Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

Thought I would start this thread. Might as well get it over sooner or later.

On January 5, 2010, I wrote the following:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:    Clarification needed
Date:    Tue, 05 Jan 2010 17:27:52 -0600
From:    Bob
To:    Gregory Simpson, Gerald Duffy
CC:    G. Arthur Joy, John Pucci, Lizette Richards, Kristin L. Kingsbury, William Christopher Penwell, Jerrie Hayes


Counselors Simpson and Duffy:

I note in plaintiffs' response to our motion filed on Monday the following sentence:

... Plaintiffs simply want this litigation to end. However, they reserve all rights under the Protective Order and their right to enforce this Court’s order that the records be returned if Pickle and Joy publish information under the Protective Order.

Have the plaintiffs abandoned their attempted confidentiality designation of material that does not fit the qualifications of the confidentiality order, such as, inter alia, IRS Form 990's, IL Form AG990-IL's, OR Form CT-12, 3ABN's financial statements and bylaws, flight information, material not designated confidential before the case was dismissed, material we also obtained from collateral sources, and material pertaining to the child molestation allegations against Tommy Shelton?

Bob Pickle

Simpson replied:

------- Original Message --------
Subject:    RE: Clarification needed
Date:    Tue, 5 Jan 2010 17:45:45 -0600
From:    Gregory Simpson
To:    Bob
CC:    G. Arthur Joy, John Pucci, Lizette Richards, Kristin L. Kingsbury, William Christopher Penwell, Jerrie Hayes, Gerald Duffy


Bob-
 
No.  If you publish the substance of anything we designated as confidential under the Protective Order, we will seek to have you held in contempt of court, in addition to any other remedies available to us.
 
M. Gregory Simpson
Meagher & Geer, P.L.L.P.
33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4400
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Direct: (612) 337-9672
Fax: (612) 877-3138
gsimpson@

The complete idiocy of such a position will be starkly evident when I publish here something I got from collateral sources that Danny Shelton's lawyers also declared to be confidential. Then we shall see if Simpson will really carry out his threat to have me held in contempt of court.

So stay tuned.

[Cindy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MT3CihStFQ

[Artiste]

Very intelligent response, Ian.

[ex3abnemployee]

Very intelligent response, Ian.

Well, when you don't have anything relevant to say....

[Bob Pickle]

Okay, here is the first "confidential" thing I am publishing. Since the lawsuit began, I've gotten thousands of copies of this from at least one collateral source. In fact, I've got over 2500 copies on hand, having already distributed thousands and thousands, after printing various messages on them.

Stamped twice on the copy I received from Jerrie Hayes were these words:

     CONFIDENTIAL
This document governed by
the terms of a Protective
Order

It also had a page number at the bottom, but I haven't bothered to put that on, though on many of the copies I've already distributed I have.

[Bob Pickle]

If you're trying to make sense of the above, see Table 4 on page 8 of http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-81.pdf, fifth entry from the bottom.

At the time we received this, I complained to Jerrie Hayes, but to no avail.

Another reference to these particular reports to the 3ABN Board can be seen at the second line item on page 13 of http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-132-2.pdf.

The earliest reference we had to the author of the report, the brother of Danny's first wife, was by Nick Miller on November 2, 2006. See p. 16 of http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-63-33.pdf.

Now since it's been over three years since we were told of Bill Otterson's alleged alteration of Nick Miller's billing records, isn't it about time that we hear from Bill as to his side of the story?

**************************************************************
edited to replace the first link which accidentally ended up missing.

[Bob Pickle]

I hope you can see just how extreme Simpson's bogus threat is to the First Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

If Simpson had his way, I would be held in contempt of court for publishing anything he and his cronies have arbitrarily declared confidential, even if I obtained the same from collateral sources. In this instance I have gone ahead and published something I obtained from a collateral source, the local office supply store. And I dare Simpson to try to have me held in contempt of court for publishing a blank sheet of paper!

Since the lawsuit began, and since Jerrie Hayes gave me the blank sheet of paper stamped confidential, I have taken thousands of such sheets and have put various messages on them and have sent them out. The opening brief in our first appeal took about 9800 sheets. Quite a few of those sheets necessarily had the same page number on it as was on the one produced to us, which according to one of the court documents cited above, probably had the page number 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 written on it.

If a lawyer could declare blank sheets of paper confidential, and then get an injunction against a defendant or a press prohibiting their use of blank sheets of paper overwritten or not, then the press would have to stop printing, and the defendant couldn't defend himself or herself.

This is not the only example of Simpson's extremism, as he certainly must know.

[Artiste]

Re:  Nick Miller's billing records

RE: Statement 1 of 1
Subject: RE: Statement
From: "Nicholas Miller" <nmiller@freedom-law.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 17:34:58 -0800
To: "'G. Arthur Joy'" <gabbjoy4@comcast.net>
Gailon,
 
   I wouldn't make a specific release to clarify this, just make the change in your notes.  I never knew that this was
a policy directive, although I can imagine that the instructions not to give Linda confidential information perhaps
were understood in this way. Darrell was one who was suspected of having mailing lists and forwarding them to
Linda, and possibly received a cease-and-desist letter regarding confidential information.  But I would not have
written a letter requiring no contact, as that would go far beyond what we could legally or fairly require as an
employer.
 
  As to Bob's question, the short answer is this:  A year ago from last January I came across various information
both financial and operational, and some personal in relation to Danny, that deeply concerned me, and was
relevant to both my role as attorney and board member.  If it was not straightened up, I could not in good
conscience stay on in either role.  I approached the chairman of the board, and one or two influential board
members, to work to straighten it up.  For the next two or three months, with their assistance, we began to put
policies in place, financial, personnel, and other accountability structures for leadership.  Unsurprisingly, Danny
began to get annoyed when policies were proposed or actually implemented that curbed his authority.  He
became aware that my concerns were the driving force behind much of it, and he confronted me, and essentially
told me to back off, or he would have his former brother-in-law, a current Three Angels senior employee,
"investigate" my legal representation.  It was a strong message that I back of my concerns or lose my legal role
with Three Angels.  Well, I'm not that kind of lawyer, so I diddn't back off, and his brother-in-law took my billing
records, modified them without my knowledge, and sent them with a report to the board members claiming that I
had billed for services that had not been requested by management.  It was an odd charge, as I submitted
detailed bills every month, and management signed off on the bills, and knew exactly what I was doing.  This
related to bills that had been happily paid more than a year earlier.  But in any event, Danny beat me to the punch
with the larger board, and of course I needed to raise the other financial and operational concerns to explain why
Danny was accusing me of this.  The board was not interested in the details of either of our accusations, they did
not ask to see the billing records, they did not ask to view the evidence underlying my accusations.  Basically they
said, and I'm paraphrasing an important board member, that "Nick's a good guy, Danny's a good guy, but they
cannot work together anymore, somebody needs to leave, and Danny's too important to go."  I had no desire to
stay around and serve on a board that would not take seriously its oversight role,and would not even be curious
about the evidence involved I had graduate studies and the Institute to pursue, and thus I willingly tendered my
resignation.  Some of the board members felt badly about it, including Ken Denslow.  Walt Thompson told me
that he knew that Danny was just trying to get rid of me, and said that he would give me a recommendation if I
needed it.  I have had a gentlemen's agreement with 3-ABN not to raise this story, if they did not spread about me
the allegation of billing impropriety, but as you know that allegation, I feel free to share my side with you.  But
please do not spread it more broadly, only to those that know off the allegation against me.
Case 4:07-cv-40098-FDS     Document 63-33      Filed 05/15/2008     Page 16 of 19

[Artiste]

If you're trying to make sense of the above, see Table 4 on page 8 of http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-81.pdf, fifth entry from the bottom.

I don't see Table 4 of page 8.

[Bob Pickle]

My mistake. I still got the link wrong. Try again:

http://www.3abnvjoy.com/mad-07cv40098/mad-07cv40098-doc-81.pdf

[Artiste]

Thanks, Bob, I see it now.

[Cindy]

I hope you can see just how extreme Simpson's bogus threat is to the First Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

If Simpson had his way, I would be held in contempt of court for publishing anything he and his cronies have arbitrarily declared confidential, even if I obtained the same from collateral sources. In this instance I have gone ahead and published something I obtained from a collateral source, the local office supply store. And I dare Simpson to try to have me held in contempt of court for publishing a blank sheet of paper!

Since the lawsuit began, and since Jerrie Hayes gave me the blank sheet of paper stamped confidential, I have taken thousands of such sheets and have put various messages on them and have sent them out. The opening brief in our first appeal took about 9800 sheets. Quite a few of those sheets necessarily had the same page number on it as was on the one produced to us, which according to one of the court documents cited above, probably had the page number 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 written on it.

If a lawyer could declare blank sheets of paper confidential, and then get an injunction against a defendant or a press prohibiting their use of blank sheets of paper overwritten or not, then the press would have to stop printing, and the defendant couldn't defend himself or herself.

This is not the only example of Simpson's extremism, as he certainly must know.

Bob, again you are treating people like they are stupid. You know perfectly well that the entire report was confidential, and not public info,and that when you print or copy reports many times you end up with a numbered but blank page because of the spacing. That is not unusual at all. Had they removed that blank page, you would have freaked out and claimed you didn't have all, and they were hiding things and being dishonest blah blah blah, because a numbered page would have been missing, and you would have posted that accusation and allegation all over the internet.


  I do not for one minute believe your claims about "Simpson's extremism" or that you are posting a confidential document subject to the protection order or that he will seek to punish you for doing so, or that he even cares about some blank page, or you running around waving it over your head while thumping your chest here. It's childish and imo only someone dumb as a box of rocks would buy all this from you.


Further Simpson was perfectly clear when he answered your questions, (see below) there is no reason to be confused, or pretend you are.   You know perfectly well what is confidential, and what is not, as you yourself told the judge that you understood why the public didn't need to see all, and you subsequently filed confidential documents in court under seal. Nothing you have posted here is confidential. And you know perfectly well that violating Judge Hillman's protection order is in fact contempt of court, so the attorney made no bogus threat.

From: Greg Simpson
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 4:50 PM
To: Bob; gailon@...
Cc: John Pucci; Lizette Richards; Chris Penwell
Subject: Remnant and MidCountry Bank Records

Bob and Arthur:
Paragraph 1 of the Confidentiality and Protective Order entered in this case on April 17, 2007 grants the right to any party to designate any Discovery Material, no matter who produces it, as "Confidential" and
subject to the Order.

Plaintiffs have previously designated, and hereby reaffirm their desigation of, the following materials as Confidential:

1. All documents produced by Remnant Publications under cover letter from Charles Bappert dated September 22, 2008, and further denoted with numbers REM001 to REM305.

2. All document produced by MidCountry Bank under seal to Judge Hillman in September of 2008.

3. Any other documents produced to Defendants pursuant to third party subpoenas issued by Defendants in this case.

4. All documents produced by Plaintiffs that have been designated by label or cover letter as "Confidential."

Per Judge Saylor's order of October 30, 2008 and the terms of the Order, you will be required to return these documents to the originator and to destroy or return all copies and notes of same. You will also be
required to retrieve any copies that were provided to third parties, such as experts, and to ensure that no notes or copies of these documents remain in the custody of such third parties.

I want to impress upon both of you the importance of full compliance with the Confidentiality and Protective Order. If I become aware of any evidence that Confidential material has been retained by you or released to others by you, or if I become aware of internet postings that reflect or imply the contents of Confidential materials, my instructions are to immediately seek relief from the Court.

M. Gregory Simpson

Subject: RE: Clarification needed
From: "Gregory Simpson"
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 17:45:45 -0600
To: "Bob"
CC: "G. Arthur Joy", "John Pucci", "Lizette
Richards", "Kristin L. Kingsbury", "William
Christopher Penwell", "Jerrie Hayes", "Gerald
Duffy"

Bob-
No. If you publish the substance of anything we designated as confidential under the Protective Order, we will seek to have you held in contempt of court, in addition to any other remedies available to us.

M. Gregory Simpson

[Bob Pickle]

You know perfectly well that the entire report was confidential, and not public info,and that when you print or copy reports many times you end up with a numbered but blank page because of the spacing.

That is not the reason why the page is blank, according to Jerrie Hayes. And that is not the reason why that page was stamped confidential, according to Jerrie Hayes.

The confidentiality order is crystal clear that only confidential business information or trade secret information could be classified as confidential in our case. And brazenly, Jerrie Hayes stamped a blank page as confidential anyway.

This is but one example of many of the problem.

[Bob Pickle]

Since Cindy doesn't like my blank-page example, here is another one. Among the Rule 26(a)(1) materials can be found Walt Thompson's May 4, 2004, ultimatum to Linda Shelton.

May, 4, 2004

Walter Thompson MD
Chairman of 3ABN Board of Directors
174 Foxborough Place
Burr Ridge, IL 60527

Linda Shelton
Three Angel's Broadcasting Network
PO Box 220
West Frankfort, IL 62896

Dear Linda,

A committee representing the 3ABN board of directors has been selected and has met for the purpose of evaluating the present problem at 3ABN relating to your relationship to Danny and to the ministry of 3ABN - and seeking a resolution acceptable to all parties involved. This letter is intended to represent the will of the board.

Let me begin by expressing our gratitude to you for the part you have played at 3ABN for the past nearly twenty years. You have been an important part of the ministry from the beginning – a fact appreciated by us all. Accordingly, this letter is not written with the intent to destroy your home or your part in the ministry, but rather to rehabilitate and restore.

In accordance with this intent, we are offering the following proposal to you. We believe it has the potential of accomplishing the desired objectives, i.e., to save both your home and a place for you in this ministry. It would do so without making the details of this matter known to the full board or others.

Nor is this letter expressing an opinion regarding the nature of your relationship with Dr. Abrahamson. Whether or not this relationship has been immoral or not is not the issue of this document. The facts are that the relationship and your refusal to discontinue it in spite of repeated requests by Danny and our requests, has damaged both your family and 3ABN – a reality we must deal with in wisdom, love and compassion – but deal with, we must.

We are offering you a 30 day leave of absence with pay and full benefits - to begin at the time of receipt of this letter. During this time the following conditions must be met.

You will be relieved of all duties at 3ABN and will not appear at 3ABN other than to obtain items from your immediate office upon personal request from me. You will arrange to leave Southern Illinois at 3ABN expense for the duration. Both you and 3ABN need time to cool off.

You will agree in writing to cease all communication with Dr. Abrahamson, whether direct or indirect, whether by e-mail, telephone, letter or any other, or through Johann or any other third party. We are designating a period of 30 days, but with the intent this must be a life-long decision.

During this time you will not discuss the issues related to your relationship with 3ABN with anyone other than your immediate family, your professional counselors or representatives or members of the board of directors.

Since this time is recommended as a time for reflection and serious rehabilitation we are requesting that you arrange to receive professional help relating to the issues at hand. We are recommending Ron and Nancy Rocky to you. They have agreed to open their home to you and to give you personal help in dealing with the issues at the center of the present problems. It will be private and protected from the public eye such that neither your image nor reputation ought be damaged. Should you choose different professional help, it must be acceptable to this committee.

At the end of 30 days we will reassess the situation and make further recommendations as indicated.

The issues in this proposal are not negotiable. Should they be unacceptable to you – we hope sincerely they will be acceptable – we will proceed promptly with further investigation of the facts regarding the matter at hand. In that case we will need a list of witnesses you would like us to hear. We will offer Danny the same opportunity. Once we have had opportunity to hear the evidence, we will be in a better position to make recommendations to the full board based upon that evidence. Based on the facts we already know, however, we think pursuing such a course would make any future role for you at 3ABN unlikely.

That is why, Linda, we are pleading with you to accept this proposal for healing and restoration. This is God's ministry. He has chosen you to be a part of it. We want you to continue to be a part of it. But in order for that to happen really important things must change.

Sincerely,

Walter Thompson MD
Chairman of the Board of Directors, 3ABN
Committee members include Nicholas P. Miller, Bill Hulsey and Kay Kuzma (by invitation)

Your signature here will confirm your agreement with this proposal. Please sign and return copy within 24 hours of receipt of this letter.

Linda Shelton __________________________________________________________.

The confidentiality order specifically and explicitly says that a party has to believe that the material is not already available to the public. The above was already posted on Save-3ABN.com before Jerrie Hayes ever gave it to us. And it can be proven that Jerrie Hayes already knew that at the time she stamped Walt's ultimatum "confidential."

[Pat Williams]

Re:  Nick Miller's billing records

Subject: RE: Statement
From: "Nicholas Miller" <nmiller@f....com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 17:34:58 -0800
To: "'G. Arthur Joy'" <gabbjoy4@....net>

Gailon,
 
   I wouldn't make a specific release to clarify this, just make the change in your notes.  I never knew that this was a policy directive, although I can imagine that the instructions not to give Linda confidential information perhaps were understood in this way. Darrell was one who was suspected of having mailing lists and forwarding them to Linda, and possibly received a cease-and-desist letter regarding confidential information.  But I would not have written a letter requiring no contact, as that would go far beyond what we could legally or fairly require as an employer.


  As to Bob's question, the short answer is this:  A year ago from last January I came across various information both financial and operational, and some personal in relation to Danny, that deeply concerned me, and was relevant to both my role as attorney and board member.  If it was not straightened up, I could not in good
conscience stay on in either role.  I approached the chairman of the board, and one or two influential board members, to work to straighten it up.  For the next two or three months, with their assistance, we began to put policies in place, financial, personnel, and other accountability structures for leadership....  

Also Nick Miller ( posted with his permission on Blacksda in 2007)

From: Nicholas Miller [mailto:nmiller@....com]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 10:06 AM
To: 'gabbjoy4@....net'; 'aureporter@save3abn.com'
Cc: 'walttmd@...net'; 'kdenslow@....org'
Subject: Recent Post on Save3abn

 

To Mr. Joy and Mr. Pickle,

 

   It has come to my attention that you very recently posted a new page on your “save3abn” website that features comments and an e-mail allegedly made or authored by myself.  As you know, you did not obtain my permission or consent before posting this material on your web-site, and I am hereby requesting that you remove it.  As you know, we communicated well-before the “Save3abn” site was operational, and you made no representations at the time that you planned to distribute our communications in a mass fashion.  Indeed, when we communicated, I made clear that I was doing so on conditions that what I shared be limited to those who had received the false communications about me.  Posting these communications on a publicly accessible web-site goes far beyond this limited scope.  I am thus asking you as Christian gentlemen to honor our agreement, and remove the page regarding my involvement in this matter.

 

   Due to a recent hard-drive reformat, I have not been able to determine whether the posted e-mail is entirely authored by myself.  I do, however, acknowledge that the much of the substance of the message reflects comments that I have previously made.  I do feel that a portion of my alleged e-mail requires clarification, as you certainly misuse it in commenting upon it.  When I possibly indicated that I willingly resigned from “a board that would not take seriously its oversight role,” I was speaking about my personal feelings at the time in regards to the immediate dispute at hand between management and myself.  I would not say, and it would not be fair to say, that the Three Angels board did not generally take its oversight role seriously.  To the contrary, the board had always been very responsive, indeed, appreciative, to any changes and reforms in accountability or oversight that I had previously initiated or supported.  The board, in my view, was responding to the breakdown in relationship between management and me in a pragmatic way.  They were not, in my opinion, resisting or opposing meaningful proposals for reform or oversight.

 

    The board and I may disagree about the appropriateness of their response in my particular instance.  But I do not see it as a part of a pattern or practice in their oversight or exercise of responsibility over Three Angels generally.  To the contrary, I found Dr. Thompson and other members of the board consistently responsive to whatever management and operational concerns that I raised, and a number of committees dealing with these matters were still operational at the time of my departure.   I found generally that they were a gracious group of Christian gentleman and ladies attempting to responsibly further the gospel broadcasting ministry, at times under challenging circumstances.  One may or may not agree with all the ways the board has responded to those challenges.  But they would not, in my experience, undermine or go contrary to basic principles of Christian respect and courtesy in dealing with others in doing so.  

 

    Unfortunately, you have not always seemed to take the same high road in responding to Three Angels’ challenges.   The “ends justify the means” is not a philosophy as Adventists that we embrace.  Rather, we think it is a course of action followed by those opposed to the true gospel.    I think that this whole conflict is revealing a spirit and principles on both sides that is a cause of concern.  You can certainly help begin mending this image by honoring my request to remove your recent post regarding myself.

 

       Sincerely,

 

 

Nicholas Miller

Note: To this day neither Gailon Joy, nor Bob Pickle have  honored their agreement or removed the page which is labeled "A Save 3ABN Exclusive", from their website as Mr Miller asked them to do. To make it worse they didn't post the above clarifications and explanations from Nicholas Miller either.

3D