Professional Documents
Culture Documents
revisionandaresupersededbytheadvancesheetsandbound
volumesoftheOfficialReports.Ifyoufindatypographical
errororotherformalerror,pleasenotifytheReporterof
Decisions,SupremeJudicialCourt,JohnAdamsCourthouse,
PembertonSquare,Suite2500,Boston,MA021081750(617)557
1030SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us
SJC09856
THEGENERALCONVENTIONOFTHENEWJERUSALEMINTHEUNITEDSTATES
1
2
OFAMERICA,INC.,&others
vs.EDWARDMacKENZIE&others.
Suffolk.September5,2007.October15,2007.
Present:Marshall,C.J.,Greaney,Ireland,Spina,Cowin,&
Cordy,JJ.
Practice,Civil,Complaint,Motiontodismiss. Religion.
Jurisdiction,Ecclesiasticalcontroversy. Contract,
Constructionofcontract,Church. Conversion. Words,
"Ceasetoexist."
CivilactioncommencedintheSuperiorCourtDepartmenton
August4,2004.
MotionstodismisswereheardbyPatrickF.Brady,J.,and
entryofjudgmentwasorderedbyCatherineA.White,J.
AfterreviewbytheAppealsCourt,theSupremeJudicial
Courtgrantedleavetoobtainfurtherappellatereview.
HowardM.Cooper(JulieE.Greenwithhim)forthe
defendants.
LawrenceR.Kulig(DamonP.Hartwithhim)forthe
plaintiffs.
COWIN,J.ThedefendantBostonSocietyoftheNew
TheMassachusettsAssociationoftheNewJerusalem
(Swedenborgian)andGeorgeChapin.
2
ThomasKennedyBostonSocietyoftheNewJerusalem,
Incorporated(Swedenborgian)andBostonviewCorporation.
2
3
Jerusalem,Incorporated(Swedenborgian)
(thechurchorthe
Bostonchurch),isaSwedenborgianchurchthatdisaffiliatedfrom
(withdrewfrommembershipin)theplaintiffGeneralConventionof
theNewJerusalemintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,Inc.(the
GeneralConventionorthenationalbody),anationaldenomination
ofcongregationalSwedenborgianchurches.Thenationalbody
commencedacivilactionintheSuperiorCourt,seeking,among
otherthings,ajudgmentdeclaringthat,undertheBoston
church'sbylaws,thisdisaffiliationtriggeredatransferofthe
Bostonchurch'sassetstothenationalbody.Inarelatedclaim,
thenationalbodyassertedthat,becausethedisaffiliation
causedownershipoftheBostonchurch'sassetstotransfertothe
nationalbody,theretentionoftheseassetsbyindividual
defendantsEdwardMacKenzieandThomasKennedycreateda
conversion.AjudgeintheSuperiorCourtgrantedthe
defendants'motionstodismiss.TheAppealsCourtreversedthe
judgmentwithregardtotheseissues,whileaffirmingtherestof
thejudgment. TheGen.ConventionattheNewJerusaleminthe
U.S.,Inc.v.MacKenzie,66Mass.App.Ct.836,844(2006).We
grantedfurtherappellatereviewlimitedtotheseissues,andnow
affirmthedismissalofthesecountsforfailuretostateaclaim
uponwhichreliefcanbegranted.
1. Facts.Wesummarizetherelevantfactsasallegedin
Theparenthetical"Swedenborgian"ispartoftheofficial
nameofthedefendantBostonchurchaswellastheplaintiff
MassachusettsAssociationoftheNewJerusalem.
3
theamendedcomplaint.Sinceitsfoundingin1818,thechurch
hasbeenaffiliatedwiththeGeneralConvention.Underthe
leadershipofMacKenzieandKennedy,however,thechurchbroke
awayfromtheGeneralConventionin2003.Priortoits
disaffiliation,thechurch'sbylawscontainednumerousreferences
totheGeneralConvention.Theprovisionattheheartofthis
litigationisentitled"Dissolution"andstates:
"Intheeventthatthereligiousbodyknownasthe
BostonSocietyoftheNewJerusalem,Inc.shallceaseto
exist,allfundsandholdingsshallbetransferredtothe
GeneralConventionoftheNewJerusalemintheUnitedStates
ofAmerica.
"Theseassetsshallbeheldinescrowforthe
establishmentofanotherGeneralConventionoftheNew
Jerusalem(Swedenborgian)ChurchwithintheCityofBoston,
Massachusetts.Afteraperiodoftwenty(20)years,should
nosuchChurchexist,thecapitalandincometherefromshall
reverttotheGeneralConventionoftheNewJerusalem
(Swedenborgian)withanyrestrictionsofuseswhichmayhave
beenvotedbytheSocietymembersatthetimeofthe
dissolution."
Sincedisaffiliation,thechurchhascontinuedtofunction
underthecorporatenameoftheBostonSocietyoftheNew
Jerusalem,Inc.(Swedenborgian).Itretainsthesamepastorand
carriesonmanyofthesamechurchandcharitableservicesasit
hadpriortodisaffiliation.
Theplaintiffsfiledanelevencountcomplaintinthe
SuperiorCourt.CountIsoughtadeclarationthat,byvirtueof
theBostonchurch'sorganizationalbylaws,atthetimeofits
disaffiliationfromtheGeneralConvention,alloftheBoston
church'sassetsrevertedtotheGeneralConventiontobeheldin
trustfortheestablishmentofanotheraffiliatedchurch.Count
4
IIallegedthattheindividualdefendantswrongfullyconverted
theassetsoftheGeneralConventiontotheirownuse.Ajudge
inSuperiorCourtallowedthedefendants'motionstodismissall
oftheplaintiffs'claims.SeeMass.R.Civ.P.12(b)(6),365
Mass.754(1974).WithrespecttocountI,theSuperiorCourt
judgereasonedthatthelanguageofthedissolutionbylawwas
unambiguousanddidnotapplytoadisaffiliationfromthe
GeneralConventionafterwhichthechurchcontinuedtoexist.
TheSuperiorCourtjudgealsodismissedtheplaintiffs'claims
formismanagementandmisappropriationofassetsforlackof
standing,explainingthat"[s]uchauthorityrestsexclusively
withtheattorneygeneral."
TheAppealsCourtaffirmedthejudgmentsofdismissalexcept
inregardtocountsIandII,rulingthatthesecountsshould
proceed. TheGen.ConventionoftheNewJerusalemintheU.S.,
Inc.v.MacKenzie,supra.TheAppealsCourtheldthatthe
dissolutionbylawwasambiguousbecause"theterm'ceaseto
exist'is'susceptibleofmorethanonemeaningandreasonably
intelligentpersonswoulddifferastowhichmeaningisthe
properone.'" Id.at842,quotingCountyofBarnstablev.
AmericanFin.Corp.,51Mass.App.Ct.213,215(2001).Thus,
thebylawcouldapplytobothdisaffiliationanddissolution.
TheAppealsCourtinterpretedcountII'sconversionclaimas
"premisedonthepropositionthatMacKenzieandKennedy
wrongfullyconvertedassetsoftheGeneralConventionfortheir
ownuse,"id.at843n.10,andthuspermittedthatcountto
5
proceedaswell.
Weconcludethatthedissolutionbylawwasnottriggeredby
thedisaffiliationbecausetheplaintextofthebylawclearly
contemplatedonlydissolutionoftheentityitself.Sincethe
churchremainstherightfulownerofitsassets,theplaintiffs'
conversionclaimalsofails.
2. Dissolutionbylaw.Inreviewingamotiontodismiss,we
acceptastrueallfactualallegationsinthecomplaint,anddraw
allreasonableinferencesinfavoroftheplaintiffs. Naderv.
Citron,372Mass.96,98(1977).Thecomplaintshouldnotbe
dismissedforfailuretostateaclaimunlessitappearsbeyonda
doubtthattheplaintiffscanprovenosetoffactswhichentitle
themtorelief. Id.
Thebylawsofachurchcorporationformacontractbetween
thechurchanditsmembers,andareinterpretedaccordingto
4
principlesofcontractlaw.
SeeMitchellv.AlbanianOrthodox
DioceseinAm.,Inc.,355Mass.278,282(1969)Kubiliusv.
HawesUnitarianCongregationalChurch,322Mass.638,644(1948).
Thewordsofacontractmustbeconsideredinthecontextofthe
entirecontractratherthaninisolation.SeeStarrv.Fordham,
AstheAppealsCourtconcluded,theFirstAmendmenttothe
UnitedStatesConstitutiondoesnotprohibitacivilcourtfrom
exercisingjurisdictionoverpropertydisputesinvolvingachurch
solongasthecourtdoesnotintrudeuponissuesofchurch
doctrine,polity,discipline,andinternaloperation.SeeThe
Gen.ConventionoftheNewJerusalemintheU.S.,Inc.v.
MacKenzie,66Mass.App.Ct.836,839840(2006),citingCallahan
v.FirstCongregationalChurch,441Mass.699,708(2004),and
Jonesv.Wolf,443U.S.595,602(1979).
6
420Mass.178,190(1995)CharlesI.Hosmer,Inc.v.
Commonwealth,302Mass.495,501502(1939).Whenthewordsofa
contractareclear,theymustbeconstruedintheirusualand
ordinarysense,Oberv.NationalCas.Co.,318Mass.27,30
(1945),andwedonotadmitparolevidencetocreateanambiguity
whentheplainlanguageisunambiguous,Panikowskiv.Giroux,272
Mass.580,583(1930).InRobertIndus.,Inc.v.Spence,362
Mass.751,753754(1973),weexplainedthatextrinsicevidence
maybeadmittedwhenacontractisambiguousonitsfaceoras
appliedtothesubjectmatter.Theinitialambiguitymustexist,
however.Furthermore,extrinsicevidencecannotbeusedto
contradictorchangethewrittenterms,butonlytoremoveorto
explaintheexistinguncertaintyorambiguity. Id.
Withtheselegalprinciplesinmind,weturntothefactsof
thiscase.TheGeneralConventionarguesthatthedissolution
bylawisambiguous,andcouldapplytoadisaffiliationofthe
churchfromtheGeneralConventioninadditiontoadissolution
ofthechurch.Thethrustoftheargumentisthatthewords"the
religiousbody"couldrefernotonlyto"theBostonSocietyof
theNewJerusalem,Inc.,"asexplicitlystatedinthetext,but
alsoto"areligiousbodyaffiliatedwiththeGeneral
Convention."Althoughthelatterphraseisnotfoundinthe
plaintextofthedissolutionbylaw,theGeneralConvention
arguesthatitisapossibleinterpretation.Upon
disaffiliation,the"religiousbodyaffiliatedwiththeGeneral
Convention"wouldthus"ceasetoexist."Anotherwaytoputthe
7
argumentisthat"ceasetoexist"isambiguous,andcouldmean
both"todissolve"and"todisaffiliate."SeeTheGen.
ConventionoftheNewJerusalemintheU.S.,Inc.v.MacKenzie,
supraat842.
Wedonotlocateanambiguityinthelanguageofthe
dissolutionbylaw,andholdthatitistriggeredonlyupon
dissolution,andnotbydisaffiliation.Massachusettsmandates
thatcharitiesfollowcertainstatutoryproceduresfor
5
dissolution,seeG.L.c.180,11A,
andthechurchhastaken
noneofthesesteps.Moreimportantly,itisundisputedthatthe
churchcontinuestoexist,andthatitengagesinreligiousand
charitableactivities,muchasithaddonebeforedisaffiliation.
Turningtotheplaintextofthebylaw,itisentitled
"Dissolution,"anddisaffiliationismentionednowhereinthe
text.Thetextconcernsonlythe"ceasingtoexist"of"the
religiousbodyknownastheBostonSocietyoftheNewJerusalem,
Inc."Ourinterpretationissupportedbythefinalsentenceof
thebylaw,whichprovidesthattheuseofrevertedchurchassets
GeneralLawsc.180,11A,providesasfollows:
"Acharitablecorporationconstitutingapubliccharity
...whichdesirestocloseitsaffairsmay,byvoteofa
majorityofitsboardofdirectors,authorizeapetitionfor
itsdissolutiontobefiledinthesupremejudicialcourt
settingforthinsubstancethegroundsoftheapplication
fordissolutionandrequestingthecourttoauthorizethe
administrationofitsfundsforsuchsimilarpublic
charitablepurposesasthecourtmaydetermine.The
provisionsofthissectionshallconstitutethesolemethod
forthevoluntarydissolutionofanysuchcharitable
organization."
8
willbeinaccordancewith"anyrestrictionsofuseswhichmay
havebeenvotedbythe[church]membersatthetimeof
dissolution."Toreaddisaffiliationintothistextistostrain
theplainwordsmorethancontractlawpermits.
Plaintiffsarguethatlanguagestatingthatassets"shallbe
heldinescrowfortheestablishmentofanotherGeneral
ConventionoftheNewJerusalem(Swedenborgian)Church"renders
theterm"religiousbody"ambiguous.Wediscernnoambiguity.
Thislanguageisconsistentwithdissolution.Itmayindicate
thecloserelationshipbetweenthechurchandtheGeneral
Conventionatthetimethechurchbylawsweredrafted,butthat
factdoesnotcreateambiguityinanotherwisecleartext.
Plaintiffsalsoarguethat,ifinterpretedinthecontextof
certainotherarticlesofthebylaws,thedissolutionbylawcould
reasonablyrefertodisaffiliation.Wedisagree.ArticleIII
referstoaffiliationwiththeGeneralConventionsince1818and
thechurch'sdelegates'righttoparticipateandvoteatthe
GeneralConvention'smeetings.ArticleIVreferstotransfersof
membershiptothechurchfromotherGeneralConventionaffiliated
churches.ArticleVIprovidesfortheelectionofanewpastor
forthechurch,andrequiresthatthenewpastorbeingood
standingwiththeGeneralConvention.Similartothedissolution
bylaw,theseprovisionsalsoindicatethecooperative
relationshipbetweenthechurchandtheGeneralConventionatthe
timeofthedraftingofthebylaws.Theydonot,however,create
anambiguitythat"ceasingtoexist"wasintendedtomean
9
"disaffiliation."
OtherStateshavetakenapositioninaccordwiththeonewe
taketoday.Forexample,inChristensenv.Roumfort,20Ohio
App.3d107,108(1984),theCourtofAppealsofOhioconsidered
aprovisionstatingthattheUnitedPresbyterianChurchinthe
UnitedStatesofAmerica(UPCUSA)wouldgaincontrolofalocal
church'sproperty"[w]heneverhereafteraparticularchurchis
formallydissolvedbythepresbytery,orhasbecomeextinctby
reasonofthedispersalofitsmembers,theabandonmentofits
work,orothercause...."Thecourtheldthatthechurchwas
notextincteventhoughithaddisaffiliatedfromUPCUSA. Id.at
110.InFirstPresbyterianChurchv.UnitedPresbyterianChurch
intheUnitedStates,62N.Y.2d110,123,cert.denied,469U.S.
1037(1984),theCourtofAppealsofNewYorkconsideredaUPCUSA
provisionstatingthatwheneveralocalchurchisdissolved,its
propertyshallreverttoUPCUSA.Thecourtheldthatthelocal
church'sdisaffiliationfromUPCUSAwasnotadissolutionor
extinctionthatwouldtriggerthisprovision.Seeid.The
SupremeCourtofMissourireachedthesameconclusionasthe
courtsinOhioandNewYorkonnearlyidenticalfactsin
PresbyteryofElijahParishLovejoyv.Jaeggi,682S.W.2d465,
474(Mo.1984).Thosejurisdictionsthathaveawardedproperty
fromalocalchurchtotheparentchurchupondisaffiliation
generallyhavedonesoonthebasisofdifferentassumptionsas
10
6
tothefacts.
Totheextentthatthefactsarenot
distinguishable,weneverthelessdeclinetofollowthereasoning
oftheseothercourts.
Sincetheplainlanguageofthedissolutionbylawis
unambiguous,wedonotconsiderextrinsicevidencesuchas
allegationsofwhatwasintendedwhenthedissolutionbylawwas
7
drafted.
Plaintiffsarguethatwearerequired,inreviewing
themotiontodismiss,toaccepttheGeneralConvention'sreading
ofthedissolutionbylawinfavoroftheGeneralConvention,asa
truefactualallegationorreasonableinference.Buttheproper
interpretationofthebylawisamatteroflaw,Berkowitzv.
President&FellowsofHarvardCollege,58Mass.App.Ct.262,
270(2003),andlegalconclusionscastintheformoffactual
allegationarenottakenastrueonamotiontodismiss,Schaer
v.BrandeisUniv.,432Mass.474,477478(2000).
3. Conversion.Theplaintiffs'claimagainstthe
individualdefendantsMacKenzieandKennedyforconversionalso
fails.CountIIoftheamendedcomplaintallegedthat(1)the
See,e.g.,CentralCoastBaptistAss'nv.FirstBaptist
Church,154Cal.App.4th586,592(2007)(holdingthat
disaffiliatedchurchhaddefactodissolvedwhenlastvoteofits
fullmembershipwastodissolveandtotransferassetstomother
church)WisconsinConferenceBd.ofTrusteesoftheUnited
MethodistChurch,Inc.v.Culver,243Wis.2d394,407409(2001)
(holdingthatdisaffiliatedchurchhaddissolvedwithinmeaning
ofStatelawwhenstatuteprovidedassetsshallrevertto
Methodistdenomination"[w]heneveranylocalMethodistchurchor
societyshallbecomedefunctordissolved").
7
Wethusdonotconsiderallegationsintheamended
complaintandintheaffidavitofJohnPerryregarding
circumstancessurroundingthedraftingofthedissolutionbylaw.
11
assetsofthechurch,asaresultofthedisaffiliation,werethe
propertyoftheGeneralConvention(2)theindividualdefendants
kneworshouldhaveknownthattheyhadnorighttothis
propertyand(3)theindividualdefendants,nonetheless,
exercisedactsofownershipandcontrolovertheseassetsfor
theirownpersonalgain.
Thedefendants'primaryargumentisthatplaintiffshaveno
standingtobringthisclaim,becausetheAttorneyGeneralhas
exclusivejurisdiction,withnarrowexceptions,overmanagement
ofcharitableassets. Weaverv.Wood,425Mass.270,275277
(1997).Weneednotaddresstheissueofstandinghere.The
conversionclaimispremisedonthefactthattheGeneral
Conventionistherightfulownerofthechurch'sassets.Since
wehaverejectedtheGeneralConvention'sclaimofownership,the
conversionclaimfailsonsubstantivegrounds.
Accordingly,weaffirmthejudgmentoftheSuperiorCourtas
tocountsIandII.
Judgmentaffirmed.
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
VIOLATIONS:
18 U.S.C. 1962(d)
RICO Conspiracy
v.
18 U.S.C. 1962(c)
Racketeering
(1) EDWARD J. MACKENZIE, JR.,
18 U.S.C. 1349
Mail Fraud Conspiracy
18 U.S.C. 1956(h)
Money Laundering Conspiracy
18 U.S.C.
Extortion
1951
18 U.S.C. 1343
Wire Fraud
Defendant.
18 U.S.C. 2(a)
Aiding and Abetting
18 U.S.C. 981, 982,
963, 28 U.S.C. 2461
Criminal Forfeiture
INDICTMENT
in and
for
the District of
COUNT ONE
(Racketeering Conspiracy)
THE ENTERPRISE
1.
in
1823
as
one
Massachusetts.
(hereinafter,
of
the
first
Swedenborgian
was
charitable
churches
which
operated
Corporation,
Inc.
as
religious
laws of
a
Inc.
non-profit
the Commonwealth of
church.
(hereinafter,
in
BSNJ
"BVC") ,
established
which
does
for the
Street,
Boston,
Massachusetts.
The
130-140
Bowdoin
church
with
(hereinafter,
and
an
approximately
approximately
145
"BVC Apartments").
18-story
residential
apartment
rental
units
Each year
since in or about 2006, BVC has remitted its net income to BSNJ.
2.
decisions
regarding
finances,
the
collection
and
preparation of a budget.
wholly-owned subsidiary,
BVC, will be
3.
Title
United
18,
States
Code,
Section
as defined by
1961(4),
that
is,
an
"the enterprise").
as
continuing
unit
for
common
purpose
of
commerce.
4.
The
Church is
Revenue
Code
Section
SOl(c) (3)").
Under
organization,
the
to
insiders.
organization under
(hereinafter,
the
tax
Church
an exempt
U. S.
is
prohibited
in inurement of
The
code,
prohibition
"IRC
as
from
an
Internal
Section
exempt
engaging
in
inurement
to
insiders
is
absolute;
therefore,
any
amount
of
inurement
to
EDWARD J.
Church
in
became
the
MACKENZIE,
approximately
Church's
54,
JR.,
September
"Director
2002i
of
2003,
Operations, "
MACKENZIE
salaried
position that was created especially for him and which he still
holds.
6.
BVC.
MACKENZIE
was an officer of
In Massachusetts,
corporations
must
act
officers
in
good
BSNJ and a
and directors
faith
and
Director of
of
non-profit
exercise
Pursuant to Massachusetts
Section 6C,
fiduciary
General
like position
A director
may
not
improperly
benefit
from
continuing
through
at
least
in
or
about
December
2012/
EDWARD
J.
MACKENZIE,
JR.,
defendant herein
Church
an
which affected
enterprise
directly
of
the
activity.
in
and
of
did unlawfully
indirectlYI
through
in
the
conduct
pattern
of
of
the
racketeering
Sections 1961(1)
and
conduct
and
participate
directly
and
(a)
indictable
Title 18
(d)
activities
1961(5)1
States
the
enterprise
to
engaged
affairs
participate,
under
i
(b)
Section 1341
Title
in
18,
fraud)
United
(c)
Section 1956
States
indictable
Code
United
under
(money laundering)
the
consisted of multiple
indirectly
Section 1951
It was part of
conspirator
would
commit
at
least
two
acts
of
racketeering
activity
in
the
conduct
of
the
affairs
of
the
enterprise.
OBJECTS OF THE CONSPIRACY
9.
holdings
and profit
from
and
his
transactions
involving
the
Church.
10.
Once
MACKENZIE
co-conspirators
were
in
the
Church by means
of
false
and
fraudulent
pretenses,
from vendors
11.
MACKENZIE
and
co-conspirator
number
of
voting
knew
members,
Thomas
that
the
many
of
J.
KENNEDY
were
elderly.
September 2002.
could
defraud
the
Church
of
its
considerable
financial
Once in control,
in or about
consolidate
limited
to,
the
and
fortify
following:
their
(a)
power,
removing
including,
certain
but
not
incumbent
parent
organizations
of
the
Swedenborgian Church
7
in order to
amending
(c)
the
Church's by-laws
for
the Church
2003
to
and
"Director of Operations"
and continued
to
hold
"Director of Operations"
as
of
May
2013
and
giving
the
In addition
to
once in control,
violation of
their
consolidating
MACKENZIE
fiduciary obligations
and
the
Church's
not
vehicles
limited
for,
(c)
to:
(a)
the
among others,
of MACKENZIE;
(b)
$50,000
in
IRC
the
MACKENZIE,
cash awards
"loan"
to
purchase
of
at
KENNEDY,
for MACKENZIE's
MACKENZIE
to
pay
his
including,
least
four
and a
new
relative
family members;
personal
legal
five-year
Church's
previously
starting
employment
"Director
of
existed.
salary
of
agreement
with
Operations,"
The
agreement
$100,000,
position
to
that
provided MACKENZIE
annual
salary
be
the
had
not
with
increases
a
in
retirement
plan,
health
insurance,
and
four
weeks
of
paid
five
years
through
December
compensation
as
effective
2013.
the
In
December
2012,
Church's
2008,
and
salary
MACKENZIE's
"Director
of
continuing
Operations
and
was
ll
approximately $200,000.
16.
the
Church
of
combination
of
Moreover,
its
considerable
fraud,
MACKENZIE
deceit,
financial
extortion,
assets
theft,
through
and
bribery.
things,
autobiography,
Whi tey
Bulger
Soldierll
criminal
providing
Street
and
the
them
with
Soldier:
Boston
In Street Soldier,
history,
including
signed
My
Irish
Life
Mob
copies
of
as
Enforcer
an
his
(hereinafter,
MACKENZIE admitted to a
burglary,
among
robbery,
2003
for
"Street
lengthy
armed assault,
Section
COUNT TWO
(Racketeering)
17.
paragraphs
and
1-6
9-16
are
restated
herein
and
2002
and
incorporated by reference.
18.
From
at
in
least
before
or
September
Massachusetts
defendant herein,
JR.,
and elsewhere,
J.
EDWARD
together wi th others,
in the
MACKENZIE,
Church,
participate,
unlawfully
did
directly
and
activities
commerce,
of
through
and
knowingly
indirectly,
the
and
the
affected,
pattern
the
conduct
and
of
which
in
conduct
interstate
of
and
racketeering
foreign
activity
In
or
about
Spring
of
2004,
MACKENZIE
and
KENNEDY
Florida
corporation,
Space
(hereinafter,
"Space propulsion").
the
to
Church
fraudulently
investment,
invest
it
was
MACKENZIE
$200,000
misrepresenting
when
propulsion
in
that
primarily
10
means
Inc.
Space
the
Systems,
Propulsion
$200,000
for
was
MACKENZIE
by
an
and
and
that
Church's
the
was
In fact,
wi th Space
conditional
Propulsion
on an
immediate
or about June 8,
scheme
money
and
and
artifice
property
by
to
defraud
means
of
the
the above
Church,
materially
and
false
to
and
On or about
the
dates
set
Middle
MACKENZIE,
known
each of
District
JR.,
and
of
Florida,
defendant herein,
unknown
to
the
Grand
and
forth below,
in
in Jacksonville,
in
elsewhere,
commerce
the
by
means
signals
of
and
wire
sounds
Jury,
for
the
communication
described
purpose
in
below,
of
caused to be
interstate
anyone
11
J.
EDWARD
of
Number
One,
in
violation
of
Title
18,
United
Code,
States
1A
1B
1C
DATE
DESCRIPTION
June 4, 2004
June 7, 2004
June 8, 2004
$200,000 wire MA to FL
$40,000 wire FL to MA (KENNEDY)
$40,000 wire FL to MA (MACKENZIE)
RACKETEERING ACT NUMBER TWO
(College Tuition Mail Fraud)
22.
The
Church has
long had a
tuition grant
program in
the
property
Apartments
management
(hereinafter
company
that
managed
the
BVC
It was part
#1
that
the
Church
had
expanded
had
Recipient
#1
not
to
done
apply
so.
to
MACKENZIE
the
then
Church / s
its
tuition
when in fact
encouraged
tuition
the
Tuition
program.
In
12
#1,
From at
through
in
or
Massachusetts,
least
about
the
as
early as
2008,
Augus t
District
in or about March
of
in
District
the
Connecticut,
2005,
and
of
elsewhere,
others,
known
and
unknown
intended to devise
to
the
Grand
Jury,
devised
and
of Massachusetts,
for
the
purpose
the District
of
executing
of
Connecticut,
and
attempting
in the District
and elsewhere,
to
execute
the
property
pretenses,
by
means
of
representations
materially
and
promises,
false
and
MACKENZIE
fraudulent
knowingly
in violation of
2A
DATE
January 1, 2006
August 3, 2006
January 4, 2007
June 141 2007
January 41 2008
July 10 1 2008
August 141 2008
2B
2C
2D
2E
2F
2G
$15,000
$15,000
$15 / 000
$15 / 000
$15 / 000
$18 / 980
TOTAL
to
to
to
to
to
to
(ck.
(ck.
(ck.
(ck.
QU (ck.
BC (ck.
BC
BC
BC
BC
#
#
#
#
#
#
3359)
3701)
4064)
4497)
6323)
6362)
$108,980
MACKENZIE
and
KENNEDY
came
into
physical
possession
Trust.
II
then
devised
scheme
to
steal
and
and
KENNEDY
created
KENNEDY
used
the
MACKENZIE and
checks
from
the
among
of
phony
other
trust
"BVC
things
the
two
with addresses
dominion and
conceal
the
bank
control.
scheme
to
This
allowed MACKENZIE
defraud
from
the
and KENNEDY
to
Church by maintaining
control over the bank statements and financial records for the
two sham Sovereign Bank accounts.
accounts were opened,
Church
totaling
approximately
and
into
$168 / 169.74 1
the
sham
KENNEDY
through
series
of
financial
26.
least
From at
on
or
about
June
20
2008
at
defendant herein
26
Boston
1
2006
l
Canton
and
EDWARD J. MACKENZIE,
until at
known and
property
representations
27.
by
1
materially
false
and
fraudulent
pretenses
and promises.
and promises
MACKENZIE
documents
between
accounts
in violation of Title 18
2006
and
2008
for
1
the
sham
Sovereign Bank
Sections
purposeful
Restaurant
of
(hereinafter
the
name
of
based
11
)
"Fill-A-Buster
MACKENZIE
documents
"FCT
1 fI
30 years.
variation
to
be
that
documents.
of
his
ex-girlfriend
MACKENZIE's
that an
and a signature
appears
ex-girlfriend
on
however
FCT1
had
never heard of FCT and was not familiar with the term "trustee
nor had she ever signed any document on behalf of FCT.
FCT was established
fl
Once the
established
Church
his
MACKENZIE
used
affiliation
conceal
from
the
Once
the
with
account
FCT 1
Three
Internal
the
to
conceal
Eight
conceal
the
Fifteen
Revenue
Service
from
proceeds
the
of
and Sixteen
more
than
16
29.
in the District of
knowing
form of unlawful
confederate,
transactions
in fact
Title
some
agree
and
affecting
bribery,
United
in
States
violation
of
in
whole
and
in
part
to
United
States
violation
General
of
Laws
Code,
Section
Section
I
in
fraud
39
in violation of
1341,
of
Chapter
commercial
271
of
the
conceal
all
and
disguise
the
Chapter
of
and
which
1341 1
of
violation
financial
fraud,
knowing that
39
conduct
commerce,
Section
Section
did knowingly
foreign
of mail
Code
to
interstate and
18 1
activitYI
Title
commercial
271
18,
of
the
briberyl
in
Massachusetts
United
States
Code
In
or
about
Summer
2006
the
(hereinafter
17
Church
hired
\\CPC tI
to replace the
large
hire
"Plumber
"oversee"
CPC
#1,"
despite
one-employee
the
fact
that
plumbing
Plumber
operation,
#1' s
to
hiring was
Between July
$123,808
the pipe
to
"oversee"
replacement
job.
During that
same period, in return for using his influence within the Church
to help Plumber #1 maintain and obtain work
in cash
relation
and matters
to
transactions
concerning
the
business
MACKENZIE,
agreed
to
employee,
JR.,
accept
defendant
herein,
payments
principal,
and
from
solicited,
Plumber
beneficiary
of
who
the
Church,
the
EDWARD J.
accepted,
#1,
in
was
and
not
an
upon
an
18
32.
greater Boston discount carpet and flooring company who was paid
approximately
by
$356 / 000
the
Church
for
numerous
flooring-related jobs.
carpet
and
in return for
maintain
flooring-related
work
at
the
Church ,
MACKENZIE
by
soliciting
and
accepting
approximately
$116 / 650
in
at
33.
in
least
or
Massachusetts 1
least
about
in
in or about
December
relation
in
to
the
transactions
the
Church,
solicited,
#11
to wit,
the Church,
EDWARD
accepted,
J.
District
and
of
matters
principal,
and
MACKENZIE,
JR.,
defendant
herein,
Church
that
in violation of Section 39
19
such payments
greater Boston
fish
and aquarium
retail
store,
billed
the
In approximately
high-end
weymouth,
aquarium
installed
at
residence
MACKENZIE's
in
to
help
Aquarium
Owner
obtain
and
maintain
aquarium-
concealed
maintenance
installed
bribes
and
and
kickbacks
replacement
in MACKENZIE's
work
residence
that
performed
(for
consisted
on
which
the
of
the
aquarium
Aquarium
Owner
to
transactions
until at least
concerning
the
business
to wit,
the
Church,
MACKENZIE,
defendant
JR.,
herein,
his
residence
and
solicited,
to wit,
related
EDWARD J.
accepted,
and
an aquarium installed
maintenance
service
and
understanding
that
MACKENZIE's conduct,
such
things
of
upon an agreement or
value
would
influence
greater
Boston
for
more
than
twenty
years.
Between
general
contracting
work
at
the
Church,
MACKENZIE
by
soliciting
and
accepting
approximately
$24,000
in
form of
checks payable
to
Fillabuster Catering,
21
which
37.
to
transactions
matters
concerning
the
MACKENZIE,
agreed
to
employee,
defendant
JR.,
accept payments
principal,
and
agreement or understanding
MACKENZIE's conduct,
herein,
from
solicited,
that
of
the
who was
Church,
such payments
the
EDWARD J.
accepted,
Carpenter #1,
beneficiary
business
to wit,
in
would
and
not
an
upon
an
influence
using
his
influence
within
the
Church to help
MACKENZIE
from
solicited
Carpenter
#2,
and
to
accepted
wit,
at
cash
least
and
in-kind
approximately
22
or about December
relation
to
2010,
transactions
and
matters
concerning
the
MACKENZIE,
JR.,
defendant
agreed to
accept
payments
employee,
principal,
agreement
or understanding
MACKENZIE's conduct,
herein,
from
and
solicited,
Carpenter
beneficiary
that
of
#2,
the
such payments
business
to wit,
the
EDWARD J.
accepted,
who
was
Church,
in
and
not
an
upon
an
would influence
Not
later
than
2009,
MACKENZIE
gave
Carpenter
#2
a
in
previously
agreed-upon
$6,000)
cash
$3,000
(instead of
kickback,
MACKENZIE
At that
41.
United
States
obtained
property,
Carpenter
#2
induced by
violence,
with
the
and
Code,
to
section
wit,
Carpenter
wrongful
fear,
use
1951,
United
#2's
of
that
States
consent,
actual
in violation of
is,
currency,
which
and
Title
MACKENZIE
consent
threatened
18,
from
was
force,
United
States
being
advised
In approximately
December
2010,
after
the
influence within the Church to help CPC obtain and maintain the
boiler
inflate
replacement
its
bid
job,
for
MACKENZIE
work
at
the
knowingly
caused
Church
soliciting
by
CPC
to
and
43.
on
or
October/November
2011,
MACKENZIE
to at least
devised
and
representations and
promises.
44.
defendant herein,
unknown to
the
elsewhere,
EDWARD
J.
MACKENZIE,
Grand Jury,
for
the
purpose
of
in the
known and
executing
the
and
sounds
described
below,
anyone
of
which
alone
18,
United States
Code,
2 (a) :
DESCRIPTION
llA
IlB
25
Sections
1343
and
Paragraph 42
is
incorporated by
reference.
From at least in or about December 2010,
46.
on
or
about
October/November
Massachusetts,
relation
in
in
2011,
the
the
to wit,
Church,
solicited,
the Church,
EDWARD
accepted,
J.
and
and
of
matters
principal,
and
MACKENZIE,
agreed
District
transactions
to
to at least
to
JR.,
defendant
accept
payments
herein,
from
the
owner of CPC and the owner's associate, who were not employees,
principals,
upon an agreement
in
violation
of
Section
39
of
Chapter
271
of
the
In
or
about
2011,
after
being
advised
again
that
at
the
Church,
the
owner
of
CPC
inflated
the
bid
he
10%
kickback
to
MACKENZIE.
In
return
for
using
his
influence within the Church to help CPC obtain and maintain the
26
for
work
at
the
Church
by
soliciting
and
accepting
an
and
District of Massachusetts
JR.,
defendant herein,
unknown
to
the
and elsewhere,
EDWARD
MACKENZIE,
J.
Grand Jury,
for
the
purpose
of
in the
known and
executing
the
and
sounds
described
below,
anyone
of
which
alone
13D
13E
7/12/2011
8/4/2011
8/4/2011
8/10/2011
8/10/2011
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
from
from
from
from
from
CPC to
CPC to
CPC to
Church
CPC to
27
Church
Church
MACKENZIE
to CPC
Church
Paragraph 47
is
incorporated by
reference.
51.
or
about
August
relation
to
2011,
in
transactions
the
District
and matters
of
Massachusetts,
concerning
the
defendant
JR.,
herein,
solicited,
business
to wit,
in
the
EDWARD J.
accepted,
and
agreed to accept payments from the owner of CPC and the owner's
associate, who were not employees, principals, and beneficiaries
of
the
payments
Church,
would
upon
an agreement
or
influence MACKENZIE's
understanding
conduct,
that
such
in violation of
despite
the
fact
that
Painter
#1
had
little
or
no
painting experience.
a long
Painter #1' s
#1
never
performed
but
28
for
which
the
Church,
at
direction,
MACKENZIE's
influence
within
the
was
billed.
Church
to
In
help
the
return
Painter
Church,
for
#1
using
his
obtain
and
MACKENZIE
knowingly
and
accepting
at
least
approximately
$24,000
in
to at least in or
and
Massachusetts
and
elsewhere,
EDWARD
J.
in the District
MACKENZIE,
JR.,
29
Paragraph 52
is
reference.
56.
or about
relation
October
to
2009,
in
transactions
the
and
District
matters
of
Massachusetts,
concerning
the
MACKENZIE,
agreed
to
JR.,
accept
associates,
defendant
herein,
payments
who
were
from
not
solicited,
Painter
#1
employees,
business
to wit,
in
the
EDWARD J.
accepted,
and
Painter
#l's
and
principals,
and
such
payments
violation of
would
Section 39
of
influence
Chapter
MACKENZIE's
271
of
the
conduct,
in
Massachusetts
General Laws.
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections
1962 (c) .
30
COUNT THREE
(College Tuition Mail Fraud Conspiracy)
57.
through at
of
Massachusetts 1
combined
other persons
devise
the
the
known
District
conspired
and
and
property
of
2008 1
confederated
unknown
to
the
and artifice
by materially
in the
Connecticut 1
defendant herein
JR.,
above-described scheme
obtain money
in or about August
EDWARD J. MACKENZIE,
intent to defraud
wi th
least
which is restated
false
and
with the
and agreed
Grand
Jury,
to
to defraud and
and
fraudulent
above-described scheme
and artifice
and promises
known and
from the
Postal Service
to
31
Section
COUNT FOUR
59.
2006,
Canton,
combined,
other persons,
2008,
at
EDWARD J. MACKENZIE,
defraud,
JR.,
defendant herein,
conspired,
confederated,
agreed
with
to devise
and promises,
known and
to
32
Section
COUNT FIVE
61.
MACKENZIE,
defendant
JR.,
herein,
and
others
known
and
activity,
agree
conduct
to
and foreign
mail
did
financial
commerce,
fraud,
in
knowingly
transactions,
which
violation
conspire,
in fact
of
Title
confederate,
affecting
and
interstate
United
States
Code,
knowing that
disguise
the
nature,
the
location,
the
source,
the
18,
United States
Code,
Section 1341,
and
COUNT SIX
(Carpenter #2 Extortion)
62.
did
obstruct,
EDWARD
delay,
J.
and
MACKENZIE,
affect
JR.,
defendant
commerce
and
the
those
section
terms
1951,
are
that
defined
is,
in Title
MACKENZIE
18,
obtained
United States
property,
to
Code,
wit,
34
Section
devised
MACKENZIE
and
intended
to
devise
property
by
means
of
materially
the
above-described
false
and
fraudulent
defendant herein,
JR.,
unknown
to
the
EDWARD
J.
MACKENZIE,
Grand Jury,
for
the
purpose
of
in the
known and
executing the
DESCRIPTION
7
8
35
Sections
2011,
to
at
least
in
or
about
August
2011,
MACKENZIE
means
of
materially
false
and
fraudulent
pretenses,
Massachusetts
defendant herein,
unknown
to
the
and elsewhere,
EDWARD
J.
Grand Jury,
for
the
purpose
of
in the
MACKENZIE,
known and
executing
the
DESCRIPTION
7/12/2011
8/4/2011
8/4/2011
8/10/2011
8/10/2011
10
11
12
13
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
E-mail
from
from
from
from
from
CPC to
CPC to
CPC to
Church
CPC to
Church
Church
MACKENZIE
to CPC
Church
36
COUNT FOURTEEN
67.
2009,
to
at
least
on
or
about
October
MACKENZIE
2009,
means
of
materially
false
and
fraudulent
pretenses,
On or
about
September
1,
2009,
in
the
District
of
to wit,
#1.
37
Sections
Upon
conviction of
violation of 18 U.S.C.
one
or more
of
the
forfeit
U.S.C.
in
offenses
defendant herein,
to 18
1963 (a) :
a. all
interests
the
defendant
has
acquired and
maintained in violation of 18 U.S.C.
1962,
wherever located, and in whatever names held;
b. all interests in, securities of, claims against, and
properties and contractual rights of any kind
affording a source of influence over, any enterprise
which the defendant has established,
operated,
controlled,
conducted,
and participated in the
conduct of, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962; and
c. all property constituting, and derived from, any
proceeds which the defendant obtained, directly and
indirectly, from racketeering activity and unlawful
debt collection in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962.
70.
limited
The
to,
property
the
to
sum
of
be
forfeited
includes,
approximately
$1
but
is
million,
not
which
If
any
of
the
property
described
in
paragraph
69
1963, as a
located
38
upon
the
exercise
of
due
c. h as been
Courti
the
placed
beyond
jurisdiction
of
this
1963 (m),
to
seek
forfeiture
of
any
other
property
of
the
39
Upon
violation of
conviction
18 U. S. C.
of
one
1343,
or
more
of
the
offenses
in
as charged in
2461(c),
or
is
to 18 U.S.C.
any property,
derived
from
981(a) (1)
real or personal,
proceeds
traceable
(C)
which
to
such
violations.
73.
If
any
of
the
property
described
in
paragraph
72
the defendant
a. cannot
be
diligence;
located
upon
the
exercise
of
due
c. has been
Court;
the
placed
beyond
jurisdiction
of
this
2461(c),
to
seek
forfeiture
40
of
any
other
property
of
the
41
Upon
1956,
conviction
as
of
charged
the
in
offense
Count
Five
in
violation
of
this
real or personal,
18
Indictment,
of
982(a) (I),
any
and any
If
any
of
the
property
described
in
paragraph
74
982(a) (1),
located
upon
the
sold to,
c. has been
Court;
the
placed
beyond
exercise
of
due
or deposited with
jurisdiction
of
this
982(b},
to
seek
forfeiture
of
any
other
property
of
the
43
A TRUE BILL
TORNEY
Returned
filed.
into
{,,,,I I . (j 1 PIC-{
(
r;(cl l (/3
44
April 2011
Vol. VIII, Issue 4
Jesus
said
Come
to
me,
all
you
who
are
weary
and
burdened,
and
I
will
give
you
rest.
Take
my
yoke
upon
you
and
learn
from
me,
for
I
am
gentle
and
humble
in
heart,
and
you
will
nd
rest
for
your
souls.
For
my
yoke
is
easy
and
my
burden
is
light.
MaAhew
11:28
Spring is here!!!
Church on The Hill (Swedenborgian) The Boston Society of the New Jerusalem, Inc.
140 Bowdoin Street ~ Beacon Hill ~ Boston, MA 02108 ~ www.churchonthehillboston.org
Ministers
Emeritus Officials
Executive Officials
Mary Guarino, President
Diane Williams, Vice President
Robert von Wolfgang, Chairman of the Board of Trustees
Susanne Rogers, Treasurer
Michael Bancewicz, Secretary
Music
Carlton Doctor, Minister of Music
Victor Cayres de Mendonca, Organist and Pianist
Michael Bancewicz, Acting Editor
Craig Williams, Assistant Editor
Directors
Edward J. Mackenzie, Jr., Director of Operations
For More information, including how to donate and sign up to volunteer, visit
www.projectbread.org or www.churchonthehillboston.org
4
Edward
J.
Mackenzie
Jr
Message
given
to
Church
on
the
Hill
March
20,
2011
It
brings
me
comfort
and
opCmism
that
our
Lord
did
not
use
the
language
of
the
streets
only
hang
with
the
morally
upright
ciCzens
of
society.
He
did
not
only
socialize
with
those
who
followed
Gods
law
and
lived
within
societys
law.
As
well,
to
our
Lord,
no
person
had
more
claim
to
heaven
based
on
income
or
social
status.
Jesus
Christ
lived
with
and
knew
the
sinners
and
the
saints.
He
lived
with
and
knew
those
of
means
and
privilege.
And
he
lived
with
and
knew
all
so
well
the
outcast
of
society
-
the
downtrodden,
the
poor,
the
oppressed.
His
name
and
that
of
a
prosCtute,
Mary
Magdalene,
are
forever
linked
not
only
in
tradiCon
or
our
Faith,
but
also
in
that
of
our
civilizaCon.
He
did
not
mind.
Our
Lord
was
put
to
death
by
the
state.
He
was
crucied
between
two
criminals
who
were
suering
the
same
fate.
Because
one
of
the
criminals
believed
and
earnestly
sought
forgiveness
Jesus
told
him
he
would
be
saved.
Think
about
it
what
faith
has
as
its
primary
symbol
the
Cross
an
instrument
of
state
sancConed
torture
and
capital
punishment?
I
believe
that
salvaCon
and
redempCon
comes
to
dierent
people
in
dierent
ways.
But
I
know
that
the
support
and
understanding
and
the
enlightenment,
I
have
found
in
this
faith,
among
you,
in
this
house,
feels
good
and
right
and
full
of
promise.
I
come
from
a
tough
background
and
knew
a
whole
slew
of
abuse.
You
see,
I
was
the
downtrodden
and
poor
that
Christ
loved.
I
was
the
criminal
that
Christ
saved.
Walking
into
this
church
or
listening
to
Rev.
Dr.
Ted
Klein
for
the
rst
Cme
might
not
have
made
me
Saul
geYng
hit
with
the
divine
light
on
the
way
to
Damascus,
but
it
was
a
start
of
something
important,
it
really
was.
You
see
the
life
I
lived
has
been
complex
5
150
Bo St
sto an
n, ifo
M rd
St
a
e
Co st E
m
Ce m nd
nte uni
ty
r
W
NEWSLETTER OF THE BOSTON CHURCH OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Cooking
Classes
Mondays
from
4-
6
Some Thoughts on
Resurrection
Roland Mills
Greetings!
March was
an eventful month
and April/May look
to be even more
dynamic. We will
be hosting a
Womens Health fair
(see page 3). A Jack and Jill Baby Shower (page 10)
Guest Minister Marion Easterling (page 10) Walk for
Hunger (page 4) and of course the arrival of our long
awaited Steinway piano plus much more. On any given
day the church is buzzing with some kind activity, though
some times distracting, it is evident that we are blessed
with success in building the mission of the church!
Please see the calendar on page 15 for events of the
Easter Season.
A contingency from the church attended CMMs 45
Annual Meeting and Awards Dinner. Speaking of CMM,
they are awarding us their first Volunteerism
Achievement Award! On March 20th we had our fourth
Laity in the Pulpit this one being led by Eddie
Mackenzie with participation from many others. The
music, message and inter-activeness made this one very
memorable. Being out of town I was sorry to have
missed Rev. Manikkas message celebrating Womens
History Month, but I have heard that the message was
strong and well received.
Congratulations to Mary Guarino for being the winner of
last months Can you name whos who contest having
been able to name 11 of the 12 photos. She will receive
a $50 gift card to Scollay Square Restaurant. We are
having another contest this month (page 11) and the
winner who guesses the most will win a gift card to the
21st Amendment. Call Craig or me at the office or mail
in your answers, Good luck!
Blessings,
Mike
Baby Shower
Correspondence
10
Guess Who?
Congratulations to Mary Guarino for winning last month.
She guessed 11 out of 12. Tied for second were Terry Mazzulli and Anne Klein
with 10 out of 12. The answers were from left to right and top to bottom;
Rosie the Riveter, Rosa Parks,
Mother Teresa, Eleanor Roosevelt,
Helen Keller, Harriet Tubman, Maya
Anjelou, Indira Gandi, Golda Meir,
Rachel Revere, Sacagawea, Edith
Piaf. Aprils winner will get a $50 gift
card to the 21st Amendment.
11
12
13
Boston Youth Organizing Project meet at Church on the Hill before lobbying at the State House.
April
Sunday, April 3
9:45 AM
11:00 AM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
9:45 AM
Bible Reflection
11:00 AM
9:45 AM
11:00 AM
Wednesday, April 20
12:00 Noon
Senior Lunch
Thursday, April 21
6:00 PM
Sunday, April 24
11:00 AM
Wednesday, April 6
Sunday, April 10
Sunday, April 17
May
Sunday, May 1
9:45 AM
Bible Reflection
11:00 AM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
9:45 AM
11:00 AM
9:45 AM
Bible Reflection
11:00 AM
Wednesday, May 18
12:00 Noon
Senior Lunch
Sunday, May 22
9:45 AM
11:00 AM
9:45 AM
Bible Reflection
11:00 AM
Wednesday, May 4
Sunday, May 8
Sunday, May 15
Sunday, May 29
15
16