Print

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

[Sam]

Most of us have already seen the results. What made this discussion interesting was why were they acting so strangely. I can understand getting the test results right to the post office but I think the test results were in question even before they were taken because even though the tests were home kits, identification was incomplete (no fingerprints) and documents were incomplete and xeroxed...

Child...

For what it is worth to you. I am acquainted with the Sheltons and the younger daughter who was tested. I have no doubts that the pictures of them which Dr Day has posted are the very same three being talked about here. Many have seen the family and I am not aware of one person who knows, has met, or has ever seen Brandy's daughter whether on tv or in person saying that is not her on Dr Day's website. Are you? In addition Brandy has video of the entire thing and it is positively her daughter being tested and despite what Tinka and Jody and others have claimed here erroneously (whether from being deceived themselves or because they are being deceiving themselves I don't know)  she was not under a blanket when she was tested.

I maintain a hope that there are some people here who care about truth as much as they profess to so I have four questions for you. 1.) Do you realize that there is no identification required with a home kit, and that Dr Day is an interested party and no lab will accept those things from her? 2.) How would taking fingerprints help Dr Day? What I mean is how could she use them to identify any of the three tested? 3.) As Dr Day had the copy of the child's passport with it's photo and she looked right at the child when she took the sample, how likely do you think it is that she would take that sample if she had any doubts that the child she was getting ready to swab was not the one in the xeroxed passport photo or did not at least look just like her? 4.) If the child Dr Day both saw and swabbed did not look like the one in the photo don't you think she would have said so?



3D

All excellent questions. I will add mine.  What doctor would even pretend that another child could be substituted and the DNA not show it?  Most lay people know better and so does Dr. Day.  I believe someone mentioned a long time ago (may have been me) that all Day had to do is ask Danny or someone at 3abn to send her the Shelton Christmas program where ********* face is shown clearly. If she had so many doubts why wouldn't she have already sent for this?  Answer:  Because she knows by DNA and also by pictures that the true child was tested and if she looked at the christmas video she would have to confirm publically what she already knows to be the truth.  How sad that someone would stoop so low to be deceitful over an innocent child.  Oh well, anyone that reads her website theology can't take her serious anyway.

This subject is just another dead horse that has been beat to death. You all have to dream up something since the tests proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Danny wasn't the father.  Go Fish cause this one ain't working.     

--------------------------
Edited by Artiste to remove inappropriate content.

[Bob Pickle]

What doctor would even pretend that another child could be substituted and the DNA not show it?

You need to think deeper. In order for your reasoning to be conclusive, it must first be proven how many children Brandy has had, and that children of Brandy's relatives are not close enough matches.

I guess it is because of these kind of questions that courts require the type of identification that they do.

I believe someone mentioned a long time ago (may have been me) that all Day had to do is ask Danny or someone at 3abn to send her the Shelton Christmas program where *****'s face is shown clearly.

If it were me, I wouldn't be happy with this. For one thing, if I wasn't allowed to see the child's face but for a short time, and then was sent that video later, I would possibly still wonder, especially if we are trying to rule out the possibility that the child tested was a sibling or cousin of the child in question. In such cases of course there would/could be a similarity in appearance.

Note: I'm not saying whether the right child was tested or not, and whether prior to the test Danny believed himself to be the father or not. The only point I am addressing is whether or not the test conducted can be considered conclusive when not even the one conducting the test at her own expense can verify that the correct child was tested.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Would this whole paternity test thing be a main part of the reason why Brandy left Danny?

[Bob Pickle]

Doubt it, since they were talking about divorce at least by about two years ago.

But there is a chance it was a final straw. Why would be a matter of speculation without more information.

[Murcielago]

There could be many factors. Danny is close to 60, Brandy is in her mid 30s and younger than his daughter; Brandy is a city girl, Danny is a country boy; Brandy is used to lots of socialization with people her age, Danny doesn't do that; Brandy is used to lots of action and excitement, Danny leads a quiet life... in short, I think that basic compatibility issues could very likely be a major part of it, but that is just a personal opinion.

[Johann]

Is it true that Brandy left ************ with Danny? Why?

I understand that when Danny's first daughter was born her mother gave her also the middle name Dawn.

------------------------
Edited by Artiste

[princessdi]

I have to agree with Bob and George, this time.  Maybe not the only reason, but definitely qualifies as the final straw.  

I think we all know this marriage was based on a very shakey foundation.  In a rush, lies, mislef crisis,she was young,cute, he had a little money, etc.......I had heard they were in trouble a couple of years ago also.  Needless to say we need to be praying for them both ,and most defintiely the children, who are only looking for some stability.

Doubt it, since they were talking about divorce at least by about two years ago.

But there is a chance it was a final straw. Why would be a matter of speculation without more information.

[Fran]

Is it true that Brandy left ************ with Danny? Why?

I understand that when Danny's first daughter was born her mother gave her also the middle name ****.

If it is true that Danny has *******, it makes the truth self evident!  If he does have *******, she needs protection ASAP!

---------------------------
Edited by Artiste

[princessdi]

Protection from whom?  Danny, who if reports are true, the child feels most comfortable that her grandmother? Or her mother who evidently just dropped her9and her sister) off........with somebody(not even the same somebody)........and hit the road.

In my experience, as a foster parent, and with family. children that age will never go back where they don't feel safe if given a choice.  I know this is something you all might not want to hear, but I don't remember reading where Danny and his daughter had a problematic relaitonship or with his grandchildren.  He just might be an excellent father and grandfather...and in this case, stepfather.

You all are going to have to get over the fact, that Danny is not sin personified(devil incarnate, whatever name you want to put on it), and his every breath or move is not evil. He is just like the rest of us who have sinned and come short..........God also looks beyond his faults.........

Is it true that Brandy left ************ with Danny? Why?

I understand that when Danny's first daughter was born her mother gave her also the middle name ****.

If it is true that Danny has *******, it makes the truth self evident!  If he does have *******, she needs protection ASAP!

---------------------------
Edited by Artiste

[Bob Pickle]

Di,

Check out Sister's post at http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10304&view=findpost&p=146302. We filed that one with the court, I believe.

There is always the possibility that Sister got it wrong. But I believe I have a letter somewhere that confirms one of the points Sister makes.

[princessdi]

As I said, i believe you all are going to have to get over trying to make Danny the devil incarnate.  Every breath, every relationship in his life is jsut not that dysfunctional.  However, going back to reading some of that just reminds me how over the top it all was....make that is.............so sad.........sigh......case in point. why would your court papers include any of that?  What was the point?

Di,

Check out Sister's post at http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=10304&view=findpost&p=146302. We filed that one with the court, I believe.

There is always the possibility that Sister got it wrong. But I believe I have a letter somewhere that confirms one of the points Sister makes.

[tinka]

The point is DS is a corrupter of the innocent. That is why the law has to be the protector...... We live by those standards since the beginning of time. It cannot be left go or......your just as guilty.

[Bob Pickle]

why would your court papers include any of that?  What was the point?

Because that thread and others like it were relevant to the question of scope of discovery, which Danny and 3ABN were trying to narrow.

Danny and 3ABN claimed that internet criticism exploding in June or July of 2006, which was before we ever got involved, was what caused 3ABN's decline in donations. What was that criticism? Those threads prove what that criticism was. Was that criticism true? Our discovery was intended to demonstrate whether it was true or not. But Danny and 3ABN didn't want us to do that.

However, Danny and 3ABN included that entire thread as a 55-page PDF document on the first CD of their Rule 26(a)(1) initial disclosure documents. That meant that they believed that thread and the information it contained to be relevant in some way to the lawsuit.

Every breath, every relationship in his life is jsut not that dysfunctional.

I agree with you that it was over the top. At least that is how I felt at the time I read it.

Was that relationship that dysfunctional? I have a written communication from a witness which suggests that it was. But it would take some cross-examination to establish whether it was and to what extent it was, and thus perhaps it is better to assume that the guilty are innocent of this one until proven otherwise.

[Cindy]

why would your court papers include any of that?  What was the point?

Because that thread and others like it were relevant to the question of scope of discovery, which Danny and 3ABN were trying to narrow.

Danny and 3ABN claimed that internet criticism exploding in June or July of 2006, which was before we ever got involved, was what caused 3ABN's decline in donations. What was that criticism? Those threads prove what that criticism was. Was that criticism true? Our discovery was intended to demonstrate whether it was true or not. But Danny and 3ABN didn't want us to do that.

However, Danny and 3ABN included that entire thread as a 55-page PDF document on the first CD of their Rule 26(a)(1) initial disclosure documents. That meant that they believed that thread and the information it contained to be relevant in some way to the lawsuit.

Every breath, every relationship in his life is jsut not that dysfunctional.

I agree with you that it was over the top. At least that is how I felt at the time I read it.

Was that relationship that dysfunctional? I have a written communication from a witness which suggests that it was. But it would take some cross-examination to establish whether it was and to what extent it was, and thus perhaps it is better to assume that the guilty are innocent of this one until proven otherwise.

On that last part we are in agreement.

That last I feel is what we as Christians are  called to do, and of course here in America we don't promote or defend inquisitions, but instead we uphold every individual's right to face their accuser(s) and believe that all have the right to a presumption of innocence till proven otherwise.

Sometimes, I think, it is hardest to look at ourselves and recognize where we with the best of intentions and in doing or saying what we think is our right may have infringed upon or stepped upon on anothers rights. It is my belief that our rights end where anothers rights begin, and that corrections or edits may be in order once we realize we have erred.

Have a good day.

...ian

[Cindy]

The point is DS is a corrupter of the innocent. That is why the law has to be the protector...... We live by those standards since the beginning of time. It cannot be left go or......your just as guilty.

Tinka,

Of course the law is a protector. The real point and fact is that the law is protecting NO ONE from Danny and never has been as there have been and still are no complaints or charges filed against him. If you have evidence take it to the law, let them do their job! But know this, rumors, slander, and gossip no matter how many times it is repeated or claimed or posted and called evidence, is still just rumor, slander, libel and gossip. Hearsay and unproven allegations and claims will never have any weight with the law or in a court of law as it does with you. They require hard evidence and proof.

You believe Danny is a corrupter of the innocent, and proclaim him that to others, but that neither makes it true, or yourself justified. So perhaps you should add "In My opinion" or In My personal judgment against him" rather than announcing your opinions and judgments as if they are proven and established facts and judgments. They aren't. Neither here on this earth or in the courts of Heaven.

IMO, you may believe your stance is justified but you have FAILED in proving it, and so that makes you merely another self righteous accuser of the brethren, talebearer, rumor monger and just one more who loves lies and believing evil of others. You are accusing those who you have never even met or talked to or asked for their side of things. (It was and remains your Christian duty to diligently examine all BEFORE determining what is true, and what is facts and what is not)

Please don't bother with the self justifications or stories here on my account, I have read them from you before and sorry I am not interested in reading it again even if you throw in your horse again, as it is all delusion and self righteousness, and loving lies to me and YES, that is "my personal opinion" and "my personal Judgment." It is also my opinion that your posts are among the worst that this forum has to offer and as do many here bring shame and reproach upon Jesus' Church, and misrepresent Him.