Connect with us

Local

Third activist released from Kameny lawsuit

Attorneys for estate say picket signs, other property still missing

Published

on

Richard Rosendall, gay news, gay politics dc, Washington Blade

Gay activist, Richard Rosendall, has been released from the Kameny estate lawsuit. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Gay activist Richard Rosendall, a longtime friend of the late gay rights leader Frank Kameny, testified in court on May 11 that he has returned several items he “borrowed” from Kameny’s house shortly after Kameny died last October.

Rosendall appeared in a courtroom at the D.C. Superior Court’s Probate Division in response to a show cause order obtained by attorneys representing Timothy Clark, the personal representative and main heir of Kameny’s estate.

Through his attorneys, Clark has charged in a lawsuit that Rosendall and three other Kameny friends and associates removed without permission documents and other property belonging to the Kameny estate from Kameny’s house in Northwest Washington shortly after Kameny died last Oct. 11.

“After the death of Franklin Edward Kameny, I borrowed, and held in my possession and control, certain personal properly lawfully belonging to the Estate of Franklin Edward Kameny,” Rosendall stated in a sworn affidavit submitted to the court two days prior to the hearing.

He identified in the affidavit and on the witness stand the items borrowed as “a copy of Dr. Kameny’s 1961 brief for the Supreme Court of the United States; a letter to or from [U.S. Supreme Court] Justice [Lewis] Powell; several letters between Dr. Kameny and an Army official concerning [the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance’s] wreath-laying ceremonies at Arlington Cemetery; a box of business cards; and three or four books.”

Two of the other three named in the lawsuit, Charles Francis and Bob Witeck, have returned items they acknowledged belonging to the estate. Rosendall testified at the May 11 hearing that he helped Francis carry 17 boxes filled with papers and other items from Kameny’s house, which he said Francis placed in a storage facility for safekeeping. Rosendall has said Clark, who lived in the house with Kameny for 19 years, gave them permission to enter the house.

Upon their return of the property last month, attorneys for the estate dismissed Francis and Witeck from the lawsuit.

Similar to Rosendall, Francis and Witeck have said they took possession of the items to ensure they remain safe and properly preserved during a period of confusion following Kameny’s death. Each has said they planned all along to return the items to the estate. Witeck has said the only items he took were several photographs.

Rosendall testified that he returned the items he borrowed to Francis, who returned them to the Kameny estate last month.

“The Estate of Dr. Franklin E. Kameny is satisfied that Richard J. Rosendall has returned the items that Mr. Rosendall removed from Dr. Kameny’s home shortly after Dr. Kameny’s death,” said Glen Ackerman, one of the attorneys representing Clark and the Kameny estate, in a statement to the Blade on Monday.

“However, there are still a number of important historical items still missing from the Estate, including Dr. Kameny’s collection of buttons, handmade picket signs and posters,” Ackerman said in the statement. “The Estate is attempting to recover these missing historically significant assets as a part of the probate process and to make certain that Dr. Kameny’s wishes as recorded in his Last Will and Testament are carried out fully.”

In his will, Kameny bequeathed his papers to the Library of Congress while leaving all other possessions, including his house and car, to Clark.

In response to questions at the May 11 court hearing by Kameny estate attorney J. Max Barger, Rosendall disputed claims by the estate that Clark believes as many as 100 picket signs were taken from the house after Kameny’s death. Rosendall told Barger he doubted that many picket signs had been in the house.

Kameny and his fellow gay activists used the picket signs in their historic gay rights demonstrations outside the White House and other government buildings in the early 1960s, the first such demonstrations ever held.

Barger and Ackerman told Judge John Campbell, who presided over the hearing, that the picket signs and buttons, which are inscribed with gay rights messages, have an important historic value and must be accounted for during the probate process for the estate.

Rosendall testified that he has possession of one of the picket signs, which he said Kameny gave permission for him to take several years prior to his death. He said Kameny also gave him a signed copy of The Homosexual Citizen, a publication of the Mattachine Society of Washington, which Kameny co-founded in 1961.

Mindy Daniels, Rosendall’s attorney, expressed concern during the hearing that the estate was confusing items that Kameny gave to Rosendall and others with items belonging to the estate. She noted items given away by someone prior to their death are not part of their estate after the person dies.

Ackerman told Campbell that Francis, Witeck, Rosendall and Marvin Carter, another Kameny friend, had not responded to earlier efforts by the estate to obtain from them an inventory of the items they allegedly took from Kameny’s house following Kameny’s death.

Daniels said the estate never contacted Rosendall about these items until it filed suit against him in March. Ackerman said the estate did make attempts to reach Rosendall and the other three men.

The estate named Carter as a defendant in one of the lawsuits seeking the return of items taken from Kameny’s house and petitioned the court to order him to appear at the May 11 show cause hearing, but Carter did not show up for the hearing. Barger told the court the estate wasn’t able to locate him to serve him a summons to appear at the hearing.

Carter hasn’t returned calls from the Blade seeking comment on the case. As head of the local LGBT charitable group Helping Our Brothers and Sisters (HOBS), Carter arranged for the group to provide financial assistance and support for Kameny in the last years of his life.

“I don’t know where we are going with this,” the judge told the attorneys at the hearing. “You can say to these folks give the items back,” Campbell said to Ackerman and Barger. “They can say we did. You can say they didn’t…But we’re not sitting in a criminal court. I can’t convict someone of theft.”

Campbell called on all parties in the case to cooperate and do their best to come up with an inventory of all property that belongs to the state.

He ruled that Rosendall fulfilled the requirements of the show cause order and ordered that he be released from the order. He denied a request from Ackerman and Barger that he issue a “non-disparagement” order prohibiting Rosendall from saying disparaging things about Clark or the Kameny estate. Ackerman told Campbell that an attorney representing Francis made derogatory remarks and false accusations against Clark earlier this year.

Campbell said that as a probate judge he did not have authority to issue such an order.

“I always hope that people will be civil,” he said.

The judge said he could not issue a ruling for Carter because the attorneys for the estate had not been able to serve him with a summons calling on him to appear in court.

Ackerman said the estate would file a motion to dismiss its lawsuit against Rosendall, leaving Carter as the only one of the four with the lawsuit still pending against him. The lawsuit calls on the court to require that Carter disclose what, if any, items he may have that belong to the estate and that he return any such items. Carter has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.

In his affidavit filed with the court, Rosendall, vice president for political affairs of the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, made these additional assertions:

“I hereby affirm that I have destroyed or returned any and all copied, digitized, or otherwise electronically or physically duplicated property belonging to the Estate, including but not limited to: personal papers, photographs, documents, memorabilia and other miscellaneous items of tangible personal property. I further affirm that I have not caused the duplication and/or digitization, whether electronic or physical, of said property of the Estate to third parties.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Maryland

Salisbury, Md. rainbow crosswalk removed on Veterans Day

Mayor’s order denounced by LGBTQ activists as act of bigotry

Published

on

Salisbury Mayor Randy Taylor ordered the removal of the rainbow crosswalk. (Screen capture via PAC 14/YouTube)

Under the directive of its mayor and over strong objections from LGBTQ rights advocates and their supporters, the city of Salisbury, Md. on Nov. 11 removed a rainbow crosswalk from a prominent intersection across from the mayor’s office and the city’s public library. 

Salisbury LGBTQ rights advocate Mark DeLancey, who witnessed the crosswalk removal, said instead of painting over it as other cities have done in removing rainbow crosswalks, a powerful grinding machine was used to rip apart the asphalt pavement under the crosswalk in what he believes was an effort by the mayor to “make a point.”

Like officials in other locations that have removed rainbow crosswalks, Salisbury Mayor Randy Taylor said the crosswalk removal was required under U.S. Department of Transportation regulations put in place by the Trump administration that do not allow “political” messages on streets and roadways.

“Since taking office, I’ve been transparent about my concerns regarding the Pride crosswalks installed in Downtown Salisbury,” Taylor said in a statement. “While I have made every effort to respect the decisions of previous administrations and the folks that supported them, it has become clear that a course of correction – as planned – is necessary to align with current Department of Transportation standards for roadway markings,” he said in his Nov. 7 statement that was posted on the city’s Facebook page.

DeLancey is among the activists and local public officials in many cities and states that dispute that the federal Department of Transportation has legal authority to ban the Pride crosswalks. D.C. and the Northern Virginia jurisdictions of Arlington and Alexandria are among the localities that have refused to remove rainbow crosswalks from their streets.

“He decided to take this on himself,” DeLancey said of Taylor’s action. “It’s not a law. It’s not a ruling of any kind. He just said that was something that should happen.”

DeLancey points out that Salisbury became the first jurisdiction in Maryland to install a  rainbow crosswalk on a public street in September 2018.

“This is another blatant attempt by our Republican mayor to remove any references to groups that don’t fit with his agenda,” Salisbury LGBTQ advocate Megan Pomeroy told the local publication Watershed Observer. “The rainbow crosswalk represents acceptance for everyone. It tells them, ‘You matter. You are valued. You are welcome here,’” she was quoted as saying.

The publication Delmarva Now reports that a longtime Salisbury straight ally to the LGBTQ community named K.T. Tuminello staged a one-person protest on Nov. 10 by sitting on the sidewalk next to the rainbow crosswalk holding a sign opposing its removal.

“Tuminello said Nov. 10 he had been at the embattled crosswalk since 12 a.m. that morning, and only three things could make him leave: ‘I get arrested, I have to get into an ambulance because of my medical difficulties, or Randy Taylor says you can keep that one rainbow crosswalk,’” the Delaware Now article states.

DeLancey said he has known Tuminello for many years as an LGBTQ ally and saw him on the night he staged his sit-in at the site of the crosswalk. 

“I actually went to him last night trying to give him some water,” DeLancey told the Washington Blade. “He was on a hunger strike as well. He was there for a total of 40 hours on strike, not eating, no sleeping in the freezing cold” 

Added DeLancey, “He has been supporting our community for decades. And he is a very strong ally, and we love his contribution very much.”

Political observers have pointed out that Salisbury for many years has been a progressive small city surrounded by some of Maryland’s more conservative areas with mostly progressive elected officials.

They point out that Taylor, a Trump supporter, won election as mayor in November 2023 with 36.6 percent of the vote. Two progressive candidates split the vote among themselves, receiving a combined total of 70.8 percent of the vote.  

Continue Reading

Virginia

Ghazala Hashmi names Equality Virginia executive director to transition team

Narissa Rahaman will join Adam Ebbin, Mark Sickles on LG-elect’s committee.

Published

on

Virginia Lt. Gov.-elect Ghazala Hashmi (YouTube screenshot)

Virginia Lt. Gov.-elect Ghazala Hashmi has named Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman to her transition team.

State Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) and state Del. Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) are among those who Hashmi also named to her Transition Committee.

“I am honored to have this diverse group of leaders join our transition,” said Hashmi in a statement. “Their experience, perspective, and commitment to public service will help build an Office of the Lieutenant Governor that is responsive, innovative, and relentlessly focused on improving the lives of every Virginia resident.”

“Together, we will develop a thoughtful roadmap for the work ahead — one that ensures we are engaging communities, strengthening partnerships across the state, and preparing this office to serve with purpose and conviction from Day One,” she added. “I am grateful to each member for bringing time, expertise, and passion to this effort.”

Hashmi, a Democrat, defeated Republican John Reid, who is openly gay, on Nov. 4.

Hashmi will succeed outgoing Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears on Jan. 17.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Capital Pride files anti-stalking complaint against local LGBTQ activist

Darren Pasha denies charge, claims action is linked to Ashley Smith’s resignation

Published

on

Darren Pasha (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events, filed a Civil Complaint on Oct. 27 against local LGBTQ activist and former volunteer Darren Pasha, accusing him of engaging in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk Capital Pride’s staff, board members, and volunteers.

The complaint, which was filed in D.C. Superior Court, was accompanied by a separate motion seeking a court restraining order, preliminary injunction and anti-stalking order prohibiting Pasha from “any further contact, harassment, intimidation, or interference with the Plaintiff, its staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates.”

According to online court records, on Oct. 28, a judge issued an “initial order” setting the date for a scheduling conference for the case on Feb. 6, 2026. As of the end of the business day on Friday, Nov. 7, the judge did not issue a ruling on Capital Pride’s request for an injunction and restraining order

The court records show that on Nov. 5 Pasha filed an answer to the complaint in which he denies all allegations that he targeted Capital Pride officials or volunteers for stalking or that he engaged in any other improper behavior.

“It is evident that the document is replete with false, misleading, and unsubstantiated assertions,” Pasha says in his response, adding that “no credible or admissible evidence has been provided” to meet the statutory requirements for an anti-stalking order.

The Capital Pride complaint includes an 18-page legal brief outlining its allegations against Pasha and an additional 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by witnesses whose names are blacked out in the court filing documents.

“Over the past year, Defendant Darren Dolshad Pasha (“DSP”} has engaged in a sustained and escalating course of conduct directed at CPA, including repeated and unwanted contact, harassment, intimidation, threats, manipulation, and coercive behavior targeting CPA staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates,” the Capital Pride complaint states.

It continues, “This conduct included physical intimidation, unwanted physical contact, deception to gain unauthorized access to events, retaliatory threats, abusive digital communication, proxy-based harassment, and knowing defiance of organizational bans and protective orders.”

The sweeping anti-stalking order requested in Capital Pride’s court motion would prohibit Pasha from interacting in person or online or electronically with “all current and future staff, board members, and volunteers of Capital Pride Alliance, Inc.”

The proposed order adds, the “defendant shall stay at least 200 yards away from the principal offices of Capital Pride Alliance” and “shall stay at least 200 yards away from all Capital Pride Alliance events, event venues, associated activities, and affiliated gatherings.”

The reason for these restrictions, according to the complaint, is that Pasha’s actions toward Capital Pride staff, board members, and volunteers allegedly reached the level of causing them to fear for their safety, become “alarmed, disturbed, or frightened,” or suffer emotional distress as defined in D.C.’s anti-stalking law.

Among the Capital Pride officials who are identified by name and who have included statements in the complaint in support of its allegations against Pasha are Ashley Smith, the former Capital Pride Alliance board president, and June Crenshaw, the Capital Pride Alliance deputy director.

“I am making this declaration based on my personal knowledge to support CPA’s petition for a Civil Anti-Stalking Order (ASO) against Daren Pasha,” Smith says in his court statement. “My concerns about the respondent are based on my personal interactions with him as well as reports I have received from other members of the CPA community,” Smith states.

The Capital Pride complaint against Pasha and its supporting documents were filed by D.C. attorney Nick Harrison of the local law firm Harrison-Stein PC.

In his 16-page response to the complaint that he says he wrote himself without the aid of an attorney, Pasha says the Capital Pride complaint against him appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with the organization and its then president, Ashley Smith, over the past year.

His response states that the announcement last month by Capital Pride that Smith resigned from his position as board president on Oct. 18 after it became aware of a “claim” regarding Smith and it had opened an investigation into the claim supports his assertion that Smith’s resignation is linked to his year-long claim that Smith tarnished his reputation.

Among his allegations against Smith in his response to the Capital Pride complaint, Pasha accuses Smith of using his position as a member of the board of the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization, to persuade HRC to terminate his position as an HRC volunteer and to ban him from attending any future HRC events. He attributes HRC’s action against him to “defamatory” claims about him by Smith related to his ongoing dispute with Smith.

The Capital Pride complaint cites HRC officials as saying Pasha was ousted from his role as a volunteer after he allegedly engaged in abusive and inappropriate behavior  toward HRC staff members and other volunteers.

 Capital Pride has so far declined to disclose the reason for Smith’s resignation pending an internal investigation. 

In its statement announcing Smith’s resignation, a copy of which it sent to the Washington Blade, Capital Pride Alliance says, “Recently, CPA was made aware of a claim made regarding him. The organization has retained an independent firm to initiate an investigation and has taken the necessary steps to make available partner service providers for the parties involved.”

The statement adds, “To protect the integrity of the process and the privacy of all involved, CPA will not be sharing further information at this time.”

Smith did not respond to a request by the Blade for comment, and Capital Pride has declined to disclose whether Smith’s resignation is linked in any way to Pasha’s allegations. 

The Capital Pride complaint seeks to “characterize me as posing a threat sufficient to justify the issuance of a Civil Anti-Stalking Order (CAO), yet no credible or admissible evidence has been provided to satisfy the statutory elements required under D.C. Code 22-3133,” Pasha states in his response.

“CPA’s assertions fail to establish any such conduct on my part and instead appear calculated to discredit and retaliate against me for raising legitimate concerns regarding the conduct of its former Board President,” he states in his response.

In its complaint against Pasha and its legal memorandum supporting its request for an anti-stalking order, Capital Pride provides a list of D.C. Superior Court records that show Pasha has been hit with several anti-stalking orders in cases unrelated to Capital Pride in the past and has violated those orders, resulting in his arrest in at least two of those cases.

“A fundamental justification for granting the [Anti-Stalking Order] lies in the Respondent’s extensive and recent criminal history demonstrating a proven propensity for defying judicial protective measures,” the complaint states. “This history suggests that organizational bans alone are insufficient to deter his behavior, elevating the current situation to one requiring mandatory judicial enforcement,” it says.

“It is alleged that in or about June 2025, Defendant was convicted on multiple counts of violating existing Anti-Stalking Orders in matters unrelated to Capital Pride Alliance (“CPA”),with consecutive sentences imposed, purportedly establishing a pattern of contempt for judicial restraint,” Pasha states in his court response to the Capital Pride complaint.

“These allegations are irrelevant to the matter currently before the Court,” his response continues. “The events cited are entirely unrelated to CPA and the allegations underlying the petition for a Civil Anti-Stalking Order. Moreover, each of these prior matters has been fully adjudicated, resolved, and dismissed, and therefore cannot serve as a basis to justify the issuance of a permanent Civil Anti-Stalking Order in this unrelated proceeding.”

He adds in his response, “Any reliance on such prior matters is misleading, prejudicial, and legally insufficient.”

Continue Reading

Popular