1. The Directors have consistently committed fraud on the tribunals before which they appeared by presenting themselves as the legitimate Board of Directors and Trustees under the 1892 Deed of Trust, whereas they are actually an illegitimate and fraudulently perpetrated five-member ecclesiastical Board.

2. The Directors have manipulated evidence and colluded with ostensible adversaries to withhold probative evidence of the actual organization. In this matter, the Directors have collected, over the years, judicial determinations, founded on misinformation, to support their claims.

3. Most recently, in Weaver v. Wood, the Directors presented themselves as the supreme hierarchical authority of the Christian Science movement. The parties, moreover, agreed at the outset that specific Church documents, the Manual and Deeds of Trust of 1892 and 1898, governed their controversy.

4. The parties decided in advance of a trial to limit any inquiry into Church organizational structure to the parameters of these three documents, thus precluding the courts from delving into related instruments, such as the 1903 and 1904 Deeds of Trust, judicial consideration of which would have elucidated the issues and aided a correct understanding of Church polity.

5. The fact that the parties concurred in concealing probative evidence suggests a secret "understanding" or agreement between purported adversaries as collusion.

6. Ostensible opponents collude in order to defraud and individual or to obtain an illegal objective.

7. In Weaver v. Wood, one objective of the parties was to renew the judicial imprimatur on a
fraudulently perpetrated organizational structure. Their fraud was on the Superior Court, the appeals
Court, and finally the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The parties were misleading the courts.

8. The parties were successful in that the Weaver court reiterated in dicta the earlier erroneous
conclusions of the Eustace court that the entire management of the Church passed into the Directors.s
hands at Mrs. Eddy passing.

9. The main reason for this error is that, due to the parties. agreement to sanitize evidence,
the Court did not have before it all necessary documents.

10. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has found .fraud on the court. where a party
tampers with the fair administration of justice by deceiving institutions set up to protect and safeguard the
public, or otherwise abuses or undermines the integrity of the judicial process.

11. The Plaintiff must show through clear and convincing evidence that the fraudulent conduct
is part of a pattern or scheme to defraud.

12. The parties in Weaver were undoubtedly aware of discrepancies between the requirements
of Church foundational documents and actual Church polity, due to the publicity such inconsistencies
had recently received in books and papers circulated within the Christian Science field.

13. The parties decided to limit the trial court.s consideration of Church documents to those
which supported the current organization, rather than to include the related instruments that would have
revealed an entirely different structure contemplated by Mary Baker G. Eddy. This manipulation of documentary
evidence to legitimize a false Church organization misled the Court and thus undermined the
integrity of the judicial process.

14. The five-member Board of Directors also committed a fraud on the courts in 1913 by
representing themselves to a New Hampshire Probate Court as the four-member Board of Directors
under the 1892 Deed of Trust in order to be declared the Trustees under Mrs. Eddy.s Will.

15. The 1913 Directors were actually a fraudulently perpetuated temporary Board that had
been created by Mrs. Eddy to manage Mother Church business only during her lifetime.

16. The residue of Mrs. Eddy.s estate was not left to the Trustees under the Will of Mary Baker
Eddy, but to The First Church of Christ, Scientist under the direction of the four-member Board of Trustee/
Directors.

17. After consolidating her plan, as embodied in the 1903 and 1904 Deed of Trust and the
Manual, to decentralize the Christian Science movement, Mrs. Eddy also amended her Will by codicil
which hanged the residuary legatee from the Mother Church to The First Church of Christ, Scientist.

18. The Directors kept this fact from the Probate Court, so the Court remained unaware of any
distinction between the residuary legatee of the Codicil and the residuary legatee of the Will.