Showing posts with label Leslie Malm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leslie Malm. Show all posts

Saturday, August 8, 2020

Grace Episcopal Alexandria: More Evidence It’s Toxic

Grace Episcopal Alexandria

Here’s another good one, allegedly from Lisa Gardner.

By way of background, Lisa’s father is a member of St. John’s, Hingham Massachusetts, where former Grace members Peter and Cheryl Barnes now are members. Lisa is friends with Bob and Leslie Malm and Lisa Medley—which right there speaks volumes.

Of course, Lisa’s lies are consistent with other conduct from Grace Church, including Bob Malm’s perjury. And there’s no sign that anyone at Grace Church objects to this behavior or repudiates it.

So if you are looking for a church, or you are applying for the rector position, just know that this sort of conduct is part and parcel of life at Grace Church. And the larger Episcopal Church. In fact, falsely accusing folks of domestic violence is nothing for folks at Grace Church — after all, it’s even okay to urge people to commit suicide and to falsely accuse them of embezzlement.

Welcome to Sugarland! And welcome to the church that 30 years of perjuring priest Bob Malm produced!

Grace Episcopal Alexandria

Tuesday, June 16, 2020

More Protests Under Way, Legal Documents Filed

Today brings several developments, including more protests outside Grace Church. Additionally, I formally filed court documents asking for leave to amend my pleadings and transfer to circuit court. 

As mentioned previously, today’s court filings were necessitated by my decision to pursue punitive damages against Leslie Malm and Lindsey Malm Anders in conjunction with what I allege is their defamation. Of course, I also have included Bob Malm’s defamation per se in the case against him, and have filed suit against Kelly Gable based on the recent republication of her defamatory statements, in which she and Bob Malm allege that I embezzled money from a previous employer. Indeed, Kelly purports to have first-hand knowledge of this, so it will be interesting to see how she responds during discovery.

Below are photos taken while protesting and a screen cap of one of the two motions filed.

Speaking of, I am considering filing suit in the next few weeks against another person connected with the church. Stay tuned!

Monday, June 15, 2020

BREAKING NEWS: More Legal Developments

As many already know, some time ago I filed suit for defamation in general district court against Lindsey Malm Anders and Leslie Malm. Today, however, I notified Wayne Cyron, their attorney, that I will be removing the cases to circuit court.

The issue is that general district court is a court of limited jurisdiction, able to hear cases in which the amount in controversy is less than $25,000. Because I believe that several of Leslie and Lindsey’s written statements about me are defamatory per se, I have decided to pursue punitive damages of at least $350,000 against each. As a result, circuit court is the appropriate jurisdiction.

The other advantage of circuit court is that a wider range of discovery is permissible, including depositions, interrogatories, and requests for admission. The downside, though, is that it is a much more protracted process.

As a result of my decision, the first return dates of these cases, which were set for late June, early July, are now cancelled. I hope to have the new cases filed by the end of the week.

Once the new cases are filed, the defendants have 27 days to file a response, so it will likely be mid to late July before the cases start to move forward.

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

Reflections: Ethics, Legal Practice and Representing Lindsey Anders and Leslie Malm

Comment from Twitter About Bob Malm’s Conduct

Earlier today, I received a copy of a document indicating that Lindsey Anders and Leslie Malm are now represented by legal counsel in Alexandria. Out of respect for the attorney involved, I am not yet prepared to disclose the document, nor the identity of legal counsel. I do, however, want to reflect on the challenges facing legal counsel in such situations.

First, let’s look at the ethical issues confronting attorneys. Per the professional rules, these include the duty of candor to the tribunal. That means being truthful with the court, including not permitting deception by silence. Further, the ABA contemplates that attorneys must correct false material evidence, including that offered during discovery. This may take the form of private remonstration, supplemental answers to interrogatories, and more. But if the client fails to correct the deception, the lawyer may be forced to take matters into her own hands, even possibly having to withdraw from representation and disclose the false testimony to the tribunal. And while the rules talk about “actual knowledge,” and “reasonable steps,” neither can an attorney turn a willingly blind eye to client fabrications.

In the case of Bob Malm, I submit that Jeff “Sugarland” Chiow’s conduct failed to comport with these requirements. He knew, or had cause to know, that Bob committed perjury by claiming that Mom, or someone purporting to be her, contacted him repeatedly to set up appointments, then canceled. This simply didn’t happen, yet Bob and his attorney took no steps to correct his perjury. Moreover, the issue is material, as he cites this as one of the reasons for his assertion that Mom’s blog was really mine. Moreover, Bob separately asserted under oath that all of the answers to his interrogatories were true, so he lied a second time. Yet I have seen no evidence to suggest that Sugarland corrected his client’s lies. And then there is Bob’s fabrication that, to his knowledge, only his wife had blogged about our conflict...the list goes on. (Those new to the matter may wish to discover elsewhere in this blog the reasons behind Sugarland’s moniker.) 

Into this ethical morass we have a second issue, which is how members of the Malm family handle conflict. My conclusion is that Bob often gaslights others, or engages in revisionist history. Both Leslie and Lindsey appear to have picked up this habit, although to a lesser extent. Some examples:
  • Leslie Malm’s alleged claim to third parties that I admitted in court that Mom’s blog was really mine, both facially ludicrous and false. 
  • False assertions as to the genesis of our conflict.
  • Leslie Malm’s claim that I have stated that my mother was in her 90’s.
  • Fabrications in which they allege that I have misused church funds, engaged in criminal activity, and am mentally ill.
Woven as a thread throughout is juvenile behavior and ad hominem attacks by the Malms, ranging from comments about my sexual orientation, to remarks about the size of various body parts, to remarks about my mother. None of these are pretty, yet Bob and his family seemingly are all about outward appearance. 

Thus, the perennial issue facing all attorneys seemingly is at play here, which is whether Lindsey and Leslie will be candid and truthful with their legal counsel. Will they admit to their behavior, or will they try to pull a fast one on legal counsel? Past conduct suggests that the answer could well be the latter.

That of course raises other questions, including whether counsel for the diocese will ignore prior courtroom fabrications on the part of Bob and the parish. While both client and counsel may well find this to be a tempting route, the long-term interests of the diocese, the parish, and The Episcopal Church suggest disclosure is the wiser course. Nor is it wise to defend a series of fabrications, misleading statements of law and fact to the courts, ad hominem attacks, and other questionable conduct on the part of Bob Malm, Sugarland Chiow, and the parish.

There’s also the reality that, in litigation, the biggest issues often are non-legal in nature, ill-suited to resolution in the courts. Bob Malm’s strategy of decreeing critics “domestic terrorists,” his ugly and false comments to the parish vestry, to church members, and to others about me (non-privileged, since I was no longer a member of the parish, and I believe made with malice), have caused lasting damage to the church, the diocese, and the bishopric, regardless of the outcome of these cases. Indeed, some of Bob’s ugliest comments were made within the church, and having met with no objection, may illustrate larger issues within the organization. Nor is it easy to defend efforts to subpoena a dying woman in violation of Pennsylvania law.

In short, no matter how long this and the related cases are in litigation, and they could well go on for years, the harm caused by Bob Malm’s misconduct and that of parish legal counsel is largely irreparable. 

Next up: The ethical perils of representing multiple parties.

Sunday, January 26, 2020

Breaking News: Additional Lawsuits Filed

Earlier today, shortly after finishing up protesting outside Grace Episcopal with two other persons, I prepared the documents needed to bring lawsuits for defamation against Leslie Malm and Lindsey Malm Anders. I have emailed courtesy copies and will send formal documents tomorrow.

My plan is to pursue punitive damages, so I likely will have to move the suits to a venue with higher jurisdictional limits; the maximum in Virginia is $350,000 per cause of action.

Meanwhile, there’s an additional case a few weeks away against Bob Malm and the parish. I’m also contemplating a defamation case against a member of the parish who has repeatedly engaged in conduct of this sort.

It’s a shame that these actions are necessary, but it seems that litigation is the only thing Episcopalians understand.

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

Grace Episcopal: More Lawsuits Coming!

As we move into 2020, I am now preparing the forms for several additional lawsuits, including one that is directed to a member of Bob Malm’s immediate family. I anticipate filing in the next 20 to 30 days.

In talking the matter over with colleagues, one asked me how I felt about suing a priest. My answer was twofold: 1) Bob is a priest in title only, and 2) Having resorted to court and committed perjury in an effort to shut down scrutiny of his conduct, Bob Malm was foolish indeed if he thought the litigation would end there. So I have no issues with suing Bob or members of his family.

And yes, I anticipate naming Grace Church as a defendant in at least one further case.

Tuesday, January 15, 2019

A Blast from the Past: Third-Party Observers Describe Parishioners’ Behavior as “Hateful and Childish”

“While they seem sane to themselves, the seem immature and hateful to outsiders who are looking at their behavior.”

An excellent observation, and one that I believe applies to numerous parishioners in this situation.

Screen cap from comments on original Wartburg Watch article about Bob Malm’s abusive behavior.

Sunday, December 30, 2018

Looking Ahead to 2019: More Protests and Possible Lawsuits

As we get ready to move into 2019, protests continue over Dysfunctional Bob Malm’s conduct, as well as that of Jeff “Sugarland” Chiow. Look for me and others at:

1) King and Seminary aka Dysfunction Junction aka Malm Square(d)
2) the monument at Braddock and Russell Road
3) the front of MOM’s
4) the intersection of Commonwealth and Mount Vernon avenues.
5) 395 during rush hour

Although we have not yet made a final go/no-go decision, I believe it likely that I and several other plaintiffs will file suit against the church, vestry, Bob Malm and family, and several individual parishioners in Federal district court in late January. Assuming we proceed, a second lawsuit is expected later in the spring.

Stay tuned for details.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Breaking News: Additional Lawsuit Possible Against Grace Episcopal, Diocese, Malm Family, Vestry Members

Shortly after Christmas, I will be out of town for several days to meet with attorneys and other potential plaintiffs to a multi-party lawsuit against Grace Episcopal Church, Dysfunctional Bob and his family, the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia, vestry members (both as officers of the organization and in their individual capacities) and several specific members of the parish. Should a decision be made to proceed, I anticipate we will be filing in federal district court towards the end of January.

Fun times on Planet Malm.

Monday, October 1, 2018

Bob Malm: Witness Tampering?

The issue of witness tampering is, of course, in the news these days following Mueller’s announcement that Paul Manafort may be attempting to improperly influence witnesses. How did Mueller did this? By allegedly sending encrypted texts via Whatsapp trying to get in touch with witnesses in an apparent effort to influence their testimony.

That raises the question, “Have Bob Malm and his wife Leslie engaged in witness tampering?”

Only a court can decide that question, but I have multiple pieces of evidence that suggest that they have contacted my friend Dee Parsons, editor of The Wartburg Watch, in an effort to suppress publication of materials documenting Bob’s misconduct. Further, Bob has directly criticized Dee’s written statement on my behalf regarding the quirky dynamics within my family, even though he knows that she likely will be a witness at the hearing on October 5. Moreover, well-placed sources tell me that Dee has expressed concern that Bob is trying to pressure her to change her testimony.

Additionally, Bob’s repeated intimations about mental illness on my part suggest he may be trying to “wire the discussion” within Grace Church and other fora.

Regardless of whether one concludes that Bob has engaged in witness tasmpering, at a minimum his conduct would seem highly questionable for a member of the clergy.

Saturday, September 15, 2018

Leslie Malm Again Underscores the Fact that Grace Episcopal is Toxic

In a recent posting on Fairfax Underground, Leslie Malm again demonstrated that Grace Episcopal Church is both toxic and paranoid.

In her posts, Leslie makes a number of assertions, including that:
  1. The “Grace Episcopal Philosoraptor” post and meme are mine.
  2. That this is all about the fact I wasn’t asked to be senior warden.
  3. That she hasn’t written to me.
  4. That I am a compulsive liar.
  5. That God will punish me in heaven for sharing my experiences with Grace Church.

To set the record straight:
  1. The original post and meme are not mine. That said, if Leslie had half the common sense God gave a goat (or half the intellect), it would be pretty obvious who did develop and publish these items. Thus, we see firsthand the paranoia that is rampant in the place — like referring to me as a “domestic terrorist.”
  2. Actually, Bob did ask me to serve as senior warden, although that was not the position in which I was hoping to serve. My preference, had anyone bothered to ask, would have been to continue as junior warden. That said, after asking, Bob reversed course and asked Lisa, no doubt as tit-for-tat for having insisted that he address the lunacy in the church office. A rude way to handle things, and some would say inappropriate on multiple fronts, given my labors following the flood at the church just prior to Bob’s accident, but what else can you expect from a “priest” like Bob Malm? And Lisa, who was never particularly popular in the church and was originally elected to the vestry as an alternate (meaning she was at the bottom of the heap in terms of votes), in my opinion proved to be exactly the senior warden that Bob deserved. That is all I have to say on that matter.
  3. No one said Leslie has written to me. Ever. She did, however, repeatedly contact me via the webform on my former website; I didn’t include a form on my new site so I wouldn’t have to listen to nonsense of this sort.
  4. Defamatory and untrue. But were that the case, members of the parish have heard things like, “Don’t worry about it, they’ll be retiring this year,” often enough that I would be in not-so-good company. And if it were the case, Leslie’s response hardly mirrors what should be normative for Christians. And speaking of lying, Leslie has yet to respond to my friend Dee Parsons’ email asking why Leslie told the former that I had admitted in open court that Mom’s blog is really mine. Nor is this the first time that Leslie has lied about this matter.
  5. If God and heaven in any way reflect Bob or Leslie Malm’s conduct or that of Grace Episcopal Church, no thanks. You can keep all of the above. And having left the Christian faith, I turned my back on all that nonsense long ago. No desire to waste time and money on a super-annuated geriatric fraternity boy who thinks he’s special, or his family, or his church, or any of the tomfoolery that goes along. So I am not worried about those issues, not in the least.
Bottom line, this is one messed up church. Good bye and good riddance; I hope others can learn from my experiences and devote their time and talent to something useful, like animal welfare, homelessness, or building a more just society. 

PS To the person who did post—thanks for weighing in. Just be careful; if people figure out who you are, you’ll be treated every bit as badly as Mike and I have been,

Friday, September 14, 2018

Still More Threats and Defamation from Leslie Malm

Check it out—yet more threats and defamation from Leslie Malm. And still no idea how what it means to conduct oneself as a Christian.

It’s interesting, too: Leslie still hasn’t responded to questions about the lie she told to Dee Parsons, in which she claimed that I had admitted in open court that Mom’s blog is mine. Dee called her on it, and Leslie went silent. That’s telling.

And nowhere in her calculus do we see any explanation for the 120 pledge units the parish has lost, or the 17 percent decline in church attendance. 

Questionable veracity — just an ordinary part of the game on Planet Malm.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Another Incident of Leslie Malm’s Questionable Veracity

Earlier today, I spoke with another person who alleged that Leslie Malm stated that I said in open court that Mom’s website is really mine. That’s a curious claim as, were that the case, Bob Malm and Jeff Chiow wouldn’t be arguing that somehow, magically, the site is mine.

Before we go further, if memory serves, Leslie made the same claim in writing over at Fairfax Underground. That, along with her defamatory per se claim that I am a stalker. 

Of course, that brings us to a larger question, which is how it is that these things are okay in a church? Having seen multiple instances of questionable veracity in the parish, including those involving our famous “long-term parishioner,” I think I know the answer, which is that Bob Malm and his family demonstrate that these things are okay.

Of course, in any church where it’s okay to try and drag a dying woman into court, distorting and misrepresenting reality is small potatoes. 

No wonder Grace Church is in decline.

Wednesday, August 1, 2018

More Information on Dysfunctional Bob

Ever wonder about the reality behind the heaps of bullcrud from Bob Malm about how his is a close family (despite the legendarily heated arguments between him and his wife Leslie)? The following screen caps may offer some insight to that paradigm.

Note that I have not verified this information so I do not vouch for its accuracy. All persons are presumed innocent as a matter of law until a court of competent jurisdiction rules otherwise.

Here is another court record, which references what appears to be a capias, or arrest warrant, for a misdemeanor offense:

Monday, June 11, 2018

See for Yourself: Leslie Malm Claims Parishioners and Grace Episcopal School Students “Terrified”

Here’s another defamatory post by Leslie Malm, Bob Malm’s wife. 

Does anyone really believe that students at Grace Episcopal School read this blog, let along my mother’s blog? And how would Leslie know that, since she typically rolls through church 3 times a year—if she’s on a tear? Nor has there ever been anything on either blog that would cause a rational person to be “terrified.” Meanwhile, Leslie still appears to struggle with basic English, such as “their” versus “there.”

Yet another example of inappropriate and abusive behavior by members of St. Dysfunction Grace Episcopal Church. 

Friday, June 1, 2018

See for Yourself: Defamation Per Se By Leslie Malm

For obvious reasons, I have zero interaction with Leslie Malm, and I refuse to be baited by her on public fora. That said, she certainly could stand with some legal advice as to the meaning of the phrase, “defamation per se.” Maybe Jeff Chiow would be so kind. Indeed, a discussion about punitive damages, and the fact that she is not covered by the church’s D&O policy, would not be untoward.

Below is a specific example from Fairfax Underground, in which she refers to me as a “stalker” in a conversation with a third party. Having not had any communication with Leslie since 2014, her comments are, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth, and thus legally actionable.

Nor can writing about someone on this on any other blog or publication constitute “stalking.” If that were the case, The Donald would successfully have sued CNN long ago. Think about it.

It’s called the First Amendment. I am guessing Leslie missed that part of school, along with the relevant second grade English classes.

Monday, March 12, 2018

Still More Misinformation from Leslie Malm

In one of her posts over at Fairfax Underground, Leslie Malm claims that, on various blogs, I provide differing ages for my Mom, and that somehow proves that I am the author of Mom’s blogs.

True to form, though, Leslie’s statement simply isn’t accurate, and never was. The only place I reference anyone’s age on a blog is on Surviving.Church, where I mention my grandmother’s age and the fact that I am happy she is still with us. That’s it. No mention of my mom’s age.

Further reason to question Leslie’s veracity.

Friday, March 9, 2018

More Misinformation from Leslie Malm

Just saw a recent post from Leslie Malm over at Fairfax Underground. In it, she makes two false assertions of fact:

1) That I claim Mom is writing both blogs. The reality is that she only writes hers. I take full responsibility for my blog and do so proudly.

2) That I told SGT Salas of the Alexandria police department that Mom’s blog is actually my own. The reality is I said no such thing; indeed, Salas’ comeback was, “Well, lots of people think the blog is yours,” to which I replied, “They can think whatever they want.”

Despite her shaky track record when it comes to veracity, you at least have to give this much to Leslie Malm: She at least does not try to provide false information under the handle, “a long-time parishioner.”

By the way, for the record, my opposition to Bob stops when he cleans up his act. No lying, no bullying, no shunning. That goes for me and my Mom.