Print

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

[Nosir Myzing]

Snoopy,

I am not "excited about the reduced charges". I was simply trying to supply truthful and factual information

Well as usual, Pickles MO of uncredible sources and his own personal embellishments, rise again. What Bob wrote today is totally wrong. Tommy took an Alford plea which says "I am not guilty of these charges, but (paraphrased) everything is against me so I am taking this plea." 3 attorney's tell me this is completely different than pleading guilty.

Also he is not facing 20 years! Nothing even close to that. In fact, they are talking months, not years. Bob where do you get your information?

Why Bob did you not mention that Alex's case was completely dropped by the DA? Did your sources mess that up too or did you leave it out purposely? My guess would be purposely since the guy that you have backed for 2 years (as a means to get to Danny) has proven not to be credible at all. Otherwise, why would the DA drop a case unless she knew she couldn't win? Of course she couldn't. Alex has lied too many times and changed his story repeatedly...not the kind of witness you want on the stand. Remember all those times Alex denied his parents were against him? There will be proof shown that he lied about that also.

It's all falling apart Bob. Your precious gossip site has turned into a bunch of mad dogs snarling at each other with nobody telling the truth about anything.

[/quote]

Definition: In the law of the United States, an Alford plea is a plea in criminal court. In this plea, the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty.

Upon receiving an Alford plea from a defendant, the court may immediately pronounce the defendant guilty and impose sentence as if the defendant had otherwise been convicted of the crime. However, in many states, such as Massachusetts, a plea which "admits sufficient facts" more typically results in the case being continued without a finding and later dismissed.

It is the prospect of an ultimate dismissal of charges which engenders most pleas of this type.

and thought members and readers would appreciate that as that is sadly lacking in this forum imho.

Your link is good as far as I am concerned and interesting in regard to the original Alford plea but I don't understand why you felt the need to post it twice. AFAIC it contradicts nothing I posted.

Be happy.

Now I am really saying, Good Night.

[Snoopy]

The facts are, Tommy appeared in court this morning and the Alford plea was accepted by the court. Alex's case is gone. It was full of inconsistencies and unprovable statements and the state's Attorney dropped it. All that remains is the sentencing for Dennis Turley's case as the Judge chose not to sentence TS today. His enemies may gloat or ridicule and scoff about him being taken out of court and to jail in a wheelchair but I am heartsick for him and for those here who can't let go of their hate.

Who said anything about being taken to jail in a wheelchair??

[Snoopy]

Snoopy,

I am not "excited about the reduced charges". I was simply trying to supply truthful and factual information and thought members and readers would appreciate that as that is sadly lacking in this forum imho.

Your link is good as far as I am concerned and interesting in regard to the original Alford plea but I don't understand why you felt the need to post it twice. AFAIC it contradicts nothing I posted.

Be happy.

Now I am really saying, Good Night.

Thank you!!  I am happy!!   

[Bob Pickle]

Sources tell me that (a) today Tommy pled guilty to four felony counts...

Misreporting.. unreliable sources...

http://crime.about.com/od/g_criminal/g/alfordplea.htm

Definition: In the law of the United States, an Alford plea is a plea in criminal court. In this plea, the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty.

Upon receiving an Alford plea from a defendant, the court may immediately pronounce the defendant guilty and impose sentence as if the defendant had otherwise been convicted of the crime. However, in many states, such as Massachusetts, a plea which "admits sufficient facts" more typically results in the case being continued without a finding and later dismissed.

It is the prospect of an ultimate dismissal of charges which engenders most pleas of this type.

Surmising yet again?

An Alford plea (also called a Kennedy plea, an Alford guilty plea and the Alford doctrine) in United States law is a guilty plea in criminal court, where the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea)

Could you please explain for all of us how a person who makes an Alford guilty plea has not thereby pled guilty? Your logic seems flawed.

[Bob Pickle]

It may appear that way to you ( I don't doubt it does) but despite Pickle's lurking silence and Alex's convenient withdrawal from the discussions here, and their apparent inability to set the record straight, that is NOT true.

I was gone for the afternoon, and got back a little bit ago.

Alex wants me to say that he has been banned a.k.a given some time to cool off, and so he can't respond to your statement, though he certainly would like to.

I was distinctly told that Tommy pled guilty to four felonies today. The docket shows that four felony cases were considered today. You have provided no evidence that the four felonies pled guilty to are anything different than the four that appear on the docket.

COTK posted a quote from the post at http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php/topic,2122.msg32768.html#msg32768, which is a post by vestedinterest which stated what the assistant Commonwealth atty. had said, which identifies two of the felony counts considered today as being for Alex's case.

Now it certainly could be that Alex's case was dropped. But in light of the docket and vestedinterest's earlier reference to the prosecutor's statement, I think if you are going to be convincing, you're going to have to post here an actual court document that spells that out. We really can't rely on just hearsay when there is a docket and an earlier reference to the prosecutor which contradict what you are saying.

Unless I was told wrong, and Tommy pled guilty to less than four felonies. But not even you have asserted that that was the case.

[Bob Pickle]

So today Tommy Shelton made the Alford plea in the state of Virginia's case in regards to D**** T**** maintaining his innocence but agreeing to a lessor sentence and charges, and the Prosecutor dropped the State's case in regards to Alex Walker entirely.

My understanding is that the plea agreement contained nothing about sentencing.

To find out more you'll need to ask Alex.

Then you must think that Alex is a reliable source of information, and not as big a liar as you have tried to make him out to be.

[childoftheking]

The following is from a July 29 2011 post here on Adventtalk: Reply #72
Topic: Tommy R. Sheltons trials are upon us.

Ms. Stott (assistant Commonwealth atty.) said the Circuit Court judge had to set the cases all the way into next year because of "calendar conflicts" on the part of Tommy's attorneys.

Four cases involving Tommy Shelton appeared on today's docket.  Ms. Stott has explained the two additional cases (FE-2010-0001987 and FE-2010-0001988) are re-indictments of counts which as part of the July 2010 plea agreement she had asked not be prosecuted

Allegations by Dennis Turley:
Case # FE-2010-0000786
Case # FE-2010-0001987

Allegations by Alex Walker:
Case # FE-2010-0000787
Case # FE-2010-0001988

So it would appear that two of the cases regarding Alex Walker and Dennis Turley which were dropped earlier have been reinstated. (Check the case numbers, please). And the other two were never dropped.

It appears there are a couple of more things to say...

COTK:

 It may appear that way to you ( I don't doubt it does) but despite Pickle's lurking silence and Alex's convenient withdrawal from the discussions here, and their apparent inability to set the record straight, that is NOT true. You can continue to attempt to talk over the truth and argue otherwise but you will just appear more foolish because you are just guessing and surmising rather than checking and verifying . The facts are not disputable and time will prove that.

The facts are, Tommy appeared in court this morning and the Alford plea was accepted by the court. Alex's case is gone. It was full of inconsistencies and unprovable statements and the state's Attorney dropped it. All that remains is the sentencing for Dennis Turley's case as the Judge chose not to sentence TS today.

His enemies may gloat or ridicule and scoff about him being taken out of court and to jail in a wheelchair but I am heartsick for him and for those here who can't let go of their hate.

Nosir,
If Alex's case was dropped, all four case numbers are still on Friday's docket at 8:00 am this morning. This is not when the trials were supposed to take place nor the sentancing, merely the consideration of the pleas. This should be up on the docket until midnight Friday when all cases listed on Friday's docket are taken down. If I see that two of them are taken down before then, your argument might have some substance. Otherwise I will trust the official court postings. May I ask, were you in court or did somebody fill you in on the court happenings?

[Bob Pickle]

Sources have clarified the case numbers in the following manner:

• Case 786 contains five charges or counts pertaining to DT.
• Case 787 contains four charges or counts pertaining to AW.
• Case 1987 contains four charges or counts pertaining to DT.
• Case 1988 contains two charges or counts pertaining to AW.

The charges in the latter two cases are re-indictments of counts that the prosecutor agreed in the July 2010 plea agreement not to prosecute.

So if Tommy pled guilty yesterday to four felony charges, then it would appear that that guilty plea was probably exchanged for dropping AW's case.

AW's case was different than DT's case in that there was a corroborating witness in DT's case, and there wasn't in AW's case. If AW and DT could have been tried together, that could have helped. But as it was, it was only AW's word against Tommy's.

[Nosir Myzing]

Sources tell me that (a) today Tommy pled guilty to four felony counts...

Misreporting.. unreliable sources...

http://crime.about.com/od/g_criminal/g/alfordplea.htm

Definition: In the law of the United States, an Alford plea is a plea in criminal court. In this plea, the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty.

Upon receiving an Alford plea from a defendant, the court may immediately pronounce the defendant guilty and impose sentence as if the defendant had otherwise been convicted of the crime. However, in many states, such as Massachusetts, a plea which "admits sufficient facts" more typically results in the case being continued without a finding and later dismissed.

It is the prospect of an ultimate dismissal of charges which engenders most pleas of this type.

Surmising yet again?

Not my words. I am quoting the definition, and I supplied the source.

An Alford plea (also called a Kennedy plea, an Alford guilty plea and the Alford doctrine) in United States law is a guilty plea in criminal court, where the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea)

Could you please explain for all of us how a person who makes an Alford guilty plea has not thereby pled guilty? Your logic seems flawed.

Actually it is Pickle's logic that does. ( He is quoting from the same source as myself btw) He flip flops like a fish while constantly justifying his false opinions, misreports and whatever his current stance and argument is. He makes no sense to me, and even contradicts himself. He knows the difference between a guilty plea and an Alford or No contest plea. He may not recall writing this here, but as I read his latest contentions I immediately recalled reading it.

Re: Bob Pickle... a Jesuit?
Reply from Bob Pickle #81 on: July 16, 2011, 05:50:03 AM »

   

Quote from: Nosir Myzing on July 16, 2011, 03:44:37 AM

    but ignored the following, the Judge went on to say:
    "This submission doesn't even acknowledge that he committed the offense. . . . "

    So you all claim he admitted guilt but the court said he didn't.

No. The court said that in the submission he didn't acknowledge that he committed the offense. But all reports still state that he pled guilty. No report that I've seen says that he instead submitted a no contest plea or Alford plea.

[Nosir Myzing]

COTK:

 It may appear that way to you ( I don't doubt it does) but despite Pickle's lurking silence and Alex's convenient withdrawal from the discussions here, and their apparent inability to set the record straight, that is NOT true. You can continue to attempt to talk over the truth and argue otherwise but you will just appear more foolish because you are just guessing and surmising rather than checking and verifying . The facts are not disputable and time will prove that.

The facts are, Tommy appeared in court this morning and the Alford plea was accepted by the court. Alex's case is gone. It was full of inconsistencies and unprovable statements and the state's Attorney dropped it. All that remains is the sentencing for Dennis Turley's case as the Judge chose not to sentence TS today.

His enemies may gloat or ridicule and scoff about him being taken out of court and to jail in a wheelchair but I am heartsick for him and for those here who can't let go of their hate.

Nosir,
If Alex's case was dropped, all four case numbers are still on Friday's docket at 8:00 am this morning. This is not when the trials were supposed to take place nor the sentancing, merely the consideration of the pleas. This should be up on the docket until midnight Friday when all cases listed on Friday's docket are taken down. If I see that two of them are taken down before then, your argument might have some substance. Otherwise I will trust the official court postings. May I ask, were you in court or did somebody fill you in on the court happenings?

It's been less then 24 hrs, and court schedules do change. In answer to your question, the information I posted came from both the court and from someone filling me in. I see no need to answer further regarding that, or to say anything more as you are capable of contacting the court yourself and inquiring about the status of Alex' case and the charges related to that. As I already posted time will prove what I claimed. I am content with that.


Pickle,

If Alex can tell you he was banned here than he can also tell you his case/charges were dropped. Arguing and quibbling with me instead of asking him, or posting what he already told you in answer to that question is ridiculous and deceitful as far as I am concerned.

I am sorry, but I am not wasting further time with you and with, what in my opinion, is just vain contentions, confusing babble, and illogical arguments.

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

[/quote]





Edited to remove inappropriate content.  Sam was caught here using multiple IDs and then ran and hid under a rock when found out.  Please keep his/her comments at the smut site where they belong.

[childoftheking]

All four case numbers have been removed from Friday's docket consistant with the claim that the judge has already accepted the plea deal. Good! I am so glad there is finally closure on this instead of being left wondering what was going to happen. I would think it is a relief to all concerned including Tommy.

[Nosir Myzing]

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

Edited to remove inappropriate content.  Sam was caught here using multiple IDs and then ran and hid under a rock when found out.  Please keep his/her comments at the smut site where they belong.
[/quote]

Wow... an observation and question, Snoopy. Have you or others here ever noticed how sometimes darkness is actually palpable, and how anger can drown out reason, love and mercy?


Of course we will continue to post on the other site as you say. I didn't realize a rule was violated in my post or that Sam and even Sam's words were banned here until now, so my apologies if they were.

I thought you had honestly posted the following:

Re: Danny Shelton Servant of God
Quote from: Snoopy on: December 03, 2011, 10:29:30 AM »

Apparently the real "Sam" is too humiliated to admit personally that her account was hacked.  Sam, if that's really the case, please don't take it as a personal reflection on you!!  You are the victim here and cannot be blamed for the actions of the perpetrator.  I've had an account hacked before and it is not a good feeling...a feeling of being violated in a weird sort of way.

My bad. Perhaps I was mistaken... or you weren't being sincere? If so I am sorry. I actually believed you. I don't know how Sam could be called to admit to anything personally if not allowed to speak or even be quoted, again I am sorry if that upset you.

How about I post my take, thoughts, and questions to Bob instead while acknowledging that they  are in sync with others? (an Amen) I hope and pray that that will be acceptable here and doesn't violate any posted rules. I can't see how the content does or I wouldn't post it but you can judge, as can the other admins and members. Whether here or on our forum.


Bob,
why not admit that either you and or your sources continue to be liars. This is the kind of stuff has given your credibility score another zero, therefore you are still batting zero. You should work for the National Equiror because they exist by telling lies to the public.

The courts never bought your lies about DS and 3ABN even though you wasted years of your lives trying to prove the unprovable. It has occurred to me why you continue to do what you do....because you are so decieved that you have lost sight of truth! You continually lie by omission. You say TS pleaded guilty and leave out the Alfred plea is used for innocent people that want to take a plea for all kinds of different reasons, but can stand up in court and say they are not guilty, plea or no plea. But you left that tidbit out. You also left out that Alex's case is now dropped. The plea has been accepted and agreed upon.

Please be man enough to say that you hate TS, DS and 3ABN so much that you jumped the gun wanting to appear to be soooo in the know, that you took a risk and wrote what you wanted to happen about TS's case hoping it would be true?

Alex is a moot point....he has no case now and really never did have a legitimate case. The DA recognized that fact and dropped Alex's case without even a fight! AT is the only people who believed Alex's lies. You are blinded by hatred.
Funny thing that Alex decided to get "banned" as soon as it became public that he was dropped from the case because the DA didn't believe him enough to prosecute TR. Why? She found out about Alex's propensity to lie!

Does it surpise any of you that Alex knew even as he was writing the last few days that TR was not pleading guilty and that he Alex had been dropped, yet continued to talk, talk, and talk?

Did anyone here besides myself catch the fact that Alex turned all his hatred on Glen Dryden recently and even began to say positive things about TS?

Did anyone catch the fact that when Alex gets exposed he always claims he is having great physical problems..he seems to think this gives him an out..for telling his lies. You all do know about Alex's claims of having a brain tumor and all the other claims he has made to his family in attempts to get their sympathy. Problem is.....He didn't have a brain tumor!! Another lie!

Notice as he was being informed by the DA that they were dropping his case that he turned his attention to Dryden and started talking about his own alleged terrible health problems? Same ole' same ole'. Well at least you have to admit that he got you all ...hook, line and sinker! When TS had a quadruple bypass and then a massive stroke 7 months ago you all wanted medical records to prove it even though you knew the judge saw the authentic records and put the trial off for all these months because of those records. But not one person here asked Alex to show his records to prove he was having seizures.

And Pickle??? Don't you read the bible? If so, why would you spread hearsay..gossip that is not true and then ask for someone to show you proof of your false statements. Do you really believe that God does not hold you accountable for bearing false witness against your neighbor and spreading it on the world wide web? Are you so blind that you can't see that according to the bible YOU, who is either spreading gossip or is making the gossip up is accountable to God for not finding out the truth FIRST?

It is so sad that you do not have a life of your own, all the while trying to expose other people's sins when the mote is huge in your own eye.

[Snoopy]

Wow... an observation and question, Snoopy. Have you or others here ever noticed how sometimes darkness is actually palpable, and how anger can drown out reason, love and mercy?

Of course we will continue to post on the other site as you say. I didn't realize a rule was violated in my post or that Sam and even Sam's words were banned here until now, so my apologies if they were.

I thought you had honestly posted the following:

Re: Danny Shelton Servant of God
Quote from: Snoopy on: December 03, 2011, 10:29:30 AM »

Apparently the real "Sam" is too humiliated to admit personally that her account was hacked.  Sam, if that's really the case, please don't take it as a personal reflection on you!!  You are the victim here and cannot be blamed for the actions of the perpetrator.  I've had an account hacked before and it is not a good feeling...a feeling of being violated in a weird sort of way.

My bad. Perhaps I was mistaken... or you weren't being sincere? If so I am sorry. I actually believed you. I don't know how Sam could be called to admit to anything personally if not allowed to speak or even be quoted, again I am sorry if that upset you.

How about I post my take, thoughts, and questions to Bob instead while acknowledging that they  are in sync with others? (an Amen) I hope and pray that that will be acceptable here and doesn't violate any posted rules. I can't see how the content does or I wouldn't post it but you can judge, as can the other admins and members. Whether here or on our forum.

I was being sincere.  And I am not upset.  It takes a lot more than you, believe me!!

Sam blatantly broke the AdventTalk forum rules and was caught doing it.  So why would we have any interest in hearing what Sam might have to say third-hand?  Sam is not banned here - just apparently too embarrassed to come here and post for him/herself.  Too bad Sam doesn't have the courage of Alex Walker!!

[Snoopy]

Notice as he was being informed by the DA that they were dropping his case that he turned his attention to Dryden and started talking about his own alleged terrible health problems? Same ole' same ole'. Well at least you have to admit that he got you all ...hook, line and sinker! When TS had a quadruple bypass and then a massive stroke 7 months ago you all wanted medical records to prove it even though you knew the judge saw the authentic records and put the trial off for all these months because of those records. But not one person here asked Alex to show his records to prove he was having seizures.

Give me a break!!  You cannot ask anyone in their right mind to compare Alex with TS!!  ALEX IS NOT THE SICKO PERPETRATOR WHO COULDN'T KEEP HIS GRUBBY ADULT MITTS OFF INNOCENT CHILDREN!!  After what TS did to him, I don't see how Alex should have to prove a medical condition any of us...  TS IS THE PERVERT HERE, NOT ALEX!!

[Nosir Myzing]

Notice as he was being informed by the DA that they were dropping his case that he turned his attention to Dryden and started talking about his own alleged terrible health problems? Same ole' same ole'. Well at least you have to admit that he got you all ...hook, line and sinker! When TS had a quadruple bypass and then a massive stroke 7 months ago you all wanted medical records to prove it even though you knew the judge saw the authentic records and put the trial off for all these months because of those records. But not one person here asked Alex to show his records to prove he was having seizures.

Give me a break!!  You cannot ask anyone in their right mind to compare Alex with TS!!  ALEX IS NOT THE SICKO PERPETRATOR WHO COULDN'T KEEP HIS GRUBBY ADULT MITTS OFF INNOCENT CHILDREN!!  After what TS did to him, I don't see how Alex should have to prove a medical condition any of us...  TS IS THE PERVERT HERE, NOT ALEX!!

ok? Not sure that's true... but in any case if you choose to apply double standards and be partial in judgment I can't stop you. Nor will the Lord unless you ask him.

I'm done posting in this thread.

Laters...

P.S. The benefit of the doubt is a good thing and part of being loving and merciful imo. You don't seem to have considered that Sam who is not lacking in courage (as Sam's history in posting here should prove to even the most hardhearted of Sam's adveraries )may not be able to login here and post anymore. But judge as you choose. I am just sayin... it's good to consider and weigh all. "toodles"