Full text
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
df
SAMINI BARIC KATZ LLP
Bobby Samini, Esq. (SBN 181796)
Michael Katz, Esq. (SBN 181728)
Steve Baric, Esq. (SBN 200066)
Nicole C. Prado, Esq. (SBN 269833)
John S. Oney IV, Esq. (SBN 338596)
650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1500
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (949) 724-0900
Facsimile: (949) 724-0901
Email: bobby.samini@sbklawyers.com
Email: michael.katz@sbklawyers.com
Email: steve.baric@sbklawyers.com
Email: nicole.prado@sbklawyers.com
Email: john.oney@sbklawyers.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Jane Roe 6 and Jane Roe 7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JANE ROE 6, an individual; and JANE
ROE 7, an individual,
Plaintiffs,
v.
INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF
CHRIST, INC., a California nonprofit
corporation; THE INTERNATIONAL
CHRISTIAN CHURCH, INC., a
California nonprofit corporation; HOPE
WORLDWIDE, LTD., a Delaware
nonprofit corporation; THOMAS
(“KIP”) McKEAN, an individual; THE
ESTATE OF CHARLES “CHUCK”
LUCAS; NORTH RIVER CHURCH
OF CHRIST, a Georgia nonprofit
corporation; AL BAIRD, an individual;
Case No. 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
FOR:
1. SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A
MINOR
2. VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE
647.6(A)(1)
3. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION
OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
4. NEGLIGENT HIRING,
SUPERVISION, AND
RETENTION
5. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
OF A MINOR
6. FAILURE TO REPORT
SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE IN
VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE
SECTION 11165. ET SEP.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 1 of 63 Page ID #:396
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
ALBERTO SCHIRMER, an indivual;
ANNA MARIA SCHIRMER, an
individual; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive,
Defendants.
BASED ON VICARIOUS
LIABILITY
7. NEGLIGENCE
8. VIOLATION OF FEDERAL
RACKETEER INFLUENCED
AND CORRUPT
ORGANIZATION (“RICO”)
ACT 18 U.S.C. § 1962(C)
9. SEXUAL BATTERY IN
VIOLATION OF CAL. CIV.
CODE § 1708.5
10. GENDER VIOLENCE IN
VIOLATION OF CAL. CIV.
CODE § 52.4
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 2 of 63 Page ID #:397
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs JANE ROE 6 and JANE ROE 7 (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) hereby
submit this First Amended Complaint pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et. seq., the
California Civil Code, and the California Penal Code, under federal question and
supplemental jurisdiction against Defendants INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF
CHRIST, INC., THE INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH, INC., HOPE
WORLDWIDE, LTD., THOMAS “KIP” McKEAN, THE ESTATE OF CHARLES
“CHUCK” LUCAS, NORTH RIVER CHURCH OF CHRIST, AL BAIRD,
ALBERTO SCHIRMER, ANNA MARIA SCHIRMER and all other named and
unnamed defendants (collectively, “Defendants”) and states as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1.
This action to recover damages on behalf of adult victims of childhood
sexual assault is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 340.01 (“section
340.01”).
2.
The incidents of childhood sexual assault against Plaintiffs alleged herein
were facilitated and actively concealed by Defendants while Plaintiffs were minors.
3.
This case arises from an ongoing and systemic scheme of abuse that
shocks the conscience from its appallingly epic proportions. The ICOC and its affiliate
churches have created a money-making enterprise through its psychological
manipulation, tight control, and hierarchical “discipleship” structure. That same
structure fostered an environment fertile for sexual abuse. Sexual predators gained
unfettered access to manipulated women and children. They could abuse them without
fear of accountability. Instead of taking action, the ICOC, its leaders, and its affiliates
did more than turn a blind eye—together, they actively concealed the abuse in order to
protect their mega-church tithing empire. As a result, the ICOC and its leaders, from
top to the bottom, aided and abetted the continued sexual abuse of women, minors, and
even children as young as 3 years old, some of whom were raped and sexually abused
with impunity by trusted church members.
/ / /
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 3 of 63 Page ID #:398
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4.
This Court has federal subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because it arises under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et. seq.).
5.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §340.1(q) as amended by Assembly
Bill 218, effective January 1, 2020, there is a three (3) year window in which all civil
claims of childhood sexual assault are revived if they have not been litigated to finality.
This provision provides that, “[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, any claim
for damages described in paragraphs (1) through (3), inclusive, of subdivision (a) that
has not been litigated to finality and that would otherwise be barred as of January 1,
2020, because the applicable statute of limitations, claim presentation deadline, or any
other time limit had expired, is revived, and these claims may be commenced within
three years of January 1, 2020. A plaintiff shall have the later of the three-year time
period under this subdivision or the time period under subdivision (a) as amended by
the act that added this subdivision.” This claim has not been previously litigated to
finality; thus, it is timely under the revised provisions of Code of Civil Procedure
§340.l(q).
6.
This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over all asserted state law claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because all state law claims are so related to, and arise
from, the same common nucleus of operative facts from which the federal claims arise
and, therefore, they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the
United States Constitution.
7.
Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a) because a
substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this
District. Additionally, the “nerve centers” of the International Churches of Christ, Inc.,
and The International Christian Church, Inc. are both within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the Central District of California.
/ / /
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 4 of 63 Page ID #:399
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
THE PARTIES
A.
PLAINTIFFS
8.
Plaintiff Jane Roe 6 is a 19-year-old female citizen and resident of
Georgia. Jane Roe 6 was a minor, citizen of the United States of America, and resident
of the State of Georgia at the time that she first became a victim and survivor of
Defendants’ sexual abuse and trafficking.
9.
Plaintiff Jane Roe 7 is a 24-year-old female citizen and resident of
Georgia. Jane Roe 7 was a minor, citizen of the United States of America, and resident
of the State of Georgia at the time that she first became a victim and survivor of
Defendants’ sexual abuse and trafficking.
B. DEFENDANTS
10.
Defendant International Churches of Christ, Inc. (the “ICOC”) is a
religious non-profit corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws
of the State of California. The ICOC purposefully conducts substantial religious and
affiliated programs and activities in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
The ICOC has ecclesiastical, governmental, and administrative authority over the
business and conduct of all locations worldwide. This authority includes, but is not
limited to, the selection of ministers, the direction of liturgical interpretation, the
collection of tithings and additional funds, and the issuance of behavioral and
commercial directives for members, ICOC churches and ICOC affiliate churches
worldwide.
11.
Defendant The International Christian Church, Inc. (“ICC”) is a religious
non-profit corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the
State of California. ICC purposefully conducts substantial religious and affiliated
programs and activities in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. ICC has
ecclesiastical, governmental, and administrative authority over the business and
conduct of all locations worldwide. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the
selection of ministers, the direction of liturgical interpretation, the collection of tithings
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 5 of 63 Page ID #:400
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-6-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
and additional funds, and the issuance of behavioral and commercial directives for
members worldwide.
12.
Defendant HOPE worldwide, Ltd. (“HOPE”) was founded in 1994 by the
ICOC and is a religious non-profit corporation organized and existing under and by
virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with a principal place of business registered
with the Secretary of State for the State of California located at 9449 Balboa Ave. Ste.
311, San Diego, California 92117. HOPE purposefully conducts substantial religious
and affiliated programs and activities in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
HOPE operates at the specific direction and control of ICOC.
13.
Defendant Thomas “Kip” McKean (“Kip” or “McKean”), upon
information and belief, is a United States citizen, currently residing in Pacific
Palisades, California. At all times relevant to the events that form the basis of this
Complaint, Defendant Kip was a member of ICOC’s Los Angeles regional branch, and
later, the City of Angels International Church of Christ in Los Angeles, California.
Defendant Kip resided in California for extended periods while conducting business in
California on behalf of Defendant ICOC and Defendant ICC. Defendant Kip’s
supervision, direction, and control over Defendants forms the basis of his personal
liability.
14.
Defendant The Estate of Charles “Chuck” Lucas (“Chuck” or “Lucas”),
upon information and belief, was a citizen of the United States of America and was
residing, at the time of his death, in Thomasville, Georgia. At all times relevant to the
events that form the basis of this Complaint, Defendant Chuck was a member of the
ICOC, and later, formed another church called Cornerstone. Defendant Chuck resided
in Georgia for extended periods while conducting business in California on behalf of
Defendant ICOC. Defendant Chuck’s supervision, direction, and control over the
Defendants forms the basis of his personal liability.
15.
Defendant North River Church of Christ (“North River ICOC”) is a
religious non-profit corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 6 of 63 Page ID #:401
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
of the State of Georgia. North River ICOC purposefully conducts substantial religious
and affiliated programs and activities in the State of Georgia. North River ICOC has
ecclesiastical, governmental, and administrative authority over the business and
conduct of all locations worldwide. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the
selection of ministers, the direction of liturgical interpretation, the collection of tithings
and additional funds, and the issuance of behavioral and commercial directives for
members worldwide. North River ICOC operates at the specific direction and control
of ICOC.
16.
Defendant Al Baird (“Baird”) upon information and belief, is a United
States citizen, currently residing in the Los Angeles metro area in California. At all
times relevant to the events that form the basis of this Complaint, Baird is a member
and Lead Elder of ICOC’s Los Angeles branch, which directs and controls the activities
of all other ICOC branches, including but not limited to North River ICOC. Baird’s
supervision, direction, and control over Defendants forms the basis of his personal
liability.
17.
Defendant Alberto Schirmer upon information and belief, is a United
States citizen, currently residing in Marietta, Georgia. At all times relevant to the
events that form the basis of this Complaint, Alberto Schirmer held a leadership
position as a Deacon of the North River ICOC. Alberto Schirmer’s active concealment
of Plaintiffs’ abuse, along with his supervision, direction, and control over Defendants
forms the basis of his personal liability.
18.
Defendant Anna Maria Schirmer upon information and belief, is a United
States citizen, currently residing in Marietta, Georgia. At all times relevant to the
events that form the basis of this Complaint, Anna Maria Schirmer was a Deacon’s
wife (i.e., a leadership position) of the North River ICOC. Anna Maria Schirmer’s
active concealment of Plaintiffs’ abuse, along with her supervision, direction, and
control over Defendants forms the basis of her personal liability.
19.
Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names of the defendants sued herein as
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 7 of 63 Page ID #:402
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-8-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Does 1-10, inclusive, and therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious names.
Plaintiffs will amend the Complaint to allege their true names when ascertained.
Plaintiffs allege that, at all relevant times herein, Does 1-10 were the co-conspirators,
subsidiaries, employees, employers, and agents of constituent members of Defendants
herein. Plaintiffs allege that each of the fictitiously named defendants is legally
responsible for the actions forming the basis of this Complaint and that Plaintiffs’ losses
and damages are the result of their wrongful conduct.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS1
A.
Kip McKean and His Core Leadership Team Spawned a Tightly Woven
Network of Cult-Like Churches.
20.
In 1979, Kip McKean officially broke off from the traditional Church of
Christ—the proto-organization that helped spawn the ICOC.
21.
Around that time in Boston, McKean founded what would become the
ICOC under the moniker of the “Boston Movement.” McKean founded the Boston
Movement with 29 other members, who seceded from the Church of Christ based out
of Gainesville, Florida. The fledgling “church” quickly grew, rabidly seeking out
new members and enjoying considerable expansion and success. After the Boston
Movement obtained religious recognition in the 1980s, it became the ICOC and grew
into a multinational movement.
22.
Over time, the ICOC morphed into an intricate and intentionally
confusing “network of over 700 non-denominational churches in about 150
countries.” Throughout its history, the ICOC has gone by other names, including the
Boston Movement, the Discipling Movement, the Crossroads Movement, and
Multiplying Ministries. Local ICOC churches or assemblies would often append the
name of their city, in which they were located, to their name, e.g., the Milwaukee
Church of Christ or the Sarajevo Church of Christ.
1 For the convenience of the reader, these general allegations are common to the pleadings in each of the following
related cases before the Court: 22-cv-09467, 22-cv-09472, 23-cv-0064, 23-cv-00765, 23-cv-00999, and 23-cv-01192.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 8 of 63 Page ID #:403
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-9-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
23.
An ICOC umbrella organization was formally incorporated in California
in December 1994. Its Articles of Incorporation filed with the California Secretary of
State stated that upon dissolution, “the remaining assets of this Corporation shall be
distributed to . . . the individual congregations that are part of the worldwide
fellowship of churches of Christ (which are affiliated with the Corporation), if they
qualify as distributes under the provisions of this Section.”
24.
Chuck Lucas, one of the original founding ministers with Kip in Florida,
was eventually paid off to leave the group because of his deviant behavior. Early on,
the ICOC and McKean strategically downplayed Lucas’s pattern of abuse by labeling
his conduct as “recurring sins.” Sadly enough, those “recurring sins” were never
investigated by ICOC. McKean and other ICOC leaders were acutely aware of
Lucas’s disturbing pattern of abuse, but nevertheless, they actively concealed Lucas’s
misdeeds to avert discovery by the police or church members. Covering up for Lucas
became the blueprint for the ICOC moving forward, integrating coverups and
concealment into its organizational DNA.
25.
In 2006, McKean spun off a derivative church, dubbed the International
Christian Church (or “the ICC”), after he was forced out of the ICOC. The ICC was
registered in California as a nonprofit religious corporation in October 2006. As of
December 2022, the ICC listed 104 affiliate churches on its website. Its Articles of
Incorporation, filed with the California Secretary of State, included references to
affiliates. One part stated that upon dissolution of ICC, “the assets of this Corporation
shall be distributed to other nonprofit funds, foundations or corporations affiliated
with the International Christian Church.23
2 Between April 2020 and February 2021, eighteen branches of the ICC received Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)
loans. These loans totaled $287,490, and a total of $290,040 was forgiven, including accrued interest.
3 Churches associated with the ICOC appeared to be incorporated into separate entities, according to a review of public
records. For instance, the Los Angeles International Church (LAICC), the largest ICOC church by membership, was
incorporated in California in December 1990, according to corporate records with the California Secretary of State. The
Los Angeles International Church (LAICC) described its structure on its website, noting that it is “organized into eight
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 9 of 63 Page ID #:404
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-10-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
B.
The ICOC Meticulously Crafted an Enterprise That Enabled, Encouraged,
and Concealed Sexual and Psychological Abuse.
26.
Under the direction and control of McKean, the ICOC (and, later, the
ICC) has collectively exploited everything good and noble in their trusting and loyal
members by callously robbing them of their childhood innocence through
psychological coercion and manipulation, pervasive sexual abuse of children as young
as three years old, and shameful financial abuse. Each of the foregoing abuses was
actively concealed by ICOC and its members to avert discovery by child protective
services and the police.
27.
The ICOC was born out of a “discipling” movement that arose among
the Churches of Christ during the 1970s. The ICOC has maintained this practice into
present times. It is a strict practice involving a “discipleship hierarchy” centered
around a formal discipleship tree—in other words, a top-down authoritarian
hierarchy.
28.
McKean co-designed the specific discipling pyramid that would later
become the foundational structure of both the ICOC and the ICC as organizations.
That pyramid structure served as the mechanism of control and coercion frequently
exerted over their members.4
29.
Pursuant to that strict and documented discipleship pyramid, every
member has an elder disciple preside over them, who acts as quasi-mentor-qua-jailor.
30.
This carefully crafted “discipleship tree” was nothing short of a
sophisticated scheme, deeply rooted in psychological manipulation, accomplished by
institutionally normalizing the use of aggressive, abusive, and coercive tactics that
self-supported regions.” “Each regional evangelist has been given the charge of equipping the brothers and sisters in his
part of the LA church (region) to effectively evangelize his area with the saving message of Jesus Christ as well as
helping one another mature in Christ.” Notably, “each region has a regional financial advisory group that assists the
ministry staff and the Board of Directors with the oversight of the finances in their particular region.”
4 Flavlil R Yeakley Jr. documented the “disciplining” movement in a book titled The Discipling Dilemma. The ICOC
and ICC have been classified as toxic, destructive cults due to their rigid and pervasive culture of fear, coercion, control,
manipulation, judgment, exclusion, and punishment, along with their overt focus on membership growth (to drive
income from tithing).
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 10 of 63 Page ID #:405
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-11-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
brainwash members into fearing the loss of salvation for menial transgressions. It
allowed the ICOC and ICC to execute and maintain considerable control over every
aspect of every member’s life. Members became systematically deindividualized,
only to endure communal isolation from the world at large.
31.
Only those members named as “disciplers” were allowed to provide any
counseling to church members. Abuses were reported only to the “disciplers.” ICOC
church members and leadership discouraged reporting those abuses to outside
authorities by routinely branding abuse victims as “disobedient” and blaming them for
the abuse they suffered. Many incidents, which could have reported, therefore never
were.
32.
McKean and the ICOC created a religious practice that required victims
to confess their “sins” daily. “Disciplers” would then share the specifics of those
“sins” with other groups and leaders to reinforce their control over the victim. This
pattern of practice allowed McKean and the ICOC to leverage the abuse as emotional
blackmail within the community.
33.
An illustration of the ICOC’s hierarchical model of authority is depicted
below:
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 11 of 63 Page ID #:406
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-12-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
C.
As Designed by McKean, the ICOC Systematically Indoctrinates,
Brainwashes, and Manipulates Its Members.
34.
Initially, new recruits receive profound amounts of “love bombing” to
lure them into a false sense of security, thereby allowing sexual predators to
effectively manipulate them and eventually abuse them with the comfort of knowing
that these vulnerable and newly brainwashed people would never report the abuse.
35.
Every new member undergoes a rigid conversion process tantamount to
systemic brainwashing, called the “First Principles.” Once a new member agrees to
all indoctrination related teachings, the neophyte must be baptized in water and
commit to devote their entire life and schedule to the church.
36.
The ICOC trains each new member to understand that “compliance was
the path of least resistance.” Members genuinely and wholeheartedly believed that
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 12 of 63 Page ID #:407
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-13-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
they needed to follow the Bible verbatim, and that the ICOC’s leadership were the
only “true” modern-day disciples on Earth.
37.
In addition to the “discipler” structure, the ICOC indoctrinated its
members with rigid fundamentalist teachings, demanded unyielding compliance with
its instruction, and enforced strict social separation.
38.
The “discipler” hierarchy facilitated McKean and the ICOC’s systemic
concealment of abuse, created a culture of fear among its most vulnerable, and
allowed predators to abuse women and children with impunity. Their practice of
concealment became an institutionalized pattern within the ICOC. For example:
a.
On information and belief, one ICOC member currently owns a
school for autistic children in the San Francisco area. He has been accused of
multiple instances of sexual abuse of adults and children/teenagers while he was in
Boston. ICOC and McKean were aware of this despicable man’s repeated abuse, but
McKean orchestrated his relocation from Boston to San Francisco to conceal his
predatory practices and avert criminal prosecution.
b.
On information and belief, non-parties Damon and Vicki James,
two ICC “disciplers” working under the specific direction of McKean, instructed a
member on July 1, 2018, to refrain from reporting two years of physical and sexual
abuse by her husband. Damon James even scolded this survivor and stated, "[w]e
don't do that to our brothers as disciples." Vicki James then victim shamed the
woman by stating "[w[]hy would you have the heart to press charges?" Damon
continued and told the woman, "[w]hat does that gain? That puts you in front of 'the
world'.”
c.
Former ICOC member Carter Whitten made the following
harrowing statement to an ICOC whisteblower regarding the abuse he endured in
connection with his “discipler” experience:
“For reasons I still don't fully understand, my
‘discipler’ met with me and two other teen boys at
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 13 of 63 Page ID #:408
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-14-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
one of the boys' houses. In the basement we sat in
a circle, and the goal of my discipler was to break
me down and to get me to fully understand the
horrors of Hell: Meaning what I had to look
forward to if I didn’t enter the Kingdom (the ICOC)
before I died. So next he took it upon himself to
paint a vivid picture for me: My discipler described
a scene in hell in which I was nailed to a ceiling by
my PENIS and spun around by a demon. Hanging
only by my genitals, I was forced to watch the devil
RAPE my mother repeatedly for all eternity. I was
then asked to take that grotesque vignette and
multiply its terror by 10,000 (or some other
arbitrarily large number) to catch even a glimpse of
how utterly horrifying the future awaiting me was,
unless I was to get baptized and be saved. I finally
broke down and cried. Which was clearly the goal,
as the ICOC famously conducted what they called
“breaking sessions.”
In addition to completing their entire conversion
series of Bible studies, there were even more
hurdles I was told I had to clear in order to become
a baptized disciple. One is that I had to call the
fathers of all the girls in the teen ministry to whom
I was sexually attracted, confess my sins of lust
after their daughters, and ask for the fathers'
forgiveness. I was mortified. I then asked another
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 14 of 63 Page ID #:409
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-15-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
teen boy—a good friend of mine, if he had been
made to do the same thing before he got baptized.
He revealed he had indeed been told to do so, and
was terrified by the whole ordeal and shunned by
most of those fathers.
The final step was the sin letter or sin list. All
disciples-in-training (those studying the Bible)
were expected to write an exhaustive letter to God,
documenting every single sin they had ever
committed in their entire lives and asking for
forgiveness. The letter was usually meant to be read
aloud in a group setting. I was only 14.
I must have been twelve or thirteen when I realized
that almost every conversation or sermon in the
teen ministry was talking about lust and
masturbation and sexual sin on some level. So now
looking back as an adult, I am horrified by how
perverse and abusive this culture was. Like many
evangelical denominations, the ICOC indulged in
purity culture and thus placed a heavy emphasis on
sexual purity.
But the ICOC took it to a whole new level, the way
that adults dealt with teens in these ministries—
children that were not their children—seems
criminal to me. At the very least, it was a gross and
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 15 of 63 Page ID #:410
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-16-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
egregious abuse of the power dynamic between
adults and children. And I know enough people
across the country in the ICOC to know that this
was not an isolated incident, it was literally
happening in every ‘teen ministry.’
But even worse than this, I had a friend that was
physically assaulted while he was studying the
Bible, because he tried to get up and leave. So the
teen leader held him down and beat him up.
We had to meet in one-on-one and group D-times,
where we had to confess our sins (especially sexual
sins) in a group setting, and the disciplers (teen
leaders) would sometimes confess sins as well.
During one such meeting, an adult discipler
confessed to a group of four or five boys that he had
had a wet dream (nocturnal emission) that week,
and in many other meetings we were told by
disciplers that masturbation equated to "ejaculating
on the cross." I never understood why grown men
were spending so much time with boys as young as
12 and 13 confessing all their sexual sins to them…
I heard things I had never heard before, and it all
felt very abusive and inappropriate to me, even as
a child.
Why were grown adults grilling other people’s
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 16 of 63 Page ID #:411
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-17-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
teenagers for specific sexual details . . . When most
of these teens had never even had a sexual
experience in their life. The abuse of power here
and power dynamics were so damaging to most of
these teens in the teen ministry, that the PTSD and
anxiety and therapy that most of these children
have needed their whole lives is astounding.”
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 17 of 63 Page ID #:412
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-18-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
D.
McKean Structured the ICOC to Maintain Secrecy.
39.
McKean’s carefully crafted church hierarchy lent itself to maintaining
secrecy and preventing outside intervention. The following diagram is a rough
depiction of the church’s organizational structure:
Kip McKean
Geographic sector leaders
Region leaders
Sector leaders
Zone leaders
Bible leaders
40.
Among other goals, McKean purposefully structured the ICOC’s
hierarchy to ensure that abuse within the church remained a secret to all outsiders,
including the authorities. Indeed, someone within the church was always monitoring
lower ranking members and giving them explicit instructions on how to conduct
themselves.
41.
McKean and the ICOC’s leadership taught, and continue to teach, the
doctrine that only fellow church members are “true disciples” of Jesus who will be
rewarded with a place in heaven in the afterlife. Conversely, non-members will not
go to heaven because they are not “true disciples.” That doctrine engendered an
insider-outsider mindset, which allowed scores of sexual predators within the
churches to abuse children without fear of criminal prosecution.
Kip
McKean
Geographic
Sector Leaders
Members/Disciples
Regional Leaders
Sector Leaders
Zone Leaders
Bible Talk Leaders
Discipler
Worldwide
Sector Leaders
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 18 of 63 Page ID #:413
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-19-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
42.
The ICOC also created a highly exclusive environment for its members
wherein they were/are prohibited from marrying anyone outside the church. The
ICOC must approve all marriages, which ultimately gives it an incredible degree of
control—and power—over each of its members.
43.
Questioning higher ranking members or the church in any manner
invited damning ostracization. Sometimes, the ICOC would labels those individuals
as “disfellowshipped” or “marked” for being divisive. “Disfellowshipped” meant
excommunication. Being disfellowshipped or marked would lead to ostracization
and scorn from the ICOC’s communities. From the point of view of ICOC doctrine,
being labeled as “disfellowshipped” or “marked” equated to being condemned to hell
on earth and in the afterlife, too. Indeed, that communal ostracization and isolation
from the outside world inflicted highly debilitating emotional and mental harm to
many of their members and, in some cases, drove them to suicide.
44.
But when it came time to judge known or suspected abusers, the ICOC
demanded that its parishioners forgive any slight, no matter how severe, and “move
on” without reporting such abuses. Judging the conduct of another, no matter how
villainous, was beyond the right of any individual, according to McKean and others,
because “no one is free from sin,” unless they are male members of the ICOC.
45.
Because of the ICOC’s strict rules, the expanse of its control over its
members’ lives, and the severe consequences it could impose on members who
questioned its teachings (let alone transgressed its instructions), the ICOC created the
ideal conditions for child molesters, pedophiles, and other sexual abusers to fester
and thrive. Furthermore, McKean and other abusers expressly leveraged the ICOC’s
hierarchical system of authority to insulate predatory church leaders from exposure.
Many of those predators continue to prey upon children without fear of repercussion.
46.
It is commonly understood that McKean was acutely aware of the
physical, psychological, and sexual abuses that church leaders (like Chuck Lucas and
others) wrought upon both children and adult parishioners of the church. Academic
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 19 of 63 Page ID #:414
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-20-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
writings, journals, recovered correspondence, newspaper articles, eyewitness
accounts, and publications like the book Toxic Christianity—written by former ICOC
leading members under the collective pseudonym “Mr. X”5—corroborate that fact.
These are but a fraction of the litany of sources of information depicting the practices
and abuses that the ICOC institutionalized to the point of normalcy within the church.
47.
To ensure that the ICOC’s exploitative conduct remain unchecked,
McKean, the ICOC, and its leadership have utilized their vast resources to silence any
internal dissidents, including through vexatious litigation. The ICOC has created a
“David and Goliath” scenario, swiftly suppressing the few members who have spoken
up over the last four decades. The ICOC would use its vast resources to silence any
internal dissidents, through coercive, deceptive, and threatening tactics to not only
force members to give 10 to 40% of their income every month, but also to turn over
student loans, IRS tax returns, children’s college funds, heirlooms, stocks, furniture,
wedding rings, cars, prized possessions, and literally anything that the ICOC could get
their hands on. The ICOC grew its resources from nonstop fundraisers, forcing
members to put their “special contribution” amounts of thousands of dollars on credit
cards, or borrowing it from outside family members.
48.
When many abused victims escaped the ICOC, they were so financially
destitute (and emotionally devastated) that they lacked both the financial resources
and emotional resilience to take on the ICOC through legal recourse. The ICOC used
this to their advantage, as it would help silence any word of sexual abuse. In short,
McKean and the ICOC intentionally created a system of exploitation that extracts all
the financial value it can from its members, which it could deploy to further shield
their illicit conduct from discovery by outsiders.
49.
The ICOC and its leaders have cajoled, manipulated, and even coerced
5 It is widely believed that Rick Bauer, a former ICOC member and whistleblower, co-published with another church
leader under the pseudonym “Mr. X” and can be accessed in its entirety here:
http://www.reveal.org/library/theology/Toxic.pdf
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 20 of 63 Page ID #:415
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-21-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
parents and other church members to remain silent about the abuses that their
children suffered, such as through payoffs and non-disclosure agreements. The
ICOC’s affiliate organizations (e.g., its non-profit arm, HOPE Worldwide) also
helped insulated abusers from accountability by lending legitimacy to the ICOC’s
system of exploitation and abuse.
E.
McKean Grew the ICOC’s Ranks to Feed Its Financial Operation.
50.
McKean and other ICOC leaders were obsessed with growing church
membership because more members meant more revenue from income tithing and
other coerced, uncompensated labor from adults and minors.
51.
Accordingly, they imposed recruiting quotas on members to help grow
their ranks. The ICOC requires all its members to recruit a certain number of new
members on regular intervals, as well as to bring visitors to all church events.
Tolerating, concealing, and hiding sexual abusers (while at the same time inviting
more abusers into the ICOC’s ranks) simply became a cost of doing business.
52.
To incentivize bringing new members into the fold, the ICOC cultivated
an atmosphere that isolated its members from other social networks, while concealing
the systemic abuse of women and children within the church. Members spent every
day together; they were not allowed much, if any, contact with family members or
friends who were not church members. Of course, the only exception to that strict rule
was contact with outsiders for the sole purpose of their recruitment.
53.
Members were required to give at least 10-30% of their income to the
churches before they were allowed to be baptized and become an official member.
54.
Thereafter, any member’s position, health, and wellbeing in an ICOC
church community depended heavily upon success in expanding the congregational
rosters. Those social incentives created a self-perpetuating business model to attract
new recruits/members, and in doing so, generate hundreds of millions of dollars in
revenue for the church through new tithing.
55.
Also, the ICOC forced its members to participate in special contributions
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 21 of 63 Page ID #:416
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-22-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
for missions approximately twice a year equaling approximately 40 times their normal
tithe amount. The ICOC was relentless in its pursuit for funding and church
leadership would resort to interrogating members about their income, going so far as
to demand copies of the members’ paystubs. By way of example, if a member gave
$4,000 per month, the total mission contributions for that year would equal an
additional (40x) and the total required sum would be $160,000 in addition to the
normal yearly tithe amount of $48,000. This particular member would be required to
give the church a whopping total of $208,000 for the year.
56.
Children were also asked to contribute, including their labor for events
like car washes or baby-sitting.
57.
On information and belief, the ICOC has collected upwards of $10 to
$15 billion in tax free contributions over the past four decades.
58.
If the tithing budget was not satisfied, the ICOC forced its leaders or
“disciplers” to contribute the financial shortfall themselves. Examples of the ICOC’s
pattern of coercive tactics to enforce non-consensual tithing include, but are not
limited to, the following:
a.
The ICOC put members, who failed to tithe, on a “weak and
struggling list,” a list which was known to all ICOC leaders. If the “weak and
struggling” member did not eventually repent and repay the tithe, the ICOC
“disfellowshipped” him or her.
b.
The ICOC would ask its members to locate members who failed to
tithe and peer pressure them into tithing, for example, by sitting on their porch and
waiting until they arrived home to collect the money.
c.
In 2005, two former ICOC members filed a suit in Tennessee
claiming the church uses cultlike tactics, manipulation, peer pressure and guilt to
force members into tithing and making other financial contributions. They alleged
that for personal gain, “the Nashville Church, the [ICOC], Hope Worldwide, and
Central and South America World Sector jointly participated in a scheme to defraud
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 22 of 63 Page ID #:417
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-23-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
church members, who are not allowed to inspect the church’s financial records.”
d.
A former member (who only wishes to go by Tina C.) witnessed
Non-Disclosure Agreements being forced upon parishioners, claiming that they could
never talk about the true finances of the Defendants despite evidence that ICOC
opened offshore accounts containing massive quantities of cash.6
59.
The pressure to comply with the church’s rigid demands became a source
of anxiety and depression for many members—so much so that several ex-members
committed suicide.
60.
In furtherance of efforts to protect the church and its primary source of
revenue (i.e., its members) at all costs, McKean and the ICOC used psychological
manipulation to conceal the incidents of abuse. ICOC members routinely read
scripture to discourage “dragging brothers into court.” For example, McKean told
members of the ICOC, including the mother of Jane Roe 8, that:
“We cannot report these abuses, because it would hurt our
church, which is God’s Modern-Day Movement.”
“Do you want the fall of God’s modern-day movement on
your head???!!”
“The cause of protecting God’s Kingdom on earth is more
important than the sin or the pain of a few individuals.”
“We need to forgive our brothers who sin and realize that
they are a new creation in Christ, and give them a chance
to make things right. If we report them, it will destroy their
lives and hurt the church.”
61.
In addition, the ICOC engaged in strategic victim blaming and victim
6 Top leaders of the ICOC put “different ICOC assets and properties in their names” in order shelter and hide those
assets “so that the church didn’t specifically own them.” For example, The Bay Area Christian Church listed its address
at the location of the HOPE Technology School for Autistic Children, which was owned by Bay Area Christian Church
executive minister Russ Ewell. As of 2022, the property had a total assessed value of $7.7 million, all of which was
exempt from taxes under an “other” exemption. The Bay Area Christian Church also received a PPP loan of $764,600
in April 2020.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 23 of 63 Page ID #:418
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-24-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
shaming. For example, ICOC leaders blame victims for bringing on their suffering
because their clothing was too provocative, they were supposedly disobedient, or that
they did not listen to the ICOC’s advice.
62.
Through this combination of tithing, labor contributions, and
concealment of crimes through fear, coercion, and manipulation, McKean and the
ICOC managed to operate a highly profitable pyramid scheme.
63.
A web of paper corporations and alter ego 501(c)(3) entities supported
that pyramid scheme, culminating in hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit gains.
The full extent of the ICOC (and the ICC’s) profiteering is unknown, especially in
view of the tithing and labor contributions that the ICOC and the ICC routinely coerce
from their members.
64.
Plaintiffs are aware that the ICOC and the ICC have also benefitted from
millions in governmental support through SBA loans, authorized under the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act).7 Through their
abuse of the corporate form and systematic exploitation of their members, the ICOC
and the ICC have created literal cash cows built upon layers of lies and deceit.
65.
McKean actively solicited church members to turn over their COVID-19
relief money to the church. The following are excerpts of emails from McKean to
various church elders and leaders:
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
7 During the COVID-19 pandemic, branches of ICOC received 77 Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, totaling
over $9.4 million. Over $9.2 million of those loans were forgiven, including accrued interest. See
https://projects.propublica.org/coronavirus/bailouts/ for more information.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 24 of 63 Page ID #:419
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-25-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
66.
HOPE, a sham charity organization, is one example of a tax-exempt
corporation under the ICOC’s and the ICC’s corporate umbrellas. HOPE has generated
over $100 million in revenue over the last six years. It continues to generate a
substantial share of its tax-free revenue from its members using substantially similar
methods of the ICOC and the ICC, which are characterized by the tax-deductible
contributions from third-party corporations and high-net-worth individuals.
F.
McKean and His Churches Used Children’s Ministries to Extend the Abuse
Enterprise.
67.
The ICOC’s children’s ministry, named the “Kids Kingdom,” further
insinuated the ICOC into the lives of its members and their children.
68.
The ICOC built a culture of child grooming. Children were taught from
a very young age to "obey" their ICOC elders or face corporal punishment. The ICOC
indoctrinated the children under its control to therefore obey adults and authority
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 25 of 63 Page ID #:420
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-26-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
figures unquestioningly.
69.
Those policies, practices, and norms allowed the ICOC and its Kids
Kingdom, in particular, to become fertile grounds for sexual predators. Countless
instances of abuse happened within the Kids Kingdom ministries themselves, during
its hosted mission trips (e.g., HOPE Worldwide trips), and other related religious and
social events.
70.
HOPE took teenagers on mission trips around the world to spread God’s
Word. Many of these children thought they were participating in an evangelical trip.
Ultimately, many, including some of the Plaintiffs, were sexually abused by vile adult
men. Children and/or their parents reported the sexual abuse, including rape, to elders
and doctors (i.e., mandated reporters) within the church, but the church never bothered
notifying the police of the illegal activity. There were no instances of any ICOC
medical doctors reporting the abuse to anyone, let alone anyone outside the church.
G.
McKean and His Churches Encouraged Physical Abuse of Children Under
the Guise of Discipline.
71.
In addition to sexual abuse, children in the care of ICOC (and ICC) staff
were routinely physically abused under the pretext of “discipline.” The ICOC also
instructed the parents to routinely physically abuse their children under the pretext of
discipline.
72.
Church leadership often recited the following commonly known passage
from Proverbs 13:24 as justification for child abuse: “Those who spare the rod of
discipline hate their children. Those who love their children care enough to discipline
them.”
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 26 of 63 Page ID #:421
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-27-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
73.
For example, the ICOC instructed its members to spank children,
including infants, with a wooden paddle or spoon. Pictured is an example of a custom-
made ICOC paddle with a heart shaped hole in it. A true and correct image of the heart
shaped paddle is depicted below:
74.
Members were instructed, with visuals, on how to use corporal
punishment without leaving bruises, welts, or red marks, so the offending members
could not be reported to child protective services. One former member recalls
frequently seeing young children at church with welts or bruises on their thighs. On
one occasion, this member witnessed a child with a “heart shaped welt” on his/her
body.
/ / /
/ / /
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 27 of 63 Page ID #:422
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-28-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
H.
Defectors are Beginning to Corroborate the Abuses Publicly, and Experts
are Taking Note.
75.
McKean and his team of capable, well-educated henchmen convinced
nearly everyone within his churches to remain silent for the last 43 years. That silence
has come to an end.
76.
Some ICOC members were fortunate enough to escape the church’s tight
grasp and successfully flee the toxic and harmful environment that McKean created.
77.
According to some of the most respected cult experts around the world
(such as Dr. Steve Hassan, PhD), the ICOC and ICC are some of the most dangerous
cults in existence. The danger arises primarily because the church insidiously
masquerades as the approachable ‘church next-door’ with deeply rooted Biblical
foundations. On its face, this public image of the church seems innocent. But the
church’s internal machinations are characterized by unmitigated systemic and chronic
physical and sexual abuse of children and women within the church.
78.
Defectors have since revealed the abuse they suffered or witnessed at the
ICOC. For example:
a.
Former member (and non-party) Lisa Johnson was a top leader in
New York City and a friend of McKean. In a podcast called Eavesdropping,8 she
made the following comments regarding the ICOC based on her personal experience:
“Women [in the ICOC] are getting ground up, and I mean tons of people, it’s not an
isolated case here and there . . . And I think about these women now, after all these
years . . . So I’m gonna bring up something here. . . . There has been sexual abuse,
there has been emotional abuse, and there has been some physical abuse of women . .
. and part of that is the issue of patriarchy. We developed a system and a way that was
not safe for women . . . There are women that have been very damaged and ground up
8 The podcast may be accessed from YouTube from https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mqhs4GJ1D-
s&pp=ygUsU3RldmVuIGxlc2xpZSBqb2huc29uIExpc2EgbXkgTGlzYSBhbmQgU2hhcmk%3D. The statements begin
at the 44:40-minute mark and last for about four minutes.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 28 of 63 Page ID #:423
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-29-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
by that. The fruit of this is so obvious, how can you miss it? How many women have
been told to stay with their physically abusive husbands and how many women have
been sexually abused?”
b.
In a 2022 podcast with Steve Johnson,9 another ICOC defector,
James Lloyd, explained the irony of Lucas’s pedophilia with young men when the
ICOC had implemented its own a LGBTQ+ conversion therapy ministry:
“The truth is the foundational—what I call—“original sin” of our
movement was homosexuality. Man on man. Specifically, male older
leader on young intern . . . Not a few times . . . You can find out, it’s not
like nobody knows. The fact that our sin, our original sin, was a senior
leader [Lucas] who is respected and loved and training a group of young
men. They get in a room and shut door and then this senior leader [Lucas]
‘puts the moves’ on these young men. And it’s worse than it sounds
because those men became ministers and went out into their churches and
some of them did the same. And I know that because I was in some of
those meetings where it was confessed!
We [the church leadership] thought it was best not to ever share that with
everybody, and I heard all the reasons and I bought into them: ‘He’s got
children, you know.’ ‘He’s got children, he’s got a wife.’ ‘You don’t just
say those things . . . it could hurt the faith of a young Christian.’
All those things are hierarchy saying, that’s patriarchy saying, that we
don’t need to bring this thing up about men on men. But I’m telling you,
9 The podcast may be accessed from Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-
IOS_GK0T-GK1C&mibextid=2Rb1fB&ref=watch_permalink&v=1109647602942209. The statements begin around
29:00-minute into the clip and continues to the 31:30-minute mark.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 29 of 63 Page ID #:424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-30-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
one of the problems—and one of the reasons why I call it “original sin”—
I don’t think that that sin is any different than if it had been a man and a
woman, by the way, that’s not married. But the fact that we hid it. You
laughed at the word ‘transparent.’ That’s what we needed. . . We needed
to be hearing about that. People should be taught that that’s how things
started in our group. And some of that has continued for three generations.
. . . Some of that trauma was carried on, was passed on to other men as
those men went out to start their churches. . .”
I.
The ICOC and the ICC Refused to Report Numerous Pedophiles Who
Were Later Arrested.
79.
At least ten pedophiles have been arrested in connection with abuses
linked to the ICOC or ICC. Described below, these individuals committed numerous
crimes before the police intervened. On information and belief, they represent only
miniscule fraction of the true number of predators who have operated with impunity
within the ICOC since 1979.
1.
David Saracino
80.
In January 2012, Defendant David Iburg, a/k/a David Saracino
(“Saracino”), was sentenced to 40 years of hard labor in the State of Louisiana, the
maximum sentence, for the forcible rape of a 4-year-old girl in 2004.10 The
prosecutor, Cynthia Guillory, told the judge that he was among the worst of the worst.
Saracino purposefully sought out women with financial problems so he could gain
access to their small children, who became his victims. He had charges and convictions
in Texas, Utah, and Louisiana, where he received the 40-year sentence.11
10 State v. Iburg, 12-2720 (La. 5/17/13), 118 So.3d 372.
11 For more information, see Theresa Schmidt, Prosecutor to child rapist: You’re the worst of the worst, KPLC News
(Jan. 6, 2012), last accessed June 13, 2023 from https://www.kplctv.com/story/16464797/man-gets-40-years-for-raping-
a/?outputType=amp.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 30 of 63 Page ID #:425
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-31-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
81.
Saracino attended the East Region of the Los Angeles ICOC, where
several members (single mothers) of the ICOC reported to the leaders in the East
Region in or about 1998 that Saracino had continuously molested their daughters.
Ultimately, several police reports were filed by the parents, while the ICOC remained
silent. Just as the ICOC did nothing to address these reports, Saracino escaped to the
San Diego ICOC and freely resided in the Escondido area, temporarily, until fleeing
again.
82.
For a time, Saracino disappeared. He was free to go on a nationwide crime
spree, abusing and raping little girls along the way. Saracino was finally caught, but
only after an episode of America’s Most Wanted produced credible leads that resulted
in his capture.
83.
Like so many others, the mothers of the victims were told not to share
with anyone else what Saracino had done, as it would “hurt the church.”
84.
Had the ICOC assisted in his arrest or alerted their congregations,
Saracino could not have continued abusing children with reckless abandon. On
information and belief, the ICOC intentionally, willfully, maliciously, and recklessly
knew of his proclivities without warning parents, concealed his whereabouts, and
enabled his escape from authorities.
2.
Waldo Milla-Guerra
85.
In or about February 2018, a volunteer soccer coach named Waldo Milla-
Guerra of Middlesex County, New Jersey, was arrested on charges of possession and
distribution of child pornography. Milla-Guerra volunteered at the South Brunswick
Soccer Club and formerly taught at Kid’s Kingdom at Central Jersey Church of Christ
in North Brunswick.
3.
Benjamin Samuel Speights
86.
In 2005, Benjamin Samuel Speights, a member of the south region Los
Angeles ICOC, was convicted for lewd and lascivious acts against a child under the
age of 15.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 31 of 63 Page ID #:426
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-32-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
87.
Speights’ unlawful conduct included forceable participation of a 14-year-
old girl to create pornographic videos that he sold.
88.
In December 2020, Speights was convicted in Arizona in connection with
a Class 2 felony of sexual exploitation of a minor as part of a negotiated plea deal
related to child pornography charges. Speights was a leader in the “Kid’s Kingdom”
ministry in the El Segundo South Region of the Los Angeles ICOC church. Several
children at this ministry reported his physical abuse, but neither the ICOC nor its ever
reported the abuse that those children endured or attempted to prevent future abuses.
4.
Nicholas Griffin Lombardi
89.
Nicholas Griffin Lombardi is another example of a known pedophile
abusing children within the ICOC’s churches. He was a long-standing member of the
ICOC, as were his parents.
90.
On or about November 27, 2022, Lombardi posted on his personal
Facebook page “I kind of have a fantasy of fucking a child ha[.]”
91.
Lombardi was convicted for lewd and lascivious acts against a child under
the age 15. In addition, there are numerous accusations of abuse against Lombardi.
And yet, the ICOC refused to report his abusive conduct to the authorities.
5.
William (Bill) Thomas McLaughlin
92.
In approximately August 2011, one ICOC abuser, William (Bill) Thomas
McLaughlin, was sentenced to 6 years to life, followed by 10 years to life of parole for
various counts of felony sexual assault on a child by a person in a position of trust.12
He abused approximately ten to fifteen individuals, all of whom were expelled or in
some fashion pushed out of the Denver ICOC as punishment for failing to comply with
the leaders’ commands.
12 For more information, see Rhonda Moore, “Denver man sentenced in Douglas County for sex assault on child” Castle
Rock News-Press (Aug. 16, 2011), last accessed June 13, 2023 from https://castlerocknewspress.net/stories/denver-man-
sentenced-in-douglas-county-for-sex-assault-on-child,117951.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 32 of 63 Page ID #:427
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-33-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
6.
Tomotaka Andrews Wilton
93.
Tomotaka (“Tom”) Andrews Wilton of the Portland, Oregon ICC location
raped a child for years. 13
94.
Church leaders, including McKean, were acutely aware of the abuse but
did nothing to warn anyone regarding this despicable predator’s presence.
95.
In 2009, he was convicted in Idaho of two counts of third-degree rape of
a child and is now a registered sex offender. On information and belief, Wilton remains
a member of the Portland ICC.
7.
Karim Torres
96.
Karim Torres was convicted of indecency with a child by contact.
97.
On information and belief, he is currently a registered sex offender.
98.
On information and belief, he serves as a Bible talk leader at several
Texas ICOC locations. He and his wife are known to frequently visit other ICOC
churches as speakers at family retreats.
8.
Warren Inman
99.
Warren Inman was convicted of at least three counts of indecency with a
child in or about February 2021 in Denton County, Texas, Case No. F-2012-0728-D.
He was a member of the Dallas ICOC and lives in Denton County.
100. He was a worship leader and allowed college students to live in his home,
as he regularly had college worship group meetings at his home. Inman has been in
and out of prison and was finally arrested for child molestation. On information and
belief, the ICOC neglected to report him to the police.
9.
Joseph Ursini
101. Joseph Ursini has multiple arrests and has been in and out of the ICOC
fellowship over the years. On information and belief, none of the Texas ICOC
13 For more information, see the Idaho State Police offender profile, last accessed June 13, 2023 from:
http://www.isp.idaho.gov/sor_id/SOR?id=35071&sz=1360; https://www.homefacts.com/offender-
detail/IDSX35071/Tomotaka-Andrews-Wilton.html.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 33 of 63 Page ID #:428
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-34-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
churches, including the Dallas location, have ever reported Ursini’s criminal conduct
to the relevant authorities.
10.
Luis Miguel Quiroz
102. Luis Miguel Quiroz was the subject of several individuals’ reports to
ICOC regarding extreme sexual abuse of several minors. However, the church did
nothing.
He was finally arrested approximately ten years after the reports were made to the
church. Luis is the brother of Dr. Carlos Quiroz, an ICOC pediatrician.
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 34 of 63 Page ID #:429
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-35-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS
A.
The Sordid History of Chuck Lucas
103. When Chuck Lucas became involved with the ICOC, he was a licensed
psychologist at the time.
104. It is commonly understood that McKean, was acutely aware of, the
physical, psychological, and sexual abuses Lucas and other church members wrought
upon children and adult parishioners. ICOC and McKean strategically downplayed
Chuck’s pattern of abuse by labeling his conduct as “recurring sins.” Sadly enough,
these “recurring sins” were never investigated by ICOC.14
105. After Lucas was paid off to leave the ICOC due to his deviant behavior,
he led CrossRoads Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida.
106. Lucas died in August 2018. However, Plaintiffs and scores of members
witnessed his ongoing abuse of children and adults within the congregation through the
end of his despicable life. Sam Laing, one of Lucas’s continued faithful supporters and
a prominent lead evangelist with ICOC, was aware of Lucas’s deeply disturbing abuses
and its chronology. Sam Laing recently made a statement about Chuck in a 2018 article
published in “Disciples Today,” which is an ICOC owned platform/news source:
““Chuck Lucas was a man of deep conviction. He was a disciple of great courage and
perseverance. He was criticized, persecuted and attacked for what he stood for, but he
never quit. Yes, he had his weaknesses and failures along the way, but he, by grace,
repented and overcame them, and was restored.”15
B.
Plaintiffs Were Tortured and Abused At Ages 5 and 9
107. On or about September 21, 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother was approached by a
deacon’s wife, Sheila Grubb, also a leader in the ICOC, at a party she was hosting for
14 Ryan Britt, History Repeats Itself: The Rise and Fall of Kip McKean & Chuck Lucas. Last accessed on December 29,
2022 from: http://www.reveal.org/library/history/britt2.html.
15 Sam Laing, Chuck Lucas: A Servant of God (2018). Last accessed on December 29, 2022 from:
https://www.dtodayarchive2.org/chuck-lucas-gods-servant-and-how-he-used-him
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 35 of 63 Page ID #:430
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-36-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
moms of special needs children. Sheila said: “one of the boys from across the street is
messing with your baby girl. I saw him this morning at church; he led her behind a
door leading into the auditorium.”
108. Plaintiffs’ mother immediately spoke with her youngest daughter, who
was 5 years old and in kindergarten at the time. Jane Roe 6 burst into tears and said,
Ian Schirmer “won’t stop”. Ian told her, “don’t tell anyone” and “this is how I show
you I love you”. On information and belief, Ian was approximately 10 years old when
he sexually abused Plaintiffs in various locations, including but not limited to church-
owned facilities.
109. Immediately, Plaintiffs’ mother understood why Jane Roe 6 had been
falling behind in school the prior month. Jane Roe 6’s teacher and Plaintiffs’ mother
had recently met to discuss concerns regarding Jane Roe 6’s lack of progress at school.
110. Plaintiffs’ mother asked Jane Roe 7, who was 9 years old at the time, if
she had been abused and she confirmed that she had also been abused by Ian Schirmer
in the same manner as her sister.
111. Ian sexually abused Plaintiffs by aggressively groping them and touching
their bodies in a sexual manner. Ian told both girls they were not allowed to say no to
his touching and groping.
112. Ian Schirmer’s parents are Alberto and Anna Maria Schirmer and the
Schirmer family attended the North River Church of Christ (“North River ICOC”)16,
an ICOC church in Marietta, Georgia. Alberto Schirmer was in a leadership position
as a Deacon at North River ICOC in or about the time Plaintiffs’ abuse occurred.
113. On or about September 22, 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother spoke with Alberto
and Anna Maria Schirmer regarding Plaintiffs’ abuse. When Plaintiff’s mother
disclosed the abuse she discovered the day before, Anna Maria looked at Alberto and
said, “I guess this means the other stuff at school is true then.”
16 https://nrcoc.org
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 36 of 63 Page ID #:431
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-37-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
114. Plaintiffs’ mother bluntly asked Alberto and Anna Maria, “has he done
this before? You could have told me so that we could have installed further safety
measures.” They both reacted calmly and in an unalarmed, yet calculated manner. After
this meeting with the Schirmers, Plaintiffs’ mother immediately went home and began
searching for help for her daughters. She called a counselor at North River ICOC,
Steven Brand, who on information and belief was/is a licensed therapist, and someone
that the ICOC recommended and used to counsel its members in a professional
capacity. When Steven Brand gave advice, church members were expected and
directed to take that advice. Upon hearing which of the Schirmer children (they had
twin boys) abused Plaintiffs, Steven said, “they have got to get a hold on that boy.”
This telling, but simple statement conveyed a disheartening fact to Plaintiffs’ mother:
church leadership was already aware of Ian’s pattern of abusing other children. Steven
told Plaintiffs’ mother they should “talk again tomorrow” about the situation. Steven
Brand, a counselor and mandatory reporter, never reported the abuse to anyone.
115. Plaintiffs’ mother also went to Plaintiffs’ school, Eastside Elementary
School, spoke with a school counselor and specifically requested assistance in keeping
Ian away from both girls. The school counselor listened and said, “I don’t need the
boy’s name I think I know who it is.” Plaintiffs’ school had approximately 1,200
students at the time in grades ranging from Kindergarten to 5th grade, however, among
such a large student body, this counselor knew the perpetrator’s name without
Plaintiffs’ mother disclosing his name. The counselor helped Plaintiffs’ mother create
an action plan and the counselor also reported the abuse to the Department of Family
and Children Services (“DFACS”). She recommended SafePath Children's Advocacy
Center (“SafePath”) in Marietta, Georgia, as a safe space to obtain help for Plaintiffs
in connection with the abuse they endured
116. On or about September 23, 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother received a call on her
lunch break from Steven Brand and he said, “I’ve known Anna Maria for years going
back to Boston where we were in the same family ministry group, so I don’t think I
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 37 of 63 Page ID #:432
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-38-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
can help you with your girls.” Plaintiffs’ mother was completely stunned that a
mandatory reporter such as Steven Brand would refuse to report child abuse because
of his personal relationship with the abuser’s mother.
117. Later that evening on September 23, 2008, Lin Beaty Ottenweller, a
women’s ministry leader in the ICOC and registered nurse, visited Plaintiffs’ home and
stated she wanted to help Plaintiffs’ mother with Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ mother asked for
Lin’s help in convincing Anna Maria to drive the twins to school so Plaintiffs would
not be forced to confront their abuser 5 days each week during the bus ride to school.
Plaintiffs’ mother made this request of Lin because when she previously asked Anna
Maria to personally drive the twins to school, Anna Maria refused and stated that her
“boys really enjoy riding the bus.” Lin Beaty Ottenweller was at all relevant times a
registered nurse and clergy member, and as a result, a mandatory reporter. Lin failed
to report the abuse to DFACS.
118. On September 24, 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother received a call from Detective
Adamchek from the Cobb County Crimes Against Children Unit and they scheduled a
time for him to interview Plaintiffs at SafePath.
119. On September 30, 2008, Anna Maria Schirmer came to Plaintiffs’ home
and spoke with Plaintiffs’ mother. Anna Maria asked, “when you talk to your girls how
do you question them?” Anna Maria’s question clearly insinuated that Plaintiffs’
mother had installed false narratives in Plaintiffs’ minds regarding the abuse. Plaintiffs’
mother responded, “you think I would want my girls to think they are victims of sexual
assault if it didn’t happen to them?” Plaintiffs’ mother then asked Anna Maria to
“please leave [her] home now and don’t ever step foot on [her] property again!”
120. On October 1, 2008, Plaintiffs and their mother went to SafePath to be
interviewed by Detective Adamchek. He interviewed Plaintiffs and their mother
separately for approximately an hour each. Detective Adamchek requested Sheila
Grubb’s phone number so he could obtain a witness statement from her.
121. On October 5, 2008, Lin Beaty Ottenweller visited Plaintiffs’ home
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 38 of 63 Page ID #:433
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-39-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
because, she said she was concerned Plaintiffs’ mother was receiving advice outside
of North River ICOC and, therefore, not receiving “Godly advice.” Plaintiffs’ mother
informed Lin that the family was receiving help from experts in the field, including
Detective Adamchek.
122. On October 8, 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother received a call from an angry
Sheila Grubb who was upset because she received a voicemail from Detective
Adamchek and she did not want to be involved in the situation.
123. In November 2008, a meeting between the elders and Plaintiffs’ mother
was held at Plaintiffs’ next-door neighbor’s home. The next-door neighbor was also a
member of North River ICOC and the following individuals were present at the
meeting: Plaintiffs’ mother, Kevin and Echo Garrett, Ken Furlong (elder), Ross
Mckenzie (elder) Thom Bogle and Bob Keen (elder and attorney). Thom Bogle was
the only individual Plaintiffs’ mother did not know personally; he and his wife had
recently moved to Georgia from the New York City ICOC. Plaintiffs’ mother later
learned that Thom Bogle was a new elder at North River ICOC and Thom had received
an endorsement from Tom and Kellie Brown, who were leading the North River ICOC
at the time. Plaintiffs’ mother shared with the group what Plaintiffs had endured and
Echo Garrett responded by sharing how ICOC leadership showed no concern regarding
Plaintiffs’ inhumane abuse.
124. During the meeting, the elders had little to nothing to say about Plaintiffs’
abuse. However, Ross McKenzie said, “someday soon your girls and the boys (Ian)
across the street can play together again!” This calloused statement horrified Plaintiffs’
mother and she quickly told the group that Plaintiffs would never play with the
Schirmer boys ever again. None of the leaders at this meeting in November 2008 ever
reported Plaintiffs’ abuse.
125. On November 13, 2008, Detective Adamchek called Plaintiffs’ mother
and asked to take photos of the family home. He arrived with 2 other detectives in an
all-black vehicle. Plaintiffs’ mother told Detective Adamchek about the feedback she
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 39 of 63 Page ID #:434
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-40-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
received from North River ICOC staff and leaders and he curtly said, “your family
should have no contact with anyone in that family, they are truly dangerous to you.”
Plaintiffs’ mother was floored that an “outsider” had such strong views about the
Schirmer family, yet not a single member or leader within the North River ICOC shared
this opinion. Indeed, it felt like everyone at North River ICOC fiercely protected the
Schirmer family instead of Plaintiffs. Detective Adamchek told Plaintiffs’ mother that
he caught Alberto Schirmer in a lie and Anna Maria was “covering” for Alberto.
Detective Adamchek told Plaintiffs’ mother that the police department should have
received multiple reports from North River ICOC, however, they had not received a
single report regarding Plaintiffs’ abuse.
126. In December 2008, Plaintiffs’ mother spoke with the mother of a little boy
who was also abused by Ian Schirmer at Eastside Elementary School in approximately
2007. This mother said her experience dealing with the Schirmer family was horrific
and she felt the family was hiding something. She was frustrated that she had no
success convincing anyone at Eastside Elementary School to restrict Ian’s activities to
protect the other children from his abuse. After discussing her concerns with the school
counselor, the school counselor told Plaintiffs’ mother, “good luck trying to get
accommodations concerning that boy, cause his mom [Anna Maria] is at the school on
a weekly basis making sure her son has his freedom!”
127. In January 2009, roughly three months after Plaintiffs’ mother first
learned of Plaintiffs’ abuse, Kellie Brown called Plaintiffs’ mother to schedule a
meeting with the new North River ICOC Elder, Thom Bogle, at his home. Plaintiffs’
mother refused because she stopped attending the church and did not consider Thom
Bogle her Elder. Kellie stated that the Elders wanted to apologize to her because they
realized they mishandled the situation concerning Plaintiffs’ abuse. She begged
Plaintiffs’ mother to meet and suggested that the meeting could help the family heal.
Reluctantly, Plaintiffs’ mother agreed to meet with the Elders and Kellie agreed to
attend the meeting to support Plaintiffs and their mother.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 40 of 63 Page ID #:435
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-41-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
128. The January 2009 meeting at Thom Bogle’s house also included Lin
Beaty Ottenweller, Kellie Brown, and Thom’s wife, Gail Bogle. Lin commenced the
meeting by telling Plaintiffs’ mother she was concerned that she was not helping
Plaintiffs “heal and forgive”. Lin alleged that Plaintiffs’ mother was trusting people in
the “world” rather than the ICOC spiritual leaders who loved and cared for the family.
Taken aback by the group’s assault on her parenting abilities, Plaintiffs’ mother
responded, “are you seriously going to sit there and tell me I’m not a good mom to my
girls because I’m seeking help from experts in the field of pediatric sexual abuse, and
I have the backing of the Crimes Against Children unit of the Cobb police!”
129. Thom Bogle then presented a document to the group, stating, “I have a
letter from a child psychologist in Athens saying that the abuser, Ian Schirmer, is not a
threat to other children.” Plaintiffs’ mother immediately responded, “are you talking
about the therapists named the Shapiros? They are ICOC members, and are
developmental psychology therapists, and not trained in child predator situations! The
Shapiros have been seeing Ian once a month for many years, so this abuse happened
on their watch! They are not qualified to make that assessment!”
130. Thom Bogle then replied verbatim to Plaintiffs’ mother: “what happened
to your girls isn’t that big of a deal, as most girls have been molested by the time they
reach 18.”
131. Thom told Plaintiffs’ mother, “we don’t need you at North River, or your
friends, as we have 60,000 square feet of building space, and people are moving in
every week.” Plaintiffs’ mother took her cue from Thom and immediately left his
home.
132. In September 2009, Plaintiffs and their mother attempted to attend Ian
Schirmer’s court hearing regarding the abuse. The prosecutor told Plaintiffs’ mother,
“this boy comes from a wealthy family and they have good representation.” Plaintiffs’
mother responded and said, “she knew the family was not wealthy because she made
more money than Alberto Schirmer.” On information and belief, Thom Bogel, a
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 41 of 63 Page ID #:436
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-42-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
wealthy individual, funded Ian Schirmer’s defense costs.
133. In September 2010, word began spreading in the community that other
abuse survivors came forward to expose abuse by Thom Bogle that the church actively
concealed. After these other survivors publicly disclosed their abuse, Plaintiffs’ mother
discovered that Thom Bogle had an extensive history of abusing young men in
ministries he oversaw. When survivors reported Thom’s abuse to church leaders, they
were immediately victim shamed and church leaders minimized their experiences by
calling the abuse “David/Jonathan” “affairs.” These church leaders never reported the
abuse to the authorities.
134. Jeff Hickman, a staff evangelist at North River ICOC, was assigned to
help Plaintiffs’ mother as a “friend” after she left the ICOC to keep an eye on her.
After learning about Thom’s history of abusing young men, Plaintiffs’ mother
demanded to Jeff Hickman that Bogle be removed as an elder and as a board member
of the church’s children camp called The Swamp. Plaintiffs’ mother, desperate to save
other innocent people from Thom’s abuse, contacted the Survivors Network of those
Abused by Priests (“SNAP”) to obtain help in exposing North River ICOC’s deeply
rooted and repeated coverup of abuse within the church. At the time, Plaintiffs’ mother
was told that exposing the church would require the cooperation of multiple victims,
so unfortunately, SNAP was unable to help her at that time.
135. In or about December 2010, Al Baird, Lead Elder for the Los Angeles
ICOC, also commonly known as the ICOC “fixer,” flew to Georgia for a meeting with
the wife of one of Thom’s abuse victims, to represent the ICOC Elders Group. On
information and belief, Al Baird was in a meeting in Boston with Thom regarding this
same victim Thom abused in the 1990’s. This victim tried on multiple occasions to
obtain help from the ICOC leadership, however, nothing happened and Thom was
allowed to continue his abuse unabated with the ICOC turning a blind eye.
136. On January 17, 2011, Plaintiffs’ mother received a text from Jeff Hickman
telling her that Bogle was removed as an Elder at North River ICOC. North River
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 42 of 63 Page ID #:437
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-43-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
ICOC announced to the church that Thom was removed because “someone from
Bogle’s past had come forward and is unforgiving.” Therefore, North River ICOC
concealed the assaults and never informed the congregation that Thom’s sexual
abuse victim came forward or that Thom abused multiple individuals while he
was a campus minister.
137. As a result of the abuse, Jane Roe 6 experienced severe trauma throughout
her childhood. For example, Jane Roe 6’s school performance went from stellar to
requiring that she repeat the first grade. Her trauma culminated in her teen years and is
ongoing to this day.
138. Plaintiffs have continuously seen psychotherapists from the time of
incident to the present and both have struggled with flashbacks, severe depression and
other related conditions.
139. As a direct and proximate result of Plaintiffs’ abuse, they suffered and
continue to suffer a litany of injuries. Among other injuries, Plaintiffs have experienced
and will continue to experience damages, including but not limited to, severe pain and
suffering, emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life,
loss of educational opportunity, loss of wages, loss of income, and loss of future wages.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A MINOR
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
140. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
141. Defendants intentionally, willfully, and maliciously sexually assaulted
and/or sexually abused and molested Plaintiff during the time that Plaintiff was a
minor.
142. In committing the unlawful acts of sexual assault against Plaintiff,
Defendants intended to put Plaintiff in imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 43 of 63 Page ID #:438
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-44-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
contact.
143. Defendants put Plaintiffs in imminent apprehension of such harmful
offensive contact as Plaintiffs actually believed Defendants had the ability to make
harmful or offensive contact with plaintiff’s person.
144. Plaintiffs did not consent to Defendants’ intended harmful or offensive
contact with plaintiff, Defendants’ intention to put Plaintiffs in fear of imminent
apprehension of such contact, plaintiff was a minor during the time herein alleged and,
therefore, lacked the ability to consent to sexual contact with any person, including
Defendants.
145. As a direct and legal result of this conduct. Plaintiffs suffered harm
including, but not limited to, physical, mental, and emotional injuries of childhood
sexual abuse and molestation; was caused to incur medical and other expenses for care,
treatment, and counseling, and Plaintiffs will continue to incur all such damages in the
future, and other damages, in an amount not yet ascertained, but which exceed the
minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
146. Defendants conduct described herein was oppressive, malicious, and
despicable in that it was intentional and done in conscious disregard for the rights and
safety rights of Plaintiffs, and with the substantial certainty that it would cause
Plaintiffs, to suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress.
147. Defendants’ conduct as alleged constitutes malice and oppression under
California Civil Code section 3294. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to the recovery of
punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the Court.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE 647.6(a)(1)
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
148. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 44 of 63 Page ID #:439
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-45-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
149. California Penal Code § 647.6(a)(1) provides that "[every person who
aims or molests any child under 18 years of age shall be punished by a fine not
exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not
exceeding one year, or by both the fine and imprisonment."
150. As alleged herein, Defendants engaged in sexual penetration with
Plaintiffs while Plaintiffs were under eighteen years of age, in violation of California
Penal Code § 647.6(a)(1).
151. Under California law, victims of childhood sexual abuse are entitled to
bring civil actions for violations of Penal Code provisions that prohibit adults from
engaging in sexual acts with minors, including Penal Code § 647.6(a)(1). See Angie
M. v. Superior Court, (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1217, 1224-1225.
152. Defendants above-noted actions in annoying and molesting the minor
Plaintiffs was the proximate and legal causes of physical, psychological, emotional,
and economic damages Plaintiffs have suffered and continues to suffer to this day. It
also has resulted in Plaintiffs incurring, and will require Plaintiffs to incur into the
future, expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling.
153. The above-described conduct of Defendants was oppressive, malicious
and despicable in that it was intentional and done in conscious disregard for the rights
and safety of Plaintiffs, and was carried out with a conscious disregard of Plaintiffs
right to be free from such tortious behavior, such as to constitute oppression, fraud or
malice pursuant to California Civil Code section 3294, entitling Plaintiffs to punitive
damages against Defendants in an amount appropriate to punish and set an example of
them.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
154. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 45 of 63 Page ID #:440
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-46-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
action.
155. The conduct of all Defendants as set forth in this Complaint was extreme
and outrageous, and committed with the intention of causing, or reckless disregard of
the probability of causing, emotional distress.
156. A reasonable person would not expect or tolerate the sexual assault
committed by Defendants.
157. A reasonable person would not expect, accept or tolerate Defendants’
unlawful sexual assault and/or sexual abuse, and molestation of Plaintiffs.
158. Defendants’ conduct exceeded all bounds of that usually tolerated in a
civilized community.
159. Defendants intended to cause Plaintiffs injury when they sexually
assaulted Plaintiffs, manipulated and brainwashed Plaintiffs into silence and actively
concealed Plaintiffs’ abuse.
160. Plaintiffs have suffered severe and/or extreme distress as a result.
161. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs suffered
harm including, but not limited to, physical, mental, and emotional injuries of
childhood sexual abuse and molestation; was caused to incur medical and other
expenses for care, treatment, and counseling, and Plaintiffs will continue to incur all
such damages in the future, and other damages, in an amount not yet ascertained, but
which exceed the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
162. Defendants’ conduct described herein was oppressive, malicious and
despicable in that it was intentional and done in conscious disregard for the rights and
safety rights of Plaintiffs, and with the substantial certainty that it would cause
Plaintiffs, to suffer humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress.
163. Defendants’ conduct as alleged constitutes malice and oppression under
California Civil Code section 3294. Plaintiffs are, therefore, entitled to the recovery of
punitive damages, in an amount to be determined by the Court.
/ / /
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 46 of 63 Page ID #:441
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-47-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT HIRING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
164. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
165. At all times relevant, a special relationship existed between Defendants
and Defendants, because Defendants were the agents of Defendants, each of whom had
the ability to control of Defendants’ conduct, yet failed to exert it. In doing so,
Defendants created a widespread culture of acceptance of the abuse of children, as
Defendants and Defendants collectively brainwashed and manipulated Plaintiffs to
remain silent about the abuse and these Defendants also actively concealed the abuse
to avert discovery by the authorities.
166. At all times herein. Defendants, and each of them, negligently supervised,
managed, and controlled Defendants in their membership and participation in
Defendants' Church, and negligently failed to warn Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ parents, and
other members of the Church, of the propensity and risk that Defendants would
sexually assault, sexually abuse, and/or molest minor children, a propensity and history
of which Defendants, and each of them, acting through their employees, agents, and
volunteers, had actual notice.
During the same time period, Defendants, and each of them, were negligent in failing
to exercise reasonable care to protect Plaintiffs, and other minors, who were members
of, or participants in, activities at Defendants' Church, from the risk of sexual assault,
sexual abuse and molestation by perpetrators, including Defendants.
167. Defendants were further negligent in failing to notify law enforcement
and other appropriate authority that Plaintiffs were and/or continued to be a victim of
child abuse/assault by Defendants when they learned of this fact. Defendants' failure
to report the known and/or reasonably suspected child abuse of Plaintiffs, but instead
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 47 of 63 Page ID #:442
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-48-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants perpetuated and facilitated Defendants’ continued sexual abuse and/or
sexual assault, and molestation of Plaintiffs.
168. If Defendants satisfied their duty to take reasonable steps to protect
Plaintiffs all minor children, from known and/or foreseeable harm, including sexual
assault, including reporting the sexual assault and/or sexual abuse, and molestation to
law enforcement, then some or all of the Plaintiff’s injuries would have been avoided.
169. Prior to, during, and after the sexual assault of Plaintiffs, Defendants,
through their administrators, employees, agents, and/or volunteers, had knowledge,
and/or were otherwise on notice, that Defendants had and/or was engaged in, and/or
presented the risk of, sexual assault of Plaintiffs, and other minors.
170. Plaintiffs are informed, believes, and thereupon alleges that prior to, and
during Defendants’ sexual assault and/or sexual abuse, and molestation of Plaintiffs,
Defendants knew or should have known, reasonably suspected, and/or were otherwise
on notice, of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, as set forth in this Complaint, but failed
and/or refused to take any affirmative action, including but not limited to notifying law
enforcement. Instead, Defendants directed Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ parents to continue
to have contact with Defendants thereby ratifying and facilitating Defendants’
continued sexual assault and/or sexual abuse and molestation of Plaintiffs.
171. Defendants breached their duties by failing to use reasonable care to
protect Plaintiffs from their pastor, deacon, employee, and/or agent, to wit, Defendants.
172. If Defendants fulfilled their duty and responsibility, then Plaintiffs would
not have been subject to all or most of the misconduct perpetrated against her and the
resulting harm.
173. As a direct and legal result of Defendants' conduct. Plaintiffs suffered
harm including, but not limited to, physical, mental, and emotional injuries of
childhood sexual abuse and molestation; was caused to incur medical and other
expenses for care, treatment, and counseling, and Plaintiffs will continue to incur all
such damages in the future, and other damages, in an amount not yet ascertained, but
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 48 of 63 Page ID #:443
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-49-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
which exceed the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
174. Plaintiffs are informed, believes, and thereupon alleges that Defendants'
failure to respond, investigate, terminate Defendants’ employment, report, or take any
other action following Plaintiffs, other minor children, and Plaintiffs parents' report of
sexual assault and/or abuse by Defendants was part of Defendants' concerted effort to
cover up and/or hide evidence related to childhood sexual assault of minor children,
including Plaintiffs.
175. Plaintiffs’ damages as a result of Defendants’ repeated sexual assault,
abuse, and molestation of Plaintiffs was a direct result of Defendants' concealment and
cover-up. As such. Plaintiffs are entitled to treble damages against Defendants pursuant
to Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1(b)(2).
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION OF A MINOR
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
176. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
177. Defendants and McKean and Lucas (McKean and Lucas are collectively,
the “Church Leader Defendants”), and each of them, were responsible for the care,
custody, control, supervision, and protection of the minor children entrusted to them,
including Plaintiffs. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants had a duty to
adequately and properly supervise, monitor, and protect Plaintiffs from known and
knowable dangers, such as those posed by Defendants.
178. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, and each of them, breached
their duty to properly and adequately supervise, monitor, and protect Plaintiffs, in part
because officers, administrators, agents, and other supervisory employees knew or
should have known of Defendants’ improper behavior, including that minor children,
including Plaintiffs, were frequently alone with Defendants without any justification,
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 49 of 63 Page ID #:444
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-50-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
that Defendants would frequently touch and sexually abuse minor children, including
Plaintiffs, at Church Leader Defendants and Defendants' Churches without any
justifiable reason for doing so, including when the minor children were by themselves,
and Defendants sexually abused, assaulted, and/or molested minor children, including
but not limited to Plaintiffs.
179. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, acting through their
administrative and supervisory employees, knew or should have known that Plaintiffs
were unattended and unsupervised with Defendants on numerous occasions, without
any justification.
It should have been obvious to any officer, agent, administrator, employee, or staff
member that there was no reason that neither Plaintiffs, nor any other child, should
have been alone with Defendants. The employees and agents of Defendants and Church
Leader Defendants instead turned a blind eye to the fact that Defendants were spending
time with minor children, including Plaintiffs, unattended and unsupervised without
any investigation into the matter.
180. After engaging in grooming activity of Plaintiffs while spending time
alone with Plaintiffs, Defendants started sexually assaulting, sexually abusing, and
molesting Plaintiffs and other minor children on Defendants' premises and during
Defendants and Church Leader Defendants’ church related services. The acts of sexual
assaults and abuse occurred while Plaintiffs were left unattended and unsupervised
with Plaintiffs.
181. If Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, and each of them,
adequately and properly supervised, monitored, and protected Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs
would not have been harmed, or would not have been harmed to the extent that
Plaintiffs were.
182. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, and each of them, also
recklessly and negligently failed to implement and/or enforce policies and procedures
that were aimed at preventing or detecting sexual assault and assault of their minor
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 50 of 63 Page ID #:445
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-51-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
members.
183. If Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, and each of them,
adequately performed their duties and responsibilities, then Plaintiffs would not have
been subject to the sexual assault, assault and harassment perpetrated by the
Defendants.
184. Plaintiffs have been severely damaged emotionally and physically, and
otherwise, in amounts to be proven at the time of trial, but which exceed the
jurisdictional limits of the Superior Court as a direct and legal result of the acts and
omissions of Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, and each of them.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO REPORT SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE IN VIOLATION
OF PENAL CODE SECTION 11165. ET SEP. BASED ON VICARIOUS
LIABILITY
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
185. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
186. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, through their administrators
and employees knew or reasonably suspected that Defendants had, and or was, engaged
in the sexual assault of children while the children were under the care, custody, and
supervision of Defendants, and each of them, and thus had a duty to report Defendants
to the appropriate authorities under the California Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting
Law. (Penal Code §§ 11164-11174.3, "CANRA".)
187. At all times relevant herein and material hereto, Defendants were
employees of Defendants and Church Leader Defendants. Defendants and Church
Leader Defendants were responsible for hiring, training, supervising, and retaining
Defendants as part of their church and youth bible studies program. Defendants and
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 51 of 63 Page ID #:446
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-52-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Church Leader Defendants’ staff, employees, and administrators were required to
report any suspected child or sexual abuse as part of their duties and responsibilities as
employees and/or agents of Defendants and Church Leader Defendants.
188. Defendants' and Church Leader Defendants’ administrators, board
members, and employees are mandated reporters under Penal Code section 11165.7.
189. Penal Code section 11166(a) states that a mandated reporter shall make a
report to an agency whenever he/she, in his/her professional capacity or within the
scope of his/her employment, has knowledge of or observes a child whom the
mandated reporter knows, or reasonably suspects has been a victim of child abuse or
neglect. "Reasonable suspicion" does not require certainty that child abuse or neglect
has occurred but looks to if it is objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a
suspicion to suspect child abuse or neglect. (Penal Code § 11 lr66(a)(l).)
190. As set forth in this Complaint, Defendants and Church Leader
Defendants, through their administrators, board members, and employees knew and/or
reasonably suspected that children had been sexually assaulted by Defendants, prior to
Defendants’ sexual assault of Plaintiffs, giving rise to a duty to report such conduct
under CANRA.
191. Defendants and Church Leader Defendants, through their administrators,
board members, and employees knew that in the absence of the exercise of reasonable
diligence, that an undue risk to minors, including the Plaintiffs, existed because
Defendants’ administrators, board members, and/or employees did not comply with
California’s mandatory reporting requirements.
192. Defendants, through their administrators, board members, and employees,
including but not limited to and Church Leader Defendants, failed to report the known
and/or reasonably suspected child molestations and assaults, created the risk and
danger contemplated by CANRA, and a result, unreasonably and wrongfully exposed
Plaintiffs and other minors to sexual molestation and abuse,
193. If Defendants, through their administrators, board members, and
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 52 of 63 Page ID #:447
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-53-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
employees, including but not limited to the Church Leader Defendants, complied with
CANRA's mandatory reporting requirements, then Plaintiffs would not have been
harmed at all or to the extent that she was.
194. As a direct result of Defendants and Church Leader Defendants’ failure
to comply with CANRA's mandatory reporting requirements, through their
administrators, board members, and employees. Defendants and Church Leader
Defendants wrongfully denied the Plaintiffs the intervention of child protection
services and constituted a per se breach of Defendants, through their administrators,
board members, and employees, duties to Plaintiffs.
195. As a direct and legal result of Defendants and Church Leader Defendants'
conduct, Plaintiffs suffered severe and permanent injuries including, but not limited to,
physical and mental pain and suffering, severe emotional distress, physical injuries,
past and future costs of medical care and treatment, and other damages, in an amount
not yet ascertained, but which exceed the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
196. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
197. Defendants owed a duty of care to the minor Plaintiffs or had a duty to
control the conduct of Defendants by way of the special relationship existing between
those individuals and Plaintiffs.
198. Defendants knew or should have known, reasonably suspected, and/or
were otherwise on notice, of the misconduct and sexually predatory behavior of the
Defendants directed towards minor children, including Plaintiffs.
199. Despite having knowledge of the misconduct of Defendants, all
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 53 of 63 Page ID #:448
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-54-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendants herein failed to take any preventative action to control, curb, and/or prevent
that conduct, failed to warn Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ parents of that wrongful conduct,
and/or failed to notify law enforcement, despite having a legal duty to do so.
200. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiffs were
sexually assaulted, sexually abused, sexually harassed, and assaulted by the
Defendants.
201. If Defendants fulfilled their duty and responsibility, then Plaintiffs would
not have been subject to all or most of the misconduct perpetrated against Plaintiffs
and the resulting harm.
202. As a direct and legal result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs suffered
severe and permanent injuries including, but not limited to, physical and mental pain
and suffering, severe emotional distress, physical injuries, past and-future costs of
medical care and treatment, and other damages, in an amount not yet ascertained, but
which exceed the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Violation of Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (“RICO”)
Act 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c)
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
203. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
204. Plaintiffs bring this claim for relief under the private cause of action
provided by 18 U.S.C. § 1984(c), which prohibits violations of the Federal RICO Act
insofar as such violation injures any person in his business or property.
205. Defendants are “persons” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(3) who
conducted the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c).
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 54 of 63 Page ID #:449
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-55-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
206. The Abuse Enterprise, distinct from Defendants, is an association-in-fact
within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4), organized within individual ministries,
funneling into regions governed by individual bishops, and headquartered in Los
Angeles, California. Members of the Abuse Enterprise maintain a common purpose
of extracting money from its members and perpetrating sexual abuse upon minor
children under the auspices of liturgical praxis and writings taught by its church
ministers worldwide. The Abuse Enterprise began as early as 1979 and continues with
a growing global membership of more than 120,000 today.
207. Defendants have conducted and participated in the affairs of the Abuse
Enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity within the meaning of 18
U.S.C. §§ 1961(1) and 1961(5).
208. Defendants’ pattern of racketeering activity includes, but is not limited to,
many repeated occurrences of the following predicate acts: sexual exploitation of
minors and the transmission of visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit
conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251, 2252, and 2260.
209. Each Defendant, in their individual capacity, knew or should have known
about the majority of the predicate acts carried out by Defendants within the Abuse
Enterprise.
210. Upon information and belief, some combination of Defendants have
engaged in an uninterrupted course of unlawful conduct consisting of all of the herein
described predicate acts.
211. Defendants’ pattern of racketeering activity includes, but is not limited to,
many repeated occurrences of the following predicate acts: (i) violating the prohibition
against human trafficking under 18 U.S.C. § 1590; (ii) laundering of monetary
instruments outside of the United States with the intent to promote the carrying on of
unlawful activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1956(a)(2); and (iii) sexual exploitation of
minors and the transmission of visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit
conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251, 2252, and 2260 Upon information and
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 55 of 63 Page ID #:450
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-56-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
belief, several hundred children have been sexually exploited as a result of this pattern
of racketeering behavior.
212. Upon information and belief, hundreds of individuals within Defendants’
inner circles have been extorted through fear of financial and physical injury into
making large financial payments to Defendants and into providing sexual services to
Defendants as a result of this pattern of racketeering behavior.
213. Upon information and belief, many millions of dollars have been
trafficked out of the United States for the purposes of carrying on unlawful activity as
a result of this pattern of racketeering behavior.
214. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ pattern of racketeering
behavior has been related and continuous since its inception. Upon information and
belief, there is not only a threat of continued criminal activity, but continued criminal
activity is occurring within the Abuse Enterprise at the hands of nearly all Defendants
as of the writing of this Complaint.
215. Defendants and the Abuse Enterprise regularly move goods, money, and
people across state lines, and are therefore engaged in interstate commerce.
216. As a direct and proximate result of these patterns of racketeering
behaviors, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, including lost wages, loss of economic
opportunity, loss of educational opportunity, loss of future income, loss of specific
extorted payments, physical injury, severe emotional distress, and additional economic
losses.
217. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to recover treble the damages she sustained
in an amount to be proven at trial, the cost of the suit, plus a reasonable attorney’s fee,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c).
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 56 of 63 Page ID #:451
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-57-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Sexual Battery in Violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 1708.5
(Against All Defendants and Does 1-10)
218. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
219. Plaintiffs bring this claim for relief under Cal. Civ. Code Section 1708.5,
which prohibits sexual battery.
220. Plaintiffs bring this claim pursuant to California Assembly Bill 218,
amending Sections 340.1 and 1002 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 905 of
the Government Code, relating to childhood sexual assault, reviving until December
31, 2023 the statute of limitations for all previously extinguished claims for damages
suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault for victims within 22 years of the age
of majority.
221. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs the victim of sexual battery as a minor
perpetrated by Defendants. Defendants subjected Plaintiffs to this sexual battery at the
hands of while Plaintiffs were minors.
222. Cal. Civ. Code § 1708.5 prohibits any act with the intent to cause a
harmful or offensive contact with an intimate part of another, and a sexually offensive
contact with the person results, or any act that causes an imminent apprehension of
such harmful or offensive contact and the offensive contact results.
223. Defendants knowingly conspired and/or aided and abetted to force
Plaintiffs into sexual battery with Defendants, and such sexual battery did, on multiple
occasions, occur.
224. Plaintiffs were minors minor when Defendants sexually battered them.
225. Each Defendant knowingly conspired and/or aided and abetted to create
conditions of coercion and control that caused Plaintiffs to be repeatedly subjected to
private, egregiously offensive sexual contact with Defendants, all in furtherance of
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 57 of 63 Page ID #:452
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-58-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
sexually battering Plaintiffs and in furtherance of the Abuse Enterprise.
226. The sexual battery of Plaintiffs by the Abuse Defendants was the result of
Defendants’ collective cover up, as statutorily defined by California Code of Civil
Procedure § 340.1(b).
227. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have
suffered severe emotional and mental distress and anxiety, humiliation,
embarrassment, and additional damages.
228. The aforementioned conduct was willful, wanton, and malicious. At all
relevant times, Defendants acted with conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights and
safety as a minor in their care. Defendants also acted with the knowledge of or with
reckless disregard for the fact that their conduct was certain to cause injury and/or
humiliation to Plaintiffs.
229. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to recover treble the amount of damages
they sustained, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 340.1(b)(1) in an
amount to be proven at trial, attorneys’ fees, and other relief that the Court may deem
proper.
TENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Gender Violence in Violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 52.4
(Against Defendants and Does 1-10)
230. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein each and every
allegation contained herein above as though fully set forth and brought in this cause of
action.
231. Plaintiffs bring this claim for relief under Cal. Civ. Code Section 52.4,
which prohibits acts of gender violence.
232. Plaintiffs bring this claim pursuant to California Assembly Bill 218,
amending Sections 340.1 and 1002 of the California Code of Civil Procedure and
Section 905 of the Government Code, relating to childhood sexual assault, reviving
until December 31, 2023 the statute of limitations for all previously extinguished
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 58 of 63 Page ID #:453
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-59-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
claims for damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault for victims within
22 years of the age of majority.
233. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs were the victims of multiple instances of
sexual battery as a minor perpetrated by Defendants and facilitated by all Defendants
herein. Defendants subjected Plaintiffs to these multiple incidents of sexual battery at
the hands of Defendants while Plaintiffs were minors.
234. Cal. Civ. Code § 52.4 prohibits commission of acts of gender violence,
defined to include a physical intrusion or physical invasion of a sexual nature under
coercive conditions, whether or not those acts have resulted in criminal complaints,
charges, prosecution, or conviction.
235. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs were repeatedly the victim of acts of gender
violence by Defendants while they were minors.
236. Each Defendant herein knowingly conspired and/or aided and abetted to
create conditions of coercion and control that caused Plaintiffs to be repeatedly
subjected to private, egregiously offensive sexual contact with Defendants, all in
furtherance of committing acts of gender violence against Plaintiffs.
237. The repeated sexual battery of Plaintiffs by Defendants was the result of
Defendants’ collective cover up, as statutorily defined by California Code of Civil
Procedure § 340.1(b).
238. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs have
suffered severe emotional and mental distress and anxiety, humiliation,
embarrassment, and additional damages.
239. The aforementioned conduct was willful, wanton, and malicious. At all
relevant times, Defendants acted with conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights and
safety as a minor in their care. Defendants also acted with the knowledge of or with
reckless disregard for the fact that their conduct was certain to cause injury and/or
humiliation to Plaintiffs.
240. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to recover treble the amount of damages
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 59 of 63 Page ID #:454
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-60-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
they sustained, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 340.1(b)(1) in an
amount to be proven at trial, attorneys’ fees and other relief that the Court may deem
proper.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE Plaintiffs respectfully pray for relief as follows:
(a)
Compensatory and special damages in an amount to be proven at
trial;
(b)
Statutory penalties and liquidated damages according to proof at
time of trial;
(c)
Punitive and exemplary damages in an amount according to
proof at the time of trial;
(d)
Treble damages;
(e)
Pre- and post- judgment interest;
(f)
Reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; and
(g)
Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Plaintiffs respectfully demand a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
SAMINI BARIC KATZ LLP
Date: June 16, 2023
By:
/s/ Bobby Samini
Bobby Samini, Esq.
Michael Katz , Esq.
Steve Baric, Esq.
Nicole C. Prado, Esq.
John S. Oney, IV, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 60 of 63 Page ID #:455
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
df
PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
I am employed in Orange County. My business address is 650 Town Center
Drive, Suite 1500, Costa Mesa, CA 92626, where this mailing occurred. I am over the
age of 18 years and am not a party to this cause. I am readily familiar with the
practices of SAMINI BARIC KATZ LLP for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service.
Such correspondence is deposited with the United States Postal Service the
same day in the ordinary course of business.
On June 16, 2023, I served the foregoing documents on the interested parties in
this action entitled as follows:
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
[ ]
(BY MAIL) I placed such envelope for collection and mailing on this
date following ordinary business practices.
[ ]
(BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I caused to be hand delivered such envelope to
the addressee so indicated.
[XX] (BY THE COURT’S ECF SYSTEM): I caused each such document(s) to
be transmitted electronically by posting such document electronically to the
ECF website of the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, on all ECF-registered parties in the action.
[]
(BY EMAIL) I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be sent in
electronic PDF format as an attachment to an email addressed to the person(s) on
whom such documents(s) is/are to be served at the email address(es) shown above as
last given by that person(s) or as obtained from an internet website(s) relating to such
person(s), and I did not receive an email response upon sending such email indicating
that such email was not delivered.
[XX] (FEDERAL) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the
bar of this court at whose direction the services was made.
Executed on June 16, 2023, at Costa Mesa, California.
/s/ Griselda Alfaro
Griselda Alfaro
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 61 of 63 Page ID #:456
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
SERVICE LIST
Andrew J. Waxler, Esq.
John T. Lupton, Esq.
Madeleina Halley, Esq.
Tad A. Devlin
KAUFMAN DOLOWICH &
VOLUCK, LLP
21515 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 450
Torrance, CA 90503
Telephone: 310-525-9720
Fac: 805-388-3414
awaxler@kdvlaw.com
jlupton@kdvlaw.com
mhalley@kdvlaw.com
tdevlin@kdv.com
Attorneys for Defendant, HOPE
WORLDWIDE, LTD.
Mindee J Stekkinger
Molly M. Loy
Thomas E. Beach
BEACH LAW GROUP LLP
500 East Esplanade Drive, Suite 1400
Oxnard, CA 93036
Telephone: 805-388-3100
Fax: 805-388-3414
mail@beachlawgroup.com
molly@beachcowdrey.com
Attorneys for Defendant, THE
INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN
CHURCH, INC.
James A. Harris
MANNING AND KASS ELLROD
RAMIREZ TRESTER LLP
801 South Figueroa Street 15th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-3012
Telephone: 213-624-6900
Fax: 213-624-6999
Email:
jimmy.harris@manningkass.com
Attorneys for Defendant, NORTH
RIVER CHURCH OF CHRIST
Alan K. Brubaker
Ian R. Friedman
WINGERT GREBING BRUBAKER
& JUSKIE LLP
Attorneys for Defendant, Alberto
Shcirmer and Ana Maria Schirmer
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 62 of 63 Page ID #:457
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
600 West Broadway, Suite 1200
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: 619-232-8151
Fax: 619-232-4665
Email: abrubaker@wingertlaw.com
ifriedman@wingertlaw.com
tneuhoff@wingertlaw.com
Byron J. Mclain
Savannah Levin
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
555 South Flower Street, Suite 3300
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2418
Telephone: 213.972.4500
Facsimile: 213.486.0065
Email: 347929slevin@foley.com
257191bmclain@Foley.Com
Attorneys for Defendant, Al Baird
Case 2:23-cv-00999-ODW-PLA Document 57 Filed 06/16/23 Page 63 of 63 Page ID #:458