(This introduction was written on December 12, 2022.) Now almost 20 years after this was originally published in the Community Miracles Center's wonderful journal Miracles Monthly, I (Rev. Tony Ponticello) feel that it is time to revisit this information. Honestly, I was waiting until Judith Skutch-Whitson had passed, and a significant time had elapsed since her passing. There is still a considerable amount of misinformation and blatant untruth about the copyright case and Ms. Skutch-Whitson's testimony circulating. I believe the historical record should be as accurate as possible. "The truth will save you. It has not left you to go out into the mad world and so depart from you." (OrEd.Tx.18.7)
Most of this article is just a transcript of her testimony on the witness stand in May of 2003. I edited out things that seemed repetitive or irrelevant to get it to a workable length. As you read it remember that when this was published no one knew how the case would turn out. It is interesting to me that when Judge Sweet gave his verdict later that year in October of 2003 he, for the most part, ignored just about everything Ms. Skutch-Whitson proclaimed here. I am proud that the Community Miracles Center took a stand for truth and published this in 2003. "Truth will correct all errors in my mind." (OrEd.WkBk.107) We again take that stand and make it available once more to perhaps a new generation of seekers of miracles. Sometimes it indeed takes decades to see the importance of actions taken long ago. — Rev. Tony Ponticello
For seven years there has been a disturbing legal conflict in the A Course In Miracles® community. The owners of the copyright for the Course itself, the Foundation For Inner Peace (FIP), The Foundation for A Course In Miracles (FACIM®) and Penguin Books Inc. have sued the New Christian Church of Full Endeavor and Endeavor Academy of Wisconsin for copyright infringement.
There have also been other lawsuits. Robert Perry and Allen Watson’s ACIM® inspired teaching organization named The Circle of Atonement in Sedona, Arizona (see Vol.13 No.5 / Jul.99 & Vol.13 No.6 / Aug.99) and Ryan Rothgeb in Seattle, Washington (see Vol.15 No.4 / Jun.01) were involved in legal proceedings with the copyright owners.
In the Endeavor case, the defense by the Wisconsin group has centered around the published and spoken facts that since so many copies of the ACIM® manuscript were distributed freely with no copyright symbol or other restrictions on it prior to ACIM® being copyrighted that the copyright should be null and void.
However, now FIP and FACIM claim that there never was any such distribution. What we all thought were the facts are not the facts. But wait a minute! Haven’t we all heard for many years (even decades) about how Judy Skutch xeroxed copy after copy of the 1,500 page manuscript and freely gave it to all her friends who then copied it and gave it to more friends who then copied it again? Isn’t that what she herself says in the documentary video tape The Story of A Course In Miracles? Isn’t this the story that Robert Skutch wrote about in Journey Without Distance?
Then what about the idea that A Course In Miracles should never have been copyrighted in the first place because being authored by Jesus, a divine nonphysical being, it is not copyrightable? There has been hearsay in recent years that the owners of the copyright, FIP and FACIM, now say that Jesus is not the author of A Course In Miracles, but are they really saying this or is that just a rumor?
Send CMC a tax-deductible donation via PayPal or your Credit Card to support this work. "Thank you!"
In the spirit of journalistic reporting, the Community Miracles Center has decided to break from its usual format and articles to do some true news reporting about the A Course In Miracles community. The fate of the copyright might not be everybody’s interest but it will effect everyone’s future study of the Course itself and the way that the Course is published, presented and perceived in the world.
Just what is the truth? Was there distribution prior to copyright ? Who truly authored the Course and what is the official statement from the Foundation For Inner Peace about authorship? We have gone through the court transcripts and are providing a greatly edited version of Ms. Skutch-Whitson’s testimony, both her direct examination and cross examination. Even after drastic editing it is still quite long. Since we want to include our entire edited version in this one issue we will not have any bookstore pages or a pledge letter in this Miracles Monthly. We feel that this important testimony takes precedent. We will not be making any editorial comments about Ms. Skutch-Whitson’s testimony. However, we invite you to do so. Please email your opinions to us at: < miracles@earthlink.net >. Be watching for comments in subsequent issues. You should know that along with Ms. Skutch-Whitson’s testimony there was also testimony from Dr. Kenneth Wapnick, James Bolen and many others. We would have liked to include it all, but space did not allow. The summary statements which were offered by both of the lawyers were also fascinating. It is all part of the public record. There are no secrets here.
Just, what is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the A Course In Miracles copyright controversy?
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
PENGUIN BOOKS USA., INC., FOUNDATION
FOR A COURSE IN MIRACLES©, INC., AND
FOUNDATION FOR INNER PEACE, INC.,
Plaintiffs
case# 96 Civ. 4126
NEW CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF FULL ENDEAVOR, LTD.,
and ENDEAVOR ACADEMY,
Defendants
May 19, 2003
Before: HONORABLE ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge
EPSTEIN, BECKER and GREEN, PC
Attorneys for Plaintiffs: JOHN ROSENBERG / CARRIE FLETCHER
Attorney for Defendants: LAWRENCE E. FABIAN
Attorney for Defendants: MONTY C. BARBER
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
JUDITH SKUTCH-WHITSON — DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. ROSENBERG:
Q. Do you know, although they are no longer living, but did you know Dr. Helen Schucman and Dr. William Thetford?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When did you meet them; do you recall.
A. Red letter day, I call it. May 29, 1975.
...
A. Present at the office before I entered it was Dr. Douglas Dean, Dr. William Thetford, [Dr.] Helen Schucman. And outside the door, they pulled the shades down as it was a glass window, and we went in. And then they locked the door, and then they introduced Dr. Kenneth Wapnick who was in the office.
...
Q.I would like you to identify for the Court ... Is that the first 25 pages?
A. Well, yes.
Q. And it is on eight and a half by eleven inch paper, correct?
A. It seems to be, yes.
Q. And this was the form in which you received it that day, correct?
A. I received it in this form that day.
MR. ROSENBERG: Witness pointing to the thesis binder.
Q. Would you concur there is no copyright notice affixed?
A There is not.
Q. And that was true on the day that you received the number of thesis binders in May, correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And each of them were in these heavy, hard black covers that were shown, it’s quite a heavy pile of manuscripts; is that correct?
A. Yes.
...
Q. Were you given at that meeting a copy of the manuscript?
A. Yes, they told me I could take the whole set home and they gave it to me in a shopping bag.
Q. All of these numerous thesis binders?
A. That’s right.
...
Q. What did you do when the meeting ended?
A. Well, I took a taxi home. They were up on 165th Street in the Black Building at the time, and I got a taxi and I was very excited. And I was so excited that I asked the cab to stop and wait for me a few moments on Broadway, and I called up my friend, Dr. Gerald Jampolsky in California.
Q. Dr. Gerald Jampolsky, another doctor. What type of doctor was he in 1975?
A. A psychiatrist.
Q. Is he a trained certified psychiatrist?
A. Oh, yes.
...
Q. What was your purpose of calling Dr. Jampolsky on this cab ride? You actually asked the cab driver to pull over to the side of the road. What was the purpose of the phone call?
A. Well, it was dual purpose really. Number one, I was so excited I couldn’t contain my enthusiasm; and number two, he was the best person I knew to give me an assessment, number one, on the story I just heard, and number two on some of the material. And I actually read him a portion of the Teacher’s Manual on the telephone.
Q. How much did you read him?
A. Maybe a page or two.
...
Q. What did you say to Dr. Jampolsky during this phone call, and what did he say to you?
A. Well, from what I remember, I said to him that this was extremely exciting to me, and I felt that I had been given something that was going to be for the rest of my life. and ... he said he would really like to see it to examine it and how soon could I get to California.
...
Q. Were you plan planning at that point any trip out to California? We’re now at May 30th.
A. Well, I hadn’t actually decided when to go, but Dr. Jampolsky was quite adamant that I come as soon as possible, and I was also going to see Dr. Eleanor Criswell.
Q. Another doctor?
A. Yes, she was going to be my advisor in my doctoral degree.
Q. You were taking a doctoral program in California?
A. Yes.
...
Q. Did you discuss with Dr. Thetford and Dr. Schucman that you were going to be going to California at some point?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you mention Dr. Jampolsky’s expressed interest in seeing a copy of the manuscript?
A. I told them both about the conversation that I had on the phone the night before or the day before when I left their office.
...
Q. They did authorize you to show it to Dr. Jampolsky?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Were any restrictions, observations made about what could be done with it with Dr. Jampolsky?
A. The document was to remain in my possession and he could look at it.
Q. What was your purpose and intent with their permission in showing it to your acquaintance, professional acquaintance, friend, colleague Dr. Jampolsky? What was your intended purpose in showing it to Dr. Jampolsky?
A. He was a trained professional in the field. I guess some people could say hearing an inner voice is crazy, and he was very interested in that sort of thing. I wanted his opinion about the value of the manuscript. And I also wanted to see whether or not we could get something from it together as a working team.
Q. Did you obtain authorization from Dr. Schucman or Dr. Thetford at this meeting, May 30, 1975 to show it to anybody else? “It” being the manuscript.
A. I believe I told them at that meeting ... that I had a very good friend in California who was also a professional associate, James Bolen, who was the publisher of a magazine in the field that we were interested in. And with their permission, I might like to show it to them.
...
Q. Did Dr. Schucman at any of these meeting in late May or early June give you any authorization to show it to anyone, the manuscript to anyone other than Mr. Bolen and Mr. Jampolsky?
A. At that point, no.
Q. Did she give you any instructions at all about disseminating the manuscript?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. What did she say?
A. She said, she would rather I didn’t take it, but Bill was adamant, and I should be very, very careful. And that I shouldn’t mention her name or Bill’s name. And I should honor their privacy. And that was all I could remember.
...
Q. What did Dr. Schucman tell you about the dissemination about the manuscript? We’re now in late May, early June of 1975.
A. She told me I was allowed to show it to Dr. Gerald Jampolsky and I was allowed to show it to James Bolen. I was not allowed to show it to anyone else.
Q. Were you ever given authorization, and I’m talking about the manuscript, this thesis bound manuscript, were you ever given authority to make any widespread dissemination of the manuscript?
A. Not at all.
...
Q. Did you see Dr. Criswell during this trip in June of 1975?
A. Yes, I saw her briefly in the library at the office of the American Humanistic Institute.
...
Q. What did you tell Dr. Criswell at this meeting?
A. I told her a little bit about A Course In Miracles. Mostly we discussed her being my doctoral advisor. ... And I told her that I had a document that had come into my life in an unusual way. And I do not remember if she looked at it at that time. ... But she did tell me since I had enough and was dragging them around, “That document looks unwieldy ...” and that she had a little business on the side called Free Person Press, where she would take her doctoral candidates’ thesis and reduce them in size for them, so they could have them put together in a book. And that if I ever needed that done, she would be glad to help me with it.
...
Q. And we’re going to cover this in much more detail later. Did such a copying process of the Course occur?
A. Yes, it did.
Q. What was the process of reproduction?
A. Xeroxed.
Q. Were hundreds of copies made?
A. Yes.
Q. Did they have a copyright notice affixed?
A. Yes.
Q. How sure of you are this?
A. I’m positive.
...
Q. Did you meet with Dr. Schucman and Dr. Thetford at any time following your return?
A. We met almost every day. Basically all of us two times a week, but sometimes every day with me.
Q. Was there any discussion during this time that you’re back in New York with Dr. Thetford and Dr. Schucman about publishing the Course?
A. There was discussion about making the Course available in a form that could be examined by people.
Q. Did you mention anything about Dr. Criswell to them?
A. Oh, yes, I did.
Q. What did you say to Drs. Thetford and Schucman in June of 1975?
A. I told them about her, and I told them what she did. And this might be a temporary solution until we found out what was our next step. And I say that because we didn’t just sit around and decide these things. We had a specific way of sitting and quieting ourself and asking for the inner answer or inner guidance. So this was our procedure. And we did that, and we felt, Helen and Bill Thetford of course, felt that it was alright to reduce the manuscript and xerox it off and put it in whatever kind of binders temporarily.
Q. I want to make clear, when that was done a copyright notice was affixed?
A. She said, “He says it must be copyrighted.”
Q. I’m sorry, she said, “He said it must be copyrighted.”
A. That’s right.
...
Q. Did you ask her who “He” was, or did you know from contextual conversations?
A. Well, from conversations, she either called that inner voice “He” or “The Voice.”
...
Q. And who was going to hold the copyright? Did Dr. Schucman tell you this?
A. Yes, she did. She said that it was not an accident that we had a not-for-profit foundation and she said it should be copyrighted to the Foundation [For] Parasensory [Investigation], but she did not like the name; thank you.
...
Q. Was the name ultimately changed?
A. Yes, it was at her request.
...
Q. To the best of your recollection, here in court under oath, did you give a copy of all or part of that manuscript to anyone during this two-week period?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. And we’re now at a point where copyright has been requested, correct?
A. That’s right.
Q. And to your knowledge, during this two-week period, did Jim Bolen give copies — we’ll hear from him — did he give copies to anyone else?
A. To my knowledge, he did not.
Q. Gerry Jampolsky?
A. To my knowledge, he did not.
...
Q. And what did you discuss with Dr. Criswell at this meeting; what did you say and what did she say with regard to the manuscript? ...
A. I told her I had spoken to Dr.Thetford and Dr. Schucman about reducing the size of the manuscript because it was, indeed, very heavy to carry. And she said she would be glad to do it.
Q. Were any arrangements made regarding the xeroxing of multiple copies of the manuscript?
A. We decided that it would be 100 copies the first one. We didn’t think there would be many more after that, and that they would have a cover on them. It would be like a paperback, and that was it.
...
Q. Now, it’s been suggested that you had given — that dozens if not hundreds of copies of the manuscript had been xeroxed. Leaving the copy of Dr. Criswell aside, are you aware of those facts?
A. No.
Q. You made some statements that might suggest that, correct?
A. Yes, I certainly have.
Q. Until the Criswell xeroxing of the manuscript went out, had there been any general widespread distribution of this manuscript?
A. Not at all.
Q. How certain are you of that?
A. Absolutely positive.
...
Q. During the entire month long trip, give or take, in California, did you give a copy of the manuscript, the eight and a half by eleven, or part of it to anybody?
A. No, I did not.
Q. To your observation, did Dr. Schucman or Dr. Thetford give any part of it to anyone?
A. To my observation, no, absolutely not.
Q. Late July, August, what’s happening with Dr. Criswell at this point in time?
A. She was busy with the paste up. She was doing the work on that. She reported that that was coming along and a couple of times I helped her.
...
Q. Now, you were present in court proceedings early today where there was some issues about some tapes and what have you; do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have spoken a lot about A Course In Miracles a lot, have you?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Before you get to that, actually your ex-husband — you’re no longer married to Robert Skutch?
A. No.
Q. He wrote a book; isn’t that right?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Do you remember when he started writing the book?
A. He started it, I believe, sometime in 1980.
Q. What was the status of your relationship with Robert Skutch at that time?
A. We were going through a divorce, a friendly one, I might say.
Q. And you’re still friendly today?
A. He is our partner, yes.
Q. Still involved in The Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. Yes, he is the Vice-President.
...
Q. What is the name of the book?
A. Journey Without Distance.
Q. Did you read the entire book before it was published?
A. No, I did not.
...
Q. Who published the book, if you know, at first?
A. A company called Celestial Arts in Berkeley, California.
Q. Did there come a time when the Foundation For Inner Peace published the book?
A. Yes, much later.
Q. Do you remember the year?
A. I really don’t.
Q. If I were to state, and it’s been on the record, that it is 1996.
A. That’s right. I was going to say ’96, but it seemed late.
Q. As of that time had you personally read every page of the book as of the time that Foundation of Inner Peace published it?
A. No.
Q. This litigation was commenced in what year, do you remember?
A. Probably 1996.
Q. I’ll represent the case number says 96-4126. In my experience that suggests that it would be 1996. By-the-way, was I The Foundation For Inner Peace’s counsel at that time?
A. No, you were not.
Q. Was my firm involved?
A. We didn’t have the pleasure of knowing your firm at the time.
Q. Thank you for saying that. I’ll move to strike. There was a whole different law firm involved, right?
A. Yes, in California.
Q. After the litigation was commenced, a certain portion of this book, was it brought to your attention?
A. That’s true.
Q. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. I’m going to read from page eleven and, again, Bob Skutch wrote this book, right?
A. Yes.
...
Q. There is some talk about Jim Bolen. You have testified about Mr. Bolen, correct?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. And then it [the book Journey Without Distance] states, “The problem then arose concerning how he ...” talking about Jim Bolen, “... could work with the Course. Judy had only one copy with her, and Jim decided the only thing to do was make a xerox copy. Because of his publishing connections ... He was able to have the job done in 24 hours and for only $48.” What’s in the book continues, “Obviously, this was not going to be a very practical solution. Not only was the material in this form much too cumbersome, but Judy couldn’t keep lending her copy out for 24 hours to everyone who wanted it. Despite this expedient development, Jim’s copy started to be reproduced and those copies were then copied. And before long, there were over a hundred people in the San Francisco area in possession of A Course In Miracles.” ... I want to ask you a few questions. Bob Skutch wrote that Judy couldn’t keep lending her copies out for 24 hours out to anyone who wanted it. Did you lend your copy of the manuscript out to any one who wanted it?
A. I did not.
...
Q. Did you ever see at any time until the Criswell edition came out, any one other than the small circle in possession of any part of A Course In Miracles?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you ever authorize anyone to make copies of the manuscript?
A. To the best of my knowledge, I never did.
Q. Did you ever authorize in any general sense that anyone who wanted this could make copies of it?
A. Definitely not.
Q. And when Bob Skutch wrote, speaking of the manuscript, “... for 24 hours to anyone who wanted it” is there any truth to that?
A. There is none.
Q. And then he wrote, “Jim’s copies started to be reproduced and those copies were copied, and before long there were 100 people in the San Francisco area that had A Course In Miracles.” To your knowledge, is that a true statement?
A. It is not.
...
Q. Bob Skutch’s book has been changed, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And it was changed after the Foundation of Inner Peace began to publish it, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And it no longer says that, at least in the soft cover version. Is that your understanding?
A. In the soft cover it does not.
Q. How did it come that that language was taken out of Journey Without Distance?
A. We were represented by a firm in California and their attorneys told us to change it to what was more truthful.
Q. And did you rely on the advice of counsel and change it?
A. That’s the only reason we did it.
Q. And that was after the litigation was commenced?
A. I believe so, yes.
Q. It was certainly after the dispute had arisen?
A. Yes.
...
Q. Does that firm still represent you?
A. Thank goodness, no.
Q. While Bob Skutch wrote that book, he is not the only person who made statements about A Course In Miracles after the fact?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever do any public speaking?
A. Quite a bit.
Q. Do you still do any?
A. Very, very little, but once in a while I do, yes.
Q. How about in ’76, ’77, ’78 into the ’80s?
A. I traveled a great deal.
Q. If you had to estimate how many speeches about A Course In Miracles did you give?
A. I don’t know that. I couldn’t estimate exactly, but one year I traveled 100,000 miles and a few others pretty close to that, and I could have been speaking about it three times a week. It’s including workshops because sometimes it lasted for a weekend, sometimes four days and a few times a whole week workshop, but I would say in the high numbers.
Q. Hundreds and hundreds of times did you speak?
A. I don’t know about hundreds and hundreds, but I would say a few hundred, yes.
Q. What was the general focus and purpose of your speeches that you gave?
A. To bring the message of the Course.
Q. And did you sometimes as part of your speeches tell a version of the story of how A Course In Miracles was developed?
A. Usually people wanted to hear how it came, it was interesting.
Q. And, in fact, the Course, the Foundation For Inner Peace itself has a video that’s called, I think, How It Came?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And that’s presented by the Foundation For Inner Peace, correct?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And you tell in part, it’s maybe an hour or more video; is that right?
A. It’s an hour.
Q. You talk on that tape?
A. Partially. I am one of the participants on that tape, yes.
...
Q. And then you say with no reference to particular editions you say, “I was kept busy running off xerox copies of A Course In Miracles, and at five cents a page for a 1,500 page document it was very expensive. First of all, literally did you run xeroxes of copies in A Course In Miracles?
A. I ran off two in the very beginning when I traveled.
Q. Did that keep you busy?
A. It was 1,500 pages and I did one of them on the machine by hand.
Q. Was it about five cents a page at that time?
A. I think at that time it was, yes.
Q. Was it expensive?
A. I would call $75 in those days very expensive.
Q. Who else was running off copies?
A. Eleanor Criswell, she, was busy preparing it for xeroxing.
Q. “You said over and over again, you said this must be published in a form we can carry. I went back to New York and discussed it with you and Helen.” This is Bill Thetford talking?
A. That’s true.
Q. I want to make clear, did you ever, ever, ever, xerox multiple copies other than the ones you testified about of the manuscript of the Course in eight and a half by eleven form?
A. I did not.
Q. Now, there is another video that has been released, I believe, by the Foundation For Inner Peace. If I can just have a moment to find my notes, and it’s called The Story of A Course In Miracles. Are you familiar with that video?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Have you listened to that prior to testifying today?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. And you speak on it and Bill Thetford speaks on it?
A. Among others, yes.
Q. And Bill says we met a large number of very eminent people in California as well as in New York who were serious students in the Course; is that true?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. All of them wanted additional copies; is that true?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. All of them, many of them?
A. Many of them, yes.
Q. Everyone was dissatisfied with the fact that this is available, xeroxing hundreds and hundreds [of pages] of material. How was the Criswell edition made?
A. Xeroxing.
Q. Was it satisfactory?
A. It wasn’t satisfying to us, no.
Q. What happened every time you ran out of the xerox?
A. We had to make more.
Q. So we had to entertain the idea of publication; is that true?
A. Yes.
...
Q. And you said “He said to me ...” he being Reid, “... I’m studying the manuscript called A Course In Miracles given to me by your friend Zelda Supplee, and I’m so delighted.” And he goes on to say, and then he said — by the way, did Reid Erickson have a copy of the manuscript of A Course In Miracles?
A. He had the manuscript that we ran off, xerox copies that was much smaller than the eight and a half by eleven.
Q. The Criswell version?
A. Yes.
Q. You don’t deny that?
A. No.
Q. You said according to you on the tape, “... and I told him I was very glad to hear and we chatted a bit, and he said the form in which it is now is very unwieldy, you have to have it published in hard covered books.” That’s what you said on the tape, correct?
A. That’s right.
Q. Is that what Mr. Erickson told you?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the form that you had it in then in 1976?
A. It was the reduced size manuscript.
Q. What was the next size that was published?
A. Hard cover.
Q. He told you you had to have it published in hard covered books, correct?
A. That’s right.
Q. In addition to these tapes that Foundation of Inner Peace released, did you take issue with the statements you released there?
A. No.
Q. You said you gave 100 or more speeches. Have you since learned that some of your speeches were tape recorded?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. And you were present during today’s proceeding where there was a legal argument about whether certain tapes could come in and what have you? Are you familiar with that?
A. Yes.
MR. ROSENBERG: And based on the judge’s preliminary ruling, as the Court said, I’ll take them for what they are worth, I don’t want this to be a concession that these are admissible because we still have our objection, but on the possibility that they are going to be considered, can we make inquiry?
THE COURT: Of course.
Q. Have you read some of those tapes?
A. I have read transcripts of some of them, yes.
Q. Out of the possible hundreds and hundreds of speeches, there are maybe a half of a dozen that are of interest to the defendants?
A. I forgot the number, but I think it is probably in that realm.
Q. Is everything you said on those recordings true?
A. No.
Q. Did you make misstatements?
A. I’m afraid I did.
Q. I’m going to read one of the excerpts of a tape that’s trying to be introduced, which is actually, I believe, it’s in evidence, New Mexico, so called, Santa Fe tape, have you listened or read a transcript of that tape?
MR. FABIAN: Just to make the record clear, you have admitted the Mexico tape way back in your first in limine motion statement. There was no question about the authenticity of that one.
MR. ROSENBERG: That is correct. I’m going to read to you from the transcript presented by the defendants. “It was very natural for me to take this material with me and say to my good friends, ‘Hey, look, look what I’ve got. Do you want to read this?’ They wanted to read it. In fact, many people xeroxed the original pages, $75 for 1,500 and a nickel a page. That’s a lot of money just to have the material. It was for anyone who wanted it, and it seemed very right that people would pass it along, copy it over and copy it over until finally people’s copies were getting so light that they couldn’t see them any more. And a few of us got together and recognized the need to put it in some kind of a form that was easier to read. And out of that came very small little paperbacks that the print was so small that you need a magnifying glass.” I have read that from the transcript. Do you accept that that’s your voice on the tape?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you accept that you said that?
A. I probably did, yes.
Q. Do have you any reason to doubt it?
A. I have no reason whatsoever to doubt it.
Q. Are they entirely true?
A. No, they are not.
Q. Leaving Criswell aside, did many people xerox the original papers?
A. No.
Q. Did people copy copies until they were getting so light they couldn’t see them any more?
A. I had no information to back that up.
Q. And then you said, I submit, “We needed to put it in a form that was easier to read.” And then you say you put it in one that was so small you needed a magnifying glass; is that easier to read?
A. No, it is not.
Q. Is that what happened?
A. No, it wasn’t.
Q. There are other tapes where you say some of them, we’ll use them, by the way, that are consistent with the Criswell story, others suggested some copying was going on. Under oath are you aware of any widespread copying in A Course In Miracles in eight and a half by eleven inch form?
A. I certainly am not.
Q. With all respect, what were you doing here?
A. I can only say that I was a spontaneous public speaker enlisted in this job. I didn’t use prepared speeches. I was extremely enthusiastic. I was telling stories, a narrative story teller. I come from a long line of story tellers and my tradition also is part of story telling.
Q. Did you exaggerate?
A. Yes, embellished, exaggerated. I sort of [pulled] it out of the air and put it in a form that people would be enthusiastic about, but I didn’t have any intention to deceive, and I’m sorry I did it.
Q. What were you trying to tell the audience for these different speeches? What was the sentiment?
A. I was trying to express the enthusiasm of people, trying to inflame the interest of the audience.
Q. How was their enthusiasm for the Course?
A. Oh, great.
Q. Was there enthusiasm for hundreds and hundreds of the Criswell?
A. Yes.
...
Q. What do you say?
A. There are times when one could say tremendous hyperboles where I told the story like Dr. Thetford where his wife was afraid of flying, and to this day he has her nail marks on his palm. I do that. That’s the way I am. This is the way I speak.
Q. Did you do that today?
A. I did not do that today.
Q. What have you dedicated the last 25 or almost 30 years of your life to?
A. 28 years to disseminate A Course of Miracles.
Q. What does it stand for to you?
A. It has a consistent thought system of love and forgiveness. It talks about honesty which is the consistency of thought and action. It talks about relationship, and how we can see past divisiveness, and how we can in our minds and in our hearts see another person as not the shape or the form or the color or the size, but truly see them in spirit.
Q. You mentioned honesty. Is that one of the fundamental components of the Course?
A. It’s a very important one.
...
Q. To save the copyright, would you lie to the Court?
A. No, I would not; I couldn’t.
Q. What would that say?
A. It would negate everything I believe in.
Q. Have you done that today?
A. No, I have not.
THE COURT: Tomorrow morning, 9:30. Thank you very much.
(Case adjourned to May 20, 2003 at 9:30 a.m.)
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
May 20, 2003
JUDITH SKUTCH-WHITSON,
CROSS-EXAMINATION — BY MR. FABIAN:
Q. As I recall your testimony, you met her [Dr. Helen Schucman] on May 29 of 1979 for the first time?
A. ’75.
Q. Within a couple of hours of meeting her she handed you a copy, the manuscript copy of A Course In Miracles of approximately 1,500 pages, is that correct?
A. Actually, Dr. Bill Thetford handed it to me.
Q. But Helen Schucman was there?
A. Yes.
Q. Was Ken Wapnick there?
A. Yes, he was.
Q. I don’t believe you testified earlier at your direct, but just so it’s clear, prior to your getting A Course In Miracles, the manuscript copy, Ken Wapnick had received a copy from Helen Schucman or Bill Thetford. Isn’t that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And I also believe that prior to your coming onto the scene on May 29 that a copy of the manuscript A Course In Miracles, the 1,500 pages, had been given to Hugh Lynn Cayce, is that correct?
A. I was told that later on, and I assume it’s correct, but I didn’t have any evidence.
Q. Who told you that?
A. I believe and I can’t be sure, sir, but I believe it was Dr. William Thetford.
...
Q. Ms. Skutch-Whitson, I believe that you testified that you are a reader of A Course In Miracles?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. And you are familiar with many of the sections and provisions of A Course In Miracles?
A. I hope so.
Q. In connection with A Course in Miracles I believe that there is a section in the Manual For Teachers on honesty?
A. Yes, there is.
Q. And you’re familiar with that?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. And honesty, as I understand it and as I’ve read it, reflects honesty in life as well as honesty in the courtroom, is that correct?
A. Of course.
Q. And I believe you testified yesterday at the end of the day that in terms of certain of the statements that you made on tapes, videotapes and otherwise, you called these, I believe, “stories”?
A. Correct.
Q. And these were stories, Ms. Skutch-Whitson which, you made up?
A. They were stories that I was weaving for dramatic effect based on memory, on my experiences and a lot of mistakes.
Q. Because you wanted to interest people or induce people to read A Course In Miracles?
A. Yes. But it’s also the way I am.
Q. Now, when people read A Course In Miracles, A Course In Miracles, whether it’s published — whoever it’s published by, FIP or FACIM, the two foundations that are involved in this case receive a royalty or a payment?
A. Yes.
Q. You yourself receive payments in connection with your work for FIP and/or FACIM, is that correct?
A. Foundation for A Course In Miracles does not remunerate me in any way whatsoever. But the Foundation of Inner Peace does. I’m a salaried employee as its President and Chief Executive Officer.
Q. How much do you receive at the present time?
A. $120,000 a year.
Q. Does your husband, Mr. Whitson, receive anything from Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. Dr. Whitson has a consulting firm and it’s his firm that does all the translation programs, 23 of them.
...
Q. Does his consulting firm receive that or does he receive it directly?
A. His consulting firm receives it.
Q. Who else works with the consulting firm besides himself?
A. He does.
Q. He is the consulting firm?
A. Yes.
Q. In connection with that consulting firm, of which Mr. Whitson is the consulting firm, how much does he receive?
A. Dr. Whitson’s consulting firm receives $84,000 a year about.
Q. And does your daughter also receive any sort of fee from
the Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. Yes, she does.
Q. How much does she receive?
A. As my assistant part-time she receives $20,000 a year.
Q. Any other family members at the Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. No, there aren’t.
Q. How about former family members? Robert Skutch?
A. I wouldn’t call that family member. He is my partner.
Q. How much does Robert Skutch —
A. He receives about $90,000 a year.
...
Q. Does the Foundation For Inner Peace receive any donations or sponsorships during the year?
A. It receives donations from the public, yes.
Q. In the year 2002 approximately how much did it receive?
A. 2002, I would guess about $150,000.
Q. How about the year 2001?
A. Probably $120,000 or $130,000.
Q. Now, those donations certainly don’t total the amount that yourself and your daughter and your husband receive from the Foundation For Inner Peace, isn’t that correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
...
Q. I believe on your direct testimony you testified to the fact that on a number of occasions I think you made it clear that when you refer to the xeroxed manuscript, that’s what we called the Criswell edition today?
A. That’s what we call the Criswell edition since this litigation began.
Q. Mr. Rosenberg when he asked you questions made it very clear that he already referred to the xerox manuscript as the Criswell edition, is that correct?
A. Only in this litigation.
Q. Only in this litigation. That’s quite correct. Now, in terms of the Criswell edition, in fact, isn’t it true that it was not a xerox, but in fact a photo offset?
A. It’s a xerox copy, as far as I know, that a xerox company did. I’m sorry. The difference here eludes me.
Q. Are you testifying you don’t know what photo offset is?
A. I know that they took a picture of ... our original eight and a half by eleven and then xeroxed off the copies.
Q. In fact for photo offset they took a picture of two pages side by side, isn’t that correct?
A. I believe so.
Q. And after taking the picture of two pages side by side they then make a plate, isn’t that correct?
A. I don’t know about the plate.
Q. And do you know if it’s then the plate, that it’s from the plate that the reproduction takes place over and over again?
A. I don’t know that. It was always my opinion otherwise.
...
Q. Now, you yourself are aware of the fact, are you not, that this was done by photo offset, that the Criswell edition was done by photo offset, aren’t you?
A. Well, what I have always held true was that the pages — a photograph was taken of them side by side and many copies were xeroxed off the negative.
Q. Does the Foundation For Inner Peace put out something on the internet?
A. Yes.
Q. And I’m looking at a document that’s from the internet for a Foundation For Inner Peace. By the way, do you read the documents that go on the internet that come from the Foundation of Inner Peace?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. I’m reading one that has in the bottom right-hand corner, March 21, 2002, and it says: “The first edition of A Course In Miracles published by the Foundation For Inner Peace in the late summer of ’75 was actually a reduced-sized, soft-cover offset production of the manuscript.” Do you recall making that statement on the internet for the Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. No, I don’t.
...
Q. I am going to show you now a document which is on the internet which was pulled off as of 10/12/02. And this document similarly says, “The first edition of A Course In Miracles published by the Foundation For Inner Peace in the late summer of 1975 was actually a reduced-sized, soft-cover offset production of the manuscript, about 300 copies in all.” I am going to ask, is that a copy of the statement that was put on the internet by the Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. Yes, it is.
...
Q. How long have you known Ken Wapnick?
A. I met him May 29, 1975.
Q. Are you aware that Mr. Wapnick has written numerous books, articles, et cetera, on A Course In Miracles?
A. I am aware he has, yes.
Q. Have you ever had conversations with Mr. Wapnick in which he referred to the Criswell edition as a photo offset edition?
A. I cannot say I remember any conversations talking with Dr. Wapnick about how the Criswell edition was made.
Q. I am going to ask you, there is a book called [A] Talk Given On A Course In Miracles, Kenneth Wapnick, May 9, 1981. Are you familiar with that talk?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Have you ever read this particular book?
A. I must have read it at some point.
Q. On page twelve of this book it says, “If you notice in the books, the copyright date is 1975, although the books were not printed until 1976. But that summer a friend of Judy’s in California made some sort of photo offset of the Course and there were 300 copies printed that way.” Do you recall reading that in Mr. Wapnick’s book?
A. I read Dr. Wapnick’s book many years ago when he wrote it, but I don’t recall that phrase, no.
Q. Is it incorrect?
A. Well, if you’re telling me now that photo offset is not the same as xeroxing, that that statement says what it says.
Q. Do you have any reason to believe that the statement made by Mr. Wapnick is not correct?
A. No, I don’t.
...
Q. Now, are you familiar with a book called Double Vision?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Who are the authors of that book Double Vision?
A. Actually, my daughter wrote it and then asked me before it was finished whether I would add my thoughts in it. So I would say it’s three-quarters Tamara Cohen and one-quarter Judith Skutch.
Q. Tamara Cohen being your daughter, just so the record is clear?
A. That’s right.
Q. In connection with that, I’m now reading from page 137 and ask if you recall writing the following statement: “So many came forward for copies of the Course that there was a need to share it in a more convenient manner than 1,500 loose photocopied pages. We had it reduced photographically and split into four more manageable volumes.” Did you write those words?
A. Yes, I did.
...
Q. Now, I note in this book you did not refer to it as the xeroxed manuscript, is that correct?
A. I didn’t seem to there. I didn’t remember the rest of the book.
...
Q. Did Helen Schucman ever tell you that she believed the inner voice to be that of Jesus Christ?
A. When I first met her, May 29, 1975, and as far as I can recollect, that’s the only time it was ever mentioned to me by Helen Schucman.
Q. What did she mention to you?
A. I asked her ... I said, “Well, did The Voice ...” because she always called it “The Voice.” I said, “Did The Voice identify itself?” She said, “I was afraid you were going to ask [that].” I said, “Well, did It?” And she said, “Yes.” And I said, “And does It have a name?” She says, “It says It’s Jesus.” That’s the tone I remember. It was very impactful to me.
Q. Did you have any reason to disbelieve her?
A. I had no reason to accept or not to accept that. The document that I saw later spoke for itself.
Q. But in fact in many writings after that date you have used the word “Jesus” as having been the author of A Course In Miracles, isn’t that correct?
A. In many writings. I believe after that date I don’t always refer to the figure that seems to be the source of the Course as Jesus. I’m still uncomfortable with it. I’m Jewish.
Q. My question was a simple one. In writings have you ever referred to Jesus as an authority in A Course In Miracles?
MR. ROSENBERG: I object at this point. That issue was resolved on summary judgment as to authorship, copyrightability. The source of this material would seem not at issue in this litigation.
MR. FABIAN: Your Honor, I only asked for the credibility in order to impeach the witness.
THE COURT: Overruled.
A. I could have.
Q. Do you recall specifically using — saying Jesus was the author in any of your writings?
A. I certainly could have. Do I recall? Absolutely no, I don’t recall absolutely, but I have said with explanation what I felt the term Jesus meant often enough.
...
Q. And in fact you did believe and understand when you were distributing and selling or giving away the Criswell edition that this was a book, was it not?
A. It was our manuscript bound in a book, yes.
Q. My question was a simple one. I know you want to keep using the word “manuscript bound in a book”, but was it a book that was published by, in that case, Ms. Criswell’s company?
A. It was an exact replica of our manuscript in a book form, yes.
Q. And that book had on it a copyright, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. But prior to that time the manuscript itself did not have a copyright notice on it. Whether it was given to one person or hundreds, that’s for the Court to decide, but it didn’t have a copyright notice on it, is that correct?
A. It did not.
Q. By the way, getting back to Mr. Wapnick for a moment, is it your recollection that the copy Mr. Wapnick originally received had a copyright notice on it or did not have a copyright notice on it?
A. I don’t know. It’s my recollection that I was never told.
Q. But you were aware that he received it before May 29, 1975, isn’t that correct?
A. Yes.
...
Q. I don’t believe you testified at the outset, but did Bill Thetford receive any copies of the uncopyrighted manuscript?
A. Well, yes, he did.
Q. How many did he receive?
A. I don’t know how many he received, but he was the one who typed it up at first, so he made copies, as far as I know.
Q. Did he receive more than two?
A. I think he xeroxed twelve, but Ken was there and I wasn’t, so it would be a better question for him.
...
Q. Ms. Skutch-Whitson, I believe you testified yesterday — I remember at the end of your testimony as to two things. One, you said that Helen wanted A Course In Miracles to be published by a not-for-profit. Isn’t [that] what you testified to?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you also — and did you also testify that Helen didn’t want excerpts of A Course In Miracles?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And on that basis, among others, perhaps, A Course In Miracles was — I think there has been some testimony or finding that it was assigned to the Foundation For Inner Peace for publication. Is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. But, in fact, it isn’t true — it isn’t true, is it, that you’ve always published A Course In Miracles through a foundation?
A. Well, in 1995, the end of the year, December, we assigned the publishing over to Penguin International.
Q. And Penguin International or Penguin Books, as it’s known, is not a not-for-profit, is that correct?
A. No, it’s not.
Q. It’s in there to make money?
A. Yes, that’s what they do.
Q. In fact, as I recall, the Foundation For Inner Peace received $1.3 million from Penguin Publishing for the publication rights, is that correct?
A. No.
Q. How much did they receive?
A. 2.5.
Q. Was that money, part of that $2.5 million used to pay for any of the salaries of yourself and Dr. Whitson and your daughter?
A. It was to support the Foundation For Inner Peace for a five-year period of time while we did not have the income from the books to support our work.
Q. Was any of that money used to pay for the salaries of yourself and Dr. Whitson and your daughter?
A. Absolutely.
...
Q. In connection with these excerpts which you received yesterday Helen did not want there to be any excerpts of the Course. Has the foundation in fact published excerpts of the Course?
A. Yes.
...
Q. I am going to show you a book now called Choose Once Again, Selections from A Course In Miracles, and this seems to be published by the Foundation For Inner Peace. It says copyright 1981. I am going to ask you to just take a look at that book. In fact, was that book published by the Foundation For Inner Peace?
A. Yes. It also says Celestial Arts on the spine, but it’s hidden by a little label.
Q. Is that book a book [of] excerpts from A Course In Miracles?
A. Yes, it is.
...
Q. Dr. Jampolsky, does he receive any royalty or any fee in connection with those cards?
A. No, not at all.
Q. Does he receive a royalty or fee in connection with any types of cards that have been produced by him relating to A Course In Miracles?
A. Does he?
Q. To your knowledge, has Dr. Jampolsky published any cards similar to these where there would be something on one side and statements from A Course In Miracles on the other?
A. Dr. Jampolsky, after writing little cards, after putting in his pocket by hand, put into a different form, I believe it’s twelve lessons with his own explanation of A Course In Miracles. And the work that he used with his patients and his groups. Many years ago. I don’t remember the year.
Q. Does he continue to do that?
A. I don’t know. I think — I don’t know.
Q. And has FIP ever, or FACIM, ever sent any statements, to the best of your knowledge, to Dr. Jampolsky to stop publishing those cards or producing them?
A. No. He had permission.
...
Q. I’m looking at the transcript from How It Came, a portion of it, and it says as follows: “And while studying I shared it ...” meaning the Course, I believe, “... with a lot of people. I made many trips to California and while there I told the whole community of people I worked with the story of the Course. Naturally, they all wanted to see copies. I was kept busy running off xerox copies of A Course In Miracles, and at five cents a page for a 1,500 page document it was very expensive.” Do you remember making those statements on the tape?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And when you refer to the 1,500 page document at five cents a page, that’s when you took each individual page and went and it was xeroxed at five cents a page, is that correct?
A. If I remember correctly, that’s what it cost to xerox a page.
Q. I think you’re right. I actually checked. In connection with the — so five times 1,500 — even I can still remember that math — $75, am I right?
A. That’s correct.
...
Q. So after this you say: “Over and over again I heard this must be published in a form we can carry.” Now, that’s a reference to the 1,500 page document, isn’t it?
A. Well, that’s a reference to a 1,500 page document, yes, because that was very heavy. It also eventually became a reference to the Criswell because that was very hard to read.
...
Q. And that was after the time when you stated in this particular video, “I was kept busy running off xerox copies and at five cents a page for a 1,500 page document it was very expensive.” You’ve just testified there is no question that that refers to the 1,500 page manuscript. Isn’t that correct?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. So after you’re stating here that it’s during this time when you were kept busy running off xerox copies and over and over again you heard it must be published, you then went back to New York. You then had the discussion with your “little family”, as you call it?
A. Yes.
Q. And it was then that the Criswell edition was agreed to be published?
A. Yes.
...
Q. Going back to the transcript, ... of The Story of A Course In Miracles, you get this call from Mr. Erickson, [it] says, “... was a man I’d only met once. His name was Reid Erickson. He said to me, ‘I’m studying the manuscript called A Course In Miracles given to me by your friend, Zelda Supplee.’” Now, since Zelda Supplee got, according to your own testimony, the Criswell edition after Mr. Erickson, she couldn’t have sent it to him, isn’t that correct?
A. No, it’s not.
Q. Ms. Skutch-Whitson, in fact, when you made this statement on The Story of A Course In Miracles, you meant when you said that he was studying the manuscript that he was studying the 1,500 page manuscript that Zelda Supplee had given to him, isn’t that correct?
A. I’m afraid not.
...
Q. I am going to refer you to the transcript ... you say: “The very next day a telephone call from out of nowhere, from Mexico, from Mazitlan, a man I scarcely knew, I had met once socially, said, I [have] been working [with] A Course In Miracles, the manuscript, for the last three months down here with a group in Mexico and it’s the most powerful teaching tool I’ve ever had in my own spiritual journey. I want you to know that it’s ridiculous for people to carry around a shopping bag full of papers.” In fact the shopping bag full of papers referred to, as “I carried out in a shopping bag ...” referred to, the 1,500 page manuscript. Isn’t that correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
...
Q. Were you told to listen to certain excerpts from the tapes?
A. Yes, I was. I actually read them and then listened to them.
Q. Having read them and listened to them, did you find any difference between what you said and what was in the transcripts?
A. No, I didn’t.
Q. So the transcripts are a fair representation of what you said on those particular tapes?
A. Yes.
...
Q. I am now referring to ... the Lee Flynn tape, I am going to read to you a portion of that transcript. I am going [to ask you] if you remember reading this transcript before and then I’ll ask you about it. “I think that looking at materials such as this when you’ve asked for something is a very powerful step that one takes forward in one’s own progress toward, let’s say, greater awareness. And for me it was just that. Because I had good friends across the country, I had been working with them many years and lecturing and teaching in many places. It was very natural for me to take this material with me and say to my good friends, ‘Hey, look what I’ve got, do you want to read this?’ They wanted to read it. In fact, many people xeroxed off the original pages, $75 for it.” By the way, do you recall reading that transcript?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. The original pages would refer to the 1,500 pages of the manuscript?
A. Yes.
Q. And $75 for — $75, again, as you have testified, refers to the approximate cost of xeroxing the original manuscript?
A. At five cents each, yes.
Q. I’ll get that math right once. Thank you. And it says, “1,500 and a nickel a page. That’s a lot of money just to have the material. It was for anyone who wanted it.” That’s consistent with what Helen Schucman told you, isn’t it, originally, the Course was for everyone?
A. Yes.
...
Q. Her inner voice may be Jesus at some times, some say it’s Jesus and some say it’s not, right? And your position is, it’s not Jesus, is that correct?
A. That’s not my position.
Q. What is your position?
A. My position is that the word or name Jesus represents a spirit of unconditional love and that we had a good representative possibly historically many years ago, and that the world recognizes that as a symbol of forgiveness and that spirit is the essence of The Voice that came through Helen.
Q. And this goes on to say, “1,500 and at a nickel a page, that’s a lot of money just to have the material. It was for anyone who wanted it and it seemed very right that people would pass it along, copy it over until finally people’s copies were getting so light they couldn’t see them anymore.” You made that statement on the tape, didn’t you?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. So you were aware that people were taking the 1,500 page document for which $75 was paid at a nickel a page and they would themselves pass it on, copy over and over, is that correct?
A. No, it’s not.
Q. You weren’t telling the truth when you gave this speech?
A. I am telling you that I was embellishing, exaggerating.
Q. In your mind, embellishing and exaggerating is not telling a lie, it’s something different?
A. It’s dramatic storytelling.
Q. It could be rationalization, too, couldn’t it?
A. Perhaps.
...
Q. Ms. Skutch-Whitson, getting back to some of these transcripts, I am going to refer you now to the transcript referred to as Healing is But Another Name for God. And in that particular document the transcript reads, “And as I brought it around to share with my many friends, suddenly we recognized there were hundreds of people xeroxing copies and carrying around ... twenty pounds of manuscript.” twenty pounds refers to the heavier 1,500 page version, isn’t that correct?
A. That’s correct.
...
Q. And it goes on to say, “It was twenty pounds in manuscript, 1,500 pages, who wanted it in a form they could carry. And the miracles began, the miracles of publishing.” And then you continue on. So at least in terms of this statement, Ms. Skutch-Whitson, you refer to the fact when you’re speaking that there were hundreds of people xeroxing the copies at 1,500 pages, five cents a page, is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And I believe it’s your testimony at this trial that this again was your storyteller, is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. This fits the storytelling version as opposed to this is the Criswell version. There is no question that this doesn’t refer to the Criswell version?
A. It doesn’t.
Q. This refers to the storyteller?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Now, ... in this one you say, “I took the manuscript to a few people deeply entrenched in orthodox churchery.” Who was that?
A. I can’t recall.
Q. But you did take it to someone or more people involved in orthodox churchery?
A. I really don’t remember that.
...
Q. As a matter of fact, Father Groeschel had gotten the manuscript at or before the time that Ken Wapnick got it in the early ’70s, isn’t that correct?
A. I didn’t have a direct experience of that, but that’s what I believe is true.
Q. You’ve heard that Ken Wapnick and Father Groeschel in the early ’70s were involved [in] the delivery of the full manuscript, isn’t that correct?
A. I did hear that Father Benedict Groeschel was shown the manuscript, yes.
...
Q. Well, here you’re saying, these are your words, that there was no thought of its being published, “No one ever thought of it being published.” So when people didn’t want it to be published they didn’t think of putting a copyright notice on it. Isn’t that correct?
A. I don’t think I could answer yes or no to that statement. I don’t know what people you mean.
Q. But you did make the statement?
A. I certainly made the statement, yes.
Q. And you’re aware — when you say it seemed obvious that I was going to share it with people, you were aware — as a matter of fact, right after you got it you called up Mr. Jampolsky and you went out to California and you gave it to him?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And Helen and Bill had never met Mr. Jampolsky when you gave it to Mr. Jampolsky, isn’t that correct?
A. That’s correct.
...
Q. Now, you then go on to say that a Course was given by you to Jim Bolen, and I believe you testified as to that?
A. Yes.
Q. Jim Bolen, as I recall your testimony, was that he worked as a publisher of some magazine?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And Jim Bolen, as I understand it, at the present time, he receives a consulting fee from FIP or FACIM?
A. At the present time he doesn’t, but he did for about three years, yes.
Q. What period of time did he receive a consulting fee?
A. I believe probably from 1998 or 9. Could have been earlier, until recently. Until about a year ago.
Q. How much did he receive as a consulting fee?
A. Probably, it varied. I would imagine the most per year was 25,000, sometimes a little bit less.
Q. And what were his responsibilities for this consulting fee?
A. Well, I had a great deal of mail to answer.
...
Q. After you continue on in this particular exhibit talking about Jim Bolen you then say, “We had sent the manuscript. There were only three of them, one for each of them and one for me, and I was showing it to people and running it off on xeroxes as fast as I could.” That’s not Eleanor Criswell because you said Eleanor Criswell ran off the Eleanor Criswell version, isn’t that correct?
A. Yes. I did help her with some.
Q. You now say, “I was showing it to some people and running it is off on xerox as fast as I could to Hugh Lynn Cayce as a thank-you for inspiring Helen to continue when she was so fearful and wanted to stop.” So you did send a copy to Hugh Lynn Cayce?
A. I didn’t, but I said I did.
Q. So I’m clear, here is another statement that you didn’t send it, but you said that you did?
A. That’s right.
...
Q. Now, I am going to refer now to the Mazza tape ... in which you say, “And when I got the material, having a big mouth and not being able to keep a secret, I shared it with a lot of people. One of the first people I shared it with was a good friend of mine in California who was in deep personal trouble and it was Jerry Jampolsky.” What was that personal trouble you were referring to?
A. He was just recovering from a divorce. I believe he was drinking at that time, too. And that’s the only personal trouble I know of.
Q. And did you give him the Course because you felt it would be helpful to him in going through these troubled times?
A. No. He was my associate and colleague. I gave it to him because he was a psychiatrist and I wanted some feedback.
Q. It’s interesting that you say you wanted [some] feedback. You made a very big point of that yesterday several times that you wanted people’s opinions. Tell me, did you ever receive a written opinion from anybody that we could present to the Court indicating that they had reviewed A Course In Miracles, let’s say Mr. Jampolsky or Mr. Bolen, and they gave you an opinion on it? Did anybody ever do that in writing for you?
A. I didn’t need writing, no.
Q. So all we have on that is your testimony that you asked these people for their opinions, but we don’t have anything further than that in terms of a writing that they may have given you back, is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
...
Q. So Bill and Helen were familiar with the concept of copyright. They knew about publishing and putting copyright notices on, isn’t that correct?
A. I can’t tell you what they were familiar with, but I would assume yes.
Q. And during this entire period, even up to the time of May 29, 1975, they didn’t put a copyright notice on A Course In Miracles, did they?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. As a matter of fact, did they ever put any writing on at all that says, “Do not reproduce, do not copy”?
A. I never saw anything like that.
Q. And when you took it out to California, did you put a copyright notice on it the first time you went out?
A. No, I did not.
Q. And when you took it out to California did you put any restrictive legend on it, a few words saying, “Do not copy, do not reproduce”?
A. I just told the people I gave it to that they shouldn’t.
Q. My question was, did you put anything in writing?
A. No, I put nothing in writing, no. Sorry.
...
Q. Now, we need not spend a great deal of time on Journey Without Distance. You will acknowledge that there did appear in Journey Without Distance ... at least at one time a statement from — a statement about A Course In Miracles published by FIP to this effect, “Obviously, this was not going to be a very practicable solution. Not only was the material in this form much too cumbersome, but Judy couldn’t keep lending her copy out for 24 hours to everyone who wanted it. Despite this expedience that did develop, Jim’s copy started to be reproduced, and those copies were then copied. And before long, there were over a hundred people in the San Francisco area in possession of A Course In Miracles.” Am I correct that at least in one version of Journey Without Distance published by FIP those words appear?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And in the prior version, from 1984 until about 1996, published by Celestial and sold by the Foundation For Inner Peace, those words did appear?
A. Yes.
...
Q. So I shall and I’ll ask you about this, Ms. Skutch-Whitson. I’m referring now to ... what’s been referred to by Mr. Rosenberg as the Wagner tape. And I believe you said this, “As I said yes, I did feel that I was the one who was supposed to have this because it felt so right, and I was ready for my spiritual education. And after all, I was there, wasn’t I? So I took it to California, as far away as I could get from New York, because these two people were so fearful for having their professional life endangered by their scientific past ...” and there was a word that no one could hear. “... and in going to California, having worked out there with many people in the scientific community for a long time and many friends, shared with those type of people those kinds of friends who were just like all of us in this room, what I had found. Remember then it was in typewritten manuscript pages, 1,500 of them, and the clamour for it was strong and I started to run it off, xerox, xerox, xerox, and it got to be terribly expensive, $75 every time you do it and very weighty.” Weighty was the twenty pounds, isn’t that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And $75 refers to the 1,500 page manuscript?
A. Yes, it did.
Q. “Xerox, xerox, xerox” is what was done, I think you acknowledge, for those copies that you do acknowledge, you did xeroxed the 1,500 page manuscript?
A. I xeroxed two copies ... 3,000 pages. That’s “xerox, xerox, xerox.”
...
Q. Now, again, I’m looking at a copy of this newsletter of FACIM, Foundation for A Course In Miracles. This one is dated December 1992. Again, it has your name on it along with Bob Skutch. And again it says, “This is a departure from our usual ones ...” You’ve joined as author. You being Judith Skutch-Whitson. And in this particular document it says, “We were informed that a copyright could not be granted to a nonphysical author such as Jesus nor to ‘anonymous.’” Now, do you recall that this Lighthouse — this particular document was written and circulated and disseminated?
A. Yes, I do.
...
Q. You wrote this because you knew it to be true?
A. I didn’t write it.
Q. But you put your name on as author?
A. That’s correct.
Q. Do you usually let people send out documents under your name?
A. Certainly not.
Q. So is this statement true that, “We were informed that a copyright could not be granted to a nonphysical author such as Jesus”?
A. No.
Q. So, again, it’s your testimony that this is a document put out by FACIM bearing your signature which contains an untrue statement?
A. Yes.
Q. When we made reference to and we read before from A Course In Miracles concerning honesty, is that honest or dishonest?
A. I believe now that was dishonest. But at the time, of course, I didn’t. It’s a reference that we used because we had used that reference before many times.
...
Q. So, just so I understand, in all of the speeches that you gave that we have the transcripts here, on many occasions when you gave those speeches and made those statements, that was because you were embellishing and telling stories. And today these are not stories. Today is when you’re telling the truth?
A. Exactly.
Q. But you do — by your own code or moral sense, having read the Course, telling something under oath or not under oath are essentially the same, aren’t they?
A. Oh, yes.
MR. FABIAN: I have no further questions, your Honor. ♥
Rev. Tony Ponticello is CMC's 20th minister. He currently (12.12.22) serves as the CMC's Executive Minister and is President of CMC's Board of Directors. He was ordained by the CMC on Oct. 17, 1997.
c/o Community Miracles Center
POB 470341
San Francisco, CA 94147
(415)621-2556
miracles@earthlink.net
www.miracles-course.org
This article appeared in the June 2003 (Vol. 17 No. 4) issue of Miracles Monthly. Miracles Monthly is published by Community Miracles Center in San Francisco, CA. CMC is supported solely by people just like you who: become CMC Supporting Members, Give Donations and Purchase Books and Products through us.