WSB-TV: State investigates Narconon Georgia after Channel 2 reveals new evidence

Discussion in 'Narconon' started by Anonymous, Oct 2, 2012.

  1. Missfit Member

    I wonder if that alone could cause a warrant to surrender ALL correspondences between whatsherface and $ci or any communications that came down from $ci to the con in not just this case but others as well. It's evidence enough to prove a legitimate connection, no?
  2. Missfit Member

    They have to prove it's a HIPPA violation first, they must send their legal teams to the con's people and find out who they plan to point the finger at. But come on, someone in their legal team or reporters or someone must have already pointed this fact out, right? If not, someone please get on that.
  3. Anonymous Member

    Oh my........looks like the Department of Health and Human Services is really going after violators ......

    And to think Narconon has been "sharing" its information with Scientology (as to who is a Narconon patient) in order to get them into scientology!!! Multiple violations = mega $ fines and federal prison. :)

    Apr 29, 2010 10:57 am | posted by Chris Dimick | HIPAA & Privacy and security
    [Editor's note, August 9, 2010: Huping Zhou ......... to receive jail time for a .... HIPAA offense—for accessing confidential records without a valid reason or authorization but not profiting from it through the sale or use of the information.]
    A former UCLA Health System employee ...... sentenced to federal prison for violating HIPAA.Huping Zhou, 47, of Los Angeles, was sentenced accessing and reading the confidential medical records of his supervisors and high-profile celebrities, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. Zhou was also fined.


    Lufkin woman pleads guilty to HIPAA violations

    Posted: Jul 23, 2012 11:12 AM EDT
    <em class="wnDate">Monday, July 23, 2012 11:12 AM EST</em>
    Updated: Jul 23, 2012 4:58 PM EDT
    lass="wnDate">Monday, July 23, 2012 4:58 PM EST</em>
    J.Cranford (Source: Angelina County Jail)
    From the US Attorney's Office
    LUFKIN, TX - A 33-year-old Lufkin, Texas woman has pleaded guilty to federal violations in the Eastern District of Texas, announced U.S. Attorney John M. Bales today.
    Joneshia Cranford pleaded guilty on July 20, 2012, to wrongful disclosure of individually identifiable health information before U.S. Magistrate Judge Zack Hawthorn


    Blue Cross spends $18.5M on HIPAA violation

    March 14, 2012 | By Dina Overland

    Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee has the dubious distinction of becoming the first health insurer to receive a fine--a hefty $1.5 million--for violating the Health Insurance Privacy and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy and security rules.

    Other insurers should take note because the penalty signals how the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services is ramping up its HIPAA privacy and security enforcement, according to an article in Computerworld. "This settlement sends an important message that OCR expects health plans and health care providers to have in place a carefully designed, delivered, and monitored HIPAA compliance program," Leon Rodriguez, director of the HHS Office for Civil Rights, said in a statement.

    Read more: Blue Cross spends $18.5M on HIPAA violation - FierceHealthPayer
    • Winner Winner x 7
  4. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Anonymous Member

    Another great thread.

    Another great thread with anons thinking using their brains inside their heads.

    I adore WWP and Anons.
    • Like Like x 4
  6. Random guy Member

    Now there's a reporter who gets it! Bloody splendid reporting, and a damaging blow to the cult and their little front group! Had they at least been honest about whet they do, they would possibly be forgiven, but I guess honesty would not bring in the dosh here...
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. RightOn Member

    Mary looks like a deer in headlights when the reporter asks about her letter to OSA.
    What a liar.
    And the state is "considering some changes?"
    how about shutting them the hell down?
    • Agree Agree x 7
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. RightOn Member

    wait... WTF?
    If you pause the vid and look at the letter that Mary the ED wrote OSA, it reads
    " Jamie is the sister-in-law of Martin Cohen. The guy who used to run the sauna before we had permission from the state to deliver it. The significance of Martin, is that he extorted a large amount of money from us in order to keep the sauna going. ($60,000-$20,00 still owed) He sends me certified letters when we are behind in payments"


    Am I crazy or is this a very juicy piece of dox that needs a lot of explaining? Running the sauna before the state gave them permission and dox of them paying some guy to keep it running?
    and they still owed him $20,000 in 2008??

    How is any of this legal?
    Running a sauna without permission from the state, extortion, and paying someone to keep it running?
    Holy crap on a cracker Batman!
    So they must have records of these pay outs?
    • Like Like x 2
  9. fishypants Moderator

    By 'extortion', I think she means 'sending debt-collection letters to Narconon when they fail to pay their bills on time'.

    Could be wrong.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. fishypants Moderator

    yeah, we're doing that already.

    but shhhhhhh!
    • Funny Funny x 2
  11. Xenu Is Lord Member

    Is it wrong for me to be masturbating to the WIN in these videos?
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  12. RightOn Member

    kudos going out to Jodi Fleischer the reporter too!
    • Agree Agree x 6
  13. another123 Member

    THIS JUST IN: LIAR, LIAR. Pants On Fire.
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. RightOn Member

  15. Missfit Member

    straight from the department of health and mental services, the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 and the Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1972:

    "Chapter 1—Overview of Federal Alcohol and Other Drug Confidentiality Law and Regulations
    The regulations that protect the identities of persons in alcohol or drug abuse treatment have their genesis in two statutes of the early 1970's: the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 and the Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1972. These statutes were implemented by regulations issued by the then Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) in 1975. Revised in 1987 by one of HEW's successors, the Department of Health and Human Services, the regulations are set out at title 42, part 2, of the Code of Federal Regulations. Recently, Congress reaffirmed and reorganized the original confidentiality statutes by merging them into one act, the Public Health Service Act, now title 42, section 290dd–3, of the United States Code. The merger had no effect on the confidentiality regulations. Throughout this document, references to the confidentiality law or regulations will mean the regulations at title 42, part 2, of the Code of Federal Regulations.

    Purpose of the Law
    The Federal drug and alcohol confidentiality laws are predicated on the public health view that people with substance abuse problems are likelier to seek (and succeed at) treatment if they are assured that their need for treatment will not be disclosed unnecessarily to others. The congressional committee that put the original drug confidentiality statute into final form noted in its report: "The conferees wish to stress their conviction that the strictest adherence to . . . [confidentiality] is absolutely essential to the success of all drug abuse prevention programs. Every patient and former patient must be assured that his right to privacy will be protected. Without that assurance, fear of public disclosure of drug abuse or of records that will attach for life will discourage thousands from seeking the treatment they must have if this tragic national problem is to be overcome."1 In keeping with this view, the drug and alcohol confidentiality regulations restrict both the disclosure and the use of information about individuals in federally assisted drug or alcohol abuse treatment programs

    Scope of the Law
    The Federal alcohol and drug confidentiality regulations restrict the disclosure and use of "patient identifying" information about individuals in substance abuse treatment. Patient- identifying information is information that reveals that a person is receiving, has received, or has applied for substance abuse treatment.3 What the regulations protect is not the individual's identity per se, but rather his or her identity as a participant in or applicant for substance abuse treatment.

    To Whom Does the Law Apply?
    The regulations apply to holders, recipients, and seekers of patient-identifying information. An individual or program in possession of such information—for example, a federally assisted substance abuse program—may not release it except as authorized by the patient concerned or as otherwise permitted by the regulations. Anyone who receives such information from a substance abuse program may not redisclose it without patient consent or as otherwise authorized by the regulations and may not use it except for certain purposes discussed below under "Exceptions to the Rule for Holders of Patient-Identifying Information." Finally, anyone seeking such information may not compel its disclosure except as permitted by the regulations.

    The Strictness of the Federal Regulations
    The Federal drug and alcohol confidentiality regulations are stricter than most other confidentiality rules. In general, they apply whether the person seeking the information already has it, is seeking it for a judicial or administrative proceeding, is a law enforcement or other government official,5 has a subpoena or a search warrant, or is the spouse, parent, relative, employer, or friend of the patient.

    What Are the Consequences of Violating or Disregarding the Law?
    Violators of the regulations are subject to a criminal penalty in the form of a fine of up to $500 for the first offense and up to $5,000 for each subsequent offense.6 Violators that are licensed or State certified (which would include virtually all programs and their professional employees) jeopardize their license or certification. The patients concerned may also sue violators for unauthorized disclosure."
    • Like Like x 3
  16. BLiP Member



    ^^^ Ssssup with the doctor? How can she have made a medical decision about whether or not a person was physically well enough to partake in the Narconon programme when she - apparently - did not have a single clue about what was involved. Be great to have a US doctor struck off as Pierre Labonte was in Canada as an example to other medical professionals wanting to associate themselves with L Ron Hubbard and his crime racket.
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. Missfit Member

    I'm sitting here like an ancy ball of rubber, please tell me this information has been forwarded to the people that need it aka lawyers and reporters. If not I will happily draft said letter myself, I just need to know where to send it.
    • Like Like x 3
  18. anonysamvines Member

    yep didn't a HIPPA get filed after the initial suit? I know HIPPA kept coming up in the depos.
    And some of the relevant proofs have only just been disclosed to Plaintiffs, which also indicated even more stuff still not produced under discovery (and another request for sanctions against Co$)
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Missfit Member

    fabulous. I still wrote a letter. Can't hurt.
    • Winner Winner x 5
  20. Missfit Member

    p.s. link to depo's, does we have?
  21. Random guy Member

    • Agree Agree x 3
  22. patriot75 Member




    remember that minister:
    • Like Like x 2
  23. anonysamvines Member

    this has been mentioned a few times before on at least 2 threads.
    It took her 5 years to get license to run sauna herself, so she funded him from the off. Then when she got license he blackmailed her ... in a different memo to Claudia ( NN INT deputy head legal dept, read her depo for some real WTF) she mentions it being Hundred G for him to hand the keys back to her, which she paid thinking it would be more expedient than to ? as she thought she would soon make the money back anyway once she had it under full control.

    Same scam she pulled with the housing, she funded west co and delgado, then Don handed it to Maria as part of the divorce settlement. Mary was bitching in a memo to NN INT/ABLE/WISE (brains to foggy to remember exactly which) that the Org wanted the delgado divorce to go ahead and wouldn't listen to her that Maria couldn't have it. So that's why when Claudia "suggested" that Mary get rid of Maria's housing (after complaints about drugs, pimps, alcohol etc) and get someone new Mary said she couldn't afford to start up another new company. Neither of the Delgados knew who was paying for their legal team either funnily enough - despite both being broke!

    Mary is being thrown under the bus by Co$ , IF (in Co$'s eyes not mine) anyone has to go down for this they will protect NN INT at all costs - she hadn't been drilled by the top team in preparation. Claudia on the other hand had - by moxie no less and boy does it show ... as usual it also shows much more than they realise tho callous, lying cunts that they are . Claudia's depo along with Mary's are well worth the read if you read no other
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Random guy Member

    Even controlling for this being an unfortunate moment, this is not a face of a woman feeling comfortable.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
  26. Missfit Member

  27. anonysamvines Member

    nope you are wrong, she stated in several memos to uplines that cos she couldn't get sauna licensed as part of NA GA she funded the sauna and this guy. When she finally got licensed 5 years later he refused to hand it and the keys back over to her without her paying money - one memo 80 grand, the other 100 grand. She thought it best to pay up especially since she expected to make that money back fast!

    Scilons play so nicely with each other don't they?
    • Like Like x 1
  28. RightOn Member

    geez, sorry for slowpoke
    I didn't read other threads in their entirety
    That is some crazy stuff.

    again it amazes me that these places are still open.
    Can part of the reason why that they are not closed be because some of the addicts were court ordered by the state (s) and it would prove to be a huge PR flap or even libel for the states who participated in using Narconon for court ordered rehab? tin foily and a stupid reason of course....
    but I really struggle to make any sense of why they are still open
    • Like Like x 1
  29. fishypants Moderator

    I'm confused. Do saunas need licenses in Georgia?

    Or is the point that she was trying to conceal from the rehab licensing authorities the fact that Really Long Saunas are part of Narconon's magic solution to addiction?
  30. Missfit Member

    Can't have a sauna because it's considered Detox...or so says this:
    • Agree Agree x 1
  31. Especially where private patient information is at issue. HIPAA violation anyone?

  32. Anonymous Member

  33. anonysamvines Member

    I think it is more likely a shitty mix of overworked and underfunded regulation agencies, SOME not all bad/lazy/stupid regulators, bad and non nationwide standard legislature, crafty sneaky scilons playing their usual and too often effective tricks and schmoozing the hell out of the ptb, an unaware and often uncaring public awareness of Co$ and how truly dangerous and evil they are, and a too prevalent derogatory public opinion on addiction/junkies/rehabs. People want these things well regulated but then when it comes to funding the work needed ......
    Plus addiction has no one simple definition let alone cure! leaving people desperate and ripe for unscupulous plucking/scamming.

    Anyone writing to anyone about new regulation PLEASE PLEASE emphasis the importance of not only the rehabs being properly regulated and overseen but also those who are advertising/advising on rehabs. Not only NA but everyone - because if NA INT gets hammered they WILL try just rebranding.

    These "advisors" are every bit as dangerous and complicit as the rehabs themselves!!
    There are some very good examples in a few threads here - one lengthy but juicy one
    • Like Like x 1
  34. Missfit Member

  35. Missfit Member

    Holyfuckballs. The names, the places, the events, the history, all shared within the church....they cannot deny it without going to jail or facing huge legal problems (obviously). They are just going to point the finger at Reisser, my thoughts? Show her if she does the right thing she has support, flood her with dox from other ex's, let her know she can help people, even though she has cause tremendous pain. Yeah she's fucking criminal and deserves jail but this is all going to turn around on her and methinks she won't go down for the ship, therefore she may just be a key piece in the puzzle that is dismantling this horrible cult. I love speculating and hyphothesiszing over my morning coffee :)
  36. wolfbane Member

    Hawt diggity dawg! The related AJC investigation reporting has begun!

    Norcross drug facility under new scrutiny

    Posted: 12:36 p.m. Thursday, Oct. 4, 2012
    By Christian Boone
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

    more at link
    • Like Like x 6
  37. anon walker Moderator

    They poke you until you say you are better to make them stop poking you. Then write up a Big Win.
    • Funny Funny x 7
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  38. RightOn Member

    don't forget the nerve assists too!
    • Like Like x 2
  39. jensting Member

    In Canada David Love already found the hospital records being leaked from a hospital to narCONon (if memory serves me).
    But, getting more general, would a letter from the criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology to an ex narCONon patient count as indicating illegal data sharing? I would be shocked if the Co$ did not keep ex narCONon patients on the mailing lists...
    • Agree Agree x 3
  40. So there I was, pondering a post in this epic thread, the whole Narconon shitstorm now reaching hurricane force and the Mary Reiser / Narconon Georgia scandal, trying to keep the RAGE in check, when I started feeling a little peckish, and then I thought about some...

    • Funny Funny x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins