MARK AND CARLA LOWRY: TWO CROOKED ATTORNEYS IN FT LAUDERDALE

2016 -2017   Four Bar Complaints

(1)   Complaint against Mark Lowry: Theft of $2500.

(2)   Complaint against Mark Lowry. Serving me with papers (for an action) illegally.

(3)   Complaint against Mark Lowry: Lying in his response to my bar complaint.

(4)   Complaint against Carla Lowry: Extortion. She was representing her ex-husband in small claims court. The extortion took place in mediation as I was extorted into signing an agreement that was brought about under the most extreme duress. The duress was brought about by the illegal service of papers imposed upon me just minutes before by Mark Lowry which would have forced me to defend myself in another county (Palm Beach to Broward) on four hours’ notice. I was given no details of the allegations and had no time to seek legal help. Perhaps surprisingly, In Carla Lawry’s response to my extortion allegations she offered no rebuttal.  

(1) Complaint against Mark Lowry: Theft of $2500.

The words “Paid $2500” and “Retainer” can be deciphered from this “chicken scratch” contract on the back of his business card in October 2016. This was the only documentation received from him. This occurred in a parking lot around 10 PM. Mark Lowry had at this time moved away from my apartment complex.

A) Attorney Mark Lowry told me that by paying cash that he could contact the State Attorney expediently and likely have the charges dropped.

B) After 11 days of non-action I called Mark Lowry and he still had not contacted the State Attorney to have the charges dropped. My legitimate fear was that he was “sandbagging” so he could be paid more at a trial.

C) I then fired Mark Lowry and hired the Boca Raton firm of Lavalle, Brown, and Rogan who quickly had the charges reduced and ultimately dropped.

D) Mark Lowry promised me that I would receive a professional, typed, and legitimate retainer agreement very soon. I never received it.

E) His chicken scratch “contract” had the word “retainer” on it. No contract was ever signed indicating that the fees were non-refundable (as required by law). 

F) I was never given an invoice of work performed and I wasn’t told the hourly rate.

G) I was never told that the $2,500 was “burned through” and he needed more money .     HE) SIMPLY KEPT IT ALL OF THE RETAIMER. HE STOLE FROM ME.

H) When I confronted Mark Lowry with stealing from me he threatened me by warning. me “this will not end well for you, Mark (Robbins).”

I) The firm of Lavalle, Brown, and Rogan directed me to file a bar complaint against Mark Lowry.

(2)    Complaint against Mark Lowry: ILLEGAL SERVICE OF ACTIONABLE ITEM.

 Above:  SAME DAY HEARING in Fort Lauderdale at 1:30 PM on February 22, 2017 

A)    While waiting in Judge Panse’s court room on 02/22/17 for mediation for the $2,500 retainer that I allege Attorney Mark Lowry stole from me, Attorney Mark Lowry approached the Sheriff and pointed to me sitting in the gallery. I was then given papers indicating I had to be in Fort Lauderdale for cyberstalking charges (filed by Attorney Mark Lowry) in four hours. (Per Florida Bar instructions, I had summoned Mark Lowry solely/only to work out our issues prior to filing a complaint. I was simply following directions. I stalked no one.)

B) The firm of Lavalle, Brown, and Rogan later informed me that that the “service” was illegal. It was illegal because I am to be provided 20 days’ notice.  I WAS GIVEN  SAME DAY 4 HOURS NOTICE and was given no allegations to respond to.

C) The firm of Lavalle, Brown, and Rogan also explained to me that the “service” was illegal because one cannot serve one in court for a future action (cybertheft) while in court for another existing action (the $2500 theft).

(3) Complaint against Mark Lowry: Lying in his response to my bar complaint. Details have been provided to the Florida Bar.

(4) Complaint against Carla Lowry: EXTORTION. (NOTE: In Carla Lowry’s response to this bar complaint, she stated in writing that she would offered not respond to my allegations of extortion described below. Instead she used a “method of distracting” by arguing that the “service” to me, giving me four hours, was somehow proper.

A) She was representing her ex-husband (Mark Lowry) in small claims court for mediation (Judge Panse; morning of February 22, 2017) regarding the $2,500 I assert Mark Lowry stole from me,

B) Here was the deal that was offered to me that I will demonstrate clearly meets the elements of extortion.

1)      I would allow Mark Lowry to keep the $2,500

2)      I would remove the bar complaint filed against him

3)      I would state in writing (to the Bar) that I was happy with Mark Lowry’s performance.

4)      IN RETURN… They would “continue” the action (give me more than four hours notice) regarding the hearing to take place the same day at 1:30 PM in Judge Kaplan’s court room in Fort Lauderdale.

C)   EXTORTION  I signed an agreement UNDER DURESS and an AGREEMENT I WOULD NEVER SIGN UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Put simply, it was last second surprise… one big CON JOB… a dirty trick that the included the necessary elements for extortion. Duress and fear was applied in these ways:

1)      I was under duress because the “illegal service” gave me just 4 hours to prepare when I would later learn from Lavalle, Brown, and Rogan that I had to be legally given 20 days’ notice.

2)      I was under duress because I did not understand the charges in that I did not know whether it was a criminal charge or a civil charge.  

3)      I was under duress because I did not understand the charges because the papers I was served with were bereft of any specific or written allegations.

4)      I was under duress because I was to be force to attend a hearing in another county in front of a Judge that Mark and Carla Lowry claimed to know (thus adding to my fear which increased the pressure on me signing whatever they put forth.)

5)      I was under duress because I had no time to get legal representation.

6)      I was under duress because I was afraid of the word “stalking” going on my record in any form. The word “stalking” has a horrible and creepy connotation to it… a connotation that has never been associated with someone with a clean record like myself.

7)      I was under duress because I was startled and “frozen” by the circumstances I was placed in. To use street terms… I was “jumped” whereas Mark and Carly Lowry had their extortion scheme planned out well in advance.

D)    THEAGREEMENT I WAS PRESSURED INTO SIGNING WAS ILLEGAL ON ITS FACE. In retrospect, I was asked to commit a crime. I signed my bar complaint under penalty of perjury. If I retracted my bar complaint and stated lies about Lowry’s performance (claiming I was happy with his work), I would be guilty of perjury. Thus, I did not abide by a contract that was null and void the second it was signed (on the face of it).

THE AMAZING STORY OF MY ADOPTED IDENTICAL TWIN SONS

Wednesday, Sep 9 1999 (7:30 PM) Melbourne, Florida

I arrived home from work at 7:30 after a long day’s work. Carly was just hanging up the telephone as I entered. “Mark, I just got off the phone with Judy Houser… you remember, the social worker that performed the home study for our planned international adoption. She just phoned to tell us that there are 9 month old twin boys available for adoption here in Melbourne. The family traveled here from Tennessee. She wanted to know if we wanted to visit with them and entertain the idea of adopting them.”

For some strange reason, amidst the flurry of work issues in my head, I was able to rapidly assimilate the proposal. It’s the big things I can process such as adopting kids , brain surgery (which I did have for those that don’t know me too well) – but sometimes it’s the little things, like taking out the garbage, that can overwhelm me. In any event… I said “Sure, Carly, it can’t hurt to meet them. We can be over there by 9 PM.”

So off we went. On the drive over, my mind was filled with projections… how would we get clothes/cribs on such short notice? What if we don’t bond with them?… What about my work? … What’s the criteria for choosing children after a single visit.? A tight ball of fear lay in my belly. We entered the room, along with the social worker and an associate from the adoption agency, and warmly introduced ourselves to the birth parents. My immediate impression of the birth parents was that they were gentle, hardworking folks doing the best they could to care for six children. One was asleep in the crib; the other was doing a “backward crab walk” across the bed.

One of the boys was then awakened and Carly and I played with the two boys for an hour – interspersed with questions/answers between the birth parents and us. One of the twins took a real liking to Carly as he sat up in her arms – mesmerized as he stared up at her. We left around 10:30 PM. Being that the birth parents had to soon return to Tennessee and that other couples were interested in meeting the children – we had to make a decision by noon the next day.

Thursday, September 10 1999 (7:00 AM)

Carly and I woke up in a daze. I can remember feeling physically nauseous over the import of the decision we faced. We shuffled and bantered about the house as we readied for the day – both of us resisting the daunting task that lay before us – making a lifetime decision. We were looking for a sign.

Boys two and four at rodeo 

We called our minister and laid out the details in front of him. We certainly did not expect him to make the decision for us, but we were looking for his guidance and validation of our thought process. He helped frame the event from a broader perspective. He helped allay our fears of becoming “instant parents,” as he suggested that parenting is the most demanding job in the world for which few are adequately prepared. He observed that Carly and I were committed and respectful of each other and that we could bring to the boys only that which we have developed in ourselves.

A few minutes later the social worker called to check in with us. It was at this point that it was revealed the boys’ birthdays were December 20 – the same date as our anniversary date. Immediately I thought to myself – “A sign!! … A sign from God!! … They’re ours !! It was also revealed that this day (September 10) was the anniversary date of the passing of my Grandmother. The pieces started falling into place. We had originally planned to go to Russia to adopt two siblings – and here twin boys dropped in our lap. We would adopt them !! 

Thursday, September 10 1999

We contacted our friends and exclaimed, “Can we borrow some children’s car seats right away, we are adopting twin boys in the next half hour!!” After our friends picked up their jaws from the ground, we were provided the car seats and we were off to the adoption agency.

As we were awaiting the paperwork to be processed, we had a chance to spend some more time with the birth parents. Carly and I were flattered to hear that the birth parents were more comfortable with us and had chosen us over other couples who had visited. The obvious question soon arises in people’s minds is “How could they possibly relinquish these two adorable boys?”

My boys and I (Coach of basketball)

Their response was that they simply weren’t able to provide the necessary time and attention that all of their children deserved and still make ends meet. Carol and I accepted the explanation at face value and concluded that their decision was carried out through their hearts and the through the guidance of their God. Carol and I chose to believe that in many respects, they are performing the greatest form of love for their children by doing what they feel will be for the highest good for these two young boys.

The most emotional moment came at the point of separation. The process was set up so that, though the birth parents met with us, they were never made aware of our names nor our residence. The attorney handling the process, in attempt to substantiate closure and to emphasize that a firm accord had been realized, stated “Please say your good-byes now.”

  My son dressed as a nerd... funniest costume ever !!  

I could feel my heart sink to my stomach. After the parents tearfully planted kisses on the cheeks of the boys, Carly and I, now crying along with the birth parents, embraced them and guaranteed that we would care for the children to the best of our abilities. In the short time we spent with the birth parents, we formed a real kinship and respect for each other and as a result, Carly and I feel tasked to do whatever it takes to provide an environment in which the boys can thrive.

Thursday, September 10, 6:00 PM

Carly and I arrived home with the boys and it quickly became apparent that word had spread about our “acquisitions.” Friends from the neighborhood and our church, as well as Carly's friends from her activities (Junior League, Book Club, Guardian ad Litem program), poured into our home that evening with food, diapers, toys, cribs, playpens, clothes, shoes, highchairs, strollers etc… Carly and I were overwhelmed by the love and support we received. It felt like an Amish barn-raising! We are blessed to have such solid, trusting friends and we couldn’t have been more thankful and appreciative.

 

Next came the immensely pleasurable task of telephoning our families to share the wonderful news. Once the initial shock wore off, their next comment was “When’s the next flight to Melbourne?” Much later that night, with our hearts overflowing, Carly and I retired for bed with the firm belief that all of our needs would be taken care of.

Can you find mu boy amidst 9 grand kids ?

UPDATE:  Both of my twin boys live in South Florida near their father and grandparents and are freshmen in college. The mom plans to join the rest with her fiance in the near future.

Almost current day

DISBARMENT REQUESTED FOR MARK / CARLA LOWRY (ex-wife) OF FORT LAUDERDALE

Dear Florida Bar

 A former client of Mark Lowry Esq adds the following as a supplement to the two complaints against Attorney Mark Stephen Lowry (Mark Lowry, Lowry legal LLC) and his ex-wife Attorney Carla Lowry. Mark Lowry continues to misuse, exploit, and bastardize the use of his law license to gain RETRIBUTION against a client who claims he was both stolen from and extorted by Lowry. The Bar Complaint system stands and falls on the basis of how a case such as this is handled. 

If lawyers are able to frivolously and senselessly issue injunction orders and civil suits to intimidate and attempt to silence clients who know they were wronged, a pall is cast around the complaint process and undermines the entire integrity of the disciplinary system. The process is marred and destroyed.

Attorney Mark Lowry is displaying the worst behavior an attorney can elicit. No client should be "legally steamrolled" simply because he issued two weighty and very honest bar complaints. Nor should the client be steamrolled because he is disadvantaged by not having a law degree. 

This client asks for immediate disbarment of Mark Lowry and Carla Lowry for actions that can only be described as merit-less and vindictive with the singular goal of retribution. Retribution is furthered by the fact that Attorney Mark Lowry knows that the client's assets are in a non-revocable trust and that Lowry has no chance of ever receiving money in a civil suit. He is just harassing his former client out of anger and adolescent immaturity.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STANDING PROMISE TO ALL

The blogger of WB Truth realizes the great power of this blog. I respect this power with reverence and care. I will never intentionally hurt innocent people and I promise to remain true to the theme of this blog which is to expose corruption. 

I hereby proclaim to all, through both private and public domains, that if this blog has posted any defamatory, slanderous, or libelous statements or comments or wordings anyone and they can prove the statements to be untrue,  the author of this blog will hastily set the record straight. If errors are made, this blog will make full, complete, and thorough retractions in an effort to make these people whole. This remains a standing offer. But you must tell me. 

This blogger has agreed and still agrees to taking a concomitant polygraph test with anyone who wishes to challenge the credibility and truthfulness of this blog. Though I have taken a polygraph test in the past, no one has countered by taking one themselves. WB TRUTH has over 6 million page views. The blog started in Wilkes-Barre PA and has expanded to south Florida.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADDENDUM TO BAR COMPLAINTS AGAINST MARK (#2) AND CARLA LOWRY

(continued message to to FL BAR) 

     Please allow this letter to depict the heinous methods of Attorney Mark Stephen Lowry (and/or Lowry Legal LLC) and ex-wife Attorney Carly Lowry (and/or her respective law firm) who, through malfeasance and intentional misuse and of their law licenses, “gamed the system” in order to intimidate, bully, harass, and extort Mark Lowry’s former client who does not have a law license. I believe the evidence contained herein will make the substantial case for the permanent removal of Mark and Carla Lowry’s law licenses for knowingly committing crimes (extortion and theft) and exacting heinous ethics violations in the process. 

    As mentioned, the integrity of the courts and the practice of law in Florida hangs in the balance when corrupt lawyers are able to perform their crooked and dubious wares with impunity. A text book case of extortion will be presented in this document. 

    The client wishes to state the truth about the many claims that Attorney Mark Lowry has made. The different between Mr Lowry and the former client is that the client has proof behind what he states whereas Mr Lowry consistently crosses ethical and legal lines by offering conjecture, hearsay, and fabrications - and to the extent that his claims are made under oath – he commits many acts of perjury. In addition a text book case of extortion will be presented here.

    Based on his abhorrent behavior and false statements, the client firmly believes that Attorney Mark Lowry should be disbarred for the good of the state of Florida and for the honor that the legal profession tries to maintain.

1)      THEFT    Mr. Lowry gave client...

-          NO Retainer agreement  (Client paid cash and NEVER receiving a professional, typed retainer agreement. This set off alarm bells. Why was cash so important to Mark Lowry? Most especially since he was dating a known pill abuser? 

-          NO hourly rate provided.

-          No invoice showing ANY work done.

-          NO Trust account to place the $2500 retainer

The blurry ink on the back of a business card above reflects

all of the “paperwork” that the client received for his case.

2)      NO WRITTEN CONSENT = THEFT   Florida law states that a non -refundable retainer is valid ONLY if the client gives written consent. The client NEVER gave this consent nor did Lowry ever indicate to client verbally or in writing that this fee was non refundable. Therefore all, or at least most of the retainer should have been returned to the client. The client asked for all of it because Lowry left the client in a damaged position. Refusing to give what is lawfully and rightfully the property of someone else is theft.

3)      FAILURE TO PERFORM / ACTS OF BAD FAITH   Mark Lowry also failed to contact the state attorney with the client's stated goal of getting client's charges dropped which occurred under a huge misunderstanding. (Charges resulted from retrieval of client bike from my girlfriend’s garage and the landlord mistaking client as a person with bad motives. As it turned out, the client is now free of all charges and all will be expunged). The client hired Ken Ronan / Alison Guerino who quickly took care of the matter (good attorneys!

1)      STATE ATTORNEY NOT CONTACTED  How does the client know that the state attorney  was not contacted (as requested by the client) with the intent of having the charges dropped? 

    Because Mark Lowry told the client himself 11 days after being hired him. It was at this point the client realized that he had lost confidence in Lowry and did not trust him. The client doubts that any proof is available illustrating such talks with the FL Attorney General.

-          Lowry did not do what was specifically what was asked of him.

-          Lowry was very negative about the charges being dropped. Contrast this with Lavelle Brown and Ronan (who was hired) which had the felony dropped almost immediately.

-          Client was keenly aware that by “dragging his feet” that a big payday awaited Mark Lowry in the form of a trial (which would have been a nonsense trial).

-          Mr. Lowry has NEVER sent me an invoice showing that he performed ANY of the work he claims to have performed. NOTHING. It is hearsay and a few e mails and such.

        

5)      WHY LOWRY'S CYBERSTALKING ALLEGATIONS are FRIVOLOUS BEYOND COMPREHENSION

The burden for stalking and/or harassment in Florida is repetitive contact “for no legitimate purpose.” The client clearly had a legitimate purpose to contact Mark Lowry:

-          Mark Lowry never asked the client to stop.

-          Lowry illegally kept (in client's judgment he “stole”)
           the $2500 retainer which he wanted returned).

-          The FLORIDA BAR mandates that the client contact the problematic attorney in order to resolve matters. It is written right into the FL BAR Instructions!!

-          Providing Lowry with the very logical and very real consequences of what is printed as a result of Lowry taking money serves a very legitimate purpose. Explained to Lowry was“purpose and intent” explained to Lowry in natural results that will occur because of theft.

      ~ A bar complaint

      ~ A post (s) on the anti corruption blog (WBTruth.blogspot.com). First Amendment 
right are protected here in the same way it protects an investigative Journalist for the Washington Post. Freedom of the press.

      ~ Google search results   The blog post(s) (citing Lowry) shows up in Google search results. This too is a fact in that the client posts regularly and people who are written about show up on Google searches. If Lowry does not like this exposure he needs to contact GOOGLE. People show up on searches given the very high number of page views of the blog. 

~ Professional courtesy in regards transmitting legal matters. This serves a very legitimate purpose in the interest of fair play and consideration.

It is beneficial to compare the client's “legitimate purposes” with the motion that Lowry filed which states “the claims of the motion for an injunction… make it appear to the Court that there is an immediate and present danger of domestic, repeat, dating, or sexual violence.” This is patently absurd and ridiculous and is indicative of Lowry exploiting his law license to “game the system” in order to intimidate, bully, and harass the client.

THIS IS SOME OF THE MOST UNETHICAL AND DISINGENUOUS ATTORNEY BEHAVIOR I HAVE SEEN IN MY LIFE. 

5)      WHY CYBERSTALKING ALLEGATIONS are FRIVOLOUS BEYOND ALL REASONABLE STANDARDS 

  

       The burden for stalking and/or harassment in Florida is repetitive contact “for no legitimate purpose.” The client clearly had a legitimate purpose to contact Mark Lowry:

-          First, it is notable that Mark Lowry never personally asked the client to stop contacting him.

-          Mark Lowry illegally kept (“stole”) the $2500 retainer which the client wanted returned

-          The FLORIDA BAR mandates that the client contact the problematic attorney in order to resolve matters. It is written right into their instructions.

-          Alerting an attorney of the logical and very real consequences that he may experience as a result of his actions is no more severe than a sign that says “Trespassers will be prosecuted.”

-           The client with “legitimate purpose and intent” explained to Lowry the natural results that will occur because of theft.

      ~ A bar complaint

      ~ A post (s) on the anti corruption blog 

(WBTruth.blogspot.com). The First Amendment

right protects the client here in the same way it protects an investigative Journalist for the Washington Post. They are free to expose illegal behavior via freedom of the press.

      ~ Google search results   My blog post (citing Lowry) showing up in Google search results. This too is a fact given Google’s algorithms and the audience of my blog.  

~ Professional courtesy in regards transmitting legal matters also serves a very legitimate purpose in the interest of fair play and consideration.

Comparing the “legitimate purposes” with the injunction that Lowry filed which states “the claims of the motion for an injunction… make it appear to the Court that there is an immediate and present danger of domestic, repeat, dating, or sexual violence.” Lowry even had the audacity to make the false claim that he was threatened by violence. This is patently absurd and ridiculous and is indicative of Lowry exploiting his law license to “game the system” in order to intimidate, bully, and harass the client.

5)      EXTORTION – THE PLANNING AND EXECUTION BY MARK LOWRY AND CARLA LOWRY

 # 1   Injuction for Protection against stalking     CLIENT SERVED?         IS VERBEAGE INCLUDED?

            (Jan 30 2017)                                                NO,  Robbins no knowledge  NO written detail

 # 2   Injuction for Protection against stalking     CLIENT SERVED?         IS VERBEAGE INCLUDED?

            (Feb 22 2017)                                                Served 4 hrs before hearing         NO written details

# 3   Injuction for Protection against stalking     CLIENT SERVED?              IS VERBEAGE INCLUDED?

            (March 21 2017)                                       Served at his home             3 Pages of written details (incl)

FACTS

(A)   CLIENT never had any idea of Jan 30 injunction.

(B)    Extortion used on Feb 22, 2017 as Mark and Carla Lowry shocked client with service of injunction. (This service is documented and confirmed in recent writings of Mark Lowry).

(C)    On Feb 22, 2017 Mark Lowry approached the Sheriff while waiting in small claims court and Lowry pointed out the client to be served with papers. The injunction hearing was scheduled 4 hours later in Fort Lauderdale (where the Lowrys practice law).

(D)   The Sheriff said to (me) client: “You better show up in Fort Lauderdale!”

(E)    Here is the extremely disadvantaged, diminished, and unfair state that the client was in:

(i)  Client was still awaiting (and preparing) for small claims court.

(ii)  Client had no idea of the legality of what he was served.

(iii)  Client had no time to prepare for “injunction” in Fort Lauderdale while awaiting in Delray Beach for small claims ($2500) hearing.                                                                              

 (iv)  Client had no time to get adequate legal help for injunction in Fort Lauderdale while awaiting in Delray Beach for small claims ($2500) hearing.

(v)  Client was terrified of the word “stalking” to be used next to his name.

(vi)  The mediator told client he had no shot to defeat two attorneys in court (Lowrys).

(vii)  Client was under the highest degree of fear, stress, intimidation, and anxiety

(viii)  Carla and Mark Lowry offered a continuation of hearing in return for everything they wanted in mediation which included 

- Keeping all of the $2500

- Having all posts re: “Mark Lowry” from Robbins’ blog removed

- Removing the bar complaint

- Asking client to lie (perjure) the Florida bar by having him falsely state that client was happy with Mark Lowry's horrible legal work. 

ILLEGALITY

(1)    Carla and Mark Lowry required client to commit the crime of perjury  by restating everything he had signed under penalty of perjury on  the first bar complaint. Forcing a person to commit a crime within an agreement makes the mediation agreement NULL and VOID by itself.

(2)    EXTORTION:  Client would never have signed mediation agreement under normal circumstances. He was coerced through unimaginable fear.

(3)    EXTORTION: Carla and Mark Lowry planned the service of the Ft Lauderdale hearing to coerce and force client to sign something he did not want to.

(4)    EXTORTION: Carla and Mark Lowry willfully increased the coercion and fear level by providing client with no verbiage (attached) that explained what Robbins would have to defend against in Fort Lauderdale in 4 hours

(5)    EXTORTION: Carla and Mark Lowry used a minuscule 4 hour window to extort client for everything they wanted.

(6)    EXTORTION: The verbiage regarding the reasons for the injunction finally appeared well after Feb 22 for a continuation to March 21. The Lowrys purposely withheld these important details on Deb 22 (the verbeage) to place client in the most "extortable" position. 

(7)    EXTORTION: To the extent that Carla and Mark Lowry willfully and knowingly picked Feb 22, 2017 at 1:30 PM is the extent to which they willfully engaged in EXTORTION. The put client in a time crunch; an impossible situation.

7)      SLANDER / LIBEL  / THREATS / HARASSMENT / CYBERSTALKING / DISPARAGEMENT

At no time did client EVER slander, libel, or offer up an action against Mark Lowry which could be construed as a credible threat.

A)      CREDIBLE THREATS (784.048 c)  At no time did client ever place Mark Lowry in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family members. In fact it was the client who was in fear for his safety given the extortion attempt and his safety and welfare after the surprise legal tricks played against him. The client also remains in fear for the frivolous, unsubstantiated, and meritless legal actions filed against him.

B)      HARASSING    The low volume of communications that the client sent Lowry would not meet the criteria for a “course of conduct.” (784.048 b). If Mark Lowry truly felt harassed, he ignored the most basic form of relief: HE NEVER PERSONALLY ASKED CLIENT TO SIMPLY “STOP COMMUNICATIING.”

C)      HARASSING and CYBERSTALKING   Does not apply to clients’ actions  (784.048 a and d). The client always had a legitimate purpose and reason to contact Mark Lowry.

-   Attempts to collect $2500 which client feels Mark Lowry stole.

-   Following the stated written instructions from the FL BAR which instructed client to try and settle the dispute with Mark Lowry

-   Providing legal courtesies

-   In the interest of fair play client explained the lawful and legal consequences that could occur if Mark Lowry stole from client and committed other illegal/unethical acts.  All of the communications were Constitutional (First Amendment; free speech and free press) and never did client threaten the safety of Mark Lowry and/or family (Client did not know the Lowry family or has knowledge of where they live). Client simply spelled out reasonable and predictable consequences for breaking the law (example: filing a bar complaint)

D)     DISPARAGEMENT      Our Constitution allows for disparaging remarks (verbal or written) if the recipient has committed disparaging acts. Mark Lowry has himself to blame for these and client is under no obligation to say nice things about someone who kept all of a refundable retainer and who tried to extort the client.

E)      SLANDER / LIBEL / DEFAMATION cannot exist if the statements made are true. All of clients’ statements and allegations and inferences are based on the truth and facts.

F)       Client has consistently offered up relief for Mark Lowry if untrue statements have been made about him. If Lowry honestly felt false statements were made… he has always direct access to relief and he has he chose not to use it. Below is clients’ standing promise on WBTruth.blogspot.com (client's blog).

STANDING PROMISE TO ALL

       WBTruth.blogspot.com

The blogger of WB Truth realizes the great power of this blog. I respect this power with reverence and care. I will never intentionally hurt innocent people and I promise to remain true to the theme of this blog which is to expose corruption. 

I hereby proclaim to all, through both private and public domains, that if this blog has posted any defamatory, slanderous, or libelous statements or comments or wordings anyone and they can prove the statements to be untrue, the author of this blog will hastily set the record straight. If errors are made, this blog will make full, complete, and thorough retractions in an effort to make these people whole. This remains a standing offer. But you must tell me. 

This blogger has agreed and still agrees to taking a concomitant polygraph test with anyone who wishes to challenge the credibility and truthfulness of this blog. Though I have taken a polygraph test in the past, no one has countered by taking one themselves. WB TRUTH has over 6 million page views. The blog started in Wilkes-Barre PA and has expanded to south Florida.

The fact that Mark Lowry has chosen not to use the above avenues of relief, his claims of defamation / libel / slander are 100 per cent meritless.

7)      Lastly, Mark Lowry made a very juvenile and “tabloid-like” accusation  against the client. He fabricated a story that the client was courting Lowry's girlfriend named Heather Walker. I will address this lie like I have the others.

A)      I never once made a single romantic gesture, offer of a date, or anything conceivable that could be construed as an advance on Heather Walker. 

B)      Upon receipt of the $2500 retainer, Mark Lowry told me he was dating Heather Walker (the girlfriend)

C)      At a Thanksgiving community (2017) celebration, Heather Walker told me that she was dating Mark Lowry and that had been meeting in remote meeting spots to avoid my detection

D)     Heather Walker told me that Mark Lowry informed her of the details of my case which is yet another violation… a complete breach of attorney/client privilege.

E)      Upon helping MS. Walker last summer (2017) in a custody crisis (a few hours) I witnessed the Ms. Walker abuse a prescription schedule 2 drug. Having been in continuous sobriety for 30 years I steered clear of Ms. Walker once I saw this.

    The fact that Mark Lowry wanted a $2500 retainer paid in cash and dated a woman who abused pills – and denied dating her - certainly did not cast Mark Lowry in a favorable light. My experience has shown that “like attracts like” and I would be dishonest if I said I did not wonder what he may have been using in the presence of Ms. Walker and otherwise… in addition to the cigarettes and beer which he openly ingested when living at Broadstone Apartments.

    I had a steady and monogamous relationship from June 2017 to October 29, 2017 with a female from Switzerland. Her name is Deb H. I never courted any other girls when I was with her nor did I cheat during this relationship. She is pictured below with me on the left and with my son to the right.

My girlfriend and my son in front of Whole Foods

Heather Walker - Mark Lowry's girlfriend of two years who 

(according to eye witness) abused controlled substances.