Print

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

[Mary Sue Smith]

tinka, did you understand what Ian said? She did not say to cover up anything or to "hush" up anything. No one is trying to "cover over" anything about this case.

Of course it is terrible to think of anyone being molested, a horrifying thing. What I think Ian is trying to say is to let the courts decide whether he is guilty or not--but to scream out that he is guilty or desiring that he be thrown "UNDER THE JAIL" before being convicted is a terrible thing to say about anyone before they are even found guilty or not.  Because someone is "charged" does NOT make them guilty until the Courts investigate and make a decision. This decision by the Courts is completely out of our hands.

And then to include the family all together--well, are you like your brothers or sisters, mother or father? Of course not.  There is NO SUCH THING as the whole family being guilty simply because they are related to one who has been charged of a crime.   

[GRAT]

The charged person can plead guilty, that is another option.  The superintendent of school in my area plead guilty to a DUI against his lawyers advice because he was guilty.  He was man enough to stand up and say I drove drunk.

[ex3abnemployee]

I know that Blood is thicker that Water, but DS is really sticking his neck out for TS. AFter reading Roger Clem's letter to TS, if he has forgiven Tommy, then he is doing better than I might. Right now, I am so angry at TS and his lies and coverups and blaming everyone else but himself for his "sickness", that he makes me"SICK". I want to put him and those just like him UNDER THE JAIL. He probably was molested as a child, as this is a sickness that just keeps on giving, unless it is stopped... but the family should have stopped it. Were they some sort of" back woods hicks," that accepted that kind of behavior?

Some members of the family knew about it, others didn't. I think your describing them as "back woods hicks" is a bit over the top.

[Wendall]

Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely.

[Bob Pickle]

Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely.

Perhaps. It might also help him get a better sentence than he might get otherwise.

[Pat Williams]

Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely.

Wendal....

I am speaking here as someone who has asked and been answered by involved parties. Have you? I, admittedly, have no idea where you have received your opinions and views, or on what you have based them, but would ask that you submit any evidence or support for them from your POV before repeating it or defending it, or condemning even one or any other who is undeserving of such.

Tommy Shelton has paid for his own lawyer.
Tommy Shelton is basing and making his plea based on his pov and what he knows and proclaims.
Tommy Shelton's family has already been trashed here regardless of anything he may say or do, and in the interest of justice this needs to be pursued and answered according to the facts of the case and regardless of who accuses and condemns his relatives or the 3ABN ministry.

If anyone, has evidence to contradict this then they need to contact law enforcement, and either post the facts concerning that here or hush their mouths.

3d

[Bob Pickle]

If anyone, has evidence to contradict this then they need to contact law enforcement, and either post the facts concerning that here or hush their mouths.

I think you are wrong. Anyone who wants to is free to express their concern or outrage at Danny Shelton and 3ABN covering up the child molestation allegations against Tommy.

[ex3abnemployee]

Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely.

Wendal....

I am speaking here as someone who has asked and been answered by involved parties. Have you? I, admittedly, have no idea where you have received your opinions and views, or on what you have based them, but would ask that you submit any evidence or support for them from your POV before repeating it or defending it, or condemning even one or any other who is undeserving of such.

Tommy Shelton has paid for his own lawyer.
Tommy Shelton is basing and making his plea based on his pov and what he knows and proclaims.
Tommy Shelton's family has already been trashed here regardless of anything he may say or do, and in the interest of justice this needs to be pursued and answered according to the facts of the case and regardless of who accuses and condemns his relatives or the 3ABN ministry.

If anyone, has evidence to contradict this then they need to contact law enforcement, and either post the facts concerning that here or hush their mouths.

3d

I notice that 3d didn't post any "evidence" either.

[Wendall]

Defender,

First, I take it you are an angry person. Next, you are most likely a close friend or relative of TS. If you were on the stand defending TS I would love to ask you several questions. The first one is are you related to the defendant. If you answer yes then I can impeach your testimony as being bias toward the defendant which could lower your credibility to the jury. Next, I would ask did you know that TS had a problem with the molestation of children. If you answer yes then you are toast on any further testimony being credibile and then the fun begins to discredit you. If you answer no then you do not really know the defendant.
Then you do not have personal knowledge that TS did or did not comitt the crimes alleged because you were not there. Next you state that you have talked to the parties=most likely an objection from the prosecutor as Hearsay and not admissilbe evidence.

Conclusion=you are not a credible witness.

[Bob Pickle]

Good point, Duane.

DD/TD, why not post here copies of canceled checks written by Tommy and sent to his lawyer? That would prove that Tommy is paying for his own lawyer, as long as the lawyer doesn't refund the money and get paid some other way on the side.

[Wendall]

Last post should have been defense attorney instead of prosecutor.

[Pat Williams]

Defender,

First, I take it you are an angry person. Next, you are most likely a close friend or relative of TS. If you were on the stand defending TS I would love to ask you several questions. The first one is are you related to the defendant. If you answer yes then I can impeach your testimony as being bias toward the defendant which could lower your credibility to the jury. Next, I would ask did you know that TS had a problem with the molestation of children. If you answer yes then you are toast on any further testimony being credibile and then the fun begins to discredit you. If you answer no then you do not really know the defendant.
Then you do not have personal knowledge that TS did or did not comitt the crimes alleged because you were not there. Next you state that you have talked to the parties=most likely an objection from the prosecutor as Hearsay and not admissilbe evidence.

Conclusion=you are not a credible witness.

Which all just goes to show you don't know what you are talking about.

I did not express anger to you as I was not angry when I posted, yet you wrongly conclude that I am an angry person and post that to all here.

I am not related to TS and have no knowledge of TS having a "problem with child molestation" nor am I a witness to any events which would qualify me as a witness for either the defense or the prosecution, and have not claimed that or even posted anything as far as that goes.

 I have read what is alleged like the rest of you, and it is my point of view that there is enough to investigate but there is not enough to conclude that he is guilty, or that he is not guilty. That is for the courts to decide after hearing all from both parties and weighing all the evidence in the case. But none of this has anything to do with what I was replying to and posted.

Which was the following from you:
"Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely."

"Did he get bailed out? and if he did who paid for that? "

And this from COTK:
"Who is Tommy's lawyer? Anybody know? And who is paying for him?"

I posted what I was told by the family in answer to those things. Which is that Tommy paid his own bail and is paying for his own lawyer and his plea will be based on his knowledge of the events in question and the allegations against him and the two who are accusing him. That has nothing to do with a plea for his family or a plea for 3abn, despite the attempts here on this forum to make it so. Neither 3abn nor Tommy's family are charged in the case. Nor does 3ABN have any reason to be involved financially in the case.

You call my answer "hearsay" but you are wrong. That is what I was told and I am a first person witness to that and can say that, and I don't need to supply canceled checks nor anything else to testify to what I was told.

You are right when you say hearsay is inadmissible in court, you are just incorrect in your definition of what hearsay is. If someone else repeats what I posted it would be hearsay. When Pickle and Joy keep claiming an unnamed or protected source says... to make their accusations and allegations? That is hearsay.

:waving:

[ex3abnemployee]

Defender,

First, I take it you are an angry person. Next, you are most likely a close friend or relative of TS. If you were on the stand defending TS I would love to ask you several questions. The first one is are you related to the defendant. If you answer yes then I can impeach your testimony as being bias toward the defendant which could lower your credibility to the jury. Next, I would ask did you know that TS had a problem with the molestation of children. If you answer yes then you are toast on any further testimony being credibile and then the fun begins to discredit you. If you answer no then you do not really know the defendant.
Then you do not have personal knowledge that TS did or did not comitt the crimes alleged because you were not there. Next you state that you have talked to the parties=most likely an objection from the prosecutor as Hearsay and not admissilbe evidence.

Conclusion=you are not a credible witness.

Which all just goes to show you don't know what you are talking about.

I did not express anger to you as I was not angry when I posted, yet you wrongly conclude that I am an angry person and post that to all here.

I am not related to TS and have no knowledge of TS having a "problem with child molestation" nor am I a witness to any events which would qualify me as a witness for either the defense or the prosecution, and have not claimed that or even posted anything as far as that goes.

 I have read what is alleged like the rest of you, and it is my point of view that there is enough to investigate but there is not enough to conclude that he is guilty, or that he is not guilty. That is for the courts to decide after hearing all from both parties and weighing all the evidence in the case. But none of this has anything to do with what I was replying to and posted.

Which was the following from you:
"Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely."

"Did he get bailed out? and if he did who paid for that? "

And this from COTK:
"Who is Tommy's lawyer? Anybody know? And who is paying for him?"

I posted what I was told by the family in answer to those things. Which is that Tommy paid his own bail and is paying for his own lawyer and his plea will be based on his knowledge of the events in question and the allegations against him and the two who are accusing him. That has nothing to do with a plea for his family or a plea for 3abn, despite the attempts here on this forum to make it so. Neither 3abn nor Tommy's family are charged in the case. Nor does 3ABN have any reason to be involved financially in the case.

You call my answer "hearsay" but you are wrong. That is what I was told and I am a first person witness to that and can say that, and I don't need to supply canceled checks nor anything else to testify to what I was told.

You are right when you say hearsay is inadmissible in court, you are just incorrect in your definition of what hearsay is. If someone else repeats what I posted it would be hearsay. When Pickle and Joy keep claiming an unnamed or protected source says... to make their accusations and allegations? That is hearsay.

:waving:

I don't know anything about Tommy paying for his own attorney, but I did hear differently about his bail. So let me guess, what I heard is hearsay and what you posted should be acccepted as fact. Right?

[Pat Williams]

...I posted what I was told by the family in answer to those things. Which is that Tommy paid his own bail and is paying for his own lawyer and his plea will be based on his knowledge of the events in question and the allegations against him and the two who are accusing him. That has nothing to do with a plea for his family or a plea for 3abn, despite the attempts here on this forum to make it so. Neither 3abn nor Tommy's family are charged in the case. Nor does 3ABN have any reason to be involved financially in the case.

You call my answer "hearsay" but you are wrong. That is what I was told and I am a first person witness to that and can say that, and I don't need to supply canceled checks nor anything else to testify to what I was told.

You are right when you say hearsay is inadmissible in court, you are just incorrect in your definition of what hearsay is. If someone else repeats what I posted it would be hearsay. When Pickle and Joy keep claiming an unnamed or protected source says... to make their accusations and allegations? That is hearsay.

:waving:

I don't know anything about Tommy paying for his own attorney, but I did hear differently about his bail. So let me guess, what I heard is hearsay and what you posted should be acccepted as fact. Right?

You heard?  You tell us if it's hearsay, or even credible... Who did you hear it from? I stated my questions were answered by the family. The know that they didn't give their own money to pay the bail themselves, but since TS was in jail at the time and someone had to step forward and make the arrangements and pay it on his behalf they do know it came from he and his wife.

How would the person you heard it from know anything about it, Mr Clem?

Let me guess, as usual you don't have to answer my questions?
And I am a coward because you don't know my name?

whatever...

[Bob Pickle]

I have read what is alleged like the rest of you, and it is my point of view that there is enough to investigate but there is not enough to conclude that he is guilty, or that he is not guilty.

Then would you also agree that there is enough evidence that Tommy should not have been allowed to work around children at 3ABN, and that the elementary school principal and the pastor should have been advised that there was an alleged pedophile on 3ABN's premises? Just so they could keep an eye out to make sure nothing inappropriate happened?

You call my answer "hearsay" but you are wrong. That is what I was told and I am a first person witness to that and can say that, and I don't need to supply canceled checks nor anything else to testify to what I was told.

Yet up above you stated:

Tommy Shelton has paid for his own lawyer.

It appears to me that you stated that as fact, rather than stating that your were told that by so and so. Yet you have no personal knowledge that Tommy has indeed paid for his own lawyer. Thus, I think you are incorrect when you stated that what you said was not hearsay.

Canceled checks, please.

If you feel free to say that family told you such and such, why not just come out and tell us which family member told you? Why keep that a secret? And how do we even know that you talked to a family member that would know?