Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

Was this a very recent trip, Pickle?

I was by 3ABN in 2008.

You have never met Danny Shelton!

I first met Danny (and Melody) Shelton in 1984. He and I also spoke in person in 2002. (Lina and I dialogged around 1988.) Danny and I corresponded in 2006 about some of the allegations floating around, and Danny confirmed that one of the allegations was indeed true, that he was trying to hide his book royalties until after his marital property case was over.

You have never met Dr Thompson, ....

Whether it was in 2002 or 2004 or 2006, we were right next to each other at ASI. We also corresponded more than once, and also spoke together more than once on the telephone. Dr. Thompson, as I pointed out, told me that there were no board actions between January and May 2004, and that Danny had told him that the allegations against Tommy were all 30 years old.

I have just stated very clearly several things that I know first hand. I know first hand what Danny and Walt told me, because they told it to me, not to someone else. And the issue has often been what they told me.

... and any meetings you sat in on were not at 3ABN, and you are not a witness to anythingthat was discussed in any meeting at 3ABN!

Meetings at 3ABN and meetings elsewhere covering issues of potential liability over not exercising due diligence regarding hiring potential pedophiles would only be different if 3ABN never conducts such meetings, or if 3ABN totally ignores standard protocols. If that is the case, then 3ABN desperately needs new management.

Barely anything has even been said to you about it! and because of your character and actions it is a safe assumption to make that no further answers or explanations will ever be given again to you by anyone at 3ABN.

If 3ABN intends to operate in violation of standard Christian, Seventh-day Adventist, and community standards, then it might as well close down, because God cannot bless apostasy.

[Sister]

Excuse me mrs53, Tommy Shelton has already been brought to "justice." Complaints were filed, a warrant was issued, he surrendered to the police and was charged and arrested, and will now be able to face his accusers and they and he have the right to a fair trial.

3ABN_Defender, from your statement that I have quoted above, it is obvious that you have no concept of the meaning of the term justice. Tommy Shelton has not been brought to "justice" he has merely entered into the first step of procedures in the justice system that will lead to him being prosecuted for pedophilia. Since Tommy has been charged and arrested, the District Attorney must believe that there are legitimate grounds to persue prosecution. As far as justice is concerned, it is his victims that deserve retributive justice under the law. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is the principle that the severity of penalty for a misdeed or wrongdoing should be reasonable and proportionate to the severity of the infraction. What is a reasonable penalty for victimizing and stealing the innocence of a child? Not one child, but multiple children? Jesus said: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)

I realize that you have chosen not to comment on my statement referring to one of Tommy's many victims being a Shelton. Would you also brand him a liar?

[tinka]

Sister
Your statement here is an exact view of the matter. What I feel is just as bad is cover up, protection from family and especially wife knowing this and giving opportunity to yet another victim. How else can you look at it?? I have a very, very hard time knowing this sort of saga is at the front of the church with all evangelist participating right in the middle of it. Surely they must have known about or read that letter to LS presented by the board and taken the same stance of guilty without proof on just the word of DS. I do not think that I ever read such a thing where all was so soft talk, (Jesus talk) with cotton in the mouth implied to such horrific threats and then hatched all in one.  Only the devil could have done so good.

Hmm, I guess when the fall comes it will be big. I have waited and watched for some sort of proof that the sympathizers can post to prove their point instead of just talk and as much as they rant and raved in opposition and cry false to what is happened, you would think they could post words of a tape, how about paying the phone company for recording the cell conversations like they portray on TV. oj and some others like Lacy Peterson Case or Casey in Florida.   I think if their side of truth was right you would have seen it long ago. I do not believe they have anything to back up for what they have done. Even emails, surely there would have been one slip up of proof in this maze.

[mrst53]

Sister, thank you for responding with the fact that TS has not been brought to justice. Again, I pray that there has not been more boys in Kentucky and I am very upset that Glen could have let him got to Kentucky to work with children knowing what his past history was. It sounds too much like the Catholic church coverup.

[Johann]

Justice?
It  may take many years like in a case where "he" forced himself on 8 and 12 year old relatives. Those minors later made various attempts to avoid further contact with "him", including seeking help from parents - to no avail. When it finally dawned on some of them that something was seriously wrong they did not feel they could reveal such secrets to any Seventh-day Adventist pastor. Finally a courageous relative talked to a Lutheran pastor who was very understanding. The pastor demanded of "him" to appear at a meeting where he was confronted with his devilish acts.

"He" replied that he had no idea that he had done anything wrong. "But in case I have done something I should not have done, then I apologize." He had, of course, just done what he needed.

The Lutheran pastor explained that even though he no longer could be sent to prison because the time limit had expired, the words of Scripture, the standard of Christian faith, condemned him as a criminal, just like a murderer. That he had ruined the lives of his own relatives, and therefore "he" was still guilty. The Lutheran pastor told him  the  only way he could now come to an appeasement with his own family was if he would ask for professional help.

This gave him a slight measure of cure. From then on he - as far as is known - never approached minors, only adults and managed to get their consent beforehand. This, of course, did not satisfy the family and it ruined his home.

When I came to that area some time after this I was the first Seventh-day Adventist pastor who heard what had happened. I talked to the Lutheran pastor and thanked him for what he had done. We enjoyed talking together, also about the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Justice? Cure? Is it possible?

[Pat Williams]

Re: Tommy...

Post by 3abn_defender » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:01 pm UTC

    

Sister wrote:

3abn_defender wrote: Excuse me mrs53, Tommy Shelton has already been brought to "justice." Complaints were filed, a warrant was issued, he surrendered to the police and was charged and arrested, and will now be able to face his accusers and they and he have the right to a fair trial.

    3ABN_Defender, from your statement that I have quoted above, it is obvious that you have no concept of the meaning of the term justice. Tommy Shelton has not been brought to "justice" he has merely entered into the first step of procedures in the justice system that will lead to him being prosecuted for pedophilia. Since Tommy has been charged and arrested, the District Attorney must believe that there are legitimate grounds to persue prosecution. As far as justice is concerned, it is his victims that deserve retributive justice under the law. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is the principle that the severity of penalty for a misdeed or wrongdoing should be reasonable and proportionate to the severity of the infraction. What is a reasonable penalty for victimizing and stealing the innocence of a child? Not one child, but multiple children? Jesus said: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)

Sister you and I see justice very differently. To me justice is not a "trial by media" (lynch mob mentality) and condemnation and verdicts of guilt only. I know what I meant and referred to, and this is it:

  

 justice definition

    jus·tice (jus?tis)

    noun

    1. the quality of being righteous; rectitude
    2. impartiality; fairness
    3. the quality of being right or correct
    4. sound reason; rightfulness; validity
    5. reward or penalty as deserved; just deserts
    6.
    1. the use of authority and power to uphold what is right, just, or lawful
    2. the personification of this, usually a blindfolded goddess holding scales and a sword
    7. the administration of law; procedure of a law court - Webster law dictionary

 

  Brought to trial (Redirected from Brought to justice)

    Brought to trial means to calendar a legal case for a hearing, or to bring a defendant to the bar of justice. The simplest definition is "the commencement of the trial in a court by formally calling and swearing in of the witnesses to initiate the trial proceedings." However, much like Pro-rata, it has several different, ambiguous meanings and examples used in the law. To bring to trial is when the process is ongoing. Most often, the terms brought to trial, bring to trial, brought to justice and bring to justice refer to the prosecution at trial of alleged war criminals and political prisoners, as well as those accused of treason or misprision of treason, sexual assault, and other infamous crimes

   Fifth amendment
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Sixth amendment
    'In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

The above from the bill of rights are applied to each State by the 14th amendment.

 

  Fourteenth amendment - Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

  INNOCENCE, PRESUMPTION OF

    The indictment or formal charge against any person is not evidence of guilt. Indeed, the person is presumed by the law to be innocent. The law does not require a person to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The Government has the burden of proving a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and if it fails to do so the person is (so far as the law is concerned) not guilty.

    Sister wrote:

I realize that you have chosen not to comment on my statement referring to one of Tommy's many victims being a Shelton. Would you also brand him a liar?

You have a long history with your posts, so I wouldn't hesitate to brand you a liar, but why would I brand "him" one? I don't even know who this person is or even if he exists or if this even occurred, outside of gossip and slander, or your imagination. I do know "if" this happened, then your person never turned Tommy in when Tommy never attended counseling for being a pedophile as you state the ultimatum was, and I know if push comes to shove that his counselor who knows what he was getting help for could testify to that, and there are zero allegations or complaints filed by your unnamed Shelton, so it appears unlikely your story is true.

I must however express my surprise that you would actually post here under the name of Sister again and think you have any credibility at all after all your boasting about never being identified, and then having Danny confront your husband at the ASI convention about how disappointed he was in you both that you would spread such lies. Even going so far as to you and Johann accusing him of murdering his first wife. When the truth is she was killed instantly when her vehicle was stuck head on by another one, and it's a miracle that their daughter wasn't. Your days of claiming to come and go and observe and report and be a witness even at Shelton family gathering are over and exposed for the lies they were, and your "Unauthorized 3abn history" is in the trash where it deserves to be.

*****************************************.

*****************************************.


3-d



Edited to remove inappropriate content.  Abide by the rules here, 3D, or don't come back.

[Pat Williams]

Was this a very recent trip, Pickle?

I was by 3ABN in 2008.

You were "by 3ABN" in 2008? What does that even mean in relation to the post you are replying to saying that you had never been to 3abn before? Especially as you, yourself have previously claimed you had never been there?

You have never met Danny Shelton!

I first met Danny (and Melody) Shelton in 1984. He and I also spoke in person in 2002. Danny and I corresponded in 2006 about some of the allegations floating around, and Danny confirmed that one of the allegations was indeed true, that he was trying to hide his book royalties until after his marital property case was over

You mean you attended a meeting in 1984 when 3ABN was just getting started, and then spoke to him once about something unrelated to the current accusations in 2002 (?)  afterwhich you harassed him by email with false assumptions accusations and judgments?

He certainly didn't say "he was trying to hide his book royalties until after his marital property case was over" as you claim. That is what you say he said, while the e-mail from him says nothing of the kind!

You have never met Dr Thompson, ....

Whether it was in 2002 or 2004 or 2006, we were right next to each other at ASI. We also corresponded more than once, and also spoke together more than once on the telephone. Dr. Thompson

You mean you stood beside him once and then sent him your accusations via email and phone calls after that?

I have just stated very clearly several things that I know first hand. I know first hand what Danny and Walt told me, because they told it to me, not to someone else. And the issue has often been what they told me.

You can't even be trusted to quote correctly what people say when it is written even though you are called on it all the time, so how can you be trusted to repeat anything they say orally? You can't!

[Pat Williams]

My comment. This is a straw man argument and has nothing to do with determining either Tommy's guilt or innocense, although this kind of thing can sure stir up a mob.

Justice?
It  may take many years like in a case where "he" forced himself on 8 and 12 year old relatives. Those minors later made various attempts to avoid further contact with "him", including seeking help from parents - to no avail. When it finally dawned on some of them that something was seriously wrong they did not feel they could reveal such secrets to any Seventh-day Adventist pastor. Finally a courageous relative talked to a Lutheran pastor who was very understanding. The pastor demanded of "him" to appear at a meeting where he was confronted with his devilish acts.

"He" replied that he had no idea that he had done anything wrong. "But in case I have done something I should not have done, then I apologize." He had, of course, just done what he needed.

The Lutheran pastor explained that even though he no longer could be sent to prison because the time limit had expired, the words of Scripture, the standard of Christian faith, condemned him as a criminal, just like a murderer. That he had ruined the lives of his own relatives, and therefore "he" was still guilty. The Lutheran pastor told him  the  only way he could now come to an appeasement with his own family was if he would ask for professional help.

This gave him a slight measure of cure. From then on he - as far as is known - never approached minors, only adults and managed to get their consent beforehand. This, of course, did not satisfy the family and it ruined his home.

When I came to that area some time after this I was the first Seventh-day Adventist pastor who heard what had happened. I talked to the Lutheran pastor and thanked him for what he had done. We enjoyed talking together, also about the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Justice? Cure? Is it possible?

[Snoopy]

I see you defenders are quite selective on who you apply your definition of justice to.  Interesting...

Sister you and I see justice very differently. To me justice is not a "trial by media" (lynch mob mentality) and condemnation and verdicts of guilt only. I know what I meant and referred to, and this is it:

  

 justice definition

    jus·tice (jus?tis)

    noun

    1. the quality of being righteous; rectitude
    2. impartiality; fairness
    3. the quality of being right or correct
    4. sound reason; rightfulness; validity
    5. reward or penalty as deserved; just deserts
    6.
    1. the use of authority and power to uphold what is right, just, or lawful
    2. the personification of this, usually a blindfolded goddess holding scales and a sword
    7. the administration of law; procedure of a law court - Webster law dictionary

 

  Brought to trial (Redirected from Brought to justice)

    Brought to trial means to calendar a legal case for a hearing, or to bring a defendant to the bar of justice. The simplest definition is "the commencement of the trial in a court by formally calling and swearing in of the witnesses to initiate the trial proceedings." However, much like Pro-rata, it has several different, ambiguous meanings and examples used in the law. To bring to trial is when the process is ongoing. Most often, the terms brought to trial, bring to trial, brought to justice and bring to justice refer to the prosecution at trial of alleged war criminals and political prisoners, as well as those accused of treason or misprision of treason, sexual assault, and other infamous crimes

   Fifth amendment
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Sixth amendment
    'In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

The above from the bill of rights are applied to each State by the 14th amendment.

 

  Fourteenth amendment - Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

  INNOCENCE, PRESUMPTION OF

    The indictment or formal charge against any person is not evidence of guilt. Indeed, the person is presumed by the law to be innocent. The law does not require a person to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The Government has the burden of proving a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and if it fails to do so the person is (so far as the law is concerned) not guilty.

3-d

[Bob Pickle]

He certainly didn't say "he was trying to hide his book royalties until after his marital property case was over" as you claim. That is what you say he said, while the e-mail from him says nothing of the kind!

You are incorrect. His email was very clear.

[Sister]

3ABN_Defender,
Attempting to deflect from the truth of the message by attacking the character of the messenger is false logic at its most obvious. Unfortunately for you, it is such an obvious tactic of those who have no facts to contradict the truth that even the least informed become suspicious of your motives. Instead of convincing them with your “arguments” you only add additional doubt to your credibility.

Although you have been very abrasive and contentious before your quotations regarding justice, those quotes  are not in opposition to my definition of retributive justice.  Your following statement is only there to attempt to incite prejudice and has nothing to do with any statement from me.

Sister you and I see justice very differently. To me justice is not a "trial by media" (lynch mob mentality) and condemnation and verdicts of guilt only.

Where there is a blaring oversight in your arguments is my referenced to Scripture:

Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is the principle that the severity of penalty for a misdeed or wrongdoing should be reasonable and proportionate to the severity of the infraction. What is a reasonable penalty for victimizing and stealing the innocence of a child? Not one child, but multiple children? Jesus said: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)

In light of the scripture quoted above, “Defender”, what do you think of a man --- a self professed Christian who has served his church as a minister --- who adopts a son and molests him? What justice does that son deserve?  A son who has been offended by his father in the most dispicable manner possible for a parent.

[ex3abnemployee]

Re: Tommy...

Post by 3abn_defender » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:01 pm UTC

    

Sister wrote:

3abn_defender wrote: Excuse me mrs53, Tommy Shelton has already been brought to "justice." Complaints were filed, a warrant was issued, he surrendered to the police and was charged and arrested, and will now be able to face his accusers and they and he have the right to a fair trial.

    3ABN_Defender, from your statement that I have quoted above, it is obvious that you have no concept of the meaning of the term justice. Tommy Shelton has not been brought to "justice" he has merely entered into the first step of procedures in the justice system that will lead to him being prosecuted for pedophilia. Since Tommy has been charged and arrested, the District Attorney must believe that there are legitimate grounds to persue prosecution. As far as justice is concerned, it is his victims that deserve retributive justice under the law. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is the principle that the severity of penalty for a misdeed or wrongdoing should be reasonable and proportionate to the severity of the infraction. What is a reasonable penalty for victimizing and stealing the innocence of a child? Not one child, but multiple children? Jesus said: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)

Sister you and I see justice very differently. To me justice is not a "trial by media" (lynch mob mentality) and condemnation and verdicts of guilt only. I know what I meant and referred to, and this is it:

  

 justice definition

    jus·tice (jus?tis)

    noun

    1. the quality of being righteous; rectitude
    2. impartiality; fairness
    3. the quality of being right or correct
    4. sound reason; rightfulness; validity
    5. reward or penalty as deserved; just deserts
    6.
    1. the use of authority and power to uphold what is right, just, or lawful
    2. the personification of this, usually a blindfolded goddess holding scales and a sword
    7. the administration of law; procedure of a law court - Webster law dictionary

 

  Brought to trial (Redirected from Brought to justice)

    Brought to trial means to calendar a legal case for a hearing, or to bring a defendant to the bar of justice. The simplest definition is "the commencement of the trial in a court by formally calling and swearing in of the witnesses to initiate the trial proceedings." However, much like Pro-rata, it has several different, ambiguous meanings and examples used in the law. To bring to trial is when the process is ongoing. Most often, the terms brought to trial, bring to trial, brought to justice and bring to justice refer to the prosecution at trial of alleged war criminals and political prisoners, as well as those accused of treason or misprision of treason, sexual assault, and other infamous crimes

   Fifth amendment
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Sixth amendment
    'In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

The above from the bill of rights are applied to each State by the 14th amendment.

 

  Fourteenth amendment - Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

  INNOCENCE, PRESUMPTION OF

    The indictment or formal charge against any person is not evidence of guilt. Indeed, the person is presumed by the law to be innocent. The law does not require a person to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The Government has the burden of proving a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and if it fails to do so the person is (so far as the law is concerned) not guilty.

    Sister wrote:

I realize that you have chosen not to comment on my statement referring to one of Tommy's many victims being a Shelton. Would you also brand him a liar?

You have a long history with your posts, so I wouldn't hesitate to brand you a liar, but why would I brand "him" one? I don't even know who this person is or even if he exists or if this even occurred, outside of gossip and slander, or your imagination. I do know "if" this happened, then your person never turned Tommy in when Tommy never attended counseling for being a pedophile as you state the ultimatum was, and I know if push comes to shove that his counselor who knows what he was getting help for could testify to that, and there are zero allegations or complaints filed by your unnamed Shelton, so it appears unlikely your story is true.

I must however express my surprise that you would actually post here under the name of Sister again and think you have any credibility at all after all your boasting about never being identified, and then having Danny confront your husband at the ASI convention about how disappointed he was in you both that you would spread such lies. Even going so far as to you and Johann accusing him of murdering his first wife. When the truth is she was killed instantly when her vehicle was stuck head on by another one, and it's a miracle that their daughter wasn't. Your days of claiming to come and go and observe and report and be a witness even at Shelton family gathering are over and exposed for the lies they were, and your "Unauthorized 3abn history" is in the trash where it deserves to be.

*****************************************.

*****************************************.


3-d



Edited to remove inappropriate content.  Abide by the rules here, 3D, or don't come back.

The unnamed Shelton in question does exist. I know him personally. And, Kay, Danny's first wife, was killed when her van was broadsided, not hit head on.

[Johann]

This was not  an attempt to determine Tommy's guilt or innocence. It is  a real story which shows how that matter was dealt with.

My comment. This is a straw man argument and has nothing to do with determining either Tommy's guilt or innocense, although this kind of thing can sure stir up a mob.

Justice?
It  may take many years like in a case where "he" forced himself on 8 and 12 year old relatives. Those minors later made various attempts to avoid further contact with "him", including seeking help from parents - to no avail. When it finally dawned on some of them that something was seriously wrong they did not feel they could reveal such secrets to any Seventh-day Adventist pastor. Finally a courageous relative talked to a Lutheran pastor who was very understanding. The pastor demanded of "him" to appear at a meeting where he was confronted with his devilish acts.

"He" replied that he had no idea that he had done anything wrong. "But in case I have done something I should not have done, then I apologize." He had, of course, just done what he needed.

The Lutheran pastor explained that even though he no longer could be sent to prison because the time limit had expired, the words of Scripture, the standard of Christian faith, condemned him as a criminal, just like a murderer. That he had ruined the lives of his own relatives, and therefore "he" was still guilty. The Lutheran pastor told him  the  only way he could now come to an appeasement with his own family was if he would ask for professional help.

This gave him a slight measure of cure. From then on he - as far as is known - never approached minors, only adults and managed to get their consent beforehand. This, of course, did not satisfy the family and it ruined his home.

When I came to that area some time after this I was the first Seventh-day Adventist pastor who heard what had happened. I talked to the Lutheran pastor and thanked him for what he had done. We enjoyed talking together, also about the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Justice? Cure? Is it possible?

[princessdi]

Ok, so let me get this straight............those who are on Danny's Side(for lack of a better term), are really still trying to defind TS in any way shape or form, even after a extensive police investigation and arrest?  Please tell me that I am readying wrong.  There is nothing for any of you to say, but that you were wrong for mounting any kind of defense int he first place.  I just have to say that it really bothers me me that anyone in their right mind would even try.  The man is a pediphile.   How can you even think of defending that?   EXpecially ones calling themselves christian.  The abuse of any one should not be tolerated, and that perpetrated against children is vile and represhensible.  I dont' care if nothing at all happened(and there seems to be some dispute if something actually did occur) when TS was at 3ABN, it is a horrible chance to take with other people's children.  Totally irresponsible on the part of Danny, and the 3ABN board.

So, one of you defender, please be kind enough to explain why you are even posting to this thread with any form of defense against a formally accused pediphile?   Also, let me know if I am wrong.

Also, just to address why victims do not report.  Gregory is correct fear of this kind of stuff is key.  Also, in the "religious" setting there is even more pressure to  keep it under wraps " for the sake of the church" or the ministry"  Parents are often talked out of reporting to the proper authorities under these pretenses.  Most pediphiles we hear about these days are trusted leaders, with youth/children and their families.  That is how many of them gain the trust of the children and their parents.  So it makes no one feels better 3ABN Defnder, that TS played the piano, etc in full view of parents and staff, that is typical.  Apparently what he did in full view of everyone was not the problem, and far too much happened "in the dark" and not in full view.

Ok so please tell me why any of you is even posting to this thread, because I see a few names I haven't even seen in a while out to jump on this one.

[Artiste]

Sister...think you have any credibility at all after all your boasting about never being identified, and then having Danny confront your husband at the ASI convention about how disappointed he was in you both that you would spread such lies. Even going so far as to you and Johann accusing him of murdering his first wife.

I think we all remember that amazing point when Danny Shelton said in court that Moses' first wife had been murdered.  See below.

Taken from 3ABN's Property Tax Case, Danny Shelton, witness, September 23, 2002, as reproduced on the Save-3ABN site:

Q. Good morning, Mr. Shelton.
A. Good morning.
Q. Can you tell us your full name and address for the record this morning?
A.. Danny Lee Shelton. I live at ****************.

And later, while giving testimony as to his work and position at 3ABN:

Suddenly I thought about Moses and the bible
who had been away from the people for 40 years, was 80
years old when he took the call and his previous wife
had been murdered and yet God used him.

I was confused by this.

Where in the Bible does it say that Moses had a previous wife that was murdered?