Print

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

[GrammieT]

I can both understand and appreciate how in many ways it may have been difficult to write the above, Gregory.

I am therefore all the more appreciative of your candor.

Yes, we shall wait and see how things develop.

I am with you, Nosir, in your comments on Gregory's post   ; however, I have another question mainly because I don't always understand the workings of the law nor the IRS.   

Q:  Is it possible that the rulings came as a result of any questions being cleared up by payment of any monies owed in the areas under discovery thereby clearing up any 'misunderstandings' or 'possible underreportings' by 3ABN's financial officers and others connected to the financial aspect of the ministry?       

Any comments, anybody?     

GrammieT 

P.S.  Please don't jump all over me now.  I'm just wondering how everything got so cleared up so quickly. 

[Daryl Fawcett]

I would also like to hear Fran's thoughts regarding this latest news.

[Eduard]

"Gregory,"

For someone who states that,


"NOTE: I am neither a licensed attorney nor am I trained in the law. My statements here are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion nor are they intended to be an expression of the legal merits of any litigation.  Such opinions should be obtained from competent legal counsel which I am not,"

I would say that the extensive conclusions included in your post seems to indicate a rather definitive, expert, and terminal perspective on the course of the litigation between Shelton and Joy & Pickle. The way you contradict yourself leaves me confused. You affirm that:


1. the fact  that "the Internal Revenue Service had cleared 3-ABN of financial misconduct as it relates to their area of purview... is a significant development that in my opinion has major consequences related to the lawsuit against Gailon and Bob, and others,"

 2. that " this decision will have a major impact upon the litigation that 3-ABN has filed against Gailon and Bob.  It does not affect, in my thinking certain parts of that litigation.  However, I will suggest that it does affect some major parts and that it becomes much more likely that 3-ABN will prevail in regard to charges related to libel and defamation of character,"

3. that "this decision may have an impact on Gailon, Bob, Fran and Linda,"

4. that Bob...is failing to prevail.  Success in litigation is not measured by inconsequential victories.  Rather it is measured by whether or not one prevails.  Bob appears to me to be outgunned and acting outside his area of expertise.  I simply see him as failing to prevail." You also offer to Bob professional advice, by stating that "as such he may want to consider contacting the attorneys who represent 3-ABN and asking how his part in the lawsuit can be resolved without further litigation.  This has been a huge emotional and financial drain on him and on his family.  It may be time for him to attempt to reach a settlement and move on in the life of him and his family."

5. About Fran you state, "Fran:  I have no substantial comment about her.  She raised issues that were worthy of   investigation.  The IRS now appears to have ruled against her.  She can be thankful that she has not been a defendant in the litigation."

6. and about Linda you affirm: "Linda: On the surface this may appear to some to have no effect on her.   She can be thankful that she is not a defendant.  She has raised issues that do not appear to be related to the IRS ruling.  But, this ruling has a deeper meaning for her than what lies on the surface.  This ruling is likely to bring the ongoing controversy to a close in major aspects sooner rather than later.  As that time comes, Linda will need to move on with her life which is a life outside of the litigation and this controversy.  She will have to make a life for herself that is unrelated to either Danny or 3-ABN.  That time has been expected to come eventually.  I will suggest that it will now come sooner."


The above statements seem to come from someone with extensive legal expertise, but the individual who makes such comments denies any training in the law, claims that his statements "are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion," and also his statements are not "an expression of the legal merits of any litigation."

So, my question is: If these statements are MERE personal thoughts, and nothing more, 1. What is their value for those involved in the litigation ( I guess none!)?, and 2. why did you bother to write the message? (Too much free time?)


Eduard

[anyman]

Please don't congratulate me Habby, it has never been a competition and I didn't win anything. I listened to the truth when I heard it. I defended what I had prayerfully discerned as truth and knew God would lead, guide, and protect. This isn't about personal won - lose records as we know God will always win in the end.

And, if all the accusations that have been flung by Gailon Arthur Joy, Robert Pickle, Fran ********, and others in regards to the finances of 3ABN and/or Danny Shelton are baseless, groundless, without foundation . . . what does that portend in regards to their other accusations, insinuations, and outright lies? As has been used her many times - where there is smoke, there is fire. Remember the certainty and condescension that was used in crowing the accusations about financial mis-dealings? Remember the claims of a wealth of information and documentation that would convict a jury that 3ABN and Danny had been involved in a myriad of financial mis-dealings? Remember the claims of victory and financial gain when all the accusations were substantiated in court with all that documentation?

Yes, there is rejoicing . . . rejoicing that God is faithful to His word to keep His hand around the faithful even when the Fallen One is pulling out all the stops to cover up the truth and destroy them. The rejoicing is about God's great love and faithfulness . . . and not about "winning" . . .

 

So thats that. Congratulations to you Sam, Ian, Donna, Anyman, Junebug and all the others. Negotiation and settlements can be wonderful options in so many disputes. Tomorrow I will go down to Jamba and raise a carrot juice (laced with wheat grass) to the end of this portion of the saga.

[Artiste]

The above statements seem to come from someone with extensive legal expertise, but the individual who makes such comments denies any training in the law, claims that his statements "are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion," and also his statements are not "an expression of the legal merits of any litigation."

Presumably Gregory has been conferring with one of his legal friends/advisors.

[Artiste]

Yes, there is rejoicing . . . rejoicing that God is faithful to His word to keep His hand around the faithful even when the Fallen One is pulling out all the stops to cover up the truth and destroy them. The rejoicing is about God's great love and faithfulness . . . and not about "winning" . . .

Since a number of us are cognizant of the fact that the "Fallen One" who is helping to cover up the truth is actually on the other side of what anyman has protrayed above, we will keep waiting for God to reveal the truth to all and sundry...and that time will come.

[anyman]

Well, this is an interesting position . . . I am going to defend Mr. Matthews, a man I have had major disagreements with and continue to disagree on some points with. His posting is accurate, anyone with an ability to consider the content of his posting will see that it just makes plain sense. As I asked in another thread - Do you remember that chest thumping about how 3ABN and Danny were going down to all kinds of ruin because of the wealth of documentation that Gailon Arthur Joy, Robert Pickle, and Fran ******** had about all those myriad of financial illegalities committed by 3ABN and Danny?

It is all moot now isn't it? There is no truth in their claims. I think the word that is being used is "exonerated" that would mean total admission by the Governing agency that there is nothing amiss . . . and if one reads the emails from Mr. R. Shelton carefully, there is no mention of payments, settlements . . . no, the agency has cleared them - period.

Back to Mr. Matthews. His post is well thought out and accurate and one need not be an attorney, if one has connection to attorneys that one can ask for interpretation. A good paralegal knows they are not to give legal advice - but can take questions from their clients back to the attorney, ask for response, and then take the response back to the client - that is not a broach of legal ethics. Mr. Matthews is merely sharing reasonable conjecture and making it clear that he does not do so as an attorney - but do you know if he did or didn't run it by an attorney to get some thoughts and ideas? Do you know what his experience with the law has been?

The point is this. This is a public forum and you have spent the past week running around these halls doing >N O T H I N G< but ridicule, disparage, malign, insult, condescend, patronize, defame, slander, smear, slur, vilify anyone and everyone who has stood by 3ABN and Danny Shelton.

The value of Mr. Matthews statements is that the contribute to the dialogue here - they C O N T R I B U T E! Weighted in the balance his comments are substantive and lead to reasoned discussion about the issues at hand. He is willing to accept the truth and see how it fits into the changing picture. I appreciate and hope that Mr. Matthews will continue to contribute - even if I don't agree with him I appreciate his attempts at candor.

"Gregory,"

For someone who states that,


"NOTE: I am neither a licensed attorney nor am I trained in the law. My statements here are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion nor are they intended to be an expression of the legal merits of any litigation.  Such opinions should be obtained from competent legal counsel which I am not,"

I would say that the extensive conclusions included in your post seems to indicate a rather definitive, expert, and terminal perspective on the course of the litigation between Shelton and Joy & Pickle. The way you contradict yourself leaves me confused. You affirm that:


1. the fact  that "the Internal Revenue Service had cleared 3-ABN of financial misconduct as it relates to their area of purview... is a significant development that in my opinion has major consequences related to the lawsuit against Gailon and Bob, and others,"

 2. that " this decision will have a major impact upon the litigation that 3-ABN has filed against Gailon and Bob.  It does not affect, in my thinking certain parts of that litigation.  However, I will suggest that it does affect some major parts and that it becomes much more likely that 3-ABN will prevail in regard to charges related to libel and defamation of character,"

3. that "this decision may have an impact on Gailon, Bob, Fran and Linda,"

4. that Bob...is failing to prevail.  Success in litigation is not measured by inconsequential victories.  Rather it is measured by whether or not one prevails.  Bob appears to me to be outgunned and acting outside his area of expertise.  I simply see him as failing to prevail." You also offer to Bob professional advice, by stating that "as such he may want to consider contacting the attorneys who represent 3-ABN and asking how his part in the lawsuit can be resolved without further litigation.  This has been a huge emotional and financial drain on him and on his family.  It may be time for him to attempt to reach a settlement and move on in the life of him and his family."

5. About Fran you state, "Fran:  I have no substantial comment about her.  She raised issues that were worthy of   investigation.  The IRS now appears to have ruled against her.  She can be thankful that she has not been a defendant in the litigation."

6. and about Linda you affirm: "Linda: On the surface this may appear to some to have no effect on her.   She can be thankful that she is not a defendant.  She has raised issues that do not appear to be related to the IRS ruling.  But, this ruling has a deeper meaning for her than what lies on the surface.  This ruling is likely to bring the ongoing controversy to a close in major aspects sooner rather than later.  As that time comes, Linda will need to move on with her life which is a life outside of the litigation and this controversy.  She will have to make a life for herself that is unrelated to either Danny or 3-ABN.  That time has been expected to come eventually.  I will suggest that it will now come sooner."


The above statements seem to come from someone with extensive legal expertise, but the individual who makes such comments denies any training in the law, claims that his statements "are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion," and also his statements are not "an expression of the legal merits of any litigation."

So, my question is: If these statements are MERE personal thoughts, and nothing more, 1. What is their value for those involved in the litigation ( I guess none!)?, and 2. why did you bother to write the message? (Too much free time?)


Eduard

[Artiste]

It is all moot now isn't it? There is no truth in their claims. I think the word that is being used is "exonerated" that would mean total admission by the Governing agency that there is nothing amiss . . . and if one reads the emails from Mr. R. Shelton carefully, there is no mention of payments, settlements . . . no, the agency has cleared them - period.

The fact that the government has found nothing does not equate to "no truth in their claims".

It only means that the government didn't find it.  "Cooked books" are somtimes successful.

[Eduard]

"anyman,"

You are very mean to me, but I will forgive you. Your celebration, though, is premature. Shakespeare said that "All is well when IT ENDS WELL." Well, it hasn't ended, and it is far from ending soon for Danny Shelton. The IRS is just a little piece in the puzzle. Trere is also Linda, and Danny's unproven claims that she commited adultery, the child molestation cases, and other issues which will keep him awake at night, and maybe send him to the hospital. And then there is his REPUTATION!  He will never clear his name even if he sues the whole world!

Eduard

[Rosa]

Please don't congratulate me Habby, it has never been a competition and I didn't win anything. I listened to the truth when I heard it. I defended what I had prayerfully discerned as truth and knew God would lead, guide, and protect. This isn't about personal won - lose records as we know God will always win in the end.

And, if all the accusations that have been flung by Gailon Arthur Joy, Robert Pickle, Fran ********, and others in regards to the finances of 3ABN and/or Danny Shelton are baseless, groundless, without foundation . . . what does that portend in regards to their other accusations, insinuations, and outright lies? As has been used her many times - where there is smoke, there is fire. Remember the certainty and condescension that was used in crowing the accusations about financial mis-dealings? Remember the claims of a wealth of information and documentation that would convict a jury that 3ABN and Danny had been involved in a myriad of financial mis-dealings? Remember the claims of victory and financial gain when all the accusations were substantiated in court with all that documentation?

Yes, there is rejoicing . . . rejoicing that God is faithful to His word to keep His hand around the faithful even when the Fallen One is pulling out all the stops to cover up the truth and destroy them. The rejoicing is about God's great love and faithfulness . . . and not about "winning" . . .

 

So thats that. Congratulations to you Sam, Ian, Donna, Anyman, Junebug and all the others. Negotiation and settlements can be wonderful options in so many disputes. Tomorrow I will go down to Jamba and raise a carrot juice (laced with wheat grass) to the end of this portion of the saga.

Well, this is an interesting position . . . I am going to defend Mr. Matthews, a man I have had major disagreements with and continue to disagree on some points with. His posting is accurate, anyone with an ability to consider the content of his posting will see that it just makes plain sense. As I asked in another thread - Do you remember that chest thumping about how 3ABN and Danny were going down to all kinds of ruin because of the wealth of documentation that Gailon Arthur Joy, Robert Pickle, and Fran ******** had about all those myriad of financial illegalities committed by 3ABN and Danny?

It is all moot now isn't it? There is no truth in their claims. I think the word that is being used is "exonerated" that would mean total admission by the Governing agency that there is nothing amiss . . . and if one reads the emails from Mr. R. Shelton carefully, there is no mention of payments, settlements . . . no, the agency has cleared them - period.

Back to Mr. Matthews. His post is well thought out and accurate and one need not be an attorney, if one has connection to attorneys that one can ask for interpretation. A good paralegal knows they are not to give legal advice - but can take questions from their clients back to the attorney, ask for response, and then take the response back to the client - that is not a broach of legal ethics. Mr. Matthews is merely sharing reasonable conjecture and making it clear that he does not do so as an attorney - but do you know if he did or didn't run it by an attorney to get some thoughts and ideas? Do you know what his experience with the law has been?

The point is this. This is a public forum and you have spent the past week running around these halls doing >N O T H I N G< but ridicule, disparage, malign, insult, condescend, patronize, defame, slander, smear, slur, vilify anyone and everyone who has stood by 3ABN and Danny Shelton.

The value of Mr. Matthews statements is that the contribute to the dialogue here - they C O N T R I B U T E! Weighted in the balance his comments are substantive and lead to reasoned discussion about the issues at hand. He is willing to accept the truth and see how it fits into the changing picture. I appreciate and hope that Mr. Matthews will continue to contribute - even if I don't agree with him I appreciate his attempts at candor.

"Gregory,"

For someone who states that,


"NOTE: I am neither a licensed attorney nor am I trained in the law. My statements here are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion nor are they intended to be an expression of the legal merits of any litigation.  Such opinions should be obtained from competent legal counsel which I am not,"

I would say that the extensive conclusions included in your post seems to indicate a rather definitive, expert, and terminal perspective on the course of the litigation between Shelton and Joy & Pickle. The way you contradict yourself leaves me confused. You affirm that:


1. the fact  that "the Internal Revenue Service had cleared 3-ABN of financial misconduct as it relates to their area of purview... is a significant development that in my opinion has major consequences related to the lawsuit against Gailon and Bob, and others,"

 2. that " this decision will have a major impact upon the litigation that 3-ABN has filed against Gailon and Bob.  It does not affect, in my thinking certain parts of that litigation.  However, I will suggest that it does affect some major parts and that it becomes much more likely that 3-ABN will prevail in regard to charges related to libel and defamation of character,"

3. that "this decision may have an impact on Gailon, Bob, Fran and Linda,"

4. that Bob...is failing to prevail.  Success in litigation is not measured by inconsequential victories.  Rather it is measured by whether or not one prevails.  Bob appears to me to be outgunned and acting outside his area of expertise.  I simply see him as failing to prevail." You also offer to Bob professional advice, by stating that "as such he may want to consider contacting the attorneys who represent 3-ABN and asking how his part in the lawsuit can be resolved without further litigation.  This has been a huge emotional and financial drain on him and on his family.  It may be time for him to attempt to reach a settlement and move on in the life of him and his family."

5. About Fran you state, "Fran:  I have no substantial comment about her.  She raised issues that were worthy of   investigation.  The IRS now appears to have ruled against her.  She can be thankful that she has not been a defendant in the litigation."

6. and about Linda you affirm: "Linda: On the surface this may appear to some to have no effect on her.   She can be thankful that she is not a defendant.  She has raised issues that do not appear to be related to the IRS ruling.  But, this ruling has a deeper meaning for her than what lies on the surface.  This ruling is likely to bring the ongoing controversy to a close in major aspects sooner rather than later.  As that time comes, Linda will need to move on with her life which is a life outside of the litigation and this controversy.  She will have to make a life for herself that is unrelated to either Danny or 3-ABN.  That time has been expected to come eventually.  I will suggest that it will now come sooner."


The above statements seem to come from someone with extensive legal expertise, but the individual who makes such comments denies any training in the law, claims that his statements "are not intended to be an expression of a legal opinion," and also his statements are not "an expression of the legal merits of any litigation."

So, my question is: If these statements are MERE personal thoughts, and nothing more, 1. What is their value for those involved in the litigation ( I guess none!)?, and 2. why did you bother to write the message? (Too much free time?)


Eduard

Anyman,

All I can say here is Amen, and then add a double Amen! and a humble and heartfelt:

I couldn't have expressed any of this better than you just did. Truth is truth.

The Lord only is to be credited here and be praised, thanked and  congratulated.

Each of us is individually accountable for what we do, how we act, react. and speak (every idle word) according to His truth and His revelation of it.

The only real question which remains is what will we as individuals do and say when confronted with the truth?

That remains to be seen, and is for God himself to judge.


In His Infinite Love and Grace,

Rosa
aka Cynthia Ann Conard

[Eduard]

And "anyman,"

Do you want some tutoring in English? There are 40 million illiterate people in this country, and you are one of them. We can do it on-line! No charge!

Your friend,

Eduard

[Artiste]

And, if all the accusations that have been flung by Gailon Arthur Joy, Robert Pickle, Fran ********, and others in regards to the finances of 3ABN and/or Danny Shelton are baseless, groundless, without foundation . . . what does that portend in regards to their other accusations, insinuations, and outright lies?

We have heard this argument before.

I think the first time it came up was when ASI was invited to negotiate between Linda and Danny/3ABN.  

The argument does not hold up.  If one assumes that the financial accusations against 3ABN are incorrect (and I do not believe that), that does not clear 3ABN of the other allegations that have been brought against it.  

[Child_of_God]

And \"anyman,\"

Do you want some tutoring in English? There are 40 million illiterate people in this country, and you are one of them. We can do it on-line! No charge!

Your friend,

Eduard

I do not believe Anyman to be illiterate. If he were it would not matter because it is not how one says something that is of any great importance. The important thing is what is said.

[Gregory]

Edard: 

As to the value of my post, that will be determined by the people who read it.  Some may find value and others may not find anything of value.  That is O.K. with me.  It is simply out there for all to read and decide for themself whether or not it has  value.

I also think that you understand the law well enough to  know why I stated what I stated.  There is a fine line between the practice of law and the freedom of speech that one has to comment on legal matters.  I  have  written on legal matters for years.  My writing on the Katcoff case has been mentioned in a book on that case that was co-written by a Constitutional attorney involved in the case and a recognized historian.  I am very careful to walk the line between the practice of law and my freedom to comment on law and specific legal cases.  I think that you  knew exactly what I was doing and did not need to ask.   But, that was your legal right just as I exercised mine and did not violate the law in doing so.

By the way, the extent to which I may have consulted with a liscensed attorney is beside the point.  I stated what I wrote as my opinion as I was legally entitled to do and in a manner that remained outside of the practice of law.

[Artiste]

I do not believe Anyman to be illiterate. If he were it would not matter because it is not how one says something that is of any great importance. The important thing is what is said.

What importance do you attach to the fact that anyman said the following to Eduard?

This is a public forum and you have spent the past week running around these halls doing >N O T H I N G< but ridicule, disparage, malign, insult, condescend, patronize, defame, slander, smear, slur, vilify anyone and everyone who has stood by 3ABN and Danny Shelton.