointly by the U.S. Army
Intelligence Board and the Chemical Warfare Laboratories.
These experiments, designed to evaluate potential intelligence uses of LSD, were known
collectively as "Material Testing Program EA 1729." Two projects of particular interest
conducted as part of these experiments, "THIRD CHANCE" and "DERBY HAT", involved
the administration of LSD to unwitting subjects in Europe and the Far East.
In many respects, the Army's testing programs duplicated research which had already been
conducted by the CIA. They certainly involved the risks inherent in the early phases of drug
testing. In the Army's tests, as with those of the CIA, individual rights were also
subordinated to national security considerations; informed consent and followup
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
356 of 813
475
476 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 76 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
examinations of subjects were neglected in efforts to maintain the secrecy of the tests.
Finally, the command and control problems which were apparent in the CIA's programs are
paralleled by a lack of clear authorization and supervision in the Army's programs.
[99] USAINTC staff study, "Material Testing Program, EA 1729," 10/15/59, p. 4.
[100] This same USAINTC study cited "A 1952 (several years prior to initial U.S. interest in LSD-25) report
that the Soviets purchased a large quantity of LSD-25 from the Sandoz Company in 1951, reputed to be
sufficient for 50 million doses." (Ibid., p. 16.)
Generally accepted Soviet methods and counterintelligence concerns were also strong motivating factors in the
initiation of this research:
"A primary justification for field experimentation in intelligence with EA 1729 is the counter-intelligence or
defense implication. We know that the enemy philosophy condones any kind of coercion or violence for
intelligence purposes. There is proof that his intelligence service has used drugs in the past. There is strong
evidence of keen interest in EA 1729 by him. If for no other purpose than to know what to expect from enemy
intelligence use of the material and to, thus, be prepared to counter it, field experimentation is justified. (Ibid, p.
34)
-92-
1. Scope of Testing
Between 1955 and 1958 research was initiated by the Army Chemical Corps to evaluate the
potential for LSD as a chemical warfare incapacitating agent. In the course of this research,
LSD was administered to more than 1,000 American volunteers who then participated in a
series of tests designed to ascertain the effects of the drug on their ability to function as
soldiers. With the exception of one set of tests at Fort Bragg, these and subsequent laboratory
experiments to evaluate chemical warfare potential were conducted at the Army Chemical
Warfare Laboratories, Edgewood, Maryland.
In 1958 a new series of laboratory tests were initiated at Edgewood. These experiments were
conducted as the initial phase of Material Testing Program EA 1729 to evaluate the
intelligence potential of LSD, and included LSD tests on 95 volunteers. [101] As part of
these tests, three structured experiments were conducted:
1. LSD was administered surreptitiously at a simulated social reception to volunteer subjects

who were unaware of the purpose or nature of the tests in which they were participating;
2. LSD was administered to volunteers who were subsequently polygraphed; and
3. LSD was administered to volunteers who were then confined to "isolation chambers".
These structured experiments were designed to evaluate the validity of the traditional
security training all subjects had undergone in the face of unconventional, drug enhanced,
interrogations.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
357 of 813
476
477 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 77 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
At the conclusion of the laboratory test phase of Material Testing Program EA 1729 in 1960,
the Army Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) authorized operational field testing
of LSD. The first field tests were conducted in Europe by an Army Special Purpose Team
(SPT) during the period from May to August of 1961. These tests were known as Project
THIRD CHANCE and involved eleven separate interrogations of ten subjects. None of the
subjects were volunteers and none were aware that they were to receive LSD. All but one
subject, a U.S. soldier implicated in the theft of classified documents, were alleged to be
foreign intelligence sources or agents. While interrogations of these individuals were only
moderately successful, at least one subject (the U.S. soldier) exhibited symptoms of severe
paranoia while under the influence of the drug.
The second series of field tests, Project DERBY HAT, were conducted by an Army SPT in
the Far East during the period from August to November of 1962. Seven subjects were
interrogated under DERBY HAT, all of whom were foreign nationals either suspected of
dealing in narcotics or implicated in foreign intelligence operations. The purpose of this
second set of experiments was to collect additional data on the utility of LSD in field
interrogations, and to evaluate any different effects the drug might have on "Orientals."
[101] Inspector General of the Army Report. "Use of Volunteers in Chemical Agent Research," 3/10/76, p. 138.
-93-
2. Inadequate Coordination Among Intelligence Agencies
On October 15, 1959, the U.S. Army Intelligence Center prepared a lengthy staff study on
Material Testing Program EA 1729. The stated purpose of the staff study was: "to determine
the desirability of EA 1729 on non-US subjects in selected actual operations under controlled
conditions. [102] It was on the basis of this study that operational field tests were later
conducted.
After noting that the Chemical Warfare Laboratories began experiments with LSD on
humans in 1955 and had administered the drug to over 1,000 volunteers, the "background"
section of the study concluded:
There has not been a single case of residual ill effect. Study of the prolific scientific literature
on LSD-25 and personal communication between U.S. Army Chemical Corps personnel and
other researchers in this field have failed to disclose an authenticated instance of irreversible
change being produced in normal humans by the drug. [103]
This conclusion was reached despite an awareness that there were inherent medical dangers
in such experimentation. In the body of this same study it is noted that:
The view has been expressed that EA 1729 is a potentially dangerous drug, whose
pharmaceutical actions are not fully understood and there has been cited the possibility of the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
358 of 813
477
478 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 78 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
continuance of a chemically induced psychosis in chronic form, particularly if a latent

schizophrenic were a subject, with consequent claim or representation against the U.S.
Government. [104]
An attempt was made to minimize potential medical hazards by careful selection of subjects
prior to field tests. Rejecting evidence that the drug might be hazardous, the study continued:
The claim of possible permanent damage caused by EA 1729 is an unproven hypothesis

based on the characteristic effect of the material. While the added stress of a real situation
may increase the probability of permanent adverse effect, the resulting risk is deemed to be
slight by the medical research personnel of the Chemical Warfare Laboratories. To prevent
even such a slight risk, the proposed plan for field experimentation calls for overt, if
possible, or contrived-through-ruse, if necessary, physical and mental examination of any
real situation subject prior to employment of the subject. [105]
This conclusion was drawn six years after one death had occurred which could be attributed,
at least in part, to the effects of the very drug the Army was proposing to field test. The
USAINTC staff, however, was apparently unaware of the circumstances surrounding Dr.
Olson's death. This lack of knowledge is indicative of the
[102] USAINTC staff study, "Material Testing Program EA 1729," 10/15/59, p. 4.
[103] Ibid, p. 4.
[104] Ibid, p. 25.
[105] Ibid.
-94-
general lack of interagency communication on drug related research. As the October 1959
study noted, "there has been no coordination with other intelligence agencies up to the
present." [106]
On December 7, 1959, the Army Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ACSI, apparently
a General Willems) was briefed on the proposed operational use of LSD by USAINTC
Project Officer Jacobson, in preparation for Project THIRD CHANCE. General Willems
expressed concern that the project had not been coordinated with the FBI and the CIA. He is
quoted as saying "that if this project is going to be worth anything, it [LSD] should be used
on higher types of non-U.S. subjects" in other words "staffers." He indicated this could be
accomplished if the CIA were brought in. The summary of the briefing prepared by Major
Mehovsky continues: "Of particular note is that ACSI did not direct coordination with CIA
and the FBI but only mentioned it for consideration by the planners." [107]
After the briefing, four colonels, two lieutenant colonels and Major Mehovsky met to discuss
interagency cooperation with CIA and FBI. The group consensus was to postpone efforts
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
359 of 813
478
479 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 79 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
toward coordination:
Lt. Col. Jacobson commented that before we coordinate with CIA we should have more
factual findings from field experimentation with counterintelligence cases that will
strengthen our position and proposal for cooperation. This approach red to by the conferees.
[108]
Had such coordination been achieved, the safety of these experiments might have been
viewed differently and the tests themselves might have been seen as unnecessary.
3. Subordination of Individual Rights to National Security Considerations
Just as many of these experiments may have been unnecessary, the nature of the operational
tests (polygraph-assisted interrogations of drugged suspects) reflects a basic disregard for the
fundamental human rights of the subjects. The interrogation of an American soldier as part
of the THIRD CHANCE 1961 tests is an example of this disregard.
The "trip report" for Project THIRD CHANCE, dated September 6, 1961, recounts the
circumstances surrounding and the results of the tests as follows:
[The subject] was a U.S. soldier who had confessed to theft of classified documents.
Conventional methods had failed to ascertain whether espionage intent was involved. A
significant, new admission by subject that he told a fellow soldier of the theft while he still
had the documents in his possession was obtained during the EA 1729 interrogation along
with other variations of Subject's previous account. The interrogation results were deemed by
the local operational authority satisfactory evidence of Subject's claim of innocence in regard
to espionage intent. [109]
[106] Ibid, p. 6
[107] Mehovsky Fact Sheet, 12/9/60, p. 1.
[108] Ibid, p. 2.
[109] SPT Trip Report, Operation THIRD CHANCE, 9/6/61, p. 5.
-95-
The subject apparently reacted very strongly to the drug, and the interrogation, while
productive, was difficult. The trip report concluded:
(1) This case demonstrated the ability to interrogate a subject profitably throughout a highly
sustained and almost incapacitating reaction to EA 1729.
(2) The apparent value of bringing a subject into the EA 1729 situation in a highly stressed
state was indicated.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
360 of 813
479
480 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 80 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
(3) The usefulness of employing as a duress factor the device of inviting the subject's
attention to his EA 1729 influenced state and threatening to extend this state indefinitely
even to a permanent condition of insanity, or to bring it to an end at the discretion of the
interrogators was shown to be effective.
(4) The need for preplanned precautions against extreme paranoiac reaction to EA 1729 was
indicated.
(5) It was brought to attention by this case that where subject has undergone extended
intensive interrogation prior to the EA 1729 episode and has persisted in a version repeatedly
during conventional interrogation, adherence to the same version while under EA 1729
influence, however extreme the reaction, may not necessarily be evidence of truth but merely
the ability to adhere to a well rehearsed story. [110]
This strong reaction to the drug and the accompanying discomfort this individual suffered
were exploited by the use of traditional interrogation techniques. While there is no evidence
that physical violence or torture were employed in connection with this interrogation,
physical and psychological techniques were used in the THIRD CHANCE experiments to
exploit the subjects' altered mental state, and to maximize the stress situation. Jacobson
described these methods in his trip report:
Stressing techniques employed included silent treatment before or after EA 1729

administration, sustained conventional interrogation prior to EA 1729 interrogation,
deprivation of food, drink, sleep or bodily evacuation, sustained isolation prior to EA 1729
administration, hot-cold switches in approach, duress "pitches", verbal degradation and
bodily discomfort, or dramatized threats to subject's life or mental health. [111]
Another gross violation of an individual's fundamental rights occurred in September 1962 as

part of the Army's DERBY HAT tests in the Far East. A suspected Asian espionage agent
was given 6 micrograms of LSD per kilogram of bodyweight. The administration of the drug
was completed at 1035 that morning:
At 1120, sweating became evident, his pulse became thready. He was placed in a supine
position. He began groaning with expiration and became semicomatose. [112]
[110] Ibid, pp. 17-18.

[111] Ibid, p. 13.
[112] "DERBY HAT" Medical and Pharmacological Report: Case #1, 9/20/62, 1). p. D10-2.
-96-
For the next 28 minutes, the subject remained semicomatose.
At 1148, responses to painful stimuli were slightly improved.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
361 of 813
480
481 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 81 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
At 1155, he was helped to a sitting position.
At 1200, he became shocky again and was returned to supine position.
At 1212, he was more alert and able to sit up with help.
At 1220, Subject was assisted to the interrogation table.
At 1230, he began moaning he wanted to die and usually ignored questions. Rarely he stated
"he didn't know."
At 1250, his phasic alertness persisted. He frequently refocused his eyes with eyelid
assistance. He frequently threw his head back with eyes closed.
At 1330, he was slightly more alert. He was forced-walked for 5 minutes. He physically
would cooperate until he became shocky again (sweating, thready pulse, pale). [113]
For the next three hours the subject remained in about the same condition. Continued
attempts at interrogation yielded no relevant answers. Six hours after receiving the drug, the
subject began giving relevant answers to questions. Eight and one-half hours after the initial
dosage, the subject was polygraphed. The interrogation continued for seventeen and one-half
hours after the drug was administered.
There was some psychological and medical screening of the individuals tested within the
United States, in Europe, and in Asia. The proposal for the field experimentation in fact
called for such examinations. The fact of prescreening did not eliminate tile risk of injury;
the availability of medical staff did, however, limit injury and may well have prevented the
death of one or more of the subjects. As the medical corps member of the team which
surreptitiously administered the LSD noted, "one subject... did collapse after the
interrogation and the presence of the medical officer was not only of value to the subject but
to the interrogation team who were thus assured that an unnecessary untoward result would
not occur." [115]
In the October 15, 1959, USAINTC staff study, moral and legal ramifications of covert
administration of LSD in field conditions were considered.
It was always a tenet of Army Intelligence that the basic American principle of the dignity
and welfare of the individual will not be violated. A more meticulous regard for the
prohibition against violence or duress is taken in practice when the suspect is a US citizen or
ally as against an actual or potential enemy, in peace as against war, and in respect to the
nature of the crime.... In intelligence, the stakes involved and the interests of national
security may permit a more tolerant interpretation of moral-ethical values, but not legal
limits, through necessity. Any claim
[113] Ibid., p. D10-3.
[115] SPT Trip Report, Operation THIRD CHANCE, 7/25/61, p. 1.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
362 of 813
481
482 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 82 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-97-
against the US Government for alleged injury due to EA 1729 must be legally shown to have
been due to the material. Proper security and appropriate operational techniques can protect
the fact of employment of EA 1729. [116]
On the basis of this evaluation, the study concluded that in view of "the stakes involved and
the interests of national security," the proposed plan for field testing should be approved.
The surreptitious administration of drugs to unwitting subjects by the Army raises serious
constitutional and legal issues. The consideration given these issues by the Army was wholly
insufficient. The character of the Army's volunteer testing program and the possibility that
drugs were simply substituted for other forms of violence or duress in field interrogations
raises serious doubts as to whether national security imperatives were properly interpreted.
The "consent" forms which each American volunteer signed prior to the administration of
LSD are a case in point. These forms contained no mention of the medical and psychological
risks inherent in such testing, nor do they mention the nature of the psychotropic drug to be
administered:
The general nature of the experiments in which I have volunteered have been explained to
me from the standpoint of possible hazards to my health. It is my understanding that the
experiments are so designed, based on the results of animals and previous human
experimentation, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment. I
understand further that experiments will be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical
and medical suffering and injury, and that I will be at liberty to request that the experiments
be terminated at any time if in my opinion I have reached the physical or mental state where
continuation of the experiments becomes undesirable.
I recognize that in the pursuit of certain experiments transitory discomfort may occur. I
recognize, also, that under these circumstances, I must rely upon the skill and wisdom of the
physician supervising the experiment to institute whatever medical or surgical measures are
indicated. [Emphasis added.] [118]
The exclusion of any specific discussion of the nature of LSD in these forms raises serious
doubts as to their validity. An "understanding... that the anticipated results will justify the
performance of the experiment" without full knowledge of the nature of the experiment is an
incomplete "understanding." Similarly, the nature of the experiment limited the ability of
both the subject to request its request its termination and the experimenter to implement such
a request. Finally, the euphemistic characterization of "transitory discomfort" and the
agreement to "rely on the skill and wisdom of the physician" combine to conceal inherent
risks in the experimentation and may be viewed as dissolving the experimenter of personal
responsibility for damaging aftereffects. In summary, a "volunteer" program in which
subjects are not fully informed of potential hazards to their persons is "volunteer" in name
only.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
363 of 813
482
483 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 83 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[116] USAINTC staff study, Material Testing Program EA 1729," 10/15/59, p. 26.
[118] Sample volunteer consent form.
-98-
This problem was compounded by the security statements signed by each volunteer before
he participated in the testing. As part of this statement, potential subjects agreed that they
would:
... not divulge or make available any information related to U.S. Army Intelligence Center
interest or participation in the Department of the Army Medical Research Volunteer Program
to any individual, nation, organization, business, association, or other group or entity, not
officially authorized to receive such information.
I understand that any action contrary to the provisions of this statement will render me liable
to punishment under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. [119]
Under these provisions, a volunteer experiencing aftereffects of the test might have been
unable to seek immediate medical assistance.
This disregard for the well-being of subjects drug testing is inexcusable. Further, the absence
of any comprehensive long-term medical assistance for the subjects of these experiments is
not only unscientific; it is also unprofessional.
4. Lack of Normal Authorization and Supervision
It is apparent from documents supplied to the Committee that the Army's testing programs
often operated under informal and nonroutine authorization. Potentially dangerous
operations such as these testing programs are the very projects which ought to be subject to
the closest internal scrutiny at the highest levels of the military command structure. There are
numerous examples of inadequate review, partial consideration, and incomplete approval in
the administration of these programs.
When the first Army program to use LSD on American soldiers in "field stations" was
authorized in May 1955, the Arm violated its own procedures in obtaining approval. Under
Army Chief of Staff Memorandum 385, such proposals were to be personally approved by
the Secretary of the Army. Although the plan was submitted to him on April 26, 1956, the
Secretary issued no written authorization for the project, and there is no evidence that he
either reviewed or approved the plan. Less than a month later, the Army Chief of Staff issued
a memorandum authorizing the tests. [120]
Subsequent testing of LSD under Material Testing Program EA 1729 operated generally
under this authorization. When the plans for this testing were originally discussed in early
1958 by officials of the Army Intelligence Center at Fort Holabird and representatives of the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
364 of 813
483
484 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 84 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Chemical Warfare Center at Edgewood Arsenal, an informal proposal was formulated. This
proposal was submitted to the Medical Research Directorate at Edgewood by the President
of the Army Intelligence Board on June 3, 1958. There is no evidence that the plan was
approved at any level higher than the President of the Intelligence Board or the Commanding
General of Edgewood. The approval at Edgewood appears to have been issued by the
Commander's Adjutant. The Medical Research Laboratories did not submit the plan to the
Surgeon General for approval (a standard procedure) because
[119] Sample Volunteer Security Statement.
[120] Inspector General of the Army Report, "Use of Volunteers in Chemical Agent Research," 3/10/76, p. 109.
-99-
the new program was ostensibly covered by the authorizations granted in May 1956. [121]
The two projects involving the operational use of LSD (THIRD CHANCE and DERBY
HAT) were apparently approved by the Army Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence
(General Willems) on December 7, 1960. [122] This verbal approval came in the course of a
briefing on previous drug programs and on the planned field experimentation. There is no
record of written approval being issued by the ACSI to authorize these specific projects until
January 1961, and there is no record of any specific knowledge or approval by the Secretary
of the Army.
On February 4, 1963, Major General C. F. Leonard, Army ACSI, forwarded a copy of the
THIRD CHANCE Trip Report to Army Chief of Staff, General Earl Wheeler. [123] Wheeler
had apparently requested a copy on February 2. The report was routed through a General
Hamlett. While this report included background on the origins of the LSD tests, it appears
that General Wheeler may only have read the conclusion and recommendations. [124] The
office memorandum accompanying the Trip Report bears Wheeler's initials. [125]
5. Termination of Testing
On April 10, 1963, a briefing was held in the ACSIs office on the results of Projects THIRD
CHANCE and DERBY HAT. Both SPT's concluded that more field testing was required
before LSD could be utilized as an integral aid to counterintelligence interrogations. During
the presentation of the DERBY HAT results, General Leonard (Deputy ACSI) directed that
no further field testing be undertaken. [126] After this meeting the ACSI sent a letter to the
Commanding General of the Army Combat Developments Command (CDC) requesting that
he review THIRD CHANCE and DERBY HAT and "make a net evaluation concerning the
adoption of EA 1729 for future use as an effective and profitable aid in counterintelligence
interrogations." [127] On the same day the ACSI requested that the CDC Commander revise
regulation FM 30-17 to read in part:
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
365 of 813
484
485 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 85 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
... in no instance will drugs be used as an aid to interrogations in counterintelligence or

security operations without prior permission of the Department of the Army. Requests to use
drugs as an investigative aid will be forwarded through intelligence channels to the ACSI,
DA, for approval....
Medical research has established that information obtained through the use of these drugs is
unreliable and invalid....
It is considered that DA [Army] approval must be a prerequisite for use of such drugs
because of the moral, legal, medical and political problems inherent in their use for
intelligence purposes. [128]
[121] Ibid, pp. 135, 137, 138.

[122] Mehovsky Fact Sheet, 12/9/60.
[123] Memorandum from Leonard to Wheeler, 2/4/63.
[124] SGS memorandum to Wheeler through Hamlett, 2/5/63.
[125] Ibid.
[126] Maj. F. Barnett, memorandum for the record, 8/12/63.
[127] Yamaki memorandum for the record, 7/16/63.
[128] Ibid.
-100-
The subsequent adoption of this regulation marked the effective termination of field testing
of LSD by the Army.
The official termination date of these testing Programs is rather unclear, but a later ACSI
memo indicates that it may have occurred in September of 1963. On the 19th of that month a
meeting was held between Dr. Van Sims (Edgewood Arsenal), Major Clovis (Chemical
Research Laboratory), and ACSI representatives (General Deholm and Colonel Schmidt).
"As a result of this conference a determination was made to suspend the program and any
further activity pending a more profitable and suitable use." [129]
D. Cooperation And Competition Among The Intelligence Community

Agencies And Between These Agencies And Other Individuals And
Institutions
1. Relationships Among Agencies Within the Intelligence Community
Relationships among intelligence community agencies in this area varied considerably over
time, ranging from full cooperation to intense and wasteful competition. The early period
was marked by a high degree of cooperation among the agencies of the intelligence
community. Although the military dominated research involving chemical and biological
agents, the information developed was shared with the FBI and the CIA. But the spirit of
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
366 of 813
485
486 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 86 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
cooperation did not continue. The failure by the military to share information apparently
breached the spirit, if not the letter, of commands from above.
As noted above, the Army Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence was briefed on the
proposed operational testing of LSD under Project THIRD CHANCE, and expressed
concern that the project had not been coordinated with FBI and CIA. Despite this request, no
coordination was achieved between the Army and either of these agencies. Had such
cooperation been forthcoming, this project may have been evaluated in a different light.
The competition between the agencies in this area reached bizarre levels. A military officer
told a CIA representative in confidence about the military's field testing of LSD in Europe
under Project THIRD CHANCE, and the CIA promptly attempted to learn surreptitiously the
nature and extent of the program. At roughly the same time Mr. Helms argued to the DDCI
that the unwitting testing program should be continued, as it contributed to the CIA's
capability in the area and thus allowed the CIA "to restrain others in the intelligence
community (such as the Department of Defense) from pursuing operations. [130]
The MKNAOMI program was also marked by a failure to share information. The Army
Special Forces (the principal customer of the Special Operations Division at Fort Dietrick)
and the CIA rather than attempting to coordinate their efforts promulgated different
requirements which varied only slightly. This apparently resulted in some duplication of
effort. In order to insure the security of CIA operations, the Agency would request materials
from SOD for operational use without fully or accurately describing the operational
requirements. This resulted in limitations on SOD's ability to assist the CIA.
[129] Undated ASCI memorandum, p. 2.
[130] Memorandum from the DDP to the DCI, 11/9/64, p. 2.
-101-
2. Relationship Between the Intelligence Community Agencies and Foreign Liaison Services
The subjects of the CIA's operational testing of chemical and biological agents abroad were
generally being held for interrogation by foreign intelligence or security organizations.
Although information about the use of drugs was generally withheld from these
organizations, cooperation with them necessarily jeopardized the security of CIA interest in
these materials. Cooperation also placed the American Government in a position of
complicity in actions which violated the rights of the subjects, and which may have violated
the laws of the country in which the experiments took place.
Cooperation between the intelligence agencies and organizations in foreign countries was not
limited to relationships with the intelligence or internal security organizations. Some
MKULTRA research was conducted abroad. While this is, in itself, not a questionable
practice, it is important that such research abroad not be undertaken to evade American laws.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
367 of 813
486
487 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 87 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
That this was a possibility is suggested by an ARTICHOKE memorandum in which it is

noted that working with the scientists of a foreign country "might be very advantageous"
since that government "permitted certain activities which were not permitted by the United
States government (i.e., experiments on anthrax, etc.)." [131]
3. The Relationships Between the Intelligence Community Agencies and Other Agencies of
the U.S. Government
Certain U.S. government agencies actively assisted the efforts of intelligence agencies in this
area. One form of assistance was to provide "cover" for research contracts let by intelligence
agencies, in order to disguise intelligence community interest in chemical and biological
agents.
Other forms of assistance raise more serious questions. Although the CIA's project involving
the surreptitious administration of LSD was conducted by Bureau of Narcotics personnel,
there was no open connection between the Bureau personnel and the Agency. The Bureau
was serving as a "cut-out" in order to make it difficult to trace Agency participation. The cut-
out arrangement, however, reduced the CIA's ability to control the program. The Agency
could not control the process by which subjects were selected and cultivated, and could not
regulate follow-up after the testing. Moreover, as the CIA's Inspector General noted: "the
handling of test subjects in the last analysis rests with the [Bureau of Narcotics] agent
working alone. Suppression of knowledge of critical results from the top CIA management is
an inherent risk in these operations." [132] The arrangement also made it impossible for the
Agency to be certain that the decision to end the surreptitious administration of LSD would
be honored by the Bureau personnel.
The arrangement with the Bureau of Narcotics was described as "informal." [133] The
informality of the arrangement compounded the problem is aggravated by the fact that the 40
Committee has had vir-
[131] ARTICHOKE Memorandum, 6/13/52.

[132] IG Report on MKULTRA, 1963, p.14.
[133] Ibid This was taken by one Agency official to mean that there would be no written contract and no formal
mechanism for payment. (Eider, 12/18/75, p. 31.)
-102-
apparent unwillingness on the part of the Bureau's leadership to ask for details, and the CIA's
hesitation in volunteering information. These problems raise serious questions of command
and control within the Bureau.
4. Relationships Between the Intelligence Community Agencies and Other Institutions and
Individuals, Public and Private
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
368 of 813
487
488 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 88 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The Inspector General's 1963 Survey of MKULTRA noted that "the research and
development" phase was conducted through standing arrangements with "specialists in
universities, pharmaceutical houses, hospitals, state and federal institutions, and private
research organizations" in a manner which concealed "from the institution the interests of the
CIA." Only a few "key individuals" in each institution were "made witting of Agency
sponsorship." The research and development phase was succeeded by a phase involving
physicians, toxicologists, and other specialists in mental, narcotics, and general hospitals and
prisons, who are provided the products and findings of the basic research projects and
proceed with intensive testing on human subjects." [134]
According to the Inspector General, the MKULTRA testing programs were "conducted
under accepted scientific procedures... where health permits, test subjects are voluntary
participants in the programs." [135] This was clearly not true in the project involving the
surreptitious administration of LSD, which was marked by a complete lack of screening,
medical supervision, opportunity to observe, or medical or psychological follow-up.
The intelligence agencies allowed individual researchers to design their project. Experiments
sponsored by these researchers (which included one where narcotics addicts were sent to
Lexington, Kentucky, who were rewarded with the drug of their addiction in return for
participation in experiments with LSD) call into question the decision by the agencies not to
fix guidelines for the experiments.
The MKULTRA research and development program raises other questions, as well. It is not
clear whether individuals in prisons, mental, narcotics and general hospitals can provide
"informed consent" to participation in experiments such as these. There is doubt as to
whether institutions should be unwitting of the ultimate sponsor of research being done in
their facilities. The nature of the arrangements also made it impossible for the individuals
who were not aware of the sponsor of the research to exercise any choice about their
participation based on the sponsoring organization.
Although greater precautions are now being taken in research conducted on behalf of the
intelligence community agencies, the dilemma of classification remains. The agencies
obviously wished to conceal their interest in certain forms of in order to avoid stimulating
interest in the same areas by hostile governments. In some cases today contractors or
researchers wish to conceal their connection with these agencies. Yet the fact of
classification prevents open discussion and debate upon which scholarly work depends.
[134] Ibid p. 9.
[135] Ibid p. 10.

Material
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
369 of 813
488
489 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 89 of 258
1977 Senate MKULTRA Hearing: Appendix B--Documents Referring To Discovery Of ... Page 1 of 5
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
APPENDIX B
Documents Referring To Discovery
Of Additional MKULTRA Material
[document begins] [View JPEG Document Scan of This Page]
22 June 1977
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
THROUGH: Deputy Director for Science and Technology
SUBJECT: Request for Guidance on Handling Recently Located MKULTRA Material
1. (U/AIUO) This memorandum is to advise you that additional MKULTRA documents

have been discovered and to obtain your approval for follow-on actions required. Paragraph
7 contains a recommended course of action.
2. (U/AIUO) As a result of John Marks FOIA request (F-76-374), all of the MKULTRA
material in OTS possession was reviewed for possible release to him. Following that
review, the OTS material in the Retired Records Center was searched. It was during that
latter search that the subproject files were located among the retired records of the OTS
Budget and Fiscal Section. These files were not discovered earlier as the earlier searches
were limited to the examination of the active and retired records of those branches
considered most likely to have generated or have had access to MKULTRA documents.
Those branches included: Chemistry, Biological, Behavioral Activities, and Contracts
Management. Because Dr. Gottlieb retrieved and destroyed all the MKULTRA documents
he was able to locate, it is not surprising that the earlier search for MKULTRA documents,
directed at areas where they were most likely to be found, was unsuccessful. The purpose of
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
370 of 813
489
490 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 90 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/AppendixB.htm 1/22/2009
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
establishing the MKULTRA mechanism was to limit knowledge of the sensitive work being
performed to those with an absolute need to know. If those precepts had been followed, the
recently found B&F files should have contained only financial and administrative
documents. (In retrospect, I realize that
-104- [View JPEG Document Scan of This Page]
a serious error was made in not having B&F files and other seemingly innocuous files
searched earlier.) As it happened most of the individual subproject folders contain project
proposals and memoranda for the record, which in varying degrees, give a reasonably
complete picture of the avenues of research funded through MKULTRA. For your
information, the original memorandum setting up MKULTRA, signed by Mr. Dulles, is also
among these documents. A copy of the memorandum is attached.
3. (U/AIUO) At this writing, it does not appear that there is anything in these newly
located files that would indicate the MKULTRA activities were more extensive or more
controversial than indicated by the Senate Select (Church) Committee Report. If anything,
the reverse is true, i.e., most of the nearly 200 subprojects are innocuous. Thus, the
overview of MKULTRA is essentially unchanged. With two exceptions, the project find
fills in some of the missing details.
4. (U/AIUO) One of these exceptions is Subproject Number 45 which concerns an

activity that should have been reported earlier. That project deals with the search for a
knockout drug which was concomitant with, and a by-product of, cancer research at a major
university. It is believed that an objective reading of that project would demonstrate the
search for knockout materials and anesthetics were compatible activities. However, the
research proposal stated that "chemical agents... will be subjected to clinical screening... on
advanced cancer patients".
5. (C) Subproject Number 55 contains full details of CIA's contribution of $375,000 to

the [deletion] Building Fund. The Agency was then involved in drug research programs,
many of which were being conducted by [deletion] whose facilities were inadequate. In
order to facilitate the ongoing research programs, it was decided to expedite the building
program by contributing to it through a mechanism that was also being used to fund some
of the research projects.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
371 of 813
490
491 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 91 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The contribution could be controversial in that it was made through a mechanism making it
appear to be a private donation. Private donations qualified for, and [deletion] received, an
equal amount of Federal matching funds. A letter from the Office of General Counsel dated
21 February 1954 attesting to the legality of this funding is in the file.
6. (U/AIUO) The Legislative Counsel has been made aware of the existence of these
additional MKULTRA documents which are still under review and sanitation. The MARKS
case is in litigation and we are committed to advise Mr. Marks of the existence of these files
shortly, and to deliver the releasable material to his attorneys by 31 July. A letter from the
Information and Privacy Staff to Mr. Marks' attorneys informing them of the existence of
this material is in the coordination process and is scheduled to be mailed on 24 June.
7. (U/AIUO) There are now two actions that should be taken:
a. Release appropriately sanitized material to Mr. Marks' attorneys as required by

FOIA litigation.
b. Inform the Senate Select Committee of the existence of the recently located records
prior to informing Mr. Marks' attorneys.
It is recommended that you approve of both of these actions.
8. (U/AIUO) If additional details on the contents of this material are desired, the OIS
officers most familiar with it are prepared to brief you at your convenience.
[signature]
David S. Brandwein
Director
Office of Technical Service
[document ends]
[document begins]
The Director of Central Intelligence
The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye, Chairman
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
372 of 813
491
492 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 92 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Select Committee on Intelligence

United States Senate
Dear Mr. Chairman:
During the course of 1975 when the Senate Committee, chaired by Senator Church, was
investigating intelligence activities, the CIA was asked to produce documentation on a
program of experimentation with the effect of drugs. Under this project conducted from
1953 to 1964 and known as "MK-ULTRA," tests were conducted on American citizens in
some cases without their knowledge. The CIA, after searching for such documentation,
reported that most of the documents on this matter have been destroyed. I find it my duty to
report to you now that our continuing search for drug related, as well as other documents,
has uncovered certain papers which bear on this matter. Let me hasten to add that I am
persuaded that there was no previous attempt to conceal this material in the original 1975
exploration. The material recently discovered was in the retired archives filed under
financial accounts and only uncovered by using extraordinary and extensive search efforts.
In this connection, incidentally, I have personally commended the employee whose
diligence produced this find.
Because the new material now on hand is primarily of a financial nature, it does not
present a complete picture of the field of drug experimentation activity but it does provide
more detail than was previously available to us. For example, the following types of
activities were undertaken:
a. Possible additional cases of drugs being tested on American citizens, without their
knowledge.
b. Research was undertaken on surreptitious methods of administering drugs.
c. Some of the persons chosen for experimentation were drug addicts or alcoholics.
d. Research into the development of a knockout or "K" drug was performed in

conjunction with being done to develop pain killers for advanced cancer patients, and tests
on such patients were carried out.
e. There is a possibility of an improper payment to a private institution.
The drug related activities described in this newly located material began almost 25 years
ago. I assure you they were discontinued over 10 years ago and do not take place today.
In keeping with the President's commitment to disclose any errors of the Intelligence
Community which are uncovered, I would like to volunteer to testify before your
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
373 of 813
492
493 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 93 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Committee on the full details of this unfortunate series of events. I am in the process of
reading the fairly voluminous material involved and do want to be certain that I have a
complete picture when I talk with the Committee. I will be in touch with you next week to
discuss when hearings might be scheduled at the earliest opportunity.
I regret having to bring this issue to your attention, but I know that it is essential to your
oversight procedures that you be kept fully informed in a timely manner.
Yours sincerely,
[signature]
STANSFIELD TURNER
[document ends]

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
374 of 813
493
494 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 94 of 258
1977 Senate MKULTRA Hearing: Appendix C--Documents Referring to Subprojects Page 1 of 59
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
APPENDIX C
Documents Referring To Subprojects
DRAFT
1 May 1953
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT: Project MKULTRA, Subproject 2
1. Subproject 2 is being set up to provide a secure and

efficient means to exploit [deletion] in regard to the MKULTRA
program.
2. [deletion] is a practicing psychiatrist in [deletion] and a

faculty member of the [deletion] His past positions have included
Chief Neuropsychiatrist at [deletion] Chief of the Psychiatric
Section at [deletion] and OSS experience during World War II.
He has been of value in the general MKULTRA field as an
overall advisor and consultant, he has been of value in containing
individuals in the [deletion] area and in setting up projects there,
and he has done work himself which has contributed to the
MKULTRA field. His professional activities and known
connections with the [deletion]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
375 of 813
494
495 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 95 of 258
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/AppendixC.htm 1/22/2009
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3. Subproject 2 would include:
a. Miscellaneous research and testing services in the

general field of MKULTRA.
b. Services as a contact and cut-out for projects in the

MKULTRA field, primarily those located in the [deletion] area.
c. Monitoring of selected projects in the MKULTRA field,

when located in the central [deletion] area.
d. Services as a general consultant and advisor in the

MKULTRA field.
4. The total cost of this project is not to exceed $4,650.00 for

a period of one year.
5. [deletion] is cleared through TOP SECRET on a contact

basis.
[signature deleted]
Chemical Division/TSS
[Multiple deletions at bottom of page]
APPROVED:
[multiple deletions]
APPROVED:
[Sidney Gottlieb signature]
Chief, Chemical Division/TSS
PROGRAM APPROVED
AND RECOMMENDED:
[signature deleted]
For Research Chairman
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
376 of 813
495
496 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 96 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Date: May 5, 1953
Attachment:
Proposal
APPROVED FOR
OBLIGATION OF FUNDS:
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: May 5, 1953
Original Only.
[multiple deletions at bottom of page]
[document ends]
[document begins]
[deletion at top of page]
PROPOSAL
Objective: To study the possible synergistic action of drugs

which may be appropriate for use in abolishing consciousness.
Proposal: Allocation of $1000 for animal experiments, to be

drawn on as needed. That experiments be conducted informally
at [deletion] without a specific grant, and with appropriate cover.
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
377 of 813
496
497 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 97 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
[deletion]
PROPOSAL
Objective: To study methods for the administration of drugs

without the knowledge of the patient. Preparation of a manual.
Method: A survey of methods which have been used by

criminals for surreptitious administration of drugs. Analysts of
the psychodynamics of situations of this nature.
Proposal: That $1000 be allocated for this purpose, funds to be

requested as needed.
[document ends]
[document begins]
DRAFT/[deletion]
11 August 1955
MEMORANDUM FOR: THE RECORD

SUBJECT: Project MKULTRA, Subproject [deletion] 2
1. Subproject 2[deletion]is being initiated to provide secure

and efficient means of exploiting [deletion] with regard to the
MKULTRA program.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
378 of 813
497
498 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 98 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
2. [deletion] is a practicing psychiatrist in [deletion] and a

faculty member of [deletion] He has been of value in the general
MKULTRA project, serving as an advisor and consultant,
contacting individuals in the [deletion] area, and carrying out his
own research program.
3. Subproject 2 [deletion] would include the following:
(a) Miscellaneous research and testing services in the general

field of MKULTRA.
(b) Services as a contact and cutout for projects in the

MKULTRA field, primarily those located in the [deletion]
(c) Monitoring of selected projects in the MKULTRA field,

when located in the central [deletion]
(d) Services as a general consultant and advisor in the

MKULTRA field.
(e) He would act as medical advisor and consultant to

[deletion] and his [deletion] establishment.
4. [deletion] will be reimbursed for his services and expenses

upon receipt of an invoice at irregular intervals. When travel
expenses are incurred through use of a common carrier, they will
be documented and reimbursed in the usual manner; that is,
consistent with standard Government allowances.
[document ends]
[document begins]
DRAFT [deletion]
2 October 1953
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
379 of 813
498
499 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 99 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1. Subproject 15 is a continuation of Subproject 3, which

involved the establishment and maintenance of facilities for the
realistic testing of certain research and development items of
interest to CD/TSS and APD/TSS. The facilities were set up
under Subproject 3, and Subproject 16 is intended to provide for
the continued maintenance of the facilities.
2. Subproject 3 was originally intended to provide funds for

the maintenance of the facilities for one year; but it turns out that
the costs of alterations, equipment, and initial supplies were
under-estimated in Subproject 3; hence the necessity to establish
Subproject 16 at this time.
3. Subproject 16 will be conducted by [deletion] a [deletion]

Certain support activities will be provided by CD/TSS and
APD/TSS.
4. The estimated cost for a period of one year is $7,740.00.
[deletion]
SIDNEY GOTTLIEB
Chief
Chemical Division, TSS
PROGRAM APPROVED
AND RECOMMENDED:
[signature deleted]
Research Chairman
Date: -------------
APPROVED FOR OBLIGATION

OF FUNDS:
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: 13 Oct 1953
TOP SECRET
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
380 of 813
499
500 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 100 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
[deletion]
May 26, 1953
Dear [deletion]
After our telephone conversation this morning I went to [one

line deleted] and opened an account -- regular checking -- in the
amount of $100.00 using the name [deletion]
It occurred to me that for sake of safety -- if, for example,

anything should happen to me -- it would simplify matters if I
made this a joint account between [deletion] and [deletion] Then,
in case of my absence, illness or death you could recover the
joint funds without any legal difficulties or monkey business.
The bank was a little sticky about opening an account in the

absences of "references" from another bank, and also found it
hard to understand how [deletion] got by all these years without
a bank account. However, I offered to provide an excellent
reference in a government official, a [deletion] who is [deletion]
at [deletion] and that seemed to placate the money-lenders.
Thereafter, I communicated with [deletion] and he immediately
wrote a reference for [deletion] on official stationary. [deletion]
also kindly said he was well acquainted with [deletion] and was
pleased to offer for him a similar recommendation.
If you think this is a good idea, I suggest you sign the Joint
Account Agreement and the three signature cards enclosed and
return them to me.
And now that the account is opened I suggest you have funds
deposited via Cashier's check -- or any other way that seems
easiest -- directly to [deleted] account.
I ordered checks printed with [deleted] name thereon and

have also ordered stationary bearing [deleted] name. I considered
this might facilitate payment of bills, etc., by mail.
What with suspicious banks, landlords, utility companies,

etc., you will understand that creating the Jekyll-Hyde
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
381 of 813
500
501 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 101 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
personality in the form of [deleted] is taking a little "doing".
See you Monday, the 8th
Rgds,
[deleted]
[document ends]
[document begins]
1. The scope of this project is intended to encompass all those

activities now engaged in by the [deleted] in its own facilities
under the direction of CD/TSS. At the present time the various
projects at this facility ([deleted] and [deleted]) are being
concluded and it is deemed desirable from the standpoint of
security and efficiency to replace these projects with a single
project more general in its approach.
2. The attached proposal from Dr. [deleted] indicates the

extent of the investigations that his facilities will allow him to
carry out on the materials developed in the three projects referred
to in paragraph 1, as well as certain other materials of interest to
Cd/TSS. Dr. [deleted] also serves as a general consultant to this
division and provides cover and cut-out facilities to the Agency.
3. The total cost of this project for a period of one year will
not exceed $42,700.00.
4. Dr. [deleted] has been granted a Top Secret Clearance by

the Agency and is fully capable of projecting the security of the
Government's interest in such matters as this.
[signature deleted]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
382 of 813
501
502 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 102 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
APPROVED:
[signature deleted]
Chief, Chemical Division, TSS
PROGRAM APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED:

[signature deleted]
Exec. [illegible] Res. Ed.
Date: Jan 28 1954
APPROVED FOR OBLIGATION OF FUNDS:

[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: 28 Jan 1954
Attachment: Proposal
[document ends]
[document begins]
The present investigation is concerned with chemical agents

which are effective in modifying the behavior and function of the
central nervous system.
1 - It is proposed to study a variety of known drugs in this

pharmacological class that are in present day use and to
synthesize new chemical agents or to modify existing ones as
occasion may demand.
2 - The various chemical agents investigated or synthesized will

be tested on animals to determine their acute and chronic
toxicity. Their pharmacological effects will be studied by a
variety of assay technics, such as blood pressure determinations,
bronchial dilation recordings, endocrine effects, etc. Complete
animal facilities will be maintained for this purpose and
pathologic study will be carried out on the affected organs when
the animals are sacrificed.
3 - Preliminary clinical investigation will be carried out on the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
383 of 813
502
503 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 103 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
more promising chemical agents, and appropriate laboratory

procedures will be performed, such as blood counts, uninalysis,
etc. to determine the effectiveness and the side reactions of the
drugs under investigation.
4 - Adequate reports will be submitted of the findings at

quarterly intervals.
5 - Proposed budget:
Personnel
Synthetic organic chemist..................$7,500.00

Research medical associate.................$6,500.00
Pharmacological assistant..................$5,500.00
Chemical assistant.........................$4,000.00
Histology technician.......................$2,400.00
Clinical technician........................$3,600.00
Chemical consultant........................$1,200.00
Total salaries for personnel..............$30,700.00
Other Expenditures
Animals, animal maintenance & facilities...$4,000.00

Chemical & laboratory supplies, expendable $4,000.00
Miscellaneous permanent equipment..........$2,000.00
Travel, medical meetings, etc..............$2,000.00
Total other expenditures..................$12,000.00
TOTAL.....................................$42,700.00
[document ends]
[document begins]
DRAFT [deleted]
8 October 1954
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
384 of 813
503
504 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 104 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
SUBJECT: Increase in the Scope of Subproject 23, Project

MKULTRA
1. Due to a considerable increase in the scope of the work

undertaken by [deleted] at the direction of TSS/CD under
Subproject 23, Project MKULTRA, the $42,700.00 sum
originally obligated for this work is insufficient to cover the
year's costs. It is therefore proposed to add $15,000.00 to that
already obligated under this Subproject.
2. The total cost of this Subproject for the period 28 January

1954 to 28 January 1955 will thus amount to $57,700.00.
3. The increase in scope responsible for this proposal consists

of the development and partial financing of two new sources of
biologically active compounds of interest in the program
TSS/CD is carrying out.
[signature deleted]

[deleted]
Research Director
Date: October 11, 1954
APPROVED:
Chief, Chemical Division, TSS
Original Only.
[handwritten notes at bottom of page:]
1) [deleted]
2) [deleted]
The additional compounds are derivatives of tryptomine not
available from any other sources.
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
385 of 813
504
505 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 105 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
25 August 1955
SUBJECT: Authorization for Payment of Certain Expenses

Under Project MKULTRA, Subproject 23
1. In order to carry on the work of the above Subproject, it

was necessary to test the effects of certain chemical substances
when administered to test the effects of certain chemical
substances when administered to human beings. Certain of the
anticipated effects involved mental functions which precluded
the use of mental defectives for this particular study.
2. In view of these circumstances the project engineer, with

verbal approval from his chief, authorized the contractor to pay
the hospitals expenses of certain persons suffering from
incurable cancer for the privilege of studying the effects of these
chemicals during their terminal illnesses. The total funds
expended in this fashion amounted to $658.05 and full value was
received.
3. It is requested that the Chief, TSS indicate his knowledge

and approval of this particular expenditure for audit purposes.
[signature deleted]
TSS/Chemical Division
APPROVED:
[signature deleted]
[deleted] Chief, TSS
APPROVED:
Chief, TSS/Chemical Division
August 31, 1955
Distribution:
Orig. - TSS/CD
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
386 of 813
505
506 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 106 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document ends]
[document begins]
21 December 1954
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence
1. While the Director's statutory authority to expend funds for

confidential purposes is not limited by law, we believe that a gift
of Government funds as such would exceed the intent of the
Congress in granting that power. However, where a gift is made
for the express purpose of producing something of value to this
Agency which cannot otherwise be obtained and there is
reasonable expectation that the value may be received, the gift
may in effect be an expenditure for proper official purposes.
2. In Subproject 35, it is stated that the donation in question

would achieve certain ends desired by TSS. There seems to be no
question that those ends would be advantageous, so the main
questions appear to be whether they could not be attained by
more direct, normal methods, and, if not, whether the return is
necessary and reasonable in relation to the donation.
3. We are in no position to review the requirements of TSS or

to appraise the advantages that would result from this project.
We do not comment, therefore, on the value received if the
project results in the benefits foreseen . We feel we should
comment on factors affecting the probability of achieving those
ends. In a legal sense, there is little or no control. Once the funds
are donated, the individual, his foundation, or the hospital could
conceivably refuse to work for us or allow us the use of the
facilities.
4. Practically, the control seems to be established as well as

circumstances permit. Certainly, as long as the individual is alive
and in his present position, we have every reason to expect his
complete cooperation in the future as in the past, unless through
some act or fault of our own he is alienated. Even in the event of
his death or incapacity, there appears to be a reasonable
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
387 of 813
506
507 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 107 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
chance of continuing the project. If these probabilities appear

sufficient to obtain an adequate return for the expenditure, there
can be no legal objection to this aspect of the project.
5. It should be noted that there are two circumstances which

require consideration in a final determination. As stated in
Section V, our contribution, by appearing to be from a private
source, would increase the matching Government contribution by
a similar amount which would not be the case if it were known
that this was in fact a Government contribution also. Secondly, it
is the stated policy of the hospital to charge the Government and
commercial organizations 80 per cent overhead on research
contracts, whereas nonprofit foundations pay only direct costs
but no overhead. Because of the ostensible source, our projects
will not be charged overhead. This could be construed as morally
wrongful to the hospital, as normally we would pay the 80 per
cent overhead charge for projects performed directly for us, but I
believe this can be offset, at least to the amount of our donation,
and perhaps by the further amount by which the other
Government contributions are increased by our donation. In any
case, if the project is a proper one and must be performed in this
manner, security dictates these circumstances and they, therefore,
do not present a legal obstacle as such.
6. We raised the question whether funds for the hospital

construction could not be obtained from other normal charitable
sources. It appeared that there was a strong possibility that the
individual concerned could raise adequate funds from private
resources, but it was the position of TSS that if this were the case
we would not obtain the commitment from the individual and the
degree of control which this project is designed to achieve.
[Lawrence R. Houston signature]

LAWRENCE R. HOUSTON
General Counsel
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
388 of 813
507
508 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 108 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
[deletion]
8 April 1955
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, DD/P/TSS
SUBJECT: Amendment to Subproject 35 of Project MKULTRA
We have noted your memorandum of 6 April 1955 to the

Director requesting an increase of $250,000 for the TSS R&D
budget for this Project. This request does not affect in any way
the comments in my memorandum of 21 December 1954.
[deletion]
General Counsel
[document ends]
[document begins]
DRAFT
[deletion]
5 May 1955
A portion of the Research and Development Program of

TSS/Chemical Division is devoted to the discovery of the
following materials and methods:
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
389 of 813
508
509 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 109 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1. Substances which will promote illogical thinking and

impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be
discredited in public.
2. Substances which increase the efficiency of mentation and

perception.
3. Materials which will prevent or counteract the intoxicating

effect of alcohol.
4. Materials which will promote the intoxicating effect of

alcohol.
5. Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of

recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used
for malingering, etc.
6. Materials which will render the induction of hypnosis

easier or otherwise enhance its usefulness.
7. Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to

withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation
and so-called "brain-washing".
8. Materials and physical methods which will produce

amnesia for events preceding and during their use.
9. Physical methods of producing shock and confusion over

extended periods of time and capable of surreptitious use.
10. Substances which produce physical disablement such as

paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.
-2-
11. Substances which will produce "pure" euphoria with no

subsequent let-down.
12. Substances which alter personality structure in such a way

that the tendency of the recipient to become dependent upon
another person is enhanced.
13. A material which will cause mental confusion of such a

type that the individual under its influence will find it difficult to
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
390 of 813
509
510 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 110 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
maintain a fabrication under questioning.
14. Substances which will lower the ambition and general

working efficiency of men when administered in undetectable
amounts.
15. Substances which promote weakness or distortion of the

eyesight or hearing faculties, preferably without permanent
effects.
16. A knockout pill which can surreptitiously be administered

in drinks, food, cigarettes, as an aerosol, etc., which will be safe
to use, provide a maximum of amnesia, and be suitable for use
by agent types on an ad hoc basis.
17. A material which can be surreptitiously administered by

the above routes and which in very small amounts will make it
impossible for a man to perform any physical activity
whatsoever.
The development of materials of this type follows the

standard practice of such ethical drug houses as [deletion] It is a
relatively routine procedure to develop a drug to the point of
human testing. Ordinarily, the drug houses depend upon the
services of private physicians for the final clinical testing. The
physicians are willing to assume the responsibility of such tests
in order to advance the science of medicine. It is difficult and
sometimes impossible for TSS/CD to offer such an inducement
with respect to its products. In practice, it has been possible to
use outside cleared contractors for the preliminary phases of this
work. However, that part which involves human testing at
effective dose levels presents security problems which cannot be
handled by the ordinary contractor.
-3-
The proposed facility [deletion] offers a unique opportunity

for the secure handling of such clinical testing in addition to the
many advantages outlined in the project proposal. The security
problems mentioned above are eliminated by the fact that the
responsibility for the testing will rest completely upon the
physician and the hospital. [one line deleted] will allow TSS/CD
personnel to supervise the work very closely to make sure that all
tests are conducted according to the recognized practices and
embody adequate safeguards.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
391 of 813
510
511 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 111 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document ends]
[document begins]
10 May 1955
SUBPROJECT 35 OF PROJECT MKULTRA
1. Subproject 35 as approved by the DCI on 15 January 1955

contemplated a financial contribution of $125,000 to the
[deletion] to participate in the construction of a new research
wing to cost $3,000,000 exclusive of furnishings and equipment.
Agency funds will be transmitted through the [deletion] as cut-
out which will result in one-sixth of the space in the new
research wing being made available for Agency-sponsored
research involving covert biological and chemical techniques of
warfare.
2. At that time (15 January 1955) [deletion] with CIA

encouragement indicated a willingness to contribute $500,000 to
the construction fund. The building fund was to have been raised
as follows:
$1,000,000 - Contributed by [deletion]

250,000 - Donation from [deletion] of which $125,000 to be
supplied by CIA
1,250,000 - Matching funds under Public Law 221 equal to
the amount of the two above contributions
500,000 - [deletion]
_________________
$3,000,000 - TOTAL
4. The Agency's contribution would thus total $375,000. This

investment, together with the equal sum resulting from matched
funds, is fully justified in the opinion of TSS for reasons which
will be explained by [deletion] Chief, TSS, and Dr. Sidney
Gottlieb, Chief, TSS/Chemical Division. The scope of subproject
35 has not changed since the Director originally approved a
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
392 of 813
511
512 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 112 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
request by TSS for permission to spend $125,000 of available
[handwritten note:]
Resume of project circulated to members of [illegible] at meeting

on 11 May '55
[deletion] funds for this purpose through the controls and

procedures established for MKULTRA. At the time subproject
35 was set up within the scope of the TSS R&D program,
security considerations and cover arrangements were carefully
reviewed, and the Office of General Counsel assisted in legal
determinations. With the exception of funding arrangements, no
changes to the program have since been made.
5. Funds to cover the previously approved sum of $125,000 are

available within the TSS [deletion] budget for FY 55 and have
been set aside. The TSS budget, however, lacks funds with
which to cover the supplemental sum of $250,000, and it is
requested that the TSS [deletion] budget be increased by this
amount. Supplementary funds available for subproject 35 can
definitely be obligated by the end of FY 55.
-2-
[document ends]
[document begins]
AMENDMENT TO SUBPROJECT 35, PROJECT MKULTRA
For the Purpose of Establishing a Cover Organization for Highly

Sensitive Projects in the Field of Biological, Chemical and
Radiological Warfare
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
393 of 813
512
513 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 113 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
I. Background on Subproject 35.
In January 1955 approval was given by the DCI to Subproject 35

of Project MKULTRA. The documents which lead this approval
(including comments of the OGC) are attached herewith as Tabs
2, A and 3.
Project MKULTRA is the framework of procedures and controls

under which research projects in certain highly sensitive fields
are carried out by TSS. A description of the background of
Project MKULTRA may be found on page 1 of Tab A.
Subproject 35 establishes cover under which the Chemical

Division of DD/P/TSS would conduct certain sensitive projects
in the fields of biological and chemical warfare and consists of a
proposed arrangement whereby the Agency covertly contributes
funds to assist the [deletion] in the construction of a new research
wing. Contribution of these funds is to be made through the
[deletion] as cut-out so that the [deletion] would remain
unwitting of Agency participation in the building program.
Projects would later be carried out by the Chemical Division
using the facilities of the new research wing, and Agency
employees would be able to participate in the work without the
University or the Hospital authorities being aware of Agency
interest. Subproject 35 contemplated the contribution of Agency
funds to assist in the construction of facilities. Future research
work would be carried out through the [deletion] as cut-out and
would be separately funded under existing procedures and
controls.
[deletion] and the background of [deletion] are described on page

2 of Tab A. On the same page there will be found a further
description of the [deletion]
II. Building Fund
The University will require $3,000,000 for the six-story addition

to the hospital exclusive of the cost of land, heating and power
supply which are being provided by the University. Under Public
Law 221, Subappropriation
663, dated 26 August 1954, funds are available to match funds

raised for this purpose by the University.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
394 of 813
513
514 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 114 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
When Subproject 35 was first prepared, it was hoped and

expected that the funds required would be provided as follows:
The University has allocated $1,000,000 to this project and will
assume upkeep and staffing obligations. [deletion] agreed that if
the Agency would provide [deletion] with a grant of $125,000,
the Fund would match this amount and make a total donation of
$250,000 to the University Building Fund. At that time,
discussions with [one line deleted] indicated that [deletion]
would contribute $500,000 to the building project on the basis
that radiological research would be conducted in the new wing
and that the construction of the new facilities was of interest to
that Agency. In summary, the financial situation was to have
been as follows:
$1,000,000 - [deletion]
250,000 - Donation from [deletion] (of which $125,000 was
supplied by CIA)
1,250,000 - Matched Funds under Public Law 221
_________________
$3,000,000 - TOTAL
It was recognized that the Federal contributions of $1,250,000

under Public Law 221 would be seemingly inflated by reason of
the inclusion of the CIA contribution in that of [deletion] It was
felt that the value to the Agency was such that this inflation of
the Federal contribution was more than justified by the
importance of the over-all project and that furthermore, the
inclusion of the CIA contribution in that of [deletion] was the
best means of maintaining security.
III. [deletion]
The original informal commitment on the part of [deletion] was

first obtained through verbal discussions with [deletion] which
were followed up by an exchange of correspondence between the
DCI and [deletion] Unfortunately at that time [deletion] was fully
occupied with the controversy concerning the [deletion] and
continued contact with [deletion] subordinates resulted in a
decision that [deletion] could not or would not contribute to the
Building Fund, but would be willing to support an annual
research program amounting to $50,000 to $75,000. It is not
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
395 of 813
514
515 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 115 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
known whether this change in policy was suggested to [deletion]

or whether it originated with him. Be that as it may, when the
change in policy became apparent, it was evident that additional
funds would be required to complete the hospital construction.
IV. Suggested Funding.
It is now suggested that the $3,000,000 required for the hospital

wing be provided as follows:
$1,000,000 - [deletion]
500,000 - Donation from [deletion] (including $375,000
supplied by CIA)
1,500,000 - Matched Funds from Public Law 221
_________
$3,000,000 - TOTAL
The donation from [deletion] would thus consist of the original

$125,000 to be supplied by CIA plus the sum of $125,000 to be
provided by the Fund and a supplemental CIA contributions of
$250,000. Originally Subproject 35 requested permission to
make a contribution of $125,000 to the building fund and
approval was given. This approval is enclosed herewith as Tab 2.
The purpose of this amendment to Subproject 35 is to request
permission to contribute an additional $250,000 to the building
construction fund through [deletion] It should be noted that the
total Government contribution to the hospital fund still remains
unchanged at $1,875,000. The increase in the size of the
contribution by the Fund is not out of keeping with other
operations of [deletion] and will not arouse undue comment
because of its magnitude. The originally approved contribution
has not as yet been transmitted to [deletion] and neither the
original contributions nor the supplement would be paid to
[deletion] until funds adequate to complete the project are made
available. This condition was specified by the DCI in approving
the original contribution.
V. Source of CIA Funds.
Funds to cover the initially approved sum of $125,000 are

available and have been segregated for this purpose within the
TSS FY 1955 Budget for Research and Development.
Insufficient funds remain in the TSS budget to cover the
supplementary sum of $250,000, and it is therefore requested
that the TSS budget be increased by this amount and that the
increase be made available to Subproject 35 of Project
MKULTRA.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
396 of 813
515
516 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 116 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-3-
VI. Comments by the Office of General Counsel.
Tab 3 is a memorandum from the General Counsel to the DCI

dated 21 December 1954, commenting on Subproject 35, and
stating in part that there are no fundamental legal objections if
the probable benefits are considered a fair return for this
expenditure. The amendment to the Subproject contemplates
only an increase in funds and in no way changes any other aspect
of the project. The project has been referred back to the OGC
even though no change in its structure is contemplated, and Tab
4 contains his comments.
VII. Justification.
The advantages and benefits accruing to the Agency outlined in

Tab A are felt by TSS to provide adequate and complete
justification for the expenditure of the additional sum herein
requested which brings the total CIA contribution to $375,000.
The most important of these advantages and benefits may be
summarized as follows: (Fuller explanations may be found in
Tab A).
a. One-sixth of the total space in the new hospital wing will

be available to the Chemical Division of TSS, thereby providing
laboratory and office space, technical assistants, equipment and
experimental animals.
b. Agency sponsorship of sensitive research projects will be

completely deniable.
c. Full professional cover will be provided for up to three

biochemical employees of the Chemical Division.
d. Human patients and volunteers for experimental use will be

available under controlled clinical conditions within the full
supervision of [deletion]
Subproject 35 was originally conceived in October and

November of 1954, and the ensuing six months have indicated
that increasing emphasis and importance are being placed on the
Chemical Division's work in this field. The facilities of the
hospital and the ability to conduct controlled experiments under
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
397 of 813
516
517 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 117 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
safe clinical conditions using materials with which any Agency

connection must be completely deniable will augment and
complement other programs recently taken over by TSS, such as
[deletion]
-4-
[deletion]
It was originally thought that at least 18 months would elapse

after the building funds had been raised before the facilities
would be finished and could be occupied by TSS. This lengthy
delay has now been overcome. When [one line deleted] has
raised the $500,000 which his Fund will ostensibly contribute, he
will then be allowed to use existing space in the present hospital
in order that he may build up the organization which will later
occupy the new wing. This means that TSS will be able to begin
to take advantage of this cover situation within a matter of
months instead of waiting for a year and a half.
VIII. Security.
Security matters and details are being co-ordinated with the TSS
Liaison and Security Officer. Security of transmittal of the funds
and cover arrangements are described in Tab A and remain
unchanged.
IX. Agreement with [deletion]
The agreement with [deletion] is described in Tab A, and the

extent of his co-operation and the control over his actions
remains unchanged.
X. Resultant Financial Saving.
The total contribution of $375,000 by CIA will result in an

additional $375,000 in matching funds provided under Public
Law 221. It is felt that the expenditure of these total funds is
justified by the importance of the programs which will be
pursued at the new facility. Even though the CIA contribution is
increased under this amended project, the total of Federal funds
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
398 of 813
517
518 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 118 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
remains unchanged. The use of this facility will allow work to

proceed under conditions of cover and security which would be
impossible to obtain elsewhere without an expenditure of
equivalent or greater funds. In addition, by funding individual
projects for this facility through the [deletion] no charge will be
incurred for overhead expense. If research projects [deletion] are
openly sponsored by the U.S. Government, it is customary to pay
an overhead rate equivalent to 80% of salaries. However, if a
non-profit fund, such as [deletion] sponsors research, the funds
granted for the work are customarily used only to pay for
salaries, equipment and supplies, but not overhead. The Agency
thus buys considerably more research through [deletion] than
would be the case if no cut-out were used.
-5-
[document ends]
[document begins]
MEMORANDUM FOR: [illegible]
Herewith the file on MKULTRA, Sub-project 35, with our

comments on the legal aspects. While there is no legal control
and there are certain incidental considerations, there is no
fundamental legal objection if the probable benefits are
considered a fair return for this expenditure.
[deletion]
General Counsel
22 December 1954
(DATE)
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
399 of 813
518
519 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 119 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
[deletion]
Tab A
SUBPROJECT 35 - PROJECT MKULTRA
For the purpose of establishing a cover organization for highly

sensitive projects in the field of covert Biological, Chemical and
Radiological Warfare
____________________________________
I. Background of Project MKULTRA.
In 1953 the DCI approved Project MKULTRA which established

procedures and controls under which research projects in certain
highly sensitive fields could be carried out by TSS without the
necessity of signing the usual contracts. The approved
procedures apply [deletion] over-all Research and Development
budget, and no additional funds are required. Controls
established in the Project Review Committee approval of the
Research and Development program (other than the signing of a
contract) remain unchanged, and special provisions for audit are
included. All files are retained by TSS.
These procedures and controls were approved since it is highly

undesirable from a policy and security point of view that
contracts be signed indicating Agency or Government interest in
this field of endeavor. In a great many instances the work must
be conducted by individuals who are not and should not be aware
of Agency interest. In other cases the individuals involved are
unwilling to have their names on a contract which remains out of
their control in our files. Experience has shown that qualified,
competent individuals in the field of physiological, psychiatric
and other biological sciences are very reluctant to enter into
signed agreements of any sort which would connect them with
this activity since such connection might seriously jeopardize
their professional reputations.
When Project MKULTRA was approved, it was not

contemplated that it would be used for the establishment of
cover. Over forty individual research and development projects
have been established under this framework and have been
carried out extremely successfully, both from technical and
administrative points of view. The experience gained in handling
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
400 of 813
519
520 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 120 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
these projects has emphasized that establishment of better cover

both for the projects and for associated Agency scientists is of
utmost importance. Subproject 35 would establish such cover.
II. Background of the [deletion]
The [deletion] was incorporated in [deletion]. It has a Board of

Directors of six members, one of whom is [deletion] who acts as
Executive Director of the Fund. [deletion] it has solicited funds
from various individuals to finance a program of basic research
in the chemotherapy of cancer, asthma, hypertension,
psychosomatic disorders and other chronic diseases. Since 1951
[deletion] has co-operated with the Chemical Division of TSS
and acted smoothly and efficiently, both as a cut-out for dealing
with contractors in the fields of covert chemical and biological
warfare, and as a prime contractor for certain areas of biological
research. Projects presently being handled for the Agency by the
Fund are administered under the controls and procedures
previously approved for MKULTRA.
III. Background of [deletion]
[deletion] is internationally known as a [deletion] in the field of

[deletion] research and is [one line deleted] In the past he has
been associated in a research capacity with both the [deletion]
During the war [deletion] served as a [deletion] in the Bureau of
Medicine and Surgery in the Navy. Since then he has maintained
a consulting relationship to the Navy medical research program,
[deletion] is TOP SECRET cleared and witting of Agency
sponsorship of the programs carried out by the Fund as are two
other members of the Fund's Board of Directors.
IV. [deletion] Fund.
[one line deleted] has been actively engaged in a campaign to

raise funds for the purpose of erecting a new clinical research
wing on the existing [deletion] The research wing will consist of
a building six stories high, 320 feet long and 50 feet wide. Two-
thirds of the space will be research laboratories and offices while
100 research beds will occupy the remainder. [deletion]
participation in the fund-raising campaign outlined below will
result in his having control of one-sixth of the total space in
addition to the base-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
401 of 813
520
521 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 121 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-2-
[deletion]
ment and general out-patient facilities. In this effort, [deletion]

has secured the enthusiastic support of the medical faculty and
the officers of the University who have carried the preliminary
arrangements forward to the maximum extent of their resources.
V. Financial Situation.
The University will require about $3,000,000 for the [deletion]

story addition. This sum is exclusive of the cost of land and the
heating and power supply, which are already available at the site.
At the present time under Public Law 221, funds are available to
match funds raised by the University. The University has
allocated $1,000,000 to this project and will assume upkeep and
staffing obligations. [deletion] has agreed that if CIA will
provide [deletion] a grant of $125,000, [deletion] will match this
amount and make a total donation of $250,000 to the University
Building Fund. This Agency's contribution will be made under
the condition that it will be refunded if construction does not take
place.
TSS has discussed this situation with [one line deleted] and has
encouraged [deletion] to donate $500,000 to the building project
on the basis that [deletion] will be conducted in the new wing.
[deletion] though aware of our interest in the building, is
unwitting of our specific fields of research and individual
projects. In summary, the financial situation would be as follows:
$1,000,000 - [deletion]
250,000 - Donation from [deletion] ($125,000 supplied by
CIA)
1,250,000 - Matched funds from Public Law 221
__________
$3,000,000 - TOTAL
Although it is recognized that the Federal contribution of

$1,250,000 under P. L. 221 is seemingly inflated by reason of the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
402 of 813
521
522 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 122 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
inclusion of the CIA contribution in that of [deletion] actually the

value to the CIA is $250,000 and not just $125,000, the amount
of CIA's contribution; furthermore the inclusion of the CIA
contribution in that of [deletion] is the best method of
maintaining security.
-3-
[deletion]
VI. Difficulties Faced by TSS.
It has been generally recognized for some time that the external
research activities of the Chemical Division of TSS in the field of
covert biological, chemical and radiological warfare are sorely in
need of proper cover. Although Project MKULTRA provides
excellent administrative and financial cover for projects, it does
not afford cover for scientific or technical personnel.
MKULTRA has been used for dealing through [deletion] as a
cut-out and for working directly with individuals or private
companies. The use of [deletion] in the future will be
increasingly limited due to
(a) The increasing number of people who, albeit properly

cleared, are aware of the Agency connection with [deletion]
(b) The feeling by [deletion] that the Agency employees

contacting him (Drs. Gottlieb, [deletion], etc.) have no cover of
any sort and consequently expose him to unnecessary and highly
undesirable personal risk; and
(c) The widespread intra-Agency awareness of the nature of

the relationship between the Fund and the Agency.
Another serious problem faced by TSS/CD as a result of lack of

suitable cover is the difficulty in planning careers for technical
and scientific personnel in the biological field. A long-range
career concept of activities in this field inevitably includes proper
cover for the individual concerned. The availability of research
facilities at [deletion] will offer an excellent opportunity to solve
many of the above problems, and [deletion] is willing and able to
make any reasonable arrangements to suit our needs. Up to three
Chemical Division employees can be integrated into [deletion]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
403 of 813
522
523 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 123 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
program for work in the new hospital wing on the Agency's

research projects. Although career planning was not a
consideration when planning the procedures and controls
established by Project MKULTRA, nevertheless this particular
subproject, in addition to its primary objective, will be of very
great secondary help
-4-
[deletion]
in simplifying and eliminating many of the very awkward and

dangerous conditions facing certain Chemical Division
employees.
VII. Advantages and Benefits Accruing to TSS.
The contemplated arrangements will result in many advantages

and benefits, including the following:
(a) One-sixth of the total space in the new research wing is to

be available to [deletion] and in turn, will be available to the
Chemical Division of TSS. This will provide laboratory and
office space, technical assistants, equipment and experimental
animals for use of Chemical Division personnel in connection
with specific future projects.
(b) The cost of Chemical Division projects which are to be

carried out under this cover will be covered by funds made
available through Project MKULTRA, and projects will be
subject to the procedures and controls established for
MKULTRA. The funds will be passed through [deletion] as has
been done in the past. [deletion] in turn will either pay expenses
directly or transfer the money to the University for this purpose.
Each project will be individually funded based on its particular
budget, and there will be no other continuing or recurring
charges for items such as space, facilities, etc.
(c) The Agency's sponsorship of sensitive research projects

would be completely deniable since no connections would exist
between the University and the Agency.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
404 of 813
523
524 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 124 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
(d) Excellent professional cover would be provided for up to

three bio-chemical employees of the Chemical Division of TSS.
This would allow open attendance of scientific meetings, the
advancement of personal standing in the scientific world. and as
such, would constitute a major efficiency and
-5-
morale booster.
(e) Human patients and volunteers for experiment use will be

available under excellent clinical conditions with the full
supervision of [one line deleted]
(f) There would be available the equivalent of a hospital

safehouse.
(g) It is expected that the output of useful results of the

Chemical Division in the bio-chemical field will be greatly
improved through the more efficient use of technical personnel
who would be able to spend more of their time on actual
laboratory work.
(h) [one and a half lines deleted]
(i) Excellent facilities would be provided for recruiting new

scientific personnel since members of the Chemical Division
working under this cover will be in daily contact with members
of the Graduate School of the University.
(j) The regular University library and reprint service will be

available as a source of technical information.
VIII. Funding.
It is proposed that $125,000 be granted to [deletion]. If approval

is granted, TSS will arrange for payment to be made under the
procedures and controls of MKULTRA. These funds would
come out of the presently approved TSS Research and
Development budget for FY 1955 and no new funds are
involved. The funds would be transferred as a grant to [deletion]
In turn [deletion] will match these funds with an equal amount
and donate a total of $250,000 to the University as outlined in
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
405 of 813
524
525 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 125 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
paragraph V. The sum of $125,000 would be entirely in the

nature of a grant and would in due
-6-
course be merged with the entire $3,000,000 raised for the

construction of the wing. The Agency would retain no residual
interest in the building or title to any equipment or facilities
purchased with this money.
This single grant will constitute the Agency's entire participation

in the new hospital wing, and there will be no recurring
obligations in the form of annual support of the hospital or
additional grants. Transmission of Agency funds to [deletion]
will be made through previously established cover channels set
up by the [deletion] for similar transmittals in the past. The
donation on [deletion]s books will be shown as having been
received from [deletion].
In the future when TSS sponsors sensitive research projects

which are to be carried out in [deletion] each project will be
individually financed through [deletion] as it has been in the past
in accordance with previously established procedures and
controls using allotted portions of the annual Research and
Development budget. The University will be totally unwitting of
Agency sponsorship, and the projects to every outward
appearance will be sponsored by [deletion].
In the event of [deletion] death, [deletion] will continue in being

and any activities under this project will be continued through
[deletion] and will be unaffected by his death.
IX. Memorandum of Agreement.
A memorandum of agreement will be signed with [deletion]

outlining to the greater extent possible the arrangements under
which the hospital space under his control will be made available
to Chemical Division personnel and the manner in which cover
will be provided and other benefits obtained. No contract will be
signed since [deletion] would be unable to reflect any of the
Agency's contractual terms in his arrangements with the
University when [deletion] makes the donation in question. The
memorandum of agreement will be retained in TSS.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
406 of 813
525
526 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 126 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
X. Security.
All security matters and details are being co-ordinated with the
TSS/Liaison and Security Office.
-7-
[deletion]
XI. Resultant Financial Saving.
The $125,000 to be contributed by CIA plus the $125,000 in

matching funds provided under P. L. 221 to the Building Fund
will be more than offset in a few years by the savings which will
result from use of this non-profit fund. If a research project at
[deletion] or other educational non-profit institution is sponsored
by the U.S. Government, it is customary for the Government to
pay for salaries, equipment, supplies, etc. and for overhead as
well. In the case of [deletion] the overhead amounts to 80% of
salaries. However, if a non-profit foundation such as [deletion]
sponsors research at a non-profit institution, the funds granted for
the work are customarily used to pay for salaries, equipment and
supplies but not for overhead. The Government dollar thus buys
considerably more research through [deletion] than would be the
case if no cut-out were used.
XII. Legal Matters.
This matter has been discussed with [deletion] of the Office of

General Counsel, and he is fully aware of all details surrounding
this grant.
-8-
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
407 of 813
526
527 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 127 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
9 April 1958
SUBJECT: Trip Report, Visit to [deletion]

7 April 1958
1. The purpose of this trip was to make arrangements for

closing out the [deletion] project. [deletion] had been given
ample previous notice that such was likely to be the intent of the
visit, and he prepared himself accordingly.
2. It was explained to [deletion] that it would not be possible

to carry over funds beyond the end of the current fiscal year.
Therefore all work would have to be completed and all payments
made prior to 30 June. This deadline approved acceptable to him,
and it was agreed that I would make my final visit there to
receive reports and attend to final details on 16 June. [deletion]
did not have a current financial report, but he estimated that
funds currently on hand would be about sufficient for remaining
expenditures. He agreed to send the Society within the next 10
days a more exact statement of current balance and estimated
remaining expenditures. I tried to impress on him strongly that
transfer of additional funds and/or return of unexpended funds
must be completed well before the end of the fiscal year.
3. Of the 30 cases called for in the original design 18 have

been completed (but only 4 have been transcribed from the
tapes). In addition there are 8 cases in progress (of which two are
already in interview and 6 are worked up to the point of having
the lists of questions prepared). It was agreed that to meet the
deadline we would have to limit the design to these 26 cases.
4. It is apparent that [deletion] is so involved in the

administrative problems of the project that he is not paying any
attention to the results. Since to date only 4 cases have been
transcribed there is no way of telling what is coming out of it. I
assume there were no dramatic reactions, because the
interviewers would have let him know about them had they
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
408 of 813
527
528 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 128 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
emerged. It is possible, however, that our own analysis of the

data may dredge up something of value, although I am dubious
on this point.
5. [deletion] gave me his usual long involved talk on the

difficulties he had encountered which account for the delays. He
also talked at some
length about his "experiments" with hypnosis, some aspects of

which are mildly hair-raising. Finally he made quite a pitch for
continuing some such project as this next year, "with realistic,
specific deadlines." I told him we would discuss possibilities
after the present project was completed and we had a chance to
closely examine the take.
[deletion]
Distribution:
1 [deletion]
[document ends]
[document begins]
[deletion]
July 18, 1958
[deletion]
Dear Mr. [deletion]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
409 of 813
528
529 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 129 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The experiment designed to test the effectiveness of certain

medication in causing individuals to release guarded information
has been completed in accordance with the original experimental
design, with the exception that 25 instead of 30 cases were used.
This matter was discussed in more detail in my letter of July 15.
Abstracts on all 25 cases, transcriptions of the interviews,
Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Tests given at the hospital and
previously given at this clinic, post-experimental rankings and
evaluation sheets, and a schedule covering the drug
administration have all been submitted to you under separate
cover.
Enclosed is a financial statement which represents the final

accounting of the funds allocated by you for use in this project.
If, for your purpose, you require a more detailed summary of
what specific professional services were performed or more
detail with reference to travel expenses or any other item, kindly
let me know.
You will note, in this connection, that Dr. [deletion] was

compensated in an amount exceeding that paid to Dr. [deletion]
This was occasioned by the fact that Dr. [deletion] spent much
time checking the files and records at the [deletion] and
[deletion] Prison selecting cases that might be suitable for our
purpose. It was from the cases selected by him that the subjects
used in the experiment were finally chosen.
I have been instructed to write a check to the Society for the

balance in the account as of today. I would like to
Mr. [deletion] Page Two July 18, 1958
delay this matter for a few days. Several checks have been
written during recent days, and I would like to be sure they
cleared the bank in [deletion] before closing out the account. You
will receive a check in the amount of $1356.26 early next week.
If there is any additional information required, I will be happy

to cooperate.
[signature deleted]
Executive Director
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
410 of 813
529
530 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 130 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[deletion]
Enc.
[document ends]
[document begins]
RESEARCH PLAN
LOCATION
The research Project will be carried out at the [deletion]

located at [deletion] which is located [deletion]. The hospital has
one thousand, one hundred and thirty-five (1,135) beds. At the
present time there are one hundred forty-two (142) non-
psychotics classified as criminal-sexual psychopaths. There are
four full-time psychiatrists and varying numbers of medical
interns; two psychologists; four social workers; nurses and
attendants. The superintendent of the Hospital is [deletion], a
witting member of the research team. The institution comes
under the direction of the Executive Secretary of the State
Department of Mental Health and any research project is
normally approved by the Co-ordinator of Research of the State
Department of Mental Health. [deletion] will secure this
approval. [deletion] will make space available and it is possible
for the research team to sleep at the Hospital while carrying out
their investigation.
SUBJECTS
The subjects will be selected from the one hundred and forty-
two (142) criminal-sexual psychopaths on whom there is an
adequate previous investigation including police reports,
physical, psychiatric and psychologic organizations and social
histories. The age range of the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
411 of 813
530
531 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 131 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
subjects varies from twenty to seventy years and there is a wide

variation of intelligence levels and social backgrounds.
INVESTIGATIONS
The following men are suggested for the research team:
[one line deleted], a psychologist who has had extensive

experience in examining criminals; has written extensively on
psychopathic sexual deviations; is an authority on polygraph and
interrogation methods.
[one line deleted] for some thirty years, a psychiatrist who has
spent his life in the treatment of the criminal insane and
rethinking the only institution [deletion] for the care and
treatment for the criminal-sexual psychopath.
[deletion] a psychiatrist who has a large private practice. At the

present time he is exclusively devoting his time to
psychoanalysis. He has had extensive experience examining
criminals. As a Navy psychiatrist he has had extensive
experience in [one line deleted] in the field of eastern cultures,
Oriental psychiatry, brainwashing, etc. He has also done drug
interrogation with criminals and has engaged in narcoanalysis
and hypnoanalysis.
-2-
[deletion] a psychiatrist who is on the staff of [one line deleted]

and maintains a private practice in the field of psychiatry.
[deletion] has had wide experience in dealing with criminals
going back some twenty-five years, including drug interrogation.
[deletion] a physician for the past twenty-five years, has been

[one line deleted] has had extensive experience dealing with all
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
412 of 813
531
532 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 132 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
sorts of criminals and has engaged in drug interrogation. Besides

his city position, he also maintains a private practice in the field
of general medicine.
[deletion] has suggested one of the psychiatrists from his staff

who is interested and has used drugs in the treatment of patients
and has also used hypnosis with mental patients. The research
assistants have not been selected as yet but might well include
psychologists or medics now attached to [deletion]. The secretary
will be [deletion] present secretary who will do all the necessary
stenographic work in addition to her present duties.
EXPERIMENTAL BASICS:
Three teams of two senior professional men each will be

selected. One team working with the selected group of patients
will use straight interrogation, hypnosis and hypnosis and LSD
and hypnosis and a
-3-
tetrahydrocannabinol acetate derivative. Another team working

on another group of subjects will use straight interrogation, LSD
with interrogation and a tetrahydrocannabinol acetate derivative
and interrogation. Later the third team with another group of
subjects will use straight interrogation and a combination of LSD
and a tetrahydrocannabinol acetate derivative.
A meeting of all the members of the research project will be

briefed on the drugs to be used and all of the pharmacological
and medical knowledge gained so far in the use of these drugs.
In selecting groups of subjects for experimentation, the

following objectives will be sought:
1) Subjects will be selected who have denied allegations of

various kinds that can be chocked or strongly assumed on the
basis of previously established records.
2) As far as possible, the actual research man administering

drugs will note aware of the drug he is administering and
placebos will be interspersed with drug administration.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
413 of 813
532
533 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 133 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3) Precautions will be taken to neutralize age, intelligence,

physical condition, social background and any other controllable
factor in selecting groups. Administration of drugs will be done
both openly and surreptitiously.
4) Sound recordings will be made of the interrogation and

written reports will be obtained in other cases.
-4-
5) Due care will be exercised in equating methods of

interrogation as far as this can be done. The results of
interrogation with drugs and other techniques will be checked
against existing records and qualitative and quantitative reports
will be kept and reports will be submitted on the basis of interim
progress and complete projects.
-5-
[document ends]
[document begins]
DRAFT/[deletion]
30 January 1961
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
414 of 813
533
534 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 134 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1. Subproject 42 is to be continued for the same purpose as

when originally established: to support [deletion] covert and
realistic field trials of certain research and development items of
interest to TSD, and to maintain the physical facilities required
for these trials.
2. In the past year a number of covert and realistic field trials

have been successfully carried out. The results of these
experiments have provided factual data essential to establishing
protocols for a number of contemplated operations. A
continuation of covert and realistic field trials are necessitated by
the production of new materials in TSD programs, particularly in
areas requiring detailed knowledge of the effectiveness and
efficiency of delivery systems. Additional trials are also
necessitated by the need for better controlled "field-type"
experiments.
3. The estimated cost of the project is $5,000,000 for a period

of six months. Charges should be made against Allotment 1125-
1390-3902.
4. Accounting for funds and equipment under this subproject

has been established on a detailed basis with the auditor and will
continue as in the past.
5. [deletion] is approved for TOP SECRET by the Agency

and operates under cover for purposes of this subproject.
[signature deleted]
TSD/Research Branch

[signature deleted]
Date:
Distribution:
Original only.
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
415 of 813
534
535 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 135 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
24 January 1955
Subproject 42 is being established to provide for the

continued support of the [deletion] facilities, and as such, is a
continuation of Subproject 16. Under Subproject 42, it is
intended that the [deletion] facilities be moved from [deletion] to
[deletion] These facilities, in the new location, will continue to
provide a means for the realistic testing of certain R and D items
of interest to CD/TSS and APD/TSS.
2. Subproject 42 will be conducted by Mr. [deletion] a

seaman. Certain support activation will be provided by CD/TSS
and AFD/TSS.
3. The estimated cost for a period of one year is $8,300.00,

starting 1 March 1955.
[signature: Robert Lashbrook for]
SIDNEY GOTTLIEB
Chief
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: 27 Jan 1955
APPROVED FOR ADDITIONAL OBLIGATION OF FUNDS:

($2,089.34)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
416 of 813
535
536 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 136 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[signature deleted]
[deletion] Research Director
Date: June 27 1956
Original Only.
[document ends]
[document begins]
21 March 1955
[deletion]

activities now engaged in by the [deletion], in its own facilities
under the direction of TSS, Chemical Division. These activities
will take the form of three lines of biochemical investigation;
namely, the curare-like effect of certain thiols, the preparation of
hydrogenated quinolines and indole alkaloids, and the continued
study of diphenolic compounds. In addition to the above
investigations, the present biological testing and assaying
techniques will be elaborated and broadened to include
cardiovascular and anticarcinogenic effects of compounds
resulting from the above programs.
2. The attached proposal from [deletion] indicates the extent

of the investigations that his facilities will allow him to carry out
on the materials developed in the three lines of research referred
to in paragraph 1, as well as certain other materials of interest to
TSS/CD. [deletion] also serves as a general consultant to this
Division and provides cover and cut-out facilities to the Agency.
not exceed $100,000.00 At the present time, the sum of
$40,000.00 is being committed, the balance of the total to be
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
417 of 813
536
537 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 137 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
committed at a later date.
4. [deletion] has been granted a TOP SECRET clearance by

the Agency, and is fully capable of protecting the security of the
Government's interest in this matter.
[signature deleted]
TSS, Chemical Division
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: 24 Mar 55
APPROVED:
[signature deleted]
Chief TSS/Chemical Division
APPROVED FOR ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF

$27,000:
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: Jun 2 1955
Attachments:
Proposal
Original Only.
[document ends]
[document begins]
30 January 1956
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
418 of 813
537
538 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 138 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORDS

activities now engaged in by the [deletion] under the direction of
TSS/CD. These activities take the form of three lines of
biochemical investigation, namely, the Curare-like effect of
certain this, the preparation of hydrogenated quinolines and
indole alkaloids and a program of investigation of toxic cerebral
states. This last investigation will include bio-assay and chemical
analysis of various body fluids of animals in which cerebral
toxemias have been produced. It is the aim of this program to
endeavor to understand the mechanism of such states as toxic
delirium, uremic coma, and cerebral toxicity from poisoning. In
order to continue the established "cover" activities of the
[deletion] and to make available a pool of subjects for testing
purposes, the [deletion] and [deletion] effects of compounds
resulting from the above program will be evaluated.
2. The attached proposal from [deletion] indicates the extent

of the investigations that his facilities will allow him to carry out
on the materials developed in the three lines of research referred
to in paragraph one, as well as certain other materials of interest
to TSS/CD. [deletion] also serves as a general consultant to this
Division and provides cover and cut-out facilities to the Agency.
not exceed $100,000. Charges should be made against Allotment
6-2502-10-001.
4. [deletion] has been requested to submit a summary

accounting or a copy of the [deletion] annual audit report be
made available for the sponsor's inspection. Also, it has been
requested that any unexpended funds shall be returned to the
Agency.
5. Title to any permanent equipment purchased by funds

granted [deletion] shall be retained by the [deletion] in lieu of
higher overhead rates.
* other than its activities as a cut-out
6. It was mutually agreed that documentation and accounting
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
419 of 813
538
539 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 139 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
for travel expenses which are normally reimbursable by the

[deletion] shall conform with the accepted practices of the
[deletion]
7. [deletion] agreed to comply with the requirements of the

Memorandum of Agreement.
[signature deleted]
APPROVED:

Chief, TSS Chemical Division
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date: 2 Feb 1956
Attachment:
Proposal
Distribution:
Original Only
[document ends]
[document begins]
1960
The research to be undertaken during the twelve month period

for which financial support is requested will be devoted to the
continued analysis of the neural and endocrine mechanism of
stress and the chemical agents that influence it. The screening
procedures are based largely upon a further analysis of phases of
stress and the influences of this physiologic behavior complex
upon both body and skin temperatures as detailed in the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
420 of 813
539
540 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 140 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
accompanying report.
The chemical synthesis of new compounds will be continued

at the [deletion] under the supervision of [deletion] and at the
[deletion] under the supervision of [deletion] These chemical
agents will be screened for their capacity to provoke stress or to
suppress the stress reaction in its acute or chronic phases. Animal
testing will include pharmacologic screening and proper toxicity
studies of these compounds as heretofore.
Chemical agents that have been found active and within a

suitable toxicity range will be subjected to clinical screening on
appropriate patients, the initial screening being carried out on
advanced cancer patients. The amount of money devoted to
chemical synthesis, however, has been further reduced. Chemical
compounds available from biologic sources as well as those
synthesized in the project will be screened, particularly those that
are active in either raising or lowering body temperature.
As heretofore any agents which prove to be of interest

[deletion] both on transplant
Page 2
animal tumors and on cancer patients. This cancer phase of the

project will be considered a by-product of the major objective,
which will be directed to the problem of stress.
[document ends]
[document begins]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
421 of 813
540
541 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 141 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
SUBJECT: Continuation of MKULTRA, Subproject No. 45
1. The scope of this subproject includes all those activities

now engaged in by [deletion], under the direction of TSD/RB
with the exception of those cutout functions specifically
mentioned in connection with other MKULTRA subprojects. In
general, the research effort under this subproject will continue
along the lines laid down in previous years. These involve the
synthesis and pharmacological and clinical evaluation of
compounds of those chemical families known to have application
in the psychochemical and "K" fields. During the past year
important progress has been made in the area related to stressor
compounds and the relationship of these materials to the
physiological pathways through which both stress and the
reaction to it are mediated in human beings. As indicated in the
attached proposal, the work of the past year has progressed to the
point where more definitive experiments on the stress reaction
can be carried out. Primarily this was brought about by the
characterization of several new materials which produce stress
reaction in humans and the application of some new clinical
methods of measuring the extent of the disturbance produced.
During the next year proportionally more effort will be expended
on the problem of the development of new
"knock-out" types of agents since progress has been slower than

is desirable in this direction and because a new approach to the
problem has been worked out.
2. [deletion] also serves as a general consultant to the Agency,

provides services of a sensitive nature on an ad hoc basis, and
serves as a cut-out in procurement problems.
not exceed $71,500.00 [handwritten note above: 40,000.00].
Charges should be made against Allotment 0525-1009-4902.
4 [deletion] has been requested to submit a summary

accounting or a copy of the Fund's annual audit report for the
sponsor's inspection. Also, it has been requested that any
unexpended funds shall be returned to the Agency.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
422 of 813
541
542 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 142 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

granted [deletion] shall be retained by [deletion], in lieu of higher
overhead rates.

for travel expenses which are normally reimbursable by
[deletion] shall conform with the accepted practices of the Fund.
[document ends]
[document begins]
SUBJECT: Continuation of MKULTRA, Subproject No. 45
1. The scope of this subproject includes all those activities

now engaged in by [deletion] under the direction of TSD/RB
with the exception of those cutout functions specifically
mentioned in connection with other MKULTRA subprojects. In
general, the research effort under this subproject will continue
along the lines laid down in previous years. These involve the
synthesis and pharmacological and clinical evaluation of
compounds of those chemical families known to have application
in the psychochemical and "K" fields. During the coming year it
is planned to concentrate more directly on the more practical
aspects of the "knockout" problem. Enough new potent
substances have become available lately to make such a change
in emphasis worthwhile. In connection with this change it should
be noted that certain findings made in [deletion] project at
[deletion] which cannot be further exploited at that facility will
be pursued at [deletion] in the future. For this reason it may be
necessary to supplement the findings of this subproject from time
to time during the year due to increases of scope.
2. [deletion] also serves as a general consultant to the Agency,

provides services of a sensitive nature on an ad hoc basis, and
serves as a cutout in procurement problems.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
423 of 813
542
543 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 143 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
not exceed $40,000. Charges should be made against Allotment
2125-1390-3902.
4. [deletion] has been requested to submit a summary

accounting or a copy of the Fund's annual audit report for the
sponsor's inspection. Also, it has been requested that any
unexpended funds shall be returned to the Agency.

granted [deletion] shall be retained by [deletion] in lieu of higher
overhead rates.

for travel expenses which are normally reimbursable by
[deletion] shall conform with the accepted practices of the Fund.
[signature deleted]
Chief
TSD/Research Branch
[signature deleted]
Research Director
Date [illegible]
Attachment: Proposal and Budget
Distribution: Original only
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
424 of 813
543
544 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 144 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
DRAFT
24 January 1964
SUBJECT: MKULTRA, Subproject 149
1. This subproject is being established for the purpose of

supporting realistic tests of certain development items and
delivery systems of interest to TSD/BB.
[handwritten note: 31 Jan '64 Testing in stand-down until policy

issues (illegible) at DCI level. OK to (illegible)]
2. During the course of development it is sometimes found

that certain very necessary experiments or tests are not suited to
ordinary laboratory facilities. At the same time, it would be
difficult if not impossible to conduct such tests as operational
field tests. This project is designed to provide a capability and
facilities to fill this intermediate requirement.
3. The activities under this subproject will be conducted by

Mr. [deletion], an individual in the import and export business, in
[deletion] Mr. [deletion] holds a TOP SECRET Treasury
Department clearance and a SECRET Agency approval. He is
completely witting of the aims and goals of his activities.
4. Mr. [deletion] possesses unique facilities and personal

abilities which makes him invaluable in this kind of testing
operation. Mr. [deletion] because of his peculiar talents and
-2-
capabilities as well as his excellent connections with all of the

local law enforcement agencies, will provide a unique and
essential capability. Because Mr. [deletion] is no longer resident
of the [deletion] area, it is necessary that a suitable replacement
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
425 of 813
544
545 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 145 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
be provided in order that a capability for continuance of our

activities be maintained.
5. The estimated cost of the project is $10,000.00 for a period

of one year. Charges should be made against Allotment Number
4125-1390-3902. Reimbursement will be made for services
rendered.
6. Accounting for funds advanced and any equipment under

this subproject will be in accordance with accounting procedures
established by the [deletion] [handwritten note: Administration
Staff/TSD] [deletion]
7. A memorandum of agreement along lines established by

previous audit recommendations in like situations will be
executed.
[signature deleted]
Chief
TSD/Biological Branch
Distribution:
Original only
[document ends]
[document begins]
SUBJECT: Request for Support of Research on the Mechanism

of Brain Concussion
1. This is a request for financial support for research on the

mechanism of brain concussion for the period 1 Feb 1956 to 1
Feb 1957.
2. The resonance-cavitation theory upon which this research is to

be based has been presented in the proposal submitted to the
[deletion] dated 27 March 1954.
3. The program as originally submitted estimated the duration of
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
426 of 813
545
546 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 146 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the program to be from three to five years requesting a total of

$72,109 for the initial year.
4. At the request of the [deletion] a reduced budget was

submitted.
5. [deletion], amounting to $24,925, was then awarded to the

[deletion] to support this program from 1 Feb 1955 to 1 Feb
1956.
6. The progress made to date under the above contract can be

summarized as follows:
A. RESEARCH FACILITIES
The following research facilities have been established for

the investigation of the very diverse aspects of the problems
being studied:
a. [deletion]
A total of 2500 square feet of laboratory and office
space equipped with much of the diversified machinery and
apparatus necessary for research in this field.
b. Blast Range
A blast range has been established at [deletion] located
approximately [deletion] of the main laboratory. This area is
owned by the [deletion] and is closed to the public. Three blast
test series have been run to date.
c. [deletion]
Arrangements have been made with the [one line
deleted] for use of their human cadavers. A test area has been
assigned for this
B. PERSONNEL
Both full-time technical personnel and part-time professional

research personnel have been acquired and indoctrinated relative
to their specific function.
C. TECHNICAL PROGRAMS
Following is the technical progress made under the current

[deletion] contract:
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
427 of 813
546
547 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 147 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
a. Specialized instrumentation and numerous testing

techniques have been developed to obtain the desired dynamic
data.
b. Considerable data has now been obtained supporting the

resonance-cavitation theory of brain concussion.
c. Preliminary acceleration threshold data has been

obtained for a fluid-filled glass simulated skull.
d. Data has been obtained on the nature and the magnitude

of pressure fluctuations within a glass simulated skull subject to
either impact or sound waves propagated in air.
e. Initial studies have been made on the simulated glass

skull attempting to establish the cavitation patterns for various
types of impact.
7. The proposed method and program plan remain the same as

stated in the original proposal, except for the temporary deletion
of the immersion blast study.
8. The current level of activity on this project can be indicated by

the most recent billing to the [deletion] for the month of
November, which amounted to $4,034.61.
9. In the interest of efficiency and economy it is requested that at

least this level of activity be maintained for the coming year.
10.0 POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH

FUNDING
10.1 Trotter, W. defines brain concussion as: "an essentially

transient state due to head injury which is of instantaneous onset,
manifests widespread symptoms of purely paralytic kind, does
not as such comprise any evidence of structural cerebral injury,
and is always followed by amnesia for the actual moment of the
accident."
10.2 The implication of the underlined portion of the above

statement is that if a technique were devised to induce brain
concussion without giving either advance warning or causing
external physical trauma, the person upon recovery would be
unable to recall what had happened to him. Under these
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
428 of 813
547
548 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 148 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
conditions the same technique of producing the concussion could

be re-used many times without disclosure of its nature.
10.3 First, considering the possibilities of direct impact to the

head or body, it should be possible from the findings of this
research program to determine the following:
a. Optimum design of impacting devices.
b. Optimum points of impact on skull or body.
c. Intensity of the blow for the effect desired.
10.4 In regard to the potential impacting devices, there are

certain design requisites that are apparent at this time:
a. The impact should be delivered without advance
warning.
b. The area of impact and force distribution should be such
that surface trauma does not occur.
c. The intensity of the impacting force and its duration
should be such as to obtain the desired effect.
d. The device should be as small and as silent as possible.
10.5 The specific impacting devices might take the form of any
of the following:
a. A pancake type black-jack giving a high peak impact

force with a low unit surface pressure.
b. Concealed or camouflaged spring-loaded impacting
devices that trigger upon contact with the head.
(Original and sole copy :agg)
c. A projectile type impactor such as an air gun using a

small shot filled sack for a projectile.
d. An explosive pad detonated in contact with the head or

the body.
10.6 Let us now consider the possibilities of exciting the

resonance cavitation directly without impact. There is
considerable evidence that resonance cavitation can be induced
directly in the following ways:
a. A blast wave propogated in air. (Blast Concussion)
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
429 of 813
548
549 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 149 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
b. Physical excitation with a mechanical driver or horn,

turned to the resonant frequency of the head.
10.7 A single blast pressure wave propogated in air must have

considerable intensity in order to produce brain concussion.
However, there is considerable evidence (Carver & Dinsley) that
modification of the pressure wave can produce profound effects.
10.8 Excitation of the resonance cavitation by using a tuned

driver at this time appears to be well within the realm of
possibility. The neurotic-like manifestations normally associated
with blast concussion could possibly be induced by this method.
Use of this method, however, would require actual physical
contact with the drivers.
10.9 Excitation of the resonance cavitation by tuned sound waves

also appears to be a reasonable possibility. Concentration of the
sound-field at some remote point could be effected with
acoustical lenses and reflectors. The blast duration would be in
the order of a tenth of a second. Masking of a noise of this
duration should not be too difficult.
11.0 It would possibly be advantageous to establish the

effectiveness of both of the above methods as a tool in brain-
wash therapy. A full knowledge of the method and the resulting
sequela should be of aid to any person forced to submit to such
treatment.
12.0 Possibly the most significant potential aspect of this study

would be in the development of practical means of giving a
person immunity, even though temporary, to brain concussion.
One technique that appears to have potentialities involves the
introduction of a small quantity of gas, approximately 1 cc, into
the spinal cord. This gas bubble would then normally migrate to
the ventricles located at the centrum of the brain. The ability of
this bubble to expand under dynamic loading would be most
effective in preventing resonance cavitation from occurring.
(Original and sole copy :agg)
[document ends]
[document begins]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
430 of 813
549
550 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 150 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
MATERIAL FOR THE RECORD
MKSEARCH, OFTEN/CHICKWIT
MKSEARCH was the name given to the continuation of the

MKULTRA program. Funding commenced in FY 1966, and
ended in FY 1972. Its purpose was to develop, test, and evaluate
capabilities in the covert use of biological, chemical, and
radioactive material systems and techniques for producing
predictable human behavioral and/or physiological changes in
support of highly sensitive operational requirements.
OFTEN/CHICKWIT
In 1967 the Office of Research and Development (ORD) and

the Edgewood Arsenal Research Laboratories undertook a
program for doing research on the identification and
characterization of drugs that could influence human behavior.
Edgewood had the facilities for the full range of laboratory and
clinical testing. A phased program was envisioned that would
consist of acquisition of drugs and chemical compounds believed
to have effects on the behavior of humans, and testing and
evaluation these materials through laboratory procedures and
toxicological studies. Compounds believed promising as a result
of tests on animals were then to be evaluated clinically with
human subjects at Edgewood. Substances of potential use would
then be analyzed structurally as a basis for identifying and
synthesizing possible new derivatives of greater utility.
The program was divided into two projects. Project OFTEN

was to deal with testing and toxicological, transmissivity and
behavioral effects of drugs in animals and, ultimately, humans.
Project CHICKWIT was concerned with acquiring information
on new drug developments in Europe and the Orient, and with
acquiring samples.
There is a discrepancy between the testimony of DOD and

CIA regarding the testing at Edgewood Arsenal in June 1973.
While there is agreement that human testing occurred at that
place and time, there is disagreement as to who was responsible
for financing and sponsorship. (See hearings before the
Subcommittee, September 21, 1977.)
[document ends]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
431 of 813
550
551 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 151 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[document begins]
THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20505
Office of Legislative
Counsel 23 December 1977
Honorable Daniel K. Inouye, Chairman

Dear Mr. Chairman:
During Admiral Turner's 3 August 1977 testimony before

your Committee and the Senate Human Resources Subcommittee
on Health and Scientific Research, you asked whether any
Agency employees had been terminated because of their
participation in MKULTRA Subproject 3. Admiral Turner
indicated he did not believe any employee had been terminated,
but would have Agency records searched on this question. Our
records have been searched and the results confirm the Director's
testimony that no such actions were taken.
Sincerely,
[George L. Cary signature]

George L. Cary
Legislative Counsel
[document ends]
[document begins]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
432 of 813
551
552 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 152 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
QKHILLTOP DEFINITION
QKHILLTOP was a cryptonym assigned in 1954 to a project

to study Chines Communist brainwashing techniques and to
develop interrogation techniques. Most of the early studies are
believed to have been conducted by the Cornell University
Medical School Human Ecology Study Programs. The effort was
absorbed into the MKULTRA program and the QKHILLTOP
cryptonym became obsolete. The Society for the investigation of
Human Ecology, later the Human Ecology Fund, was an
outgrowth of the QKHILLTOP.
[document ends]
Appendix A: Testing and Use of Chemical and

Biological Agents by the Intelligence Community
Appendix B: Documents Referring to Discovery of
Additional MKULTRA Material
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
433 of 813
552
553 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 153 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: Testimony of CIA Director Stansfield Turner Page 1 of 20
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
TESTIMONY OF ADM. STANSFIELD TURNER,

DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
Accompanied by Frank Laubinger, Office of Technical Services; Al Brody, Office of
Inspector General; Ernest Mayerfield, Office of General Counsel; and George L. Cary,
Legislative Counsel
Admiral TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to begin by thanking you and
Senator Kennedy for having a joint hearing this morning. I hope this will expedite and facilitate
our getting all the information that both of your committees need into the record quickly.
I would like also to thank you both for prefacing the remarks today by reminding us all that the
events about which we are here to talk are 12- to 24-years old. They in no way represent the
current activities or policies of the Central Intelligence Agency.
What we are here to do is to give you all the information that we now have and which we did not
previously have on a subject known s Project MKULTRA, a project which took place from 1953
to 1964. It was an umbrella project under which there were numerous subprojects for research,
among other things, on drugs and behavioral modification. What the new material that we offer
today is a supplement to the considerable material that was made available in 1975, during the
Church committee hearings, and also to the Senate Subcommittee on Health and Scientific
Research.
At that time, the CIA offered up all of the information and documents it believed it had available.
The principal one available at that time that gave the greatest amount of information on this
subject was a report of the CIA's Inspector General written in 1963, and which led directly to the
termination of this activity in 1964, 13 years ago.
The information available in 1975 to the various investigating groups was indeed sparse, first
because of the destruction of material that took place in 1973, as detailed by Senator Kennedy a
minute ago, with the concurrence of the then Director of Central Intelligence and under the
supervision of the Director of the Office of Technical Services that supervised Project
MKULTRA.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
434 of 813
553
554 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 154 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-9-
The material in 1975 was also sparse because most of the CIA people who had been involved in
1953 to 1964 in this activity had retired from the Agency. I would further add that I think the
material was sparse in part because it was the practice at that time not to keep detailed records in
this category.
For instance, the 1963 report of the Inspector General notes:
Present practice is to maintain no records of the planning and approval of test programs.
In brief, there were few records to begin with and less after the destruction of 1973.
What I would like to do now, though, is to proceed and let you know what the new material adds
to our knowledge of this topic, and I will start by describing how the material was discovered and
why it was not previously discovered. The material in question, some seven boxes, had been sent
to our Retired Records Center outside of the Washington area. It was discovered that as the result
of an extensive search by an employee charged with the responsibility for maintaining our
holdings on behavioral drugs and for responding to Freedom of Information Act requests on this
subject.
During the Church committee investigation of 1975, searches for MKULTRA-related material
were made by examining both the active and the retired records of all of the branches of CIA
considered likely to have had an association with MKULTRA documents. The retired records of
the Budget and Fiscal Section of the branch that was responsible for such work were not
searched, however. This was because the financial paper associated with sensitive projects such
as MKULTRA were normally maintained by the branch itself under the project title, MKULTRA,
not by the Budget and Fiscal Section under the project title, MKULTRA, not by the Budget and
Fiscal Section under a special budget file.
In the case at hand, however, this newly located material had been sent to the Retired Records
Center in 1970 by the Budget and Fiscal Section of this branch as part of its own retired holdings.
In short, what should have been filed by the branch itself was filed by the Budget and Fiscal
Section, and what should have been filed under the project title, MKULTRA, was filed under
budget and fiscal matters. The reason for this departure from the normal procedure of that time is
simply not known, and as a result of it, however, the material escaped retrieval and destruction in
1973, as well as discovery in 1975.
The employee who located this material did so by leaving no stone unturned in his efforts to
respond to a Freedom of Information Act request, or several of them, in fact. He reviewed all of
the listings of material of this branch, stored at the Retired Records Center, including those of the
Budget and Fiscal Section, and thus discovered the MKULTRA-related documents, which had
been missed in the previous searches.
In sum, the agency failed to uncover these particular documents in 1973, in the process of
attempting to destroy them. It similarly failed to locate them in 1975, in response to the Church
committee hearings. I am personally persuaded that there is no evidence of any attempt to conceal
this material during the earlier searches. Moreover, as we will discuss as we proceed, I do not
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
435 of 813
554
555 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 155 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
believe the material itself is such that
-10-
there would be a motive on the part of the CIA to withhold this, having disclosed what it did in
1975.
Next, let me move to the nature of this recently located material. It is important to remember what
I have just noted, that these folders that were discovered are finance folders. The bulk of the
material in them consists of approvals for the advance of funds, vouchers, and accountings and
such, most of which are not very informative as to the nature of the activities that they were
supporting. Occasional project proposals or memoranda commenting on some aspect of a
subproject are scattered throughout this material. In general, however, the recovered material does
not include overall status reports or other documents relating to operational considerations, or to
the progress on various subprojects, though some elaboration of the activities contemplated does
appear from time to time.
There are roughly three categories of projects. First, there are 149 MKULTRA subprojects, many
of which appear to have some connection with research into behavioral modification, drug
acquisition and testing, or administering drugs surreptitiously. Second, there are two boxes of
miscellaneous MKULTRA papers, including audit reports and financial statements from
intermediary funding mechanisms used to conceal CIA sponsorship of various research projects.
Finally, there are 33 additional subprojects concerning certain intelligence activities previously
funded under MKULTRA but which have nothing to do either with behavioral modifications,
drugs or toxins, or any closely related matter.
We have attempted to group the activities covered by the 149 subprojects into categories under
descriptive headings. In broad outline, at least, this presents the contents of these files. The
following 15 categories are the ones we have divided these into.
First, research into the effects of behavioral drugs and/or alcohol. Within this, there are 17
projects probably not involving human testing. There are 14 subprojects definitely involving
testing on human volunteers. There are 19 subprojects probably including tests on human
volunteers and 6 subprojects involving tests on unwitting human beings.
Second, there is research on hypnosis, eight subprojects, including two involving hypnosis and
drugs in combination.
Third, there are seven projects on the acquisition of chemicals or drugs.
Fourth, four subprojects on the aspects of the magician's art, useful in covert operations, for
instance, the surreptitious delivery of drug-related materials.
Fifth, there are nine projects on studies of human behavior, sleep research, and behavioral change
during psychotherapy.
Sixth, there are projects on library searches and attendants at seminars and international
conferences on behavioral modifications.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
436 of 813
555
556 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 156 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Seventh, there are 23 projects on motivational studies, studies of defectors, assessments of

behavior and training techniques.
Eighth, there are three subprojects on polygraph research.
Ninth, there are three subprojects on funding mechanisms for MKULTRA's external research
activities.
-11-
Tenth, there are six subprojects on research on drugs, toxins, and biologicals in human tissue,
provision of exotic pathogens, and the capability to incorporate them in effective delivery
systems.
Eleventh, there are three subprojects involving funding support for unspecified activities
conducted with the Army Special Operations Division at Fort Detrich, Md. This activity is
outlined in Book I of the Church committee report, pages 388 to 389. (See Appendix A, pp. 68-
69).
Under CIA's Project MKNAOMI, the Army assisted the CIA in developing, testing, and
maintaining biological agents and delivery systems for use against humans as well as against
animals and crops.
Thirteenth, there are single subprojects in such areas as the effects of electroshock, harassment
techniques for offensive use, analysis of extrasensory perception, gas propelled sprays and
aerosols, and four subprojects involving crop and material sabotage.
Fourteenth, one or two subprojects on each of the following: blood grouping research; controlling
the activities of animals; energy storage and transfer in organic systems; and stimulus and
response in biological systems.
Finally, 15th, there are three subprojects canceled before any work was done on them having to
do with laboratory drug screening, research on brain concussion, and research on biologically
active materials.
Now, let me address how much this newly discovered material adds to what has previously been
reported to the Church committee and to Senator Kennedy's Subcommittee on Health. The answer
is basically additional detail. The principal types of activities included in these documents have
for the most part been outlined or to some extent generally described in what was previously
available in the way of documentation and which was supplied by the CIA to the Senate
investigators.
For example, financial disbursement records for the period of 1960 to 1964 for 76 of these 149
subprojects had been recovered by the Office of Finance at CIA and were made available to the
Church committee investigators. For example, the 1963 Inspector General report on MKULTRA
made available to both the Church Committee and the Subcommittee on Health mentions
electroshock and harassment substances, covert testing on unwitting U.S. citizens, the search for
new materials through arrangements with specialists in hospitals and universities, and the fact that
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
437 of 813
556
557 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 157 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the Technical Service Division of CIA had initiated 144 subprojects related to the control of
human behavior.
For instance also, the relevant section of a 1957 Inspector General report was also made available
to the Church committee staff, and that report discusses the techniques for human assessment and
unorthodox methods of communication, discrediting and disabling materials which can be
covertly administered, studies on magicians' arts as applied to covert operations, and other similar
topics.
The most significant new data that has been discovered are, first, the names of researchers and
institutions who participated in
-12-
MKULTRA projects, and second, a possibly improper contribution by the CIA to a private
institution. We are now in the possession of the names of 185 nongovernment researchers and
assistants who are identified in the recovered material dealing with these 149 subprojects.
There are also names of 80 institutions where work was done or with which these people were
affiliated. The institutions include 44 colleges or universities, 15 research foundation or chemical
or pharmaceutical companies or the like, 12 hospitals or clinics, in addition to those associated
with the universities, and 3 penal institutions.
While the identities of some of these people and institutions were known previously, the
discovery of the new identities adds to our knowledge of MKULTRA.
The facts as they pertain to the possibly improper contribution are as follows. One project
involves a contribution of $375,000 to a building fund of a private medical institution. The fact
that that contribution was made was previously known. Indeed, it was mentioned in the 1957
report of the Inspector General on the Technical Service Division of CIA that supervised
MKULTRA, and pertinent portions of this had been reviewed by the Church committee staff.
The newly discovered material, however, makes it clear that this contribution was made through
an intermediary, which made it appear to be a private donation. As a private donation, the
contribution was then matched by Federal funds. The institution was not made aware of the true
source of the gift. This project was approved by the then Director of Central Intelligence and
concurred in by CIA's top management including the then General Counsel, who wrote an
opinion supporting the legality of the contribution.
The recently discovered documents also give greater insight into the scope of an unwitting nature
of the drug testing, but contribute little more than that. We now do have corroborating
information that some of the unwitting drug testing was carried out in what is known in the
intelligence trade as safe houses in San Francisco and in New York City, and we have identified
that three individuals were involved in this undertaking, whereas we previously reported there
was only one person.
We also know that some unwitting testing took place on criminal sexual psychopaths confined at
a State hospital, and that additionally research was done on a knockout or K drug in parallel with
research to develop painkillers for cancer patients.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
438 of 813
557
558 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 158 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
These, then, are the principal findings identified to date in our review of this recovered material.
As noted earlier, we believe the detail on the identities of researchers and institutions involved in
CIA sponsorship of drug and behavioral modification research is a new element and one which
poses a considerable problem. Most of the people and institutions involved were not aware of
CIA sponsorship. We should certainly assume that the researchers and institutions which
cooperated with CIA on a witting basis acted in good faith and in the belief that they were aiding
their Government in a legitimate and proper purpose.
I believe that we all have a moral obligation to these researchers and institutions to protect them
from any unjustified embarrassment
-13-
or damage to their reputations which revelation of their identities might bring. In addition, I have
a legal obligation under the Privacy Act not to publicly disclose the names of the individual
researchers without their consent.
This is especially true, of course, for those researchers and institutions which were unwitting
participants in CIA sponsored activities.
Nonetheless, Mr. Chairman, I certainly recognize the right and the need of both the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research to
investigate the circumstances of these activities in whatever detail you consider necessary. I am
providing your committee with all of the documentation, including all of the names, on a
classified basis. I hope that this will facilitate your investigation while still protecting the
individuals and the institutions involved.
Let me emphasize again that the MKULTRA events are 12 to 24 years in the past, and I assure
you that CIA is in no way engaged in either witting or unwitting testing of drugs today.
Finally, I am working closely with the Attorney General on this matter. We are making available
to the Attorney General whatever materials he may deem necessary to any investigations that he
may elect to undertake. Beyond that, we are also working with the Attorney General to determine
whether it is practicable from this new evidence to identify any of the persons to whom drugs
were administered, but we are now trying to determine if there are adequate clues to lead to their
identification, and if so how best to go about fulfilling the Government's responsibilities in this
matter.
Mr. Chairman, as we proceed with that process of attempting to identify the individuals and then
determining what is our proper responsibility to them, I will keep both of these committees fully
advised. I thank you, sir.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Admiral Turner. Your spirit of cooperation is much
appreciated. I would like to announce to the committee that in order to give every member an
opportunity to participate in this hearing, that we would set a time limit of 10 minutes per
Senator.
Admiral Turner, please give this committee the genesis of MKULTRA. Who or what committee
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
439 of 813
558
559 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 159 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
or commission or agency was responsible for dreaming up this grandiose and sinister project, and
why was it necessary? What is the rationale or justification for such a project and was the
President of the United States aware of this?
Admiral TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask Mr. Brody on my right, who is a long-time
member of the CIA to address that in more detail. I believe everything that we know about the
genesis was turned over to the Church committee and is contained in that material. Basically, it
was a CIA-initiated project. It started out of a concern of our being taken advantage of by other
powers who would use drugs against our personnel, and it was approved in the Agency. I have
asked the question you just asked me, and have been assured that there is no evidence within the
Agency of any involvement at higher echelons, the White House, for instance, or specific
approval. That does not say there was not, but we have no such evidence.
-14-
Mr. Brody, would you amplify on my comments there, please?
Mr. BRODY. Mr. Chairman, I really have very little to add to that. To my knowledge, there was
no Presidential knowledge of this project at the time. It was a CIA project, and as the admiral
said, it was a project designed to attempt to counteract what was then thought to be a serious
threat by our enemies of using drugs against us. Most of what else we know about is in the Senate
Church committee report.
Senator INOUYE. Are you suggesting that it was intentionally kept away from the Congress and
the President of the United States?
Admiral TURNER. No, sir. We are only saying that we have no evidence one way or the other
as to whether the Congress was informed of this particular project. There are no records to
indicate.
Senator INOUYE. Admiral Turner, are you personally satisfied by actual investigation that this
newly discovered information was not intentionally kept away from the Senate of the United
States?
Admiral TURNER. I have no way to prove that, sir. That is my conviction from everything I
have seen of it.
Senator INOUYE. Now, we have been advised that these documents were initially discovered in
March of this year, and you were notified in July of this year, or June of this year, and the
committee was notified in July. Can you tell us why the Director of Central Intelligence was
notified 3 months after its initial discovery, why the delay?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir. All this started with several Freedom of Information Act requests,
and Mr. Laubinger on my left was the individual who took it upon himself to pursue these
requests with great diligence, and got permission to go to the Retired Records Center, and then
made the decision to look not only under what would be the expected subject files, but through
every file with which the branch that conducted this type of activity had any conceivable
connection.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
440 of 813
559
560 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 160 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Very late in March, he discovered these seven boxes. He arranged to have them shipped from the
Retired Records Center to Washington, to our headquarters. They arrived in early April. He
advised his appropriate superiors, who asked him how long he thought it would take him to go
through these and screen them appropriately, clear them for Freedom of Information Act release.
There are, we originally estimated, 5,000 pages here. We now think that was an underestimation,
and it may be closer to 8,000 pages. He estimated it would take about 45 days or into the middle
of May to do that. He was told to proceed, and as he did so there was nothing uncovered in the
beginning of these 149 cases that appeared particularly startling or particularly additive to the
knowledge that had already been given to the Church committee, some details, but no major
revelations.
He and his associates proceeded with deliberateness, but not a great sense of urgency. There were
other interfering activities that came and demanded his time also. He was not able to put 100
percent of his time on it, and there did not appear to be cause for a great rush here. We were
trying to be responsive to the Freedom of Information Act request within the limits of our
manpower and our priorities.
-15-
In early June, however, he discovered two projects, the one related to K drugs and the one related
to the funding at the institution, and realized immediately that he had substantial new information,
and he immediately reported this to his superiors.
Two actions were taken. One was to notify the lawyers of the principal Freedom of Information
Act requestor that we would have substantial new material and that it would be forthcoming as
rapidly as possible, and the second was to start a memorandum up the chain that indicated his
belief that we should notify the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence of this discovery
because of the character at least of these two documents.
As that proceeded up from the 13th of June, at each echelon we had to go through the legal office,
the legislative liaison office and at each echelon about the same question was asked of him: Have
you gone through all of this, so that when we notify the Senate Select Committee we do not notify
half of the important revelations and not the other half? The last thing I want, Mr. Chairman, is in
any way to be on any topic, give the appearance on any topic of being recalcitrant, reluctant, or
having to have you drag things out of me, and my subordinates, much to my pleasure, had each
asked, have you really gone through these 8,000 pages enough to know that we are not going to
uncover a bombshell down at the bottom?
By late June, about the 28th, this process reached my deputy. He notified me after his review of it
on the 7th of July, which is the first I knew of it. I began reading into it. I asked the same probing
question directly. I then notified my superiors, and on the 15th delivered to you my letter letting
you know that we had this, and we have been working, many people, many hours since then, to
be sure that what we are telling you today does include all the relevant material.
Senator INOUYE. I would like to commend Mr. Laubinger for his diligence and expertise, but
was this diligence the result of the Freedom of Information Act or could this diligence have been
exercised during the Church hearings? Why was it not exercised? Admiral TURNER. There is
no question that theoretically this diligence could have been exercised at any time, and it may
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
441 of 813
560
561 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 161 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
well be that the Freedom of Information Act has made us more aware of this. Would you speak
for yourself, please.
Mr. LAUBINGER. I really don't attribute it, Senator, to diligence so much as thoroughness. If
you can imagine the pressures under an organization trying to respond, which I think the CIA did
at the time of the Church committee hearings, the hallways of the floor I am on were full of boxes
from our records center. Every box that anyone thought could possibly contain anything was
called up for search. It was one of a frantic effort to comply.
When the pressure of that situation cools down, and you can start looking at things systematically,
you are apt to find things that you wouldn't under the heat of a crash program, and that is what
happened here.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. Senator Kennedy?
Senator KENNEDY. Admiral Turner, this is an enormously distressing report that you give to
the American Congress and to the American people today. Granted, it happened many years ago,
but what we are
-16-
basically talking about is an activity which took place in the country that involved the perversion
and the corruption of many of our outstanding research centers in this country, with CIA funds,
where some of our top researchers were unwittingly involved in research sponsored by the
Agency in which they had no knowledge of the background or the support for.
Much of it was done with American citizens who were completely unknowing in terms of taking
various drugs, and there are perhaps any number of Americans who are walking around today on
the east coast or west coast who were given drugs, with all the kinds of physical and
psychological damage that can be caused. We have gone over that in very careful detail, and it is
significant and severe indeed.
I do not know what could be done in a less democratic country that would be more alien to our
own traditions than was really done in this narrow area, and as you give this report to the
committee, I would like to get some sense of your own concern about this type of activity, and
how you react, having assumed this important responsibility with the confidence of President
Crater and the overwhelming support, obviously, of the Congress, under this set of circumstances.
I did not get much of a feeling in reviewing your statement here this morning of the kind of
abhorrence to this type of past activity which I think the American people would certainly deplore
and which I believe that you do, but could you comment upon that question, and also perhaps
give us what ideas you have to insure that it cannot happen again?
Admiral TURNER. Senator Kennedy, it is totally abhorrent to me to think of using a human

being as a guinea pig and in any way jeopardizing his life and his health, no matter how great the
cause. I am not here to pass judgment on my predecessors, but I can assure you that this is totally
beyond the pale of my contemplation of activities that the CIA or any other of our intelligence
agencies should undertake.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
442 of 813
561
562 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 162 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
I am taking and have taken what I believe are adequate steps to insure that such things are not
continuing today.
Senator KENNEDY. Could you tell us a little bit about that?
Admiral TURNER. I have asked for a special report assuring me that there are no drug activities
extant, that is, drug activities that involve experimentation. Obviously, we collect intelligence
about drugs and drug use in other countries, but there are no experimentations being conducted by
the Central Intelligence Agency, and I have had a special check made because of another incident
that was uncovered some years ago about the unauthorized retention of some toxic materials at
the CIA. I have had an actual inspection made of the storage places and the certification from the
people in charge of those that there are no such chemical biological materials present in our
keeping, and I have issued express orders that that shall not be the case.
Beyond that, I have to rely in large measure on my sense of command and direction of the people
and their knowledge of the attitude I have just expressed to you in this regard.
Senator KENNEDY. I think that is very commendable.
Admiral TURNER. Thank you, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. I think it is important that the American people understand that.
-17-
You know, much of the research which is our area of interest that was being done by the Agency
and the whole involved sequence of activities done by the Agency, I am convinced could have
been done in a legitimate way through the research programs of the National Institutes of Mental
Health, other sponsored activities, I mean, that is some other question, but I think you went to an
awful lot of trouble, where these things could have been.
Let me ask you specifically, on the followup of MKULTRA, are there now -- I think you have
answered, but I want to get a complete answer about any experimentations that are being done on
human beings, whether it is drugs or behavioral alterations or patterns or any support, either
directly or indirectly, being provided by the Agency in terms of any experimentation on human
beings.
Admiral TURNER. There is no experimentation with drugs on human beings, witting or

unwitting, being conducted in any way.
Senator KENNEDY. All right. How bout the nondrug experimentation our Committee has seen -
- psychosurgery, for example, or psychological research?
Admiral TURNER. We are continually involved in what we call assessment of behavior. For
instance, we are trying to continually improve our polygraph procedures to, you know, assess
whether a person is lying or not. This does not involve any tampering with the individual body.
This involves studying records of people's behavior under different circumstances, and so n, but it
is not an experimental thing. Have I described that accurately, Al?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
443 of 813
562
563 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 163 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. BRODY. Yes.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, it is limited to those areas?
Admiral TURNER. Yes; it does not involve attempting to modify behavior. It only involves
studying behavior conditions, but not trying to actively modify it, as was one of the objectives of
MKULTRA.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we are scarce on time, but I am interested in the other areas besides
polygraph where you are doing it. Maybe you can either respond now or submit it for the record,
if you would do that. Would you provide that for the record?
Admiral TURNER. Yes.
[The material on psychological assessments follows:]
Psychological assessments are performed as a service to officers in the operations directorate who recruit and/or
handle agents. Except for people involved in training courses, the subjects of the assessments are foreign nationals.
The assessments are generally done to determine the most successful tactic to persuade the subject to accept convert
employment by the CIA, and to make an appraisal of his reliability and truthfulness.
A majority of the work is done by a staff of trained psychologists, some of whom are stationed overseas. The
assessments they do may be either direct or indirect. Direct assessments involve a personal interview of the subject
by the psychologist. When possible the subject is asked to complete a formal "intelligence test" which is actually a
disguised psychological test. Individuals being assessed are not given drugs, nor are they subjected to physical
harassment or torture. When operating conditions are such that a face-to-face interview is not possible, the
psychologist may do an indirect assessment, using as source materials descriptions of the subject by others,
interviews with people who know him, specimens of his writings, etc.
-18-
The other psychological assessments involve handwriting analysis or graphological assessment. The work is done by
a pair of trained graphologists, assisted by a small number of measurement technicians. They generally require at
least a page of handwritten script by the subject. Measurements are made of about 30 different writing characteristics,
and these are charted and furnished to the graphologist for assessments.
The psychologists also give courses in psychological assessment to group of operations officers, to sharpen their own
capabilities to size up people. As part of the training course, the instructor does a psychological assessment of each
student. The students are writing participants, and results are discussed with them.
It is important to reiterate that psychological assessments are only a service to the operations officers. In the final
analysis, it is the responsibility of the operations officer to decide how a potential agent should be approached, or to
make a judgment as to whether any agent is telling the truth.
Admiral TURNER. The kind of thing we are interested in is, what will motivate a man to
become an agent of the United States in a difficult situation. We have to be familiar with that kind
of attitudinal response that we can expect from people we approach to for one reason or another
become our spies, but I will be happy to submit a very specific listing of these.
Senator KENNEDY. Would you do that for the committee?
In the followups, in the MKSEARCH, in the OFTEN, and the CHICKWIT, could you give us
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
444 of 813
563
564 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 164 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
also a report on those particular programs?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Did they involve experimentation, human experimentation?
Admiral TURNER. No, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. None of them?
Admiral TURNER. Let me say this, that the CHICKWIT program is the code name for the CIA
participation in what was basically a Department of Defense program. This program was
summarized and reported to the Church committee, to the Congress, and I have since they have
been rementioned in the press in the last 2 days here, I have not had time to go through and
personally review them. I have ascertained that all of the files that we had and made available
before are intact, and I have put a special order out that nobody will enter those files or in any
way touch them without my permission at this point, but they are in the Retired Records Center
outside of Washington, and they are available.
I am not prepared to give you full details on it, because I simply haven't read into that part of our
history, but in addition I would suggest when we want to get into that we should get the
Department of Defense in with us.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you will supply that information to the Intelligence Committee, the
relevant, I mean, the health aspects, obviously, and the research we are interested in?
Senator KENNEDY. Will you let us know, Admiral Turner?
Admiral TURNER. I will be happy to.
[See p. 169 for the material referred to.]
Senator KENNEDY. Thank you. I am running out of time. Do you support the extension of the
protection of human subjects legislation to include the CIA and the DOD? You commented
favorably on that
-19-
before, and I am hopeful we can get that on the calendar early in September, and that is our strong
interest.
Admiral TURNER. The CIA certainly has no objection to that proposed legislation, sir. It is not
my role in the administration to be the supporter of it or the endorser of it.
Senator KENNEDY. As a personal matter, since you have reviewed these subjects, would you
comment? I know it is maybe unusual, but you can understand what we are attempting to do.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
445 of 813
564
565 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 165 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. From your own experience in the agency, you can understand the value of
it.
Just finally, in your own testimony now with this additional information, it seems quite apparent
to me that you can reconstruct in very careful detail this whole project in terms of the responsible
CIA officials for the program. You have so indicated in your testimony. Now with the additional
information, and the people, that have been revealed in the examination of the documents, it
seems to be pretty clear that you can track that whole program in very careful detail, and I would
hope, you know, that you would want to get to the bottom of it, as the Congress does as well. I
will come back to that in my next round. Thank you very much.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Goldwater?
Senator GOLDWATER. I have no questions.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Schweiker?
Admiral Turner, I would like to go back to your testimony on page 12, where you discuss the
contribution to the building fund of a private medical institution. You state, "Indeed, it was
mentioned in a 1957 Inspector General report on the Technical Services Division of CIA,
pertinent portions of which had been reviewed by the Church committee staff." I would like to
have you consider this question very carefully. I served as a member o the original Church
committee. My staffer did a lot of the work that you are referring to here. He made notes on the
IG's report. My question to you is, are you saying that the section that specifically delineates an
improper contribution was in fact given to the Church committee staff to see?
Admiral TURNER. The answer to your question is "Yes." The information that a contribution
had been made was made available, to the best of my knowledge.
Senator SCHWEIKER. To follow this up further, I'd like to say that I think there was a serious
flaw in the way that the IG report was handled and the Church committee was limited. I am not
making any accusations, but because of limited access to the report, we have a situ-
-20-
ation where it is not even clear whether we actually saw that material or not, simply because we
could not keep a copy of the report under the procedures we had to follow. We were limited by
notetaking, and so it is rather ambiguous as to just what was seen and what was not seen. I
certainly hope that the new Intelligence Committee will not be bound by procedures that restrict
its ability to exercise effective oversight.
I have a second question. Does it concern you, Admiral, that we used a subterfuge which resulted
in the use of Federal construction grant funds to finance facilities for these sorts of experiments
on our own people? Because as I understand what you are saying, while the CIA maybe only put
up $375,000, this triggered a response on the part of the Federal Government to provide on a
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
446 of 813
565
566 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 166 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
good faith basis matching hospital funds at the same level. We put up more than $1 million of
matching funds, some based on an allegedly private donation which was really CIA money.
Isn't there something basically wrong with that?
Admiral TURNER. I certainly believe there is. As I stated, the General Counsel of the CIA at
that time rendered a legal opinion that this was a legal undertaking, and again I am hesitant to go
back and revisit the atmosphere, the laws, the attitudes at that time, so whether the counsel was on
good legal ground or not, I am not enough of a lawyer to be sure, but it certainly would occur to
me if it happened today as a very questionable activity.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, I think those of us who have worked on and amended the Hill-
Burton Act and other hospital construction assistance laws over the years, would have a rather
different opinion on the legal intent or object of Congress in passing laws to provide hospital
construction project money. These funds weren't intended for this.
It reminds me a little bit of the shellfish toxin situation which turned up when I was on the Church
committee. The Public Health Service was used to produce a deadly poison with Public Health
money. Here we are using general hospital construction money to carry on a series of drug
experimentation.
Admiral TURNER. Excuse me, sir. If I could just be, I think, accurate, I don't think any of this
$375,000 or the matching funds were used to conduct drug experiments. They were used to build
the hospital. Now, the CIA the put more money into a foundation that was conducting research on
the CIA's behalf supposedly in that hospital, so the intent was certainly there, but the money was
not used for experimentation.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, I understand it was used for bricks and mortar, but the bricks
were used to build the facility where the experiments were carried on; were they not?
Admiral TURNER. We do not have positive evidence that they were. It certainly would seem
that that was the intent, but I do not want to draw inferences here --
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, why else would they give this money for the building fund if the
building was not used for a purpose that benefited the CIA program?
Admiral TURNER. I certainly draw the inference that the CIA expected to benefit from it, and
some of the wording says the General
-21-
Counsel's opinion was that this was legal only if the CIA was going to derive adequate benefit
from it, but, sir, there is no evidence of what benefit was derived.
Senator SCHWEIKER. There must have been some pretty good benefits at stake. The Atomic
Energy Commission was to bear a share of the cost, and when they backed out for some reason or
another, the CIA picked up part of their tab. So, at two different points there were indications that
CIA decisionmakers thought there was great benefit to be derived from whatever happened within
the brick and mortar walls of that facility.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
447 of 813
566
567 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 167 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Admiral TURNER. You are absolutely right. I am only taking the position that I cannot
substantiate that there was benefit derived.
Senator SCHWEIKER. The agreement documents say that the CIA would have access to one-
sixth of the space involved in the construction of the wing, so how would you enter into an
agreement that specifically says that you will have access to and use of one-sixth of the space and
not perform something in that space? I cannot believe it was empty.
Admiral TURNER. Sir, I am not disputing you at all, but both of us are saying that the inference
is that one-sixth of the space was used, that experimentation was done, and so on, but there is no
factual evidence of what went on as a result of that payment or what went on in that hospital. It is
just missing. It is not that it didn't happen.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Admiral Turner, one other--
Senator KENNEDY. Would the Senator yield on that point?
Senator SCHWEIKER. I understand that in the agency's documents on the agreement it was
explicitly stated that one-sixth of the facility would be designated for CIA use and made available
for CIA research are you familiar--
Mr. BRODY. Senator, as I recall, you are right in that there is a mention of one-sixth, but any
mention at all has to do with planning. There are no subsequent reports as to what happened after
the construction took place.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Admiral Turner, I read in the New York Times that part of this series of
MKULTRA experiments involved an arrangement with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics to test
LSD surreptitiously on unwitting patrons in bars in New York and San Francisco. Some of the
subjects became violently ill and were hospitalized. I wonder if you would just briefly describe
what we were doing there and how it was carried out? I assume it was through a safe house
operation. I don't believe your statement went into much detail.
Admiral TURNER. I did mention the safe house operation in my statement, sir, and that is how
these were carried out. What we have learned from the new documentation is the location and the
dates at which the safe houses were run by the CIA and the identification of three individuals who
were associated with running those safe houses. We know something about the construction work
that was done in them because there were contracts for this. Beyond that, we are pretty much
drawing inferences as to the things that went on as to what you are saying here.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, the subjects were unwitting. You can infer that much, right?
Admiral TURNER. Right.
-22-
Senator SCHWEIKER. If you happened to be at the wrong bar at the wrong place and time, you
got it.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
448 of 813
567
568 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 168 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. BRODY. Senator, that would be -- contacts were made, as we understand it, in bars, et
cetera, and then the people may have been invited to these safe houses. There really isn't any
indication as to the fact that this took place in bars.
Admiral TURNER. We are trying to be very precise with you, sir, and not draw an inference
here. There are 6 cases of these 149 where we have enough evidence in this new documentation
to substantiate that there was unwitting testing and some of that involves these safe houses. There
are other cases where it is ambiguous as to whether the testing was witting or voluntary. There are
others where it was clearly voluntary.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Of course, after a few drinks, it is questionable whether informed

consent means anything to a person in a bar anyway.
Admiral TURNER. Well, we don't have any indication that all these cases where it is ambiguous
involved drinking of any kind. There are cases in penal institutions where it is not clear whether
the prisoner was given a choice or not. I don't know that he wasn't given a choice, but I don't
positively know that he was, and I classify that as an ambiguous incident.
Senator INOUYE. Your time is up, Senator.
Senator Huddleston?
Senator HUDDLESTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Turner, you stated in your testimony that you are convinced there was no attempt to
conceal this recently discovered documentation during the earlier searches. Did you question the
individuals connected with the earlier search before you made that judgment?
Admiral TURNER. Yes; I haven't, I don't think, questioned everybody who looked in the files or
is still on our payroll who looked in the files back in 1975, but Mr. Laubinger on my left is the
best authority on this, and I have gone over it with him in some detail.
Senator HUDDLESTON. But you have inquired, you think, sufficiently to assure yourself that
there was no intent on the part of any person to conceal these records from the previous
committee?
Admiral TURNER. I am persuaded of that both by my questioning of people and by the

circumstances and the way in which these documents were filed, by the fact which I did not and
should have mentioned in my testimony, that these were not the official files. The ones that we
have received or retrieved were copies of files that were working files that somebody had used,
and therefore were slipped into a different location, and again I say to you , sir, I can't imagine
their deliberately concealing these particular files and revealing the other things that they did
reveal in 1975. I don't see the motive for that, because these are not that damning compared with
the overall material that was provided.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Is this the kind of operation that if it were continuing now or if there
were anything similar to it, that you would feel compelled to report to the Select Committee on
Intelligence?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir. You mean, if I discovered that something like this were going on
without my knowledge? Yes, I would feel absolutely the requirement to --
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
449 of 813
568
569 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 169 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-23-
Senator HUDDLESTON. But if it were going on with your knowledge, would you report it to
the committee? I assume you would.
Admiral TURNER. Yes. Well, it would not be going on with my knowledge, but theoretically
the answer is yes, sir.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Well, then, what suggestions would you have as we devise charters
for the various intelligence agencies? What provision would you suggest to prohibit this kind of
activity from taking place? Would you suggest that it ought to be specifically outlined in a
statutory charter setting out the parameters of the permissible operation of the various agencies?
Admiral TURNER. I think that certainly is something we must consider as we look at the
legislation for charters. I am not on the face of it opposed to it. I think we would have to look at
the particular wording as we are going to have to deal with the whole charter issue as to exactly
how precise you want to be in delineating restraints and curbs on the intelligence activities.
Senator HUDDLESTON. In the case of sensitive type operations, which this certainly was,
which might be going on today, is the oversight activity of the agency more intensive now than it
was at that time?
Admiral TURNER. Much more so. I mean, I have briefed you, sir, and the committee on our
sensitive operations. We have the Intelligence Oversight Board. We have a procedure in the
National Security Council for approval of very sensitive operations. I think the amount of
spotlight focused on these activities is many, manyfold what it was in these 12 to 24 years ago.
Senator HUDDLESTON. How about the record keeping?
Admiral TURNER. Yes; I can't imagine anyone having the gall to think that he can just blithely
destroy records today with all of the attention that has come to this, and certainly we are
emphasizing that that is not the case.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Admiral, I was particularly interested in the activity that took place at
the U.S. Public Health Service Hospital at Lexington, Ky., in which a Dr. Harris Isbell conducted
experiments on people who were presumably patients there. There was a narcotics institution, I
take it, and Dr. Isbell was, according to the New York Times story, carrying on a secret series of
correspondence with an individual at the agency by the name of Ray. Have you identified who
that person is?
Admiral TURNER. Sir, I find myself in a difficult position here at a public hearing to confirm or
deny these names in view of my legal responsibilities under the Privacy Act not to disclose the
names of individuals here.
Senator HUDDLESTON. I am just asking you if you have identified the person referred to in
that article as Ray. I am not asking you who he was. I just want to know if you know who he is.
Admiral TURNER. No. I am sorry, was this W-r-a-y or R-a-y?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
450 of 813
569
570 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 170 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator HUDDLESTON. It is listed in the news article as R-a-y, in quotations.
Admiral TURNER. No, sir, we have not identified him.
Senator HUDDLESTON. So you have no knowledge of whether or note is still a member of

your staff or connected with the Agency in any way. Have you attempted to identify him?
-24-
[Pause.]
Admiral TURNER. Senator, we have a former employee whose first name is Ray who may have
had some connection with these activities.
Senator HUDDLESTON. You suspect that but you have not verified that at this time, or at least
you are not in a position to indicate that you have verified it?
Admiral TURNER. That is correct.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Wallop?
Senator WALLOP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Turner, not all of the -- and in no way trying to excuse you of the hideous nature of some
of these projects, but not all of the projects under MKULTRA are of a sinister or even a moral
nature. Is that a fair statement?
Admiral TURNER. That is correct.
Senator WALLOP. Looking down through some of these 17 projects not involving human
testing, aspects of the magician's art, it doesn't seem as though there is anything very sinister
about that. Studies of human behavior and sleep research, library searches. Now, those things in
their way are still of interest, are they not, to the process of intelligence gathering?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir. I have not tried to indicate that we either are not doing or would not
do any of the things that were involved in MKULTRA, but when it comes to the witting or
unwitting testing of people with drugs, that is certainly verboten, but there are other things.
Senator WALLOP. Even with volunteer patients? I mean, I am not trying to put you on the spot
to say whether it is going on, but I mean, it is not an uncommon thing, is it, in the prisons of the
United States for the Public Health Service to conduct various kinds of experiments with vaccines
and, say, sunburn creams? I know in Arizona they have done so.
Admiral TURNER. My understanding is, lots of that is authorized, but I am not of the opinion
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
451 of 813
570
571 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 171 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
that this is not the CIA's business, and that if we need some information in that category, I would
prefer to go to the other appropriate authorities of the Government and ask them to get it for us
rather than to in any way--
Senator WALLOP. Well, you know, you have library searches and attendants at the national
seminars. This is why I wanted to ask you if the bulk of these projects were in any way the kinds
of things that the Agency might not do now. A President would not have been horrified by the list
of the legitimate types of things. Isn't that probably the case?
Senator WALLOP. And if it did in fact appear in the IG report, is there any reason to suppose
that the President did not know of this project? You said there was no reason to suppose that he
did, but let me reverse that. Is there any reason to suppose that they did not?
Admiral TURNER. No.
Senator WALLOP. Well, you know, I just cannot imagine you or literally anybody undertaking
projects of the magnitude of dollars here and just not knowing about it, not informing your
superior that
-25-
these were going on, especially when certain items of it appear in the Inspector General's report
on budget matters.
Admiral TURNER. Well, I find it difficult when it is that far back to hypothesize what the
procedures that the Director was using in terms of informing his superiors were. It is quite a
different climate from today, and I think we do a lot more informing to day than they did back
then, but I find it very difficult to guess what the level of knowledge was.
Senator WALLOP. I am really not asking you to second-guess it, but it just seems to me that,
while the past is past, and thank goodness we are operating under different sets of circumstances,
I think it is naive for us to suppose that these things were conducted entirely without the
knowledge of the Presidents of the United States during those times. It is just the kinds of
research information that was being sought was vital to the United States, not the means, but the
information that they were trying to find.
Admiral TURNER. I am sorry. Your question is, was this vital? Did we view it as vital?
Senator WALLOP. Well, your implication at the beginning was that it was a response to the
kinds of behavior that were seen in Cardinal Mindszenty's trial and other things. I mean,
somebody must have thought that this was an important defensive reaction, if nothing else, on the
part of the United States.
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir, I am sure they did, but again I just don't know how high that
permeated the executive branch.
Senator WALLOP. But the kinds of information are still important to you. I mean, I am not
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
452 of 813
571
572 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 172 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
suggesting that anyone go back and do that kind of thing again, but I'm certain it would be of use
to you to know what was going to happen to one of your agents assuming someone had put one of
these things into his bloodstream, or tried to modify his behavior.
Admiral TURNER. Absolutely, and you know, we would be very concerned if we thought there
were things like truth serums or other things that our agents or others could be subjected to by use
or improper use of drugs by other powers against our people or agents.
Senator WALLOP. Are there? I don't ask you to name them, but are there such serums?
Admiral TURNER. I don't know of them if there are. I would have to answer that for the record,
sir.
Senator WALLOP. I would appreciate that.
[The material referred to follows.]
Next: "Truth" Drugs in Interrogation

Continue Reading CIA Director Stansfield Turner's Testimony
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
453 of 813
572
573 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 173 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: "Truth" Drugs in Interrogation Page 1 of 11
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
"TRUTH" DRUGS IN INTERROGATION

The search for effective aids to interrogation is probably as old as man's need to obtain information from
an uncooperative source and as persistent as his impatience to shortcut any tortuous path. In the annals of
police investigation, physical coercion has at times been substituted for painstaking and time-consuming
inquiry in the belief that direct methods produce quick results. Sir James Stephens, writing in 1883,
rationalizes a grisly example of "third degree" practices by the police of India: "It is far pleasanter to sit
comfortably in the shade rubbing red pepper in a poor devil's eyes than to go about in the sun hunting up
evidence."
More recently, police officials in some countries have turned to drugs for assistance in extracting
confessions from accused persons, drugs which are presumed
-26-
to relax the individual's defenses to the point that he unknowingly reveals truths he has been trying to
conceal. This investigative technique, however humanitarian as an alternative to physical torture, still
raises serious questions of individual rights and liberties. In this country, where drugs have gained only
marginal acceptance in police work, their use has provoked cries of "psychological third degree" and has
precipitated medico-legal controversies that after a quarter of a century still occasionally flare into the
open.
The use of so-called "truth" drugs in police work is similar to the accepted psychiatric practice of narco-
analysis; the difference in the two procedures lies in their different objectives. The police investigator is
concerned with empirical truth that may be used against the suspect, and therefore almost solely with
probative truth: the usefulness of the suspect's revelations depends ultimately on their acceptance in
evidence by a court of law. The psychiatrist, on the other hand, using the same "truth" drugs in diagnosis
and treatment of the mentally ill, is primarily concerned with psychological truth or psychological reality
rather than empirical fact. A patient's aberrations are reality for him at the time they occur, and an accurate
account of these fantasies and delusions, rather than reliable recollection of past events, can be the key to
recovery.
The notion of drugs capable of illuminating hidden recesses of the mind, helping to heal the mentally ill
and preventing or reversing the miscarriage of justice, has provided an exceedingly durable theme for the
press and popular literature. While acknowledging that "truth serum" is a misnomer twice over -- the
drugs are not sera and they do not necessarily bring forth probative truth -- journalistic accounts continue
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
454 of 813
573
574 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 174 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
to exploit the appeal of the term. The formula is to play up a few spectacular "truth" drug successes and to
imply that the drugs are more maligned than need be and more widely employed in criminal investigation
than can officially be admitted.
Any technique that promises an increment of success in extracting information from an uncompliant
source is ipso facto of interest in intelligence operations. If the ethical considerations which in Western
countries inhibit the use of narco-interrogation in police work are felt also in intelligence, the Western
services must at least be prepared against its possible employment by the adversary. An understanding of
"truth" drugs, their characteristic actions, and their potentialities, positive and negative, for eliciting useful
information is fundamental to an adequate defense against them.
This discussion, meant to help toward such an understanding, draws primarily upon openly published
materials. It has the limitations of projecting from criminal investigative practices and from the permissive
atmosphere of drug psychotherapy.
SCOPOLAMINE AS "TRUTH SERUM"
Early in this century physicians began to employ scopolamine, along with morphine and chloroform, to
induce a state of "twilight sleep" during childbirth. A constituent of henbane, scopolamine was known to
produce sedation and drowsiness, confusion and disorientation, incoordination, and amnesia for events
experienced during intoxication. Yet physicians noted that women in twilight sleep answered questions
accurately and often volunteered exceedingly candid remarks.
In 1922 it occurred to Robert House, a Dallas, Texas obstetrician, that a similar technique might be
employed in the interrogation of suspected criminals, and he arranged to interview under scopolamine two
prisoners in the Dallas county jail whose guilt seemed clearly confirmed. Under the drug, both men denied
the charges on which they were held; and both, upon trial, were found not guilty. Enthusiastic at this
success, House concluded that a patient under the influence of scopolamine "cannot create a lie... and
there is no power to think or reason." [14] His experiment and this conclusion attracted wide attention,
and the idea of a "truth" drug was thus launched upon the public consciousness.
The phrase "truth serum" is believed to have appeared first in a news report of House's experiment in the
Los Angeles Record, sometime in 1922. House resisted the term for a while but eventually came to
employ it regularly himself. He published some eleven articles on scopolamine in the years 1921-1929,
with a noticeable increase in polemical zeal as time when on. What had begun as something of a scientific
statement turned finally into a dedicated crusade by the "father of truth serum" on behalf of his offspring,
wherein he was "grossly indulgent of its wayward behavior and stubbornly proud of its minor
achievements." [11]
-27-
Only a handful of cases in which scopolamine was used for police interrogation came to public notice,
though there is evidence suggesting that some police forces may have used it extensively. [2,16] One
police writer claims that the threat of scopolamine interrogation has been effective in extracting
confessions from criminal suspects, who are told they will first be rendered unconscious by chloral
hydrate placed covertly in their coffee or drinking water. [16]
Because of a number of undesirable side effects, scopolamine was shortly disqualified as a "truth" drug.
Among the most disabling of the side effects are hallucinations, disturbed perception, somnolence, and
physiological phenomena such as headache, rapid heart, and blurred vision, which distract the subject
from the central purpose of the interview. Furthermore, the physical action is long, far outlasting the
psychological effects. Scopolamine continues, in some cases, to make anesthesia and surgery safer by
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
455 of 813
574
575 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 175 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
drying the mouth and throat and reducing secretions that might obstruct the air passages. But the
fantastically, almost painfully, dry "desert" mouth brought on by the drug is hardly conducive to free
talking, even in a tractable subject.
THE BARBITURATES
The first suggestion that drugs might facilitate communication with emotionally disturbed patients came
quite by accident in 1916. Arthur S. Lovenhart and his associates at the University of Wisconsin,
experimenting with respiratory stimulants, were surprised when, after an injection of sodium cyanide, a
catatonic patient who had long been mute and rigid suddenly relaxed, opened his eyes, and even answered
a few questions. By the early 1930's a number of psychiatrists were experimenting with drugs as an
adjunct to established methods of therapy.
At about this time police officials, still attracted by the possibility that drugs might help in the
interrogation of suspects and witnesses, turned to a class of depressant drugs known as the barbiturates.
By 1935 Clarence W. Muehlberger, head of the Michigan Crime Detection Laboratory at East Lansing,
was using barbiturates on reluctant suspects, though police work continued to be hampered by the courts'
rejection of drug-induced confessions except in a few carefully circumscribed instances.
The barbiturates, first synthesized in 1903, are among the oldest of modern drugs and the most versatile of
all depressants. In this half-century some 2,500 have been prepared, and about two dozen of these have
won an important place in medicine. An estimated three to four billion doses of barbiturates are prescribed
by physicians in the United States each year, and they have come to be known by a variety of commercial
names and colorful slang expressions: "goofballs," Luminal, Nembutal, "red devils," "yellow jackets,"
"pink ladies," etc. Three of them which are used in narcoanalysis and have seen service as "truth" drugs
are sodium amytal (anobarbital), pentothal sodium (thiopental), and to a lesser extent seconal
(seconbarbital).
As one pharmacologist explains it, a subject coming under the influence of a barbiturate injected
intravenously goes through all the stages of progressive drunkenness, but the time scale is on the order of
minutes instead of hours. Outwardly the sedation effect is dramatic, especially if the subject is a
psychiatric patient in tension. His features slacken, his body relaxes. Some people are momentarily
excited; a few become silly and giggly. This usually passes, and most subjects fall asleep, emerging later
in disoriented semi-wakefulness.
The descent into narcosis and beyond with progressively larger doses can be divided as follows:
I. Sedative stage.
II. Unconsciousness, with exaggerated reflexes (hyperactive stage).
III. Unconsciousness, without reflex even to painful stimuli.
IV. Death.
Whether all these stages can be distinguished in any given subject depends largely on the dose and the
rapidity with which the drug is induced. In anesthesia, stages I and II may last only two or three seconds.
The first or sedative stage can be further divided:
Plane 1. No evident effect, or slightly sedative effect.
Plane 2. Cloudiness, calmness, amnesia. (Upon recovery, the subject will not remember what
happened at this or "lower" planes or stages.)
Plane 3. Slurred speech, old thought patterns disrupted, inability to integrate or learn new patterns.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
456 of 813
575
576 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 176 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Poor coordination. Subject becomes unaware of painful stimuli.
-28-
Plane 3 is the psychiatric "work" stage. It may last only a few minutes, but it can be extended by further
slow injection of drug. The usual practice is to back into the sedative stage on the way to full
consciousness.
CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES
The general abhorrence in Western countries for the use of chemical agents "to make people do things
against their will" has precluded serious systematic study (at least as published openly) of the
potentialities of drugs for interrogation. Louis A. Gottschalk, surveying their use in information-seeking
interviews, [13] cites 136 references; but only two touch upon the extraction of intelligence information,
and one of these concludes merely that Russian techniques in interrogation and indoctrination are derived
from age-old police methods and do not depend on the use of drugs. On the validity of confessions
obtained with drugs, Gottschalk found only three published experimental studies that he deemed worth
reporting.
One of these reported experiments by D.P. Morris in which intravenous sodium amytal was helpful in
detecting malingerers. [12] The subjects, soldiers, were at first sullen, negativistic, and non-productive
under amytal, but as the interview proceeded they revealed the fact of and causes for their malingering.
Usually the interviews turned up a neurotic or psychotic basis for the deception.
The other two confession studies, being more relevant to the highly specialized, untouched area of drugs
in intelligence interrogation, deserve more detailed review.
Gerson and Victoroff [12] conducted amytal interviews with 17 neuropsychiatric patients, soldiers who
had charges against them, at Tilton General Hospital, Fort Dix. First they were interviewed without
amytal by a psychiatrist, who, neither ignoring nor stressing their situation as prisoners or suspects under
scrutiny, urged each of them to discuss his social and family background, his army career, and his version
of the charges pending against him.
The patients were told only a few minutes in advance that narcoanalysis would be performed. The doctor
was considerate, but positive and forthright. He indicated that they had no choice but to submit to the
procedure. Their attitudes varied from unquestioning to downright refusal.
Each patient was brought to complete narcosis and permitted to sleep. As he became semiconscious and
could be stimulated to speak, he was held in this stage with additional amytal while the questioning
proceeded. He was questioned first about innocuous matters from his background that he had discussed
before receiving the drug. Whenever possible, he was manipulated into bringing up himself the charges
pending against him before being questioned about them. If he did this in a too fully conscious state, it
proved more effective to ask him to "talk about that later" and to interpose a topic that would diminish
suspicion, delaying the interrogation on his criminal activity until he was back in the proper stage of
narcosis.
The procedure differed from therapeutic narcoanalysis in several ways: the setting, the type of patients,
and the kind of "truth" sought. Also, the subjects were kept in twilight consciousness longer than usual.
This state proved richest in yield of admissions prejudicial to the subject. In it his speech was thick,
mumbling, and disconnected, but his discretion was markedly reduced. This valuable interrogation period,
lasting only five to ten minutes at a time, could be reinduced by injecting more amytal and putting the
patient back to sleep.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
457 of 813
576
577 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 177 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The interrogation technique varied from case to case according to the background information about the
patient, the seriousness of the charges, the patient's attitude under narcosis, and his rapport with the
doctor. Sometimes it was useful to pretend, as the patient grew more fully conscious, that he had already
confessed during the amnestic period of the interrogation, and to urge him, while his memory and sense of
self-protection were still limited, to continue to elaborate the details of what he had "already described."
When it was obvious that a subject was withholding the truth, his denials were quickly passed over and
ignored, and the key questions would be rewarded in a new approach.
Several patients revealed fantasies, fears, and delusions approaching delirium, much of which could
readily be distinguished from reality. But sometimes there was no way for the examiner to distinguish
truth from fantasy except by reference to other sources. One subject claimed to have a child that did not
exist,
-29-
another threatened to kill on sight a stepfather who had been dead a year, and yet another confessed to
participating in a robbery when in fact he had only purchased goods from the participants. Testimony
concerning dates and specific places was untrustworthy and often contradictory because of the patient's
loss of time-sense. His veracity in citing names and events proved questionable. Because of his confusion
about actual events and what he thought or feared had happened, the patient at times managed to conceal
the truth unintentionally.
As the subject revived, he would become aware that he was being questioned about his secrets and,
depending upon his personality, his fear of discovery, or the degree of his disillusionment with the doctor,
grow negativistic, hostile, or physically aggressive. Occasionally patients had to be forcibly restrained
during this period to prevent injury to themselves or others as the doctor continued to interrogate. Some
patients, moved by fierce and diffuse anger, the assumption that they had already been tricked into
confessing, and a still limited sense of discretion, defiantly acknowledged their guilt and challenged the
observer to "do something about it." As the excitement passed, some fell back on their original stories and
others verified the confessed material. During the follow-up interview nine of the 17 admitted the validity
of their confessions; eight repudiated their confessions and reaffirmed their earlier accounts.
With respect to the reliability of the results of such interrogation, Gerson and Victoroff conclude that
persistent, careful questioning can reduce ambiguities in drug interrogation, but cannot eliminate them
altogether.
At least one experiment has shown that subjects are capable of maintaining a lie while under the influence
of a barbiturate. Redlich and his associates at Yale [25] administered sodium amytal to nine volunteers,
students and professionals, who had previously, for purposes of the experiment, revealed shameful and
guilt-producing episodes of their past and then invented false self-protective stories to cover them. In
nearly every case the cover story retained some elements of the guilt inherent in the true story.
Under the influence of the drug, the subjects were crossexamined on their cover stories by a second
investigator. The results, though not definitive, showed that normal individuals who had good defenses
and no overt pathological traits could stick to their invented stories and refuse confession. Neurotic
individuals with strong unconscious self-punitive tendencies, on the other hand, both confessed more
easily and were inclined to substitute fantasy for the truth, confessing to offenses never actually
committed.
In recent years drug therapy has made some use of stimulants, most notably amphetamine (Benzedrine)
and its relative methamphetamine (Methadrine). These drugs, used either alone or following intravenous
barbiturates, produce an outpouring of ideas, emotions, and memories which has been of help in
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
458 of 813
577
578 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 178 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
diagnosing mental disorders. The potential of stimulants in interrogation has received little attention,
unless in unpublished work. In one study of their psychiatric use Brussel et al. [7] maintain that
methedrine gives the liar no time to think or to organize his deceptions. Once the drug takes hold, they
say, an insurmountable urge to pour out speech traps the malingerer. Gottschalk, on the other hand, says
that this claim is extravagant, asserting without elaboration that the study lacked proper controls. [13] It is
evident that the combined use of barbiturates and stimulants, perhaps along with ataraxics (tranquilizers),
should be further explored.
OBSERVATIONS FROM PRACTICE
J.M. MacDonald, who as a psychiatrist for the District Courts of Denver has had extensive experience
with narcoanalysis, says that drug interrogation is of doubtful value in obtaining confessions to crimes.
Criminal suspects under the influence of barbiturates may deliberately withhold information, persist in
giving untruthful answers, or falsely confess to crimes they did not commit. The psychopathic personality,
in particular, appears to resist successfully the influence of drugs.
MacDonald tells of a criminal psychopath who, having agreed to narco-interrogation, received 1.5 grams
of sodium amytal over a period of five hours. This man feigned amnesia and gave a false account of a
murder. "He displayed little or no remorse as he (falsely) described the crime, including burial of the
body. Indeed he was very self-possessed and he appeared almost to enjoy the examination. From time to
time he would request that more amytal be injected." [21]
MacDonald concludes that a person who gives false information prior to re-
-30-
ceiving drugs is likely to give false information also under narcosis, that the drugs are of little value for
revealing deceptions, and that they are more effective in releasing unconsciously repressed material than
in evoking consciously suppressed information.
Another psychiatrist known for his work with criminals, L.Z. Freedman, gave sodium amytal to men
accused of various civil and military antisocial acts. The subjects were mentally unstable, their conditions
ranging from character disorders to neuroses and psychoses. The drug interviews proved psychiatrically
beneficial to the patients, but Freedman found that his view of objective reality was seldom improved by
their revelations. He was unable to say on the basis of the narco-interrogation whether a given act had or
had not occurred. Like MacDonald, he found that psychopathic individuals can deny to the point of
unconsciousness crimes that every objective sign indicates they have committed. [10]
F.G. Inbau, Professor of Law at Northwestern University, who has had considerable experience observing
and participating in "truth" drug tests, claims that they are occasionally effective on persons who would
have disclosed the truth anyway had they been properly interrogated, but that a person determined to lie
will usually be able to continue the deception under drugs.
The two military psychiatrists who made the most extensive use of narcoanalysis during the war years.
Roy R. Grinker and John C. Spiegel, concluded that in almost all cases they could obtain from their
patients essentially the same material and give them the same emotional release by therapy without the
use of drugs, provided they had sufficient time.
The essence of these comments from professionals of long experience is that drugs provide rapid access to
information that is psychiatrically useful but of doubtful validity as empirical truth. The same
psychological information and a less adulterated empirical truth can be obtained from fully conscious
subjects through non-drug psychotherapy and skillful police interrogation.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
459 of 813
578
579 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 179 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
APPLICATION TO CI INTERROGATION
The almost total absence of controlled experimental studies of "truth" drugs and the spotty and anecdotal
nature of psychiatric and police evidence require that extrapolations to intelligence operations be made
with care. Still, enough is known about the drugs' actions to suggest certain considerations affecting the
possibilities for their use in interrogation.
It should be clear from the foregoing that at best a drug can only serve as an aid to an interrogator who has
a sure understanding of the psychology and techniques of normal interrogation. In some respects, indeed,
the demands on his skill will be increased by the baffling mixture of truth and fantasy in drug-induced
output. And the tendency against which he must guard in the interrogate to give the responses that seem to
be wanted without regard for facts will be heightened by drugs: the literature abounds with warnings that
a subject in narcosis is extremely suggestible.
It seems possible that this suggestibility and the lowered guard of the narcotic state might be put to
advantage in the case of a subject feigning ignorance of a language or some other skill that had become
automatic with him. Lipton [20] found sodium amytal helpful in determining whether a foreign subject
was merely pretending not to understand English. By extension, one can guess that a drugged interrogatee
might have difficulty maintaining the pretense that he did not comprehend the idiom of a profession he
was trying to hide.
There is the further problem of hostility in the interrogator's relationship to a resistance source. The
accumulated knowledge about "truth" drug reaction has come largely from patient-physician relationships
of trust and confidence. The subject in narcoanalysis is usually motivated a priori to cooperate with the
psychiatrist, either to obtain relief from mental suffering or to contribute to a scientific study. Even in
police work, where an atmosphere of anxiety and threat may be dominant, a relationship of trust
frequently asserts itself: the drug is administered by a medical man bound by a strict code of ethics; the
suspect agreeing to undergo narcoanalysis in a desperate bid for corroboration of his testimony trusts both
drug and psychiatrist, however apprehensively; and finally, as Freedman and MacDonald have indicated,
the police psychiatrist frequently deals with a "sick" criminal, and some order of patient-physician
relationship necessarily evolves.
-31-
Rarely has a drug interrogation involved "normal" individuals in a hostile or genuinely threatening milieu.
It was from a non-threatening experimental setting that Eric Lindemann could say that his "normal"
subjects "reported a general sense of euphoria, ease and confidence, and they exhibited a marked increase
in talkativeness and communicability." [18] Gerson and Victoroff list poor doctor-patient rapport as one
factor interfering with the completeness and authenticity of confessions by the Fort Dix soldiers, caught as
they were in a command performance and told they had no choice but to submit to narco-interrogation.
From all indications, subject-interrogation rapport is usually crucial to obtaining the psychological release
which may lead to unguarded disclosures. Role-playing on the part of the interrogator might be a possible
solution to the problem of establishing rapport with a drugged subject. In therapy, the British narco-
analyst William Sargent recommends that the therapist deliberately distort the facts of the patient's life-
experience to achieve heightened emotional response and abreaction. [27] In the drunken state of
narcoanalysis patients are prone to accept the therapist's false constructions. There is reason to expect that
a drugged subject would communicate freely with an interrogator playing the role of relative, colleague,
physician, immediate superior, or any other person to whom his background indicated he would be
responsive.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
460 of 813
579
580 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 180 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Even when rapport is poor, however, there remains one facet of drug action eminently exploitable in
interrogation -- the fact that subjects emerge from narcosis feeling they have revealed a great deal, even
when they have not. As Gerson and Victoroff demonstrated at Fort Dix, this psychological set provides a
major opening for obtaining genuine confessions.
POSSIBLE VARIATIONS
In studies by Beecher and his associates, [3-6] one-third to one-half the individuals tested proved to be
placebo reactors, subjects who respond with symptomatic relief to the administration of any syringe, pill,
or capsule, regardless of what it contains. Although no studies are known to have been made of the
placebo phenomenon as applied to narco-interrogation, it seems reasonable that when a subject's sense of
guilt interferes with productive interrogation, a placebo for pseudo-narcosis could have the effect of
absolving him of the responsibility for his acts and thus clear the way for free communication. It is
notable that placebos are most likely to be effective in situations of stress. The individuals most likely to
react to placebos are the more anxious, more self-centered, more dependent on outside stimulation, those
who express their needs more freely socially, talkers who drain off anxiety by conversing with others. The
non-reactors are those clinically more rigid and with better than average emotional control. No sex or I.Q.
differences between reactors and non-reactors have been found.
Another possibility might be the combined use of drugs with hypnotic trance and post-hypnotic
suggestion: hypnosis could presumably prevent any recollection of the drug experience. Whether a subject
can be brought to trance against his will or unaware, however, is a matter of some disagreement. Orne, in
a survey of the potential uses of hypnosis in interrogation, [23] asserts that it is doubtful, despite many
apparent indications to the contrary, that trance can be induced in resistant subjects. It may be possible, he
adds, to hypnotize a subject unaware, but this would require a positive relationship with the hypnotist not
likely to be found in the interrogation setting.
In medical hypnosis, pentothal sodium is sometimes employed when only light trance has been induced
and deeper narcosis is desired. This procedure is a possibility for interrogation, but if a satisfactory level
of narcosis could be achieved through hypnotic trance there would appear to be no need for drugs.
DEFENSIVE MEASURES
There is no known way of building tolerance for a "truth" drug without creating a disabling addiction, or
of arresting the action of a barbiturate once induced. The only full safeguard against narco-interrogation is
to prevent the administration of the drug. Short of this, the best defense is to make use of the same
knowledge that suggests drugs for offensive operations: if a subject knows that on emerging from narcosis
he will have an exaggerated notion of how much he has revealed he can better resolve to deny he has said
anything.
-32-
The disadvantages and shortcomings of drugs in offensive operations become positive features of the
defensive posture. A subject in narco-interrogation is garbled and irrational, the amount of output
drastically diminished. Drugs disrupt established thought patterns, including the will to resist, but they do
so indiscriminately and thus also interfere with the patterns of substantive information the interrogator
seeks. Even under the conditions most favorable for the interrogator, output will be contaminated by
fantasy, distortion, and untruth.
Possibly the most effective way to arm oneself against narco-interrogation would be to undergo a "dry
run." A trial drug interrogation with output taped for playback would familiarize an individual with his
own reactions to "truth" drugs, and this familiarity would help to reduce the effects of harassment by the
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
461 of 813
580
581 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 181 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
interrogator before and after the drug has been administered. From the viewpoint of the intelligence
service, the trial exposure of a particular operative to drugs might provide a rough benchmark for
assessing the kind and amount of information he would divulge in narcosis.
There may be concern over the possibility of drug addiction intentionally or accidentally induced by an
adversary service. Most drugs will cause addiction with prolonged use, and the barbiturates are no
exception. In recent studies at the U.S. Public Health Service Hospital for addicts in Lexington, Ky.,
subjects received large doses of barbiturates over a period of months. Upon removal of the drug, they
experienced acute withdrawal symptoms and behaved in every respect like chronic alcoholics.
Because their action is extremely short, however, and because there is little likelihood that they would be
administered regularly over a prolonged period, barbiturate "truth" drugs present slight risk of operational
addiction. If the adversary service were intent on creating addiction in order to exploit withdrawal, it
would have other, more rapid means of producing states as unpleasant as withdrawal symptoms.
The hallucinatory and psychotomimetic drugs such as mescaline, marihuana, LSD-25, and microtine are
sometimes mistakenly associated with narcoanalytic interrogation. These drugs distort the perception and
interpretation of the sensory input to the central nervous system and affect vision, audition, smell, the
sensation of the size of body parts and their position in space, etc. Mescaline and LSD-25 have been used
to create experimental "psychotic states," and in a minor way as aids in psychotherapy.
Since information obtained from a person in a psychotic drug state would be unrealistic, bizarre, and
extremely difficult to assess, the self-administration of LSD-25, which is effective in minute dosages,
might in special circumstances offer an operative temporary protection against interrogation. Conceivably,
on the other hand, an adversary service could use such drugs to produce anxiety or terror in medically
unsophisticated subjects unable to distinguish drug-induced psychosis from actual insanity. An
enlightened operative could not be thus frightened, however, knowing that the effect of these
hallucinogenic agents is transient in normal individuals.
Most broadly, there is evidence that drugs have least effect on well-adjusted individuals with good
defenses and good emotional control, and that anyone who can withstand the stress of competent
interrogation in the waking state can do so in narcosis. The essential resources for resistance thus appear
to lie within the individual.
CONCLUSIONS
The salient points that emerge from this discussion are the following. No such magic brew as the popular
notion of truth serum exists. The barbiturates, by disrupting defensive patterns, may sometimes be helpful
in interrogation, but even under the best conditions they will elicit an output contaminated by deception,
fantasy, garbled speech, etc. A major vulnerability they produce in the subject is a tendency to believe he
has revealed more than he has. It is possible, however, for both normal individuals and psychopaths to
resist drug interrogation; it seems likely that any individual who can withstand ordinary intensive
interrogation can hold out in narcosis. The best aid to a defense against narco-interrogation is
foreknowledge of the process and its limitations. There is an acute need for controlled experimental
studies of drug reaction, not only to depressants but also to stimulants and to combinations of depressants,
stimulants, and ataraxics.
-33-
REFERENCES
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
462 of 813
581
582 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 182 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
1. Adams, E. Barbiturates. Sci. Am., Jan. 1958, 198 (1), 60-64
2. Barkham, J. Truth Drugs: The new crime solver. Coronet, Jan. 1951, 29, 72-76.
3. Beecher, H. K. Anesthesia. Sci. Am., Jan. 1957, 198, p. 70.
4. -----. Appraisal of drugs intended to alter subjective responses, symptoms. J. Amer. Med. Assn., 1955,
158, 399-401.
5. -----. Evidence for increased effectiveness of placebos with increased stress. Amer. J. Physiol., 1956,
187, 163-169.
6. -----. Experimental pharmacology and measurement of the subjective response. Science, 1953, 116.
157-162.
7. Brussel, J. A., Wilson, D. C., Jr., & Shankel, L. W. The use of methedrine in psychiatric practice.
Psychiat. Quart., 1954, 28, 381-394.
8. Delay, J. Pharmacologic explorations of the personality: narcoanalysis and "methedrine" shock. Proc.
Roy. Soc. Med., 1949, 42, 492-496.
9. deRopp, R. S. Drugs and the Mind. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1960.
10. Freedman, L. Z. "Truth" drugs. Sci. Am., March 1960. 145-154.
11. Geis, G. In scopolamine veritas. The early history of drug-induced statements. J. of Crim. Law.,
Criminal, & Pol. Sci., Nov.-Dec. 1959, 50 (4), 347-358.
12. Gerson, M. J. & Victoroff, V. Experimental investigation into the validity of confessions obtained
under sodium amytal narcosis. J. Clin. and Exp. Psychopath., 1948, 9, 359-375.
13. Gottschalk, L. A. The use of drugs in information-seeking interviews. Technical report #2, ARDC
Study SR 177-D Contract AF 18 (600) 1797. Dec. 1958. Bureau of Social Science Research, Inc.
14. House, R. E. The use of scopolamine in criminology. Texas St. J. of Med., 1922, 18, 259.
15. Houston, F. A preliminary investigation into abreaction comparing methedrine and sodium amytal
with other methods. J. Ment. Sci., 1952, 98, 707-710.
16. Inbau, F. G. Self-incrimination. Springfield: C. C. Thomas, 1950.
17. Kidd, W. R. Police interrogation. 1940.
18. Legal dose of truth. Newsweek, Feb. 23, 1959, 28.
19. Lindemann, E. Psychological changes in normal and abnormal individuals under the influence of
sodium amytal. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1932, 11, 1083-1091.
20. Lipton, E. L. The amytal interview. A review. Amer. Practit. Digest Treatm., 1950, 1, 148-163.
21. MacDonald, J. M. Narcoanalysis and criminal law. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1954, 111, 283-288.
22. Morris, D. P. Intravenous barbiturates: an aid in the diagnosis and treatment of conversion hysteria
and malingering. Mil. Surg., 1945, 96, 509-513.
23. Orne, M. T. The potential uses of hypnosis in interrogation. An evaluation. ARDC Study SR 177-D
Contract AF 18 (600) 1797, Dec. 1958. Bureau of Social Science Research, Inc.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
463 of 813
582
583 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 183 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
24. Pelikan, E. W., & Kensler, C. J. Sedatives: Their pharmacalogy and uses. Reprint from The Medical
Clinics of North America. W. B. Saunders Company, Sept. 1958.
25. Redlich, F. C., Ravitz, L. J., & Dression, G. H. Narcoanalysis and truth. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1951, 107,
586-593.
26. Rolin, J. Police Drugs. Translated by L. J. Bendit. New York: Philosophical Library, 1956.
27. Sargant, W., & Slater, E. Physical methods of treatment in psychiatry. (3rd. ed.) Baltimore: Williams
and Wilkins, 1954.
28. Snider, R. S. Cerebellum. Sci. Am., Aug. 1958, 84.
29. Uhr, L., & Miller, L. G. (eds.). Drugs and Behavior. New York-London: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
1960.
Next: CIA Director Stansfield Turners Testimony, Continued

Previous: Opening Testimony of CIA Director Stansfield Turner
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
464 of 813
583
584 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 184 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: CIA Director Stansfield Turner's Testimony (pp. 33... Page 1 of 23
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents
CIA Director Stansfield Turner's Testimony

(Continued -- pp. 33-50)
Senator WALLOP. If they are, I would assume that you would still try to find from either
theirs or somebody else's information how to protect our people from that kind of activity.
Senator WALLOP. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Chafee?
Senator CHAFEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
-34-
Admiral Turner, I appreciate that these tawdry activities were taking place long before your
watch, and I think you have correctly labeled them as abhorrent, but not only were they
abhorrent, it seems to me that they wee rather bungled, amateurish experiments that don't
seem to have been handled in a very scientific way, at least from the scanty evidence we
have.
It seems to me that there were a minimum of reports and the Agency didn't have the ability
to call it quits. It went on for some 12 years, as you mentioned. What I would like to get to
is, are you convinced now in your Agency that those scientific experiments, legitimate
ones that you were conducting with polygraph and so forth, were being conducted in a
scientific manner and that you are handling it in a correct manner to get the best
information that you are seeking in the end?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
465 of 813
584
585 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 185 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Admiral TURNER. Yes, I am, and I also have a sense of confidence that we are limiting
ourselves to the areas where we need to be involved as opposed to areas where we can rely
on others.
Senator CHAFEE. I am convinced of that from your report. I just do hope that you have
people who are trained in not only handling this type of experiment, but in preparing the
proper reports and drawing the proper data from the reports. You are convinced that you
have this type of people?
Senator CHAFEE. The second point I am interested in was the final lines in your
testimony here, which I believe are very important, and that is that the Agency is doing all
it can in cooperation with other branches of the Government to go about tracking down the
identity of those who were in some way adversely affected, and see what can be done to
fulfill the government's responsibilities in that respect. I might add that I commend you in
that, and I hope you will pursue it vigorously.
A hospital in my State was involved in these proceedings, and it is unclear exactly what did
take place, so I have both a parochial interest in this and a national interest as well, and I do
hope you will press on with it. It involves not only you, I appreciate, but also HEW and
perhaps the Attorney General.
Admiral TURNER. Thank you, sir. We will.
Senator CHAFEE. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Turner, MKULTRA subproject 3 was a project involving the surreptitious

administration of LSD on unwitting persons, was it not?
Senator INOUYE. In February 1954, and this was in the very early stages of MKULTRA,
the Director of Central Intelligence wrote to the technical services staff officials criticizing
their judgment because they had participated in an experiment involving the administration
of LSD on an unwitting basis to Dr. Frank Olson, who later committed suicide. Now, the
individuals criticized were the same individuals who were responsible for subproject 3,
involving exactly the same practices. Even though these individuals were clearly aware of
the dangers of surreptitious administration and had been criticized by the Director
-35-
of Central Intelligence, subproject 3 was not terminated immediately after Dr. Olson's
death.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
466 of 813
585
586 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 186 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
In fact, according to documents, it continued for a number of years. Can you provide this
committee with any explanation of how such testing could have continued under these
circumstances?
Admiral TURNER. No, sir, I really can't.
Senator INOUYE. Are the individuals in technical services who carried on subproject 3
still on the CIA payroll?
Admiral TURNER. I am sorry. Are you asking, are they today?
Senator INOUYE. Yes.
Senator INOUYE. What would you do if you criticized officials of the technical services
staff and they continued to carry on experimentation for a number of years?
Admiral TURNER. I would do two things, sir. One is, I would be sure at the beginning
that I was explicit enough that they knew that I didn't want that to be continued anywhere
else, and two, if I found it being continued, I would roll some heads.
Senator INOUYE. Could you provide this committee with information as to whether the
individuals involved had their heads rolled?
Admiral TURNER. I don't believe there is any evidence they did, but I will double check
that.
[See p. 170 for material referred to.]
Senator INOUYE. As you know, Senator Huddleston and his subcommittee are deeply
involved in the drafting of charters and guidelines for the intelligence community. We will
be meeting with the President tomorrow. Our concern is, I think, a basic one. Can anything
like this occur again?
Admiral TURNER. I think it would be very, very unlikely, first, because we are all much
more conscious of these issues than we were back in the fifties, second, because we have
such thorough oversight procedures. I cannot imagine that this kind of activity could take
place today without some member of the CIA itself bypassing me, if I were authorizing
this, and writing to the Intelligence Oversight Board, and blowing the whistle on this kind
of activity.
I am also doing my very best, sir, to encourage an openness with myself and a free
communication in the Agency, so that I am the one who finds these things if they should
happen. The fact is that we must keep you and your committee and now the new committee
in the House informed of our sensitive activities. I think all of these add up to a degree of
scrutiny such that this kind of extensive and flagrant activity could not happen today
without it coming to the attention of the proper authorities to stop it.
Senator INOUYE. A sad aspect of the MKULTRA project was that it naturally involved
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
467 of 813
586
587 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 187 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the people who unwittingly or wittingly got involved in experimentation. I would

appreciate it if you would report back to this committee in 3 months on what the Agency
has done to notify these individuals and these institutions, and furthermore, to notify us as
to what steps have been taken to identify victims, and if identified, what you have done to
assist them, monetarily or otherwise.
Admiral TURNER. All right, sir. I will be happy to.
Senator GOLDWATER. Will the Senator yield?
-36-
Senator INOUYE. Yes, sir.
Senator GOLDWATER. I wonder if he could include in that report for our information
only a complete listing of the individuals and the experiments done on them, and whether
they were witting or unwitting, volunteer or nonvolunteer, and what has been the result in
each case. I think that would be interesting.
Admiral TURNER. Fine. Yes, sir.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Kennedy?
Senator KENNEDY. Thank you. It is your intention to notify the individuals who have
been the, subjects of the research, is that right, Admiral Turner? Do you intend to notify
those individuals?
Senator KENNEDY. If you can identify them, you intend to notify them?
Senator KENNEDY. And you intend to notify the universities or research centers as well?
Admiral TURNER. Senator, I am torn on that. I understand your opening statement. I put
myself in the position of the president of one of those, universities, let's say. If he were
witting -- if his university had been witting of this activity with us, lie has access to all that
information today. If lie, were not witting, I wonder if the. process of informing him might
put his institution's reputation in more jeopardy than letting them go on the way they are
today, not knowing. I really don't know the equities here.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, the problem is, all you have to do is pick up the newspapers
and you see these universities mentioned. In many instances, I think you are putting the
university people at an extraordinary disadvantage, where there is a complete change of
administration, and they may for one reason or another not have information that they are,
under suspicion. There is innuendo; there is rumor. I cannot help but believe that it will just
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
468 of 813
587
588 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 188 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
get smeared all over the newspapers in spite of all the security steps that have been taken.
It seems to me that those universities should be entitled to that information, so that the ones
with other administrations can adapt procedures to protect those universities. The
importance of preserving the independence of our research areas and the communities
seems to me to be a very fundamental kind of question about the protection of the integrity
of our universities and our research centers.
Admiral TURNER. You are saying that you feel that if we identify them privately to
themselves, we can benefit them in an adequate way to cover the risk that this will lead to a
more public disclosure? There are lots of the 80 who have not been identified publicly at
this point.
Senator KENNEDY. I think the universities themselves should be notified. I think then
the universities can take whatever steps in terms of their setting up the procedures to
protect. their own kinds of integrity in terms of the future. I would certainly hope that, they
would feel that they could make a public comment or a public statement on it. I think it is
of general public interest, particularly for the people that are involved in those universities,
to have some kind of awareness of whether they were. used or were not used and how they
were used.
I think they are entitled to it, and quite frankly, if there is a public official or an official of
the university that you notify and be wants
-37-
for his own particular reasons not to have it public, I don't see why those in a lesser echelon
or lower echelon who have been effectively used by it should not have the information as
well.
So, I would hope that you would notify the universities and then also indicate to the public.
I can't conceive that this information will not be put out in the newspapers, and it puts the
university people at an extraordinary disadvantage, and of course some of it is wrong,
which is the fact of the matter, and I think some university official saying, well, it isn't so,
is a lot different than if they know it is confirmed or it is not confirmed in terms of the
Agency itself. I think that there is a responsibility there.
Admiral TURNER. I have great sympathy with what you are saying. I have already
notified one institution because the involvement was so extensive that I thought they really
needed to protect themselves, and I am. most anxious to do this in whatever way will help
all of the people who were perhaps unwitting participants in this, and the difficulty I will
have is, I can't quite do, I think, what you suggested, in that I may not be able to tell an
institution of the extent and nature of its participation.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you can tell them to the best of your information, and it seems
to me that just because the university or an individual is going to be embarrassed is not a
reason for classifying the information. So, I would hope -- I mean, I obviously speak as an
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
469 of 813
588
589 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 189 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
individual Senator, but I feel that that is an incredible disservice to the innocent individuals
and I think, a disservice to the integrity of the, universities unless they are notified, to be
able to develop procedures you are developing with regards to your own institution and we
are trying to in terms of the Congress. Certainly the universities are entitled to the same.
Admiral TURNER. Yes. Not all of these, of course, were unwitting.
Senator KENNEDY. That's right.
Admiral TURNER. Many of them were witting, and therefore they can take all those
precautionary steps on their own, but I am perfectly open to doing this. I am only interested
in doing it in a way that when identifying a university it will not lead to the public
disclosure of the individuals, whom I am not allowed to disclose, and so on.
Senator KENNEDY. That could be done, it seems to me.
Admiral TURNER. So, we will see if we can devise a way of notifying these institutions
on a private basis so that they can then make their own decision whether their equities are
best served by their announcing it publicly or their attempting to maintain it--
Senator KENNEDY. Or you. I wonder. What if they were to ask you to announce, or
indicate?
Admiral TURNER. My personal conscience, sir, at this time, is that I would be doing a
disservice to these universities if I notified the public.
Senator KENNEDY. Would you meet with some university officials and ask what their
views are or whether they feel that the preservation of the integrity of the universities
would be better served or not? I think that would be useful to find out from small, large,
private, and public universities' officials how they view the integrity--
Admiral TURNER. Fine. I Will phone several university presidents today who are my
friends and who are not involved in this, and ask them what they think the equities would
be.
-38-
Senator KENNEDY. All right. You let us know, too.
Admiral TURNER. But I am not sure that I see that there is any great benefit, in my
notifying the public as opposed to the university notifying them. Let him have his choice
whether he wants -- each institution wants to have it made public.
Senator KENNEDY. Yes. The fact would remain that the institution's credibility would be
better served if the institution's president were to deny it and the university indicated that it
did not participate in that program than if the university were to deny it and the Agency
says nothing. It seems to me that that would be the strongest, and the only way that that is
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
470 of 813
589
590 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 190 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
going to be credible. I would value it if you would get some input from universities as to
what they believe is the fairest way in terms of the preservation of the integrity of the
universities.
Let me, if I could, ask on the question of the uses of these safe houses, as I understand from
information that was provided to us in the course of our last committee, the testing of
various drugs on individuals happened at all social levels, high and low, it happened on
native Americans and also on foreign nationals. That is what I understand was the nature of
the project itself.
Now, I am just wondering whether those tests were conducted at the two locations on the
east coast and the west coast which were known as safe houses. To your knowledge, is that
correct?
Senator KENNEDY. In terms of the research in this particular program, it did not go
beyond the safe houses located on the east coast and the west coast? I believe I am correct
on that.
Admiral TURNER. That type of unwitting testing of sort of randomly selected

individuals, yes.
Senator KENNEDY. It was just located in those two places?
Admiral TURNER. To the best of our knowledge, there were only two locations.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, how do we interpret randomly selected?
Admiral TURNER. Well, as opposed to prisoners in a prison who were somehow

selected.
Senator KENNEDY. All right. Do you know from this information how many people
were recruited during this period?
Admiral TURNER. No idea.
Senator KENNEDY. Do you know approximately?
Admiral TURNER. I asked that question the other day, and we just don't have --
apparently we are very -- well, either there were no records kept of the actual numbers and
types of people tested or they were destroyed.
Admiral Turner, I would like to come back to the experiments which may have been
conducted at the hospital research facilities which the CIA helped to finance. It wasn't clear
to me from your previous answers what kind of work was done there. I gather you are
unclear on that, too, from your remarks, yet I find in the CIA documentation which you
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
471 of 813
590
591 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 191 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
have supplied us, a list describing some of the advantages the Agency hoped to gain. It
says:
(a) One-sixth of the total space in the new hospital wing will be available to the Chemical
Division of TSS * * *; (b) Agency sponsorship of sensitive research
-39-
projects will be completely deniable; (c) Full professional cover will be provided for up to
three biochemical employees of the Chemical Division; (d) Human patients and volunteers for
experimental use will be available under controlled clinical conditions with the full
supervision of
and there is a blank, something has been deleted.
It seems pretty clear to me what they intended to do in that particular wing. Doesn't it to
you? Why would you go to such elaborate preparations, to buy part of the wing, bring three
of your own personnel there, give them a cover, and give them access to patients? Why
would you go to such trouble and expense to arrange, all that, if you weren't planning to
experiment on people in the hospital?
Admiral TURNER. I agree with you 100 percent, sir. Those were clearly the intentions. I
have no evidence that it was carried out in that way. I am not trying to be defensive,
Senator. I am only trying to be absolutely precise here.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, then, as to the nature of what was done there, the last
paragraph on the same page of the document says, "The facilities of the hospital and the
ability to conduct controlled experimentations under safe clinical conditions using
materials with which any agency connection must be completely deniable will augment
and complement other programs recently taken over by TSS, such as," and then there's
another deletion.
Now, the words following "such as" have been deleted. That is still classified, or at least it
was removed when this document was sanitized and released. It seems to be that whatever
was deleted right there would give you a pretty good clue as to what they were doing, since
it says that the activities would "augment and complement other programs" undertaken by
TSS. So, I have trouble understanding why you don't know what was contemplated. Just
the fact that similar programs are referred to in the document, though what they are is still
deleted, should enable you to check it out.
You could look at what went on in the similar programs mentioned following the "such as"
in the classified version of this document.
Admiral TURNER. Senator, I have not said that we don't know what was contemplated
being done there. We do not know what was done there.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
472 of 813
591
592 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 192 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator SCHWEIKER. Why did you delete that reference? Why is that still classified,
that particular project of whatever it is?
Admiral TURNER. I don't know this particular case. We will get you the exact answer to
that one and inform you about it, but it is quite probable that that other case is unrelated to
this in the -- well, not unrelated, but that that was a project that still deserves to be
classified.
[The material referred to follows:]
Construction of the Gorman Annex was begun in 1957 and the Annex was dedicated in March
1959. Of the several MKULTRA projects conducted at Georgetown only one involving human
testing covered a time span subsequent to March 1959. Subproject 45 ran from 1955 to 1963,
thus it is possible that the final four years 1959-1963) of the subproject could have been spent
in the Gorman Annex. However, there is no reference to the Gorman Annex or a "new Annex"
in Subproject 45 papers, neither is there any mention of the subproject moving to a new
location in 1959 or later years.
Authorization to contribute CIA funds toward construction of the Gorman Annex is contained
in Subproject 35 of MKULTRA. Recently discovered material indicated that Dr. Geschickter
continued his research for sleep- and amnesia-producing drugs under Project MKSEARCH
through July 1967 at Georgetown University Hospital. But it is impossible to determine if the
facilities of the Gorman Annex were involved.
-40-
Senator SCHWEIKER. I think that would give us a pretty good clue as to what was
going to be done in the wing the CIA helped to finance.
Was there any indication at all in the records you found that the project ultimately used
cancer patients or terminally ill patients in connection with this facility?
Admiral TURNER. I'm sorry. I missed your question because I was trying to get the data
on the last one. I will read you the blank.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Go ahead.
Admiral TURNER. QKHILLTOP. It doesn't help you, but--
Senator SCHWEIKER. Can you tell us what that is, or is it still classified?
Admiral TURNER. I don't know, and I assume from the fact that we deleted it, it is still
classified, but I will get you that answer, sir.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Thank you. I'd like to see that information.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
473 of 813
592
593 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 193 of 258
1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA: CIA Director Stansfield Turner's Testimony (pp. ... Page 10 of 23
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Now my next question was: Is there any indication, Admiral, that projects in that particular
center involved experimentation on terminally ill cancer patients?
Admiral TURNER. I missed the first part of your question, sir. I am very sorry.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Do you have any indication that some experiment in the facility
used terminally ill cancer patients as subjects? You do acknowledge in your statement and
it is clear from other documents that these kinds of experiments were at some point being
done somewhere. My question is, is there any indication that cancer patients or terminally
ill patients were experimented with in this wing?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, it does appear there is a connection here, sir.
Senator SCHWEIKER. The other question I had relates to the development of something
which has been called the perfect concussion. A series of experiments toward that end were
described in the CIA documents. I wonder if you would just tell us what your
understanding of perfect concussion is.
Admiral TURNER. Is that in my testimony, sir, or in some other document?
Senator SCHWEIKER. Subproject 54, MKULTRA, which involved examination of

techniques to cause brain concussions and amnesia by using weapons or sound waves to
strike individuals without giving and without leaving any clear physical marks. Someone
dubbed it "perfect concussion" -- maybe that was poetic license on the part of our staff
rather than your poets over there. I wonder if you could just tell us what brain concussion
experiments were about?
Admiral TURNER. This project, No. 54, was canceled, and never carried out.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, I do believe the first year of the project in 1955 was carried
out by the Office of Naval Research, according to the information that you supplied us.
The CIA seems to have been participating in some way at that point, because the records
go on to say that the experimenter at ONR found out about CIA's role, discovered that it
was a cover, and then the project was transferred to MKULTRA in 1956. Again, this is all
from the backup material you have given us. So, it was canceled at some time. I am not
disagreeing
-41-
with that, but apparently for at least a year or two, somebody was investigating the
production of brain concussions with special blackjacks, sound waves, and other methods
as detailed in the backup material.
Admiral TURNER. The data available to me is that this project was never funded by the
CIA, but I will double-check that and furnish the information for the record for you as to
whether there was ever any connection here and if so, what the nature of the work was.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
474 of 813
593
594 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 194 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Mr. Laubinger corrected his testimony regarding Subproject 54 during the September 21, 1977
hearings before the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Human Resources
Committee. The relevant portion is reproduced below:
Mr. LAUBINGER. On project 54, it has got a rather sensational proposal in there, in terms of
the work that they propose to do, and you asked about the proposal and I said, in fact, it was
never funded under MKULTRA. Now, I overlooked -- at least, my memory did not serve me
correctly when I went through that file folder to see one memorandum dated January 10, 1956,
which makes it quite clear, as a matter of fact, that that proposal was based on prior work that
was funded by the Agency.
Senator SCHWEIKER. By what?
Mr. LAUBINGER. By the CIA. So, that information was in their file folder. It did not
happen to be in my head when I testified.
Senator SCHWEIKER. I think I might have read you that, and that is why I argued at the
time with you, because I think I had in front of me, as I recall, some indication that it was
funded there. I did read that to you. So, you did supply it to us; there is no argument about that
information.
Mr. LAUBINGER. Perhaps I am sort of headstrong, myself, and in my own view, I am

reading under the ULTRA project, that if it had been funded under ULTRA, it would have had
a project number and identified as such. The thing that threw me was that it was funded,
apparently, outside of any MKULTRA activity and it was under the normal contracting
process, so that it was not included in MKULTRA as any work done under that funding
umbrella.
The file folder that you have and I have, right here, makes it quite clear, however, that a year's
work was done through navy funding -- a navy funding mechanism -- on which the proposal
was based that ultimately came into the MKULTRA program. That second proposal was never
funded. So, there was conflict and I, personally, I think, introduced a little bit of confusion in
that in my testimony.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, do you agree or not agree with DOD's statement here that even
though the initial funding was navy, it was really I conduit for the CIA?
Mr. LAUBINGER. I think that is correct.
Senator SCHWEIKER. Yes; I would appreciate that. I would like to know how it went
from ONR to CIA after a year. Somebody made a decision to make that transfer, and to
make this an MKULTRA subject. There had to be some sort of review that led to a
decision to continue that kind of concussion -- total blackout, maximum amnesia, and
whatever else it was you were interested in -- study and testing.
Mr. LAUBINGER. Senator, if I may try to say a few words on that, the files that were
available to us for inspection, which are limited, indicated that there was a project being
carried on by the Navy having to do with the, effects of brain concussion. The CIA
developed an interest in that, and considered funding it, but actually never did, and as the
admiral testified, the MKULTRA is merely a funding mechanism, a place they go for
money to do such things, but there is no evidence that I know of that that project was ever
funded.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
475 of 813
594
595 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 195 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-42-
Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, I am confused, because here again is another quote from a
document that we have seen, which you have released and supplied to us:
Following is the technical progress made under the current [deleted] contract: (a) Specializing
instrumentation and numerous testing techniques have been developed to obtain the desired
dynamic data; (b) considerable data has now been obtained supporting the resonance-
cavilation theory of brain concussion; and (c) preliminary acceleration threshold data has been
It goes on to talk about a blast range and a 2,500-square-foot laboratory. The document
notes that "Three blast test series have been run to date." It describes a special blackjack
device, "a pancake-type blackjack giving a high peak impact force with a low unit surface
pressure."
I agree the records are inconclusive as to the results of this work, but it certainly seems that
some testing was done.
Mr. LAUBINGER. Senator, you are putting us in the same position I think you were
stating that you were in earlier referring to documents not before us, but I believe you are
quoting from a proposal that someone sent to the Agency to fund this work, and he is
referring to past work. The past work would have encompassed a lot of things like that, but
CIA was not involved with that.
Senator SCHWEIKER. What do you mean, Admiral, on page 6 of your testimony when
you mention projects using magician's art? How do magicians get into the spook business?
Admiral TURNER. I have interpreted this as to how to slip the mickey into the finn, but I
would like to ask my advisers here to comment.
Mr. BRODY. I think that is essentially it, Senator. It is surreptitious administration of

material to someone, deceptive practices, how to distract someone's attention while you are
doing something else, as I understand it. It was also some type of a covert communication
project involved with the study of how magicians and their assistants perhaps communicate
information to one another without having other people know it. This is the type of thing
that was involved, sir.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Huddleston?
Admiral, in your checking these newly discovered documents and interviewing members
of the CIA staff, did you find information that would confirm the contention described by
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
476 of 813
595
596 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 196 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
the reporters for the New York Times that this type of experimentation was begun out of a
fear that the Agency that foreign powers might have drugs which would allow them to alter
the behavior of American citizens or agents or members of the Armed Forces who were
taken into custody, and which would have resulted in false confessions and the like? Is my
question clear?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir. I haven't personally read the documentation on that. In my
discussions with the people who are well informed in this area at the Agency, I am told that
that is the case.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Was there any evidence or any indication that there were other
motives that the Agency might also be looking for drugs that could be applied for other
purposes, such as debilitating an individual or even killing another person? Was this part of
this kind of experimentation?
-43-
Admiral TURNER. Yes; I think there is. I have not seen in this series of documentation
evidence of desire to kill, but I think the project turned its character from a defensive to an
offensive one as it went along, and there certainly was an intention here to develop drugs
that could be of use.
Senator HUDDLESTON. The project continued for some time after it was learned that, in
fact, foreign powers did not have such a drug as was at first feared, didn't it?
Admiral TURNER. That is my understanding. Yes, sir.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Is there any indication that knowledge gained as a result of

these experiments has been useful or is being applied in any way to present operations?
Mr. BRODY. Senator, I am not sure if there is any body of knowledge. A great deal of
what there was, I gather, was destroyed in 1973. I would like to defer to Frank here. Do
you know of any?
Mr. LAUBINGER. I know of no drugs or anything like that developed under this program
that ever reached operational use or are in use today.
Senator HUDDLESTON. So apparently any information that was gathered was

apparently useless and not worth continuing, not worth further development on the part of
the Agency.
Mr. LAUBINGER. I am having difficulty hearing your questions.
Senator HUDDLESTON. I can hardly hear myself.
Admiral TURNER. I think the answer to your question is that we have no evidence of
great usefulness on this, and yet I think we should remember--
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
477 of 813
596
597 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 197 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator HUDDLESTON. Well, is it accurate to say that this experimentation produced

few useful results or had little application at all to the operations of the Agency or anybody
else as far as we know?
Admiral TURNER. I think that is basically correct. At the same time, I would point out
that we had two CIA prisoners in China and one in the Soviet Union at this time, and we
were concerned as to what kinds of things might be done to them, but I am not saying that-
-
Senator HUDDLESTON. Have you detected any sign that any other nation is continuing
or has in the past conducted experiments similar to this or with a similar objective?
Admiral TURNER. I am not prepared to answer that one off the top of my head, sir, but I
will get it to you.
We maintain no files of up-to-date information on the testing of drugs in foreign countries.

Some years ago we occasionally would review foreign research on antibiotics and
pharmaceuticals in connection with public health and civil defense assessments. For a few
years beginning in 1949 we assessed foreign research on LSD under Project ARTICHOKE
because of concern that such drugs might be employed against Agency and other U.S.
personnel. Information relative to this work has already been provided to relevant Committees.
In this early work we also occasionally looked at foreign human experimentation; we long ago
eliminated our holdings on this subject and no collection requirements are any longer served.
As consumer interest in this area has dropped off and higher priority areas need attention, we
have virtually no present coverage with the possible exception of an occasional scanning of
the literature for a specific program. To the best of our knowledge no other unit in the
Intelligence Community is tracking this subject now.
-44-
Senator HUDDLESTON. You don't know whether any of your agents anywhere in the
world have been subjected to any kind of procedure like this?
Admiral TURNER. We certainly know of other powers conducting research in these

areas, yes.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Do you know how they go about that research?
Admiral TURNER. It is pretty sketchy, the information we have.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Do you know of any other organization in this country or any
institution that has conducted extensive research on unwitting individuals and through
unwitting institutions?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
478 of 813
597
598 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 198 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Admiral TURNER. Well, I have read something in the newspapers about this, but I have
not familiarized myself with it in specifies.
Senator HUDDLESTON. It is not a normal mode of operation for hitman research, is it?
Senator WALLOP. Mr. Chairman, I only have one to follow up on Senator Huddleston's
questions and my earlier ones. You are not really saying, are you Admiral Turner, that
there are no mind-altering drugs or behavior modification procedures which have been
used by foreign powers?
Admiral TURNER. No, sir, I am not.
Senator WALLOP. I drew that inference partly in answer to my question that you knew
of no truth serum. Maybe that is a misnomer, but surely there are relaxants that make
tongues looser than they would otherwise be. Isn't that true?
Senator WALLOP. So I think it is fair to say, too, that the experience of many American
prisoners of war in the Korean conflict would indicate that there are behavior modification
procedures in use by foreign powers of a fairly advanced degree of sophistication.
Senator WALLOP. Again, I will just go back and say I think this must have been part of
the motivation. I don't think you would have mentioned Cardinal Mindszenty had you
thought his behavior was normal at the time or had anybody else. So, I would just again
say I think it is a little bit scapegoating. I don't think the object of this hearing is in any way
to lay blame on those passed or those dead or otherwise, but I think it is a little bit
scapegoating to say that it stopped with the directors of the CIA or the DCT's of the time.
Also I think it is a little bit scapegoating, to say they didn't even know it, but that it was
some lower echelon acting alone.
I think this was a behavior pattern that was prevalent in those years, and I think the object
lesson is that we have discovered, we think and we hope, through your assurances and
other activities of the Congress, means of avoiding future incidents of that kind. I thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator CHAFEE. No questions.
Senator INOUYE. Senator Kennedy, I think you have another question.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
479 of 813
598
599 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 199 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-45-
Senator KENNEDY. Just talking about the two safe houses on the east and west, coast as
being the sources for the unwitting trials, now, the importance of this and the magnitude of
it, I think, is of significance, because we have seen from your records that these we're used
over a period of 8 or 9 years, and the numbers could have been considerable. You are
unable to determine, at least, in your own research, what the numbers would be, and what
the drugs were, how many people were involved, but it could have been considerable
during this period of time.
It would certainly appear to me in examining the documents and the flow charts of cash
slips that were expended in these areas that it was considerable, but that is a judgmental
factor on it, but I think it is important to try and find out what the Agency is attempting to
do to get to the bottom of it.
Now, the principal agent that was involved as I understand it is deceased and has been
deceased for 2 years. The overall agent, Mr. Gottlieb, has indicated a fuzzy memory about
this whole area. He has testified before the Intelligence Committee. Yet he was responsible
for the whole program. Then, the Director had indicated the destruction of the various
materials and unfamiliarity with the project.
Now, you have indicated in your testimony today that there are two additional agents on
page 9 of your testimony, you indicated there were two additional agents which you have
uncovered at the bottom of it, and you say the names of CIA officials who approved or
monitored the various projects. You talk about the two additional agents in your testimony.
Now, I am just wondering if you intend to interview those agents to find out exactly what
is being done. I suppose, first of all, shouldn't the project manager know what was being
done?
Admiral TURNER. Our first problem, Senator, is that we have been unable to associate
an individual with those names at this point. We are still burrowing to find out who these
people are. We haven't identified them as having been CIA employees, and we don't know
whether these were false names.
Senator KENNEDY. You are tracking that down, as I understand it?
Senator KENNEDY. You are tracking that. down, and you have every intention of
interviewing those people to find out whatever you can about the program and project?
Admiral TURNER. My only hesitation here is whether I will do this or the Justice
Department.
Senator KENNEDY. It will be pursued, though, I understand?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
480 of 813
599
600 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 200 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. Either through the Agency or through the Justice Department?
Admiral TURNER. [Nods in the affirmative.]
Senator KENNEDY. Is it plausible that the director of the program would not understand
or know about the details of the program? Is it plausible that Dr. Gottlieb would not
understand the full range of activities in those particular safe houses?
-46-
Admiral TURNER. Let me say it is unlikely. I don't know Mr. Gottlieb.
Senator KENNEDY. Has anybody in the Agency talked with Mr. Gottlieb to find out
about this?
Admiral TURNER. Not since this revelation has come out.
Senator KENNEDY. Not since this revelation? Well, why not?
Admiral TURNER. He has left our employ, Senator.
Senator KENNEDY. Does that mean that anybody who leaves is, you know, covered for
lifetime?
Senator KENNEDY. Why wouldn't you talk with him and find out? You have new
information about this program. It has been a matter of considerable interest both to our
committee and to the Intelligence Committee. Why wouldn't you talk to Mr. Gottlieb?
Admiral TURNER. Well, again, I think the issue is whether this should be done by the
Justice Department or ourselves.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, are we wrestling around because you and Attorney General
Bell can't agree--
Senator KENNEDY [continuing]. On who ought to do it?
Admiral TURNER. We are proceeding together in complete agreement as to how to go. I

have, in connection with trying to find all of these Americans or others who were
unwittingly tested, I have some considerable concern about the CIA running around this
country interviewing and interrogating people, because I don't want to give any impression
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
481 of 813
600
601 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 201 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
that we are doing domestic intelligence.
Senator KENNEDY. I am just talking about one, in this case. That was the man who was
responsible for the whole program, and to find out whether anyone within the Agency
since you have had this new material has talked to Gottlieb since 1975, and if the answer is
no, I want to know why not.
Admiral TURNER. The reason he was not interviewed in connection with the 1975
hearings was that he had left the employ of the CIA and there was a concern on the part of
the Agency that it would appear to the investigators that the CIA was in some way trying to
influence him and influence his testimony before the committee. If these committees have,
no objection, we would be happy to contact Dr. Gottlieb and see if he can augment
anything here in this new information, though I don't think there is much in this new
information that be can add to as opposed to what was available in 1975.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, you see, Admiral Turner, you come to the two committees this
morning and indicate that now at last we have the information. We don't have to be
concerned about anything in the future on it. Now, I don't know how you can give those
assurances to the members of these committees as well as to the American people when
you haven't since 1975 even talked to the principal person that was in charge of the
program, and the records were destroyed. He is the fellow that was running the program,
and the Agency has not talked to him since the development of this new material.
Admiral TURNER. Our only concern here is the proprieties involved, and we will dig
into this and work with the Justice Department on
-47-
who, if either of us, should get into discussions with Dr. Gottlieb so as not to prejudice any
legal rights that may be involved here, or to appear in any way to be improper.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, do I understand you have not contacted the Justice Department
about this particular case since the development of this new material about Gottlieb?
Admiral TURNER. Not about Gottlieb specifically. We have contacted him.
Senator KENNEDY. Well, it is amazing to me. I mean, can you understand the difficulty
that any of us might have in terms of comprehending that when you develop a whole new
series of materials that are on the front page of every newspaper in the country and are on
every television, I mean, that means something, but it does not mean nearly as much as the
interest that we have in the fact about the testing of unwitting Americans, and every single
document that the staff reviews has Mr. Gottlieb's name on it and you come to tell us that
we don't have to worry any more, we have these other final facts, and Mr. Gottlieb has not
been talked to?
Admiral TURNER. Sir, I am not saying that these are in any way the final facts. I am
saying these are all the facts we have available.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
482 of 813
601
602 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 202 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. And you have not talked to the person who was in charge of the
program, so what kind of value or what kind of weight can we give it?
Admiral TURNER. We are happy to talk to him. I think the issue here again is one of
propriety and how to go about this. We have not, I believe, enough new information about
Gottlieb's participation here to signal that his interview would be that much more revealing
than what was revealed in 1975.
Senator KENNEDY. The importance of it, I think, from our point of view, is, he would
know the drugs that were administered, the volume of drugs, how it was administered, and
in terms of your ability to follow lip to protect these people and their health, to the extent
that it can be done, that opportunity is being lost.
I want to get on to some others, but will you give us the assurance that you will get ahold
of Gottlieb or that you will talk to Attorney General Bell and talk with Gottlieb?
Senator KENNEDY. And let us know as to the extent of it. I don't see how we can fulfill
our responsibility in this area on the drug testing without our hearing from Gottlieb as well,
but I think it is important that you do so, particularly since all of the materials have been
destroyed.
These other two agents, have they talked to them?
Admiral TURNER. We don't, know who they are, sir. We are trying to track down and
see whether these names can be related to anybody.
Senator KENNEDY. That is under active investigation by the Agency?
Senator KENNEDY. And you have the intention of talking to those people when you
locate them. Is that correct?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir, under the same circumstances as Gottlieb.
Senator KENNEDY. And you have people working on it? Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir.
-48-
Senator KENNEDY. With regards to the activities that took place in these safe houses, as
I understand from the records, two-way mirrors were used. Is that your understanding?
Admiral TURNER. Yes, sir. We have records that construction was done to put in two-
way mirrors.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
483 of 813
602
603 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 203 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator KENNEDY. And they were placed in the bedroom, as I understand.
[Pause.]
Senator KENNEDY. Well, we have documents--
Admiral TURNER. I believe that was in the Church record, but I don't have the details.
Senator KENNEDY. And rather elaborate decorations were added, as I understand, at,
least, to the one in San Francisco, in the bedroom, which are French can-can dancers, floral
pictures, drapery, including installation of bedroom mirrors, three framed Toulouse Lautrec
posters with black silk mats, and a number of other -- red bedroom curtains and recording
equipment, and then a series of documents which were provided to the committee which
indicate a wide proliferation of different cash for $100, generally in the $100 range over
any period of time on the particular checks. Even the names are blocked out, as to the
person who is receiving it. Cash for undercover agents, operating expenses, drinks,
entertainment while administering, and then it is dashed out, and then the other documents,
that would suggest, at least with the signature of your principal agent out there, that "called
to the operation, midnight, and climax."
What can you tell us that it might suggest to you about what techniques were being used by
the Agency in terms of reaching that sort of broad-based group of Americans that were
being evidently enticed for testing in terms of drugs and others? Do you draw ally kind of
conclusion about what might have been going on out there, in these safe houses?
[General laughter.]
Senator KENNEDY. There is a light side to it, but there is also an enormously serious
side. And that is that, at least the techniques which are used or were used in terms of
testing, and trying to find out exactly the range of drugs used and the numbers of people
involved and exactly what that operation was about, as well as the constant reiteration of
the, use of small sums of cash at irregular intervals. A variety of different techniques were
employed but there is an awful lot of documentation putting these matters together.
When you look at the fact that, it is a broad range population that has been tested, tested in
these two areas, with the kind of cash slips that were used in this payment mechanisms and
decorations and all of the rest, we are not able to put a bottom line on it but one thing is for
sure, and that is, Gottlieb knows. That is one thing for sure, because his name appears on
just about every one of these documents, and it is, I think, very important to find out what
his understanding is of the nature of that. So, we will hear more about that.
Admiral TURNER. I believe Gottlieb has been interviewed by the Congress.
Senator KENNEDY. That's right, he has, and in reviewing the record, it is not very
satisfactory, and it just seems with the new information
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
484 of 813
603
604 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 204 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-49-
and the new documentation and the new memoranda -- and he did not have the checks at
that time -- and with the wide variety of different memoranda with his name on it, his
memory could be stimulated on that.
Thank you.
Senator INOUYE. I would like to thank the admiral and his staff for participating in this
hearing. I believe the record should show that this hearing was held at the request of the
Agency and the admiral. It was not held because we insisted upon it. It was a volunteer
effort on the part of the Agency. I think the record should also indicate that Admiral Turner
has forwarded to this committee a classified file, including all of the names of the
institutions and the persons involved as the experimentors.
I should also indicate that this hearing is just one step involved in the committee's
investigation of drug abuse. Just as you have had much work in going over the 8,000
pages, the staff of this committee has had equal problems, but I would like the record to
show that you have made these papers and documents available to the committee. I thank
you for that.
As part of the ongoing investigation, we had intended to call upon many dozens of others,
experimentors, or those officials in charge, and one of those will be Dr. Gottlieb.
In thanking you, I would like to say this to the American people, that what we have
experienced this morning in this committee room is not being duplicated in any other
committee room in any other part of the world. I doubt that very much. Our Agency and
our intelligence community has been under much criticism and has been subjected to much
abuse, in many cases justified, but this is the most open society that I can think of. For
example, in Great Britain there are about six people who are aware of the identity of the
man in charge of intelligence. In other countries, similar conditions exist. Here in the
United States we not only know Admiral Turner, we have had open hearings with him,
such as this. The confirmation hearings were all open.
In a few weeks, the Senate of the United States will debate a resolution to decide upon
whether we should disclose the amounts and funds being used for counterintelligence and
national intelligence. I would hope that, in presenting this issue to the public, the media
will take note that the Agency has cooperated and will continue to. The abuse that we have
learned about this morning is one I hope will never happen again, but without constant
oversight on the part of the Executive Office, on the part of the Congress, it could happen
again. It is important, therefore that we continue in this oversight activity.
So, once, again, Admiral, I thank yon very much for helping us. We will continue to call
upon you for your assistance. We would like to submit to you several questions that the
members and staff have prepared. I hope you will look them over carefully and prepare
responses for the record, sir.
Senator KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
485 of 813
604
605 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 205 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Senator INOUYE. Yes, sir?
Senator KENNEDY. I, too, want to thank Admiral Turner for his responsiveness. I have
had meetings with him in the committees and also conversations, telephone conversations,
and private meetings, and
-50-
I have found him personally to be extremely responsive, and it is a very difficult challenge
which lie has accepted in heading this Agency. I want you to know, personally, I, too,
would like to see this put behind us. I don't think we are quite there yet in terms of this
particular area that we are interested in. I think the Intelligence Committee has special
responsibilities in this area of the testing, so we look forward to working with you in
expediting the time that we can put it behind, but it does seem to me that we have to dig in
and finish the chapter. So, I want to personally express my appreciation to you, Admiral
Turner, and thank you for your cooperation and your help, and I look forward to working
with you.
Admiral TURNER. Thank you.
Senator HUDDLESTON. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure you emphasized this enough, but I
think the record ought to show that Admiral Turner informed the Select Committee on his
own initiative when the new documentation was found. The documentation has been made
available to us voluntarily, in a spirit of cooperation.
I think this shows a vast difference from the mode of operation that existed prior to the
formation at least of the Church committee, and a difference that is very helpful.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Admiral.
We would now like to call upon Mr. Philip Goldman and Mr. John Gittinger.
Mr. Goldman and Mr. Gittinger, will you please rise and take the oath.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, so help you, God?
Mr. GOLDMAN. I do.
Mr. GITTINGER. I do.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Goldman, will you identify yourself, and after that, Mr. Gittinger.
Senator KENNEDY. Before we start in, we had a third witness, Mr. Chairman, Mr.
Pasternac, who planned to testify, traveled to Washington -- he, lives in Washington, and
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
486 of 813
605
606 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 206 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
was contacted recently --with the intention of testifying this morning. And something -- he
called us late this morning and indicated that he wanted to get a counsel before he would
wish to testify.
Senator INOUYE. Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman, will you identify yourself, sir.
Next: Testimony of Philip Goldman and John Gittinger

Previous: "Truth" Drugs in Interrogation
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
487 of 813
606
607 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 207 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents

-34-
have.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
488 of 813
607
608 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 208 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
on others.

-35-
death.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
489 of 813
608
609 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 209 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
circumstances?
that.
of activity.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
490 of 813
609
610 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 210 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

-36-
those individuals?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
491 of 813
610
611 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 211 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
this point.
were used.
-37-
well.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
492 of 813
611
612 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 212 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
indicate?
be.
-38-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
493 of 813
612
613 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 213 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
universities.
the project itself.
correct?
on that.

individuals, yes.

selected.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
494 of 813
613
614 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 214 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
says:
-39-
supervision of
another deletion.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
495 of 813
614
615 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 215 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
classified.
-40-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
496 of 813
615
616 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 216 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

disagreeing
-41-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
497 of 813
616
617 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 217 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
information.

umbrella.
funded.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
498 of 813
617
618 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 218 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-42-
pressure."

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
499 of 813
618
619 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 219 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
question clear?
that is the case.
-43-

you know of any?

the Agency.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
500 of 813
619
620 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 220 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

-
will get it to you.

-44-

areas, yes.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
501 of 813
620
621 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 221 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
you, Mr. Chairman.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
502 of 813
621
622 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 222 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-45-
done?
Department.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
503 of 813
622
623 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 223 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-46-
about this?
lifetime?
Bell can't agree--

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
504 of 813
623
624 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 224 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-47-
been talked to?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
505 of 813
624
625 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 225 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
destroyed.
-48-
way mirrors.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
506 of 813
625
626 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 226 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[Pause.]
[General laughter.]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
507 of 813
626
627 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 227 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-49-
Thank you.
you for that.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
508 of 813
627
628 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 228 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-50-
with you.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I do.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
509 of 813
628
629 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 229 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
wish to testify.

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
510 of 813
629
630 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 230 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
Table of Contents

-34-
have.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
511 of 813
630
631 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 231 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
on others.

-35-
death.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
512 of 813
631
632 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 232 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
circumstances?
that.
of activity.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
513 of 813
632
633 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 233 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

-36-
those individuals?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
514 of 813
633
634 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 234 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
this point.
were used.
-37-
well.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
515 of 813
634
635 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 235 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
indicate?
be.
-38-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
516 of 813
635
636 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 236 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
universities.
the project itself.
correct?
on that.

individuals, yes.

selected.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
517 of 813
636
637 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 237 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
says:
-39-
supervision of
another deletion.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
518 of 813
637
638 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 238 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
classified.
-40-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
519 of 813
638
639 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 239 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

disagreeing
-41-
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
520 of 813
639
640 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 240 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
information.

umbrella.
funded.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
521 of 813
640
641 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 241 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-42-
pressure."

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
522 of 813
641
642 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 242 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
question clear?
that is the case.
-43-

you know of any?

the Agency.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
523 of 813
642
643 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 243 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

-
will get it to you.

-44-

areas, yes.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
524 of 813
643
644 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 244 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
you, Mr. Chairman.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
525 of 813
644
645 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 245 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-45-
done?
Department.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
526 of 813
645
646 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 246 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-46-
about this?
lifetime?
Bell can't agree--

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
527 of 813
646
647 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 247 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-47-
been talked to?
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
528 of 813
647
648 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 248 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
destroyed.
-48-
way mirrors.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
529 of 813
648
649 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 249 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
[Pause.]
[General laughter.]
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
530 of 813
649
650 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 250 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-49-
Thank you.
you for that.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
531 of 813
650
651 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 251 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
-50-
with you.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I do.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
532 of 813
651
652 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 252 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
wish to testify.

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
533 of 813
652
653 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 253 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Sign the Resolution

1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990
APPENDIX B
Documents Referring To Discovery
Of Additional MKULTRA Material
22 June 1977
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
THROUGH: Deputy Director for Science and Technology
1. (U/AIUO) This memorandum is to advise you that additional MKULTRA documents

have been discovered and to obtain your approval for follow-on actions required. Paragraph
7 contains a recommended course of action.
2. (U/AIUO) As a result of John Marks FOIA request (F-76-374), all of the MKULTRA
material in OTS possession was reviewed for possible release to him. Following that
review, the OTS material in the Retired Records Center was searched. It was during that
latter search that the subproject files were located among the retired records of the OTS
Budget and Fiscal Section. These files were not discovered earlier as the earlier searches
were limited to the examination of the active and retired records of those branches
considered most likely to have generated or have had access to MKULTRA documents.
Those branches included: Chemistry, Biological, Behavioral Activities, and Contracts
Management. Because Dr. Gottlieb retrieved and destroyed all the MKULTRA documents
he was able to locate, it is not surprising that the earlier search for MKULTRA documents,
directed at areas where they were most likely to be found, was unsuccessful. The purpose of
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
534 of 813
653
654 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 254 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
establishing the MKULTRA mechanism was to limit knowledge of the sensitive work being
performed to those with an absolute need to know. If those precepts had been followed, the
recently found B&F files should have contained only financial and administrative
documents. (In retrospect, I realize that
a serious error was made in not having B&F files and other seemingly innocuous files
searched earlier.) As it happened most of the individual subproject folders contain project
proposals and memoranda for the record, which in varying degrees, give a reasonably
complete picture of the avenues of research funded through MKULTRA. For your
information, the original memorandum setting up MKULTRA, signed by Mr. Dulles, is also
among these documents. A copy of the memorandum is attached.
3. (U/AIUO) At this writing, it does not appear that there is anything in these newly
located files that would indicate the MKULTRA activities were more extensive or more
controversial than indicated by the Senate Select (Church) Committee Report. If anything,
the reverse is true, i.e., most of the nearly 200 subprojects are innocuous. Thus, the
overview of MKULTRA is essentially unchanged. With two exceptions, the project find
fills in some of the missing details.
4. (U/AIUO) One of these exceptions is Subproject Number 45 which concerns an

activity that should have been reported earlier. That project deals with the search for a
knockout drug which was concomitant with, and a by-product of, cancer research at a major
university. It is believed that an objective reading of that project would demonstrate the
search for knockout materials and anesthetics were compatible activities. However, the
research proposal stated that "chemical agents... will be subjected to clinical screening... on
advanced cancer patients".
5. (C) Subproject Number 55 contains full details of CIA's contribution of $375,000 to

the [deletion] Building Fund. The Agency was then involved in drug research programs,
many of which were being conducted by [deletion] whose facilities were inadequate. In
order to facilitate the ongoing research programs, it was decided to expedite the building
program by contributing to it through a mechanism that was also being used to fund some
of the research projects.
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
535 of 813
654
655 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 255 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
The contribution could be controversial in that it was made through a mechanism making it
appear to be a private donation. Private donations qualified for, and [deletion] received, an
equal amount of Federal matching funds. A letter from the Office of General Counsel dated
21 February 1954 attesting to the legality of this funding is in the file.
6. (U/AIUO) The Legislative Counsel has been made aware of the existence of these
additional MKULTRA documents which are still under review and sanitation. The MARKS
case is in litigation and we are committed to advise Mr. Marks of the existence of these files
shortly, and to deliver the releasable material to his attorneys by 31 July. A letter from the
Information and Privacy Staff to Mr. Marks' attorneys informing them of the existence of
this material is in the coordination process and is scheduled to be mailed on 24 June.
7. (U/AIUO) There are now two actions that should be taken:
a. Release appropriately sanitized material to Mr. Marks' attorneys as required by

FOIA litigation.
b. Inform the Senate Select Committee of the existence of the recently located records
prior to informing Mr. Marks' attorneys.
It is recommended that you approve of both of these actions.
8. (U/AIUO) If additional details on the contents of this material are desired, the OIS
officers most familiar with it are prepared to brief you at your convenience.
[signature]
David S. Brandwein
Director
Office of Technical Service
[document ends]
[document begins]
The Director of Central Intelligence
The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye, Chairman
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
536 of 813
655
656 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 256 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016

Dear Mr. Chairman:
During the course of 1975 when the Senate Committee, chaired by Senator Church, was
investigating intelligence activities, the CIA was asked to produce documentation on a
program of experimentation with the effect of drugs. Under this project conducted from
1953 to 1964 and known as "MK-ULTRA," tests were conducted on American citizens in
some cases without their knowledge. The CIA, after searching for such documentation,
reported that most of the documents on this matter have been destroyed. I find it my duty to
report to you now that our continuing search for drug related, as well as other documents,
has uncovered certain papers which bear on this matter. Let me hasten to add that I am
persuaded that there was no previous attempt to conceal this material in the original 1975
exploration. The material recently discovered was in the retired archives filed under
financial accounts and only uncovered by using extraordinary and extensive search efforts.
In this connection, incidentally, I have personally commended the employee whose
diligence produced this find.
Because the new material now on hand is primarily of a financial nature, it does not
present a complete picture of the field of drug experimentation activity but it does provide
more detail than was previously available to us. For example, the following types of
activities were undertaken:
a. Possible additional cases of drugs being tested on American citizens, without their
knowledge.
b. Research was undertaken on surreptitious methods of administering drugs.
c. Some of the persons chosen for experimentation were drug addicts or alcoholics.
d. Research into the development of a knockout or "K" drug was performed in

conjunction with being done to develop pain killers for advanced cancer patients, and tests
on such patients were carried out.
e. There is a possibility of an improper payment to a private institution.
The drug related activities described in this newly located material began almost 25 years
ago. I assure you they were discontinued over 10 years ago and do not take place today.
In keeping with the President's commitment to disclose any errors of the Intelligence
Community which are uncovered, I would like to volunteer to testify before your
U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
537 of 813
656
657 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 257 of 258
EXHIBITMedia
re Preliminary
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
Committee on the full details of this unfortunate series of events. I am in the process of
reading the fairly voluminous material involved and do want to be certain that I have a
complete picture when I talk with the Committee. I will be in touch with you next week to
discuss when hearings might be scheduled at the earliest opportunity.
I regret having to bring this issue to your attention, but I know that it is essential to your
oversight procedures that you be kept fully informed in a timely manner.
Yours sincerely,
[signature]
STANSFIELD TURNER
[document ends]

U.S. Sponsored
Lancaster County
Mind
Court
Control
538 of 813
657
658 548
667
17, 2016
21,
Page No. 258 of 258
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
!
" #"
!
"#$ %&"'(
) * ++ , - . + * / +,0
/ ,* + ! 1"&&$&&& ! - . /
+,$ ! + - . - * , - ,
$% & ' ' !' ( ) * '

+ %
$% & ' ' !' ) ' , * * *
$% & ' ' !' - . * . . * *
. ' . ' . . * ' '!'
$% & ' .* '& $ / * $ ' 0 '!' ' /
' * $ ' 0 '!' 1 0 ' ** ' ! '
+ $% . ' % ' ! * !' ' 2 '
'
* ' % * 3
4 ' ' '( ) % 5'
' % ( * % * % 6 %! ) 5 '
& ! . % % . 7 % % ' ' ') %
+ !' , % / % / '% - % 6 %! '
1 8% ' . ' ' 9! % : ' '!' *%
/ ' , % % ; .* ' < * % . % ( 7
6 %! ) = 4 '> '* = '
1 ? % % * ' @#< * % ! . % (
$% . ."
! / ., -
! , + 2! . ., = % ! '
A41 ) $086B 9 B B ' .B .B
' : 0$0? $086B ' A4 4 A1> * ' '
! * % * '! ' ) ' ? ' ** ' '
C 1 =>8 4
C 1 . ' % ? ' ' ' A %
) ! & ! . * # % * % % ' '
)D& $A ' ' 8% ' ' ' % * B * B
B ' % %.
C 1 ' '! ' ) ' ? E E
. ' * ' ' E F . ' 'F '
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Control of Transcripts
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
of Common State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
174
539
658
659
678111of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
C 1 ' % '! ' ) ' ? % ! ' ' ' * ' ' .

' ' ' #7 ' 9=% , : % * ' '
* ' % 0 G 1 * 90 1 ' ' .
0 2 ! % * ' ( , ' ## : & * . * '
' * ' ' % % % % ' * * ' % ' % %
' . ' - = H %
* % ' / . ' =
* % * ; % % % 1 ' *
% * ; '! ' ) ' ? * % '
A . * . % ! ' * 1 > 1 . '
1 . %' '1 1 ! "& . =% , * % 0 1 ' I
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
175
540
659
660
679222of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
!
" #"
%%$ %&"'
3 4 + 5 , * 67 8 + 8 !
0 % ! % ! * ' ' ! ' . % ' /

#7 ' * % ! . % D % D % J ' ' . J 0
#7 0 % % . 0 G 1 0 1 %
' '* ' 0 2! % * % % ' ' * % 10
' % 6 0 % ' % % ! ' ( , + 0
% ! * ' ' % ! " % % ' %
' ' #* * ' * ' ' %
% ' .
D % D ' ' * % ' % ' * /
% * ' ' '* % & 1 ' % * % % .
% . % ' $% . ! ' ' % ** %
% . ! % ' % .! - . % % $%
' * % % % ; ' . ' * ' . %
' ' % % ' 1 . ' . 0 %
4 6$ * % & $% ' 1 1 * % ! ! % >
1 * ! ' ' ' ) % ' % . ## E
% ' * % ## & + C ' + H * ' % .
' J * % * ' % 4 % /
J ' ' % * $% ' ' % %
.! . ? % )/ % ' % % * # % .
% % * % * ' % > 1
$ / 7 ' ! % >
+ H * % * ' %
)/ % ' . ' ) % / % #
% % % / % 1 .1 *1 $% >
C ' % ' %% % % * ' . ' '
* $% ! ' . % $ " ' . G4 '
, 1 ' ' @7 > ' * ) ! ' !
$% . % J? ' 8 ' , . J ' ' ** * . ** *
) % % 0 % ' ' . ' ** ! . %' % )85 6$
' '! 0 . ' % % . ' % * %
. * % ' . * % ! . % ) %
* ! ). ** ' * % % % '
. % ' % * % % 0 % .
* % % % > 1 % * ' ) . * @ 0 % & +
C ' . ! ! ' ' ' . * ' % /
% * * * . '*
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
176
541
660
661
680333of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
% ' 0 * ' ' * * % #7 E %

% ' ' '
# ' *# % 0 %
' #7 E
. ## E 0 *
' % % ' % * *
1+A8)E % ' '
% % ' % ' ' ' ! '*
' #7 . * ' ' ' $ . , ! ' % *
' ' ' * 6 K / ' ! ' ' % *
J' ! J $% . % ' % A018 % . .
* ' %* % J? ' 8 ' , . J % '
LLLLLLLLLLLLLF FLLLLLLLLLLL
$ 9
!
*** . + + . ! .
/ /
/ - !! +, 1 6 " @#B " @ B " B "@@ @
, , , - 1 6 " #7@B @" #B " 77B "@
! - , + 1 6 )+ B # )+
9 , - .. + ,1 6 7" B " B " @#
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
177
542
661
662
681444of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
:: /
$ 9
--
"%;& : .
9 , $ "#'&<
/ + ! 3 #"#=>%'=;<;?
* .!
1 . *
). C 1 ' . ''
0 . . * ' . '' * '
* 0 % ** ' % * ' . *
' % * * . * C 1
0 % ** % 0 % ! ' . & ' ) ' 1 % B '

% ! - ' % * B ' ' % % ! * . ; ' .
'. ! % % ' ; 0 % ** % 0 % ! / '
. 9 '!' . ' :0 % ** % 0% ! '
* 3 9 , + $ . / * , ! + $
+ + $ : + 5 - , $ -- $ , +
-- $ 9 , , $ 9 , -- 0
% ! ' % , + +$ , -- $ 6 + @ -- $
+ ! $ 5 , - . , * 8 A 5
+ $ . ' % * % .! ? .
' ! ; ! . . % ' % ' ' %
* . %
0 % ** % ! ' * . ' % %. .% ' '

. ** . ' ! 0 % ** % . * % ' 0
. 0 / ' . / ' ' . * .
% '
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
178
543
662
663
682555of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
0 % ! ! * 9 / % -
! * ' ' % . ' % % %
* ' ' . % & ' ! % * % % ' ! '
* ' ' ! ' + *+ * + ! @ " M
' M > 4- 9 & ' % : * 0
% ' % > A % 0 % ! ! ! * % * .
'. .* . . . % ' * % & ' !
' . % . . . ** ' %
' * . . '!' % % ' % % % . '. *
. ' * % ! ' ' $ * % % . '
% % + * + * C $
% 3FF F* F' * F' 'F' L' 'L; L '*B +8+ C $ *
0 '!' ' ? % ! ! % & ' NC 1% * * 1 'O ' % & '
9>> : > % ' > ! ! ! . % ! % '
' * ! . H % H % ' .* ' !
* % B
0 % ** * % ** ' ! ' ; % ' * . '. ' * 0

'' % ! ' . ' % % % . *
' * H * % . 0 ' ; % + * + *
+ ! @ " M ' % % ' % ' * .% % %
% ' % - ' * ' ' % ! % . - % ' '
! ' % . * ' * H $% % '
* 3
"< B / "< "< C / / B 5 / :
/ 99
"< " 9 5 9 /D $% ' - % ; * %
- ' ' . % * * + + $% '
' . - ;
"< % C 9 / : : / "< % " 4- % -
. % ! . ! ! % ; % . - % ;
% . * . ; . 9 ' %. . % '
' ' % * % : . ' % / * ; . % % % ;
' . - ' % ' . !
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
179
544
663
664
683666of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
"< % % 2! . ' ' % * * + + *

' ' ' % % + +1 * % * * %
% 2 * % ' * % - *
%
"< % < B . , E , % - ' . % % %
& ' 1 A814+&A4 1 4- % ;
' ' . % * * + + . ' / . % %
* ' * % ; ' % ' ' . % + *
> % ' > ! ' % * ' % * * % ;
7
0% . % % * ! % * ./ ' 0 * %
% * % % ' ' ! * %
' 9 : '!' % % % 0 * % . 3
F+ G -- HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH$ --
$ - , + $ - 9 , $ - 9 , $
,$ HHHHHHHHH - HHHHHHHHHHHHHH$ %&HHHH$ - . ! + $
, F! . G HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH$ ! , ++
!! - . $ 6 * . F , ,- + ! - -- 2
, G HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ! , * , . ,
, , , . $ 6 *+ , 2 , . -
! ! , , * ,, -$ , . -- +
, + HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
+ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH .. ,, 2! ,
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
180
545
664
665
684777of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
KEISLING: Palace coup: what the Kathleen Kane prosecution is really ... http://newslanc.com/2015/12/09/keisling-palace-coup-what-the-kathleen...
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
December 9, 2015 Letters to the Editor, News and Commentary
" "#
$ % $
$ $
!
% &
' $ ( )*$
"# + "#
&
, " # $ +
- . $/ $ 0 1 2
&
, "# " # 3 1
$ 45)4&
6 $
+ $ &
" # !
' $
&
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
181
546
665
666
685888of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
1 of 4 3/22/2016 2:11 AM
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
"#
$ $
&
3 "# 8
&
)9*5$ "#
& :1
$ )9*5$
" &;
, $ 8
, "#7 !
&
< " #
- $ $ $
+ &
0 $ &
$ $
&3 $ $ "#
&
3 "#
&
3
$ &=
% &
3 $ $ 3
&
"# # $ . $ 6 1
$ &
#
&
3 # "#
. $
+ &
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
PagePage
Page
182
547
666
667
686999of
of
of113
of 23
27
23
183
548
667
668
813 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
2 of 4 3/22/2016 2:11 AM
Published
Publishedby
bythe
theAdvanced
Advanced
EXHIBIT
Media
Media
re Preliminary
Group
Groupand
andInjunction
Stan J. Caterbone
for EMERGENCY
EMERGECNY
Copyright
RELIEF
2016
3 $ # $ "# .
&. 8
&
$1 " $ $ >: "#; .

$ &?
3 $" & # $
&
>3 # $? " &> &?
( $
"# &
0 $
&
3 $ 8 $
&
$ $
$ &
0 $ $
8 $ 8 &
' &
3 &@ &
. $ " #
8 $ $
8 . 1 $ > ? & #<
&
( A $ $ &# &3 6
"# &
, 8 $# &6
+ &
3 + 8 &
' $ #< # &6

&
B $ &
Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT of Stan
MindSponsored
U.S.
Lancaster
Stan
CountyJ.Mind
J Caterbone
Caterbone
J. Caterbone
Court re
reState-of-Affairs
Control Current
re State-of-Affairs
Pleas Page
Page
Page
Page 10
183
548
667
668
68710
10of
of
of
of813
113
23
27
23
183
548
667
668 Tuesday,
Saturday
Sunday,March
June22,
September 5, 2016
17,
21,
3 of 4 3/22/2016 2:11 AM
CHAPTER
DIVIDER
Preliminary
PACTS - Testimonials
Injunction forofEMERGENCY
Targeted Individuals
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
Preliminary
RELIEF
COINTELPRO USED TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE
%
!"" # $
&! ! '" !
((( &&" " ! & )#

# *& !" #
+,+-../-0,.1
'$ ! #
2 3
/14 '" ! $ 5
5 6! & $ 07414-777,
80709 10:-1777
; << = ; = < 5 = = = 2 = =
= > < < =
! " # # $ % & " & ! & " & % & '

" ! " ! ( " ) # !" ' ( ' #
$ ' $ ' & * + , &( & * - *
& % . /0 1. $ % $ " 2
= < 3 ( & $ $ % & = <' # # 4 ! %

$ '' # ' 5 65 6 ( 7 $& $ " , $ $ ' 8& & %
# 3 8 4 $ & '' # %' # $ $ # $ $ &( # $ ( ' '
# 9 *5 6
8 $ " ! " . /0 1. & #$ # &( $ $
$& ' " " 8
$ $ & 5:6 '&$ # -; < # 9 % " ' 1 #"
+ 8' ) ! 3 *#* + & " = # >* $ " 8' ) " 4
% # 9 - ' ' 3 & " & 1 $ ( $ # &( ' )
" ? & # $ 4 $ % # 9 " ! ( % " $ ! %*
8 >* 0$# @ & $ $ # # . /0 1. $ # 8 #
A B( &( $ $ $ $ & '9 " ! ' A " % "
$ ( '' " ' $ *5 65 6 , $ @ " # " # % . /0 1.
! < '' * &'' *5 6 C ' 1 * = $ ( '' &" 9 $ %
" ( # *5 6 ' " &#" = $ ' # ! (( '% ' $! (( # % = #D
(" A ' % " A 5E6 @ B $ $ " ' " !
A& " )' $A ' )% $ % = #D ' % " $ $ ! " *5 6
# ! ? !# $ % $ " ' $ " $ & 2

3 4 <" ) '' ( ) '' " ( ! " ' # ( %
3 4 " $ % ! ( %% '( $ # #
$ $ & " 7 ( $& $ ! %% '( $ #F
384 ( $ # ' ! % %% % ' # " ( '
LETTER to Director Comey, FBI Page 1 of 5 Monday November 28, 2016

% $ ' %% ' % $ %( &( $ '

( ' ' ( $ # 7&$ '( $ # *
" ' 8 1 "&' *+ " $ 0 G* $ &# =6 ) ! !

! # ! ? = < (! 6 6 &- "@! & &
"! @ 6 ;
6 );AA !)" #' A! B )6) ) ! C# D@0 ! (C! ! C,.E.; 6 -
) ! ! - ! # ! - ?-# ! ") -(! 6- 6 -# ) -& &- "@! &-
) & ! C:EE
+*+ " $ !
H ,/+4 @ 6 #6 # F ! ! "A# & ! "! 3 ! '

! 6 & &! 6 !&6 #! !" "! ! ! " ! ? 6 "
""!& # & #' 8G H9$ ! " # ! ' & #' 8G H9$ ( "" 6
" 2 ? !& ! 8G 2 H9 & ! ) )" 6 ? !&
!# #6 " & ! ! #" 6 G "!I ! H
G "! ! ! H ? ) "! !# " ! ! $ G ! ? 6 $H " ! &!
6 ! " # ! '$ ' " 6 ) ! " 6! "! ? 6
!"! ' ! " )" B 8G H9
/" "& " ! " , $ ' &$

C ' .( ! " 1 ( '' # ,* *
" $ ) "& " 3 4 E * ( & " ,* * '
'' # " # $ '' # # " # % '' # '
" % $ # % " $ ' $ " < #
%% *
%& B (' !" " " # $ '&$ 2 3 4 " 8 $ # '
+ &" = #> & # #" ) '' " '% ' " ! &'$ '' " ! '$ &
" B& ' ( ' F 3 4 " (' $ & %&' %% # ' $ & "
$ ' & & $ & ' " &" + $$' 0
' $ F 3 4 " !" ' ' & $ # % % # % "
$ '' ' $ $$ ! " " ' ( ! & & $ ( % "
, $ & " !" & $ # ' '' $ % C& ' F 3:4 "
( ' % > " = $ F 3 4 ' % " (" ' > &
E % " ,* * D ( # " ' ( (&' F3 4 " E : !
? ) / ' & @ " $ ' # ( # # $ " "
" " $ $& $ " A% ' 7 ! ' I ' # ( # ' #
( # % # ' $ $ ( & % #
# ! ( $% " % F 3 4 %% '' # # ''
% " ( ' ' %, 9 F $3 4 & ' " B (' "
$$ '' *
/" $ &' % " "& " @ # ! " & #" #
! '' " 8 J .> . /0 1. # #- ') # ( # * E $
E " "& " (& ' " $ % & ( & ,* * '' #
# D% ( $ " '' # $ & %' ! $ %( ! " " " $
$ ! " $ % % % !" " ! ' (& (' *I
## ! & ' 2 ! "!#@ ! 6! @ 5 $ 6 2 ?

! 6 ! & = < ;
8,9 ?!" ! ; # $ % $$ ' ( ( ' ' * /"

(& ( ! $ $ $ $ &( * /" ( $ & $ & $

%% ( ' &(( * /" 8 $ ( ' B(' $ " % # &
# F
809 '#6 " &!# " ( ? ; /" 8 $ ( ' & $ $ A$ ) A & $
( # * /" (' $% ' $ $ (& ' " $ #& ' %' $
" (& ' " % # $ # &( * /" % # $ ( $
& ' $ $ & ' (" '' * /" ( $ %
& # $ &( ( &$ # &( & # #
$ (&' $ # $( (' ' $' $ " ' %% ' $ "
& & ' % * /" & $ $ 7 ) # & ( & # $
! "' " ' G& F
819 ! 6 " & " ' ; /" 8 $ ( ' & $ " ' # '
" $ $ $ ) " (( ' * .%% % " ' !# ( 7& $
$ ( $ % $ $ ( B % % ' $ ! #%&'
( * /" $ ' % $ B ' ! $ " # #&'
$& $ ( & & & '' A # A ! $# $ 7& & (
%% $ $ ' " &(( F
8:9 "" & " ? # ; /" 8 ( $! "' '( ' $ ( " $ $ F
$& '' # ' ) $ " $ $ " F $ $ '
&' # $ * /" 7 ! % #" ' $ $
$ $ &( " *
, % & ' ' " ! " # ') $ " $ $ " $

#" ( D * . $ ' " # &( % ( (' #
" $ '9 # ' # $( # % $* / ) ! " ( ' % '' !
% $ ' $ ' ' & " & * 0 ' $ " " $ &
( $ $ " ) $ % " * 0 ' & " $ % '
& '&$ # " ) # & $ & & ' * % % % &$
$ " % $ ( # *
< '' " % '' ! # ' ) &(( # $ $ .< < @ ?., ?.,1
+ ? ;01? @ ? +011? @1 /+ * J= = K >
= $ L 5 = > > <> >
= = 2 < = 5 = = = = = -
' ,:$ 07,. -
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A11,7.E1,0A - - - -
?"!# -5! 6- 6 -= )- ! ! ! - '- -,:-07,.
< = << < = = ' ""!& #

& #! ,0$ 07,. -
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A117E./0,/A " - ) ! - -
"" & "- & ! - '- - - ""!& # - & #! - -,0-07,.

< <$ = = $ < = K = = ?

,0$ 07,. - 6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A117/0,477A - -
-< # "- - - "- -E,,- & -2 @ @ - #@ - 6 -
- ?- -,0-07,.
2 <= 2 K 1 6 2 >2 K ? <=

< (! 6 = = 2 < = ! " #6
? ' +$ 07,. -
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A11740E/17A - - " -2 @- -1-
6 - ! ! '-2 @ - ?- " - ! #! "-5! 6- - - - ! !"- # ! -
- ! - "- #6- ?- '-
= K =$ = = $ <
M = = = ? 6 # ? <! !#6 "" <
! $ ,4$ 07,. -
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A11,1/11:/A ) - - ?- 6 - ! -
- - -,.-EE00- K =- - = = -< == - - 2 - -
= 2 - - ""! - "" - -<! -< - -
! ! !&6 #!" ? (! I "

)" ! B6! ! ) ! "$ # :$ 077/ ) ?
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A0/,7E1114A - - - ! - ! -
- !&6 - #!"- ?- - (! I " - )" ! - - B6! ! - - - -
) - ! - "- # -:-077/-) ?
= 2 ? !# $ "$ ,.-# -7:,: ! 6 !

! # !# ? '" !
6 ) ;AA((( # ! # A # A1,EE.0:/+A = 2 - - 6 - ! - - ?-
!# - - "- < =- "'-07-07,.- -0-7- ""

1 ( %&''
DDDDDDDDDDDA ADDDDDDDDDDDD
$ <! !&
%
!"" # $
&! ! '" !
((( &&" " ! & )#

# *& !" #
- E-
!# ! #" ! ; ! 6 ) 6 " $ #
? $ ) "!#"' ! # ! ! # ,/E+
& ! & ) "!# 856! " 2" ( 9 (! 6
"" & ! ? ! # # ? (! 6!
! " !& " "$ "# ? < # $
8 )" & !" ' ""! & 3 ! 6 ? !# N, 2!""! ! ,//09
? "' ( ? # ? ) ! 6 6 (! 6 6 ! ? " (
? # 6 ! $ (6!#6 ( " ""' ) # B) ) "!# # ) ! 5
!"!I # !# ! 6( ? 6 "! " "!#! #@ ) $
) ) '$ ! 5 # ! ?!&6 ? F !# 6 &6 6 $
# !# ! ?) # ! & !&6 # ! ) ! ?F !# #
! ) ! " ? 6 ! )"' !? ' (! 6 ? #
<! ( " & # < # ' < # ! ' 6! ! - ) '
56! " 2" (! & ? 6 # "8 6 = ? ) ! "9O
= =
71-,.-/7774 ??!# ? 6 ! # ! B # ! $ ! =6! ! # ! ? )) " -
< = < = 2 < => - : $ - :EP 71-,.-/777:. <<
<< = = = =
) ,.-.E00 = = 5 = = * - :E
+.; /% + " ''
=6! ! # ! ? )) " * - :E =? <! !#6 "" < F - :
=? <! !#6 "" < PF - F -:: :
! !# ! !# ? * - -:EF - E :F :- E =? <!
!#6 "" < P - F -: - E P
! !# ! " ! !# ? ,.-# -,+4, = = 2
( " 6 ? '" ! !#! " # 2 Q 07,.-:.0 (' #
& & % ' & < 2 (
'" ! ) & * +/ F : +/ P ++ !# ? K 6" K
) ! ? '" ! ' )) " * - - - E- ? K 6"
K ,,.: 07,.F * + F E+ P ,.-,0,/ "! ! '
F # ! ? 07,.
< # ' ? " * - F - F - :E - - :
2 @ ) #' ? =6 ! !# ? '" ! * -

Another Public Official Is Leaving Stan J. Caterbone IN-HARMS-WAY!
Stan J. Caterbone

Surveillance,
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-528-2200
February 5, 2017
Mr. Craig Stedman

Lancaster County District Attorney
Lancaster County Courthouse
50 North Duke Street
5th Floor
Lancaster, PA 17602
[email protected]
Re: Our Journey Is Coming To An End
Dear Craig,
I still remember the first time I met you. It was outside one of the courtrooms and you
had just announced that you were running for the DA's position. I asked you if we could meet so
that I could determine what kind of District Attorney you were going to be. Time flies when we're
having fun, right?
Well, I was not surprised to see you win the GOP endorsement for a state-wide judgeship.
You are following a long line of public officials that have moved on and upward after having been
connected to my legal odyssey. In all fairness, politics aside, you have always treated me fairly in
person on the several occasions we have talked. That is something that I wish I could say for
everyone, but, as I have to address these issues, I guess the reasons are what they are.
First there was Governor Dick Thornburgh, who then went on to be the U.S. Attorney
General. Joe Madenspacher went on to be a Lancaster County Common Pleas Judge. The same
was true of Donald Totaro. Governor Tom Ridge went to become the first U.S. Secretary of
Homeland Security. Christie Fawcett went from the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office to the
U.S. Attorney's Office. Christina Rainville went first to the U.S. Securities Commission Office in
Philadelphia, then to the Vermont Attorney General's Office. Mike Fisher went from being the
Pennsylvania Attorney General during the LISA MICHELLE LAMBERT era to sitting as a Judge on
the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals. And now you are moving toward a Pennsylvania Superior
or Supreme Court Judge.
I hold no animosity toward you. If you understood the complex and deceptive history of
my Dad, you would better understand just who set these circumstances in motion, and why
everyone in between, keeps them in play. Those perpetrators and long gone, however their
tradecraft and trickery have left their fingerprints in my family's life and affairs ever since.
If there is anything that I want you to understand before you hear your first case
it is this; just because a policeman, detective, or psychiatrist, for that matter, testifies
Letter to Lancaster County DA Craig Stedman Page 1 of 3 Sunday February 5, 2017

under oath that a person has committed a crime, it does, in no way, support the truth of
that persons guilt or innocence, sadly to say. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT KATHLEEN
KANE WAS TRYING TO REFORM IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. The fact
IS that there was no separation in the judicial system between law enforcement the
judiciary and the prosecution. That is why I believe the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania is one of the most corrupt states in this country. What you have
contributed to that I do not know, and am not alleging that you have at all. We are all
victim to the information that we peruse and study to guide us to our conclusions.
Please take note of the following letter to the co-counsel, Andrew Wallet, of the Britney
Spears Cosnservatorship:
_________________________
I have been a VICTIM OF U.S. Sponsored Mind Control for the past 30 years and have been
litigating in federal courts regarding claims arising from that as well as my WHISTLEBLOWER Case
since 2005. I am the AMICUS for the former Pennsylvania Attorney General, Ms. Kathleen Kane,
have taken my AMICUS case for the LISA MICHELLE LAMBERT case to the U.S. Supreme Court,
and have been before every court possible since 2005 as a Pro Se Litigant.
I now am learning to help others in my situation and have been on the other end of the
CONSERVATORSHIP tactic, although they have never legally attempted in courts, just veiled
threats. My oldest brother, Sammy was under a CONSERVATORSHIP in Santa Barbara, California
in the 1980's, was a victim of the MKULTRA LSD experiments, and was ultimately murdered on
Christmas Day of 1984, while under the CONSERVATORSHIP in Santa Barbara.
Recently I have been in contact with the Legal Counsel for the Ft. Lauderdale Shooter and
have always been following the career of Britney, both as a fan and as one interested as finding
similar attributes to my own targeting. In 1987 I was named the Executive Producer for a film in
a partnership with Tony Bongiovi, former owner and founder of Power Station Studios. I was also
refinancing the Ted Gamillion Film Studio in Hollywood for Ted and his wife. I know my way
around the entertainment business.
I have some 8 Gigabytes of experience, research, law, and evidence to support my claims
and would be honored to help Britney free herself from enslavement. Please Call.
Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may
testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:
(a) the experts scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to
understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d)the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the
case.
RESEARCH
xxxxxxxxxxFEE SCHEDULE - $50,000.00
EXPERT TESTIMONY
Following is attached File List of 1209 files and over 13,000 BOOKMARKS of RESEARCH
MATERIALS WITH AUDIO AND VIDEOS sent via US Priority Mail 9505 5165 0616 7019
0008 77 and the letter to Eric Cohen. Phone calls were made on Thursday January 19,
2017 regarding the information submitted.
__________________________

Best of Luck,
___________/S/____________

1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
[email protected]
717-528-2200
ACTIVE COURT CASES

U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 16-4014 CATERBONE v. United States, et.al.; Case
No. 16-cv-49; 15-03984; 14-02559 MOVANT for Lisa Michelle Lambert; 05-2288; 06-4650, 08-02982;

LETTER TO The Honorable Judge David Ashworth Re Case No. CI-16-08472 LANDMARK HUMAN RIGHTS TORTURE CASE March 22, 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LETTER TO The Honorable Judge David Ashworth Re Case No. CI-16-08472 LANDMARK HUMAN RIGHTS TORTURE CASE March 22, 2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LETTER TO The Honorable Judge David Ashworth Re Case No. CI-16-08472 LANDMARK HUMAN RIGHTS TORTURE CASE March 22, 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Landmark Human Rights Torture Case

MARCH 22, 2017

The Honorable Judge David Ashworth

The Honorable Judge Lawrence Stengel

Re: Case No. CI-16-08472 Preliminary Injunction for Pain Relief

Dear Judge Ashworth,

The following is part of the injunction, it reads:

I have been subject to this torture, harassment, extortion, and obstruction of

ACTIVE COURT CASES

MARCH 21, 2017

STAN J CATERBONE & ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

6. 7 SOCIAL MEDIA SITES

7. 23 NEW LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS, March 13, 2017

8. 84 INTERNET LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS, February

Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

ACTIVE COURT CASES

STAN J. CATERBONE & ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

8. STAN J. CATERBONE'S WEBSITE www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

9. STAN J. CATERBONE'S YOUTUBE CHANNEL -

10.STAN J. CATERBONE'S TWITTER PAGE - https://twitter.com/SCaterbone

11.STAN J. CATERBONE'S SCRIBD PAGE FOR DOCUMENTS -

12.STAN J. CATERBONE'S LINKDIN PAGE - https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?

13.STAN J. CATERBONE'S AUDIO RECORDINGS ON YOURLISTEN.COM

14.STAN J. CATERBONE'S AUDIO RECORDINGS ON SOUNDCLOUD -

23 NEW LINKS OF EVIDENCE FOR ALL CLAIMS

12.Case No. 17-cv-867-EGS Preliminary Injunction for Emergency Relief

13.LETTER to HIGH INDUSTRIES re MARRIOTT BAR THREATS, HARASSMENT,

14.FEDERAL PRIVATE CRIMINAL NOTARIZED COMPLAINT Filed in U.S.

16.WIKILEAKS CIA DATA DUMP re 100 NAMED TARGETED INDIVIDUALS OF

17.CHAPTER 11 CASE No. 10615 NOTICE OF APPEAL TO JUDGE RICHARD

18.02101-NT-000214-2016 ORDER BY LANCASTER COUNTY COMMON PLEAS

19.STAN J. CATERBONE AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP INVOICES AND

20.NOTARIZED ENOUGH IS ENOUGH DECLARATION BY STAN J. CATERBONE

21.LETTER TO MATHEW HAVERSTICK, ATTORNEY FOR SCOTT MARTIN re

22.STAN J. CATERBONE NEW CASE IN U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT IN

23.KATHLEEN KANE APPEAL CASE IN SUPERIOR COURT OPINION OF

24.STAN J. CATERBONE LETTER TO PENNSYLVANIA STATE LEGISLATORS re

25.STAN J. CATERBONE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FOR LANCASTER COUNTY

26.NOTORIZED DECLARATION TITLED ENOUGH IS ENOUGH BY STAN J.

27.LETTER TO TARGETED INDIVIDUAL ABBE EDISON OF PITTSBURG, PA re

28.CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY CASE No. 17-10615 MOTION FOR

29.PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE COMPLAINT No. 055746172-

30.STAN J. CATERBONE LANCASTER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CASE

31.PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE COMPLAINT No. 055746172-

32.STAN J. CATERBONE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FOR LANCASTER COUNTY

33.STAN J. CATERBONE LETTER TO PENNSYLVANIA STATE LEGISLATORS re

34.STAN J. CATERBONE'S PHOTO INVENTORY OF 1250 FREMONT STREET

84 INTERNET LINKS OF EVIDENCE OF ALL CLAIMS

2. STAN CATERBONE NAMED AMICUS FOR KATHLEEN KANE Superior Court of

3. WHISTLEBLOWERS KAREN STEWART AND STAN CATERBONE A Candid Discussion of

4.The Surreptitious Reincarnation of COINTELPRO with the COPS Gang-Stalking

7. Legal Implications of the Soviet Microwave Bombardment of the U.S. Embassy

THE COMPUTER HACKER WANTS THIS FREE SPACE

8. Congressman Robert Walker Pleading July 7 1991 Important

15. B2B Consulting From 1999 to 2002 January 16, 2017

20. Institutional Investors Mortgage Banking Business Development of 1987 January

23. FALSE IMPRISONMENT AND ILLEGAL INTERROGATIONS by U.S. Intelligence

28. Robert Gates

31. Report of Douglas F Gansler/Kathleen Kane on Misuse of Commonwealth Email