Before the initial hearing started on Monday in front of Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell, the court atmosphere was relaxed and filled with conversations between McKinny’s defense attorney, Mack McKeller, and other court participants. Mr. McKeller was obviously known by all of the regular court staff. He gave the court reporter a hug in the friendliest way and received a warm welcome from the Magistrate once everyone was in their place to start the hearing.

The hearing started at 10:13AM. Magistrate Howell led by outlining the order of the proceedings: there would be an initial hearing, a detention hearing and an arraignment. He started by asking Diane several introductory questions meant to establish her ability to hear, read and understand the procedures as each step occurred. He read a list of her rights including not saying anything and a right to jury trial as well as others.

Soon, he was into the reading of the multi-page Indictment which served as a foundation for the other steps taken during this session.

As with Jerry Gross and Jason Gross, Magistrate Howell took extreme care and consideration to ask questions meant to secure Diane’s agreement that she understood the process unfolding. He read each word of the indictment which took a while. He was very engaged. I provided a copy of the Indictment in my last post and will not go over all of it here. Not mentioned in my last post was the forfeiture judgment sought for $309,660. This amount represents the sum of benefits believed by the investigators which was acquired by fraudulent means.

As procedure, the Magistrate advised Diane she had three choices for representation. She could represent herself. She could hire an attorney or she could apply for indigent status and after a review of a sworn and signed financial affidavit, she could be granted a court appointed attorney. She chose to complete the financial forms and ask for a court appointed attorney- in this case it was Mr. McKeller.

The list of the requirements of the pre-trial release conditions were read by Magistrate Howell. Right away, complications began to surface. Diane McKinny is (still) employed as the “bookkeeper” for Kent Covington. During the time in question, she worked in those duties for three companies owned or managed by Marion “Kent” Covington- Diverse Corporate Technologies (DCT), Integrity Marble, Inc. d/b/a Integrity Marble and Granite and during the time in questions, Sky Catcher Communications, Inc. These were the companies listed in the indictment.

Her continued employment for Kent posed a problem in that a few of the affected DCT employees from the time period in question remain employed today. Discussions began to resolve this issue since McKinny is not allowed to talk to anyone who could be called as a witness in this case or possibly in other related cases. The Magistrate again, as in the Gross hearings, expressed the requirement for McKinny to strictly adhere to this condition. He warned her that if it is discovered that she talked with Kent, present employees or anyone else who is a witness in this case, except for her attorney and the investigators, her bond would be revoked, a warrant for contempt of court issued for her arrest and she could be sent to jail and possibly fined.

A major conundrum was discussed in that McKinny is still a part of the “church community” (Word of Faith Fellowship) of which many members are subject to several ongoing investigations. The Magistrate stopped short of telling Diane she could not go to work or go to church, but he emphasized again that she is forbidden to discuss this case except with her attorney or investigators.

The list of limitations on Diane in many regards mirrored those put upon the Grosses. These include but are not limited to restricted travel to the District of Western North Carolina and the District of South Carolina, giving up her passport and not apply for a new one, no firearms, no violations of the law including reporting if she gets speeding ticket, no consumption of alcohol, no doing drugs or hanging out with those that do, agreeing to random drug testing, agreeing to submit a DNA sample if requested.

Additionally, her home, car, cell phone, any computer she has access to – all are subject to random searches. Also, she was to meet with a probation officer to discuss other limitations and requirements.

The major conundrum which surfaced with the Grosses and with Diane was how to limit the contact with those who may be witnesses in this case. Next Monday, this same complication will be discussed. A possible solution would be for their counsel to advise them that until the trial is over and the outcome known- listen to the services/sermons from home. Not as discipline, but as a precaution to keep them free from compromising conversations.

Kent’s indictment includes the allegation he used his authority within the church community to coerce compliance to the illegal scheme. Will it be prudent to advise Kent to take his church involvement over the phone?

During the arraignment hearing, McKinny plead not guilty and was issued a $500,000 unsecured bond. The court date was set for September 4th, 9:00AM courtroom 1. An “open file policy” on behalf of the U.S. Attorney was confirmed. This may speed up the defense’s access to the evidence or discovery held by the prosecution.

By 10:54Am, the hearing was complete. Diane had a couple of other meetings. Her attorney presented me and the other media with his card and said, No time to talk now, send me an email and I will answer questions as I can… “We will present a vigorous defense.”

Monday was a beautiful, hot and humid day in the mountains of Western North Carolina. In many ways, this day in U.S. District court served as a warm-up for next Monday. Kent Covington is cast as instigator and developer of this illegal scheme along with McKinny. For those familiar with both parties, who do you think took the lead in birthing the “scheme?”

One has to wonder if either of them will turn on the other as the main promoter or driving force behind these alleged crimes. Once each of their attorneys views the discovery and evidence against their client, will they strategize to reflect the guilt on the other defendant? Or will a new person be named as the master of the plan of fraud?

Adding to the complicated dynamics of the “church community” is Kent’s marriage to Brooke – who is known as top tier leadership within WOFF. Will these factors complicate things even more?

With the trial for McKinny set for September in front of Judge Martin Reidinger, one wonders who might be indicted in July. Appears there will be more fireworks in the days to come.

I believe the conundrums and complications will continue to multiply as more individuals are indicted. Members and business owners will decide if their loyalty to WOFF is worth the risk of jail time. Has it come to this? Yes, it has. The cost of being a faithful WOFF member is higher than many expected. Agree?

Follow this blog on 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 638.