Local: Visalia pastor sues son over '...

Local: Visalia pastor sues son over 'cyberbullying'

There are 1863 comments on the The Fresno Bee story from Oct 18, 2012, titled Local: Visalia pastor sues son over 'cyberbullying'. In it, The Fresno Bee reports that:

Visalia Calvary Church pastor, the Rev. Bob Grenier, and his wife, Gayle, have sued their estranged son, Alex Grenier, accusing him of defamation and cyberbullying.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Fresno Bee.

Who

Modesto, CA

#1724 Feb 11, 2013
topix.com is analogous to an Old World busy street corner.
Alex is analogous to a nutty street preacher yelling his message to any and all passers-by.
Who decided to stand near the same busy street corner and provide an alternative narrative to the one yelled about by Alex, the crazy street preacher.
Alex USED to scream at this busy topix.com street corner every day, several times a day, in a way reminiscent of an inner-city crack ho smoking five dollar rocks.
Since Who arrived at the topix.com street corner, Alex has curtailed his screaming at topix.com considerably.
Alex' hatesite is, in effect, another street corner on the other side of town.
There has been no curtailment of free speech, and there is no intent to curtail free speech.
There has been an effort to get Alex to leave THIS PARTICULAR topix.com street corner, and in this Who has bee effective.
Alex continues to post on topix.com because the media market coverage it affords him is greater than that which his hatesite provides, his salesmanship notwithstanding.
But, he posts/screams here a lot less.
Who

Modesto, CA

#1725 Feb 11, 2013
Dear General Reader,
It is highly unfortunate that Alex has to date not put together a coherent chronology of events leading up to the lawsuit.
Had he, I believe you, General Reader, would come to some different conclusions than the ones Alex is trying to lead you to using his hate campaign.
-
Fact: Alex has exhibited, with various contributors at michaelnewnham.com , a propensity/proclivity to mischaracterze, misrepresent, misreport and outright lie about private conversations and communications that he has with other people. There is an e-mail and blogging trail to support this fact.

Fact: There is (and has been for some time) a division in the Grenier household.

Fact: Divisions in a household are not illegal, and in fact have sometimes been known to be unavoidable, especially when one party is intransigent....it takes two to tango, and if the partner doesn't want to tango, well there's not much that can be done to remedy the situation.
This is not illegal. And in fact, with all relevant information on the table, such a division in a household can actually be seen to be understandable. Shocking, I know!

Fact: Alex' assertion that the General Reader will have to, and I quote, "wait for the details," shows that Alex has a habit of/proclivity to keep all relevant information away from the general reader in an attempt to carefully manipulate public opinions against his mother and father.
Who

Modesto, CA

#1726 Feb 11, 2013
2004 - Alex has a conversation with Bob.
Alex has written about this, but given his credibility issues (that I've seen exampled with participants at michaelnewnham.com ), Alex' account of this conversation must be met with healthy skepticism until evidence is given to the general reader to support his, Alex' conclusion.
-
It seems that this is when the breach in the family occurred, and since Alex began professing Christianity in 2009, it is possible that the discussion was religious in nature, and not about falsely alleging abuse.
At any rate, we cannot today know what was the source of Alex' conflict with his father, and we cannot know why the division in the family occurred.
If we were flies on the wall during that conversation, the division in the family might even be (gasp!) understandable.
-
2004 - Alex continues to hound his father about his concocted and thus false allegations of abuse.

2005- Alex' son is born, division in the family continues, Alex continues to hound his father and mother after they have made it clear that any and all contact is undesired by them.
This is not illegal, and may in fact be quite understandable, especially if Alex is using bullying tactics to goad his parents into further connection.

2006 - Alex continues to attempt to bully his way into communication. He contacts Bob a "few" times and contacts his mother "several" times, and his attempts are rebuffed.
This is not illegal, and might even be understandable. We would have to know ALL of the facts, and these facts are exactly what Alex has refused to provide, for going on a few years now.

2007 - At a funeral--YES, AT A FUNERAL (thus the Westboro Baptist connection), Alex' wife brings her children to CCV and attempts to bully her way into a meeting with Alex' mother. Alex is not present.
KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS AT A FUNERAL.
Amy's attempt is rebuffed by Gail. This is not illegal, and may even be understandable.

2007-2008-2009 - Alex sells his advertising business. Alex moves to Idaho with his wife and children and opens a pawn and gun shop. Alex' wife discovers topix.com . Alex begins a phone call and e-mail campaign to any and every person even tangentially associated with Bob Grenier, wherein Alex makes all sorts of accusations about conduct that he says occurred roughly FIFTEEN YEARS PRIOR.
Alex finds these people cold to his courting.

2010 - Gene Pensero recommends that Alex take his concerns to CCOF. Alex does so. CCOF refuses to, in the absence of evidence, bend their rules to serve Alex' agenda.
This is not illegal, and may even be understandable.

June 2010 - Who begins posting at topix.com .

July/August 2010 - Alex starts his refuse collector of a hatesite whereon he continues making all sorts of non-specific allegations without in any way providing supporting evidence that would allow the disinterested reader to come to his or her own conclusions.

Late 2010/early 2011 - Once again Alex' wife Amy shows up at CCV, unannounced and WITHOUT ALEX, and attempts to bully her way into a meeting with Alex' mother.
Just like three years prior, Alex' mom refuses to be bullied into meeting with someone with whom she may have a good reason for not wanting to meet with.
This is not illegal, and may in fact be understandable.
Who

Modesto, CA

#1727 Feb 11, 2013
From THIS side of the fence, Alex' wife looks more culpable than Alex.
My guess is that Amy hates Gail and Alex is conducting a hate campaign to keep Amy off his ass for procrastinating on washing the dishes.

2011- Paul's accusation surfaces for the first time.

2012 - Alex' allegations grow and grow like Pinnochio's nose to include accusations that seem constructed to give credence to Paul's claims.
Why was a "showering" incident completely unmentioned by Alex until 2012? Could it be that reading about the Sandusky affair gave him ideas? Seems likely to me, more likely in fact than the possibility that the showering incident occurred.
If Alex were a serial killer we would call him a copycat.
-
It is my hope that this loose chronology (which is the best that I could do given Alex' attempts to muddy the chronological, ideological and factual waters) will help the general reader navigate their way through the enduring saga that is
Alex Grenier's cyberbully hate campaign against the only family that loved him enough to raise him, a hate campaign motivated by Alex' disgust that his father made him shop for clothes at Miller's Outpost in high school in lieu of letting Alex wear Smiths t-shirts like all the other wanna-be pre-emo losers.
Facts

Hanford, CA

#1728 Feb 11, 2013
oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK
"Fact: Who Drunk Molester Pants doesnt know anyone involved.
Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't.
Fact: Who is a drunk with no credibility.
Fact: Who is a paid cyber troll who works for CCVisalia.
I'll say this one again because it is the truth.
Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't!
You don't know anything because you don't know anyone involved. You are a liar and a fool.
More lies, less substance then Mom "it's not that I defend Bob its that Alex won't answer my stupid poorly worded open ended questions. I asked really stupid things and when nobody answered them, I made up my own answers and that's how I know he truth, I created it"
I gotta say, that's some really stupid reasoning Who. More pathetic then ever.
Who said "Now its not enough that I bully Alex on here, I have to go to other sites to try to peace together my own hate campaign since I coined the phrase and everyone gives me credit for the lawsuit and I'm the best!"
"Oh and I'm Who, waaaaaaaaaaah!"
Poor Who, he can't dispute the facts so he makes up his own.
Ever get tired of lying and spreading hate Who? Do you ever get tired of defending a child molester?
Have you gone to met the man you defend Who? Have you coward?
Go meet him. He'd love to pat you on the back. It's a common thing. Happens all the time. See where that leads you. Lol
I'm 100% positive that he would have nothing but contempt for you. Because you are "beneath him." But that won't matter, you'll still worship at his alter. The alter if Bob.
The Alter of Bob. That's a scary thought isn't it.
Who wrote:
oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK
And that's how Who responds to anything his little troll brain can't handle.
"it's not that I defend Bob its that Alex won't answer my stupid poorly worded open ended questions. I asked really stupid things and when nobody answered them, I made up my own answers and that's how I know he truth, I created it"
Facts

Hanford, CA

#1729 Feb 11, 2013
Who said

"oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK

"Fact: Who Drunk Molester Pants doesnt know anyone involved.

Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't.

Fact: Who is a drunk with no credibility.

Fact: Who is a paid cyber troll who works for CCVisalia.
I'll say this one again because it is the truth.

Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't!

You don't know anything because you don't know anyone involved. You are a liar and a fool.

More lies, less substance, "it's not that I defend Bob its that Alex won't answer my stupid poorly worded open ended questions. I asked really stupid things and when nobody answers them, I make up my own answers and that's how I know the truth, I created it"
I gotta say, that's some really stupid reasoning Who. More pathetic then ever.

Who said "Now its not enough that I bully Alex on here, I have to go to other sites to try to peace together my own hate campaign since I coined the phrase and everyone gives me credit for the lawsuit and I'm the best!"

"Oh and I'm Who, waaaaaaaaaaah!"

Poor Who, he can't dispute the facts so he makes up his own.

Ever get tired of lying and spreading hate Who? Do you ever get tired of defending a child molester?

Have you gone to met the man you defend Who? Have you coward?

Go meet him. He'd love to pat you on the back. It's a common thing. Happens all the time. See where that leads you. Lol

I'm 100% positive that he would have nothing but contempt for you. Because you are "beneath him." But that won't matter, you'll still worship at his alter. The alter if Bob.
The Alter of Bob. That's a scary thought isn't it.

Who wrote:
oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK
Who

Modesto, CA

#1730 Feb 11, 2013
Whatever.
Your statements all presuppose Alex' defamation as truth, and you were not standing there in the room when Alex had conversations with his father, so you are just regurgitating what Alex told you.
I have good reason for doubting what Alex says, and since you are merely repeating HIM, I have good reason to doubt you, too.
My name is Who.
Who

Modesto, CA

#1731 Feb 11, 2013
you says
"... Do you ever get tired of defending a xxx?..."
Who says
In my opinion, that is not at all what I am doing. I am merely pointing out that your claim is likely false.
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1732 Feb 11, 2013
The truth is now in the court record.

A jury of peers needs to sort out the allegations of sexual molestation and make a binding determination on the one issue to which statute of limitations does not apply in California. An arrest needs to be made and a jury needs to sort it all out.

I pray for justice for Paul.
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1733 Feb 11, 2013
Who will continue to spin and dodge and deflect and try to trick the focus off of BG and onto anything but.

The facts are the facts and it's in a venue that Camp BG cannot control and cannot make the determination of truth and falsity.

Testimonies are evidence. The allegations are very serious and a jury of peers needs to weight the evidence in a criminal proceeding, in my opinion.
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1734 Feb 11, 2013
Who wrote:
In my opinion, that is not at all what I am doing. I am merely pointing out that your claim is likely false.
The court record is available. You can get it and read it for yourself. There is much corroboration and testimony and evidence from bookkeepers, long time pastors, long time board members etc.

Paul's testimony is powerful and very upsetting. I hope he gets justice.

Your strategy is to focus on Alex while dodging the fact that many other credible people are the sources of the information that has been reported (along with Alex's own personal experiences and abuse, etc).

Yours is a failed strategy and tactic.
Thoughts

South San Francisco, CA

#1735 Feb 11, 2013
Alex is one big liar! His stories grow like pinnochio's nose!
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1736 Feb 11, 2013
Who wrote:
Whatever.
Your statements all presuppose Alex' defamation as truth, and you were not standing there in the room when Alex had conversations with his father, so you are just regurgitating what Alex told you.
I have good reason for doubting what Alex says, and since you are merely repeating HIM, I have good reason to doubt you, too.
My name is Who.
You seem to doubt anyone who has a testimony against BG. You intentionally obfuscate and ignore Paul's testimony, Geoff's, bookkeepers, long time board members, long time pastors, secretaries, long time members, neighbors, family members etc etc.

This is telling of your intellectual dishonesty and agenda-driven participation.

You can remove Alex's personal testimony, and the same allegations are all still there, from a variety of other credible sources.

You intentionally dodge this fact and either you are a troll on steroids or you have skin in the game. I'm guessing skin in the game, as it is highly unlikely that someone would spend so much time and energy being intentionally dishonest and game-playing just for fun. But I could be wrong.
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1737 Feb 11, 2013
Regardless, the civil suit has entered a new phase and a local judge or the Appeal's court will decide if BG's lawsuit is valid. I'm confident the law is on our side and that justice in that particular will prevail as no defamation has happened and there is no actual malice, etc.

We need to push for justice for Paul as the statute of limitations for sexual abuse is not up in California. There is a loophole in the law that will allow an arrest and a trial for Paul's allegations. I want justice for Paul. A jury of peers needs to hear all the testimonies, BG needs to give a defense and a judge and jury need to make the final determination, not a blog, not CS, not VPD.
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1738 Feb 11, 2013
Who, do you agree that a jury of peers and a judge in the criminal court system is the right venue to weigh the evidence and render a judgment on sexual abuse allegations?
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1739 Feb 11, 2013
Straightforward yes or no question that you are dodging, no?
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1740 Feb 11, 2013
I'll ask it again, since "Who" has said topix and blogs are the wrong place to hash this stuff out:

Do you agree that a jury of peers and a judge in the criminal court system is the right venue to weigh the evidence and render a judgment on sexual abuse allegations?
CalvaryChapelAbu sedotcom

Caldwell, ID

#1741 Feb 11, 2013
"Who" has been saying this stuff doesn't belong on the blogs, topix etc

Don't you think it's high time that the criminal court system hears Paul's allegations of sexual abuse and hears from other witnesses and hears BG's defense and that a jury of peers and a judge hears all sides of this and makes a judgment?

I agree with "Who"..let's get this off of topix and off the blogs and into criminal court!
The Truth Unshadowed

Hanford, CA

#1742 Feb 11, 2013
Facts wrote:
Who said
"oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK
"Fact: Who Drunk Molester Pants doesnt know anyone involved.
Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't.
Fact: Who is a drunk with no credibility.
Fact: Who is a paid cyber troll who works for CCVisalia.
I'll say this one again because it is the truth.
Fact: If Who doesn't actually know anyone involved how can he have any facts? He can't!
You don't know anything because you don't know anyone involved. You are a liar and a fool.
More lies, less substance, "it's not that I defend Bob its that Alex won't answer my stupid poorly worded open ended questions. I asked really stupid things and when nobody answers them, I make up my own answers and that's how I know the truth, I created it"
I gotta say, that's some really stupid reasoning Who. More pathetic then ever.
Who said "Now its not enough that I bully Alex on here, I have to go to other sites to try to peace together my own hate campaign since I coined the phrase and everyone gives me credit for the lawsuit and I'm the best!"
"Oh and I'm Who, waaaaaaaaaaah!"
Poor Who, he can't dispute the facts so he makes up his own.
Ever get tired of lying and spreading hate Who? Do you ever get tired of defending a child molester?
Have you gone to met the man you defend Who? Have you coward?
Go meet him. He'd love to pat you on the back. It's a common thing. Happens all the time. See where that leads you. Lol
I'm 100% positive that he would have nothing but contempt for you. Because you are "beneath him." But that won't matter, you'll still worship at his alter. The alter if Bob.
The Alter of Bob. That's a scary thought isn't it.
Who wrote:
oh that's funny. If i WASN'T DRUNK RIGHT NOW i'D TRY TO GIVE YOU AN INTELLIGENT RESPONSE.
iF Y9OU HAVE FACTS, LET THEM FLY, IF NOT GO FUCK YOURSELF. i DON'T LIVE IN CHURCH AS A MATTER OF EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS wHO.
pS I KNOW THE CAPS LOCK
Good points Facts
Thoughts

South San Francisco, CA

#1743 Feb 11, 2013
Alex is crazier than a shithouse rat

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Domestic Violence Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Fulton man arrested for child porn (Jun '12) May 23 QMoney 2
News Security Systems Donated To OKC Domestic Violen... May 12 bullcrap 1
News Iuka man charged with felony child abuse (Apr '16) May 8 WellPhartz 8
News Man's sex abuse acquittal shows challenges for ... May 6 ThomasA How Many ... 3
News Oklahoma City man accused of child abuse after ... May 2 kingdomofools 1
News The Casey Anthony trial is dissected again in a... Apr '17 kauna 22
News Poorest preschoolers most vulnerable to fatal c... Apr '17 Spotted Girl 1
More from around the web