Print

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

[Nosir Myzing]

Again: I'm posting to respond to someones obvious misinformation; Pat Williams....

As Alex said before:

"If anyone was wondering what post I was referring too it's this one:

Re: Court Information Post by Pat Williams » Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:18 am UTC

1.  Fact:  Tommy Shelton rejected another plea deal from his attorney.

2.  Fact:  Tommy Shelton has chosen to go to Court.

3.  Fact:  When what Alex has told in Court is proven to be lies, Tommy will have no choice but to sue for his court expenses.

4.  Fact:  There has been some talk that Tommy Shelton's attorney advised him to sue.  

This came from friends.

Well, we already knew Tommy has always maintained that these two were lying and he was innocent, despite him accepting that plea bargain. So I am very pleased to read Tommy's going to fight them in court now.   We certainly have had enough praying for God to bring His will about and that truth and justice will prevail. I will continue to pray that His will be done, and that He preserve Tommy's health and speak to the hearts of all involved. God knows all, and what's best and will answer accordingly.

 I read this. Then I read some of the reaction on Pickle's forum. It seems to me some they are so busy reacting they haven't stopped to think. Alex maintains it doesn't bother him that he has to go to court now, but I tend to disbelieve him. The case is weak.  For one he has a family according to the court document who it seems will testify that there was no opportunity, and that he lies. Second, he has no witnesses while Tommy does.  Third, his testimony keeps changing so it isn't credible , and that's all the evidence there is according to the prosecutor.

Another of the things which has changed about his testimony which I noticed, but which wasn't brought up in the court document was the difference in age from his initial police report. News Release: 08/080/2600/BW/(3) from the Fairfax County Police Department:
"In November of 2008, a 22-year-old man contacted police to report that he had been molested by Shelton when he was 8 to 9 years old."

Of course Pickle got a statement from him way before this and always maintained he was 8 years old also, so I don't know how that could be a mistake. But strangely when Alex testified in court the story is he was 11 years old.  That appears to be a big difference to me, and I have seen no explanation for it.

Of course Pickle had a statement from Dennis Turley also which was also different then his police statements, and court reports of oral sex. In Dennis' first statement which was either taken by Pickle, or given to Pickle by Glenn Dryden, Dennis says that Tommy only "tempted[sic] to kiss him and preform oral sex on him" etc.. Yet his later statement says it was more than attempts it actually occurred several times. I do remember though that at the first hearing before the grand Jury the Prosecutor had to reduce the charges as Dennis' subsequent testimony didn't support them.

So the original 5 counts are back against Tommy and it appears she will have to reduce them again....

This should be interesting as it progresses.

Another thing  I want to comment about here are  Gregory Matthew's posts on adventtalk. He posted:

"Alex: You should not be worried about any litigation against you, as I understand the way the courts work in the U.S."

This after he gave an explanation in an earlier post in reply to Alex's, claiming:

I can not help myself, I just have to reply to that post:

Yes, I have stated that if TS goes to trial, it will not be a slam-dunk.  TS might be found guilty and he might be found not guilty.

So, if he is found not guilty, can he sue those who have accused him?  Yes, one can file a suit for just about any reason at all.  However, the mere filing of a lawsuit does not mean that it will ever go to trial and to judgement.  [NOTE: One of the first motions in a trial is often to dismiss the lawsuit.  Sometimes the litigation is dismissed without going to trail.]  If it goes to trial, it does not mean that a favorable verdict will be obtained.

In my opinion:  If TS is found Not Guilty, he will have almost zero chance of collecting anything from those who have accused him on the basis of anything which involves that trial--the charges and/or sworn testimony are included in my statement.  1) The thought that a jury would award TS damages against the plaintifs reveals, in my mind a fundamental misunderstanding of what juries are likely to do in such cases.  2) The plaintifs are represented by competent council.  Those attornies would not allow anything to happen. connected to the trail, that would make their clients subject to such damages.

Is there any way that TS might collect damages from someone?  Yes, I think that there is a way.  Perhaps TS could collect from someone on the basis of posts made in this forum!

However, there are two issues associated with that:  1)  As I read TS,  I do not beleive that he would want to be involved in such litigation.  2)  TS could only collect if the person had the means to pay the judgement.

I do not believe Gregory Matthews knows Tommy Shelton, although I may be mistaken, but the point here is that Gregory Matthews appears to be speaking from a bias, and according to his view that Alex and Dennis are telling the truth and that Tommy is guilty. Although he claims he may or he may not be found guilty , and he may, or he may not be found innocent by a court of law...........  Thus GM's opinion and reassuring to Alex is one sided. He fails to take into account what Alex was replying to which was Nikolas' post above:

" When what Alex has told in Court is proven to be lies, Tommy will have no choice but to sue for his court expenses." "...Tommy Shelton's attorney advised him to sue"

Tommy, may I remind all, has lost his home, his retirement and much more in all of this.

Courts and Juries do not look kindly on perjury, nor does the police. If Alex (or Dennis) is indeed proven to be lying in court, he is gonna be in big trouble, and if GM was really trying to impartially comment, and explain things, he should have at least pointed that out to him imo.

This is also from the Fairfax County Police Department In Virginia:

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police...

Be advised that it is a crime to make a false police report. Anyone found to have submitted a false police report will be prosecuted under the authority of Virginia State Code, Section 18.2-461, which shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor. Maximum possible penalty is one year in jail and/or $2,500 fine.

I'm sure some will freak out, like Alex already did, saying I am trying to intimidate him. That's ok,  I'm not. I am just saying one should consider all. The courts will decide fairly, God willing.

[Nosir Myzing]

I wasn't going to respond again to Pat Williams, but I must.

and as Alex said before:

If anyone was wondering what post I was referring too it's this one:

Re: Alex Walker... Post by Pat Williams » Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:1

Alex has just replied to my last post above over on Pickle's forum. Most of it imo is not worth replying to or repeating here.  I would like to respond to two things however as I don't want to give the impression I have some inside scoop, or inside source feeding me information as the yokels over there are fond of claiming. I was merely commenting based on the information which has been made publicly available.

1.

First Pat states this:
"Alex maintains it doesn't bother him that he has to go to court now, but I tend to disbelieve him."
---Pat, I don't care what you believe or don't believe. I mean what I said. It does not at all bother me to go to court. I'm glad you people think so, but you're in for a suprise!

It really makes no difference to me, but for what it's worth, my opinion is based on your own previous decision to accept the plea bargain with significantly reduced charges with only probation and no prison or jail time, after being told the risks of going to trial. It was also based on your own words about never pressing charges, and the testimony of your own family:

From the facebook conversation posted on Pickle's forum:

Alex Larry Walker April 9 at 11:31pm wrote :

As far as me talking to Bob Pickle, yes, I have talked to Bob. However, not
to the extent that people think I have.
As far as the trial, I do not know much. I have not been communicated
with since the arrest. Let me say this, and it is nothing different then what
I told Brad, so I think I can say it.
I did call the detective from fair fax county two years ago. I never pressed
formal charges; actually I never pressed them at all. I had no idea that
Tommy was going to be arrested until after it happened.
I want to make that point crystal clear. That I did communicate with the
police detective, but never met her, nor did I write or file any charges or
statements to her, but the phone conversations.
I have hired attorneys, who are looking into the case, but this has been
since the charges were brought. Honestly, I was advised that it was in my
best interest to get legal counsel so that is what I did. To be honest with
you, how I learned of Tommy’s arrest was a news reporter who called me.
Like I said, I never pressed formal charges.

Bellows asked the prosecutor why she had agreed to the plea deal proposed by defense attorneys Kimberly Irving and Thomas Pavlinic. Stott said she had discussed the proposal with the two victims, and the risks of going to trial, and they had accepted it. She said the only evidence would be the two men's testimony about events up to 15 years ago...
Source: Washington Post  By Tom Jackman  |  July 19, 2010; 12:13 PM ET

From the court document posted in this thread:

Mr. Walker’s own family does not find his story credible. For example, Bradley and Valerie Walker, Mr. Walker’s brother and sister-in-law, both attest that Mr. Walker was never left in the care of Mr. Shelton, and hence would never have had occasion to be alone with him on a bike path. (Bradley and Valerie Walker e-mail dated October 19, 2010.)


Deon and Geneva Walker, Mr. Walker’s parents, also state that Mr. Shelton never cared for Mr. Walker during his childhood. (Deon and Geneva Walker e-mail dated October 18, 2010). Mr. Walker’s parents also point out that while he asks this Court to impose a “heavy” sentence in his Victim Impact Statement, the truth of the matter is that Mr. Walker hopes this Court will “accept the plea bargain and no harm would come to Tommy.” (Id.) His mother explains these inconsistencies by Mr. Walker’s propensity to “hurt others to gain from their misfortune.” (Id.)

I believe that it was also posted that a family member of yours said that you told them after Tommy's arrest that you were going to try and get out of the case as you didn't want to be involved...


2.

Second it states this: -note I say "it" because they talk trash, but don't identify themselves. ---He makes references to the evidence that the prosecutor may or may not have. The prosecutor along with my attorney's believe there is enough evidence in both trials to get a conviction. You further talk about the prosecution having no witnesses...are you sure about that?    

 I feel no need to argue with you about it. I merely posted my own opinion based on the prosecutor's own words on two different occasions in court to the Judge. Witnesses for you were never mentioned. She said, and I quote: "There were no corroborating witnesses." and "she said she did not want to submit her two victims, each almost 30 years old, to potentially grueling trials with the possibility of acquittals."

Bellows asked the prosecutor why she had agreed to the plea deal proposed by defense attorneys Kimberly Irving and Thomas Pavlinic. Stott said she had discussed the proposal with the two victims, and the risks of going to trial, and they had accepted it. She said the only evidence would be the two men's testimony about events up to 15 years ago, that Shelton had not spoken to police and had no prior criminal record.
Source: Washington Post  By Tom Jackman  |  July 19, 2010; 12:13 PM ET

Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Katherine E. Stott said she did not want to submit her two victims, each almost 30 years old, to potentially grueling trials with the possibility of acquittals.

Listing the factors that led her to agree to the deal, Stott said: The events occurred separately, so the cases would be tried separately. There were no corroborating witnesses or forensic evidence. There was no confession; Shelton's plea could not be used against him. The victims made inconsistent statements. Shelton would have witnesses testify positively about him. The events happened about 15 years ago. Juries want forensic evidence, and they don't want any doubt before convicting a pastor of a sex offense.
source: By Tom Jackman ,Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, November 16, 2010

[Alex L. Walker]

Cindy wrote this over at her site:

"But, I think, if I remember correctly, the problem with Alex and Pickle claiming he was 8 yrs old, and was molested 15 yrs ago, is that he wasn't a foster kid of the Walkers yet, or adopted, so there was no way he could ever even have been in Virginia, or been anywhere around Tommy in Virginia. He couldn't even have been with his adopted brother and sister-in-law there as he hadn't even met them yet... Can any one confirm or deny this?"

WOW CINDY!!! Where are you getting your information!!!!! All I can say is WOW! Yes you are wrong! I was taken in when I was 8 months old. That is alot longer than 15 years ago.

[Alex L. Walker]

I spoke to the prosecutor Kathy Stott yesterday about this perjury claim that the other side is now throwing out. Her responce: She laughed. She said that there is no way that the other victim or I would be charged with perjury if Tommy is found innocent.

She stated: "One judge already found probable cause to move forward and another judge rejected the plea deal because he believed the victims. She said that there is zero chance of a perjury charge of either victim if Tommy is found innocent. They are in dream land."

She also said that this is a clear tactic of intimidation and even possibly witness intimidation. Now that I'm sure she would be more than happy to charge someone with.

[Murcielago]

Alex, I would advise against allowing them to bait you into discussion of matters related to any case currently active or pending in the legal system.

[Nosir Myzing]

Re: Tommy... Postby Pat Williams » Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:38 pm UTC

It appears my earlier post were copied over onto Pickle's forum and Alex posted the following there:

Alex L. Walker
Senior Member
Gender: Male
Posts: 125    
   
Re: SNAP to appear at the Community Church of God in Dunnloring, Va. tomorrow.
« Reply #138 on: Today at 07:31:08 AM »
   
I spoke to the prosecutor Kathy Stott yesterday about this perjury claim that the other side is now throwing out. Her responce: She laughed. She said that there is no way that the other victim or I would be charged with perjury if Tommy is found innocent.

She stated: "One judge already found probable cause to move forward and another judge rejected the plea deal because he believed the victims. She said that there is zero chance of a perjury charge of either victim if Tommy is found innocent. They are in dream land."

She also said that this is a clear tactic of intimidation and even possibly witness intimidation. Now that I'm sure she would be more than happy to charge someone with.

Two more things.

1.
I am quite sure that a "not guilty" or "innocent" judgment for Tommy by itself would not result in a perjury charge for either Alex,or Dennis, so of course I would never say something so silly.

What I said, in reply to another member here [not Alex] who posted the following:
" When what Alex has told in Court is proven to be lies, Tommy will have no choice but to sue for his court expenses." "...Tommy Shelton's attorney advised him to sue"

Was this:
"Courts and Juries do not look kindly on perjury, nor does the police. If Alex (or Dennis) is indeed proven to be lying in court, he is gonna be in big trouble"

Notice the "if" which I bold texted in my earlier post and the "proven to be lying" part?

Perjury involves lying.

If Alex is not lying, and it cannot be proven he lied, either to the police or in court, then he has nothing to worry about.

If, on the otherhand, it can be proven, then he may have multiple counts to face. IF...

I am sure that many remember the high profile sexual assault case in 1997 when just days before the Dallas Cowboys were set to play the Carolina Panthers in a playoff game, this Dallas women falsely accused Michael Irvin and Erik Williams of raping her in William's home.  It turned out, no assault had occured and that there was no opportunity as the woman was never even at his home on the date in question. She ended up recanting her story, was charged, and took a plea bargain for perjury requiring 90 days in jail and a fine.


2.

I already posted that "I'm sure some will freak out, like Alex already did, saying I am trying to intimidate him. That's ok, I'm not. I am just saying one should consider all. The courts will decide fairly, God willing."

and of course Alex did claim that: "Yes I'm going to say you're trying to intimidate me because that is exactly what it is."

And as I said, that's ok, I'm not, but he can say whatever he thinks, even if wrong.

BUT NOW HE TOOK IT ONE STEP FURTHER AND POSTED:
"She [the Prosecutor/Commonwealth Atty K. Stott] also said that this ["Courts and Juries do not look kindly on perjury, nor does the police. If Alex (or Dennis) is indeed proven to be lying in court, he is gonna be in big trouble"] is a clear tactic of intimidation and even possibly witness intimidation. Now that I'm sure she would be more than happy to charge someone with."


Alex may be ignorant of the law, but I am quite sure she is not, nor am I. He's lying, and that should be readily apparent to anyone looking up the legal definitions.

[Nosir Myzing]

Pat apparently has some server issue preventing posting here, and Cindy is banned permanently, so:

Re: Tommy...

Postby Cynthia » Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:14 pm UTC

Well Alex claims he became a member of the Walkers household at 8 mos old, so if that is true, and I don't know for sure whether it is or not, I was mistaken.

I would still like to hear an explanation of the 3 year time difference, but so far he's ignoring that question, and neither he or Pickle have offered any explanation of why they both claimed before 2008, that he was molested 15 years ago at age 8, and now the claim is he was molested at age 11, in 1998. It looks like we will have to wait for further court testimony and hearings for an answer.

~ Cindy

[Gregory]

Response to Nosir Myzing:

1) Bias:  Yes, I probably do have a bias which foir me is a tendency to believe those who claim sexual misconduct on the part of another.  By the way, psychological studies give credence to my bias.  IOW they show that such accusations are not typically falsle.

2) As to most of my other comments, they stem not from bias but from a perception of the statute and the way that the courts and legal system in the U.S. works and that perception is based more upon knowledge and experience rather than bias.  Certainly I could be wrong in my perceptions.  I sometims am wrong.

[Murcielago]

Again Alex. Its probably not a good idea to let Nosir Myzing, Pat, Cindy or anyone else bait you into any further discussion of ongoing and pending legal matters.

[Alex L. Walker]

Again Alex. Its probably not a good idea to let Nosir Myzing, Pat, Cindy or anyone else bait you into any further discussion of ongoing and pending legal matters.

You are correct. It is pointless trying to explain anything to *********.





Edited to remove inappropriate content.

[Murcielago]

The primary reason any of them would have for communicating with you is to bait you into making statements that they will twist into attempts to hurt you. You need to assume that they are here specifically to hurt you, and that any communication they have with you has only one purpose behind it, and that is to destroy you.

Again Alex. Its probably not a good idea to let Nosir Myzing, Pat, Cindy or anyone else bait you into any further discussion of ongoing and pending legal matters.

You are correct. It is pointless trying to explain anything to *********.

Edited to remove inappropriate content from quoted post.

[JustWondering]

The primary reason any of them would have for communicating with you is to bait you into making statements that they will twist into attempts to hurt you. You need to assume that they are here specifically to hurt you, and that any communication they have with you has only one purpose behind it, and that is to destroy you.

Again Alex. Its probably not a good idea to let Nosir Myzing, Pat, Cindy or anyone else bait you into any further discussion of ongoing and pending legal matters.

[DARVO]

A common strategy of abusers: Deny the abuse, then Attack the victim for attempting to make them accountable for their offense, thereby Reversing Victim and Offender.

Nosir Myzing - Clever screen name. If things in Virginia go to trial you'll most likely need a new one -- sufficient evidence will be presented by the prosecution team.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a nationally televised address railing against Israel and the West.
Speaking before a crowd of supporters at Tehran University, he questioned whether the Holocaust was a "real event" and called it a pretext for the creation of Israel. He said the Jewish state was founded on "a lie and a mythical claim."
Ahmadinejad called the Holocaust a "big deception" and claimed Israel uses it to sway international support. Outside the university, while the speech blared on loudspeakers, opposition protesters shouted "liar, liar!"

Nosir Myzing, if you listen carefully you can hear, "liar, liar!"  And you know and I know you're that your tactics on this site are to intimidate.

[Snoopy]

 


Welcome, DARVO!  Excellent post.  Clever user name.


http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineDARVO.html

[Alex L. Walker]

A common strategy of abusers: Deny the abuse, then Attack the victim for attempting to make them accountable for their offense, thereby Reversing Victim and Offender.

Nosir Myzing - Clever screen name. If things in Virginia go to trial you'll most likely need a new one -- sufficient evidence will be presented by the prosecution team.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a nationally televised address railing against Israel and the West.
Speaking before a crowd of supporters at Tehran University, he questioned whether the Holocaust was a "real event" and called it a pretext for the creation of Israel. He said the Jewish state was founded on "a lie and a mythical claim."
Ahmadinejad called the Holocaust a "big deception" and claimed Israel uses it to sway international support. Outside the university, while the speech blared on loudspeakers, opposition protesters shouted "liar, liar!"

Nosir Myzing, if you listen carefully you can hear, "liar, liar!"  And you know and I know you're that your tactics on this site are to intimidate.

Someone with some common sense! Excellent post!