Remnant continues to hide the truth

[reader]

This may have been answered before, but I did not see it, how long will it be before some of these civil suits against 3ABN or DS???

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

That, unfortunately, is not our call. If it were, yesterday would be the day.
Just ask Pickle.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

This may have been answered before, but I did not see it, how long will it be before some of these civil suits against 3ABN or DS???

Reader,
I can tell you this, the civil enforcement action to enforce the subpoena against Remnant Publications has been drafted and is being served and filed with the US District Court in Michigan. 

Next comes the enforcement of the subpoena for the auditor in the Illinois district Court.

Then there will be a bunch of miscellaneous third party subpoenas that will need to be served and
most likley enforced, one at a time.

This will be supporting evidence and clarify the picture for experts and for the inevitable jury presentation.

I trust this clarifies where we are at this point in time.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[Ozzie]

This may have been answered before, but I did not see it, how long will it be before some of these civil suits against 3ABN or DS???

Reader,
I can tell you this, the civil enforcement action to enforce the subpoena against Remnant Publications has been drafted and is being served and filed with the US District Court in Michigan. 

Next comes the enforcement of the subpoena for the auditor in the Illinois district Court.

Then there will be a bunch of miscellaneous third party subpoenas that will need to be served and
most likley enforced, one at a time.

This will be supporting evidence and clarify the picture for experts and for the inevitable jury presentation.

I trust this clarifies where we are at this point in time.

Gailon Arthur Joy

Thank you for this explanation Gailon. It also demonstrates why legal procedures take so long to have an outcome. I had not understood all this background stuff. :TY:

[Bob Pickle]

Magistrate Judge Ellen Carmody on July 28 denied Remnant's motion to reconsider her previous order that Remnant produce documents to us instead of under seal to Magistrate Judge Hillman.

Today Remnant appealed that decision, and paid $455 to do so.

What are Remnant and Dwight Hall trying to hide?

Do donors to Remnant think this is a good way to spend their money?

[anyman]

Actually, I would say you have been the one wasting the money - and I am guessing none of it yours (see banner at bottom of page and all legal bills of third party subpoena victims). Remnant is doing what it can to end your lies, innuendo, prevarication, falsehood, fib, fiction, inveracity, misrepresentation, tale, untruth, fabulation, fabrication, falsehood, hyperbole, mendacity, pseudology, roorback, subreption, subterfuge, forswearance, canard, tergiversation, deception, dishonesty, mis-statements.

Trying to hide? Nothing! They are doing all they can to insulate the ministries of God that you daily seek to bring to demise. Maybe you should follow suit and put your energies into the spreading of God's message of love, forgiveness, and salvation. Job endured, so will 3ABN, Danny, Remnant, Dwight, the 3ABN board, and ever other individual you have spent your time and other people's money defaming and harassing. Maybe if you didn't travel far and wide harassing people you might find a mission field in your own backyard.

Magistrate Judge Ellen Carmody on July 28 denied Remnant's motion to reconsider her previous order that Remnant produce documents to us instead of under seal to Magistrate Judge Hillman.

Today Remnant appealed that decision, and paid $455 to do so.

What are Remnant and Dwight Hall trying to hide?

Do donors to Remnant think this is a good way to spend their money?

[Bob Pickle]

anyman,

Why not try to answer the question?

The lawsuit essentially accuses us of saying that Danny was trying to hide his royalties, and of saying that Danny did not disclose all his assets and income on his July 2006 financial affidavit, among other things.

3ABN's Form 990's and financial statements, and Remnant's Form 990's indicate that Nick Miller was likely correct when he said that Danny earned several hundred thousand dollars in royalties.

So we need the documents we've requested from Remnant, and the magistrate agreed. If what Nick Miller and other said was all lies, Remnant could simply produce the documents and put the questions to rest once and for all.

[Bob Pickle]

anyman,

Your reply was highly inappropriate and unchristian. I think Jeanette would agree with me on that.

You've accused me of lying. Why not list what you think I've said that you think are lies?

• Did I lie when I said that Walt Thompson didn't contact any of Tommy's alleged victims?
• Did I lie when I said that Tommy was an alleged pedophile?
• Did I lie when I said that Nick said that he was fairly certain that Danny earned several hundred thousand dollars in royalties?
• Did I lie when I said that Hal Steenson said there was a recording?
• Did I lie when I said that Kevin Paulson said that Danny told him that Brandy had been chasing him for 17 years?
• Did I lie when I said that I've talked with 7 of Tommy's alleged victims and the mother of an 8th and an eye witness?
• Did I lie when I said that Mike Riva threatened Glenn Dryden with a lawsuit?
• Did I lie when I said that Gerald Duffy invoked common law copyright?

Name the lies you think I've told.

But really, your reply is totally inappropriate. Rather, you should take a stand for truth and righteousness and conservative Seventh-day Adventist principles, which supports the church's stance that dishonesty in business practices is grounds for church discipline. So misrepresentation in business matters is a serious thing, according to the world church.

[Bob Pickle]

Further, unlike Danny et. al., I am not afraid to apologize and make things right. Christian courtesy demands that opportunities be given to do that privately regarding many matters. But I realize that Danny doesn't play that way.

This scandalous saga gives us an idea of what it was like in days of old, and what it will be like in the days ahead to take a stand for truth and righteousness. The Albigensians were accused by their persecutors of engaging in unseemly conduct, and then sacrificing the babies that resulted, and then burning them to ashes, and then eating the ashes as a special food. The early Christians were also accused of human sacrifices and/or cannibalism. Shall we expect any different today?

I fear that if persecution were to start in earnest, many Adventists would simply disappear to escape ridicule and privation.

[Ozzie]

Actually, I would say you have been the one wasting the money - and I am guessing none of it yours (see banner at bottom of page and all legal bills of third party subpoena victims). Maybe a job and some prayer and Bible study will get you back on track.[b] Remnant is doing what it can[/b] to end your lies, innuendo, prevarication, falsehood, fib, fiction, inveracity, misrepresentation, tale, untruth, fabulation, fabrication, falsehood, hyperbole, mendacity, pseudology, roorback, subreption, subterfuge, forswearance, canard, tergiversation, deception, dishonesty, mis-statements.

Anyman
You speak as if you are the person representing Remnant.  :scratch:

You sound that you are answering as if you are the person implicated in this saga. :hot:

Now, how could that be? :dunno:

Looks like you've been poring over a dictionary in your anger also! One correction though. Should that read "confabulation" rather than "fabulation"? :help:

Got to get it right Mate, when you're dealing with legal stuff.  :ROFL:

[anyman]

Remnant could simply produce the documents and put the questions to rest once and for all.

As evidenced by your misrepresentation of emails and information over the past two years I think of many reasons why they wouldn't want to give you anything - and none of them have to do with hiding anything. You hae misrepresented, put words in peoples mouths they never uttered on numerous occasions over the past two years and many have taken you to task for it . . . yet you always make a rousing attempt at justifying your actions always trying to cloak yourself in righteous robes. Maybe if you didn't edit, insinuate, and misrepresent the information that lands in your lap people would give you what you demanded.

Often you walk a very fine line between outright lies and defensible comments - however, the discerning juror will know the difference.

[anyman]

If wishes were -phishes- we'd all have a fry, eh, Oz?

It doesn't take a degree in rocket science to see what is happening - a little common sense and an understanding of the Spanish Inquisition methods of Mr. Robert Pickle, and Mr. Gailon Arthur Joy allows one to understand why Remnant continues on course.

As to your "correction" . . . here is a little elucidation: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=fabulation

Maybe down under the word no longer exists, but for now, the dictionary still contains the word.

Anyman
You speak as if you are the person representing Remnant.  :scratch:

You sound that you are answering as if you are the person implicated in this saga. :hot:

Now, how could that be? :dunno:

Looks like you've been poring over a dictionary in your anger also! One correction though. Should that read "confabulation" rather than "fabulation"? :help:

Got to get it right Mate, when you're dealing with legal stuff. [/b]  :ROFL:

[anyman]

You love to take every opportunity to spew your nonsense don't you. They say that if someone repeats something long enough to themselves - they eventually believe it is the truth . . . NLP tactics again? . . .

anyman,

Your reply was highly inappropriate and unchristian. I think Jeanette would agree with me on that.

You've accused me of lying. Why not list what you think I've said that you think are lies?

• Did I lie when I said that Walt Thompson didn't contact any of Tommy's alleged victims?
• Did I lie when I said that Tommy was an alleged pedophile?
• Did I lie when I said that Nick said that he was fairly certain that Danny earned several hundred thousand dollars in royalties?
• Did I lie when I said that Hal Steenson said there was a recording?
• Did I lie when I said that Kevin Paulson said that Danny told him that Brandy had been chasing him for 17 years?
• Did I lie when I said that I've talked with 7 of Tommy's alleged victims and the mother of an 8th and an eye witness?
• Did I lie when I said that Mike Riva threatened Glenn Dryden with a lawsuit?
• Did I lie when I said that Gerald Duffy invoked common law copyright?

Name the lies you think I've told.

But really, your reply is totally inappropriate. Rather, you should take a stand for truth and righteousness and conservative Seventh-day Adventist principles, which supports the church's stance that dishonesty in business practices is grounds for church discipline. So misrepresentation in business matters is a serious thing, according to the world church.

[Wendall]

Generally speaking fighting a motion to produce documents falls into two categories 1. You have information in those documents that either prove the other parties contentions or the documents reveal incriminating evidence on other issues and possibly a combination of those two. 2. You want to wear down the other party by a. Costing them money and time by fighting senseless motions  b. Get the other party frustrated  c. Stalling preventing other party from making their case
d. Prevent the other party from the information because it might affect another ongoing case. :hamster:

[Bob Pickle]

Maybe if you didn't edit, insinuate, and misrepresent the information that lands in your lap people would give you what you demanded.

Examples? Got any?

It's interesting that the Plaintiffs made the same claim around May 2007, but I don't recall them ever giving any examples either. You'd think that they would have come up with at least one by now.