We continue with questions that would help us in the vetting process for Frank Webster. The process is needed since Mr. Webster has put his name on a list of potential candidates for appointment by the Governor of North Carolina to an open judgeship in District 29A. The meeting to determine the three names that will be forwarded to the Governor will take place on January 29^th at 1:30PM.  If Mr. Webster secures enough votes, his name would go on the list. The Governor would select one person within sixty days from the list or the candidate with the most votes would automatically be appointed.

Why do I feel I am qualified to ask these questions? The answer contains two parts. First, I am a citizen of the District. How judges rule can affect all citizens of the District. Second, I am a survivor of Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) and have spent time in the group where Mr. Webster is considered one of the leaders. Some of these questions are pertinent to any survivor of the group. Questions about why and how I allowed the teachings and doctrines of WOFF to affect my life are ones I have been asking myself since I left the group in July 2008. Answers to these questions can help process and put in perspective the events inside WOFF. When I reflect on the intense influence and yes, control, that Jane Whaley has over members of WOFF- it is humbling to know how many years I spent there. Stepping back, I would suggest that it was my pursuit of religious enlightenment or fulfillment and subsequent trust of someone who I thought had acquired that, which brought me to WOFF doors. Was it the same for you, Frank?

Also, I believe that unless you have been a part of WOFF- you may not even know what questions to ask in order to discern or uncover the degree to which Mr. Webster has been or will continue to be, influenced by Jane and her teachings. If you have never been inside WOFF for any length of time, you will not know the inner dynamics, either how they were or how these dynamics can evolve over time. I may not be qualified to ask questions about Frank’s law education or legal training; but, questions about his affiliation with WOFF, I am comfortable with asking. Though I have never been a part of the inside leadership team of WOFF, I think my perspective is still valid, maybe even more so, since my life was definitely affected by the pyramidal structure of WOFF and all that included. We proceed and “…try to love the questions themselves…” Shall we continue the vetting?

Frank, considering the present questions and controversy about what has been called the fourth building or the lower building; where do you stand on issues concerning the fourth building? More specifically, how do you view the reported uses of this building and have you ever been relegated to living there? Do you agree to the purposes and practices reported in what has been referenced as a jail-like environment on the church property? Have you ever visited the building when it was in full use and witnessed any of the happenings reported by Michael Lowry? Did Jane ever ask you for any advice about the use and practices within this building? How do you view possible repercussions of the grand jury hearing of Mr. Lowry? Do you believe any of the reported allegations of Mr. Lowry? Mark Morris has been reported as one of the leaders over the fourth building and was named in the original complaint of Mr. Lowry in February 2012. Considering that Mark Morris is openly endorsing you and one would assume you converse quite a bit, does Mark ever discuss the happenings in the fourth building with you? If so, what do these conversations include?

From the McGee custody case heard in General District Court in Rutherford County- FILE NO. : 00 CVD 0686-       FINDINGS OF FACT:

47. KT offered credible testimony related to mind control, excessive corporal punishment and blasting.  KT taught in the WOFF school.

48. Ms. T testified that blasting was routinely used in school and in services. She testified that there was never an attempt to shield children from blasting during services.  Blasting, according to Ms. T, was used to break the power of the devil and to deliver people from demonic possession.  Ms. T testified that pink buckets were brought into services and that during deliverance services, those being delivered would be subjected to blasting and would vomit into these buckets.

 49. Further, Ms. T related that when children and adults are subjected to blasting, they are held down forcibly, and that she has observed children shaking, kicking and screaming while blasting occurs.. (redacted and emphasis added)

Is it possible that Mr. Lowry was one of the children subjected to such a treatment during your time at WOFF even before the start of the fourth building usage as a “dormitory”? Have you ever witnessed what Ms. T related to the court? In your estimation, does this practice seem prudent or necessary for children and adult members of WOFF? If so, then how does that apply to others outside of WOFF? Is the practice described by Ms. T something you personally have participated in while at WOFF? Have you ever restrained anyone during a “blasting” session? If so, do you still personally practice such restraining activities?

Mr. Webster, do you agree with the practice documented here in court findings that young children at WOFF should be beaten to remove “homosexual devils?” Have you ever been a part of such activities as Mr. McDonald was cited for? From the McGee custody case heard in General District Court in Rutherford County- FILE NO. : 00 CVD 0686-       FINDINGS OF FACT:

 31. On at least one occasion, prior to 1995, a child of six years of age, within the WOFF, was disciplined by Douglas McDonald who struck this child at least15 times, leaving bruises and contusions.  The child was physically injured and traumatized by this discipline, had difficulty sleeping following this incident and had to sleep on his stomach due to injuries sustained as a result of this discipline. This child was disciplined because the child was allegedly possessed by “homosexual devils”.

 If you agree with the validity of such a practice, how could that affect your rulings in cases involving admitted homosexuals? Do you feel you bring an unbiased clarity and could rule justly on these types of issues, especially if they reflect crimes pertaining to any sexually perverse activities?

It seems prudent to ask if Mr. Webster has ever been involved in the security team of WOFF. If so, to what extent were you involved? If you were not involved, why not? Have you ever been on the overnight “watch” at the church? Has anyone from WOFF ever asked you about the placement of or legality of cameras and other electronic monitoring devices whether on church property or in private homes? Do you know of any recording devices in your home that would record video or audio of visitors?

What prompted you to recently change your political affiliation from unaffiliated to Republican?

Do you actively participate in the prison ministry employed by WOFF? What are your thoughts on convicted felons attending services and mixing with the congregation at WOFF? Are there any precautionary measures in place to protect regular members from possible violent relapses of former inmates? Do you sense any caution about relegating former prisoners who were convicted of violent crimes, to life in the fourth building?

The practices of WOFF include loud prayer, blasting, deliverance (as evidenced by the Inside Edition videos), shunning of ex-members, shunning of relatives who do not agree with WOFF practices; strict controls over media access for children, youth and certain adults in the congregation; strict adherence to many unwritten and ever-changing life-style rules, communal living, compulsory reporting of fellow members’ infractions to leadership, corporal punishment, public debasement of members who break these rules. Are you in agreement with and an advocate of all of these attributes of WOFF-life? Do you practice all of this yourself? How does the practice of shunning of ex-members affect you personally? Does it seem just to you?

Mr. Webster, it has been told to me that you were one of the leadership who handed out or sold condoms to those in the young married group. If that is true, how did you come upon those duties? If you were not directly involved, can you confirm such practices have existed within WOFF? When did this activity start and if it has stopped, when and why did that occur? How important was it for you to be so intricately involved in the marriage relationships of young married couples? Are you a licensed marriage counselor? Do you have any credentials that would recommend you as a marriage counselor?  Did Jane announce strict guidelines for birth control and other personal aspects of the marriage relationship? Did you follow and advocate the following of such rules? Did you see your role as a leader in WOFF to include supervision or vital oversight of a couple’s private time? If so, why?

When Sam and Jane pass on, do you see your leadership role changing? Would you become more or less involved in the everyday decisions of members lives and of running WOFF? Would you then move for full financial disclosure which to date has not happened. Does the lack of financial disclosure to members even concern you? Do you see the lack of full financial disclosure as a prudent, advisable and a safe practice?

Are you involved in legal counsel for any of the WOFF-member owned businesses? If so, to what extent and have you been compensated for such counsel? If you have, would you disclose the names of such clients?

Mr. Webster, when you were accepted by the North Carolina Bar, you signed an oath to uphold the North Carolina Constitution. That Constitution includes Article 1 Section 13 which says:

Sec. 13. Religious liberty.

All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. (source- http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html )

How would you answer former members of WOFF and those who peer into the group from the outside who say that membership in WOFF does NOT allow for the exercise of “a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their (WOFF members) own consciences…” And that by being a faithful member of WOFF; one is required to allow a human authority to interfere with or control their “rights of conscience”. Subsequently, is your allegiance to WOFF, Jane Whaley and the practices of WOFF in conflict in any way with the Oath you swore when being accepted by the North Carolina Bar? Please, explain your answer.

Mr. Webster, will you address these questions before the meeting on Tuesday when other attorneys are asked to vote for you? Will you join more closely with Jane and her religion or deny the extensive influence it has had over these last 20 plus years? Is it not simpler for you to withdraw your name from consideration? Please, either make your case and defend the questionable practices of WOFF or withdraw. Do not just dismiss the questions as baseless. These questions reflect valid concerns. Many in the legal community would not know to ask these questions.

Honestly, I realize Frank faces family destruction if he ever decides the WOFF gig is too much. He faces the same family implosion as other members have experienced, if he ever chooses to distance himself from Jane over open endorsement of WOFF/Jane worship. It is a heavy price to pay, and I am sure he loves his wife and son beyond measure. For those that say Mr. Webster conducts himself with the utmost professional decorum and is polite and equitable, I have no doubts. The question remains can we as citizens of North Carolina afford to allow a man who lives in very close proximity to such an extremely controversial, litigious, controlling figure have such a critical point of power in our court system? Does it seem in our best interest to allow this?

The questions will continue but, I suspect Frank’s answers will always be the same. He will defend WOFF and WOFF practices and Jane’s religion until the end. Who would expect anything less..? He is so deep into it. I write this post for many reasons. One of which is I just can’t agree to allowing him a position of influence all the while knowing his home/church environment is full of abnormalities, dangerous practices and questionable religious notions. Can one live in such a place as he does and not be adversely affected to some degree? What say, ye?

If you echo my concerns, please, contact local attorneys who will be voting in the meeting on Tuesday. Also, consider contacting the Governor in some form. The contact information is listed below. Thank you.

Mailing address:

Office of the Governor

20301 Mail Service Center

Raleigh NC 27699

Phone- 919-733-5811      Email go to http://www.governor.state.nc.us/contact

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. 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 424.