Could that be the source of much speculations of late? Critics jumped the gun as usual and made accusations based on nothing but rumors we know little about. Some even advanced the possibility that the information could have come from their PC folders, when two out of the three protesters never were in the Church to start with and when the other has made his alleged HIV+ condition publicly known for more than twelve years.
Could it be that the officers, knowing the two were (very openly) gay, voiced their own prejudice about gays and HIV+?
Update Jan 16: Scarff writes in a post to ARS: "The LA Times reporter present informed Graham Berry that Muriel blurted the information out."
So now we have a 5th hand account... Muriel --> Journalist --> Berry --> Scarff. And that is assuming that the Journalist heard it directly and not from the officer. Besides, it is unclear from Scarff's post whether this information was blurted out about the two of them or about Scarff only.
Besides, if the LA Times did have this information, why did it not report it in it article? It only said "Officers also asked two of the men whether they were HIV-positive, protesters said".
So far, I have not seen a shred of proof to sustain the initial allegation that: "Scientology had obtained and distributed personal medical information from the private health records of AGP and Happy Smurf".
But that won't prevent Anonymous moralfags at WhyWeBWAAAAAAA to spread the story and call those with legitimate questions as to whether we have evidence that the story is true to engage in "Scilon Spin-control" - another notorious example of Anonymous' motto "dox or STFU", which they brag about but do not apply.
- Apr. 25, 1997 letter from Garry Scarff where he reveals his alleged HIV+ condition
- Oct 22, 1997 Garry Scarff post where claims that he has been HIV+ for two years
- Jan 16: dox or STFU
- Jan15: Jason Beghe Message to Anonymous - Grow Up!
- Jan 14: More Speculations About the HIV+ Claim
- Jan 13: HIV+ Rumor Only a Rumor