Tony Alamo Lies Under Oath

This excerpt from the attached interrogatory over child support was filed Sept 2, 1969, Superior Court of the state of California, for the county of Los Angeles. You can click here to open and read the entire deposition.

Judy Lee Stearns, Plantiff vs.
Bernie Lazar Hoffman, Defendant

Q. Have you ever had sexual relations with the plantiff?
A. I have never had normal sexual relations with the plantiff.

Q. Give your exact address for each place you resided……(Click here to read all of the details)

Q. Do you now claim that you are disabled and unable to work?
A. Yes

Q. If so, what is the nature of your disabilities?
A. Blindness

Q. Prior to January 1, 1965 had you ever been married?
A. Yes

Q. If so, what was the maiden name of each wife, the date of each marriage, and the place of each marriage.
A. I am unable at this time to locate all of my records regarding this interrogatory. However, I am able at this time to provide the following information:
1. Joann Dill, married to her from 1952 to 1955, divorced in Cleveland, Ohio. other information unverified at this time.
2. Helen Hagen, married to her from 1961 to 1965, married and divorced her in Las Vegas, Nevada; other information unverified at this time.

Q. For each divorce or annulment proceeding to which you have been a party, please specify the following:
A. At this time I am unable to provide more specific information than I have previously provided above and the fact that I married Susan Lipowitz on August 19, 1965.

Q. Have you ever been the father of a child?
A. Not to my knowledge.


Now let’s skip forward to a deposition on April 22, 1981 of Tony Alamo aka Bernie Lazar Hoffman.

In this deposition Tony claims he has two sons by a former wife. Just shows that Tony Alamo had no problem lying under oath in his 1969 interrogatory. Tony was a liar even then, when he was claiming to be a zealous young Christian.

Mr Garner: Mr Alamo, were you ever a defendant in a paternity suit?
Tony answers: Yes.

Q. When?
A. Oh, about seventeen years ago.

Q. Where?
A. Los Angeles

Q. Were you directed……..
Then Roy Gean steps in and trys to stop the questioning about Tony’s personal life.
Mr Garner continues…..

Q. Were you ordered and directed to make monthly support payments, Mr Alamo?
Mr Gean: That’s more than ten years ago and we’re not going to answer that.
Garner continues:
Q. Are you making monthly support payments now?
A. Yes

Q. And have you been making them continuously for the last ten years?
A. Yes

Q. Are they made by check out of the Foundation funds?
A. Yes

Q. The Foundation pays them, in other words?
A. The Foundation pays several paternity suits for any—on cases.

Mr Gean: You’re talking about divorce and so on?
A. Yeah
Mr Garner: But I’m talking about—
Mr Gean: You’re just talking about him, and he answered that, yes.
A.Mine too, that’s right.

Mr Garner: It pays—has been paying $50 a month?

Q. Ever since the Foundation’s been formed.
A. Before the Foundation—

Q. Yes, but since the Foundation—when the Foundation came into being, it took up the payments and started paying it?
A. That’s right.

Q. All right, sir. And where was that sent?
(skipping down to more information)
Garner continues:
Q. When will your child, putative child, reach majority?
A. It’s not my child, but I’m paying the payments on it.

Q. I’m saying putative child, that’s the reason I said that.
A..When will—what?

Q.. Reach majority?
A.. I believe within a half a year to a year.

Q. In other words, you anticipate the payments will stop within a year?
A. Yes

Q. All right.
A. It might have already stopped.

Q. Do you have any children by any other wife or lady?
A. Well, I’ve been accused, but I have two children and I don’t know where their whereabouts are.
(skipping down)

Q. The $50.50 you’re paying is for a son?
A. It’s for a—

Q. A boy?
A. A boy.

Q. All right, sir. Do you have a child, a putative child, other than that boy?
Mr Gean: Explain to him what you mean by putative.
Mr Garner continues: That means it’s alleged, somebody accused you of being the father.
Mr Gean: Now, Charlie, you know we’re objecting to this, as far as the admissibility at the trial—
Mr Garner: I understand.
Tony Alamo answers: Well, I had two children by a former wife, but I don’t know where the two boys are. They are my boys.

Q. But you’re not in contact with them or the wife?
A. No, don’t know where they are.

Q. When was the last contact you had with them?
A. I would say around thirty years ago.

Logic + Arithmetic = A Lie: 1981 minus 30 years would be the year 1951. That would mean that the last time Alamo saw his children was in 1951. In the 1969 interrogatory, Tony Alamo stated that he didn’t have any children to his knowledge (last Q&A in the 1969 interrogatory excerpt on this page).

In: Legal & Court Documents

| Back to Top |
Want to help?

Click the button!

Comments are closed.