Posts Tagged ‘Constance Fortune’
A rather even-handed article was posted in the local Los Angeles newspaper Our Weekly. It gives the non-Mo’Kelly Report reader a broader historical perspective of the issues which exist in this situation and leading up to this moment.
It details how Bishop T. Larry Kirkland was made aware in July of the numerous issues in First AME…18 members filed formal charges (church-speak for “official AME compaint”).
It also details how Lamothe went to the church FIRST in an attempt to resolve the issue internally, before filing the lawsuit.
First AME could have dealt with this internally and the public (and parishioners) would have been spared the embarrassment and gory details.
This “could” have been addressed internally…but instead, the church did what the church does. It gets what it gets. I guess the three articles in the L.A. Times weren’t enough of a hint that Pastor Jack-Off is bad news…pun intended.
Get ready for #4…
Full article HERE.
Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE
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.)
Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE