D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty and Martin Moulton
After former Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner (ANC) Leroy Thorpe failed to file an amended complaint by the December 11 deadline set by a D.C. Superior Court judge, one could have assumed that Thorpe’s lawsuit alleging harassment by community civic leader Martin Moulton had run its course. Instead, Thorpe found an attorney willing to advocate on his behalf (coincidentally, the attorney has also been accused of filing frivolous lawsuits).
The amended complaint, filed by Thorpe’s new attorney E. Scott Frison, Jr. on February 4, pioneers new legal territory. Whereas Thorpe’s original pro se complaint merely sought a restraining order against Moulton and reimbursement of the $160 filing fee, the new complaint ups the ante to a demand for $20 million in damages. Meanwhile, a restraining order and a criminal charge against Thorpe for allegedly filing a false police report remain in effect.
The first count of the amended complaint alleges that Moulton “published false and defamatory statements about Mr. Thorpe” which “caused Mr. Thorpe harm to his good name….” Both this count and the second count, invasion of privacy/false light, apparently rely on the allegation that Moulton “creat[ed] a website using Mr. Thorpe’s name and picture without his permission” that contends “Mr. Thorpe is ‘a criminal’ [who] was ‘charged with rape and convicted’ and other statements that are factually false.”
The arrest warrant and court documents on the website, www.leroythorpe.com, state that a D.C. resident named "Leroy Joseph Thorpe" was charged in 1984 with "assault with intent to rape," resulting in a guilty verdict for "simple assault." Whether or not the website takes liberties with the truth, Thorpe’s legal claim may be flawed for another reason: According to neighbor Charles Walker, Moulton didn’t create or fund the website.
"The amended complaint is completely frivolous... We will be exploring further options." -- Moulton attorney Ruth Eisenberg.
The third count of the amended complaint, assault, appears to rest in part on complaints that Moulton “visited Mr. Thorpe’s home without permission” and “charg[ed] towards Mr. Thorpe.” The fourth count alleges battery of Thorpe by Moulton, and the fifth count alleges that Moulton has been stalking Thorpe. For each of the five complaint counts, Thorpe seeks compensatory damages of $1 million and punitive damages of $3 million, for a grand total of $20 million.
The response from Moulton’s attorney, Ruth Eisenberg of the D.C. law firm Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP, is succinct: “The amended complaint is completely frivolous, and we are confident that it will be dismissed.” She adds: “We will be exploring further options to recoup Mr. Moulton’s legal fees.”
The exhibits to the complaint include an e-mail that Thorpe sent to Moulton in July 2007 warning Moulton that he should not e-mail Thorpe or speak to him. However, on election day in November 2008, Thorpe allegedly encouraged Moulton to take his picture (that photo accompanies this article). During an October 6, 2009 hearing, D.C. Superior Court Judge Robert Tignor summed up Moulton’s explanation: “You’re suggesting that [Thorpe] vacillates” between consenting and barring Moulton from contact.
“We were just sitting there.” -- Shaw resident Charles Walker, recalling an incident in which Thorpe discharged him from an ECCA meeting.
Another complaint exhibit is a “barring notice” issued by the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department on February 4, 2008, which prevents Moulton from entering Third Baptist Church, located at 1546 5th Street N.W. Walker, who also received a barring notice, explained the situation during an interview at his row house, located a short distance from both Moulton’s home and the church on 5th Street N.W. “We were just sitting there” at Thorpe’s East Central Civic Association (ECCA) meeting, Walker says. Thorpe ordered them to leave the meeting, and they refused. According to Walker, MPD police threatened to arrest Moulton and Walker, but they didn’t possess a sufficient legal justification.
Walker says that Thorpe convinced the church to obtain a barring notice. He adds that Ward Two Councilmember Jack Evans (D) is aware of the ongoing situation, but “did absolutely nothing” to stand up against Thorpe’s refusal to permit civic participation by all ward residents. On the same day Walker received the barring notice, he happened upon Evans leaving the ECCA meeting. Walker says that Evans “seemed ashamed” during the chance encounter.
Leroy Thorpe (left) and an unidentified voter.
(Photo by Martin Moulton.)
A November 7, 2007, e-mail sent by Second Northwest Cooperative Homes Association Vice President Earline Matthews to Councilmember Evans paints a different picture. Matthews wrote: “Martin Moulton did attend the [ECCA] meeting and of course was his usual self, very disruptive, disrespectful, and acted like a complete idiot.” Matthews has also filed a compaign finance complaint against Kevin Chapple, who twice defeated Thorpe in ANC elections. Walker provides an example of what behavior Matthews might consider “disruptive.” At an ECCA meeting in late 2007, Thorpe became angry at Moulton because he was typing notes on his laptop computer. Thorpe asked the MPD police officer present to order Moulton to shut down his laptop. Moulton complied.
Meanwhile, Frison, Thorpe’s attorney, has been accused of being overly litigious. According to the website of the District of Columbia Bar, on July 22, 2008, the “Bar Counsel issued Frison an informal admonition for filing a frivolous action and engaging in conduct that seriously interfered with the administration of justice. Specifically, Frison sued a former client and successor counsel for defamation based on allegations in the former client’s letter to Bar Counsel.” Frison did not respond to e-mail and voicemail messages seeking comment concerning Thorpe’s lawsuit against Moulton.
Even if Thorpe’s amended complaint is dismissed, his legal saga will likely continue. Thorpe informed residents present at the ECCA meeting held earlier this month that he plans to sue the D.C. police department in connection with the criminal charge he is currently facing. Thorpe’s bench trial concerning the false police report charge is set for May 3.
Comments
So the saga continues! It's unbelievable -- asking $20 million in damages is ridiculously excessive. What will Thorpe do next? He seems like he has a lot of energy. Perhaps he should focus that energy on doing something productive for the community rather than forwarding his own self-interests.
Thorpe is a hate-mongering racist. He is no longer relevant in Shaw and just can't take it.
Thorpes Attorney is a fraud, a bully, a liar who fabricates evidence and will harass, intimidate the opposing counsel to the detriment of his clients. If Thorpe had a case, HE JUST LOST IT.
Amazing that Thorpe got a lawyer to take this case. Looks like there's another frivilous lawsuit action coming against said counsel. If there was ever a frivilous lawsuit, this is it. It's why the concept was created.
Shameful to see Thorpe CONTINUE to exhaust public resources to further his ridiculous, violent, inflammatory, anti-community, harassing, & racist agenda.
If what DCDisgusted says about Thorpe's attorney is true, then he and Thorpe will get along well. They have a lot in common.
Thorpe's Civil hearing 9:30am, Friday, February 19; 2009 CA 007215 B
Thorpe's Criminal Trial, Courtroom 120, 9am, May 3, Non-Jury Trial, District of Columbia v Thorpe, 2009 CDC 024676
After two hearings in his criminal case, with his top DC criminal defense counsel, Mark E Schamel - Schertler & Onorato LLP, Mahdi Thorpe still has not convincingly demonstrated his innocence, and since his request for a jury trial has been denied, it looks like MT is desperately looking for a way out of this deep stinking whole he dug himself into. So, a day after his last criminal, Feb. 3, hearing, he decided to dig harder.
He scraped the bottom of the legal barrel (in a city with seemingly more lawyers than rats); he must have Googled: "E. Scott Frison Jr. Bar No. 478092" and liked what he found. ...
Their honeymoon may not last if MT loses the civil case -- given his and his lawyer's similar habit of alienating and backbiting their allies like rabid dog
Did the reporter even bother to contact Earline Matthews, VP - 2ndNW Cooperative Homes Assoc., to get a 2010 quote before using her remarks pimped by Mr Thorpe's lawyer? An email isn't a sworn affidavit in a legal suit. Why is it even relevant? Besides, she might have warmed up to Moulton and lost favor with Thorpe since 2007. Mr Thorpe's usual honeymoon is about 6-12 months with neighbors who don't bow down to him and drink his StoolAid. Mr Thorpe's friends (MPD and gov't officials included) are abandoning him like rats on a sinking ship over this; he's been having trouble getting officials to come to our ECCA meetings or invite him to community events. And he's biting back at them.
It must be difficult being married to a volatile, self-centered, bombastic, manipulative, loud, egomaniac DC gov't theRAPIST with no boundaries, self-restraint, sense of decency or respect for the law. Hope the dear woman knows there are supportive folks around to help her if she feels trapped. Immigrants are so often exploited.
I wish somebody would look into Thorpe's special relationship with the MPD. Why does he get away with ordering around MPD officers as if they are his hired help? Why does Chief Lanier give him awards? Why did they respond within seconds to his 911 call that somebody was distributing leaflets on his block, when calls to 911 reporting actual criminal activity may go for an hour or more without a response? And why is it that the MPD was not going to press charges against him for filing a false police report until somebody filed a FOIA request for the 911 transcript? Why?
Rewarding Thorpe with even $200 for his foolishness would be ridiculous.
Frison and Thorpe, they are malignant narcissist who usually take innocents with them... in this case, their opponent is a temporary distraction. Frison, in federal court, swore in an affidavit that he was suffers from paranoia (02-cv-02278-ESH FRISON v VA). In that same case, Frison's current wife vouched for Frison's physical ailments especially as it pertained to her being satifisfied.
Frison and his client have much in common and hopefully in 6 - 12 months when their honeymoon is over, they will be in court suing one another FRISON with his false evidence and Thorpe with hfalse percussion. While Thorpe may or may not have a case, Frison has a 99.9% failure rate in court and 100% rate of harming his clients, Frison v Ryan Homes (MD) Frison was described as a vexatious litigant and an emergency hearing request was filed to determine his competency. Frison has practiced law without a license in both MD and VA...maybe this case will be the one that stops this predatory behavior
Being arrested and having a restraining order slapped on would be a life changing experience for most people, for Thorpe it's just another day.
Why stop at a paltry US$20M (or 154,209,073.71 South African Rand)?
A much more reasonable sum would be A Gamillionzillion. That's about how much Thorpe would need to run for the Ward 2 Council seat even if Evans bequethes it to him in return for his loyalty.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!