SOUTHLAKE (TX)
0223com [Mar del Plata, Argentina]
August 7, 2025
By Krista Summerville
It’s the latest development in a high-stakes civil case that stems from allegations of sexual abuse and institutional cover-up within Gateway Church in Southlake.
Gateway announced Thursday that Pastor Nic Lesmeister has been named its new executive pastor, marking a new era for the North Texas megachurch.
SOUTHLAKE, Texas — Three former elders of Gateway Church have officially denied defaming Robert Morris’ accuser, Cindy Clemishire, in a series of recent court filings, which stem from allegations of sexual abuse and institutional cover-up with the megachurch founded by Morris.
Former elders, Thomas H. Miller Jr., Gayland Lawshe, and Jeremy Carrasco, denied any wrongdoing in the recent court filings. They were among the elders removed from the church in November after church leaders claimed they had information about Clemishire’s abuse allegations.
Cindy Clemishire is the Oklahoma woman who accused Morris of sexually abusing her starting when she was 12 in the ‘80s, leading to his indictment in March.
Clemishire and her father, Jerry Lee Clemishire, filed a lawsuit in June against Gateway Church, Morris, and multiple current and former elders. The suit alleges that the defendants defamed her through public statements made in connection with her accusation that Morris sexually abused her as a child in the 1980s.
According to the lawsuit, Gateway officials “acted in concert” to discredit Clemishire’s allegations and portray her claims as morally inappropriate but consensual rather than criminal. The Clemishires argue that this characterization not only harmed her reputation but also inflicted significant emotional distress.
In response, all three elders have denied wrongdoing.
In a filing submitted Monday, Miller Jr. stated that any comments he may have made were “without actual malice” and were shared only with individuals who had a legitimate interest in the matter. His attorneys emphasized that the statements were part of an internal investigation into alleged employee misconduct and were intended to inform the congregation. Miller also invoked the legal standard that a person cannot be held liable for publishing a true statement unless they present the facts in a misleading way, the filing read.
Carrasco, who also submitted a general denial on Aug. 1, argued that any statements attributed to him were either true, not defamatory, or never published. Carrasco’s filing stated that his statements were protected under both absolute and qualified privilege, and that he made them without malice or negligence. The filing also stated that any harm to Clemishire came from third parties beyond Carrasco’s control and added that some claims may be time-barred under the statute of limitations.
Lawshe responded on July 25 with a general denial, without addressing specific allegations. He, like the others, demanded that the plaintiffs prove their claims in court.
Miller, Lawshe, and Carrasco were among four church leaders removed from Gateway last fall. Elder board chair Tra Willbanks had previously stated that the removed elders had either known or should have known the full scope of Clemishire’s allegations and failed to act accordingly.
Morris resigned from Gateway in June 2024 and was indicted in March 2025 in Oklahoma on five counts of lewd or indecent acts to a child. Each charge carries a potential 20-year prison sentence. He made his first court appearance in May, and a preliminary hearing is scheduled for Sept. 4.
In a separate May 2025 court filing, Morris’ attorneys acknowledged that he had a “highly inappropriate relationship” with Clemishire, but they’re now focused on a different legal battle, trying to collect retirement payments he says the church still owes him. Morris is seeking $1 million in additional retirement benefits.
Dallas County Judge Emily Tobolowsky has scheduled the civil case for jury trial on June 15, 2026, in district court. The suit seeks $1 million in damages.
The trial is expected to address not only whether the church and its leaders defamed Clemishire, but also broader issues of whether religious institutions and their leaders can be held liable for internal communications later alleged to be defamatory.Close Ad