Baptist Convention of Maryland/Delaware Complaint and Docs

Will BCMD Board Choose Resolution Outside or Inside the Courts?

Legal Complaint and Related Documents re: BCMD

Operating in the light is not only a biblical teaching, in civil court matters, the filed documents, sworn testimonies and exchanged evidence are a matter of public record.

This article in under construction, but until it can be completed, below are links to various documents and related FB Live videos in the legal complaint filed against the Baptist Convention of Maryland/Delaware and three of the BCMD agents.

The BCMD inserted itself into my case with NAMB when Tom Stolle, under BCMD Exec. Director Kevin Smith’s leadership, submitted a deceptive affidavit to a federal judge.  (see below)  BCMD efforts appeared to be in direct coordination with NAMB leadership to fool a federal court into believing something that is absolutely false, that NAMB is a Supporting Organization of the BCMD and that the BCMD is dependent upon NAMB to fund its operations.  The fact is NAMB did not contribute to the operations of the BCMD, as all the money NAMB invested was their portion to be combined with the BCMD portion to fund mutually agreed to areas of missions and evangelism and fund jointly funded staff.  Furthermore, NAMB does not meet ANY of the 3 federal IRS requirements to be a Supporting Organization.

While under the leadership of NAMB President Kevin Ezell, the NAMB CFO Carlos Ferrer also filed a deceptive affidavit with the federal courts. (see below)  After these two false affidavits were filed, the federal judge dismissed my case on the grounds that the court did not have the jurisdiction to rule without hearing evidence or even allowing for the discovery phase.  This was heavily influenced by the false arguments of NAMB attorneys as they claimed a connection and rights over State Baptist Conventions that the SBC Constitution forbids.  This was undergirded by the false statements of NAMB’s Ferrer and the BCMD’s Stolle.  The SBC is NOT like the Methodists, Catholics, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, or other denominations with an ecclesiastical hierarchy and ruling authorities.  The SBC does not have a ruling authority at ANY level, with the local church as the sole authority snd the supporting partnerships are purely voluntary.

Links to Docs: 

Legal Complaint ONLY McRaney v. BCMD Stolle Winborn Fehrman

McRaney Barton to BCMD GMB re: Resolution

Affidavits NAMB Ferrer and BCMD Stolle

NAMB motion to stay motion and dismiss from Ferrer Stolle affidavits: showing collaboration

BCMD Gives more Than NAMB Partners -question and totals 2013 thru 2018

Affidavit by Exec. Director Assistant Donna Jefferys BCMD

BCMD Board Chair Duncan is a paid NAMB Ambassador

BCMD GMB to McRaney No Accusation at termination

Links to Related Videos:

Legal Complaint Filed Against the BCMD and 3 Agents: After Defamation, False Affidavit and Silence Cover Resolution Now Moves to the Courts

Conflict of Interest?:  Updates on NAMB/Ezell’s Approaches to Influence the BCMD and Other State Conventions

“Do the Next Right Thing”:  More Evidence Surfaces of NAMB’s Ezell Buying Influence into the BCMD via Contract with Board Chairman

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply