Conservative Babylon

Backstory: “Pentecostal ‘Prosperity Gospel’ Televangelist Marcus Lamb Confesses to Adultery… But Only After Blackmail Threat,” November 30, 2010

Thanks to John for alerting us to this most recent development.

In a nutshell, a former employee of Lamb’s Daystar Television Network, is suing the televangelist, his Word of God Fellowship, Inc., and Daystar for… well, at first it sounds like she’s suing for false representation, and then it sounds like she’s suing on the grounds of the elusive and intangible “mental anguish” angle, but those claims do not comprise the meat of the suit at all.

Just wait until you read the excruciating details of the allegations, which, if true, likely spell the end of the Marcus Lamb empire. We’re not even talking about any monetary loss — we mean: Once Lamb’s followers get a load of these allegations, they’re going to turn on him like an army of jilted lovers. (And we wouldn’t blame them.)

Fasten your seatbelt and get ready for the most damning parts of the lawsuit filed by one Jeanette Hawkins, December 1, 2010.

One more note: This was all typed in by hand, because we don’t have a copy-able copy of the suit; best efforts were made to preserve the sometimes odd punctuation:

At all relevant times, Defendant Word of God Fellowship, Inc., doing business as Daystar Television Network … has publicly represented itself to be a Christian television network, a Christian ministry, and even a Christian church.

. . .

Defendant Marcus D. Lamb abd Joni Lamb are the faces of Daystar. They host a daily, one-hour talk show entitled Celebration… In addition, Joni Lamb is the host and executve producer of another show, entitled Joni.

. . .

On or about June 13, 2005, Plaintiff Jeanette Hawkins was hired by Defendant to serve as its Director of Marketing.

In the process of applying for the job, Plaintiff was interviewed by Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and by [redacted] who was identified as the [redacted] of Daystar, and the individual to whom Plaintiff would report if she became Director of Marketing.

Before accepting the employment with Daystar, it was very important to Plaintiff, who was and is a Christian, to determine the moral integrity of the organization and especially the individuals under whose authority she would be placing herself.

Indeed, in an employment brochure, Daystar encouraged job-applicants to do exactly that, quoting 1 Thessalonians 5:12, “And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you.”

Accordingly, Plaintiff asked both Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted] about the moral standards with which Daystar was managed and the moral climate of the workplace there.

Both Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted] replied and represented to Plaintiff that Daystar was operated in conformity to the highest standards of Christian behavior, making specific reference to chastity, modesty, and purity, and that conformity to those standards was required of all employees. Written information provided to Plaintiff by Daystar made similar representations. These representations were made by officers of Daystar in the course and scope of their employment with Daystar.

When Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted] made these representations to Plaintiff, they were themselves in the midst of an illicit sexual affair which, at that point, had been ongoing for approximately five years. They did not disclose this fact to Plaintiff.

. . .

Thereafter, Defendant Daystar and Defendant Marcus D. Lamb himself continued to make representations about Daystar, and about the marriage between Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and Joni Lamb, that were false, in light of the ongoing affair between Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted].

. . .

In August 2007, an employee of Daystar named [redacted], who reported to Plaintiff, advised Plaintiff and another employee named [redacted] who was in charge of information systems, that he had found emails clearly proving that Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted] were having an illicit sexual relationship and that it had been going on for about seven years. In addition to many lewd statements, Defendant Marcus D. Lamb wrote in one of his emails to [redacted] that he could not wait to make her the next Mrs. Marcus Lamb. The emails also revealed that financial resources of Daystar had been used to facilitate trysts in other locations. Mr. [redacted] provided copies of the emails to Plaintiff and to Mr. [redacted], and promptly thereafter tendered a two-week notice of his resignation.

Hmmm… Did the guy quit because his Christian sensibilities were offended, or was he forced to resign?

The revelation of the ongoing and longstanding affair between two senior officers of Daystar — and indeed the two people who interviewed Plaintiff and to whom she reported — was utterly devastating to Plaintiff.

The illicit sexual relationship between Defendant Marcus D. Lamb and [redacted] obviously violated the published “Statement of Core Values” of Daystar. Plaintiff and Mr. [redacted] did not know what they should do, so they consulted Fred and Anna Kendall, who were experienced marriage-counselors and who often had appeared on Celebration.

So, at this point, we’ve got Ms. Hawkins, her direct report, the head of I.T., and two marriage counselors… That’s five people who knew about the affair more than three years ago — seven, if you count Lamb and his mistress (it sounds like Joni Lamb was still in the dark at this point, which is pretty incredible, but possible) — and nobody blew the whistle?

Well, surely the Christian marriage counselors stepped up and did the right thing… right? Right?

The Kendalls advised Plaintiff and Mr. [redacted] that Defendant Marcus D. Lamb should step down from his leadership position, and that he and Joni Lamb should seek marriage counseling. They refused, however, to confront Defendant Marcus D. Lamb themselves

Tsk, tsk.

and left Plaintiff and Mr. [redacted] the decision as to exactly how to present the information to the management of Daystar.

Plaintiff and Mr. [redacted] decided to explain the situation to Bill Trammell, who is the father of Joni Lamb and who then occupied a management position at Daystar. They did so and provided a copy of the emails to him.

Now we’ve got six people who knew about the affair.

He thanked them and told them that he would provide a copy of the emails to Joni Lamb. Almost immediately thereafter, Joni Lamb called Plaintiff and thanked her for bringing the affair to light — although this may also have been misleading, as the emails contain information suggesting that Joni Lamb may already knew [sic] of the affair before it was discovered by plaintiff.

Like we said, pretty incredible Joni Lamb wouldn’t have known about a seven-year affair. In any case, now we’re up to seven other people who knew.

After Plaintiff and Mr. [redacted] spoke with Bill Trammell, Joni Lamb insisted that [redacted] leave Daystar immediately. Daystar hastily agreed to purchase her home and entered into a sham consulting agreement under which Daystar paid substantial sums of hush-money to her. Thereafter, [redacted] moved out-of-state and did not render to Daystar services of equivalent value to the substantial sums she was paid.

Daystar then actively deceived people — both within and outside the Daystar organization — about the reason for [redacted] departure. [redacted] had been in a high-profile position and had herself appeared frequently on Celebration, but suddenly she was gone. Many people asked what happened.

Daystar, and Joni Lamb in particular, directed Plaintiff to participate in the cover-up and deception concerning [redacted]. This, coupled with the flagrant breach of trust described above, was intolerable to Plaintiff, so she resigned her position with Daystar. The last day of her employment there was on or about May 31, 2008.

Now, here’s where things get rather drama-queeny, but, OK, we’ll take Ms. Hawkins at her word that the whole episode nearly led her to off herself:

Both before and after gher departure from Daystar, Plaintiff experienced severe emotional trauma because of the egregious misrepresentations made to her by persons whom she loved and respected, and because of the improper instructions to lie about the affair and the fraudulent financial transactions that ensued, Eventually, Plaintiff’s depression was so severe that she became suicidal, and was involuntarily committed to a mental institution.

Did Ms. Hawkins just blow her case with that admission? No matter — it would have come out anyway, so it’s better she cops to it first.

Such trauma, however, does lead us to shake our heads, cluck our tongues, and offer a gentle warning to True Believers™ who invest far too much of themselves in their religious leaders, and a not-so-gentle reminder about false prophets and wolves in sheep’s clothing.

As a direct and proximate result of these events, Plaintiff sustained compensable injuries, including but not limited to severe mental anguish and emotional distress, as well as lost income and benefits.

Again, we’re not lawyers — we only watch a lot of Law & Order — but we think Hawkin’s lawyer should have downplayed the “mental anguish” angle, and emphasized the “lost income and benefits.” From what we hear, it’s pretty darn difficult to win a lawsuit based on “mental anguish.” Still, we haven’t gotten anywhere near the real core of the suit…

On November 18, 2010, the undersigned attorney delivered to a lawyer named John Terrell Lynch IV, who has a longstanding professional relationship with Daystar, a letter stating that he is representing Jeanette Hawkins, as well as two other former employees of Daystar.

On November 30, 2010, at 11:00 a.m. Daystar broadcast a new episode of Celebration in which Defendant Marcus D. Lamb admitted that he had been unfaithful to his wife. Various guests, including the Kendalls, appeared on the program and praised Defendant Marcus D. Lamb for his “transparency” and the manner in which he had conducted himself. The descriptions of the affair and the ensuing events were completely misleading. The “inappropriate” relationship was incorrectly described as lasting “a brief period of time.” It was falsely represented that the other participant in the affair bore no responsibility for what happened, despite the fact that she had been a senior officer of Dastar and fully aware that the company’s resources had been used improperly, both to arrange secret meetings and to cover-up the affair. Defendant Marcus D. Lamb falsely represented that he had “stepped down for an extended period of time from preaching.”

During the same broadcast of Celebration, multiple references were made to three, unnamed presons. It was falsely stated that these three persons had informed Daystar that unless Daystar paid them $7,500,000, they were going to take to the media the story of the affair. This was described as a work of “the Devil.” Defendant Marcus D. Lamb falsely stated that these three persons “are trying to take our pain and turn it into their gain,” and stated that they were “not going to take God’s money and pay to keep from being humiliated or exploited.” He urged his viewers to “pray that the Enemy will not be victorious.”

Many employees of Daystar knew that the three persons to whom these references were made were the three former employees identified later in the letter to Mr. Lynch dated November 18, 2010, and specifically they knew that one of them was Jeanette Hawkins. This information apparently was disseminated by employees or other representatives of Daystar to persons not currently employed there. Moreover, it was obvious that, as soon as the three former employees filed their pleadings in courts of law, the pleadings would become public records and the viewers of Celebration would readily conclude that the three plaintiffs were the three persons referenced during the broadcast on November 30, 2010.

Now, that sounds to us like grounds for a lawsuit: defamation.

Members of the news media were invited to the studio to watch the production of Celebration which was broadcast on November 30, 2010. In addition, off-the-air statements apparently were made to them. It was clearly communicated to them that the three persons were attempting to commit extortion. This was reported — with the specific use of the word “extort” attributed to Defendant Marcus D. Lamb — in stories published on that same day, and thereafter, in Dallas County, Texas, and nationwide.

The above-described episode of Celebration has been re-broadcast by Daystar at least three times and is now available for downloading on Daystar’s website.

. . .

Defendants Marcus D. Lamb and Daystar committed the tort of fraud against Plaintiff Jeanette Hawkins. … Under Texas law, Defendants had an affirmative duty to disclose to Plaintiff the existence of the affair because they voluntarily disclosed to her information about the standards of conduct to which employees of Daystar were expected to conform…

Here, Hawkins requests “judgment against Defendants, awarding actual damages,” without specifying an amount, leaving that “to be determined by the trier of fact.”

And here, finally, the suit gets to that defamation claim we figured she had in mind:

Defendants Marcus D. Lamb and Daystar committed the tort of defamation against Plaintiff Jeanette Hawkins, who is a private figure and is neither a public figure nor a public official.

That’s important; it’s much harder to prove defamation against a public figure.

During the initial broadcast and numerous re-broadcasts of Celebration, first aired on November 30, 2010, Plaintiff was falsely described as, among other things, doing a work of the Devil,

Oh, come on now — saying somebody’s doing the “work of the devil” is an opinion. (Do you know how many times we here at ConBab have been called “evil”?) But maybe, with all the players in this story, right down to Daystar’s audience, actually believing in a devil, this part of the complaint is appropriate, even if it seems wildly out of place in a civil lawsuit. We don’t know — we can’t relate to the sort of people who actually believe in a real devil.

trying to take others pain and turn it into her gain, threatening to go to the media with humiliating information if money was not paid to her, and improperly trying to induce Defendants to pay “God’s money” to her. These statements, and apparently additional statements made to reporters, were intentionally calculated to be, and were in fact, taken by the listeners as affirmative statements that Plaintiff Jeanette Hawkins was attempting to commit extortion. All of the statements are false and defamatory. As originally uttered, they constitute slander. As broadcast in the form of Celebration re-runs and through publication on the Daystar website, they constitute libel.

. . .

The wrongful conduct of Defendants … was committed with “malice”…

That’s important, too; in order to prove libel and/or slander, you have to prove the intent of malice.

The rest of the lawsuit concerns itself with the usual boring legalese.

Two questions:

1. What were the three employees, particularly Hawkins, planning to sue Lamb for, before he made his allegedly defamatory statements? The suit says Daystar’s lawyer was sent a letter on November 18th, and the “defamatory” show was not aired until November 30th.

We’re guessing Hawkins, at least, was going for false representation and “mental anguish,” and added the defamation claim after Lamb started yapping about “extortion.” In fact, if you re-read the lawsuit, the defamation claim, while far more damning, looks tacked on, almost like an afterthought.

2. If Lamb was not being blackmailed, how much trouble will he be in for telling police he was being blackmailed?

Police confirmed Wednesday that they are investigating a report by televangelist Marcus Lamb that three people tried to extort $7.5 million from him to keep quiet about an affair he had years ago. Lamb, creator of the Daystar Television Network, disclosed the affair and extortion attempt Tuesday. Bedford police said then that they were not investigating.

On Wednesday, Lt. Kirk Roberts, a police spokesman said: “We have been in contact with a representative of Daystar and the matter you are referencing is currently under investigation. We will have no comment on a pending investigation.”

And that, ladies and gents, is where things stand right now. But stayed tuned — this story is getting juicier by the day.

More to read:

“Exclusive: Former employee sues Daystar founder Marcus Lamb over his extramarital affair with another employee“
Dallas Morning News, December 2, 2010

“Former Daystar Employee Sues Evangelist Over Affair“
Christian Post, December 3, 2010

Related posts (automatically generated):

1. Pentecostal “Prosperity Gospel” Televangelist Marcus Lamb Confesses to Adultery… But Only After Blackmail Threat
2. Wife Says Chip Pickering (R-Miss.) Having Affair
3. Anti-Gay Bigot John Ensign (R-Nev.) Admits to Extramarital Affair
4. Bishop Eddie Long: Third Sex-Coercion Lawsuit Filed; “Daddy” Details Emerge

3 Responses to “Blockbuster Lawsuit Over Marcus Lamb’s Adulterous Affair: Is This the End of the Daystar Empire?”