Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ozzie]

I know you are under enormous pressure presently.  You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years.  Those are all tremendous stressors.  Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice.  Is this the case?  Is this the message  you are meaning to shout to the watching world?  Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon.  At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted.  It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.

Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!

Yes, I have gotten to know you quite well over the last 1.5 years. I have clearly seen how you have treated those who you feel are questioning your actions in this investigation.  It is why I have chosen to have little further communication with you. 

I have bolded and highlighted in red the preface to my statement about your legal separation from your wife.  It was not an assumption or an extrapolation.  I read it in black and white in court documents over a month ago.

You and others can find the document in question, GJBankdoc5081407.pdf(40.08k) in fallible humanbeing's post of January 22, 2008.

"Part II. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY INCOME.... " has the box by b checked which states:

b. Married, not filing jointly with declaration of separate households.  By checking this box, debtor declares under penalty of perjury: "My spouse and I are leagally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpost of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." Complete only column A ("Debtor's Income") for Lines 3-11.

Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation?  Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. 

[sonshineonme]

[/b]

I know you are under enormous pressure presently.  You've got all that you are doing to meet the physical and financial demands of the law suit, you've got your bankruptcy case, and, per your bankruptcy documents you are legally separated from your wife of many years.  Those are all tremendous stressors.  Now you are making it sound like you are being let down by Linda, that she is fighting against your efforts towards justice.  Is this the case?  Is this the message  you are meaning to shout to the watching world?  Nobody is trying to speculate, Gailon.  At least I don't believe so from the questions that I have seen posted.  It appears to me that there are some, probably many, who would simply would appreciate clarificaton for your huge statement about Linda so speculation can be nipped in the bud.

[/b]
Anyone who knows me, and you certainly know me well enough, knows that I am relatively immune to "stressors"...however, I was quite bemused by your declaration of my seperation from my wife
...but I got the biggest kick out of the many calls of "tongue in cheek" condolences!!! Unfortunately, My wife was not as amused and requested your contact information. I will spare you the indignity!!!

Yes, I have gotten to know you quite well over the last 1.5 years. I have clearly seen how you have treated those who you feel are questioning your actions in this investigation.  It is why I have chosen to have little further communication with you. 

I have bolded and highlighted in red the preface to my statement about your legal separation from your wife.  It was not an assumption or an extrapolation.  I read it in black and white in court documents over a month ago.

You and others can find the document in question, GJBankdoc5081407.pdf(40.08k) in fallible humanbeing's post of January 22, 2008.

"Part II. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY INCOME.... " has the box by b checked which states:

b. Married, not filing jointly with declaration of separate households.  By checking this box, debtor declares under penalty of perjury: "My spouse and I are leagally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purpost of evading the requirements of (symbol) 707(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code." Complete only column A ("Debtor's Income") for Lines 3-11.

Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation?  Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. 

AMEN! People never surprise me anymore. To me, this was not right - for many reasons. IMO, it was in bad taste.

I am still "mirthing" over those series of posts. As soon as I am finished "mirthing", I plan to post something. It was troubling to see how those series of posts went - no, disturbing. I know some of you know what I mean. Hopefully I can put it into constructive words (when I am done mirthing, that is - I like that word!)) and address it, since I was the one that GrandmaNettie asked behind the scenes for information, and I directed her to Gailon. That is how I do things, and I felt that was the way to go. Obviously she didn't take my advice.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

After we finish in Minnesotta and deal with the 3ABN Motion for Protective Order in Massachusetts we have to turn our attention back to Illinois.  Yet another front that needs a little subpoena enforcement motion. And don't forget Michigan.

ANd on and on as we move to build our case against 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton!!! We move steadilly but assuredly forward as we prepare for a trial on the merits!!!

Time and fortitude and the evidence will all come together with a clear picture...add a little testimony from actual witnesses and we will get our Jury Verdict.

Gailon Arthur Joy

 


May I quote from another document quoted on BSDA, one filed in answer to Bob Pickle's document, which was quoted both here, and there?

"Plaintiff is not a criminal defendant, Defendant is not a governmental actor"

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=20348&view=findpost&p=238869

Just a Doodle

And your point is... Are we to suppose assume that just because the plaintiffs counsel says it, it is the law? In fact, as I stated, the 8th District has already spoken and  it was a Minnesotta case that summarizes simply that Minnesotta has no jurisdiction to determine the claims of privilege and motions for protective order; they can only issue a stay pending the decision of the juridictional decision of the underlying case. Or enforce the subpoena.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

By the way, Doodle, ever give thought to the implications of a qui tam claim???
Yes that is the one where you can become a private attorney general and take the role of the government. I am sure counsel is aware of the concept.

Regardless, there is plenty of support for the premise that those docs are essential to our case and the First District, the jurisdictional district, seems to support the concept of limited privilege and limited privacy. Just take a look at the local rules and decision that follow them.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[GrandmaNettie]

Reading this gave me the opportunity for quite a lot of mirth, and then I started wondering what people might be thinking about my husband (of 48 years) and myself. As we are legally classified as being 'separated' - my husband lives next door to me, I wondered what 'spin' people might put on that situation?  Just as well we both have a sense of humour. Just goes to show how people can misinterpret situations, if they want to see things in a bad light. 

Ozzie, apparently you responded to Gailon and my posts before you read further in the thread and discovered the post where Gailon states he didn't know that the bankruptcy document had him listed as separated from his wife.
 

And I do not blame you. Frankly, I had no idea the wrong box was checked on the ECF Filing with the Bankruptcy Court. THe proper check and the one that is checked in my original document was letter C:  "Married, not filing jointly, without the declaration of seperate households. Spouse income is included in CMI but not DMI." SInce Mrs Joy did not have any income in 2007 it was not a material issue, but certainly could be confusing to those who did not know the difference.

Gailon Arthur Joy

He was no longer "bemused" and Mrs. Joy had reached "livid" status, but no longer at me.

I'm relieved this was just a mistake, Gailon.  So, Mrs. Joy and I are okay now? 

Is this document something that you will have to repair so there aren't judicial repercussions?

Any possibility we can get an explanation for your statement about Linda not supporting the cause?

Mrs Joy is now livid!!! But not with you...sometimes you cannot win for losing. C'est la vie!!!

I am sorry to see your sources have failed you. Believe me, I understand the frustration. Run into it all the time. Don't we, Bob???

As to the The Linda Mystery, it is simple enough...she had been asked to do some research and get the information back to us and it was not forth-coming, not to mention she seemed to be non-responsive to communication efforts. Following my post, I did speak with her and discovered she had completed the research and had given the package to another to deliver...it has now gone into a bottomless pit that seems to be an ever increasing problem for us. It will be available in time. Just a matter of how much effort it will take to get it out. Again, C'est la vie!!!

It is that simple!!!  Satisfied??? I would think not, but the rest will be speculative fun!!!

Oh, yeah...the other news...the accountant for DLS, D&L and DLS Publishing seems to have misplaced the 2004 tax returns, I am told. Any speculation why?

Gailon Arthur Joy

=======

Quote formatting problem corrected. - Daryl

Once Gailon posted his explanations, I ceased from further discussion on the matter.  I note that both Snoopy and Sister ceased from their challenges of the intent in my original post, as well.  It appeared to me that this matter was settled.  I trust it will be for you once you catch up with the other posts.

Jeanette

[GrandmaNettie]

AMEN! People never surprise me anymore. To me, this was not right - for many reasons. IMO, it was in bad taste.

I am still "mirthing" over those series of posts. As soon as I am finished "mirthing", I plan to post something. It was troubling to see how those series of posts went - no, disturbing. I know some of you know what I mean. Hopefully I can put it into constructive words (when I am done mirthing, that is - I like that word!)) and address it, since I was the one that GrandmaNettie asked behind the scenes for information, and I directed her to Gailon. That is how I do things, and I felt that was the way to go. Obviously she didn't take my advice.

Do you believe Gailon is still "mirthing"?  Or Mrs. Joy?  Yes, I approached you... both by email and IM to try to privately get the information on why both Bob and Gailon seemed to be posting negative statements against Linda all of the sudden.  Why would I approach you? Because I care deeply about Linda's welfare and it appeared there was a level of acrimony developing against her.  Because you are in constant contact with both Linda and Gailon and in the past have been completely willing to provide clarification when needed.  I have operated in that same capacity for Bob and Gailon in the past when they have needed clarification but have not been able, for whatever reason, to approach a source directly. 

Obviously I did take it to Gailon just a few hours after you and I IMd from 8:58am to 11:27am on February 24th.  Gailon's statement was made publically.  The matter was already being address publically.  And  you are well aware of why I choose not to approach Gailon privately any longer.

[Bob Pickle]

In defense of GrandmaNettie, she based what she thought on what were supposed to be official documents. What else was she to think?

[Daryl Fawcett]

If you can't even trust in the accuracy of official documents, then what can you trust? 

But then, errors and mistakes can be found even there.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

I clearly owe GrandmaNettie and an open and public apology. My response was clearly bothersome for her and that was not the intent but rather to clarify what I thought was a ridiculous rumor. The fact that it had a dcumentary basis was devastating to my grandstand effort. It is the kind of surprise that leaves one, specifically myself, stunned and humbled and was clearly needed.

But the most important concern is that Grandma Nettie felt she could not come to me directly for an answer. I have always stood for the premise of open and transparent and have maintained an open-door policy in vocation and avocation for far too many years to ever allow that to be jeopardized. Clearly I am guilty of closing this door to Grandma Nettie and for that I apologize and must ask her forgiveness.

I am so sorry, Grandma Nettie, and I humbly seek your forgiveness.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[sonshineonme]

I clearly owe GrandmaNettie and an open and public apology. My response was clearly bothersome for her and that was not the intent but rather to clarify what I thought was a ridiculous rumor. The fact that it had a dcumentary basis was devastating to my grandstand effort. It is the kind of surprise that leaves one, specifically myself, stunned and humbled and was clearly needed.

But the most important concern is that Grandma Nettie felt she could not come to me directly for an answer. I have always stood for the premise of open and transparent and have maintained an open-door policy in vocation and avocation for far too many years to ever allow that to be jeopardized. Clearly I am guilty of closing this door to Grandma Nettie and for that I apologize and must ask her forgiveness.

I am so sorry, Grandma Nettie, and I humbly seek your forgiveness.

Gailon Arthur Joy

I am done mirthing and happy to see this resolved. 

[Snoopy]

Do you believe Gailon is still "mirthing"?  Or Mrs. Joy?  Yes, I approached you... both by email and IM to try to privately get the information on why both Bob and Gailon seemed to be posting negative statements against Linda all of the sudden.  Why would I approach you? Because I care deeply about Linda's welfare and it appeared there was a level of acrimony developing against her.  Because you are in constant contact with both Linda and Gailon and in the past have been completely willing to provide clarification when needed.  I have operated in that same capacity for Bob and Gailon in the past when they have needed clarification but have not been able, for whatever reason, to approach a source directly. 

Obviously I did take it to Gailon just a few hours after you and I IMd from 8:58am to 11:27am on February 24th.  Gailon's statement was made publically.  The matter was already being address publically.  And  you are well aware of why I choose not to approach Gailon privately any longer.

WOW!!  Were you able to get anything out of SSOM??  My personal experience has been that she shares NOTHING!!!  If I had a secret I needed to have taken to a grave, there are not too many I would trust with it, but SSOM is definitely one of them!!

[inga]

WOW!!  Were you able to get anything out of SSOM??  My personal experience has been that she shares NOTHING!!!  If I had a secret I needed to have taken to a grave, there are not too many I would trust with it, but SSOM is definitely one of them!!

What a lovely compliment for Sonshine On Me. 

[Snoopy]

Our information is that Ewing is leaving. If he leaves they will have to find a replacement. It will be a major project, but one that will speak volumes as
they prepare to replace his position.

Gailon Arthur Joy

Mr. Joy,

Any new information regarding the head accountant?  Is Mr. Ewing really leaving?  Won't that be a problem for 3ABN?  Can you shed any light on the current situation there?  Has a replacement been named?

Snoopy

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

No replacement has yet been named but a special board meeting was held and it is likely that was a topic of dicussion. I have heard that he has tendered his resignation for the end of the quarter, specifically the end of March. I do not know the departure date of the other gentleman, yet.

The current board has substantial talent and connections, denominationally and extra-denominationally and should have no problem coming up with a talented individual.

On the other hand, I do not believe the resignation was the only topic. I have heard rumblings that someone who worked in the Accounting Dept recently has issued a letter that would seem to indict the current accounting administration for failure to follow GAAP procedures and has raised quite the furor among directors regarding just how to deal with those charges. I am not sure yet whether the letter, which I have been told went to a lot of directors and officers, came before or after the resignation. If it came before the resignation, it is likely this may have precipitated the resignation. If it came after the resignation, it may have been the strain of dealing with an IRS Criminal Investigation and the stigma that such a process could have on your career, not to mention the premise that you could very well become the scapegoat for decades of inappropriate accounting issues.

The other question is whether the letter also made it to the IRS Criminal Investigation coordinator. It obviously represents a serious challenge to 3ABN's perpetual assertion that "the books are in order" and there is no basis for the "Joy and Pickle claims of wrongdoing". Now to discover it from the clowns...should be loads of fun!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy