This Blog is intended for educational and informational purposes only. Some posters are court ordered to have no contact of any kind with the person having a Restraining Order against them. Meaning no third party contact as well. If you by chance know a person one of our posters/authors is discussing to share their experiences with others, we ask you to respect our rights to free speech, under the United States Constitution. Restraining Order Blog is not meant to harass, directly or indirectly contact, harm, intimidate, bring any emotional distress, stalk or cyberstalk, nor intentionally slander or damage any individual in any way. Nor is it intended to initiate any third party contact on behalf of any poster or author, or violate a current restraining order in any way either. If you feel there is anything here that is slanderous, untrue, or illegal, please bring it to our attention. We will examine your request promptly, and any post you find offensive will be reviewed for removal in a timely manner. If you have a story to share, email me at, and I will add you as an author on Restraining Order Blog.


Update 4: Episcopal Priest Bob Malm Refers to Me and Mom as “Domestic Terrorists”

Just when you thought it couldn’t get any uglier and less Christian, along comes Episcopal priest Bob Malm via his attorney, telling the court that mom and I are “domestic terrorists.”

See for yourself:

Meanwhile, Jeff Chiow continues to claim that this is a case of “domestic terrorism,” in his court filings, even while he sends forward settlement proposals.

If nothing else, a really stupid approach. If one concludes that Jeff is lying, then folks are likely to avoid the church for that very reason. If, on the other hand, one concludes that Jeff is telling the truth, then one is likely to avoid the church for that reason. Either way, not good. And the fact that the police have not gotten involved speaks compelling to Jeff’s claims of “domestic terrorism.”


Oregon Restraining Order Questions


Update 3:: Episcopal Priest Bob Malm’s Attorney Lies, Claims I Violated Protective Order

In a filing that he marked as an “emergency,” attorney Jeff Chiow, representing Episcopal priest Bob Malm, rector of Grace Episcopal Church in Alexandria VA, falsely told the Circuit Court that I had repeatedly violated the general district court’s protective order by posting to my blog, despite the fact that I have made no threats. In addition, Chiow untruthfully told the court that I had lied about being a police officer and an attorney (now retired).

In response to these fabrications, I filed disciplinary complaints against Chiow in multiple jurisdictions. My filing included documentation, both that I practiced law and served as a police officer.

So far, no comment from Chiow, or his law firm, Rogers Joseph O’Donnell. Nor has the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia or the national church done anything to address the torrent of inflammatory rhetoric and dishonest accusations being made by the church.

My advice: Avoid this sad, dysfunctional, toxic church and its childish power games.


Orange County Injunction Questions

Here are some questions from a reader, if anyone has any experience or advice to share with her.

My biological daughter has issued a temporary injunction against me. I live in Sarasota county and she lives in Orange County.  I need to speak to an expert when it comes to family law. My biological parents had adopted my daughter under extreme duress 16 years ago. 

I have been paying for it ever since. I appreciate any help or clarity. My parents have brainwashed my biological daughter and manipulated many things over the years. I moved away to get away from them it was only the past year that we all decide to forgive one another & start again. However, my daughter wants nothing to do with me. I only had reached out to her after my parents suggested I try a different approach. This approach has now landed me a court date on 8/27. 

The injunction of course is filled with coached material from my mother.  The confusing part is my parents and sister have stated they no longer were going to support my daughter's anger or enable her when everyone in the family has started over. I was told by my father just the other night my daughter will have to make a choice to forgive and move on; or she can make other arrangements for the holiday. 

I would appreciate any help. She is twenty and I seriously want her to be independent but this temporary injunction makes no sense. It is impossible to stalk her when I have a life in another county two hours away. I do not want to attend this court date by myself.  What is shocking that my mother and sister who I have talked to everyday for the past year provided private text messages to my daughter & a judge took it as apart of me stalking her which is so ridiculous. We are all family and I just do not get it. My dad refuses to be apart of this mess that my mom created.  My daughter is all over the internet from her youtube channel & instagram. I am not a stalker I am her biological mom & sister. I am 42 years old and I just want my life back to normal without any of this drama.  Thank you in advanced for reading and helping.


Update 2: Trash Settlement Agreement Received

Late this past week, I received a trash settlement agreement from Episcopal priest Bob Malm and his attorney. In it, they basically offered to drop the protective order if I quit blogging about them—proof, if any was ever needed, that Bob’s entire effort has been bogus from the get-go, and is a flagrant abuse of the Virginia protective order statute.

That tacit admission is exactly what I wanted to get from litigation, so I have rejected the settlement offer and dropped my appeal. That saves money, while freeing me up to spread word far and wide of several very simple truths:

  1. Episcopal priest Bob Malm is toxic.
  2. Grace Episcopal Church in Alexandria Virginia is toxic.
  3. Episcopal Bishop Shannon Johnston is toxic.
  4. The Episcopal diocese of Virginia is toxic.
So, going forward, I to intend to make sure that anyone considering getting involved in the systemic narcissism that is Grace Episcopal Church has the information needed to make the right decision for them.

If you want to visit the church’s website, it’s here.

To visit my blog, which contains dozens of screen caps illustrating the behind-the-scenes conversations that people at Grace Church have been having about this conflict and their disgraceful comments, go here. Or Google Fairfax Underground and visit the Alexandria section.


Breaking News: Episcopal Priest Bob Malm Tries to Drag Dying Woman into Court

Breaking news: Jeff Chiow, a shareholder with the DC-based law firm of Rogers, Joseph O’Donnell, has issued a subpoena on behalf of his client, Grace Episcopal Church in Alexandria VA, to my mother, Sigrid Yahner, in which he tries to drag her into court to testify on behalf of his client. This, despite the fact that rector Bob Malm and Jeff Chiow both know that my mom is dying of COPD. Meanwhile, Jeff continues to trot out the word “defamation,” with very little apparent concept of what the term means. Other attorneys familiar with the case have stated their belief that Jeff is pursuing a personal vendetta, possibly based on Jeff’s inflammatory and potentially prejudicial rhetoric.

Episcopal priest Bob Malm attempts to subpoena a dying woman

The bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia are well aware of these actions and appear to remain fully supportive of Malm’s efforts.

Needless to say, unless your idea of Christianity includes bullying the dying, things are a hot mess at Grace Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia.

To learn more about the church, visit

To learn more about Rogers, Joseph O’Donnell, visit

To access my blog, which covers this situation, visit

On social media, find me @gracealexwatch.


Update: Episcopal Priest Bob Malm‘s Abusive Restraining Order

I wanted to provide an update to the earlier post about my situation with Episcopal priest Bob Malm, rector of Grace Episcopal Church in Alexandria VA

While I cannot yet share specifics, Bob continues to try to bully me and my family, including suggesting to various people that I somehow am mentally ill. For example, in an email to my friend Dee Parsons, publisher of The Wartburg Watch, Bob notes that several of the posts on my blog are posted in the early hours of the morning—something that happens when a person travels. He then asks her, “Is that healthy?”

I also can confirm that Bob indeed trades on his status as clergy by taking comments out of context and trying to somehow make them into threats. But if we use the same approach to the church’s website, it mentions “white supremacists” a number of times, which would mean that Grace Church supports white supremacists. It also has dozens of references to terrorism; does that mean that Bob Malm supports terrorism? If you use his logic, it does.

The Episcopal Diocese of Virginia is fully aware of Bob Malm’s conduct and continues to turn a willfully blind eye to the entire situation. In fact, Bishop Shannon Johnston has sent a letter to the parish supporting Bob Malm, which tells you that this is one bishop who has absolutely zero moral compass.

Meanwhile, Jeff Chiow, Bob’s attorney, continues to object to sharing of information about the case. But if this were really about being threatened, wouldn’t Bob want as much information as possible out there? Our legal system is based on open courts, in which the public can see and hear firsthand what is going on. The fact that Bob Malm appears to want to conduct things in secret speaks volumes about his real motive, which is to try and use a restraining order as a way to shut down criticism of his bullying and other bad conduct.

I’ve also uncovered several emails between Bob Malm and the City of Alexandria that he did not share during discovery; there are also a number of emails he sent to Dee Parsons, mentioned above, that he has not provided. Sketch alert.

My appeal is set for October 5th in Alexandria VA Circuit Court and is open to the public. If you are in the area I encourage you to see for yourself a really bad example of how someone in a position of perceived authority can use and abuse our court system.


Restraining orders at US Customs and Border Protection

Angela, the woman who had restraining orders against me for about eight years, successfully petitioned for her first restraining order against me in Dec 2008.  After I was served with the copy of the final restraining order, there was little further drama for a couple of years and I avoided contact with Angela.  During those first two years, I was unable to travel internationally due to financial limitations.

After a couple of years, though, that changed when improvements in my employment situation led to more travel both personally and for work.  During my first trip to Canada, there were no problems in leaving the US, but the experience when returning to the US was definitely different with a restraining order in effect.  In flying back to the US from Canada, at most of the major Canadian airports one clears US Customs and Border Protection in Canada before boarding one's flight, rather than at the US destination airport.  This is known as "preclearance".  When I arrived at the preclearance location, the process of clearing customs started in the normal way.  But at a certain point it became evident that something had showed up on the officer's screen that he wasn't happy with.  He started asking questions like "have you ever been arrested?" and "what brought you to Canada?"  Eventually he put my documents in a folder, wrote some kind of code on the customs form, and directed me to a back room known as the "secondary inspection" area.

Secondary inspection is a mechanism by which US Customs detains travelers for more intense inspections.  At the primary inspection area, the officers are generally allotted only a limited amount of time to screen each traveler.  If the traveler cannot be cleared in that time frame, they are sent to secondary inspection where there is a much longer delay.  People get sent to secondary inspection for various reasons.  Sometimes it is random.  Sometimes people's answers at primary inspection don't quite add up in the estimation of the officer.  Sometimes noncitizens are entering the US with more complex paperwork than an ordinary tourist or business traveler and it takes more time to process their entry.  It seems, however, that with an active restraining order, one gets sent to secondary inspection most of the time whether a citizen or not.

Mostly for me secondary inspection just involved a delay.  The first few trips to secondary inspection resulted in delays of about 45 minutes or so.  I've heard of much longer delays though.  When going through preclearance a delay can present a problem because if delayed for too long, one can miss one's flight.  That first time, I waited for about 45 minutes without much to do (you have to turn off all electronic devices in the secondary inspection area).  After about 45 minutes, I was finally called up to see an officer in the secondary inspection area.  The actual questions at secondary inspection were quite brief--no more detailed than at primary inspection.  The officer did mention Angela by name and asked a bit about the restraining order, but not in a lot of detail.  He also briefly searched my luggage and then cleared me to proceed and catch my flight.

After my first trip to secondary inspection, I'd hoped that they would have "cleared" the restraining order in their system and noted that, although I had a restraining order, there were no associated arrests or warrants that would lead to a problem entering the country.  However it seemed that the process of clearing secondary inspection had to be repeated each time.  My second trip abroad was just a few weeks later, and this time I went to Asia and cleared US customs stateside.  Again the officer at primary inspection noticed something awry in my records and asked me some questions that were directed at the restraining order, and sent me to secondary inspection.  There I waited, again for about 45 minutes, before being cleared to enter the country.

These trips to secondary inspection presented a couple of problems for me.  One is that they were embarrassing especially when traveling on business with people who didn't know about the order and presumably thought of me as an upstanding member of the community.  It is embarrassing to be singled out of a group one is traveling with and directed to a back room for further questioning.  If traveling with a group on business, I often ended up coming up with an excuse to not travel back with the group to avoid this embarrassment.  I'd still fly out to the foreign destination with the group, as I never had problems leaving the US.  But I might ask to take a couple of days off to visit the foreign country as a tourist, thereby avoiding traveling back with the group.  Alternatively, if the other members of the group opted for their own reasons to stay in the other country for a few days as tourists, I'd come up with a reason why I needed to return immediately--and therefore could be sure of traveling on a different flight.  Fortunately, I've never had to travel internationally so much that these habits attracted too much attention.

I also noticed that the customs officials at preclearance locations in Canada were just a notch less intimidating than their counterparts at US airports.  I believe that is because the preclearance officers in Canada don't directly have the powers of arrest since they are not in their own country.  For this reason, when returning to the US from a business trip in Asia, I would often arrange to connect through an airport in Canada so as to clear US customs in Canada.

The questions asked at secondary inspection generally seemed to assume a past relationship between myself and Angela, because restraining orders are often sought in divorce cases.  The questioning would usually open with something like "who's Angela?", "have you ever been married?", or "are you still married to Angela?"  In fact I've never been married to Angela, but they seem to make certain assumptions in these secondary inspections.  One officer did tell me that the reason for such an inspection is to verify that the two people aren't travelling together, which would be a violation of the order.  Regardless of the reasons for the secondary inspection, these trips to secondary inspection were probably the most inconvenient part of having a restraining order against me.  Once the final restraining order expired, I have never again had to go to secondary inspection.