Advent Talk

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Go and check out the Christians Discuss Forum for committed Christians at  http://www.christians-discuss.com

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed  (Read 41368 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

princessdi

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1271
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #45 on: May 30, 2011, 05:21:20 PM »

Ok Got it.  But I have to say this, I thought in my reading of at least one of the documents the judge did order the return of the evidence documents.  Now, I could be wrong.  Also, since the documents were not ordered destroyed(on which I believe everyone can agree), what was there to keep B & G from returning the orginals(so to speak) and keeping copies?  I mean was someone going to come and search their files? 

I completely understand what you are saying, Gregory.  So there are two things I get from your statements and subsequent questions asked. 

1.  No matter what the details, the fact that Bob and Gailon keep making motions and such is the reasont hat simpson is still getting paid(at least on this case).  Had they comlied with the original dismissal, very little income would have come to Simpson from this particular case, correct?

2.  And this one is on the blunt side......if Bob and Gailon had returned "a" copy of the evidence documents and kept their mouths shut about keeping "a" copy against being taken to court again by Danny and 3ABN intheir personal files, Simpson would not be able to count on generated income(like a retainer) on a regular basis from contacting them to ask for these documents, is this also correct?


 

The short answer is:  Yes.

The longer answer is more complicated:  1) Often times in an out of court settlement there will be an agreement (order) directing that one or more parties either return documents and/or destroy all copies in their possession.  2) The retention of documents after a stated time is often governed by a judicial order.

Number 2, above, is the issue here.  The two sides each are making conflicting claims in regard to a judicial order.  At this point, it is up to the one side to request that a judge order the other side to comply with the origonal order of the judge.  Of course, such a request would give the other side an opportunity to rebut the request.  NOTE: My wording is not to be construed as indicating which side I believe to be correct in its understanding. 


Logged
It is the duty of every cultured man or woman to read sympathetically the scriptures of the world.  If we are to respect others' religions as we would have them respect our own, a friendly study of the world's religions is a sacred duty. - Mohandas K. Gandhi

Gregory

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 964
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #46 on: May 30, 2011, 06:10:58 PM »

Quote
1.  No matter what the details, the fact that Bob and Gailon keep making motions and such is the reasont hat simpson is still getting paid(at least on this case).  Had they comlied with the original dismissal, very little income would have come to Simpson from this particular case, correct?

Yes.  Sompson would have had to have depended upon other clients to earn a good living.  As a result of Bob and Gailon the goose is laying eggs of gold for Simpson.
Logged

Gregory

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 964
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #47 on: May 30, 2011, 06:13:35 PM »

Quote
2.  And this one is on the blunt side......if Bob and Gailon had returned "a" copy of the evidence documents and kept their mouths shut about keeping "a" copy against being taken to court again by Danny and 3ABN intheir personal files, Simpson would not be able to count on generated income(like a retainer) on a regular basis from contacting them to ask for these documents, is this also correct?

I am not willing to take that position.  Simpson would have demanded that the judge order them to state whether or not they had kept a copy.  I assume that Boband Gailon would have been truthful.  So, the litigation would have gone on and on.

 
Logged

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #48 on: May 30, 2011, 06:49:44 PM »

Ok Got it.  But I have to say this, I thought in my reading of at least one of the documents the judge did order the return of the evidence documents.  Now, I could be wrong.  Also, since the documents were not ordered destroyed(on which I believe everyone can agree), what was there to keep B & G from returning the orginals(so to speak) and keeping copies?  I mean was someone going to come and search their files?

Di, immediately after getting the case dismissed (< 90 minutes after the status conference ended), Simpson demanded that we surrender not just the originals but also all copies. I do not recall if he also demanded a sworn statement to that effect, but in his last threatening letter he did.

I do not think Simpson is just bumbling along not knowing what he is doing.

Here's from the dismissal order:

Quote from: Judge Saylor in Doc. 141
     I will order that all materials produced in discovery that were designated as confidential under the confidentiality and protective order issued in this case on April 17th will be returned, as set forth in that order.
     Destruction of the documents will only be permitted if consistent with the terms of the order; and similarly, any photocopying or other copying of any such materials will only be permitted if permitted under that order.
     ...
     THE COURT: Well, it's -- it is transferable, unless it's subject to the confidentiality order. If it's subject to the confidentiality order, you have to return it, or do whatever the order says you're supposed to do with it; and, you know, you have gained presumably a certain amount of information. You're not required to erase it from your brain, and you can use it consistent with the terms of the order as -- as may be permitted by that order, but that's --

(Doc. 141 pp. 12, 14-15).

Now Di, isn't it pretty clear that Saylor was only ordering the return of documents if the confidentiality order so required? Do you have to have a law degree to see that?

Further, even if we returned the originals, isn't it clear that we can keep copies if the confidentiality order permits?

The confidentiality order consists of two parts: 6 pages laying out the terms of the order, and a 2-page exhibit, Exhibit A, that certain non-litigants must sign before receiving any confidential documents from a litigant. The only return requirement mentioned anywhere in that order is in Exhibit A, not in the 6 pages that apply to me.

And I think Simpson has understood this all along. I think this is why Atty. Charles Bappert tried to get me to sign Exhibit A when he sent me the Remnant documents. I think Simpson wanted to get us to be legally bound to return those documents.

But I didn't fall for it. I called Bappert and told him I didn't need to sign it, and he didn't argue with me at all about it.

Exhibit A is a way for the court to obtain jurisdiction of non-parties so that the court can enforce the confidentiality order upon a non-litigant. But the court already has jurisdiction over me.

In some respects one could say, "already had jurisdiction" instead of "already has." My understanding is that since the case was dismissed, the court has authority to enforce the existing order, or relieve the existing order's obligations under Rule 60. But the court does not have jurisdiction to alter the existing order to impose new obligations upon us under rule 60. In order for Simpson to legally get that order altered to force us to surrender all copies, he would have to file a new action against us.

Returning just the originals and keeping copies isn't good enough for Simpson. He doesn't want us to keep anything, even though Exhibit A permits non-litigants to retain the materials until 30 days after the end of all appeals. Understand? Simpson even wants us to surrender everything before the appeals are over!

I do not have any record of Simpson returning any documents either Gailon or I had designated confidential. Now why would that be if Simpson really believes all confidential documents must be returned?

And then there is the issue of who designated the Remnant documents as confidential. Remnant denied that they did. How can Danny or 3ABN have standing to designate documents pertaining to DLS Publishing, Inc. as confidential? DLS has never contacted us, not once. Jerrie Hayes explicitly told the magistrate in Minnesota that she was representing Danny, not DLS, and the magistrate didn't think Danny had standing to complain about our subpoenaing bank records pertaining to DLS.

The bottom line is that Judge Saylor said we could keep copies if the confidentiality order permits, the confidentiality order doesn't require litigants to return anything or to sign Exhibit A, and Simpson won't be satisfied if we keep any copies whatsoever.
Logged

Sam

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #49 on: May 31, 2011, 10:46:22 AM »

Ok Got it.  But I have to say this, I thought in my reading of at least one of the documents the judge did order the return of the evidence documents.  Now, I could be wrong.  Also, since the documents were not ordered destroyed(on which I believe everyone can agree), what was there to keep B & G from returning the orginals(so to speak) and keeping copies?  I mean was someone going to come and search their files?

Di, immediately after getting the case dismissed (< 90 minutes after the status conference ended), Simpson demanded that we surrender not just the originals but also all copies. I do not recall if he also demanded a sworn statement to that effect, but in his last threatening letter he did.

I do not think Simpson is just bumbling along not knowing what he is doing.





Gailon & Bob why do you talk with such arrogance about round two coming up? Both of you are the only two people who have followed this law suit with 3ABN and think you have won. Can you show me anything from the court records from day one where you have won anything that amounted to anything with Duffy and or Simpson?  The answer is no!
You have totally lost everytime you have gone to court. Hasn't it occurred to you that you may be the only people who have been in court for years and never won any rounds whatsoever! 

You and Bob are worse than any ordinary laymen because at least they realize when they are whipped!  Let me give you an example. You lost in the court to dismiss the court case with 3ABN. You continued to talk big for nearly three years, meanwhile losing every appeal. This case is over and you two are the only ones in the world who seem to believe that you can still win! This is utter nonsense. This last move with Simpson shows how ate up with hatred you are for those involved with 3ABN. If either of you ever had any balance in judgement before this case, it is obvious that there is no balance, judgement or common sense left.

Bob, Look what this has done to your family and church family relationships. You have put your hatred for 3ABN above your family. Sadly these results will last a lifetime. Gailon had boo coo family troubles before he came into this situation. Pride will eat away at the foundations of a happy home.

Look at the IRS situation.  You have denied for years it was over...when you found out it was over and 3abn and DS were cleared completely did you publically apologize? Did you admit your accusations were false? Did you admit you were wrong when you kept saying the investigation was still ongoing?
Again...The IRS cleared Danny and 3ABN of any wrong doing....this would include any of the accusations that you point to, Bob...laundering blah blah blah....
Any reasonable, sane and AND HONEST person would acknowledge that when the IRS,  cleared DS of any wrong doing...they should move on and admit they falsely accused DS and 3ABN.  Both you and Gailon admits that the IRS investigation is over...Yet you continue to hold fast to your false accusing which of course is a sin in the books of heaven!

How many souls have either of you guys helped lead to the Lord in the last several years since you made trying to destroy 3abn your lifes work?
In your defense, there was never any chance that your dreams would come true. 3ABN is God's channel of blessing. Reports come in from around the world everyday of people who have given their lives to Christ because of the message being taught.
Did you guys really think you could fight against God and win?  No one ever has and no one ever will.

Gailon Joy, Bob Pickle, Linda, Arild, Johnann or any of your little group will never take over 3ABN.  You really thought you could pull this off, didn't you?
3ABN is ran by a great Board who is commited to getting the undiluted 3 Angels messages to the world and God is blessing abundantly. They would never allow Linda or any of the rest of you to touch 3abn with your gloating, arrogance, hatred and lies. With all you've tried to do 3ABN continues to grow and it's outreach and influence is spreading around the world. This is happening because of God's grace and His love for the tool He brought about to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ.

It's sad you call yourselves SDA's and are puppets for your little internet group who are either non SDA,  unhappy SDA's with an ax to grind,
or not even Christian.. period.

Think about it. Of all the ministries on earth which one does Satan hate the most? For over 25 years 3ABN has been giving an end times message to the world. You cannot stop it nor decide who is in leadership...that is God's job.  It's been seven years since the divorce of DS and LS. 
Johann and Aril A. are dilusional when they talk about all this swirl of support for Linda...She is dilusional when she comes on the internet and says something like..  "Let's take a vote"  concerning her taking over 3ABN.  Does she really think after seven years that the cry from the pews as Gailon likes to call it..will be so loud that all the 3ABN board members will be stepping down and turning 3ABN over to you all.... You people are under such deception that it is terrible..       The fact that she is allowed to talk in churches every once in a while means what???   3abn cannot keep up with all the requests from around the world  every Sabbath....Why?  Because 3abn is spreading the gospel where Linda is spreading lies of abuse and being "thrown out penniless" instead of talking about Jesus. She had to admit, under oath, in a deposition that she lives with the doctor. Does that not wake anyone up?

Haven't you all noticed Jim G, DS and others from 3ABN interviewing Elder Ted Wilson, GC President and Dan Jackson, North American Division President and a host of other top GC leaders? Have you read the letter from Elder Wilson to the world leaders about giving their support to 3ABN??  Have you seen the list of 3ABN's Pillars campmeeting speakers...the best of the best in the SDA church! 
I'm amazed that you two guys can live in total denial as you do!

God is moving to finish His work. He is coming ready or not. It's my prayer that all the haters of truth will become lovers of truth and turn their attention of doing what God commissioned us to do..and that is to go into all the world to help finish the work on this earth so that Jesus can come back to redeem His children!
Logged

princessdi

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1271
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #50 on: May 31, 2011, 11:11:01 AM »

Thank you gentlemen.  All questions asked were answered.   
Logged
It is the duty of every cultured man or woman to read sympathetically the scriptures of the world.  If we are to respect others' religions as we would have them respect our own, a friendly study of the world's religions is a sacred duty. - Mohandas K. Gandhi

princessdi

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1271
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #51 on: May 31, 2011, 12:13:04 PM »

Well, I just have a couple of comments/questions.  I didn't know that Bob and Gailon admitted the IRS investigation was over.  I htought their position is tha it is still gong on on some level.  Once agian, I could be wrong an dmissed something.  But if they have, Thank God!! for some progress.  I basically agree with you on the legal portion. I am still at a loss as to why they are still lining Simpson's pocket, but Hey! I don't have to understand it.  It is between them and God, at this point.

Now where we part is your summation where Linda is concerned.  Just as I blieve Bob and Gailon to be wrong to contiue with this lagel mess, I believe 3ABn and Danny were wrong in the way they handled the divorce.  Even if(and that is a HUGE if) Linda had been unfaithful to Danny, that means she was a broken soul.  Since, 3ABn is God's ministry(and believe it or not I have no argument with that), and the mission given is the "Mend Broken People", then "mending" should have started at home.  Yes, yes by laws of business in this land you legally got away with paying her the bare minimum to leave and keep her mouth shut as she went, you constantly maintain to answering a "Higher Power", no better witness for 3ABN would have been than to "love" when[they feel] they were wronged.  I know you all know you were wrong in this because you immediately started dimishing her role in establishing 3ABN as aminisry and a business.  IOW, for 20 years she was a equal partner in buidling 3ABN, 20+ the day Danny decided she had to go, she did almost nothing.  Not cool, Not Christlike, Not ministry.  I know it makes you no difference at all, but it is these actions(3ABN's actions, not Linda's that will forever keep me from endorsing or even watching 3ABN. 

About her speaking engagements, she was near here a couple of months ago, and Iwas going to book her at my church on the recommendation of my pastor's wife who was impressed with her for exhibiting God's spirit and lack of anything negative.  Now, I don't know about any other engagements, I can just speak to that one.  Also, I wouldn't crow bout Linda's supposed admission to living with the good Dr., not while we have Danny another failed marriage later(very quietly failed, I might add).  Once again you all are failing to remember that "what's good for the goose, is good for the gander".  Don't throw Linda's business in the street, if you don't want Danny's to go out with it.......There are a plethora of other like phases, but I believe you get my drift.

About GC supporting 3ABN, the church does not have a great history in this area.  they tend to support the man no matter the situation.  That does not impress me.  However, I fully agree that God's work will go on and is not dependent on the "perfection" of the servants He chooses.  3ABN will continue to be a blessing no matter who is at the helm here on earth because God is at the helm in this minstry in Heaven.
Logged
It is the duty of every cultured man or woman to read sympathetically the scriptures of the world.  If we are to respect others' religions as we would have them respect our own, a friendly study of the world's religions is a sacred duty. - Mohandas K. Gandhi

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #52 on: May 31, 2011, 01:28:56 PM »

Just as I blieve Bob and Gailon to be wrong to contiue with this lagel mess, I believe 3ABn and Danny were wrong in the way they handled the divorce.

Di, we're not the ones continuing with the threats. It was the continued threats that led in part to our appeals.

And Sam is plain wrong about us not winning anything. We won in Michigan, pretty much won in Minnesota, and were slowing gaining ground in Massachusetts. We won the issue of the form of electronic discovery, and pretty much won the issues of the confidentiality order and of the scope of discovery. We got the subpoenas enforced in Michigan and Minnesota, and successfully responded to a show cause order in Illinois.

As far as the IRS investigation goes, our understanding is that the IRS was paid over $1 million for the criminal investigation to go away. Whether that took care of everything regarding Danny, or whether there were still some civil issues, I don't know.

But the bottom line is that it was wrong for Danny to line his pockets with kickbacks and excessive royalties, the 1998 house deal was wrong, and the horse donation(s) reported as cash were wrong.
Logged

princessdi

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1271
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #53 on: May 31, 2011, 01:39:54 PM »


Di, we're not the ones continuing with the threats. It was the continued threats that led in part to our appeals.

Ok, because he believes he has a legal right on bahlf of his client, right?  Also that you all will not just file these docs away, you will be pouring over them,,,possibly for the rest of your lives....trying to find......something.  Well, at this point, it is clear that somebody needs to clear this up.  You believe the judgements say you can keep the docs and the other side believes you should give them back.  It's still a mess.

And Sam is plain wrong about us not winning anything. We won in Michigan, pretty much won in Minnesota, and were slowing gaining ground in Massachusetts. We won the issue of the form of electronic discovery, and pretty much won the issues of the confidentiality order and of the scope of discovery. We got the subpoenas enforced in Michigan and Minnesota, and successfully responded to a show cause order in Illinois.

This portion, I just don't care about. Tit for tat, is just plain silly, even in the court system.

As far as the IRS investigation goes, our understanding is that the IRS was paid over $1 million for the criminal investigation to go away. Whether that took care of everything regarding Danny, or whether there were still some civil issues, I don't know.

You really want to post on the world wide web that the IRS took a bribe?  And from a big fish in a very little pool........ok....   :dunno:


But the bottom line is that it was wrong for Danny to line his pockets with kickbacks and excessive royalties, the 1998 house deal was wrong, and the horse donation(s) reported as cash were wrong.

[color=[urple]Ok, but this sounds a lot like..coveting.....[/color]
Logged
It is the duty of every cultured man or woman to read sympathetically the scriptures of the world.  If we are to respect others' religions as we would have them respect our own, a friendly study of the world's religions is a sacred duty. - Mohandas K. Gandhi

Nosir Myzing

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #54 on: May 31, 2011, 03:29:34 PM »

Delete plz- duplicate post
« Last Edit: May 31, 2011, 03:52:42 PM by Nosir Myzing »
Logged

Nosir Myzing

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #55 on: May 31, 2011, 03:40:19 PM »

Sam is plain wrong about us not winning anything. We won in Michigan, pretty much won in Minnesota, and were slowing gaining ground in Massachusetts. We won the issue of the form of electronic discovery, and pretty much won the issues of the confidentiality order and of the scope of discovery. We got the subpoenas enforced in Michigan and Minnesota, and successfully responded to a show cause order in Illinois.

NOT. The first clue that Pickle should have is that the word "Denied" in response to all his his motions, indicates that, and means just that. The first clue all reading here should have is his claims are always that "claims"- empty words- lacking proof...

As far as the IRS investigation goes, our understanding is that the IRS was paid over $1 million for the criminal investigation to go away. Whether that took care of everything regarding Danny, or whether there were still some civil issues, I don't know.

Again the first clue Pickle should have and what he and others need to question is why he believes such. What is it based on? Is he just justifying himself and listening to gossip, false accusations -- without doesn't bothering to get any proof ? Is he accepting what he hears and is accepting and passing that  on only to justify himself and his thinking? Or does he have solid evidence and proof? I HAVE SEEN NONE. Thus, imo, the first clue the readers should have about his claims and accusations is that he never gives any verification or proof. Come on people, God requires you to ask for that, to compare testimony, verity all and dilegently examine all.  You are required to  expect such before buying into and accepting and passing on swill... WHY do you fail to do so?

But the bottom line is that it was wrong for Danny to line his pockets with kickbacks and excessive royalties, the 1998 house deal was wrong, and the horse donation(s) reported as cash were wrong.

According to Bob... but this was all reported to the IRS, and their investigation went back as far as they had reasons to believe they needed to based on all the information they had which was much more than Bob had. They are not known for being easy - even on the innocent or those not at fault. So  either they were totally corrupt where DS and 3ABN were concerned or Pickle and Joy and co.. are just DEAD WRONG and guilty of sin. You decide, but "please" make sure your are accountable and know all before doing so...

This isn't unimportant, your soul and eternal life may be at stake, as it is all about love, judgment, mercy and the character of Christ. Be like Him or be unlike Him, whatever you do to others you do to Him, whatever you don't do to others you don't do to Him... your choice...
« Last Edit: May 31, 2011, 03:54:33 PM by Nosir Myzing »
Logged

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #56 on: May 31, 2011, 06:15:53 PM »

You really want to post on the world wide web that the IRS took a bribe?  And from a big fish in a very little pool........ok....

I said nothing about a bribe.

Ok, but this sounds a lot like..coveting.....

Danny went way beyond just coveting.
Logged

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #57 on: May 31, 2011, 06:32:37 PM »

Sam is plain wrong about us not winning anything. We won in Michigan, pretty much won in Minnesota, and were slowing gaining ground in Massachusetts. We won the issue of the form of electronic discovery, and pretty much won the issues of the confidentiality order and of the scope of discovery. We got the subpoenas enforced in Michigan and Minnesota, and successfully responded to a show cause order in Illinois.

NOT. The first clue that Pickle should have is that the word "Denied" in response to all his his motions, indicates that, and means just that.

In Minnesota it was Danny's motion to quash that was denied. That subpoena was enforced.

In Michigan our motion to compel Remnant was granted.

In Illinois Danny and 3ABN's motion to quash was not granted.

In Massachusetts:

  • Danny and 3ABN's attempt to permanently seal the case was denied.
  • Danny and 3ABN's attempt to get a copy of our hard drives was denied.
  • Danny and 3ABN's motion for a confidentiality order was granted, but that order was much more to our liking than to Danny and 3ABN.
  • My motion to compel production of the Rule 26(a)(1) materials was granted.
  • Danny and 3ABN's motion to limit the scope of discovery was denied. The part of their motion requesting that we must get court approval before issuing subpoenas backfired, since the court imposed that requirement upon them too.

So you are clearly wrong in saying that we never won anything.

As far as the IRS investigation goes, our understanding is that the IRS was paid over $1 million for the criminal investigation to go away. Whether that took care of everything regarding Danny, or whether there were still some civil issues, I don't know.

Again the first clue Pickle should have and what he and others need to question is why he believes such. What is it based on? Is he just justifying himself and listening to gossip, false accusations -- without doesn't bothering to get any proof ? Is he accepting what he hears and is accepting and passing that  on only to justify himself and his thinking? Or does he have solid evidence and proof? I HAVE SEEN NONE. Thus, imo, the first clue the readers should have about his claims and accusations is that he never gives any verification or proof. Come on people, God requires you to ask for that, to compare testimony, verity all and dilegently examine all.  You are required to  expect such before buying into and accepting and passing on swill... WHY do you fail to do so?

That's what our sources have told us, and I would think our sources are more reliable than Danny Shelton and Jerrie Hayes, who denied that there was any IRS investigation going on. But then later Danny and Gerry Duffy admitted that an investigation had been going on after all.

The problem is that even Walt Thompson admitted under oath that no proof of IRS exoneration could be produced.

If you really want proof one way or another, get Danny and Jim Gilley to each fill out the required form that would allow the IRS to disclose return information to me. Have them send me those forms, and then I will contact the IRS and get proof one way or another regarding Danny Shelton, individually, and 3ABN.

But the bottom line is that it was wrong for Danny to line his pockets with kickbacks and excessive royalties, the 1998 house deal was wrong, and the horse donation(s) reported as cash were wrong.

According to Bob... but this was all reported to the IRS, and their investigation went back as far as they had reasons to believe they needed to based on all the information they had which was much more than Bob had. They are not known for being easy - even on the innocent or those not at fault. So  either they were totally corrupt where DS and 3ABN were concerned or Pickle and Joy and co.. are just DEAD WRONG and guilty of sin. You decide, but "please" make sure your are accountable and know all before doing so...

This isn't unimportant, your soul and eternal life may be at stake, as it is all about love, judgment, mercy and the character of Christ. Be like Him or be unlike Him, whatever you do to others you do to Him, whatever you don't do to others you don't do to Him... your choice...

Greg Simpson admitted to me that the IRS criminal investigation did not go back far enough to deal with the 1998 house scandal.

For 3ABN or the directors to pay more than $1 million to the IRS to end the criminal investigation, the IRS must have found some pretty serious stuff.
Logged

Snoopy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3056
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #58 on: May 31, 2011, 07:14:54 PM »

You really want to post on the world wide web that the IRS took a bribe?  And from a big fish in a very little pool........ok....

I said nothing about a bribe.



C'mon, Diane.  Use some common sense.  I even posted a red hat warning saying that.  If you are going to quote people, please make sure you are not perpetuating a blatant lie.  I don't think you would have appreciated that at BSDA!!

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,2122.msg31693.html#msg31693
Logged

Snoopy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3056
Re: Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc filed
« Reply #59 on: May 31, 2011, 07:34:48 PM »

Quote
1.  No matter what the details, the fact that Bob and Gailon keep making motions and such is the reasont hat simpson is still getting paid(at least on this case).  Had they comlied with the original dismissal, very little income would have come to Simpson from this particular case, correct?

Yes.  Sompson would have had to have depended upon other clients to earn a good living.  As a result of Bob and Gailon the goose is laying eggs of gold for Simpson.


I strongly disagree.

Why does this have to be laid entirely at Bob and Gailon's feet?  3ABN and DS brought the case in the first place, but when it got hot in the kitchen they cut and ran.  They caused Bob and Gailon to incur a great deal of time and expense to defend themselves, and they have a right to try to recoup that.  Bob and Gailon also have a right to fight for their first amendment rights, something obviously lost on several readers here.  As for Simpson's "golden eggs", nobody is forcing 3ABN/DS to continue to respond to the litigation and pay Simpson.  They could take the high road, try to resolve the mess they created and attempt a good faith effort to at least make Bob and Gailon whole after dragging them into court.  Seems to me that's what Jesus would do...oh...except that He would have never done what 3ABN/DS did in the first place.

Your bias is obvious.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Up