Posts Tagged ‘5th District’

Mo’Kelly told you so, including the amount ONE WHOLE YEAR IN ADVANCE!

Related: The Sinister AME/Bryant Connection

Full story HERE

*Irvine, California, Trial Attorney Gregory Brown secures the largest settlement in firm history in a sexual molestation case against the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME) in Los Angeles, CA.

While some justice has been served in the courts, the victim(s) will have to deal with the fallout for the rest of their lives. It is truly unfortunate that such predators can survive for such long periods of time Mr. Brown has stated that “After 2 years of denial and cover up, the Ward AME Church, greater AME Church, Inc. and Bishop John R. Bryant, have decided to settle the largest of sexual molestation claims that were pending against the church.” AME is the largest all black church in the world, with over 2,500 congregations.

“The victim (“John Doe”) can now finally move on from unbelievable anxiety, anger, embarrassment and backlash faced as a result of the Church’s head pastor, Sylvester Laudermill (deceased), multiple molestations and later attempts to cover up,” says Mr. Brown. Mr. Brown believes “the trial would have been a media circus and could have dealt a crushing blow to the organization, already suffering severely from other financial scandals and a crippling economy.”

According to Mr. Brown, the settlements with Bishop John R. Bryant and the AME Church, Inc. are confidential, subject to a $100,000 liquidated damages clause for revealing the settlement amount. Just before the trial, the least culpable defendant, Ward AME paid $300,000. “Of course, this was after their attorneys lead the slanderous charge against the victim, turned down a prior $100,000 settlement offer and ran up at least $400,000 in attorney’s fees!” says Mr. Brown

___________

Related: The Sinister AME/Bryant Connection

[Stay tuned...the new mrmokelly.com website is coming to you in 2010.  Set your browsers now.]

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

From L.A. Weekly

Attorneys for Brenda Lamothe, the reverend who has taken First AME Church Pastor and head John J. Hunter to court over allegations of sexual harassment, on Friday released evidence they say proves Lamothe was being employed by the church at the time she alleges Hunter coerced her to have sex as part of “God’s will.”

Lamothe’s side argues that Hunter’s lawyers played a dirty trick by demonstrating that Lamothe had resigned from the church on Sept. 10, 2008, long before she says she cut ties with First AME — last June — casting some doubt about her claims. However, Lamothe’s representatives released documents showing she indeed stayed on at the church as a part-time preacher at least through April of this year.

Full story HERE.

RELATED:

John Hunter Sued by Rev. Brenda Lamothe

From L.A. Weekly

Attorneys for Brenda Lamothe, the reverend who has taken First AME Church Pastor and head John J. Hunter to court over allegations of sexual harassment, on Friday released evidence they say proves Lamothe was being employed by the church at the time she alleges Hunter coerced her to have sex as part of “God’s will.”

Lamothe’s side argues that Hunter’s lawyers played a dirty trick by demonstrating that Lamothe had resigned from the church on Sept. 10, 2008, long before she says she cut ties with First AME — last June — casting some doubt about her claims. However, Lamothe’s representatives released documents showing she indeed stayed on at the church as a part-time preacher at least through April of this year.

Full story HERE.

RELATED:

John Hunter Sued by Rev. Brenda Lamothe

Rev. Brenda Lamothe

Rev. Brenda Lamothe returns to the pulpit this Sunday, November 22.

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

Constance Fortune

LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Constance Fortune, a member of the Executive Committee of the First AME Church of Los Angeles and Chairperson of the Church’s Board of Trustees #2, issued the following statement in response to the statements made by Mrs. Brenda Lamothe:

“The leadership of the First AME Church is shocked that Mrs. Lamothe has publicly distributed private personal communications between Pastor John Hunter and Mrs. Hunter as husband and wife.

(Note: Nowhere does Constance substantively deny the relationship between Hunter and Lamothe.  The main issue is the relationship between the ministers, not the cards.  To deny the cards, yet ignore the relationship is a red herring.)

“Mrs. Hunter has confirmed that the materials that were handed out to the press today by Mrs. Lamothe are private personal communications between Mrs. Hunter and her husband. As early as October 25, 2009, the Church reported to the Los Angeles Police Department that these communications had been taken from the Church parsonage and that they had been presented to the Church with a demand for money.

(Again, nowhere does Fortune factually deny the relationship between Hunter and Lamothe or provide factual basis to support the idea that Lamothe is lying.  Lamothe has provided cards and identification of personal physical attributes of Hunter.  Fortune has provided a rambling, ineffectual statement.

Let’s be clear on who is offering what here.

And if there were a WRITTEN demand for money, WHY DIDN’T YOU SUBMIT IT TO THE MEDIA CONSTANCE?!?!?!  You can show Mo’Kelly better than you can tell Mo’Kelly Constance.  This is a LAWSUIT.  Documentation is KING.)

“Mrs. Hunter is mortified and outraged that such personal, private communications between her husband and herself have been handed out to the media by Mrs. Lamothe. Clearly, Mrs. Lamothe is continuing her efforts to personally harm Mrs. Hunter. Such conduct by a person who refers to herself as a minister is morally offensive.”

(Again, nowhere does Fortune factually deny the relationship between Hunter and Lamothe or allege Lamothe is lying.  This is the THIRD paragraph and reference to the “Jack-off” notes.  Denise Brown’s <she’s not married so don’t call her ‘Mrs.’ anything> outrage or level of mortification is neither here nor there and is specious in nature.  And by the way, Pastor Jack-Off’s conduct is morally offensive to Mo’Kelly.  Just FYI.)

“Mrs. Hunter cannot believe that Mrs. Lamothe, someone who has been in the Hunters’ home numerous times and even babysat for their daughter, would behave in such an outrageous manner.

(The First Concubine Denise Brown’s supposed inability to “believe” is not a prerequisite for Rev. Lamothe’s allegations to be true.  And personally, Mo’Kelly thinks that Pastor Jack-Off using the church credit card for $122,000 in personal expenses <many of which benefiting The First Concubine> is equally ‘outrageous.’)

(Lather, rinse, repeat…no factual denial of the relationship, only the supposed “ownership” of the letters.  Lamothe offered specifics and evidence, Fortune responds with an angry letter and no evidence to support it.)

“She has authorized me to give you the following statement directly from her:

‘I have personally seen the material that Mrs. Lamothe handed out to the media today, and I can confirm that these are private communications between me and my husband, Pastor John Hunter. I am furious and disgusted that our private property has been taken and disclosed. I cannot believe that Mrs. Lamothe, who has been to our home many times and even babysat for our daughter on numerous occasions, would stoop so low.’

“We support the Hunters 100% and we do not for one moment believe the outrageous allegations in the lawsuit filed by Brenda Lamothe.

(Note the key word in the above sentence…”believe.”  Your lack of “belief” Ms. Fortune is neither here nor there in the ultimate determination of truth.  Again it is not a pre-requisite here for Rev. Lamothe to prevail.  Documentation is KING.)

This is nothing more than an attempt to harm the First AME Church, smear the Hunters and damage their relationship with the Church.

(Emotional rhetoric and argumentative.  That is for the courts to decide.  If true, the case will be summarily dismissed.  But given the evidence it will likely be tried on the merits.  Meaning, everybody has an opinion but so far only Rev. Lamothe has evidence. This is a COURT case not a sermon.  Fortune wasn’t in the bedroom…as far as we know not hiding under the bed, so she has no EVIDENCE to repudiate Lamothe’s claims.)

The Church and the Hunters are now more determined than ever to pursue their rights in Court via their invasion-of-privacy, theft and conspiracy lawsuit against Mrs. Lamothe. Lamothe’s actions today have obviously compounded the damage she has already caused.”

(If Constance Fortune is so full of “belief” in this statement and she stands behind the Hunters 100%, then come do an interview in The Mo’Kelly Report.)

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

"Aw Damn Mo'Kelly...you got me"

UPDATE 11.9.09 – Rev. Lamothe to speak out to the media TOMORROW 11.10.09.  Click HERE

_____________

Another EXCLUSIVE from The Mo’Kelly Report.

Mo’Kelly has THE lawsuit docs.

Click HERE!

Mo’Kelly told you about John Hunter…now he’s NATIONAL news!  Featured on ABC News tonight.  Looking for video to post now!  Remember, Mo’Kelly FIRST reported this story 10.16, HERE.

LA Times reports HERE

______________

Law Offices of Rheuban & Gresen: Controversial Los Angeles Clergyman Accused With Inflicting Years of Sexual Abuse and Harassment on Female Employee

Lawsuit Alleges Reverend Dr. John J. Hunter, Senior Minister of the First AME Church of Los Angeles, Forced a Female Employee Into 4 Years of Sexual Submission Then Fired Her When She Refused Further Abuse

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 4, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Encino law firm of Rheuban & Gresen filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court asking that Pastor Hunter and the First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles “be held to account for years of sexual abuse and harassment suffered by Reverend Brenda Lamothe, Hunter’s Executive Minister at the time of her sexual abuse,” said Solomon E. Gresen, the attorney representing Reverend Brenda Lamothe.

In a 12-page complaint filed November 3, Reverend Lamothe detailed years of continuous pressure to provide her employer, Pastor Hunter, with sexual services at his whim. “The complaint exposes Pastor Hunter insistence it was ‘God’s will’ that she provide him sex on demand. Hunter claimed that providing him with continuous sexual ‘comfort’ was the only way Lamothe could fulfill her job duties and her ministry. Hunter said that he is a prophet and that God had revealed to him that Lamothe was to be his ‘everything’. Feeling scared and trapped, Reverend LaMothe reluctantly agreed to his incessant demands for sex,” said Solomon E. Gresen.

RELATED: Hunter Bans Rev. Lamothe From Church Over Bulletins

Background video on Rev. Brenda Lamothe

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

"Aw Damn Mo'Kelly...you got me"

UPDATE 11.9.09 – Rev. Lamothe to speak out to the media TOMORROW 11.10.09.  Click HERE

_____________

Another EXCLUSIVE from The Mo’Kelly Report.

Mo’Kelly has THE lawsuit docs.

Click HERE!

Mo’Kelly told you about John Hunter…now he’s NATIONAL news!  Featured on ABC News tonight.  Looking for video to post now!  Remember, Mo’Kelly FIRST reported this story 10.16, HERE.

LA Times reports HERE

______________

Law Offices of Rheuban & Gresen: Controversial Los Angeles Clergyman Accused With Inflicting Years of Sexual Abuse and Harassment on Female Employee

Lawsuit Alleges Reverend Dr. John J. Hunter, Senior Minister of the First AME Church of Los Angeles, Forced a Female Employee Into 4 Years of Sexual Submission Then Fired Her When She Refused Further Abuse

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 4, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Encino law firm of Rheuban & Gresen filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court asking that Pastor Hunter and the First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles “be held to account for years of sexual abuse and harassment suffered by Reverend Brenda Lamothe, Hunter’s Executive Minister at the time of her sexual abuse,” said Solomon E. Gresen, the attorney representing Reverend Brenda Lamothe.

In a 12-page complaint filed November 3, Reverend Lamothe detailed years of continuous pressure to provide her employer, Pastor Hunter, with sexual services at his whim. “The complaint exposes Pastor Hunter insistence it was ‘God’s will’ that she provide him sex on demand. Hunter claimed that providing him with continuous sexual ‘comfort’ was the only way Lamothe could fulfill her job duties and her ministry. Hunter said that he is a prophet and that God had revealed to him that Lamothe was to be his ‘everything’. Feeling scared and trapped, Reverend LaMothe reluctantly agreed to his incessant demands for sex,” said Solomon E. Gresen.

RELATED: Hunter Bans Rev. Lamothe From Church Over Bulletins

Background video on Rev. Brenda Lamothe

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

Put this in the “Now Ain’t THAT a Bitch” File…

5th District Bishop T. Larry Kirkland, in an “effort” to address the “criminal” misgivings of pastors and arguably limit future financial liability has implemented a policy of administering criminal background checks for all pastors.

Mind you, it doesn’t mean much when the Bishop in question is too of questionable disposition as it relates to financial disposition.  Mind you, it doesn’t mean much when Kirkland is on record in “support” of First AME pastor John Hunter, who had ALREADY admitted to stealing (at least) $122,000 in the form of improper church credit card expenses.  The same John Hunter who is the process of ANOTHER sexual misconduct scandal, which may result in lawsuit.

What’s the purpose of a backround check if the pastors presently in one’s employ are committing crimes without ANY disciplinary action?  That’s having said NOTHING about the estimated 5 million dollars in missing property proceeds which never hit the church’s books.

Criminal background check?  Mo’Kelly would settle for a simple REALITY check.

Mind you, reports are rolling in that Grant AME pastor Leslie White will be PROMOTED to presiding elder (think: district manager of area churches) during this week’s highly anticipated Southern California Area Conference although his present church is up for auction due to foreclosure.  And that’s having nothing to do with the parsonage sale of more than $800,000…which of course never hit the church’s books.

Criminal background check?

Check out the letter HERE.

Neither of the aforementioned have faced ANY disciplinary action and none of the information presented here in The Mo’Kelly Report has either been debunked or disputed.  The information continues to stand unopposed.

After it was made known that Bishop Kirkland would require background checks of its pastors, Rev. Kupaji Jaliwa, an itinerate minister of 2nd AME here in Los Angeles went on the record and published the following open letter to Bishop Kirkland.

_______________

To: Bishop T. Larry Kirkland
Presiding Prelate of the 5th Episcopal District

From: Rev. Kupaji Jaliwa
Itinerate Elder

CC: Council of Bishops
Presiding Elders of the 5th Episcopal District
Clergy (Ordained and Non Ordained)
Members-At-Large of the African Methodist Episcopal Church

RE: Open Letter Regarding Criminal Background Checks For All Clergy

First, Bishop Kirkland I want to thank you for your insight and making this requirement a reality within our Zion. I know I had a conversation about this very thing with my Presiding Elder a few years ago, and he insisted that this would not happen because people would leave the church or not volunteer. However, I don’t think it should be just limited to the clergy. I believe that anyone that works with our children, handle our money, and work in areas that require full confidentiality should have a Criminal Background Check. Too often we find after the fact about the character and backgrounds of these people and by then it’s too late.

But I am a little confused. In accordance with Bishop Carolyn Tyler Guidry, in her response to my Formal Charges I filed against you, that if it’s not in the Discipline, it can’t be done. I can’t seem to find anything in the Discipline regarding the clergy having a Criminal Background Check. Is this new policy?

Back in June, at our Quarterly Conference, Presiding Elder Copeland told our Pastor that he could not ask members to sign a “Confidentiality Form” because it was not in the Discipline. Now you are requesting that the clergy do something that is not in the Discipline – I don’t understand. Is the Discipline only being used for what those in “authority” wants or is it to be a tool that we use to govern ourselves within our Zion? I am confused.

There are some concerns, that I wish you would take time and address:

1. Is this new policy? If so, why would you not be up front with what’s going on to make the new policy? I understand, that with the recent illegal activities, in the church universal, Insurance Companies, Banks, and even the IRS maybe asking for more information. If so, why can’t you just say that, instead of a 5 sentence letter with no information? We are just being told to ‘do’ it.

2. If this is not a new policy, then what happens if someone refuses to get a Criminal Background Check?

3. Is this happening across the connection? As a Connectional Church has this gone through the Council of Bishops and the General Board? According to the 2008 Discipline, “No other funds are to be collected by the Episcopal district except for emergencies declared by the Council of Bishops and concurred by the General Board”. Page 255, Section II. Episcopal District Budget.

4. Don’t you have to have approval through the General Conference to implement new policy or legislation or funds?

5. What will happen to the information once you get it?

6. How will it be used?

7. What will happen to those who have been arrested, convicted, or pleaded guilty or no-contest? What will you do with them? There are some who, maybe 20 to 30 years ago had a brush with the law, but have changed their live completely. How will this information impact them?

8. Who will be responsible for maintaining this information in confidence? I hope not the same people that are in charge now that hold secret meetings, hearings and trials without notifying the accused, but share the information with the general public. I hope not the same pastors who have lost church property, admitted to miss-using church funds, accused of sexual misconduct, who cheat on their wives, or who are abusive to their wives, children and members.

9. Is this just a smoke screen – to change the conversation prior to Annual Conference?

10. As the employer who is requiring the Criminal Background Check, why would it be an expense to the clergy and not incurred by your office?

I know that there are a number of clergy who will give you $25.00 and do a Criminal Background Check without any knowledge of what this information will be used for nor will they ask the question. They will just “blindly” follow.

In addition from your letter, the Presiding Elders knew that you where making these changes. However, my Pastor was not notified until Tuesday, October 20, 2009 only after making an inquiry into when we are to make our Annual Report. So just how long has this been a discussion? And why are the Pastors and clergy just now finding out?

Now maybe I have jumped the gun, and maybe it was only for those in Copeland’s District, due to the fact that the letter sent was addressed to him and dated October 9, 2009.

I truly would appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to address my concerns. I am sure that I am not the only one with these concerns.

Thank you and I look forward to your response.
RELATED: Rev. Jaliwa Interviewed in The Mo’Kelly Report 3.10.09

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE