Trial date moved- another indictment? Motion to Quash Subpoenas

The trial date for Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) member, Diane M. McKinny, has been moved to May 6th. McKinny faces charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in relation to a “scheme” to direct and administer false reports in order to obtain Unemployment Insurance Benefits (UI) for employees of at least three different companies. Several of these same employees continued to work full-time or near-full-time during the periods of reporting unemployment status. These funds allowed Diverse Corporate Technologies, Integrity Marble and Granite and Sky Catcher Communication, Inc. free or reduced labor costs essentially shifting those costs to the State of North Carolina and the United States government. All three companies were either owned or managed by Marion Kent Covington.

Earlier in 2018, Covington recognized as leadership within the WOFF church community, pleaded guilty to the same charges and awaits sentencing.
Facing charges in the same case, WOFF leadership, Dr. Jerry Gross and Jason Gross also pleaded guilty in 2018 and await sentencing.

“In total, between approximately November 2008 and March 2013, the scheme resulted in over $250,000 in fraudulent claims for UI Benefits for employees who continued to work full-time or near-full-time for businesses owned or managed by co-conspirators, and who were therefore ineligible to claim those UI Benefits.”

Interesting to note, the three who pleaded “guilty” remain pictured on the WOFF website as of February 2019 under “All Pastors and Ministers.” Diane McKinny pleaded “not guilty” is not pictured on that page. What conclusion do we draw from this?

In court documents, Judge Reidinger recognized McKinny’s counsel’s reasons for another delay. Included in these statements was the following;

“Further counsel states he expects the Government to seek a superseding indictment before the March trial term and to produce additional information responsive to Defendant’s discovery request.”

What does this mean? The March term starts on the 4th. Just because defense counsel “expects” a superseding indictment does not mean the Government has obtained this indictment and will reveal it before March 4th. But, the possibility remains. There could be additional conspirators indicted in this ongoing case. The expectation of such is at least worth some reflection.

Prior to this statement, “As grounds, counsel states that additional time is needed to effectuate service of subpoenas ducas tecum…”

This references the subpoenas issued for Benjamin Cooper, Micah Cooper, Sarah Anderson, Chad Cooper, Sean Bryant and Rachel Bryant. These subpoenas seek details of the communication between the production company for the A&E docuseries – “The Devil Next Door” and these individuals. This series reviews the stories of a group of ex-WOFF members. Yet, this is another chapter in the ongoing efforts of WOFF to delay and/or prohibit the broadcast of “The Devil Next Door”. The delay of the series has been a point of discussion in the local community and elsewhere since December.

Through press releases, radio programs and in media sources, Josh Farmer and Mark Morris have been the public face to spearhead WOFF efforts to stop the series. They have called into question the integrity of not only the participants, but the Production Company and A&E. The move by McKinny’s counsel to subpoena these individuals was an obvious effort to obtain private information in order to harass and intimidate former members from telling their story. In a broader sense, the subpoenas served as a warning to keep present members from wandering away from the fold.

Motion to Quash

In court documents filed Friday, Jones Road LLC, formerly known as “Fly Girls LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Collins Avenue Entertainment (CAE) filed a “Motion to Quash Subpoenas Ducas Tecum and Request for Hearing.” The filing of forty pages details CAE’s position that the subpoenas filed against the six previously mentioned individuals were among other things- filed to “harass and intimidate CAE and its affiliates as part of an ongoing effort of the Church (WOFF) to thwart airing The Devil Next Door and chill CAE’s First Amendment rights…

The motion calls for the court to quash to subpoenas… and award the costs and fees of the motion to Movant (CAE).

An alternate acceptable outcome would be to limit the viewing of any information provided as for defense “attorney’s eyes only.” If the court did find the information acceptable at trial, the witness in question, the jury would view the information, but no actual document would be entered into evidence.

In the Memorandum of Support, more details are given for the reasons for the motion. The information sought by the subpoenas is deemed, “irrelevant, inadmissible and proprietary information about the production of The Devil Next Door….” The information requested is “strictly confidential” and pertains to CAE business practices which allow it to operate in the marketplace.

“Release of the irrelevant, inadmissible document to McKinny—and, inevitably, her release of them to Word of Faith Fellowship—would put CAE at a severe competitive disadvantage.”

“The Court should not permit Defendant McKinny to fish for information that is irrelevant to her defense and that serves no purpose other than to enable Word of Faith Fellowship to continue its abusive campaign of intimidation and harassment.”

“Beyond the lack of authority, McKinny’s argument is unavailing, First, McKinny alleges that the witnesses have been critical of the Church but she does not allege that they have been critical of her or that the docuseries even mentioned her. Even if witnesses were paid to criticize the Church (they were not), there is no allegation (much less evidence) that they were paid to criticize McKinny. Second, the witnesses were publicly critical of the Church long before CAE decided to create a docuseries about it and documented their personal experiences and observations. They are not “motivated by profit” but by a desire to sound the alarm about an abusive, cult-like organization. There is no allegation that the AP or any other news organization paid the witnesses for numerous critical statement they have made about the Church over the years; they made these statements of their own volition and as a matter of conscience. Third, and perhaps most important, McKinny conflates the relationship between the production companies and their sources with what happens in a court of law, under oath, and the relationship between the government and its witnesses. There is no allegation that the government has paid the witnesses for testimony critical of McKinny, and she utterly fails to explain how the terms of the witnesses’ agreements with CAE would impact their sworn testimony in a criminal trial. In sum, the information the subpoenas seek is irrelevant to McKinny’s defense.”

This argument shows clearly the convoluted thinking and apparent pressure applied to the Defense. I have no written proof or first-hand knowledge, but do you think it is plausible to say the attorneys for McKinny were “advised” by any of the several attorneys who attend WOFF? Could the faulty, but excited arguments put forth on the WOFF radio show about The Devil Next Door give us some insight into possible discussions with McKinny’s lawyers? The sideways tactic to gather information is a tired strategy used against Matthew Fenner and Danielle Cordes. It is a well-known Josh Farmer ploy.

Back to the source document.

“Indeed, two things are certain: (1) if McKinny gets the information she seeks, she will give it to the Church and (2) the church will use the information to support its ridiculous claim that the docuseries contains nothing more than “exaggerated or fabricated tales of opportunity seekers telling filmmakers the sensational tidbits they think an audience wants to hear.” Press Release, Word of Faith Fellowship (Nov. 23, 2018)”- view on their website. “Never mind that the witnesses have been telling these “tales” for years, not only to CAE but also to mainstream news organizations such as the AP.”

The argument for quashing the subpoenas goes for several more pages warning of the power to subpoena with the intent to keep whistleblowers quiet. Several court cases are cited as examples which apply to the issues before this court.

Will a hearing be scheduled for arguments on this issue? Is this a test of the court’s recognition of the complexity of the next chapter of WOFF-drama? To dismiss the Motion to Quash without hearing arguments could open a minefield during trial. It seems the expeditious choice would be to get the first of several pink elephants out of the room. Don’t forget, there is a herd of large pink elephants to navigate around when WOFF is involved.

Follow here:

Twitter – @religiouscults

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/johnhuddleauthor

YouTube- religiouscultsinfo.com

Thank you, for taking time to visit and read this blog. Please, consume the information on this site responsibly. The author is not a licensed mental health professional and encourages those that need professional help to seek it. The intent of the material is to inform and be a resource. Be sure to tell every member that you know at WOFF about this blog. There are readers at WOFF. Jane told me and Josh confirmed it.

Comments are invited from all readers, including present or former members. Polls are not scientific and no private information is gathered.

Look on the right side of any post for the option to subscribe by email for notifications or RSS feeds notifying of new postings. It is a great feature. Also, find more posts by selecting “Categories”.

Guest posts reflect the opinions of the writers. Their opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of John Huddle or any other persons affiliated with this blog.

Please, take time to read the Terms of Use for this personal blog. As mentioned, for posts written by John Huddle, any information about WOFF is from his memories and recollections as perfect as that may be or not be.

Scripture references are Amplified Version unless otherwise noted.

(Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation ) This is post number 651.