Print

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

[Petunia]

Don't know what you're talking about. Never had NLP training.

Let's get down to basics. We both agree that Dryden invited Walt to contact Tommy's alleged molestation victims, do we not?

We both agree that he should have done so in order to safeguard 3ABN from any potential liability, do we not?

We both agree that he admitted that he never did so, do we not?

We both agree that Walt himself personally told me that he never did, and that he has never retracted his position, do we not?

So what exactly do we disagree about?

I have also spoken with Walt at least twice on the phone, and thus Sam's statement is patently false. He should apologize for making a false statement.

As I have read here, some of your statements have raised some questions.

How many of Tommy's alleged victims have filed charges against him?  As Pastor Dryden and you have attempted to build a case as to the guilt of Tommy Shelton, it seems that the most proper procedure would instead be for alleged victims to address this situation in the justice system. 

I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities.  Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things? 

I understand that it is often very difficult for victims to report abuse, but if they were bold enough to report it to a pastor and other members of the congregation, why not take the next logical step and take it to the proper authorities?  Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter.  Whose job is it to investigate such things?

One of Tommy's victims DID press charges and somehow Tommy was able to smooth talk his way out of being prosecuted.

For most of us, the statute of limitations has run out. There is a bill pending in the Illinois Senate that would open a window for criminal charges to be filed. I contacted our state senator, Gary Forby, and he didn't even have the courtesy to answer my email. He is a worthless coward. Believe me, if the statute ever opens up, I will be the first to press charges.

My brother Duane, I am making your entire reply stand out from the rest of this post because I feel strongly that what you are saying here begs to be studied and heard by all.

Someday, the world may pull its head out of the sand (or even darker places) and properly address the cycle of abuse, to intervene this soul-shredding system that has, for far too long, been allowed to insidiously attach itself to the very DNA of humanity.

Should that day come when your state's legislature removes the statue of limitations, I urge you to maintain your resolve to take that step.

I reported what happened to me because I have since been told that nearly the entire Shelton family, including Tommy's wife Carol, knew the abuse was going on and did nothing to stop it. In fact, after our statements were made, both Tommy and Carol sent out blistering letters complaining about how bad they have been treated. No denying the charges, but no apologies or remorse, either.

Your documentation was compelling, Duane.  As I followed your stepping out of silence, I wondered why others did not.  I know it must be frustrating to be the only one willing to take that stand.  I watched as some attempted to cause speculation as to your orientation and, frankly, that made me believe your reports all the more strongly.

As far as Glenn Dryden goes, he delights in sticking his nose into things that cause controversy. He isn't interested in a resolution, he just wants to mail out letters and spread gossip. He has done it for years and I don't anticipate any change in that.

This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden.  There is an appropriate manner in which these types of issues should be handled, for the sake of both the alleged victims and the alleged abuser.  To build a case on words or gossip alone is not only fruitless, it is dangerous.  I've seen so much of that happening with some of the issues being discussed here on Adventtalk.  Opinion becomes treated as fact without the benefit of due process.

Pet

[Petunia]

Arrrrgh.....  This is why I even stepped out of the shadows of lurkage and decided to finally speak my mind instead of just sitting here shaking my head in disbelief that anyone would buy what you are attempting to sell!

If I was sitting on a jury listening to heartbroken mothers and their children telling horrendous stories of abuse, I would wonder why those mothers didn't contact law enforcement and legislators when they discovered the abuse; why that pastor didn't report the abuse.  So many "knew" that it split a church apart, but it never seemed to get to the point that the group had enough belief in the allegations that they would take it to the justice system.  Why there wasn't a public outcry once it came to light.  Will the jury hear that?

As Duane illustrated above, he knows that Glenn Dryden's aim was spreading gossip and building juicy controversy.  If Duane can see that and chooses not to get involved with that situation, perhaps others in the community are aware of Dryden's character and goals as well.  It  is dangerous to accept the tragic tales of abuse without proper process.  Have you forgotten the Salem witch trials?  How many lost their lives due to believing the lies of some little girls?  How many exploited those lies for their own gain?  How many clothed that process in the garb of religion and righteousness?

I have followed many of the trials against the Catholic priests.  Some victims have prevailed, some have not.  One woman, who had a compelling story of several instances of rape, did not because she remained silent too long and had earlier convinced others and herself that the sex (when she was a teen) was consenual.  Her abuser was convicted on counts against others, but not hers, so it is not a given that all will collect damages.

Once guilt is established, then one could reasonably be critical of a board chairman for not responding to such a letter.

Are you telling me that if you were on a jury and listened to heartbroken mothers and their children tell horrendous stories, and heard the board chairman say that he never bothered to talk to the alleged victims even when invited to, and that it enough evidence was brought out to demonstrate that the alleged perpetrator was indeed a perpetrator, that you would not reward one penny to the alleged victims on grounds of extreme negligence?

Where is your head at? How can you even say such a thing?

Have you not read about the huge judgments against the Catholic Church even in cases where no charges were filed?

=====

Edited to remove an inappropriate abbreviation of saying the Lord's name in vain. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.

[Petunia]

It is truly amazing what sitting on a conservative SDA pitard will do to one's ability to see, reason and comprehend true religion and righteousness. 

And you worry about an anti-christ...

Because that is what you choose to see and say?

No, because it's the truth.

Are you ready yet to return to the ranks of conservativism and take a stand for righteousness? Are you ready to say that Walt should have spoken with the alleged victims and not just the alleged perpetrator and his brother?

I wonder what you would think if the police routinely spoke only with the alleged murderer, the alleged thief, the alleged rapist, and never the alleged victims, and took the alleged perpetrator's word for it that everything was fine.

[bonnie]

Arrrrgh.....  This is why I even stepped out of the shadows of lurkage and decided to finally speak my mind instead of just sitting here shaking my head in disbelief that anyone would buy what you are attempting to sell!

And many of us shake our head in disbelief that so many do not see.

[quote[If I was sitting on a jury listening to heartbroken mothers and their children telling horrendous stories of abuse, I would wonder why those mothers didn't contact law enforcement and legislators when they discovered the abuse; why that pastor didn't report the abuse.  So many "knew" that it split a church apart, but it never seemed to get to the point that the group had enough belief in the allegations that they would take it to the justice system.  Why there wasn't a public outcry once it came to light.  Will the jury hear that? [/quote]

In a large part vocims or their families do not come forward because of people just like yourself.

In our personal  family situation many knew, going back 30 years I might add. Five conferences to spread is questionable charm. It is hard enough when it is your child. My son was in his middle thirties when a pastor (so called)
tore apart his family.  I cannot imagine putting a child
or a young adult thru that. The "if I had been in that situation  "I would have handled in the proper way and exposed my child the good christian folks" Not a good place to be in.

.  Have you forgotten the Salem witch trials?  How many lost their lives due to believing the lies of some little girls?  How many exploited those lies for their own gain?  How many clothed that process in the garb of religion and righteousness?

Yup compare the poor Sheltons with the Salem witch trials. That usually gets a little mileage and takes the focus of the guilty and places it on those "victims that might be lying"  All to frequently that works.

I have followed many of the trials against the Catholic priests.  Some victims have prevailed, some have not.  One woman, who had a compelling story of several instances of rape, did not because she remained silent too long and had earlier convinced others and herself that the sex (when she was a teen) was consenual.  Her abuser was convicted on counts against others, but not hers, so it is not a given that all will collect damages.

Most are not the age of consent, or it happens as a result of a vulnerable young person. Does not matter if they agree or the sex was forced,the party with the authority is the one that needs to be stopped. Especially in a christian enviourment. Doesn't even matter if the party was barely age of consent. What does matter is many of you are willing to look at this only as a slightly naughty activity. Not nice, but you know "all have sinned"
Ever occur to you that "collecting damages" is not what is upper most in the mind of most victims.
To me,it shows a lot about where you and others place their values, as it is always those that haven't a clue that are so anxious to bring up financial gain



Once a pastor, teacher, volunteer or employee of a christian denomination or employment crosses that line, he needs to be out the door as far as job goes, or acess to those he likes to prey on.

=====

Edited to clean-up quote of edited post.

[Bob Pickle]

Your documentation was compelling, Duane.  As I followed your stepping out of silence, I wondered why others did not.  I know it must be frustrating to be the only one willing to take that stand.

If you read his documentation, how can you also claim that he was the only one of the alleged victims that took a stand?

This is exactly why I think it was wisdom for Walt Thompson to make the choices he did, regarding the contact from Dryden.

How in the world at this late date can you dare call it wisdom for Walt to take the word of the alleged perpetrator and his brother and never once contact the alleged victims?!?!?!

[Gregory]

I have read the information from Dryden and I had to wonder if this pastor reported the allegations to the authorities.  Isn't it the law that pastors, counselors, teachers, etc, must report such things? 

1) Does the law require that clergy report abuse?  There is no Federal law that requires such.  So, the question now goes to what the individual States have on their law books.

2)  There is no uniformity among the 50 States in regard to clergy being required to report abuse.  However, in my opinon, I believe that the majority of the States do not require clergy to report.

3) There are a few States, such as Colorado who do require such to be reporrted.  In Colorado, the law is recent, within the past five years if my memory is good.  In any case, the individual States will differ as to what they require to be reported and the circumstances under which it must be reported.  So, it would not be wise to make a general statement related to clergy reporting requiremenets.

4) In any case, clergy-penetitent relationships are covered by the First Ammendment.  Therefore, on this basis a clergy person  would not be required to report under circumstances in which the "sinner" had come to the clergy person in an attempt to get right with God.  e.g.  No clergyperson could be required to report an act of confession.  This limits what the clergy person could be required to report.

[Artiste]

I watched as some attempted to cause speculation as to your orientation and, frankly, that made me believe your reports all the more strongly.

As the later posted context of Petunia's comments reveals, this is an underhanded harsh and devastating criticism of Duane which does not correlate well with the seemingly understanding tone that Petunia attempts to develop at the beginning of his/her remarks.

[Bob Pickle]

It  is dangerous to accept the tragic tales of abuse without proper process.

And thus you declare for all to read that you think it vital and wisdom to accept the tales of alleged perpetrators without proper process. Why would you take such a ludicrous position? Why would you take the position that the tales of the alleged perpetrator should be listened to but not the tales of the alleged victims?

[Bob Pickle]

And you worry about an anti-christ...

An antichrist who makes of none effect the commandments of God by his traditions.

Yet we are told that the last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimonies, so I guess we shouldn't be surprised if some Seventh-day Adventists make of none effect the commandments of God by justifying the protection of an alleged pedophile by covering up and refusing to properly investigate the allegations against him.

[anyman]

How in the world at this late date can you dare call it wisdom for Walt to take the word of the alleged perpetrator and his brother and never once contact the alleged victims?!?!?!

Here you go again! Your post is so misleading. According to the content of your website, Maritime, and other sites as well the following was a communication between you and Dr. Thompson that you posted a number of times:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson

Dear Bob,

Thank you for you attempt to understand my sensitivity and that of 3abn administratin and board. We believe we have acted responsibly and wisely, appropriate to the circumstances. While one can always be criticized after the fact and without all of the evidence then available for consideration, often those same critics would have made similar judgments had they been there.

As I recall the events of 2003, I received a call from Brad Thorp from the General Conference telling me of Pastor Dryden's accusations. Brad appropriately told me that it was not his concern, and that it was ours to handle. As I recall, I contacted pastor Dryden and heard his side of the story following which I received the letter that is circulating. I was at 3abn at the time and spoke at length with Danny about the matter. He shared with me the details as he understood them. Whether or not I was aware of what generated the letter at that time, I do not remember. Based upon my understanding that Dryden had had a long standing feud with Tommy over factors unrelated to the above accusations, it did not seem indicated to approach the boys in question directly, having been informed that no case had ever been filed with the courts or legal disposition made. We then discussed the situation with the full board. Given the alleged events had occured many years before, attempts had been made to make things right, and no legal action had been taken, we did not see any reason to pursue the issue further nor to follow through with his recommendations. In my reply to pastor Dryden I merely thanked him for fulfilling his obligation to us. (I will make this one further comment. Whereas there are many accusations on the Internet alledging that Danny cannot be trusted, I disagree. I have known Danny now since the beginning of the ministry. Now more than 23 years. I have been fully appraised of many of the difficulties that he has faced during that time. While Danny sees things from his perspective, as we all do, he is honest and trustworthy. I have found no reason to distrust his reports to me. Yes, there are occasions when after having spoken with both sides of an issue it has been a matter of he said vs she said, but in all situations where I could know the facts, Danny has proven true.)

Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront (I think there is only one person who could have known about this and brought it to world wide attentionm, and that person was then on the board and voted with the concensus) I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations) The picture that was painted by that leader of the Church was exactly as portrayed earlier by Danny. Dryden was jealous of Tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present. I was again informed that the DA knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against Tommy. I have been informed that the Church of God is a congregational type or organization with different jurisdictions in different states and that there was no higher authority that I could speak with to resolve the issue further. It was not entirely clear to me how that worked. I was also told that one leader pestered Tommy over and over again until Tommy voluntarily gave up his ministerial license. These are the facts as I have been able to sort them out.

I will not comment regarding ****** except to say that good people sometimes see things from differing perspectives. We ******. We continue to have communication with ****** and consider ****** a friend of 3ABN.

Since you have not described the other allegations against Danny, I am unable to know what you are referring and therefore unable to comment on them.

I hope this is helpful to you.

I would like to request that you not circulate this letter, but that you merely summarize and varify its contents.

Sincerely,

Walt

It is quite clear from this email that Dr. Thompson and the board followed a very rational process in investigating the situation. Dr. Thompson spoke with Brad Thorp, Danny Shelton, Glenn Dryden, and an unnamed higher-up in the CoG. From all indications there was no reason to go further - especially with the corroboration from leaders in the CoG in regards to Dryden's motivations. The board discussed this issue more than once, even by your own account, and arrived at the same decision.

I would like you to explain how you account for the local DA's office decision that there was no action to constitute a legal process. You have been at this for almost two years now and have yet to indicate if you contacted the DA, asked them why they didn't pursue any legal action - or have you and you just don't want to share what they told you? Can you or can you not produce any evidence from the DA's office that they failed in their duties to their community? Can you or can you not provide any substantial insight into their decision not to pursue legal action? Do you have any evidence that will verify a claim by you, should you make one, that you did contact the local DA's office and discuss the issue with them?

Your claim (which is quoted at the top of this post) is, as pointed out, misleading as it attempts to tell people that Dr. Thompson (and subsequently the board) took only the word of Danny Shelton and his brother. As the email proves, this is another attempt on your part to misled by omission. Did Dr. Thompson talk to Danny Shelton and his brother? It appears that he did talk with Danny, but no mention of a conversation with Tommy. It is also clear, via the email, that Dr. Thompson also spoke with at least two other individuals with a working knowledge of the accusations - and you conveniently leave this out of your question, which is intended to be more of a statement than question you just add a "?" at the end to try and hide your real intent.

[Artiste]

The above post appears to support Bob Pickle's position that Walt Thompson, 3ABN Chairman of the Board, did not think the issue was important enough to dialogue with the alleged victims.

[Bob Pickle]

The above post appears to support Bob Pickle's position that Walt Thompson, 3ABN Chairman of the Board, did not think the issue was important enough to dialogue with the alleged victims.

Absolutely. And here at this late date, anyman is defending Walt Thompson's reprehensible, irresponsible decision not to contact any of the alleged victims, on the groundless, absurd notion that the allegations that cost Tommy a suspension of his ordination in 1985 were orchestrated by an envious man who lived 800 miles away until 1993!!!!!

So anyman has joined Petunia in the defense of the cover up of and refusal to properly investigate allegations of child molestation by the chairman of a network that claims to mend broken people!

[Bob Pickle]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Possible way to win 3ABN critics.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:04:53 -0600
From: Walt Thompson

Dear Bob,

...

I contacted the only person from the Chruch of God that I could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events. (Accept for pastor Dryden's personal accounts, there are apparently no other records of the allegations)

anyman, be honest, what do you think of Walt's obviously and ludicrously false statement? (I'm not saying that he knew it was false at the time he originally made it.) Roger Clem had come forward a few months before in early 2003, a number of Church of God folks readily locatable will gladly tell a different story, and Walt can't locate anyone else but this unnamed person?

It's been more than a year and a half, and Walt still hasn't explained this discrepancy. Why not? Did he only contact a name that Danny or Tommy gave him so that he wouldn't contact the people that would really count?

"Before the final visitation of God's judgments upon the earth there will be among the people of the Lord such a revival of primitive godliness as has not been witnessed since apostolic times" (GC 464).

Primitive godliness includes apologizing when necessary. One of the most profound evidences that we have finally reached this point in earth's history would be for Walt, Danny, Tommy, Riva, and Duffy to all issue sincere, heartfelt apologies for the parts they played in this sordid affair.

[GRAT]

Petunia - What does ***** stand for?  Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments?  (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)

=====

Edited to remove inapproprate abbreviation from a edited post made by Petunia.

[Artiste]

Petunia - What does ***** stand for?  Is that a breaking of one of the 10 commandments?  (am I the only one that bothers or is it just not important how we use the name of God?)

No, GRAT, you were not the only one who was bothered by that.


=====

Edited quote from quoted post.