Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Bob Pickle on August 15, 2012, 07:53:59 PM
-
I have been informed that Tommy Shelton was deposed yesterday, August 14, 2012, at the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.
"Mr, Shelton, did you ...?"
"I plead the Fifth."
That's how I'm informed it went, most of the time.
-
Yet the Dannyites will still maintain he has nothing to hide.
-
Yet the Dannyites will still maintain he has nothing to hide.
I was about to say, Where will they post such claims, since that other site is dead? But I see they've cranked it up again, making the same sort of tired claims, twisting words, etc.
My deposition must have gotten under their skin.
Not sure why they are attacking me about the idea that Tommy's dad molested him, since I have no knowledge to that effect, and have never stated such as far as I can recall. They accuse me of saying that Tommy molested Danny, but I've never said that. What I said was that Tommy went after Danny. There is a difference. The guy that fled the car from Tommy, I don't think anyone claims that he was molested, but Tommy sure went after him.
Not sure why someone would want to use the username "Lilly" when trying to cover up base, vile iniquity. Lillies aren't like that.
-
Lilly is plain stupid. That's the bottom line. Most of what she says is incoherent babbling and sounds like someone who is a few fries short of a Happy Meal. However, one statement stands out: "In one breath Pickle says Danny was in a "cover up" for Tommy Jr. and in the next, he says Tommy may have molested Danny! Now honestly, how many people would cover up anything for a person that molested them?" This genius obviously has never been abused and doesn't understand the mental effects of abuse, and should therefore shut up.
-
Lilly is plain stupid. That's the bottom line. Most of what she says is incoherent babbling and sounds like someone who is a few fries short of a Happy Meal. However, one statement stands out: "In one breath Pickle says Danny was in a "cover up" for Tommy Jr. and in the next, he says Tommy may have molested Danny! Now honestly, how many people would cover up anything for a person that molested them?" This genius obviously has never been abused and doesn't understand the mental effects of abuse, and should therefore shut up.
:goodpost:
-
What does "The guy that fled the car from Tommy..." refer to? What does it have to do with Danny Shelton?
-
So interesting that the other site still thinks that Linda Shelton is a significant source for Bob Pickle's information.
And I totally believe that the President of the North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists, Elder Dan Jackson, would "throw Linda S. under the bus". He's just that kind of person...
-
John 11:49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.”
Don't address the facts or dig into the issues - find a scapegoat and stir up a lot of drama.
Blame that person for everything!
EVERYTHING
(Including your hangnail and the price of gas)
-
What does "The guy that fled the car from Tommy..." refer to? What does it have to do with Danny Shelton?
In 1991 someone was riding with Tommy and had to flee the car. That may have been why Danny sent Tommy and his family on the road promoting 3ABN. It is said to have led to a board meeting which then decided Tommy had to go. Our understanding has been that Tommy hit the road promoting 3ABN after the board meeting, but now I'm thinking Danny may have sent Tommy off beforehand.
-
Lilly is plain stupid. That's the bottom line. Most of what she says is incoherent babbling and sounds like someone who is a few fries short of a Happy Meal. However, one statement stands out: "In one breath Pickle says Danny was in a "cover up" for Tommy Jr. and in the next, he says Tommy may have molested Danny! Now honestly, how many people would cover up anything for a person that molested them?" This genius obviously has never been abused and doesn't understand the mental effects of abuse, and should therefore shut up.
Duane, I was wondering whether a lot of posters over there may have been Tommy's family, but isn't Lilly the lady from the Northwest who used to post on BlackSDA, and who thought that minors consenting might make a difference? Wasn't Lilly the one who claimed to be Junebug?
The reason I was wondering if it might be Tommy's family is that everything went silent when Tommy got sentenced.
-
Yes, I believe I know who Lilly is. The woman just isn't very bright. I don't know how she finds her way out of bed in the morning.
-
What does "The guy that fled the car from Tommy..." refer to? What does it have to do with Danny Shelton?
In 1991 someone was riding with Tommy and had to flee the car. That may have been why Danny sent Tommy and his family on the road promoting 3ABN. It is said to have led to a board meeting which then decided Tommy had to go. Our understanding has been that Tommy hit the road promoting 3ABN after the board meeting, but now I'm thinking Danny may have sent Tommy off beforehand.
Hmm. Not long after the above account, TS becomes pastor of the Dunn Loring Community Church of God. I'm thinking of the evening TS had DS visit the church to share his testimony of how God led him create 3ABN. Miracle after miracle. It was quite moving. Ugh. I don't remember if an offering was collected, but imagine one was.....
TS gets caught (again). DS sends TS away. DL throws the doors wide open and lays down the red carpet and embraces TS. TS does it again. DS takes TS back. Sad story.
-
What does "The guy that fled the car from Tommy..." refer to? What does it have to do with Danny Shelton?
In 1991 someone was riding with Tommy and had to flee the car. That may have been why Danny sent Tommy and his family on the road promoting 3ABN. It is said to have led to a board meeting which then decided Tommy had to go. Our understanding has been that Tommy hit the road promoting 3ABN after the board meeting, but now I'm thinking Danny may have sent Tommy off beforehand.
Hmm. Not long after the above account, TS becomes pastor of the Dunn Loring Community Church of God. I'm thinking of the evening TS had DS visit the church to share his testimony of how God led him create 3ABN. Miracle after miracle. It was quite moving. Ugh. I don't remember if an offering was collected, but imagine one was.....
TS gets caught (again). DS sends TS away. DL throws the doors wide open and lays down the red carpet and embraces TS. TS does it again. DS takes TS back. Sad story.
Did Danny ever come to the CCoG before Tommy became pastor?
Any idea why Tommy would have been in the DC area in mid-1993? He was working back at 3ABN in 1993 sometime, so I'm wondering why he was in the DC area in mid-1993. Was he still on the road and hadn't gotten back to 3ABN yet? IL Conf. president Bj Christensen who had been a large part of the adverse 3ABN board decision against Tommy took a call to California in April or May 1993, and thus would have been out of the way if Tommy showed back up at 3ABN.
-
Duane, I was wondering whether a lot of posters over there may have been Tommy's family...
The reason I was wondering if it might be Tommy's family is that everything went silent when Tommy got sentenced.
Hmmm... , well you are wrong. No they aren't. It went silent because there was nothing substantial or factual to say, or add.
Why argue about repetitive accusations from people: who don't really listen to those who have a different view, or who refuse to deal with the facts presented , or answer legit questions? That get's old--- and stale--- and --- is repetitious. (I'm just saying... that goes nowhere) God's people are not to have the spirit of debate, or to throw pearls before swine, or dogs who rend, we are to wipe our feet and walk away, and not call down destruction upon them, etc, as that is the wrong spirit, if I am correct, right? )
The court is dealing with Tommy Shelton and Alex Walker , right? I'm convinced the truth will come out. If you don't report what happens there accurately, Bob Pickle? Well then be sure that I'll correct you, if you do? I have nothing to add...
-
Yes, I believe I know who Lilly is. The woman just isn't very bright. I don't know how she finds her way out of bed in the morning.
Niiiiice? (not)
It seems to me you (and all Christians -me and Lilly too) should deal with the issues and avoid getting personal , but that's just my opinion.
-
I have been informed that Tommy Shelton was deposed yesterday, August 14, 2012, at the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.
"Mr, Shelton, did you ...?"
"I plead the Fifth."
That's how I'm informed it went, most of the time.
I am quite sure you are not in the confidence of those who were involved in the deposition and that neither you or your informant was a fly upon the wall.. Wouldn't it be better to wait and see what comes of all of this and not depend on others who may have an agenda and bias before repeating what they say to others?
-
So, Squiggle Cindy, apparently you don't even know who all has been involved in the disposition so far, do you?
-
So, Squiggle Cindy, apparently you don't even know who all has been involved in the disposition so far, do you?
I am just Cindy, and I don't know why you would assume or ask that.
-
According to your screen name, you are "sqiggle-Cindy".
-
I have been informed that Tommy Shelton was deposed yesterday, August 14, 2012, at the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.
"Mr, Shelton, did you ...?"
"I plead the Fifth."
That's how I'm informed it went, most of the time.
I am quite sure you are not in the confidence of those who were involved in the deposition and that neither you or your informant was a fly upon the wall.. Wouldn't it be better to wait and see what comes of all of this and not depend on others who may have an agenda and bias before repeating what they say to others?
Again, how do you know who was and who was not involved in depositions?
You may have made an incorrect assumption.
-
Oh, by the way, welcome back, Cindy. It seems like years since we've seen you here at Advent Talk.
Although we have certainly been aware of your activities at the "other site".
-
I have been informed that Tommy Shelton was deposed yesterday, August 14, 2012, at the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.
"Mr, Shelton, did you ...?"
"I plead the Fifth."
That's how I'm informed it went, most of the time.
I am quite sure you are not in the confidence of those who were involved in the deposition and that neither you or your informant was a fly upon the wall.. Wouldn't it be better to wait and see what comes of all of this and not depend on others who may have an agenda and bias before repeating what they say to others?
Again, how do you know who was and who was not involved in depositions?
Actually your original question was about "who" not "how".
So, Squiggle Cindy, apparently you don't even know who all has been involved in the disposition so far, do you?
Yes, I do.
You may have made an incorrect assumption.
No, I did not. Pickle and his "source" were not there, and his "source" Alex has proven time and again even here on this forum that he plays fast and loose with the facts and is Not credible. It is reasonable to presume that the attorneys who were there would not be talking to Bob about how the deposition went or what occurred as they are professionals with ethics, and Pickle's is not one of them. Besides that, his reputation of repeating questionable hearsay, gossip, and accusations, or of misreporting and misrepresenting the facts is well known by now.
You can continue to imply I am wrong or don't know, but my point to Pickle was that he should stop repeating what he is told irresponsibly and should rather wait for the facts to be stated and proven in court.
-
Oh, by the way, welcome back, Cindy. It seems like years since we've seen you here at Advent Talk.
It has been awhile. Thank you. I tend to be blunt, but I promised Johann when he approved me that I would only post here under my own name and post respectfully to others even when disagreeing with them. I will do my best to stick to the issues, and obey the rules.
Although we have certainly been aware of your activities at the "other site".
That is kind of you, thanks. So many others here claim they read nothing there.
Blessings...
-
No, I did not. Pickle and his "source" were not there, and his "source" Alex has proven time and again even here on this forum that he plays fast and loose with the facts and is Not credible. It is reasonable to presume that the attorneys who were there would not be talking to Bob about how the deposition went or what occurred as they are professionals with ethics, and Pickle's is not one of them. Besides that, his reputation of repeating questionable hearsay, gossip, and accusations, or of misreporting and misrepresenting the facts is well known by now.
Cindy, was your source present at the deposition? If not, aren't you violating your own advice by speculating about who was there and who was not? And, has your source have a reputation for not repeating questionable hearsay, gossip, and accusations, and for not misreporting and misrepresenting the facts?
Do note that, from what I recall, one of your posters, just before things went kind of silent, speculated that Tommy wasn't going to spend much time behind bars at all. That was before Tommy got sentenced at a hearing at which he refused to take responsibility for his crimes.
-
Oh, by the way, welcome back, Cindy. It seems like years since we've seen you here at Advent Talk.
It has been awhile. Thank you. I tend to be blunt, but I promised Johann when he approved me that I would only post here under my own name and post respectfully to others even when disagreeing with them. I will do my best to stick to the issues, and obey the rules.
Blessings...
Thank you, Cindy. Welcome.
-
No, I did not. Pickle and his "source" were not there, and his "source" Alex has proven time and again even here on this forum that he plays fast and loose with the facts and is Not credible. It is reasonable to presume that the attorneys who were there would not be talking to Bob about how the deposition went or what occurred as they are professionals with ethics, and Pickle's is not one of them. Besides that, his reputation of repeating questionable hearsay, gossip, and accusations, or of misreporting and misrepresenting the facts is well known by now.
Cindy, was your source present at the deposition? If not, aren't you violating your own advice by speculating about who was there and who was not? And, has your source have a reputation for not repeating questionable hearsay, gossip, and accusations, and for not misreporting and misrepresenting the facts?
I am not speculating about who was there, Bob. It is a fact that Tommy Shelton was there being deposed with attorney's from both sides. I am not claiming what happened during it either. I am content to wait for the case to progress and for court documents (documented facts) I am not saying "I was told...." You are... Deal with it.
Do note that, from what I recall, one of your posters...
I neither control nor own posters.
-
Oh, by the way, welcome back, Cindy. It seems like years since we've seen you here at Advent Talk.
It has been awhile. Thank you. I tend to be blunt, but I promised Johann when he approved me that I would only post here under my own name and post respectfully to others even when disagreeing with them. I will do my best to stick to the issues, and obey the rules.
Blessings...
Thank you, Cindy. Welcome.
Thanks :)
-
I am not speculating about who was there, Bob. It is a fact that Tommy Shelton was there being deposed with attorney's from both sides.
I think you're evading my question. I asked you about how you knew who was there. You have stated as fact that Alex was not present at the deposition. I want to know how you know that. Are you speculating or were you told? And if you were told, was the person who told you that personally present at Tommy's deposition, or are you just taking someone's word for it that Alex wasn't there?
You see, if what you are stating is really the truth, and if you really are following your own advice, either Tommy called you or you called Tommy, or Alex's attorney(s) or Tommy's attorney(s) called you or you called them. That's the only possibilities I see. Otherwise, you have violated your own advice by speculating or by accepting as truth something someone said who wasn't even there.
-
Yes, I believe I know who Lilly is. The woman just isn't very bright. I don't know how she finds her way out of bed in the morning.
Niiiiice? (not)
It seems to me you (and all Christians -me and Lilly too) should deal with the issues and avoid getting personal , but that's just my opinion.
You are correct. It's just your opinion. Remember that.
-
So, Squiggle Cindy.....
:ROFL:
-
"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"
"Yes."
"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"
"I plead the Fifth."
Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.
-
"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"
"Yes."
"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"
"I plead the Fifth."
Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.
In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?
-
When I first read this it did not make any sense to me. Why would he take the 5th, so to speak. He was in prison. What did it matter? He went to prison on an Alford Plea, as I recall. An Alford Plea is commonly thought and accepting the punishemnt, agreeing that a conviction was likely, but not pleading guiltly. Then I recalled that case law is mixed on this. The potential exists for equating the Alford Plea with a guilty Plea. At this point, I understood why he was asked that question.
If he had replied that he had pled quilty, a judge could have considered that to be as giving up his 5th Ammendment rights. If so, he could have been required to answer any questions about any persons whom he might have molested and/or his relationships with them.
If his response had been that he took the Alford Plea the same thing could have happened.
If he had responded that he did not plead guilty that response would have been an answer to the question as to guilt. Again, the judge could have considered that he gave up his 5th Ammendement rights and therefore required to answer any further questions. The attorney asking the questions would then have concnetrated on questioning him as to his relationshilp with peole who had accused him, in an attempt to provehis response false, and he could not have pled the 5th.
In short: The attorney who asked the question knew exactly what he was doing. TS was wise to assert his 5th Ammendments rights.
-
Daryl asked:
In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?
When one takes the 5th Ammendment, they are saying: I have a right to refuse to provide you with any evidence that might be used to convict me. Therefore, I refuse to answer your question.
NOTE: 1) It is not a refusal to provide evidence that would convict. It is a right to refuse to provide evidence that might be used to convict. IOW, the mere asking of the question is an indicator that it might be used to convict and therefore one can refuse to answer.
2) Under case law in 5th Ammendment cases, any answer may be considered as giving up the right to pled the 5th. Therefore, attornies will often attempt to obtain an answer to some simple question that pertains to the criminal issue but may be public knowledge. Such a question might be: Do you know Mr.X? If X is involved in the criminal activity, even as a victim, a failure to take the 5th may be intrepreted as giving up the right to take the 5th.
-
"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"
"Yes."
"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"
"I plead the Fifth."
Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.
In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?
How would Bob Pickle know either what was really said, or not said by Mr Shelton at his deposition? Further. how would Bob Pickle or Alex know what was meant by Mr Shelton, or why he would answer a question, or not answer a question?
Bob Pickle wouldn't know.
(This, imo, is a large part of what has been wrong all along in this ongoing gossip and slanderfest. Many here form their negative opinions and views by asking their questions of the wrong people, most of whom have a bias and are only repeating what they are told, or who are only telling a part of the story... Then it gets repeated endlessly as factual and embellished on. And sadly many who accept all without needing proof end up loving lies and feeling justified and righteous in their judgmental stance, and repeating it to still more people...)
Since Bob wasn't there and does not have an inside scoop on Tommy Shelton's head or heart nor knowledge of what the attorneys advice to Tommy Shelton may or may not have been regarding the deposition? And since he is obviously getting his questionable info from Alex, and Alex is obviously talking about what he was told (as he too wasn't there), why not bypass Bob altogether and directly ask Alex a question more pertinent to his allegations and case?
Like this. (my question to Alex):
Alex, what did your attorney tell you about what Tommy Shelton answered and said when asked about you and your allegations?
Of course even if Alex does answer that will only be half the story, and may not be the truth. ( He's not known for that according to his family, and in my view and understanding, does not have a good record on this forum either. You may look back at his posts and decide for yourself.) Even if Alex answers , we would still need to reserve judgment and wait for answers from the other side and for the documented evidence as it comes out in the case before deciding what the actual proven facts are, and who is credible. but at least you'd be attempting to find answers to your questions in the right way, and not judging anyone prematurely, or falsely... -----> IMO.. ;)
~ Cindy
-
Gregory, I think it is possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell... ;) I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.
-
I am not speculating about who was there, Bob. It is a fact that Tommy Shelton was there being deposed with attorney's from both sides.
I think you're evading my question. I asked you about how you knew who was there. You have stated as fact that Alex was not present at the deposition. I want to know how you know that. ...
"...no, you can't always get what you want, oh, you can't always get what you want... But if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need..."
Are you speculating or were you told? And if you were told, was the person who told you that personally present at Tommy's deposition, or are you just taking someone's word for it that Alex wasn't there?
You see, if what you are stating is really the truth, and if you really are following your own advice, either Tommy called you or you called Tommy, or Alex's attorney(s) or Tommy's attorney(s) called you or you called them. That's the only possibilities I see. Otherwise, you have violated your own advice by speculating or by accepting as truth something someone said who wasn't even there.
It seems to me you always try to turn whatever is said to you, or asked of you into a finger pointing at someone else instead of just answering or being accountable for yourself and your actions. It also seems to me you limit things to only what you can see or what your understanding is. I think there is a better way to look at things... and I also think that there's no reason to argue about minutia. You already know Alex wasn't there. Please just move on. I am.
-
Gregory, I think it is possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell... I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.
Cindy: I do not think that TS dreamed up his plea of the 5th himself. His alleged answer clearly tells me that he was acting on the advice of competent attornies who knew exactly what they were doing and what was at stake. His alleged response was in accord with his rights under the Constiltution. I would not take those away from him. I do not criticize him for making that response, if indeed he did.
I have to assume that TS answered questions that were appropriate and in the process of responding did not abridge his rights.
The criminal process has taken place. TS is in prison under what I recall to be an Alford Plea. Now the civil process is taking place. It should be noted that a criminal process differs from a civil process. They are not the same. It remains to be seen how this civil process will play out and what the result will be. That final result cannot be predicted at this time.
-
Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?
Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?
-
Gregory, I think it is possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell... I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.
Cindy: I do not think that TS dreamed up his plea of the 5th himself. His alleged answer clearly tells me that he was acting on the advice of competent attornies who knew exactly what they were doing and what was at stake. His alleged response was in accord with his rights under the Constiltution. I would not take those away from him. I do not criticize him for making that response, if indeed he did.
I have to assume that TS answered questions that were appropriate and in the process of responding did not abridge his rights.
The criminal process has taken place. TS is in prison under what I recall to be an Alford Plea. Now the civil process is taking place. It should be noted that a criminal process differs from a civil process. They are not the same. It remains to be seen how this civil process will play out and what the result will be. That final result cannot be predicted at this time.
Understood.
I would just like to clarify for those who don't know...
Mr Shelton's plea bargain, in a criminal case, essentially saying I'll accept the judgment against me, and pray for mercy, while still asserting I am not guilty and that I maintain I didn't do it, was NOT in regards to Alex's allegations nor was it in regards to Alex's criminal case.
Alex Walker's criminal case was dropped by the state. The criminal case was about DT's claims.
What I want understood here, is that the civil case is not only a different type of case, it is actually an entirely different case about a totally different person and different claims and allegations. The civil case is one where Alex Walker is suing 3ABN and Tommy Shelton for $9,999,000.00
-
Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?
Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?
What in the world...
Did you even attempt to consider one single concept that I was trying to get across, or try to even once consider what GM was trying to explain about the justice system and rights and why someone would refuse to answer certain questions in a deposition?
As far as Tommy Shelton saying "Not guilty" FYI: he's actually done that. Over and over. I am including his answer to Alex's complaint in the civil case, for you to read. Now you'll have no excuse not to know his position and side before refusing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
-
I am not really familiar with the US Justice System.
I don't even know what the equivalent is here in Canada, if there even is an equivalent.
I may need to ask a retired lawyer member of our church here about this.
-
Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?
Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?
No.
To do so could have compromised thepending civil case.
He acted in accord with his rights and in his best interests and clearly had competent legal advice.
-
Cindy said:
Mr Shelton's plea bargain, in a criminal case, essentially saying I'll accept the judgment against me, and pray for mercy, while still asserting I am not guilty . . . .
Cindy's response, above, is substantially in accord with the law. The law is generally clear that taking an Alford Plea is not an admission of guilt. There is what I would call a minor exception in case law to that general rule.
So,the bottom line is that TS can continue to claim that he is not guilty of the crime to which he was charged. At this point in time, I do not believe that the minor exception that I mention applies to him.
-
About 60 years ago American Congress was investigating "everybody" about their communist affiliation. I recall a newspaper drawing of a rabbit running away from CongressThe caption wnet something like this:
- Why are you running so fast away from Congress, since you were never a communist?
- That's right, but I cannot prove it.
In those days Congress could ruin a person politically and financially by indicating they had communist connections.
For that reason many of the people questioned took a Fifth. Our college professor explained this in detail in American Government at Berrien Springs at that time.
-
How do people normally react though whenever somebody takes the 5th?
-
The typical reaction is: He has something to hide.
-
The typical reaction is: He has something to hide.
That's what I thought and why I posted what I posted in an earlier post here that resulted in a "What in the world!" type of a response from Cindy.
-
Are you speculating or were you told? And if you were told, was the person who told you that personally present at Tommy's deposition, or are you just taking someone's word for it that Alex wasn't there?
You see, if what you are stating is really the truth, and if you really are following your own advice, either Tommy called you or you called Tommy, or Alex's attorney(s) or Tommy's attorney(s) called you or you called them. That's the only possibilities I see. Otherwise, you have violated your own advice by speculating or by accepting as truth something someone said who wasn't even there.
It seems to me you always try to turn whatever is said to you, or asked of you into a finger pointing at someone else instead of just answering or being accountable for yourself and your actions. It also seems to me you limit things to only what you can see or what your understanding is. I think there is a better way to look at things... and I also think that there's no reason to argue about minutia. You already know Alex wasn't there. Please just move on. I am.
If you don't like being criticized for judgmentally criticizing others on the basis of mere hearsay, then don't accuse others of doing what you yourself are doing. That's my point.
So let's be real specific, then, based on your evading the question: You have no firsthand knowledge of whether Alex was there or not, but are stating that he wasn't on the word of someone whom you know wasn't there.
-
Mr Shelton's plea bargain, in a criminal case, essentially saying I'll accept the judgment against me, and pray for mercy, while still asserting I am not guilty and that I maintain I didn't do it, was NOT in regards to Alex's allegations nor was it in regards to Alex's criminal case.
This is a half-truth. Tommy's Alford guilty plea was for D.T., not for Alex. But Tommy's guilty plea from July 2010 was for both D.T. and Alex. So Tommy did plead guilty for abusing Alex, and even tried to convince the judge that he was remorseful for abusing Alex.
I suppose you could try to say that the reason the judge found Tommy's "remorse" for abusing Alex so unconvincing was that Tommy was lying, and that he had never really abused Alex, even though he said he had.
-
As far as Tommy Shelton saying "Not guilty" FYI: he's actually done that. Over and over.
He has also said he WAS guilty.
-
Of course even if Alex does answer that will only be half the story, and may not be the truth. ( He's not known for that according to his family, and in my view and understanding, does not have a good record on this forum either. You may look back at his posts and decide for yourself.) Even if Alex answers , we would still need to reserve judgment and wait for answers from the other side and for the documented evidence as it comes out in the case before deciding what the actual proven facts are, and who is credible. but at least you'd be attempting to find answers to your questions in the right way, and not judging anyone prematurely, or falsely... -----> IMO.. ;)
~ Cindy
Cindy, YOU have been proven to be a liar numerous times as well. You've got no room to be parroting the bilge that Danny Shelton has fed you to post here on the forum. Your attacks against Alex, myself, Darrell, Dennis and numerous others make me wonder just how genuine your claims of previous abuse really are. Honestly, I think you just like to see posts with your name on them, regardless of whether they make sense or not.
-
And while you're at it, you need to tell "Lilly" (Debbie) that Tommy Shelton most definitely DID say he was guilty. She just doesn't have the mental capacity to comprehend that. So sad.
-
Gregory, I think it is possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell... ;) I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.
Let's get one thing perfectly clear, Ms Cindy:
Mr Simpson is very aware of my tactics and I have EVERY RIGHT to continue our investigation and to assist any victims with their claims by providing any information we have in out EXTENSIVE FILES. Your attorney broke and ran rather than resolve the issues four years ago this very month!!! Did he thinki we were just going to go away??? Got busy with another project but did not forget or abandon this project.
In August 2008 they approached us regarding settling the 3ABN v Joy case and we declined. Mr. Simpson wanted to know what would have to happen in order to settle the case. I wrote a memo that made it clear we would consider settlement only if it was a "comprehensive settlement"
of all claims, filed or pending. That would have included Mr Walker's claim, Linda Shelton's claim and a number of other issues itemized in that memo. That option was declined and we moved to the very Gates with a Subpoena Duces Teacum for all the records of the Accountants. A battle royal ensued and the Judge ordered the production. The very next day Mr Simpson cut and ran with a Motion to Dismiss a case they were clearly losing. The evidence supported EVERYTHING we alleged and then some. AND HE KNEW IT!!!
We are aware of Mr Simpson's Tactics as well and frankly I WELCOME THE RE-OPENING OF THIS OR ANY OTHER CASE ANYTIME, ANYDAY and will even save them the cost of service and ACCEPT SERVICE.
BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT THIS INVESTIGATION HAS NOT ENDED NOR HAVE THE ALLEGATIONS ENDED.
In fact, I have stepped back from my latest project to a consulting role only and will put more time into this case. It is time to put an end to the Shelton Legacy at 3ABN, once and for all. There is absolutely no basis for believing DLS was EVER the "annointed of the Lord" and the miracles were merely great business breaks "exploited to enhance HIS image", while he methodically pushed aside the other founders and now claims to be the SOLE FOUNDER aka FLOUNDER.
Since Goliath is simply afraid to step forward himself, you will do just fine as the VOICE OF DANNY LEE SHELTON. Be careful as we ALL KNOW how unreliable that source is!!! Always check collateral sources and try and get statements in writing to avoid culpability and destroy your credibility.
So, we re-open this battle and may the LORD'S WILL BE DONE!!! And I will not finish this time until the entire REAL story is properly told and available for the Laodicean Church...might just move us the faster into the Remnant.
And I look forward to hanging on every word you write for it's origin and authenticity. Maybe, just maybe, we finally open those blinders and you will join those who seek revival and reformation at 3ABN.
LET THE SPARRING BEGIN!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
-
Mr Gregory,
I will be happy to predict the final result. Since the defendants have ALREADY requested mediation, I predict more offers to settle as the Plaintiff's have not yet begun to get serious about discovery. I will be happy to make sure this effort is enhanced and strategic, FOR FREE!!! And I predict a seven figure settlement or face serious retribution and an eight figure award from a jury.
They have never been very wise about litigation and once again are proving PENNY WISE AND POUND FOOLISH. Except in the tax case!!!
You will have much to analyze going forward and will likely be SURPRISED by MANY of the revelations just ahead. Your wisdom and analysis is badly needed by the old conspirators and we wish you luck in your renewed endeavors.
Once again, they should have settled when they had a chance. The future is bleak for a 3ABN with Danny Lee Shelton as the titular face of 3ABN.
And the directors, past and present, will have to play a role, or wish they had played the role, they should have finished in May 2008!!!
MAY THE GAMES BEGIN!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
Gregory, I think it is possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell... I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.
Cindy: I do not think that TS dreamed up his plea of the 5th himself. His alleged answer clearly tells me that he was acting on the advice of competent attornies who knew exactly what they were doing and what was at stake. His alleged response was in accord with his rights under the Constiltution. I would not take those away from him. I do not criticize him for making that response, if indeed he did.
I have to assume that TS answered questions that were appropriate and in the process of responding did not abridge his rights.
The criminal process has taken place. TS is in prison under what I recall to be an Alford Plea. Now the civil process is taking place. It should be noted that a criminal process differs from a civil process. They are not the same. It remains to be seen how this civil process will play out and what the result will be. That final result cannot be predicted at this time.
-
WHEW!!!!
Those are fighting words!!!!!
Is there any real teeth to those fighting words? Time will answer that question.
-
Exactly, Daryl.
There are two things that would not surprise me:
1) A settlement offer which might or might not be accepted dpeending uponm its boundaries.
2) A battle to the finish in the courts,
Beyond that I have no idea as to the details. One cannot predict with certainty what a judge and/or jury will order.
-
The play book from the defenders' side never changes. "Lilly" (Debbie) can't refute anything that has been said so she launches into an attack on Gailon's character, even dragging family members into it. Danny Shelton has done this for as long as I can remember.
Debbie, I think it's people like YOU who turn people away from Christianity. You claim to be a caring Christian when you are actually a spiteful, vindictive witch.
-
It is time to put an end to the Shelton Legacy at 3ABN, once and for all.
Is it even possible to put an end to the Shelton legacy at 3ABN?