Print

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

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

For the record Gregory, let it be clear just how seriously I take this outrageous threat to re-open the case by Mr Simpson and his clients...I consider it a clear intent to re-open hostilities and will take full advantage of the opportunity to finish this case once and for all, with or without Mr Pickle...mediation
will never be an acceptable option...thunbs up or thimbs down, we go to the finish.

 Reply
G. Arthur Joy to Gregory, bcc: Bob
show details May 26 (10 days ago)

You can play the misuse of process any way you wish, but let us be clear that we are complying with the ENTIRE order and let this serve as notice that a filing that violates the ENTIRE Order and that violates the Confidentiality Order will be grounds to pursue you personally and your client for the appropriate legal remedies. YOU ARE CLEARLY WRONG AND OUT OF LINE ON THIS ISSUE.

Since it is clear your clients, as in 3ABN, Danny Lee Shelton, the officers and directors, do not wish to see this litigation ever to come to a peaceful conclusion pursuant to the rule of law, I have no alternative but to conclude it is in my best interest to review carefully my post petition claims and to move expeditiously to exercise my right to litigate all claims to a complete and final conclusion.

An appropriate demand pursuant to Mass General Laws 93-A, et siq will follow.

Let this serve as CLEAR notice that if you pursue this effort to violate the ENTIRE order and the underlying Confidentiality Order, I will be compelled to draft a comprehensive complaint and YOU will be a party to that complaint. I will not tolerate further legal bullying form you or your clients.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

Gregory, isn't it kind of expected, or assumed that all parties to keep files on the entire case and it's evidence even if they are settled out of court, in trial, or even dismessed?  I would think so.

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. 

[Bob Pickle]

I will not tolerate further legal bullying form you or your clients.

The bullying MUST stop.

[Johann]

You mean it has to go head on? Is that what Danny Shelton and 3ABN want?

[princessdi]

Bob,, the rest of your post are answers to questions for clarification, and I have no problem with your answers...You like it, I love it.   However,  the statement below.....come on now....You guys got sued because to opened up a web page specificaly created to publish documents proving legal, financial, moral wrong doing by DS and 3ABN.  You have go to be kidding me! You have spent 7 years pouring over public and private documents you were able to get your hands on and posting their contents...........come on.   BSDA Was choked full of documents. 

I believe that to be false. I believe they know we don't have to return documents.

We have never said we would publish what is in those documents.

However, there are things in these documents that are clearly not confidential, and the plaintiffs should have been sanctioned for calling them confidential. For example, how could Catch the Vision, freely downloadable from 3ABN's website, be confidential?

[Bob Pickle]

I'm not kidding you at all. We have never said we would publish those documents. How could we, without getting permission first from either the plaintiffs or the court?

Di, look at what we haven't published. Scan through the archive of BSDA, scan through Save-3ABN.com, scan through AdventTalk.com. You won't find anywhere were we published Danny's tax returns. Correct? And when we filed them with the court, we filed them under seal on our own initiative, not because we had to.

Can you find published anywhere the email where Melody essentially acknowledging to conceiving a baby out of wedlock? Or the irate email about the man who had allegedly had an affair with Tammy Chance? Now if we were publishing everything, why did we never publish these things?

7 years? Neither Gailon nor myself were involved until August 2006.

Bob,, the rest of your post are answers to questions for clarification, and I have no problem with your answers...You like it, I love it.   However,  the statement below.....come on now....You guys got sued because to opened up a web page specificaly created to publish documents proving legal, financial, moral wrong doing by DS and 3ABN.  You have go to be kidding me! You have spent 7 years pouring over public and private documents you were able to get your hands on and posting their contents...........come on.   BSDA Was choked full of documents. 

I believe that to be false. I believe they know we don't have to return documents.

We have never said we would publish what is in those documents.

However, there are things in these documents that are clearly not confidential, and the plaintiffs should have been sanctioned for calling them confidential. For example, how could Catch the Vision, freely downloadable from 3ABN's website, be confidential?

[princessdi]

Ok, nearly 5 yerars.  Bob, true, you haven't published those things(even though mentioning, Bob, is almost as bad), but look at what you have published.  Even somethings at your own descretion without the permission. The fact that you even can as me to 'scan the documents' on three(3) different site locations makes my point.    On BSDA, we had to stop you all(both sides) from going into folks families, children, we even had to draw the line at Brandy, because her business was all in the street, just because she married Danny.  As I said before, both sides have been running in the "all if ari" kind of energy most of the time.  It is not a healthy situation at all, no matter which side you support. 

I'm not kidding you at all. We have never said we would publish those documents. How could we, without getting permission first from either the plaintiffs or the court?

Di, look at what we haven't published. Scan through the archive of BSDA, scan through Save-3ABN.com, scan through AdventTalk.com. You won't find anywhere were we published Danny's tax returns. Correct? And when we filed them with the court, we filed them under seal on our own initiative, not because we had to.

Can you find published anywhere the email where Melody essentially acknowledging to conceiving a baby out of wedlock? Or the irate email about the man who had allegedly had an affair with Tammy Chance? Now if we were publishing everything, why did we never publish these things?

7 years? Neither Gailon nor myself were involved until August 2006.

Bob,, the rest of your post are answers to questions for clarification, and I have no problem with your answers...You like it, I love it.   However,  the statement below.....come on now....You guys got sued because to opened up a web page specificaly created to publish documents proving legal, financial, moral wrong doing by DS and 3ABN.  You have go to be kidding me! You have spent 7 years pouring over public and private documents you were able to get your hands on and posting their contents...........come on.   BSDA Was choked full of documents. 

I believe that to be false. I believe they know we don't have to return documents.

We have never said we would publish what is in those documents.

However, there are things in these documents that are clearly not confidential, and the plaintiffs should have been sanctioned for calling them confidential. For example, how could Catch the Vision, freely downloadable from 3ABN's website, be confidential?

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

We did not publish a host of information we had recovered on Brandy. In fact did not seriously discuss Brandy until the divorce, despite the fact that my notes are full of salacious issues that normally sell newspapers. We could write a book on just the Danny and Brandy story!!!

It would embarrass the entire Board, particularly the "blinded" Chairman. It would embarass Danny, and it would embarass Brandy, a lady who simply took the dip to take her go at the lifestyle...clearly not grounded in the Faith and clearly went back to her former lifestyle. Clearly did not find the face of adventism very compelling!!!

Someday, she will likely share her story!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[princessdi]

In all these years of reading Gregory's posts, I never got this impression.  Now, he is very confident in what he knows and even in admitting what he doesn't know, but he was always very clear and informative.  That is why I ask him for clarification all the time.  He seems to be the most "detached" from the immeidate emotional portion of this mess.  Most others seem to be responding not with legal facts but with their emotions seeking legal loopholes to fit their emotions, so it is difficult to get an impartial answer to the tangled web of legal actions.

Gregory are you aware that (to me at least) you come accross as very condescending in your manner. This seems to be quite deliberate. Now I may be wrong and it is not your intention to lecture or talk down to us individuals who are mere mortals.  In which case your remarks would be appropriate.

[princessdi]

Yeah, you all did not publish them, they weren't allowed on BSDA, and rightly so, anywhere else.   Because Admins had to review teh info before ruling on posting, I know some of those things, and even some that came to me some interesting ways, and pretty much they bared out, but the point is still that you guys will post whatever you can get away with in your effort to take Danny down.  Info on Brandy willnot assist you in that end at this point.

We did not publish a host of information we had recovered on Brandy. In fact did not seriously discuss Brandy until the divorce, despite the fact that my notes are full of salacious issues that normally sell newspapers. We could write a book on just the Danny and Brandy story!!!

It would embarrass the entire Board, particularly the "blinded" Chairman. It would embarass Danny, and it would embarass Brandy, a lady who simply took the dip to take her go at the lifestyle...clearly not grounded in the Faith and clearly went back to her former lifestyle. Clearly did not find the face of adventism very compelling!!!

Someday, she will likely share her story!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[Artiste]

I think you're wrong on this one, princessdi.  Of course BlackSDA was very important to you, but that was not the primary place where Bob and Gailon were posting info.

It was on the Save3ABN site.  I don't think you had any jurisdiction there.

Gailon is correct in that they themselves decided not to share the material in question. It had nothing to do with your moderating duties at BSDA.

[Bob Pickle]

And we still haven't published Danny's tax returns, even though we've had them for over fur years now. If we published anything to take Danny down, why haven't we published those? We voluntarily, at our own initiative, filed them under seal.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

You would be surprised how often we have not published information on Danny. Unlike 3ABN's General Counsel, we have NEVER published ANY communications that enjoyed "off the record" status.

And I am sure you are aware that we did not publish loads of stories that came our way that cannot be corroberated by at least one other party. I have several great stories that await the primary party to verify the third party statement.

But, If I could corroborate, it would be published!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

Yeah, you all did not publish them, they weren't allowed on BSDA, and rightly so, anywhere else.   Because Admins had to review teh info before ruling on posting, I know some of those things, and even some that came to me some interesting ways, and pretty much they bared out, but the point is still that you guys will post whatever you can get away with in your effort to take Danny down.  Info on Brandy willnot assist you in that end at this point.

We did not publish a host of information we had recovered on Brandy. In fact did not seriously discuss Brandy until the divorce, despite the fact that my notes are full of salacious issues that normally sell newspapers. We could write a book on just the Danny and Brandy story!!!

It would embarrass the entire Board, particularly the "blinded" Chairman. It would embarass Danny, and it would embarass Brandy, a lady who simply took the dip to take her go at the lifestyle...clearly not grounded in the Faith and clearly went back to her former lifestyle. Clearly did not find the face of adventism very compelling!!!

Someday, she will likely share her story!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[princessdi]

Actually, Artiste I only mentioned BSDA because there was a whole lot of information posted there. i am quite aware that there was more posted on the Save3ABN site, and I know I had no jurisdiction there.  My point is that for all they sai they haven't posted, they have posted a lot more, and nobody knows what they will post next.........I would be a bit wary also about allowing them to keep sensitive documents.  Well, actually, I would be worried with anyone.  That is probably the reason it is generally ordered to return such documents.


 

I think you're wrong on this one, princessdi.  Of course BlackSDA was very important to you, but that was not the primary place where Bob and Gailon were posting info.

It was on the Save3ABN site.  I don't think you had any jurisdiction there.

Gailon is correct in that they themselves decided not to share the material in question. It had nothing to do with your moderating duties at BSDA.

[childoftheking]

Some of the documents 3ABN wants "returned" they never had. How can you return something to somebody who never had it?

[princessdi]

Well, then they never had those, but Bob is not saying the never had them, he's saying they were not ordered to return them and have a right to keep them against further legal action by 3ABN.