Talk:Rick Alan Ross

Template:OTRS could refer to one of several templates related to the OTRS system. Instead of using this template, use one of the more specific templates listed below.

Commonly-used OTRS templates

• {{OTRS pending}}: Added when an email has been sent to OTRS
• {{OTRS permission}}: Permission received via OTRS
• {{OTRS ticket}}: Provides a link to an OTRS ticket
• {{OTRS talk}}: For article talk pages, where an issue is raised by OTRS
• {{OTRS received}}: OTRS received, but is not sufficient to confirm permission
• {{Verified account}}: Added to userpage when an account is verified

See also

• Category:OTRS templates, a more complete list of templates related to the OTRS process

Suggested edits

Early Life

The "Early Life" portion of this entry does not reflect the complete history of the court record regarding the burglary and conspiracy to commit grand theft charge concerning a jewelry store. Nor does it reflect the complete history of the probation sentence.

I was convicted of one felony and a misdemeanor. My misdemeanor conviction in 1974 was for "Conspiracy" to commit a crime. This involved an attempted burglary of a vacant model home in 1974.

My felony conviction was specifically for "Conspiracy to Commit Grand Theft" in 1975. This concerned the embezzlement of property from a jewelry company, where a friend of mine was employed. My friend and I were both involved. Everything taken was returned to the satisfaction of the store and the police did not oppose probation. No one was physically hurt in any way and this was not a violent crime and did not involve a weapon. I plead guilty and was sentenced to probation.

I was sentenced to four years probation April 2, 1976. But my probation was terminated early "due to good conduct" January 18, 1979.

See http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23617-rick-ross-termination-of-probation-.html

In 1983 the Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona officially ordered the vacating of both judgments of guilt, dismissed the charges against me and restored my civil rights.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23616-rick-ross-application-for-restoration-of-civil-rights-.html

If my (1974-1975) criminal convictions and probation is to be discussed here then the complete history of both judgments of guilt (1974 and 1983)and the actual length of my probation (1974-1979) must be included. Also, the words "robbed a jewelry store" are misleading. A jewelry store robbery implies an armed robbery or a burglary. The theft was neither. It was an embezzlement and involved an employee of the jewelry store.

Also, I am the author of the book "Cults Inside Out: Hop People Get In and Can Get Out"

See http://www.amazon.com/Cults-Inside-Out-How-People/dp/149731660X

The Chinese version of the book has been published in China by Hong Kong publisher Peace Books.

See http://www.facts.org.cn/Reports/China/201503/02/t20150302_2358069.htm

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Waco

Waco

The overwhelming consensus of history, litigation and news reports contradicts the second hand speculation and opinions expressed by certain sociologists and religious studies professors, sympathetic to David Koresh and the Waco Davidians. Certainly, the government (BATF and FBI) made mistakes. But the academics cited in footnotes are expressing opinions, which have largely been discredited about Koresh, the final days of the Waco standoff, the following forensic investigation and as further established through both criminal and civil court proceedings and an independent investigation.

Those footnoted within the Waco section of my bio such as Nancy Ammerman, James Tabor, Stuart Wright, George Chryssides, Kenneth Newport, Crawford Gribben, Catherine Wessinger and George Michael are expressing their very biased point of view, not historically established and properly attributed facts.

Ammerman was lauded in a full page feature article within "Freedom Magazine" run by Scientology.

Wessinger is also a cult apologist who previously attempted to spin the "Heaven's Gate" mass suicide as a religious event rather than a cult mass suicide.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1941-is-catherine-wessinger-a-cult-apologists.html

The only significance of Ammerman regarding my work with the FBI is that she did review their notes and she says those notes reflect that the FBI worked with me. This contradicts the Justice Department report, which says that the FBI "politely declined [my] unsolicited offers of assistance throughout the standoff."

In fact I did work with the FBI at their request. This included working with two FBI agents who were assigned to work with me during the standoff.

See the following letters, which reflect an ongoing disagreement about my work with the FBI.

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24063-davidian-tragedy-letters-re-attorney-general-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24174-davidian-tragedy-letter-from-united-states-senate-to-rick-ross-dated-november-19-1993-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24284-letters-to-the-editor-what-happened-at-waco-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24392-davidian-tragedy-letter-to-jo-ann-farrington-.html

James Tabor is a self-styled expert who was once affiliated with a "cult" called the WorldWide Church of God and its school in Texas. Tabor likewise expresses his point of view and opinions. James Tabor and Stuart Wright are both recommended as "religious resources" by the Church of Scientology, which demonstrates that they are cult friendly apologists.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1963-resources-recommended-by-the-church-of-scientology-published-list-from-freedom-magazines.html

These cult apologists don't appreciate my work and are personally invested and professionally motivated in discrediting me. They come to the issue of Waco with a highly biased and self-serving point of view.

The paragraph about Waco needs editing to make it NPOV instead of POV.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Jason Scott

The Jason Scott section is largely based upon the biased accounts and characterizations of cult apologists paid by Scientology.

I never made "derogatory comments about [Jason Scott], his beliefs, his girlfriend and his pastor" and there were no "diatribes...about the ways in which Christianity and conservative Protestantism were wrong." These are very biased characterizations offered (see footnotes) by Anson Shupe, Susan Darnell and Alexander Cockburn. All three of these sources have a history of working closely with Scientology. Shupe worked for Scientology lawyer Kendrick Moxon during the Scott civil case as a highly paid expert who testified about the "anti cult movement" during the Scott civil suit trial in federal. I never compared "New Age religions and channeling...as "related to Pentecostalism." This is totally ridiculous and wholly fabricated.

Shupe, Darnell and Cockburn represent a very biased point of view. It is completely ridiculous to claim that I somehow denigrated Christianity or conservative Protestantism during the Scott intervention. Jason's mother and family, who were physically present throughout that intervention, were devoted Christians and conservative Protestants. We did discuss the excessive power held by Pastor Harold Kern. Kern is a minister for the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI), which is not part of conservative Protestantism according to conservative Protestants. The Assemblies of God, which is the largest denomination of Pentecostal Christians, considers the UPCI a radical splinter group with heretical teachings and has called the UPCI a "cult."

See the following documents that support this.

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5602-affidavit-of-katherine-l-tonkin-.html -- Affidavit of Jason's mother Kathy Tonkin, completely ignored by Shupe, Darnell and Cockburn, because it contradicts the biased narrative and their preferred point of view.

See also http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/21711-sermon-of-upci-pastor-harold-kern-bellevue-washington.html -- Sermon by Harold Kern that illustrates his approach to ministry, beliefs and authority.

See http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5598-declaration-of-garry-scarff.html -- Declaration of Scientology operative explaining ties of the Scott case to Scientology.

See also http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5599-sworn-testimony-of-jason-scott.html -- Jason Scott's testimony confirming his involvement with Scientology operatives.

The jury in the civil suit was not allowed to hear any testimony about Scientology's involvement with Jason Scott and/or about the sexual abuse of Jason Scott's younger brother by a youth pastor within the UPCI church led by Harold Kern. The jury in the criminal trial did hear some testimony concerning these facts and acquitted me.

Please maintain factual balance within my bio, rather than allowing people editing here with a bias against me to use cult apologists that despise my work and/or work for the paid propaganda machine of Scientology to shape my bio, reflecting the bias of some editors here that want to use this bio for propaganda purposes.

I would prefer no bio at all rather than a bio biased upon propaganda at Wikipedia. Please understand that I never sought, a Wikipedia website entry. Frankly, I feel very uncomfortable with an open source self-styled encyclopedia that anyone can anonymously edit, which includes a disclaimer essentially obviating any meaningful responsibility for the validity of its content. You may mean well, but regarding controversial issues and/or people somehow linked to a controversial issue, Wikipedia often becomes a propaganda platform used by various interest groups like Scientology and their minions to create a narrative, which serves their own self-interest rather than education and objective research.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Further Reading

What is the purpose of this section? To reflect, argue or advance a point of view through suggested further reading? I

Instead, this section must be specifically relevant to the bio. That is my work and life.

Madigan, Tim, See No Evil, Summit Publishing Group – Legacy Books, May 1993, ISBN 1-56530-063-7 (Foreword by Rick Ross)

This book is relevant and specifically has a chapter about my work deprogramming a Waco Davidian.

Douglass, William A.; Zulaika, Joseba (1996). Terror and taboo: the follies, fables, and faces of terrorism. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-91759-X. OCLC 33664912.

This book has nothing to do with me or my work. Why is this book listed here?

Kaplan, Jeffery and Heléne Lööw,The Cultic Milieu: Oppositional Subcultures in an Age of Globalization, Rowman Altamira, 2002, ISBN 0-7591-0204-X

This book reflects someone's point of view, but has nothing to do directly with me or my work. Why is this book listed here?

Breitbart, Andrew and Mark C. Ebner, Hollywood, Interrupted: Insanity Chic in Babylon-- the Case Against Celebrity, John Wiley and Sons, 2004, ISBN 0-471-45051-0

This book has a chapter largely based upon an interview with me about groups called "cults" in Hollywood.

Newport, Kenneth G. C. (2006). The Branch Davidians of Waco: the history and beliefs of an apocalyptic sect. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-924574-6.

This book may reflect the point of view of the editor that added it to this reading list, but it has nothing to do directly with my work and is inappropriate to add to this reading list.

Ross, Rick Alan, (2014) Cults Inside Out: How People Get In and Can Get Out. CreateSpace ISBN 13: 978-1497316607

I wrote this book and it explains my work.

Roman Espejo,(2012)Book Editor, Cults; Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press ISBN 13: 978-0737739954

I contributed a chapter to this book titled "Ex-Cult Members Can Be Deprogrammed" p. 165 by Rick Alan Ross.

I have also had papers published in peer-reviewed academic journals in recent years. This would be relevant to further reading.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 20:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

External Links

This section is now empty, but previously had some helpful links, which were apparently deleted.

I suggest the following as helpful external links.

The Cult Education Institute www.culteducation.com

Cult News www.cultnews.com

Cults Inside Out: How People Get In and Can Get Out http://www.amazon.com/Cults-Inside-Out-How-People/dp/149731660X

Rick Alan Ross CV http://culteducation.com/cv.html

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 20:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Jason Scott's lawyer Kendrick Moxon and involvement of Scientology in Scott lawsuit

One of the most important and reported facts about the lawsuit filed against me by Jason Scott is the fact that Jason Scott was represented by Scientology lawyer Kendrick Moxon.

Kendrick Moxon, before becoming a lawyer for Scientology, was a staffer at Scientology's notorious Guardian's Office later known as its Office of Special Affairs (OSA). This is significant because OSA is the office within Scientology delegated to go after and destroy Scientology's perceived enemies. In just such an activity Moxon was named as a co-conspirator, though not indicted, in the federal indictment against Scientology regarding the infamous Scientology program known as "Snow White." This program was ended when federal law enforcement raided Scientology facilities and arrested and prosecuted Scientologists. 11 Scientologists were sentenced to prison terms, including Mary Sue Hubbard, the third wife of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard.

See Moxon named in federal indictmen at http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23185-stipulation-of-evidence-in-the-usa-vs-mary-sue-hubbard-.html#moxon2

More about the serious nature and historical significance of "Snow White."

Also See http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23187-the-thriving-cult-of-greed-and-power-.html

Also see http://www.newtimesslo.com/cover/2628/l-ron-hubbards-last-refuge/

Scientology filed more than 100 lawsuits against my co-defendant in the Scott lawsuit, the Cult Awareness Network, Moxon was involved directly in much of that legal activity.

The following articles report about Moxon and Scientology's involvement in the Jason Scott case.

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/23030-did-scientology-strike-back.html

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5603-what146s-2995-million-between-former-enemies-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/21691-holy-wars-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5595-cults-in-the-courtroom-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/15147-plaintiff-shifts-stance-on-anti-cult-groups.html

http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5592-cult-buster-.html

Scientology lawyers, previous to representing Scott in the civil lawsuit, lobbied the country prosecutor to reopen and pursue criminal charges against me, which had previously been dropped. A jury acquitted me of those charges at trial. Subsequent to that acquittal the same Scientology lawyer, Kendrick Moxon, who sought criminal charges filed a civil lawsuit against me in federal court.

See http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5616-letters-from-scientology-lawyers-to-county-prosecutor.html

Scietology's involvement in the Scott is further supported by the sworn testimony of a former Scientology operative and further supported by Scott's sworn testimony in court.

See http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5598-declaration-of-garry-scarff.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/888-cult-deprogramming/5599-sworn-testimony-of-jason-scott.html

It is a glaring to withhold such information in any account of the Jason Scott civil lawsuit. That is, not to mention Scientology's direct involvement and Moxon, as it is one of the most prominently reported facts about the case.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 13:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Confusion in the fourth paragraph

Currently the fourth paragraph in the bio reads:

In 1993 Ross faced charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming where he held an United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott against his will for five days, but was cleared the following year by jury trial.[4] Ross settled a civil suit with Scott in 1995, causing Ross to file for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him.[5] In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.[6]

This is muddled and confusing not making distinctions regarding the criminal and civil suit in historical order.

I suggest it be changed to read as follows:

In 1993 Ross faced criminal charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming where he held an United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott against his will for five days, but was cleared the following year by jury trial.[4] Jason Scott later filed a civil suit against Ross in federal court. In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Ross filed for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him.[5] Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.[6]

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 15:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Prominent Court Cases Rick Ross

The Scott court case, which concluded almost 20 years ago, is not the only prominent legal case I have been involved in. And the general public knows about me, not because of the Scott case, but rather for my work regarding the Waco Davidians before and during Waco Davidian standoff, my many appearances on local, national and international television, my media work with the local, national and international press and documentary work (14 documentaries) that I have done over the years and the database of the Cult Education Institute initially, which was first launched in 1996.

I question placing a paragraph about the Scott case prominently near top of the bio, in addition to the designated Jason Scott subsection. It seems to me that this gives the Scott case undue weight within this bio.

My work spans some 33 years to date. The Scott criminal and civil court cases are two of the many court cases I have been personally and/or professionally involved in over the years. I have been sued five times unsuccessfully by the Church of Immortal Consciousness (1999), Pure Bride Ministries (2002), NXIVM (2003), Landmark Education (2004), and the Gentle Wind Project (2005).

NXIVM v. Ross injunction was appealed to the United States Supreme Court and the ruling against NXIVM effectively expanded First Amendment rights on the Internet.

See http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1556&context=btlj (NXIVM v. Ross)

NXIVM v. Ross is now cited as an important court decision and precedent.

Other court cases involving groups called "cults" who sued me and lost.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1262-church-of-immortal-consciousness/10390-appeals-response.html (Church of Immortal Consciousness)

See http://www.culteducation.com/group/1256-general-assembly/8368-st-lucie-minister-drops-suit-over-web-site.html (Pure Bride Ministries).

See http://culteducation.com/group/1020-landmark-education/12390-introduction-to-the-landmark-education-litigation-archive.html (Landmark Education)

See http://culteducation.com/group/946-the-gentle-wind-project/8882-judge-web-site-cant-be-sued-for-cult-comment-.html (Gentle Wind Project)

I have been qualified as a court expert witness and testified in about 20 court proceedings within 10 states, including United States Federal Court, after a Daubert hearing.

The federal court case that I testified as an expert witness in California (2008) Noyes v. Kelly Services, Inc No. 2:02-cv-2685-GEB-CMK, ended in a $6.5 million dollar judgement for my client the plaintiff.

See http://culteducation.com/group/927-fellowship-of-friends/7215-kelly-worker-wins-65-million-in-suit-.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/1253-expert-witness/26572-united-states-federal-court.html

I also worked as an expert consultant and potential expert witness in the wrongful death lawsuit Coughlin v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses). This lawsuit was filed in the Sate of Connecticut Superior Court at Milford (CV-00-0072183 S). The case settled for $1.5 million (2005), which was the largest out of court settlement ever paid by Jehovah's Witnesses to any plaintiff known at that time.

See http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/44805/wt-makes-out-court-settlement?page=2

Also see http://www.cultnews.com/2003/03/why-did-jehovahs-witnesses-pay-the-largest-cash-settlement-in-its-history/

In the widely reported criminal prosecution of the so-called "sweat lodge guru" James Arthur Ray, I was retained by the Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk as an expert. I worked with the prosecution team, which ultimately convicted Ray of three counts of negligent homicide. I was qualified and accepted as an expert witness in the case, despite the considerable efforts of Ray's legal team to have me disqualified. I never testified in court as a witness, but was thanked by the prosecution officially for my help in the case (letter from Prosecutor Sheila Polk dated December 20, 20111).

See http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10567-james-arthur-ray-gets-prison-time-in-sweat-lodge-deaths.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

I was also presented with a United States Department of Justice citation signed by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III (April 2011) for my "outstanding assistance to the FBI in connection with its investigative efforts" regarding cyber attacks launched on the Web against numerous websites by Bruce Raisley. Raisley attacked the website servers of Corrupted Justice, music magazine Rolling Stone, Carnegie Mellon University and the Rick Ross Institute (now known as the Cult Education Institute). I testified as a fact witness at Raisley's trial. It was through my cooperation with the FBI that Raisley was identified, arrested, ultimately to be convicted at trial and sentenced to prison.

See http://www.culteducation.com/group/1256-general-assembly/7927-local-man-indicted-on-federal-cyber-attack-charges.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/907-nxivm/15893-bruce-raisleys-appeal-of-his-computer-fraud-conviction-denied-by-united-states-court-of-appeals-third-circuit.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

Hi Mr. Ross,

Saw this popping up on my watchlist, will take some time to look in to, hope for some help from other editors too. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

• Re. suggestions at #Further Reading above: the books authored by Rick Alan Ross could also go in a separate section called "Writings" or something like that. Don't know if any info is available on how these writings were received (by the press, by oponents, etc.)? --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
• Stumbled on this one: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology#Rick Alan Ross instructed and restricted: "User:Rick Alan Ross is requested to contact the Arbitration Committee by email to establish his identity or to rename; instructed to not edit using anonymous IP addresses; and restricted to one account only with his other named account, User:Rick A. Ross, indefinitely blocked and redirected to the main account." – Is this cleared? Need any assistance regarding this? --Francis Schonken (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
• Question regarding page name: the article title is currently Rick Ross (consultant), seems the subject rather self-identifies as Rick Alan Ross. Don't know how the person is best known or usually referred to in third party sources: the version with the middle name or just "Rick Ross"? In the first case I'd change the article title to Rick Alan Ross. --Francis Schonken (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I was specifically told by the Wikipedia Support team to post my concerns and suggestions here at the Talk Page.I use the name Rick Alan Ross now because of the rapper Rick Ross. For the same reason the name of the Ross Institute and domain name entry point was changed from rickross.com to culteducation.com.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

• Re. Support team: the current support team may be unaware of the 2009 ArbCom remedy. I go from the assumption the situation is cleared. If doubts I would take it up at WP:ARCA, to get it rubber stamped or whatever the analogy. For me the only important thing is that "IP 173.72.57.223" identifies with "Rick Alan Ross" in real life and that this is clear henceforth.
• Re. page name of the biographical article: if everyone is OK with Rick Ross (consultant) for the time being I would keep it that way, once the Rick Alan Ross page name would become more opportune, the issue can be raised again here, and we can take it from there. --Francis Schonken (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully something will be done to make this bio less biased and more neutral. I have posted several section related comments with supporting links to articles and documents.

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 23:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Started with the easier ones (further reading, external links), but intend to look into the other issues too. Others may join. Anyway, I'm off-line for some hours now (real life etc.) --Francis Schonken (talk) 23:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 14:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify as the OTRS team member who referred this here, I was unaware of any ARBCOM involvement - however if there is background, it's probably best to comply with what they say, just to prevent further issues. Mdann52 (talk) 17:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Scott

• Suggestions regarding last paragraph of intro (see #Confusion in the fourth paragraph above):

The paragraph currently reads:

---

In 1993 Ross faced charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming where he held an United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott against his will for five days, but was cleared the following year by jury trial. Ross settled a civil suit with Scott in 1995, causing Ross to file for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him. In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.

---

Rick Allen Ross proposes to replace by the following (retaining links and refs):

---

In 1993 Ross faced criminal charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming where he held an United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott against his will for five days, but was cleared the following year by jury trial. Jason Scott later filed a civil suit against Ross in federal court. In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Ross filed for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him. Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.

---

References

Concerns:

1. Are the references still OK? I mean, do they cover the content of the sentences to which they are appended? And/or are additional references needed?
2. Doesn't this take too much space in the lede of the article? I mean, the case is apparently significant (it has a separate article, i.e. Jason Scott case) but isn't it nonetheless overemphasised in the lede?

--Francis Schonken (talk) 07:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

FYI--I have never used the name "Rick Allen Ross" my name is Rick Alan Ross. I recall Scientology using the middle name spelled "Allen," but I never have.

The paragraph about Jason Scott should appear at Jason Scott Deprogramming section. The following is the only other NPOV relevant historical information that section contains.

"As a result of the legal risks involved, Ross stopped advocating coercive deprogramming or involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary exit counseling without the use of force or restraint.[52] He states that despite refinement of processes over the years, exit counseling and deprogramming continue to depend on the same principles.[52]"

All the rest of the current Jason Scott Deprogramming section is unnecessary and/or POV expressed by biased sources. Please consider editing this NPOV and condensing it.

I would also appreciate a review of the other points and references I noted at this Talk Page for review and potential further editing.

Thank You,

Rick Alan Ross 173.72.57.223 (talk) 18:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

To be precise and correct the paragraph might read as follows:

In 1993 Ross faced criminal charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming of United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott, but was found "not guilty" by the jury at trial.[1] Jason Scott later filed a civil suit against Ross in federal court. In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Ross filed for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him.[4] Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.[5] As a result of the legal risks involved, Ross stopped advocating coercive deprogramming or involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary exit counseling without the use of force or restraint.[52] He states that despite refinement of processes over the years, cult intervention work continues to depend on the same basic principles originated through deprogramming.[52]

This sums up the Scott deprogramming case in one paragraph, which should appear only at the Jason Scott Deprogramming section. It' NPOV and fact based rather than relying upon the sensationalized POV and characterizations of biased sources.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 18:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Combined:

(1) Last paragraph of intro

---

The approach originally called deprogramming was refined over the years, for which the Jason Scott case in the mid 1990s was a turning point.

(or:)

After the Jason Scott case in the mid 1990s Ross no longer advocated coercive deprogramming.

(or:)

Coercive deprogramming evolved into voluntary exit counseling, to which the Jason Scott case in the mid 1990s was instrumental.

(or:)

In the mid 1990s Ross left the coercive deprogramming approach in favour of voluntary exit counseling, to which his conviction in the Jason Scott case was instrumental.

(or:)

Convicted in the Jason Scott case, Ross left the coercive deprogramming approach in favour of voluntary exit counseling in the mid 1990s.

I was not "convicted" in the Jaason Scott case. A conviction occurs in a criminal case. In the criminal case I was found not guilty. I lost the civil lawsuit.

Correctly the sentence would read:

After losing in a lawsuit filed against him, the Jason Scott case (1995), Ross stopped doing involuntary interventions with adults.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 16:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

---

(2) Section "Jason Scott deprogramming"

---

Main article: Jason Scott case

In 1993 Ross faced criminal charges over a 1991 forcible deprogramming of United Pentecostal Church International member Jason Scott, but was found "not guilty" by the jury at trial. Jason Scott later filed a civil suit against Ross in federal court. In September 1995, a nine-member jury unanimously held Ross and other defendants in the case liable for negligence and conspiracy to deprive Scott of his civil rights and religious liberties. Ross filed for personal bankruptcy because of the $2,500,000 in punitive damages awarded against him. Scott later reconciled with his mother, who had originally hired Ross to deprogram him, and was persuaded by her to settle with Ross; under the terms of the settlement, the two agreed that Ross would pay Scott $5000 and provide 200 hours of his professional services.

As a result of the legal risks involved, Ross stopped advocating coercive deprogramming or involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary exit counseling without the use of force or restraint. He states that despite refinement of processes over the years, cult intervention work continues to depend on the same basic principles originated through deprogramming.

---

References

--Francis Schonken (talk) 06:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Re [1] – I don't think this is an improvement. The impact on the approach (coercive deprogramming → voluntary counceling) seems to me to be rather caused by it being a "conviction" rather than because it was a "civil court" case. --Francis Schonken (talk) 08:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

• this edit removed the Jason Scott case link from the lede. I'm not in agreement with that. --Francis Schonken (talk) 06:10, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Early convictions

• Re. suggestions regarding crimes committed in Ross's early twenties, in #Early Life above:

Replace (second paragraph in Rick Ross (consultant)#Early life):

---

In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and sentenced to probation.. The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime and received five years probation.

---

by:

---

In his early twenties Ross ran into justice twice, once for attempted burgulary, and once for the embezzlement of property. In 1983 Ross was vacated of guilt for both cases, and his civil rights were restored.

---

References

I don't believe the choice is either to omit this or otherwise go in excessive detail: an acceptable summary should work. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

What about the following:

In 1974 Ross was convicted for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and subsequently in 1975 he was again convicted for conspiracy to commit grand theft by embezzlement. Ross confessed to these crimes, made restitution and was sentenced to probation, which was terminated early in 1979. Both judgements of guilt were later vacated and Ross' civil rights restored by court order in 1983.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 15:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Would prefer somewhat shorter. Maybe also get rid of rather technical juridical terms like "vacated", which may be a bit above the heads of a general readership. --Francis Schonken (talk) 08:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think vacate is difficult to understand. Other words commonly used are expunged or voided. Vacate is the most precise word and matches the wording of the court order.

How about this?

In 1974, at the age of 21, Ross was convicted for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home. In 1975 he was again convicted for conspiracy to commit grand theft by embezzlement. Ross confessed to these crimes, made full restitution and was sentenced to probation, which was terminated early in 1979. Both judgements of guilt were later vacated or removed by court order and Ross' civil rights were restored in 1983.

FYI--At the time of sentencing for the grand theft charge both the police and jewelry store company representatives attended. They advised the judge that they did not oppose probation. The store was satisfied by the full restitution made. That is, everything I had in my possession was returned to their satisfaction.

I am not a licensed counselor and do not do counseling. In my opinion and in the opinion of others in the field of cultic studies, intervention and counseling cannot be done ethically at the same time and represent a conflict of interest and potential violation of professional ethics. This is all detailed in my book "Cults Inside Out: How People Get In and Can Get Out" and also in my published academic journal paper "Deprogramming: An Examination of the Intervention Process," which explains that my approach is educational, based upon the sharing of information and discussion about that information. This is not counseling. Counseling requires informed consent per licensing and board requirements. Cult interventions, much like drug or alcohol interventions, occur as a surprise. Historically, cult intervention work has been based upon an educational model and not a counseling approach. That is why I prefer the title cult intervention specialist or consultant as opposed to "exit counselor," which was briefly in vogue during the early 1990s and later abandoned.

The sentences "After the civil verdict in the Jason Scott case Ross stopped coercive interventions for adults in the mid 1990s, in favour of voluntary exit counseling." would accurately read--

After the civil verdict in the Jason Scott case (1995) Ross stopped involuntary interventions with adults, in favor of voluntary interventions.

Likewise the opening sentence would accurately read -- Rick Alan Ross (born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross) works as a consultant, lecturer, court expert witness and intervention specialist, with a focus on what has been described as "deprogramming" of those belonging to groups called "cults."

This makes it as NPOV as possible and accurate.

I do quite a bit of cult expert witness work and much media work. In fact most people know me through television, documentaries, news reports in the press, print media and online publications. I have probably done more work with the media than any other living person engaged in cultic studies. And I have been qualified, accepted and testified in more court proceedings in 10 states, including US Federal Court, than almost any other court qualified on the subject of groups called "cults," other than Gordon Melton, who has testified to defend such groups. This has included expert witness testimony in hi-profile cases. I have also worked extensively with law enforcement, governmental agencies and lectured at the college and university level across the US and in Asia. My book has been published in Chinese. The Cult Education Institute, formerly known as the Ross Institute, is one of the oldest and most utilized research database resources on the Web concerning controversial groups and movements. It's been online since 1996. These are the things the public actually knows me for, though my Wikipeida bio appears to minimize and obscure much of my work, or give it as little weight as possible. It seems to me that this was the intent of anonymous editors that worked on my bio in the past.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 15:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

...hence my proposal to reduce the amount of space devoted to the early convictions, not amplify it as also the second proposal by Rick Ross does.

Re. "civil verdict", again the important point imho is not to qualify the verdict as "civil" vs. whatever, but as a "conviction", the change in approach (involuntary → voluntary) followed from it being a conviction, not from it being civil or criminal.

The other points deserve attention too, will try to address one at a time.

Something that bugs me: "born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross" in the intro vs. "adopted by Paul and Ethel Ross in Cleveland, Ohio in 1953" in Rick Ross (consultant)#Early life (my bolding). Is there a story behind this or just inaccurracy? --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I was born November 24, 1952, but adopted 10 months later by Paul and Ethel Ross in Cleveland, Ohio. In 1956 my parents moved the family to Phoenix, Arizona, where I stayed until 2001. In 2001 I moved to New Jersey, first to Jersey City and now I live in Trenton. The name of my birth certificate is Ricky Alan Ross, but beginning as a teenager my name is Rick Alan Ross. That's what it says on High School diploma, passport, driver's license, etc. For some reason the court in my court papers regarding vacating the guilty judgments, the name is Ricky Allan Ross. But I have never spelled my middle name with more than one L.

If Wikipedia is going to include information about my 40-year-old criminal record the three sentences I have suggested are not an amplification, but rather a historical clarification. The court record reads accordingly and unless the point is to make my record look as bad as possible for propaganda purposes, explaining it fully in three sentences is the correct, complete and factual NPOV.

Again, there was never any conviction regarding the Jason Scott case. The jury in the criminal case found me not guilty after only two hours of deliberation. I was completely exonerated. The word "conviction" is associated with a criminal case not civil lawsuit. In a civil lawsuit there is a verdict and there is a civil judgement, but there is never a conviction. To use the word conviction implies that there was a criminal conviction, which is false.

My decision to stop doing involuntary interventions with adults actually ceased before the Scott case was resolved. I did a handful of involuntary interventions with adults, about a dozen in total before I stopped. The Scott case motivated me to stop because I could not afford to be in court endlessly and the expense bankrupted me. I realized it was not realistic for me to continue. But I have deep sympathy for the families that I helped and other families that are suffering due to cults. I have done 500 interventions from 1982 to present. My book recounts 88 between the years of 2006-2014. Some of them were involuntary interventions of minor children under the direct supervision of their legal guardian. So I continue to do involuntary interventions, but not with adults.

If this is to be a factual bio and NPOV it's important to get the facts straight and be balanced. Right now this bio is far from that and editors here have deliberately used misleading words, withheld information and generally twisted this bio to make me look as bad as possible.

In the United States when the presiding court, Maricopa County Superior Court in my case, vacates guilty verdicts and expunges them, they do so because the person has proven to be a good citizen and has earned the respect of the court. The only further action that can be done in such a matter is an official full pardon from the Governor of Arizona. This would be the equivalent of a Presidential pardon if someone was previously convicted of a federal crime. The fact that my convictions were vacated is quite significant. The fact that full restitution was made is also quite significant and a factor. The fact the grand theft conviction was not simply a robbery is important because the word robbed implies the possibility of a weapon, violent crime or jewel heist, which was not the case. The fact that the burglary involved a vacant model home is important as well because this means no one's home was burglarized and no one was in residence that might have been hurt. The fact that my probation was terminated early for good behavior is also relevant and laid the foundation for the court to later vacate the guilty verdicts. The fact that the Arizona Department of Corrections allowed me to be the Chairman of its religious advisory committee is significant because it requires a security clearance to enter prisons.

Whoever constructed what is up now wanted to leave out key facts to make me seem as bad as possible. That's their POV and purpose in editing here. It's called propaganda not an research resource or online encyclopedia.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Rick, these walls of text are not helpful. Would you please propose specfic changes, with sourcing? The best thing to do would be to propose it like this: Please change "bla bla bla" to "bla bla bal"(ref). One thing at at time. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

request 1

Please change "After the civil verdict in the Jason Scott case Ross stopped coercive interventions for adults in the mid 1990s, in favour of voluntary exit counseling" to After the civil verdict in the Jason Scott case (1995) Ross stopped involuntary interventions for adults in favor of voluntary interventions.

Source documents have been previously linked and cited.

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I take it that this is the content in the lead, that you want to change. That content is based on content in the body in Rick_Ross_(consultant)#Jason_Scott_deprogramming that says:

As a result of the legal risks involved, Ross stopped advocating coercive deprogramming or involuntary interventions for adults, preferring instead voluntary exit counseling without the use of force or restraint. He states that despite refinement of processes over the years, cult intervention work continues to depend on the same basic principles originated through deprogramming.

References

SO - there are multiple things going on here. First of all, the source in the body no where says 1995 nor even ties stopping involuntary interventions to the Jason Scott case - there is no date or chronology at all in that source. So the proposed change is not OK, and even the existing content in the lead is not OK. For now I am changing the lead to simply read "Due to the legal risks, Ross stopped conducting coercive interventions for adults, in favour of voluntary exit counseling".

 Not done with respect to naming a date. Question to Rick - are you aware of a reliable source that says when you stopped doing coercive interventions? Jytdog (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I actually stopped before the civil lawsuit verdict. That verdict certainly reinforced that decision.

See http://culteducation.com/group/1300-q-amp-a-brainwashed-rick-ross-talks-about-deprogramming-members-of-religious-cultss.html Interview 1995

See https://web.archive.org/web/19980429001130/http://rickross.com/

This documents my statements about involuntary vs. voluntary interventions at my website regarding adults and minor children going back to 1998. This was posted earlier, but I cannot access back any further through Internet Archives.

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/1301-national-religious-cult-expert-who-gained-local-attention-has-own-web-site-nows.html

"Ross has been fighting a long and costly legal battle stemming from a forcible deprogramming he did in the early 1990s. He no longer does such forcible deprogramming, but only works with willing adults, or minors with the approval of their parents or guardians,"

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/10412-rick-ross-interview-with-hurontaria.html

Also see http://culteducation.com/group/13381-hell-fire.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

NO I am a volunteer here and I took probably three hours out of my life last night dealing with your slew of requests. I don't mind helping but you are becoming abusive now. I will say this again - please offer concrete suggestions for content with actual sourcing. Any change you want to make needs to be strictly supported by the source you provide - do not waste my time trying to add puffery.. Please use independent sourcing and not anything from from your website. Please write concisely. I don't care about anything other than the exact change you want to make and the sources for it and neither does anybody else here. So be concise. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Also, it appears to me that some of documents you link to that are hosted on culteducation.com may violate copyright - you have copy/pastes from Willamette Week, FHM Magazine, etc. in links above. Wikipedia has strict rules about copyright and we cannot provide a link to a site that may be violating copyright. please do not post any more links here that may violate copyright. I will remove future links you post that appear to be copy/pasted from copyrighted sources and do not have a clear copyright release on them. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 18:25, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Many of the articles archived within the Cult Education Institute (CEI) database are not otherwise available on the Web. That is in part why the CEI archive exists. Much like the Internet Archives, which allows for the storage of many articles and documents that would not otherwise be available. CEI and Internet Archive are both online educational nonprofit libraries.

We are going back 20 years. Are you insisting that I go to a public library, physically go through the periodicals and hopefully find the specific articles archived at CEI or Internet Archives within a some paper stack and then create a PDF document for you to review? The Way Back Machine is an independent source. Hurontaria is likewise not online and may have closed. Many magazine sources from 20 years ago and newspapers have gone out of business or don't maintain extensive archives.

The FHM article likewise is not otherwise online.

See http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Bridget-Freer/53258046

The Reporter has referred people to the former Ross Institute site (now the CEI database) to read her work.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

1) i will repeat this - do not post links here that violate copyright. the reason you want to violate copyright does not matter. just don't do it.

2) you can post a useable citation here without a link. There are databases like lexisnexis where editors can find and read articles that are not otherwise online.

thanks Jytdog (talk) 10:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

request 2

Please change "In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and sentenced to probation.[3] The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime and received five years probation.[3]" to In 1974 Ross was convicted for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and subsequently in 1975 he was again convicted for conspiracy to commit grand theft. Ross confessed to these crimes, made restitution and was sentenced to probation, which was terminated early in 1979. Both judgements of guilt were later vacated and Ross' civil rights restored by court order in 1983.

Source documents have been previously linked and cited.

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

the original content said:

In 1974 at the age of 21, Ross was convicted of the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and sentenced to probation. The following year, he robbed a jewelry store in Phoenix. Ross confessed to the crime and received five years probation.

References

The proposed first sentence is fine and is supported by the source;

the second sentence is unsourced.  Not done. Question to Rick: What is the reliable source for: "Ross confessed to these crimes, made restitution and was sentenced to probation, which was terminated early in 1979. Both judgements of guilt were later vacated and Ross' civil rights restored by court order in 1983." That is not in the Guardian source. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review the following article and legal documents:

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/hush-hush-sweet-charlatans-6426159

"Some of the pieces his partner had taken had been melted down, but everything in Ross' possession was returned to the store. Ross was sentenced to four years' probation."

http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23617-rick-ross-termination-of-probation-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23616-rick-ross-application-for-restoration-of-civil-rights-.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

We cannot use documents from your website for any of this. See WP:BLPSPS. The ortega source supports a change from 5 years probation to 4 years for the jewelry store thing. I will make that change. Jytdog (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I have posted PDF images of the actual documents. All the pertinent court information is there. Do I have to fax you the document or email an PDF to someone at Wikipedia. The documents were issued by the probation department and court in Arizona.

In the article by Tony Ortega he reports, "Some of the pieces his partner had taken had been melted down, but everything in Ross' possession was returned to the store. Ross was sentenced to four years' probation." It is understood that I must have confessed to the crime before returning everything to the store through the authorities.

Please either don't include my criminal record from 1974-1975 or include the complete record. A previous editor very selectively chose to include only part of my record, the worst part.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

request 3

Please change "In 1986 Ross left the staff of the JFCS and BJE to become a full-time private consultant and deprogrammer.[3][4] and worked as a Cult Awareness Network-associated deprogrammer."

To -- In 1986 Ross left the staff of the JFCS and BJE to become a full-time private consultant and deprogrammer.[3][4] He attended conferences and was a supporter of the Cult Awareness Network.

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 21:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

the original content said:

In 1986 Ross left the staff of the JFCS and BJE to become a full-time private consultant and deprogrammer. and worked as a Cult Awareness Network-associated deprogrammer.

References

and (saving) Jytdog (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, what the Guardian actually says here, is "before striking out in 1986 as a private consultant and deprogrammer ". It does not mention going to conferences nor the "Cult Awareness Network" (at all). The Bio says "In 1986 Ross left the staff of JFCS to become a full-time private consultant, lecturer and cult intervention specialist.". It does not mention going to conferences nor the "Cult Awareness Network" (at all). The proposed content is not supported by sources. Note: for now I am removing the content after the sources in the original content.

I am not making any other change. Question to Rick: if you want some content about Cult Action Network here, please provide a reliable source describing your involvement with them after 1986. Jytdog (talk) 22:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done added content with source Jytdog (talk) 01:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

request 4

Please change "Rick Alan Ross (born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross) works as a consultant, lecturer, and intervention specialist, with a focus on exit counseling and deprogramming of those belonging to cults. He runs a blog called Cult News[1] and in 2003 founded the Rick A. Ross Institute (later to be renamed the Cult Education Institute), which maintains a database of court documents, essays, and press articles on groups and individuals that have attracted controversy.[2]"

To -- Rick Alan Ross (born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross) is well known expert regarding controversial groups called "cults." Ross is often quoted by the national and international media and has been qualified and testified as a court expert witness. Ross works as a consultant, lecturer, and intervention specialist, with a focus cult deprogramming. He is the founder and executive director of the Cult Education Institute, formerly known as the Ross Institute of New Jersey, which is an online database of court documents, research papers and press reports about groups and individuals that have attracted controversy.[2]

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Original content in LEAD is

Rick Alan Ross (born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross) works as a consultant, lecturer, and intervention specialist, with a focus on exit counseling and deprogramming of those belonging to cults. He runs a blog called Cult News and in 2003 founded the Rick A. Ross Institute (later to be renamed the Cult Education Institute), which maintains a database of court documents, essays, and press articles on groups and individuals that have attracted controversy.

References

Jytdog (talk) 23:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Breaking down requested change:

• sentence 1: Rick Alan Ross (born 1952 as Ricky Alan Ross) is well known expert regarding controversial groups called "cults."
• sentence 2: Ross is often quoted by the national and international media and has been qualified and testified as a court expert witness.
• sentence 3: Ross works as a consultant, lecturer, and intervention specialist, with a focus cult deprogramming.
• sentence 4: He is the founder and executive director of the Cult Education Institute, formerly known as the Ross Institute of New Jersey, which is an online database of court documents, research papers and press reports about groups and individuals that have attracted controversy.

OK

• sentence 1 - change here is not to meaning but to add puffery.  Not done. please do not waste time with things like this.
• sentence 2 - change here is not in any independent sources.  Not done
• sentence 3: no change
• sentence 4: This seems OK.  Done

note - I am adding an instance of the Guardian source to the first sentence, since both sources 1 and 2 are WP:SPS. Also, no reason was given for deleting the blog, so I left that in. Jytdog (talk) 23:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review the following:

http://culteducation.com/cv.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1253-expert-witness/26572-united-states-federal-court.html

http://culteducation.com/group/927-fellowship-of-friends/7215-kelly-worker-wins-65-million-in-suit-.html

http://culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/02-08-2011-RESPONSE-TO-MOTION2.pdf

http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

none of those sources are independent. Cannot use them. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

The PDF document if an actual court document and was filed by the prosecution in the James Ray case. The document cites my experience, including my expert testimony in United States Federal Court, after a Daubert hearing, which is quite significant.

See http://www.albuquerquejournal.com/news/state/apsweatlodgeross02-28-11.htm

I was able to find the Associated Press article elsewhere online.

See http://ced.blr.com/2008/06/religious-discrimination-employee-wins-6-5-million-jury-verdict-because-of-manager-s-favoritism-lessons-for-employers/#

I was able to find this report about the federal lawsuit judgement of 6.5 million in US Federal Court in California. I testified as an expert witness in this case at trial, after a Daubert hearing.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

added "expert witness" to first sentence. it is well supported in the body of the article. i think this request is done. Jytdog (talk) 11:35, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

request 5

Please change "In 1996 Ross started a website titled "The Ross Institute Internet Archives for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups and Movements".[34] Ross has lectured at the University of Pennsylvania, University of Chicago and University of Arizona,[35] and has testified as an expert witness in court cases.[3] According to the biography page on his website he has worked as a paid consultant for television networks CBS, CBC and Nippon, and Miramax/Disney retained him as a technical consultant to one of the actors involved in making Jane Campion's film Holy Smoke!.[4]"

To -- In 1996 Ross launched a website rickross.com, which later became "The Ross Institute Internet Archives for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups and Movements" and is now the Cult Education Intitute, an institutional member of the American and New Jersey Library Associations.[34] Ross has lectured at many universities and colleges including the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Baylor University, University of Chicago and University of Arizona,[35]. He has been qualified and testified frequently as an expert witness in court proceedings concerning groups called "cults."[3] He also worked for Miramax/Disney retained as a technical consultant to one of the actor Harvey Keitel for the Jane Campion film "Holy Smoke."[4]

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:24, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

original content with sources:

In 1996 Ross started a website titled "The Ross Institute Internet Archives for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups and Movements". Ross has lectured at the University of Pennsylvania, University of Chicago and University of Arizona, and has testified as an expert witness in court cases. According to the biography page on his website he has worked as a paid consultant for television networks CBS, CBC and Nippon, and Miramax/Disney retained him as a technical consultant to one of the actors involved in making Jane Campion's film Holy Smoke!.

References

Jytdog (talk) 23:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

proposed changes:

• sentence 1: "In 1996 Ross launched a website rickross.com, which later became "The Ross Institute Internet Archives for the Study of Destructive Cults, Controversial Groups and Movements" and is now the Cult Education Intitute, an institutional member of the American and New Jersey Library Associations" Did most of this.
• sentence 2: "Ross has lectured at many universities and colleges including the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Baylor University, University of Chicago and University of Arizona,"  Not done no support in source for Baylor.
• sentence 3: "He has been qualified and testified frequently as an expert witness in court proceedings concerning groups called "cults.  Not done Rick - what is the source for this statement?
• sentence 4: "He also worked for Miramax/Disney retained as a technical consultant to one of the actor Harvey Keitel for the Jane Campion film "Holy Smoke." no change Jytdog (talk) 23:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review the following court document.

http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review the following:

http://culteducation.com/cv.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1253-expert-witness/26572-united-states-federal-court.html

http://culteducation.com/group/927-fellowship-of-friends/7215-kelly-worker-wins-65-million-in-suit-.html

http://culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/02-08-2011-RESPONSE-TO-MOTION2.pdf

http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

none of those sources are independent. Cannot use them. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please see the PDF document, which is part of the court record in the James Arthur Ray case, which cites my expert witness work and experience.

The filing states, "Mr. Ross has studied cults and the persuasive techniques used by cults for 25 years. Mr. Ross previously testified as an expert in the court of (10) states, as well as qualifying in 2008 as an expert in religious cults and persuasion following a Daubert hearing in a federal trial court in California. Mr. Ross has published articles on cults and coercive persuasion, has lectured at numerous universities, including the University of Chicago, Baylor University and the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Ross has been cited or interviewed as an expert on numerous local, national and international new outlets."

Also see http://gothamist.com/2005/07/18/rick_ross_cult_expert.php

Also see http://www.cbsnews.com/news/leaving-endeavor-academy/ (cult expert analyst for CBS News).

See http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/may/27/cults-definition-religion (published piece in the Guardian).

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

added Gothamist and CBS sources. no change in content Jytdog (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

request 6

Pleas change "Ross has worked as an expert court witness and as an analyst for the media in cases relating to such groups.[3] His work deprogramming a 14 year old Potter's House Christian Fellowship member was covered in a 1989 edition of the American TV series 48 hours.

To -- Ross has appeared in 14 documentaries and testified as an expert witness in court proceedings in ten states, including United States Federal Court subsequent to a Daubert hearing.[3] His work deprogramming a 14-year-old member of the controversial Potter's House Christian Fellowship was featured in a 1989 episode of the American TV series "48 hours." Ross deprogrammed two members of the notorious Waco Davidian sect led by David Koresh and was a paid professional analyst for the Dallas affiliate of CBS News during the Waco Davidian standoff. He has also worked as a paid consultant for CBC of Canada, Nippon and Ashai networks of Japan.

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done. the source here is the beyond belief guardian source. None of this new content is in that source. Rick - above I asked you to provide proposed changes with sourcing. Please do so going forward for any new content you propose. thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review the following:

http://culteducation.com/cv.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1253-expert-witness/26572-united-states-federal-court.html

http://culteducation.com/group/927-fellowship-of-friends/7215-kelly-worker-wins-65-million-in-suit-.html

http://culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/02-08-2011-RESPONSE-TO-MOTION2.pdf

http://culteducation.com/group/997-james-arthur-ray/10638-group-expert-can-testify-in-ariz-sweat-lodge-case.html

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

none of those sources are independent. Cannot use them. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please change "Ross has worked as an expert court witness and as an analyst for the media in cases relating to such groups.[3] His work deprogramming a 14 year old Potter's House Christian Fellowship member was covered in a 1989 edition of the American TV series 48 hours."

Ross has studied cults and the persuasive techniques used by cults for more than 30 years. He has testified as an expert in the court of (10) states, as well as qualifying in 2008 as an expert in religious cults and persuasion following a Daubert hearing in a federal trial court in California. Ross has published articles on cults and coercive persuasion, has lectured at numerous universities, including the University of Chicago, Baylor Universit, Arizona State University and the University of Pennsylvania. Ross has been cited or interviewed as an expert on numerous local, national and international new outlets. His work deprogramming a 14-year-old member of the controversial Potter's House Christian Fellowship was featured in a 1989 episode of the American TV series "48 hours." Ross deprogrammed two members of the Waco Davidian sect led by David Koresh and was a paid professional analyst for the Dallas affiliate of CBS News during the Waco Davidian standoff. He has also worked as an expert analyst for CBS National News.

See the following:

Also see http://gothamist.com/2005/07/18/rick_ross_cult_expert.php

Also see http://www.cbsnews.com/news/leaving-endeavor-academy/ (cult expert analyst for CBS News).

See http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/may/27/cults-definition-religion (published piece in the Guardian).

See http://www.albuquerquejournal.com/news/state/apsweatlodgeross02-28-11.htm

See http://ced.blr.com/2008/06/religious-discrimination-employee-wins-6-5-million-jury-verdict-because-of-manager-s-favoritism-lessons-for-employers/#

See http://culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/02-08-2011-RESPONSE-TO-MOTION2.pdf (court document)

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

The source about the discrimination case does not even mention your name. None of these sources say anything about "10 states". Stop wasting my time with requests for unsupported, promotional content. Going forward, please provide proposals one sentence at a time with a source that provides explicit support for everything in the sentence I will respond very briefly to future requests like this one, with a simple  Not done. Jytdog (talk) 11:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The point of the article about the $6.5 million dollar judgement, is the weight and importance of the case. I have specifically linked a court document filed by the prosecution in the State v. James Arthur Ray (PDF of document in court record). I have also provided you with a copy of the judge's finding regarding my expert testimony in Noyes v. Kelly. Both were very prominent cases. Also NXIVM v. Ross created a court precedent regarding freedom of speech online. Coughlin v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society $1.5 million dollar settlement is one of the largest if not the largest out of court settlements paid by Jehovah's Witnesses. These important legal cases with considerable weight. If you are going to cite the Scott case why not cite other court cases I have been involved in more recently? Also the five court cases that involved groups called "cults" suing me, in which the cults lost.

Church of Immoral Consciousness

See Phoenix Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlatans – Phoenix New Times (Tony Ortega reports about lawsuit)

See http://culteducation.com/group/1262-church-of-immortal-consciousness/10390-appeals-response.html (final response to appeal after I won in court)

Pure Bride Ministries

Chapman, Kathleen, (February 22, 2002) "St. Lucie Minister Drops Suit Over Web Site," Palm Beach Post

Gentle Wind Project

Kesich, Gregory D., (January 11, 2005)"Judge: Web site can't be sued for 'cult' comment," Portland Press Herald)Ultimately as the direct result of litigation the Gentle Wind Project was effectively shut down by the Attorney General of Maine.

See http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/clinical/gwp

Landmark Education

http://culteducation.com/group/1020-landmark-education/12390-introduction-to-the-landmark-education-litigation-archive.html This introduction by lawyers from the law firm Lowenstein Sandler puts into context through court documents the lawsuit against me, which Landmark dismissed. Historically, this may be the only time that the litigious company dismissed one of its own lawsuits.

NXIVM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NXIVM_Corp._v._Ross_Institute

Also see http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1556&context=btlj

All of these court cases had an affect on the issue of freedom of speech online through the Web. The Cult Education Institute and I have been targeted, harassed etc. by various angry cult members for this very reason, including here at Wikipedia.

Why give special consideration and weight only to the Jason Scott case?

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

request 7

Please change "In 1992 and 1993, Ross opposed actions of the Branch Davidian group led by David Koresh in Waco, Texas.[18] Ross had previously deprogrammed a member of the group.[19][20] Ross was the only deprogrammer to work with Branch Davidian members prior to a siege involving the death of many of the group's members at Waco.[21] Television broadcaster CBS hired Ross as an on-scene analyst for their coverage of the Waco siege.[3] Ross also offered unsolicited advice to the FBI during the standoff.[20] A later Department of Justice report on the matter stated that "the FBI did not 'rely' on Ross for advice whatsoever during the standoff."[20] According to the report, the FBI "politely declined his unsolicited offers of assistance throughout the standoff" and treated the information Ross supplied as it would any other unsolicited information received from the public.[20] Criticism of government agencies' involvement with Ross has come from Nancy Ammerman, a professor of sociology of religion, who cited FBI interview notes which stated that Ross "has a personal hatred for all religious cults." She claimed that the BATF and the FBI did rely on Ross when he recommended that agents "attempt to publicly humiliate Koresh, hoping to drive a wedge between him and his followers." She criticized them for doing so and ignoring the "wider social sciences community".[22][23][24] Other scholars also criticized Ross' involvement.[19][22][25][26][27][28] Ross characterized his critics as cult apologists who held the belief that cult groups "should not be held accountable for their action like others within our society".[29]"

To -- In 1992 and 1993, Ross helped to expose the destructive and abusive behavior of David Koresh, leader of the Branch Davidian sect in Waco, Texas.[18] Ross had previously deprogrammed a member of the group.[19][20] Ross was the only cult deprogrammer to work with Branch Davidian members prior to the Waco Davidan standoff.[21] CBS hired Ross as an analyst for their coverage of the Waco standoff.[3] According to the Department of Justice report "the FBI did not 'rely' on Ross for advice whatsoever during the standoff."[20] According to that report, the FBI "politely declined his unsolicited offers of assistance throughout the standoff"[20] Ross contested that account and claimed that the FBI had solicited his advice and that two agents of the FBI were assigned to him during the standoff. Criticism of government agencies' involvement with Ross came from from Nancy Ammerman, a professor of sociology of religion, who cited FBI interview notes.[22][23][24] Other scholars also criticized Ross' involvement.[19][22][25][26][27][28] Ross characterized Ammerman and other academic critics as "cult apologists" who held the belief that cult groups "should not be held accountable for their action like others within our society".[29]

See previously linked letters and published statements under Waco.

Rick Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 22:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done the changes here are not sourced and violate NPOV. Jytdog (talk) 00:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please change "According to the report, the FBI "politely declined his unsolicited offers of assistance throughout the standoff" and treated the information Ross supplied as it would any other unsolicited information received from the public.[22]"

To According to the report, the FBI "politely declined his unsolicited offers of assistance throughout the standoff" and stated that it treated the information Ross supplied as it would any other unsolicited information received from the public.[22] Ross contested the Department of Justice Report and stated that the FBI had requested his assistance and consulted him.

See the following documents online:

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24063-davidian-tragedy-letters-re-attorney-general-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24392-davidian-tragedy-letter-to-jo-ann-farrington-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24174-davidian-tragedy-letter-from-united-states-senate-to-rick-ross-dated-november-19-1993-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1220-waco-davidians/24284-letters-to-the-editor-what-happened-at-waco-.html

Please change " Criticism of government agencies' involvement with Ross has come from Nancy Ammerman, a professor of sociology of religion, who cited FBI interview notes which stated that Ross "has a personal hatred for all religious cults." She claimed that the BATF and the FBI did rely on Ross when he recommended that agents "attempt to publicly humiliate Koresh, hoping to drive a wedge between him and his followers." She criticized them for doing so and ignoring the "wider social sciences community".[24][25][26] Other scholars also criticized Ross' involvement.[21][24][27][28][29][30] Ross characterized his critics as cult apologists who held the belief that cult groups "should not be held accountable for their action like others within our society".[31]"

To -- Criticism of government agencies' involvement with Ross came from Nancy Ammerman, a professor of sociology of religion, who had access to FBI interview notes. She claimed that the BATF and the FBI did rely on Ross. She criticized them for doing so and ignoring the "wider social sciences community".[24][25][26] Other scholars, some that worked closely with groups called "cults," also criticized Ross' involvement.[21][24][27][28][29][30] Ross characterized his critics as cult apologists who held the belief that cult groups "should not be held accountable for their action like others within our society".[31]

Ammerman's POV and the FBI characterizations don't represent a common point of fact, but rather are characterizations that represent a point of view. I do not hate any religious cults, but do have concerns about the behavior of some cults. I never advised the FBI to humiliate David Koresh. These are claims and characterizations not supported by anything other than POV. Some of sthe scholars listed have either been recommended by the Church of Scientology and/or worked for and been paid by Scientology. I explained this and provided links to support this in my previous entry on the Talk Page about Waco.

Rick Alan Ross173.72.57.223 (talk) 16:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

none of the new sources are independent. Cannot use them. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Never mind the POV language which we obviously cannot use, but what is the position of the project regarding material that is of importance to the subject and can possibly bring clarity to it, but is apparently no longer covered by secondary sources? On the one hand I'm of course weary of using primary sources like the ones Mr. Ross hosts on his website, but on the other can we present a full picture without them? This has cropped up from time to time. The most recent one I believe revolved around the publishing of material by a bio subject that attempted to "set the record straight" against multiple reliable secondary sources that covered negative information about them, and then subsequently abandoned any interest in their case, thus leaving things hanging, in a sense. I'm sorry I can't find that discussion, but maybe this would make a good case for an RFC even. It is a rather worrying gap in our ability to present information, especially about living persons. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:SELFPUB sets the standards for use of self-published sources. In particular for WP:BLP articles (as the one we're dealing with here) WP:BLPSELFPUB is the policy governing this. WP:INDY is an essay that cannot be used in a refusal like this: "none of the (...) sources are independent. Cannot use them". It is Wikipedia policy that self-published sources can be used within certain boundaries, as explicited in the relevant policies. --Francis Schonken (talk) 05:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

But in many of these cases the sources are not self-published, but rather primary sources hosted by the subject. The issue here is the interpretation, for which we (by policy) need to rely on secondary sources. This of course applies to all primary sources, self-published or authored and otherwise. But it does present a challenge in the sense that if no one was interested in the long-term outcome of a particular issue, we cannot report on it without using and interpreting these sources, and therefore we cannot be completely neutral and fair. This is problematic for biographical articles in particular where the material around the "15 minutes of fame" are all we have to build an article. To me this goes back to requiring a stricter interpretation of WP:BLP1E and the tightening of our notability guidelines. Would Mr. Ross have an article here if he hadn't been involved in the Jason Scott case? My guess is probably not. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 05:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Re. "But in many of these cases..." – this is not the place to deal with cases in general: some cases relevant to the Rick Ross biography are presented here, let's deal with those.

Of course WP:PRIMARY is another relevant policy. "Rick Ross's civil rights were restored in 1983" can be referenced to a primary source, available on self-published website of the subject (see above). As you can see, no need to problematise interpretation of primary sources. Next thing to check is WP:BALASPS, as we were doing in #Early convictions above on this particular issue. I propose to continue doing that on these issues one by one. Jytdog's recommendation somewhere above (couldn't find it anymore in the wall of text) to keep it snappy, and proceed with precisely formulated suggestions is of course something I subscribe to. --Francis Schonken (talk) 05:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I've carefully reviewed the current content and I think it is fine. I don't think Ross' proposed changes add value. These changes seem to be about spin, not substance. Jytdog (talk) 11:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It is not fine and remains factually inaccurate, slanted and deliberately misleading. I have pointed out where this was done and I have complied with Wikepdia's internal protocol to make the necessary changes.

Please understand that I never requested to be included at Wikipedia. After learning that cult members were using my bio here as a propaganda platform I requested that the bio be deleted. Wikipedia declined to do so. The people that edit and post here are volunteers. I never volunteered to spend my time here at Wikipedia, but was forced to do so because of the false information posted here and the fact that this bio is being used for propaganda purposes. A number of identified cult members from Scientology and other groups were found to be editing Wikipedia and banned. Some were found working on this bio.

To say that my bio was included at Wikipedia because of the 20-year-old Scott case is ridiculous. If that were true the cult members would never have bothered. I have posted a number of articles and documents at this Talk Page that demonstrate that my work has included a number of landmark hi-profile court cases as an expert witness, ongoing local, national and international media work. Work with law enforcement, government agencies, publishing of papers in peer-reviewed academic journals, etc. etc. etc. And of course the CEI databse, which is one of the largest, oldest and most used research sources on the Web regarding groups called "cults." That is whycult members use Wikipedia to attack me. Ignoring these facts makes Wikiepedia seem like a subculture disconnected from reality.

See http://culteducation.com/cv.html

This is my publicly posted CV, which reflects the length, duration and impact of my work to some extent. It certainly includes substantial work after the Scott case ended in 1995. Most of my work occurred after the Scott case. No attorney has ever contested any part of my CV in court. My CV is absolutely accurate and has been entered as an attached exhibit in numerous court proceedings before and/or during the expert witness qualification process. I am one of a handful of people studying cults in the US that has been qualified and testified in about 20 court proceedings, including US Federal Court after a Daubert hearing, which is a hearing specifically used by lawyers to oppose and disqualify an expert. I have never been disqualified in any court proceeding.

The fact that I was not included by name as an expert witness in a report about the $6.5 million dollar award for my client is not surprising. The article is not about me, but it does reflect the importance of the verdict and judgement. I submitted a link to both the federal judge's order that qualified me as an expert in Noyes v. Kelly case and also the prosecution's motion in the State v. James ARthur Ray case recounting my expertise very specifically and specifically noting the US Federal case in California.

It is in part because of impact legal victories such as Noyes v. Kelly and the $1.5 historic settlement made by Jehovah's Witnesses in the Coughlin v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society case that cults come here to Wikipedia and edit. The James Arthur Ray case was also a hi-profile case that impacted the LGAT (large group awareness training) industry.

The CEI database impacts controversial groups and movements, some called "cults" every day, by providing the general public with a free research library readily accessible online through any electronic device. Cult News, Cult News Network and the CEI attached message baord (more than 100,000 entries by former cult members and affected families) has been converted to Responsive and the CEI Web team is currently in the final lap of converting the database, which contains almost 30,000 documents and hundreds of controversial groups and leaders.

Again, this is why the cult group members and their apologists spent the time here in an effort to edit my bio at Wikipedia as negatively and selectively as possible.

By the way I am known now as the author of the book "Cults Inside Out: How People Get In and Can Get Out."

See http://www.amazon.com/Cults-Inside-Out-How-People/dp/149731660X

The book has been published (Chinese version) by a Hong Kong publisher and I will be attending a book fair in Hong Kong and doing a book tour in China.

I have offered sources from original official documents repeatedly and/or news reports, which have been rejected. This documentation represents the facts not "spin" or "puffery."

My 40-year-old criminal history is incomplete and does not report the historical facts regarding my probation and the further actions taken by the court to clear and restore my name and rights.

Again, to be accurate and complete based upon court records, the entry regarding my criminal history must read -- In 1974 Ross was convicted for the attempted burglary of a vacant model home and subsequently in 1975 he was again convicted for conspiracy to commit grand theft. Ross confessed to these crimes, made restitution and was sentenced to probation, which was terminated early in 1979. Both judgements of guilt were later vacated and Ross' civil rights restored by court order in 1983.

The following official documents record these facts.

http://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23617-rick-ross-termination-of-probation-.html

http://culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/23616-rick-ross-application-for-restoration-of-civil-rights-.html

These are PDF documents from the record issued by the court. I am willing to make them available for inspection.

The article run in the New Times explains that I returned everything.

See http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/hush-hush-sweet-charlatans-6426159

I plead guilty without a plea bargain regarding the grand theft charge, which is a matter of cult record. But common sense dictates that no one gives back property, as reported by the Phoenix New Times, without admitting they illegally took it.

Please make the necessary changes to this section about my criminal record.

There are other changes that I have carefully gone over, suggested and cited historical sources regarding Waco. Also, the disproportionate weight of the Scott case and its inclusion twice, once in the lead and then again in a subsection is historically unbalanced and arbitrary. Unlike the Noyes v. Kelly and Coughlin v. Watchtower judgements that ended with millions of dollars being paid to the plaintiffs by the defendants, I paid Jason Scott $5,000. The actual bulk of the my settlement with Jason was for 200 hours consulting time. At that time my hourly rate was $50.00 per hour, which means that part of the settlement was worth $10,000. FYI--Jason wanted me to deprogram his then wife who remained in the group. Later they divorced and he became estranged from his two children because of his refusal to return to the group.

Jason later told both "60 Minutes" and the Washington Post that he felt used by Scientology and Scientology lawyer Kendrick Moxon.

See http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/whats-2995-million-between-former-enemies-6423217

Also see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCE-ICnqtVk

The real story about Jason Scott was how he was used by Scientology. Most news organization got that and reported it. Today with the prominence of the book and HBO documentary "Going Clear" people can see how Scietology has historically gone after its perceived enemies.

You may claim this is an unnecessary wall of text, but to me it's an honest and detailed response about how my life and has been distorted and my work maligned by Wikipedia.

I have read the disclaimer that Wikiepedia has posted that essentially says no one can take Wikipedia seriously as a valid factual source for anything, which concludes, "all information read here is without any implied warranty of fitness for any purpose or use whatsoever." Can't you at least try a little harder to make the editing process credible?

Rick Alan Roas173.72.57.223 (talk) 15:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)