First Amendment
Jailed Evangelist Wants Religious References Edited From Docs
Posted Dec 24, 2008 7:59 AM CST
By Molly McDonough
A lawyer representing evangelist Tony Alamo has asked a federal court to remove religious references from a civil suit, arguing that the court has no business weighing in on theological issues.
Alamo's lawyer, John Hall of Little Rock, pointed to claims that Alamo engaged in practices to intimidate church members by withholding food, marrying young girls and performing severe beatings, the Associated Press reports.
Hall asserts in a court filing that Alamo's defense to these allegations is that his conduct -- including spanking, fasting and underage marriage -- was based on biblical references.
"All of these fall within the ambit of defendant's religious beliefs," the filing says.
The underlying suit filed in federal court in Texarkana last month alleges that Seth Calagna and Spencer Ondrisek were beaten and subjected to abuse as teenagers in the Tony Alamo Christian Ministries church. The suit seeks $750,000 in damages for pain, emotional distress, scarring and disfigurement.
Alamo, 74, is currently jailed without bond on charges that he raped and sexually abused girls in his ministry. His trial is set for February.
- How B of A’s GC Got Fired: Leave Now, and Leave Your BlackBerry Behind
- Schools Ranked by 'Super Lawyers' Produced
- Law Firm Price Wars Break Out as Some Try ‘Loss Leader’ Bids for Work
- Five Questions for Law Firms Abandoning Lockstep Compensation
- Judge Jails 2 Attorneys for Contempt in 4 Days
- Reed Smith Will Ask Nonequity Partners to Pony Up Possibly 15% of Pay
- Court Deputy Ordered to Apologize or Face Jail After Taking Lawyer's Paperwork
- Skadden Jumps on the Bonus Bandwagon
- ABA Executive Director Resigns
- Nasty Attitude to Co-Worker, Naughty Word in E-Mail Cost 2 Their Jobs
Should Supreme Court Justices Be Able to Review News Accounts Before Publication?
Comments
B. McLeod
Dec 24, 2008 10:25 AM CST
I’m glad that I am not working on Alamo’s defense. It appears ill-fated. (I remember T. Alamo).
Flag this comment
london
Dec 24, 2008 10:50 AM CST
McLeod,
Your comments are consistently unfunny and this one is just poor taste.
Moderator,
Please allow the return of Ellen Barshevsky so that we may be spared the imposters.
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Dec 24, 2008 10:52 AM CST
Yes, well, one does not really look to London for a sense of humor (at least since George III).
Flag this comment
london
Dec 24, 2008 11:40 AM CST
Moderator -
See what I mean?
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Dec 24, 2008 12:24 PM CST
Probably not, I would guess. As in the blitz, London is alone.
Flag this comment
Allen Sheketovits
Dec 25, 2008 6:49 AM CST
I second the ELLEN motion. Bring the real Ellen back! This supposed BRIT just ain’t funny. He’s obviously a TROLL for the ABA.
Unfortunately, the Moderator is the same A-Wipe that threw Ellen off the site and is the same person as McLeod. So good luck trying to get rid of him/her/it.
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Dec 26, 2008 2:36 AM CST
What a clueless bazoo!
Flag this comment
Tom
Dec 27, 2008 6:12 PM CST
Not knowing or caring who Ellen is. I would like to say that I agree with Mcleod. It would be very troublesome to have to defend Mr. Alamo.
If he is using freedom of religion as a defense for beating children, (seeing that he is not a legal guardian). He is accused of forcing children to go without food, and he is accused of child molestation and rape.
If he uses the freedom of religion as a defence, he is admitting he paeticipated in these acts. It is clearly behond anyones freedom of religion to engage or enforce these acts upon another.
Flag this comment
J.D.
Dec 31, 2008 9:41 AM CST
^ But what if he was a Muslim man marring multiple women (some underage) who beat a wife for being raped? Would we accept that? Wouldn’t we have to under sharia law?
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.