3/29 Helen Lies About Seeing My Reply To Daria

At my trial, Crown Greg Elder had no idea how a Google Business Review works. Both Helen and Jaclyn were sent THE SAME screen capture which only Daria COULD have known about.

Helen was on the witness stand and Elder goes into detail about his lack of understanding. In his hand he has Daria’s screen capture. He had so little understanding that he compelled his witness to lie.

He asked a series of questions about that screen capture as if everyone in the world could have seen it. He just wanted Helen to testify that she saw it with her own eyes. So she did.

The Problem?

The screen capture was from Daria, it was not timestamped or dated at all. She could NOT testify to when she saw it. She swore she saw it, but she denies knowing the date she saw it. Because she NEVER saw it. Not even once. All she had was the printout of Daria’s screen capture.

So, she lied at the explicit request of Crown Greg Elder. Read it yourself following.

Q. Okay. It was put to you that you or someone in your Facebook group approved Mr. Lepp’s

acceptance into the Facebook group.

A. That is correct.

Q. I think you answered already. I believe you said, and correct me if I was wrong, that it would have been either you or one of the other administrators, is that right?

A. That is correct.

Q. Do you know when he was approved?

A. It would have been, I believe, around the November timeframe.

Q. Of?

A. Of 2016 when we started – when he started with these E-mails.

Q. Okay. Now, it was also put to you that posts were approved that mentioned you.

A. That is correct.

Q. When was those – when were those approved?

A. They would have been approved sometime between the November timeframe and the February timeframe.

Q. Okay, and was that by yourself or by other administrators?

A. It was by myself and by another administrator.

Q. Okay. It was put to you that I believe it was this morning, that the pictures of the van were

simply to report a violation. You said you don’t know if that’s correct. You couldn’t speak to Mr. Lepp’s motivation. What was your subjective belief about his motivation, your own opinion?

A. My own opinion…

Q. Yes.

A. …was that he was frustrated that I did not take the same position as he did with counsel and

with the condition of the dog park, and he felt that I had somehow wronged him, that I’d abandoned him, and that he was looking for things to get back at me with.

Q. Then why pictures in your opinion? What was your suggestive belief about why he was taking pictures in that regard?

A. He’s looking – he was – he was looking for things that I was doing wrong.

Q. Now, the name Daria Morgendorffer came up. Do you know anyone named Daria Morgendorffer?

A. I do not.

Q. Okay. Moment’s indulgence, Your Honour. I’m just going to put to you a document. If I

could approach, Your Honour?


MR. ELDER: Q. I’m showing you what looks like a Google review by someone named Daria

Morgendorffer and the spelling for the record is D-A-R-I-A space M-O-R-G-E-N-D-O-R-F-F-E-R. Do you recognize this?

A. I do.

Q. Is this something you saw?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Okay. Where did you see it?

A. On his Google – on the Google review.

Q. And WHEN did you see it?

A. I’m not sure of the exact date. I’m sorry.

Q. Okay.

A. It would have been the day that – I guess it’s the day that this is posted because it’s like so

whatever date this posted is the day I saw it.

Q. Okay, but it doesn’t say that on the page, right?

A. No, there’s no date. I can’t see any kind of date on here.

Q. Okay. Did you write this?

A. I did not.

Q. Did your husband to your knowledge write this?

A. He did not.

Q. Okay. Now, it seems to be – it’s pointing to – it says “Bob Lepp & Associates” on the map,

and it seems to be a review of a business registered to Mr. Lepp. Is that correct?

A. Yes, that’s correct.

Q. And then it says “Response from owner”. Can you just take a second to read the response in your head? Have you had a chance? And I’m sorry, Your Honour, I didn’t have a copy for Your Honour, I apologize, but I am going to be asking that it be marked as an exhibit. Ma’am, so the response from owner, who do you think that was written by?

A. By the owner is Bob Lepp.

Q. Okay, and on the second page it references the name “Helen”.

A. Yes.

Q. No last name is written, right?

A. That is correct.

Q. Who do you think that this is referring to?

A. That is referring to me.

Q. Why?

A. Because it also mentions the Town of Aurora and the agreement that was – that I signed. It also talks about when I started my volunteer work in 2007, and it’s talking about Al Downey, and there’s also references in – that he’s made these allegations and references in E-mails as well. I’ve seen similar content in E-mails.

Q. Okay. Thank you, so Your Honour, I’ll be asking that it be marked as the next Exhibit. I think

we’re at five now?

CLERK REGISTRAR: I believe that’s five.

THE WITNESS: Do you want me to give this to you?

THE COURT: Okay. I’ll make it an exhibit. The witness has said that this is the Google review that she saw, she thinks the day it was posted, and it’s not her creation, she says what she

understands it to be.

MR. ELDER: Okay.

Q. And just in terms of timeframe, I know you weren’t aware of the date.

A. No, I’m not.

Q. But was it roughly – when was it in time?

A. It was after Mr. Lepp was told not to use my name in social media.

Q. By whom?

A. By the Courts.

Q. Okay.

A. It was part of his bail.

Q. Okay. Thank you, and, Your Honour, you’ll hear more evidence about that later. Okay. I’m

almost done my re-exam.

CLERK REGISTRAR: Sorry, the title of the exhibit, Your Honour?

THE COURT: A Google review.


EXHIBIT NO. 5: Google review.

MR. ELDER: Q. There was a video put to you.

A. Yes.

Q. You have referred to two interactions at the dog park where Mr. Lepp was trying to give you

papers of some sort?

A. Yes.

Q. Was that the first or the second interaction?

A. That was the second interaction.

Q. You said that your – sorry, Your Honour. I don’t know if Mr. Lepp needs a moment.

THE COURT: I’m still having a little trouble with the chronology by which you

ended up with a copy of the claim, Ms.Clarke. In the video that was played earlier there’s – you’re refusing to receive documents which Mr. Lepp is trying to give to you, but did you

ultimately end up with those documents?

THE WITNESS: I did, Your Honour.

THE COURT: That day?

THE WITNESS: I did, Your Honour.


MR. ELDER: Q. So if I understand correctly, he left them on the ground and you did take


A. The 911 officer instructed us to take them to defuse the situation. They said he’d go away if we took the documents.

Q. Okay. Now, you said that your response saying you would sue him was an emotional response?

A. That is correct.

Q. You said it was a stressful situation. Why was it stressful?

A. Because I feel that Mr. Lepp has been harassing me and purposely trying to intimidate me and scare me, and I do not – and I had tried to stay away from him on multiple occasions, and he continued to approach me, and I was very upset about it. I actually had an anxiety attack.

Q. I don’t want to go too much into personal details but what – can you describe the anxiety


THE COURT: Well, I’m going to raise a qualm here since Mr. Lepp is self-represented. There was a full opportunity for you in-chief, Mr. Elder, to review, and I think you did review with Ms. Clarke her altercations with Mr. Lepp at the park. You’re now going back to that and expanding on what you had raised earlier. This doesn’t arise only out of the cross-examination of Ms. Clarke by Mr. Trombly.

MR. ELDER: So my submission in response to that, Your Honour, is that the defence ultimately put the video in and the defence put it to her which did not come up in my chief that she threatened to sue him, and then it came out through cross-examination from her perspective it

was an emotional response, and I’m trying to unpack that now.

THE COURT: Well, you have.

MR. ELDER: Okay. If Your Honour feels that way I can leave my re-exam then.

THE COURT: I think you should move on.

MR. ELDER: Okay. I’m finished actually. Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Ms. Clarke. You can step down.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

June 13, 2109 Testifying At My Trial