Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Fran on July 06, 2008, 04:03:48 PM
-
I am not a member of the Yahoo Group where these items are posted. I feel I must answer some of the questions and comments made about missing financial information.
Do they know anything about business?
Stan Jensen Wed Jul 2, 2008 8:45 pm
One has to wonder why 'they' are always attacking the accounting staff at 3ABN.
Do they think Danny does all of the entries? That the 3ABN external auditor is not competent?
It would appear that some of the major complainers have never run a business, successful or not, yet they seem to be all knowing on running an international multimillion dollar organization.
Am I missing something? Does Danny do all the accounting etc?
Who are "they"? I am assuming you were not speaking of me at all.
I have never accused Danny of doing any accounting entries.
I have never even thought that Danny had entered any of the accounting entries, except in the beginning when the accounting was probably on scrap paper because they had nothing but the vision of the future of 3ABN. I have heard it was hand to mouth in the beginning, just like many start up companies are.
I have never accused any auditors of being "incompetent" in their findings. I believe their findings were 99.9% correct. In fact, their reports are what I have based many of my concerns.
I have also used the 3ABN vs. IL Property Tax Lawsuit findings.
I have also talked about eBay for which I have documentation.
My concerns have always been about what is missing, not what is there.
So that would not be stating that Danny was active in any posting. However, in my opinion, he could have been involved in things that did NOT get posted.
I have done accounting for a multi-trillion dollar Agency, the Treasury Federal Bank. I had the job of posting Congressional Appropriations, and made adjustments all year long. At the end of each month, I had to balance the treasury with many agencies.
At another agency I moved money from Treasury to ANY agency. That was fun. I paid agency bills through Treasury. I was able to take money from their account at the Federal Bank. And, yes, Agencies spend money they do not have. Kind of like hot checks. I got to go fish and find an appropriation that would cover the bill. That was only if they did not respond to me as to what appropriation they wanted me to use. Sometimes Treasury had to create money! Yeah, for real!
I understand accounting processes on the large and small scale. I know the rules. I was a certified cash handler of "Petty Cash". Since much travel was accomplished the dollar amount was very large. I was there when they moved to Credit Cards, Cash Cards.
My American Express allowed me to make purchases/payments of $100,000 per transaction. I could do that all day long.
I have written Policy and Procedure Manuals for accounting in the government and for Private Businesses.
I have set companies up on the computer from manual bookkeeping. I set up "mean" cash controls and "very strict" separation of duties. By doing so, the business owners saw that several holes got plugged and exposed the ones skimming off the top.
I am nobody. However, I am an accountant, and was able to read the auditors reports and the 990's as well as the Tax Lawsuit. Everyone can go to these documents and read for themselves. The Auditors clearly state there were problems. They said it very well.
-
It would appear that some of the major complainers have never run a business, successful or not, yet they seem to be all knowing on running an international multimillion dollar organization.
I have done accounting for a multi-trillion dollar Agency, the Treasury Federal Bank. I had the job of posting Congressional Appropriations, and made adjustments all year long. At the end of each month, I had to balance the treasury with many agencies.
I am assuming that "international multimillion dollar organization", referrs to 3ABN.
Since Fran has done accounting for a "multi-trillion dollar agency", that would appear to trump 3ABN.
************************************************
-
Do they know anything about business?
sam11584 Sun Jul 6, 2008 2:20 pm
Posts from Fran on BSDA. Could she have been any more wrong?
Fran @ Mar 15 2008, 01:12 AM)
I believe I know the answer to this question! "They" hijack every thread when I put out financial information. They would rather sacrifice Tommy to keep silent about all of the financial irregularities. They spit venom at the first person in their path. Go back to where I posted about the finances of 3ABN and watch them at work.
They want my post buried as fast as possible. They have a united front to cause my post to be on a prior page. I find it funny! Now I have to figure out how to make a series of posts without the post getting buried. I want to tell about what happened to cause me to raise my voice in an outcry for truth. It has been a long journey. It began way back before the 2000 Property Tax law suit. The first negative information I came across was about Tommy having to live outside of IL because of his alleged sexual abuse to male members of his church. I heard that the parents of the boys agreed not to press charges as long as Tommy did not live in IL. That is when I learned about him living in Marion, TN. That was at least as long ago as 1987 or 1988.
That is when I learned about Kenny and his wife fired in 1989. Silly me. I figured Danny did a good thing at the time. I felt bad that he had to make such a decision. I had a copy of the IL property lawsuit as soon as Danny went on TV and said they may have to pay taxes because the had health shows. Now that hit me with a thud. That sis (did) not ring true at all! Impossible! So I found the law suit and I was right, it wasn't about health programming. I wondered why Danny would say that on the air! I shrugged it off and set it aside for quite a while, until another poster talked to me about Kenny in 2004.
Then I saw Danny announcing Linda's departure. I was all for Danny! I was! I even called and told Mom Ford to tell Danny to stop pouting and get out there in front of the camera, NOW! And that is exactly what he did.
Then Nicodema posted Walt Thompson's letter and I realized there was something very wrong.
I began my research. God placed all this information in my lap. How could I not cry out! I was crushed. I loved 3ABN and I still do! I still want 3ABN to succeed! I just have not seen any evidence of change in financial actions. Danny has accused me several times of trying to destroy 3ABN. That is a LIE!
He is right (that) these documents are very damaging to Danny Shelton first and the actions of Danny Shelton through 3ABN. Does that make sense?
So we hear that Danny is not in Charge any more. That is not true. I will have to continue to talk finance at 3ABN until the time that transparency is visible.
I still have some of my original questions about what I have posted.
1...Why was $2.45 Million dollars not posted in 2000?
2...Why was $1.7+ million dollars not posted in 2001?
3...Why was over $14,000 of money that belonged to other ministries, NOT 3ABN'S, posted to 3ABN Income?
4...Why are they NOT USING GAAP?
5...Why has 3ABN been written up every years since 2000 by auditors about a problem with Valuing assets?
MOOOOOOOOOT!
What is it that makes my comments a moot point? I still have these questions and many more.
-
Fran,
Interesting post. I do not go to yahoo, but the wording of what you were responding to was also AT ONE TIME I believe on C/A. True to form,as many statements have ,the accusations against others disappeared, went POOF.
Out of curiosity I checked the link here that I had posted to some rather "nasty rumormongering" C/A style, only to find it had a almost through cleansing. Blame is now spread out over the mysterious they.
Portions of the initial post was not generic in that they blamed you as well as Gregory for preventing LS from another sucessful ministry........
.Turns out the Rumourmongers did NOT have it right.
http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/175187
No reason whatsoever for the rumormongering, capitalized no less,statement. The beginning of this particular topic does exactly what some so strongly condemn. Repeating from reliable sources derogatory information against others, including Gregory Matthews. A person that is so fond of repeating over and over his disapproval of those repeating gossip as fact. He waves his clean hands by saying...... I might of over stated a bit concerning Gregory. Turns out the Rumourmongers did NOT have it right.
http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/175187
No reason whatsoever for the rumormongering, capitalized no less,statement. The beginning of this particular topic does exactly what some so strongly condemn. Repeating from reliable sources derogatory information against others, including Gregory Matthews. A person that is so fond of repeating over and over his disapproval of those repeating gossip as fact. He waves his clean hands by saying...... I might of over stated a bit concerning Gregory. Then I was talking to DS
It is now generic without a apology. The maturity one should be able to expect from the adminstrator of the unofficial adventist forum.
Overstated means what?? An apology? That is the kind my siblings and I give one another in fun when we don't want to admit we were in the wrong. Does it mean those he named bear some responsibility for LS's failure to begin a new ministry? y
.
Who were the mysterious reliable sources that shared with Stan the names of those responsible for the failure of LS?
This certainly would not be taken as a reliable source by intelligent people would it.......Then I was talking to DS
Are we all to believe his "reliable" sources could survive the unbiased truth test??
Added......
PS
Here is that portion that seems to know what LS should have or should be doing with her life. Wonder who "those" are. Are the still the same "those" that was in the initial post, now without names
What about Linda? This is my opinion.
If those who gave so much energy to taking down 3ABN because of their love and respect for Linda, would have used that to help build her ongoing Ministry, she would have been much better off. Now, I doubt, if a Conference, or other Adventist Media, would hire her, and that is such a waste of her talents and gifts.
-
While the post I referenced is relevant to what is being spread, this is the actual post that just kind of makes one shake their head. This has not been changed.
Stan Jensen
I doubt if he will return, as he was looking for a new President for 3 years or so..
Word on the street, says, there were a number of bogus charges.. It is true that people love and believe in a lie.
What is this word on the street bit. Almost sounds as if it should be taken as gospel.
Many of us are supporters of Linda, and would wish 'they' would have put their energy into building her ministry. Instead, they have scared off other adventist media, and conferences from ever hiring her.
How about the "many of us" referenced would have put their energy into building her ministry instead of finding "those others" to condemn, without giving factual information for charges being made?
I wonder if the other adventist media and conferences specifically said they would never hire LS because of Gregory Matthews and Fran? This certainly would never be said this definitively would it without it being a fact from the "horses" mouth?
In my opinion, the 'Gregory, Joy, Pickle, Fran' team did her more damage for her career than her termination did. Just my opinion. not my kids, spouse, employer, pet rock and friends. HOWEVER my goldfish, says this is her opinion as well.
Mighty mouthy goldfish isn't it. Wonder if the goldfish has a name we would recognize. Seems he has the confidence of LS and repeats the same accusation Stan has made.
HOw has so many become privy to God's plan for LS. Or is another ministry her right ? Maybe, just maybe, it may not be in God's plan, or shock of shocks, maybe LS isn't listening or willing. Or maybe it isn't time yet.
All the crystal ball gazers may need some new batteries to get the right reading here
-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3abnDefended/message/33?var=1
Re: STRAIGHT ANSWERS TO EBAY QUESTIONS
"sam11584" Fri Jun 6, 2008 1:16 am
I took questions that a member of another forum had about 3 angels eBay store and donation department straight to the source..Tammy Chance. The following are the questions I ask and the answers I received through email.
------------------------------------------
From: Tammy Chance
Sent: Thu 6/05/08 11:58 AM
To:
Sam,
I have no problem with answering your questions to the best of my ability. I will try to go through them one at a time.
Q. Now, 3ABN started selling on eBay in 1998. I made purchases. The User ID at that time was nan_don! The Store now says it started June 1, 2001, on the information page right now. 3ABN has a total feedback of 2011; however the feedback SCORE is 1581. What does this mean? It means that they have bought and sold to 1581 unique accounts. The difference is for repeat sellers and buyers.
A. At no time was 3abn's user name nan-don. If you will look at the link that you sent me it says nan_don had over 4000 sales! That certainly wasn't us. Only a very limited number of items were even sold on eBay before we created the donation dept and then started the store.
Nan_don had nothing whatsoever to do with 3 Angels. Someone entirely different. I won't go into answering the rest of the questions you sent pertaining to nan_don since it is a moot point. As far as the feedback score, repeat buyers are limited to the amount of feedback that can be left, and we also must take into account that some people that purchase don't bother to leave feedback so their purchase isn't calculated into feedback scores.
Q. Did the store change its name 4 times in less than 2 weeks?
A. Absolutely not! There was no eBay store until I created and named the store and I have never changed it! I am guessing this is another error related to the nan_don ID.
Q. The PayPal expense is posted when PayPal charges it. The eBay/PayPal expenses should be looked at each month to see if you are losing money!
A. Though this wasn't a question I will answer. Every sale is logged into the computer database which connects to the accounting dept. It is done at the time of the sale and the money from the item goes directly into 3abn's account as soon as the person pays unless they use an e check which takes approximately 7 days to clear. We do not sell items everyday but when we do all is taken care of the day of sale and again when payment is made. (We have a 3 day payment policy). Every sold item has a check and balance.
Monthly reports are as follows: A download of all paypal payments and fees. A download of all auctioned items and store inventory items as well as, all sold items and all fees pertaining to those items.
There is a monthly donor "sold item report" which shows the items that were sold, the donor that gave the items, the donor's constituent number, the sale date and the amount sold for. These records are compared with the eBay/PayPal records and any receipts and records of sales outside of eBay.
As items arrive they are logged into the computer with the info of who sent it, constituent number, date received and a description of the item or items. A report of those items is made monthly. Though you didn't ask for a "play by play" directly it may simplify the process for you if I explain the process.
When an item or items arrive at 3 Angels it arrives at the call center's shipping and receiving dept. The S/R manager opens the box, gets the general idea of what is in it (doll, picture, quilt) and makes a note of the description, who sent it and when it arrived. These are kept on file. The box is then brought over to the donation department where an assistant inventories the box completely and then logs the contents into the database along with donor and const #, date received....Then the item or items is tagged or labeled with the const # of the person who gave it. Later when it is sold we look up the record by the const # where it was entered upon arrival and we put the date sold and the amount sold for.
The same process of recording the sold items also applies to the Barn Sale. Each item is tagged with the correct const # and is recorded when it sells. When the monthly sale report is printed out it is given to accounting so that they can receipt the donor for their items that sold.
Q. Did you ever say on a program that you had brought in 2.4 million dollars?
A. Absolutely not!
Because we haven't. On one program we quoted that over several years time we had brought in a quarter of a million and on a later program close to half a million. Again those figures were over several years. I don't have the exact time period in front of me but 2.4 never happened and hasn't happened yet. We have faith that one day we will reach that mark though as we continue to receive great donations.
Q. What time period did the mock check you presented to Jim G. represent?
A. One year.
Q. When did you begin using PayPal? Was it because of something you read on Club Adventist?
A. Lol! We began using PayPal in 2003. I never heard of Club Adventist until about 8 or 9 months ago and certainly have never been there.
Q.Is your department audited?
A. Absolutely. The auditor's come to our department with all the reports in hand. They know our system and the checks and balances that are in place. Given the complexities of all that is involved, + a massive paper trail, they give us good marks on our accountability with the department. Laws change as time goes by so we comply with everything we are told to do by our CFO and the auditor's. That results in periodic changes that are implemented into the program and we do our best to keep up. I could go into more facts and details than told here but I won't bore you with everything that is required of us. Suffice it to say we keep as precise and detailed records as is possible and we continue to grow as our department grows.
Hope this helps,
Tammy Chance
The bolded sentences bother me.
"The same process of recording the sold items also applies to the Barn Sale. Each item is tagged with the correct const # and is recorded when it sells. When the monthly sale report is printed out it is given to accounting so that they can receipt the donor for their items that sold."
Receipting the donor is supposed to happen at the time of the donation. They should receive an IRS Form 8283, Noncash Charitable Contribution, as their receipt. 3ABN cannot assess the value! The donor does that. All the 8283 does is give a description of items that were donated and a certification that 3ABN received the items. What 3ABN sells the item for is not relevant to the assessed value by the donor.
I will give an example that Bruce and Tammy used on their program asking for donations. This did not come from the current advertisement to bring donations to the 3ABN booth at the upcoming ASI Meetings.
Say some one sends in a diamond ring that has an insured replacement value of $10,000.00. However, 3ABN can only sell it for $1,500. The donor would list the value as $10,000. Whereas the 3ABN value would only be $1,500. The donation is finished at the time of the donation. THE DONOR ALWAYS DOES THE VALUEATION on their IRS form 8283.
Some items are not required to have an 8283. However, one should be given anyway. The donor may have other 8283's that when added together result in needing the 8283's to make the deductions from their itemized Tax returns.
Receipting the items after the items are sold is wrong! Check it out. Ask your CFO.
]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3abnDefended/message/99
Re: STRAIGHT ANSWERS TO EBAY QUESTIONS
sam11584
I hated to bother the Chances again but did so just to be crystal clear on What Fran is saying or should I say, trying to say? I emailed the "highlights" to Tammy and here are the answers I received. I think we can lay all the false information to rest once and for all.
from: Tammy Chance@3abn
Hi Sam,
No I don't mind answering a few more questions but after looking at them, must say, someone is definitely "not getting it". I refer to the nan _ don stuff. Will try to answer as specific as I can.
Notice Tammy falls short of telling who had it between nan_don and 3ABN Store. They just had, "someone". Why not settle this by telling us where all that feedback is?
A. There was no one selling for 3abn called nan _don. Good heavens look at the link that you sent me that goes to nan _ don feedback and look at some of the items they were selling!! There were nude posters or pin ups or something of that nature. That ought to tell anybody that it wasn't from anyone connected to 3abn! Also nan whoever may have started in 98 but that has nothing to do with us. 3abn started using eBay in 01. I'LL SAY IT ONCE AGAIN SAM, NAN_DON AND THEIR FEEDBACK WAS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH 3ABN PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE.
If 3ABN sales started selling in 1998,
A. Ask and answered. 3abn did not start in 98.
My strongest questions are; "Where is all that feedback? Where did that money go? Whose account received the money?"
A. Well, you would have to ask nan_don since we are in no way connected.
Another thing to look at is the store that Tammy Shelton Chance used to have and closed.
A. I have NEVER and DO NOT NOW have an eBay store. I have my own personal eBay account where I sell odds and ends like anyone else but have never had my own store and don't plan on it in the future. Someone is feeding you very faulty information or at the very least, mistaken information.
In addition I fail to see why anyone would care if I personally did or did not have a store or sell on eBay. My personal eBay practices have no connection to 3abn and would actually be nobodies business. I do not mean that in a hateful way, but I just can't imagine why anybody would be interested in something so minute.
Please share this information with your "source" as we are finished repeating that nan_don had no association with 3abn. I know this since I have past and present 3abn eBay records.
Sam, I do appreciate you coming to me for answers instead of speculating and guessing as so many others do.
Tammy C.
Of course everyone knows that we accept by faith that these responses are from Tammy Shelton-Chance. I do not post or belong to the Yahoo group. I believe they are hunting for personal information and bait certain posters at AdvenTalk.com.
A. I have NEVER and DO NOT NOW have an eBay store. I have my own personal eBay account where I sell odds and ends like anyone else but have never had my own store and don't plan on it in the future. Someone is feeding you very faulty information or at the very least, mistaken information.
This comment has me wondering why Tammy would so emphatically that she has never had a store. She said she has NEVER had a store. Yet, she has. It was named Tammy's Variety Outlet. How can we reconcile this difference?
-
Over the past 18 months or more, many of us have read Johanns claims
that nothing could have happened between Linda and the doctor as he
was constantly present, whether here or in Norway with the "Nathan"
trip.
I question his recollection of events or maybe his definition
of "constantly". Here is the information that I have received
concerning the "Nathan" trip.
Of the entire week that Linda was in Norway, Johann spent
approximately 10 minutes in the foyer of Arild's home (not even
coming into the house) and then proceeded to go out to dinner with
them. He had driven from his home to pick up an ozone machine that
Linda had brought for his wife. After dinner he complained of being
too tired to drive the several hours home and was ignored by Arild &
Linda. In fact, I believe Arild told Johann if he got too sleepy to
pull over and nap. After dinner, Johann headed for home. (Denmark I
believe)
That is the summation of time spent chaperoning Linda and the Doctor.
Is Johann out and out lying? Is his memory failing? Or is he just
desperate to do whatever it takes to protect his "adopted" daughter?
Only God knows.
Where did you get this bit of info? Wouldya tell us Sam? If your source is correct, we might want to rethink a few things. So, who is this and how credible are they?
-
Habanero;
I had the same thoughts. Someone is having trouble with Geography as well as Chronology. This is definitely propaganda in my eyes!
-
Habanero;
I had the same thoughts. Someone is having trouble with Geography as well as Chronology. This is definitely propaganda in my eyes!
Over the past 18 months or more, many of us have read Johanns claims
that nothing could have happened between Linda and the doctor as he
was constantly present, whether here or in Norway with the "Nathan"
trip.
I question his recollection of events or maybe his definition
of "constantly". Here is the information that I have received
concerning the "Nathan" trip.
Of the entire week that Linda was in Norway, Johann spent
approximately 10 minutes in the foyer of Arild's home (not even
coming into the house) and then proceeded to go out to dinner with
them. He had driven from his home to pick up an ozone machine that
Linda had brought for his wife. After dinner he complained of being
too tired to drive the several hours home and was ignored by Arild &
Linda. In fact, I believe Arild told Johann if he got too sleepy to
pull over and nap. After dinner, Johann headed for home. (Denmark I
believe)
That is the summation of time spent chaperoning Linda and the Doctor.
Is Johann out and out lying? Is his memory failing? Or is he just
desperate to do whatever it takes to protect his "adopted" daughter?
Only God knows.
Where did you get this bit of info? Wouldya tell us Sam? If your source is correct, we might want to rethink a few things. So, who is this and how credible are they?
Some bending of facts, avoiding important details, and adding an untrue statement distorts the picture and weakens the credibility of the source.
-
IMO Laird was a pawn in many ways. We know that Linda was AWOL for her
scheduled depo. Now another depo for her has been scheduled but she is
asking for a continuance while she seeks another attorney. mmhh Good
move if she is wanting, again, to avoid that depo.
Quote from Sam.
Sam, Linda was AWOL for her scheduled depo? When did that happen? I am aware that a depo was scheduled and she was issued a faulty subpoena that she was not obligated to follow. Is that the one you are speaking of? If so, she was not AWOL.
-
Habanero;
I had the same thoughts. Someone is having trouble with Geography as well as Chronology. This is definitely propaganda in my eyes!
Over the past 18 months or more, many of us have read Johanns claims
that nothing could have happened between Linda and the doctor as he
was constantly present, whether here or in Norway with the "Nathan"
trip.
I question his recollection of events or maybe his definition
of "constantly". Here is the information that I have received
concerning the "Nathan" trip.
Of the entire week that Linda was in Norway, Johann spent
approximately 10 minutes in the foyer of Arild's home (not even
coming into the house) and then proceeded to go out to dinner with
them. He had driven from his home to pick up an ozone machine that
Linda had brought for his wife. After dinner he complained of being
too tired to drive the several hours home and was ignored by Arild &
Linda. In fact, I believe Arild told Johann if he got too sleepy to
pull over and nap. After dinner, Johann headed for home. (Denmark I
believe)
That is the summation of time spent chaperoning Linda and the Doctor.
Is Johann out and out lying? Is his memory failing? Or is he just
desperate to do whatever it takes to protect his "adopted" daughter?
Only God knows.
Where did you get this bit of info? Wouldya tell us Sam? If your source is correct, we might want to rethink a few things. So, who is this and how credible are they?
Some bending of facts, avoiding important details, and adding an untrue statement distorts the picture and weakens the credibility of the source.
It appears that half-truths and fabrications are par for the course on "the dark side".
-
IMO Laird was a pawn in many ways. We know that Linda was AWOL for her
scheduled depo. Now another depo for her has been scheduled but she is
asking for a continuance while she seeks another attorney. mmhh Good
move if she is wanting, again, to avoid that depo.
Quote from Sam.
Sam, Linda was AWOL for her scheduled depo? When did that happen? I am aware that a depo was scheduled and she was issued a faulty subpoena that she was not obligated to follow. Is that the one you are speaking of? If so, she was not AWOL.
...half-truths and fabrications!
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
-
Everyone wants to know my source and insinuates I just made the whole
thing up. So, let me throw this out....Anyone that doesn't believe
me...feel free to ask Johann if this is what happened. Make sure and
ask him how many days Linda had already been there (staying at the
Doctor's house) when he came to pick up the ozone machine. Ask him if
he spent the night after he picked it up or did he drive all the way
back home that night. Then ask him if he came back again at all
during the rest of the time that Linda was there?
BTW just to bring out the above point... Linda stayed in the doctor's
house....Nathan did not.
We have no reason to not believe that you made the whole thing up. Have you talked it over with Johann yourself? Do you have any of this from him? Why don't you ask him all the questions you tell others to ask regarding the accusation you made. You make nebulous accusations without citing any sources regarding a matter of which you have absolutely no personal knowledge whatsoever and expect us to believe you? Get real!
You obviously have not been to the doctor's home and are speaking on the basis of rumour when you say that Nate was not in the doctor's house. Have you asked the doctor or Nathan, or are you talking off the top of you head again, and bluffing in hope that you will be right?
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
-
Everyone wants to know my source and insinuates I just made the whole
thing up. So, let me throw this out....Anyone that doesn't believe
me...feel free to ask Johann if this is what happened. Make sure and
ask him how many days Linda had already been there (staying at the
Doctor's house) when he came to pick up the ozone machine. Ask him if
he spent the night after he picked it up or did he drive all the way
back home that night. Then ask him if he came back again at all
during the rest of the time that Linda was there?
BTW just to bring out the above point... Linda stayed in the doctor's
house....Nathan did not.
We have no reason to not believe that you made the whole thing up. Have you talked it over with Johann yourself? Do you have any of this from him? Why don't you ask him all the questions you tell others to ask regarding the accusation you made. You make nebulous accusations without citing any sources regarding a matter of which you have absolutely no personal knowledge whatsoever and expect us to believe you? Get real!
You obviously have not been to the doctor's home and are speaking on the basis of rumour when you say that Nate was not in the doctor's house. Have you asked the doctor or Nathan, or are you talking off the top of you head again, and bluffing in hope that you will be right?
Ok
Johann,
How many days had Linda already been at the Doctor's house before you came tp pick up the machine?
Did you stay the night when you went there, or return home?
Did you ever return while she was at Doctor Abrahamsson's house?
Where was Nathan staying while there?
Please just answer the questions and make it easier for both yourself and us.
Thank you.
P.S.
If any of you who are friends with or in contact with Linda want to get the answers from her as she will answer you, feel free to do so and let us know what she says.
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.
3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.
As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.
3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.
As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.
Linda has counsel now? Good, however in the Benton Court Case and website she is still listed as having none after Heal's name was removed. I am sure that 3ABN's attorneys will be glad to hear that from her, if they haven't already, so they can move ahead with scheduling her deposition. There have been so many delays in this case already...
So, to clarify, now you are claiming it wasn't the subpoena which was faulty but that there was a problem with those who were supposed to be notified of the deposition not being notified in a timely manner? What is the basis of this claim, and who made it? Pickle and Joy?
And yes, we are all just people, but despite your love and hugs (TY) I noticed you did not really answer the questions caused by your own arguments here, although this one shouldn't be too difficult to answer, and would clear up a lot here imho.
So let me try once more.
What reason did Linda or her attorney, Heal, give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
-
With all the high pressure fiction that is produced, taking a chance that some of it fits into the true picture, it is amazing how some squander with the term "FICTION" on others who know what they are talking about.
-
Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly. Remember avoiding them IS answering them.
Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too.
WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired? :dunno:
-
Not working Junebug!! Why don't YOU PEOPLE answer some questions honestly??
Where is that "exoneration letter" from the IRS? Many here have asked to see it but the requests have been ignored. Remember, avoiding that question IS answering it...
Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly. Remember avoiding them IS answering them.
Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too.
WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired? :dunno:
-
Re: Do they know anything about business?
Esaajr (Shiny Penny to BSDA Posters) Sun Jul 6, 2008 7:57 pm
Fran (whoever she or he is) constantly is throwing out these charges, and despite the fact that her analysis has been shown to be faulty...she persists.
It seems she has a small following that believes every utterance she makes. But I can assure you...that after a cursory analysis of her statements - she is either unable to ascertain the facts, does not make a comprehensive study to determine all the facts or is intentionally trying to mislead.
I refer you back to a post I made on BSDA over a year ago - detailing the fallacies and faultiness of her analysis of just one of 3ABN's 990s. If she is this far off the mark in this one case, there is no reason to believe that any of her other analysis would stand up to scrutiny.
Response to Fran's inaccurate analysis of one 990.
The fact that the IRS has found nothing worth pursuing at 3ABN is further evidence that Fran's analysis is not worthy to be relied upon.
Many thanks to Ian for starting up this group to defend/support 3ABN. A forum where support for 3ABN can be discussed without ridicule has been long over due. (It astonishes me that over at ATalk the sub-heading on the 3ABN category is "For respectfully discussing any issues and concerns pertaining to 3ABN." Some posters are disrespectful and seemingly encouraged to be so or at least not discouraged from being so).
This 3ABN Defended post has me really praying.
1. Why was my “faulty analysis” not cited?
2. Why would you only direct them to your erroneous statements?
3. Why didn't you direct them to read my answers to your statements?
4. Posting only part of the whole is misleading and not honest.
5. Why have been unfair accusing me of something that is not true?
6. Why would you do that?
7. Are you receiving some reward for your efforts; what could that be?
8. I replied to your post; why did you not give a link to those answers?
9. I believe this dishonest since you failed to show not only what I said, but my reply to your post!
10. Are you afraid for people to read the facts?
11. Are you are afraid of the WHOLE topic since only pointing to your previous post?
12. I find you 3ABN Defended post to be very narcissistic. (ME; ME; ME!)
13. There is no official word that the IRS Investigation is over. Where is it?
Because you have set out with this post to deceive, I will bring to the front what really was said. This also gives me the opportunity to bring these documented facts up front for all to see. Remember, don’t bait me, I could just bite back.
This is my post, showing what you said I have no understanding of. I will let the readers decide.
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=2c468e18afc3b399355bb71c8f718c7d&showtopic=13308&st=75&p=194088&#entry194088
Fran May 4 2007, 12:22 AM Post # 84
http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf
This is link to the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax lawsuit. This comes from page 17. # 61.
61. The Independent Auditor’s Reports for 2000 and 2001 state:
Downlink equipment acquired by gift is not recorded in the financial statements. In our opinion, generally accepted accounting principles require that such donated property be recorded at its fair value at the date of receipt. It was not practicable to determine the effects of the unrecorded equipment on the financial statements,
In connection with the recording of real estate revocable trusts, the fair values of the trusts were based on internal estimates performed by the organization. We were unable to obtain sufficient evidential matter in connection with the estimates of fair value.14 (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, & 15)
Then read the footnotes #14 & #15 at the bottom of page 17.
14 The financial report for 2000 contains additional concerns found by the independent auditors.
15 Applicant’s financial reports raise additional questions and concerns. For example, the unrecorded contribution revenue related to charitable gift annuity agreements were not recorded in conformance with generally accepted accounting principles. The “related party transactions” were acknowledged without identifying the parties. The notes refer to “split interest agreements,” where applicant received the assets funding the trusts and applicant is to pay certain amounts for specified periods of time to the donors. There is nothing in the record to identify the donors or the assets. None of the trust agreements were supplied. (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, 15)
More...
Fran Said...
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm
Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.
Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.
Open the 2002 Form 990 and go to page 13 and read statement #2 again.
Trust Funds not posted in the amount of $ 1,708,918.00
The other entries are relevant too, but I need further information.
How do I know these numbers deal with Trust Funds? The auditors told us! Refer back to footnote 15 page 17 of the Lawsuit.
The auditor's answer that by telling us the Split Interest Agreements deal with Trust Funds. Just by reading the IRS Form 990's you can't tell what Split Interest Agreements are! However, the auditors informed us as to what it was.
The other concern is that 3ABN is not following Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, GAAP. This raised the eyes of the auditors, as it should have. It certainly raised mine!
A Corporation should have copies of every major accounting publication. Many are provided. The Journal of Accountancy covers new Accounting practices that keeps up with all of the new technologies that will affect Accounts and Accounting. It will also let you know about important publications. It also has lots of FASB's. (OK, so I am a sick woman!) An updated GAAP book is published every year.
Read these documents through different eyes. This Lawsuit is full of information that has NOTHING TO DO WITH PROPERTY TAX at all! Keep your eyes open. The auditors are probably talking about their findings!
Find how many times you read that the auditors were not provided information. Take note of those instances and ask yourself, "Why didn't they provide this requested information?"
Read the reports and ask your shelf, "Why?"
The information provided here comes from the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax Lawsuit and the IRS Form 990's for 2001-2005.
The link to the lawsuit is at the beginning of this post.
The links to the Form 990's are at http://save-3ABN.com
On the left column click the title Danny Shelton
Select Financial Allegations
Select Form 990's
This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, and Documentation.
More to come... It will take me a few more minutes. Stand by.
-
(Fran @ May 3 2007, 10:22 PM) [snapback]194087[/snapback]
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm
Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.
Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.
...
The links to the Form 990's are at
http://save-3ABN.com
On the left column click the title Danny Shelton
Select Financial Allegations
Select Form 990's
This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, and Documentation.
More…
Shiny Penny said... May 4 2007, 02:47 AM Post # 85
Fran, Wow! Thank you for taking the time to provide the links, details and interpretations of the data found. I'm writing a rather long, detailed and technical response, in part because your post was also detailed. I haven't had the chance to check all of what you sent me, but I did check the 2001 990. The auditor's concerns (as reported in the lawsuit documents) and what you had posted - gravely concerned, even alarmed, me. But, as I show below, there is no reason to be alarmed - at least not about the 990 in 2001.
The 990 states (and please correct me if I am wrong) - the information posted in Statement 2 (page 17):
Fran Said...
Form 990, Part 1, Line 20
Record split interest agreements previously unrecorded, $2,451,034
Reclassification of amounts due to other ministries previously classified as temporarily restricted, ($14,282)
Net unrealized gains on marketable securities, $13,862.
More…
Penny Said.....
So I went back to part 1, Line 20 and that line reads "Other changes in net assets or fund balances (attach explanation)"
I interpret this to mean that this 990 is correcting prior mistakes/errors and sometime in 2001 3ABN had recorded the previously unrecorded split interest agreements and also recorded the unrealized gains on marketable securities. To go into a little more detail on the unrealized gains - these gains were described as unrealized. Meaning that the end of year value of the securities was greater than the beginning of year value, but the marketable securities had not been sold during the year - hence the gain is unrealized.
This is a paper gain that should have been recorded in an earlier year (2000?), but had not been. It seems to me that you are familiar with accounting and so would know that prior period adjustments (such as this unrealized gain) are made directly to retained earnings in the case of a corporation and in the case of not for profit organization would be an adjustment to the fund balance. Which is exactly what 3ABN did. Therefore, I am relieved to see that 3ABN had made the correction to the prior periods error!
About the amounts due to other ministries, according to the 990 these amounts had previously been classified as temporarily restricted and were now being reclassified to something else. I didn't see what they were being classified to, but since this amount is in parenthesis (meaning it is being subtracted) would indicate that in this correction 3ABN was removing that amount from its fund balance. To get a bit technical here (and probably lose the rest of the readers who would have gotten even this far in my post) we know that the debit was to some restricted account (I assume restricted cash) and was improperly credited to some account (such as donations or something similar) that increased the fund balance. I supposed that this is an easy enough mistake to make and part of the reason books are audited - to find material errors and misstatements. Anyway, the good news is the auditors caught the mistake and that 3ABN made the correction in 2001 as is reported in the 990.
These are perfectly good explanations for what happened. You are correct when you said "3ABN did not post $2.45 MILLION Dollars in TRUST FUNDS in 2001." Well at least partly correct, the year would have been 2000 or earlier. The 990 shows that they corrected this in 2001.
But when you say "They also mis-posted over $14,000 of money meant to be forwarded to other Independent Ministries. The funds went straight into the 3ABN coffers. I still wonder what Ministries did not get their money" I beg to differ. Truth be said, of course the money went straight into 3ABN's coffers. It was sent to 3ABN and would go into their coffers before going out of the 3ABN coffers into another ministry's coffers. We don't have any indication that any ministry did not get its money in 2000 - we only know that 3ABN did not record the receipt of the cash properly. In other words, we know that 3ABN made a mistake with the accounting when the cash came into the coffers. This tells us nothing about any transaction transferring the money out of the coffers. And again the 990 tells us that in 2001 3ABN made the correction to its books.
I'll have to take the time to investigate the other points you brought up, to see if 3ABN is correcting mistakes, or just making them and leaving them be. But so far the verdict is the 3ABN is making the corrections.
God bless.
Shiny Penny (now starting to follow the money around)
This post has been edited by Shiny Penny: May 4 2007, 07:16 AM
--------------------
--Shiny Penny—
More to come...be patient; it will be a few more minutes.
-
Shiny Penny:
Response Part #1
I have taken time to allow you to read and get familiar with BSDA without being chased off by my blunt remarks, which I do not intend to be so brash, but it comes out and it is just me. So do not take offense over anything that I say because it is not given to be offensive. I have a tendency to really believe that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Many others go the scenic route. We are just different thank God! Both ways are correct. There is no one way to say something. I will post this reply in several post so none will be too long. Stay with me ok?
More…
Penny:
Fran, Wow! Thank you for taking the time to provide the links, details and interpretations of the data found. I'm writing a rather long, detailed and technical response, in part because your post was also detailed.
More…
Fran:
Actually, my post was not really that detailed to me, but to others I guess it could be. I only hit some light points to start people asking questions. Thank you so much for your response. Since you say you are into details, we should have fun reviewing even more items in those afore mentioned details. It is exciting to get a response from someone that has an understanding of the form 990’s and non-profit accounting.
I feel as if I have died and gone to heaven. I sure hope the Lord has accounting in heaven. I want to count the stars and the sand of the sea. I want to know the number of the hairs on my head! Of course, once we get to heaven, God will have so much going on that accounting will fall by the wayside naturally.
More…
(Fran @ May 4 2007, 01:22 AM) [snapback]194087[/snapback]
http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf
This is link to the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax lawsuit. This comes from page 17. # 61.
Then read the footnotes #14 & #15 at the bottom of page 17.
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm
Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.
Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.
Open the 2002 Form 990 and go to page 13 and read statement #2 again.
Trust Funds not posted in the amount of $ 1,708,918.00
The other entries are relevant too, but I need further information.
How do I know these numbers deal with Trust Funds? The auditors told us! Refer back to footnote 15 page 17 of the Lawsuit.
The auditor's answer that by telling us the Split Interest Agreements deal with Trust Funds. Just by reading the IRS Form 990's you can't tell what Split Interest Agreements are! However, the auditors informed us as to what it was.
The other concern is that 3ABN is not following Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, GAAP. This raised the eyes of the auditors, as it should have. It certainly raised mine!
A Corporation should have copies of every major accounting publication. Many are provided. The Journal of Accountancy covers new Accounting practices that keeps up with all of the new technologies that will affect Accounts and Accounting. It will also let you know about important publications. It also has lots of FASB's. (OK, so I am a sick woman!) An updated GAAP book is published every year.
Read these documents through different eyes. This Lawsuit is full of information that has NOTHING TO DO WITH PROPERTY TAX at all! Keep your eyes open. The auditors are probably talking about their findings!
Find how many times you read that the auditors were not provided information. Take note of those instances and ask yourself, "Why didn't they provide this requested information?"
Read the reports and ask your shelf, "Why?"
The information provided here comes from the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax Lawsuit and the IRS Form 990's for 2001-2005.
The link to the lawsuit is at the beginning of this post.
The links to the Form 990's are at http://save3ABN.com
On the left column click the title Danny Shelton
Select Financial Allegations
Select Form 990's
This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, Documentation.
Shiny Penny:
-
Response Part #2
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13308&st=135
Posted by Fran May 10 2007, 01:49 AM Post # 142
I hope this post does not attach itself to my previous post. I waited awhile before posting this. Sorry if it does.
Penny said...
I haven't had the chance to check all of what you sent me, but I did check the 2001 990. The auditor's concerns (as reported in the lawsuit documents) and what you had posted - gravely concerned, even alarmed, me. But, as I show below, there is no reason to be alarmed - at least not about the 990 in 2001.
More...
Fran said...
You said, “…there is no reason to be alarmed about the 990 in 2001.”
Are you sure? I was and am still shocked after three years of looking at it. However, that is OK! It would be quite a boring world if we all agreed on everything; Right?
I never meant I was “alarmed” at the 990’s alone. The 990’s reflect exactly what you stated; corrections to errors the auditors found.
It is the Lawsuit and the Auditor’s responses that cause/caused me to pause and contemplate exactly what they really trying to say. The 990’s are an accounting Statement of Historical Transactions. That is exactly what accounting is in actuality.
Do you feel these amounts are “material?”
Do you feel the “number of mistakes” listed are a reflection of grossly, incompetent management?
Or, do you see/feel these large errors were flukes?
Since I have read about so many corrected mistakes in the 990’s and in the audit reports, it gets harder for me trust the numbers in front of my eyes.
In all honesty, do these corrections reflect to you in some way that all mistakes were corrected?
Do you ask questions about what happened in all the previous years of 1984-1999?
Do you wonder what happened once the auditors left?
Was it back to business as usual?
Did 3ABN take strong actions to correct these policy/procedural black holes?
Or do you feel it just put a band aid over the hole as a temporary plug to massive seepage?
Did the same mistakes fall back into place once no one was looking?
What is it that makes you feel that all is well because they corrected a gross error?
Penny said:
The 990 states (and please correct me if I am wrong) - the information posted in Statement 2 (page 17):
So I went back to part 1, Line 20 and that line reads "Other changes in net assets or fund balances (attach explanation)"
More …
Fran said:
This is correct! The 900’s are similar to the 1040 where you must take a number that you have calculated and put it on another form, another line, in another place to add into the whole. This is the IRS’s clever way to double check figures and calculations. In fact, the IRS will ask different questions that should result in the same answer, or one that the IRS can do a calculation on. Very clever they are!
Of course, there would be a change in Net Assets / Fund Balances and/or Income and Expense, because changes cause the old figures to become the new improved figures! That is what accounting is all about. It is impossible to make such changes and the balances of something NOT change.
Penny said...
I interpret this to mean that this 990 is correcting prior mistakes/errors and sometime in 2001 3ABN had recorded the previously unrecorded split interest agreements and also recorded the unrealized gains on marketable securities.
More…
Fran said...
I agree wholeheartedly with your interpretation. The auditors audited in 2000 & 2001 respectively. The corrections made stem from these findings. Being familiar with audit procedures, I know there is no such thing as a 100% audit of accounts. These figures are numbers the auditors FOUND. However, I find, in the Property Tax Lawsuit, the auditors were not provided enough information to be able to perform a comprehensive audit. Repeatedly you will find that information was “not available” or “it was not provided.”
-------------------
The greatest want of the world is the want of men-- men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall. {Ed 57.3}
But such a character is not the result of accident; it is not due to special favors or endowments of Providence. A noble character is the result of self-discipline, of the subjection of the lower to the higher nature--the surrender of self for the service of love to God and man. {Ed 57.4}
-
Not working Junebug!! Why don't YOU PEOPLE answer some questions honestly??
Where is that "exoneration letter" from the IRS? Many here have asked to see it but the requests have been ignored. Remember, avoiding that question IS answering it...
Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly. Remember avoiding them IS answering them.
Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too.
WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired? :dunno:
Do you think that they're capable of answering truthfully Snoopy? I don't. :hot:
I'm still waiting to see this great news letter about EXONERATION. I haven't seen anything to indicate that is the truth as yet.
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
Ian, you are so out of the loop. The subpoena was untimely served. Her attorney in fact made it clear to Hayes that it was untimely and they need to re-serve or work out an alternate date that was more convenient for his schedule.
Since distance and time is an issue, another Illinois based attorney has been approached and may be the counsel of record in both cases before the deposition. And by the way, I believe Heal filed a motion to quash, did he not? Or did you forget to mention this?
Rest assured, there will be a deposition in time, if it is appropriate.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
Ian, you are so out of the loop. The subpoena was untimely served. Her attorney in fact made it clear to Hayes that it was untimely and they need to re-serve or work out an alternate date that was more convenient for his schedule.
Since distance and time is an issue, another Illinois based attorney has been approached and may be the counsel of record in both cases before the deposition. And by the way, I believe Heal filed a motion to quash, did he not? Or did you forget to mention this?
Rest assured, there will be a deposition in time, if it is appropriate.
Gailon Arthur Joy
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
-
I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.
Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.
Lovely little scenario, but pure fiction.
You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...
So, why don't you just gives us the facts?
1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?
2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?
As far as your question?
"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"
She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does. She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.
Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.
3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.
As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.
Linda has counsel now? Good, however in the Benton Court Case and website she is still listed as having none after Heal's name was removed. I am sure that 3ABN's attorneys will be glad to hear that from her, if they haven't already, so they can move ahead with scheduling her deposition. There have been so many delays in this case already...
So, to clarify, now you are claiming it wasn't the subpoena which was faulty but that there was a problem with those who were supposed to be notified of the deposition not being notified in a timely manner? What is the basis of this claim, and who made it? Pickle and Joy?
And yes, we are all just people, but despite your love and hugs (TY) I noticed you did not really answer the questions caused by your own arguments here, although this one shouldn't be too difficult to answer, and would clear up a lot here imho.
So let me try once more.
What reason did Linda or her attorney, Heal, give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?
I believe Linda has hired a firm of 4 lawyers out of Decatur IL. They may only be representing her in the marital property case, I don't know.
-
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
-
Ian, you are so out of the loop. The subpoena was untimely served. Her attorney in fact made it clear to Hayes that it was untimely and they need to re-serve or work out an alternate date that was more convenient for his schedule.
Untimely as in she was gone after signing for it? and don't you mean "her schedule"? Did she even contact the 3ABN attorneys or say anything? Was Heal even representing her in regards to the subpoena? :dunno:
Tell us please, if you are "in the loop"
Since distance and time is an issue, another Illinois based attorney has been approached and may be the counsel of record in both cases before the deposition. And by the way, I believe Heal filed a motion to quash, did he not?...
ummmm... NO.
and what do you mean "both cases before the deposition"?
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
and Joy? what sam just posted? I echo it. :thumbsup:
-
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
That seems to go hand in hand with the anyone is expendable for the cause because there are always casualties if war approach.
I don't buy that kind of thing. As far as I am concerned outside of the game of chess, only The enemy and those he deceives have "pawns" or "patsies"
Yes, that IS my personal opinion, view and conviction and so I stand here with it.
-
Sam,
This is one reason I do not take your strident defense of 3ABN as gospel.
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
You claim speculation in what you are saying. Tells me again, why are you willing to put things out there that you fault find others for. SPECULATION, not proof. Tell me again how you know what you said is true? Another obvious explaation of who Sam really is.
What makes sense to you is not necessarily what has taken place. Unless it were to go to trial, you have no idea if what you say is true or not. At least if the rules remain the same as they were. The information as to who might have reported with what they considered illegalities,never is relased until and if a trial. Reason is quite simple if you think about it.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
Personally I have never seen two sides that are so blind.
-
Sam,
This is one reason I do not take your strident defense of 3ABN as gospel.
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
You claim speculation in what you are saying. Tells me again, why are you willing to put things out there that you fault find others for. SPECULATION, not proof. Tell me again how you know what you said is true? Another obvious explaation of who Sam really is.
What makes sense to you is not necessarily what has taken place. Unless it were to go to trial, you have no idea if what you say is true or not. At least if the rules remain the same as they were. The information as to who might have reported with what they considered illegalities,never is relased until and if a trial. Reason is quite simple if you think about it.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
Personally I have never seen two sides that are so blind.
And yet you consistently keep taking one side only when it comes to your own views, opinions, judgments and posts, and provide no reason or evidence to support what you say except your own thinking but present it all as forgone conclusions and facts as if nothing can be argued or debated.
Blind?
Open your own eyes and WAKE UP!
-
And yet you consistently keep taking one side only when it comes to your own views, opinions, judgments and posts, and provide no reason or evidence to support what you say except your own thinking but present it all as forgone conclusions and facts as if nothing can be argued or debated.
Blind?
Open your own eyes and WAKE UP!
You rarely have seen me take a side. You need also to wake up.
DS is the one that represents SDA's to the world. LS no longer is. Does not whitewash or eliminate anything she may have responsibility for. But that does not grab the attention and bring disfavor or scorn on the SDA church. Does not carry the same responsibility.
It is a forgone conclusion for me. Long before I read any post of yours, before I was aware of any IRS investigation.
You watch behaviours long enough and the true character eventually shows thru.
DS conduct in the very beginning told me who he was.
Your actions betray who you really are. You can deny, you can pretend, but in the end it shows.
Had DS treated LS fairly in the beginning,I doubt you would be listening any longer to this soap opera.
From what I have seen and read, she put her heart and soul into 3ABN as well. The public trashing and the gag order leaves much to be desired from the man who represents SDA's around the world
-
You rarely have seen me take a side. You need also to wake up.
DS is the one that represents SDA's to the world. LS no longer is. Does not whitewash or eliminate anything she may have responsibility for. But that does not grab the attention and bring disfavor or scorn on the SDA church. Does not carry the same responsibility.
It is a forgone conclusion for me. Long before I read any post of yours, before I was aware of any IRS investigation.
You watch behaviours long enough and the true character eventually shows thru.
DS conduct in the very beginning told me who he was.
Your actions betray who you really are. You can deny, you can pretend, but in the end it shows.
Had DS treated LS fairly in the beginning,I doubt you would be listening any longer to this soap opera.
From what I have seen and read, she put her heart and soul into 3ABN as well. The public trashing and the gag order leaves much to be desired from the man who represents SDA's around the world
Yes it is a forgone conclusion for you, and that has always been the side you have taken, that is all I have ever seen from you. Don't tell me I haven't seen it, you are doing it even now, wipe away one side as non important or inconsequential or offer excuses and condemn the other. Have you ever once traced all of this talk back and found when it started and with whom it originated? No. for if you had you would already know the FACTS and know that when Danny went on the Live and when Dr Thompson wrote his letter it was a response and reaction to all the publicity and questions and criticisms caused by the side with whom this all originated. Have you ever once researched or tried to find out the facts? NO, for if you had you wouldn't keep posting such nonsense and false testimony.
You say show me, yet refuse to see all that has been shown and keep offering excuses and reasons such as in this IRS issue, you don't even wait to see the facts you just keep going. why? because you don't want to see or here anything which might cause you to admit fault or error or change your thinking. Yes, That's my opinion.
So I can only repeat what I said before:
And yet you consistently keep taking one side only when it comes to your own views, opinions, judgments and posts, and provide no reason or evidence to support what you say except your own thinking but present it all as forgone conclusions and facts as if nothing can be argued or debated.
Blind?
Open your own eyes and WAKE UP!
I'm done here I have no intention of having this argument be moved to your hidden forum and continuing it there, where all that you browbeat and oppose and disagree with go, to allow you to continue to insist on your views of them or their opinions being accepted while the posse allows it, and condemns them. Have the last word Bonnie, you are soooo very good at that without ever needing to cool off..
I am not going to convince you, nor you me.. right?
so moving on...
-
I'm done here I have no intention of having this argument be moved to your hidden forum and continuing it there, where all that you browbeat and oppose and disagree with go, to allow you to continue to insist on your views of them or their opinions being accepted while the posse allows it, and condemns them. Have the last word Bonnie, you are soooo very good at that without ever needing to cool off..
Hidden Forum????? If I have such it is news to me. I have no hidden forum, I have no ability to move this discussion or to browbeat anyone.
-
Yes it is a forgone conclusion for you, and that has always been the side you have taken, that is all I have ever seen from you. Don't tell me I haven't seen it, you are doing it even now, wipe away one side as non important or inconsequential or offer excuses and condemn the other. Have you ever once traced all of this talk back and found when it started and with whom it originated? No. for if you had you would already know the FACTS and know that when Danny went on the Live and when Dr Thompson wrote his letter it was a response and reaction to all the publicity and questions and criticisms caused by the side with whom this all originated. Have you ever once researched or tried to find out the facts? NO, for if you had you wouldn't keep posting such nonsense and false testimony.
No side was wiped away. I am not a strong supporter of LS, I never have been. She is not the one in the public eye as DS and does not carry the same responsibility. She of course does between her and God, but DS represents SDA's to the world. Far greater impact and damage
The area's that concern me were pretty clear cut.
You say show me, yet refuse to see all that has been shown and keep offering excuses and reasons such as in this IRS issue, you don't even wait to see the facts you just keep going. why? because you don't want to see or here anything which might cause you to admit fault or error or change your thinking. Yes, That's my opinion.
I don't recall anything being shown in the area's that would concern me in attempting to defend DS. I see speculation, DS said but little else. Same some on the other side is showing you. I couldn't care less about the fact of the IRS and the resolution. Most will never know what took place and how it was resolved. Nor will you confirm or deny the bogus appraisel DS was after. That is flat out illegal if carried thru. You can spin that from now until the second coming and that will not change. You do not choose one area to be dishonest in or ask for the aid of others to help you in that dishonesty,that is who you are.
DS public visibility and conduct should be a concern for all that are SDA.
And yet you consistently keep taking one side only when it comes to your own views, opinions, judgments and posts, and provide no reason or evidence to support what you say except your own thinking but present it all as forgone conclusions and facts as if nothing can be argued or debated.
You seem to have failed to note where I said it came from DS himself. I never offered to provide proof, never said proof was in my hands. I do not accept DS recommendation on how special DS is. Nor do I accept LS recommendation on how special she is,or clueless . But yes, I do form opinons based on people's behavior and that is exactly what I said
I would really like to know where this private forum is that I have. Does it have a name?
-
Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly. Remember avoiding them IS answering them.
Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
The wording of questions tells even more about the inquirer.
-
Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly. Remember avoiding them IS answering them.
Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
The wording of questions tells even more about the inquirer.
Agreed, Johann.
-
The wording of questions tells even more about the inquirer.
Good try. Here are the questions for a third time Johann,
1. Did Johann drive back home that night?
2. Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
3. Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
It would be nice if these questions were answered rather than avoided.
-
The wording of questions tells even more about the inquirer.
Good try. Here are the questions for a third time Johann,
1. Did Johann drive back home that night?
2. Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
3. Did Nathan stay somewhere else?
It would be nice if these questions were answered rather than avoided.
Please tell me Junebug, why you think that Johann should bow to your demands? I'm afraid that I wouldn't.
-
What about simple questions, asked nicely, makes them demands?
-
What about simple questions, asked nicely, makes them demands?
It would be no problem answering simple questions, asked nicely, if there were only honest people reading. But I know from experience that there are people here who are looking for answers to be twisted and turned, because they don't seem to be interested in discovering the truth. So often I have found my clear answers twisted in a different connection and turned into a distortion of truth.
-
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
-
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
-
What about simple questions, asked nicely, makes them demands?
It would be no problem answering simple questions, asked nicely, if there were only honest people reading. But I know from experience that there are people here who are looking for answers to be twisted and turned, because they don't seem to be interested in discovering the truth. So often I have found my clear answers twisted in a different connection and turned into a distortion of truth.
Johann,
You have claimed to be a first person witness to Linda and Brenda's visit to Norway in Feb 2004, and now refuse to answer any questions when it was pointed out you couldn't have witnessed much as you were only there for mere hrs on one day while they were there.
The only twisting and turning of the facts or blocking of readers and members discovering the truth appears to be yours.
In addition your claims about the planned Florida trip are also wrong, it was supposed to have taken place in February but Danny found out and Linda admitted it, It had nothing to do with the week of Easter as you claimed. So again your alibi is about as worthless as when you claimed to have been with Linda and the Dr in that motel room but had actually already flown back home leaving the Dr behind later that same year. -- ie.. Before the divorce.
Those are the facts, and I can see why you have a hard time answering questions about all this, but can only consistently reply by accusing those actually trying to discover the truth and let others know. What is even sadder is that others, such as Ozzie join you in doing so, a love of the truth seems to be the least of yours or their concern.
There are honest people, who are and are not members reading here, and you are not answering for them or helping them discover the truth because you claim someone will twist your words if you say anything? What?
Think, you have claimed your words have been twisted all along, yet it hasn't ever stopped you from continuing to post and claim things to be facts, it only offers an excuse to never answer any direct questions related to what you have claimed.
Do you really think others are so stupid that they can't see through this?
For shame.
..ian.
-
[/quote]
Johann, I have never \"twisted and turned\" or \"distorted\" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn\'t He?
Jesus knew their intent and motives. You cannot possibly know anyone’s intent or motives. Junebug has never twisted and turned or distorted anything you have said. She is correct in saying that your not answering is in essence answering them very plainly. It is plain for all to see.
-
Good for you, Johann!!
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
-
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
Good for you, Johann!!
???
So Johann is justified and righteous because he refuses to answer questions in this situation?
The only time I know of that Jesus didn't answer questions was at his trial... Why?
Because he came here to lay down his life for us, and he was being falsely accused, and if he had opened his mouth it would have proved his innocence and they couldn't have condemned him to death.
Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
How does that relate to Johann here?
The rest of the gospels are full of Jesus answering questions, many by those seeking to accuse him, even the one time he said Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things, he had actually already answered his accusers with the questions he asked them about John the Baptist before that and they knew it.
-
Ian, Junebug, and "child of God",
Your harsh criticisms and accusations of Johann are entirely out of place.
-
Ian, Junebug, and "child of God",
Your harsh criticisms and accusations of Johann are entirely out of place.
Not.
Broken mirror?
Your harsh and continuing criticisms and judgments of myself, Junebug, child of God, Danny Shelton, Leonard Westphal etc, and willing work as a shill, is far worse then anything said here by us, or that we would even think to say or do.
-
Ian, Junebug, and \"child of God\",
Your harsh criticisms and accusations of Johann are entirely out of place.
How so?
-
That door swings both ways!! You have yet to answer the question as to where the "IRS exoneration letter" is?? How is it that you can demand answers but provide none?
Interestingly, from what I heard recently there will NOT be an exoneration letter!! That whole exoneration thing was one big misunderstanding.
So??
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
Good for you, Johann!!
???
So Johann is justified and righteous because he refuses to answer questions in this situation?
The only time I know of that Jesus didn't answer questions was at his trial... Why?
Because he came here to lay down his life for us, and he was being falsely accused, and if he had opened his mouth it would have proved his innocence and they couldn't have condemned him to death.
Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
How does that relate to Johann here?
The rest of the gospels are full of Jesus answering questions, many by those seeking to accuse him, even the one time he said Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things, he had actually already answered his accusers with the questions he asked them about John the Baptist before that and they knew it.
-
That door swings both ways!! You have yet to answer the question as to where the "IRS exoneration letter" is?? How is it that you can demand answers but provide none?
How is it you can't understand "please be patient, it's coming" is an answer? The IL AG, and IRS don't jump in time to your demands.
Interestingly, from what I heard recently there will NOT be an exoneration letter!! That whole exoneration thing was one big misunderstanding.
So??
Interesting... and who would have claimed that, and how would they know, and why would you believe that? It makes no sense. Obviously with the lawsuit and all Pickle and Joy's financial defamation per se in this regard, there will need to be findings or a letter spelling them out to submit as "hard copy" evidence. You must have missed the fact that it seems Joy has already been informed that the IRS investigation resulted in a big fat nothing, zero, nada, zip, zilch.
Ask him. :puppykisses:
and btw, what on earth does this really have to do with the post you are replying to?
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
Good for you, Johann!!
???
So Johann is justified and righteous because he refuses to answer questions in this situation?
The only time I know of that Jesus didn't answer questions was at his trial... Why?
Because he came here to lay down his life for us, and he was being falsely accused, and if he had opened his mouth it would have proved his innocence and they couldn't have condemned him to death.
Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
How does that relate to Johann here?
The rest of the gospels are full of Jesus answering questions, many by those seeking to accuse him, even the one time he said Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things, he had actually already answered his accusers with the questions he asked them about John the Baptist before that and they knew it.
[/quote]
-
OK. I'll wait patiently. But I'll bet you my next paycheck it's not coming!!! :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
That door swings both ways!! You have yet to answer the question as to where the "IRS exoneration letter" is?? How is it that you can demand answers but provide none?
How is it you can't understand "please be patient, it's coming" is an answer? The IL AG doesn't jump in time to your demands.
Interestingly, from what I heard recently there will NOT be an exoneration letter!! That whole exoneration thing was one big misunderstanding.
So??
Interesting... and who would have claimed that, and how would they know, and why would you believe that? It makes no sense. Obviously with the lawsuit and all Pickle and Joy's financial defamation per se in this regard, there will need to be a letter to submit as evidence. You must have missed the fact that Joy has been informed that the IRS investigation resulted in a big fat nothing, zero, nada, zilch.
Ask him. :puppykisses:
and btw, what on earth does this really have to do with the post you are replying to?
Johann, I have never "twisted and turned" or "distorted" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn't He?
Good for you, Johann!!
???
So Johann is justified and righteous because he refuses to answer questions in this situation?
The only time I know of that Jesus didn't answer questions was at his trial... Why?
Because he came here to lay down his life for us, and he was being falsely accused, and if he had opened his mouth it would have proved his innocence and they couldn't have condemned him to death.
Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
How does that relate to Johann here?
The rest of the gospels are full of Jesus answering questions, many by those seeking to accuse him, even the one time he said Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things, he had actually already answered his accusers with the questions he asked them about John the Baptist before that and they knew it.
[/quote]
-
OK. I'll wait patiently. But I'll bet you my next paycheck it's not coming!!!
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Snoopy,
There may be a type of letter. But I would suspect they have it at this time. I am still hearing the drum roll If they have been exonerated it usually is at time of completion of a resolution.
I doubt if they or their legal counsel is silly enough not to have the resolution in writing. They could be exonerated in terms of the resolution. At the time of resolution of ours, it was in writing and our tax return had been amended.
We knew a party very well that simply quit filing due to gambling debts and what he saw as no hope in paying taxes due. He did not file for 6 years by the time the IRS caught up with him.
They had him without question, yet he was exonerated in terms of criminal charges. They wanted their money and to enforce compliance. In the end worked out rather well for the taxpayer. Worked out so that the resolution was a fraction of what he owed in taxes ,penalities and interest. BUT, you can bet the IRS had total compliance from him after that which was more ecomonically prudent than paying his way in jail for a length of time. He now reminds me of a reformed drunk. No one shows the same eagerness to comply. Yet his IRS returns show nothing of what he actually did. HIs was downgraded from a criminal investigation. At resolution he obtained a written agreement and that was it.
What the infractions may have been or how minor or serious, most of us will never know. I do not believe the NO INFRACTION,NOT ONE report. There wasn't I am sure at the end. Compliance in the most minor ways can look very inviting after a go-around with seasoned investigators.
Why doesn't everyone just wait till they are ready to show whatever it is they have? You can bet they have it already and it seems it is being milked for all it is worth.
-
Since you have not figured it out yourself, Ian, I can tell you that those three questions were based on faulty conclusions drawn from partly incorrect information that has been posted. You have just stated that since a court case is going on, not all information will be given here. So why should I do the homework for you? I will leave it up to you to figure out where mistakes have been made. This is not the court hearings, and therefore there is no reason to answer these faulty questions here and now.
-
Since you have not figured it out yourself, Ian, I can tell you that those three questions were based on faulty conclusions drawn from partly incorrect information that has been posted.
:huh: :dunno:
You have just stated that since a court case is going on, not all information will be given here.
:huh: I did? :dunno:
So why should I do the homework for you? I will leave it up to you to figure out where mistakes have been made. This is not the court hearings, and therefore there is no reason to answer these faulty questions here and now.
:huh:
OoOoOo kay.. so why are you even bothering to post here? :dunno:
I believe you want to help Linda, but Johann?
You are not doing so...
-
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
-
ADMIN HAT ON
Ian, this post violates forum rule #5 as well as #24. If you wish to continue posting here, I suggest you attempt to abide by the rules of the forum.
ADMIN HAT OFF
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
hmm... Then I would suggest you appeal to this forum's administration and have them ban anything you don't want to hear or consider, that is totally understandable in light of your post here, and how you define spiteful as being only that of all defenders and not that of any of the accusers.
And if they agree? I would also suggest that being biased partial or being willfully ignorant deaf or blind is not a legit excuse and will not prevent others from hearing seeing or understanding.
Those who want to read and reply to what we say, or post as evidence can do so on 3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com as we don't censor any opposing views or concerns and legit criticisms -- as long as the posts are written in a courteous and forthright manner. We are not into attacking the messenger without addressing the message, unsupported opinions,( unless not stated they are such) or evasions, diversions, or repetition.
Truth has nothing to fear.
But this may be just a major difference in the way you and I think.
..ian
owner and moderator
3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com
-
LOL!! I agree! But I think they get tired of talking to themselves over there!!
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
-
LOL!! I agree! But I think they get tired of talking to themselves over there!!
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
Or we just answer where and when we can... when necessary?
That's my humble opinion.
:)
POST EDITED BY SNOOPY TO REMOVE ADMIN DIG
-
No one on 3ABN side have ever given over any evidence of Linda's so called affair that Danny even admitted he wasen't sure she had done the deed. Notice on Danny's divorce decree also. This has been going on for several years and they keep saying it will be forthcomming.
So goes the IRS information. Not to be released.
Johann has no need to answer questions that will postively get twisted, denied and turned around and not believed by the 3ABN posters. They have done it in the past so why should he let himself be subjected to same again. He has never been anything but honest.
If I had several letters that a dear sweet old lady received from Walt Thompson who she thought was her dear friend who trashed Linda even before the story about her and Dr in Norway I would produce them but the dear sweet old lady has since passed on and the letters have been destroyed.
The dear sweet old lady of course told all her freinds at the local communty center thrift store on what her dear friend wrote to her. If you want to get gossip out fast tell a woman especially an old one. They believe what they read. Especially when they think that dear man was such a good friend of theirs. He wouldn't lie to them.
I have seen in BSDA information about two of the letters and have never heard anyone discuss the third. I asked Sister about the third one and she replied that as far as she could tell the information was false.
So as far as I am concerned Walt Thompson is Danny Shelton's yes man. He did Danny's dirty work for him.
My twisting of the truth and rumormongering.
-
LOL!! I agree! But I think they get tired of talking to themselves over there!!
You got that impression too Snoopy? Heard of the saying "Great minds think alike"? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Guess they've come back here to beat the boredom of talking to themselves! :oops: ::) :dunno:
-
LOL!! I agree! But I think they get tired of talking to themselves over there!!
You got that impression too Snoopy? Heard of the saying "Great minds think alike"? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Guess they've come back here to beat the boredom of talking to themselves! :oops: ::) :dunno:
How so?
Do you and snoopy keep replying to and about us, and moderating her according to our posts and what any of us say?
-
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
You get that feeling too Christineed?
We had some really lovely people here at AT and they seem to have vanished because of this nastiness. :'(
-
LOL!! I agree! But I think they get tired of talking to themselves over there!!
You got that impression too Snoopy? Heard of the saying "Great minds think alike"? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Guess they've come back here to beat the boredom of talking to themselves! :oops: ::) :dunno:
How so?
Do you and snoopy keep replying to and about us, and moderating her according to our posts and what any of us say?
I'm not moderating anything Ian. Get your facts straight, just for once. :hamster:
-
I just wish that all the 3ABN defenders would just stay over at Yahoo. Their spiteful postings are just not Christian for supporters of a Christian network. :(
You get that feeling too Christineed?
We had some really lovely people here at AT and they seem to have vanished because of this nastiness. :'(
No worries, Ozzie....I'm still here. :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
(edited to add " 'm")
-
No one on 3ABN side have ever given over any evidence of Linda's so called affair that Danny even admitted he wasen't sure she had done the deed. Notice on Danny's divorce decree also. This has been going on for several years and they keep saying it will be forthcomming.
So goes the IRS information. Not to be released.
Johann has no need to answer questions that will postively get twisted, denied and turned around and not believed by the 3ABN posters. They have done it in the past so why should he let himself be subjected to same again. He has never been anything but honest.
If I had several letters that a dear sweet old lady received from Walt Thompson who she thought was her dear friend who trashed Linda even before the story about her and Dr in Norway I would produce them but the dear sweet old lady has since passed on and the letters have been destroyed.
The dear sweet old lady of course told all her freinds at the local communty center thrift store on what her dear friend wrote to her. If you want to get gossip out fast tell a woman especially an old one. They believe what they read. Especially when they think that dear man was such a good friend of theirs. He wouldn't lie to them.
I have seen in BSDA information about two of the letters and have never heard anyone discuss the third. I asked Sister about the third one and she replied that as far as she could tell the information was false.
So as far as I am concerned Walt Thompson is Danny Shelton's yes man. He did Danny's dirty work for him.
My twisting of the truth and rumormongering.
I don't believe 3abn has every said evidence on Linda was "forthcoming". I believe they have said if it needs to come out in court, they will show it.
Wait, I just had a great idea! If one of you Lindanites want to ask her if she would sign a formal agreement that she would not take any legal action against 3abn if they released their evidence against her...I bet they would do it. Something official could be drawn up and notorized without too much problem. Since Linda demanded the "evidence" she shouldn't have a problem with signing that kind of document. Throw it out there to her.
-
I believe they have said if it needs to come out in court, they will show it.
I already asked for the evidence via the legal process, and they haven't turned over a thing, even the stuff they claimed to have had. How could Linda sue them if they are forced to turn it over because of the legal process?
-
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
SAMMY, BABY, if you need the investigators number I can arrange that. You will have to PM me. However, you are so very, very wrong!!! When you call ask a single question: "If I have more documentation demonstrating issues at 3ABN, would you like me to fax them to you?"
ANd let us all know the reaction!!! And then cry in your soup!!!! And don't forget to tell Doug...after all, he really does know better. Just ask Bonnie.
Oh, by the way, where is that "exoneration" document???? Elusive, is it??? As elusive as the evidence against Linda, maybe???
Perhaps you would like to tell us just how many times they interviewed Danny Lee Shelton and what they had him produce. Then tell me if you think there will be an "exoneration" letter??? Or is it another one of those "miracles" that they simply ignored the obvious violations???? And when will this "miracle" story get published? Will it be in the 3ABN World? This month or next??? ANd are you putting it up on 3ABN.org? How about the Live on 3ABN Today on this coming Thursday!!!
Come on, now Sammy, tell us all about this wonderful miracle!!! I do so love "miracle" stories.
We really need that "exoneration" letter asap before things become very embarrassing.
By the way, the Qui Tam claim for 3ABN and Danny was established long before I came into it. But you can keep on salivating in jealousy as YOU SURE MISSED THE BOAT ON THIS REWARD!!!
Stay tuned as the last laugh is always the best laugh. ANd the Qui Tam claimant is going to laugh ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK!!!
Who knows, maybe they will contribute to our defense fund...but Californians are not known for sharing a whole lot. I'll just enjoy the ring of laughter.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I believe Linda has hired a firm of 4 lawyers out of Decatur IL. They may only be representing her in the marital property case, I don't know.
Now, SAM, how did you know that? Are you paying the bills or just consulting? Or are you still the President? of which entity, Russia or the Phillipines?
It must be a bit scary as the thoughts of a serious group of TIGERS gets ready to take on the bulls of Thompsonville. Wonder just how much they will be looking for before all this is over??? Lot of deep pockets in the bulls team!!!
If I were you, SAM, I wouldn't be sleeping well either....
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
ANYMAN, what a puff of smoke you are!!! And who said I was wrong? Lets' see. speaking of putting their heads on the chopping block, there is Ronnie Shelton, a VERY RELIABLE SOURCE...then there is Doug Batchelors' requoting Ronnie's email and attributing it to Gilley...poor Gilley, how embarrassing!!! But, how about poor Dougie??? That was a LEAP OF FAITH virtually unwarranted by the facts, but only time will tell the real story.
Just to bad I didn't have more courage to take you all on. Let me look in my miracle bag, could be a little courage in there somewhere.
In the meantime, I will hunker in my bunker, shivering in fear, as the shells burst outside reigning down on my pawns while my lttle bishop figures out how to pull off a checkmate!!! Be assured, my little bishop isn't far from that "checkmate" and the new little queenie will be very lonely!!!
But, that is the nature of Chess!!!
To the little bishop!!! Three cheers!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
In addition your claims about the planned Florida trip are also wrong, it was supposed to have taken place in February but Danny found out and Linda admitted it, It had nothing to do with the week of Easter as you claimed. So again your alibi is about as worthless as when you claimed to have been with Linda and the Dr in that motel room but had actually already flown back home leaving the Dr behind later that same year. -- ie.. Before the divorce....
..ian.
IAN, Dear, regarding Florida, are you talking about the tickets that Brenda ordered so she and Linda could go to the Condo together because the Dr was treating several patients, including Imgard, in Norway? Where are those tickets? Let's see them...they have dates, times and the source of the order all carefully laid out...but where are they??? Simple enough to irradicate this little dispute...produce the evidence!!!
You are really just an evil surmising hypocrit!!! Particularly when the evidence does not support your, or shall we say Danny's, story!!! PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE!!!
ANd Danny has claimed his detectives have pictures of the hotel room incident...so where is the report from the detective agency and the photos to go with it??? Gone missing, have they???
IAN, you are a wolf in sheeps clothing, but a poor imitation at best because your teeth are showing...so go investigate, get those reports and photos and report back to alleviate your "EVIL SURMISING SYNDROME". In fact, post them on your website!!! Don't forget to include the private detective's date stamp to prove your little story.
BEST OF LUCK, my dear!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
... Obviously with the lawsuit and all Pickle and Joy's financial defamation per se in this regard, there will need to be findings or a letter spelling them out to submit as "hard copy" evidence. You must have missed the fact that it seems Joy has already been informed that the IRS investigation resulted in a big fat nothing, zero, nada, zip, zilch.
Ask him. :puppykisses:
Let me add "DELUSIONAL" to my prior concerns. In fact, "DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR", IAN. Here I am, IAN Dear...over here!!! AM I showing two fingers or four, my dear? The men in the white coats are just outside the door and will be happy to take you where you can rest and get some sleep. When you wake up, you will see better and realize you have been duped yet again!!! Poor Dear!!!
I think you will find the "hard copy" answer long before we go to court...take off the blinders and you will see. Any one as fluent in biblical text as you are should know the difference between RIGHT & WRONG.
SO get right and stop being wrong, so very very wrong!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
..ian
owner and moderator
3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com
Thank-you, for that bit of news. So revealing!!! Did you get that, BOB?
Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I don't believe 3abn has every said evidence on Linda was "forthcoming". I believe they have said if it needs to come out in court, they will show it.
Wait, I just had a great idea! If one of you Lindanites want to ask her if she would sign a formal agreement that she would not take any legal action against 3abn if they released their evidence against her...I bet they would do it. Something official could be drawn up and notorized without too much problem. Since Linda demanded the "evidence" she shouldn't have a problem with signing that kind of document. Throw it out there to her.
Well, we will see what the Motion to Compel develops. I trust you understand that IF you do not produce it now, the door is closed at trial. But then, only a delusional person would not understand there are no surprises in the court-room. Perry Mason just wasn't real!!! But, then, neither are you!!!
I'll put my money on the team in Decatur and my guess is they do not need to sign anything to recover very clear damages. They are just not the small fish type!!! In fact, I would guess they are smelling eight (8) figures??? Enough for Linda and some of them to retire on!!!
Ready to pay up, SAM???
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Have y'all seen the recent posts at 3ABN Defended site?? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
The "defenders" are griping that anyman and Junebug were banned here at AdventTalk!! Those usernames have NOT been banned here, so if those members cannot gain access to the site it simply means that they are using an IP address that HAS been banned...because it was being used by multiple user IDs! They have just proved our point!! Thanks guys!!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3abnDefended/message/249
In 3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com, "sammy39377dl"
> <sammy39377dl@> wrote:
> >
> > I just got the report that anyman and Junebug were both banned.
> > Anyman didn't even post. What did I say in my last post? Yep...
> >
> > And the Administrator said no one can talk about the moderators
or
> > administrator over on another forum. I wonder why?
> >
> > Why are these people so AFRAID of the TRUTH? That is the bottom
> line.
> > They are scared to death that we are right. They have a reason to
> be
> > scared because the truth will come out. Sad day for those on AT.
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
-
Gailon, I notice that your posts this evening have far more hostile overtones than usual and that concerns me. Is this spirit you are presenting, this contempt for fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, the correct one when one is calling for a removal of perceived sin from any camp? Would God approve of these words you have written?
The cryptic sparring has crossed the lines in several places here, IMO. The line I have bolded could even be interpreted as a threat against Danny. Is that the message you intended to convey?
Is it really a productive damage control tactic to begin to demonize Doug Batchelor for writing the email that Daryl posted?
This may be just a chess game to you, but those who you treat with such contempt are of equal value as those with whom you agree. These are real people, precious human beings, as are you; not chess pieces.
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
ANYMAN, what a puff of smoke you are!!! And who said I was wrong? Lets' see. speaking of putting their heads on the chopping block, there is Ronnie Shelton, a VERY RELIABLE SOURCE...then there is Doug Batchelors' requoting Ronnie's email and attributing it to Gilley...poor Gilley, how embarrassing!!! But, how about poor Dougie??? That was a LEAP OF FAITH virtually unwarranted by the facts, but only time will tell the real story.
Just to bad I didn't have more courage to take you all on. Let me look in my miracle bag, could be a little courage in there somewhere.
In the meantime, I will hunker in my bunker, shivering in fear, as the shells burst outside reigning down on my pawns while my lttle bishop figures out how to pull off a checkmate!!! Be assured, my little bishop isn't far from that "checkmate" and the new little queenie will be very lonely!!!
But, that is the nature of Chess!!!
To the little bishop!!! Three cheers!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
SCORE!!!
Gailon, I notice that your posts this evening have far more hostile overtones than usual and that concerns me. Is this spirit you are presenting, this contempt for fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, the correct one when one is calling for a removal of perceived sin from any camp? Would God approve of these words you have written?
The cryptic sparring has crossed the lines in several places here, IMO. The line I have bolded could even be interpreted as a threat against Danny. Is that the message you intended to convey?
Is it really a productive damage control tactic to begin to demonize Doug Batchelor for writing the email that Daryl posted?
This may be just a chess game to you, but those who you treat with such contempt are of equal value as those with whom you agree. These are real people, precious human beings, as are you; not chess pieces.
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.
As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.
ANYMAN, what a puff of smoke you are!!! And who said I was wrong? Lets' see. speaking of putting their heads on the chopping block, there is Ronnie Shelton, a VERY RELIABLE SOURCE...then there is Doug Batchelors' requoting Ronnie's email and attributing it to Gilley...poor Gilley, how embarrassing!!! But, how about poor Dougie??? That was a LEAP OF FAITH virtually unwarranted by the facts, but only time will tell the real story.
Just to bad I didn't have more courage to take you all on. Let me look in my miracle bag, could be a little courage in there somewhere.
In the meantime, I will hunker in my bunker, shivering in fear, as the shells burst outside reigning down on my pawns while my lttle bishop figures out how to pull off a checkmate!!! Be assured, my little bishop isn't far from that "checkmate" and the new little queenie will be very lonely!!!
But, that is the nature of Chess!!!
To the little bishop!!! Three cheers!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Have y'all seen the recent posts at 3ABN Defended site?? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
The "defenders" are griping that anyman and Junebug were banned here at AdventTalk!! Those usernames have NOT been banned here, so if those members cannot gain access to the site it simply means that they are using an IP address that HAS been banned...because it was being used by multiple user IDs! They have just proved our point!! Thanks guys!!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3abnDefended/message/249
In 3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com, "sammy39377dl"
> <sammy39377dl@> wrote:
> >
> > I just got the report that anyman and Junebug were both banned.
> > Anyman didn't even post. What did I say in my last post? Yep...
> >
> > And the Administrator said no one can talk about the moderators
or
> > administrator over on another forum. I wonder why?
> >
> > Why are these people so AFRAID of the TRUTH? That is the bottom
> line.
> > They are scared to death that we are right. They have a reason to
> be
> > scared because the truth will come out. Sad day for those on AT.
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Did someone call the Orkin man?
-
Gailon, I notice that your posts this evening have far more hostile overtones than usual and that concerns me. Is this spirit you are presenting, this contempt for fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, the correct one when one is calling for a removal of perceived sin from any camp? Would God approve of these words you have written?
The cryptic sparring has crossed the lines in several places here, IMO. The line I have bolded could even be interpreted as a threat against Danny. Is that the message you intended to convey?
Is it really a productive damage control tactic to begin to demonize Doug Batchelor for writing the email that Daryl posted?
This may be just a chess game to you, but those who you treat with such contempt are of equal value as those with whom you agree. These are real people, precious human beings, as are you; not chess pieces.
1) When I can believe that you, Grandma Nettie, or even Gregory Matthews have my soul as your serious concern, we will open a dialogue, but you will both have to take a stand on adultery first;
2) Chess is a very civil non-violent game and when the King is taken, the queen, assuming she has survived the gameboard strategy, has no king with whom to remonstrate. If you see that as threatening, then may I propose you suffer from evil surmising. And yes, I am having fun, while making significant points, which you clearly find objectionable, but what is new???;
3) I am not in "damage control mode" and If the e-mail is from Doug, it has all too many likenesses to the original posted from Ronnie Shelton. Douglas Batchelor is a big boy and has never been the neutral party. Out of one side of his mouth he preaches about adultery and ignores a clear example for the sake of his 3ABN ratings. He was dragged willingly down the primrose trail last year with the merger mess and does not seem to have yet learned that reliability is a major issue at 3ABN...in other words, the wise man would have waited for the "evidence". But, then again, he is a televangelist. And if that analysis "demonizes" Doug Batchelor, maybe he is not yet ready for sainthood. But we will make that your call, Grandma!!!
4) Chess came in as a result of ANYMAN's Pawn comments...I simply merrily picked up on the theme. And I rather enjoyed it, having been a Chess Champion in younger years.
For the record, in case you have never figured that out, I am not a televangelist, I am not worried about ratings, and your facial concerns are not taken seriously. I intend to disseminate the truth as I have come to see it and will deal with the fallacies in ways you clearly find objectionable. My guess is the message is clear and the war goes on. Suddenly you are more concerned about "casualties" than the truth, but then, maybe that has been the reality for some time.
Let's face it Grandma, you and I will never find ourselves in the same lifeboat. Frankly, I'd rather swim anyway!!! And you will still be slapping me on the head with the oars. It would seem to be your calling.
As for me, I will continue to have fun as long as I am allowed!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I think I just stepped on a cockroach...
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Have y'all seen the recent posts at 3ABN Defended site?? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
The "defenders" are griping that anyman and Junebug were banned here at AdventTalk!! Those usernames have NOT been banned here, so if those members cannot gain access to the site it simply means that they are using an IP address that HAS been banned...because it was being used by multiple user IDs! They have just proved our point!! Thanks guys!!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3abnDefended/message/249
In 3abnDefended@yahoogroups.com, "sammy39377dl"
> <sammy39377dl@> wrote:
> >
> > I just got the report that anyman and Junebug were both banned.
> > Anyman didn't even post. What did I say in my last post? Yep...
> >
> > And the Administrator said no one can talk about the moderators
or
> > administrator over on another forum. I wonder why?
> >
> > Why are these people so AFRAID of the TRUTH? That is the bottom
> line.
> > They are scared to death that we are right. They have a reason to
> be
> > scared because the truth will come out. Sad day for those on AT.
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Did someone call the Orkin man?
-
Johann, I have never \"twisted and turned\" or \"distorted\" anything you have said.
I asked three simple questions politely. For you not to answer them or to evade answering them tells me a few things. Because you are not going to answer them, is in essence answering them very plainly. I would have thought more of a SDA Pastor than this.
Seems like I am in good company. Jesus did not answer their simple questions either. Why didn\'t He?
Jesus knew their intent and motives. You cannot possibly know anyone’s intent or motives. Junebug has never twisted and turned or distorted anything you have said. She is correct in saying that your not answering is in essence answering them very plainly. It is plain for all to see.
[/quote]
What about simple questions, asked nicely, makes them demands?
It would be no problem answering simple questions, asked nicely, if there were only honest people reading. But I know from experience that there are people here who are looking for answers to be twisted and turned, because they don't seem to be interested in discovering the truth. So often I have found my clear answers twisted in a different connection and turned into a distortion of truth.
Johann,
You have claimed to be a first person witness to Linda and Brenda's visit to Norway in Feb 2004, and now refuse to answer any questions when it was pointed out you couldn't have witnessed much as you were only there for mere hrs on one day while they were there.
The only twisting and turning of the facts or blocking of readers and members discovering the truth appears to be yours.
In addition your claims about the planned Florida trip are also wrong, it was supposed to have taken place in February but Danny found out and Linda admitted it, It had nothing to do with the week of Easter as you claimed. So again your alibi is about as worthless as when you claimed to have been with Linda and the Dr in that motel room but had actually already flown back home leaving the Dr behind later that same year. -- ie.. Before the divorce.
Those are the facts, and I can see why you have a hard time answering questions about all this, but can only consistently reply by accusing those actually trying to discover the truth and let others know. What is even sadder is that others, such as Ozzie join you in doing so, a love of the truth seems to be the least of yours or their concern.
There are honest people, who are and are not members reading here, and you are not answering for them or helping them discover the truth because you claim someone will twist your words if you say anything? What?
Think, you have claimed your words have been twisted all along, yet it hasn't ever stopped you from continuing to post and claim things to be facts, it only offers an excuse to never answer any direct questions related to what you have claimed.
Do you really think others are so stupid that they can't see through this?
For shame.
..ian.
Document what you are saying here about the Florida trip, if you care to be known as trustworthy.
-
I can speak only for myself and certainly not for Grandma N. But Bro. Gailon Arthur Joy I an unhappy by your scorched earth take no prisoners attitude. I think a little civility is in order among CHRISTians
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
OK, this caught my eye. I have not been keeping up with all the posts here, so if this has already been discussed, I apologize. But the above request makes me think that the "evidence" was obtained in an illegal way--a legally actionable way, or else they (Danny and 3ABN) would not be asking for immunity. The way it is stated, it is almost an admission of guilt of some sort. Like when a kid says "If I tell you, do you promise you won't spank me?"
Is that really what is being said here, or am I missing something?
It this is true, it explains why the "evidence" has been hidden away for so long. Bummer to have what you think will clear you but you can't use it because it will prove you guilty.
Wow...
(Actually, I have wondered if that was not the case for a long time, but to have it admitted in black and white is pretty interesting)
Scratsmom :hamster: (think squirrel, not hamster)
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
Just a question. Who is the "Us" and why would someone other than DS or 3ABN be concerned and asking for a written
notarized document to protect DS and 3ABN from a lawsuit?
bonnie
-
Sounds to me like something is Rotten in Denmark. :oops:
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
OK, this caught my eye. I have not been keeping up with all the posts here, so if this has already been discussed, I apologize. But the above request makes me think that the "evidence" was obtained in an illegal way--a legally actionable way, or else they (Danny and 3ABN) would not be asking for immunity. The way it is stated, it is almost an admission of guilt of some sort. Like when a kid says "If I tell you, do you promise you won't spank me?"
Is that really what is being said here, or am I missing something?
It this is true, it explains why the "evidence" has been hidden away for so long. Bummer to have what you think will clear you but you can't use it because it will prove you guilty.
Wow...
(Actually, I have wondered if that was not the case for a long time, but to have it admitted in black and white is pretty interesting)
Scratsmom :hamster: (think squirrel, not hamster)
Yes you are missing something. Linda has threatened action before just on what she perceives 3abn has told to others. So if they really put the evidence out there don't you think there is a good chance she would try to take action against them for hurting her chances in future ministry? Yes we know she demanded it, but, there is no doubt in my mind if they had complied she would have tried (with Joy and Pickle as her cheerleading section) to then take some kind of action against them.
To me signing a document as described above would be a clear and concise way to put an end to all the speculation and accusations. If Linda isn't guilty she should have no problem whatsoever in complying with this request. Once she complies then 3abn would be forced to turn over any evidence they may have...or risk looking very foolish. So, ask Linda to force their hand by agreeing to this simple request.
-
I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way? Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public? The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially. If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?
SAMMY, BABY, if you need the investigators number I can arrange that. You will have to PM me. However, you are so very, very wrong!!! When you call ask a single question: "If I have more documentation demonstrating issues at 3ABN, would you like me to fax them to you?"
ANd let us all know the reaction!!! And then cry in your soup!!!! And don't forget to tell Doug...after all, he really does know better. Just ask Bonnie.
Oh, by the way, where is that "exoneration" document???? Elusive, is it??? As elusive as the evidence against Linda, maybe???
Perhaps you would like to tell us just how many times they interviewed Danny Lee Shelton and what they had him produce. Then tell me if you think there will be an "exoneration" letter??? Or is it another one of those "miracles" that they simply ignored the obvious violations???? And when will this "miracle" story get published? Will it be in the 3ABN World? This month or next??? ANd are you putting it up on 3ABN.org? How about the Live on 3ABN Today on this coming Thursday!!!
Come on, now Sammy, tell us all about this wonderful miracle!!! I do so love "miracle" stories.
We really need that "exoneration" letter asap before things become very embarrassing.
By the way, the Qui Tam claim for 3ABN and Danny was established long before I came into it. But you can keep on salivating in jealousy as YOU SURE MISSED THE BOAT ON THIS REWARD!!!
Stay tuned as the last laugh is always the best laugh. ANd the Qui Tam claimant is going to laugh ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK!!!
Who knows, maybe they will contribute to our defense fund...but Californians are not known for sharing a whole lot. I'll just enjoy the ring of laughter.
Gailon Arthur Joy
I will say one thing for you, you are consistent with your MO. When you do not want to answer a question or charge, you bring out the very unchristian blow and go. Enough hot air to fill the good year blimp. You are a sore loser. I will address a few things for the readers.
You insinuate that the IRS didn't have all of Danny's personal records. They did. They demanded them.
You insinuate he wasn't interviewed. You are correct. It didn't come to that. Had they found discrepancies in his personal records he would have been on the hot seat so fast it would make your head swim. They didn't find any so he wasn't interviewed. Nada to tell.
You insinuate that I am Danny...that is getting tiresome and foolish but unlike you, I will answer the question straight out. NO I AM NOT DANNY.
You have insinuated time and again that you have rallied your troops to try and bring some kind of civil litigation or action against 3abn/Danny....go for it. Proving their false accusations will be no more succesful that the attemps made by you and Pickle.
Your favorite phrase now the "elusive" letter is ridiculous. It wouldn't matter if there is never an official letter, the IRS investigation is over, the 100,000 + documents destroyed including Danny's personal records. Again, you know this to be truth so have been tap dancing up a storm to detract and evade the truth. As I stated in another thread I talked to 3abn's CFO who also confirmed 3abn was cleared of any wrong doing with paid no settlements or fines of any kind.
You tell me to call the IRS and ask them if I have anything incriminating concerning 3abn do they want it. Of course you are insinuating they are begging for it. Please. A standard answer would be "Yes send what you have...thank you", and then upon receiving it, it would go the way of the 100,000 documents before it. You could ask the IRS if they wanted you to send something incriminating against your neighbor down the street and they would answer to the affirmative. Means absolutely nothing.
You, yourself ask if the news would be on a Live or in the world magazine....I would guess it may even be on a regular Today program....so stay tuned, you may be surprised...or not...since you already know the truth.
You hint, insinuate and bragg about so many different things that never happen. Put's me in mind of all the propaganda by you about Laird Heal and how Danny and 3abn should be shaking and quaking. Laird Heal wasn't afraid to take on anybody including Judges!
As far as I know Heal never won a single motion for Linda in the marital property case, then left Pickle to represent himself, and now, seems to have quietly ridden off into the sunset leaving no discernable imprint that he was even here.
I could fill up pages with all your braggart about what the IRS was going to find and going to do to 3abn/Danny. All the gleeful speculation about financial wrong doing and taking tons of credit for sicking the IRS onto 3abn in the first place. We have heard 2 years of financial accusations and a year of repurcussions from the IRS. Didn't happen. It's over. Accept it. Rejoice and be glad that you were wrong and that God's ministry stands tall and true without hindrance. You and Pickle should be praising God that you were wrong. Wouldn't that be the christian reaction?
It would seem the only one truly nailed and convicted for financial wrong doing was you.
Sadly all you are showing is desperation and diversion while still not answering directly if the IRS contacted you and told you it was offically over. You bury yourself deeper and deeper. How would you look to your handful of followers if 3abn ended up producing a statement from the IRS saying that you were contacted several weeks ago? Ahhh, don't break out into a sweat..I'm sure 3abn has no time or desire anymore to try and keep up with your shenanigans. Your case has fell apart and you made it a whole lot worse by bragging about it all of this time. When will you learn?
-
TOO LATE!!
Yes you are missing something. Linda has threatened action before just on what she perceives 3abn has told to others. So if they really put the evidence out there don't you think there is a good chance she would try to take action against them for hurting her chances in future ministry? Yes we know she demanded it, but, there is no doubt in my mind if they had complied she would have tried (with Joy and Pickle as her cheerleading section) to then take some kind of action against them.
To me signing a document as described above would be a clear and concise way to put an end to all the speculation and accusations. If Linda isn't guilty she should have no problem whatsoever in complying with this request. Once she complies then 3abn would be forced to turn over any evidence they may have...or risk looking very foolish. So, ask Linda to force their hand by agreeing to this simple request.
-
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
SAMMY, my boy, she has new counsel and I doubt they will be interested in such a proposal. In fact, you best produce the evidence or you will wish you did.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"I will say one thing for you, you are consistent with your MO. When you do not want to answer a question or charge, you bring out the very unchristian blow and go. Enough hot air to fill the good year blimp. You are a sore loser. I will address a few things for the readers." SAMMY
So glad to be of service. Are you in that blimp? If so, you have been cut off...prepare for a bumpy landing!!!
The questiion has been answered and you are so very wrong...in fact I have every indication that you are off the wall with the assumptions you have devised regarding the IRS. Sorry to let you down so hard.
Maybe you can put in a damages claim!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"You insinuate that the IRS didn't have all of Danny's personal records. They did. They demanded them.
You insinuate he wasn't interviewed. You are correct. It didn't come to that. Had they found discrepancies in his personal records he would have been on the hot seat so fast it would make your head swim. They didn't find any so he wasn't interviewed. Nada to tell." SAM
Sam,
a person represented by counsel in an IRS investigation would likely invoke the fifth amendment.
Caselaw all the way to the US Supreme court makes it clear they can demand them from Danny and his accountants, so clearly they have been produced.
However, your grossly inaccurate assumption that they didn't find anything is virtually not supported by the documents we already have. Are you accusing the IRS of incompetence? Or is this a "miracle" as the story now goes?
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"Your favorite phrase now the "elusive" letter is ridiculous. It wouldn't matter if there is never an official letter, the IRS investigation is over, the 100,000 + documents destroyed including Danny's personal records. Again, you know this to be truth so have been tap dancing up a storm to detract and evade the truth. As I stated in another thread I talked to 3abn's CFO who also confirmed 3abn was cleared of any wrong doing with paid no settlements or fines of any kind.
You tell me to call the IRS and ask them if I have anything incriminating concerning 3abn do they want it. Of course you are insinuating they are begging for it. Please. A standard answer would be "Yes send what you have...thank you", and then upon receiving it, it would go the way of the 100,000 documents before it. You could ask the IRS if they wanted you to send something incriminating against your neighbor down the street and they would answer to the affirmative. Means absolutely nothing." SAM
And where did you get the information that 100,000 documents were either returned or destroyed? The only information that is currently available is that they called about 13,000 documets. That, I believe, leaves something like 94,000 unaccounted for. Or do we have another update that you have failed to apprise the world of?
In the interim, we will hang our hat on the 13,000... and wait to see what happens to the other 94,000.
We still await the "elusive" "exoneration" letter.
Gailon Arthur Joy
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"I could fill up pages with all your braggart about what the IRS was going to find and going to do to 3abn/Danny. All the gleeful speculation about financial wrong doing and taking tons of credit for sicking the IRS onto 3abn in the first place. We have heard 2 years of financial accusations and a year of repurcussions from the IRS. Didn't happen. It's over. Accept it. Rejoice and be glad that you were wrong and that God's ministry stands tall and true without hindrance. You and Pickle should be praising God that you were wrong. Wouldn't that be the christian reaction?" SAM
Now, Sammy, my boy, show me one document where I have ever taken credit for a Qui Tam claim to the IRS. Apparently your veracity is typical of 3ABN...factually challenged!!!
In fact, I have clearly reported that others filed claims and would be in line. I am a reporter and have shared nothing with the IRS other than what is clearly posted on the internet.
FACTUALLY CHALLENGED...that is the phrase that best describes nearly EVERYTHING you write. You are not even a good source for information.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"Sadly all you are showing is desperation and diversion while still not answering directly if the IRS contacted you and told you it was offically over. You bury yourself deeper and deeper. How would you look to your handful of followers if 3abn ended up producing a statement from the IRS saying that you were contacted several weeks ago? Ahhh, don't break out into a sweat..I'm sure 3abn has no time or desire anymore to try and keep up with your shenanigans. Your case has fell apart and you made it a whole lot worse by bragging about it all of this time. When will you learn?" SAM
I will always invite you to post your evidence. if and when you EVER have anything. In the interim I continue a single response:
NUTS!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
However, your grossly inaccurate assumption that they didn\'t find anything is virtually not supported by the documents we already have. Are you accusing the IRS of incompetence? Or is this a \"miracle\" as the story now goes?
Gailon Arthur Joy
On the contrary, the IRS is highly competent in their investigations. They also had far more to look at then you of Fran or Bob have. So if your conclusions differ from theirs it would seem you are the ones who are not competent and are in error.
Were you informed of the IRS conclusions and that their investigation of both Danny Shelton and 3ABN was over?
You seem to be saying quite a lot here while avoiding giving either a yes or a no to that question.
-
However, your grossly inaccurate assumption that they didn\'t find anything is virtually not supported by the documents we already have. Are you accusing the IRS of incompetence? Or is this a \"miracle\" as the story now goes?
Gailon Arthur Joy
On the contrary, the IRS is highly competent in their investigations. They also had far more to look at then you of Fran or Bob have. So if your conclusions differ from theirs it would seem you are the ones who are not competent and are in error.
Were you informed of the IRS conclusions and that their investigation of both Danny Shelton and 3ABN was over?
You seem to be saying quite a lot here while avoiding giving either a yes or a no to that question.
JAck,
Where is the proof that is a sound conclusion??? Ronnie Shelton's letter? Or are we relying on the Doug Batchelor replication of Ronnie's Letter?
PROOF, not just your pablum, is what we want to see. Give us the proof. YOU ARE LEFT WANTON, per usual!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
You have the proof, you are just to arrogant to admit it . . . You were contacted by the IRS - the trick here is that you know they won't publicly acknowledge that - but they will privately. So you are safe behind your plastic wrap facade for a short time until the wrath of God lays waste to your deeds . . . go ahead, live there, delight in misleading those who have put their faith in you . . . continue to write your Screwtape Letters and delude those who hitch their wagon to your falling star. In the end the souls of many lost will weigh in your balance . . . and you - Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy will answer to the Creator for your deceptions.
You don't get to demand what you will see . . . you must prove your deceptions with what you have - as it should be!
JAck,
Where is the proof that is a sound conclusion??? Ronnie Shelton's letter? Or are we relying on the Doug Batchelor replication of Ronnie's Letter?
PROOF, not just your pablum, is what we want to see. Give us the proof. YOU ARE LEFT WANTON, per usual!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
It would appear that you might actually be telling the truth for once Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy . . . according to the infamous "watchbird" of BSDA fame:
Daryl, I find this roughly accurate on some things, inaccurate in some details, and slanted towards making Joy much more of a major player that what he, in fact, was.
The most grossly inaccurate detail is that the IRS Criminal Investigation originated with the EEOC complaint in 2006. In fact, the IRS Criminal Investigation originated much before... and initially therefore was totally unrelated to the EEOC complaint.... and this was much before Joy had made any appearance on the scene of action.
In regard to other comments made on this thread... especially in regard to Linda's involvement... those were totally without merit or basis in fact. The original contact with IRS was made by an accountant who was not even connected with 3abn, but had gotten all of her information from publicly available documents on the internet and had merely called the attention of the IRS to those documents. It was the content of those publicly available documents that caused the IRS to assign the case to their Crime Division. And what they did with that information from then on has never been shared with anyone... including those who supplied them with further information.
The document above is correct that the case was given a new status in the fall of 2007... moving from a publicly passive and secretive phase, in which the agents were open to being contacted by others and took whatever information was given them but did not actively seek out informants, to an active phase, where they began "knocking on doors" and confronting those whom they believed to have information they wanted to see.
While I do not know very much of what went on behind the scenes, I do know that one reason the "trail went cold" so far as Joy obtaining information as to the progress of the Investigation was that he gave offense by his careless handling of proprietary information, thus closing the door for himself to certain doors he tried to hard to pry open.
So I guess that passes the ball to Ms. Fran ********'s court . . . so Fran, did you receive a call in this regard? It is obvious that watchbird is referring to you so the question is begged . . . what have you heard? And notice the question doesn't ask you if you agree with the IRS, doesn't ask you to comment on the IRS work, doesn't ask your "professional" opinion about their process . . . it asks you one simple thing, "Did the IRS contact you in regards to an outcome on the 3ABN investigation?" and of course would be followed up by, "Did they indicated anything at all about their decision?"
Now, Sammy, my boy, show me one document where I have ever taken credit for a Qui Tam claim to the IRS. Apparently your veracity is typical of 3ABN...factually challenged!!!
In fact, I have clearly reported that others filed claims and would be in line. I am a reporter and have shared nothing with the IRS other than what is clearly posted on the internet.
FACTUALLY CHALLENGED...that is the phrase that best describes nearly EVERYTHING you write. You are not even a good source for information.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Sudden epiphany, ANYMAN?
The IRS has not contacted anyone, including you, ANYMAN, with the status of the IRS "AUDIT" of 3ABN.
You can dream, pray and bluster, but the entire charade is just another "CHARADE" by the passion driven deluded followers of Danny Lee Shelton. Yes, just another sect of cool-aid drinking lemmings that will run into the sea when their "fearless" leader says "run".
Get use to the loyal opposition to your sectarianism. It will always be there in a society where men and women are able to think and analyse with the clear right of conscience. Unbearable, I am sure, but a reality as long as there is a battle between good and evil, and as long as there is a dark side and you have chosen to be a part of it.
As has been so often demonstrated, the opposition to your angelic terror are free thinking and broadly based libertarians who know a factually challenged sect when they see one. Nothing you can say or do will ever deter these wide open minds from seeing through the perpetual RUSE that is so essential to your very existence. I know you feel your very existence is threatened by the TRUTH, but the TRUTH will prevail and your ingenious travails will at last be seen for what they really are as surely as History has defined the Third Reich for the falacy that it was.
This war is far from over and you are not even CLOSE to a win. The TRUTH will prevail despite your every effort. Get ready to cry in your soup and feel that betrayal that most certainly awaits you.
This is, and will be, your legacy, regardless of your worthless efforts at pretense and bluster.
The TRUTH will prevail. And there is none in you!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
In several of the preceeding posts I note that one person has been referenced as "my boy."
That reminds me of earlier days in the U. S. when White people wanted to put down an African-American male they whould often refer to them as "my boy."
Ownership . . .
My equals mine . . .
-
Anyman;
No, I have heard nothing about the Criminal Investigation coming to an end. You should have received a statement of some kind from the IRS. I don’t believe the IRS produces exoneration letters just to say they are squeaky. If that were true, there would not have even opened an investigation.
Sometimes they state that so much is owed and they just leave after the check is written. They do produce apologies to squeaky clean individuals and entities. However, most receive a bill. In this case, I believe the auditors have to recover enough to pay for their keep. You said that they had been on the case for one year. The collection is an indication of how well the audit went.
Go to this link to find the audit of 3ABN for December 31, 2000.
http://www.save-3abn.com/media/administrative-record-submitted-by-defense-for-04-mr-15-vol-3.pdf
On the top bar of the PDF, find where it says next page. Right beside that to the right is a block that says “1”. Change the “1” to “110” and hit your enter key. This will take you to the beginning of the audit. I received a PM from a member that asked me to provide information about this audit.
Auditors have a standard 3-4 paragraphs they use when all is well. However, as you begin to read notice paragraph 2. I have talked about the problems with trust funds. This is the Paragraph is a place where Auditors CYA (Cover your ass). Auditors have to outline what is wrong so that they do not get sued for not doing their job. Paragraph 2 tells about Revocable Real Estate Trust Funds... Management was assessing the value for the Real Estate. Folks, this is a major point. Go back to the first sentence of paragraph 2. It says, "Except as discussed in paragraph six…”
After reading all of paragraph 2, go to paragraph 6. Wow. “Except for things discussed in paragraphs 2 through 5…” Now we have errors in paragraph 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Paragraph 1, 7, 8 are parts of what every auditor has memorized. These have to be word for word to outline and protect the auditor.
The items discussed in these paragraphs are very significant. Read the audit and their Financial Statements, as presented by the auditors. The next thing would be to compare these Financial Statements with 2000 Form 990 you can find here.
http://www.save-3abn.com/media/3abn-form-990-2000.pdf.
This Audit Report is the reason I have been speaking out loud. 3ABN still had problems with Trust funds in February 2006.
Why did they not fix what was broken?
Why did they avoid using GAAP?
It is clear, from this auditors letter, that 3ABN was informed; why were these thing allowed to continue year after year. Somebody and/or the Board decided nothing needed to change.
As for the IRS contacting me; once I am contacted, I may or may not be able to tell anyone anything. If I get a sum of money, I can't tell how much or talk about anything. I will not be able to confirm or deny having been contacted. I will not tell anyone anything. So as of right now I have not been contacted.
If you have time, it would be good for everyone to read all 5 pdf documents here:
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-property-tax-case-entire-public-record.htm
All it takes is reading. I think that most could understand what they read and see.
I am sorry I have not been helpful to anyone. I am just waiting.
I wrote this several days ago, and decided to wait until I heard something. Then I decided if it is over, as 3ABN says. Reading this audit will do no harm to 3ABN.
I still am not supporting 3ABN financially. I still have problems. I do not watch Danny at anytime. I turn him off. I also do not watch Brenda Walsh. I do not recommend that anyone watch her programs. IMO she has become a movie star over night at 3ABN. Then there is the one million dollar set. I am of the opinion that she climbed her way to the top. You have to remove anyone in the way! There is a saying that “there is nothing like wrath of a woman scorned.” Surely others have figured this out also.
The paragraph right above this is my opinion and belief. I do NOT believe Linda committed adultery. I believe Danny did. I believe Brenda did. What does it take to get a woman scorned to keep her mouth shut and speak only what she is told to say?
She went from Linda’s best friend to a marriage destroyer. She apologized to Linda and Danny for lying, according to Danny’s email. Now she is in my opinion morphed reality in to a fairy tale. Yes, every time she embellishes her story, she gets more and more. Will she be the next president?
Well this is my opinion. Not that it matters to anyone but me. It is my prayer that 3ABN will continue in their ministry. I am so proud that 3ABN is no longer a “mending broken people” mission statement. Too many lives have been destroyed at the hands of Danny and his crew. This was a good move.
I intend no harm to anyone. I am not trying to destroy 3ABN. I am just trying to deal with all that is going on. I believe that Danny is still trying to destroy people through this lawsuit and all the criticism of people on line. It is so uncalled for. They found out who everyone was and is now using that to destroy them. This is so very wrong.
I find this to be so very disappointing.
-
Anyman;
No, I have heard nothing about the Criminal Investigation coming to an end. You should have received a statement of some kind from the IRS. I don’t believe the IRS produces exoneration letters just to say they are squeaky. If that were true, there would not have even opened an investigation.
Sometimes they state that so much is owed and they just leave after the check is written. They do produce apologies to squeaky clean individuals and entities. However, most receive a bill. In this case, I believe the auditors have to recover enough to pay for their keep. You said that they had been on the case for one year. The collection is an indication of how well the audit went.
Go to this link to find the audit of 3ABN for December 31, 2000.
http://www.save-3abn.com/media/administrative-record-submitted-by-defense-for-04-mr-15-vol-3.pdf
On the top bar of the PDF, find where it says next page. Right beside that to the right is a block that says “1”. Change the “1” to “110” and hit your enter key. This will take you to the beginning of the audit. I received a PM from a member that asked me to provide information about this audit.
Auditors have a standard 3-4 paragraphs they use when all is well. However, as you begin to read notice paragraph 2. I have talked about the problems with trust funds. This is the Paragraph is a place where Auditors CYA (Cover your ass). Auditors have to outline what is wrong so that they do not get sued for not doing their job. Paragraph 2 tells about Revocable Real Estate Trust Funds... Management was assessing the value for the Real Estate. Folks, this is a major point. Go back to the first sentence of paragraph 2. It says, "Except as discussed in paragraph six…”
After reading all of paragraph 2, go to paragraph 6. Wow. “Except for things discussed in paragraphs 2 through 5…” Now we have errors in paragraph 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Paragraph 1, 7, 8 are parts of what every auditor has memorized. These have to be word for word to outline and protect the auditor.
The items discussed in these paragraphs are very significant. Read the audit and their Financial Statements, as presented by the auditors. The next thing would be to compare these Financial Statements with 2000 Form 990 you can find here.
http://www.save-3abn.com/media/3abn-form-990-2000.pdf.
This Audit Report is the reason I have been speaking out loud. 3ABN still had problems with Trust funds in February 2006.
Why did they not fix what was broken?
Why did they avoid using GAAP?
It is clear, from this auditors letter, that 3ABN was informed; why were these thing allowed to continue year after year. Somebody and/or the Board decided nothing needed to change.
As for the IRS contacting me; once I am contacted, I may or may not be able to tell anyone anything. If I get a sum of money, I can't tell how much or talk about anything. I will not be able to confirm or deny having been contacted. I will not tell anyone anything. So as of right now I have not been contacted.
If you have time, it would be good for everyone to read all 5 pdf documents here:
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-property-tax-case-entire-public-record.htm
All it takes is reading. I think that most could understand what they read and see.
I am sorry I have not been helpful to anyone. I am just waiting.
I wrote this several days ago, and decided to wait until I heard something. Then I decided if it is over, as 3ABN says. Reading this audit will do no harm to 3ABN.
I still am not supporting 3ABN financially. I still have problems. I do not watch Danny at anytime. I turn him off. I also do not watch Brenda Walsh. I do not recommend that anyone watch her programs. IMO she has become a movie star over night at 3ABN. Then there is the one million dollar set. I am of the opinion that she climbed her way to the top. You have to remove anyone in the way! There is a saying that “there is nothing like wrath of a woman scorned.” Surely others have figured this out also.
The paragraph right above this is my opinion and belief. I do NOT believe Linda committed adultery. I believe Danny did. I believe Brenda did. What does it take to get a woman scorned to keep her mouth shut and speak only what she is told to say?
She went from Linda’s best friend to a marriage destroyer. She apologized to Linda and Danny for lying, according to Danny’s email. Now she is in my opinion morphed reality in to a fairy tale. Yes, every time she embellishes her story, she gets more and more. Will she be the next president?
Well this is my opinion. Not that it matters to anyone but me. It is my prayer that 3ABN will continue in their ministry. I am so proud that 3ABN is no longer a “mending broken people” mission statement. Too many lives have been destroyed at the hands of Danny and his crew. This was a good move.
I intend no harm to anyone. I am not trying to destroy 3ABN. I am just trying to deal with all that is going on. I believe that Danny is still trying to destroy people through this lawsuit and all the criticism of people on line. It is so uncalled for. They found out who everyone was and is now using that to destroy them. This is so very wrong.
I find this to be so very disappointing.
*******************************************************************************************
Edited to add a few comments. I have accounting experience from setting up accounting for 501 (c) (3) Ministries to being the Treasurer and the Finance Committee chair. It is a "fact" that 501 (c) (3)'s are never businesses. This has really been another issue that is upsetting to read of 3ABN's failure to prove they are a true not-for profit entity. Twice, IL has stated that 3ABN is a closely held, for profit, family business. I have a vast array of experience. Does this make me right? Not necessarily so. How ever, I can read the rulings and see the result of what has taken place.
I will not bring the comments from 3ABN Defended about me. It is not necessary. I know my heart and what I have been trained to see and do. What bothered me is the character assassinations going on at the 3ABN Defended site. I guess I am just as good as anybody else getting pecked to death by asking insinuating, accusatory questions.
-
Fran, this is a quote of paragraph 6 that you mentioned.
Probably you have covered this before, but could you explain exactly what is wrong with basing the values of the trusts on internal estimates performed by the organization, if there is something wrong with it?
In connection with the recording of real estate revocable trusts, the fair
values of the trusts were based on internal estimates performed by the
Organization. We were unable to obtain sufficient evidential matter in
connection with the estimates of fair value.
-
Fran,
Wouldn't it be interesting...and devastating...to 3ABN if they were required to utilize mark-to-market accounting for their real estate holdings??
-
What effect would that have?
-
In several of the preceeding posts I note that one person has been referenced as "my boy."
That reminds me of earlier days in the U. S. when White people wanted to put down an African-American male they whould often refer to them as "my boy."
Ownership . . .
My equals mine . . .
What a cultural difference...every older person in our New England Culture spoke of their siblings or any other youth being mentored as "my boy"...giving a clear assertion of affinity, NOT OWNERSHIP. In New England we do not believe in any person OWNING another and marched South to make sure that was not to be in this great country...over one hundred and forty years ago... and my Great GrandDaddy was right there with the Fifth Maine!!!
I would hope that with over one hundred forty years long since past since we conquered that premise that everyone would get over that paranoia.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Here is an example of "FACTUALLY CHALLENGED" as delivered by Sammy at that YAHOO site:
"It is absolutely AMAZING that the IRS actually apologized to Danny
Shelton and 3ABN but not only did they do this, but also the Attorney
General apologized! The IRS is a powerful entity as we all know and
they do not apologize easily!
Most of those who have been through an IRS audit know what a horrible
experience that can be--but how many have been through an
actual "criminal" investigation by the IRS? I'm sure what 3ABN had to
endure for many months was no fun at all.
Oh but Joy and the rest on AT refuse to believe it until they see it
in writing. Don't worry AT--you will see it eventually. What is
important is that the Judge has seen it." Sammy
The very last sentence leaves the entire statement DOA. What Judge has seen this document? Was there an ex parte communication between someone representing 3ABN / Danny Lee Shelton and a judge in any matter pending?
Any communication with any judge in any action pending would have to be via a filing and NO SUCH DOCUMENT HAS BEEN FILED!!! And any document produced would have to be shared with the opposing counsel. NO SUCH DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRODUCED!!!
It is more than safe to say there has been NO APOLOGY by the IRS or the ATTORNEY GENERAL. SUch an apology would leave them open to a counter-claim...just how stupid do you think these attorneys are???
Of course we will leave you with our perpetual refrain: Give us the "proof" that "it" was shown to a judge!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
And here is another little jewel from Sammy...the back-step has begun:
"Even if the IRS never issued an official letter that still doesn't
make it untrue. In fact, at this point, it is ludicrous to still try
and say it isn't true. Ronny Shelton knew it, Doug Batchelor knew it,
Jim Gilley president of 3abn knew it and guess what? I called the CFO
at 3abn and he told me that all I had heard was true!!! No fines, no
nothing from the IRS. So to keep living in denial of the facts is
just crazy." Sammy
Has Sammy not been the most vocal about an imminent "exoneration" letter? Just how long have we heard one was coming? And what happened to the story of the Judge that "saw it"?
Can't believe Stamn Jensen is quite that gullible, but certainly brought the fish into the spotlight!!!
Factually Challenged...can't even keep the story straight from one post to the other!!! And we are suppose to believe anything you say???
Not this country boy!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
And this query comes from Lee:
"I wonder how long it will take before it dawns on Bonnie and others
over on AT that 3ABN has done NOTHING morally wrong just as they were
clear in the Financial IRS case. I wonder when it will dawn on them
we have been telling the truth all along?" Lee
Answer is simple enough: When you start telling the truth and do so consistently. And you will have to document your allegations, a perpetual problem by previous administrations.
One other point Lee, regarding Duane Clems' allegations that you have so much contempt for: Some of the allegations regarding Tommy Ray Shelton (while he was managing programming) occurred on the 3ABN premises and would follow the characterization of "sexual harrassment" and reportedly occurred with more than one MALE employee.
So, until 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton prove to be less than "factually challenged" and you all can start telling the same story twice, we will believe you when you start telling the truth and the statements match the evidence. That rarely happens!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"You insinuate that the IRS didn't have all of Danny's personal records. They did. They demanded them.
You insinuate he wasn't interviewed. You are correct. It didn't come to that. Had they found discrepancies in his personal records he would have been on the hot seat so fast it would make your head swim. They didn't find any so he wasn't interviewed. Nada to tell." SAM
Sam,
a person represented by counsel in an IRS investigation would likely invoke the fifth amendment.
Caselaw all the way to the US Supreme court makes it clear they can demand them from Danny and his accountants, so clearly they have been produced.
However, your grossly inaccurate assumption that they didn't find anything is virtually not supported by the documents we already have. Are you accusing the IRS of incompetence? Or is this a "miracle" as the story now goes?
Gailon Arthur Joy
Of course not. I am accusing you of incompetence.
-
I just cannot help myself, these guys are so dilusional. Here is yet another "off the wall analysis" by this
proffaberf:
". . . yet the truth bears out differently as the hearing is the result of the fact that the judge presiding
(Judge Gilbert) isn't going to take any nonsense from these two individuals. He has required Mr. Robert Pickle to appear in person and bring his evidence with him. This evidence is suppose to give cause why the judge should not quash the subpoena Mr. Robert Pickle served on the accounting firm that handles the auditing of 3ABN and personal finances of Danny Shelton. He makes it clear that Mr. Robert Pickle is not to waste his time either, but instead better come prepared to be concise and to the point. Additionally, the judge has made it clear that Mr. Robert Pickle had better show up with his "A" game."
proffaberf
Just to humor proff, how do you read the Judges clear change in tone including allowing more than ten pages AFTER HE SAW ALL THE "GIVE CAUSE" Document and read the Motion to Compel??? No comment proffaberf??? Or are you still digesting the hundreds of documents showing cause why the accountants/ auditors records should be produced??? Quite a revelation, isn't it??? And aren't those documents placed under seal just killing your curiosity??? I wonder what other evidence Pickle came up with to justify those subpoena's?
Well, proffaberf, once again a bit factually challenged. Within days the entire issue will be back in Worcester for Judge Hillman to unravel and we doubt he will find them and a whole lot more "irrelevant".
YOU are fighting a loosing battle as we grind away at discovery and put the pieces together methodically designed to prove our defense and collapse the allegations...you know the rule...TRUTH is the absolute defense!!!And your a bit short in that category..VERY SHORT!!!
Three cheers for Mr Pickles "A" Game!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
"You insinuate that the IRS didn't have all of Danny's personal records. They did. They demanded them.
You insinuate he wasn't interviewed. You are correct. It didn't come to that. Had they found discrepancies in his personal records he would have been on the hot seat so fast it would make your head swim. They didn't find any so he wasn't interviewed. Nada to tell." SAM
Sam,
a person represented by counsel in an IRS investigation would likely invoke the fifth amendment.
Caselaw all the way to the US Supreme court makes it clear they can demand them from Danny and his accountants, so clearly they have been produced.
However, your grossly inaccurate assumption that they didn't find anything is virtually not supported by the documents we already have. Are you accusing the IRS of incompetence? Or is this a "miracle" as the story now goes?
Gailon Arthur Joy
Of course not. I am accusing you of incompetence.
PROVE IT!!! And stop looking in the mirror for answers.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
It is really sounding like Sam should check his legal facts with anyman...
Here is an example of "FACTUALLY CHALLENGED" as delivered by Sammy at that YAHOO site:
"It is absolutely AMAZING that the IRS actually apologized to Danny
Shelton and 3ABN but not only did they do this, but also the Attorney
General apologized! The IRS is a powerful entity as we all know and
they do not apologize easily!
Most of those who have been through an IRS audit know what a horrible
experience that can be--but how many have been through an
actual "criminal" investigation by the IRS? I'm sure what 3ABN had to
endure for many months was no fun at all.
Oh but Joy and the rest on AT refuse to believe it until they see it
in writing. Don't worry AT--you will see it eventually. What is
important is that the Judge has seen it." Sammy
The very last sentence leaves the entire statement DOA. What Judge has seen this document? Was there an ex parte communication between someone representing 3ABN / Danny Lee Shelton and a judge in any matter pending?
Any communication with any judge in any action pending would have to be via a filing and NO SUCH DOCUMENT HAS BEEN FILED!!! And any document produced would have to be shared with the opposing counsel. NO SUCH DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRODUCED!!!
It is more than safe to say there has been NO APOLOGY by the IRS or the ATTORNEY GENERAL. SUch an apology would leave them open to a counter-claim...just how stupid do you think these attorneys are???
Of course we will leave you with our perpetual refrain: Give us the "proof" that "it" was shown to a judge!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Rather than carrying an asset at its historical cost, the organization would be required to adjust the carrying value to what the asset is worth at the end of the accounting period.
What effect would that have?
-
And just to belabor their leaky analysis here is another flawed diamond in the very rough:
synthian2 wrote:
The File is more aptly described "Judgment in favor of 3ABN in Illinois subpoena, w/ Pickle ordered to show cause"
What I find interesting is that after GRANTING 3ABN's said Motion and STAYING the Subpoena Duces Tecum until further Court order; Judge Gilbert, basically went straight down the list of reasons 3ABN gave in his further order to Pickle and Joy:
The Court further ORDERS the defendants to SHOW CAUSE on or before July 9, 2008, why the Court should not quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum
because it subjects a third party to undue burden, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(iv),
because it requires disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(B)(i),
and because it is not tailored to request records relevant or with a nexus to the issues in the underlying litigation.
Synthian clearly mis-understood or otherwise virtually fabricated the issue...this was a STAY OF EXECUTION...and only a temporary stay...for the Judge ordered a Show Cause by July 9, 2008 and boy did he get one. It is all on PACER (I notice Synthian hasn't uploaded that mass of evidence against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton). It was so overwhelming, it includes a Motion to Compel Production.
So compelling the entire matter is back to Worcester for a hearing before Judge Hillman. If Hillman rules as the evidence requires, you better bet the motion to compel will be granted or they withdraw their opposition to avoid sanctions.
Oh yeah, and notice their detrimental and flawed reliance upon Illinois State Law regarding Accountant Client privilege and then notice the Illinois Caselaw evaporating the concept in a case similar to this. But, Synthian's real problem is that THIS IS A FEDERAL COURT and Federal Common Law applies. Federal Common Law and the US SUPREME COURT DO NOT RECOGNIZE ACCOUNTANT CLIENT PRIVILEGE!!!
Synthian, I am so sorry you are so "under-privileged" these days, and so "factually challenged", but I must ask why you have not shared Pickles' MASTERPIECE and the exhibits that go with it??? Yes, some were so sensitive that Mr Pickle justly filed them "under seal" to avoid the publicising of personal tax returns, but they developed a clear picture that is difficult to refute.
"It ain't over til it's over", but since 3ABN brought the suite and have made the relevant allegations, and since there is CLEARLY NO CLIENT ACCOUNTANT PRIVILEGE, my best guess is that this is yet another effort in futility by 3ABN and DLS.
And I have to address the "undue expense" issue as well. We had already come to a clear agreement with the accountant that we would bring two "EXPERT" auditors and One "EXPERT" Forensic Accountant to review all documents for relevance. The relevant documents would then be copied by us on our paper, watermarked "confidential" by our support staff and then scanned into our hard-drive repository. NO COST TO THE ACCOUNTANT, confidentiality preserved and safely scanned as well for back-up. I believe any judge would see that would alleviate that "frivolous" concern.
One more thing, notice the difference in attitude in the Judges last order after getting that mass of documentation. Evidence can make a difference!!! And it clearly has so far in Minnesotta and Michigan.
Judge Gilbert will "see the light" as he is a wise gentleman with many years of Juris Priudence back to the Nixon era.
And gone bye bye is the premise that we made allegations without proof!!! We clearly presented plenty of "proof". Don't water the soup too much!!! Besides, tears are a bit salty!!!
Once again you fall short, WAY SHORT!!!
Don't you have to wonder how short you will be at trial???
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
It is really sounding like Sam should check his legal facts with anyman...
Now there is a foundation built on sand: Does ANYMAN have "LEGAL FACTS"?
Does ANYMAN have FACTS? We already know the "LEGAL" answer.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
And just to belabor their leaky analysis here is another flawed diamond in the very rough:
synthian2 wrote:
The File is more aptly described "Judgment in favor of 3ABN in Illinois subpoena, w/ Pickle ordered to show cause"
What I find interesting is that after GRANTING 3ABN's said Motion and STAYING the Subpoena Duces Tecum until further Court order; Judge Gilbert, basically went straight down the list of reasons 3ABN gave in his further order to Pickle and Joy:
The Court further ORDERS the defendants to SHOW CAUSE on or before July 9, 2008, why the Court should not quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum
because it subjects a third party to undue burden, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(iv),
because it requires disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(B)(i),
and because it is not tailored to request records relevant or with a nexus to the issues in the underlying litigation.
Synthian clearly mis-understood or otherwise virtually fabricated the issue...this was a STAY OF EXECUTION...and only a temporary stay...for the Judge ordered a Show Cause by July 9, 2008 and boy did he get one. It is all on PACER (I notice Synthian hasn't uploaded that mass of evidence against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton). It was so overwhelming, it includes a Motion to Compel Production.
So compelling the entire matter is back to Worcester for a hearing before Judge Hillman. If Hillman rules as the evidence requires, you better bet the motion to compel will be granted or they withdraw their opposition to avoid sanctions.
Oh yeah, and notice their detrimental and flawed reliance upon Illinois State Law regarding Accountant Client privilege and then notice the Illinois Caselaw evaporating the concept in a case similar to this. But, Synthian's real problem is that THIS IS A FEDERAL COURT and Federal Common Law applies. Federal Common Law and the US SUPREME COURT DO NOT RECOGNIZE ACCOUNTANT CLIENT PRIVILEGE!!!
Synthian, I am so sorry you are so "under-privileged" these days, and so "factually challenged", but I must ask why you have not shared Pickles' MASTERPIECE and the exhibits that go with it??? Yes, some were so sensitive that Mr Pickle justly filed them "under seal" to avoid the publicising of personal tax returns, but they developed a clear picture that is difficult to refute.
"It ain't over til it's over", but since 3ABN brought the suite and have made the relevant allegations, and since there is CLEARLY NO CLIENT ACCOUNTANT PRIVILEGE, my best guess is that this is yet another effort in futility by 3ABN and DLS.
And I have to address the "undue expense" issue as well. We had already come to a clear agreement with the accountant that we would bring two "EXPERT" auditors and One "EXPERT" Forensic Accountant to review all documents for relevance. The relevant documents would then be copied by us on our paper, watermarked "confidential" by our support staff and then scanned into our hard-drive repository. NO COST TO THE ACCOUNTANT, confidentiality preserved and safely scanned as well for back-up. I believe any judge would see that would alleviate that "frivolous" concern.
One more thing, notice the difference in attitude in the Judges last order after getting that mass of documentation. Evidence can make a difference!!! And it clearly has so far in Minnesotta and Michigan.
Judge Gilbert will "see the light" as he is a wise gentleman with many years of Juris Priudence back to the Nixon era.
And gone bye bye is the premise that we made allegations without proof!!! We clearly presented plenty of "proof". Don't water the soup too much!!! Besides, tears are a bit salty!!!
Once again you fall short, WAY SHORT!!!
Don't you have to wonder how short you will be at trial???
Gailon Arthur Joy
Yes, Gailon, that is quite an impressive packet on PACER. I notice that none of the 3ABN defenders have posted any little nuggets from that. I thought they liked cutting and pasting from PACER? ???
Comments, anyone? Sam? anyman? Ian? GrandmaNettie?
Helllloooooooo................?
-
Each group seems to provide deistic power to its own: Girolamo Savonarolla, John Calvin, St. Benedict, Martin Luther, the Pope, the Conference President, the Televangelist of your choice, the Evangelist of your choice, the pastor, the teacher... the list goes on.
Doesn't matter who they are and under what banner they conquer, they are no different than Emperor Constantine when he saw the handwriting on the wall and declared the vision that showed the cross and said "In this sign conquer." It is all about conquering. Thats all it is about. Under this name, in this sign conquer.
-
And this query comes from Lee:
"I wonder how long it will take before it dawns on Bonnie and others
over on AT that 3ABN has done NOTHING morally wrong just as they were
clear in the Financial IRS case. I wonder when it will dawn on them
we have been telling the truth all along?" Lee
You mean Lee might have been telling the truth when she said on BSDA that maybe the minor was consenting, and then refused to backtrack or apologize regarding that morally reprehensible idea?
I don't buy it and never will.
-
"I wonder how long it will take before it dawns on Bonnie and others
over on AT that 3ABN has done NOTHING morally wrong just as they were
clear in the Financial IRS case. I wonder when it will dawn on them
we have been telling the truth all along?" Lee[/i]
From Me? Probably never.
Not sure who Lee is or why he/she is concerned as to how I see 3ABN and DS. My feelings concerning the principal players in this continues to be based on "what or whoever We is" are telling me themselves.
Generally it is the issues that seem less important to others that I base my impression of anyone on.
Minor issues of the IRS investigation is one. I don't know what went on and at this point don't care. What I am watching and basing my opinion on of 3ABN and supporters is the milking for all it is worth in a childish way. If there is a letter of complete exoneration, produce it. If not simply say investigation is over and we are pleased that it has reached resolution. Still hearing the drum roll, expecting people to be sitting breathless on the edge of their seat.
One would think that 3ABN would like to put each incident as far behind them as possible,not milking it for all it is worth. No matter how it was resolved it should be in the past for them. For me, that still leaves the conclusion I first began this with when I heard a few things from DS and about DS that really couldn't be denied. Ignoring them ,or not making them right ,or saying "they don't understand" doesn't cut it once you have gone public with accusations or intimidation. 3ABN supporters cannot convince innocence concerning matters DS has openly declared or committed.
Nor does it exempt LS from responsibility. Did she say as has been implied that she blamed others, specifically Gregory Matthews and Fran for her failing to have a sucessful new ministry? IF NOT SHE HAS TO MAKE SURE SHE "CORRECTS THE LITTLE GOLDFISH" WITH THE GOSSIPY,DISHONEST MOUTH. Among other issues.
[qoute]You mean Lee might have been telling the truth when she said on BSDA that maybe the minor was consenting, and then refused to backtrack or apologize regarding that morally reprehensible idea?
I don't buy it and never will.
[/quote]
This should not be suprising as many feel this way. Unless a victim or alleged victim attacks physically or shouts it from the street corner they somehow wanted their abuse.
-
Maybe those that know Lee can pass this on if that poster is not here.
While both sides should be a lot more concerned about convincing those that can aid them in support of whichever side they are on instead of me, you need to show me something much different.
Answer accusations or questions put to you. If legally you can't, stop implying and using inuendo to cast doubt on the other side.
Two parties recently have destroyed any credibility they might have had for me. Small things, but if you cannot handle the small things with honesty and integrity, could telling me how ethical you really are in the big things be factual? Don't believe a word. I can understand people lying in really big issues trying to protect family or reputation. As wrong as that is, most can see how that happens. When the lies and the slyness begins over little issues I believe nothing said of the big issues.
What does the little sly drop of Bob's church membership have to do with 3ABN and what their actions might be? Where did that belong in the conversation? What was the purpose?
Ian seems to feel she needed to leave a conversation before I hauled her off to my "HIDDEN FORUM". If I had such a forum what would it have to do with 3ABN? What did it have to do with anything under discussion.
As I do not have a private,hidden forum where someone is dragged to be browbeat,it means she is either telling a lie,or is listening to unsubstantiated gossip. Both of which she accuses others. So tell me where she and others really stand on what they condemn??
I have seen those that opposse 3ABN do this as well. When they do,credibility goes out the window.
Cutsey little quips about those that do not dance to the same tune of those strongly oppossed,kissing someone's ring and kissing up to the powers that be. A almost undeniable enjoyment of a very serious issue and legal matter.
My kids used to do that. When caught in something they just knew if they could get me to focus on "THAT REALLY BIG SIN of their sibling, surely I would overlook their little itty bitty one. and forget all about it
Tell me where DS stands on the issue of honesty with his e-mail to LS concerning the fudging of the appraisel of the horses? Doesn't matter if it took place.DS showed his stance on honesty.
His conduct concerning public airing of LS alleged adultry? Where is the high integrity and christian conduct?
I see some that appear
to have honest grave concerns concerning 3 ABN. That is as it should be,3ABN represents SDA's and something far greater to the public. While a non-SDA would likely not know our GC president, chances are many non SDA's know DS and 3ABN. Others on both sides of the aisle seem to be enjoying their 15 minutes of fame.
-
When you tell me you don't like gossip but keep yourself abreast of all that is said and then mock,or condemn others as gossip mongers you are a liar.
When you repeat stories that you have no factual backup for, you are a gossip.
Especially those that rely on the poor little goldfish,or state your reliable source comes from "the street"
When you want to focus on some unrelated issue, something that shifts focus to the other guy, you are being dishonest and may at times be spreading loose words about another.
When you blast those that do not have the same agenda as you and use public ridicule you are arrogant and dishonest as well,making statements for effect instead of making factual statements.
-
Bonnie,
You're swinging that mallet with a wide sweep and many of us posters here fall within its arc. But that's what I call 'spadespeak'.
When you tell me you don't like gossip but keep yourself abreast of all that is said and then mock,or condemn others as gossip mongers you are a liar.
When you repeat stories that you have no factual backup for, you are a gossip.
Especially those that rely on the poor little goldfish,or state your reliable source comes from "the street"
When you want to focus on some unrelated issue, something that shifts focus to the other guy, you are being dishonest and may at times be spreading loose words about another.
When you blast those that do not have the same agenda as you and use public ridicule you are arrogant and dishonest as well,making statements for effect instead of making factual statements.
-
Bonnie,
You're swinging that mallet with a wide sweep and many of us posters here fall within its arc. But that's what I call 'spadespeak'.
No, actually it is not that wide.
1. When you tell me you don't like gossip but keep yourself abreast of all that is said and then mock,or condemn others as gossip mongers you are a liar.
There are some that like to wring their hands over gossip,reading here to make sure they stay on top of what they profess to abhor, and then go around and condemn the very act they have just been guilty of.
When I read of rumormongers and doing the devil's work I have to wonder how they know. You can only know the gossip if you keep listening for it.
That is different to me than those concerned about what has taken place or they fear has with someone in the public SDA media.
Look at the e-mail Daryl received. There is a man sending out a e-mail condemning others for trying to tarnish 3ABN.
Who's word is he taking or does he know first hand for a certainty, those he condemned are guilty of having the motives he ascribed to them.
2.When you repeat stories that you have no factual backup for, you are a gossip.
Especially those that rely on the poor little goldfish,or state your reliable source comes from "the street"
If you want a direct statement, I was referring to those like Ian on either side of the aisle on this. She drifted off into left field with a totally unrelated false statement concerning me. The matter is trivial but not for one that beats the drum she does.
Had I a private forum, what did that have to do with anything, other than to shift the focus to me and cast doubt somehow on what I had said. She either repeated something she had been told, without any verification and repeated it. That is gossip plain and simple and in this case done for a specific reason. If she is not repeating unverified facts she was told, then she is making it up as she goes along. Having to leave a discussion as I was going to somehow take this to a imaginary hidden forum for browbeating. Well, I don't have this hidden place
I can't recall who now, but someone threw in a statement concerning Bob that had nothing to do with the discussion.
I don't know bob and do not know where he has his church membership. Why would anyone be digging around to find out when they abhor supposedly that behaviour they have condemned in others.
Nothing but dishonest intention behind that kind of stuff, to say nothing of petty.
When you want to focus on some unrelated issue, something that shifts focus to the other guy, you are being dishonest and may at times be spreading loose words about another.
I stand by this as I have seen some do this. Here and other forums where adventtalk comes up and is condemned.
When you blast those that do not have the same agenda as you and use public ridicule you are arrogant and dishonest as well,making statements for effect instead of making factual statements.
This has also been done here. Unfortunately it has been done by both sides. I have said it to Gailon so I don't believe he will be surprised at reading it now.
He was quite graphic in his public ridicule of one because they had different agenda's. Has been so from the start as far as I could read, but when things did not go gailon's way I could almost see him stamping his foot.
Some responses almost show glee at this lawsuit. Lawsuits are not fun or they sure shouldn't be. Lawsuits are never a sure thing,most that have gone thru one finds that out pretty quick. Not the most effective PR to be seen bragging about the win and how the other is going to get tromped.
When it is a lawsuit like this, even when the innocent win, they lose. They lose what they can never get back sometimes. It is never funny, it is never fun. It causes damage not seen by those that have not gone thru it.
It is a dirty ugly business, sometimes necessary, but no one should ever enjoy the battle and to me it is obvious there are a few that just plain enjoy it. Sometimes life can make starnge bedfellows.
While they may not like each other much there are a very few from both sides that are having a field day.
Those that come to get their daily dose of "gossip" so they can run back "home" and act like "THANK YOU GOD I AM NOT LIKE THOSE OTHERS. You know the ones, those rumormongers and that gossip.
So there are some yes that maybe need a mallet upside the head. Most I think sincerely want change where they are convinced they see a real need.
-
Bonnie, I agree with you that lawsuits are not fun.
But I get the idea that lawyers don't look at them the same way that the parties do. It seems to be a game to them. (I'm not impressed if their game involves trying to ruin some innocent person's life just because their client pays them to do that.)
Now if a party in a suit just happens to have a bit of litigation experience, they may not look at the suit as being such an awful thing. Someone without that experience would tend to be a bit burdened.
-
From ProffAberf: "The court doesn't care who divorced whom and the majority of the remaining "issues" that Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy and Mr. Robert Pickle keep harping on have no place clogging the court system and the Judges involved are going to see this and quickly decide in favor of 3ABN."
Problem is that para. 50 of the complaint is all about the divorce and such.
"Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy loves to toss around the term "frivolous law suit" and yet his serf Mr. Robert Pickle continues to file one ill-formed, poorly thought out motion after another - his latest an attempt to circumvent Judge Gilbert's order to appear before the court and show cause AND keep it to 10 pages. His little stunt of filing an emergency motion and attaching a "show cause," which exceeds the Judge's limit may very well seal the quahing of the subpoena, we'll see - Mr. Robert Pickle was to have met the requirement by today, July 9th."
20 pages is what is allowed by the local rule, so I asked for that, and Judge Gilbert granted my motion, I believe on July 8.
-
Considering the events of the last few days, I am devastated. They say it is over; however, it isn't over with me yet.
Several days ago I received a PM from a member to talk about the 2000 audit. I replied that I had that file and I did not want to destroy 3ABN. The very next morning, I turned my computer, and Windows came up in a fix mode. My files had been changed. It took forever for it to fix the null files. Guess what files were gone?
All five of the pdf files found here:
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-property-tax-case-entire-public-record.htm
I laughed because I have the whole ball of wax on removable storage. That is when I wrote what I did about the 2000 audit. However, I did not post it until things progressed. I have a lot of files on my hard drive, but these were only files I was using at the time. The rest is on DVD and removable storage.
I posted about the audit and added a few comments after the fact.
Then I got up and my computer opened up with all kinds of red alerts. My data had changed again! It took forever to get my firewall up and running along with Windows defend and my virus and scan came up. Everything security was turned off!
It had to check all my drives! Guess what? They have removed all my 3ABN information from my hard drive. In fact, they took everything on that drive. All of my files and folders are empty. Yeah, all of it! This is so unnecessary. Please stop. You did not get most of my eBay files. What you got was files saved from the save-3ABN site, and several other things I have used frequently.
You deleted some files with my photos. This is so uncalled for.
My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over. I am also going to ask for protection. This is about the 6th or 7th time this has happens. This is so un-Christ like!
Telling keeps me safer. There are several questions that I still need answered.
Tammy said she has NEVER had a store. Why would she lie? Yes, I still have a copy of an item Tammy was selling at her STORE! Yes, she had a store. The printout was done in 2006. Would her memory have forgotten that so soon?
The name of her store was Tammy’s Variety Outlet. All I can ask is why lie? Could it be that 3ABN items were sold on her site? 3ABN did not get the proceeds from these certain sales. Tammy did. Could this be where all that missing feedback is?
As Tammy explained the procedures and processes, she made a comment that raised my eyebrows. She said the items are received and once they were sold, they sent the information to the Donation center and then they sent the donor a receipt.
When I made a purchase from the 3ABN store, I was sent a cash donation receipt. It clearly said that I “HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY GOODS OR SERVICES.” However, I did receive goods that I purchased.. Do they do this to all that purchase items from the store? What a windfall! Was this a fluke? If it happened more than once, there is a problem.
What is wrong with what she said?
All donations of goods or services should be receipted at the time of the donation. That is why every donor of goods should be given and IRS Form 8283 that has a Control Number on it. There should be 3 copies with the same control number on it
#1. Copy 1. The donor gets the original WITHOUT the Fair Market Value on it. The donor leaves with their IRS 8283 IRS Form that has all of 3ABN’s contact information on the form. 3ABN should also write a description of the donated item on all copies
#2. Copy 2 goes to Accounting once 3ABN’s Fair Market Value has been assigned and noted on both of 3ABN’s copies. They each bear the same control number as the original 8283. Accounting posts the receipt of an asset using the Control number as the asset identification number.
#3. Copy 3 stays with the item until it is sold. Once it is sold, the sales price is recorded on the Sales copy of the 8283. Then it goes to accounting so the sales price is posted to a contra account under the same control # where it was originally posted. This will create a gain or loss.
Remember, the DONOR is responsible for assessing the Fair Market Value and attaching whatever they used to arrive at that appraisal of Fair Market Value attached to their form 8283. They will use their 8283 with attachments to receive a deduction on their tax returns.
The 3ABN copy #1 of the 8283 they gave the donor with the description of the item and assess a Fair market value for 3ABN. Never does 3ABN see the Fair Market Value the donor has supplied and 3ABN does not share their Fair Market Value. Copy #2 goes immediately to Accounting to be posted as an asset. The Asset Control Number is also the Identification Number. The copy #3 of the 8283 stays with the item until it is back to 3ABN Accounting with information of the sale.
Now there is a record of receipt in accounting with the assessed value, and a copy showing disposal. These 8383’s get filed in numerical order. Every month the computer needs to check the control numbers listed. No control number used should be missing. If one is missing, the hunt is on! If a form 8283 gets voided, all 3 copies are turned into accounting right away.
This stops the temptation of seeing a donated items and using it for yourself, or giving it to your brother or sister. It is transparent! It is honest. It follows GAAP.
As for me, remember, IRS IT forensics can find out who was on my computer and took my information. I believe all of us understand what has happened again, again, again, again, again, and again. Please stop.
-
Bonnie, I agree with you that lawsuits are not fun.
But I get the idea that lawyers don't look at them the same way that the parties do. It seems to be a game to them. (I'm not impressed if their game involves trying to ruin some innocent person's life just because their client pays them to do that.)
Now if a party in a suit just happens to have a bit of litigation experience, they may not look at the suit as being such an awful thing. Someone without that experience would tend to be a bit burdened.
Now if a party in a suit just happens to have a bit of litigation experience, they may not look at the suit as being such an awful thing.
Someone without that experience would tend to be a bit burdened.
A bit burdened?? Without that experience someone has no idea of what they are talking about. NONE
I was a family member watching and involved for almost 6 years. It was a win against all odds and I would rather walk over hot coals barefoot than be involved in another or watch one of mine go thru that again. The attorney, a grizzled old veteran of lawsuits of this type warned in the beginning, it will be long,nasty and a hard row. Can you handle it?? Someone with experience should be saying just the opposite instead of "it isn't such an awful thing". It was no game to our attorney. But in one sense you are right, there are those that will willingly say or do whatever the client allows or wishes within the law.
edited to correct a sentence
-
From ProffAberf: "The court doesn't care who divorced whom and the majority of the remaining "issues" that Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy and Mr. Robert Pickle keep harping on have no place clogging the court system and the Judges involved are going to see this and quickly decide in favor of 3ABN."
Problem is that para. 50 of the complaint is all about the divorce and such.
"Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy loves to toss around the term "frivolous law suit" and yet his serf Mr. Robert Pickle continues to file one ill-formed, poorly thought out motion after another - his latest an attempt to circumvent Judge Gilbert's order to appear before the court and show cause AND keep it to 10 pages. His little stunt of filing an emergency motion and attaching a "show cause," which exceeds the Judge's limit may very well seal the quahing of the subpoena, we'll see - Mr. Robert Pickle was to have met the requirement by today, July 9th."
20 pages is what is allowed by the local rule, so I asked for that, and Judge Gilbert granted my motion, I believe on July 8.
I think if you reread you will find I said both sides. It doesn't matter what the other guy said. It matters what each one has to say.
It is the glee which a few show over this litigation, regardless of which side of the fence.
I don't know anything about the attorney's for the other side except some of what they have to say if from the attorney's shows me a mentality much like I consider DS to have. But I would be willing to bet they are not stupid.
This bragging by those that are so confident "We Are Going To Blow Them Out of The Water" and "We Are Going To Win" may come back to bite. Remember OJSimpson?? He won, but his actions and who he was is coming back to bite him. Because one side does it there is no excuse for the other side, whichever that is,to do it.
Really is only impressive to the one talking and a few that are enjoying the show and being part of it.
-
A bit burdened?? Without that experience someone has no idea of what they are talking about. NONE
What I meant was that if you have no such experience and you get sued, it isn't fun. It isn't a game.
Someone with experience should be saying just the opposite instead of "it isn't such an awful thing". It was no game to our attorney.
A person with a lot of experience will ask others if they can stomach it, but they themselves if sued may consider it all to be a game because of their experience.
-
Bonnie, I agree with you that lawsuits are not fun.
But I get the idea that lawyers don't look at them the same way that the parties do. It seems to be a game to them. (I'm not impressed if their game involves trying to ruin some innocent person's life just because their client pays them to do that.)
Now if a party in a suit just happens to have a bit of litigation experience, they may not look at the suit as being such an awful thing. Someone without that experience would tend to be a bit burdened.
Some of you seem to be confused which side of the fence I am on.
I take DS role and that of 3ABN supporters no matter what more seriously than I do LS. That is true because 3ABN and DS are in the public spotlight.They have the far greater responsibility. It is also true I personally take a dim view of most televangelists. When I give my hard earned, limited resources to anyone for a cause,there are certain things I want to know. Doesn't matter whether the answers concern what some may think illegal activity or whether it is perfectly legal but tacky.
If I had unlimited resources and was content with donating a 100.00 and having 50.00 of it go first and foremost to support a cushy lifestyle for someone no problem. But as I am unlikely to reach that goal I watch where I give and who I support.
I want the most mileage out of my dollar. When a televangelist lives a modest comfortable life on my donations, I will believe his heart is where his mouth is. I don't expect them to live in subsidized housing or as Mother Theresa, Existing on one or two meals a day, giving everything else to what she believed in. But nor to I want to support a life most that earn a paycheck cannot live .
Horses, a very expensive hobby is not my idea of promoting the gospel and taking care of the poor. To enjoy riding and owning a horse is one thing. Asking others to support several, while accepting and asking for donations for spreading the gospel is another. For your expensive hobby to be supported by donations is tacky, unless that party is independently wealthy and not using my donation to support.
We have a friend that owns one horse. He estimates that one horse at 80.00 a month to support. Times that by several. Then take in to account you need to hire someone to care for on a daily basis while you are not there. The regular vet, farrier fees,worming, hay, grain,riding equipment. Now in the next breath tell me to donate so the poor lost souls that need to hear the gospel can be reached, or the many starving children. Guaranteed ed you will not get my money. Or tell me about the swimming pool you have to dip your toes in after a hard day riding or caring for the horses as you are almost teary eyed over those lost souls just waiting for you to come with the gospel.
Even at that, if there are those wishing to donate being made fully aware of what their hard earned dollar goes to support first, no problem. Their choice.
When money coming from that type of source is used to support that, or as Jim and Tammy Baker, air conditioned dog houses I do not believe their heart is where the mouth is. I don't believe TB was anymore innocent than her husband in taking advantage of others to live a lifestyle most of us can't. My preference is that she would have had the same accommodations the State of MN provided for her husband.
We have many org that do a lot of good things while doing some of the more questionable. I will not support ADRA either. While no denying the many wonderful things they do, I want to know someone is minding the storehouse first. Not building tennis courts for employee's. Then I believe another, wasn't it along the lines of the sun was in their eyes. I can find many places for my money that go directly to the one hurting or in need.
I believe many start out with the purest of intentions, but like politicians something goes horribly wrong. There are those that are committed to spending wisely and living modestly, but I don't have the time or patience to sift thru the debris to figure out which one will spend my money the most wisely.
Like many ,DS showed his true colors as far as I am concerned with a disgraceful public display by him and those he allowed. Anything else he has to say, no matter how eloquently, he has lost me if I had ever been a supporter.
Never would anyone question where the heart of Mother Theresa was. If asked, she would have received anything she asked I was able to give. DS and others do not have to feel called to live as she did,but I have no desire to support a lavish lifestyle first.
If that lifestyle can be supported by independent means, have at it. Do not beg for mine.
If you are going to prattle on and on publically about the gospel,forgivness and all that goes with it, conduct your personal life accordingly. Doesn't it say somewhere Christ did not defend himself against his accuser's?
Maybe a brief statement about his failed marriage to LS, treat the settlement in a fair manner, and move on would have helped immensely in preventing this
edited to correct sentence
-
A bit burdened?? Without that experience someone has no idea of what they are talking about. NONE
What I meant was that if you have no such experience and you get sued, it isn't fun. It isn't a game.
Someone with experience should be saying just the opposite instead of "it isn't such an awful thing". It was no game to our attorney.
A person with a lot of experience will ask others if they can stomach it, but they themselves if sued may consider it all to be a game because of their experience.
I have never been a great fan of lawsuits. Experience has taught me sometimes in this world it is necessary,but avoid it wherever and whenever possible. Once you get to the part of almost enjoying the battle, time to take a good long look in the mirror and see what others see
-
Doug Batchelor is another that had they my support to begin with, would have lost it with this......
Evidently, all the nasty internet rumors 3ABN’s enemies manufactured influenced the feds to investigate. They figured that where there was smoke there must be fire but they discovered it was all smoke.
People can be reassured that their donations to 3ABN have always been, and are still going into expanding God’s kingdom. Karen and I never stopped supporting them.
Please feel free to share this with you friends and perhaps it will help to reestablish confidence in this great ministry and undo some of the damage caused by the smear campaign.
Uncalled for,no facts only rumor being repeated, that which he seems to be against.
People can be reassured that their donations to 3ABN have always been, and are still going into expanding God’s kingdom. Karen and I never stopped supporting them.
Bully for him. His reassurence means little. Maybe he can explain how some things expand God's kingdom??
What LS has done or is doing is not in the public eye,but I would not throw myself under the bus for her either.
If she is the one that is going to others, blaming and naming names as to who has cost her another ministry, she needs to grow a spine. If she puts up with "the little goldfish" mentioned elsewhere saying this is what she thinks, she might gain more respect by not relying on the goldfish to get the message out. Maybe she should just be upfront with people.
Any private citizen that can have any enjoyment, feel it is not so bad because they have had some experience in litigation, needs to get a life. There are a lot more beneficial ways to get a high out of life than this. Try a hobby you can turn into helping others.
Nothing gives me greater pleasure than using my love of sewing to help someone else. Try it, it may give you a far greater high than a lawsuit ever could.
-
Considering the events of the last few days, I am devastated. They say it is over; however, it isn\\\'t over with me yet.
Several days ago I received a PM from a member to talk about the 2000 audit. I replied that I had that file and I did not want to destroy 3ABN. The very next morning, I turned my computer, and Windows came up in a fix mode. My files had been changed. It took forever for it to fix the null files. Guess what files were gone?
All five of the pdf files found here:
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-property-tax-case-entire-public-record.htm
I laughed because I have the whole ball of wax on removable storage. That is when I wrote what I did about the 2000 audit. However, I did not post it until things progressed. I have a lot of files on my hard drive, but these were only files I was using at the time. The rest is on DVD and removable storage.
I posted about the audit and added a few comments after the fact.
Then I got up and my computer opened up with all kinds of red alerts. My data had changed again! It took forever to get my firewall up and running along with Windows defend and my virus and scan came up. Everything security was turned off!
It had to check all my drives! Guess what? They have removed all my 3ABN information from my hard drive. In fact, they took everything on that drive. All of my files and folders are empty. Yeah, all of it! This is so unnecessary. Please stop. You did not get most of my eBay files. What you got was files saved from the save-3ABN site, and several other things I have used frequently.
So why would they even bother to hack your computer? What would be the point, Fran?
From your own posts about this, it is my understanding.
Its all from files which are available online to anyone.
You have copies in removable storage.
You have sent it all to IRS and Gailon and Bob et all...
The IRS has considered it and concluded their investigation.
You have posted it all along with your personal judgments and personal conclusions and faultfinding on at least 4 forums that I know of, many times.
All of the above is still here, available to anyone concerned. This makes no sense to me.
You appear to be afraid, but the truth is 3ABN has nothing to be afraid of from you all that you have to say has already been investigated and they were not guilty or at fault.
You posted:
\"My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over.\"
I think this is wise, and is what you should have done as soon as it was posted that the IRS investigation was over, rather than continuing to post defensively and to repeat your assumptions and allegations, faultfinding and conclusions without even checking..
But better late then never.
I am very interested in the response you get from your point of contact. I am sure I am not alone.
-
Bonnie,
From reading your posts it is apparent that you have never met Danny Shelton, you did not ever watch 3ABN, you have not ever corresponded with Danny Shelton.
So when I read you also keep posting how your opinion of Danny Shelton came from Danny Shelton?
I consider you not credible.
Where did you get your opinions of Danny Shelton?
It is obvious you have got them from what his critics and accusers have said about him and claimed.
Now you are finding fault with Doug Batchelor based on that?
Think, and be ashamed, and stop.
Doug Batchelor is another that had they my support to begin with, would have lost it with this......
Evidently, all the nasty internet rumors 3ABN’s enemies manufactured influenced the feds to investigate. They figured that where there was smoke there must be fire but they discovered it was all smoke.
People can be reassured that their donations to 3ABN have always been, and are still going into expanding God’s kingdom. Karen and I never stopped supporting them.
Please feel free to share this with you friends and perhaps it will help to reestablish confidence in this great ministry and undo some of the damage caused by the smear campaign.
Uncalled for,no facts only rumor being repeated, that which he seems to be against.
People can be reassured that their donations to 3ABN have always been, and are still going into expanding God’s kingdom. Karen and I never stopped supporting them.
Bully for him. His reassurence means little. Maybe he can explain how some things expand God\'s kingdom??
What LS has done or is doing is not in the public eye,but I would not throw myself under the bus for her either.
If she is the one that is going to others, blaming and naming names as to who has cost her another ministry, she needs to grow a spine. If she puts up with \"the little goldfish\" mentioned elsewhere saying this is what she thinks, she might gain more respect by not relying on the goldfish to get the message out. Maybe she should just be upfront with people.
Any private citizen that can have any enjoyment, feel it is not so bad because they have had some experience in litigation, needs to get a life. There are a lot more beneficial ways to get a high out of life than this. Try a hobby you can turn into helping others.
Nothing gives me greater pleasure than using my love of sewing to help someone else. Try it, it may give you a far greater high than a lawsuit ever could.
-
Bonnie, I agree with you that lawsuits are not fun.
But I get the idea that lawyers don\'t look at them the same way that the parties do. It seems to be a game to them. (I\'m not impressed if their game involves trying to ruin some innocent persons life just because their client pays them to do that.)
Now if a party in a suit just happens to have a bit of litigation experience, they may not look at the suit as being such an awful thing. Someone without that experience would tend to be a bit burdened.
Some of you seem to be confused which side of the fence I am on.
I take DS role and that of 3ABN supporters no matter what more seriously than I do LS. That is true because 3ABN and DS are in the public spotlight.They have the far greater responsibility. It is also true I personally take a dim view of most televangelists. When I give my hard earned, limited resources to anyone for a cause,there are certain things I want to know. Doesn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t matter whether the answers concern what some may think illegal activity or whether it is perfectly legal but tacky.
If I had unlimited resources and was content with donating a 100.00 and having 50.00 of it go first and foremost to support a cushy lifestyle for someone no problem. But as I am unlikely to reach that goal I watch where I give and who I support.
I want the most mileage out of my dollar. When a televangelist lives a modest comfortable life on my donations, I will believe his heart is where his mouth is. I don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t expect them to live in subsidized housing or as Mother Theresa, Existing on one or two meals a day, giving everything else to what she believed in. But nor to I want to support a life most that earn a paycheck cannot live .
Horses, a very expensive hobby is not my idea of promoting the gospel and taking care of the poor. To enjoy riding and owning a horse is one thing. Asking others to support several, while accepting and asking for donations for spreading the gospel is another. For your expensive hobby to be supported by donations is tacky, unless that party is independently wealthy and not using my donation to support.
We have a friend that owns one horse. He estimates that one horse at 80.00 a month to support. Times that by several. Then take in to account you need to hire someone to care for on a daily basis while you are not there. The regular vet, farrier fees,worming, hay, grain,riding equipment. Now in the next breath tell me to donate so the poor lost souls that need to hear the gospel can be reached, or the many starving children. Guaranteed ed you will not get my money. Or tell me about the swimming pool you have to dip your toes in after a hard day riding or caring for the horses as you are almost teary eyed over those lost souls just waiting for you to come with the gospel.
Even at that, if there are those wishing to donate being made fully aware of what their hard earned dollar goes to support first, no problem. Their choice.
When money coming from that type of source is used to support that, or as Jim and Tammy Baker, air conditioned dog houses I do not believe their heart is where the mouth is. I don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t believe TB was anymore innocent than her husband in taking advantage of others to live a lifestyle most of us can\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t. My preference is that she would have had the same accommodations the State of MN provided for her husband.
We have many org that do a lot of good things while doing some of the more questionable. I will not support ADRA either. While no denying the many wonderful things they do, I want to know someone is minding the storehouse first. Not building tennis courts for employee\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s. Then I believe another, was not it along the lines of the sun was in their eyes. I can find many places for my money that go directly to the one hurting or in need.
I believe many start out with the purest of intentions, but like politicians something goes horribly wrong. There are those that are committed to spending wisely and living modestly, but I don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t have the time or patience to sift thru the debris to figure out which one will spend my money the most wisely.
Like many ,DS showed his true colors as far as I am concerned with a disgraceful public display by him and those he allowed. Anything else he has to say, no matter how eloquently, he has lost me if I had ever been a supporter.
Never would anyone question where the heart of Mother Theresa was. If asked, she would have received anything she asked I was able to give. DS and others do not have to feel called to live as she did,but I have no desire to support a lavish lifestyle first.
If that lifestyle can be supported by independent means, have at it. Do not beg for mine.
If you are going to prattle on and on publically about the gospel,forgivness and all that goes with it, conduct your personal life accordingly. Doesnt it say somewhere Christ did not defend himself against his accuser\'s?
Maybe a brief statement about his failed marriage to LS, treat the settlement in a fair manner, and move on would have helped immensely in preventing this
edited to correct sentence
Bonnie,
You need to be a good steward of your own money, not Danny Sheltons, nor anyone elses.
If he and Linda had horses and paid for them by breeding them and selling others, that is their business, not yours nor any one elses. No one comes into your house and claims you can\'t have pets or spend money or resources in feeding and caring for them, as that money should go to the Lord.
I keep reading you condemning Danny Shelton for the letters he and Linda wrote and it makes me sick. It should make you sick also.
It is not his critics DS should be most concerned about.
DS explained his committment to honesty with the e-mail concerning the horses. Couldn\\\'t care less what the IRS says, don\\\'t care if it actually transpired. DS is the one that gave a clear picture of what DS wanted to do. Don\\\'t even waste time trying to tell me that it is legal . I know from living the life of a hobby/working farm for 17 years that is not legal. He also wanted to involve others in his little game. DISHONEST,ILLEGAL if carried out. Intent may not count with the IRS, but maybe God has other ideas.
Your motive and intent is considered by God also, along with every idle word.
You have claimed many times that what he was saying and promoting was ilegal and he knew it. You have implied insinuated and posted that he willingly and knowingly tried to flout the law, cheat the IRS, and get Linda to do so with him as he was dishonest ect..
You have repeatedly judged his motive and intent as wrong, and said it does not matter whether they ended up filing, as he said, or doing such as his intent was wrong and illegal. You have claimed what matters to you is that he tried to break the law and cheat the IRS, and tried to get Linda to also.
What you have not ever done was to give him the benefit of the doubt.
What you have never done is admit you do not know anothers mind or what they know or are ignorant of and so can not rightfully judge their motive intent and character based on so little. This includes Danny Shelton who you have never met, talked to or have personal knowledge of.
What you have not done is consider that this originated with the ministry which he and Linda donated multiple horse to (each). That ministry was the one who wanted to send the cash receipts. Danny did not ask them to do so, the idea never originated with him.
What you have never considered is that Danny was ignorant at first, and did not know what the tax laws and requirement were when he repeated what that ministry said to Linda.
What you do not consider is that after he and Linda both went to their accountants and were informed of the law and what was required that they both learned and so did the legal thing as required as he never had any intention of cheating the IRS or doing anything illegal. He did not know that was not allowed until he talked to his accountant.
I am not going to apologize to you here for posting this, no matter how defensive you react, or how you may attack me or any other in return, for the above is exactly what happened.
Asking is so much easier than assuming and finding fault with another and judging their motives and intents and character and repeating those false things to another.
You owe Danny Shelton an apology, or at least the courtesy of asking him what happened.
In the meantime judging anothers motive and intent without proof is not your job.
And what you do and say about this from here on out is on you. You can not claim ignorance or another way or POV was not revealed here. Nor can any other reading this.
-
Bonnie,
From reading your posts it is apparent that you have never met Danny Shelton, you did not ever watch 3ABN, you have not ever corresponded with Danny Shelton.
So when I read you also keep posting how your opinion of Danny Shelton came from Danny Shelton?
I consider you not credible.
Where did you get your opinions of Danny Shelton?
It is obvious you have got them from what his critics and accusers have said about him and claimed.
Now you are finding fault with Doug Batchelor based on that?
Think, and be ashamed, and stop.[/quote
Frankly I am not concerned whether you believe me credible or not. That is not the criteria I base my opinions on. I have never met DS. I had never watched 3ABN till just very recently. I don't need to read a correspondence to me from DS. Reading his and others that purportedly speak for DS or on his behalf, will tell me more than any contrived response or any critic of his. Two things intitially turned me off on DS. Not the IRS or the lawsuit.
HIs conduct concerning LS publically and his treatment of Mabel Dunbar. There are some public things that no one can deny concerning LS. Mabel Dunbar has far more credibility as far as I am concerned than DS will ever have.
These two things do not square with this almost cultish like following.Or this potrayal of this very righteous man in the eyes of some.
Personally, think what you like. I have no idea who you are and as such,what you say has little credibility with me so
looks like we are at a stalemate.
It is obvious you have inserted what you wish into what I said.
It is not his critics DS should be most concerned about.
DS explained his committment to honesty with the e-mail concerning the horses. Couldn't care less what the IRS says, don't care if it actually transpired. DS is the one that gave a clear picture of what DS wanted to do. Don't even waste time trying to tell me that it is legal . I know from living the life of a hobby/working farm for 17 years that is not legal. He also wanted to involve others in his little game. DISHONEST,ILLEGAL if carried out. Intent may not count with the IRS, but maybe God has other ideas.
Now you are finding fault with Doug Batchelor based on that?
You call it what you like. I really had no opinion either way on DB before this started. My fault finding or opinion is based not on what others said, but on what DB said and as far as I am concerned showed with that e-mail..
No, I am not ashamed of my opinion. I am entitled to it and I have not stated anything other than my opinion.
If you do not like knowing it, don't read it and don't spread it
-
You need to be a good steward of your money, not Danny Sheltons, nor anyone Else's.
Glad we agree. As long as it is my money I am donating, I intend to be careful with it so it does not land in the wrong hands.
If he and Linda had horses and paid for them by breeding them and selling others, that is their business, not yours nor any one Else's. No one comes into your house and claims you can\'t have pets or spend money or resources in feeding and caring for them, as that money should go to the Lord.
No one can come into my home and be concerned about how I spend my money as I am not living on donations from others. When I get to the place I am asking others to donate to support my lifestyle than I have a responsibility to use their means wisely. I never said anything about not having pets or feeding them. Expensive hobbies based on the generosity of others is quite another. If they were bought and paid for by independent means I don't have a problem with it and think I said so. If this type of hobby can be maintained on the REPORTED income, again I have no problem. As long as the donors are aware of where their money is going.
I keep reading you condemning Danny Shelton for the letters he and Linda wrote and it makes me sick.
Good, it should.
You have claimed many times that he what he was saying and willingly and knowingly tried to flout the law and get Linda to.
That is exactly what the e-mail stated. Spin it however you like, not legal
You have repeatedly judged his motive and intent as wrong, and said it did\'t matter whether they ended up filing as he said as his intent was wrong and illegal.
No, I took DS at his word for what he hoped to do with LS help
What you have not ever done was to give him the benefit of the doubt. What you have not done is consider that the ministry which he and Linda donated multiple horse to (each) was the one who wanted to send the cash receipts.
My reading comprehension tests have scored quite high. I don't have to give the benefit of the doubt to someone that has just explained what he wished to do.
What you have never considered is that Danny did not know what the tax laws and requirement were when he told this to Linda.
No, not likely. I read what was in the e-mail by DS to LS. I read his response to her after she refused.
What you do not consider is that after he and Linda both went to their accountants and were informed of the law and what was required that they both learned and did the legal thing as required as he never had any intention of cheating the IRS or doing anything illegal.
I have no problem believing that. Sometimes honesty is the prudent thing even if it is something you do not wish to do. Making public the emails no doubt had something to do with his compliance.
I am not going to apologise here for posting this no matter how defensive you react, or how you may attack me or any other in return, for that is exactly what happened.
I didn't ask for an apology. Had you even attempted you would have had far less credibility than you do now. I have not attacked you. I have responded to what you have said. I am not attacking others. My opinion.
Asking is so much easier than assuming and finding fault with another and judging their motives and intents and character and repeating those false things to another.
I do not need to ask what DS has already taken the time to explain. His motives were made clear by DS, not me.
I have not repeated anything I believe to be false. I do not put a great deal of faith in the reference DS is going to give DS.
You owe Danny Shelton an apology, or at least the courtesy of asking him what happened.
No, I do not owe DS an apology. If he anticipates one, he will need to contact me directly. Not have his surrogates request one. Besides a requested and demanded apology is totally worthless
-
Maybe someone can take the time to locate and post DS intent . I am not interested enough at this point, I know what they said, but might be interesting to see how many ways it can be spun
-
-------- Original Message --------
From: Danny Shelton
To: Linda Shelton
Date: Thursday, April 07, 2005 3:14 PM
Ms. Shelton
I tried to call you to explain the horse deductions. I just remembered that ****** just gave us a donation of $20,000 last year. It did not mention horses. That is much better than all the other rig a ma role.
I have no idea if that's even close to spelling that word, but it seemed to fit.
So, I have left a message that he has not returned yet. Hopefully, you will just get a tax donation report from his ministry showing that you gave $20,000 to his ministry. That's the way he chose to do it.
I should get one too. I guess he's counting it the same as a cash donation.
Happy Dan
ps. I think he's willing to give us a $10,000 donation for 2005 ($5,000 @), if we donate our black 3 yr. old stud. I can't really use him to breed any more of our horses or they will all be the same blood line.
If this is ok with you please let me know in writing and I'll try to make it happen. He's hurt his foot really bad by kicking in his stall. I hope it heals ok.
Danny Shelton
-
Maybe someone can take the time to locate and post DS intent . I am not interested enough at this point, I know what they said, but might be interesting to see how many ways it can be spun
WHAT?!?
Bonnie, you have been posting his motive and his intent and claiming to know what that was, and what he thought and knew, and claiming that is why you found fault with him every time this horse issue has come up, and been brought up BY YOU Bonnie. Starting with your posts about it on MSDAOL.
Yet you never once asked him to explain, but were arrogant enought to think you could see and know all about him just by reading what Pickle via Linda produced against Danny?
Yet never once have the critics and accusers( including you) thought it relevant to include anything which occurred between when the published emails and when the tax returns (which did not claim cash receipts?) were filed?
Now you claim you arent interested in Dannys intent, and refuse to be accountable for your own stout words against him? or see where Bob Pickle has erred?
Despite the fact the IRS has concluded their investigation? And you or no other can prove any fault or error, and it seems the IRS has found nothing?
You posted this:
me:
What you do not consider is that after he and Linda both went to their accountants and were informed of the law and what was required that they both learned and did the legal thing as required as he never had any intention of cheating the IRS or doing anything illegal.
You:
I have no problem believing that. Sometimes honesty is the prudent thing even if it is something you do not wish to do. Making public the emails no doubt had something to do with his compliance.
But the emails were posted aka published way after the emails and events and tax returns were filed. Your excuse and justification here makes no more sense, then your earlier posts.
FOR SHAME!!!
May the Lord rebuke you!!
And may you at least have conscience enough to never repeat those same arguments whether on or off these forums, for you are accountable, just as Bob Pickle is for all you have led to believe a lie.
So much on this forum is like this, where all all those who sigh and cry over all that is done in the name of the Lord which is just so blind and ignorant of him?
-- absolutely disgusted and ashamed
-
I get reminded of some words of Scripture, "Thy language betrayeth thee."
-
Exactly what I just got through posting in another part of the forum, Johann.
-
I get reminded of some words of Scripture, \\\\\\\"Thy language betrayeth thee.\\\\\\\"
Yes it does, Pastor Johann, and Artiste...
EVERY IDLE WORD.
Something for each and every one of us to consider and take to heart.
A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.....But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man
Pro 15:28 The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things.
Job 5:12 He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise.
Pro 1:31Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
-
Dear "disgusted",
You seem to have quite an in-depth knowledge of what Danny did or didn't know about the IRS regulations.
I'm just curious - do you happen to know anything about the IRS rules regarding ministry employees who receive subsidized housing? For example, if a ministry employee were to be renting a ministry owned house at below market rents, how would the IRS expect that to be treated?
WHAT?!?
Bonnie, you have been posting his motive and his intent and claiming to know what that was, and what he thought and knew, and claiming that is why you found fault with him every time this horse issue has come up, and been brought up BY YOU Bonnie. Starting with your posts about it on MSDAOL.
Yet you never once asked him to explain, but were arrogant enought to think you could see and know all about him just by reading what Pickle via Linda produced against Danny?
Yet never once have the critics and accusers( including you) think it relevant to include anything which occurred between the published emails and when the tax returns (which did not claim cash receipts?) were filed?
Now you claim you arent interested in Dannys intent, and refuse to be accountable for your own stout words against him? or see where Bob Pickle has erred?
Despite the fact the IRS has concluded their investigation? And you or no other can prove any fault or error?
You posted this:
me:
What you do not consider is that after he and Linda both went to their accountants and were informed of the law and what was required that they both learned and did the legal thing as required as he never had any intention of cheating the IRS or doing anything illegal.
You:
I have no problem believing that. Sometimes honesty is the prudent thing even if it is something you do not wish to do. Making public the emails no doubt had something to do with his compliance.
But the emails were posted aka published way after the emails and events and tax returns were filed. Your excuse and justification here makes no more sense, then your earlier posts.
FOR SHAME!!!
May the Lord rebuke you!!
And may you at least have conscience enough to never repeat those same arguments whether on or off these forums, for you are accountable, just as Bob Pickle is for all you have led to believe a lie.
So much on this forum is like this, where all all those who sigh and cry over all that is done in the name of the Lord which is just so blind and ignorant of him?
-- absolutely disgusted and ashamed
-
Fran, that is just awful. I'm glad you are smart enought to keep your sensitive stuff in a safe place. Have you considered filing a police report of the intrusion just for third party documentation? It might come in handy down the road, if you know what I mean... :pals:
BTW, I agree with you - I don't believe that the IRS investigation is over - not by a LOOOOONNNNGGGG shot...
Considering the events of the last few days, I am devastated. They say it is over; however, it isn't over with me yet.
Several days ago I received a PM from a member to talk about the 2000 audit. I replied that I had that file and I did not want to destroy 3ABN. The very next morning, I turned my computer, and Windows came up in a fix mode. My files had been changed. It took forever for it to fix the null files. Guess what files were gone?
All five of the pdf files found here:
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-property-tax-case-entire-public-record.htm
I laughed because I have the whole ball of wax on removable storage. That is when I wrote what I did about the 2000 audit. However, I did not post it until things progressed. I have a lot of files on my hard drive, but these were only files I was using at the time. The rest is on DVD and removable storage.
I posted about the audit and added a few comments after the fact.
Then I got up and my computer opened up with all kinds of red alerts. My data had changed again! It took forever to get my firewall up and running along with Windows defend and my virus and scan came up. Everything security was turned off!
It had to check all my drives! Guess what? They have removed all my 3ABN information from my hard drive. In fact, they took everything on that drive. All of my files and folders are empty. Yeah, all of it! This is so unnecessary. Please stop. You did not get most of my eBay files. What you got was files saved from the save-3ABN site, and several other things I have used frequently.
You deleted some files with my photos. This is so uncalled for.
My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over. I am also going to ask for protection. This is about the 6th or 7th time this has happens. This is so un-Christ like!
Telling keeps me safer. There are several questions that I still need answered.
Tammy said she has NEVER had a store. Why would she lie? Yes, I still have a copy of an item Tammy was selling at her STORE! Yes, she had a store. The printout was done in 2006. Would her memory have forgotten that so soon?
The name of her store was Tammy’s Variety Outlet. All I can ask is why lie? Could it be that 3ABN items were sold on her site? 3ABN did not get the proceeds from these certain sales. Tammy did. Could this be where all that missing feedback is?
As Tammy explained the procedures and processes, she made a comment that raised my eyebrows. She said the items are received and once they were sold, they sent the information to the Donation center and then they sent the donor a receipt.
When I made a purchase from the 3ABN store, I was sent a cash donation receipt. It clearly said that I “HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY GOODS OR SERVICES.” However, I did receive goods that I purchased.. Do they do this to all that purchase items from the store? What a windfall! Was this a fluke? If it happened more than once, there is a problem.
What is wrong with what she said?
All donations of goods or services should be receipted at the time of the donation. That is why every donor of goods should be given and IRS Form 8283 that has a Control Number on it. There should be 3 copies with the same control number on it
#1. Copy 1. The donor gets the original WITHOUT the Fair Market Value on it. The donor leaves with their IRS 8283 IRS Form that has all of 3ABN’s contact information on the form. 3ABN should also write a description of the donated item on all copies
#2. Copy 2 goes to Accounting once 3ABN’s Fair Market Value has been assigned and noted on both of 3ABN’s copies. They each bear the same control number as the original 8283. Accounting posts the receipt of an asset using the Control number as the asset identification number.
#3. Copy 3 stays with the item until it is sold. Once it is sold, the sales price is recorded on the Sales copy of the 8283. Then it goes to accounting so the sales price is posted to a contra account under the same control # where it was originally posted. This will create a gain or loss.
Remember, the DONOR is responsible for assessing the Fair Market Value and attaching whatever they used to arrive at that appraisal of Fair Market Value attached to their form 8283. They will use their 8283 with attachments to receive a deduction on their tax returns.
The 3ABN copy #1 of the 8283 they gave the donor with the description of the item and assess a Fair market value for 3ABN. Never does 3ABN see the Fair Market Value the donor has supplied and 3ABN does not share their Fair Market Value. Copy #2 goes immediately to Accounting to be posted as an asset. The Asset Control Number is also the Identification Number. The copy #3 of the 8283 stays with the item until it is back to 3ABN Accounting with information of the sale.
Now there is a record of receipt in accounting with the assessed value, and a copy showing disposal. These 8383’s get filed in numerical order. Every month the computer needs to check the control numbers listed. No control number used should be missing. If one is missing, the hunt is on! If a form 8283 gets voided, all 3 copies are turned into accounting right away.
This stops the temptation of seeing a donated items and using it for yourself, or giving it to your brother or sister. It is transparent! It is honest. It follows GAAP.
As for me, remember, IRS IT forensics can find out who was on my computer and took my information. I believe all of us understand what has happened again, again, again, again, again, and again. Please stop.
-
Dear \\\\\\\"disgusted\\\\\\\",
You seem to have quite an in-depth knowledge of what Danny did or didn\\\\\\\'t know about the IRS regulations.
I\\\\\\\'m just curious - do you happen to know anything about the IRS rules regarding ministry employees who receive subsidized housing? For example, if a ministry employee were to be renting a ministry owned house at below market rents, how would the IRS expect that to be treated?
May I suggest you email and make inquiries of both 3ABN and the IRS, and not look to find fault with me or act like it is my responsibility to answer your questions, or pretend like my answers would be of any merit to you?
Sorry, but I have read all your posts...
-
I'm having a hard time understanding what all of those \\\\\ stand for in some of the posts. Are we having some kids playing silly games in here?
-
WOW - guess that question hit a NERVE!!!
Dear \\\"disgusted\\\",
You seem to have quite an in-depth knowledge of what Danny did or didn\\\'t know about the IRS regulations.
I\\\'m just curious - do you happen to know anything about the IRS rules regarding ministry employees who receive subsidized housing? For example, if a ministry employee were to be renting a ministry owned house at below market rents, how would the IRS expect that to be treated?
May I suggest you email and make inquiries of both 3ABN and the IRS, and not look to find fault with me or act like it is my responsibility to answer your questions, or pretend my answers will be of merit to you?
-
WHAT?!?
Bonnie, you have been posting his motive and his intent and claiming to know what that was, and what he thought and knew, and claiming that is why you found fault with him every time this horse issue has come up, and been brought up BY YOU Bonnie. Starting with your posts about it on MSDAOL Yet you never once asked him to explain, but were arrogant enought to think you could see and know all about him just by reading what Pickle via Linda produced against Danny?
I don't recall saying I knew all about him. DS has explained what I need to know as far as my impression of him. Don't care about the rest. I don't care about what is for PR consumption, don't care what praise DS heaps on DS, don't care about your comments either. What is with the capitalization of "BY YOU". I never claimed or said I had not read or commented at MSDAOL. Is this suppossed to mean something or shock someone>
Yet never once have the critics and accusers( including you) think it relevant to include anything which occurred between the published emails and when the tax returns (which did not claim cash receipts?) were filed?
I don't give a hoot what the tax retrun says. Dob't give a hoot what was decided after it was made public. Don't give a hoot about your claims of ignorance on DS part. One year of filing income tax concerning some of these issues tells you pretty plain what you can and cannot do.
Now you claim you arent interested in Dannys intent, and refuse to be accountable for your own stout words against him? or see where Bob Pickle has erred?
You really need to spend more time makisng sure you understand what you have read. I am not just now uninterested in DS intent. I have understood his intent on somethings that to me explains DS. Nor have I refused to be accountable for what I said. I don't care where or if Bob Pickle erred. It is DS's little error's of conduct that formed my opinion of him. Take it up with Bob if you believe he has erred.
[qoute]Despite the fact the IRS has concluded their investigation? And you or no other can prove any fault or error[/quote]
I have never attempted to prove any error.
You posted this:
me:
What you do not consider is that after he and Linda both went to their accountants and were informed of the law and what was required that they both learned and did the legal thing as required as he never had any intention of cheating the IRS or doing anything illegal.
You:
I have no problem believing that. Sometimes honesty is the prudent thing even if it is something you do not wish to do. Making public the emails no doubt had something to do with his compliance
Jack
But the emails were posted aka published way after the emails and events and tax returns were filed. Your excuse and justification here makes no more sense, then your earlier posts.
I DO NOT CAR WHEN THE E_MAILS WERE PUBLISHED, I DO NOT CARE WHAT THE IRS FILE READS.
Now are we clear on that, you keep repeating that as if I have denied it.
If you were to find a e-mail from me to John Doe, suggesting we steal money from Jane Doe. You resist and publish that or refuse to comply. I think you would be somewhat careful of your back pocket with me around. I would rethink my foolish plan and asking for your help and never carry thru. Law cannot touch me, God may have other plans.
FOR SHAME!!!
May the Lord rebuke you!!
God will probably handle my rebuking or reward without any pleas from you. Save it for someone that is has a problem with what comes out of your mouth and calls on God to rebuke you.
And may you at least have conscience enough to never repeat those same arguments whether on or off these forums, for you are accountable, just as Bob Pickle is for all you have led to believe a lie.
See, now you are accusing another of something he has not done. For shame. Bob did not convince me of anything, lie or truth. My impressions were formed of DS on C/A, by DS, before I knew it was on Maritime. Also on some issues with LS. One little oops and not very important to others I think is that DS told a little fib to Stan Jensen in this little interview. Pretty staged but...... DS denied that donations had dropped as a result of the "rumormongering". Imagine that. Haven't I read elsewhere just the opposite from him and those like yourself. This kind of stuff, not very important probably to others helps me form my impressions of those I am dealing with or interested in
So much on this forum is like this, where all all those who sigh and cry over all that is done in the name of the Lord which is just so blind and ignorant of him?
This could be flipped right around to yourself, so before I comment, perhaps you would let me know if it is you and your allies or those that are referred to as anti-3ABN
--
absolutely disgusted and ashamed
Your right.
edited to correct a sentence
-
Jack, Just to give you another reason to perhaps call God's rebuke down on my head, the following by you when you first joined the foum is something that began my impression of you. Not illegal in anyway,just don't like game players on serious issues and one who wants to bring up a subject that he condemns others for commenting on. If what people had to say on this issue was so distasteful to you, you would have shut your mouth on the subject and not do what you could to bring it to the forefront to call God's wrath down on those that have an opinion other than yours. Your righteous indignation would have a much more convincing sound had you not been so eager to discuss this hot topic or discuss the odds
I Just posted the following to Gailon:
Quote
Hey Gailon,
How sure are you?
What do you think the chances are that 3ABN will produce the Exoneration letter from the IRS?
50/50? 20/80 ?
Since this is such a hot topic lately I thought it would be both interesting and fun to take a poll and get the consensus here.
The poll only lasts for 7 days so get your vote in on time and make it count.
-
Jack, Just to give you another reason to perhaps call God\\\'s rebuke down on my head, the following by you when you first joined the foum is something that began my impression of you. Not illegal in anyway,just don\\\'t like game players on serious issues and one who wants to bring up a subject that he condemns others for commenting on. If what people had to say on this issue was so distasteful to you, you would have shut your mouth on the subject and not do what you could to bring it to the forefront to call God\\\'s wrath down on those that have an opinion other than yours. Your righteous indignation would have a much more convincing sound had you not been so eager to discuss this hot topic or discuss the odds
I Just posted the following to Gailon:
Quote
Hey Gailon,
How sure are you?
What do you think the chances are that 3ABN will produce the Exoneration letter from the IRS?
50/50? 20/80 ?
Since this is such a hot topic lately I thought it would be both interesting and fun to take a poll and get the consensus here.
The poll only lasts for 7 days so get your vote in on time and make it count.
Bonnie,
You need to stop.
I have never condemned anyone for commenting.on a subject,in fact I have invited it as you posted above. I have only found fault with or questioned others for claiming things as factual and proven which have not been, and still arent backed up and proven by the facts and evidence.
So trying to condemn me based on the above is just another assumption, false conclusion and false judgment from you which demonstrates to others how your mind works and where your heart is.
Please take note of that... and think!
-
So why would they even bother to hack your computer? What would be the point, Fran?
From your own posts about this, it is my understanding.
Its all from files which are available online to anyone.
You have copies in removable storage.
You have sent it all to IRS and Gailon and Bob et all...
The IRS has considered it and concluded their investigation.
You have posted it all along with your personal judgments and personal conclusions and faultfinding on at least 4 forums that I know of, many times.
All of the above is still here, available to anyone concerned. This makes no sense to me.
You appear to be afraid, but the truth is 3ABN has nothing to be afraid of from you all that you have to say has already been investigated and they were not guilty or at fault.
You posted:
\"My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over.\"
I think this is wise, and is what you should have done as soon as it was posted that the IRS investigation was over, rather than continuing to post defensively and to repeat your assumptions and allegations, faultfinding and conclusions without even checking..
But better late then never.
I am very interested in the response you get from your point of contact. I am sure I am not alone.
I think you read my mind Jack. I was just about to post those same questions. Obviously 3abn has reason to believe the IRS investigation is over so why would they care about anybody's files? Especially from Fran who has said repeatedly she gave all her docs to the IRS.
Now if the IRS went through 100,000 Docs from Danny's personal records and 3abn records why would anybody have reason to believe that Fran would know something or have something that the IRS does not?
Fran, has the IRS contacted you at all to ask if you want your records back or if you want them destroyed? When an investigation is over, they do give anyone that has given them documents, that choice. Just tell them you want them back and all will be well again. Of course if the IRS has already been over them I can't imagine why you would care or want them back.
I don't think there is question in anyone's mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and ebay. I'm quite sure the 3abn attorney's now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Maybe you have nothing better in life to do than try to create dishonesty out of the most minute situations. If that makes you happy then go ahead and keep accusing but I can tell you, it doesn't make God happy. It really is time for you to move on Fran. For your own sake.
-
So why would they even bother to hack your computer? What would be the point, Fran?
From your own posts about this, it is my understanding.
Its all from files which are available online to anyone.
You have copies in removable storage.
You have sent it all to IRS and Gailon and Bob et all...
The IRS has considered it and concluded their investigation.
You have posted it all along with your personal judgments and personal conclusions and faultfinding on at least 4 forums that I know of, many times.
All of the above is still here, available to anyone concerned. This makes no sense to me.
You appear to be afraid, but the truth is 3ABN has nothing to be afraid of from you all that you have to say has already been investigated and they were not guilty or at fault.
You posted:
\\\"My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over.\\\"
I think this is wise, and is what you should have done as soon as it was posted that the IRS investigation was over, rather than continuing to post defensively and to repeat your assumptions and allegations, faultfinding and conclusions without even checking..
But better late then never.
I am very interested in the response you get from your point of contact. I am sure I am not alone.
I think you read my mind Jack. I was just about to post those same questions. Obviously 3abn has reason to believe the IRS investigation is over so why would they care about anybodys files? Especially from Fran who has said repeatedly she gave all her docs to the IRS.
Now if the IRS went through 100,000 Docs from Dannys personal records and 3abn records why would anybody have reason to believe that Fran would know something or have something that the IRS does not?
Fran, has the IRS contacted you at all to ask if you want your records back or if you want them destroyed? When an investigation is over, they do give anyone that has given them documents, that choice. Just tell them you want them back and all will be well again. Of course if the IRS has already been over them I can\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t imagine why you would care or want them back.
I do not think there is question in anyones mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and ebay. I am quite sure the 3abn attorneys now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Maybe you have nothing better in life to do than try to create dishonesty out of the most minute situations. If that makes you happy then go ahead and keep accusing but I can tell you, it doesnt make God happy. It really is time for you to move on Fran. For your own sake.
It seems of merit to consider that this talk of a ebay store is just she(TC) said vs what she (Fran ....) has said, and keeps saying repeatedly...
How can Tammy Chance prove a negative? No one can prove a negative.. TC says no store exists.
If Fran claims it exists then she should be the one able able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe the words she says without any evidence.
I have seen no proof.
Has anyone?
It does not appear so, nor has the IRS found fault with anything concerning this.
If they had, it could be posted and proved. None has.
Truth remains the truth regardless of what is posted to cover or disguise it.
-
Bonnie,
You need to stop.
Sorry, you lack the authority or the position on the right hand of God to tell me to stop basing my opinion of someone on their own actions
I have never condemned anyone for commenting.on a subject, just for claiming things which can not be backed up and proven by facts and evidence.
What did you anticipate, complete agreement with what you and others that are followers of DS dictate as important or true. Not the way life works. I or anyone is entitled to an opinion, one based on personal behaviour of another.
We are not there yet when that right can be denied or the attempt made to do so
So tyrying to condemn me based on that is just another assumption, false conclusion and false judgment from you which demonstrates to others how your mind works and where your heart is.
I said my impression of you began to be formed when I read that post. And that I do not like game players over serious issues. I do not believe you made that post as a friendly bystander without an agenda. Would be no different than a supporter of LS posting a similar post, all in fun and giggles. Then getting angry and calling for the rebuke of God on those that do not see things your way.
Sorry if you feel free to CONDEMN others and KNOW Where their Heart is, I have it on good and very recent authority that is not valid. Shame on anyone that does not ask first before making such a statement
I do not support anyone of them. Again, because of his media presence and his trashing LS for adultry and to various people he has more responsibility.
corrected formatting error
-
It seems of merit to consider that this talk of a ebay store is just she(TC) said vs what she (Fran ....) has said, and keeps saying repeatedly...
How can Tammy Chance prove a negative? No one can prove a negative.. TC says no store exists.
Regardless of what TC says, a store doesn\'t exist unless it is proved to exist.
If Fran claims it exists then she should be able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe the words she says without any evidence.
I have seen no proof.
On some issues have you had this little chat with DS. It might be interesting to see what proof he has of adultry, or spiritual adultry or whatever it is now. Why the divorce actually took place.
[/quote]
-
If DS claims proof of adultry exists then he should be able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe the words he says without any evidence. As long as he put it out there, he should be willing to prove
I have seen no proof.(in many things on both sides of the table)
Has anyone?(good question)
It does not appear so, or no one would be questioning whether this proof actaully exists.
If they had, it could be posted and proved.(Yup, many are waiting for various truths to be posted)
Truth remains the truth regardless of what is posted to cover or disguise it.( It does, doesn't it}
-
Well, THANK YOU JACK INDABOCKS!!
I SO agree - "no one can prove a negative."
So, regardless of what any of you say, an IRS exoneration letter doesn't exist unless it is proved to exist.
If any of you claim that such does exist, then you should be able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe it without any evidence!
I have seen no proof.
Has anyone?
BTW...Mr. Jack....Would you happen to know anyone who is getting a good rent deal from 3ABN??
Snoopy
PS: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
It seems of merit to consider that this talk of a ebay store is just she(TC) said vs what she (Fran ....) has said, and keeps saying repeatedly...
How can Tammy Chance prove a negative? No one can prove a negative.. TC says no store exists.
Regardless of what TC says, a store doesn\\\'t exist unless it is proved to exist.
If Fran claims it exists then she should be able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe the words she says without any evidence.
I have seen no proof.
Has anyone?
It does not appear so, nor has the IRS found falt with anything concerning this.
If they had, it could be posted and proved.
Truth remains the truth regardless of what is posted to cover or disguise it.
-
If DS claims proof of adultry exists then he should be able to prove it, and not just expect all to believe the words he says without any evidence. As long as he put it out there, he should be willing to prove
I have seen no proof.(in many things on both sides of the table)
Has anyone?(good question)
It does not appear so, or no one would be questioning whether this proof actaully exists.
If they had, it could be posted and proved.(Yup, many are waiting for various truths to be posted)
Truth remains the truth regardless of what is posted to cover or disguise it.( It does, doesn\\\'t it}
If Danny claims it you must see that proof?
Why?
Whos business s it besides his local Church or the 3abn ministry?
Are you them? Do you even know Linda or any facts? Do you have info or grounds to disagree with him or them, or agree with her?
Do you have reason to think it\'s your business, or that you have call to disbelieve any of them, or believe her?
How so, and what?
-
So why would they even bother to hack your computer? What would be the point, Fran?
From your own posts about this, it is my understanding.
Its all from files which are available online to anyone.
You have copies in removable storage.
You have sent it all to IRS and Gailon and Bob et all...
The IRS has considered it and concluded their investigation.
You have posted it all along with your personal judgments and personal conclusions and faultfinding on at least 4 forums that I know of, many times.
All of the above is still here, available to anyone concerned. This makes no sense to me.
You appear to be afraid, but the truth is 3ABN has nothing to be afraid of from you all that you have to say has already been investigated and they were not guilty or at fault.
You posted:
"My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over."
I think this is wise, and is what you should have done as soon as it was posted that the IRS investigation was over, rather than continuing to post defensively and to repeat your assumptions and allegations, faultfinding and conclusions without even checking..
But better late then never.
I am very interested in the response you get from your point of contact. I am sure I am not alone.
I think you read my mind Jack. I was just about to post those same questions. Obviously 3abn has reason to believe the IRS investigation is over so why would they care about anybody's files? Especially from Fran who has said repeatedly she gave all her docs to the IRS.
Now if the IRS went through 100,000 Docs from Danny's personal records and 3abn records why would anybody have reason to believe that Fran would know something or have something that the IRS does not?
Fran, has the IRS contacted you at all to ask if you want your records back or if you want them destroyed? When an investigation is over, they do give anyone that has given them documents, that choice. Just tell them you want them back and all will be well again. Of course if the IRS has already been over them I can't imagine why you would care or want them back.
I don't think there is question in any one's mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and eBay. I'm quite sure the 3abn attorney's now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Maybe you have nothing better in life to do than try to create dishonesty out of the most minute situations. If that makes you happy then go ahead and keep accusing but I can tell you, it doesn't make God happy. It really is time for you to move on Fran. For your own sake.
First, the fact is that Tammy Shelton-Chance DID INDEED have a store. I have asked that that PDF File showing she DID have a store be posted. Then you will see she DID have a store.
My next question is if the IRS investigation of Tammy has been finished too?
The reason 3ABN would be interested in my files is because they don't want me to have my data for the lawsuit. I still have my data. I would never claim Tammy had a store if I could not prove that. Now, I ask again, why would she lie?
-
So why would they even bother to hack your computer? What would be the point, Fran?
From your own posts about this, it is my understanding.
Its all from files which are available online to anyone.
You have copies in removable storage.
You have sent it all to IRS and Gailon and Bob et all...
The IRS has considered it and concluded their investigation.
You have posted it all along with your personal judgments and personal conclusions and faultfinding on at least 4 forums that I know of, many times.
All of the above is still here, available to anyone concerned. This makes no sense to me.
You appear to be afraid, but the truth is 3ABN has nothing to be afraid of from you all that you have to say has already been investigated and they were not guilty or at fault.
You posted:
\\\\\\\"My correspondence with the IRS is not on my hard drive. I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over.\\\\\\\"
I think this is wise, and is what you should have done as soon as it was posted that the IRS investigation was over, rather than continuing to post defensively and to repeat your assumptions and allegations, faultfinding and conclusions without even checking..
But better late then never.
I am very interested in the response you get from your point of contact. I am sure I am not alone.
I think you read my mind Jack. I was just about to post those same questions. Obviously 3abn has reason to believe the IRS investigation is over so why would they care about anybody\\\\\\\'s files? Especially from Fran who has said repeatedly she gave all her docs to the IRS.
Now if the IRS went through 100,000 Docs from Danny\\\\\\\'s personal records and 3abn records why would anybody have reason to believe that Fran would know something or have something that the IRS does not?
Fran, has the IRS contacted you at all to ask if you want your records back or if you want them destroyed? When an investigation is over, they do give anyone that has given them documents, that choice. Just tell them you want them back and all will be well again. Of course if the IRS has already been over them I can\\\\\\\'t imagine why you would care or want them back.
I don\\\\\\\'t think there is question in any one\\\\\\\'s mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and eBay. I\\\\\\\'m quite sure the 3abn attorney\\\\\\\'s now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Maybe you have nothing better in life to do than try to create dishonesty out of the most minute situations. If that makes you happy then go ahead and keep accusing but I can tell you, it doesn\\\\\\\'t make God happy. It really is time for you to move on Fran. For your own sake.
First, the fact is that Tammy Shelton-Chance DID INDEED have a store. I have asked that that PDF File showing she DID have a store be posted. Then you will see she DID have a store.
My next question is if the IRS investigation of Tammy has been finished too?
The reason 3ABN would be interested in my files is because they don\\\\\\\'t want me to have my data for the lawsuit. I still have my data. I would never claim Tammy had a store if I could not prove that. Now, I ask again, why would she lie?
You claim facts, then have asked that the proof be posted? well if you did not and do not have it yourself and could not post it, WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD are you doing making claims about it yourself?
Why would not you prove your own claims, if you could?
Why would you or anyone lie, if the proof could be posted?
Doublly disgusted and downright sick.
I hope all who love the truth, are!
-
If Danny claims it you must see that proof?
DS claims mean nothing more than LS claims. This idea that it almost sounds as if someone is supposed to genuflect because the great one speaks only works with his ardent follower's
Why?
Because DS made it public
Who\'s business s it beside\'s his local Church or the 3Ban ministry?
It is the business of every SDA how DS, public personality that represents the SDA church to the world conducts himself and the message he sends. Perhaps it was not anyone's business in the beginning, thank DS for making it so.
do you have info or grounds to disagree with him or them?
Yes, because they refuse to grant what they demand from others, including you
Do you have reason to think it\'s your business, or that you have call to disbelieve any of them?
It is the business of every SDA after it was made public. When I went public with my sons ordeal, it became the business of SDA's everywhere as it included the SDA church and how it was perceived.
Yes, I do have reason as far as I am concerned. As I am not part of any lawsuit,I am not part of any jury, mine is opinion and sorry you don't like it. But ....
How so, and what?
How is your reading comprehension??? I believe I have answered this several times. If you still don't get it, try going back and rereading .
What GC president Jan Paulsen does, says and how he conducts himself is my business and that of every SDA. Most of the world would have no idea who was being talked about. Not so with DS. He and 3ABN is the business of every SDA
If he did not want the divorce to be anyone's business a good plan would have been to make a brief statement, shut his mouth and deal financially fairly and publicity wise with LS, marry his thrid wife and move on.
His mistake was in thinking all were willing to bend the knee as he humiliated LS publically.
I don't care whose fault the divorce was,he behaved in a way that was more than a little tacky and invited the public involvement that he now has.
I am not real sure he even minds all that much. This will give you another reason to implore God's wrath on my head.From where I sit, there is far to much theatrics going on . If there was adultery and you have made it public, stop milking it. Provide the proof you used to trash a ex-spouse publically. Not drag it out for as much effect as possible. This we have proof, when time is right, or if we have to....... is just a little to much fun. Use it or shut up. Don't continue the trashing and milk it for all it is worth. It will not matter now anyway. many have already been convinced and even if proof is never forthcoming, most will overlook or not even notice.
Doing same with IRS ruling. The over dramatization and the baited breath routine, waiting for the letter of exoneration, the big drum roll building up to this letter being released. How about "We are pleased this has been resolved, thank you to those that have supported them thru a difficult time and move on. If for some reason a public statement cannot be made, then again shut their mouth. This "ARE YOU READY.... ARE YOU READY.... SOON NOW ,THE BIG ONE IS COMING ... is explaining DS loud and clear.
Now go ahead and petition God to rain his wrath
-
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
:goodpost:
-
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
:goodpost:
:( So be it. You are a mocker and find it all funny, but can\\\'t support or prove anything?
Mat 24:36-39 But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only3 But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be...
2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2Pe 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2Pe 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast [them] down to hell, and delivered [them] into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
2Pe 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth [person], a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
2Pe 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned [them] with an overthrow, making [them] an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
2Pe 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:
2Pe 2:8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed [his] righteous soul from day to day with [their] unlawful deeds;)
2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous [are they], selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
2Pe 2:11 Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
2Pe 2:13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, [as] they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots [they are] and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
2Pe 2:14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:
2Pe 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam [the son] of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
2Pe 2:16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man\\\\\\\'s voice forbad the madness of the prophet.
2Pe 2:17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
2Pe 2:18 For when they speak great swelling [words] of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, [through much] wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
2Pe 2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
Carry on, You are accountable for yourself here. I just have to say I find your stance sad, and do not find it funny or in any way supported.
Bye.
-
Great, you know how to CC&P. Have you also learned how to apply these words of wisdom to yourself and others that you so strongly defend.
-
Great, you know how to CC&P. Have you also learned how to apply these words of wisdom to yourself and others that you so strongly defend.
A practical application would be helpful, provided the person understands what he reads.
-
ADMIN HAT ON
Mr. Indabocks, if you would like to maintain your posting privileges here I suggest you refrain from using disgusting language. I edited your post to remove some terms from your last sentence.
ADMIN HAT OFF
I understand you and your focus and point, and your definition of disgusting language as you define it perfectly snoopy. I willl try to not offend further, but doubt I will be able to even tho this is not a disagrement with or condemnation of criticism of you or your post as a adminstrator of advent talk or the rules here.
I do feel I am doomed to have you personally find fault with me no matter what I post as you don\'t like it, and I do wish you had it in your heart to understand me, my point, and my point. :)
Regardless. I\'ll just repost what I said elsewhere if you don\'t allow it, and may God bless and :puppykisses: anyway.
If Danny claims it you must see that proof?
DS claims mean nothing more than LS claims. This idea that it almost sounds as if someone is supposed to genuflect because the great one speaks only works with his ardent follower\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s
Why?
Because DS made it public
Last question to you Bonnie.
Where and when did HE do so?
Quote it and prove it please!
I am absolutely siick of the *******.
-
I don't think there is question in anyone's mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and ebay. I'm quite sure the 3abn attorney's now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Sam, could you comment on these files which appear to show Tammy's store? Got an explanation, or is an apology in order?
-
Last question to you Bonnie.
Doubtful as this is not the first time you have threatened to leave this conversation.
Where and when did HE do so?
You want to spend the time going back thru miles of posts on other forums, Go For it. DS has not remained silent, either himself, or his followers. His followers could have been shut down in a heart beat by DS if he so wanted. He set the pace and tone. He is also setting the pace and tone for the breathless announcement that is coming any day now about the IRS. Build and build and build. Simple three sentence declaration from him and poof all goes away.
Quote it and prove it please!
That is always such an interesting demand from some. When demands are made, I always expect the one doing the demanding to lead the way. So far you are not doing a very good job. Mine is opinion, you are the one that sounds as if you have the facts, again, go for it
I am absolutely siick of the ********.
I am sorry you are ill, however I am not the one that has you tethered here. I am not the one that just for the giggles wanted to lay odds on a very hot topic. I am not the one that came with a hidden agenda. If you want to feel better, stop pushing the ******* ahead of you
Post edited by Snoopy to remove disgusting references.
-
Do not twist my words, Bonnie. I did not say or threaten to leave this conversation.
I just said it was my last question to you, as you have always, and remain unable or unwilling to answer any direct questions regarding what you post, say and claim, and do not seem to feel accountable for what you post and claim against another, as regardless of the questions about this you just keep insisting it is true and you are right regardless of your lack of evidence or proof, or any questions from others about that.
I am no longer responsible for shouting danger to you as you don\\\'t acknowledge any danger.
You can choose to see and hear only what you want to see and hear.
You have heard and can and are reacting to what I and others have said and presented as you choose.
All have that right.
It is a waste of time to me to continue to argue with your opinions regardless of the facts. Can you possibly understand that?
May God help you and have mercy on you.
Good bye.
Last question to you Bonnie.
Doubtful as this is not the first time you have threatened to leave this conversation.
Where and when did HE do so?
You want to spend the time going back thru miles of posts on other forums, Go For it. DS has not remained silent, either himself, or his followers. His followers could have been shut down in a heart beat by DS if he so wanted. He set the pace and tone. He is also setting the pace and tone for the breathless announcement that is coming any day now about the IRS. Build and build and build. Simple three sentence declaration from him and poof all goes away.
Quote it and prove it please!
That is always such an interesting demand from some. When demands are made, I always expect the one doing the demanding to lead the way. So far you are not doing a very good job. Mine is opinion, you are the one that sounds as if you have the facts, again, go for it
I am absolutely siick of the *******.
I am sorry you are ill, however I am not the one that has you tethered here. I am not the one that just for the giggles wanted to lay odds on a very hot topic. I am not the one that came with a hidden agenda. If you want to feel better, stop pushing the ******* ahead of you
Post edited by Snoopy to remove disgusting references.
-
Do not twist my words, Bonnie. I did not say or threaten to leave this conversation.
Actually I think you did, but edited out the part about being done or leaving this discussion. Will have to check.
I just said it was my last question to you[/b[, as you have always and remain unable or unwilling to answer any direct questions, and don\'t seem to feel accountable for what you post and claim against another, but just keep insisting it is true regardless of your lack of evidence or proof, or any questions about it
I have given you my true impression of DS. What is it you would like me to be accountable for and in what manner? The same manner in which you offer prove of his total innocence in all matters? I am totally accountable for what I said. It is my true impression of DS. Wish I could say I am sorry it bothers you.
I am no longer responsible for shouting danger to you.
I am not sure that you ever were responsible for shouting danger to me. You are only belatedly partially responsible for deepening my impression of this whole mess. Don't burden yourself further
You choose to see what you see and hear what you hear.
That is your opinion. But shame on you for trying to define motives and the heart of another
You have heard and can and are reactng to what I and others have said and presented as you choose.
Quite right. I have reacted to what you have said and presented at this time. No law against it and we all have to be able to form opinions. I do not begrudge you yours until, you start telling me to provide what you refuse. When you are imploring God to rebuke me on behalf of DS or for my opinion of DS.
Funny how that rebuke was not invoked when not supporting LS, must be because she desrves it HUH???
May God help you and have mercy on you.
Thank you, he has in ways to numerous to count. The have mercy part if memory serves me right is something we should all hope and prayer for. Or did I get that part wrong as well
Last question to you Bonnie.
Doubtful as this is not the first time you have threatened to leave this conversation.
Where and when did HE do so?
You want to spend the time going back thru miles of posts on other forums, Go For it. DS has not remained silent, either himself, or his followers. His followers could have been shut down in a heart beat by DS if he so wanted. He set the pace and tone. He is also setting the pace and tone for the breathless announcement that is coming any day now about the IRS. Build and build and build. Simple three sentence declaration from him and poof all goes away.
Quote it and prove it please!
That is always such an interesting demand from some. When demands are made, I always expect the one doing the demanding to lead the way. So far you are not doing a very good job. Mine is opinion, you are the one that sounds as if you have the facts, again, go for it
I am absolutely siick of the *******.
I am sorry you are ill, however I am not the one that has you tethered here. I am not the one that just for the giggles wanted to lay odds on a very hot topic. I am not the one that came with a hidden agenda. If you want to feel better, stop pushing the ******* ahead of you
[/quote]
-
Jack,
I really don't care who you are,who you support, who you defend. What you ask from me, be willing to give.
What you are asking me to believe be willing to show me as you demand from others.
Until then, you have done nothing but what you condemn me for. Giving an opinion. Did you witness the act of adultery? Irrefutable proof? from a source independent of DS? If not, the fact that is still even a topic should bother you. Where is the requested rebuke from God?
Are little lies someone tells a non issue and it is only the really big ones that define who you are?
If you are defending more than an opinion, proof please. Surely you would not ask of me what you refuse.
It is people like yourself that further cement my impression of DS.
It would be interesting to see a subpoena for the true identifies of some here that demand so much and are willing to give so little. Don't know if possible or even of any importance but would be really interesting.
Possibly then the demands would cease.
When you volunteer proof of your opinions, you have a perfect right to ask me for mine. Till then I stand by my opinion,regardless of your shouts of danger.
-
You know what Jack? I don't personally find fault with you at all. I am sure you are a perfectly wonderful human being! What I have a problem with is your language and the attitude you have displayed when someone disagrees with you. I think we can all agree to disagree without having to stoop to using references to excrement in our conversations with each other. And, you know what else? You didn't need to tell me that you would just post your comments elsewhere, 'cause I already knew that. As long as you don't do it here, I really don't care where you do it!!! But thanks for the well wishes of God's blessings - He certainly has already blessed me "abundantly more than I could ever ask"!! And, :puppykisses: back at ya!!
ADMIN HAT ON
Mr. Indabocks, if you would like to maintain your posting privileges here I suggest you refrain from using disgusting language. I edited your post to remove some terms from your last sentence.
ADMIN HAT OFF
I understand you and your focus and point, and your definition of disgusting language as you define it perfectly snoopy. I willl try to not offend further, but doubt I will be able to even tho this is not a disagrement with or condemnation of criticism of you or your post as a adminstrator of advent talk or the rules here.
I do feel I am doomed to have you personally find fault with me no matter what I post as you don\'t like it, and I do wish you had it in your heart to understand me, my point, and my point. :)
Regardless. I\'ll just repost what I said elsewhere if you don\'t allow it, and may God bless and :puppykisses: anyway.
If Danny claims it you must see that proof?
DS claims mean nothing more than LS claims. This idea that it almost sounds as if someone is supposed to genuflect because the great one speaks only works with his ardent follower\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s
Why?
Because DS made it public
Last question to you Bonnie.
Where and when did HE do so?
Quote it and prove it please!
I am absolutely siick of the *******.
-
Explain to me the little white lie of DS. Don't tell me he didn't say it or I have to ask what he meant. I mentioned earlier his little lie about falling donations. No misunderstanding, no wicked rumormongering, DS said that was not true. Also in that interview he said something to reassure donors that the legal tab was being picked up by other than donations to 3ABN. So the lawsuit would have already been in the works or planned. I did not know of Gailon Joy or Bob Pickle at that time so was unaware of why the lawsuit. Strange how things can change from forum to forum. When I finally went to Maritime here the complete opposite. Falling donations was one of the reasons given for the lawsuit. Little lie, maybe most did not even pay attention. Now tell me why I would believe anyone in important issues when they have already proven they will lie over small issues.
Bob Pickle,Gailon Joy, no anti- 3ABN distractor gave me one of my first close up of the honesty of DS. No rumormonger, no lovers of lies, except DS himself. Small things like this have formed my opinion of DS. No amount of you calling for God's wrath on my head is going to change what I read
-
I don't think there is question in anyone's mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and ebay. I'm quite sure the 3abn attorney's now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Sam, could you comment on these files which appear to show Tammy's store? Got an explanation, or is an apology in order?
Well, it looks like Fran was right.
"Tammy's Variety Outlet" is listed as the Seller's Store for both the bass guitar and the Peavey amp, with the seller id of 812worden.
-
. . . Then I got up and my computer opened up with all kinds of red alerts. My data had changed again! It took forever to get my firewall up and running along with Windows defend and my virus and scan came up. Everything security was turned off!
. . . Guess what? They have removed all my 3ABN information from my hard drive.
. . . I believe the Criminal Investigation is not over. I have left a message with my IRS point of contact. I will find out if it is really over. I am also going to ask for protection. This is about the 6th or 7th time this has happened. This is so un-Christ like!
. . . Telling keeps me safer.
. . . As for me, remember, IRS IT forensics can find out who was on my computer and took my information.
Fran, I think it is wise of you to put this information on the Forum.
I, for one, am praying for your safety and protection.
-
You claim facts, then have asked that the proof be posted? well if you did not and do not have it yourself and could not post it, WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD are you doing making claims about it yourself?
Why would not you prove your own claims, if you could?
Why would you or anyone lie, if the proof could be posted?
Doublly disgusted and downright sick.
I hope all who love the truth, are!
Yes, some of us are, but not with Fran. She proved her claims. She was not lying, someone else was. Are you still doubly disgusted and sick with the one not telling the truth?
-
I don't think there is question in anyone's mind that you have been wrong in your financial allegations. Now you start in on Tammy C and ebay. I'm quite sure the 3abn attorney's now have it in your words that she lied about a store. That is called defamation as she has already made the statement in her email to me that she did not ever have a store. Knowing how all can be traced these days, I doubt if anyone would lie about something like that as they would be putting their own head in a noose. You are confused again just as you were confused about the nan don thing.
Sam, could you comment on these files which appear to show Tammy's store? Got an explanation, or is an apology in order?
Well, it looks like Fran was right.
"Tammy's Variety Outlet" is listed as the Seller's Store for both the bass guitar and the Peavey amp, with the seller id of 812worden.
Quite obvious that Fran was right and someone was handling the truth about not having the store, rather carelessly.
Well, we've seen that quite a bit in all the workings of DS and 3abn, haven't we?
Fran, take care and please do notify the authorities. That alone, can be one way of keeping you safe. I too, am praying for your safety.
-
Where did Jack go??? It got...oh...so quiet...!!
-
Where did Jack go??? It got...oh...so quiet...!!
Maybe, someone put the lid back on his box? :oops:
If so, hope it stays on. :TY:
-
oh Jack...
-
Yikes!
-
YEA!!! JACK'S BACK!! Hey - I like your Jack better!! Maybe that's what Jack looks like when he finds out his flunkies have been untruthful...
Yikes!
-
Hey - a Snoopy-in-the-Box!!
-
Hey - a Snoopy-in-the-Box!!
I love 'Snoopy in a box'. Don't know that I'm so rapt about Jack-in-the bocks' though! :oops:
-
My next question is if the IRS investigation of Tammy has been finished too?
The reason 3ABN would be interested in my files is because they don't want me to have my data for the lawsuit. I still have my data. I would never claim Tammy had a store if I could not prove that. Now, I ask again, why would she lie?
Fran is asking why Tammy would say something that appears untrue.
Is there some reason for this other than the obvious?
-
Sure - Tammy probably just asked to be taken off the IRS mailing list...
-
My next question is if the IRS investigation of Tammy has been finished too?
The reason 3ABN would be interested in my files is because they don\'t want me to have my data for the lawsuit. I still have my data. I would never claim Tammy had a store if I could not prove that. Now, I ask again, why would she lie?
Fran is asking why Tammy would say something that appears untrue.
Is there some reason for this other than the obvious?
The files Bob posted are very curious.
Ebay has no record of a store by the name of Tammys variety outlet. No records of items sold by a store by that name and no records of a store by that name ever belonging to 812worden, nor any other user...
Do your own search and see for yourself.
-
I imagine they don't allow you to look at old records, just like you can't view listings that are a certain age.
-
I imagine they don't allow you to look at old records, just like you can't view listings that are a certain age.
There are trails if you follow them. Old listings are removed but name change will show previous user ID's under the original and link that to the present. If you do a name search for 812worden you will pull up zoolane49 and show the following
812worden is still active, only using another name...
User ID Effective Date End Date
zoolane49 Jun-18-08 Present
812worden Jun-24-04 Jun-18-08
Re: eBay Sales Revisited
« Reply #4 on: Today at 06:00:32 AM » Quote Modify
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Match the dates with Fran's record. 812worden-Tammy's Variety Store is join date of June 24th 2004
User ID Effective Date End Date
zoolane49 Jun-18-08 Present
812worden Jun-24-04 Jun-18-08
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Fran,
I do hope that your records are not stored in your home. Please do not inform where they are stored. Just make sure they are in secure location(s).
I'm not a tech person but is there a program that you and install on your computer that could hack the hacker? You know once he gets in, that program somehow stops the hacking and sneaks back and drops a neutron bomb on the miscreant!
My next question is if the IRS investigation of Tammy has been finished too?
The reason 3ABN would be interested in my files is because they don't want me to have my data for the lawsuit. I still have my data. I would never claim Tammy had a store if I could not prove that. Now, I ask again, why would she lie?
Fran is asking why Tammy would say something that appears untrue.
Is there some reason for this other than the obvious?
-
----------------edited for content------------------------
-
Stores open and close all the time. This is why all the feedback stays with the User ID. It is the user ID that is verified. They also provide links to the new User ID. However, there are no permanent records of stores where it shows the items sold.
I wonder if I can find those copies of 3ABN Changing name 4 times all in a 1-2 week period.
Why won't Tammy tell us where the feedback from 1998 through 2002 is? The User ID was not Don_3ABN.
Tammy does ceramic work too. She had a beautiful basket of flowers for sale on 3ABN that she had made. It was for $59.00. Again I missed it. I emailed back and forth with Tammy, and she referred me to Tammy's Tiles. Is this her store? Does anyone know? Maybe it was hers and she sold it?
Right now, 3ABN has a Civil War Sword for sale! I sure wish I had the money to purchase it. However, I don't. It is listed with $2,499.99 as the opening bid. I am a civil War Buff. I saved a copy of the listing because there are some close ups that give the detail of the sword and sheath. It is exquisite.
-
Fran,
Prior if you had changed ID,including changing to a new account you couuld merge your ID with the new and that is what most want. In the past those wnating to not be identified with the prior name would just open a completely new account and not have the feedback merged. Now that can no longer be done. If you are not trying to distance yourself from the feedback the best you can do is refer potential buyer's to your pervious feedback. It will not show in the count of the new ID if you have opened a compltely new account
If you are leaving all information and not changing accounts, just names ID will stay with you.
-
I was just looking at 3ABNdefended, and I have to wonder what is going on. Here we have Danny claiming in April 2005 to have falsified a figure on his 2003 tax return, and these folks are still claiming that that is nothing, not an infraction, or anything like that.
I would never have imagined that we could have a situation like this in Adventism, where people claim to be conservative or involved in ministry, and yet so willing to violate the most basic principles of our faith.
Why can't we simply agree that claiming that a donation of property is cash is wrong?
-
How many souls are won by a meganetwork claiming minor sins do not count? Is that what the world needs most of all?
-
I was just looking at 3ABNdefended, and I have to wonder what is going on. Here we have Danny claiming in April 2005 to have falsified a figure on his 2003 tax return, and these folks are still claiming that that is nothing, not an infraction, or anything like that.
I would never have imagined that we could have a situation like this in Adventism, where people claim to be conservative or involved in ministry, and yet so willing to violate the most basic principles of our faith.
Why can't we simply agree that claiming that a donation of property is cash is wrong?
Someone actually opened a Yahoo group defending 3ABN? Yahoo? :ROFL:
-
From 3ABNdefended:
Can someone please help me understand? What is the basis of his
accusation? Does Pickle have a copy of the 1040 to substantiate his
accusations?
1) The basis of the accusation is Danny's email of April 2005 in which he claimed that he counted a donation of property as a donation of $20,000 cash. The basis is Danny's own words.
2) It's been a matter of court record for months that I have examined Danny's Sched. A's for 2001 through 2003. The results of my analysis have been online since around last September. The 2003 Sched. A shows an excess cash donation of around $20,000, thus affirming that Danny was telling the truth.
Danny doesn't always tell the truth, as when he said last September that Christians who say that he is being investigated by the IRS are enemies of the gospel. (Whether he gave Jim Gilley a special dispensation to say last Thursday that there really was an IRS investigation going on, I do not know.)
Why can't we simply accept that the IRS has investigated, cleared the
accused and moved on?
Because we're Seventh-day Adventists, that's why. We think for ourselves. We aren't zombies that simply follow whatever someone else says.
1) No proof or evidence of such a clearing of the accused has yet been produced.
2) No proof or evidence of Ronnie Shelton's original claim is possible, since Ronnie falsely stated that there were no infractions or discrepancies, and Danny's reporting a donation of property as cash in 2003 is definitely either an infraction or a discrepancy.
-
From 3ABNdefended:
Pickle, Joy, Fran etc have never been to 3abn, have never had access to the thousands of records that exist, have never talked personally to those they accuse and therefore are basically clueless as to the day to day functions of 3abn.
Would anyone call this statement by Sam a bald-faced lie?
-
From 3ABNdefended:
Pickle, Joy, Fran etc have never been to 3abn, have never had access to the thousands of records that exist, have never talked personally to those they accuse and therefore are basically clueless as to the day to day functions of 3abn.
Would anyone call this statement by Sam a bald-faced lie?
Sam also said I didn't know Danny. Didn't Fran work at 3ABN?
-
Only you.
Would anyone call this statement by Sam a bald-faced lie?
-
Only you.
Would anyone call this statement by Sam a bald-faced lie?
And, your explanation anyman is...?
-
Either Sam is a liar or he is so uninformed that he shouldn't be commenting when he says that Gailon and I have not personally talked with some of the 3ABNites involved in this saga.
anyman and Sam, I request an acknowledgment of your mistake, and I request an apology.
-
You missed a couple of possible reasons:
a. YOU are wrong
b. YOU have fabricated your positions by manipulating other peoples honest and truthful communications to say
what you would have them say
So there is a very real possibility that you are the one who needs, or will need to, make apologies. I realize you may never do so because it will mean you will have to admit that you were wrong . . . but your fruits reveal that isn't a likely possibility. Spamming people with emails isn't really communication now is it?
Either Sam is a liar or he is so uninformed that he shouldn't be commenting when he says that Gailon and I have not personally talked with some of the 3ABNites involved in this saga.
anyman and Sam, I request an acknowledgment of your mistake, and I request an apology.
-
anyman, why don't you demonstrate your familiarity with Christian principles by seeking common ground where there should be some.
Sam accused us of having never talked personally to some of the players in this saga. That accusation is patently false. Despite your assertion, I am not wrong about that, and you know it.
I have never manipulated Walt's honest communication that he never contacted any of the alleged molestation victims of Tommy Shelton. I took his word for it that he was telling the truth on that one, for he certainly had no reason to prevaricate on such a point that would make him look so irresponsible.
I again request an apology from you for your unkind and inappropriate remark that only I would consider Sam's accusation a lie.
-
Hhhmm . . . this might make a good addition to the Wikipedia page on the Jesuit tactic of "reservatio mentalis" or maybe Sophistry . . . you know this comment is meant to mislead and create a perception that is not true . . . and your constant repetition of it, and others, is certainly your use of your NLP training.
I have never manipulated Walt's honest communication that he never contacted any of the alleged molestation victims of Tommy Shelton. I took his word for it that he was telling the truth on that one, for he certainly had no reason to prevaricate on such a point that would make him look so irresponsible.
-
Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.
Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?
We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?
We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?
We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?
So what exactly do we disagree about?
I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.
-
First, let's start with this . . . don't assume I agree with you on anything. Your suggestion, via another misleading post, is that we have talked and we agree . . . just to clarify for the reading public, we haven't and we don't.
Secondly, to clarify for those guests reading here, Dr. Thompson did everything he was required to do. Mr. Robert Pickle's insinuation that he was negligent in his duties is purely Mr. Robert Pickle's attempts at disparagement - not to mention his insinuations and allegations in regards to Danny, Doug Bachelor, Dr. Thompson, Jim Gilley, etc. while occassionally not outright lies are perfect examples of casuistry and amphibology.
So it is obvious I am not going to agree with you as your goal here is not to present the truth and I will not agree with your manufactured reality.
You want an apology from people - set an example and apology for foisting this charade on the world.
Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.
Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?
We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?
We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?
We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?
So what exactly do we disagree about?
I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.
-
So it should be patently clear to the reading public that on some of the most basic points, Danny Shelton's defenders reveal some serious problems.
1) anyman can't even bring himself to say that he agrees that Dryden's letter invited Walt to contact the alleged victims of Tommy Shelton. Why not?
2) anyman can't even bring himself to say that he agrees that Walt admitted that he never contacted any of the alleged victims.
3) anyman can't even bring himself to say that he agrees that Walt personally told me he never did, and that he has never retracted his position.
4) anyman can't even bring himself to say that he agrees that Walt should have contacted the alleged victims in order to safeguard 3ABN from potential liability.
I would guess that he would also have trouble agreeing that Christian courtesy would dictate that he should have contacted those alleged victims. And that Riva should never have sent that nasty letter to Dryden. And that Riva should apologize to Dryden for his unchristlike conduct.
And all this highlights the weirdness of this whole situation, where a ministry claims to be spreading the 3 angels' message into all the world which includes a call to obey the 10 Commandments, and that ministry's defenders can't even bring themselves to say that the board chairman should have talked with the alleged victims of alleged pedophile Tommy Shelton to get their side of the story.
-
Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.
Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?
We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?
We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?
We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?
So what exactly do we disagree about?
I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.
As I have read here, some of your statements have raised some questions.
How many of Tommy's alleged victims have filed charges against him? As Pastor Dryden and you have attempted to build a case as to the guilt of Tommy Shelton, it seems that the most proper procedure would instead be for alleged victims to address this situation in the justice system.
I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities. Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things?
I understand that it is often very difficult for victims to report abuse, but if they were bold enough to report it to a pastor and other members of the congregation, why not take the next logical step and take it to the proper authorities? Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter. Whose job is it to investigate such things?
-
Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.
Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?
We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?
We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?
We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?
So what exactly do we disagree about?
I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.
As I have read here, some of your statements have raised some questions.
How many of Tommy's alleged victims have filed charges against him? As Pastor Dryden and you have attempted to build a case as to the guilt of Tommy Shelton, it seems that the most proper procedure would instead be for alleged victims to address this situation in the justice system.
I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities. Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things?
I understand that it is often very difficult for victims to report abuse, but if they were bold enough to report it to a pastor and other members of the congregation, why not take the next logical step and take it to the proper authorities? Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter. Whose job is it to investigate such things?
One of Tommy's victims DID press charges and somehow Tommy was able to smooth talk his way out of being prosecuted.
For most of us, the statute of limitations has run out. There is a bill pending in the Illinois Senate that would open a window for criminal charges to be filed. I contacted our state senator, Gary Forby, and he didn't even have the courtesy to answer my email. He is a worthless coward. Believe me, if the statute ever opens up, I will be the first to press charges.
I reported what happened to me because I have since been told that nearly the entire Shelton family, including Tommy's wife Carol, knew the abuse was going on and did nothing to stop it. In fact, after our statements were made, both Tommy and Carol sent out blistering letters complaining about how bad they have been treated. No denying the charges, but no apologies or remorse, either.
As far as Glenn Dryden goes, he delights in sticking his nose into things that cause controversy. He isn't interested in a resolution, he just wants to mail out letters and spread gossip. He has done it for years and I don't anticipate any change in that.
-
Good for you, Duane!! You are truly a courageous individual. Please don't interpret this post as trying to intrude in to your business or tell you what to do, but might I respectfully suggest that you not give up your case with one cowardly senator. Write to someone else. Maybe the other senator. Maybe a Representative. Maybe a media troubleshooter. Do all in your power to get your story out on the table. Remember, the squeaky wheel theory!! What about Dr. Phil? Or Oprah? I'm serious!! It will take someone with your backbone to push this ugly story into the public eye and FORCE someone, somewhere to take action. This whole mess is absolutely disgusting.
One of Tommy's victims DID press charges and somehow Tommy was able to smooth talk his way out of being prosecuted.
For most of us, the statute of limitations has run out. There is a bill pending in the Illinois Senate that would open a window for criminal charges to be filed. I contacted our state senator, Gary Forby, and he didn't even have the courtesy to answer my email. He is a worthless coward. Believe me, if the statute ever opens up, I will be the first to press charges.
I reported what happened to me because I have since been told that nearly the entire Shelton family, including Tommy's wife Carol, knew the abuse was going on and did nothing to stop it. In fact, after our statements were made, both Tommy and Carol sent out blistering letters complaining about how bad they have been treated. No denying the charges, but no apologies or remorse, either.
As far as Glenn Dryden goes, he delights in sticking his nose into things that cause controversy. He isn't interested in a resolution, he just wants to mail out letters and spread gossip. He has done it for years and I don't anticipate any change in that.
-
Good for you, Duane!! You are truly a courageous individual. Please don't interpret this post as trying to intrude in to your business or tell you what to do, but might I respectfully suggest that you not give up your case with one cowardly senator. Write to someone else. Maybe the other senator. Maybe a Representative. Maybe a media troubleshooter. Do all in your power to get your story out on the table. Remember, the squeaky wheel theory!! What about Dr. Phil? Or Oprah? I'm serious!! It will take someone with your backbone to push this ugly story into the public eye and FORCE someone, somewhere to take action. This whole mess is absolutely disgusting.
One of Tommy's victims DID press charges and somehow Tommy was able to smooth talk his way out of being prosecuted.
For most of us, the statute of limitations has run out. There is a bill pending in the Illinois Senate that would open a window for criminal charges to be filed. I contacted our state senator, Gary Forby, and he didn't even have the courtesy to answer my email. He is a worthless coward. Believe me, if the statute ever opens up, I will be the first to press charges.
I reported what happened to me because I have since been told that nearly the entire Shelton family, including Tommy's wife Carol, knew the abuse was going on and did nothing to stop it. In fact, after our statements were made, both Tommy and Carol sent out blistering letters complaining about how bad they have been treated. No denying the charges, but no apologies or remorse, either.
As far as Glenn Dryden goes, he delights in sticking his nose into things that cause controversy. He isn't interested in a resolution, he just wants to mail out letters and spread gossip. He has done it for years and I don't anticipate any change in that.
Duane, I know that this is a decision that only you can make, but I certainly endorse everything that Snoopy has said here; particularly about the 'squeaky wheel'.
There has to be people out there who care enough to investigate and support you. Investigative journalism is a specialty area as I understand it, but there are people who are interested in helping get to the nuts and bolts of these cases. Dr Phil sounds like a good person who would be particularly interested in this too.
'LateLine' blew apart allegations of sexual abuse just a few days before the Pope arrived in Australia. Many people didn't like it, but those 'victims/survivors' got their message across. Of course the Catholic Church came up with an idea about 'how they would handle it in house', but it got people that have the ability to investigate, on the job.
I was furious when I heard and saw Cardinal Pell say that he hoped it would all be over and done with before 'World Youth Day' (a week after this was first aired), but he didn't do himself or the Catholic Church any favours by such statements. What it did do, was raise the ire of many people, who demanded justice. It also brought forward 'legal eagles' who provided some useful advice to victims about where to go to get help - and that was not to the Church, but to the appropriate legal authorities.
Take care Duane. I admire your courage and perseverance.
-
Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter.
Are you telling me that if you were on a jury and listened to heartbroken mothers and their children tell horrendous stories, and heard the board chairman say that he never bothered to talk to the alleged victims even when invited to, and that it enough evidence was brought out to demonstrate that the alleged perpetrator was indeed a perpetrator, that you would not reward one penny to the alleged victims on grounds of extreme negligence?
Where is your head at? How can you even say such a thing?
Have you not read about the huge judgments against the Catholic Church even in cases where no charges were filed?
-
I was furious when I heard and saw Cardinal Pell say that he hoped it would all be over and done with before 'World Youth Day' (a week after this was first aired), but he didn't do himself or the Catholic Church any favours by such statements.
Was it Pell or another Catholic official who had taken the position that a minor was consenting, but after the publication of a transcript of a phone call was maybe going to take a different position since the priest in that phone call had admitted that it wasn't consensual?
Yes, it was Pell: http://www.missionandjustice.org/pell-stands-by-consensual-decision/ (http://www.missionandjustice.org/pell-stands-by-consensual-decision/)
As if consensual makes any difference!
The caption under the picture at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/09/2299355.htm?section=australia (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/09/2299355.htm?section=australia) says that Pell met with the priest but not with the alleged victim. Sound familiar?
Why do we keep seeing similarities between this saga and those of the Vatican? Why did both Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell and Walt Thompson meet with the alleged perpetrators and/or their relative but not with the alleged victim(s)? Why did Walt Thompson approach this situation like Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell rather than in the way I would think the average Seventh-day Adventist would expect him to?
-
....
Why do we keep seeing similarities between this saga and those of the Vatican? Why did both Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell and Walt Thompson meet with the alleged perpetrators and/or their relative but not with the alleged victim(s)? Why did Walt Thompson approach this situation like Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell rather than in the way I would think the average Seventh-day Adventist would expect him to?
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
Dear Bob,
Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there......
Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attentionm, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy......
-
Didn't TS write a letter that was pretty damning against him and left little doubt that he was guilty
-
Didn't TS write a letter that was pretty damning against him and left little doubt that he was guilty
He's written more than one.
-
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
No, because it's the truth.
Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness? Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?
I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator's word for it that everything was fine.
-
Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.
Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?
We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?
We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?
We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?
So what exactly do we disagree about?
I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.
As I have read here, some of your statements have raised some questions.
How many of Tommy's alleged victims have filed charges against him? As Pastor Dryden and you have attempted to build a case as to the guilt of Tommy Shelton, it seems that the most proper procedure would instead be for alleged victims to address this situation in the justice system.
I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities. Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things?
I understand that it is often very difficult for victims to report abuse, but if they were bold enough to report it to a pastor and other members of the congregation, why not take the next logical step and take it to the proper authorities? Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter. Whose job is it to investigate such things?
One of Tommy's victims DID press charges and somehow Tommy was able to smooth talk his way out of being prosecuted.
For most of us, the statute of limitations has run out. There is a bill pending in the Illinois Senate that would open a window for criminal charges to be filed. I contacted our state senator, Gary Forby, and he didn't even have the courtesy to answer my email. He is a worthless coward. Believe me, if the statute ever opens up, I will be the first to press charges.
My brother Duane, I am making your entire reply stand out from the rest of this post because I feel strongly that what you are saying here begs to be studied and heard by all.
Someday, the world may pull its head out of the sand (or even darker places) and properly address the cycle of abuse, to intervene this soul-shredding system that has, for far too long, been allowed to insidiously attach itself to the very DNA of humanity.
Should that day come when your state's legislature removes the statue of limitations, I urge you to maintain your resolve to take that step.
I reported what happened to me because I have since been told that nearly the entire Shelton family, including Tommy's wife Carol, knew the abuse was going on and did nothing to stop it. In fact, after our statements were made, both Tommy and Carol sent out blistering letters complaining about how bad they have been treated. No denying the charges, but no apologies or remorse, either.
Your documentation was compelling, Duane. As I followed your stepping out of silence, I wondered why others did not. I know it must be frustrating to be the only one willing to take that stand. I watched as some attempted to cause speculation as to your orientation and, frankly, that made me believe your reports all the more strongly.
As far as Glenn Dryden goes, he delights in sticking his nose into things that cause controversy. He isn't interested in a resolution, he just wants to mail out letters and spread gossip. He has done it for years and I don't anticipate any change in that.
This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden. There is an appropriate manner in which these types of issues should be handled, for the sake of both the alleged victims and the alleged abuser. To build a case on words or gossip alone is not only fruitless, it is dangerous. I've seen so much of that happening with some of the issues being discussed here on Adventtalk. Opinion becomes treated as fact without the benefit of due process.
Pet
-
Arrrrgh..... This is why I even stepped out of the shadows of lurkage and decided to finally speak my mind instead of just sitting here shaking my head in disbelief that anyone would buy what you are attempting to sell!
If I was sitting on a jury listening to heartbroken mothers and their children telling horrendous stories of abuse, I would wonder why those mothers didn't contact law enforcement and legislators when they discovered the abuse; why that pastor didn't report the abuse. So many "knew" that it split a church apart, but it never seemed to get to the point that the group had enough belief in the allegations that they would take it to the justice system. Why there wasn't a public outcry once it came to light. Will the jury hear that?
As Duane illustrated above, he knows that Glenn Dryden's aim was spreading gossip and building juicy controversy. If Duane can see that and chooses not to get involved with that situation, perhaps others in the community are aware of Dryden's character and goals as well. It is dangerous to accept the tragic tales of abuse without proper process. Have you forgotten the Salem witch trials? How many lost their lives due to believing the lies of some little girls? How many exploited those lies for their own gain? How many clothed that process in the garb of religion and righteousness?
I have followed many of the trials against the Catholic priests. Some victims have prevailed, some have not. One woman, who had a compelling story of several instances of rape, did not because she remained silent too long and had earlier convinced others and herself that the sex (when she was a teen) was consenual. Her abuser was convicted on counts against others, but not hers, so it is not a given that all will collect damages.
Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter.
Are you telling me that if you were on a jury and listened to heartbroken mothers and their children tell horrendous stories, and heard the board chairman say that he never bothered to talk to the alleged victims even when invited to, and that it enough evidence was brought out to demonstrate that the alleged perpetrator was indeed a perpetrator, that you would not reward one penny to the alleged victims on grounds of extreme negligence?
Where is your head at? How can you even say such a thing?
Have you not read about the huge judgments against the Catholic Church even in cases where no charges were filed?
=====
Edited to remove an inappropriate abbreviation of saying the Lord's name in vain. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
It is truly amazing what sitting on a conservative SDA pitard will do to one's ability to see, reason and comprehend true religion and righteousness.
And you worry about an anti-christ...
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
No, because it's the truth.
Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness? Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?
I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator's word for it that everything was fine.
-
Arrrrgh..... This is why I even stepped out of the shadows of lurkage and decided to finally speak my mind instead of just sitting here shaking my head in disbelief that anyone would buy what you are attempting to sell!
And many of us shake our head in disbelief that so many do not see.
[quote[If I was sitting on a jury listening to heartbroken mothers and their children telling horrendous stories of abuse, I would wonder why those mothers didn't contact law enforcement and legislators when they discovered the abuse; why that pastor didn't report the abuse. So many "knew" that it split a church apart, but it never seemed to get to the point that the group had enough belief in the allegations that they would take it to the justice system. Why there wasn't a public outcry once it came to light. Will the jury hear that? [/quote]
In a large part vocims or their families do not come forward because of people just like yourself.
In our personal family situation many knew, going back 30 years I might add. Five conferences to spread is questionable charm. It is hard enough when it is your child. My son was in his middle thirties when a pastor (so called)
tore apart his family. I cannot imagine putting a child
or a young adult thru that. The "if I had been in that situation "I would have handled in the proper way and exposed my child the good christian folks" Not a good place to be in.
. Have you forgotten the Salem witch trials? How many lost their lives due to believing the lies of some little girls? How many exploited those lies for their own gain? How many clothed that process in the garb of religion and righteousness?
Yup compare the poor Sheltons with the Salem witch trials. That usually gets a little mileage and takes the focus of the guilty and places it on those "victims that might be lying" All to frequently that works.
I have followed many of the trials against the Catholic priests. Some victims have prevailed, some have not. One woman, who had a compelling story of several instances of rape, did not because she remained silent too long and had earlier convinced others and herself that the sex (when she was a teen) was consenual. Her abuser was convicted on counts against others, but not hers, so it is not a given that all will collect damages.
Most are not the age of consent, or it happens as a result of a vulnerable young person. Does not matter if they agree or the sex was forced,the party with the authority is the one that needs to be stopped. Especially in a christian enviourment. Doesn't even matter if the party was barely age of consent. What does matter is many of you are willing to look at this only as a slightly naughty activity. Not nice, but you know "all have sinned"
Ever occur to you that "collecting damages" is not what is upper most in the mind of most victims.
To me,it shows a lot about where you and others place their values, as it is always those that haven't a clue that are so anxious to bring up financial gain
Once a pastor, teacher, volunteer or employee of a christian denomination or employment crosses that line, he needs to be out the door as far as job goes, or acess to those he likes to prey on.
=====
Edited to clean-up quote of edited post.
-
Your documentation was compelling, Duane. As I followed your stepping out of silence, I wondered why others did not. I know it must be frustrating to be the only one willing to take that stand.
If you read his documentation, how can you also claim that he was the only one of the alleged victims that took a stand?
This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden.
How in the world at this late date can you dare call it wisdom for Walt to take the word of the alleged perpetrator and his brother and never once contact the alleged victims?!?!?!
-
I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities. Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things?
1) Does the law require that clergy report abuse? There is no Federal law that requires such. So, the question now goes to what the individual States have on their law books.
2) There is no uniformity among the 50 States in regard to clergy being required to report abuse. However, in my opinon, I believe that the majority of the States do not require clergy to report.
3) There are a few States, such as Colorado who do require such to be reporrted. In Colorado, the law is recent, within the past five years if my memory is good. In any case, the individual States will differ as to what they require to be reported and the circumstances under which it must be reported. So, it would not be wise to make a general statement related to clergy reporting requiremenets.
4) In any case, clergy-penetitent relationships are covered by the First Ammendment. Therefore, on this basis a clergy person would not be required to report under circumstances in which the "sinner" had come to the clergy person in an attempt to get right with God. e.g. No clergyperson could be required to report an act of confession. This limits what the clergy person could be required to report.
-
I watched as some attempted to cause speculation as to your orientation and, frankly, that made me believe your reports all the more strongly.
As the later posted context of Petunia's comments reveals, this is an underhanded harsh and devastating criticism of Duane which does not correlate well with the seemingly understanding tone that Petunia attempts to develop at the beginning of his/her remarks.
-
It is dangerous to accept the tragic tales of abuse without proper process.
And thus you declare for all to read that you think it vital and wisdom to accept the tales of alleged perpetrators without proper process. Why would you take such a ludicrous position? Why would you take the position that the tales of the alleged perpetrator should be listened to but not the tales of the alleged victims?
-
And you worry about an anti-christ...
An antichrist who makes of none effect the commandments of God by his traditions.
Yet we are told that the last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimonies, so I guess we shouldn't be surprised if some Seventh-day Adventists make of none effect the commandments of God by justifying the protection of an alleged pedophile by covering up and refusing to properly investigate the allegations against him.
-
How in the world at this late date can you dare call it wisdom for Walt to take the word of the alleged perpetrator and his brother and never once contact the alleged victims?!?!?!
Here you go again! Your post is so misleading. According to the content of your website, Maritime, and other sites as well the following was a communication between you and Dr. Thompson that you posted a number of times:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
Dear Bob,
Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there.
As I recall the events of 2003, I received a call from Brad Thorp from the General Conference telling me of Pastor Dryden's accusations. Brad appropriately told me that it was not his concern, and that it was ours to handle. As I recall, I contacted pastor Dryden and heard his side of the story following which I received the letter that is circulating. I was at 3abn at the time and spoke at length with Danny about the matter. He shared with me the details as he understood them. Whether or not I was aware of what generated the letter at that time, I do not remember. Based upon my understanding that Dryden had had a long standing feud with Tommy over factors unrelated to the above accusations, it did not seem indicated to approach the boys in question directly, having been informed that no case had ever been filed with the courts or legal disposition made. We then discussed the situation with the full board. Given the alleged events had occured many years before, attempts had been made to make things right, and no legal action had been taken, we did not see any reason to pursue the issue further nor to follow through with his recommendations. In my reply to pastor Dryden I merely thanked him for fulfilling his obligation to us. (I will make this one further comment. Whereas there are many accusations on the Internet alledging that Danny cannot be trusted, I disagree. I have known Danny now since the beginning of the ministry. Now more than 23 years. I have been fully appraised of many of the difficulties that he has faced during that time. While Danny sees things from his perspective, as we all do, he is honest and trustworthy. I have found no reason to distrust his reports to me. Yes, there are occasions when after having spoken with both sides of an issue it has been a matter of he said vs she said, but in all situations where I could know the facts, Danny has proven true.)
Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attentionm, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy. I have been informed that the Church of God is a congregational type or organization with different jurisdictions in different states and that there was no higher authority that I could speak with to resolve the issue further. It was not entirely clear to me how that worked. I was also told that one leader pestered Tommy over and over again until Tommy voluntarily gave up his ministerial license. These are the facts as I have been able to sort them out.
I will not comment regarding ****** except to say that good people sometimes see things from differing perspectives. We ******. We continue to have communication with ****** and consider ****** a friend of 3ABN.
Since you have not described the other allegations against Danny, I am unable to know what you are referring and therefore unable to comment on them.
I hope this is helpful to you.
I would like to request that you not circulate this letter, but that you merely summarize and varify its contents.
Sincerely,
Walt
It is quite clear from this email that Dr. Thompson and the board followed a very rational process in investigating the situation. Dr. Thompson spoke with Brad Thorp, Danny Shelton, Glenn Dryden, and an unnamed higher-up in the CoG. From all indications there was no reason to go further - especially with the corroboration from leaders in the CoG in regards to Dryden's motivations. The board discussed this issue more than once, even by your own account, and arrived at the same decision.
I would like you to explain how you account for the local DA's office decision that there was no action to constitute a legal process. You have been at this for almost two years now and have yet to indicate if you contacted the DA, asked them why they didn't pursue any legal action - or have you and you just don't want to share what they told you? Can you or can you not produce any evidence from the DA's office that they failed in their duties to their community? Can you or can you not provide any substantial insight into their decision not to pursue legal action? Do you have any evidence that will verify a claim by you, should you make one, that you did contact the local DA's office and discuss the issue with them?
Your claim (which is quoted at the top of this post) is, as pointed out, misleading as it attempts to tell people that Dr. Thompson (and subsequently the board) took only the word of Danny Shelton and his brother. As the email proves, this is another attempt on your part to misled by omission. Did Dr. Thompson talk to Danny Shelton and his brother? It appears that he did talk with Danny, but no mention of a conversation with Tommy. It is also clear, via the email, that Dr. Thompson also spoke with at least two other individuals with a working knowledge of the accusations - and you conveniently leave this out of your question, which is intended to be more of a statement than question you just add a "?" at the end to try and hide your real intent.
-
The above post appears to support Bob Pickle's position that Walt Thompson, 3ABN Chairman of the Board, did not think the issue was important enough to dialogue with the alleged victims.
-
The above post appears to support Bob Pickle's position that Walt Thompson, 3ABN Chairman of the Board, did not think the issue was important enough to dialogue with the alleged victims.
Absolutely. And here at this late date, anyman is defending Walt Thompson's reprehensible, irresponsible decision not to contact any of the alleged victims, on the groundless, absurd notion that the allegations that cost Tommy a suspension of his ordination in 1985 were orchestrated by an envious man who lived 800 miles away until 1993!!!!!
So anyman has joined Petunia in the defense of the cover up of and refusal to properly investigate allegations of child molestation by the chairman of a network that claims to mend broken people!
-
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
Dear Bob,
...
I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations)
anyman, be honest, what do you think of Walt's obviously and ludicrously false statement? (I'm not saying that he knew it was false at the time he originally made it.) Roger Clem had come forward a few months before in early 2003, a number of Church of God folks readily locatable will gladly tell a different story, and Walt can't locate anyone else but this unnamed person?
It's been more than a year and a half, and Walt still hasn't explained this discrepancy. Why not? Did he only contact a name that Danny or Tommy gave him so that he wouldn't contact the people that would really count?
"Before the final visitation of God's judgments upon the earth there will be among the people of the Lord such a revival of primitive godliness as has not been witnessed since apostolic times" (GC 464).
Primitive godliness includes apologizing when necessary. One of the most profound evidences that we have finally reached this point in earth's history would be for Walt, Danny, Tommy, Riva, and Duffy to all issue sincere, heartfelt apologies for the parts they played in this sordid affair.
-
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
=====
Edited to remove inapproprate abbreviation from a edited post made by Petunia.
-
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No, GRAT, you were not the only one who was bothered by that.
=====
Edited quote from quoted post.
-
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically 'winced' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what's to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
=====
Edited inappropriate abbreviation, as it was also removed from original post.
-
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically 'winced' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what's to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
I agree, it sickens me also to hear members on a Christian forum take the Lord's name in vain. So much for the defenders of 3ABN...
=====
Edited quoted post.
-
Quote from: Bob Pickle on Today at 06:53:26 AM
....
Why do we keep seeing similarities between this saga and those of the Vatican? Why did both Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell and Walt Thompson meet with the alleged perpetrators and/or their relative but not with the alleged victim(s)? Why did Walt Thompson approach this situation like Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell rather than in the way I would think the average Seventh-day Adventist would expect him to?
Ian responded--Because that is what you choose to see and say?
Quote
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
Dear Bob,
Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there......
Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attentionm, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden\'s personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy......
Quote from: Ian on Today at 07:45:29 AM
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
Pickle responded--No, because it\'s the truth.
Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness? Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?
I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator\'s word for it that everything was fine.
Bob Pickle, I know what my opinion is of you and what you stated above by its contents.
1. Ian was correct in saying your stance is one you choose to see and say and you did it again when you totally ignored what Dr. Thompson said in the quote Ian gave from him. Also he did not make the decision all on his own.
2. You wanted Dr. Thompson to do as you do. Hear something and rashly move on it by trying to find anyone or anything that might back up the alleged allegations instead of being open to all the information and possibilities within the limits set upon him and prayerfully considering all of it. You seem to think that he should have put aside what the police and prosecutor investigation ascertained and just move on what he had heard to begin with. You seem to think that he should have put aside what the church that was involved ascertained too. And through all of it spread the alleged allegations far and wide stating it to be the truth. If I were being accused of anything I would rather have Dr. Thompson looking into it in a Christian and ethical way over one such as you that chooses to be a pawn and mouthpiece for the accuser of the brethren.
3. It has been stated before that you are or were at the time of these alleged allegations a pastor. Then as a pastor it was your responsibility to contact the appropriate legal persons over and rather than 3ABN, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims. It does not take any courage at all to spread around alleged allegations and let others take up the cause for you. That way if things do not go as you want you can slip out and let the others take the responsibility and consequences for your actions as well as their own.
By the way I agree with what Petunia said in post #225.
This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden. There is an appropriate manner in which these types of issues should be handled, for the sake of both the alleged victims and the alleged abuser. To build a case on words or gossip alone is not only fruitless, it is dangerous. I\'ve seen so much of that happening with some of the issues being discussed here on Adventtalk. Opinion becomes treated as fact without the benefit of due process.
-
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
-- snip --
I contacted pastor Dryden and heard his side of the story
-- snip --
But here's the point everyone seems to be missing. Glenn Dryden DOESN'T HAVE A "SIDE OF THE STORY"!!! He was not abused, nor were his sons to my knowledge. He wasn't even in West Frankfort when it took place. He's a Johnny-come-lately who for some reason feels "left out" because he isn't involved. Talking to Glenn Dryden is in NO WAY investigating abuse by Tommy Shelton.
Gregory, to answer your question from another post, yes, Illinois has mandatory reporting for clergy. In fact, I was told by someone in law enforcement that it doesn't even matter if you are ordained or not. If you are in a position serving as a minister, ordained or not, paid or volunteer, you are a mandated reporter. Pastor Dryden did not go to the authorities as far as I know. All he did was mail out a bunch of letters, by his own admission. That's not trying to help, that's being a tale bearer.
Walt Thompson never talked to me or any of the other victims as far as I know. He says he talked to Danny. What did he think Danny was going to say? :huh:
All I know is this: It was a lot easier to go through life before Glenn Dryden ran his mouth about this garbage. I know I eventually would have had to deal with it, but I needed to do it in my own time. Now for the past couple of years I've had to relive this all over again. Glenn Dryden is no hero, and not much of a pastor either as far as I'm concerned.
-
1. Ian was correct in saying your stance is one you choose to see and say and you did it again when you totally ignored what Dr. Thompson said in the quote Ian gave from him.
What specifically did I ignore?
You seem to think that he should have put aside what the police and prosecutor investigation ascertained and just move on what he had heard to begin with.
Did the police or prosecutor look into Roger Clem's allegations at all? He had recently come forward. Which allegations had they looked into and when? Are you taking the position that an investigation should never be reopened, or that no one should ever ask for one to be reopened unless they are a policeman or prosecutor?
You seem to think that he should have put aside what the church that was involved ascertained too.
Pardon me, but didn't the church ascertain that there definitely was a problem? If not, why was Tommy's ordination suspended, and why did Ezra issue a signed apology or some such?
And through all of it spread the alleged allegations far and wide stating it to be the truth.
When have I ever done that?
If I were being accused of anything I would rather have Dr. Thompson looking into it in a Christian and ethical way ...
That's my whole point. He to this day has refused to do so.
3. It has been stated before that you are or were at the time of these alleged allegations a pastor. Then as a pastor it was your responsibility to contact the appropriate legal persons over and rather than 3ABN, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims.
What is your basis for saying this? Walt and Danny had a responsibility to handle this appropriately in order to safeguard 3ABN and the Illinois Conference. They instead chose to cover up or not properly investigate the allegations. How would calling up the cops and telling them what Danny and Walt had failed to do help matters?
By the way I agree with what Petunia said in post #225.
Then I suggest you spend some time seeking the Lord and asking Him if you are really seeing things clearly. Defending those who have refused to properly deal with child molestation allegations, defending those who hire attorneys to write nasty letters to those concerned about child molestation allegations, defending those who refuse to apologize for such reprehensible behavior, and using the username Child_of_God, that sounds a bit contradictory.
-
I should never have tried to talk to you. I forgot that you think you are the prosecutor, judge and jury.
-
Why would any of you three want to even consider that it was what Petunia meant? I have never said that in my whole life and I have never heard a SDA Christian say it, so why would one think that is what Petunia meant by those initials in a SDA forum. It could just as easily have meant oh my goodness. That is exactly what I thought it meant. Others may have too if you hadn\'t assumed it meant something so horrible. Why always look for the worst?
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically \'winced\' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what\'s to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
=====
Edited quoted post.
-
I should never have tried to talk to you.
If you want to defend folks who lie, or who jeopardize the reputation or financial security of 3ABN or of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, or who cover up child molestation allegations, then, as Sister White put it, "Silence is eloquence."
-
Why would any of you three want to even consider that it was what Petunia meant? I have never said that in my whole life and I have never heard a SDA Christian say it, so why would one think that is what Petunia meant by those initials in a SDA forum. It could just as easily have meant oh my goodness. That is exactly what I thought it meant. Others may have too if you hadn\'t assumed it meant something so horrible. Why always look for the worst?
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically \'winced\' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what\'s to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
Even if it meant "Oh my goodness", that is just veganized swearing. What is the goodness of a Christian? It is God... so, what is the difference? It is wise too think before using certain "expressions", especially in writing.
=====
Edited quoted post.
-
Gregory, to answer your question from another post, yes, Illinois has mandatory reporting for clergy. In fact, I was told by someone in law enforcement that it doesn't even matter if you are ordained or not. If you are in a position serving as a minister, ordained or not, paid or volunteer, you are a mandated reporter. Pastor Dryden did not go to the authorities as far as I know. All he did was mail out a bunch of letters, by his own admission. That's not trying to help, that's being a tale bearer.
Walt Thompson never talked to me or any of the other victims as far as I know. He says he talked to Danny. What did he think Danny was going to say? :huh:
All I know is this: It was a lot easier to go through life before Glenn Dryden ran his mouth about this garbage. I know I eventually would have had to deal with it, but I needed to do it in my own time. Now for the past couple of years I've had to relive this all over again. Glenn Dryden is no hero, and not much of a pastor either as far as I'm concerned.
I have no knowledge as to what IL law is on this point. Thank you for your comment.
Il law is correct. It should not matter whether the clergy person is ordained, or not, paid, volunteer or whatever. The law should apply to that person simply because of the office or function performed. i.e. It should apply to all who act as such.
I can well immagine that all of the publicity has not been easy for you. Only the people who haved gone through the experience can know what the experience was like.
-
From what I have heard from others higher up in acedamia Goodness=God. So to me also it means the same thing.
BTW I am offended also. I would expect to see that remark from a non-christian message board or chat room but not this one.
-
I noticed it, too.
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
=====
Edited quoted post.
-
I didn't even bother to try to read this, as it is very difficult to follow. Please, people - learn how to use the quotes here on AdventTalk. It really is not that hard!!!
Quote from: Bob Pickle on Today at 06:53:26 AM
....
Why do we keep seeing similarities between this saga and those of the Vatican? Why did both Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell and Walt Thompson meet with the alleged perpetrators and/or their relative but not with the alleged victim(s)? Why did Walt Thompson approach this situation like Roman Catholic Cardinal Pell rather than in the way I would think the average Seventh-day Adventist would expect him to?
Ian responded--Because that is what you choose to see and say?
Quote
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
Dear Bob,
Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there......
Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attentionm, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden\'s personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy......
Quote from: Ian on Today at 07:45:29 AM
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
Pickle responded--No, because it\'s the truth.
Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness? Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?
I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator\'s word for it that everything was fine.
Bob Pickle, I know what my opinion is of you and what you stated above by its contents.
1. Ian was correct in saying your stance is one you choose to see and say and you did it again when you totally ignored what Dr. Thompson said in the quote Ian gave from him. Also he did not make the decision all on his own.
2. You wanted Dr. Thompson to do as you do. Hear something and rashly move on it by trying to find anyone or anything that might back up the alleged allegations instead of being open to all the information and possibilities within the limits set upon him and prayerfully considering all of it. You seem to think that he should have put aside what the police and prosecutor investigation ascertained and just move on what he had heard to begin with. You seem to think that he should have put aside what the church that was involved ascertained too. And through all of it spread the alleged allegations far and wide stating it to be the truth. If I were being accused of anything I would rather have Dr. Thompson looking into it in a Christian and ethical way over one such as you that chooses to be a pawn and mouthpiece for the accuser of the brethren.
3. It has been stated before that you are or were at the time of these alleged allegations a pastor. Then as a pastor it was your responsibility to contact the appropriate legal persons over and rather than 3ABN, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims. It does not take any courage at all to spread around alleged allegations and let others take up the cause for you. That way if things do not go as you want you can slip out and let the others take the responsibility and consequences for your actions as well as their own.
By the way I agree with what Petunia said in post #225.
This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden. There is an appropriate manner in which these types of issues should be handled, for the sake of both the alleged victims and the alleged abuser. To build a case on words or gossip alone is not only fruitless, it is dangerous. I\'ve seen so much of that happening with some of the issues being discussed here on Adventtalk. Opinion becomes treated as fact without the benefit of due process.
-
Why would any of you three want to even consider that it was what Petunia meant? I have never said that in my whole life and I have never heard a SDA Christian say it, so why would one think that is what Petunia meant by those initials in a SDA forum. It could just as easily have meant oh my goodness.
OMG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
"Oh My G*D, commonly abbreviated to OMG, as an Internet slang phrase"
=====
I thought of editing out OMG here, but decided to leave it, as it contained information relative to the inappropriate use of OMG in Petunia's post. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
Did it dawn on you or any one of the other pious collection of bishops here that maybe Petunia is a new convert, someone who left and is considering returning to the faith, or someone working in concert with the Savior to change their lives? Did even ONE of you contact her via PM and broach the issue? I am guessing the answer is NO across the board . . . instead you take your arrogance and attack her publicaly . . . patently unChristian!
From what I have heard from others higher up in acedamia Goodness=God. So to me also it means the same thing.
BTW I am offended also. I would expect to see that remark from a non-christian message board or chat room but not this one.
-
The spinning wheel is sure busy spinning round! (maybe I'm a new Christian who was surprised to find such - did you ever think of that anyman? wish I was as holy as you. by the way, I did not attack her/him just asked a question - what did those letters mean to her/him)
-
Really hope anyman encourages Petunia to not defend alleged pedophiles or the cover up of allegations of child molestation.
-
Why would any of you three want to even consider that it was what Petunia meant? I have never said that in my whole life and I have never heard a SDA Christian say it, so why would one think that is what Petunia meant by those initials in a SDA forum. It could just as easily have meant oh my goodness. That is exactly what I thought it meant. Others may have too if you hadn\'t assumed it meant something so horrible. Why always look for the worst?
Petunia - What does ***** stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically \'winced\' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what\'s to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
Even if it meant "Oh my goodness", that is just veganized swearing. What is the goodness of a Christian? It is God... so, what is the difference? It is wise too think before using certain "expressions", especially in writing.
OOOOHHHHH BROTHER.....
Quote from sister on BSDA
"1. Danny Shelton is a liar.
2. Danny Shelton is a thief.
3. Danny Shelton molested Linda Shelton's daughter.
4. Danny Shelton is a serial adulterer.
5. Danny Shelton is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
6. Linda Shelton did not have an affair during her marriage with Danny Shelton.
7. Danny Shelton trumped up charges against Linda Shelton in order to remove her from the ministry and divorce her.
8. The reason Danny Shelton has never produced "the evidence" is because it does not exist.
And the list goes on and on and on..."
Sister
It would be wise not to use certain expressions in writing??????? :ROFL:
Oh wait...I forgot.....you didn't write anything that God didn't tell you to write........... :ROFL:
=====
Edited quoted post.
-
For some, OMG may represent "god", but not for me. There are many things that OMG might mean. (http://www.acronymfinder.com/OMG.html) For me, OMG = Oh My Goodness, Oh My Gosh or Oh My Gnats.
Yes, the gnats are disgusting... far better to strain them so they don't get in way of the mouthfuls of camel you are swallowing.
Petunia - What does OMG stand for? Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments? (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)
No GRAT. You are not the only one who noticed it. I physically 'winced' as I read that, as it sickens me when I hear/see people take the name of the Lord in vain.
If one so blatantly breaks that commandment, what's to stop them from breaking others just as blatantly?
I agree, it sickens me also to hear members on a Christian forum take the Lord's name in vain. So much for the defenders of 3ABN...
=====
Note: I am leaving this as is for now. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
3. It has been stated before that you are or were at the time of these alleged allegations a pastor. Then as a pastor it was your responsibility to contact the appropriate legal persons over and rather than 3ABN, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims.
What is your basis for saying this? Walt and Danny had a responsibility to handle this appropriately in order to safeguard 3ABN and the Illinois Conference. They instead chose to cover up or not properly investigate the allegations.
What, in your opinion, would have been the appropriate way to handle these allegations in order to safeguard 3ABN and the Illinois Conference?
Bob Pickle said:
How would calling up the cops and telling them what Danny and Walt had failed to do help matters?
Child of God did NOT ask you why you didn't call the cops and tell them that Danny and Walt had failed to do to help matters. Child of God asked why, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims, you didn't contact the appropriate legal persons. What drives you to twist the words of others so?
By the way I agree with what Petunia said in post #225.
Bob Pickle said:
Then I suggest you spend some time seeking the Lord and asking Him if you are really seeing things clearly. Defending those who have refused to properly deal with child molestation allegations, defending those who hire attorneys to write nasty letters to those concerned about child molestation allegations, defending those who refuse to apologize for such reprehensible behavior, and using the username Child_of_God, that sounds a bit contradictory.
Properly dealing with abuse allegations of any kind is vital. You are obviously convinced that your manner of handling them has been appropriate. According to what your fellow investigator, Mr. Joy, recently posted, the alleged victims don't seem to want your help any more than the former employees of the Trust Services. Why do you suppose that is?
Did you know that every one of us, whether a sinner or not, whether measuring up to your idea of religious dogma or not, is a Child of God? Every one of us. Even you. I suggest you spend some time seeking the Lord and asking Him if you are really seeing things clearly.
Your username is quite appropriate. Needing to twist even the most straight-forward statements has certainly gotten you into a pickle.
edited to repair missing html
-
The smelly little skunk on Bambie was named Petunia. So is your user name appropriate? (I'm quite sick of the I'm so holy attitude of the DS defenders and then they have to give a nasty jab at whoever they don't agree with.)
-
The smelly little skunk on Bambie was named Petunia. So is your user name appropriate? (I'm quite sick of the I'm so holy attitude of the DS defenders and then they have to give a nasty jab at whoever they don't agree with.)
Awww, come on GRAT, give Petunia a break. Everyone need something to hang their soul on. For some it might be Muhammed, for others it might be Buddha, EGW, Jesus, a televangelist, an author, a singer, a pastor... and when one's soul is riding on the veracity of any person that person must be flawless and perfect in every way. You should to let Petunia enjoy her sense of fulfillment through what she has to have.
-
The smelly little skunk on Bambie was named Petunia. So is your user name appropriate? (I'm quite sick of the I'm so holy attitude of the DS defenders and then they have to give a nasty jab at whoever they don't agree with.)
1. I'm not a DS defender. I don't personally know DS. I actually began to think that DS might be guilty of the allegations, but then Mr. Joy and Mr. Pickle began behaving in a manner not consistant with their claims of righteouness. Then I began to see numerous places where Mr. Pickle twisted and manipulated statements to make them say thngs they clearly did not say, so I lost confidence in his information. The flawed logic he demonstrates makes it impossible to know what is fact and what is the world according to Bob Pickle.
2. Please show me where I posted anything approaching an "I'm so holy attitude". I can certainly show you how my "*****" comment got you and others to clutch your pearls and post your own "I'm so holy attitudes". Interesting that Bob Pickle often posts in such a manner but you don't admonish him for it.
3. Nasty jabs? Scroll up a bit and read what Mr. Bob Pickle said to Child of God about her/his username. Nasty jab, eh?
4. My username is my name....Petunia Rathbone. Seems rather juvenile, like something elementary school bullies would do on the playground, to make fun of my name, but it is what you folks seem to do to those who have an opinion or thoughts that are not in line with your own.
=====
Inappropriate abbreviation removed from post. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
Snoopy said, I didn\'t even bother to try to read this, as it is very difficult to follow. Please, people - learn how to use the quotes here on AdventTalk. It really is not that hard!!!
Snoopy, I am sorry my post was difficult for you to follow. I have tried to use quote many times and each time I get a message that there is no body to my message. I then have to post in whatever way I can.
-
For some, OMG may represent "god", but not for me. There are many things that OMG might mean. (http://www.acronymfinder.com/OMG.html) For me, OMG = Oh My Goodness, Oh My Gosh or Oh My Gnats.
We should avoid phrases that are substitutes for taking God's name in vain.
-
What, in your opinion, would have been the appropriate way to handle these allegations in order to safeguard 3ABN and the Illinois Conference?
At the very least, investigate them by talking with the alleged victims, their families, and the ordaining associations as invited to do.
Child of God did NOT ask you why you didn't call the cops and tell them that Danny and Walt had failed to do to help matters. Child of God asked why, if you were really concerned about the alleged victims, you didn't contact the appropriate legal persons. What drives you to twist the words of others so?
I didn't twist your words. I was making a valid point. The issue for the last year and a half has been how Danny and Walt handled the matter in 2003. You raised the question about reporting it to the authorities. Reporting only the child molestation allegations to the authorities does nothing to address the issue at hand.
Did you know that every one of us, whether a sinner or not, whether measuring up to your idea of religious dogma or not, is a Child of God?
I suggest you read 1 John.
"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother" (1 Jn. 3:10).
To claim to be a child of God is a high profession. Never should the child of God defend the cover up of child molestation allegations, for that certainly isn't righteousness.
-
Because that is what you choose to see and say?
No, because it's the truth.
Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness?
As you define it? ummmm....
NO
My beliefs and conviction are mine, my defense of "right-doing" and opposition to "wrong-doing" obviously differ from yours....
as I follow my own conscience and convictions, based on my own knowledge and conclusions.
A word of advice, Bob.
Get down off the judgment seat of Christ and just deal with the issues and subjects of debate here and leave the individuals to Jesus.
Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?
I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator's word for it that everything was fine.
So one sided and biased...
I wonder how you would feel if you were the accused and all just wanted to consider the words of your accusers and seek evidence to back that up without listening to you or any who might provide background, evidense to exonerate you, or add insight to all, which is the other extreme?
I hope there are people who will look at and consider all, for without that the truth will never be known.
That is a big loss.
moving on...
-
I was making a valid point. The issue for the last year and a half has been how Danny and Walt handled the matter in 2003. You raised the question about reporting it to the authorities. Reporting only the child molestation allegations to the authorities does nothing to address the issue at hand.
Depends on what you think the main issue and focus should be...
1. Condemning DS and 3ABN, and getting others to join you.
or
2. protecting alleged victims, and possible others who might be endangered and seeking justice according to civil laws of land, whether it be for the accused or the accusers.
and...
the laws of Minnesota require clergy whether ordained or not to report any such things to authorities, how in the world can you find fault with Dr Walt, or Danny Shelton, and how 3abn handled it, when you who claim to know and have so much more evidence have NEVER reported it and have done nothing to help alleged victims or the alleged perpetrator? When you have done nothing except gather evidence to find fault with just one employer (3abn) of a man who without due process you have already condemned and found guilty?
Physician heal thyself!
-
Again, Ian, I want to invite you to return to the ranks of conservatism, and cease defending those who cover up child molestation allegations, cease defending those who lack the Christian courtesy to contact alleged victims when invited to do so, cease defending those who hire attorneys to threaten those who are concerned about child molestation allegations, and cease defending those who refuse to apologize for such ungodliness.
The Lord is coming soon!
-
So then as the self-appointed guardian of "conservatism," Mr. Robert Pickle, you are then admitting that because you claimed to be a member of the clergy when you became aware of said accusations and never contacted the authorities when you became aware of said accusations that you failed in your legal duty as a said member of the clergy.
So then based on your own description of responsibility is it not incumbent on you to apologize to all of these so-called "victims" (and the only one that can reasonably be identified as such because of their own claims is Duane) that you have been in contact with. To date you have not reported anything to the appropriate authorities and you seem to be legal bound to do such. Is your inaction on their part not unchristian? Isn't it an indication of dereliction of duty as a self-proclaimed member of the clergy?
You are not the guardian of conservatism, you are not the arbiter of what qualifies as conservatism. Instead you have taken a Pharisaical approach of judgmentalism and a inventor of laws and requirements that "allow" someone to be worthy of your opinion of "conservatism."
As Petunia pointed out, you manipulate peoples words by suggesting meaning that is not there, by editing and rearranging, by out right misleading interpretation, by suggesting you know intent even without asking individuals for clarification . . . and then you present it as truth - this is an abomination your subtle mixing of truth and lie.
When I look at the totality of your efforts and those you have associated with I am reminded of the following Psalm, as it seems to accurately describe the lament of those you have attacked publicly and privately, David is the voice for all of those you have attempted to vilify and destroy in public and private:
Psalms 64
1 Hear me oh God as I voice my complaint; protect my life from the threat of the enemy.
2 Hide me from the conspiracy of the wicked, from the noisy crowd of evildoers.
3 They sharpen their tongues like swords and aim their words like deadly arrows.
4 They shoot from ambush at the innocent man; they shoot at him suddenly. without fear.
5 They encourage each other in evil plans, they talk about hiding their snares; they say, "who will see them?"
6 They plot injustice and say, "We have devised a perfect plan!" Surely the mind and heart of man are cunning.
7 But God will shoot them with arrows; suddenly they will be struck down.
8 He will turn their own tongues against them and bring them to ruin; all who see them will shake their heads in scorn.
9 All mankind will fear; they will proclaim the works of God and ponder what he has done.
10 Let the righteous rejoice in the Lord and take refuge in him; let all the upright in heart praise him!
Verse 10 defines what action has been seen by those you attack - they have put their faith in God, yes even in filing a suit against you. Your fruits are not the fruits of the brethren, the suit is not for personal gain by 3ABN or anyone on that side - but to silence the voice of evil attempting to destroy the work of God. In the filing do you find anywhere that they will demand you make up the difference in any lost donations - NO. In the filing to you find anywhere that they will seek to debilitate you or Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy in any way financial - NO! The suit is designed to end your evil attack on 3ABN and to allow for all the energies necessary to counter the lies to be redirected back to the work of God. As opposed to your compatriots claim that there would be wonderful financial results for your side when the case was done.
Those you have attacked have sought the Peace of the Lord and abide there knowing your lies and attacks will be exposed in God's time. To date we have the end of the IRS investigation and their admittance that 3ABN was not charged a penny (Fran, have you heard back from your inside contact at the IRS? You have been rather silent on your claim that you would find out what the "real" truth was). Should the case (aren't you there today?) proceed your remaining allegations will be exposed as just the weak worn tapestry produced by a loosely held together rumor mill.
To reiterate, have you not been in dereliction of your pastoral duty by not taking the accusations you heard to the proper authorities? Do you not owe any "victims" an apology for failing to do so?
Again, Ian, I want to invite you to return to the ranks of conservatism, and cease defending those who cover up child molestation allegations, cease defending those who lack the Christian courtesy to contact alleged victims when invited to do so, cease defending those who hire attorneys to threaten those who are concerned about child molestation allegations, and cease defending those who refuse to apologize for such ungodliness.
The Lord is coming soon!
-
The smelly little skunk on Bambie was named Petunia. So is your user name appropriate? (I'm quite sick of the I'm so holy attitude of the DS defenders and then they have to give a nasty jab at whoever they don't agree with.)
GRAT, in order to clear up a minor inaccuracy, I am further replying to your post.
You can call me Flower (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_baARWvmPd4). From that time forward, the little animal was known by what Bambi dubbed her. The smelly little skunk in Bambi was not named Petunia, but a petunia is a flower...so, you were in the ballpark with your jab.
Sometimes in our haste to make another look worse than ourselves, to give a nasty jab, we err and end up showing our own shortcomings.
Pet (otherwise known to some as the smelly little skunk wallowing amongst the flower patch) Rathbone
-
anyman, I despise the use of smilies in serious discussions and tend to feel a rising nausea in the way I have seen them used here on this forum...and yet I am so nearly compelled to insert one here to give you props for the many substantial points you have just made.
I may not agree with every word, but certainly do with most. Will they fall on deaf ears or blind eyes? I hope not...and, (in a move that might be interpreted as an "I'm so holy attitude") I pray not.
So then as the self-appointed guardian of "conservatism," Mr. Robert Pickle, you are then admitting that because you claimed to be a member of the clergy when you became aware of said accusations and never contacted the authorities when you became aware of said accusations that you failed in your legal duty as a said member of the clergy.
So then based on your own description of responsibility is it not incumbent on you to apologize to all of these so-called "victims" (and the only one that can reasonably be identified as such because of their own claims is Duane) that you have been in contact with. To date you have not reported anything to the appropriate authorities and you seem to be legal bound to do such. Is your inaction on their part not unchristian? Isn't it an indication of dereliction of duty as a self-proclaimed member of the clergy?
You are not the guardian of conservatism, you are not the arbiter of what qualifies as conservatism. Instead you have taken a Pharisaical approach of judgmentalism and a inventor of laws and requirements that "allow" someone to be worthy of your opinion of "conservatism."
As Petunia pointed out, you manipulate peoples words by suggesting meaning that is not there, by editing and rearranging, by out right misleading interpretation, by suggesting you know intent even without asking individuals for clarification . . . and then you present it as truth - this is an abomination your subtle mixing of truth and lie.
When I look at the totality of your efforts and those you have associated with I am reminded of the following Psalm, as it seems to accurately describe the lament of those you have attacked publicly and privately, David is the voice for all of those you have attempted to vilify and destroy in public and private:
Psalms 64
1 Hear me oh God as I voice my complaint; protect my life from the threat of the enemy.
2 Hide me from the conspiracy of the wicked, from the noisy crowd of evildoers.
3 They sharpen their tongues like swords and aim their words like deadly arrows.
4 They shoot from ambush at the innocent man; they shoot at him suddenly. without fear.
5 They encourage each other in evil plans, they talk about hiding their snares; they say, "who will see them?"
6 They plot injustice and say, "We have devised a perfect plan!" Surely the mind and heart of man are cunning.
7 But God will shoot them with arrows; suddenly they will be struck down.
8 He will turn their own tongues against them and bring them to ruin; all who see them will shake their heads in scorn.
9 All mankind will fear; they will proclaim the works of God and ponder what he has done.
10 Let the righteous rejoice in the Lord and take refuge in him; let all the upright in heart praise him!
Verse 10 defines what action has been seen by those you attack - they have put their faith in God, yes even in filing a suit against you. Your fruits are not the fruits of the brethren, the suit is not for personal gain by 3ABN or anyone on that side - but to silence the voice of evil attempting to destroy the work of God. In the filing do you find anywhere that they will demand you make up the difference in any lost donations - NO. In the filing to you find anywhere that they will seek to debilitate you or Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy in any way financial - NO! The suit is designed to end your evil attack on 3ABN and to allow for all the energies necessary to counter the lies to be redirected back to the work of God. As opposed to your compatriots claim that there would be wonderful financial results for your side when the case was done.
Those you have attacked have sought the Peace of the Lord and abide there knowing your lies and attacks will be exposed in God's time. To date we have the end of the IRS investigation and their admittance that 3ABN was not charged a penny (Fran, have you heard back from your inside contact at the IRS? You have been rather silent on your claim that you would find out what the "real" truth was). Should the case (aren't you there today?) proceed your remaining allegations will be exposed as just the weak worn tapestry produced by a loosely held together rumor mill.
To reiterate, have you not been in dereliction of your pastoral duty by not taking the accusations you heard to the proper authorities? Do you not owe any "victims" an apology for failing to do so?
Again, Ian, I want to invite you to return to the ranks of conservatism, and cease defending those who cover up child molestation allegations, cease defending those who lack the Christian courtesy to contact alleged victims when invited to do so, cease defending those who hire attorneys to threaten those who are concerned about child molestation allegations, and cease defending those who refuse to apologize for such ungodliness.
The Lord is coming soon!
btw, I am not a really new convert... but not an old one, either. I appreciate your kind thoughts in my defense as well as those of others who were not quick to demean and dismiss me for my use of OMG. I hope you will continue to feel kindly towards me when my opinions do not agree with your own. Somehow, I believe you will. I do have a great many rough edges but believe that God is smoothing them out as I walk with Him. I firmly believe in the words of John 3:16. He loves all Earthlings. Because of Him, my soul sings.
Pet
-
Petunia, you know what the point of my post was - you made a "nasty jab" at Bob Pickles name. By the way, my children are all adults so it has been a long time since I watched Bambie. Maybe it's the dementia setting in. :puppykisses:
-
I don't know if you have ever been a conservative, or whether you have ever been an Adventist, anyman, but I invite you to take your stand upon Bible truth and cease defending those who have tried to cover up child molestation allegations, those who hire lawyers to bully those concerned about child molestation, and those who prevaricate regarding this subject, as I assume you just did when you said that Duane is the only identifiable alleged victim of the bunch.
Furthermore, since I am not the one who has covered up these hideous allegations, since I am not the one who has hired attorneys to bully people over this matter, since I am not the one who refused to contact the alleged victims or who blamed it all on the jealousy of a man who lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended, it is readily apparent that Ps. 64 is something I can invoke rather than 3ABN or Danny Shelton.
-
I don't know if you have ever been a conservative, or whether you have ever been an Adventist, anyman, but I invite you to take your stand upon Bible truth and cease defending those who have tried to cover up child molestation allegations, those who hire lawyers to bully those concerned about child molestation, and those who prevaricate regarding this subject, as I assume you just did when you said that Duane is the only identifiable alleged victim of the bunch.
Furthermore, since I am not the one who has covered up these hideous allegations, since I am not the one who has hired attorneys to bully people over this matter, since I am not the one who refused to contact the alleged victims or who blamed it all on the jealousy of a man who lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended, it is readily apparent that Ps. 64 is something I can invoke rather than 3ABN or Danny Shelton.
Good point, Bob.
-
I am just so totally amazed that thinking people, especially those who are parents and most especially mothers could think that someone who has been accused of child molestation and admitted that he has a problem with young boys (even if some were over 18) could think that it is OK for the accused to be around children. We should be OVER protective of our precious young people. If allegations have been made they should never be around children until it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the allegations are false. I am still upset years later at our SDA school for allowing my boy children to go put on music programs at a church nears where we live that had a level 3 sex offender of young boys in their congregation and never let the parents know. I would have insisted that no boy go to the restroom alone at the very least. (there was a book written about this man called the sins of the father I believe. It was a Pacific Press book. Very hard to read. Those parents who brought their children to 3ABN to perform should have known there were allegations against TS and had the chance to make a decisions if they wanted to put their children in that place. (He never should have been there in the first place!)
-
I am just so totally amazed that thinking people, especially those who are parents and most especially mothers could think that someone who has been accused of child molestation and admitted that he has a problem with young boys (even if some were over 18) could think that it is OK for the accused to be around children. We should be OVER protective of our precious young people. If allegations have been made they should never be around children until it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the allegations are false. I am still upset years later at our SDA school for allowing my boy children to go put on music programs at a church nears where we live that had a level 3 sex offender of young boys in their congregation and never let the parents know. I would have insisted that no boy go to the restroom alone at the very least. (there was a book written about this man called the sins of the father I believe. It was a Pacific Press book. Very hard to read. Those parents who brought their children to 3ABN to perform should have known there were allegations against TS and had the chance to make a decisions if they wanted to put their children in that place. (He never should have been there in the first place!)
But this is nothing new. It is not taken all that seriously.
If this was talking about a drunk around your children at 3ABBN, or one that smoked, it would have been taken care of quite quickly. That would really generate the concern and get some excitement going
edit to add sentence
-
I don't know if you have ever been a conservative, or whether you have ever been an Adventist, anyman, . . .
Wouldn't a more accurate question or statement on your part be a "conservative according to my definition of such"? If you had stated it that way it would be far more honest - the same with your question about my membership (or not) in the Adventist church.
Your recent posting in this regard reminds me of a joke I once heard:
"A certain man arrived at the gates of heaven and was met by Peter who welcomed him home and offered to take him on a tour of the beautiful city. The man of course was desirous and they set out. Every few blocks they came upon a church, distinctive worship characteristics were evident from each, joyous music, powerful preaching, and many others. Each time the new arrival asked what faith occupied the church and Peter gladly filled him in. As they approached a bend in the road Peter stopped, turned, and told the man that in the next block he would need to be completely silent - not a word and he needed to walk as softly as possible.
They proceeded and passed a church along the next block. The man abiding by Peter's request was silent, even through the block following that church. However, the curiosity was too create and he finally blurted out - 'Why did we have to be so quiet as we passed that church?' Peter, with a rather sad look told him, "That was the Adventist church and they think they are the only ones up here.'"
Now, we know from the SoP that that just isn't going to be the case - yet your attitude carries all the earmarks of that kind of triumphalist attitude. Is there no place in your heaven for people who do not adhere to your self declared "right" brand of conservatism?
. . . but I invite you to take your stand upon Bible truth and cease defending those who have tried to cover up child molestation allegations, those who hire lawyers to bully those concerned about child molestation, and those who prevaricate regarding this subject, as I assume you just did when you said that Duane is the only identifiable alleged victim of the bunch.
I stand by my statement in regards to your "list of victims":
(and the only one that can reasonably be identified as such because of their own claims is Duane)
I haven't noticed any of your other so-called victims coming forward and making their claims public. Duane has come forward and made added his voice. While it is entirely possibly that Duane is truly a victim, we also have numerous examples on the American legal landscape where accusations were later proven false (and Duane I am making NO JUDGMENT on your situation - merely presenting a salient point as part of the discussion) He has also put one of your main sources of information on the record as having very sketchy reasons for being involved - he has made it clear that the veracity of Mr. Glenn Drydan is suspect at best, yet you continue to hang your hat on Mr. Glenn Dryden's coat rack. (Its is intriguing that rather than indicating that he would provide contact information, Mr. Glenn Dryden instead makes sure to insert himself into the process as the middle man who will contact the families and make the arrangements for a conversation between Dr. Thompson and said "victims")
This section of your post is nothing more than an opportunity to restate your allegation du jour. Since it is obvious that you can no longer harp on the false allegations you laid out in regards to the finances of 3ABN and Danny Shelton you have returned to this one. Let's be clear here . . . "you" are the one who has claimed there was a cover-up, "you" have manufactured the "evidence" by piecing little bits from here and little bits from there together to construct what you claim indicts and then presented it to the public.
Furthermore, since I am not the one who has covered up these hideous allegations, since I am not the one who has hired attorneys to bully people over this matter, since I am not the one who refused to contact the alleged victims or who blamed it all on the jealousy of a man who lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended, it is readily apparent that Ps. 64 is something I can invoke rather than 3ABN or Danny Shelton.
No, Mr. Robert Pickle, as much as you might want to claim Psalm 64, it doesn't apply to you - the evidence of the past almost two years (the length of time you admit to being involved) does not play out that way. Psalm 64 is the salve for the soul of those you have attacked and treated in some of the most unchristian ways. Your penchant for the "end justifying the means" is light years from the Christian heart of how to relate to our other fellow travelers on this planet.
Your comments indicate that you are seeking justification for not following your own demands. "YOU" claim that Dr. Thompson and the board of 3ABN should have contacted the "victims" but yet you rationalize away your responsibility as a member of the clergy to notify the appropriate authorities when you became aware of the accusations. At that very point you were responsible and you didn't follow through on it - there are no two ways about it. Why didn't you? Why did you instead decide to turn your vengeance against 3ABN? Why at the point you became aware that there were accusations of that nature, did you not go to the authorities in defense of said "victims"? Why did you instead turn your heart to vilify a fellow Christian publicly? Why even now, after all that has passed these two years do you still remain silent unless you can use it to bring down 3ABN and Danny Shelton? Why are you not in the DA's office even now advocating for your list of "victims" instead of attending today's hearing in Mass. by phone?
If the accusations had substance, and you believed they were substantial, why didn't you go directly to advocate for these individuals rather than turning all your attentions and energies toward brining down a ministry of the Gospel?
Again, these questions are asked - but not answered.
-
Grat,
If you my prevous post was a little over the top and exaggerated,let me share something with you.
During the ordeal of my son,it was very easy to see what was considered important.
The pastor that broke up my sons marriage was planning on attending dinner put on by the school children for mother's.fathers and grandparents. In talking with those that could stop this, right up to the conference president took a very perculiar stand.
I was told it was not illegal so they did not feel they could really iintervene. Never mind the fact he was living with my DIL while both were still married to other spouses.
I suggested at that time that my husband wished to bring a 6 pack of beer and I thought some after dinner cigars would be nice.
I was immediately told "You cannot do that, as SDA's we have standards to uphold" So my husband and I were seated at the same table as my DIL and her shack up ex- pastor . It was so nice to see him sitting there with his arm around my granchildren's mother, Can you imagine how the chilldren felt?Thankfully my son was out of twon that weekend and it was just my husband and myself
Am I the only one that sees anything wrong with "our standards"??
-
Anyman, you are correct when you said, we also have numerous examples on the American legal landscape where accusations were later proven false.
I had an 8 year old girl in my Brownie scout troop once who was not only an alleged victim but the alleged perpetrator, her father, was also a victim as well as her mother and her siblings. The whole thing made me sick, and it was all because a third person, her teacher, overheard something, told the principal who in turn called the child protective services. The police and child protective representative took the girl from school and then went to the home and arrested the father and took the other siblings into their custody. No one had talked to the girl or her parents until later. It was a long drawn out mess that went on for several months. To make it a short story, the girl was telling her friend that she took showers with her daddy and that is what the teacher overheard. What could have been ascertained right from the start was that she had taken showers with her daddy because her parents had told her so. It was when she was a baby. Her father lost his job and found it difficult to later get another one. Their reputations were shot. Financially they were at rock bottom, even to loosing their home. The children had spent months in foster care and neither parent was allowed to be with the children. The whole family was devastated.
While it is good to look out for children it is not wise to assume and presume and take on third party heroics. In the above case they did major harm to 5 people.
-
Anyman, you are correct when you said, we also have numerous examples on the American legal landscape where accusations were later proven false.
I had an 8 year old girl in my Brownie scout troop once who was not only an alleged victim but the alleged perpetrator, her father, was also a victim as well as her mother and her siblings. The whole thing made me sick, and it was all because a third person, her teacher, overheard something, told the principal who in turn called the child protective services. The police and child protective representative took the girl from school and then went to the home and arrested the father and took the other siblings into their custody. No one had talked to the girl or her parents until later. It was a long drawn out mess that went on for several months. To make it a short story, the girl was telling her friend that she took showers with her daddy and that is what the teacher overheard. What could have been ascertained right from the start was that she had taken showers with her daddy because her parents had told her so. It was when she was a baby. Her father lost his job and found it difficult to later get another one. Their reputations were shot. Financially they were at rock bottom, even to loosing their home. The children had spent months in foster care and neither parent was allowed to be with the children. The whole family was devastated.
While it is good to look out for children it is not wise to assume and presume and take on third party heroics. In the above case they did major harm to 5 people.
The low number of the innocent that is accused is always thrown in to determine better not do anything at all.
Most are telling the truth and if there were more 3rd party heriocs there would not be so much harm to so many.
Risk Management has stated that 8 out of 10 are telling the truth, then times that by all those that are to afraid or ashamed to come forward.
People are unfortunately falsely accused over many crimes, maybe we best just let crimes be. That way we know that none will be falsely accused.
It appears most believe Duane. HOw naive are you to believe that Duane was the only one?
-
For some, OMG may represent "god", but not for me. There are many things that OMG might mean. (http://www.acronymfinder.com/OMG.html) For me, OMG = Oh My Goodness, Oh My Gosh or Oh My Gnats.
We should avoid phrases that are substitutes for taking God's name in vain.
This sort of brings us back around to the story Bonnie told about what happened with her sons wife and the preacher and how they were allowed to come to a school function but when she mentioned drinking and smoking they all fell to pieces.
This is what we call gagging at a gnat and swallowing a camel. For you Mr. Pickle to take Petunia to task for whatever she meant for OMG is about the biggest joke so far. Just like sister, you have called people thieves, liars, adulterers, child molestors etc etc....and that's ok. You think you are doing God's will. But someone posts the initials for Oh my Goodness and you are riding high on your righteous high horse and tell her she should avoid such.
This should go down in a book as the classic example of gagging at the gnat and swallowing the camel. Hopefully with your picture beside the definition.
Mmmhh You and sister are quite a bit alike.
-
I don't know if you have ever been a conservative, or whether you have ever been an Adventist, anyman, . . .
Wouldn't a more accurate question or statement on your part be a "conservative according to my definition of such"? If you had stated it that way it would be far more honest - the same with your question about my membership (or not) in the Adventist church.
Your recent posting in this regard reminds me of a joke I once heard:
"A certain man arrived at the gates of heaven and was met by Peter who welcomed him home and offered to take him on a tour of the beautiful city. The man of course was desirous and they set out. Every few blocks they came upon a church, distinctive worship characteristics were evident from each, joyous music, powerful preaching, and many others. Each time the new arrival asked what faith occupied the church and Peter gladly filled him in. As they approached a bend in the road Peter stopped, turned, and told the man that in the next block he would need to be completely silent - not a word and he needed to walk as softly as possible.
They proceeded and passed a church along the next block. The man abiding by Peter's request was silent, even through the block following that church. However, the curiosity was too create and he finally blurted out - 'Why did we have to be so quiet as we passed that church?' Peter, with a rather sad look told him, "That was the Adventist church and they think they are the only ones up here.'"
Now, we know from the SoP that that just isn't going to be the case - yet your attitude carries all the earmarks of that kind of triumphalist attitude. Is there no place in your heaven for people who do not adhere to your self declared "right" brand of conservatism?
. . . but I invite you to take your stand upon Bible truth and cease defending those who have tried to cover up child molestation allegations, those who hire lawyers to bully those concerned about child molestation, and those who prevaricate regarding this subject, as I assume you just did when you said that Duane is the only identifiable alleged victim of the bunch.
I stand by my statement in regards to your "list of victims":
(and the only one that can reasonably be identified as such because of their own claims is Duane)
I haven't noticed any of your other so-called victims coming forward and making their claims public. Duane has come forward and made added his voice. While it is entirely possibly that Duane is truly a victim, we also have numerous examples on the American legal landscape where accusations were later proven false (and Duane I am making NO JUDGMENT on your situation - merely presenting a salient point as part of the discussion) He has also put one of your main sources of information on the record as having very sketchy reasons for being involved - he has made it clear that the veracity of Mr. Glenn Drydan is suspect at best, yet you continue to hang your hat on Mr. Glenn Dryden's coat rack. (Its is intriguing that rather than indicating that he would provide contact information, Mr. Glenn Dryden instead makes sure to insert himself into the process as the middle man who will contact the families and make the arrangements for a conversation between Dr. Thompson and said "victims")
This section of your post is nothing more than an opportunity to restate your allegation du jour. Since it is obvious that you can no longer harp on the false allegations you laid out in regards to the finances of 3ABN and Danny Shelton you have returned to this one. Let's be clear here . . . "you" are the one who has claimed there was a cover-up, "you" have manufactured the "evidence" by piecing little bits from here and little bits from there together to construct what you claim indicts and then presented it to the public.
Furthermore, since I am not the one who has covered up these hideous allegations, since I am not the one who has hired attorneys to bully people over this matter, since I am not the one who refused to contact the alleged victims or who blamed it all on the jealousy of a man who lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended, it is readily apparent that Ps. 64 is something I can invoke rather than 3ABN or Danny Shelton.
No, Mr. Robert Pickle, as much as you might want to claim Psalm 64, it doesn't apply to you - the evidence of the past almost two years (the length of time you admit to being involved) does not play out that way. Psalm 64 is the salve for the soul of those you have attacked and treated in some of the most unchristian ways. Your penchant for the "end justifying the means" is light years from the Christian heart of how to relate to our other fellow travelers on this planet.
Your comments indicate that you are seeking justification for not following your own demands. "YOU" claim that Dr. Thompson and the board of 3ABN should have contacted the "victims" but yet you rationalize away your responsibility as a member of the clergy to notify the appropriate authorities when you became aware of the accusations. At that very point you were responsible and you didn't follow through on it - there are no two ways about it. Why didn't you? Why did you instead decide to turn your vengeance against 3ABN? Why at the point you became aware that there were accusations of that nature, did you not go to the authorities in defense of said "victims"? Why did you instead turn your heart to vilify a fellow Christian publicly? Why even now, after all that has passed these two years do you still remain silent unless you can use it to bring down 3ABN and Danny Shelton? Why are you not in the DA's office even now advocating for your list of "victims" instead of attending today's hearing in Mass. by phone?
If the accusations had substance, and you believed they were substantial, why didn't you go directly to advocate for these individuals rather than turning all your attentions and energies toward brining down a ministry of the Gospel?
Again, these questions are asked - but not answered.
I find your points quite interesting, Mr. Anyman. I just wish that you had been around with those arguments back in 2004, and that you had helped Mr. Danny Shelton apply those principles in his dealings with his wife, Linda. Then there never had been all of these problems.
-
This sort of brings us back around to the story Bonnie told about what happened with her sons wife and the preacher and how they were allowed to come to a school function but when she mentioned drinking and smoking they all fell to pieces.
This is what we call gagging at a gnat and swallowing a camel. For you Mr. Pickle to take Petunia to task for whatever she meant for OMG is about the biggest joke so far. Just like sister, you have called people thieves, liars, adulterers, child molestors etc etc....and that's ok. You think you are doing God's will. But someone posts the initials for Oh my Goodness and you are riding high on your righteous high horse and tell her she should avoid such.
This should go down in a book as the classic example of gagging at the gnat and swallowing the camel. Hopefully with your picture beside the definition.
One thiing you always seem to overlook in your responses. Contrary to popular opinion of some of you,DS does not walk on water,nor is there this need to almost genuflect at the mention of his name.
What stands out most from your posts is nothing, but nothing wrong has ever been done by DS.
Say what you will but TS has lost his credentials in another denomination. What was that for again? We have a very credible witness from a victim of TS.
Please explain to me why anyone that has the slightest idea of what that type of behaviour can do to a victim employs him in a trusted capacity???
My sons and now my grandchildren would have had no problem previously trusting and maybe putting themselves in harms way with anyone employed by the church or a ministry. I don't care if it is just as a janitor. You can bet my grandchildren are no longer taught such a fairy tale. Explain DS complete disregard for the safety of others, especially young people.
I have as much problem with a man like DS, one that is almost revered being so callous in his disregard for others as I do his brother TS. DS, in my opinion is doing nothing more than holding the coat of one that has already preyed on the vulnerable. And now, many more are willing to wink
-
I find your points quite interesting, Mr. Anyman. I just wish that you had been around with those arguments back in 2004, and that you had helped Mr. Danny Shelton apply those principles in his dealings with his wife, Linda. Then there never had been all of these problems.
Mr. Johann Thorvaldson (hope I spelled the name correctly),
- Edited to avoid allowing you to hijack this thread. The questions have been put to Mr. Robert Pickle he has refused to answer, people will make decisions on his veracity based on those facts. If you want to start a thread about what I have said and attempt to apply it to something completely different you have that prerogative. -
-
For some, OMG may represent "god", but not for me. There are many things that OMG might mean. (http://www.acronymfinder.com/OMG.html) For me, OMG = Oh My Goodness, Oh My Gosh or Oh My Gnats.
We should avoid phrases that are substitutes for taking God's name in vain.
This sort of brings us back around to the story Bonnie told about what happened with her sons wife and the preacher and how they were allowed to come to a school function but when she mentioned drinking and smoking they all fell to pieces.
This is what we call gagging at a gnat and swallowing a camel. For you Mr. Pickle to take Petunia to task for whatever she meant for OMG is about the biggest joke so far. Just like sister, you have called people thieves, liars, adulterers, child molestors etc etc....and that's ok. You think you are doing God's will. But someone posts the initials for Oh my Goodness and you are riding high on your righteous high horse and tell her she should avoid such.
This should go down in a book as the classic example of gagging at the gnat and swallowing the camel. Hopefully with your picture beside the definition.
Mmmhh You and sister are quite a bit alike.
What a load of BS which stands for Bull Stuff or Bull Smelly or Bull Stinky or Bull Whatever - Get the point? You can't change what initials stand for, people will read what is accepted that they stand for.
-
Bonnie,
I totally agree with you and you were not over the top. No one seems to want to admit that this kind of stuff happens in the church. Just ignore the big stuff that might embarrass the church and focus on the stuff we can control by rules. We don't smoke and we don't drink and we don't go with folks that do. But we will bury our heads in the sand with adultery and child rape and other awful things going on so we don't hurt how our church looks. Might get in the paper. We know what is sticking up when the head is in the sand.
(Sorry for what your family has had to go through. It must have been awful!)
-
What a load of BS which stands for Bull Stuff or Bull Smelly or Bull Stinky or Bull Whatever - Get the point? You can't change what initials stand for, people will read what is accepted that they stand for.
And this is what opens the back door wide open and ushers so many new converts right out the back door. Have you taken a look at the "retention" statistics within the N. American Seventh-day Adventist Church? We love to get them in, then we fail to love them . . . and this is a prime example of what that looks like . . . Can you image Jesus responding as you have - STOP! take a minute, don't respond, don't accuse me of being pious answer the question in your head - would Jesus say what you just did? Simple question.
-
Bonnie,
I totally agree with you and you were not over the top. No one seems to want to admit that this kind of stuff happens in the church. Just ignore the big stuff that might embarrass the church and focus on the stuff we can control by rules. We don't smoke and we don't drink and we don't go with folks that do. But we will bury our heads in the sand with adultery and child rape and other awful things going on so we don't hurt how our church looks. Might get in the paper. We know what is sticking up when the head is in the sand.
(Sorry for what your family has had to go through. It must have been awful!)
I think the worst is in knowing nothing ever really changes. No one learns.
I don't care whether it is the Shelton family or ones less known. This they will ignore, hide,deny and blame the victim.
You know, many of the pro-3ABN machine blame others for leading the other poor dupes down the wrong path on this mess. I don't know and really don't care who is the most factual in this. The fact remains that DS, like so many that are employed by the denomination are willing to put other vulnerable children or young adults in harm's way.
I don't think it can be denied that TS definitely has a problem in the area of sexual morality. He lost his credentials, he wrote what was a pretty damning letter of TS.
IMO Duane is pretty credible, you can bet where there is one victim many others are out there. Yet this has so little importance when it is brought up excuses are made or the topic gets shifted rather than confront the topic head on.
This ,as it does in the heirachy,is all I need to know about this man. I dn't care what else he has done, whether it is good or bad. From there I know he is not one bit different than the ones that turned their backs on the behaviour of the pastor that destroyed my sons marriage and tore apart the home of my grandchildren.
And for anyman,Sam,Ian,Petunia. The blame for that impression and opinion I have of DS is not anyone's fault except DS. The IRS,and all that was involved, is nothing compared to this type of callousness.
-
Wouldn't a more accurate question or statement on your part be a "conservative according to my definition of such"?
Not at all. True, Bible-believing, Bible-following, conservative, Seventh-day Adventist Christians do not prevaricate, do not refuse to apologize, do not cover up child molestation allegations, and do not hire lawyers to bully people.
Think I'm wrong? Then see how many people you can find who will tell you that true, Bible-believing, Bible-following, conservative, Seventh-day Adventist Christians prevaricate, refuse to apologize, cover up child molestation allegations, and hire lawyers to bully people. Come back and tell us how many you found.
I haven't noticed any of your other so-called victims coming forward and making their claims public.
Where you been? Roger Clem went public in 2003. Brad Dunning has never hidden it, as far as I know, and he released a public statement a year and a half ago.
Where you been?
And anyman, why be so disrespectful as to call them so-called victims? Why not call them alleged victims? What's your problem?
He has also put one of your main sources of information on the record as having very sketchy reasons for being involved - he has made it clear that the veracity of Mr. Glenn Drydan is suspect at best, yet you continue to hang your hat on Mr. Glenn Dryden's coat rack.
Kind of twisted. Duane has never suggested that Dryden's claim of Tommy Molesting six boys is inaccurate. And I haven't hung my hat on Dryden's coat rack. I have personally spoken with SEVEN alleged victims, and Dryden wasn't one of them.
Why don't you just not comment till you can keep your facts straight. It really isn't helpful when you paint a picture that isn't true.
(Its is intriguing that rather than indicating that he would provide contact information, Mr. Glenn Dryden instead makes sure to insert himself into the process as the middle man who will contact the families and make the arrangements for a conversation between Dr. Thompson and said "victims")
Unless you've been victimized, I think you are out of line with such a comment.
Since it is obvious that you can no longer harp on the false allegations you laid out in regards to the finances of 3ABN and Danny Shelton you have returned to this one.
Which allegation are you suggesting was false? Sam was having problems coming up with one even after several days. No, it really is true that Danny said in April 2005 that he had falsified a figure on his 2003 tax return, and that tax return looks like he was telling the truth on that one.
Let's be clear here . . . "you" are the one who has claimed there was a cover-up, "you" have manufactured the "evidence" by piecing little bits from here and little bits from there together to construct what you claim indicts and then presented it to the public.
Actually, Walt Thompson told me that Danny had told him things about the child molestation allegations that couldn't possibly be true. If you have a problem with that, talk to Walt Thompson, not me.
No, Mr. Robert Pickle, as much as you might want to claim Psalm 64, it doesn't apply to you - the evidence of the past almost two years (the length of time you admit to being involved) does not play out that way. Psalm 64 is the salve for the soul of those you have attacked and treated in some of the most unchristian ways.
Sure it applies to me, not to folks who cover up child molestation allegations or who hire attorneys to bully people.
Remember that Rome justifies the slaughter of the Albigenses on the basis that the culture of the times was threatened. A representative of Rome was actually murdered, and the crusades were launched in retaliation for that crime, though who did the deed was a question. Yet how can one justify the carnage that followed on the basis of one person being murdered?
The Albigenses could rightly invoke Ps. 64, I think we can agree. But Rome would likely claim, as you are doing, that they could invoke Ps. 64, not the Albigenses.
"YOU" claim that Dr. Thompson and the board of 3ABN should have contacted the "victims" but yet you rationalize away your responsibility as a member of the clergy to notify the appropriate authorities when you became aware of the accusations.
I haven't rationalized a thing, and you haven't cited one single statute to base your legal opinion on.
anyman, how come we don't hear one bit of outrage coming from you regarding Danny Shelton's cover up of child molestation allegations?
-
For you Mr. Pickle to take Petunia to task for whatever she meant for OMG is about the biggest joke so far.
I didn't take her to task.
Just like sister, you have called people thieves, liars, adulterers, child molestors etc etc....and that's ok.
Got any quotes to back up your claim that I have called people these things? Please provide at least one quote for each term.
-
And this is what opens the back door wide open and ushers so many new converts right out the back door.
Coming across as if we refuse to deal with vile sin, as in not talking to any of the alleged victims of Tommy Shelton, also can send new converts out the back door.
-
I haven't rationalized a thing, and you haven't cited one single statute to base your legal opinion on.
Questions still asked and you have yet to answer. Can you? Can't you? Will you? Won't you? You are doing a good job of avoiding them. Why did you fail to meet your obligations as a member of the clergy? Why did you instead focus all your attention on attacking the Gospel and the ministry spreading it? Why did you focus your energy on attacking fellow Christians in a public manner? Why didn't you go to the authorities and advocate for your list of so-called "victims"?
BTW, I never proffered a legal opinion on anything. I stand by my claim that you rationalized your behavior doing what ever you needed to to assuage your conscience when it comes to your "With any means necessary" approach to the whole situation.
Finally, it is clear to all that Psalms 64 does not, has not, will not apply to you. Its words describe your behavior, your attitude, your fruits - it indicts your behavior and gives those you attack hope in the blessed love of the Saviour.
-
Got any quotes to back up your claim that I have called people these things? Please provide at least one quote for each term.
Do you realize how silly you come across with this question? You can't possibly be serious, can you? The response from Sam to this question would take hours to write and he could cite, AT, BSDA, Maritime, Yahoo Prophecy and still not be cover them all.
-
Jesus dealt with sin on a daily basis . . . and NEVER the way you have, never with the callous disregard for those He worked with. He never employed a "scorched earth, any means necessary" approach the way you have. He never failed to honor and respect those he dealt with. Even when dealing with the Pharisees He honored the person they were while pointing out the sin they needed to put away. You don't have the patience or understanding He exhibited, the compassion or sympathy He engendered. He cared about people - you have failed to show even once that you care. Even those you claim to defend you failed when you didn't meet your pastoral responsibility of alerting the appropriate authorities when you felt there were legitimate accusations.
Coming across as if we refuse to deal with vile sin, as in not talking to any of the alleged victims of Tommy Shelton, also can send new converts out the back door.
-
Questions still asked and you have yet to answer. Can you? Can't you? Will you? Won't you?
Why should I do your legal research for you? Cite the statute and then let's talk.
Why did you instead focus all your attention on attacking the Gospel and the ministry spreading it?
Stop your blasphemy. Speaking out against the cover up of child molestation allegations is not attacking the gospel.
Finally, it is clear to all that Psalms 64 does not, has not, will not apply to you. Its words describe your behavior, your attitude, your fruits - it indicts your behavior and gives those you attack hope in the blessed love of the Saviour.
Not at all. Ps. 64 is not for those who cover up child molestation allegations.
-
Got any quotes to back up your claim that I have called people these things? Please provide at least one quote for each term.
Do you realize how silly you come across with this question? You can't possibly be serious, can you? The response from Sam to this question would take hours to write and he could cite, AT, BSDA, Maritime, Yahoo Prophecy and still not be cover them all.
No, it isn't silly at all. And it doesn't take an hours to cite at least one quote for each term he listed.
That's the problem with you folks. You make claims and then don't want to back up your claims. When I say that Danny said he reported a donation of property as cash, I can tell you the day he said that, and which tax return he said he did it on. I can give you the actual quote.
-
Jesus dealt with sin on a daily basis . . . and NEVER the way you have, never with the callous disregard for those He worked with. He never employed a "scorched earth, any means necessary" approach the way you have. He never failed to honor and respect those he dealt with. Even when dealing with the Pharisees He honored the person they were while pointing out the sin they needed to put away.
Have you forgotten the correspondence which demonstrates the patent falsity of your statements?
-
Why were you derelict in your duty? Why did you fail to fulfill your responsibility as a member of the clergy. Why do you continue to refuse to address the questions put to you?
Questions sill asked and not answered. There is no legal research involved - only your resistance to addressing the questions put to you. Why are you dodging them? Why are you not forth coming in responding to them? There are no statues necessary - we have your words that lead to these quesiotns.
- Your claim to have been a pastor around the time you "discovered" the accusations
- Your constant haranguing of Dr. Thompson and the board for not meeting what you have defined as their obligation
You have set the precedent with your own words so . . . why didn't you follow through on your responsibility as a member of the clergy to alert the appropriate authorities when you were made aware of accusations that you felt needed to be addressed?
What we do see is that at that point you went into overdrive in an attempt to dismantle a ministry of the Gospel and decided to attack anyone and everyone who disagreed with you along the way. You constantly have employed a "by any means necessary" approach and have tried to defile and vilify even the most cursory individuals. You haven't advocated for those -you- claim are victims . . . instead you have used them to continue your attacks on the Gospel and those who work to bring it to a wanting world.
Why did you fail in your duty as a member of the clergy?
Questions still asked and you have yet to answer. Can you? Can't you? Will you? Won't you?
Why should I do your legal research for you? Cite the statute and then let's talk.
Why did you instead focus all your attention on attacking the Gospel and the ministry spreading it?
Stop your blasphemy. Speaking out against the cover up of child molestation allegations is not attacking the gospel.
Finally, it is clear to all that Psalms 64 does not, has not, will not apply to you. Its words describe your behavior, your attitude, your fruits - it indicts your behavior and gives those you attack hope in the blessed love of the Saviour.
Not at all. Ps. 64 is not for those who cover up child molestation allegations.
-
Why were you derelict in your duty?
There is no legal research involved ....
You can't have it both ways. If no research is needed, then quit asking the question. If you think you need to ask the question, then by all means cite the statute that spells out what my duty was.
Don't be lazy.
-
Not being lazy at all Mr. Robert Pickle. Many have come here and other forums and discussed the responsibility of the clergy, doctors, psychiatrists, counselors, educators, day care providers, etc to report anything they feel needs to be reported to the appropriate authorities . . .
You claimed to be a member of the clergy
You demean others who you feel did not deal with a situation you felt needed to be
However . . . at the same time you didn't do anything with the information you had except to use it to tear down a Gospel ministry and the people involved in that ministry. You didn't go to the authorities . . . but you did immediately run and use the information that was given you to tear down God's ministry and the people who worked there.
Your new focus on demanding that I cite a legal statute seems to be just another attempt to divert and avoid answering the question. Let's say, for the sake of debate here, that there isn't a specific statute in Minnesota requiring clergy to report suspected cases of abuse . . . if we are going to hold you to the same type of Christian behavior that you are demanding of everyone else - well, then you should have gone above and beyond and you didn't. If your concern was for the so-called "victims" you wouldn't have let anything stand in your way in order ot advocate for them . . . instead you didn't bother, you used it to attack the Gospel ministry and those spreading God's word to the world.
Why were you derelict in your duty?
There is no legal research involved ....
You can't have it both ways. If no research is needed, then quit asking the question. If you think you need to ask the question, then by all means cite the statute that spells out what my duty was.
Don't be lazy.
-
What a load of BS which stands for Bull Stuff or Bull Smelly or Bull Stinky or Bull Whatever - Get the point? You can't change what initials stand for, people will read what is accepted that they stand for.
And this is what opens the back door wide open and ushers so many new converts right out the back door. Have you taken a look at the "retention" statistics within the N. American Seventh-day Adventist Church? We love to get them in, then we fail to love them . . . and this is a prime example of what that looks like . . . Can you image Jesus responding as you have - STOP! take a minute, don't respond, don't accuse me of being pious answer the question in your head - would Jesus say what you just did? Simple question.
What I can't imagine Jesus doing is using His Fathers name in the manner it was used. Why didn't you ask Petunia if Jesus would say what she did? Don't give me the "Oh My Goodness" either. Not buying that and can't imagine Jesus saying that either. I went to Adventist Academy and am just too old to fall for your guilt trip. :hot:
I can also not imagine Jesus defending someone who sexually violates children and or young adults.
-
Some here delight in pointing out things that they believe to be using God’s name in vain and show disdain for anyone doing such. There is more to that commandment than that. Taking the Lord’s name in vain is to say you are one thing, such as Christian, a believer and follower of Jesus Christ, and at the same time behaving and speaking in ways that are unchristian, in no way doing and saying as He did and said. His name is His character. Remember when Jesus pointed out that while some thought their father was Abraham that they were really of another father. They were in actuality not following the ways of Abraham but the fallen one instead and they could not and would not see that. They looked for flaws and sins in others instead of looking for their own flaws and sins. They continued on the same as they had been and ended up killing the Son of God. Whatever we do or say to our fellow man is the same as doing or saying it to our Lord Jesus. It is something to think about huh?
-
Not being lazy at all Mr. Robert Pickle.
Sure you are. Don't fib.
Many have come here and other forums and discussed the responsibility of the clergy, doctors, psychiatrists, counselors, educators, day care providers, etc to report anything they feel needs to be reported to the appropriate authorities . . .
Have you forgotten? I don't take people's word for things, regardless of which side they're on. If you want to discuss what my duty was, then cite the statute you are referring to.
Let's say, for the sake of debate here, that there isn't a specific statute in Minnesota requiring clergy to report suspected cases of abuse . . . if we are going to hold you to the same type of Christian behavior that you are demanding of everyone else - well, then you should have gone above and beyond and you didn't.
You sound as if you don't know whether there is such a statute or not.
You sound as if you think checking out both sides of the story is going above and beyond the call of duty. Go ask your pastor or conference secretary or conference president, and they will tell you that only talking to the alleged perpetrator and his factually challenged brother could result in massive liability.
-
Taking the Lord’s name in vain is to say you are one thing, such as Christian, a believer and follower of Jesus Christ, and at the same time behaving and speaking in ways that are unchristian, in no way doing and saying as He did and said.
Those who keep defending the cover up of child molestation allegations are not behaving and speaking like He who said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me."
-
For those readers who aren't sure what Tommy Shelton was accused of doing, here's is the statement of Pastor Brad Dunning taken from http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-brad-dunning.htm (http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-brad-dunning.htm).
For those who want to condemn the alleged victims for not doing more, take note that the explanation Tommy Shelton is alleged to have told at the time is that Brad was trying to get other boys into homosexual activity, and Tommy was trying to bring it out in the open by propositioning him. But Brad never knew Tommy was saying anything like that about him.
-------- Original Message --------
From: Brad Dunning
Subject: RE: Here's my email, Pastor Dunning.
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 16:09:11 -0600
Dear Bob,
Here is my follow up email from our telephone conversation yesterday January 3rd, 2007.
The purpose of this communication is to give you a personal account of how I was assaulted by Tommy Shelton, then Pastor of the Ezra Church of God.
I believe it was in the 1982-83 school year. I was a student in the Ezra Church of God Christian School. I was an honor student and a member of the basketball team.
On the day of my encounter with Tommy Shelton, here is what took place.
I was in the gym playing basketball one afternoon by myself. I had extra free time as I was an "E" privilege student.
Ricky Shelton came to the gym and told me that his dad wanted to see me in his office. So I left the gym and went to the Pastor's office. Tommy invited me in and closed the door. He sat behind his desk, I sat on the couch.
He began to tell me that he was really embarrassed to talk about this, but he needed my help. He said that he had a problem with his t*******s. It was a medical condition that was causing them to bleed. I asked him if he had been to the doctor. He replied that he was too embarrassed to be seen by the nurses and that he would not go.
He said that he had prayed about it, and God showed him how that he could be healed. He told me that God showed him that if he could apply the s***m of another man, that the proteins would heal his t*******s. He then asked me if I would be willing to help him by applying my s***m to his t*******s.
Being in shock, I told him that I had to think about it and left his office. I went home that afternoon and told my mother all that had gone on.
I did not return to school. My mother, my grandfather and I, went back to the school and confronted Tommy. He denied everything and told my Grandfather that no one would believe us and he would win.
We then went to the West Frankfort Police Department and filed a formal complaint. To my knowledge, no charges were brought against Tommy. Our family suspected that Tommy was being protected by State Police officers who were members of his congregation.
My mother and I moved to Houston, TX shortly after that.
A few years later, we were told that Tommy had been caught with other boys. Some who were personal friends of mine while I was at Ezra.
One of the boys later apologized to me for not speaking up when I did.
My mother received an official written apology from the Church of God. I had not had any communication with Tommy Shelton since that event took place.
If I can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Because of Him,
Brad Dunning
www.facs4u.com
-
Okay, since anyman was having such a hard time citing the appropriate Minnesota statute, for some unknown reason, I have looked it up:
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 626.556, Subd. 3(a) (LexisNexis through 2007 Reg. Sess.)
A person who knows or has reason to believe a child is being neglected or physically or sexually abused...shall immediately report the information to the local welfare agency, agency responsible for assessing or investigating the report, police department, or the county sheriff if the person is...employed as a member of the clergy and received the information while engaged in ministerial duties, provided that a member of clergy is not required to report information that is otherwise privileged under § 595.02(1)(c) [pertaining to clergy-penitent privilege].
anyman, I request an apology for your false and diversionary statements that I was derelict in my duty. The question is, and the test of your Christianity is, whether you will be quicker to apologize now than you were last time I asked for such. Last time you never did.
-
After reading it I do not understand how you can honestly say you were not derelict in your duty.
Okay, since anyman was having such a hard time citing the appropriate Minnesota statute, for some unknown reason, I have looked it up:
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 626.556, Subd. 3(a) (LexisNexis through 2007 Reg. Sess.)
A person who knows or has reason to believe a child is being neglected or physically or sexually abused...shall immediately report the information to the local welfare agency, agency responsible for assessing or investigating the report, police department, or the county sheriff if the person is...employed as a member of the clergy and received the information while engaged in ministerial duties, provided that a member of clergy is not required to report information that is otherwise privileged under § 595.02(1)(c) [pertaining to clergy-penitent privilege].
anyman, I request an apology for your false and diversionary statements that I was derelict in my duty. The question is, and the test of your Christianity is, whether you will be quicker to apologize now than you were last time I asked for such. Last time you never did.
-
After reading it I do not understand how you can honestly say you were not derelict in your duty.
Distract and divert. This garbage is really getting old.
The issue here is that Tommy Shelton abused several young males, not whether Bob reported something to the authorities that happened years before. How petty can you be?
-- editied to correct misspelling --
-
After reading it I do not understand how you can honestly say you were not derelict in your duty.
Distract and divert. This garbage is really getting old.
The issue here is that Tommy Shelton abused several young males, not whether Bob reported something to the authorities that happened years before. How petty can you be?
Looks like Duane can read just fine.
The statute says that if I know or believe a child is being abused, I must report it. I have never known or believed a child is being abused by Tommy Shelton, since all the alleged victims I have talked with are adults now, and the alleged abuse took place some time ago.
Perhaps Child_of_God and anyman are using some other definition for "IS"?
-
For those who position themselves as advocates for those who claim sexual abuse, as you and Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy appear to have done, the mandated reporting time is for abuse that has happened within the previous 10 years. (http://www.mncasa.org/documents/svji_fact_sheets/mandated.rptrfactsht.pdf)
You have posted that TS is an alleged child molester. Did all of the alleged incidences occur further back than 10 years before the date you learned of them? If not, you aren't yet off the hook if you did not report them to the appropriate agencies.
After reading it I do not understand how you can honestly say you were not derelict in your duty.
Distract and divert. This garbage is really getting old.
The issue here is that Tommy Shelton abused several young males, not whether Bob reported something to the authorities that happened years before. How petty can you be?
Looks like Duane can read just fine.
The statute says that if I know or believe a child is being abused, I must report it. I have never known or believed a child is being abused by Tommy Shelton, since all the alleged victims I have talked with are adults now, and the alleged abuse took place some time ago.
Perhaps Child_of_God and anyman are using some other definition for "IS"?
-
After reading it I do not understand how you can honestly say you were not derelict in your duty.
Distract and divert. This garbage is really getting old.
The issue here is that Tommy Shelton abused several young males, not whether Bob reported something to the authorities that happened years before. How petty can you be?
Looks like Duane can read just fine.
The statute says that if I know or believe a child is being abused, I must report it. I have never known or believed a child is being abused by Tommy Shelton, since all the alleged victims I have talked with are adults now, and the alleged abuse took place some time ago.
Perhaps Child_of_God and anyman are using some other definition for "IS"?
So you don't believe TS continued on with the alleged abusive behavior after the incidences occurred to the alleged victims you have interviewed? And yet you criticize the leadership of 3abn for allowing him to work there. Why?
-
For those who position themselves as advocates for those who claim sexual abuse, as you and Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy appear to have done, the mandated reporting time is for abuse that has happened within the previous 10 years. (http://www.mncasa.org/documents/svji_fact_sheets/mandated.rptrfactsht.pdf)
Come on Petunia, make some sense, please. In what way do I fit the qualifications of a mandatory reporter as given on that publication?
Further, why have you yet to show any outrage over Danny Shelton's cover up of these allegations? What's wrong? Can't you at least say you agree that it was wrong for him to cover these things up?
-
So you don't believe TS continued on with the alleged abusive behavior after the incidences occurred to the alleged victims you have interviewed?
I never said that, did I? Please stick to what I said.
And yet you criticize the leadership of 3abn for allowing him to work there.
Where have I done that? Quotes please.
My consistent concern has been that Danny Shelton and Walt Thompson did not handle these allegations appropriately, and when they were given the opportunity to explain otherwise they stubbornly refused to do so. That was inappropriate.
Moreover, when they gave a special tribute to Tommy in the face of new allegations, that was over the top and just plain wrong.
-
Let's remember a few things about that tribute.
Linda was accused by Danny Shelton of talking too long on the telephone, and she was consequently terminated. She was never given a special tribute before she departed.
In stark and despicable contrast, Tommy Shelton was accused of molesting boys, and he was given a 20+ minute tribute on global TV.
If that incident doesn't demonstrate the utter moral bankruptcy of some of the main folks at 3ABN, what does?
-
For those who position themselves as advocates for those who claim sexual abuse, as you and Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy appear to have done, the mandated reporting time is for abuse that has happened within the previous 10 years. (http://www.mncasa.org/documents/svji_fact_sheets/mandated.rptrfactsht.pdf)
You have posted that TS is an alleged child molester. Did all of the alleged incidences occur further back than 10 years before the date you learned of them? If not, you aren't yet off the hook if you did not report them to the appropriate agencies.
It is not a question of who gets off the hook . Back again to the behaviour of my sons when young. "If you think what I did or did not do is so bad,do you know what ,,,,,, did"
What was it again DS did regarding this matter?
If Bob or Gailon knew while it was going on, there is no doubt they were in the wrong for not reporting it. PERIOD.
Their reporting or not reporting is not the sole issue.
Now let's get to DS and TS. What steps did DS take. The investigation that was claimed seems to be somewhat in doubt. Did DS or his legal team make contact with the victims, there has been several names mentioned.?
BTW, as this is a topic you and DS supporters bring up quite frequently and you seem quite knowledgeable about 3ABN and DS. What did you do? Have you spoken to DS about the risk he is running? Have you asked him if he has cautioned others with young people to be careful around his brother,as he lost his minsterial credentials for immoral conduct? All it would take is one coming forward currently and what a mess it would be.
.
Distract and divert. This garbage is really getting old.
This is so accurate and one fellow adventists play well when this topic is brought out.
As knowledgeable as you are,you give every indication of being concerning all that pertains to DS and 3ABN, what is your take on TS and being allowed now a role in a christian ministry.
What excuse can you find for not having a through investigation concerning the victims named previously?
Are all the victims just jealous and out to get God's annointed one?
The issue here is that Tommy Shelton abused several young males, not whether Bob reported something to the authorities that happened years before. How petty can you be?
This is not petty, this is a deliberate attempt to sidetrack. If Bob knew at the time he is quilty as well. Now let's get back to the guilt of DS,TS and 3ABN
-
I have three stories from three different people that all indicate that Danny has known about this problem for years. So one obvious question is whether Danny ever reported it to the authorities, and if not, why not.
-
I believe I can read just as well as anyone. Maybe others read what Bob Pickle said, The statute says that if I know or believe a child is being abused, I must report it. I have never known or believed a child is being abused by Tommy Shelton, since all the alleged victims I have talked with are adults now, and the alleged abuse took place some time ago. He also said, Have you forgotten? I don\'t take people\'s word for things, regardless of which side they\'re on. Well he did take the word of those alleged victims of child abuse, most of whom have never reported it to the authorities. At any rate there has never been a basis for a trial or conviction. At the time Bob got involved he did not know if there was such a statute and still did not try to report it. Now since it was some time ago they will not come forward leaving Bob in a pickle to soak in his own brine. Still he expected that 3ABN should have investigated and done something he could not do anything about. All the talk of a cover up has no basis as no proof has ever been given for such, just the words of those working against 3ABN.
I honestly do not know if there were any alleged victims or not nor do I know anything personal about TS. But, somehow we have all forgotten that there has been nothing reported in all the years from then to now. We have also forgotten that even if TS had done something years ago how do we know that he has not repented and left it in the past. When the Lord talked with the woman in sin, He told her to go and sin no more. None of us know TS heart and the heart of the alleged victims except Jesus. Isn’t it time to stop being the accusers of the brethren? Let it go and let God.
-
"The statute says that if I know or believe a child is being abused, I must report it."
It would be highly unusual for a State law to say the above. None of the laws of which I am aquainted make "belief" a condition of the requirement to report. The reason is very simple: MAking belief a requirement to report make a lack of belief a defense against a failure to report. e.g. I did not believe, therefore I was not required to report.
NOTE: I am not stating anything in regard to who I might believe had a requirement to report and who did not have such a requirement. I am simply questioning the statement about the law.
-
Bonnie, you said, he lost his minsterial credentials for immoral conduct? Where is the proof for this statement? As far as I know while the allegations were being investigated his license was suspended. When the investigation ended, he retained his license.
-
He also said, Have you forgotten? I don\'t take people\'s word for things, regardless of which side they\'re on. Well he did take the word of those alleged victims of child abuse, most of whom have never reported it to the authorities. At any rate there has never been a basis for a trial or conviction. At the time Bob got involved he did not know if there was such a statute and still did not try to report it. Now since it was some time ago they will not come forward leaving Bob in a pickle to soak in his own brine. Still he expected that 3ABN should have investigated and done something he could not do anything about. All the talk of a cover up has no basis as no proof has ever been given for such, just the words of those working against 3ABN.
I wonder if you can understand the failure of victims to report their abuse is not uncommon. For the one that does come forward,there usually is more that can't. If Bob Pickle had the knowledge and it was still going on,or within the time limit of course of course he had an obligation to report. But if Bob knew, then it is not a leap to believe that DS knew the same thing. Did he report it?? As for the time frame according to MN law,I probably would have thought it was to late to go to the authorities as well. It was only learning the hard way as to what MN law is. The pastor in our situation committed a felony. Mn conference knew for a year there was a BIG problem and did nothing.
honestly do not know if there were any alleged victims or not nor do I know anything personal about TS. But, somehow we have all forgotten that there has been nothing reported in all the years from then to now. We have also forgotten that even if TS had done something years ago how do we know that he has not repented and left it in the past. When the Lord talked with the woman in sin, He told her to go and sin no more. None of us know TS heart and the heart of the alleged victims except Jesus. Isn’t it time to stop being the accusers of the brethren? Let it go and let God.
We have also forgotten that even if TS had done something years ago how do we know that he has not repented and left it in the past. When the Lord talked with the woman in sin, He told her to go and sin no more. None of us know TS heart and
When people do not acknowledge,ask for forgivness it is tough to believe there is any repentence
That doesn't even matter, those that work with him, those that have come to trust him and could be harmed by his behaviour deserve to know.
-
Bonnie, you said, he lost his minsterial credentials for immoral conduct? Where is the proof for this statement? As far as I know while the allegations were being investigated his license was suspended. When the investigation ended, he retained his license.
I was under the impression he had lost it for good. I am sorry for having said such if not true.
It still doesn't answer many questions. Now that you say TS did not lose but was suspended temporaily how was that was dealt with, given his letter of what appeared to be pretty damning against TS.
If is liscense was suspended pending outcome,what did those investigationg make out of his letter
edited to correct sentence
-
It would be highly unusual for a State law to say the above. None of the laws of which I am aquainted make "belief" a condition of the requirement to report.
That's the way the statute I quoted was worded.
-
child of God,
Can you respond to the email enclosed. Not as in Bob Pickle was derelict in his obligation to report.
Just what you think of this email. This type of behaviour is almost classic for a sex predator. Then could you explain a written apology from the Church of God,and then lifting the suspension on his credentials?
For those readers who aren't sure what Tommy Shelton was accused of doing, here's is the statement of Pastor Brad Dunning taken from http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-brad-dunning.htm (http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-brad-dunning.htm).
For those who want to condemn the alleged victims for not doing more, take note that the explanation Tommy Shelton is alleged to have told at the time is that Brad was trying to get other boys into homosexual activity, and Tommy was trying to bring it out in the open by propositioning him. But Brad never knew Tommy was saying anything like that about him.
From: Brad Dunning
Subject: RE: Here's my email, Pastor Dunning.
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 16:09:11 -0600
Dear Bob,
Here is my follow up email from our telephone conversation yesterday January 3rd, 2007.
The purpose of this communication is to give you a personal account of how I was assaulted by Tommy Shelton, then Pastor of the Ezra Church of God.
I believe it was in the 1982-83 school year. I was a student in the Ezra Church of God Christian School. I was an honor student and a member of the basketball team.
On the day of my encounter with Tommy Shelton, here is what took place.
I was in the gym playing basketball one afternoon by myself. I had extra free time as I was an "E" privilege student.
Ricky Shelton came to the gym and told me that his dad wanted to see me in his office. So I left the gym and went to the Pastor's office. Tommy invited me in and closed the door. He sat behind his desk, I sat on the couch.
He began to tell me that he was really embarrassed to talk about this, but he needed my help. He said that he had a problem with his t*******s. It was a medical condition that was causing them to bleed. I asked him if he had been to the doctor. He replied that he was too embarrassed to be seen by the nurses and that he would not go.
He said that he had prayed about it, and God showed him how that he could be healed. He told me that God showed him that if he could apply the s***m of another man, that the proteins would heal his t*******s. He then asked me if I would be willing to help him by applying my s***m to his t*******s.
Being in shock, I told him that I had to think about it and left his office. I went home that afternoon and told my mother all that had gone on.
I did not return to school. My mother, my grandfather and I, went back to the school and confronted Tommy. He denied everything and told my Grandfather that no one would believe us and he would win.
We then went to the West Frankfort Police Department and filed a formal complaint. To my knowledge, no charges were brought against Tommy. Our family suspected that Tommy was being protected by State Police officers who were members of his congregation.
My mother and I moved to Houston, TX shortly after that.
A few years later, we were told that Tommy had been caught with other boys. Some who were personal friends of mine while I was at Ezra.
One of the boys later apologized to me for not speaking up when I did.
My mother received an official written apology from the Church of God. I had not had any communication with Tommy Shelton since that event took place.
If I can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Because of Him,
Brad Dunning
www.facs4u.com[/quote]
[/quote]
-
Well he did take the word of those alleged victims of child abuse, most of whom have never reported it to the authorities.
And where did I do that? True, while it is hard to believe that seven alleged victims and the mother of an eighth and the written answers of a ninth could all be lies, I still call them alleged victims, don't I?
But, somehow we have all forgotten that there has been nothing reported in all the years from then to now.
Where did you come up with that?
Roger Clem went public in 2003. Duane in 2007. Someone had to flee Tommy's car around 1991, which resulted, I understand, in Tommy leaving 3ABN. And others came forward in the 1980's and within the last few years.
Or by reported are you referring to a certain kind of reporting?
We have also forgotten that even if TS had done something years ago how do we know that he has not repented and left it in the past.
If he has repented, how come he hasn't given evidence of that repentance by making things right? Why did he participate in that outrageous tribute in which he said that if it weren't for the ferry he could cope? Why did he send out that open letter threatening a lawsuit? Why did he and 3ABN have Riva send out that nasty letter? Why did he allow Riva to send out that letter in 2003 threatening legal action on the grounds that even if the actions did occur, the statute of limitations has run out?
Isn’t it time to stop being the accusers of the brethren? Let it go and let God.
Let God do what? Let God pour out his judgments because we were so hard hearted we didn't speak up?
Are you suggesting that even if Tommy is a perpetrator and unrepentant, that he is still a brother and we shouldn't say anything? Not even to the authorities since that would be accusing the brethren? And have you accepted the heresy that there is never grounds for church discipline? Even for child molestation?
-
Bonnie, I do not have all the information so I cannot give the whole picture. The investigation was years ago. The letter was written last year.
-
Bob, I only have one thing to say to you because I refuse to get caught up in your devious tricks. Maybe TS got a lawyer because you were publically maligning his character. That is against the law you know.
-
Bonnie, I do not have all the information so I cannot give the whole picture. The investigation was years ago. The letter was written last year.
If you are lacking the whole picture how is it you can criticize others ??
But you can answer to what yo have read.
In the email from an intended victim of DS what do you suppose he was proposing to this man Brad?.
If in fact his license was only suspended during investigation and then re-instated, what motivation would there be for a written apology for something that never happened?
If you do not have the facts or only a portion of them,how can you so strongly defend one side.
I don't care what else took place,this one is fairly obvious and should be seen as a problem concerning the idolization of DS.
-
I have three stories from three different people that all indicate that Danny has known about this problem for years. So one obvious question is whether Danny ever reported it to the authorities, and if not, why not.
I think this pretty much says it all. This couldn't be any kinder or anymore factual than it is.
------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Gailons last email to me. "We got a problem"
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:26:23 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
CC: Danny Shelton
Dear Bob,
The allegations against Tommy were made about 30 years ago. They were
reported to the proper authorities. No physical actions ever occured.
Tommy appologized to the kids and offered recompence. The DA said there
was no case. No restrictions were ever imposed. Tommy is employed by
3abn with full board approval, knowing the facts. The author of a book,
"These kind don't change, do they?" was interviewed on 3abn recently.
You may wish to purchase that book and read itl (The sad thing about
this is that the ones who are loudest in spreading falsehood know this,
yet continue to agitate and keep the fires burning.)
Jesus said, he that is without sin, let him cast the first stone. I
would echo Jesus statements today. All of us at 3abn are human. All have
sinned. But, thank God, He forgives and uses our fallings as stimulants
to make us grow. 3ABN is in the work of healing broken people, but we
too are still in a sense broken. Almost every employee has a record they
would not be proud of. Yet, Got takes great pleasure in accomplishing
His purposes on earth by people just such as us. No where in the Bible
are there examples of people who have fallen who have suffered the wrath
of God who have confessed their sins and learned from their mistakes.
Yet, for the past almost 3 years 3abn has been bombarded with lies and
insinuations. Of course, we know where they come from, and we know that
no one ever wins when he enters argument with the devil. Therefore, we
have tried to let the Lord fight our battles. We have resisted the
temptation to take on the battle ourselves and I am sure have sometimes
said too much or too little, but never the less, know in our hearts that
we have taken the high road in this battle. Attorneys that have looked
at the evidence agree full heartedly. While not everyone may agree with
the decisions we have made, we have continued to rejoice with the
blessing of our Lord.
Yes, it is wearing. I can only thank God for giving Danny the strength
of faith and health to hang on as he has done. I am sure it is only by
God's amazing grace that this has occured. And I must thank our faithful
viewers and supporters who by their prayers of intercession have joined
the powers of heaven in this battle.
You speak of the need for damage control. Please place yourself in
Danny's shoes for just one day and try to imagine how you would respond.
Then imagine being the source of bombardment day after day, seemingly
unendingly. It has not been easy. Danny is a fighter. Without his
determination and resiliency, this ministry would have been taken down
long ago. I have no doubt that God chose Danny for this task,
recognizing that all of our greatest strengths are sometimes also our
greatest weaknesses. Yes, I know he sometimes would be better off to
keep quiet, let the Lord fight his battles and relax, but that is not
always easy. Most of all is the difficulty of knowing when to speak and
when to be silent. God told ancient Israel that they should wait upon
the Lord and He would fight their battles, but I find it interesting
that they still had to go into battle and fight - Gideon is the classic
example. While God took the battle into His own hands, Israel was called
to do it's part before God could do His thing. Rather than faulting
Danny for his tendencies to defend himself, I find I must lift him up in
prayer.
You propse to me "that folks who have a few questions would not be
called 'accusers." This would ordinarily be true, but when in battle for
long periods of time, even good soldiers sometimes develop shell shock.
When "friends" turn out to be enemies over and over again, one soon
"learns" that he can trust no one. A number of e mails and letters that
I have written as private responses have appeared on the Internet
forums, "spun" to fit the desire of the "friend" who placed them there.
Thanks for your interest,
walt
Walter Thompson MD
This subject needs to be dropped. Pickle only brings it up again as the rest of his accusations have been made null and void by a Federal Office so he has nothing left but a he said she said situation. Give it up Bob and go to something that concerns the lawsuit you are involved in.
-
Bob, I only have one thing to say to you because I refuse to get caught up in your devious tricks. Maybe TS got a lawyer because you were publically maligning his character. That is against the law you know.
I knew nothing about this when Riva sent his letter in 2003. I didn't know about the allegations against Tommy Shelton until 2006.
Could you give an example of where you have shown the same skepticism of the other side's claims?
-
I have three stories from three different people that all indicate that Danny has known about this problem for years. So one obvious question is whether Danny ever reported it to the authorities, and if not, why not.
I think this pretty much says it all. This couldn't be any kinder or anymore factual than it is.
------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Gailons last email to me. "We got a problem"
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:26:23 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
CC: Danny Shelton
Now Sam, I cannot but conclude that you are intentionally and blatantly lying in stating that what Walt wrote is factual. You know very well that Dryden lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended.
And you know very well that in 2003 Tommy was asked to apologize for deceit and inappropriate behavior to a church he pastored from about 1995 till about 2001, making the allegations as recent as 3 years old when Walt did his so-called "investigation."
So please explain on what basis you call Walt's email "factual"?
And why move on if the issues have not yet been resolved? Roger Clem told Tommy when Tommy asked him what he wanted him to do, "I want you to register as a sex offender." Sounds reasonable to me. If Tommy is really repentant and has really made things right, he shouldn't have any trouble with that.
Did you know that it is now a matter of court record that one of Tommy's alleged victims stated that Tommy tried to perform oral *** on him? It's in the guy's own handwriting from what I recall. And yet Walt claims that there was no physical action at all?
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
-
Yet another low blow. It rather looks as though there are quite a few things you can't get your mind around, sammy...
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
-
I have three stories from three different people that all indicate that Danny has known about this problem for years. So one obvious question is whether Danny ever reported it to the authorities, and if not, why not.
I think this pretty much says it all. This couldn't be any kinder or anymore factual than it is.
------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Gailons last email to me. "We got a problem"
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:26:23 -0600
From: Walt Thompson
CC: Danny Shelton
Now Sam, I cannot but conclude that you are intentionally and blatantly lying in stating that what Walt wrote is factual. You know very well that Dryden lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended.
And you know very well that in 2003 Tommy was asked to apologize for deceit and inappropriate behavior to a church he pastored from about 1995 till about 2001, making the allegations as recent as 3 years old when Walt did his so-called "investigation."
So please explain on what basis you call Walt's email "factual"?
Bob Pickle, could you please clarify the bolded statement above? Were there allegations that incidences of abuse took place only 3 years before Walt Thompson made his inquiries? Or, had it been 3 years at that point since anyone had made allegations that they were abused at some past point?
And why move on if the issues have not yet been resolved? Roger Clem told Tommy when Tommy asked him what he wanted him to do, "I want you to register as a sex offender." Sounds reasonable to me. If Tommy is really repentant and has really made things right, he shouldn't have any trouble with that.
Did you know that it is now a matter of court record that one of Tommy's alleged victims stated that Tommy tried to perform oral *** on him? It's in the guy's own handwriting from what I recall. And yet Walt claims that there was no physical action at all?
In which court is this document a matter of record? Mass? Is it a part of this defamation per se law suit or was it evidence in a trial some time in the past. Is it an allegation or has it been given proven fact status?
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
Sam, some years ago Danny Shelton interviewed a couple on a 3abn Today program. They run a ministry called The Hope Of Survivors. The woman was in her 20s or early 30s when an SDA pastor counseled the couple when they were having relationship problems, gained her trust and convinced her she was in love with him. It lead to a physical relationship that only in retrospect did the young woman realize was pastoral abuse.
It matters not the gender of the young person, these things really do happen. When a predatory pastor, a person of authority, gets someone who is vulnerable or troubled to trust them, the intended victim is really quite easy to control and manipulate into doing things they might otherwise not do.
-
Also, the frontal lob of the brain is not fully developed until somewhere between the age of 25 to 30. Dr. Neal Nedley spoke at our campmeeting this year and he said age 30. I have heard other experts say around 23 for females and 25 for males.
-
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
I understand your statement as it is one that many people would make. Allow me to challenge your thinking, if you will and if I am able to do so:
My 85 year-old mother-in-law is a resident of a nursing home and lacks the mental capacity to understand and to make certain decisions about her life. If she were to enter into a sexual relationship with a male employee of the nursing home would she be a victim?
I immagine that you would agree with me that she would likely be a victim due to her lack of capacity to understand and make decisions about her life. You would then likely state that the 20 year-old male you referenced has never been claimed to have lacked the mental capacity to give consent. O.K. I am just attepting to illustrate that one can not make an automatic judgement that one is not a victim based upon chronological age.
Professional societies have some very clear rules as to the relationships that are proper for their members and clients. Physicians are not allowed to enter into a sexual relationship with their patients. Counselors are not allowed to have sexual relationships with theri clients. Lawyers are restricted from sexual relationships with the peple whom they represent. I could go on and on.
The general understanding for all of these prohibitions comes from the knowledge of the dynamics of the relationshlips that often are formed between a client who is in trouble/pain/distress/etc. and the individual who is the saviour who attempts to relieve them from that trouble/pain/distress/etc. Those dynamics are often considered to be such that the individual is thought to be unable to freely give consent. When the law is based upon that understanding, the law is called statutory rape. As an example, a teacher may be convicted of statutory rape of a 14 year-old. In this case the teacher will not be allowed to defend with a claim that the 14 YO consented. To expand futher, under the law a professional may be convicted of statutory rape of a 35 year-old. In such cases, age in not the question.
Unfortunately, clergypersons are not as clearly defined in State laws in regard to statutory rape as are other professionals. In other words,while in some cases a clergyperson might be prosecuted for a criminal violation in regard to sexual contact with as congregational member, in other places no such criminal violation would have occured.
But, in my thinking, the law is not the central issue to me. The central issue is not in my mind whether or not a clergyperson could be charged and convicted of statutory rape. To me the central issue is that of the dynamics that take palce between a clergyperson and the congregational member. Those dynamics are powerful enough that I can well think of a manipulative clergyperson (I believe that pastors have their share of manipulative people.) could manipulate a troubled congregational member to enter into a sexual relationship that the person would never enter into if they were in fully aware of what was going on in the dynamics of the relationship.
In other words, I can consider a 20/30/35/40/50 year-old to be a victim of a predator clergyperson.
-
Bob Pickle, could you please clarify the bolded statement above? Were there allegations that incidences of abuse took place only 3 years before Walt Thompson made his inquiries?
If Tommy was asked to apologize for deceit and inappropriate behavior to a church he pastored from about 1995 to about 2001, then that very request suggests that there may have been sexual misconduct between those dates. And anyone responsible for following up on Dryden's concerns in 2003 would need to look at that rather than merely say that the allegations were all 30 years old.
In which court is this document a matter of record?
U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, Case No. 07-cv-40098.
Is it an allegation or has it been given proven fact status?
I'm not sure your question makes sense. Are you asking whether someone videotaped the alleged abuse? What in your mind would give an allegation proven fact status?
And what would it matter if we are talking about whether Walt properly investigated the child molestation allegations? Allegations don't have to be proven before an organization can be opened up to considerable liability.
-
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
I understand your statement as it is one that many people would make. Allow me to challenge your thinking, if you will and if I am able to do so:
My 85 year-old mother-in-law is a resident of a nursing home and lacks the mental capacity to understand and to make certain decisions about her life. If she were to enter into a sexual relationship with a male employee of the nursing home would she be a victim?
I immagine that you would agree with me that she would likely be a victim due to her lack of capacity to understand and make decisions about her life. You would then likely state that the 20 year-old male you referenced has never been claimed to have lacked the mental capacity to give consent. O.K. I am just attepting to illustrate that one can not make an automatic judgement that one is not a victim based upon chronological age.
Professional societies have some very clear rules as to the relationships that are proper for their members and clients. Physicians are not allowed to enter into a sexual relationship with their patients. Counselors are not allowed to have sexual relationships with theri clients. Lawyers are restricted from sexual relationships with the peple whom they represent. I could go on and on.
The general understanding for all of these prohibitions comes from the knowledge of the dynamics of the relationshlips that often are formed between a client who is in trouble/pain/distress/etc. and the individual who is the saviour who attempts to relieve them from that trouble/pain/distress/etc. Those dynamics are often considered to be such that the individual is thought to be unable to freely give consent. When the law is based upon that understanding, the law is called statutory rape. As an example, a teacher may be convicted of statutory rape of a 14 year-old. In this case the teacher will not be allowed to defend with a claim that the 14 YO consented. To expand futher, under the law a professional may be convicted of statutory rape of a 35 year-old. In such cases, age in not the question.
Unfortunately, clergypersons are not as clearly defined in State laws in regard to statutory rape as are other professionals. In other words,while in some cases a clergyperson might be prosecuted for a criminal violation in regard to sexual contact with as congregational member, in other places no such criminal violation would have occured.
But, in my thinking, the law is not the central issue to me. The central issue is not in my mind whether or not a clergyperson could be charged and convicted of statutory rape. To me the central issue is that of the dynamics that take palce between a clergyperson and the congregational member. Those dynamics are powerful enough that I can well think of a manipulative clergyperson (I believe that pastors have their share of manipulative people.) could manipulate a troubled congregational member to enter into a sexual relationship that the person would never enter into if they were in fully aware of what was going on in the dynamics of the relationship.
In other words, I can consider a 20/30/35/40/50 year-old to be a victim of a predator clergyperson.
Eloquent the words of explanation from one who knows. Thank you, Gregory.
My rhetorical question is... why isn't state law more uniform when it comes to clergy as, clearly, the dynamics can be the same between them and those who are vulnerable and gain their trust.
-
It would be highly unusual for a State law to say the above. None of the laws of which I am aquainted make "belief" a condition of the requirement to report.
That's the way the statute I quoted was worded.
Bob:
You are correct. Here is better information:
Minn. Stat. Ann. § 626.556, Subd. 3(a) (LexisNexis through 2007 Reg. Sess.)
A person who knows or has reason to believe a child is being neglected or physically or sexually abused...shall immediately report the information to the local welfare agency, agency responsible for assessing or investigating the report, police department, or the county sheriff if the person is...employed as a member of the clergy and received the information while engaged in ministerial duties, provided that a member of clergy is not required to report information that is otherwise privileged under § 595.02(1)(c) [pertaining to clergy-penitent privilege].
NOTES:
1) I am required to cite my source for the above quote of MN law. I thought I had the URL saved so I could post it, but I seem to have lost it. My source was the Child Welfare Information [something]. If I am able to reconstruct the source, I will post it.
2) Note, the above citation is still not clear as to what responsibility Bob Pickle may have had to report. I could argue a case on both sides of the question. As to what my actual opinion is: As it is not an informed opinion, I will not state it. Rather those who think they know can continue to argue their position. :)
3) My source was: Child Welfare Information Gateway.
4) The URL was: www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/clergymandated.cfm
5) Those who are interested should click on the above URL. I has a great article on the opening page and some good links that will give you more information.
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
First of all, I was 19. Second, he was my pastor and had been since age 5. Third, unless this has happened to you personally (and I pray it hasn't) no, you probably can't understand it.
Again I say, comments such as the one above are why it takes some victims years to come forward, and still others take it to the grave.
-
Eloquent the words of explanation from one who knows. Thank you, Gregory.
My rhetorical question is... why isn't state law more uniform when it comes to clergy as, clearly, the dynamics can be the same between them and those who are vulnerable and gain their trust.
A couple of responses:
1) People simply often do not understand the issues relating to the interpersonal dynamics that take place in a professional counseling relationship. They simply do not understand how a sexual relaltionship between two adults could have one person as a victim.
2) The issues of clergy-penitent privilege are fundamental to the First Ammendment of the Federal Constiltution. That is a severe (major) legal issue.
-
Eloquent the words of explanation from one who knows. Thank you, Gregory.
My rhetorical question is... why isn't state law more uniform when it comes to clergy as, clearly, the dynamics can be the same between them and those who are vulnerable and gain their trust.
A couple of responses:
1) People simply often do not understand the issues relating to the interpersonal dynamics that take place in a professional counseling relationship. They simply do not understand how a sexual relaltionship between to adults could have one person as a victim.
2) The issues of clergy-penitent privilege are fundamenetal to the First Ammendment of the Federal Constiltution. That is a severe legal issue.
I believe this places a much heavier responsibility on clergy. People have the right to expect a much higher standard of a person promoting the Gospel and the teachings of Jesus Christ. That responsibility extends to any person employed or doing voluntary work on behalf of a Christian society.
-
Here is what the IL Statute says:
Citation: 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/8-803 (LexisNexis through 2007 Reg. Sess.)
A clergyman or practitioner of any religious denomination accredited by the religious body to which he or she belongs shall not be compelled to disclose in any court, or to any administrative body or agency, or to any public officer, a confession or admission made to him or her in his or her professional character or as a spiritual advisor in the course of the discipline enjoined by the rules or practice of such religious body or of the religion that he or she professes, nor be compelled to divulge any information that has been obtained by him or her in such professional character or such spiritual advisor.
Citation: 325 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/4 (LexisNexis through 2007 Reg. Sess.)
Any member of the clergy having reasonable cause to believe that a child known to that member of the clergy in his or her professional capacity may be an abused child as defined by law shall immediately report or cause a report to be made to the department.
Whenever such person is required to report under this act in his or her capacity as...a member of the clergy, he or she shall make a report immediately to the department in accordance with the provisions of this Act and may also notify the person in charge of such...church, synagogue, temple, mosque, or other religious institution, or his or her designated agent that such report has been made. Under no circumstances shall any person in charge of such...church, synagogue, temple, mosque, or other religious institution, or his or her designated agent to whom such notification is made, exercise any control, restraint, modification or other change in the report or the forwarding of such report to the department.
The privileged quality of communication between any professional person required to report and his or her patient or client shall not apply to situations involving abused or neglected children and shall not constitute grounds for failure to report.
A member of the clergy may claim the privilege under § 8-803 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
NOTE:
1) The above came from the Child Welfare Informaiton Gateway, as I referenced in a post above.
2) The above is present law. It may not represent the law at a previous time which is the situation under discussion.
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
So, you reckon that you can't get your mind around it?
How low can you get with such a statement? But then... the serpent slid along on his under-carriage didn't he, after he deceived Eve in the garden of Eden?
Maybe, you need to put yourself in the position of any young or vulnerable person who is abused by someone in authority. That is where the abuse of power is no noxious, because the person who holds that 'powerful position' has the vulnerable person (be that adult or child), in a position with which they are not acquainted and don't know how to deal with.
Then, it becomes 'our little secret', or the abused person is made to feel that hey have done something wrong to deserve it.
It always runs the same pattern. Just need to look for the pattern.
Likewise, just need to look at the pattern of those who want to cover it all up and pretend it hasn't happened. No difference in holding the coat of the perpetrater while he/she abuses the victim. Both are as guilty as each other.
You know it all as much as I do, but you CHOOSE to deny it and CHOOSE to try to make the victim feel like the person who has done the wrong.
"May God have mercy on your soul", are the only words left for me to say.
-
Chrissie, in this case it appears that Duane has developed the chutzpa needed to recognize and ignore the sort who get off on victimizing victims, and shunt them aside. To many others the words and attitudes of some who delight in subjecting victims of abuse to ridicule will keep them silent. The primary abuser was enough. They don't need to be subjected to the tender mercies of these secondary abusers.
-
Chrissie, Not everyone who hears rumors, and sees the character traits of those spreading the rumors, can possibly know it all. What can they go on that is factually substantial?
You know it all as much as I do, but you CHOOSE to deny it and CHOOSE to try to make the victim feel like the person who has done the wrong.
unquote]
-
Pick up the phone and make a few phone calls, and you will hear first-person accounts of this stuff. Be like Walt Thompson and never lift a finger to do that, and you just might continue to call it all rumors.
But tell us, in what way is Sherry Avery's eyewitness account a mere rumor?
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
So, you reckon that you can't get your mind around it?
How low can you get with such a statement? But then... the serpent slid along on his under-carriage didn't he, after he deceived Eve in the garden of Eden?
Maybe, you need to put yourself in the position of any young or vulnerable person who is abused by someone in authority. That is where the abuse of power is no noxious, because the person who holds that 'powerful position' has the vulnerable person (be that adult or child), in a position with which they are not acquainted and don't know how to deal with.
Then, it becomes 'our little secret', or the abused person is made to feel that hey have done something wrong to deserve it.
It always runs the same pattern. Just need to look for the pattern.
Likewise, just need to look at the pattern of those who want to cover it all up and pretend it hasn't happened. No difference in holding the coat of the perpetrater while he/she abuses the victim. Both are as guilty as each other.
You know it all as much as I do, but you CHOOSE to deny it and CHOOSE to try to make the victim feel like the person who has done the wrong.
"May God have mercy on your soul", are the only words left for me to say.
I don't "know" anything and neither do you unless you were there and witnessed alleged events first hand. So think about that before you get on your high horse and start stating things as fact.
What I can give you is MPO. I have read the accusations from Duane. He first left the impression that he was a child. That impression stuck for quite a time before the truth was laid out. In the beginning he said all he wanted was an apology. Down the road we found out that he had received a verbal as well as written apology. ?????? We also find that Duane's answer to those apologies were that all was ok, forgiven and let's move on.
But after doing that he then starts threatening legal actions of some kind. All the time I am wondering what grounds would legal action be taken since he was 20 years old. Was he raped? Of course not. Was he underage? No Was he forced against his will by a weapon? No. So...where is the case under the law?
Now do I say all the above makes it ok? I have never said such a thing. If Duane's claims are true then it was wrong in the sight of God for BOTH parties involved. If TS was sorry and said so (and he did) I'm sure he ask for God's forgiveness many years ago. I'm sure Duane ask forgiveness many years ago. The fact that the Pickle's and Drydens of the world decided to dredge it up years later doesn't change the fact that alleged events were over, done with, and repented of long ago. It should never have been made public.
Again this is only being rehashed because the Irs has cleared 3abn and Pickle doesn't have a leg to stand on with his allegations. 3/4 of their defense in the lawsuit is now out the window. Pickle is desperate. Any reasonable thinking person knows that this subject has nothing to do with the lawsuit and he is grasping at straws. Anything to distract from IRS clearance.
-
Sam, you have yet to provide any evidence that the IRS investigation is over, so please don't state that as fact.
Second, do you think it was appropriate for Danny Shelton to have replaced his wife in 2004 with an alleged pedophile as 3ABN production manager?
Third, if Tommy truly repented long ago, why do we have new allegations from Virginia from somewhere between 1995 to 2001, including some coming from someone who was a minor at the time, who claims that Tommy tried to perform oral *** on him?
Fourth, if he did truly repent long ago and then backslid multiple times while in Virginia, should he have been entrusted with that position at 3ABN in 2004?
Fifth, did Danny know about Tommy's trouble in Virginia when he started working again at 3ABN?
-
This is truly an ignorant statement......
But after doing that he then starts threatening legal actions of some kind. All the time I am wondering what grounds would legal action be taken since he was 20 years old. Was he raped? Of course not. Was he underage? No Was he forced against his will by a weapon? No. So...where is the case under the law?
My DIL was in her thirties and the mother of three. Where is the case? What took place was a felony in MN
-
I have read the accusations from Duane. He first left the impression that he was a child.
Would you please copy and paste any quotes from me where I said I was a child when this happened?
-
Still waiting, Sam. Where did I insinuate that I was a child? Is this another wild accusation from your side that can't be backed up?
-
How many of Tommy's alleged victims have filed charges against him? As Pastor Dryden and you have attempted to build a case as to the guilt of Tommy Shelton, it seems that the most proper procedure would instead be for alleged victims to address this situation in the justice system.
I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities. Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things?
I understand that it is often very difficult for victims to report abuse, but if they were bold enough to report it to a pastor and other members of the congregation, why not take the next logical step and take it to the proper authorities? Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter. Whose job is it to investigate such things?
I have a much better idea, why not just report them all to SAM and let SAM investigate and we await a full report!!! After all, he is a pastor, of sorts, and he is being charged with sexual misconduct with parishioners. Seems a perfect fit to me.
AWAITING THAT REPORT!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
Well, SAM,
How about a 20 year old man being required to "help" his pastor who also was the boss at 3ABN...seems it crosses the line, doesn't SAM?
Better get on it before you miss the most obvious sexual misconduct story of your career!!! Me thinks it may have qualified as "sexual harrassment", what do you think SAM??? You are the expert!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I don't "know" anything and neither do you unless you were there and witnessed alleged events first hand. So think about that before you get on your high horse and start stating things as fact.
SAM, just how many cases have you investigated where YOU were there? Are you telling me that you do not believe any allegations of misconduct of pastors "unless you were there?"
I wouldn't let that get out...might be a bit bad for business!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Still waiting, Sam. Where did I insinuate that I was a child? Is this another wild accusation from your side that can't be backed up?
Still won't respond, huh? I'm not surprised.
I know your post was designed to make me mad. Sorry, that doesn't work anymore. Tell the Sheltons they'll have to find a new tactic.
Your failure to respond has exposed you as someone who is less than credible. Any legitimate criticisms could have easily been backed up. I guess you don't have any evidence of ANYTHING you say. Otherwise, you'd present it.
-
Still waiting, Sam. Where did I insinuate that I was a child? Is this another wild accusation from your side that can't be backed up?
Still won't respond, huh? I'm not surprised.
I know your post was designed to make me mad. Sorry, that doesn't work anymore. Tell the Sheltons they'll have to find a new tactic.
Your failure to respond has exposed you as someone who is less than credible. Any legitimate criticisms could have easily been backed up. I guess you don't have any evidence of ANYTHING you say. Otherwise, you'd present it.
Some of the multiple personality respondents have clearly fallen silent. But, as we have seen, there are clearly rotating shifts and someone will be back someday!!!
But then, there is always Grandma Nettie. She should be good for a response. Come on, Grandma, I have my red cape out!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Interesting concerns here!
i am personally acquainted with Linda. She is a fine, caring compassionate person. I have heard from others about how she would do kind deeds for employees having problems. She most certainly does want whatever info out there against her to be brought out in the open. She has no fears as there is no evidence. She knows who was spending time with someone other than their spouse, and it was not her.
Kitty, you may be the perfect person then to contact her and ask her if she is willing to sign a notarized document that she will take no legal action against 3abn or Danny Shelton if they produce the evidence. I truly believe if she would do that, they would be willing to bring out the evidence she demands.
Please let us know if she is agreeable to this.
OK, this caught my eye. I have not been keeping up with all the posts here, so if this has already been discussed, I apologize. But the above request makes me think that the "evidence" was obtained in an illegal way--a legally actionable way, or else they (Danny and 3ABN) would not be asking for immunity. The way it is stated, it is almost an admission of guilt of some sort. Like when a kid says "If I tell you, do you promise you won't spank me?"
Is that really what is being said here, or am I missing something?
It this is true, it explains why the "evidence" has been hidden away for so long. Bummer to have what you think will clear you but you can't use it because it will prove you guilty.
Wow...
(Actually, I have wondered if that was not the case for a long time, but to have it admitted in black and white is pretty interesting)
Scratsmom :hamster: (think squirrel, not hamster)
-
Still waiting, Sam. Where did I insinuate that I was a child? Is this another wild accusation from your side that can't be backed up?
Still won't respond, huh? I'm not surprised.
I know your post was designed to make me mad. Sorry, that doesn't work anymore. Tell the Sheltons they'll have to find a new tactic.
Your failure to respond has exposed you as someone who is less than credible. Any legitimate criticisms could have easily been backed up. I guess you don't have any evidence of ANYTHING you say. Otherwise, you'd present it.
Some of the multiple personality respondents have clearly fallen silent. But, as we have seen, there are clearly rotating shifts and someone will be back someday!!!
But then, there is always Grandma Nettie. She should be good for a response. Come on, Grandma, I have my red cape out!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
:-\
-
Thanks for bumping this thread Johann...
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
Well, SAM,
How about a 20 year old man being required to "help" his pastor who also was the boss at 3ABN...seems it crosses the line, doesn't SAM?
Better get on it before you miss the most obvious sexual misconduct story of your career!!! Me thinks it may have qualified as "sexual harrassment", what do you think SAM??? You are the expert!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Just so set the record straight Joy. Duane Clem has zero claims to file against Tommy Shelton, or 3ABN, and I am not talking about the expired statute of limitations. Clem was of age, and he consented and even travelled on his own to meet a man who was not his Pastor, nor a Pastor at all, nor was he Clem's boss at 3ABN, when Clem alleges he was abused by him.
Here's some dates, and Clem's statement to verify that.
While Tommy is his Pastor, his Principal, and his Counsellor - NOTHING HAPPENED:
Clem: "Tommy Shelton was my pastor for many years at the Ezra Church of God in West Frankfort, IL. I began attending with my mother, sister and two brothers around 1974 or so, and my father became a Christian and began coming with us shortly after I graduated from high school in 1984. Tommy and I were never really close until I began attending the Christian school our church operated. Over the next few years, we would spend a lot of time talking, as I was dealing with depression issues and he was counseling me.When the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois decided to suspend Tommy's ministerial credentials in 1985, I was one of several who wrote a letter in his defense. I was also questioned by a detective at the West Frankfort Police Department. I had been on a few overnight trips with him, and gave testimony that nothing had happened that would substantiate the allegations being made against him. At the time, this was true."
Tommy Shelton letter Feb 2007:
The facts are, the first allegation was made in September of 1985 and my credentials were suspended on October 25, 1985 without anyone contacting me (IGA did not follow Matt. 18) The next correspondence I have with the committee in my records is dated January 29, 1987 – over a year later.
On a tape previously mentioned taped at Ezra Church of God in 2001, Pastor Dryden states that
I erred in not resigning when accusations were first made. He says my sin was the sin of division because of not resigning.
I did resign immediately upon hearing of accusations. I resigned the church and a pastor from the First Church of God who had just resigned that church, came to be the interim pastor...For at least the next 9 months I did not preach and I ceased activities in the Church of God as instructed. I worked at 3ABN during that time, in construction, as it was just being built at the time.
Confirmed:
..a letter dated Nov. 1, 1985 from one of the pillars of the church [Ezra COG]to the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois .........”.I might bring to your attention, now, that Brother Tommy resigned as Pastor from the Ezra Church of God , Sept. 15, 1985"
Clem:
Sometime in late 1985 or early 1986, Tommy came to me..and asked for my help....Over the next few months, Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road, anywhere he thought no one would see us. There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen because in my heart I knew it wasn't right. I was wrestling with thoughts like "What if someone finds out?...On one occasion, I had been hired by a television and appliance rent-to-own company as an assistant manager, and was to travel to the main office about an hour away for two days of training. The company said they would get me a motel room so I wouldn't have to drive back and forth. ...Finally, he said he realized that I was uncomfortable and decided we shouldn't be doing this. It was like a thousand pound weight was gone.
No, I am not defending what did happen. It was wrong. There's just no reason to believe or promote lies.
edited to add where each was working at the time.
-
Don't speak on my behalf. Some of the abuse did happen when Tommy was my pastor. You don't know what you're talking about...again.
-
I would like to see the full letter from Tommy Shelton if that is possible, not just portions of it. Would someone either post it or supply me with it?
-
I would like to see the full letter from Tommy Shelton if that is possible, not just portions of it. Would someone either post it or supply me with it?
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11955&view=findpost&p=179087
edit to correct url
-
You need to read my full statement as well. You'll see that "Pat Williams" is incorrect.
-
Don't speak on my behalf. Some of the abuse did happen when Tommy was my pastor. You don't know what you're talking about...again.
When? All I did was quote you and him, You said nothing happened before late 1985, early 1986. He resigned as Pastor Sept 15, 1985.
You need to read my full statement as well. You'll see that "Pat Williams" is incorrect.
I've read it. I was quoting it. http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-duane-clem-statement.htm What part do I have incorrect? Don't make people guess. Just explain what you are saying, Duane.
-
I'm not explaining anything to you. You're lying and you know it. That's the bottom line.
Anyone who attended Ezra during the aforementioned time period can confirm that you are wrong.
-
Tommy states in his letter:
This statement could mean no other than Bro. and Sis. Wood who headed up the Ministerial Council of the Church of God, Inc., at the time. These two statements imply either irresponsibility, or cover-up on the part of the Woods. Let me set the record straight. Bro. and Sis. Wood was neither irresponsible nor were they part of a cover-up. They acted in good faith both in my ordination with the Ministerial Council of the Church of God and in the call to be pastor of the Community Church of God.
They called me in the middle 80’s after hearing of allegations to offer prayer and support and yes, years later called me to come to Dunn Loring knowing of the allegations. They based their decision on information they had. For example they knew of a police investigation that yielded no evidence and resulted in no charges. They were aware that my chairman of the board was a well respected State Patrolman and would have known the details of the investigation, and supported me fully. They also knew people that they respected who were supporting me like Ben Jordan who was part of the congregation at the time and actually went to the police to testify in my behalf. Things like the above caused them to be confident in calling me to come to Dunn Loring. NO FAULT can be laid at the feet of Bro. and Sis. Wood.
Really? No fault can be laid at their feet. Unbelievable.
-
So Pat, because you think Gailon is wrong on a point, you have to smear and attack one of Tommy Shelton's victims? How can you reconcile such an attack with the standards of Christian conduct you yourself have referred to?
-
This really makes me sick..... :-\
-
OK, so here is what I was thinking.............Pat said that Duane had no claims against TS because, you all fee he was a consenting adult, the second he turned at, right? But I think he still would have a claim, not for pedophilia, but for sexual harrassment/abuse, because TS abused his postion of authority. Even if nothing happened, "physically"(which Duane said it did,a nd I believe him....he is the victim), but they is didn't, I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor.
Also, adults can and do claim sexual harrassment/abuse. Statute of limitations notwithstanding, I think Duane would have a pretty good chance going that route.....but I am not a lawyer. Someboey with some legal knowledge..........not those whot hink they have the knowledge....somebody with the actual knowledge.....help me out here........
-
So Pat, because you think Gailon is wrong on a point, you have to smear and attack one of Tommy Shelton's victims? How can you reconcile such an attack with the standards of Christian conduct you yourself have referred to?
Call it what you will. I know and God knows that setting the record straight and correcting lies is NOT "smearing and attacking a victim". I just provided quotes from what you yourself put on line, Robert Pickle from both DC himself and TS.
But as far as the casualties of war go in this war you and Joy have waged? They have been many,I would like to draw attention to the following from TS's letter, and to the last paragraph specifically and leave you with that thought.
To the many I have loved through the years. I am sending you this letter in response to an open letter that was sent to many, if not all, of you from Pastor Glenn Dryden. This letter is not meant as revenge, but so that you might be informed of the other side of the story.
From my first hearing of allegations against me at the Community Church of God I determined to say as little as possible in order to keep as much harmony among the congregation as possible. In the very beginning, I determined not to even express my guilt or innocence fearing people may tend to choose sides and be divided. I wanted to go through proper channels and wait to see how it would all be handled. I should mention that I was not contacted by the church to let me know that allegations had been made against me. In fact, for those who don't know, I first found out about allegations from someone who had seen it posted on the internet with Glenn Dryden's name signed to it. Upon checking into it, I found that the allegations against me had been put on the internet for the world to see at least two weeks before the church body was even informed. Not only were allegations from the Community Church of God posted, but postings of letters, accusations and copies of personal documents going back more than 20 years - all signed by Pastor Glenn Dryden.
Realizing that this issue had become public over the internet and then taken before the church, without my knowing it, I decided to write to the board expressing my position. A number of other lay people and pastors also began writing to the board expressing their disagreement, if not outrage, that a pastor would handle this situation in such an unbiblical way. To my knowledge these letters, mine or others, have not been read to the congregation or even at the meeting of the church staff.
Since no one has contacted me to advise, inform or let us know what the purpose is of the meetings which are being held, and since there have been more postings on the internet, as recent as January 16, and since Pastor Glenn Dryden has written an open letter to the congregation (and sent it to some outside the church as well) I find it necessary to write an open letter myself. I would in no way have been the first to write an open letter, but his actions have now compelled me to give another side.
My letter will basically be an answer to his "rationale" for handling this situation as he has. It is lengthy but I beg a few minutes of your time to hear the other side of the story.
I will begin with the opening paragraph of his cover sheet where he admits to “cooperating with certain Seventh Day Adventist "ecclesiastical investigators" who were looking into Tommy Shelton's conduct while he pastored in Illinois as well as presently in his employment at the 3ABN Seventh Day Adventist television ministry in Illinois.”
These men are not "ecclesiastical investigators" for the Seventh Day Adventist. They hold no official position, and have no authority in the Seventh Day Adventist Church to investigate anything or anybody. By next week I will have in hand an official statement from the Illinois Conference President of SDA, stating that these men do not work for the Seventh-Day-Adventist church and were not authorized to investigate anyone. Gailon Joy, one of the “self appointed investigators” was convicted of embezzlement in the 80’s. Although one may get the impression after talking with him that he is a lawyer, he is not. His conviction was appealed 3 times but the conviction remained. We have evidence of his unscrupulous dealings in recent months and years and you will also hear in the near future that he is being held accountable for his slander in a court of law.
The web site that your pastor was cooperating with is a garbage dump whose purpose is to destroy my brother and Three Angels broadcasting Network. This is how I got into the mix. In endeavoring to bring down my brother, his ex-wife gathered a group together to bring down all Board Members and Executives of the network.
The mentality of many of those who actively post on the web sites that Pastor Dryden gave information to can be seen in a few excerpts taken from the sites.
(highlights are mine)
“Unless Danny can prove otherwise that he did not kill his first wife we should probably believe that Fran and Johann are correct that Danny is a murderer. They have also said that he is a child molester, adulterer, liar, thief, conman, burglar, vandal, and almost every other crime in the book. Almost like Hitler, except Hitler did it a lot more times. If Danny has not done all this then obviously blacksda and the people who have provided this information can later apologize. (same posting) The fact that they actually witnessed these things, including murder attempts, with physicality adds another dimension for those who are weaker who require both faith and sight. But those who are pure can go based on faith that Danny did these things alone based on the word of testimony and without the need for worldly evidence.”
Danny’s first wife was killed in a car accident. She was hit head on by an oncoming car. Any suggestion of ANYTHING else is a black lie. Notice the mentality – If Danny has not done all of this …….can later apologize. In other words, put it out there, do the damage and apologize later if it is not true. Notice the scary statement – but those who are “pure” can go based on “faith” that Danny did these things. This is typical of the numerous postings on the sight. Many things we have viewed on the site do not even have an element of truth.
For example, Gailon Joy posted an article that stated that 3ABN gave me a check for $10,000 to get me out of a child molestation case while I lived in Manassas, VA. No check was produced (because it doesn’t exist) and I challenge anyone to check every county in Virginia and see if such a case ever existed.
These are the kinds of people that Pastor Dryden has been comfortable "cooperating with." Following is an excerpt from one of his conversations posted on the internet. I quote:
(highlights are mine)
“ I am sure we share similar emotions regarding this matter. Perhaps an argument may be made for the criticism you have received regarding the e-mail postings, but I should tell you that they have served to make me comfortable communicating with both you and Mr. Joy and if they serve to put pressure on Danny and Tommy, you may carry the criticism as a badge of commendation.”
How sad that he would welcome pressure be put on my brother. He knows absolutely nothing about my brother's situation except what he has been told by the “self appointed investigators" The truth is, no statement against my brother, or 3ABN, has been made by the General Conference of the Seventh Day Adventist Church or by any of it’s top leadership. To the contrary, ASI, one of the most prestigious organizations in the Adventist denomination just came out with a statement in support of Danny and 3ABN - and in the same statement revealed much about Gailon Joy.
In paragraph five of his cover letter, Pastor Dryden next points you to two web sites to read a number of letters from those who came forward against me.
He fails to mention that he is the one who supplied the names of these people to "the self appointed investigators" who called these people asking for statements to be published on the internet. We can only guess as to what kind of pressure these people were put under (I've been told - I can't confirm) that one was told by the " self appointed investigators" that he had better say something quickly because I intended a lawsuit and was planning to drag him into it, which of course, is not true.
Pressure would certainly seem to explain a lot concerning one person [Duane Clem]who came forward against me, because just days prior to his posting about me, he wrote (copied from the internet)
“Your "informant", Glenn Dryden, is not a credible source of information. ... accusations .... the same reason as the ones he is leveling against Tommy Shelton: JEALOUSY. Glenn Dryden is a spiteful, vindictive backstabber when someone crosses him. He has done this with numerous people over the past several years .... I had to threaten him with legal action myself to get him to shut his mouth.”
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
-
No princessdi I am saying Gailon is full of air. There is no legal case not only because Clem was a consenting adult, but there is no "sexual harrassment/abuse case because TS NEVER abused his postion of authority." When it occured TS wasn't Clem's Pastor, wasn't his boss, he had no position of authority over him at all. Did you even read the post you are replying to?
You can say "I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor." from now until judgment day but it doesn't make it so. Even Clem doesn't say that. Read what I quoted from Clem again. Unless you are calling him a liar, or he suddenly wishes to change his story, you have no call to say that, much less be pretty sure of it.
It's hard giving up preconceived notions, and beliefs, but when they are false. IT is necessary.
All I was trying to say is there is no legal case, criminal nor civil when it comes to Duane Clem.
No it wasn't right, but that's a moral call.
NO, I am not defending a child abuser, nor attacking victims of child molestion here. ok?
OK, so here is what I was thinking.............Pat said that Duane had no claims against TS because, you all fee he was a consenting adult, the second he turned at, right? But I think he still would have a claim, not for pedophilia, but for sexual harrassment/abuse, because TS abused his postion of authority. Even if nothing happened, "physically"(which Duane said it did,a nd I believe him....he is the victim), but they is didn't, I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor.
Also, adults can and do claim sexual harrassment/abuse. Statute of limitations notwithstanding, I think Duane would have a pretty good chance going that route.....but I am not a lawyer. Someboey with some legal knowledge..........not those whot hink they have the knowledge....somebody with the actual knowledge.....help me out here........
-
So Pat,
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
You going to do the right thing and denounce what Tommy is describing, or are you going to help Tommy's threat become more of a reality?
It is wrong to assassinate the character of the victims of sexual misconduct and child molestation, don't you agree?
That statement by Tommy very clearly comes across to me as an attempt to silence those concerned about his misconduct, rather than an attempt to come clean and apologize and make things right.
-
So Pat,
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
You going to do the right thing and denounce what Tommy is describing, or are you going to help Tommy's threat become more of a reality?
It is wrong to assassinate the character of the victims of sexual misconduct and child molestation, don't you agree?
That statement by Tommy very clearly comes across to me as an attempt to silence those concerned about his misconduct, rather than an attempt to come clean and apologize and make things right.
Edited:..
Please reread my previous post.
Call it what you will. I know and God knows that setting the record straight and correcting lies is NOT "smearing and attacking a victim". I just provided quotes from what you yourself put on line, Robert Pickle from both DC himself and TS.
But as far as the casualties of war go in this war you and Joy have waged? They have been many,I would like to draw attention to the following from TS's letter, and to the last paragraph specifically and leave you with that thought.
-
That is messed up. Again, an example of why victims most often remain silent and allow the aggressor to go on and victimize again and again. A child doesn't necessarily see the age of the other victim who is talking and being ripped apart, they often only see themselves in that person's shoes.
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
-
That is messed up. Again, an example of why victims most often remain silent and allow the aggressor to go on and victimize again and again. A child doesn't necessarily see the age of the other victim who is talking and being ripped apart, they often only see themselves in that person's shoes.
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
I am thankful that there are those who stand in full support as well. Words cannot express the gratitude that I have for so many people that have showed their continuous support. Many of those I do not even know personally, but God does. Without people like this it would be next to impossible to keep your sanity through it all.
I am reminded of the old saying "Sticks and stones may break my bones (but words will never hurt me)." I am here to tell you there is absolutley no truth in that. Sticks and stones will break your bones, but words hurt even worse. They cut you deeper than anything else.
-
No princessdi I am saying Gailon is full of air. There is no legal case not only because Clem was a consenting adult, but there is no "sexual harrassment/abuse case because TS NEVER abused his postion of authority." When it occured TS wasn't Clem's Pastor, wasn't his boss, he had no position of authority over him at all. Did you even read the post you are replying to?
You can say "I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor." from now until judgment day but it doesn't make it so. Even Clem doesn't say that. Read what I quoted from Clem again. Unless you are calling him a liar, or he suddenly wishes to change his story, you have no call to say that, much less be pretty sure of it.
It's hard giving up preconceived notions, and beliefs, but when they are false. IT is necessary.
All I was trying to say is there is no legal case, criminal nor civil when it comes to Duane Clem.
No it wasn't right, but that's a moral call.
NO, I am not defending a child abuser, nor attacking victims of child molestion here. ok?
OK, so here is what I was thinking.............Pat said that Duane had no claims against TS because, you all fee he was a consenting adult, the second he turned at, right? But I think he still would have a claim, not for pedophilia, but for sexual harrassment/abuse, because TS abused his postion of authority. Even if nothing happened, "physically"(which Duane said it did,a nd I believe him....he is the victim), but they is didn't, I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor.
Also, adults can and do claim sexual harrassment/abuse. Statute of limitations notwithstanding, I think Duane would have a pretty good chance going that route.....but I am not a lawyer. Someboey with some legal knowledge..........not those whot hink they have the knowledge....somebody with the actual knowledge.....help me out here........
Pat Williams, again I say you are a liar. Abuse DID occur while Tommy Shelton was my pastor. Stop slandering me.
-
So Pat,
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
You going to do the right thing and denounce what Tommy is describing, or are you going to help Tommy's threat become more of a reality?
It is wrong to assassinate the character of the victims of sexual misconduct and child molestation, don't you agree?
That statement by Tommy very clearly comes across to me as an attempt to silence those concerned about his misconduct, rather than an attempt to come clean and apologize and make things right.
Edited:..
Please reread my previous post.
Call it what you will. I know and God knows that setting the record straight and correcting lies is NOT "smearing and attacking a victim". I just provided quotes from what you yourself put on line, Robert Pickle from both DC himself and TS.
But as far as the casualties of war go in this war you and Joy have waged? They have been many,I would like to draw attention to the following from TS's letter, and to the last paragraph specifically and leave you with that thought.
I read it well the first time. Now be a man as well as a Christian, and do the right thing. Say that Tommy was wrong in saying that.
Tell us, how many of those that have tried to assassinate Tommy's unfortunate victims has Tommy reprimanded? Why doesn't his open letter tell the world what he has personally done to get the assassinaters to stop?
And if Tommy's victims are a bit dysfunctional, did not Tommy help make them that way? Or did Tommy particularly prey on those with problems so that nobody would believe them if they ratted on him?
I seem to recall a particularly perverse threat that one of Tommy's victims told me Tommy made to him as a youth if he told what Tommy did to him. The whole scandal is pretty sick, but you certainly make it worse when you bring up stuff like this.
-
No princessdi I am saying Gailon is full of air. There is no legal case not only because Clem was a consenting adult, but there is no "sexual harrassment/abuse case because TS NEVER abused his postion of authority." When it occured TS wasn't Clem's Pastor, wasn't his boss, he had no position of authority over him at all. Did you even read the post you are replying to?
You can say "I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor." from now until judgment day but it doesn't make it so. Even Clem doesn't say that. Read what I quoted from Clem again. Unless you are calling him a liar, or he suddenly wishes to change his story, you have no call to say that, much less be pretty sure of it.
It's hard giving up preconceived notions, and beliefs, but when they are false. IT is necessary.
All I was trying to say is there is no legal case, criminal nor civil when it comes to Duane Clem.
No it wasn't right, but that's a moral call.
NO, I am not defending a child abuser, nor attacking victims of child molestion here. ok?
Pat Williams, again I say you are a liar. Abuse DID occur while Tommy Shelton was my pastor. Stop slandering me.
Duane Clem, I was originally just quoting you. Now if I have something wrong you should say what it is. I asked you to do so and you refused.
Liar.. Liar.. by itself doesn't work here. What are you claiming I lied about?
I asked you that too, and you refused to answer.
Now you come back and call me a liar again and say "Abuse DID occur while Tommy Shelton was my Pastor. Stop slandering me."
Are you playing games here? What do you mean?
Do you mean "Abuse of myself DID occur while Tommy Shelton was my pastor."
or
Do you mean Abuse of others DID occur while Tommy Shelton was my pastor.
Earlier you said "Some of the abuse occurred while he was my Pastor"
What abuse, when? Please explain for all. as well as myself. I really don't want to believe a lie about somebody, nor do I want to bear false witness, but you have to help me here, please.
It's not just me you are answering for you know. Others also are probably wondering as you don't explain. If you have something to say, just say it! I don't mind. I would like to know what you are talking about.
Don't speak on my behalf. Some of the abuse did happen when Tommy was my pastor. You don't know what you're talking about...again.
When? All I did was quote you and him, You said nothing happened before late 1985, early 1986. He resigned as Pastor Sept 15, 1985.
You need to read my full statement as well. You'll see that "Pat Williams" is incorrect.
I've read it. I was quoting it. http://www.save-3abn.com/tommy-shelton-victim-duane-clem-statement.htm What part do I have incorrect? Don't make people guess. Just explain what you are saying, Duane.
I'm not explaining anything to you. You're lying and you know it. That's the bottom line.
Anyone who attended Ezra during the aforementioned time period can confirm that you are wrong.
edited to explain more and add quote.
-
This is the first time I have seen that letter by Tommy. It sounds like a desperate cry from a man in an attempt to clear himself of the wrong things he has done. It reminds me very much of how his younger brother, Danny has throughout the past six years attempted to project any mistake he has made over on others. And some people accept all of this as words of truth.
I recall when Danny wrote to me that since God could use murderers like Moses and David then he could also use him. To me that seemed to be an indication he had also dome some of those things he had mentioned about Moses and David. I wrote back to him that the difference is that the acts of Moses and David are recorded. They did not deny what they had done, but asked forgiveness. I told Danny that God and others would also forgive him if he would acknowledge in stead of denying. I understood him as saying that if he admitted the bad things he had done that would hurt 3ABN. That seemed to be the reason he gave that it should not be revealed, whatever it was.
Tommy and his spin doctors seem to have a similar idea, especially in the way they are "attacking" or "downgrading" the victims. Is that the Christian way of doing things? According to the gospel?
-
You are not the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit woo's and speaks softly and gently, not bossy and arrogant and demanding like yourself.
I read it well the first time. Now be a man as well as a Christian, and do the right thing. Say that Tommy was wrong in saying that....
-
Tommy abused me while he was my pastor. That's all you're getting. O suggest you tone down the attitude when you speak to me. I'm in no mood for your arrogance.
-
No princessdi I am saying Gailon is full of air. There is no legal case not only because Clem was a consenting adult, but there is no "sexual harrassment/abuse case because TS NEVER abused his postion of authority." When it occured TS wasn't Clem's Pastor, wasn't his boss, he had no position of authority over him at all. Did you even read the post you are replying to?
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And sorry but anyone in authority can abuse their position, and it is not only with children. That also factors in a lot of the time with women, grown women in sexual harrassment cases involving those in authority over them, bosses, clergy, etc. It is part of the copnsideration when a grown women is abuse by clergy when they go for counseling or normal intereaction with clergy. They have won their cases, because pastors are considered to be in authority over their entire congregation, and those who might not be in their congregation but come to them for help because of their position of authority. Plus he doesn't have to be "his" pastor, just a pastor and that office carries a position of authority. I know I treat all pastors, not only mine, with the authority of that office. We take them at their word because of that position. We give them more than the usual amount of trust because of that position, right? He didn't have to be "his" pastor at the time. He was sttill in authority over Duane by the nature of his office. Your point is, therfore, moot.
But let's just also go with your scenario. TS was Duane's pastor, a trusted, beloved, and respected pastor. So much so that he went to bat for him. That love, trust and respect did not stop when TS was no longer Duane's pastor. Duane respected, as he should have, the office of pastor and the position of authority it carried...........once again TS did not have to still be his pastor. The pastor/member relationship was already established while TS was his pastor and it continued. Still being a pastor, TS was still in a position of authority over Duane....even after he turned eighteen, it was the position of authority, love, and trust respect that was maintained. TS violated every last one of the parts of that appropriate relationship, in favor of a relationship that was totally inappropriate.
Now, with all of that being said, can I get somebody with some legal experience and/or knowledge to answer my question?
You can say "I am pretty positive that the emotional and psychological abuse started when Duane was a minor." from now until judgment day but it doesn't make it so. Even Clem doesn't say that. Read what I quoted from Clem again. Unless you are calling him a liar, or he suddenly wishes to change his story, you have no call to say that, much less be pretty sure of it.
He doesn't have to say it if you know anything about how abuse occurs. Physical and sexual abuse is always accompanied by emotional and mental abuse. They have to tear down the defenses of their victims in order to keep them in a state to "allow" the physical and/or sexual abuse.........that is basically Abuse 101.
It's hard giving up preconceived notions, and beliefs, but when they are false. IT is necessary.
All I was trying to say is there is no legal case, criminal nor civil when it comes to Duane Clem.
No it wasn't right, but that's a moral call.
NO, I am not defending a child abuser, nor attacking victims of child molestion here. ok?
And I was only saying that there might be a case, barring the statute of limitations.
And I am saying that barring the stateutes of limitation, there maybe a legal case for the reasons I have stated about. It can be both a moral and legal issue.
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse.
-
Your response is inappropriate. When someone points out a valid problem, it is inappropriate to attack the person instead of acknowledging the point.
Go ahead, be a man and a Christian, and admit that Tommy was wrong in saying that, and in not telling the assassinators he knew about to cool it. It is evil and wicked to try to assassinate the characters of those you know were the victims of iniquitous practices, and it is evil and wicked for the perpetrator to just stand by and let it happen without protest.
Tommy should have brought forth fruits meet for repentance by coming down harder on the assasinators than he came down on Dryden in that letter. He missed a golden opportunity.
You are not the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit woo's and speaks softly and gently, not bossy and arrogant and demanding like yourself.
I read it well the first time. Now be a man as well as a Christian, and do the right thing. Say that Tommy was wrong in saying that....
-
Duane, see this is what I was talking about before and how you interjecting yourself into the child molestation topics and talking about being a victim confuses people.
Could you please explain here and clear up the confusion?
Did you say something occurred when you were a minor? because Princessdi says you did and she's gotto go with what you say...
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And because of that she is now also falsely accusing me of attacking a victim of child abuse after "you" a victim of child abuse told "me" that you were abused as a child. Now how sad is this?
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse. [/color]
-
This is the 1st time I have seen a letter mentioning Brother and Sister Wood. Is there anyway, I can see the full letter?
-
Your response is inappropriate. When someone points out a valid problem, it is inappropriate to attack the person instead of acknowledging the point.
Well then you should really stop doing that, Robert Pickle.
Go ahead, be a man and a Christian, and admit that Tommy was wrong in saying that, and in not telling the assassinators he knew about to cool it. It is evil and wicked to try to assassinate the characters of those you know were the victims of iniquitous practices, and it is evil and wicked for the perpetrator to just stand by and let it happen without protest.
Well that was most likely why he was calling it sad, and saying they were being victimized. He didn't say he knew who those doing so were, Bob. I doubt he did. You added that part to condemn him because you are an accuser and always believe the worst of all people. You might try asking for help with that. It's not good.
Tommy should have brought forth fruits meet for repentance by coming down harder on the assasinators than he came down on Dryden in that letter. He missed a golden opportunity.
And the beat goes on... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umrp1tIBY8Q)
You are not the Holy Spirit. And the Holy Spirit woo's and speaks softly and gently, not bossy and arrogant and demanding like yourself.
I read it well the first time. Now be a man as well as a Christian, and do the right thing. Say that Tommy was wrong in saying that....
[/quote]
-
This is the 1st time I have seen a letter mentioning Brother and Sister Wood. Is there anyway, I can see the full letter?
It's post #253 and you have to scroll down about a third of the page to get to it.
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11955&view=findpost&p=179087
-
To "Pat Williams"
I told you all I'm going to tell you. I don't even know who you ate, other than a meddler and liar.
-
Kk... screaming and dying laughing here! Even Pat has to laugh on this! One wrong key on that darn keyboard and it becomes something entirely different.
To "Pat Williams"
I told you all I'm going to tell you. I don't even know who you ate, other than a meddler and liar.
-
I just finished reading all of the letter posted by Tommy- it sounds like the same ole Tommy, blaming everyone else, but himself.
-
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: Yea - I saw that, too!!!
Kk... screaming and dying laughing here! Even Pat has to laugh on this! One wrong key on that darn keyboard and it becomes something entirely different.
To "Pat Williams"
I told you all I'm going to tell you. I don't even know who you ate, other than a meddler and liar.
-
Ok, I admit it, that was hilarious. The hypocrites are next...
Kk... screaming and dying laughing here! Even Pat has to laugh on this! One wrong key on that darn keyboard and it becomes something entirely different.
To "Pat Williams"
I told you all I'm going to tell you. I don't even know who you ate, other than a meddler and liar.
-
That's what I get for trying to post from my phone.
-
HAHAHAHA!!!! You will forever be Pacman in my mind now. No more 3D, and no more Pat... you are now Pacman.
Ok, I admit it, that was hilarious. The hypocrites are next...
Kk... screaming and dying laughing here! Even Pat has to laugh on this! One wrong key on that darn keyboard and it becomes something entirely different.
To "Pat Williams"
I told you all I'm going to tell you. I don't even know who you ate, other than a meddler and liar.
-
Lands when I read that my eyeballs turned around cause I did not know what to think. I was not thinking a typing error. That was so funny, I'll tell ya Duane that was my laughing for the day when I saw that.
-
Must be migraine fog- took me till now to get it :dunno:
-
You speak as if you have first hand knowledge. Maybe as if this is personal to you. How can you say for a fact that Tommy was not his Pastor at the time? Were you there? I had the same pastor from my teenage years until I was a young adult and to this day when I am around him there is still a level of authority. When I went to my 10 year school reunion there were 3 of my teachers that we invited to come also. There was still that level of authority and I had been out of school for a decade. So don't tell me that there was no level of authority between Tommy had over Duane, because that would be a lie. Furthermore, as you know first hand, Tommy did go back and became the Pastor of Ezra again and continued as pastor until the early 1990's. You and I both know that he even hand picked a replacement. Someone who was young and naive. I wonder if that pastor knew what he was getting into?? I would imagine not. I doubt Tommy could "man" up and be honest.
-
You're not all that smart, are you? You aren't getting any answers from me. I don't give explanations to cowards. How many times do I have to say it before you finally comprehend?
Duane, see this is what I was talking about before and how you interjecting yourself into the child molestation topics and talking about being a victim confuses people.
Could you please explain here and clear up the confusion?
Did you say something occurred when you were a minor? because Princessdi says you did and she's gotto go with what you say...
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And because of that she is now also falsely accusing me of attacking a victim of child abuse after "you" a victim of child abuse told "me" that you were abused as a child. Now how sad is this?
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse. [/color]
-
No, Duane Clem, it is you who doesn't get it. I don't need your answer here. It is Princessdi, you needs you to explain to as she is confused about what she thinks you said. You should have done so without me asking. To allow her to continue believing the lie that you were molested as a minor by Tommy Shelton when you could easily correct that is dead wrong. To be spiteful to me and insult me calling me coward, rather than doing the right thing and just posting to her and explaining is wrong, there are no ifs ands or buts about that.
You're not all that smart, are you? You aren't getting any answers from me. I don't give explanations to cowards. How many times do I have to say it before you finally comprehend?
Duane, see this is what I was talking about before and how you interjecting yourself into the child molestation topics and talking about being a victim confuses people.
Could you please explain here and clear up the confusion?
Did you say something occurred when you were a minor? because Princessdi says you did and she's gotto go with what you say...
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And because of that she is now also falsely accusing me of attacking a victim of child abuse after "you" a victim of child abuse told "me" that you were abused as a child. Now how sad is this?
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse. [/color]
-
No, Duane Clem, it is you who doesn't get it. I don't need your answer here. It is Princessdi, you needs you to explain to as she is confused about what she thinks you said. You should have done so without me asking. To allow her to continue believing the lie that you were molested as a minor by Tommy Shelton when you could easily correct that is dead wrong. To be spiteful to me and insult me calling me coward, rather than doing the right thing and just posting to her and explaining is wrong, there are no ifs ands or buts about that.
You're not all that smart, are you? You aren't getting any answers from me. I don't give explanations to cowards. How many times do I have to say it before you finally comprehend?
Duane, see this is what I was talking about before and how you interjecting yourself into the child molestation topics and talking about being a victim confuses people.
Could you please explain here and clear up the confusion?
Did you say something occurred when you were a minor? because Princessdi says you did and she's gotto go with what you say...
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And because of that she is now also falsely accusing me of attacking a victim of child abuse after "you" a victim of child abuse told "me" that you were abused as a child. Now how sad is this?
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse. [/color]
I think Duane is correct, you need to grow some brains. Using PrincessDi to get your answers. How pathetic are you? Your nothing, but a gossip queen. Do us a favor and just shut up.
-
No, Duane Clem, it is you who doesn't get it. I don't need your answer here.
Good, because you're not getting it.
It is Princessdi, you needs you to explain to as she is confused about what she thinks you said. You should have done so without me asking. To allow her to continue believing the lie that you were molested as a minor by Tommy Shelton when you could easily correct that is dead wrong. To be spiteful to me and insult me calling me coward, rather than doing the right thing and just posting to her and explaining is wrong, there are no ifs ands or buts about that.
I called you a coward and a liar because that is what you are: a coward because you won't identify yourself before spreading slander, and a liar because you say Tommy never abused me while he was my pastor.
-
No, Duane Clem, it is you who doesn't get it. I don't need your answer here.
Good, because you're not getting it.
It is Princessdi, you needs you to explain to as she is confused about what she thinks you said. You should have done so without me asking. To allow her to continue believing the lie that you were molested as a minor by Tommy Shelton when you could easily correct that is dead wrong. To be spiteful to me and insult me calling me coward, rather than doing the right thing and just posting to her and explaining is wrong, there are no ifs ands or buts about that.
I called you a coward and a liar because that is what you are: a coward because you won't identify yourself before spreading slander, and a liar because you say Tommy never abused me while he was my pastor.
Don't blame me here.. This is from your own published Statement, Duane Clem: stating TS did not abuse his position as your Pastor or Counsellor, and molest you as a minor:
Tommy Shelton was my pastor for many years at the Ezra Church of God in West Frankfort, IL. I began attending with my mother, sister and two brothers around 1974 or so, and my father became a Christian and began coming with us shortly after I graduated from high school in 1984. Tommy and I were never really close until I began attending the Christian school our church operated. Over the next few years, we would spend a lot of time talking, as I was dealing with depression issues and he was counseling me.
When the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois decided to suspend Tommy's ministerial credentials in 1985, [October 25, 1985] I was one of several who wrote a letter in his defense. I was also questioned by a detective at the West Frankfort Police Department. I had been on a few overnight trips with him, and gave testimony that nothing had happened that would substantiate the allegations being made against him. At the time, this was true.
From the letter from the Ezra Church of God to the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois: "Brother Tommy resigned as Pastor from the Ezra Church of God , Sept. 15, 1985"
Again from your own Published statement, you claim you were abused during this time period:
Sometime in late 1985 or early 1986, Tommy came to me and said he had an unusual medical problem and asked for my help. I was shocked....I was, 19 years old...
[or 20 if in 1986]
In your own published statement you say:
Over the next few months , Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road, anywhere he thought no one would see us. There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen because in my heart I knew it wasn't right. I was wrestling with thoughts like "What if someone finds out?...On one occasion, I had been hired by a television and appliance rent-to-own company as an assistant manager, and was to travel to the main office about an hour away for two days of training. The company said they would get me a motel room so I wouldn't have to drive back and forth. ...Finally, he said he realized that I was uncomfortable and decided we shouldn't be doing this. It was like a thousand pound weight was gone.
Whether it was in late 1985 or early 1986 doesn't matter. Those "next few months" were after he resigned on Sept 15, 1985 and had his ministerial liscence suspended, and you claimed "When the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois decided to suspend Tommy's ministerial credentials in 1985, [October 25, 1985] I was one of several who wrote a letter in his defense. I was also questioned by a detective at the West Frankfort Police Department. I had been on a few overnight trips with him, and gave testimony that nothing had happened that would substantiate the allegations being made against him. At the time, this was true.
Those "next few months" starting after Oct 25, 1985 or early 1986 fall in the time period when he was NOT your Pastor, nor anyone's Pastor. The Documented facts are that Tommy was employed helping build 3ABN for the next 9 mos and did not become a Pastor again till after that when A.J Mitchell, representing the Ezra Church of God, came and asked him to return. You do not and have not ever said you were abused during that time frame.
I don't understand how you can steadfastly keep calling me a liar for going by your own time frame and statement, and insist he abused you while he was your Pastor and refuse to explain how that is possible. But since you refuse to answer or explain, this discrepancy in your own testimony, I have no reason to change mine, or apologize, so I guess you can just carry on with your name calling and insults.
Laters...
-
This is the paragraph that you keep conveniently editing to suit your own fantasies:
"Sometime in late 1985 or early 1986, Tommy came to me and said he had an unusual medical problem and asked for my help. I was shocked. I had previously been told by two other young men that he had said the same thing to them, but I could not believe that they were telling me the truth, even though they told me identical stories at two different times. Now I was hearing these words from my pastor. I felt trapped. I wanted to say something right then, but I didn't. I had vigorously defended him against allegations in the past, and had even lost friends because of it. I had written a letter saying nothing had happened to me. I had told the police nothing happened. Now, here I was, 19 years old, with NO ONE I felt I could talk to about it."
Why are you so obsessed with this one issue? Sounds like you might be afraid of losing some money.
-
Whether it was in late 1985 or early 1986 doesn't matter. Those "next few months" were after he resigned on Sept 15, 1985 and had his ministerial liscence suspended, and you claimed "When the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois decided to suspend Tommy's ministerial credentials in 1985, [October 25, 1985] I was one of several who wrote a letter in his defense. I was also questioned by a detective at the West Frankfort Police Department. I had been on a few overnight trips with him, and gave testimony that nothing had happened that would substantiate the allegations being made against him. At the time, this was true.
Those "next few months" starting after Oct 25, 1985 or early 1986 fall in the time period when he was NOT your Pastor, nor anyone's Pastor. The Documented facts are that Tommy was employed helping build 3ABN for the next 9 mos and did not become a Pastor again till after that when A.J Mitchell, representing the Ezra Church of God, came and asked him to return. You do not and have not ever said you were abused during that time frame.
I don't understand how you can steadfastly keep calling me a liar for going by your own time frame and statement, and insist he abused you while he was your Pastor and refuse to explain how that is possible. But since you refuse to answer or explain, this discrepancy in your own testimony, I have no reason to change mine, or apologize, so I guess you can just carry on with your name calling and insults.
Laters...
Do you honestly think I have posted everything that ever happened? There are some things too disgusting to share even in a private message. If I was to post the entire story it would be deleted immediately, and very well should be. I have a feeling you already KNOW everything that happened, don't you? You certainly have a lot of first hand knowledge, things that only those directly involved would know.
There is NO discrepancy in my statement (it's not testimony). You just don't have all the information to make an informed judgment about what I have said. I hope you're not holding your breath, because you're not getting it from me.
Everyone here can see right through what you're trying to do. Give it a rest. You're fooling no one.
-
This is the paragraph that you keep conveniently editing to suit your own fantasies:
"Sometime in late 1985 or early 1986, Tommy came to me and said he had an unusual medical problem and asked for my help. I was shocked. I had previously been told by two other young men that he had said the same thing to them, but I could not believe that they were telling me the truth, even though they told me identical stories at two different times. Now I was hearing these words from my pastor. I felt trapped. I wanted to say something right then, but I didn't. I had vigorously defended him against allegations in the past, and had even lost friends because of it. I had written a letter saying nothing had happened to me. I had told the police nothing happened. Now, here I was, 19 years old, with NO ONE I felt I could talk to about it."
Why are you so obsessed with this one issue? Sounds like you might be afraid of losing some money.
I was only speaking about the legal precedents in regards to a criminal or civil suit as you have none. None of that was relevant, nor may I add, has it been proven.
Johann bumped this thread, and I was correcting lawsuit happy Gailon Joy's false statements, in one of the last posts in it in regards to there being no legal precedent for you to join him in his class action lawsuit. (see original post below) Then you and Bob arrived and started insulting and name calling. It appears to me that it is you who may be afraid of losing some money. I am not involved in anyway and have nothing to lose or be sued for, Duane. I have to go meet my family now, Good-bye.
Thanks for bumping this thread Johann...
This subject needs to be dropped.
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
Walt Thompson, quite frankly, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. If he wants the facts, why doesn't he call me or some of the other victims, as he should have done to begin with?
Say what you want....I can't quite get my mind around a 20 year old man being a victim.
Well, SAM,
How about a 20 year old man being required to "help" his pastor who also was the boss at 3ABN...seems it crosses the line, doesn't SAM?
Better get on it before you miss the most obvious sexual misconduct story of your career!!! Me thinks it may have qualified as "sexual harrassment", what do you think SAM??? You are the expert!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Just so set the record straight Joy. Duane Clem has zero claims to file against Tommy Shelton, or 3ABN, and I am not talking about the expired statute of limitations. Clem was of age, and he consented and even travelled on his own to meet a man who was not his Pastor, nor a Pastor at all, nor was he Clem's boss at 3ABN, when Clem alleges he was abused by him.
Here's some dates, and Clem's statement to verify that.
While Tommy is his Pastor, his Principal, and his Counsellor - NOTHING HAPPENED:
Clem: "Tommy Shelton was my pastor for many years at the Ezra Church of God in West Frankfort, IL. I began attending with my mother, sister and two brothers around 1974 or so, and my father became a Christian and began coming with us shortly after I graduated from high school in 1984. Tommy and I were never really close until I began attending the Christian school our church operated. Over the next few years, we would spend a lot of time talking, as I was dealing with depression issues and he was counseling me.When the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois decided to suspend Tommy's ministerial credentials in 1985, I was one of several who wrote a letter in his defense. I was also questioned by a detective at the West Frankfort Police Department. I had been on a few overnight trips with him, and gave testimony that nothing had happened that would substantiate the allegations being made against him. At the time, this was true."
Tommy Shelton letter Feb 2007:
The facts are, the first allegation was made in September of 1985 and my credentials were suspended on October 25, 1985 without anyone contacting me (IGA did not follow Matt. 18) The next correspondence I have with the committee in my records is dated January 29, 1987 – over a year later.
On a tape previously mentioned taped at Ezra Church of God in 2001, Pastor Dryden states that
I erred in not resigning when accusations were first made. He says my sin was the sin of division because of not resigning.
I did resign immediately upon hearing of accusations. I resigned the church and a pastor from the First Church of God who had just resigned that church, came to be the interim pastor...For at least the next 9 months I did not preach and I ceased activities in the Church of God as instructed. I worked at 3ABN during that time, in construction, as it was just being built at the time.
Confirmed:
..a letter dated Nov. 1, 1985 from one of the pillars of the church [Ezra COG]to the General Assembly of the Church of God in Illinois .........”.I might bring to your attention, now, that Brother Tommy resigned as Pastor from the Ezra Church of God , Sept. 15, 1985"
Clem:
Sometime in late 1985 or early 1986, Tommy came to me..and asked for my help....Over the next few months, Tommy and I would meet at his house, the church, the original 3ABN building, and even one night on a back country road, anywhere he thought no one would see us. There was a lot of inappropriate touching, but nothing further. He wanted much more out of it, but I couldn't let it happen because in my heart I knew it wasn't right. I was wrestling with thoughts like "What if someone finds out?...On one occasion, I had been hired by a television and appliance rent-to-own company as an assistant manager, and was to travel to the main office about an hour away for two days of training. The company said they would get me a motel room so I wouldn't have to drive back and forth. ...Finally, he said he realized that I was uncomfortable and decided we shouldn't be doing this. It was like a thousand pound weight was gone.
No, I am not defending what did happen. It was wrong. There's just no reason to believe or promote lies.
-
Who started all the talk about a civil suit? It certainly wasn't me.
And, by the way, you people have a big surprise coming as far as the statute of limitations is concerned, too.
-
Duane, Yes it does look as if "Pat Williams" does have a stake in this situation. You hang in there. You do have a lot of people standing behind you in support. I agree with 'power of authority no matter the age of the victim whether they are underage or adults'.
-
Duane, Yes it does look as if "Pat Williams" does have a stake in this situation. You hang in there. You do have a lot of people standing behind you in support. I agree with 'power of authority no matter the age of the victim whether they are underage or adults'.
I find it interesting that "Pat" is so bent on telling everyone that I have "no case" even though I have said nothing about any kind of litigation. Why else would someone be so edgy about it unless they were on the hook to lose some money?
"Pat Williams" is a liar, and she knows she's lying. It's a thinly veiled attempt to get me to release information. Sorry "Pat", I've known the Shelton tactics for years now. The playbook hasn't changed, so it's really easy to spot now.
BTW, why are you still hiding in fear? Can't you back up what you say? Thought not.
-
NO, I am not defending a child abuser, nor attacking victims of child molestion here. ok?
Can you prove that?
-
Williams,
What are you doing then, you are drilling like your the fact finder to spin, twist, and Harass until you can get a misplaced word to use against no way out situation for you. Your exhausting efforts are very plain to understand. Yes you are Harassing.
The one document was so sickening that it was enough proof for me that this TS perp did exactely that. No innocent and unexperience young person can think of such idiot, stupid way to down an unsuspecting situation. How much more do you want these victims to come up with more of the same. Enough was said to make anyone a beliver. To tell anymore outside of court is that You must like throwing up. Or have you no conscience or noodles for cooking? You don't fool me one bit who you are. It is intimate enough to know and desperate enough to see.
-
Pat & ...;
Your posts are making me literally sick. Leave Duane and all others alone! Can I ask what business do you have even speaking to him. I can't help but think you will find yourself right in the middle of this mess. You really need to stop tampering with witnesses and probable witnesses. Your emails will convict you.
I don't have special links to the Heavenly Father that you all don't have also; however, I must pray.
Dear Heavenly Father, in the name of Jesus Christ our Savior, I ask that you intervene in these matters. Tommy is sorry for what he has done, but has he turned away from his sin for the future. Only You know his heart. Thank you for intervening and stopping Tommy and seeing that other innocent children's lives are not ruined! Father, I have prayed this prayer so many times over the passed 6 years. I thank you Father for bring this issue front and center to clear the way to Danny, Walt, Brenda, Mollie... or do you still need more time to expose even more? Thank you for hearing my prayer in Jesus' name. I love you. Fran
Now, I will deal with the fallen. Satan, get thee behind us! Your tactics are showing! You are not welcome here.
These last posts show me that Danny has not repented and turned away from his sin. He is still is doing his normal activities, destroying as many people as possible. It is time Lord.
-
Go ahead, be a man and a Christian, and admit that Tommy was wrong in saying that, and in not telling the assassinators he knew about to cool it. It is evil and wicked to try to assassinate the characters of those you know were the victims of iniquitous practices, and it is evil and wicked for the perpetrator to just stand by and let it happen without protest.
Well that was most likely why he was calling it sad, and saying they were being victimized. He didn't say he knew who those doing so were, Bob. I doubt he did. You added that part to condemn him because you are an accuser and always believe the worst of all people. You might try asking for help with that. It's not good.
My point is that Tommy let it happen without protest. Assuming that Tommy did not know and could not find out the identities of any of the assassinators, which I doubt, quote for me from his open letter where he condemned the assassinators for their smearing of his victims.
Sad to say, some of the people whose names Pastor Dryden released to the internet group, are now going through character assassination themselves because of their statements, by people who knew them "way back when" and have reason to doubt their testimony. His actions of hurt are far more reaching than just "bringing me down."
That's what you quoted Tommy as writing. It's weird.
Tommy is saying, "Dryden should never have released the names of my victims because they're all liars and now they're being brought down too." No hint of repentance or remorse on his part. Not a shred of an interest in defending his victims from being victimized again. Only an attempt on his own part to suggest to his readers that all his alleged victims are liars.
Has Tommy changed his attitude since February 2007? If so, we can rejoice. But your coming on here and trying to continue smearing Tommy Shelton's victims suggests that his heart has not changed at all.
-
I posted this apology somewhere else before I saw this thread.
I apologize for making that misstatement. Duane is not to blame, I am for not reading more carefully. I have to admit with the rush of new information/members I have been a bit confused, and that I was always a bit confused about the timeline of the abuses by TS. Forgive me for speaking before I understood fully. I am sorry for any confusion I might have caused.
That being said, Pat, please don't twist or use my statements to support anything you have to say in defene of TS, it is a sick mind who defends a molester. HE IS WRONG and being ocnvicted for his crimes, against two young men who were children at the time. His family needs to shut allthis down and get him the help he needs, while on probation, etc. It only helps TS to stay in the mind of denial. Even if Duane wasn't a minor, TS abused his position of authority as pastor/even ex-pastor. God has made that office a position of authority and TS abused that position. Tha can happen with a grown person, also.
No, Duane Clem, it is you who doesn't get it. I don't need your answer here. It is Princessdi, you needs you to explain to as she is confused about what she thinks you said. You should have done so without me asking. To allow her to continue believing the lie that you were molested as a minor by Tommy Shelton when you could easily correct that is dead wrong. To be spiteful to me and insult me calling me coward, rather than doing the right thing and just posting to her and explaining is wrong, there are no ifs ands or buts about that.
You're not all that smart, are you? You aren't getting any answers from me. I don't give explanations to cowards. How many times do I have to say it before you finally comprehend?
Duane, see this is what I was talking about before and how you interjecting yourself into the child molestation topics and talking about being a victim confuses people.
Could you please explain here and clear up the confusion?
Did you say something occurred when you were a minor? because Princessdi says you did and she's gotto go with what you say...
Yes, I read it, and Duane's reply that he said something "did" happen when he when he was a minor. he's the victim, he was there, I gotta to with him on this one.
And because of that she is now also falsely accusing me of attacking a victim of child abuse after "you" a victim of child abuse told "me" that you were abused as a child. Now how sad is this?
Pat, when a victim of child abuse tells you he was abused as a child and you call him a liar....you are attacking a victim of child abuse. [/color]