Walter Thompson, Chairman of the Board of 3ABN puts the blame on those who have improperly “attacked” Danny. “Why wouldn’t Brandy leave after having to put up with all the problems caused by these attacks on Danny?” goes Thompson’s story.
Princessdi,
How could you know Walter Thompson is right?
Have you talked to Brandy?
Is it not possible her views might differ from his?
Not only did Brandy agree to appease the ridiculous accusations and submit her innocent child to a DNA test, NOW it is not even good enough.
Not only did Brandy agree to appease the ridiculous accusations and submit her innocent child to a DNA test, NOW it is not even good enough.
I know of no evidence that Brandy agreed. Remember? Her signature was forged on that agreement.
Dr Day:
"Danny got out of the truck, we said “Hello” and he began to sign the consent for DNA testing. Brandy refused to get out of the truck at first, or even to look at us, or acknowledge our presence. She was clearly angry"
Not only did Brandy agree to appease the ridiculous accusations and submit her innocent child to a DNA test, NOW it is not even good enough.
I know of no evidence that Brandy agreed. Remember? Her signature was forged on that agreement.
Boy Howdy! There is nothing like juicy SDA gossip. I have some questions for you Bob Pickle.
( or for "dr day")
I Do you know if it is the real Dr Day who is posting here?
II If so, do you know why the post here is different then what is on her website?
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/dr_day/shelton%27s/danny_shelton.htm
III If Dr Day required that Danny Shelton sign a "consent" the day she took the DNA sample from him despite him already signing an agreement one month earlier, why didn't she require his wife to sign a consent form for the child and herself?
The outcome now was evident long before this point, ....
As I read through the information on Dr. Day's website, I didn't find any "proof" that the child submitted for DNA testing was indeed Brandy's child!! ...
Dr Day did 2 separate paternity tests, taking samples from Danny, Brandy and the child. She sent them to 2 different labs and both results proved Danny was not the Father. They are also posted in this thread. So her excuse for not keeping her agreement was that despite having a copy of the child's passport and seeing her when she swabbed her for the test, she didn't know who the child was and she suggested that Brandy and Danny had substituted another child in place of Brandy's daughter. So the group here has been attacking Danny for his deceit about this.
Problem is the same lab, the same Dr, and same samples Dr Day sent in were also tested to see if the Mother and child were actually Mother and child and it came back with the most positive result that lab gives, 99.999 probability.
The documented and proven truth is that the Child is Brandy's and is not Danny's....
http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1621.0;attach=322;image
Ok so I can be a little slow at times admittedly. However, this test is saying that Brandy is the child's mother? Was the point to establish that Brandy is the mother or Danny as the father? I see Danny name at the top, but only Brandy and the child tested. So after ALL of this There was no paternity test done to established Danny paternity? If the answer is yes, this, too, should be let go. Danny doesn't really have to answer to anyone here about that. Now if he were wise, I would believe he would basically comply in order to avoid the appearance of evil, but he is not obligated to do so..........
So the group here has been attacking Danny for his deceit about this.
Not only did Brandy agree to appease the ridiculous accusations and submit her innocent child to a DNA test, NOW it is not even good enough.
I know of no evidence that Brandy agreed. Remember? Her signature was forged on that agreement.
Ian, this is in response to your statement to my post where you said: "Because it is not on her website" referring to the proof that the child submitted was not Brandy's. Perhaps you haven't gone to the proper web site. Go to: www.goodnewsaboutgod.com and click on Spiritual Truths. Then, scroll down to the bottom center of the many icons and you'll see "Shelton's DNA Testing". Click on that and read the entire post. Clearly, the child presented for testing was not identified as required. DS would not allow that. Therefore, it can be said (and DS loves this!) that he complied with the testing, but HE DID NOT. He showed up with Brandy and "a" child, but he did NOT COMPLY with the testing as required BY LAW.
]To travel several hours to and from a certified DNA testing laboratory would have been a major imposition on the Sheltons, including the child, ****, who would have missed a day of school.
To make it as convenient as possible for the Sheltons, I traveled from California to Southern Illinois at my own expense, and brought along two DNA testing kits...
What is the difference between a Private and a Legal Paternity Test?
The private paternity test (a/k/a “peace of mind” or “home“) where a client requests and is sent the sample collection kits. The client or someone they appoint collects the samples themselves and returns them to our lab. Not much documentation is required by the private test. Simply completing the Chain of Custody included in the kit and signing it and providing the samples is sufficient.
The legal paternity test (a/k/a court admissible) where the client goes into a doctor’s office, a sample collection site, or a clinic, and a disinterested third party (a trained DNA specimen collection technician) collects the donors’ samples and completes the formal chain of custody form. This formal collection process entails the taking of the donors’ fingerprint, photograph, and making a copy of the donors’ government issued identification. All these items together with the donors’ samples establish and attest to an unbroken chain of custody
www.dnacenter.com
Test Types: Legal and Home DNA Test
The type of paternity test you need will depend on what you
intend to use the DNA test results for:
* If you need paternity test results that can be used as a
legal document (for example, to change the name on the
birth certificate or to obtain child support and other
benefits), a *Legal DNA Test* needs to be performed
*(described below)*.
* However, if you need the test only for personal knowledge,
a Home DNA Test
<http://www.dnacenter.com/paternity/home-test.html> willl
suffice.
Unlike the Home DNA Test, where tested parties collect their own
samples at their convenience, the Legal DNA Test follows a
Chain of Custody documentation process
<http://www.dnacenter.com/paternity/establishing-paternity.html>
to ensure that you receive accurate and legally defensible
results. When you set up your case with DDC, _we will coordinate
a convenient sample collection appointment,_ during which a
trained sample collector will complete all the necessary
documentation to satisfy chain of custody requirements.
Sample Collection
We routinely use the painless buccal (cheek) swab to collect
samples. We have the largest network of collection sites
<http://www.dnacenter.com/locations.html> in the U.S., allowing
our customers to choose a sample collection appointment most
convenient for them. We also have extensive affiliations with
laboratories worldwide for international sample collections.
*DNA Testing Costs*
The basic cost for the Chain of Custody DNA test is *$475* for
one child and one alleged father, with or without the mother. In
addition, a sample collection fee of *$70* is charged for each
paternity test *case* (child and alleged father). The mother's
DNA sample is collected free of charge.
Home Paternity Testing
DNA Collection Kit
Collecting the DNA sample is quick and painless. Once you place
an online DNA test order
<https://www.dnacenter.com/cgi-bin/home-paternity.pl?info=DNIS5768>,
we will send you a DNA sample collection kit within one business
day. The kit will contain the following:
* Complete instructions for collecting the DNA samples
* Buccal swabs and swab envelopes for the child, alleged
father, and mother (if participating)
* Business return envelope for shipping the samples back to
the laboratory
*DNA Testing Costs*
The basic cost for the Home DNA test is *$295.* This
all-inclusive fee includes the DNA sample collection kit, Dual
Process™ DNA testing, and shipping of kits and samples from and
to the laboratory.
Not only did Brandy agree to appease the ridiculous accusations and submit her innocent child to a DNA test, NOW it is not even good enough.
I know of no evidence that Brandy agreed. Remember? Her signature was forged on that agreement.
It is a naive and ignorant assumption that a person signs his or her name consistently each time.
I have looked as all of the provided signatures. My initial reaction was that there might be a difference. Then I took a closer look:
1) The initials on pagae 1 of the DNA agreement, in my view tie to both the signatures on page 2 and to the previous signatures provided at earlier times.
2) It should be noted thata the "S" in the initials on page 1, is written two different ways. The first one is tied to the signatures on page 2 and the second is tied, in my thinking to the previous signatures.
3) The "L" in the initials on page 1, in my mind is clearly tied to the "L" in the previous signatures.
4) The second "B" in the initials, in my thinking is tied to the "B" on the passport.
5) How do I explain what I see as the differences between the signatures on page 2 of the DNA agreement and the previous signatures?
Very simply: I explain these differences as what happens when a person is signing a document in a rush, page 2 of the DNA agreement. The exact same type of differences occur in my signature when I am in a rush. Why would Brandy be in a rush to sign the DNA agreement--If she was angry she just might be in a rush to get a distaseful duty out of the way. I can see me being angry and in a rush.
I have to say that I do not find to be substantiated any claim that might be made that the DNA agreement contained forged signatures.
4) The second "B" in the initials, in my thinking is tied to the "B" on the passport.
Obviously, Danny is not the stupid one here. I can tell you from a mans point of view that he exhibits (Danny) all the signs of a man in midlife crisis. Princess, you conclude Brandy left because of all the pressure, but you cannot conclude that a man who reports to be so in love with his wife can do the things Danny did to Her, I think not. As far as Brandy goes she is not a stupid lady, she well knew Danny's situation from the start since it is common knowledge in Adventist circles. The outcome now was evident long before this point, I already knew that the roosters would come home to roost; I do not blame the people here for their breakup I blame SIN. I am not a professional but the people that are around Danny should have had a spiritual enough eye to discern the outcome and should have acted accordingly. I blame the suppose friends and Spiritual leaders for Danny, who did not have the guts to either leave or ask him to step down until things were worked out. Danny should have never been allowed to continue on if this work was really Gods work with the intent of mending broken people.
A comment from myself, as a bystander, not involved
If there had been a plan to use the DNA results in a court of law, obviously the procedure would
necessarily have been more rigorous. Strict ID tests would have been enforced and the collecter
would have had to have been certified (as someone has already pointed out).
As it is, Brandy turned up for the test with the child - whoever that child was - and agreed
to let her (Brandy's) mouth be swabbed.
Does not that imply consent? Whether willingly or unwillingly, she let herself be tested. Not knowing
American law, I do not know whether that consent in action would take precedence over a claim of
coerced consent if her signature had been forged.
Also, as I said Bob, the efforts put forth on the other side are now suspect because you all did not get the outcome you so desired. Brandy signed the papers, the {right} baby took the test, and Danny is not that baby's daddy...simple.
:ROFL: This place is hilarious.
Prince,
Honestly, this is a tragedy for the Adventsit Church more than for the parties involved. I find it difficult to believe that given the circumstance that the church would stand by and watch with approval what has taken place. Have you read Dr Day's post? By the way, I watched 3abn extensively and I could see what was happening. The folks here are in no way responsible for what has happen it solely rest at the feet of the board at 3abn and Danny Shelton himself. Actually, if he had just step down and married Brandy that would have been his business and his only. But to expect Adventist people to just be quiet and sit back and except what was happening would be crazy. I am interested to know what you think should have been done? Please answer that question because I have often wanted to ask those defending Danny that question. Actually, for the true Christian it left them very little choice but to speak out if they valued truth and purity.
After reading Dr Thompson's letter (dictated by Danny Shelton...my opinion only) I was wondering just why was Brandy so terribly upset? I don't see how it could have had any bearing on any little online "chat room" (Danny's words). Seems like she was furious at the moment for what was going on at that particular time.
I have my opinions on what she was furious about but I bet it has nothing directly related to the fact that the child was being tested... but another thought comes to my mind.
From the first time I heard the name Trinity mentioned as one of Brandy's children I thought that this would be Danny's style of naming a child. Why would a non-christian woman married to another man call her child such a name.
Two words. "DANNY'S CHILD"
I haven't seen proof of any kind to satisfy me that this child is not Danny's.
Shame on TPTB for going along with all of Danny Shelton's craziness. I am discusted with all of it. No money comming from me to 3ABN. The lies just keep on going...going...going... going.
I don't care if anyone wants to disagree or fight with me or whatever. This is my opinion and mine only. I have not been hipnotized to think this thought. Danny Shelton himself with his lies and other shenanigans gave me this opinion.
I am beginning to get tired of the upper echelon talking on 3ABN discussing how wonderful 3ABN is and hey buy our 10 commandments book. I have no desire to watch 3ABN. My mother who is blinded by Danny Shelton' self love stories LOVES him and 3ABN and listens to them every evening. My computer is nearby so unless it gets so bad I get nauseated I stay and try to ignore the lies spewed. (especially the Sunday Tuesday and Thursday evening two hour how wonderful we are... no talking about how wonderful Jesus is and he is comming to save us progamming)
:ROFL: This place is hilarious.
I agree, Rex, for a variety of reasons. I am learning that things are not always as they appear to be... How do you ever know for sure who is right or who to trust?
Easy, Snoopy, you trust God and allowed the Holy spirit to lead you. That is the only way.
But I must admit I do agree with Rex, this place is hilarious, but I can only take it in doses. I post for a while leave for a month, or two, or three......because they are deadly serious about this stuff, and that is also very sad.
:ROFL: This place is hilarious.
I agree, Rex, for a variety of reasons. I am learning that things are not always as they appear to be... How do you ever know for sure who is right or who to trust?
:ROFL: This place is hilarious.
I agree, Rex, for a variety of reasons. I am learning that things are not always as they appear to be...
How do you ever know for sure who is right or who to trust?
From the first time I heard the name Trinity mentioned as one of Brandy's children I thought that this would be Danny's style of naming a child. Why would a non-christian woman married to another man call her child such a name.
Two words. "DANNY'S CHILD"
POPULARITY
Trinity has recently become a popular girl's name in the United States. It first appeared on the top 1000 chart in 1974, but dropped off again in 1980. It reappeared in the lower ranks of the chart in 1993, and rose quickly until it cracked the top 100 in 2000. Trinity was most popular (so far) in 2004 and 2005, when it ranked as the 48th most popular girl's name. In 2007, it ranked as number 72.
Trinity was also used as a boy's name, and appeared on the top 1000 chart between 1974 and 1980. It reached as high as 780 in 1975.
The name Trinity was popularized by the 1999 film The Matrix, in which Carrie-Ann Moss portrayed a character named Trinity. The film also featured other symbolic names such as Neo and Morpheus.[1] The popularity of this film may account for the sudden jump in popularity (#527 in 1998 to #74 in 2000), but the popularity of the film had already been on the rise before The Matrix was released. But Trinity is also part of a new trend of novel religious names: Miracle, Messiah, Angel and Grace are all top 1000 names.
As with names such as Jesus and Angel, Trinity is often used by Spanish-speaking families.
Let us not forget the middle name DAWN!
Like Melody DAWN!
Like Trinity DAWN!
To me this screams, "Danny's Child!"
Tinka, I never said I know all.
I don't think I worded my last post very well, though ~ ....let me clarify. I believe the DNA test did not prove that Danny was the father of the child presented (and Danny - in my opinion - manipulated that test to show that very result); however, consider that the test also did NOT PROVE THAT BRANDY WAS THE MOTHER!! Interesting, indeed.
Here's a possible scenario: If the child presented was a niece to Brandy, then of course, Danny wouldn't be the father and Brandy couldn't be the mother. Of course, Danny could then say he complied with the DNA test to prove to the world he wasn't the father of Brandy's "child" and brag that he had complied with the request to be tested. Just so like him to do that.
... however, consider that the test also did NOT PROVE THAT BRANDY WAS THE MOTHER!!
Nowhere do I find, in the test results, that it proved that Brandy was the mother. The fact that DS didn't allow the child to stand (Danny held her on his lap), it was difficult for Dr. Day to assess the height and size of the child. It appeared to her that the size of the child's legs were that of about a 6 year old, not an eight year old that Brandy's child is. The child presented was not allowed to be seen nor photographed for identification. Why all the secrecy on DS's part? ~ unless there was something to hide! The child was required to remain laying down in the back seat of his pickup (for 30 minutes!), covered up at all times, and DS took her out only for the collection of her mouth swab - head covered. I do not believe that the child presented was indeed, Brandy's birth child.
The Director of Parentage Testing, Thomas Gilroy, Ph.D, states:
“The item submitted as a specimen from 15735 MO cannot be excluded as the mother of the item submitted as specimen from 15735 CH. The combined maternity index (genetic odds In favor of maternity) is 1,832,372. The relative chance of paternity, assuming a prior chance of 50%, is 99.99%.”
That location was Danny's choice.
You know these folks are really strange!That location was Danny's choice.
That location was Danny's choice.
I think it was supposed to be a school parking lot, but then got changed by Danny et. al. to a post office parking lot, I think in Benton.You know these folks are really strange!That location was Danny's choice.
Ok but why not the lab, like errybody else? Why was the parking lot even a consideration? Danny could have had the person come to him if he wanted. Does Dr. Day have an office? This is all so very strange.
Ok, and WHY in the h.........sorry.......world was he worried about it being public when he was allowing this woman to post the results on the world wide web?
I think it was supposed to be a school parking lot, but then got changed by Danny et. al. to a post office parking lot, I think in Benton.You know these folks are really strange![quote That location was Danny's choice. quote]
Reply: Because Danny was the one who changed the location a couple of times at the last minute it is evident that he was the one who was making the decisions about where it would be held. Dr Day lives in California. I presume that her office is there. Dr Day did say that "To travel several hours to and from a certified DNA testing laboratory would have been a major imposition on the Sheltons, including the child, Trinity Murray, who would have missed a day of school."But why not the Shelton's home or another more suitable location? Maybe that is just the way they do things in Southern Illinois? A parking lot indeed! And why hide the child under a blanket? And for that length of time? That is the strangest of all to me. Especially as you have said when Danny wanted Dr Day to publish the results on the world wide web and asked her to do so.
That location was Danny's choice.
The switch to the parking lot by the post office was Danny's choice because some of the parties involved felt the school parking lot had the potential to be too public.
As far as I recall from reading the agreement, the choice to meet in a parking lot for the sample swabbing by Dr. Day was agreed to by both Danny and Dr. Day, according to the agreement.
Ok but why not the lab, like errybody else? Why was the parking lot even a consideration? Danny could have had the person come to him if he wanted. Does Dr. Day have an office? This is all so very strange.
Ok, and WHY in the h.........sorry.......world was he worried about it being public when he was allowing this woman to post the results on the world wide web?
I think it was supposed to be a school parking lot, but then got changed by Danny et. al. to a post office parking lot, I think in Benton.You know these folks are really strange!That location was Danny's choice.
... those same samples taken by Dr Day were tested twice by the very same lab and the very same Doctor she mailed them to.
Brandy is the mother of the child and Danny is not the father of the child.
Of course people can choose to live in a fantasy world here and keep denying that reality till judgment day, and keep quibbling about every little thing as if it will somehow override those facts -- and some will I am sure-- but for the rest of the world the subject is closed and over with and their continuing arguments and excuses just sound like sour grapes and an inability to admit to being wrong.
DNA tests don't lie, those same samples taken by Dr Day were tested twice by the very same lab and the very same Doctor she mailed them to.
False.
Brandy is the mother of the child and Danny is not the father of the child. Of course people can choose to live in a fantasy world here and keep denying that reality till judgment day, and keep quibbling about every little thing as if it will somehow override those facts -- and some will I am sure-- but for the rest of the world the subject is closed and over with and their continuing arguments and excuses just sound like sour grapes and an inability to admit to being wrong
DNA tests don't lie, those same samples taken by Dr Day were tested twice by the very same lab and the very same Doctor she mailed them to.
False.
False?
Folks, see the results of those 2 tests attached below for yet another example of why Bob's claims are just not credible.
DNA tests don't lie, those same samples taken by Dr Day were tested twice by the very same lab and the very same Doctor she mailed them to.
False.
False?
Yes. False.Folks, see the results of those 2 tests attached below for yet another example of why Bob's claims are just not credible.
Cynthia Ann Conard, why did you write that? Why did you twist my true statement into a slam like that?
If you were going to post the results of two tests, why didn't you post the results of two tests? Why not? Why did you only post two letters from the same lab pertaining to only one test? Why didn't you post the report for the other test from the other lab?
More importantly, why do you keep trying to pretend to be an expert when you can't get your facts straight?
And, where did you get the second letter you posted from?
Problem is, as you well know but wish to ignore in this discussion, that there is no proof presently that the child tested was the child that was supposed to be tested. And that is the question that is still not resolved.
Sure you're right! So we're all going with a paternity test and a maternity test are only one test now?
Problem is, as you well know but wish to ignore in this discussion, that there is no proof presently that the child tested was the child that was supposed to be tested. And that is the question that is still not resolved.
I'm going with the DNA test was accurate and Mrs Shelton is the Mother.So if the wrong child was tested how many other children does Mrs Shelton have? Are they close in age? Which of her children do you think it was?
Sure you're right! So we're all going with a paternity test and a maternity test are only one test now?
That is correct. There were two tests for two different labs, and each test took samples from all three individuals. There were no separate paternity and maternity tests.Problem is, as you well know but wish to ignore in this discussion, that there is no proof presently that the child tested was the child that was supposed to be tested. And that is the question that is still not resolved.
I'm going with the DNA test was accurate and Mrs Shelton is the Mother.So if the wrong child was tested how many other children does Mrs Shelton have? Are they close in age? Which of her children do you think it was?
According to how I read the report Nosir Myzing posted from who knows where, she has a 19,999/20,000 chance of being the mother. That means she has a 1/20,000 of not being the mother.
I have no way presently to prove how many children she has. And I don't know the odds of a niece having the same test results.
Actually, according to what the surmising Nosir Myzing posted, the one lab said that paternity was 99.99% certain, which would make Danny the father of the child. A likely typo.
Nowhere do I find, in the test results, that it proved that Brandy was the mother.
Most of us have already seen the results. What made this discussion interesting was why were they acting so strangely. I can understand getting the test results right to the post office but I think the test results were in question even before they were taken because even though the tests were home kits, identification was incomplete (no fingerprints) and documents were incomplete and xeroxed...
Yet you spout your opinions anyway..
FYI She has 2 children ....
To the best of my knowledge there are no nieces, and she would not pass as their mother even if there were although you will no doubt keep trying to pretend that is a possibility.
I guess you also don't care or think it relevant that Dr Day payed for only a paternity test, and then after her and your silly excuses and arguments on the internet about not knowing who the child was, the Sheltons called and in order to clear up any confusion caused by your continuing libel requested that a Maternity test be done on the same samples so that the question could be resolved and put to rest for all the rational people?
Your double standards are revealed yet again by the fact that you posted:QuoteActually, according to what the surmising Nosir Myzing posted, the one lab said that paternity was 99.99% certain, which would make Danny the father of the child. A likely typo.
So if it had been about Danny he would have been the father, but since it was about Brandy, you say there is not proof she is the mother?
Since the results were mailed to Dr Day also why do you think Dr Day has never included the maternity test results on her website along with the 2 paternity test results proving that Danny was not the father?
Most of us have already seen the results. What made this discussion interesting was why were they acting so strangely. I can understand getting the test results right to the post office but I think the test results were in question even before they were taken because even though the tests were home kits, identification was incomplete (no fingerprints) and documents were incomplete and xeroxed...
Child...
For what it is worth to you. I am acquainted with the Sheltons and the younger daughter who was tested. I have no doubts that the pictures of them which Dr Day has posted are the very same three being talked about here. Many have seen the family and I am not aware of one person who knows, has met, or has ever seen Brandy's daughter whether on tv or in person saying that is not her on Dr Day's website. Are you? In addition Brandy has video of the entire thing and it is positively her daughter being tested and despite what Tinka and Jody and others have claimed here erroneously (whether from being deceived themselves or because they are being deceiving themselves I don't know) she was not under a blanket when she was tested.
I maintain a hope that there are some people here who care about truth as much as they profess to so I have four questions for you. 1.) Do you realize that there is no identification required with a home kit, and that Dr Day is an interested party and no lab will accept those things from her? 2.) How would taking fingerprints help Dr Day? What I mean is how could she use them to identify any of the three tested? 3.) As Dr Day had the copy of the child's passport with it's photo and she looked right at the child when she took the sample, how likely do you think it is that she would take that sample if she had any doubts that the child she was getting ready to swab was not the one in the xeroxed passport photo or did not at least look just like her? 4.) If the child Dr Day both saw and swabbed did not look like the one in the photo don't you think she would have said so?
3D
Yet you spout your opinions anyway..
Have you posted an apology for your last false accusation, Cynthia?FYI She has 2 children ....
That's probable. But you can't prove that, can you?To the best of my knowledge there are no nieces, and she would not pass as their mother even if there were although you will no doubt keep trying to pretend that is a possibility.
To your knowledge, there was only one lab involved when there were in fact two. So your knowledge has been impeached.
I do not know the odds of a lady testing out to be the probable mother when she is in fact but an aunt. What would be more productive than your mere assertion is if you provided a concrete number as to those odds.I guess you also don't care or think it relevant that Dr Day payed for only a paternity test, and then after her and your silly excuses and arguments on the internet about not knowing who the child was, the Sheltons called and in order to clear up any confusion caused by your continuing libel requested that a Maternity test be done on the same samples so that the question could be resolved and put to rest for all the rational people?
Your explanation is totally absurd. Why not simply acknowledge your mistake?
Look at the two reports. What evidence do you see that a second test was run on the same samples? There is none!Your double standards are revealed yet again by the fact that you posted:QuoteActually, according to what the surmising Nosir Myzing posted, the one lab said that paternity was 99.99% certain, which would make Danny the father of the child. A likely typo.
So if it had been about Danny he would have been the father, but since it was about Brandy, you say there is not proof she is the mother?
Excellent point. So to clear up the inconsistency, based on the likely typo, there is a 19,999 out of 20,000 chance that Danny is the father.
Cindy, where did you get that report from?
Getting back on topic, what's the latest on Brandy leaving Danny?
Is this actually true?
Ok, I sam with Rex...you can't even begin to make this stuff up. Bob you have got to be kidding. Can she prove that Brandy on has 2 children? I am not sure, with the imaginations that exist here, why you all are not into sci-fi........things that make you go...hmmmmm......LOL!!!
Getting back on topic, what's the latest on Brandy leaving Danny?
Is this actually true?
I asked them over at the other what some refer to here as the smut site (not my choice of words), but met with surprising opposition by simply asking them whether this was true or not, therefore, by their very biased remarks, it obviously must be true, otherwise, they would have given me a resounding NO!!!!
I was called last week, asking me if I had heard that Brandy's divorce from Danny was already final. The party that called me had heard it was...I don't know. Has anyone heard any more on that subject recently?
I was called last week, asking me if I had heard that Brandy's divorce from Danny was already final. The party that called me had heard it was...I don't know. Has anyone heard any more on that subject recently?
Most of us have already seen the results. What made this discussion interesting was why were they acting so strangely. I can understand getting the test results right to the post office but I think the test results were in question even before they were taken because even though the tests were home kits, identification was incomplete (no fingerprints) and documents were incomplete and xeroxed...
Child...
For what it is worth to you. I am acquainted with the Sheltons and the younger daughter who was tested. I have no doubts that the pictures of them which Dr Day has posted are the very same three being talked about here. Many have seen the family and I am not aware of one person who knows, has met, or has ever seen Brandy's daughter whether on tv or in person saying that is not her on Dr Day's website. Are you? In addition Brandy has video of the entire thing and it is positively her daughter being tested and despite what Tinka and Jody and others have claimed here erroneously (whether from being deceived themselves or because they are being deceiving themselves I don't know) she was not under a blanket when she was tested.
I maintain a hope that there are some people here who care about truth as much as they profess to so I have four questions for you. 1.) Do you realize that there is no identification required with a home kit, and that Dr Day is an interested party and no lab will accept those things from her? 2.) How would taking fingerprints help Dr Day? What I mean is how could she use them to identify any of the three tested? 3.) As Dr Day had the copy of the child's passport with it's photo and she looked right at the child when she took the sample, how likely do you think it is that she would take that sample if she had any doubts that the child she was getting ready to swab was not the one in the xeroxed passport photo or did not at least look just like her? 4.) If the child Dr Day both saw and swabbed did not look like the one in the photo don't you think she would have said so?
3D
What doctor would even pretend that another child could be substituted and the DNA not show it?
I believe someone mentioned a long time ago (may have been me) that all Day had to do is ask Danny or someone at 3abn to send her the Shelton Christmas program where *****'s face is shown clearly.
Doubt it, since they were talking about divorce at least by about two years ago.
But there is a chance it was a final straw. Why would be a matter of speculation without more information.
Is it true that Brandy left ************ with Danny? Why?
I understand that when Danny's first daughter was born her mother gave her also the middle name ****.
Is it true that Brandy left ************ with Danny? Why?
I understand that when Danny's first daughter was born her mother gave her also the middle name ****.
If it is true that Danny has *******, it makes the truth self evident! If he does have *******, she needs protection ASAP!
---------------------------
Edited by Artiste
Di,
Check out Sister's post at http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10304&view=findpost&p=146302 (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10304&view=findpost&p=146302). We filed that one with the court, I believe.
There is always the possibility that Sister got it wrong. But I believe I have a letter somewhere that confirms one of the points Sister makes.
why would your court papers include any of that? What was the point?
Every breath, every relationship in his life is jsut not that dysfunctional.
why would your court papers include any of that? What was the point?
Because that thread and others like it were relevant to the question of scope of discovery, which Danny and 3ABN were trying to narrow.
Danny and 3ABN claimed that internet criticism exploding in June or July of 2006, which was before we ever got involved, was what caused 3ABN's decline in donations. What was that criticism? Those threads prove what that criticism was. Was that criticism true? Our discovery was intended to demonstrate whether it was true or not. But Danny and 3ABN didn't want us to do that.
However, Danny and 3ABN included that entire thread as a 55-page PDF document on the first CD of their Rule 26(a)(1) initial disclosure documents. That meant that they believed that thread and the information it contained to be relevant in some way to the lawsuit.Every breath, every relationship in his life is jsut not that dysfunctional.
I agree with you that it was over the top. At least that is how I felt at the time I read it.
Was that relationship that dysfunctional? I have a written communication from a witness which suggests that it was. But it would take some cross-examination to establish whether it was and to what extent it was, and thus perhaps it is better to assume that the guilty are innocent of this one until proven otherwise.
The point is DS is a corrupter of the innocent. That is why the law has to be the protector...... We live by those standards since the beginning of time. It cannot be left go or......your just as guilty.
Please don't bother with the self justifications or stories here on my account, I have read them from you before and sorry I am not interested in reading it again even if you throw in your horse again, as it is all delusion and self righteousness, and loving lies to me and YES, that is "my personal opinion" and "my personal Judgment." It is also my opinion that your posts are among the worst that this forum has to offer and as do many here bring shame and reproach upon Jesus' Church, and misrepresent Him.
Tinka, I don't believe Melody ever said that. I have never seen or heard of any document or testimony that would indicate she said that.
I would more then anything for Di's post to be untrue.
and the other posters in put of this also.
It sure would be a better feeling for me to discover my first instinct is "how could this horrible thing be true" and that is why I came on and asked this after it was stated to be truth by what I felt to be reptuable after about 3-4 years of reading this mess.
I did read back that Melody was supposed to have admitted this and it came from her mouth. I guess it is a process to see who is the liar when you have these talks.
I have found that some on here are just imposters of SDA religion. Many times you can see if they are unfaithful to little things then they must not be trustworthy in the bigger and then you try too syphon out. I do care what is truth because SDA has been a lifetime for me and 5 generations back. I hate what is happening and it has been the broader picture for me as a whole and not the personal disgusting details but the public showoffs of misused funds.
Why do I waste time looking at this in wee hours is my lifetime of loyallity to my beliefs and thinking of the perfect message given to a special chosesn people to see what they do with it. They confiscated it for personal use of extravaganza :horse:! and that is my jest of concerment and discernment to wonder into this place hoping for better details of what has been observed of documents. So how about this Di and the ones that are the accusers of this! Ya all got this wrong--I did not make up this story and post it here. I simply gave my opinion if it was truth! But for some I find a complete ignorance in understanding simple English words and then they come across with total different views then what a posters first subject was initallly about or how they stated it.
An example of this is the rules for DNA perfection of the courts for truth. The valiity of the courts have been explained and shown over and over on the orginal documents. There is only one way of validity and some just don't get it. and I realize who those are that just go on and on about and make justification for false validity. But my point is VALIDITY and I could care less on whose baby is whose, (but still care what has been done to innocent life for a lifetime of woes because of the corruption the adult did) other then that all the rest is what comes with deceivement ane lies are miggled with trying to justify "misused funds". I just can't believe in this time of trouble knowing and having all knowledge of SDA truth we have this corruptions. That is what I hate to be truth. --THE CORRUPTION. SO ANYMAN--I am not the orginator of this fabrication that you feel is fabrication of ones mind. You need to read a little clearer or keep up with the posts before you speak and how and direct your posts to the ones that put your concerns of what you think is truth on here.
.You should have first demanded that anyone making these ugly hateful accusations prove it to you. Why didn't you? Because you wanted to believe this horrible ugly nasty story about Danny Shelton?
3abn defender,
Go to the thread while it is still fresh " Anybody here from Idaho?"Start reading what you failed evidently to read before you opened your mouth. Check out Di's post, mine and others. You can defend what ever you want but truth is still visible. and not referring to Mel F. but follow the links for your defending the whole picture. Evidently there is aplace called Sisters, but also this has been stated by the regulars on here. No matter what Mel F. said or did --you defender --are defending the wrong side with evidently no way out as your posts suggest that you are in the main mingle of things. Your pockets must be jingling. but in the end it will be gone just as lying easy it came.
What is so bad about this is --documents are there on corruption that are very hard to bring to light in a corrupted system when money counts for all. I know the system oh so well.
The defenders of this mess cannot seem to come up with one thing to prove different the visible corruption except a bunch of their own accusations. I would like nothing more then for this to be wrong and so would people on death row. My mind can change instantly with the proof.
If I would have known before hand where donations went and that a bunch of :horse: that had to be bought and fed and personal extraganza items, jets and proven etc.etc. they would not have gotten a dime. So in reality the money went to manuer and back to the ground and oh yes..to wild women.
:ROFL: you can't deny that one!!
3abn defender,
Lets see --the meaning of Visible Extravaganza of "misuse of pew money"
So, 3-D what do you do with the two men who are brothers who have been abused by TS as young men? Seems that there is a letter where TS admits it happened. So he has never been convicted by a court of law, that doesn't mean that he is not guilty. OJ is as guilty as you can get and he went through a trial and got off.
3abn defender,
...
10. Validity rules (of the court) supersede DS or Dr. Days poor and mishandled saga( DNA testing story). Don't you agree?
I think I know who you really are :ROFL:
What other posters claimed this? Sister? That was an old post which Bob Pickle quoted from years back from another forum, and excuse me but she was not in a position to know what she was saying. Her posts were over the top and ugly. She just repeated the gossip, slander and rumors as she heard them and presented them in an even uglier way without one shred of evidence to back anything up ....
First of all Grat, TS was a Pastor of the Church of God and married, he was dead wrong having a relationship with a church member. He has repented of that sin, he has been in counselling for it, and he is no longer a pastor. He apologized to Duane, ....
And the fact is not even the Church of God that he pastored in Virginia has any statements from any alleged victims to go on.
5. Do you deny the jets and personal travel?
--- Tinka, I do not deny that Jets were leased, as it is a huge expense to fly all of the 3abn crew as well as take all the recording equipment and all else all over the United States and the world. There was a donor who provided funding earmarked for that expense, as was his right, ....
I do deny that Jets were used for personal use. Can you or anyone else claiming this prove this occured? NO
7. Do you deny "pew money" going for documented gigantic attorney's fees to hide documents that if all was on up an up that would not have been necessary? It's always easy to prove truth if you have it!! Where is it?
Tinka, yes I deny that. A donor earmarked money for a lawsuit against Pickle and Joy, and the purpose of that lawsuit was not to hide documents. That is just ignorant.
The purpose of the lawsuit was to sue Pickle and Joy for lies and slander and libel. Why are you asking me where the truth is? Pickle and Joy shouldn't have to get it from 3ABN, they should have already had the proof before they made their accusations and claims, or they shouldn't have made them.
8. Do you deny other relationships and quickies? fast divorce and instant new family is "visual proof" and back on divorce again?
--- Yes Tinka I deny it.
So, 3-D what do you do with the two men who are brothers who have been abused by TS as young men? Seems that there is a letter where TS admits it happened. So he has never been convicted by a court of law, that doesn't mean that he is not guilty. OJ is as guilty as you can get and he went through a trial and got off.
Boy, did I ever strike a nerve over at the other site, which some here refer to as the smut site, which I never thought I would ever repeat here, until after I was informed about and read about the dirt they were trying to conjure up against me there!!!!
If they were really looking for the truth of Brandy and Danny and Linda and Danny, and everything else, they would never have posted such gossip against me as they posted there!!!
And all because of what I asked there and what I said here in this thread.
May God have mercy on their souls!!!
FYI 3-D, for all your work and defending you didn't convince me one iota that TS is not guilty of abuse. Just because he has not been convicted does not make him not guilty. It does not matter to me if the person was just at legal age of consent or his size or weight. TS used his position to take advantage. He admitted to it in his letterS. And what about the letters from the other mothers of young men or boys? He is a lucky man that he didn't come in contact with my sons. He might not have lived to confess. You don't mess with the cubs of a momma bear! And don't try to shame me with "that is not christian", won't work. Go defend all you want but your defense is full of it.
FYI 3-D, for all your work and defending you didn't convince me one iota that TS is not guilty of abuse. Just because he has not been convicted does not make him not guilty. It does not matter to me if the person was just at legal age of consent or his size or weight. TS used his position to take advantage. He admitted to it in his letterS. And what about the letters from the other mothers of young men or boys? He is a lucky man that he didn't come in contact with my sons. He might not have lived to confess. You don't mess with the cubs of a momma bear! And don't try to shame me with "that is not christian", won't work. Go defend all you want but your defense is full of it.
So, 3-D what do you do with the two men who are brothers who have been abused by TS as young men? Seems that there is a letter where TS admits it happened. So he has never been convicted by a court of law, that doesn't mean that he is not guilty. OJ is as guilty as you can get and he went through a trial and got off.
Grat, there are actually two such letters. See http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-127-18.pdf (http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-127-18.pdf) and http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-127-19.pdf (http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-127-19.pdf).
The latter letter is at http://www.Save-3ABN.com/ (http://www.Save-3ABN.com/), but the former letter is not. It is pretty damaging. Tommy admits to having "caused a lot of pain in many people's lives," not just Duane's.
QuoteAnd the fact is not even the Church of God that he pastored in Virginia has any statements from any alleged victims to go on.
Mighty strange of you to make such an assertion, Tommy_Defender. Mighty strange.
It's only been since July 2008 that just such a statement has been available on PACER. It's Doc. #81-11, pp. 8-9. See those pages at http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-81-11.pdf.
Read the answer to question #3 where that individual wrote, "He tried to perform oral sex on me ...." (Duane told me he wasn't surprised by this.) I won't quote the rest. You can read it for yourself.
Am I mistaken or is someone trying to justify, defend or deny TS' actions with young men/boys in any way, shape or form?
Please don't bother with the self justifications or stories here on my account, I have read them from you before and sorry I am not interested in reading it again even if you throw in your horse again, as it is all delusion and self righteousness, and loving lies to me and YES, that is "my personal opinion" and "my personal Judgment." It is also my opinion that your posts are among the worst that this forum has to offer and as do many here bring shame and reproach upon Jesus' Church, and misrepresentation
LOL!!
Well, that's rich, coming from you Cindy Conard Ford, administrator of the smut site!! Hahahahaha!!!
Maybe you should go back over there and check on things in your own house before you bring you come over here throwing stones. I dare you - go back and read some of the garbage you have allowed...AND EVEN CONTRIBUTED...over there and just imagine how you yourself have made Jesus feel...
Check out this link...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite
Snoopy, I am assuming that you read your dictionary reference before posting. I don't want there to be any un necessary problems so I am also presuming that there is nothing wrong with me replying to your post here or you, and that there is no reason for my reply to be removed, and that if there is that the admin will tell me what that is within 24 hrs as promised, so I can avoid problems in the future :) so...
If you feel you have a legit complaint, plz go to the forum you keep maligning and file it with the forum admin and explain specifically what post(s) you are talking about what you object to in it or them,and why, so it can be dealt with. Plz do that in the same way that you ask your forum members here to do on this forum.
IMO, your generic complaints and accusations of "smut" and continual attempts at identifying me here are nothing but hot air and ire. Although they may amuse you or make you feel better, or allow you to vent, or serve whatever purpose it is that you have, they resolve nothing, and don't really solve whatever problem you perceive or think there is.
toodles...
-------------------------------------
Ian: Second ban imposed for repeating the same infraction that caused your immediately previous ban.
Sorry, Was not trying to shout with large letter in the whole post. Many times I just emphasis words and capitalize for recognization. Learned to do that in helping out a friend in writing some political books. Will definitely try to remember. some times I just hit the cap and keep going and don't even spell check like I should because the older I get it seems my fingers do just oposite. and I usually do everything in a hurry. So will be more careful.
Quote from: Bob PickleQuoteAnd the fact is not even the Church of God that he pastored in Virginia has any statements from any alleged victims to go on.
Mighty strange of you to make such an assertion, Tommy_Defender. Mighty strange.
It's only been since July 2008 that just such a statement has been available on PACER. It's Doc. #81-11, pp. 8-9. See those pages at http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-81-11.pdf.
Read the answer to question #3 where that individual wrote, "He tried to perform oral sex on me ...." (Duane told me he wasn't surprised by this.) I won't quote the rest. You can read it for yourself.
Questions:
The document you filed in court, claiming that TS wanted but didn't preform oral sex etc ( makes you feel kinda hot and squirmy doesn't it?) was it filed anywhere else? Where? Does the church of God in VA have it?
Now let me tell you what I am sick of. It's people like you who are too big a coward to sign their name to a post like this. Your little dissertation here is full of half truths and outright fabrications. I'm not getting specific about anything until you identify yourself. So, the way I see it, you have two choices: Come clean about who you are and we'll discuss specifics, or remain behind your screen name, and thus remain branded a coward and liar. The ball is in your court.
OJ is a strawman and has nothing to do with TS or 3abn.
First of all Grat, TS was a Pastor of the Church of God and married, he was dead wrong having a relationship with a church member. He has repented of that sin, he has been in counselling for it, and he is no longer a pastor. He apologized to Duane, took all the blame on himself, and tried to make it up to Duane Clem, and encourage him too to get help also, but there is a letter which Duane Clem sent him saying that he had never hurt him and there was nothing to forgive. To this day Duane Clem denies he needs any help. It was Duane Clem who tried to initiate contact with TS again and it was TS who told him they could never be alone together again because of the past, but said that he and his wife would meet together with Duane and talk to him and try to help in whatever way they could. Duane did not want that.
Second of all, Duane Clem was an adult who entered into a wrong relationship and met TS and drove himself to those meetings on his own. He in his letter to Bob Pickle claims it was TS who broke off the relationship saying it was wrong. He also says TS accused him repeatedly of "faking it" and that once TS realized he didn't want the relationship he stopped. This to me suggest that the adult Duane Clem did not ever say "NO", or tell TS that he did not want anything to happen between them, and if he had it never would have occurred. So it is debatable wither the relationship was an abusive or consentual one. Duane Clem is a very large man, in heighth and weight, and TS is a very small man who is dwarfed by the man he is accused of molesting. For those who have seen and met both and know the characters of each the whole rape molestation story is utterly unbelievable.
In any case it was not a case of Pedophilia and that is the accusation which has been made against TS and what 3abn and DS have been accused of covering up over and over again.
The other brother has problems, and I don't mean that unkindly, yes he made angry accusations , but what are they specifically? Do you know? I don't. TS has never admitted to doing anything with him in the letter you refer to or otherwise, and even his own brother Duane in reply to Bob Pickle's questions about that said he could not comment as he would get in trouble with both sides no matter what he said.
Now ask yourself this Grat. If Duane said that yes his brother told the truth, certainly that would cause TS to be upset, but as he was already accusing TS it is all the same, and why would that get him in trouble with his brother? If he said no it wasn't true, obviously that would cause a problem with his brother. And why has his brother never filed a complaint as he threatened to. He said he could due to his current age and having checked into recent changes in the law. That brother has never even written out what he is claiming even occurred so there is nothing to check, investigate, confirm or deny.
Without charges, or facts to back anything up, and with no investigation nor trial, how can you accept what he claims and believe TS is guity?
The truth is their mother was among the most staunch defenders of TS. And the fact is not even the Church of God that he pastored in Virginia has any statements from any alleged victims to go on. Only claims by Pastor Dryden that they have decided can not be accepted as anything but hearsay without those statements.
I really am sick of the witch hunt here. If any accusing TS really wanted to see justice done, they would see to it that papers and statements were filed. Even if the statute of limitations has run out, the counties involved would still have a record to use in case it ever came up again. But nothing has been reported nor filed, yet there are so many yelling guilty and accusing others of covering up sexual crimes and defending a pedophile.
That's all I have to say about this matter Grat.
Snoopy,
Don't bother going to what you refer to as that smut site, which has revealed to me how biased it really is, as you would only be wasting your time there, as I finally learned. That is what I get for trying to be open and unbiased.
Oh yes, I also owe you an apology for my past reaction to you for calling that site a smut site, as I finally experienced that for myself.
Now let me tell you what I am sick of. It's people like you who are too big a coward to sign their name to a post like this. Your little dissertation here is full of half truths and outright fabrications. I'm not getting specific about anything until you identify yourself. So, the way I see it, you have two choices: Come clean about who you are and we'll discuss specifics, or remain behind your screen name, and thus remain branded a coward and liar. The ball is in your court.
Snoopy,
Don't bother going to what you refer to as that smut site, which has revealed to me how biased it really is, as you would only be wasting your time there, as I finally learned. That is what I get for trying to be open and unbiased.
Oh yes, I also owe you an apology for my past reaction to you for calling that site a smut site, as I finally experienced that for myself.
Obviously, Danny is not the stupid one here. I can tell you from a mans point of view that he exhibits (Danny) all the signs of a man in midlife crisis. Princess, you conclude Brandy left because of all the pressure, but you cannot conclude that a man who reports to be so in love with his wife can do the things Danny did to Her, I think not. As far as Brandy goes she is not a stupid lady, she well knew Danny's situation from the start since it is common knowledge in Adventist circles. The outcome now was evident long before this point, I already knew that the roosters would come home to roost; I do not blame the people here for their breakup I blame SIN. I am not a professional but the people that are around Danny should have had a spiritual enough eye to discern the outcome and should have acted accordingly. I blame the suppose friends and Spiritual leaders for Danny, who did not have the guts to either leave or ask him to step down until things were worked out. Danny should have never been allowed to continue on if this work was really Gods work with the intent of mending broken people.
With another divorce on the way to happening, when are the powers that be, if they really exist, going to wake up and realize that they have a liability that needs to be unloaded, rather than kept to their own hurt?
Can any organization of humans be the unerring voice of God? Can any human be God's unerring voice to the world? Can any human truly represent God?
Lol! I was going to fix the formatting on your quote, Princess, but I think I only made it worse.
And no.