Site Index

Overview of the Michael Foundation Trial
by Dick and Peggy Johnson

Peggy and I just returned from Oklahoma City.  We attended all but the

first day of trial.  That which follows is the writer's impression of

what took place, including some guesswork, some insights gained, the

disappointments felt and some opinions of "The rest of the Story."

Thanks to R. Burns, Claudia and Lee whose records I have used for the

days they previously reported. 

Please simply weigh any material wherein  I have expressed opinions or

seem to "color" the events.  We feel very fortunate to have been there to

hear the origins and history of Big Blue openly and freely discussed.  It

was a strange and freeing feeling to look over at the Jurors and know

they were hearing for the first time the story of its gift to humankind.

I don't know if they were impressed, but I was.  I wish readers from all

sides could have been there.  So many myths became just that.  The

mystery remains, but some of the gloss and wishful rumors are gone. I

suspect Matthew Block's book will clarify this wonderful gift even more.

Michael Foundation, a nonprofit corporation, had published "Jesus A New

Revelation," (JANR) and therefor was the "copyright infringer."  U.F. had

filed suit in Arizona and joined Harry McMullan as a party defendant.

The case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (incorrect venue)  (M.F.

being located in Oklahoma and U.F. located in Chicago).  Michael

Foundation. filed a "Declaratory Judgment" action in Oklahoma asking that

the Court determine either that the U.F. Copyright was invalid or that

JANR did not infringe their copyright. U.F. filed a counterclaim for

violation of Copyright, Trademark and a claim of Cybersquatting

(acquiring domain names belonging to U.F.).

Jury trial in the 10th Circuit is set by rule.  The Jury can vary from

six to twelve and unless agreed upon by the parties must reach a decision

unanimously.  Apparently the parties agreed to eight. Jury selection

began Tuesday morning (June 12) and ended up with four men and four

women.  Some were quite young and most appeared middle aged.  They were

admonished to discuss the case with no one, not even among themselves,

till they retired to deliberate.

Michael Foundation, as Plaintiff presented its case first, calling only

two witnesses:  Richard Keeler and Harry McMullan.  A good part of

Richard's time was spent in identifying exhibits.  I have little

information about his testimony on Tuesday as we didn't get to Court

until commencement on Wednesday. Before trial began the Judge had ruled

that the Table of Contents could not constitute co-authorship.

Tom Allen attended part of that first day and said they spent a lot of

time arguing over the use of the word patient.  It was resolved that he

would be called "The Patient/Contact Person."    On examination by his

attorneys (there were three of them plus one who handled one witness),

Rich spent considerable time relating his first visit with Dr. Sadler in

which Sadler told him numerous details on how the U.B. came about.   When

asked his opinion about JANR, he gave a funny anecdote about someone

stealing 800 of his 2000 head of cattle - and that they'd call that

person a rustler.  On redirect he was asked about his memory and he

admitted that it was good and that he had taken a memory course.  When

asked what course,  he tried and tried, but couldn't remember.  At least

we had one good laugh that day.  It did seem strange to some of us that

Dr. Sadler, who required all forum members to take an oath of silence, to

give such details to a college student whom he had just met.

Notwithstanding these two caveats, my impression was that Rich answered

the questions honestly and didn't try to get in a lot of extraneous

material. He was emphatic that Dr. Sadler had told him that the Urantia

Papers were all in the handwriting of the Patient. (Later in the trial

the Foundation stipulated that the Patient/Contact Person was legally the

Author).  My impression was that they had tried to explain away the

Burton position that he was the author and were concerned that simply

asking questions would not support the "Work for Hire" position they had

taken in this case.  If the patient was the author, then they could

somehow show that they had supervision over him as a commissioned work.

("Work for Hire can be either as an employee-employer relationship or a

'not-for-pay' commissioned work).  Rich had sent an email to a reader's

inquiry, explaining that they claim of "work for hire" was because of the

first 61 pages of the book.

Harry was the second and last witness for Michael Foundation.  Except for

his introduction Harry stuck to answers to questions from his attorney

(Murry Abrovich).  He told how he had come upon U.B. and how deeply it

had touched him, especially the life of Jesus.  The shocker came on cross

examination when he was asked whether he had any reason to doubt the

story of how the book was written.  He said that he did.  He thought it

strange that if all the papers were in the patient's handwriting, and

they had already consulted copyright advice, that he hadn't gotten a

formal assignment from the patient and locked it up somewhere.  He felt

that the Doctor had a fiduciary relationship with the patient and should

have dealt carefully with him. But in addition all of the original

manuscript had been destroyed, the typewritten copy of the work was also

destroyed and any person having any knowledge was then sworn to secrecy

regarding the patient's identity and any knowledge about the origin of

the papers.  Then to top all this off, they wait 20 years to publish

them.  The U.F. attorneys made a good argument that notwithstanding these

seemingly suspicious events; the Doctor and the Patient had nearly 20

years of association and it was understandable that they wouldn't have

formalized their mutually understood trust. That the original copyright

was taken out in the belief that it was a "Work for Hire" and they didn't

require a formal  assignment.  Harry also said that other works have been

inspired and the writers could have obtained a copyright as the author.

That the Urantia Papers were written just as most books, even if

inspired, are written.

At this point it was, in my opinion,  that the issue of the renewal was

getting lost in the stories about the origin. If the patient was legally

"the author," then, although the copyright was valid, only his heirs or

estate could renew in 1983.  The two exceptions would be a "work for hire

as a commissioned work" or if the papers were held to be a compilation or

collection -- an encyclopedic work.  In either case, the Foundation could

renew in its own right.

An affidavit by Scott Forsythe (who worked at the U.F.) was read wherein

he reported that it was important to divert attention from the upcoming

renewal of the copyright in 1982. No other testimony seemed to clarify

why it should be secretive.

At this point Michael Foundation and McMullan concluded their part of the

trial.  This was on Thursday morning.  Carolyn Kendall was called to

testify to her Father's diary which he had kept as an early Forum member.

 Notwithstanding that they were not to take notes, he had made notes of

all the papers read at the Sunday meetings.  Some of the papers in his

diary had different titles and the page numbers were quite different --

one note of over 3,000 pages (they were typewritten).  Much was made of

subtle changes in titles, some of which appeared to be part headings.  I,

for one, was thoroughly confused as to their importance.  They, of

course, were trying to show that the papers were not complete and in a

different order.  On cross it was constantly pointed out that the "Sadler

History" and the papers themselves all indicated that they were complete

in 1934 and 1935.  The History uses the phrase "completed and certified

in 1934 and 1935.  No testimony cleared up the use of the word certified.

Gard Jameson was next examined by U.F. attorneys.  He appeared much more

warm and humanlike than Rich.  Primarily his testimony was apparently to

paint Harry as a disgruntled, vengeful malcontent.  He acknowledged that

he and Mo Siegle and Harry had at one time wanted to print the Life of

Jesus as a separate volume but that they had changed their minds.  He

also denied having donated funds for the Maahera defense - admitting that

he donated to help JJ Johnson.  He also said that the U.F. had apologized

to JJ. for mistakenly including him in the Maaherra lawsuit. Others were

somewhat upset with his apparent disrespect toward the Fellowship.

(Frankly, I was embarrassed by his apparent willingness to vilify an old

friend).

Next was Rob Davis from Oxford Press.  His testimony was to establish

that JANR would hurt the sale of Urantia books. He was followed by

another expert witness to establish the economics of book sales.  They

flew him in from Cairo Egypt!  Turned out that he got most of his

information from Rob Davis and then we discovered that Rob was a reader

of U.B. and knew the Foundation.  Ah, what a tangled web (please

disregard). Keeler had testified that the 2,600 of JANR didn't effect

book sales.  Tonya, on the other hand, said that it did and that Keeler

was just a Trustee and wouldn't know about such things.

A former employee of Harry's gave testimony of a luncheon with Harry in

which Harry had threatened to keep the Foundation in Court.  Les Tibbles

wrote the Foundation about his conversation and repeated all the details

on the stand.

(I may have some of these witnesses out of the order they appeared)

Tiki Harris and Mary Lou Hales who were forum members testified about all

the years of questions and receipt of papers.  They were both grand

ladies and all of us enjoyed having them there.  They, of course, were to

establish the "work for hire" claims.  No questions no papers is what the

written history (attributed to Dr. Sadler)  had stated.  They of course

meant if there were no questions they wouldn't have gotten any papers.

But it could have meant until they finished questioning, the next paper

wouldn't be given yet.  Oh, well, I don't think the Dr. wrote it anyway.

Most do, I know.

Next was Tonya Baney.  She rambled quite a bit instead of answering

questions directly.  She, too, painted a picture of an angry, vengeful

McMullan out to destroy the Foundation.  Next up was Ann Garner whose

sole testimony was likewise to paid a similar picture of Harry.  My

disappointment was over Les, Gard and Ann.  They seemed perfectly willing

to disclose private conversations - not just in answer to direct

questions, but went out of their ways to "spill the beans."  Ah,

friendship, why must courts steal you from us?

Now the star of the show:  Barbara Newsome.  Seems she and Christy worked

diligently amassing letters, journals, records, and writings trying to

prepare a history of the movement.  Her testimony was abruptly terminated

after a long conference of the five attorney's and the Judge (Judge

West). After a 15 minute recess Barbara resumed the stand and began

recounting from her memory all of the different steps of receipt of the

papers which she said continued into 1942.  Because all this was hearsay,

the Court admonished the Jury to disregard it.

(With the Jury absent the Foundation tried to get a memo by Barbara

introduced.  She had testified that the records, journal, etc. were kept

in a locked file drawer in a back room on the second floor of 533 and

that Christy announced (on Dec. 30, 1979) that they "had disappeared."

Barbara claims to have immediately written a 30 page memo of her memory

of those records and the Doctor's Journal. But for 22 years she has never

told the Fellowship, the Trustees or any other person that she had done

this until on Friday of last week.  The Judge disallowed the memo or

further testimony. Those in attendance have dubbed it "the secret

document file that disappeared" theory.

The Foundation then rested their side of the case.  Harry was called in

rebuttal.  He covered some of Tibbles testimony and also Gard's denial of

donating to help Maaherra ($1,500 worth).  A letter from Harry to Gard

was introduced indicating that he was still friendly to Gard but

determined to break the hold the Foundation had over readers.  On Cross

Harry admitted he had sent an e-mail to a friend saying he'd like to

drive a Ryder truck to the Foundation headquarters.  (Remember, the trial

started Tuesday rather than Monday because of the execution Monday of

McVeigh).  That was quite a shocker to those in the court room-especially

the Jurors.  Harry expressed his regrets over having used such black

humor.

The Foundation ended their surrebuttal.  Both sides made motions for

directed verdict which were denied.  The survey about Urantia religion

was not introduced or alluded to.  Thus ended the fifth day.

Day six began with instructions to the Jury.  The Judge first told them

that the trademark, trade name and cybersquatting issues had been

resolved.  (That resolution is to be confidential - for how long, we do

not know)  He indicated that they had a series of questions to answer

(interrogatories).

1)  Did the U. papers constitute a work for hire or a commissioned work?

2)  Did the U. papers constitute a compiled work- a periodic,

encyclopedic or composite work. ?

If yes to either 1 or 2, then check the box on the verdict form

indicating the copyright renewal was valid.

If no to both, then check the box indicating the renewal was invalid

If yes to 1 or 2 they went to the questions pertaining to liability;

whether deliberate and willful.  (Statutory damages from $200 (if under

color of right) up to $750,000. 

He then read instructions on the law for nearly  an hour .  I wish I had

a copy to share with you.  As I listened to them I felt they were

succinct and clear and would enable even laymen to understand them.  A

couple of them you could identify as having been insisted upon by the

Foundation and several of them were obviously propounded by Harry's team.

 All in all I thought that they were fair to both sides and would make

the Jury's task very clear.

Murray Abowitz used 35 minutes to make his closing argument.  He used

Rich Keeler's and Gard's testimony to show that the papers were meant to

be a whole - not a compiled series of stories.  He again apologized for

Harry's Ryder Truck statement.  He focused on the fact that the

Revelatory Commission "drove" the work -- they decided what to write,

what questions to answer or not, and how to answer the questions.  The

patient nor the Doctor, nor the Contact Commission, nor the Forum had

anything to do with the writings. 

Steve Hill argued for 50 minutes, using charts and exhibits.  He argued

that Christy took notes concerning the first 57 papers; furnished the

shorthand equipment and the printing costs as a commissioned work.  He

indicated that this was not a copyright case but a case of revenge. His

argument proceeded smoothly and convincingly.  But he spent not a word in

trying to argue that it was a composite or compiled work. Murry made sure

the Jury noted this failure when he took his remaining 15 minutes of

rebuttal.  He spent some time on the difference between copyright and

public domain.  He also pointed out that if a juror wrote a book but the

publisher paid for printing it, the author is the writer not the

publisher.  He also reminded them that Christy said she didn't change a

word, so she was not involved in the writing of any of the papers.  He

then explained the burden of proof - by preponderance of the evidence. 

At 2:40 the Jury retired to deliberate.  They sent one message to the

Judge saying they are "far from reaching a verdict."  They asked for

copies of the 1955 U.B. and a 1983 copy, Sadler's history, Carolyn

Kendall's history, Keeler's email about the table of contents and the

Declaration of Trust. They were dismissed for the night. My feeling after

hearing his instructions and the form of the interrogatories was that

their task was going to be difficult, but at least they would know

exactly what they had to decide as facts.

We arrived in Court about ten a.m.  Other than the lawyers only Peggy and

I were there.  The Jury was still out.  We also learned of negotiations

for settlement that had occurred after Harry had completed his side of

the case.  Several proposals were made, one of which would enable the

Foundation to keep the copyright. None of them came to fruition.  It had

delayed trial for almost a half day.  By noon, no decision was reached.

The day before there were around 30 spectators in attendance. By noon

there were only six or seven of us.   We all had lunch.

The Jury sent a question about how to renew a copyright.  The Judge and

the lawyers agreed they should just re-read certain instructions already

given them.  They then asked whether they had to consider the 1955

copyright.  About two o'clock we heard that they had reached a decision.

Stacy called Harry and Mindy Williams called Hal and Tara.  These plus

John were the only spectators when the Jury filed in.  Harry was on his

way but didn't get to hear the verdict read.  The Judge asked if they had

reached a decision; the foreman announced they had.  He handed the

interrogatories and verdict to the bailiff who passed it to the clerk.

The clerk handed it to the judge who read it (for about an hour, it

seemed).  The clerk stood to take the verdict but the Judge waived his

hand and said that he would read it.  He then read To Interrogatory

Number One - Answer No.  To Interrogatory Number Two - Answer No.

Verdict the copyright is invalid.

End of Trial of the Century.

>From all these facts and histories and testimony I came away with some

personal observartions:

1)  So long as keeping the "text inviolate" is equated with keeping the

"copyright."  there was bound to be problems.  Bill Sadler forsaw that in

some of his writings.  Martin Myers made sure it would end up in court

fights.  They have now had King, Burton, CUBS, Maaherra/Johnson, Michael

Foundation in Arizona and now M.F. in Oklahoma.  And the copyright

"mandate" is suspect from the very beginning.

2)  One impression we, who were there, agree on is that Harry's case

contrasted favorably with that of the Foundation. Harry seldom wandered

from the facts of copyright and copyright renewal.  He tried not to paint

the Foundation as an Evil Empire nor discredit their witnesses unless it

bore some relation to the legal questions.  It must have been difficult

not to go into the past and all the heartrending events of the past 20

years.  The Foundation, on the other hand, while dealing with copyright

spent almost an equal amount of testimony and time in attacking Harry.

We were home by five on Wednesday ready to pack up and leave Oklahoma.

Instead we were invited to a spur-of-the-moment pot luck, with Claudia

and Lee as prime cooks.  About 20 people came and we rehashed some of the

events of the trial....to all the congratulations to Harry he would say:

"No, I didn't win.  We did.  Now what are we going to do with our

new-faught freedom." 

 

3)  At the end of this seven days of listening and wondering I have to

ask this question:  "If, as the papers and Dr. Sadler and Christy all

say, the papers were "indited and put into English in 1934 and 1935, WHY

all these questions?  To me, there are two equally plausible answers. One

is evolutionary and the other just plain arbitrary.

On Page 1 of the Foreword they say:  "I have been directed....as they may

be hereinafter used ....which the Orvonton corps of truth revealers have

been authorized to TRANSLATED INTO the English language of

Urantia.(Emphasis added)

 They had the papers done before ever they contacted us humans.

1)  Because of restrictions they are not at liberty to just plunk down a

complete revelation without contact with the then prevalent level of

"earned knowledge."  Thus they could only disclose what they already had

prepared when these humans (the forum) showed that they knew enough to

ask questions about subjects they were prepared to disclose to us.

2)  Because the papers were so all-inclusive they needed questions to

know what to include.  If "no questions; no papers" means what this

implies, then the papers were considerably longer  but they only gave the

subject those which the forum were interested in enough to pose

questions.

Thus, perhaps the papers were complete by Celestials who gave us just

what we could handle.  This also explains Sadler's statement "no

questions; no papers", and why Part IV was given as a whole and needed no

questions.

If this is the case, I wonder what additional material we would have had,

if they asked even more searching and far-seeing questions.