Showing posts with label confidentiality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label confidentiality. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

Reminder: Grace Episcopal Publicly Discloses Confidential Giving

With pledge season off to a slow start at Grace Episcopal Alexandria, it’s time for an important reminder. Specifically, while the church will tell you that giving is confidential, it is not.

I repeat: Your giving to Grace Episcopal Alexandria is not confidential. In fact, some imbecile may decide to post that information on social media.

Doubt it? Here’s proof in the form of a screen cap from The Wartburg Watch, in which a parishioner, believed to be Lisa Medley, shares the fact that someone in my family wrote a check to the church in the amount of $.02.

For the record, true to form the poster has her facts wrong. Leaving aside other lies in her post, the check for $.02 was neither giving to the church, nor written by me. Yet the fact remains: Individual giving is not supposed to be shared with other parishioners, nor posted to social media. The fact that the idiot behind this post doesn’t recognize this makes clear just how thoroughly toxic the parish is.

Unless you want to risk your personal data being posted to social media, it is best to avoid pledging to Grace Episcopal Alexandria.

Grace Episcopal Publicly Discloses Member Giving
Grace Episcopal Posts Details of Member Giving to Social Media

Monday, August 26, 2019

Financial Reporting and Cash Management Problems at Grace Episcopal Alexandria

I’ve written on this topic before, including the fact that the $500,000 loan from the parish to Bob Malm was recorded off the books for many years.

Here, in bulleted format, are some of the other problems with cash management and financial reporting during Bob Malm’s 30-year reign.

Before you join the church, make a pledge of financial support, serve on the vestry, or revise your will, it behooves you to ensure that these issues have been addressed to your satisfaction.








Monday, January 21, 2019

See for Yourself: The 2016 Confidential Settlement Proposal that Dysfunctional Bob Malm Rejected

With Grace Episcopal Church set to hold its annual parish meeting Sunday the 27th, here’s a potentially useful inflection point. Specifically, in January 2016, through my attorney, I offered to settle the matter in exchange for nothing more than Bob Malm’s written agreement to act like a priest. That’s right — simply stop disparaging me and stop interfering in my participation in the church. Additionally, I asked that the matter be treated as confidential. All things that should be normative for a priest.

Through Sugarland Chiow, Bob rejected my offer, including my request for confidentiality. (I wasn’t aware clergy could pick and choose. Beware.)

As a result, I launched my social media campaign, which continues to this day, and will do so indefinitely. This has proven effective, although I may soon augment it with additional litigation.

Of course, that also underscores a key point: Even when faced with possible litigation and other actions with the potential to seriously damage Grace Church’s standing in the community, Bob Malm, with the advice of Sugarland Chiow, put his own perceived interests ahead of those of the church. Bob wanted revenge for my asking the diocese to mediate our dispute, and he didn’t care what that meant for Grace Church. And today we see the results, with church revenue and attendance down sharply, and all indications suggesting that things will only get worse over time. In fact, he still doesn’t give a red rat’s rear end about the church; his only interest appears to be shutting down criticism long enough to get the hell out of Dodge with his generous retirement in place.

In that vein, now that people understand what really does on behind the scenes at Grace Church Bob, being the manipulative little weasel he is, is playing his usual games, taking words out of context, lying repeatedly, claiming he’s been threatened, and asking the Alexandria police if there is any way they can take away my First Amendment rights. Having been repeatedly told that there isn’t, Bob’s fallback has been to argue “abuse of First Amendment rights,” in his emails to the diocese. And, of course, his old standby, which is to conduct smear campaigns behind the scenes. 

In all of this, of course, Bob conveniently overlooks the fact that that is the very reason for the First Amendment—to engender accountability, including for dirtbags like Dysfunctional Bob Malm. Meanwhile,  our recent litigation included numerous requests from Sugarland Chiow for confidentiality, including his trash settlement offer with — you guessed it — a confidentiality clause. Sorry, kids, that horse has left the barn.

This also touches on the issue of Bob’s real motivations. In that realm, there’s one thing that is abundantly clear to me , which is that, for Bob, it’s just a job. Nothing in Bob’s actions in any way suggests he’s a priest or Christian in anything but name only.

Check out my letter here in PDF.

Sunday, September 30, 2018

See for Yourself: Lying Episcopal Priest Bob Malm Seeks Discovery Sanctions

Determined to prove, once and for all, that Grace Church is toxic, and that he has repeatedly breached the confidentiality mandated by church canons, Episcopal fake priest Bob Malm recently filed the attached motion, in which he is trying to get discovery sanctions against me for allegedly lying during discovery.

Between these issues, and Bob Malm’s repeated lies to the court (that I was never admitted to practice law, that I didn’t serve as a police officer, and that I have violated the existing court order), Bob’s references to me as “sick,” “twisted,” and “dysfunctional, as well as his efforts to drag my mother, dying of COPD, into court, this is one seriously screwed up church.

Meanwhile, I am considering filing a separate legal action against the church and Bob Malm. Stay tuned.













Sunday, September 2, 2018

See for Yourself: Bob Malm Violates Episcopal Title IV Disciplinary Canons

In an email that demonstrates both the paranoia of St. Dysfunction staff and Bob Malm’s flagrant violation of church canons that require that Title IV matters be treated as confidential, former director of parish operations Jeff Aaron contacts diocesan intake officer Caroline Parkinson about the original Title IV complaint against Bob. Pursuant to Canon IV.6.10, this is illegal under church law unless authorized by the bishop, which did not occur. Nor is this the only violation; evidence suggests multiple violations occurred. In other words, Bob Malm was not entitled to share this matter with others, full stop.

Needless to say, if you can’t trust Bob to adhere to church requirements involving confidentiality, you probably shouldn’t trust him with your confidential information. And if Bob isn’t prepared to adhere to the express provisions of Title IV, it’s a safe bet he’s prepared to play fast and loose on other ethical issues. But then, given his willingness to try and drag a dying woman into court, and to lie to the court, no surprise there.

Meanwhile, you gotta love the discussion about retaliation by calling my employer.

Here is Jeff Aaron’s email (which Jeff “Sugarland” Chiow attempted to redact to conceal evidence of the breach of confidentiality; the redacted version Jeff supplied in discovery is included at the bottom):



Here is a screen cap of the provision that expressly makes this a violation of Title IV:


And here is Jeff “Sugarland” Chiow’s redacted version, which tells you that he is fully aware that Bob violated church canons.






Tuesday, August 28, 2018

See for Yourself: Bob Malm Violated Church Canons Requiring Confidentiality

Here’s a good one. In it, Jeff Aaron, then Director of Parish Operations, emails the diocesan intake officer, to forward a bunch of emails to her. In the part that is redacted, he asks about the Title IV disciplinary complaint lodged against Bob Malm—timeframe, when it will be concluded, and what Parkinson thinks of calling my then-employer, St. Thomas’ to retaliate. That’s noteworthy, because Title IV is expressly confidential for clergy, albeit not for laity.

For the record, yes, Jeff “Sugarland” Chiow redacted them, but no, he did not manage to conceal the fact that Bob Malm improperly disclosed the underlying complaint. 

Concealing evidence of a violation of the canons. Hmmm.

Why have canons if they are not enforced?

#fakechristians