Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"

"Yes."

"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"

"I plead the Fifth."

Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.

[Daryl Fawcett]

"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"

"Yes."

"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"

"I plead the Fifth."

Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.

In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?

[Gregory]

When I first read this it did not make any sense to me.  Why would he take the 5th, so to speak.  He was in prison.  What did it matter?  He went to prison on an Alford Plea, as I recall.  An Alford Plea is commonly thought and accepting the punishemnt, agreeing that a conviction was likely,  but not pleading guiltly.  Then I recalled that case law is mixed on this.  The potential exists for equating the Alford Plea with a guilty Plea.  At this point, I understood why he was asked that question.

If he had replied that he had pled quilty, a judge could have considered that to be as giving up his 5th Ammendment rights.  If so, he could have been required to answer any questions about any persons whom he might have molested and/or his relationships with them.

If his response had been that he took the Alford Plea the same thing could have happened.

If he had responded that he did not plead guilty that response would have been an answer to the question as to guilt.  Again, the  judge could have considered that he gave up his 5th Ammendement rights and therefore required to answer any further questions.  The attorney asking the questions would then have concnetrated on questioning him as to his relationshilp with peole who had accused him, in an attempt to provehis response false, and he  could not have pled the 5th.

In short:  The attorney who asked the question knew exactly what he was doing.  TS was wise to assert his 5th Ammendments rights.

[Gregory]

Daryl asked:

In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?

When one takes the 5th Ammendment, they are saying:  I have a right to refuse to provide you with any evidence that might be used to convict me.  Therefore, I refuse to answer your question.

NOTE: 1) It is not a refusal to provide evidence that would convict.  It is a right to refuse to provide evidence that might be used to convict.  IOW, the mere asking of the question is an indicator that it might be used to convict and therefore one can refuse to answer.

2) Under case law in 5th Ammendment cases, any answer may be considered as giving up the right to pled the 5th.  Therefore, attornies will often attempt to obtain an answer to some simple question that pertains to the criminal issue but may be public knowledge.  Such a question might be:  Do you know Mr.X?    If X is involved in the criminal activity, even as a victim, a failure to take the 5th may be intrepreted as giving up the right to take the 5th.

 

[~ Cindy]

"Mr. Shelton, this prison is where you live?"

"Yes."

"And you are here because you pled guilty to molesting a child?"

"I plead the Fifth."

Somehow I don't think this makes any sense.

In answer to that question, what is he really saying when he pleads the Fifth?

How would Bob Pickle know either what was really said, or not said by Mr Shelton at his deposition? Further. how would Bob Pickle or Alex know what was meant by Mr Shelton, or why he would answer a question, or not answer a question?

Bob Pickle wouldn't know.

(This, imo, is a large part of what has been wrong all along in this ongoing gossip and slanderfest. Many here form their negative opinions and views by asking their questions of the wrong people, most of whom have a bias and are only repeating what they are told, or who are only telling a part of the story... Then it gets repeated endlessly as factual and embellished on. And sadly many who accept all without needing proof end up loving lies and feeling justified and righteous in their judgmental stance, and repeating it to still more people...)

Since Bob wasn't there and does not have an inside scoop on Tommy Shelton's head or heart nor knowledge of what the attorneys advice to Tommy Shelton may or may not have been regarding the deposition? And since he is obviously getting his questionable info from Alex, and Alex is obviously talking about what he was told (as he too wasn't there), why not bypass Bob altogether and directly ask Alex a question more pertinent to his allegations and case?

Like this. (my question to Alex):

Alex, what did your attorney tell you about what Tommy Shelton answered and said when asked about you and your allegations?

Of course even if Alex does answer that will only be half the story, and may not be the truth. ( He's not known for that according to his family, and in my view and understanding, does not have a good record on this forum either. You may look back at his posts and decide for yourself.) Even if Alex answers , we would still need to reserve judgment and wait for answers from the other side and for the documented evidence as it comes out in the case before deciding what the actual proven facts are, and who is credible. but at least you'd be attempting to find answers to your questions in the right way, and not judging anyone prematurely, or falsely... -----> IMO..

~ Cindy

[~ Cindy]

Gregory, I think it is  possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell...   I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.

[~ Cindy]

I am not speculating about who was there, Bob. It is a fact that Tommy Shelton was there being deposed with attorney's from both sides.

I think you're evading my question. I asked you about how you knew who was there. You have stated as fact that Alex was not present at the deposition. I want to know how you know that. ...

"...no, you can't always get what you want, oh, you can't always get what you want... But if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need..."

Are you speculating or were you told? And if you were told, was the person who told you that personally present at Tommy's deposition, or are you just taking someone's word for it that Alex wasn't there?

You see, if what you are stating is really the truth, and if you really are following your own advice, either Tommy called you or you called Tommy, or Alex's attorney(s) or Tommy's attorney(s) called you or you called them. That's the only possibilities I see. Otherwise, you have violated your own advice by speculating or by accepting as truth something someone said who wasn't even there.

It seems to me you always try to turn whatever is said to you, or asked of you into a finger pointing at someone else instead of just answering or being accountable for yourself and your actions. It also seems to me you limit things to only what you can see or what your understanding is. I think there is a better way to look at things... and I also think that there's no reason  to argue about minutia. You already know Alex wasn't there. Please just move on. I am.

[Gregory]

Gregory, I think it is  possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell...   I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.

Cindy:  I do not think that TS dreamed up his plea of the 5th himself. His alleged answer clearly tells me that he was acting on the advice of competent attornies who knew exactly what they were doing and what was at stake.  His alleged response was in accord with his rights under the Constiltution.  I would not take those away from him.  I do not criticize him for making that response, if indeed he did.

I have to assume that TS answered questions that were appropriate and in the process of responding did not abridge his rights. 

The criminal process has taken place. TS is in prison under what I recall to be an Alford Plea.  Now the civil process is taking place.  It should be noted that a criminal process differs from a civil process.   They are not the same.  It remains to be seen how this civil process will play out and what the result will be.  That final result cannot be predicted at this time.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?   

Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?

[~ Cindy]

Gregory, I think it is  possible that Mr Shelton answered what was pertinent to Alex's case and allegations and declined to answer what was not, under the advice of the attorneys, but who knows, time will tell...   I do know that at least one of the attorneys is familiar with Pickle and Joy's tactics and it's no secret about their involvement with Alex, and his with them and this forum etc.

Cindy:  I do not think that TS dreamed up his plea of the 5th himself. His alleged answer clearly tells me that he was acting on the advice of competent attornies who knew exactly what they were doing and what was at stake.  His alleged response was in accord with his rights under the Constiltution.  I would not take those away from him.  I do not criticize him for making that response, if indeed he did.

I have to assume that TS answered questions that were appropriate and in the process of responding did not abridge his rights. 

The criminal process has taken place. TS is in prison under what I recall to be an Alford Plea.  Now the civil process is taking place.  It should be noted that a criminal process differs from a civil process.   They are not the same.  It remains to be seen how this civil process will play out and what the result will be.  That final result cannot be predicted at this time.

Understood.

I would just like to clarify for those who don't know...


Mr Shelton's plea bargain, in a criminal case, essentially saying I'll accept the judgment against me, and pray for mercy, while still asserting I am not guilty and that I maintain I didn't do it, was NOT in regards to Alex's allegations nor was it in regards to Alex's criminal case.


Alex Walker's criminal case was dropped by the state. The criminal case was about DT's claims.

What I want understood here, is that the civil case is not only a different type of case, it is actually an entirely different case about a totally different person and different claims and allegations. The civil case is one where Alex Walker is suing 3ABN and Tommy Shelton for $9,999,000.00

[~ Cindy]

Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?   

Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?

What in the world...
Did you even attempt to consider one single concept that I was trying to get across, or try to even once consider what GM was trying to explain about the justice system and rights and why someone would refuse to answer certain questions in a deposition?


As far as Tommy Shelton saying "Not guilty" FYI:  he's actually done that. Over and over. I am including his answer to Alex's complaint in the civil case, for you to read. Now you'll have no excuse not to know his position and side before refusing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I am not really familiar with the US Justice System.

I don't even know what the equivalent is here in Canada, if there even is an equivalent.

I may need to ask a retired lawyer member of our church here about this.

[Gregory]

Would TS had pleaded the 5th if he were not guilty?   

Wouldn't he have said "Not guilty" instead?

No.

To do so could have compromised thepending civil case.

He acted in accord with his rights and in his best interests and clearly had competent legal advice.
 

[Gregory]

Cindy said:

Mr Shelton's plea bargain, in a criminal case, essentially saying I'll accept the judgment against me, and pray for mercy, while still asserting I am not guilty . . . .

Cindy's response, above, is substantially in accord with the law.  The law is generally clear that taking an Alford Plea is not an admission of guilt. There is what I would call a minor exception in case law to that general rule.

So,the bottom line is that TS can continue to claim that he is not guilty of the crime to which he was charged.  At this point in time, I do not believe that the minor exception that I mention applies to him.

[Johann]

About 60 years ago American Congress was investigating "everybody" about their communist affiliation. I recall a newspaper drawing of a rabbit running away from CongressThe caption wnet something like this:

- Why are you running so fast away from Congress, since you were never a communist?

- That's right, but I cannot prove it.

In those days Congress could ruin a person politically and financially by indicating they had communist connections.

For that reason many of the people questioned took a Fifth. Our college professor explained this in detail in American Government at Berrien Springs at that time.