The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-5294 Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GALE G. BEAR, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW : ()~- : NO 6.1.'14 CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE v. ROBERT L. BEAR, NOTICE TO DEFEND AND CLAIM RIGHTS You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take prompt action. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case will proceed without you and a decree of divorce or annulment may be entered against you for any claim or relief requested in these papers by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you, including custody or visitation of your children. When the ground for the divorce is indignities or irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, you may request marriage counseling. A list of marriage counselors is available in the Office of the Prothonotary at Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17013. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAYBE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMA nON ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Phone: (717) 249-3166 or (800) 990-9108 Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GALE G. BEAR Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LA W : (j{,- : NO 5";).. 'I <.( CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE v. ROBERT L. BEAR, COMPLAINT IN DIVORCE COUNT I NO FAULT 1. Plaintiff is Gale G. Bear, an adult individual currently residing at 1166 Rhoda Blvd. Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant is Robert L. Bear, an adult individual currently residing at 101 Potato Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff is a bonafide resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and has been so for at least six months immediately previous to the filing of this Complaint. 4. Plaintiff and Defendant were married on December 14, 1958 in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. There have been no other prior actions for divorce or annulment between the parties, except an action that was initiated by the Defendant herein, Robert L. Bear, docketed in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County Pennsylvania, to No. 05-935, which Complaint was filed on February 22, 2005. A counterclaim was filed to that complaint. The matter was pre-tried before the Divorce Master of Cumberland County. The Defendant herein filed a Petition to Bifurcate, which was scheduled to be heard by the trial court but not heard as the Trial Court allowed the Defendant herein to withdraw his divorce action. 6. Neither the Plaintiff nor the Defendant are members of the United States Armed Forces or its Allies. 7. Plaintiff has been advised of the availability of counseling and the right to request that the Court require the parties to participate in counseling. Knowing this, Plaintiff does not desire that the Court require the parties to participate in counseling. 8. Plaintiff and Defendant are citizens of the United States of America. 9. The parties' marriage is irretrievably broken. COUNT II DIVORCE SECTION 3301C 10. Paragraphs 1 through 9 of Plaintiffs Complaint are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in their full text. 11. Plaintiff desires a divorce based upon the belief that the Defendant will, ninety (90) days from the date of service of this Complaint, consent to this divorce. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests your Honorable Court to enter a decree in divorce pursuant to 23 P.S. Section 3301 (c) of the Divorce Code of 1980 as amended. COUNT III DIVORCE SECTION 3301d 12. Paragraphs 1 through 9 of Plaintiff s Complaint are incorporated herein as if set forth in their full text. 13. They have been separated since on or before June, 11 1972. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests your Honorable Court to enter a Decree in Divorce pursuant to 23 P.S. Section 3301(d) of the Divorce Code of 1980, as amended. Respectfully submitted, . riffie, Esquire ey or Plaintiff G IFF IE & ASSOCIATES 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-5551 (800) 347-5552 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: Cf j (" Jo (, ~f;tlJ!R ~YrlV I'" GALE G. BEAR ~ \\- ~ q.> ~ C1\' ~ c.... ~ ~. '> \\:: V', c; \A - ""'01 ~ r }. \~ 0> i ~ E;' ~, -0 ~ ~ '> ...t:::. Y """t> ~ 6... -&> r .,( ,",'" . . GALE G. BEAR IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. CIVIL ACTION - LA W ; NO ,);lCj4 CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant COUNTER AFFIDAVIT UNDER &3301(d) OF THE DIVORCE CODE 1. Check either (a) or (b): (a) I do not oppose the entry of a divorce decree. (b) I oppose the entry of a divorce decree because (Check either (i), (ii) , or both) (i) The parties to the action have not lived separate an apart for a period of at least two (2) years. (ii) The marriage is not irretrievably broken. 2. Check either (a) or (b): (a) I do not wish to make any claims for economic relief. I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division of property, lawyer's fees, or expenses if I do not claim them before a divorce is granted. _ (b) I wish to claim economic relief which may include alimony, division of property, lawyer's fees or expenses or other important rights. I understand that in addition to checking (b) above, I must also file all of my economic claims with the Prothonotary in writing and serve them on the other party. If I fail to do so before the date set forth on the Notice of Intention to Request Divorce Decree, the divorce decree may be entered without further notice to me, and I shall be unable thereafter to file any economic claims. I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant "" . ...," .- NOTICE: IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO OPPOSE THE ENTRY OF A DIVORCE DECREE AND YOU DO NOT WISH TO MAKE ANY CLAIM FOR ECONOMIC RELIEF, YOU SHOULD NOT FILE THIS COUNTER AFFIDAVIT. t""'"-') -J -.1 .-\ .... r--i^"'\ -:;- (.~j t.~ "'-~ GALE G. BEAR Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO O(P.g~IVIL TERM IN DIVORCE v. ROBERT L. BEAR, NOTICE If you wish to deny any of the statements set forth in the attached affidavit, you must file a counter-affidavit within twenty days after this Affidavit has been served on you or the statements will be admitted. AFFIDAVIT UNDER &3301(d) OF THE DIVORCE CODE 1. The parties to this action have been separated since June 11, 1972 and have continued to live separate and apart since that time. 2. The marriage is irretrievable broken. 3. I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division of property, lawyer's fees or expenses if! do not claim them before a divorce is granted. I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: j I ~ I D " Ai] J. ~y(}}J r GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff Ul ( i ~ ~ \\: ~ -'. J:(' ~ ~ cp ., ... c:> " 0::. ~'.\. OC\. ~, ~, -t.. c:v -, ~ - ~ --' '- \,cZ -_.~\ --~ --- \t)..~2 " 1\ Vi , . .r: y ""3 "> ..... ..c> (" Laserfiche WebLink Cumberland County Browse ~ ~~ '\). "_,_,,,_,,,_,~____"_____"_"''''~_H_H'' DD ,r; DD r;T'1 1 of3 http://records.ccpa,netlweblink _ extldocview .aspx?id=3 8827 Help Logout My WebLink .!J .!J Page r1~ of 186 ~ "@f~-~~..'Q':~I~'~~~"'~'--'-'~:'(~;p~~'~~F~~'-'t~-F~~ .'.. .....,...... .,.,.. ProthonotarL7 > Civil Dockets> 2005 Dockets> 05- 0901 thru 05- 1000> 05-0935 l\Oill!:r<T L. JlI!JLR I Iol 'l'llli: COURT OF C()HIoDN PLEIll> OF CUMiER~O COONTY, PENNSYLVANIA l'lO. 05-935 crV1L ACUOI>l .LAW ~l'I Dl VORa; v. GJ\LI!. G. Bl!:AIl OltDIlR or COtlU ~D NOW, this l~th day of January, 2006, upon Co~sidoration of the Plaintiff's praeoipe to diecont1nue filed pIev1o~~ly in thi8 matter, and Plaintiff having indioated in open court that h~ r.gard~ hi~ cl~irns in this ca~e ae hav1n; b.en discontinued b~ virtu~ of tha praecipe, the Court deem$ the flajntiff's c1.ime dieccntinued withQut prejudice to Def~nd.nt'8 right to file a petition to $t~i~e tbe discQrttinuance. PUr$Uant to Pennlylvan1~ ~ple of c~jm~nal FroCQdure 232{a), the counterclaim tOr co~ts, e~pen5es and attornaY'9 fe~B filed by Defendant snaIl ~emain vi~ble. Ily the Court, Robert L, DenIo ?lalntift ~rBdley ~. Griltie, Eaquira For the o.fendant pcb 9/11/2006 1 :20 PM .., , Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GALE G. BEAR, v. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : NO.O(,-.r.29V CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE ROBERT L. BEAR, MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF MASTER AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Gale G. Bear, by and through her attorney of record, Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire, and moves the Court to appoint a Master with respect to the following claims: (X) Divorce ( ) Distribution of Property ( ) Annulment ( ) Support ( ) Alimony ( ) Counsel Fees ( ) Costs and Expenses ( ) Alimony Pendente Lite and in support of her Motion states: 1. Discovery is complete as to the claims for which the appointment of a Master is requested. 2. The Defendant has appeared in this action pro se. 3. The Statutory grounds for divorce are 23 Pa.C.S.A. ~3301(c) or ~3301(d). 4. This action is not contested. 5. The action does not involve complex issues of law or fact. 6. The hearing is expected to take one hour. 7. Additional information, if any, relevant to the motion: None. . G. . e, Esquire ttorney for laintiff GRIFFIE & ASSOCIATES 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 243-5551 (800) 347-5552 .. ~~ \~ t;~ (;) ~t:; '0 :L._ -:S 'Ze,,) ~ "Z 'P~ . ~ ~ ~ \ , Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GALE G. BEAR, v. CIVIL ACTION LAW Defendant : NO 06-5294 : IN DIVORCE CIVIL TERM ROBERT L. BEAR, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE I, Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire, counsel of record for Plaintiff, and states that a true and attested copy of a Complaint in Divorce was sent to Defendant, Robert L. Bear, at his address of 201 Potato Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, by certified mail, restricted delivery. A copy of said receipt is attached hereto indicating service was made on September 16, 2006. riffie, Esquire or for Plaintiff GRI FIE & ASSOCIATES 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-5551 (800) 347-5552 Sworn and subscribed to before me this ,q '!f,.. day of ., 2006 NOTARY BLIC MOT ARIAL SEAL ROB'"J GOSHORN NOTARYpU8~ LISLE BORO., CUMBERLAND coUIRY it~OMMISSIO" EXPIRES APRIL 1 1 ................., D"" 'f1~". ..1.t.'\, t...::'; l" "i "j . .. 1.~L"'~ur J ~\~~ ~"-, Itt IJOt ~ ,re~ B.~~~~ /(Jrb~V 'l. 1D~ D. ..dIIIVIIY....c:IIIflInR__1? If YES, ..... cIeIIvwy 8ddniIIa blIIow: 3. '. ... 'he ...... '~__Md o "1'lltJId ~Aec8lpt1orMelchlll'" 1;1 ......... 00.0.0. 4. ...~~(afnr". 0.,. :=:sr....., H HI ;r;,w,'1.UO]1 J~f4fIl7b!:1: I '7tZ IT' .... ..D .... ~ I ~ U1 r-'J CJ CJ CJ U.S Postal Servlc(~ CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mall Only: No Insurance COllerage Provided) L ..",y.. S~ '."~,'." \ . /0. ,--,,,," \ Iw/!, '/ ," :jf~~\.~\~ ..J 'J" J. " ... tfS!,) J ,/ '. ~ C .:./:;) \ \ 1.),;,-< '. )' entTo p ""be. J_ L 1/2 ear ".,::;--.;,..../ s;m;i;Atrf;O:i...C~.....:....E"""""""'''''~~r'''''''''''''........... ~~.~.~~~.~~:...J9..~...fQtQ.. ....~. ......................... CIty, ..,., Z1P~ 4 ; B' . Postage Certified Fee CJ . .. Return Receipt Fee ..D' (EncfOlSellletll Requlrecf) ~ ' Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Requlrecf) ., ru Total PostlIge & Fees CJ CJ .... .\ o ~;~~ ~"1" 1 .. ~ \, ~ ! .--~ Plaintiff f '~:C":~':-.::::=:::;-::'C:-"'."'--'c-...,c;:::- ~ : ' i) I . ..d..c.__ I i" ,.SEP."., ".1....1.0.,0,6 j" "':/}1 """. '. J -._~ : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA J GALE G. BEAR, Defendant : CIVILACTION - LAW ; No.O(r5,}.et~CML TERM : IN DIVORCE v. ROBERT L. BEAR, ORDER APPOINTING MASTER AND NOW this ~ay of ~J..e.A. , 2006, E. Robert Elicker. II. Esquire, is appointed Master with respect to the following claims: Divorce. BY THE COURT, J, cc: Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Robert L. Bear, Plaintiff, pro se \ tj. - ~lf- O~ Cb-f~ /~tL ,JUJ C:.,~'c~?:,C r/' .,) !("\}::;;'>." ,\ :-o:""..r-\\ ,...J ",r~\'l\ ',;, "'/'\'\'''':' ()! {...r.... \ \,-"- >>,\,\0,) ,) ~ 6""S ~~%t ""S':/' ~6 S ., ~ .,.\>,\ -~ \_,\. \1'-\0 ."" , ,..'.\. ~..J'" "'\"\'0 \.':o~\Oi'\')>:'f,A):'I \ i" .. -:;fJ\-;';;'" Although all statements made herein before the Cumberland County Court are subject to the penalties for false -statements, I would prefer that any false statements of mine could be punished by the maximum years in prison for those convicted of perjury. My past experiences with the Cumberland County Court have convinced me it is not because Cumberland County Court Judges love Ole so much that I haven't already been also publicly castigated as was another on the front page of the Carlisle Sentinel a few years ago. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3: 16-17) For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. (Jude 1 :4-5) To even a vile sinner such as I, Jude gives a "perfect" description of Menno Simons and his "evil men and seducers" (2 Timothy 3:13) who have commanded for 450 years; when a Mennonite husband is excommunicated he must "hath his privy member cut oft'" (Deuteronomy 23:1) from "the wife of his bosom" (Deuteronomy 28:54) until he "falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20) will Mennonite "repent." "Do you know what I suggest? If you would take that (tape recorder) home and bury it on your farm, and if you would repent, you would have your wife back." (Reformed Mennonite Bishop Earl M. Basinger propositioning me on behalf of Menno Simons (1496-1561) and all Reformed Mennonites, April 15, 1973.) Bishop Basinger made possible, as never before, to prove how Menno Simons and his "ungodly men, turning the grace of our God in lasciviousness," use the denial of married sex, "exciting sexual desires," to bring us down upon our knees to "falsely so called" Mennonite "repent." Had Menno Simons demanded of all Mennonites and Amish for 450 years; all husbands must "hath his privy member cut oft" from "the wife of his bosom," I am certain ,the starving sexual organs of Mennonite men and women would have taught them long ago how "ungodly" their prophet Menno Simons was, far more than "all scripture" has. Judges of the Cumberland County Court have judged ever since June 23, 1976, "that Satan tempt" (1 Corinthians 7:5) me sexually ever since June 11,1972 is merely Mennonite "fully warranted- love and concern." I am certain, had all Cumberland County Court Judges and their supporting cast of characters had "his privy member cut off' from "tbe wife ofbis bosom," or from aU other females, ever since June 23, 1976, it would have taken only a small fraction of the past 30 years to prove to all what "ungodly men" Cumberland County Court Judges truly are. "I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed," (Galatians 2:11) Lawrence N. Bard, husband and father of 5, because he took advantage of the "lasciviousness" forced upon wife and mother of 6, Gale Gross Bear. Reformed Mennonite "ungodly men" demanded she remain celibate ever since my excommunication on June 11, 1972 or they seduced her to believe she would be "set on fire of hell." (James 3:6) ... I ... 6- The Sentind. Carlisle, PL. Wednesday, fcbNary 9,200) Liar sent to prison ByTracv Stellino Sentinel Reporter A Hanisturg man was sentenced co one to seven years in Slate prison Tuesday for lying about his ability to wort at a Cumberland County child support burinI- Donald Woods Sr.. 3', wu cODvicted last week by a Cumberland County jury of com- mitting perjury at a croW support hearing on July 27. 1998. At the time ~ w.s1i\ing in Wormley s bw). Lawrence N. Bard readily confessed on August 11,2005 to an almost 19 year adulterous affair with -shunning wife Gale Gross Bear, even for several years while she was yet wearing her Reformed Mennonite ~4sheep's clothing" (St. Matthew 7: 15) and before she was excommunicated for other reasons during the fall of 1989 by Reformed Mennonites. The 38th chapter of ~nesis tells of Judah promising his son Shelah, when he 44be grown" to his widowed daughter-in-law Tamar. 44And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot; because she had covered her face." (Genesis 38: 14-15) The end result was Judah said to his veiled daughter-in-law Tamar, 441 pray thee, let me come in unto thee." Tamar replied, 44What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me?" Judah said he would send her a kid from his goat flock. Tamar asked, "Will thou give me a pledge, till you send it?" Judah gave Tamar his "signet," his "bracelets" and his "statT." "And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him." His servant couldn't find Tamar when Judah sent the kid. Three months later Judah was told that Tamar was "with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." When she was brought forth, she sent for her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff. And J udab acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; beause that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more. (Genesis 38: 25-26) I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to bum. (1 Corinthians 7:8-9) But I say unto you; Tbat whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: And whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. (St. Matthew 5:32) Reformed Mennonites dare not believe Jesus Christ, in that when they "put away" Gale Gross Bear from me, beginning June 11, 1972, they "causeth her to commit adultery." Where can a Reformed Mennonite be found who doesn't believe he has "No Fault" in causing Gale Gross Bear to commit adultery and also "No Fault" in judging, unless she repents she will surely be "set on fire of heD?" (James 3 :6) Where can one be found among Reformed Mennonite "evil men and seducers" as honest as Judah and publicly acknowledge, "She hath been more righteous than I; because I gave her not (her husband to prevent Gale Gross Bear's lasciviousness from causing her to commit adultery)?" As far as is yet known, didn't Gale Gross Bear, before her "lasciviousness" to love and be loved drove her to adultery, and of aD evils, adultery with the husband of another woman, remain celibate for some 14 years? Reformed Mennonite "ungodly men" know, if they admit the trutb tbey can't claim "No Fault" "in the day of judgment" (S1. Matthew 12:36) in causing "her to commit adultery," any more than Gale Gross Bear can claim "No Fault" "in the day of judgment" for demanding a "No Fault Divorce" now to justify her adultery; Reformed Mennonites know the Reformed Mennonite cult would be "destroyed." (Jude 1: 5) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" and gives a "perfect" description of all who fulfill an American Heritage Dictionary definition of whore: "To otTer oneself or another for sexual hire," demanding a Mennonite damned husband must "hire" his shunning wife's body for the demanded price of "repent." Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went awhoring with their own inventions. (psalm 106:39) And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: who so pleaseth God shall escape from her, but the sinner shall be taken by her. (Ecclesiastes 7:26) ~- ....,....... ~ , I started my search for information with a phone call to the Pennsylvania State Police at the Carlisle barracks. The trooper who answered the phone gave me what seemed to be a spontaneous response to my question. I asked him who had called the State Police to complain of Bear taking his daughter and what the exact nature of the complaint was that the police received. I also asked the trooper if the logbook would reflect how the matter was brought to the attention of the State Police. The trooper told me that he thought this case was one of Judge Shughart's and that he believed the matter was handled with an assignment slip and would therefore not show up on the logbook. An "assignment slip" was described as a piece of paper which is handed to the police officer who performed the job noted on the paper. I waited on the phone while the trooper checked with someone else at the barracks whom he thought might know more about the incident. When he returned to the phone he told me, "Oh boy, you really created a monster here." I asked him what he meant by this remark and he told me that he didn't know anything about the incident involving Bear's arrest and admission to Holy Spirit Hospital. On December 27, 1977 I called the Cumberland/Perry Mental Health (CPMH) office in Carlisle. Michael Chambers who identified himself as director spoke to me because he alleged that Carolyn Sukay, Bear's caseworker, was not in. Mr. Chambers told me he couldn't answer any of my questions except to advise me that Bear had been taken to the Holy Spirit Hospital with a warrant under emergency mental health procedures provided for by the Emergency Mental Health Procedures Act. He could not release any information or records to me until he spoke with his attorney, Kevin Hess. On December 27, 1977 I also called the Holy Spirit Hospital and spoke to Mrs. Holmes who is in charge of mental health records. Mrs. Homes advised me that I could review Bear's records but that I couldn't receive a copy of the records without a court order or subpoena. On December 28, 1977 Bear and I went to the Holy Spirit Hospital to review their records which related to Bear's three-day confinement. We found that the records were not available because they could not be located in the Hospital. After waiting sometime, Dr. Borelli arrived at the facility but in spite of his help, the records could not be located. I was allowed to review a very few papers which were in a file relating to Bear. These included a psychological report which indicated Bear was normal. A copy of this document was given to me. I gave it to Bear for his use. There was a social history in this file. The history stated that Bear took his daughter off a school bus with a loaded gun. The history indicated that Bear denied reports of taking his daughter off the bus with a loaded gun. The report was prepared by a social worker at the facility named Ted. I later spoke to him and he explained to me that he got the report of the bus and loaded gun from the State Police who had told the story to the hospital staff. The story was general knowledge among the staff according to this social worker. He never saw the story in writing. We had to leave the hospital without reviewing the entire file because it could not be located. Mrs. Holmes advised me that she would attempt to locate the file so I might review the records at a later time. On December 29, 1977 Bear and I went to the office ofCPMH on Hanover Street in Carlisle. I presented them with a letter requesting certain information be made available to me. I attached an authorization from Bear. We were able to speak with Carolyn Sukay who was the caseworker assigned to Bear's case. Miss Sukay didn't have much to say that was helpful or informative. With respect to the CPMH records which we asked to review, Miss Sukay said there was only authorization, chronological notes and a copy of the discharge summary. (a) Bear was taken into custody by the State Police and taken to Holy Spirit Hospital under the emergency mental health procedures available when there is immediate danger to someone's life. A warrant to allow this was issued by CPMH. (b) The State Police were the complaining party asking for the warrant to involuntarily commit Bear to Holy Spirit Hospital. (c) The State Police wanted to know of Bear's diagnosis and discharge plans. (d) Bear was not admitted to Holy Spirit under emergency procedures because the papers were not completed properly, (This varies with the hospital records which indicate that Bear was not admitted on an involuntary basis because an examination at the time he was brought to the hospital revealed that there was no mental health emergency which would necessitate involuntary admission.) (e) On either 12/8 or 12/9 Sgt. Mixell of the State Police called CPMH for information about Bear's eva"luation. Sukay called the Holy Spirit Hospital and they said to have the Police call Dr. Borelli. Sukay then called the State Police and spoke to a policeman named Cletus because Sgt. Mixell was not there. Cletus said he would have the District Attorney call Dr. Borelli. (f) On either 12/8 or 12/9 Judge Shughart called CPMH to get information relating to Bear's evaluation. .. Sukay notes that she didn't tell Shughart anything. Two hours after leaving the CPMH offices, Robert Goril called to advise me that their attorney told them they didn't have to release the information requested by my letter because emergency procedures were not completed and Bear was not admitted involuntarily. On December 31, 1977 I visited Holy spirit Hospital for a review of the medical records. The records were apparently complete except for the discharge summary, which Dr. Borelli had not yet completed. The records revealed the following information: (a) The warrant for Bear's arrest and involuntary commitment to the hospital was issued by CPMH pursuant to an affidavit signed by Sgt. Mixell. The affidavit was dated 12/5/77. (b) The affidavit stated that Bear threatened to kill his children and commit suicide. It further stated that a noose was seen in Bear's barn and that he kept weapons on the premises. (c) There were two references in the file to Judge Shughart wanting Bear admitted for evaluation. (d) Dr. Borelli examined Bear at 6:45 p.m. on 12/5/77 approximately 45 minutes after Bear was brought to Holy Spirit. Dr. Borelli certified that Robert Bear was not in need of emergency commitment. (e) Bear signed a voluntary admission authorization which included a statement that he was aware of his rights and understood that he could leave the facility at any time after giving them a written request to leave. (f) There is a reference in the file to Bear authorzing the release of evaluation results to David Ody and Judge Shughart. It is possible for Bear to review this record personally if he will make a written application to the Holy Spirit Hospital. A treatment team will sit down with Bear when he reviews the records. The discharge summary of Dr., Borelli has still not been provided to me although the Hospital agreed to send it to me when it is complete. Mrs. Holmes indicated to me that these summaries are often not completed and made part of a record for many months after a patient is discharged. I received a request from Dr. Borelli to call him through Robert Bear shortly after Bear was discharged from the hospital. I called Dr. Borelli and he informed me that there was nothing wrong with Bear and that he would be willing to testify to that effect. There are a number of questions which remain unanswered concerning the matter of Bear's commitment and arrest. I have contacted the State Police at the Carlisle barracks, but they have not answered the questions I have. I would like to know where Sgt. Mixell got his directions in the matter of Bear's arrest and commitment and I would like to find out exactly how the entire matter was brought to the attention of the State Police. With the exception of Mrs. Holmes at the Holy Spirit Hospital, everyone involved with the matter had been reluctant to talk, unwilling to give any information or evasive in their answers to me. They all seem to be uncomfortable with my questions about these events even though the questions are not difficult or unusual. Perhaps Judge Shughart would tell you why he wanted you evaluated as indicated in the records at Holy Spirit Hospital. He may even tell you what steps he took to see that you were evaluated if any. If he has done nothing wrong he should have nothing to hide. (End of Report) Our Mental Health laws state: (c) Notification of Rights at Emergency Examination - Upon arrival at the facility, the person shall be informed of the reasons for emergency examination and of his right to communicate immediately with others. We needed to wait until David Ody read the hospital records on December 31, 1977 before we learned of the reasons for the attempted emergency examination. Sgt. Grant Mixell told me that District Attorney Bayley and Judge Shughart ordered me to be taken into custody. If I had known I was charged with all their false charges and had been told that I was free to leave without being arrested and that this part of the law applied, I would have asked them to take me home. Instead the state police posed as friends and I trusted them. "If it is determined that the person is severely mentally disabled and in need of emergency treatment, treatment shall be begun immediately. If the physician does not so find, or if at any time it appears there is no longer a need for immediate treatment, the person shall be discharged and returned to such place as he may reasonably direct." On December 29,1977, Lawyer David Ody reminded Cumberland/Perry Mental Health and Mental Retardation worker Sukay in my presence that the law provides a penalty of up to one year in prison for anyone who gives false information in order to have a citizen falsely committed to a mental hospital and that includes all who help cover up such falseness. I never threatened to kill myself. I never threatened to kill our children. I did not even own a gun. I sold my one rifle several months before December 5, 1977 and had no other weapons. I did not have a hanging noose in the barn. In happier times our children swung on a rope with a loop in it and it was seventeen (17) inches from the floor. I was not even near a school bus when I brought our twelve year old daughter home after she said, "You bastard!" This was the summary of my Psychological Evaluation one day after I was lied into the mental hospital, taken December, 6, 1977. PHYCHOLOGICAL EV ALVA TION: Robert Baer An intellectual profile such as this is counter-indicative of emotional disturbance. Mr. Baer is capable of thinking in abstract terms, but has enough practical orientation not to lose sight of the concreteness of issues. There is no evidence of psychotic process in this man. His thinking is clear and his flow of ideas is quite relevant to the issue. The question of paranoia was raised. Rorschach responses and T AT stories yielded no evidence of this disorder beyond a slight tendency to be somewhat suspicious and defensive. This was not seen in clinical proportions and may well be real when one considers the situation in which this man finds himself. Based on these test results, there is no reason why this man cannot function quite adequately in the community. His ability to relate to others is good. His cooperative nature and sensitivity toward the wellbeing of other people are positive factors in his adjustment to a difficult situation. In summary then, Mr. Baer's psychological profile is well within normal limits. There is no apparent need for ongoing treatment at this time. TLH:bw Thomas L. Hanshaw Psychologist I was discharged from Holy Spirit December 9, 1977. I was first told to go to the business office. A Mrs. Messersmitt presented me with a bill for $521.60. I said, "I didn't bring myself here. I didn't come here because there was anything wrong. I will go to prison before I pay that." Mrs. Messersmitt asked me if I was the Bear who had been in the newspapers. I said, "I am sorry to say I am." She said Holy Spirit didn't want any publicity and I was free to go. I went home and the State Police never arrested me for the crimes they charged against me December 5, 1977. But Holy Spirit began to send me statements demanding their $521.60. I talked to Lawyer David A. Ody. The result was his investigative report. I sent it around, Holy Spirit no longer sent me statements demanding payment. I may be nothing, nothing but persistent. Years later Holy Spirit-gave me a copy of their document proving Cumberland County picked taxpayers' pockets of $521.60 May 5, 1978 in order to cover up the Court-State Police "in cahoots" crime. All my efforts to uncover who criminally authorized payment of that $521.60 ended with all who had to know, also being "in cahoots." << #.";"--::- .'~~{7:" ~~". .;~~ ALFRED L WHITCOMB CONTROlLER r JANICE B. WARICHER AOMINISTRA nve ASSISTANT .. ,~~: ~:~':3~~~~"~~-"~: QInntrnllir nf aruml1J~rlanD QID1tni~ COURT HOUSE. CARUSLE. p~ 170'3 March 13, 1989 Mr. Ro~ert L. Bear R. D. #9 Box 325 . Carlisle, Pa. .17013 Dear Mr. Bear, .l ALFRED e. SHIPE OEPtJT'Y CONTROlLER JAMES O. BOGAR soucrrOR of,. .,~ -. ~7f: ... ~ .~: "'1:. ". As we explained in our previous letter we are unable- to provide copies of invoices for the year 1978. To explain further, all Cumberland County's records are maintained for periods of time designated by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Division of Archives authorized by the County Records Act.of August 14, 1963. The Act sets guide- lines on the length of time County records must be maintained. In the case of Invoices,the records are required to be kept for a period of seven years. We have in our possession authorization from the State Archives Division to destroy invoices for the year 1978. Unlike hospitals we do not have a need to maintain certain financial records forever. Sincerely, ~~-P~ f' . Affred L. Whitcomb Contro ller Ericl. ALW:as . j I . to Lawyer David A. Ody. The result was his investigative report. I sent it around, Holy Spirit no 'Ionger sent me statements demanding payment. I may be nothing, nothing but persistent. Years later Holy Spirit gave me a copy of their document proving Cumberland County picked taxpayers' ~ pockets of$521.60 May 5,1978 in order to cover up e court-State Police "in cahoots" crime. All my efforts to uncover ho criminally authorized p ment of that $521.60 ended with all who had to know, also being "in c boots." Code Judicial Conduct avoid impropriety a 'd the appearance of impro 'ety in all his activities. ct and comply w' the law and should condu t himself at all times in a ublic confid ce in the integrity and imp iality of the judiciary. his famil , social, or other relationshilJ. to influence his judicial e should ot lend the prestige of his 0 ce to advance the private ld h conveyor knowingly permit hers to conv the impression p it' n to influence him. He shoul not testify v 1 tarily as a o the face beca e he was to be lamed" (G latians 2' 0) and asked Assistant Dis . ct A ey Jaime Keatin on December 19, 2000. the Cu berland County Courthouse," 0 yo believe there is any ne in the Cu rland C unty C urthouse who doesn't know tee urt lied in my case?" n a rare mo ent of h. esty i my case, Jaime Keating confess There may be a few." According the Code of Judicial Co oct, aU Ju violated their C d of Judicial Conduct beca se "there impression tha th yare in a special position infJuen say, "There m y b a few" who don't know "tll y are in s al position to inOuence" their boss Judges i they ake public their Judges' c .mes, lies and corruption? "Com rt tbe bleminded" (1 Thessaloni 5: 14) wb can't know Controller Alfred L. Whitcomb as not on oftbe "the few" who didn know h was in double "hot water" had he dared tell of his Court' rimes, lies and corruption. 1. Had Controller fred L. Whitcomb told he 1m who authorized picking taxpayers' pockets of $521.60, e would be admitting he Iped to cover up the Cum berland County Court's crime. 2. Still rule those minds on ea ge Milton's wormwood words were hurled: Truth like a bastard CfJ.nJeS into the world never without ilt-fame to him who gives her birth. 'Ishii Mil*~) \---n;~I1~.) Hr:;/'l...fJ y) Had Contro))er Alfred L. Whitcomb dared teU the truth on March 13, 1989, wouldn't Whitcomb have felt fortunate if the Cumberland County Court criminals he uncovered had just called him a "bastard?" ~ .. R~ D. #9 Box 325 Carlisle, FA 17013 M.arch 15, 1989 . Controller Alfred 1.. Whitcomb Courthouse Carlisle, FA 17013 Dear Mr . Whitcomb: .. Please be patient wit.h this, dghth grade dropout who is even more confused due to lOur latest letter received todaT. Your letter o~ March 1, 1989 st.ates: "In accordance wi:t.h subpeonea no. 2043 ciyil '8S, and after extensive searching, we are unable :to locate the documents you bave requested." Now your letter o:f March 13, 1989 states in part: "We have in our possession authorization from the state Archives Divisio~ tQ destroy invoices for the year 1978." . '-.-' . My subpeonea to you requested a copy of the documeDt sbowi.ng ..ho authorized payment. of rrI1' voluntary commitment to Holy SPiI?-t Commumty Mental Health Center, December 5, 1977 and was certaiDly not a request for a cop)" of an -invoice". I! the records ~or 1978 have been destroyed, as you strongly :infer without saying so, why would ,you wr:tte', "After extensive searching we are unable to locate the idocuments you have requested. "? Could you fault me for "readiDg between the lines. of your two letters and conc.ludi.ng that since it is ~ossible to carry out an "extensive s.earch" of 1978 records destroyed without a trace, your latest letter is a smokescreen bi.ding the fact that, although granted permission to destroy the 1978 records, you chose not to do so? Or your "extensive searc~ lette~ is ut~er.l7 false? After carefu.ll7 pSring all the fat from your two letters this is a11 the gristl.y' meat left: "After extensive searching" of records destroyed years ago "we are unable to lc..e,t.. "'h.::. ...,...,...um"..~- ~.. \..~-~ -Pr'I'n"<ll"t-d" ' ......... lW ... iw r.a...,- . __","iIia' J W'''' ........ ~ ... -".....---..... · "0 what a tangled web we weave when we first prac~ce to deceive." Sir Walter Scot~ How better could you bury this matter am put it to rest than to send me a signed statement according to the fo1+owing: I declare UDder the penalties of perjury that all ~978 authorized records have been destroyed on date. AJ..!red L. Whitcomb, Controller o~ CumberlaDd County , Pennsylvania. Or do you not keep records. of when you destroy irreplaceabl.e r'ecords? You' probably know that to support John Tower's recent. nomination for Secretary of Defe:1Se, tormer m.zona Senator Barry Go1dwater said if a11. who shacked U'O with women and. all who were drunken had to leave government there wOuldn I t be a.IJyone. le~t. in, iiashington.. " You also probably know that if all who helped lie. me into the mental hospital. ,and! or covered up their crime would confess here as they surely will confess in the here- after,', there would DOt be as maJ1Y left in the Cumber~a.rxi County Courthouse. Do not your two confusing le:tters rightly lead one to bel.ieve that yeu are well aware of the fact that what, I ~uested is the Cumberland ComIty Court's "smoking gun" Do we not both ~w that .more then a document bas ~aJ.J.en through -the c::-acks of the Cumberland County Court? A." smok:i.ll2 ~. bas fallen t~h the cracks of the Cumberlar.d County Court. .. ''''\ S:incerel~_ ~ ."l .) ~/"'""'" ...-.- L.t...., I -;'< ~~J ~- J~~ ,~RCfuert. L. ~ear Attorney David Ody wrote a letter dated February 7, 1978, containing the following explanation. "As .,7Oa'will recall, you asked me to call Dr. Borelli at his request to discuss your evaluation and what ver o\her matter Dr. Borelli had on his mind. I tried several times to get him on the phone . without ccess, but finally, I found him at one of his offices and explained who I was and that I 'was calling rsuant to his request that you have you e" calL poten iaJ rapist. have ifficul e you elf to women. you prob ems to interject misu derstood. H sai 01 Spirit the night of December 5, 19 7, woman came in to question e twice was, "Did you use a loaded to take your daughter ofT d I held up a school bus with a r. Borelli said, ~'I believe you. e to do with you.'" Code of Judicial Conduct ~ .. Canon 2. A judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all his activities. A. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. B. Ajudge should not allow his family, social, or other relationships to influence his judicial conduct or judgment. He should not lend the prestige of his office to advance the private interest of others; nor should he conveyor knowingly permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him. He should not testify volnntarily as a character witness. Commentary Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. He must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. He must therefore accept restrictions on his conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. "I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed" (Galatians 2:11) and asked Assistant District Attorney Jaime M. Keating on December 19,2000; "Do you believe there is anyone in the Cumberland County Courthouse who doesn't know the court lied in my case?" In a rare moment of honesty in my case, Jaime Keating confessed, "There may be a few." Nothing is so good for an ignorant man as silence; and if he was sensible of this he would not be ignorant. (Saadi) If any Cumberland County Court Judge was ignorant of his Court's crimes and lies, to "avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety," wouldn't he publicly state how Lawyer David A. Ody's report and my further evidence are nothing but chargeable lies? That Cumberland County Court Judges "respect and comply with the la~~nd punish all who don't?" Has the "public confidence'in the Cumberland County judiciary become so eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of its judges, that not one citizen will tell me what I here state are all lies and they or Cumberland County Court Judges can prove they are lies? The Chicago White Sox professional baseball team, due to gamb6ng interests, threw the 1919 World Series. A reporter told of a boy pleading to his baseball-player idol, "Say it isn't so, Joe." For years the Chicago White Sox were called "the Black Sox." "Comfort the feebleminded" (1 Thessalonians 5:14) who can read the irrefutable evidence and would say to any Cumberland County Court Judges, "Say it isn't so." Man would fain be great and sees that he is little; would fain be happy and sees that he is miserable; would fain be perfect and sees that he is full of imperfections; would fain be the object of love and esteem of men, and sees that his faults merit only their aversion and contempt. The embarrassment wherein he finds himself produces in him the most unjust and criminal passions imaginable, for he conceives a mortal hatred against that truth which blames him and convinces him of his faults. (Pascal) President Judge Edgar B. Bayley's "unjust and criminal passions" caused him to help commit his Court's crime of lying me into Holy Spirit Community Mental Health Center on December 5,1977, and commit his additional cover up crime ever since. Will President Judge Edgar B. Bayley's "mortal hatred against that truth that blames him and convinces him of his faults" conceive in him "such unjust and criminal passions" he will not sign my Bifurcation Order? "The best little whorehouse west of the Susquehanna or east of the ~ Mississippi, serving the most prominent judges, generals, lawyers, chiefs of 'police, legislators, not to mention local prominent businessmen and even the not so prominent," according to local historian George Difenderfer. "Comfort the feebleminded" (1 Thessalonians 5: 14) who would have come before the Cumberland County Court for protection from Reformed Mennonites demanding their price of "repent" before they would "Give me my wife - that I may go in unto her." (Genesis 29:21) Had I known, for 100 years the Cumberland County Court condoned Carlisle's blackmailing "Best Little Whorehouse" dynasty demanding dollars before any "may go in unto" its whores, I hope I wouldn't have been stupid enough to have had any hope of relief. "Do you know what I suggest? If you would take that (tape recorder) home and bury it on your farm, and if you would repent, you would have your wife back." (Reformed Mennonite Bishop Earl M. Basinger propositioning me on behalf of Menno Simons (1496-1561) and all Reformed Mennonites, April 15, 1973.) The Judges of the Cumberland County Court can't deny the truth of Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" any more than they can deny this truth: The principle is the same, only the price is different when Reformed Mennonites demand the price of "repent" for a Mennonite shunning wife's "piece of bread" (Proverbs 6:26) or Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" demanded dollars for "a piece of bread" from one of its whores. Too late I read on the Cront page of the Carlisle Sentinel oC February 24, 1990 of Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" and I finally was able to understand how the Judges of the Cumberland County Court could be so conscienceless as to judge Mennonite wife prostitution "fully warranted - love and concern" ever since June 23, 1976. Had I known how Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" sened"prominentjudges, generals, lawyers, chiefs of police, legislators, not to mention t~~~t prominent businessmen and even the not so prominent" until the last madam was murdered in 1971; shouldn't I have known not to allow those leftovers oCgoing along to Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" or going along with condoning it, to lie me into the mental hospital? In 1979 I picked up ReCormed Mennonite shunning wife Gale Gross Bear, hoping to rescue her from Mennonite wife prostitution. Instead, I faced up to 10 years in the penitentiary plus $22,500 in fines if convicted. In an effort to test the pulse of Cumberland County's conscience, I sent out more than 20,000 copies of Lawyer David A. Ody's report of how the Court and State Police at Carlisle committed their crime of lying me into the mental hospital. I should have known, Cumberland County citizens who knew of their court condoning Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse," also could easily condone how the Court could commit its crime oC lying me into the mental hospital. letter to editor: - The Evening Sentinel, Carlisle, PA" Wednesday, Oct. 17, 1979 Just another cult? To the editor: All of us have at one time or another read about religious cults such as the Jonestown people, Moonies, but we haven't associated one group with the above two only because they usually keep a low profile, the Mennonites. Even though these three have taken different avenues of expression, they all have one thing in common, a hierarchy. They are in the truest sense of the word "dictators" or in the case of the Mennonites, "elders." But nevertheless they are the ones that set policy and enforce it by whatever means necessary to keep the cult members in line. The Mennonites use the shunning. This practice is completely out of step with reality and the times, but effective as a Mr, Bear has found out. Mr. Bear's plight also has brought much needed attention to this cult, which I don't think is appreciated but needed, We tend to think of these in the mystery sense. Mr. Bear has been denied his wife and children because he dare be critical of his elders, This is called freedom of expression and is healthy, but what bothers me after reading the letter he sent out is that his constitutional rights have been violated by the court, state police, etc. Everybody connected with his incarceration at Holy Spirit should be investigated by the Justice Department, starting with judge Shughart. Shughart seems to be the instigator of his ordeal and if he as overstepped his authority he should be publicly castigated and removed from office. I can't approve of some of Mr. Bear's actins, but can understand his frustrations, One wonders if Catholics, Protestants, Methodists would tolerate their priests, ministers or clergy dictating to them that they no longer had the companionship of his or her mate because of their criticism of the church's actions. To Mr, Bear one hopes that your day in court will bring you peace this time and I wish you well. C, Wyant Carlisle The Carlisle Sentinel never reported one Cumberland County citizen being so naive as to say to any Cumberland County Court Judge, "Say it isn't so, Judge, first the Cumberland County Court judged it "fully warranted -love and concern" for Reformed Mennonites to demand their price of "repent" for "the natural use of the woman" (Romans 1 :27) of Bear's Mennonite shunning wife. Say it isn't so, Judge, to stop Bear's protests against the utter injustice of Cumberland County Court Judges, you had Bear lied into a mental hospital and have committed your additional cover up crime ever since. " : ~ ~ # , ~ r. S"UO~ ..........~ --. COMMCNWEALTI:f Of' PENNSYLVANIA NINTH JUOICIAL DISTRICT c...'U"ISL.E, PI.. .70.=- June 27, 1977 C7I7J a4e-ta.a:a "0: , - Mr. Robert L. Bear R.D. 9, Box 325 Carlisle, PA 17013 Dear Mr. Bear: . .~9 ....... The statements in your report of .June 2.1, 1977. regarding the involvement of ffl'1 children in drugs and the necessity for me to "easell them through, court because of being caught with "drugs is a complete and absolute untruth. You asked that I make a denial and 1 have done so. Further, I' would appreciate receiving from you the names and identifi- cation of those whom you say gave you this information. Both of my children are professional people and such statements are either libelous or slanderous and I am en- titled to an explanation so that I may in turn give it to th~.. . A prompt response giving me'the names of the individuals who furnishea you with t~ information will be<appreciated. Yo " DFS:bd In my open letter of June 21, 1977, I stated due to this cult and court destroyed marriage and family, I didn't want any of our six children caught using drugs as Judge Shughart's son was caught and how he was eased through court. I answered Judge Shughart's letter publicly by declaring it was public knowledge his son was caught using drugs and I would not name those who told me. Without looking I found a mole in the Cumberland County Courthouse who later declared Judge Shughart's letter was why he and District Attorney Edgar B. Bayley had the State Police at Carlisle lie me into the mental hospital six months later. Will Judge Edgar B. Bayley's "unjust and criminal passions" not only prevent him from signing my Bifurcation Order, but also prevent him from emulating Judge Dale F. Shughart while Bayley was under his evil influence and/or his understudy? WiD Judge Bayley's "unjust and criminal passions" cause him to also publicly . lie like Judge Shughart and also send me a letter also stating, what I herein state of Judge Bayley and Court company "is a complete and absolute untruth" and is "libelous?" ( Lawyer David A. Ody was a young and idealistic lawyer in 1978 when he wrote his report. Now he is a . prosperous lawyer with his name part of his law firm in Huntington, P A. When I subpoenaed Lawyer David A. Ody some years ago to back up his investigation before the Cumberland County Court, he asked the Court to quash his subpoena. Wouldn't it be interesting if Judge Bayley would write a letter to Lawyer Ody and to me, parroting Judge Shughart; Lawyer David A. Ody's investigation of how I was lied into the mental hospital "is a complete and absolute untruth?" Would Lawyer David A. Ody then have too much to lose and he would take his character assassination without a munnur of complaint because he is now only a shadow of the moral man he was when ''young and foolish" enough to "teU the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" in his 1978 investigation? Has "the world's slow stain," stained Lawyer David A. Ody so horribly that he would rather die than cause to be "proclaimed upon the housetops" (81. Luke 12:3) the truth he had courage to state when young? I hope not. "Judge Oler, you are part of the criminal conspiracy of covering up how I was lied into the mental hospital. - I say that the Cumberland County Court has - is guilty - of the crime of lying me into the mental hospital, attempting to have me declared criminally insane. One of the lies was that I held up a school bus with a loaded gun." This I stated in the witness chair June 6, 2000. The court transcript was certified by Judge Oler. On page 3 of his April 1, 2003 Opinion, Judge J. Wesley Oler stated: "The document proceeds to discuss the purported injustice of a mental health commitment proceeding in 1977, a prosecution in which Defendant was apparently accused of holding up a school bus with a loaded gun, and a Mennonite shunning experience to which he was subjected and which apparently occurred in 1972." Didn't Judge J. Wesley Oler, Jr., reveal "a mortal hatred against that truth which blames him and convinces him of his faultS' and of his Court's crimes and lies, with his encapsulated sleeping pill, intended to put all asleep to his and his Court's crimes and lies none have the courage to face? 1. The Cumberland County Court and State Police at Carlisle committed their crime of lying me into Holy Spirit Community Mental Health Center on December 5,1977 and bave committed their cover up crime ever since. 2. It is not the appearance of an "injustice." It was an "injustice" committed by Cumberland County Court Judges who boast to be so above committing crimes and lies, making tbem worthy to sit in judgment of fellow criminals and liars. 3. "Not only in this world, but also in that which is to come" can anyone lie Cumberland County Court Judges out oftbe crimes and lies ofwbicb they are guilty and all seem to know it because during more than 28 years, none have had tbe courage to even try. 4. Half a fact is a whole falsehood. He who gives the truth a false coloring by his false manner of telling it, is the worst of liars. (E. L, MaGoon) Judge Oler gave "the troth a false coloring by his false manner of telling it," would have all believe the criminals who lied me into the mental hospital and the criminals who are guilty of covering up their crimes or crime are unknown. The troth is, President Judge Edgar B. Bayley and others are known to have committed their crime of having me lied into the mental hospital and all make themselves known for their cover up crime when they cover up their court's crimes and lies publicly as has Judge Oler. 5. Then we come to the otber balf of Judge Oler's public Opinion in which he tells "a half truth (and) gives the truth (another) false coloring by his false manner of telling it." "A Mennonite shunning experience to which he was subjected and which apparently occurred in 1972." 6. It is well documented before the Cumberland County Court that my "severe punishment" at the hands of Gale Gross Bear and Reformed Mennonites began June 11, 1972 and Reformed Mennonites intend my "severe punishment" will continue until I mercifully die or can't stand their "severe punishment" and am forced to "repent." Deposition of Reformed Mennonite Bishop Earl M. Basinger, October 20, 1975, Page 23 Question: The promise between the husband and wife is broken when one is excommunicated? ... I Bishop Basinger: They break it. They break it. The church doesn't break it. It can never be the same as it was before. It's a severe punishment, I agree. It's a severe punishment. It's the commandment of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. "Do you know what I suggest? If you would take that (tape recorder) home and bury it on your farm, and if you would repent, you would have your wife back." (Reformed Mennonite Bishop Earl M. Basinger propositioning me on behalf of Menno Simons (1496- 1561) and all Reformed Mennonites, April 15, 1973.) This also is part of the Reformed Mennonite stated "severe punishment." "All human ties, including those of marriage and the family, must give way under the ban of the church. Crush before God, terrify, humble, pulverize with the lash of the ban until they return to the right way, in other words the Mennonite way, or until they become as ravening, biting dogs or unclean, filthy swine, a dung hill of a man." Then to stop my protests after the Cumberland County Court judged on June 23, 1976, Mennonite marriage and family murdering madness "severe punishment" is "fully warranted - love and concern," the Cumberland County Court and State Police at Carlisle committed their crime of lying me into the mental hospital. Then Judge Oler publicly revealed why he tells half truths to give "the truth a false coloring" and stated on page 4 and essentially again on page 8 of his April I, 2003 Opinion, what motivated him to cover up the Cumberland County Court's crimes and lies. "On a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case, the evidence is to be viewed in 'the light most favorable to the Commonwealth' and 'all reasonable inferences in the Commonwealth's favor' are to be entertained." I realized there were some men, perhaps most men, who know no greater horror than the truth. (Martin Gray) 7. Who needs to be smart as Satan or even as smart as Judge Oler to know; "the light most favorable to the Commonwealth" and "all inferences in the Commonwealth's favor" dictate Cumberland County Judges must never confess this truth: It was not "fully warranted -love and concern," as Cumberland County Court Judges have judged ever since June 23, 1976, for Menno Simons and Reformed Mennonites to demand, "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 5:4) their price of "repent" before they would'Give me my wife - that I may go in unto her." No, no more than it would be "fully warranted - love and concern" had Menno Simons and Reformed Mennonites demanded money in the name of Christ and prostitution before "I may go in unto her." Historian Stanley Loomis wrote in his book The Fatal Friendship: "In many royal courts of an earlier century it had been the courtiers' privilege not merely to escort the bridal pair to the nuptial couch, but to remain in the room and witness the consummation of their union. Indeed, among the Gonzagas ofMantua it is recorded that at one such 'scene' a priest was called upon to insert his hand between the couple to verify full intromission, Such robust customs were no longer in vogue at the court of France at the time of Marie Antoinette's marriage, but their purpose, apart from entertaining the spectators, was practical. It was in this manner that the legitimacy of the future heir was symbolically verified. " "I almost literally looked down into my open grave. Friendships, position, fortune, everything that makes life desirable to an ambitious man were about to be swept away by the breath of my mouth, perhaps forever." That is what Senator John F. Kennedy stated in his book Profiles in Courage, how freshman Senator Edmund G. Ross of Kansas expressed how it felt to cast the deciding vote against the removal of President Andrew Johnson in 1868. I almost literally looked down upon Reformed Mennonite shunning wife Gale Gross Bear's naked body and saw, with my mind's eye, Menno Simons' forbidding hands, plus the hands of aU Reformed Mennonites, beginning June II, 1972. There they aU were, all their filthy forbidding hands between our naked bodies forbidding any "intromission." Reformed Mennonite "evil men and seducers" (2 '"1 ~ t Timothy 3: 13) seduced Gale Gross Bear to believe if she was woman enough to push all their forbidding f"dthy hands aside and allow me to remain at her side; she would be sure to hear what Reformed Mennonites are certain I will hear; "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." (St. Matthew 25:41) 8. "Comfort the feebleminded" (1 Thessalonians 5: 14) who can't know. It was no more "fully warranted - love and concern" for every Reformed Mennonite filthy forbidding hand being between Gale Gross Bear and me until her "lasciviousness" drove her to adultery tban it was "fully warranted - love and concern" for that priest of Mantua having his hand between that copulating couple verifying "full intromission." 9. "Comfort the feebleminded" who can't know. Had Reformed Mennonites confessed in Court my "severe punisbment" until I would "repent" was always having Mennonite rllthy hands between our naked bodies to verify full "intromission," even when our "lasciviousness" caused us to "come together again" (1 Corinthians 7:5) under those utterly inhuman conditions; the Judges of the Cumberland County Court would never bave dared judge tbat "fully warranted -love and concern." 10. I am certain Reformed Mennonite "evil men and seducers" (2 Timothy 3: 13) could never have seduced Gale Gross Bear to believe she must allow their filthy hands between our naked bodies, falsely verifying "full intromission," yet sbe was seduced by cult and Court to believe every Reformed Mennonite forbidding hand between us forbidding coitus was "fully warranted - love and concern." With six young children, our youngest daughter was not quite 2 ~ years on June 11, 1972 and we had 115 acres of potatoes, 150 acres of com for grain and about 20 acres of cabbage and other vegetables planted in our fields, Gale Gross Bear believed she is guilty of "No Fault" for forcing the following upon our marriage and family. "All human ties, including those of marriage and the family, must give way under the ban of the church. Crush before God, terrify, humble, pulverize with the lash of the ban until they return to the right way, in other words the Mennonite way, or until they become as ravening, biting dogs or unclean, fdthy swine, a dung hill of a man." At the Carlisle State Police substation on I><<ember 29,1997, before State Policeman Kirk Perkins, Probation Officer David L. Myers, myself and my permitted tape recorder; Reformed Mennonite Senior Bishop brother-in-law Glenn M. Gross adamantly refused to reduce my death sentence I quoted, no, not by even one word. 11. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. (Romans 13:3) The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania's July, 1975, Opinion proved with the following words it was "not a terror to good works," but ordered the Cumberland County Court to give me a fair trial by listing Reformed Mennonite "evils." "In our Opinion, the complaint in Counts I and ll, raises the 'shunning' practice of appellee church and the conduct of the individuals may be an excessive interference of marriage and the family relationship, alienation of affections, and tortuous interference with a business relationship which the courts of this Commonwealth may have authority to regulate, even in light of the 'establishment' and 'free exercise' clause of the First Amendment." For of all sad words of tongue or pen the saddest are these: "It might have been!" (Whittier) "It might have been!" The Judges of the Cumberland County Court had obeyed the leadership of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and declared Reformed Mennonites must stop shunning wife Gale Gross Bear's "severe punishment" of me; before the Mennonite "severe punishment" caused her to invite the husband of another woman to "Come in unto me," (Genesis 30: 16) again and again for now almost 20 years. Instead, the Judges of the Cumberland County Court had tbe "absolute power" to judge Reformed Mennonite "severe punisbment" of shunning wife Gale Gross Bear and of me is "fully warranted -love and concern" ever since June 23, 1976. Cumberland County Court Judges became "a terror to good works" of trying to not allow Reformed Mennonites to cause another "house be divided against itself." (81. Mark 3 :25) Here is proof I wasn't the only one who noticed how Cumberland County Court "rulers (are) a terror to good works." The University of Pennsylvania Law Review contains an article written by Justin K. Miller entitled, Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't Religious Shunning and the Free Exercise Clause, i published in November, 1988. Mr. Miller states in volume 137, Page 282, regarding another shunning case which also is fully applicable to mine: "The religious group could argue that its religious belief, which required shunning, would be burdened by state action. - This distinction, however, lacks substance. If the court is a state actor when it upholds the church member's tort claim, then it is a state actor when it upholds the religious group's free exercise defense." True to Justin Miller's words, the Cumberland County Court became a "state actor" ever since judging June 23, 1976 it is "fully warranted - love and concern" for the ''free exercise" of Reformed Mennonites in their" excessive interference of marriage and the family relationship, alienation of affections, and tortuous interference with a business relationship." Justin Miller stated the following on Page 285, Volume 137: "Bear v. Reformed Mennonite Church "The Reformed Mennonite Church, as one of its fundamental principles, teaches that an excommunicated member should be shunned. The shunning includes a total boycott of the individuals by their families. Bishop Daniel Musser of the Reformed Mennonite Church spoke of the practice this way:" "All company necessary to admonish, or to minister to their necessities, should be freely given; but eating social meals, or keeping social company, or having commercial intercourse, the Word of God forbids; and when it is demanded, must be denied under all circumstances.... And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. (Deut. XIll) Surely, this command disturbed the sacred family relation much more seriously than the gospel command. Besides, the espousals (sic) of Christ are above the espousals (sic) of man. The duties of wedlock must ever yield to our duties to God. To be faithful to God, is the first duty of man; and consequences can never enter into consideration." (pages 360-361) How can any judge possibly be so "feebleminded" not to know the Cumberland County Court would never have dared allow Reformed Mennonites to force the same "excessive interference of marriage and the family relationship" upon all Cumberland County husbands and fathers? Nor "alienation of affection, and tortuous interference with a business relationship" could be forced upon all as cult and court force upon one? Cumberland County Court Judges have judged ever since June 23, 1976 it is "No Fault" to do to a weak one what they know they couldn't do to all if they were "feebleminded" enough to try. The Cumberland County Court became "a state actor" when it judged it was "fully warranted - love and concern" for Reformed Mennonites to demand their price of "falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20) "repent" before they would "Give me my wife - that I may go in unto her." (Genesis 29:21) 12. "The best little whorehouse west of the Susquehanna or east of the Mississippi, serving the most prominent judges, generals, lawyers, chiefs of police, legislators, not to mention local prominent businessmen and even the not so prominent," according to local historian George Difenderfer. Only when I read that on the front page of the Carlisle Selllinel did I begin to realize the "terror" and "evil" of the Cumberland County Courthouse crowd. H all weren't leftovers in going along to Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse," they were leftovers in 1973 of going along with Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" in order to "save" themselves from social problems, political problems, power problems, and if they chose to speak out, very likely mental problems. Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. (Lord Acton) Where is there a better, if there can be such an oxymoron, example of Lord Acton's truism than the Cumberland County Court when it has no power to publicly or privately prove false the following truth? ',' Almost 20 years after Carlisle's last madam Bessie Jones was murdered in 197i), ending her family's 100 year blackmailing semi-public whorehouse dynasty reign over Cumberland County, the . Carlisle Sentinel, what a misnomer, apparently thought it finally safe to tell the truth on its front page of February 24, 1990. That is the truth the Sentinel kept secret for a hundred years. The Sentinel was founded in 1861 and it is more than I can believe tbe Sentinel didn't know that black camp follower of the Confederate Army came to stay in 1863 and was charming the pants ofT of prominent citizens before she could then blackmail Cumberland County. According to the Sentinel's belated public confession, for a hundred years all who did not uphold their sworn duty to the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by not upholding laws against prostitution had "unclean hands," even if they didn't have "unclean hands" after putting their hands on Carlisle's whores! One of madam Bessie Jones' "girls" was put on trial for her murder. Altbough many believed she couldn't be more guilty of murder, her Cumberland County Court jury set her free. It was as if it was her jury's thanks for doing what Cumberland County judges, lawyers, law enforcement, churches, the Sentinel, and citizens didn't have backbone enough to do for more than a hundred years; end Carlisle's blackmailing whorehouse reign. They shall put you out of the synagogues: Yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me. (St. John 16:2-3) Deprive him of his ambitions and desires. Then he dies a thousand deaths. (B,C, Wise Roman Scaevol) "I die daily" (1 Corinthians 15:31) ever since June 11, 1972 as a husband, a meaningful father and respected human being as Reformed Mennonite "fully warranted -love and concern" has as its stated intent, reducing me to becoming "as ravening, biting dogs or unclean, filthy swine - a dunghill of a man." The Judges of the Cumberland County Court have judged ever since June 23,1976, Mennonite marriage and family murdering madness is merely Mennonite "fully warranted - love and concern. " As Carlisle's "Best Little Whorehouse" was handed down from generation to generation so also was Menno Simons' bastard belief he "doeth God service" ONL Y if he and his die-hard devotees demanded the Mennonite price of "repent" for a Mennonite shunning wife's "piece of bread." (Proverbs 6:26) As the churches of Cum berland County believed they "doeth God service" by not speaking out and creating a shameful scandal, so also did Mennonite churches, as they do to this day, believe they "doeth God service" by not calling for and ending 450 years of other Mennonites and Amish who "went awhoring" (psalm 106:39) figuratively and literally to this day. In this manner aU Mennonites of aU time believed they "doeth God service" by perpetuating Mennonite prostitution in the name of God. Evil does not exist in isolation; it is a product of amorality by consensus. (peter 1. Malkin) Just as Carlisle's semi-public "Best Little Whorehouse" blackmailing dynasty evil didn't exist in isolation for 100 years, but was a product of amorality by consensus, so also is the Mennonite 450 year evil of shunning wife prostitution "a product of amorality by consensus." Had Judge J. Wesley Oler, Jr. stated the preceding 12 truth's in his April 1, 2000 Opinion, don't aU know it wouldn't have been in "the light most favorable to the Commonwealth" and those quite "reasonable inferences" certainly wouldn't be "in the Commonwealth's favor?" "Do you know what I suggest? If you would take that (tape recorder) home and bury it on your farm, and if you would repent, you would have your wife back." (Reformed Mennonite Bishop Earl M. Basinger propositioning me on behalf of Menno Simons (1496-1561) and all Reformed Mennonites, April 15, 1973.) Thus were they derded with their own wor~ and went awhoring with their own inventions. (psalm 106:39) Thus does the Holy Bible judge Menno Simons, all Reformed Mennonites and shunning wife Gale Gross Bear because all fulfilled an American Heritage DictioIUllY definition of whores; "to offer oneself or another for sexual hire." How weak is thine heart, saith the Lord God, seeing thou doest all these things, the work of an - imperious whorish woman. (Ezekiel 16:30) j And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as . bands: who so pleaseth God shall escape from her, but the sinner shall be taken by her. (Ecclesiastes 7:26) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3: 16-17) Even a sinner such as I am knows "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" and gives a "perfect" description of Reformed Mennonites and shunning wife Gale Gross Bear during her past more than 34 years. He that believeth not God hath made him a liar. (1 John 5: 10) Gale Gross Bear has made "the Lord God" - "a liar" in refusing to believe she "doest all these things, the work of an imperious whorish woman;" yet has "No Fault." Reformed Mennonite Bishop Glenn M. Gross' Reformed Mennonite father, Israel M. Gross, sent Bishop Gross and many others, even to me, a copy of his August 7, 1991 letter, for which Bishop Gross and all Reformed Mennonites excommunicate<<J,damned and shunned Bishop Gross' own father because he refused to "repent" for writing the following. "Dear Glenn, You do not teach the words of Jesus and the apostles and in so doing you disobey the Word, and break up homes and destroy happy marriages just as the church did with R. Bear, Adan Shank, Edward Shields, and many others, making their lives a living hell of torture. Do you not believe the Word of God? Or do you feel you are greater than God? That you need to reject His Word and do what you feel is right contrary to His Word. - How dark can we get that we think we know more than God?" "Comfort the feebleminded" (1 Thessalonians 5: 14) who can't know. All my other Reformed Mennonite married torturers could bed their spouses and be "saved" from experiencing what Israel Gross called "a living hell of torture." But not my main torturer, Gale Gross Bear. The American Heritage Dictionary definition of sadism is "1. The perversion of deriving sexual satisfaction from the infliction of pain on others. 2. Delight in cruelty. 3. Extreme cruelty." Beyond a shadow of a question of a doubt, Gale Gross Bear proved she was a sadist a few months later when she derived "sexual satisfaction" from welcoming me to fondle her naked body, quite a number of times, welcoming all but "the physical union of male and female sexual organs, leading to orgasm and the ejaculation of semen" into her. Gale Gross Bear may lie, but her oozing vagina didn't. Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. (Lord Acton) Reformed Mennonites had "absolute power" to seduce Gale Gross Bear to believe she must give me what her father called "a living hell of torture" or be "set on fire of hell." James 3:6) Gale Gross Bear was seduced to believe she must be a Mennonite sadist in order to be "saved" and mercilessly inflict me with the Mennonite "perversion of deriving sexual satisfaction from the infliction of pain on others, delight in cruelty, extreme cruelty." Ever since June 23, 1976, the Judges of the Cumberland County Court have had "absolute power" to judge what her own father judged is "a living hell of torture" is merely Mennonite "fully warranted - love and concern." "Comfort the feebleminded "wife who can't know what "cruelty" or extreme cruelty it would be if Reformed Mennonites would deny them their right to love and be loved physically by their husbands from when all wives are 33 years old, as Gale Gross Bear was June 11, 1972. Reformed Mennonite shunning wife Gale Gross Bear had to force "extreme cruelty" upon herself in order to force her sexual and other "extreme cruelty" upon me. Although I am no Samson, Reformed Mennonites hoped their Delilah would cause me to be a weak Samson, as many of their other . victims have been and they too could say of their Delilah Gale Bear, "And she made him sleep upon her 1 knees." (Judges 16: 19) The "extreme cruelty" Reformed Mennonites forced upon shunning wife Gale Gross Bear in order to force their "extreme cruelty" upon me, when they "put away" her from me beginning June 11, 1972, had the exact effect Jesus Christ prophesied. But 1 say unto you; That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: And whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. (St. Matthew 5:32) Within a month after June 11, 1972,1 couldn't take it and moved into an old empty house on one of our other farms. Then after another month or more I purchased a mobile home to live in. I remember Gale Gross Bear driving in our car to see my new mobile trailer and I kissed her through the open window while she sat in the car. That time she also put one hand on the back of my head in order to return my kiss harder. But I also remember during those months how she turned up her face to be kissed and at the last minute have me kiss her tongue, instead of her lips. Then she would gloat and chide me how she tricked me. Then on or about October 29, 1972 I came home from our other farm one evening to find her in my bed with two of our youngest daughters sleeping, one on each side of her. I told her I was going to take a bath and then I was going to sleep in that bed. To my surprise she was yet there. I made two trips carrying our two sleeping daughters to the room where they usually slept, yet Gale Bear remained in my bed. I got in bed with her and my hands started to explore her body until she said she wanted to leave my bed. 1 made no effort to restrain her in any way. From that Gale Bear told Reformed Mennonites I tried to rape her. My Reformed Mennonite brother Francis said in front of our Reformed Mennonite father, "You tried to rape Gale!" "Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh." (Job 2:10) Not only did Gale Bear, but also did my brother Francis. We were not married very long until, in a playful mood, Gale Bear said I couldn't force her. She did all she could to resist, but was pleasantly startled how quickly, "His it was." (Ezekiel 16: 15) She was never "foolish woman" enough to ever again say she couldn't be forced and she knew as surely as she knew anything, if I wanted to rape her that night she would have been raped. I told Reformed Mennonites I couldn't stand Gale Gross Bear's sexual teasing and never pleasing. 1 wasn't supposed to stand it. It was intended to "crush before God, terrify, humble, pulverize" me to "repent," then and only then, would Gale Gross Bear and Reformed Mennonites allow me to "go in unto her." (Genesis 29:21) Then on the afternoon of April 5, 1973, when our older children were in school and our younger children were sleeping, Gale Gross Bear arched her back against our couch in our living room and removed her panties from under her Mennonite "plain dress" for me to stimulate her sexually. She said, "I like that" and/or "That feels good." She also accused me with, "You would have impregnated me" when she refused sexual intercourse. That night in her bed she again welcomed all but sexual intercourse. Tiring of such a teaser and never a pleaser, I left her and went to my bed. Gale Gross Bear to my surprise then came to my bed and the rest is Cumberland County Court testimony, except she allowed me to go to sleep with my hand upon her naked body wherever I chose to place it. Cumberland County Court 1975 testimony Pages 17-18 Lawyer for Reformed Mennonites William Musser: Is there any question in your mind, Mr . Bear, that your wife in her dealings with you, was, in her mind, being completely faithful to God and her religious beliefs? Bear: As mentioned in the writings, right before the publicity came out, yes, there is a question and I'll explain. Right before the publicity came out I came home from Delaware for a night and I went to bed and she came and got in bed with me and I thought in good faith, she said to me "I'll get in bed . with you if you don't tell." And I said I won't. I thought our marriage was no one's business, and I -~ thought we were going to resume our marriage, and she also said that you don't bother me tonight. ,. Almost a year I had a wife like that and I promised that I wouldn't. Morning came and she said, ... well, and I started to bother her and she said you promised, and I said it's morning, and she allowed it. (But not coitus) And then before I was going home to Delaware she talked of maybe resuming our marriage and I said, well, then what you have done for almost a year is wrong. She said no, that isn't wrong, and then I said what you are doing, what you did is wrong. No, that wasn't wrong. I said then what you're thinking of doing must be wrong. She said no that wasn't wrong either. Then... The Court interrupting: Wait a minute, when are you going to answer the question? Bear: Pardon me? The Court: Have you answered the question? Bear: Yes, I said that I didn't believe she was sincere, and then, pardon me, your Honor, I explained. The Court: All right. Anything else, Mr. Musser? Mr. Musser: That's all. That's not all! Either shunning wife Gale Gross Bear and/or her Reformed Mennonite Bishop handlers tinally realized what was between Gale Gross Bear's legs wasn't going to lord over what is between my ears! Never again did Gale Gross Bear and I even kiss. Soon after my excommunication shunning wife Gale Gross Bear boldly gloated, "What can you do? I have the whole church behind me." For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. (1 Samuel 15:23) During the high water mark of Gale Bear's rebellion against all that is holy in Christ's marriage and family commands and her Gross stubbornness in continuing, she did have the whole Reformed Mennonite cult and Cumberland County Court behind her teasing me with her naked behind and judging it "fully warranted -love and concern." No longer can Reformed Mennonite Senior Bishop Glenn M. Gross and all Reformed Mennonites be behind Gale Gross Bear welcoming Bad Bard to her naked behind and say she has "No Fault," although Reformed Mennonites yet boast they have "No Fault" in what they have driven her to do. A friend traveling in Thailand at the time sent me the following Wodd News headline and its accompanying news story. A man who delivered a load of fertilizer to the farm years later said he never thought while serving as a soldier in South Korea he would meet the husband he read about being accused of !~pe by his MelUlonite shunning wife. i~m)O lyti1~ 111'116 '1 a iU11flU rut. .&.. BANGKOK POST W~U't:SU:\ l Ut;Ct::\t8fo~H S, 1811 I WORLD NEWS BANGKOK. THIALAND Cumberland County, PA 1979 Criminal Court Testimony, Page 32 Bear: Did you never sexually tease after I was excommunicated? Gale Gross Bear: No Robert, I did not. (Page 34) - Judge Harold E. Sheely: Did he ever rape you? Gale Gross Bear: In my mind, I would say yes, I don't know what the definition under the circumstances would be. As I see it, I would say yes. (Page 36) - Judge Harold E. Sheely: You are talking now of sexual intercourse? Gale Gross Bear: Yes. . Page 38) - Bear: Then you mean it occurred sometime between June the 11th of 1972 and 1974 when you left home, is that right? Gale Gross Bear: That's correct. Bear: And you don't ~ know when? Gale Gross Bear: I can't remember. Bear: But it happened? Gale Gross Bear: Yes. .Bear: Well, were you clothed or were you naked? Gale Gross Bear: I really can't remember those details. Bear: Did it happen in the times that I was in your bed or when you were in my bed? District Attorney Michael Eakin objected and Judge Sheely upheld his objection although Judge Sheely earlier had stated: "You will have to tell us what you meant by it." Reformed Mennonite Gale Bear, at the time, inadvertently forced Judge Harold E. Sheely and District Attorney J. Michael Eakin to either allow me to expose and exploit her court perjury crimes or be accomplices to her crimes by attempting to hide them from my jurors, which they failed to do. Gale Bear also forced aD Reformed Mennonites to bless her crimes or excommunicate her for her obvious perjury crimes and expose Reformed Mennonites publicly as being less than the "pure church" they boast to be. When I went to court on the morning of December 2, 1979, I faced a maximum of ten years in the penitentiary, plus $22,500 in fmes. Even so, was I not "cut off' by then District Attorney J. Michael Eakin, now Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Justice Eakin? Didn't Judge Harold E. Sheely also "cut off' me, but not before my jurors realized Gale Gross Bear was lying through her Mennonite "plain dress" and white "prayer covering" "sheep's clothing?" (S1. Matthew 7: 15) All Cumberland County Court judges can't be that "feebleminded" (1 Thessalonians 5:14) they don't know my Mennonite mesmerized shunning wife attempted to lie me into the penitentiary by testifying in court that I forced "rape, sexual intercourse" upon her. Nor can the Cumberland County Court be too "feebleminded" to know Judge Harold E. Sheely and District Attorney J. Michael Eakin knowingly helped Gale Bear get away with her Gross perjury crimes right before their eyes. The greatest incitement to guilt is the hope of sinning with impunity. (Cicero) Had Judge Harold E. Sheely and District Attorney J. Michael Eakin not made it possible for Gale Gross Bear to commit her crimes of perjury right before their eyes and ears, her lying could have been stopped back in 1979. Gale Gross Bear lied herself into a corner and there was no way she could have lied herself out, but the Cumberland County "No Fault" Court "saved" her to lie again and again in court. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shaD speak, they shaD give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (S1. Matthew 12:36-37) According to Jesus Christ, "No Fault" Gale Gross Bear, "No Fault" Reformed Mennonites and "No Fault" Cumberland County Court Judges "shall give account thereof in the day of judgment" for Gale Gross Bear's "No Fault Divorce." As quickly as laws deteriorate, the Cumberland County Court Oath of Arbitrators may no longer end with: "And so will we answer to God at the last great day." But if any yet believe Christ enough, they will know the late Judge Clinton R. Weidner "shall give account thereof in the day of judgment" and speak on behalf of "No Fault" Gale Gross Bear, "No Fault" Reformed Mennonites and the "No Fault" Judges of the Cumberland County Court; "Bear's problems were his own fault - because my God, he brought this all on himself." / . "4l . - 'Associated Press, April 26, 1976: "But on Monday, Weidner said Bear's problems were his own fault. "Weidner said it will be several weeks before he makes a ruling. He said he was surprised that the case had been returned to him by the State Supreme Court. "Well, the church's case is even stronger, now, and maybe that's why they wanted it sent back, the judge said. "He said he felt 'the higher court thought ~ear's lawsuit should be thrown out, because my God, he brought this all on himself,' Weidner replied. , .-. .... "The judg~--made' th~~-c~minent~--d~~i;';g an inter- view following Monday's court session, but had made similar remarks in open court." RCBffiT L. BSAR . . Il-; THE COURT OF COE:r.ON ?LE:~..s O!-" CUl'iBERIAND COUNTY, PE~NSYLVA~I.~ NO. ' . -. .,.- / -;"~ " _'- " . , ..... . ......... ~ tI .." "_*' vs. . . . . THE R~~C~~S~ ME~NONITS CHURCH GLENN io1. GROSS ,and J. HE~"'RY FISHE.=t, individual.ly .. . . . . . . . . . REQUEST 1~T ~uDGE DISQ0hLIFY HI~l15~F I respectfully request tha"t Your Honor disqualify yourself fro;} any further proceeding,s in this case, includi:lg a f1.ngl decision because o~ prejudice evidenced by you~ interview and statements to the press, including the Associated Press, prior to your decision. as shown by the attached copies of news . articles; this being in violation of Canons of Judicial Conduct, co~y of which is also attached. ,. Respectfully submitted, ; " :.~. ~J F r ~ ~ :: r, ~ ~.!: ~ ~.\ . ~-~: CI ~: '.~ r f ~ Y .-. .'":~ .."; i ' ! . 0 :;.:. ;:~ .::.,:i ; '( ,'"'-'. '. ~:..\ '. .,..: 1..._". ,.;~:!~ i j U J~, ~U '/l: Robert L. Bear " ~~ . ~M..6<tJ. ~~ ~~~/.''i?c, {J~R~J:r He that believeth not God hath made him a liar. (1 John 5: 10) Not wanting to make Jesus Christ "a liar," I believe "No Fault" Gale Gross Bear, "No ,"1l Fault" Reformed Mennonites and "No Fault" Cumberland County Court Judges "shall give . account thereof (against me) in the day of judgment." If I can't escape all who intend to blood hound hunt me to death with, "Bear's problems were his own fault - because my God, he brought this all on himself," but know all must confess the same and "condemn" me also likewise "in the day of judgment," then I believe it only right of all who have "No Fault" to grant the few token requests in my Bifurcation Order. A Tribute to Shunning Wife Gale Gross Bear Never in the 450 year history of Mennonitism has any Mennonite shunning wife made it possible to uncover Mennonite marriage and family murdering madness as has Gale Gross Bear,aUhoughinadvertently. Gale Gross Bear has also, by asking for a "No Fault Divorce" made possible to "tell the truth, the whole truth ,and nothing but the truth" here, without the Court having an opportunity to say of the truth it can't stand to face, nor face down, "I am not interested in your diatribes, Mr. Bear." That is how Judge J. Wesley Oler, Jr. ducked out June 12, 2006, in open court. A lying tongue hateth those that are amicted by it; and a Oattering mouth worketh ruin. (Proverbs 26:28) Before the "lying tongue" of Reformed Mennonites "afflicted" her, and their "Oattering mouth worketh (her) ruin," I never once knew Gale Gross Bear to lie. Marriage requires an adjustment of not only two personalities, but the experiences of two ditTerent childhoods, as ours surely were! During the tirst year of our marriage Gale Gross Bear was determined to have her way in something I believed was wrong. She wouldn't talk, kiss or be bedded for a whole week, as if she never read this gospel command: Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: Neither give place to the devil. (Ephesians 4:26-27) Then at the end of the week she quite visibly changed and in bed she rejoiced by telling me, "I always wanted a husband who could put me in my place." There is no disparity in marriage like unsuitability of mind and purpose. (Dickens) I didn't put Gale Gross Bear in her place, her desire to be loved put her in her place. I always wanted a ,wife who tried to know her place, as I believed I should try to know my place and stay in it. Even so, Gale Gross Bear volunteered not long before this trouble reared up its ugly as sin head, our life together on the farm with our children was "idyllic." I believe, had I been able to overlook very evident dishonesty among Reformed Mennonites, we would yet probably have remained together and these serious weaknesses would have been hidden from others and likely hidden from ourselves. Unfortunately, Gale Gross Bear has morally regressed because for years, she knew, as surely as she knew anything, her "place" was certainly not with the husband of another woman and hiding their adultery until they were exposed. Undoubtedly, her desire to love and be loved caused her to evilly weaken to Lawrence N. Bard just as her desire to be loved and to love strengthened her to behave herself that time during the first year of our marriage. Gale Gross Bear doesn't now have a man who can put her in her place, just the opposite. She has Lawrence N. Bard living at her place and anytime he doesn't please her she can send him packing. In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. (2 Timothy 2:25-26) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined . together, let not man put asunder. (St. Matthew 19:6) ~ Reformed Mennonites were "taken captive by (Menno Simons (1496-1561) at his will" to believe they would hear, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels" (St. Matthew 25:41) unless they would try to seduce Reformed Mennonite wife Gale Gross Bear to shun me. Gale Gross Bear was "taken captive by (Reformed Mennonites) at (their) will" to believe she must "crush before God, terrify, humble, pulverize" me with all the Mennonite mesmerized might of her mind, soul and naked, teasing body, in order to force me to "repent," beginning June 11, 1972, or she would be "set on fire of hell." (James 3:6) Ever since June 23, 1976, Gale Gross Bear has also been "taken captive by (tbe Judges of the Cumberland County Court) at (their) will" to believe what she has done is merely Mennonite "fully warranted -love and concern." Bebold, ye have sinned against the Lord: and be sure your sin will find you out. (Numbers 32:26) Gale Gross Bear was "taken captive by (Lawrence N. Bard) at his will" to believe if they "sinned against the Lord" by committing adultery for many years, God lies and their "sin will (not) find (them) out." Via Judge J. Wesley Oler, Jr., the Cumberland County Court has done all it could to prove God lies and Gale Gross Bear's and Lawrence N. Bard's adultery will not find them out in court. Lawrence N. Bard recently presented to the Cumberland County Court his new address, 1166 Rhoda Blvd., Mechanicsburg, PA; the same address as Gale Gross Bear, proving they are now embedded together. Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? Nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush. (Jeremiah 6:15) Gale Gross Bear stated on March 10, 2005, under the penalties of committing a crime, when she stated the following to the Cumberland County Court: 7. Admitted in part. Denied in part. a. Denied. It is denied that Defendant committed adultery. b. Denied. It is denied that Defendant offered any indignities whatsoever to Plaintiff, or acted in any way to cause Plaintiff's condition to be intolerable or life burdensome. Most husbands and wives would consider it an indignity every time their spouse committed adultery against them after their spouse's lover had confessed adultery for "almost 19 years." Most spouses guilty of adultery would have enough sense not to have their longtime lover embedded with them unless they realized their lie was common knowledge that they did commit adultery by lying with their lover. Not waiting until I had time to recover from the blow to my self esteem after realizing Gale Bear had so much Gross gall, after committing adultery for almost 20 years, she demands a "No Fault Divorce," she, via Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie sent me the following: --- . ROBERT L. BEAR, o g ~ ~i ~ ~:D ro n' i ..... ~ r-:: -? --I' '" '" rn ~,'. S.. N :09 ~ s 0 06 r<c, ~=H 2::c' ~ 90 ..:- ,-. :2 rn >r' N ~ Z .. ~ AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Gale G. Bear, by and through her attorney of record,~radrfB L..< Griffie, Esquire, and moves the Court to appoint a Master with respect to the following claims: (X) Divorce ( ) Distribution of Property ( ) Annulmlent ( ) Support ( ) Alimony ( ) Counsel Fees ( ) Costs and Expenses ( ) Alimony Pendente Lite Defendant NO. CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE , MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF MASTER --- and in support of her ~otion states: 1. Discovery is complete as to the claims for which the appointment of a Master is requested. 2. The Defendant has appeared in this action pro see 3, The Statutory grounds for divorce are 23 Pa,C.S.A. ~3301(c).or 93301(d). 4. This action is not contested. 5. The action does not involve complex issues of law or fact. 6. The hearing is expected to take one hour. 7. Additional information, if any, relevant to the motion: None. ..... . Gr' ie, Esquire ttorney for: lainti/f GRIFFIE & ASSOCIATES 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717) 243-5551 (800) 347-5552 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? (St. Matthew 9:4) Gale Gross Bear and Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie present themselves before the Cumberland County Court as if they, like Christ, know my thoughts. Before I responded, Gale Gross Bear and Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie pretend to the Cumberland County Court that I agree to their statements when I agr~ their Motion of Appointment of Master, only reveals "the evil in (their) hearts." Gale Gross Bear and Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie are so "vain in their imaginations" (Romans 1 :21) they imagine, even if President Judge Edgar B. Bayley has "absolute power" to appoint Lawyer E. Robert Elicker, ll, as Divorce Master that I will appear for another divorce hearing after all three proved the "evil in (their hearts." , I Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA GALE G. BEAR v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant NO CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE ROBERT 1. BEAR, NOTICE If you wish to deny any of the statements set forth in the attached affidavit, you must file a counter-affidavit within twenty days after this Affidavit has been served on you or the statements will be admitted. AFFIDAVIT UNDER &3301(d) OF THE DIVORCE CODE 1. The parties to this action have been separated since June 11, 1972 and have continued to live separate and apart since that time. 2. The marriage is irretrievable broken. 3, I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division of property, lawyer's fees or expenses if I do not claim them before a divorce is granted. I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa,C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: j I" J D , )rdi J v.3.Ufl r GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff J *t oj 1 ~ GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW : O~- . : NO ~~ qy CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE v. ROBERT L. BEAR, NOTICE TO DEFEND AND CLAIM RIGHTS You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in . the following pages, you must take prompt action, You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case will proceed without you and a decree of divorce or annulment may be entered against you for any claim or relief requested in these papers by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you, including custody or visitation of your children. When the ground for the divorce is indignities or irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, you may request marriage counseling. A list of marriage counselors is available in the Office of the Prothonotary at Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Cumberland County, P~sylvania, 17013. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LA WYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAYBE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Phone: (717) 249-3166 or (800) 990-9108 lfWE COpy FROM RECORD In T-.Wher8oI, I here unwllt ~ ft and, ..~ -:~ at QlIIIe~, t.. ~ -~ ~~ Pmthnnnh,.. . ~ ~ :. ,. GALE G. BEAR Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LA W ROBERT 1. BEAR, Defendant NO CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT UNDER &3301(d) OF THE DIVORCE CODE ~ 1 . Check either (a) or (b): ,/ (a) I do not oppose the entry of a divorce decree. X (b) I oppose the entry of a divorce decree because (Check either (i), (i1), or both) (i) The parties to the action have not lived separate an apart for a period of at least two (2) years. X (ii) The marriage is not irretrievably broken. 2, Check either (a) or (b): _ (a) I do not wish to make any claims for economic relief. I understand that I may lose rights concerning alimony, division of property, la\\ryer's fees, or expenses if I do not claim them before a divorce is granted. I wish to claim economic relief which may include alimony, division of property, lawyer's fees or expenses or other important rights. -X (b) I understand that in addition to checking (b) above, I must also file all of my economic claims with the Prothonotary in writing and serve them on the other party. If I fail to do so before the date set forth on the Notice of Intention to Request Divorce Decree, the divorce decree may be entered without further notice to me, and I shall be unable thereafter to file any economic claims. I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities, DATE:..Af1! ~~I .t.~ -/ ~~~ ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant ~. . . .. ,.. , ! SEP 2 1 2006 i -/))1- "'----mJ GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : NO.(kr5;;''ff CIVIL TERM : IN DIVORCE ROBERT L. BEAR, ORDER APPOINTING MASTER AND NOW thi'\J5.Jtday of Sf ~~ , 2006, E. Robert Elicker. II. Esquire, is appointed Master with respect to the following claims: Divorce. BY THE COURT, 151 t-~ ~M ~ f3 LlJ /0/ " J. cc: Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff Robert L. Bear, Plaintiff, pro se T"'-'E c..oPY FROM RECORD '... 11 ,U.Jf "1UlJ~,' here ._.,... ~ 1M .., of, ." Coo ~,,",-~. Ill" _, '.-, . Pl." 6L~it. ~. .. ...~ ~} t:':. ; '~l~ft. .;.~... ,\..., "...:..",," ,...., (':':? c.~ 0-'"' o ..,., ~~ ~gy (~~ (') :;-1 :! ~ ~.~~~ .::::, "1>' ~ C) C? --I , .:;:- ~...~ -"". \f? en U1 ~ The last time, Divorce Master Lawyer E. Robert Elicker ll, wasn't the Divorce Master, he was the , servant of Gale Gross Bear and Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie, helping to hide her presence so she could hear the "proceedings in the next room. The only way I ever knew is, Gale Gross Bear told our one daughter of that "evil . in your hearts," causing our daughter to cry to me the family calamity socially and business wise if their mother's adultery would be made public. Furthermore, there was no court reporter there to record the discussion. The result was, Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie agreed to not demand I pay his $250 hourly fee for representing Gale Gross Bear if I wouldn't make her adultery public. I agreed. But Divorce Master, Lawyer E. Robert Elicker ll, wasn't masterful enough to demand Lawyer Griffie remain true to our verbal agreement when Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie again put his demand I pay him for helping Gale Gross Bear lie before the Court, back on the bargaining table again. "If a man's word is no good, he's no good." That had been a very familiar saying among fanners of just a few generations ago. "He takes me once, shame on him; he takes me twice, shame on me." Divorce Master E. Robert Elicker II took me once, shame on him. If he takes me twice, shame on me! I would prefer for the Cumberland County Court to put me in prison again, than put me in with Lawyer Bradley L. Griffie and Divorce Master, Lawyer E. Robert Elicker ll, again, when only God knows what the "evil in (their) hearts" will think to jointly do to me the next time, if I am stupid enough to appear. VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: _~ 3, -;Z~O G / ~-;(. ~ Robert L . Bear GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff O. OCl" 0 5 200V" : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA First Class Mail Robert L. Bear 201 Potato Road To: . Carlisle,PA 17015 J v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant NO 06-5294 CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE Request For Admissions Defendant's request for admission addressed to the Plaintiff under P AR.C.P. 4014 To: Gale Gross Bear You are hereby requested to admit for the purposes ofthis action only, pursuant to PA R.C.P 4014 (b) within thirty days after service of this request upon you. 1. We both were born into Reformed Mennonite families and indoctrinated from the time we could understand that the Reformed Mennonite Church was the one and only "true church of Christ" and if we didn't want to be "set on fire of hell" (James 3:6) for forever, we must likewise believe and become Reformed Mennonites. We did. We married because Reformed Mennonites may only marry another Reformed Mennonite. Supposedly we married until death would part us, although from only about 500 Reformed Mennonites scattered throughout the United States and Canada, with very few young and unmarried, our choices of a spouse for life were extremely limited 2. Your Reformed Mennonite father earlier, I believe, had accused your mother of adultery with their next door neighbor in Camp Hill, P A, I believe a Mr. Christopher. Your Reformed Mennonite minister brother Glenn M. Gross didn't believe your father, but believed he was mentally ill and had him committed to the State Hospital at Harrisburg. After remaining at the State Hospital for sometime and after recanting his belief your mother committed adultery, he was allowed to come home and supposedly resume intimate married life with your mother. 3. After some years, your father again accused your mother of adultery with her next door neighbor. You Gross Reformed Mennonite children met to decide what to do with your father. I waited up late that night until you came home. You volunteered to me, you Gross Reformed Mennonite children present at that meeting agreed in believing your father was mentally responsible. Since Glenn was our minister you Gross children gave him the responsibility to reconcile your father and mother. 4. All Reformed Mennonite members are forbidden to partake of communion if any believes his Reformed Mennonite wife is guilty of adultery and she wouldn't allow him to "come in unto her." (Genesis 29:21) 5. We were expected to trust our Reformed Mennonite bishops and ministers, just as we were expected to trust God. 6. At our 1971 spring communion at the Middlesex Church where we were married, I saw Minister Glenn M. Gross give communion to your father and I trusted he was reconciled with your mother and she with him. Then just several days later you received a letter from your father requesting that you instruct your mother what her duty as a wife was, because before that communion for quite sometime, during that communion and until that letter was written she wouldn't allow him to "come in unto her." (Genesis 29:21) When you looked into the matter you discovered your mother wouldn't allow your father to "come in unto her" because he yet accused her of adultery. 7. If the world goes against truth, then Athanasius goes against the world. (Athanasius) Always before communion Reformed Mennonite bishops and ministers declare that as far as man can " determine, all Reformed Me~nonite,s who partake of communion "are in harmony with God and with one . another." Reformed Mennonites hold a special service before communion in order to examine every ~ member and that is often said to be "examination meeting." Reformed Mennonite Minister Glenn M. Gross went against the trust you Gross children entrusted to him and I brought that to the attention of Glenn and others. All Reformed Mennonites rallied around Glenn, including you, and against me. Only in his 1975 deposition did Reformed Mennonite Minister Willis Weaver, who also was excommunicated, admit the truth. By 1975, Glenn M. Gross was elevated to Bishop and Willis Weaver stated Glenn was at fault and I had a right to object. Willis Weaver said things wouldn't have come as far as they had even in 1975, had Glenn M. Gross confessed his guilt of knowingly lying before the church. The Reformed Mennonite world was the only world we knew and the Reformed Mennonite world went "against truth." You knew that fully as well as I did, but in going with the Reformed Mennonite world, you not only knowingly went "against truth," but also against me. 8. At the time we had six young children with out youngest daughter being not quite 2 ~ years old on June 11, 1972 when I was excommunicated and you began to shun me mind, body and soul. I could no longer teach our six children, as my Reformed Mennonite parents taught me of the Reformed Mennonite one and only "true church of Christ," after I learned Reformed Mennonites can't face the truth. Whatever cost to you, to our six children and to myself, I couldn't believe any more what I knew to be a bald faced lie. 9. Man would fain be great and sees that he is little; would fain be happy and sees that he is miserable; would fain be perfect and sees that he is full of imperfections; would fain be the object of love and esteem of men, and sees that his faults merit only their aversion and contempt. The embarrassment wherein he finds himself produces in him the most unjust and criminal passions imaginable, for he conceives a mortal hatred against that truth which blames him and convinces him of his faults. (Pascal) True to Pascal's words, you and your fellow Reformed Mennonites' lying faults know they "merit only aversion and contempt. The embarrassment wherein (you find yourself) produces in (you) the most unjust and criminal passions imaginable, for (you conceive) a mortal hatred against that truth which blames (you) and convinces (you) of (your) faults." Unfortunately, your "mortal hatred against that truth which blames (you)" has carried over to a "mortal hatred" of me. 10. Truthfulness is a corner-stone in character, and if it is not firmly laid in youth, there will ever after be a weak spot in the foundation. (J , Davis) He that spareth his rod hateth his son, but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. (Proverbs 13:24) Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying. (Proverbs 19: 18) I appreciate that from the time we knew, we knew our hardest whippings would be when we lied. I know that now is considered by many to be about as archaic as the abacus, but I am thankful it wasn't in our family while growing up. I am also thankful our Reformed Mennonite father trained us to endure hardship as very few children of Mennonites and Amish are trained to endure. A milk truck driver, son of a local farmer, said to me just a few years ago, "The way you boys worked out in all kinds of weather, it's a wonder it didn't kill you." But when we did get sick or injured, which fortunately was seldom, we knew our parents felt the best care was scarcely good enough for us. When you married you brought your $3,000 in savings to our marriage and I said you were to save that for when I couldn't provide for you in the manner in which you were accustomed. I thought any young Reformed Mennonite intended bride would come to marriage with her health problems cared for as much as possible. I soon learned differently. You very much neglected your teeth and your excuse was "it hurt" to go to the dentist. Also you kept hidden from me until we married how you had a horrible breath due to a pocket in your throat which trapped food where it decayed. Your dental bill was quite expensive and finally we found a specialist in Harrisburg who cauterized shut the pocket in your throat and ended your foul breath from that source. I don't remember you even once offering to pay any of the expenses to catch you up health wise, from your $3,000, because you negligently didn't keep up. Houses and riches are the inheritance of fathers, but a prudent wife is of the Lord. (Proverbs 19: 14) Who can find a virtuous woman? For her price is above rubies. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall, have ~o need of spoil. She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life. (Proverbs 31: 10-13) From the time we were able to understand, our Reformed Mennonite father drilled into me to not "follow the lines of least resistance." You, Dear Gale, did "follow the lines of least resistance" when you believed to follow the dishonest Reformed Mennonites would be "the lines of least resistance" compared to resisting all Reformed Mennonites and what they would do to you, to prove you would "do (me) good and not evil all the days of (your) life." You also have proven, even more importantly, you haven't been a mother whom our six children could "safely trust." For years you were the shunning pride of Reformed Mennonites when our young children shouldn't have trusted you anymore than I did. 11. A friend traveling in Thailand at the time sent me the following World News headline and its accompanying news story. A man who delivered a load of fertilizer to the farm years later said he never thought while serving as a soldier in South Korea he would meet the husband he read about being accused of rape by his Mennonite shunning wife. I,~fl!)n hH"~ )'"1.IY! Ii )1 a i\.il1fllJ Vi.R, I.c&\itl. BANGKOK POST Wl::lJ'\ J-:SIU Y fH':CE:Y1 H f:;R 5. 19711 WORLD NEWS BANGKOK. THIALAND Cumberland County, PA 1979 Criminal Court Testimony, Page 32 Bear: Did you never sexually tease after I was excommunicated: Gale Gross Bear: No, Robert, I did not. (Page 34) - Judge Harold E, Sheely: Did he ever rape you? Gale Gross Bear: In my mind, I would say yes, I don't know what the definition under the circumstances would be. As I see it, I would say yes. (Page 36) - Judge Harold E. Sheely: You are talking now of sexual intercourse? Gale Gross Bear: Yes. (Page 38) - Bear: Then you mean it occurred sometime between June the 11th of 1972 and 1974 when you left home, is that right? Gale Gross Bear: That's correct. Bear: And you don't know when? Gale Gross Bear: I can't remember. Bear: But it happened? Gale Gross Bear: Yes. Bear: Well, were you clothed or were you naked? Gale Gross Bear: I really can't remember those details. Bear: Did it happen in the times that I was in your bed or when you were in my bed? District Attorney Michael Eakin objected and Judge Sheely upheld his objection although Judge Sheely earlier had stated: "You will have to tell us what you meant by it." When I went to court on the morning of December 2, 1979, I faced a maximum of ten years in the penitentiary, plus $22,500 in fines. Even so, was I not "cut ofr' by then District Attorney J. Michael Eakin, now Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Justice Eakin? Didn't Judge Harold E. Sheely also "cut ofr' me, but not before my jurors realized Gale Gross Bear was lying through her Mennonite "plain dress" and white "prayer covering" "sheep's clothing"? (St. Matthew 7:15) Dear Gale, in the Cumberland County Court December 2, 1979 you revealed how your embarrassment of how you did nakedly sexually tease me after my excommunication; produced in you the "unjust and criminal passions" you evidenced when your crimes of perjury could have sent me to the penitentiary for years. 12. You deliberately again lied before the Cumberland County Court when you stated the following March 10, 2005. 7. Admitted in part. Denied in part. a. Denied. It is denied that Defendant committed adultery. b. Denied. It is denied that Defendant offered any indignities whatsoever to Plaintiff, or acted in any way to cause Plaintiffs condition to be intolerable or life burdensome. Most husbands and wives would consider it an indignity every time their spouse committed adultery against them after their spouse's lover had confessed adultery for "almost 19 years" on August 11, 2005. Most spouses guilty of adultery would have enough sense not to have their longtime lover embedded with them unless they realized their lie was common knowledge that they did commit adultery by lying with their lover. You have had your almost 20 year long adulterous lover, Lawrence N. Bard, father of 5, embedded with you from at least October 14,.2005 at your 1166 Rhoda Blvd., Mechanicsburg, PA residence. 13. You know, until yeu committed adultery, had you returned and confessed, because Reformed Mennonites did "defraud" you of married sex "that Satan tempt you" (1 Corinthians 7:5) to commit adultery, and you wanted me to do my best to relieve you of your increasing "lasciviousness," (Jude 1 :4) 1 would have been happy to try. But your Gross pride would have suffered terribly had you confessed to me you couldn't get along without me any better than 1 have without you. But for you "the lines of least resistance" caused you to multiply your Gross sins by destroying not only our marriage and family of 6 children, but also destroying another marriage and family of 5 children. The end result was, you forced our six children, some for 15 years or more, to help you keep your adultery secret until our one son told. 14. Your "cunning craftiness" (Ephesians 4:14) caused you to know, if you confessed your own crimes and lies you would uncover Reformed Mennonite crimes and lies and Cumberland County Court crimes and lies. Therefore, you knew you had a tacit quid pro quo arrangement with cult and court, if you would cover their derrieres; they would cover your derriere. 15. Probably more than 50 years ago, actress Elizabeth Taylor stated publicly of her irresponsible behavior, "I have a child's mind in a woman's body." Who could see Elizabeth Taylor's beautiful woman's body and her misconduct and not agree.~ Dear Gale, as sometimes happens, any of our six children who are ashamed of your long time adultery with Lawrence N. Bard, doesn't have as childish a mind as their mother who isn't so ashamed she must immediately get Lawrence N. Bard out of her house, out of her life, out of her body and forever. Who can see our six children and not know you also have a woman's body? But who can see you and Lawrence N. Bard embedded together and not know you both yet are morally childish "lovers of their own selves" (2 Timothy 3:2) more than your spouses, your children and of God? There is no question, you, all our children and 1 have been "pressed out of measure, above strength" (2 Corinthians 1 :8) by what the circumstances of life have dealt us or due to our weaknesses we have dealt to ourselves. How Did You Die? Edmund Vance Cooke Did you tackle that trouble that came your way With a resolute heart and cheerful? Or hide your face from the light of day With a craven soul and fearful? Oh, a trouble's a ton or a trouble's an ounce, Or a trouble is what you make it. And it isn't the fact that you're hurt that counts, But only how did you take it? You are beaten to earth? Well, well, what's that? Come up with a smiling face. It's nothing against you to fall down flat. But to lie there - that's disgrace. The harder you're thrown, why the higher you bounce; Be proud of your blackened eye! It isn't the fact that you're licked that counts; It's how did you fight and why? And though you be done to death, what then? If you battled the best you could; If you played your part in the world of men, Why, the Critic will call it good. Death comes with a crawl, or comes with a pounce, And whether he's slow or spry, '. It isn't the fact that you're dead that counts, But only, how did you die? I have been young, and now I am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging . bread. (Psalm 37:25) You may vainly imagine you have many years ahead in which to enjoy life with your adulterous lover, Lawrence N. Bard and not believe; "God in whose hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways, and hast thou not glorified" (Daniel 5:20) could stop your "breath" this moment, as well as mine, or anyone's. "How did you die?" A lying tongue hateth those that are afflicted by it; and a flattering mouth worketh ruin. (Proverbs 6:28) "Did you die" an example to all Bears who may roam the earth from out brief mating, reminding each how your "lying tongue" reveals how much you "hateth" me, the father of all who unfortunately may have some of my genes in them? Will you die an example to all how the "flattering mouth" of all Reformed Mennonites and the "flattering mouth" of Cumberland County Judges who judged your destroying our marriage and family is "fully warranted -love and concern," "worketh (your) ruin"? In your "fight against God," (Acts 5:39) will you die adamantly not wanting God to "peradventure give (you) repentance to the acknowledging of the truth"? Will you die gloating because I have not been nearly meek enough for God to give you "repentance"? In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. (2 Timothy 2:25, 26) And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief. (St. Matthew 13:58) "And when he looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts;" (St. Mark 3 :5) will you die because your hardness of heart and "the hardness of their hearts" and "their unbelier' of all who don't want "God to peradventure give (you) repentance to the acknowledging of the truth" cause you to die in Lawrence N. Bard's arms or he die in yours? Or you may die after "God peradventure (has given you) repentance to the acknowledging of the truth," regardless of how many whose "heart is not right in the sight of God" (Acts 8:21) because they don't want you to tell the truth of how you have been misled by their lies. The History of Cumberland and Adams Counties, Pennsylvania tells of "the meeting of the captives" after the Indians had been "thoroughly conquered" and were compelled to bring back all prisoners whom they had captured. They were brought to the public square in Carlisle. "Some had married their captors, had grown to love their bondage, and refused to leave their lords." Really not much different than you, Dear Gale, not wanting to leave the capturer of your love and affection after all these years, Lawrence N. Bard. "One German mother recognized her long lost child by singing to her the familiar hymn 'Alone, yet not alone am I, Though in this solitude so drear,' which she had sung to it in childhood. This incident happened December 31,1764." Possibly it will help you if you too are reminded of when you first decided to become a Reformed Mennonite and you asked me to come to your parent's home to instruct you in how I believed. I always thought before I chose to be a Reformed Mennonite that becoming a Mennonite just to marry one would have been comparable having a ball and chain impeding me in what I wanted to do. But after we married you confessed guilt when you confessed becoming a Reformed Mennonite was partly motivated with your hope that we could be married. In all my life I never saw a woman desirable enough to cause me to join the Mennonites in order to marry her and I didn't suspect it of you to be any less sincere when you joined. After I had a bishop's approval to visit you with the stated object, possible marriage, as Reformed Mennonites expect, you said I once came very near to touching your one breast, which I couldn't remember. You said had I deliberately put my hand on your breast before we married, you would have had nothing more to do with me. I yet believe in the same Holy Bible as I did the first time you invited me to instruct you. Dear Gale, now think how often you have welcomed Lawrence N. Bard, the husband of another woman to put his hands on your naked breasts during the past almost 20 years, the same breasts you would have discarded me as a prospective husband had I jumped the gun and put my hand on your clothed breasts. , For all you have done ever since June 11, 1972, when you were seduced to begin shunning me and destroying our settled lives,ando( our six children; Christ promises: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass .away." (St. Matthew 24:35) You, Dear Gale., may "pass away" before you obey the following words of Jesus Christ, but "heaven and earth shall pass away" and the following words of Christ will condemn you to "burn" (1 Corinthians 7:9) with all unrepentant adulteresses unless you obey them before you "pass away." Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of its place, except thou repent. (Revelation 2:5) Jesus Christ said that to the church of Ephesus, but isn't it also fully applicable to you when Christ commands you to "do the first works" and get Lawrence N. Bard out of your house and out of your mind and out of your naked body? Shortly after my excommunication June 11, 1972, you boasted: "What can you do? I have the whole church behind me." Who would have thought during those long past days when you invited me to explain "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God," (Ephesians 6: 17) that just some 15 years later you would challenge me to use "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" against you, the very last person in the world I ever wanted to do that to? ." How far may we go on in sin? How long will God forbear? Where does hope end, and where begin The confines of despair? Dr. J. Addison Alexander Dear Gale, won't any who believe the Holy Bible in that un repented adultery is a deadly sin, know you "begin the confines of despair" each day "God peradventure (doesn't give you) repentance to the acknowledging of the truth" of your adultery with Lawrence N. Bard? This is a request for admissions. Therefore I will make it easy for you, yet my dear wife Gale Gross Bear. Anything you don't categorically deny in writing in this request for admissions within 30 days will be regarded as admissions of your Gross guilt. &' ,/r & ! ) ;;~ ',:-..""" ~ - /' Robert L. Bear October 3, 2006 C) c,--=: "" C''::> = c'''' o II :i! rn::!J , 'orn ~;~6 :f: ~-T~ ::;J(') iSm --I 55 -< c:> C) -i I &"" ~ \D U1 U, ; f.-- GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : NO 06-5294 : IN DIVORCE CIVIL TERM ROBERT L. BEAR, PETITION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND SPECIAL RELIEF AND NOW COMES, Petitioner, Gale G, Bear, and petitions the Court as follows: 1. Your Petitioner is the above named Plaintiff in the divorce action filed at the above docketed number. 2. Respondent is Robert L. Bear, the above named Defendant, an adult individual currently residing at 201 Potato Road, Carlisle, PA 17013. 3. Petitioner is represented by counsel Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire in this matter. 4. As per the parties' Affidavits filed in this and prior cases, they have been separated for in excess of thirty (30) years. 5. The parties' various marital assets that existed in the 1970's have been distributed to their mutual satisfaction and without additional claim by one party against the other, which distribution occurred many years ago. 6. No marital assets exist at this time for which there could be distribution. 7. Petitioner has initiated a No Fault Divorce action pursuant to Section 3301(c) of the divorce code, or in the alternative pursuant to 3301(d), in that the parties have been separated for an excess of thirty (30) years and neither party have any collateral claims against the other. .' 8. Respondent has filed a thirty (30) page document in this action, which included a Defendant's Affidavit pursuant to 3301(d) of the divorce code, wherein a claim for economic relief is made. 9. There is no basis in law or fact for the claim made by Respondent. 10. The claim made by Respondent is made solely for purposes of creating additional costs and expense for Petitioner in this matter, and to create additional delay. 11. The thirty (30) page document filed by Respondent suggests/requests some type of bifurcation of the instant proceedings and for which a hearing is scheduled for November 21, 2006. 12. The matter is presently pending a hearing before the Divorce Master, E. Robert Elicker, II, Esquire, who has been appropriately appointed by Order of Court dated September 25, 2006 to serve as Master in these proceedings. 13. As the entire matter including the divorce is moving forward there is no need for any type of bifurcation. 14. As the Master has already been appointed to hear the divorce in this case, Petitioner respectfully submits that it is appropriate for him to likewise be appointed to hear the issue of attorney fees, which is being claimed through this Petition. 15. Petitioner is obligated to pursue this matter through the use of legal counsel due to the complicated nature of the case that has been created by Respondent, and Respondent has indicated through his most recent filing an unwillingness to cooperate in the resolution of this entire divorce case. \- .-. 16. Due to the need to provide legal services, Respondent's lack of any attorney fees by proceeding pro se. Respondent's ability to pay attorney fees for the Petitioner and Respondent's conduct, it is appropriate to have the Court enter an Order awarding her attorney fees for the pursuit of the instant divorce action. 17. In that the parties have been separated for an excess of thirty (30) years, any request for marriage counseling is done solely for the purpose of creating the opportunity for confrontation with Petitioner, creating unnecessary expense for the Petitioner, and for delay. WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests your Honorable Court to: 1. Dismiss the "Bifurcation" claim made by the Defendant pursuant to the thirty (30) page documents filed by him in this matter; 2. Enter an Order appointing the Divorce Master to also hear the claim of attorney fees raised herein by the Petitioner, as well as any other economic claims deemed to be raised by the Respondent pursuant to the filing of his 3301(d) Counter Affidavit; and 3. Dismiss Respondent's request for marriage counseling. 4. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, ~B ~ . Ie, sqUIre Attorney for Petitioner 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717)243-5551 (800)347-5552 '. " VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. DATE: /0 - /& - oCt; Ja ~ J'~ ,~ . V~d~,V - GALE G. BEAR . '; " GALE G. BEAR, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff v. : CIVIL ACTION - LA W ROBERT L. BEAR, : NO 06-5294 : IN DIVORCE CIVIL TERM Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1l' I, Bradley L. Griffie, Esquire, hereby certify that I did, the;)..J day of October, 2006, cause a copy of Plaintiffs Petition for Attorney Fees and Special Relief to be served upon Defendant by first-class mail, postage prepaid at the following addresses: Robert L. Bear 201 Potato Road Carlisle, P A 17013 DATE: ~,~\ t U ra . riffi, Esquire ttorney for Plaintiff GRIFFIE & ASSOCIATES 200 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 (717)243-5551 (800)347-5552 ~ (:)~~ 1~~8 cp .... \) Th!Q!~ ~ 'fi ~ :~ . -.<.. r-:> c:::> c.:::l Cf" o C") --l N o -ill," o ~n ~~ ~~ :L~ s;; :YJ {:>~ --l N ~~ -0 .....Jm,. '2 GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff v, ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA CIVIL ACTION - LA W NO. 06-5294 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 25th day of October, 2006, upon consideration of Defendant's Request for Admissions, filed on October 4, 2006, the filing is stricken from the record and Defendant's attention is directed to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 4014 (directing that requests for admissions be served upon other party, not filed with court). pObert Elicker, II 9 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Divorce Master ;Cadley L. Griffie, Esq. 200 N. Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Attorney for Plaintiff ~ ~bert L. Bear 201 Potato Road Carlisle, P A 17013 Defendant, pro Se :rc BY THE COURT, \/1 ~\!\//\l }\~; r\~ \..J ',:!d , t... ,(,\,.-...,A ,., "-,; """,,!"-'f.'/j,1"'\ t\l.!'~: :" ' ',' ',':,:,H'~! Iv ~ ~ :2 Wd S2 1JO 900Z ^H'v~Ot~OH10ud 3H1 :i0 38!:HO-031I::l GALE G, BEAR, Plaintiff ,. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant NO. 06-5294 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 25th day of October, 2006, upon consideration of a document filed by Defendant on October 4, 2006, commencing with the words "Although all statements made herein before the Cumberland County Court are subject to the penalties for false statements, I would prefer that any false statements of mine could be punished by the maximum years in prison for those convicted of perjury, . . ," and the document containing (a) a proposed order directing "a Bifurcation, a division between fact and fiction. . . ," (b) a diatribe, and (c) a counter-affidavit which does not appear to be an original, to the extent that Defendant is requesting an order from the court based upon the document the request is denied. BY THE COURT, ~ Robert Elicker, II 9 North Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Divorce Master ~adley L. Griffie, Esq. 200 N, Hanover Street Carlisle, P A 17013 Attorney for Plaintiff 7 " .)(obert L. Bear 201 Potato Road Carlisle, P A 17013 Defendant, pro Se \/ ~ :r\~ \/l\""t1, '::: 1\j j\J:fd A1NnC'! !"'=QifinO tl ~ :2 Hd SZ 1:::10 900Z A'tN'C' 'f" "(~"d ""il:lO 1""'U'-' ii !-" ...., ';:..i.... I t....~..lU' .....J 3JI:l~O-{]31l.:l "..,. " GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 06 - 5294 CIVIL ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant IN DIVORCE NOTICE OF FILING OF SUPPLEMENTAL MASTER'S REPORT The report of the Master has been filed this date and copies have been sent with this notice to counsel of record and the parties. In accordance with P.R.C.P. 1920.55 within ten (10) days after the mailing of this notice and report exceptions may be filed to the report by any party. If no exceptions are filed within the ten (10) day period, the Court shall receive the report, and if approved, shall enter a final decree in accordance with the recommendations contained in the report. ~- Date: 11/22/06 E. Robert Elicker, II Divorce Master NOTE: If exceptions are filed, file the original with the Prothonotary and a copy with the Master's office. At that time, the party filing the exceptions should notify the court reporter in the Master's office so arrangements can be made for a transcript. Upon completion of the transcript and receipt of payment, the entire file will be returned to the Prothonotary's office for transmittal to the Court at time of argument on the exceptions. If no exceptions are filed, counsel shall prepare an order of Court consistent with the recommendations and provide a proposed order of Court to the Master. Counsel shall also prepare and provide with the ~~ , * proposed order of Court a praecipe* to the Prothonotary directing the Prothonotary to submit the case to the Court for final disposition. The Master will then transfer the file with the proposed order of Court and praecipe to the Prothonotary's Office for docketing and transmittal by the Prothonotary to the Court. Form available in the Prothonotary's office and the Master's office. (NOT the praecipe to transmit the record form as set out in P.R.C.P. 1920.73(b).) t-,:> <:7::::: ..", (..... N t-...:> C:J . . GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 06 - 5294 CIVIL ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant IN DIVORCE MASTER'S REPORT AND TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Proceedings held before E. Robert Elicker, II, Divorce Master 9 North Hanover Street, Carlisle, PA 17013 proceedings held on November 21, 2006, commencing at 9:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: Bradley L. Griffie Attorney for Plaintiff Robert L. Bear (Pro Se) Attorney for Defendant e e 1 MASTER'S REPORT 2 The record of the proceedings is attached as 3 the Master's report which the Master has utilized as the 4 basis for his finding and recommendation appearing at the 5 conclusion of the transcribed record. 6 (Transcript of proceedings on November 21, 7 2006.) 8 THE MASTER: Today is Tuesday, November 21, 9 2006. This is the date set for a hearing in the 10 above-captioned divorce proceedings. Present in the hearing 11 room are the Plaintiff, Gale G. Bear, and her counsel 12 Bradley L. Griffie, and the Defendant, Robert L. Bear. Mr. 13 Bear is not represented by counsel and indicated that he 14 does not intend to have representation. 15 (A discussion was held off the record.) 16 THE MASTER: The divorce action was commenced 17 by the filing of a complaint on September 11, 2006, raising 18 grounds for divorce of irretrievable breakdown of the 19 marriage. The complaint averred that the parties separated 20 on June 11, 1972. The complaint also had attached an 21 affidavit under Section 3301(d) averring the date of 22 separation as previously noted and a counter-affidavit which 23 was sent to the Defendant, Mr. Bear. Mr. Bear filed a 24 counter-affidavit dated September 26, 2006, opposing the 25 entry of a divorce decree, indicating that he did not 2 e e 1 believe that the marriage is irretrievably broken and 2 stating that he wished to raise economic claims. The Master 3 is not aware of any economic claims pending at this time in 4 the proceedings. 5 Mr. Griffie, is that your understanding? 6 MR. GRIFFIE: Yes, that's my understanding. 7 But I also want to point out that a document was filed by 8 Mr. Bear which resulted in two orders entered by Judge Oler 9 on October 25, 2006, one of which, in reviewing the 10 document, if the attempt by Mr. Bear was to have a request 11 for admissions which was possibly part of the document, he 12 was directed to the appropriate rule under the Pennsylvania 13 Rules of Civil Procedure and told to proceed appropriately 14 under the rules. The second order dismissed his petition if 15 it was making any types of any claims indicating what was 16 filed according to Judge Oler's order was a 17 counter-affidavit which does not appear to be an original 18 and he was directed that any request in that document were 19 denied. 20 THE MASTER: Have any economic claims in the 21 proceedings been raised? 22 MR. GRIFFIE: No. 23 MR. BEAR: Pardon me. In that, that I gave 24 Judge Oler to sign, order for bifurcation, I asked that all 25 of our property be equally divided plus all of our assets 3 e e 1 and Judge Oler dismissed that outright and he -- pardon me. 2 He had to -- I also brought up the case of how I laid in the 3 mental hospital and none of you people can ever admit that. 4 You can't deny it and you can't admit it. 5 THE MASTER: Well, the issue before us today 6 7 MR. BEAR: Yes, but the thing is -- the thing 8 is this -- I hope you get this -- the thing is this, either 9 here or right behind that wall the last time, that Griffie 10 and you and Gale Bear conspired to have her concealed and 11 you expect this to be a fair hearing? Why it is as phoney 12 as can be. And the only reason I would have known was Gale 13 worked on our one daughter 14 THE MASTER: I'm going to stop you there 15 because that's not relevant to the issue before us. 16 MR. BEAR: It certainly is. 17 THE MASTER: The issue is -- 18 MR. BEAR: Yes it is. Here is 19 THE MASTER: You are out of order 20 MR. BEAR: No, I am not -- 21 THE MASTER: Yes, you are. 22 MR. BEAR: -- because you were out of order 23 by having her there and the only reason that I knew -- I 24 hope you get this -- 25 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, you are out of order 4 - e e 1 2 3 MR. BEAR: THE MASTER: No -- I hope you get this -- Let me tell you what the issue 4 is 5 MR. BEAR: The issue is this, I can't have a 6 fair hearing. 7 THE MASTER: The issue is today whether or 8 not your marriage to Gale Bear is irretrievably broken. 9 MR. BEAR: First she lied when she said we 10 were separated. 11 THE MASTER: And that is what we are going to 12 have testimony about -- 13 MR. BEAR: Well, sure it's broken. She has 14 been lying with a man for 20 years. 15 THE MASTER: So you admit that the marriage 16 is broken? 17 MR. BEAR: It's broken but whether it's 18 irretrievable -- now here's what, when she said in her 19 complaint -- 20 THE MASTER: Do you think your wife has any 21 intention of resuming a relationship with you? 22 MR. BEAR: I don't believe she has the 23 courage to admit that she has been a liar all these years 24 and -- 25 THE MASTER: So in that context, the marriage 5 e e 1 is irretrievably broken, do you agree with that? 2 MR. BEAR: Divorce Master, do you agree with 3 this, that, no, I can't have a fair hearing because you 4 can't -- you haven't even had the decency to admit the 5 deceit that you all three -- was she back in that room 6 hearing everything or was she in this room? And right here 7 8 THE MASTER: Actually I think she was in the 9 room down the hall, whether she heard anything or not, I 10 don't know. 11 MR. BEAR: My daughter -- she worked on my 12 daughter -- that's the trouble. You're the boss -- you're 13 like God. You can't get anything past you. 14 THE MASTER: Well, I am just doing my job 15 MR. BEAR: No, you aren't. You aren't 16 honest. You aren't honest. That's deceit. 17 THE MASTER: Now, would you swear Mrs. Bear, 18 please. 19 20 Whereupon, GALE G. BEAR, having been 21 duly sworn, testified as follows: 22 THE MASTER: Mr. Griffie. 23 MR. GRIFFIE: So the record is clear, after 24 the divorce complaint was filed on September 11, 2006, it 25 was served by certified mail restricted delivery on Mr. Bear 6 e e 1 along with the 3301(d) affidavit on September 16, 2006. As 2 we indicated previously, there are no other pending claims 3 at this point based upon what was filed and the orders that 4 were entered. 5 We do want to make it clear though, so that 6 the record is complete, that there was a prior divorce 7 action filed by Mr. Bear against Ms. Bear docketed in 8 Cumberland County to 05-935 Civil Action in which Mr. Bear 9 filed a complaint for divorce based upon Section 3301(a) (2) 10 and 3301(a) (6) and 3301(d) and further verified that the 11 parties have lived separate and apart since June 11, 1972, 12 and continue to do so. 13 That complaint also raised equitable 14 distribution by Mr. Bear. However, at Mr. Bear's request an 15 order was entered by Judge Oler on January 12, 2006, in that 16 case that states as follows: (Reading) 17 AND NOW, this 12th day of January 2006, upon 18 consideration of the Plaintiff's praecipe to discontinue 19 filed previously in this matter, and Plaintiff having 20 indicated in open court that he regards his claims in this 21 case as having been discontinued by virtue of the praecipe, 22 the Court deems the Plaintiff's claims discontinued without 23 prejudice to Defendant's right to file a petition to strike 24 the discontinuance. No further action was taken. So that 25 matter was dismissed at that point. However, the order also 7 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 e e preserved our counterclaim for costs, expenses, and attorney fees. I'm not sure procedurally what that means but the complaint and claims filed by Mr. Bear were withdrawn by praecipe and the Court approved that. So the only thing pending is our divorce complaint and a request for a divorce pursuant to Section 3301(d). THE MASTER: All right. Would you proceed with the testimony? DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. GRIFFIE: Q Ms. Bear, please state your name and address? A Gale G. Bear. 1166 Rhoda Boulevard, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. Q Is that in Cumberland County? A Yes. Q What is your age and date of birth? A 9/30/38. I'm 68. Q Ms. Bear, what is Mr. Bear's address, if you know? A I don't know his address other than I believe he lives on Potato Road. Q Do you know Mr. Bear's date of birth and age? A I believe it's February 16, 1929. I believe. Q And are you employed? A Semi-retired. 8 1 e e Q Are you aware of Mr. Bear's status? 2 A No, nothing about it. 3 MR. GRIFFIE: We've already put on the 4 service document. Do you want me to have her verify his 5 signature or are we satisfied with the affidavit of service? 6 THE MASTER: I'm satisfied. He hasn't denied 7 that he signed it. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BY MR. GRIFFIE: Q A Q A Q A Q before? A Q A Q Not that I know of. How long have you resided in Pennsylvania? All my life. How about Mr. Bear? To your knowledge, how long has he resided in Pennsylvania? A As far as I know all his life. Q Do you and Mr. Bear have any children? A Six. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 e e Q A Are they allover 18 years of age? Yes. Q Are any of them under any type of medical or legal disability where they need assistance? A Not that I know of. Q Now, we recited the fact that Mr. Bear previously filed a complaint where he indicated you separated in June of 1972. Do you recall reading that document, the document that he filed previously? A Yes. Q When did you physically separate from Mr. Bear? When did you move out into different homes? A December of 1974. Q So about 32 years ago? A Right. Q Now, since that time have you renewed your marital relationship in any way? A No. Q Have you attempted to reconcile your marital problems? A Q No. Since December 1974 have you renewed your 23 cohabitation? 24 25 A Q No. Is there any question in your mind, Ms. Bear, 10 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 e e that this marriage is irretrievably broken? A None whatsoever. Q To try and look from the other side, what type of relationship have you and Mr. Bear had since 1974, December? A emotionally. conduct. He's been abusive, physically and He has been arrested numerous times for his Q Has there been any conduct on his part toward you suggesting that you can or should reconcile? A Not to my way of thinking, no. Q In particular, say in the last ten years, has there been any suggestion that the two of you could in any way renew your marital relationship? A No. I think there has been a complete disrespect for my wishes. Q In the complaint that Mr. Bear filed that I referenced, the prior document, he stated that you had separated June 11, 1972, and continued to live separate and apart since that time. Since he filed that divorce complaint, in the last year or two years, has there been any change in your relationship? A No. Q Do you believe the marriage to be irretrievably broken as we sit here today? 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BY MR. BEAR: 10 Q Gale, isn't it true the only reason this 11 marriage is irretrievably broken is because after June 11, 12 1972, as the bishop said -- I had a tape recorder do you 13 know what I suggest, if you would take that home and bury it 14 on the farm and if you would repent, you would have your 15 wife back. And that's what the reform Mennonites did. They e e A Absolutely. MR. GRIFFIE: That's all the testimony we are going to present. MR. BEAR: I would like to ask - - THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, would you like to cross-examine? MR. BEAR: Yes, I would. CROSS EXAMINATION 16 offered me your body for the price of repent. Isn't it not 17 true that you say we were separated June 11, 1972 but you 18 teased with your naked body 19 THE MASTER: Is there a question 20 MR. BEAR: That's the main part. That's what 21 these Mennonites do and that's what she is 22 THE MASTER: The Mennonites are not on trial 23 here today. 24 MR. BEAR: Yes, but what she did -- here's 25 what she said, we were separated -- 12 e e 1 THE MASTER: Wait a minute. Is there a 2 question? 3 MR. BEAR: Yes, there is. Were we separated 4 or not when I put my hands in her vagina on April 6, 1973, 5 or were we separated she teased with her naked body and 6 that's what this is all about. 7 8 9 10 THE MASTER: MR. BEAR: THE MASTER: MR. BEAR: Is there a question? Yes, there is. What is the question? How do you expect to have any kind 11 of a fair trial when you can't even question her. 12 THE MASTER: Well, you have to ask a 13 question. You are not to make a statement at this point. 14 MR. BEAR: Well, I asked her and she said no. 15 THE MASTER: What is the question. 16 MR. BEAR: Well, the question was, after she 17 said we were separated, she teased with her naked body and 18 welcomed everything, three times within 16 years, I mean, 16 19 hours she teased with her naked body. The first time was 20 THE MASTER: What is the question? 21 MR. BEAR: The question is: Are you going to 22 lie out of it? Are you going to lie out of it? No -- you 23 call this a fair trial? 24 25 Bear, with -- THE MASTER: What does that have to do, Mr. 13 e e 1 MR. BEAR: She is a liar. I was in court and 2 she said I raped her. And my jury set me free because she 3 couldn't remember if she had her clothes on or off when I 4 raped her. Why you people -- you think you can get a fair 5 trial when you hide her either there or over here? Well, 6 you're phonies. You are all phonies. 7 THE MASTER: What is the question? 8 MR. BEAR: Isn't that true? 9 THE MASTER: No, that's not a relevant 10 question. 11 MR. BEAR: Isn't that true, Gale? No, Gale, 12 because you can't face the truth and you haven't been able 13 to all these years. 14 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, you are out of order 15 16 MR. BEAR: Oh, there is no order here. The 17 only difference this time is she is not standing behind that 18 door listening and I don't have my daughter coming and 19 telling me what she did. 20 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, this is the time -- 21 MR. BEAR: No, this isn't anything. This 22 isn't anything. This is phoney -- this is as phoney as she 23 has been all these years, teasing with her naked body and 24 then lying out of it. She can't tell the truth and neither 25 can you. 14 e e 1 THE MASTER: Okay. 2 MR. BEAR: There is nothing here. Another 3 thing too, listen, little girl, if you have this snake here 4 (indicating to Mr. Griffie) -- if you have him charge me 5 $250.00 an hour for helping you lie, that you didn't commit 6 adultery, I'll tell you what, I won't pay it. You can put 7 me in prison until I rot and you can sell the only property 8 that I have out from under me. You are all phonies. You 9 are liars and she is the biggest liar. 10 I would like a copy of that. May I have 11 that, please. 12 THE MASTER: Yes, you can have a copy of 13 that. You will have to pay the court reporter for it. 14 MR. BEAR: I'll be glad too. You don't even 15 have any shame. 16 THE MASTER: Are you finished, Mr. Bear? 17 MR. BEAR: I would like to say this -- no 18 I would like to say this. If I would have done something 19 like that in business, I would never have done business with 20 them people anymore. You can be glad you came here, like, 21 hiding someone like that. You can't do that. 22 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, you are finished? 23 MR. BEAR: Yeah, except for this. You have 24 no conscience and neither does Griffie and neither do you, 25 Gale, because in court, why, you knew very well I never 15 e e 1 raped you. I'll tell you -- I would like to say this, that 2 a friend said to me, and he knew what he was talking about, 3 he said the way your wife teased you with her naked body, no 4 one will believe that you didn't force her and it made sense 5 until we got in court and then my jury knew that she lied 6 and set me free that I raped her. 7 MR. GRIFFIE: May I make a 8 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, are you finished? 9 MR. BEAR: I would like to say this -- 10 THE MASTER: One more time. One more thing 11 because you are not asking any questions. You are out of 12 order -- 13 MR. BEAR: All right. I would like to say 14 there is no order here. There is no order here since we 15 caught you -- I said to my daughter -- 16 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, I am going to have to 17 ask you to sit down or you are going to have -- 18 MR. BEAR: Okay. I will sit down. I would 19 say this -- 20 THE MASTER: Do you have any other questions 21 today? 22 MR. BEAR: Yes. Gale, isn't it true, that 23 you worked on our one daughter to help keep your adultery 24 quiet? 25 MR. GRIFFIE: Objection. 16 e e 1 2 THE MASTER: Sustained. Not relevant to the issue. 3 MR. BEAR: Oh, there is nothing relevant 4 except this -- try to get that money and you will send me to 5 prison or else we will sellout the only piece of property 6 that I have. There is no justice here. What do you call 7 that justice? And you call it justice when the Court says 8 9 THE MASTER: Mr. Bear, are you finished? 10 MR. BEAR: Yes, good-bye. 11 THE MASTER: Good-bye, Mr. Bear. 12 (Mr. Bear left the hearing room.) 13 MR. GRIFFIE: I want to put on the record 14 that we have not made any claims of fault grounds for the 15 divorce and are not pursuing any claims for fault grounds so 16 Mr. Bear's comments about what occurred back in 1972 or '74 17 are not relevant -- 18 THE MASTER: I agree with you. I just let 19 him have his chance to say something on the record to 20 perhaps let him express his feelings. He said some things 21 here, obviously, that we both agree, as you note in your 22 objection, are irrelevant to the issue. I am going to 23 recommend that the parties be divorced and make a finding 24 that the marriage is irretrievably broken. 25 There being no further issues before the 17 e e 1 Court, we will adjourn at this time. 2 (Court adjourned at 9:20 a.m.) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION Based on wife's affidavit under Section 3301(d) that the parties separated on June 11, 1972, and further based on the testimony that there has been no marital relationship since the separation, the Master finds that the marriage is irretrievably broken and recommends that wife is entitled to a divorce under Section 3301(d) of the Domestic Relations Code. Respectfully submitted, (JJL; rML- E. Robert Elicker, II Divorce Master 18 . . 1 CERTIFICATION 2 3 4 I hereby certify that the proceedings are 5 contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me on 6 the abovecause and that this is a correct transcript of 7 same. ~ -,.. 8 9 Traci J. Colyer Official Stenographer 10 11 12 13 The foregoing record of the proceedings on 14 the hearing of the within matter is hereby approved and 15 directed to be filed. 16 Date ~~ E. Robert Elicker, II Divorce Master 17 18 ~ d-;2~ 7.-oJ>G 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 .- l-.":) i..J ;:-',_.~ 11 '4 -r :TI f11 <" .) I'v "' c. :TJ -< IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA GALE G. BEAR, Plaintiff vs. No. 06-5294 CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE ROBERT L. BEAR, Defendant PRAECIPE It appearing that the Master's report in the above stated case has been filed for ten (10) days, that no exceptions have been filed thereto, that the costs have been fully paid and that all the requirements of law and Rules of court have been met, you are hereby directed to submit the said case to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, at the next sitting thereof. TO: Curtis R. Long Prothonotary DATED:J ~~ $ ..(J {p I, l\.' , Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pe ylvania, do hereby certify that the costs in the above stated case, have all been paid, incl ding the Master's fee. (") r--;) 0 = c: <::::) 'Tl -,. CI'" ':"::",. 0 ~ -r.,l t:r: ::r:..." ,n .. M n1F --;;.. ; CJ -- I --nrl1 .r_~_. "',0 ~i c.n ~~?; (~~ \ r' < 7- .! .,j.... ,r' -0 . >~ :y: ;~ :x '.'0.; (") )> c: arc: c <:.:; s;! oi'.c::.. --..{ !'V :n -< \.0 -< :+; :+; :+; :+; :+; :+; :+; :f. :f. :f. :f. :+; :f. :f. :f. :f. :+; :f. :f. :f. :f. :f. :f. :f.:f. :f.:f. :f. :f.Of.0f.0f. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. Of. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OFCUMBERLANDCOUNTY STATE OF PENNA. Gale G. Bear, Plaintiff No. 06-5294 VERSUS Robert L. Bear, Defendant DECREE IN DIVORCE AND NOW, D~,-~ .....,k,d 7 ZOOb IT IS ORDERED AND , DECREED THAT Gale G. Bear , PLAI NTI FF, AND Robert L. Bear , DEFENDANT, ARE DIVORCED FROM THE BONDS OF MATRIMONY. THE COURT RETAINS JURISDICTION OF THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED OF RECORD IN THIS ACTION FOR WHICH A FINAL ORDER HAS NOT YET BEEN ENTERED; The Master's Report and Recommendation filed on November 22, 2006 is incorporated herein. ATT . ~C?~i PROTHONOTARY J. Of. Of. Of. :f. :f. :f. :f. :f. :f. Of. Of. 0f.0f. Of. Of. :f. :f.:f.:f.:f.Of.:f. :f.:f.:f.:f. if", Of. Of. :f. :f. Of. Of. :+; :f. Of. :f. :f. :f. :f. :f. if :f. :f. :+; :f. if if if if Of. :f. :f. Of. :f. if if :f. :f. Of. :f. :f. if :f. :f. if :f. :f. if'li ~P~~jt, 9(7 f..-c/ ~~ Z~~cJ ~ 10' L.c/ .. .. . ... .-... '\" ~-, ~ '