Showing posts with label defamation per se. Show all posts
Showing posts with label defamation per se. Show all posts

Thursday, January 24, 2030

BUSTED: Perjuring Priest Bob Malm Caught Lying to Bishop!

Check it out: In perjuring priest Bob Malm’s court filings, he PROVES conclusively that he lied to bishop Shannon Johnston. Yup, this comes directly from his own court filings, and is an email he sent to the bishop.

Specifically, he claims that I left RPJ Housing prior to coming to Grace. As he well knows, that is a boldfaced lie, and he discussed the matter with Elizabeth Legere in January 2014, and with Kelly Gable and me. And Patrick Crerar and I discussed the matter many times, with my even hiring a member of La Gracia following discussions with him. And then there is Amy Barron, who worked at RPJ Housing’s offices at the Church of the Covenant.

So, if there was any doubt that Bob Malm is a lying POS, this should put those doubts firmly to rest. And if anyone doubts my claims, I will be more than happy to subpoena multiple witnesses who can conclusively show that I was, in fact, executive director of RPJ Housing while a member of Grace Church. So, if Bob doesn’t agree that he lied to Bishop Shannon Johnston, he is more than welcome to file suit for defamation. In fact, I encourage him to do so.

Thursday, June 25, 2020

BREAKING: Kelly Gable Defends Her Defamation, Admits Parish Was Party to Perjuring Priest Bob Malm’s Previous Legal Action

You have to hand it to Kelly Motormouth Gable and the other fake Christians of Grace Episcopal Church — when they lie, they don’t see any problem with continuing to insist that their lies are truth. So much for the whole thing about not bearing false witness.

In the attached files, Kelly Motormouth Gable, now represented by Wayne Cyron, the same attorney who represents perjuring priest Bob Malm and his wife/daughter, tells the court that her claims of embezzlement are true. Simply put, they are not.

Even better, Kelly states that her email was sent on behalf of the church, in her role as a member of the vestry. So there’s no denying that this sort of bullcrud goes right to the top at Grace Church —even within the vestry, it’s okay to lie about other members of the church. And members of the parish vote Kelly and other parishioners onto the vestry, so it is fair to say that this nonsense enjoys support at every level of the parish.

Like others at Grace Church, Kelly likes to talk about people, not to other people. Nor is Kelly’s conduct in other areas exactly exemplary. Whether it is her speculation about other people’s personal lives, her checkered career and workplace performance, or her questionable relationship with alcohol, Kelly can, to put it gently, be described as “colorful.”

The good news, though, is that the current litigation lays all this bare for the entire world to see. While Kelly would be well-advised to worry about the details of her own life, her time, money, and efforts seemingly are pointed in myriad other directions.

It’s also important to note: Kelly’s claim, and perjuring priest Bob Malm’s republication, together with his lie that my departure from RPJ Housing occurred before I came to Grace Church, were germane to the previous litigation in which Bob Malm sought a protective order. And they were clearly covered by my subpoena for records, yet perjuring priest Bob Malm and Jeff Sugarland Chiow failed to provide the relevant email. In other words, but for Bob’s concealment of this email, which he was required to provide during discovery, there would be no issue involving the statute of limitations. Such conduct is highly inappropriate and unethical, especially since Sugarland had an obligation as an attorney to ensure that all relevant documents were retained and provided.

Best of all, Kelly’s filing contradicts an assertion made by defense counsel for the parish, which is that the motion for a protective order was solely Bob’s doing. Kelly’s pleadings expressely state that the church was part of that effort. Thus, the parish is fully responsible for Bob Malm’s perjury, in which he falsely claimed that:

1) My mom, or someone claiming to be her, repeatedly set up appointments with him, only to cancel.
2) His wife Leslie was the only person he knew who had blogged about the matter.

Check out Kelly’s court filings below, which are in PDF:

Kelly’s response to my request for admission

Kelly’s motion to transfer venue

Kelly’s plea to the statute of limitations

Thursday, June 11, 2020

BREAKING NEWS: Motion to Amend Complaint Filed, Bob Malm Sued for Defamation Per Se

After receiving from perjuring priest Bob Malm’s attorney a copy of the email in which Kelly Motormouth Gable falsely stated that she has first-hand knowledge that I embezzled from a previous employer, I have filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint that sues Bob Malm for defamation per se.

In the email, Bob not only republishes Kelly’s defamatory statements, he endorses them and adds a defamatory per quod statement. To make matters worse, Bob lies to bishop Shannon Johnston, claiming that these events happened before I came to Grace Church. As perjuring priest Bob Malm well knows, they happened while I was serving on the church vestry. Indeed, Bob provided pastoral care to Kelly in conjunction with the matter, so his knowledge of the matter is not second-hand.

My guess? Perjuring priest Bob Malm wanted to discredit me, but didn’t want to admit that I was serving on the vestry at the time, which would have called into question his judgment. 

It’s also telling that Sugarland Chiow conveniently omitted this document during the earlier litigation, although he provided other documents in the email chain. Hmmmm.

Normally, such a claim would be barred by the Virginia statute of limitations, but Va. Code
§ 8.01-229 (D) “obstruction of filing by defendant” expressly tolls the statute of limitations in cases in which the prospective defendant prevents filing of the civil claim by obtaining a stay in bankruptcy, or otherwise takes legal or other action to prevent filing. Since the earliest a defamation case could be brought against Bob was January 28, 2020, I am still well within the timeframe in which to sue.

As before, I am seeking punitive damages against Bob, which could reach $350,000 per claim or more.

See the motion and amended complaint in PDF below:

Wednesday, June 10, 2020

Punitive Damages Could Prove an Existential Threat to Grace Church

With perjuring priest Bob Malm now facing potential punitive damages claims against him and by implication the parish itself, the vestry and individual church members should understand that such damages could threaten the very existence of the church and school. Additionally, they could result in personal liability for vestry members and church members alike.

What are punitive damages? Simply put, they are not compensatory, but rather intended to punish bad behavior. An example would be attempting to use a protective order as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) and committing perjury in the context of the proceeedings. Yes, that would be perjuring priest Bob Malm.

Under Virginia law, punitives are capped at $350,000 per claim. But with multiple incidents of outrageous misconduct on the part of the church, there could be multiple such claims.

In order for an employer like the church to be liable under the legal doctrine of respondent superior, the action complained of must be within the scope of the employee or board member’s official duties. That, of course, begs the issue of whether perjuring priest Bob Malm was acting within the scope of their authority.

At this point, things get tricky for an insurer, because to defend the claims against perjuring priest Bob Malm makes it difficult to claim that he was not acting within the scope of his authority. On the other hand, it likely will prove costly for perjuring priest Bob Malm to defend his conduct in court.

Moreover, there is the issue of ratification, or endorsement. While defense counsel may claim that Bob was acting on his own, the evidence is clear that diocesan officials supported and endorsed his actions, as did the vestry. Indeed, Amy Middle Finger Medrick sent around talking points on church email to the vestry to assist vestry members — and Grace school officials — discuss the matter. Meanwhile, diocesan officials even provided legal counsel to perjuring priest Bob Malm in conjunction with this matter, and sent out a letter saying that they fully support Malm.

Two further challenges confront Grace Church:
  1. Most insurance policies don’t cover punitive damages. Thus, if the church is found liable for either defendant’s actions, it could be on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
  2. The church is not incorporated, meaning that individual church members could be on the hook for the church’s liability.
Thus, church members and prospective church members may want to consider the potential for personal liability due to the parish’s support for Bob’s outrageous conduct.

To be sure, my motive in bringing suit has little to do with money, Indeed, at one point I offered in writing to settle the dispute in exchange for nothing more than perjuring priest Bob Malm’s written agreeement to leave me alone. Through Jeff Sugarland Chiow, Bob refused the offer, and I believe the evidence will show that he had one or more fulsome discussions with Bishop Shannon Johnston about the matter, as well as intake officer Caroline Parkinson. Of course, had any of the above had half the common sense God gave a goat — or half the Christian values of a goat — they would have accepted my offer. But as it stands they now live with the consequences of Bob’s decisions.

In short, with a severe recession under way, a resurgence of the pandemic, declining giving, and a reputation marred by perjuring priest Bob Malm’s mean and stupid conduct, Grace Church’s long-term prospects are, at best, unclear. 

Perhaps when the dust settles folks at Mayo House, and within the parish, will take the time to carefully contemplate their conduct and whether an outsider, looking at their behavior, would see anything remotely Christian about it.

I can tell you this: No one external to the church who is familiar with dynamics within the parish is impressed in a positive way with the church.

Friday, June 5, 2020

Check it Out: Kelly Gable Runs Her True Colors Up the Mast, Shows Just How Toxic Discourse is at Grace Church

You have to hand it to Kelly Gable—she’s nothing if not two-faced, and more than willing to engage in defamation.

In the attached letter, which Bob Malm included in his most recent court filings — but curiously did not share during discovery in our prior litigation — we see Kelly Gable accuse me of being a compulsive liar and an embezzler. That’s interesting, coming from someone who inter alia lied about her whereabouts while working for RPJ Housing; in one instance, she claimed to be at the office, but punched the organization’s timekeeping system from an IP address in Alexandria.

See for yourself. If this is your idea of how people in a church should talk about others, Grace is the perfect church for you.

In the meantime, I am going to consider possible legal action against Kelly.

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.

Sunday, April 22, 2018

Bob Malm’s Smear Campaign

To the observant within Grace Church, this doesn’t come as news, but Bob Malm’s smear campaign, which currently focuses on suggestions that I am mentally ill, continues.

Specific examples:
  • It is documented that Bob contacted both an employer of mine and my current church to complain of my protests. By Bob’s own written admission, he brought up the matter with my employer.
  • In court, Bob repeatedly suggested the same, including offering innuendo based on my protesting in cold weather.
  • In an email to Wartburg Watch publisher Dee Parsons, Bob asked the rhetorical question, “Is that even healthy?”
Of course, what is really dysfunctional and sad is any situation in which a member of the clergy feels that this is appropriate conduct. Rather than acting as a shepherd of his flock, in cases like this Bob fulfills the role of wolf in sheep’s clothing. And this behavior is, in my experience, typical of Bob’s conduct—lots of behind-the-scenes manipulation and Machiavellian power plays.

In such cases, the inherent imbalance of power between clergy and parishioners means the latter will often uncritically adopt the views of clergy. That has happened in the case of Grace Church, and I have in my possession a defamatory per se communication from a parishioner on the topic of my mental health. (In cases of defamation per se, damages do not need to be proved, and the plaintiff can move directly to judgment, including potential punitive damages.)

Meanwhile, I like Bob’s comments about “Dysfunction Junction” sufficiently that I am going to use the phrase to refer to Grace Church going forward. Or, maybe I’ll refer to the church as St. Dysfunction Episcopal Church.

We’ll see.