Voris: “Somehow, things have gotten out of control”
By Damien Fisher
At the end of Tuesday’s emergency court hearing held the day after Christmas, United States District Court Judge Joseph LaPlante had pointed parting words for Michael Voris and Mike Sherry.
“Mr. Voris, Mr. Sherry, I look forward to your retention of counsel,” LaPlante said.
Sherry, the current president of Church Militant’s board, and Voris, the now disgraced former board president and founder, agreed to an order that essentially gives New Hampshire priest the Rev. Georges de Laire control over Church Militant finances pending the outcome of the defamation lawsuit. Neither is currently represented by a lawyer, the result of Voris’ so-far disastrous legal machinations.
In perhaps the first good decision Voris has made in the case, he appeared in Tuesday’s Zoom call as an audio-only participant.
Voris and his assistants at Church Militant, Christine Niles and Simon Rafe, are accused in court documents of hiding and destroying evidence. Voris is also accused of lying about basic facts of the case, hiding the identity of key figure Marc Balestrieri, using Church Militant money to give Balestrieri an interest -free loan, and later threatening Balestrieri when it seemed his testimony could hurt Voris.
Voris and Church Militant defending themselves in court; judge advises a different plan
LaPlante was blunt with the pair, telling them Church Militant’s legal defense up to this point has been “troubling.”
“Unorthodox is the most charitable word I can use,” LaPlante said. “The way it’s been conducted is troubling from the defense’s perspective.”
In August, Voris’s attorneys Kathleen Klaus and Neil Nicholson quit the case, a day after Niles admitted under oath that she had been sitting on texts with Balestrieri that should have been turned over as evidence. LaPLante said Klaus and Nicholson quit because they “could not continue due to the conduct of one of the parties in the case.”
Howard Cooper, de Laire’s attorney, said in court the conflict came about because members of Church Militant’s board want to pursue criminal charges against Voris.
Voris: “Somehow, things have gotten out of control”
Voris, perhaps trying to refute the idea he is criminally liable, spoke up during the hearing to set the record straight about Lehmann’s departure.
“Somehow, things have gotten out of control,” Voris said.
Voris started to explain that he and Sherry, as a pair, did not ask Lehmann about separate defenses. Instead, Voris started to say that both he and Sherry had private conversations with Lehmann about different possibilities for the defense.
It was at this point, LaPlante stopped Voris from speaking.
“I don’t know where you’re going with this,” LaPlante said.
The judge then explained to Voris that his statements were approaching a legal line, and if he continued talking, he would be effectively waiving attorney-client privilege with Lehmann, and all his communications with the former attorney would become discoverable in the trial.
Voris tried to simplify his message while protecting his interests.
“Mr. Sherry and I have not arrived at a decision that we’re two competing parties,” Voris said.
Voris followed this statement with a drawn-out explanation that the pending sale of Church Militant’s only real assets, two office buildings in Ferndale, Michigan — which were the subject of Tuesday’s hearing — have nothing to do with the de Laire lawsuit. LaPlante responded that the reason for the sale is not relevant to the hearing to decide what happens to the money.
“I don’t know what you want me to do with that information,” LaPlante said.
When Voris then tried to explain he had not had a chance to speak to Sherry about these matters before Tuesday’s hearing, the Judge seemed surprised.
“That’s mystifying,” LaPlante said.
Church Militant sale proceeds to go into escrow so it doesn’t disappear
Hemorrhaging donations in wake of the scandal, the Michigan non-profit is about to close on a deal to sell the two office buildings, one which is home to Church Militant’s offices and studio. But under the agreement reached Tuesday, the proceeds of those sales, set to close Thursday, are now frozen in an escrow account.
Sherry was authorized by his board to agree to a capped escrow of $200,000, saying any more could mean the end of Church Militant.
“I can accept a $200,000 attachment, but we cannot do the full amount; we might as well shut down,” Sherry said.
Cooper stressed on Tuesday that de Laire is not trying to end Church Militant, but simply to secure funds that are likely to go to him either in a settlement or in damages awarded by a jury. To that end, Cooper offered to allow Church Militant to access the funds to keep the lights on. But the non-profit would first need to prove the figure they need.
Church Militant must disclose operating expenses
Sherry appeared alone in the Zoom hearing, streaming from an empty studio. He did not seem to understand the proceedings at times. After Cooper’s proposal was repeatedly explained to him, Sherry agreed to allow all the building sale money to go into an escrow account. Sherry is now under court order to file an affidavit stating Church Militant’s monthly operating expenses. The organization will be allowed to draw out that amount from escrow in order to keep operating.
LaPlante said the escrow order is temporary and will be revisited once Voris and Sherry both find new lawyers. The judge suggested whoever Voris and Sherry find to defend them in court, they be first allowed to speak with the attorneys who quit the case.
*** Image: Mike Sherry in a Church Militant studio during Tuesday’s virtual hearing. Courtroom sketch by Simcha Fisher
The answer, it seems, is that Church Militant wants to pursue unspecified criminal charges against Voris.
Voris appeared alone in his video feed and seemed to be streaming himself from his home. A dog could be seen in the background, at times licking itself.
Criminal charges for Voris?
Lehmann recently filed a motion to leave the case as the defense lawyer for Voris and Church Militant, citing an untenable conflict of interest that arose as Lehmann attempted to get the Catholic media non-profit to comply with a court order to stop hiding evidence.
Howard Cooper, the attorney representing de Laire, told LaPlante that he was informed Lehmann is leaving due to the possibility of a criminal case involving the defendants.
“It’s my understanding there are calls from members of the board for Voris to be criminally prosecuted,” Cooper said.
Cooper wanted Mike Sherry, the current Church Media board president who also attended via video, to confirm a possible criminal investigation into the conflict forcing Lehmann out. The exact nature of that conflict was disclosed in a brief virtual in camera session between LaPlante, Lehmann, Voris, and Sherry, after which LaPlante agreed Lehman cannot stay on the case
“I am going to have to allow (Lehmann) to withdraw,” LaPlante said.
Lehmann is the third Church Militant lawyer to quit the case citing an untenable conflict of interest. The trial in de Laire’s defamation lawsuit is still scheduled for February, and neither Church Militant nor Voris have lawyers.
Voris, who now cannot rely on Church Militant to provide an attorney, told LaPlante he will likely represent himself at trial out of necessity since he cannot afford to hire counsel.
“Frankly I do not have the financial wherewithal to do that,” Voris said. “I do not have a job, I do not have any money to speak of, except some equity in my home. I would have to be my own counsel.”
LaPlante told Voris it is his right to act as his own attorney, though he strongly discouraged the former broadcaster from representing himself.
If there is good news for Church Militant, it is that de Laire is now offering a settlement agreement, after saying on the record for months he had no plans to deal. The terms of the settlement offer are not being made public, but it will likely be costly for the beleaguered media company.
Church Militant had no defamation liability insurance
Sherry said Church Militant has no insurance to cover damages, and no assets outside of the two commercial buildings that house the organization. Both buildings in Ferndale, Michigan are currently for sale.
At this point, Church Militant could possibly soon lose its home, its equipment, and all its money.
LaPlante pressed Sherry on whether Church Militant has anything of value that could go toward a settlement, or be forcibly turned over through damages. Sherry told LaPlante the equipment inside the building, mostly studio gear, is owned by Church Militant outright and is valued at about $1 million. LaPLante then asked about how much money Church Militant has in cash donation, the major source of revenue.
Sherry did not know the current figures for Church Militant, and LaPlante empathized with Sherry, saying donors didn’t give them money with the intent to pay for damages in a lawsuit, but implied that might be what happens after the buildings and the studio equipment are liquidated.
Church Militant assets for sale, but where will the money go?
Cooper expressed concern about the impending sale of Church Militant’s buildings, and what might happen to the proceeds. Sherry did not agree to put the sale revenue into an escrow account pending the outcome of the case, as Cooper wants.
LaPlante is calling both sides back to court on Tuesday to give Sherry a chance to speak with a real estate advisor about the escrow proposal. In the meantime, LaPlante said no sale should happen until after the Tuesday conference.
“I don’t want to hear about anybody selling these properties between now and then,” LaPlante said.
If Sherry does not accept a voluntary escrow, Cooper is prepared to file a temporary restraining order against Church Militant and attach a lien on its property, essentially freezing any sales funds.
“We would hate to lose this place to the Devil and allow him to undermine all our work. That is precisely what he wants,” Sherry wrote.
That email did not mention the lawsuit, and it did not mention that the board of a news media non-profit did not ensure it has insurance in place to cover a defamation liability.
*** Courtroom sketch of Friday’s hearing by Clara Fisher. Voris appears at right
That’s the message current Church Militant President Mike Sherry sent out days after New Hampshire attorney Richard Lehmann announced he wants to quit defending the media “apostolate” in the federal defamation lawsuit that could further cripple the scandal-plagued organization.
“There are not too many places on the internet to get the kind of nourishment we specifically provide. We would hate to lose this place to the Devil and allow him to undermine all our work. That is precisely what he wants,” Sherry wrote in a Dec. 15 letter to Church Militant subscribers. “We appeal to you, our good supporter, to pray about this — all of this. We appeal to you out of faith to continue to prayerfully and financially help those of us who remain here in this mission field of Church Militant. We cannot continue if donations dry up.”
“The Evil One took a huge bite out of our apostolate”
Sherry blames the Devil for all of Church Militant’s current problems.
“Over the past month, Church Militant has suffered the greatest crisis of its 17-year history, beginning with the scandal that erupted online regarding the apostolate’s former leader, Michael Voris,” Sherry wrote. “The Evil One took a huge bite out of our apostolate and will stop at nothing other than complete annihilation of this good place. He may get what he wants.”
But Voris’ antics in the looming defamation case could have catastrophic consequences for Church Militant. Voris is being sued in federal court by the Rev. Georges de Laire, who serves as New Hampshire’s judicial vicar and a parish priest. Voris allegedly defamed de Laire when he published stories attacking de Laire in support of a Feeneyite fringe group in New Hampshire, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Voris has again failed to meet the court ordered deadline to finally hand over discovery documents he’s allegedly been hiding. In fact, Lehmann filed his motion to withdraw from the case on Dec. 11, the latest deadline set by Judge Joseph LaPlante.
Voris originally had until Dec. 5 to come up with the discovery documents, but got an extension until Dec. 11 based on the turmoil caused by the firing. After Voris was fired, he stayed on the Church Militant board until Dec. 5, according to Lehmann’s motion.
Four lawyers down
While working with Voris, Sherry, and other Church Militant leadership to get the discovery documents filed, Lehmann writes he soon found he could not continue to represent the outfit.
“During conversations with Mr. Voris and the new leadership of St. Michael’s Media on December 7 and December 8, it became apparent that an untenable conflict of interest had arisen under New Hampshire Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7 (a) that precludes (Lehmann) from providing representation to both St. Michael’s Media and Michael Voris due to these changed circumstances,” Lehmann wrote.
Lehmann cites the same ethics rule used by attorneys Kathleen Klaus and Neil Nicholson when they quit the defense in August. That rule, concerning conflicts of interest, states lawyers cannot represent clients when there is a concurrent conflict of interest. Those are defined as when: (1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or (2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.
Nicholson and Klaus quit one day after former Church Militant reporter Christine Niles admitted under oath in a deposition that she did not turn over all text communications she had with key witness Marc Balestrieri. She had previously told de Laire’s lawyers she had, in fact, turned over everything.
Niles later claimed she misread an email from Klaus about handing over all emails and texts, thinking it only applied to Voris personally. She signed a statement filed Dec. 5 that she no longer has access to any email or text associated with the case since she is no longer a Church Militant employee.
Lehmann is now the fourth attorney hired to represent Church Militant in the lawsuit, and the third to quit. The fourth lawyer, Marc Randazza, was barred by LaPlante from appearing in the case due to Randazza’s own ethical issues.
This leaves Church Militant without any representation in the lawsuit, which is scheduled to go to trial in February. Lawyers for de Laire are objecting to Lehmann’s departure, saying it represents another delay in the case that started in 2021.
“There has never been any mismanagement”
Since Voris was ousted, former employees say board members knew since at least the spring that Voris was living a gay double life while continuing to denounce other Catholics for similar lifestyles. There are also questions about what Voris and the organization were doing with donor money. Sherry blames “Internet chatter” for these accusations and promises in his fundraising letter to come clean with Church Militant supporters, and prove Voris and others did nothing wrong.
“The board would like you to know that it is conducting an independent financial audit to prove there has never been any mismanagement of donor funds, either by board members or by Michael Voris,” Sherry wrote. “The board was never involved in any sort of cover-up for Michael Voris, financially or otherwise, and did, in fact, ask him to resign immediately upon learning of his personal failings.”
Court records in the de Laire case include a loan agreement between Balestrieri and Church Militant reached last year. Voris signed the agreement, lending Balestrieri $65,000 in Church Militant money at no interest.
Balestrieri is either the source for the alleged defamatory statements Voris published, the sole author, or Voris’s collaborator, depending on the different versions put forward so far.
Voris originally tried to hide Balestrieri’s involvement from de Laire, but admitted Balestrieri was the author in late 2021, months after the lawsuit was filed. Voris originally in court documents claimed he was the author.
Balestrieri has claimed he did not write the defamatory statements about de Laire, and was set to give a deposition under oath this summer before he disappeared. Voris is accused of threatening Balestrieri about the authorship in a June text sent on the day Balestrieri agreed to sit for the deposition.
Given Lehmann’s motion to withdraw could significantly delay the case again, de Laire’s lawyers may seek a default judgment against Voris and Church Militant. That would mean, if granted, Voris would be found liable without trial on the facts, and the case would simply be a matter of deciding how much de Laire is owed in damages.
Church Militant looks for new leader who understands the mission
With the future in doubt thanks to Voris, Sherry writes that a new leader from outside the organization will be hired to take charge.
“The board fully understands change must take place within its ranks. It has approved an interview with a possible new director, a non-employee, and will soon replace its current directors who are Church Militant employees, making sure they, too, are faithful Catholics who understand the mission of the apostolate,” Sherry wrote.
Assuming the Devil loses this round, and a miracle occurs in the United States District Court in Concord, Church Militant is already planning new shows. According to Sherry, the line up includes: Unveiling Mary (tentative title) — Hosted by Brad Eli and Rodney Pelletier, The Afterlife Coach (tentative title) — Hosted by Ryan Seybold, and The Extraordinary Road (placeholder title) — Hosted by Veronica Vance.
***
Image is a still from an undated video in which Mike Sherry, then in Church Militant’s tech department, acts out a short skit in which he briefly falls under the thrall of the gruff-voiced, rubber-masked character “Loan Shark.” Sherry extorts money from his co-workers, but eventually learns that it’s better to give than to take. Christine Niles also briefly appears in the skit, counseling her co-workers on how to earmark money so that it doesn’t “go to the bishops.” By the end of the video, Sherry uses the Gospel to convert Loan Shark, who no longer demands money, but allows money to be donated to the Carmelites, instead.
Days before a morality clause violation forced Gary Michael Voris to resign his job leading St. Michael’s Media, Voris’ attorney Richard Lehmann asked United States District Court Judge Joseph LaPlante to delay the upcoming trial in the federal defamation lawsuit.
Voris is the face of St. Michael’s Media and its news outlet, Church Militant. He started the organization almost 20 years ago, and his presence on the cruise voyage is essential, Lehmann wrote in his motion seeking a delay.
“Defendant Voris is a significant draw for participants, who register in large part to hear his presentations and have an opportunity to meet him for private conversations, meals, and other events,” Lehmann wrote.
The cruise generates substantial revenue for Voris and his organizations. Lehmann wrote that last year’s voyage garnered $128,000.
With the “Retreat at Sea” scheduled for Feb. 4 through Feb. 11, LaPlante agreed to set the trial start back to Feb. 13.
Voris still from video https://twitter.com/Michael_Voris/status/1727102250311733320
“Sometimes it takes very horrible events, even at your own hand, to surface certain things that need to be faced,” Voris said.
Lehmann declined to comment when asked how the sudden change in Voris’ employment status might impact the defamation case.
The delay of the trial date might be the last bit of good news for Voris’ defense.
Both Voris former Church Militant personality Christine Niles are now personally under court order to produce evidence de Laire claims they have been hiding since the case started in 2021. Lawyers for de Laire say the two sat on incriminating texts and emails, destroyed evidence, and even interfered with the testimony of Marc Balestrieri, the key witness who has once again disappeared, according to court records.
Niles and Voris have until Dec. 5 to file statements under oath attesting they have made good faith efforts to find and hand over the evidence or face serious sanctions, like automatically losing the case and setting up a trial for the damages they will have to pay de Laire.
“Failure to comply with this court order, or failure to make the required productions referenced above, could result in entry of a default judgment against one or more defendants,” LaPlante wrote in his Nov. 16 order.
But since they’re both out at Church Militant, it remains to be seen if Niles and Voris can even comply with LaPlante’s order. Niles resigned Nov. 9, and Voris was pushed out Nov. 21. The uncertainty creates the possibility for yet another delay in the trial. Lawyers for de Laire have repeatedly accused Voris and Church Militant of stalling in order to drive up his legal costs.
As of Nov. 22, there were no disclosures on file in the United States District Court in Concord that Niles and Voris are no longer employed at Church Militant. Interestingly, the allegedly defamatory articles about de Laire no longer appear on Church Militant’s website.
Voris and Niles resignations unexplained
Voris’ ouster from Church Militant came as a shock to his legions of fans. The controversial media mini-magnate isn’t saying why he’s no longer leading the organization, other than to get help with some sort of dark and ugly secret that’s impaired his life.
The board statement, which they call “fully transparent,” simply states Voris violated the morality clause and is seeking help for his health.
But Niles, who has been with Voris and Church Militant for almost a decade, dropped hints in a video of her own put out Tuesday night. Niles claims she resigned on Nov. 9 by bringing a damning letter to the board detailing Voris’ transgressions, but she refused in the video to say what they were.
“I’m not in the business of detraction,” Niles said.
Christine Niles still from video https://twitter.com/ChristineNiles1/status/1727120238721048950
Niles did offer that Voris seemed to have undergone a personality change in recent years, including a seeming loss of fervor for his very public faith. Voris stopped attending the mandatory Church Militant prayer sessions, she claimed, as well as committing whatever misconduct that is seemingly at the center of the sudden resignations.
Niles did say Voris’ actions have hurt and scandalized people at Church Militant.
“To say that I am heartbroken and furious is an understatement. There’s a lot of anger, there is a great deal of anger over this,” Niles said.
But why now?
The resignation mystery is unfolding as the de Laire lawsuit appears to be going poorly for Voris, with new allegations surfacing that he used Church Militant money to buy Balestrieri’s testimony with an interest-free loan, and then threatened Balestrieri when it seemed his testimony could hurt the defense.
Voris and former Church Militant writer Anita Carey were scheduled to go to trial in September in de Laire’s lawsuit. Church Militant as an entity is also a defendant in the case. Voris’ attempts to hide key facts and witnesses have already delayed the start of the trial, according to court records.
Rev. de Laire, the judicial vicar for the Manchester New Hampshire Diocese, sued Voris after Church Militant published videos and articles attacking de Laire as incompetent, emotionally unbalanced, and considered a “troublemaker” by his superiors in Rome.
Balestrieri is a canon lawyer with a penchant for secrecy. In a recent deposition under oath, Voris himself called Balestrieri “squirrelly” when it comes to matters of privacy. Since he wants to protect his image with Church officials he works with, Balestrieri is loath to have it known he has been a secret Church Militant author and source for years, Voris said.
“Marc’s great overarching concern was always being worried that his providing information — sometimes extraordinarily sensitive information — on all kinds of cases — that he was always very squirrelly about any of that being found out … He was always — for obvious reasons, because of retaliation and, you know, not viewed as trustworthy by, you know, individuals in the Church who would care about that sort of thing,” Voris testified in a recent deposition.
Lawyers for de Laire used the fact Voris hid Balestrieri as one of the arguments for a summary judgment, essentially asking for a finding by a judge instead of a jury in his favor. By the time the summary judgment question was heading for a hearing, Balestrieri had already been added to the lawsuit as a defendant and found in default.
Balestrieri repeatedly dodged process servers for months, at one point actually running into the woods to evade a server, prompting LaPlante to declare him liable for the defamation last year. Assuming the case ever gets to a jury, Balestrieri will automatically be on the hook for damages no matter what happens to Voris.
But it was the June 15 summary judgment hearing that continues to cause problems for Voris. After being unfindable for months, Balestrieri made a surprise appearance at that hearing claiming he was ready to set the record straight. The day before the hearing, Balestrieri emailed the court announcing his intention to challenge the default judgment and tell his side of the story.
“(He wished to) ‘have my day in court’ to defend myself against the false accusations of fact and claims that have been asserted by more than one party against me,” Balestrieri wrote.
This spelled trouble for Voris.
Good friends make bad loans
With the disclosure that Balestrieri is the man behind the disputed articles revealed in early 2022, a mutual panic seems to have set in, according to newly released evidence.
Voris needed Balestrieri’s sources, the people he relied on to write the articles about de Laire. At the same time, Balestrieri needed to keep his name off the lawsuit. Though Balestrieri has been named as the author in court documents filed in the spring of 2022, he was not yet named as a defendant in the lawsuit. That would happen in October of 2022 over Voris’ objections.
New evidence shows Voris not only hid that Balestrieri wrote the articles, but he hid the fact Balestrieri was heavily involved in the early days of the legal defense.
When de Laire sent Church Militant a letter demanding a retraction in January of 2019, soon after publication, the Church Militant response letter was drafted by Balestrieri, according to new evidence. Balestrieri didn’t sign the letter, though. Voris signed the response sent to de Laire’s attorneys, giving the impression he wrote the letter and not Balestrieri.
Voris would later acknowledge in his August deposition that he presumed Balestrieri had been communicating with his lawyers when they drafted the original answer to de Laire’s lawsuit.
With pressure mounting, Voris and Balestrieri had a meeting at Voris’ house in June of 2022. During the heated conversation, Voris demanded Balestrieri divulge his sources. Balestrieri was hesitant, because his sources who allegedly called de Laire’s ability, competence, mental state, and general character into question were involved in delicate canonical matters like marriage and annulment cases.
“[W]ell, you know, Marc, these are your sources and if they won’t step up, well, then you have to,” Voris said, according to his August deposition.
Voris testified that he had been “forceful” in this conversation and had raised his voice at Balestrieri.
Yet, during this contentious meeting, it was Church Militant as a corporation, not Voris personally, that loaned Balestrieri the $65,000, according to the loan agreement filed in court. The interest-free loan was to be paid back by the end of 2022, but otherwise carried no restriction.
When asked under oath, Voris said Church Militant giving Balestrieri a loan in the midst of an argument about sources was simply a “coincidence of time.”
Communications between Voris and Balestrieri since handed over indicate the canon lawyer and ghostwriter was struggling to pay medical bills for his ailing mother.
After Balestrieri was added to the lawsuit as a defendant, and the matter started to attract attention on Catholic social media, a worried Balestrieri texted Voris in November of 2022. Voris’ response was to remind Balestrieri about the loan.
“Also, you should know, that what I presume is going to be a failure to repay as agreed, we are likely going to have to lay off at least one person. You agreed to pay the $70K and so far haven’t,” Voris texted on Nov. 28 2022.
Brother Andre’s choice
Whatever else can be said about “Brother” Andre Marie Villarubia, head of the Richmond Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, he is a man of conviction.
The Richmond Slaves splintered from the Still River, Massachusetts Slaves in the 1980’s over disputes about watering down founder Rev. Leonard Feeney’s message. Still River leaders sought recognition within the Church, and that meant toning down their interpretation of“No Salvation Outside The Church,” which got Feeney excommunicated.
The Richmond Slaves didn’t want recognition if it meant giving up their beliefs. The group started the St. Benedict Center with an order for men and women, as well as a school. Villarubia took over as leader around 2010.
“Brother” Andre Villarubia in 2019. Photo by Damien Fisher
He had been part of the Richmond Slaves efforts for accommodation with the Manchester Diocese, agreeing in 2009 to disavow the open anti-semitism in the Slaves’ prior writings. In exchange, Manchester gave the group permission to have a traditional Latin Mass celebrated, assuming they could find a priest in good standing.
But “No Salvation Outside the Church” continued to cause friction for the Slaves. Villarubia appealed to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, basically arguing he and the other Richmond Slaves should be free to hold to their interpretation of the doctrine.Even after the CDF rejected this argument and considered the matter closed in 2016, the group persisted in holding to the Feeneyite message.
Unbowed, Villarubia raised money to fight the precepts in Rome. His canon lawyer? Balestrieri.
Just weeks after the precepts were issued in January of 2019, Voris was in New Hampshire interviewing Villarubia, and Church Militant published video reports and stories about the controversy and attacking de Laire as an incompetent.
Among the questionable facts Voris/Balestrieri included in their articles is the fact de Laire owns a million dollar house. The articles question how the priest could afford the luxury home.
Rev. de Laire is assigned to a parish in Manchester, and lists that address as his residence. The home, in nearby Amherst, was bought for his elderly mother. The de Laire family are heirs to a French perfume fortune, a fact seemingly missed by Voris and Balestrieri.
Balestrieri worked on getting the precepts overturned. But the appeal was rejected by Rome after Balestrieri missed the deadline.
Marc Balestrieri
The lawsuit against Church Militant snared Villarubia, requiring him to sit for depositions with de Laire’s lawyers. The March deposition Villarubia gave under oath this year included a missile aimed at Voris.
In June of 2022, around the time a shouting Voris gave a worried Balestrieri a $65,000 loan, Villarubia learned about Balestrieri’s authorship of the alleged defamatory articles for the first time. This obvious conflict of interest unnerved Villarubia enough that he decided to fire Balestrieri, according to the deposition. That’s when Balestrieri made a stunning claim.
“And I said this is a problem, that Michael Voris said you wrote the article and you’re our canon lawyer. And [Balestrieri] said ‘I didn’t write the article.’ He vehemently denied authorship of the article,” Villarubia said during his March deposition. “I simply thought that that should be on the record. Obviously, Marc’s chosen not to defend himself, but I have this information, and I thought that this should be part of the record.”
Villarubia further speculated Voris might have written the article with Balestrieri in a collaborative effort. Either way, the question was now open if Voris lied when he originally claimed authorship of the articles, or when he later put the onus on Balestrieri.
Welch!
Voris knew Balestrieri planned to say something at the June 15 hearing, and he worried it would be a denial about writing the articles.
The hearing transcript depicts an odd scene in which Balestrieri does not appear to understand the court proceedings, does not realize he is about to be served with subpoenas to give a deposition, and refuses to give the court his address, claiming to live a “nomadic” lifestyle.
Soon, however, it is agreed during the hearing that Balestrieri will sit for a July 12 deposition with de Laire’s attorneys and answer questions under oath.
A now concerned Voris, despite claiming for months he had no way to contact Balestrieri, arranged for a staffer to send Balestrieri a text he composed with a warning.
“Marc – you are committing perjury. You know you wrote that article. What you don’t know is this morning we found proof – your digital fingerprints – all totally documented – on that article. Remember the email address – TomMoore@Churchmilitant.com.? We have all the receipts. You go through with this and we will rain down on you publicly. You are a liar, and a Welch,” Voris wrote.
Knowing what Villarubbia said about Balestrieri’s denial, Voris wanted proof that Balestrieri was the original author. So on June 15 he ordered his Church Militant team, including Niles and Chief of Staff Simon Rafe, to find the Google Drive drafts, emails, text messages, and other evidence Niles and others had previously claimed could not be found or did not exist, according to court records.
Sometime between receiving the “Welch” text and the July 12 deposition date, Balestrieri had second thoughts. On July 11 he let de Laire’s lawyers know he would not show up, and he since has gone missing again.
Lawyers for de Laire argue the “Welch” text was a clear threat to the publicity adverse Balestrieri, and the prior Nov. 28 text about the loan show Voris has been attempting to manipulate Balestrieri and his testimony.
Voris denied he was threatening Balestrieri, but insisted in his August deposition that he was concerned for the elusive canon lawyer’s soul.
“[I was] troubled he was going to perjure himself,” Voris testified. “First of all, that’s a sin to take an oath before God and then lie. It’s a mortal sin, which is in the category of pretty darn bad in Catholicism.”
But in trying to save his friend from sin, and prove he didn’t write the article himself, the new evidence Voris turned over after the June 15 hearing was a double-edged sword. It showed the court Voris had been hiding evidence, and might be hiding more.
After Balestrieri skipped his deposition, the court ordered Voris and Niles to sit for new depositions, during which more evidence that had been hidden came to light.
Deposition of a law school graduate
Niles, Church Militant’s senior investigative reporter and unofficial in-house counsel, was now fully enmeshed in the lawsuit when she sat for her Aug. 9 court-ordered deposition.
Niles provided the court in June with a signed affidavit detailing the evidence she had recently found in a Church Militant Google Drive that proves Balestrieri’s authorship. In her affidavit, Niles explained she never turned over the drafts proving Balestrieri wrote the articles because she forgot to check the Google Drive.
“In all sincerity, I forgot that he did not email me the article, but shared it through his Google Drive under his alternate email tommoore@churchmilitant.com,” Niles wrote in her affidavit.
But, Niles’ affidavit also raised a new set of problems for Church Militant.
Her signed statement made clear Niles was not Church Militant’s lawyer, in-house or any other kind. But Voris had refused, in earlier depositions, to answer questions about his conversation with Niles, citing attorney-client privilege.
Niles would need to answer questions about her work status, as well as the evidence on Balestrieri she found after June 15, evidence she and Voris had previously claimed didn’t exist.
During her Aug. 9 deposition, Niles confirmed that she graduated law school, and then clerked for a state supreme court justice for two years. Then, she gave up her law practice to be a stay-at-home mom.
Niles never argued a case in court, never represented a defendant, and when she moved to Michigan, where Church Militant is headquartered, never joined that state’s Bar Association. Niles is a licensed attorney in another state, though her status is inactive.
Around 2014, Niles turned her part-time copyediting and proofreading skills into a job at Church Militant, and moved to Michigan to launch her career. In that time, she testified, she acted as a sort of informal legal adviser, but she was never Church Militant’s attorney.
But it was her next admission that really tripped up Church Militant’s defense. When asked if she had any communication with Balestrieri in 2022 concerning the lawsuit, Niles said she had sent him at least one text. She had never turned that over doing the discovery phase because she “was never asked,” even though de Laire’s team had been seeking such communication for months.
At this point, Church Militant attorneys Kathleen Klaus and Neil Nicholson called for a short break in Niles’ deposition. When they restarted ten minutes later, the lawyer handed over pages of text messages from Nile’s phone showing that she and Balestrieri engaged in multiple conversations about the lawsuit over the course of several months.
“These text messages, in addition to testimony of Niles and Voris, show that Defendants have been working and coordinating with Balestrieri concerning information to be disclosed (or, more accurately, withheld) from Father de Laire throughout the duration of this entire litigation,” de Laire’s lawyers wrote.
Klaus and Nicholson quit the case the day after Niles’ deposition.
“Recent events that have transpired in the litigation have created an unwaivable conflict between Counsel and their clients … Counsel believes this conflict bars them from taking any further action on behalf of their clients,” Klaus and Nicholson wrote to the court.
But Randazza had a reputation for more than fighting for freedom of speech. In 2018, he pleaded guilty to violating the attorney code of ethics in Nevada in a case in which he allegedly solicited pay-offs from companies his porn production client was considering suing.
Marc-randazza, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
“There needs to be a little gravy for me,” Randazza emailed an opposing attorney in one lawsuit. “And it has to be more than the $5K you were talking about before. I’m looking at the cost of at least a new Carrera in retainer deposits after circulating around the adult entertainment expo this week. I’m gonna want at least used BMW money.”
Randazza has gone on to represent the likes of Alex Jones and neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin.
LaPlante ordered Randazza off the case last month after de Laire objected. It is not known why Randazza is not being allowed to represent Voris, as LaPlante’s order is under seal. The court docket states there is a new, pending ethics complaint filed against Randazza in another jurisdiction.
That leaves Lehmann as the sole attorney for Church Militant. Lehmann is well-respected in New Hampshire legal circles, but he’s no stranger to culture war skirmishes. He’s the lead attorney for a mother suing the Manchester, New Hampshire School District over her child’s social gender-transitioning. Lehmann was also on former President Donald Trump’s legal team in a failed effort to keep Trump off the New Hampshire presidential primary ballot. When LaPlante agreed to reschedule the trial to accommodate the cruise, he also noted Lehmann’s need to now get up to speed as the lead attorney.
___
___
Damien Fisher is married to Simcha Fisher, who is the owner of this site. Simcha Fisher is an independent contractor for Parable Magazine, which is owned by the Diocese of Manchester.
