Karen de la Carriere

Karen de la Carriere is an obsessed, unstable and bitter anti-Scientologist who with her husband, Jeffrey Augustine, prowls the Internet fringe spreading lies and smears.

De la Carriere’s and Augustine’s complete lack of credibility emerged for all to see when a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge exposed their penchant to lie.

De la Carriere had sued her accountant, William Greene, claiming that a 2003 promissory note and trust deed Greene held on her house was a forgery. When Greene filed a cross complaint, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson not only ruled in favor of Greene, he found that de la Carriere’s forgery claim was a complete falsehood.

Judge Johnson’s ruling is packed with statements about de la Carriere’s lack of truthfulness and Augustine’s lack of credibility. In short, the Court exposed the two of them as pathological liars.

Judge Johnson described de la Carriere as follows:

• Untruthful, about many aspects of the case—presenting testimony that was false, conflicting, exaggerated and evasive.
• Carriere’s evidence… is not credible and has been rejected.
• Carriere has tried to back away from this admission, but her testimony is not credible.
• At trial, even Carriere begrudgingly admitted that the signature was hers.
• Carriere’s charge that Greene had forged her signature was reckless and desperate, and it is illustrative of why the Court has so little confidence in what Carriere has said.
• The Court also finds that Carriere signed the 2003 Note and DOT [Deed of Trust] with full knowledge of and consent to all of its terms. Greene so testified, and this aspect of his testimony is credible. Carriere’s evidence to the contrary is not credible or persuasive. Carriere’s testimony that she did not sign a complete version of the instrument is not credible. The testimony by Carriere and her husband Jeffrey Augustine that Carriere first learned of the instrument in 2012 is not credible.
• Carriere testified that Greene assured her that she would not have to pay principal or interest on both the 1998 Note and DOT and the 2003 Note and DOT, but this testimony is not credible.

Judge Johnson further described de la Carriere’s claims as “incendiary” and that Greene was entitled to recover “a total amount of $149,997.69 through July 31, 2015, with continuing prejudgment interest at $23.68 per day through entry of judgment.”

The Court ruling only confirms that de la Carriere is among the most discredited, unbelievable and unstable sources for media. She churns out hysterical unfounded rants to the tabloids. She is exceptionally bitter at being removed from her position in the Church 30 years ago and will say anything, falsely “corroborating” any lie that attacks the Church, no matter how absurd.

She worked as a casino croupier and a call girl, admitting later … she had one-night stands with as many as 50 men.

De la Carriere has a long history of instability in her life, dating back to when she moved to England from her native country of India in the early 1960s. She worked as a casino croupier and a call girl, admitting later in a self-written life history that during that time she had one-night stands with as many as 50 men.

 

She also engaged in a long-term arrangement with a married British parliamentary adviser. She was set up with a posh apartment, expensive clothing and a large allowance, to be available on call for her services.

Wanting to turn her life around, de la Carriere joined the Church. But she failed to live up to the ethical standards required and was removed from her position in the religious order nearly 30 years ago.

 

Well into her 50s at that time, de la Carriere returned to her roots to support herself, even sending email solicitations to potential “johns” under the name “Snow Suzy,” one of 13 different names and aliases, complete with price lists and photographs.

De la Carriere also destroyed her relationship with her late son. Her daughter-in-law witnessed de la Carriere’s decision to disown him: “[Karen de la Carriere] was just screaming and yelling and … just started insulting him… just saying very disheartening, very hurtful, hurtful things to him. And in the end saying that he was not her son. She said ‘I disown you. You’re disinherited. You are not my son. Don’t call me again. Don’t ever contact me again.’ And then she hung up on him.”

“[De la Carriere] said ‘I disown you. You’re disinherited. You are not my son. Don’t call me again. Don’t ever contact me again.’ And then she hung up on him.”

One of de la Carriere’s former husbands also witnessed violent rages against her son: “At the time he was 6 or 7 years old… she would go into these incredible rages, just severe violent rages and she would take it out on him. And he was just a little kid at the time and he was just overwhelmed by that. I’d seen her do this on several occasions.”

When her son later died tragically, de la Carriere, by her own choice, had been estranged from him for years. Yet on a national television show, she held up a photo of him and conveyed the false impression that he had “disconnected” from her, when clearly the opposite was the truth.

Now in her 70s and unable to pursue her past line of work, she and her husband, under various aliases, post psychotic ramblings and peddle stories to tabloids, seeking to spread bigotry and hatred against the Church of Scientology and the leader of the religion.