2007
GRAND LODGE OF MISSOURI
15
MASONIC TRIAL Mo. Wo. Bro. John Nations appointed a trial commission comprised of: Ralph K. Soebbing – Chairman, Brainerd W. LaTourette, Jr. – Member, and Robert L. Campbell – Member The following is their findings of fact, Conclusions of Law, and Judgment in the matter of Phillip G. Elam. The Trial Commission convened at Webster Groves Lodge on September 30, 2006 at 1:00 P.M. The Commission heard the sworn testimony of seven witnesses, but the Commission heard no oral testimony from defendant Phillip Elam, as he chose not to be present. In lieu of his personal appearance, defendant Elam submitted a lengthy written document denominated “A Formal Response to Unfounded Masonic Charges.” For convenience we shall hereafter refer to this document as defendant’s brief. The Commission has carefully considered all of the testimony heard along with the 42 exhibits admitted into evidence. We find that the evident, taken as a whole, confirms a long history of insubordination and unmasonic conduct on the part of Phillip Elam. An especially egregious example of his unmasonic conduct took place on May 8, 2006, when he called the St. Louis County police with the intent of having two brothers forcibly removed from Gardenville-Cache Lodge. We find that his conduct in this respect was arbitrary, abuse and completely without justification. Much of Elam’s unmasonic conduct appears to have centered around his mistaken belief the Grand Lodge had no authority to order an audit of Gardenville’s books. On January 12, 2006, Elam went so far as to offer a formal motion in open lodge to table and suspend all audit-related actions. The motion, consisting often numbered paragraphs, failed, but Elam continued his persistent resistance to an audit and his unrelenting defiance of Grand Lodge authority. Defendant’s brief is filled with strident and inflammatory argument that generates more heat than light. By no stretch of the imagination can the brief be considered admissible evidence. Although defendant’s brief has no probative value, it does reflect Elam’s continuing and ongoing defiance of orders and directives emanating from the Grand Lodge. Sadly, there is nothing in his brief to suggest even the slightest degree of repentance or remorse. Why Elam chose not to attend the trial is a matter about which the Commission will not speculate. Suffice it to say the Elam was not out of town on September 30, 2006; as he said he would be in a letter he wrote to WB Alan DeWoskin erroneously dated August 17, 2006. In fact, Elmas was in town on the morning September 30, 2006. According to the uncontradicted testimony of WB James Emory, Elam delivered a “big brown envelope” (containing several copies of Elam’s brief) to Emory’s house late that morning. After Emory found the envelope in his office at home, Emory called Elam and had a telephone conversation with Elam regarding what Elam wanted him to do with the envelope. At that time Emory had only 45 minutes to get to Webster Groves Lodge in time for the trial at 1:00 P.M. Clearly Elam was not out of town and could have attended the trial had he chosen to do so. The Trial Commission did enter its judgment as follows: Charge No. 1 is supported by clear and convincing evidence. (Same as to remaining eight charges except for Charge No. 3, which was dismissed at the beginning of the trail). Wherefore, the Trial Commission did hereby order that Philip Elam be expelled from Freemasonry and be divested of all of the rights and privileges appertaining thereto. Costs assessed against defendant.