Print

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

[Cindy]

Everyone wants to know my source and insinuates I just made the whole
thing up. So, let me throw this out....Anyone that doesn't believe
me...feel free to ask Johann if this is what happened. Make sure and
ask him how many days Linda had already been there (staying at the
Doctor's house) when he came to pick up the ozone machine. Ask him if
he spent the night after he picked it up or did he drive all the way
back home that night. Then ask him if he came back again at all
during the rest of the time that Linda was there?

BTW just to bring out the above point... Linda stayed in the doctor's
house....Nathan did not.

We have no reason to not believe that you made the whole thing up. Have you talked it over with Johann yourself? Do you have any of this from him? Why don't you ask him all the questions you tell others to ask regarding the accusation you made. You make nebulous accusations without citing any sources regarding a matter of which you have absolutely no personal knowledge whatsoever and expect us to believe you? Get real!

You obviously have not been to the doctor's home and are speaking on the basis of rumour when you say that Nate was not in the doctor's house. Have you asked the doctor or Nathan, or are you talking off the top of you head again, and bluffing in hope that you will be right?

Ok

Johann,

How many days had Linda already been at the Doctor's house before you came tp pick up the machine?

Did you stay the night when you went there, or return home?

Did you ever return while she was at Doctor Abrahamsson's house?

Where was Nathan staying while there?

Please just answer the questions and make it easier for both yourself and us.

Thank you.


P.S.
If any of you who are friends with or in contact with Linda want to get the answers from her as she will answer you, feel free to do so and let us know what she says.

[Habanero]

I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.

Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.

Lovely little scenario,  but pure fiction.

You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...

So, why don't you just gives us the facts?

1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?

2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?

As far as your question?

"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"

 She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does.  She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.

Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.

3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.

As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.

[Cindy]

I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.

Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.

Lovely little scenario,  but pure fiction.

You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...

So, why don't you just gives us the facts?

1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?

2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?

As far as your question?

"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"

 She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does.  She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.

Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.

3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.

As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.

Linda has counsel now? Good, however in the Benton Court Case and website  she is still listed as having none after Heal's name was removed. I am sure that 3ABN's attorneys will be glad to hear that from her, if they haven't already, so they can move ahead with scheduling her deposition. There have been so many delays in this case already...

So, to clarify, now you are claiming it wasn't the subpoena which was faulty but that there was a problem with those who were supposed to be notified of the deposition not being notified in a timely manner? What is the basis of this claim, and who made it? Pickle and Joy?

And yes, we are all just people, but despite your love and hugs (TY) I noticed you did not really answer the questions caused by your own arguments here, although this one shouldn't be too difficult to answer, and would clear up a lot here imho.

So let me try once more.

What reason did Linda or her attorney, Heal,  give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

[Johann]

With all the high pressure fiction that is produced, taking a chance that some of it fits into the true picture, it is amazing how some squander with the term "FICTION" on others who know what they are talking about.

[Mary Sue Smith]

Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly.  Remember avoiding them IS answering them.

Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?

Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too. 

WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired?   

[Snoopy]

Not working Junebug!!  Why don't YOU PEOPLE answer some questions honestly??

Where is that "exoneration letter" from the IRS?  Many here have asked to see it but the requests have been ignored.  Remember, avoiding that question IS answering it...

Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly.  Remember avoiding them IS answering them.

Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?

Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too. 

WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired?   

[Fran]

Re: Do they know anything about business?

Esaajr   (Shiny Penny to BSDA Posters)                       Sun Jul 6, 2008 7:57 pm

Fran (whoever she or he is) constantly is throwing out these charges, and despite the fact that her analysis has been shown to be faulty...she persists. 

It seems she has a small following that believes every utterance she makes.  But I can assure you...that after a cursory analysis of her statements - she is either unable to ascertain the facts, does not make a comprehensive study to determine all the facts or is intentionally trying to mislead.

I refer you back to a post I made on BSDA over a year ago - detailing the fallacies and faultiness of her analysis of just one of 3ABN's 990s.   If she is this far off the mark in this one case, there is no reason to believe that any of her other analysis would stand up to scrutiny. 
Response to Fran's inaccurate analysis of one 990. 

The fact that the IRS has found nothing worth pursuing at 3ABN is further evidence that Fran's analysis is not worthy to be relied upon.

Many thanks to Ian for starting up this group to defend/support 3ABN.  A forum where support for 3ABN can be discussed without ridicule has been long over due.  (It astonishes me that over at ATalk the sub-heading on the 3ABN category is "For respectfully discussing any issues and concerns pertaining to 3ABN."  Some posters are disrespectful and seemingly encouraged to be so or at least not discouraged from being so).

This 3ABN Defended post has me really praying.

1.   Why was my “faulty analysis” not cited?

2.   Why would you only direct them to your erroneous statements?

3.   Why didn't you direct them to read my answers to your statements?

4.   Posting only part of the whole is misleading and not honest.

5.   Why have been unfair accusing me of something that is not true?

6.   Why would you do that?

7.   Are you receiving some reward for your efforts; what could that be?

8.   I replied to your post; why did you not give a link to those answers?

9.   I believe this dishonest since you failed to show not only what I said, but my reply to your post!

10.   Are you afraid for people to read the facts?

11.   Are you are afraid of the WHOLE topic since only pointing to your previous post?

12.   I find you 3ABN Defended post to be very narcissistic.  (ME; ME; ME!)

13.   There is no official word that the IRS Investigation is over.  Where is it?


Because you have set out with this post to deceive, I will bring to the front what really was said.  This also gives me the opportunity to bring these documented facts up front for all to see.  Remember, don’t bait me, I could just bite back.

This is my post, showing what you said I have no understanding of.  I will let the readers decide.

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=2c468e18afc3b399355bb71c8f718c7d&showtopic=13308&st=75&p=194088&#entry194088
Fran  May 4 2007, 12:22 AM  Post # 84

http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf

This is link to the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax lawsuit. This comes from page 17. # 61.

61. The Independent Auditor’s Reports for 2000 and 2001 state:

Downlink equipment acquired by gift is not recorded in the financial statements. In our opinion, generally accepted accounting principles require that such donated property be recorded at its fair value at the date of receipt. It was not practicable to determine the effects of the unrecorded equipment on the financial statements,

In connection with the recording of real estate revocable trusts, the fair values of the trusts were based on internal estimates performed by the organization. We were unable to obtain sufficient evidential matter in connection with the estimates of fair value.14 (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, & 15)

Then read the footnotes #14 & #15 at the bottom of page 17.

14 The financial report for 2000 contains additional concerns found by the independent auditors.

15 Applicant’s financial reports raise additional questions and concerns. For example, the unrecorded contribution revenue related to charitable gift annuity agreements were not recorded in conformance with generally accepted accounting principles. The “related party transactions” were acknowledged without identifying the parties. The notes refer to “split interest agreements,” where applicant received the assets funding the trusts and applicant is to pay certain amounts for specified periods of time to the donors. There is nothing in the record to identify the donors or the assets. None of the trust agreements were supplied. (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, 15)

More...

Fran Said...
http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm

Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.

Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.

Open the 2002 Form 990 and go to page 13 and read statement #2 again.

Trust Funds not posted in the amount of $ 1,708,918.00

The other entries are relevant too, but I need further information.

How do I know these numbers deal with Trust Funds? The auditors told us! Refer back to footnote 15 page 17 of the Lawsuit.

The auditor's answer that by telling us the Split Interest Agreements deal with Trust Funds. Just by reading the IRS Form 990's you can't tell what Split Interest Agreements are! However, the auditors informed us as to what it was.

The other concern is that 3ABN is not following Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, GAAP. This raised the eyes of the auditors, as it should have. It certainly raised mine!

A Corporation should have copies of every major accounting publication. Many are provided. The Journal of Accountancy covers new Accounting practices that keeps up with all of the new technologies that will affect Accounts and Accounting. It will also let you know about important publications. It also has lots of FASB's.   (OK, so I am a sick woman!) An updated GAAP book is published every year.

Read these documents through different eyes. This Lawsuit is full of information that has NOTHING TO DO WITH PROPERTY TAX at all! Keep your eyes open. The auditors are probably talking about their findings!

Find how many times you read that the auditors were not provided information. Take note of those instances and ask yourself, "Why didn't they provide this requested information?"

Read the reports and ask your shelf, "Why?"

The information provided here comes from the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax Lawsuit and the IRS Form 990's for 2001-2005.

The link to the lawsuit is at the beginning of this post.

The links to the Form 990's are at http://save-3ABN.com

On the left column click the title Danny Shelton

Select Financial Allegations

Select Form 990's

This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, and Documentation. 

More to come...  It will take me a few more minutes.  Stand by.

[Fran]

(Fran @ May 3 2007, 10:22 PM) [snapback]194087[/snapback]


http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm

Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.

Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.

...

The links to the Form 990's are at

http://save-3ABN.com

On the left column click the title Danny Shelton

Select Financial Allegations

Select Form 990's

This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, and Documentation.

More…

Shiny Penny said... May 4 2007, 02:47 AM  Post # 85

Fran, Wow! Thank you for taking the time to provide the links, details and interpretations of the data found. I'm writing a rather long, detailed and technical response, in part because your post was also detailed. I haven't had the chance to check all of what you sent me, but I did check the 2001 990. The auditor's concerns (as reported in the lawsuit documents) and what you had posted - gravely concerned, even alarmed, me. But, as I show below, there is no reason to be alarmed - at least not about the 990 in 2001.

The 990 states (and please correct me if I am wrong) - the information posted in Statement 2 (page 17):

Fran Said...

Form 990, Part 1, Line 20

Record split interest agreements previously unrecorded, $2,451,034

Reclassification of amounts due to other ministries previously classified as temporarily restricted, ($14,282)

Net unrealized gains on marketable securities, $13,862.

More…

Penny Said.....

So I went back to part 1, Line 20 and that line reads "Other changes in net assets or fund balances (attach explanation)"

I interpret this to mean that this 990 is correcting prior mistakes/errors and sometime in 2001 3ABN had recorded the previously unrecorded split interest agreements and also recorded the unrealized gains on marketable securities. To go into a little more detail on the unrealized gains - these gains were described as unrealized. Meaning that the end of year value of the securities was greater than the beginning of year value, but the marketable securities had not been sold during the year - hence the gain is unrealized.

This is a paper gain that should have been recorded in an earlier year (2000?), but had not been. It seems to me that you are familiar with accounting and so would know that prior period adjustments (such as this unrealized gain) are made directly to retained earnings in the case of a corporation and in the case of not for profit organization would be an adjustment to the fund balance. Which is exactly what 3ABN did. Therefore, I am relieved to see that 3ABN had made the correction to the prior periods error!

About the amounts due to other ministries, according to the 990 these amounts had previously been classified as temporarily restricted and were now being reclassified to something else. I didn't see what they were being classified to, but since this amount is in parenthesis (meaning it is being subtracted) would indicate that in this correction 3ABN was removing that amount from its fund balance. To get a bit technical here (and probably lose the rest of the readers who would have gotten even this far in my post) we know that the debit was to some restricted account (I assume restricted cash) and was improperly credited to some account (such as donations or something similar) that increased the fund balance. I supposed that this is an easy enough mistake to make and part of the reason books are audited - to find material errors and misstatements. Anyway, the good news is the auditors caught the mistake and that 3ABN made the correction in 2001 as is reported in the 990.

These are perfectly good explanations for what happened. You are correct when you said "3ABN did not post $2.45 MILLION Dollars in TRUST FUNDS in 2001." Well at least partly correct, the year would have been 2000 or earlier. The 990 shows that they corrected this in 2001.

But when you say "They also mis-posted over $14,000 of money meant to be forwarded to other Independent Ministries. The funds went straight into the 3ABN coffers. I still wonder what Ministries did not get their money" I beg to differ. Truth be said, of course the money went straight into 3ABN's coffers. It was sent to 3ABN and would go into their coffers before going out of the 3ABN coffers into another ministry's coffers. We don't have any indication that any ministry did not get its money in 2000 - we only know that 3ABN did not record the receipt of the cash properly. In other words, we know that 3ABN made a mistake with the accounting when the cash came into the coffers. This tells us nothing about any transaction transferring the money out of the coffers. And again the 990 tells us that in 2001 3ABN made the correction to its books.

I'll have to take the time to investigate the other points you brought up, to see if 3ABN is correcting mistakes, or just making them and leaving them be. But so far the verdict is the 3ABN is making the corrections.

God bless.

Shiny Penny (now starting to follow the money around)

This post has been edited by Shiny Penny: May 4 2007, 07:16 AM


--------------------
--Shiny Penny—

More to come...be patient; it will be a few more minutes.

[Fran]

Shiny Penny:

Response Part #1

I have taken time to allow you to read and get familiar with BSDA without being chased off by my blunt remarks, which I do not intend to be so brash, but it comes out and it is just me. So do not take offense over anything that I say because it is not given to be offensive. I have a tendency to really believe that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Many others go the scenic route. We are just different thank God! Both ways are correct. There is no one way to say something. I will post this reply in several post so none will be too long. Stay with me ok?

More…

Penny:

Fran, Wow! Thank you for taking the time to provide the links, details and interpretations of the data found. I'm writing a rather long, detailed and technical response, in part because your post was also detailed.

More…

Fran:

Actually, my post was not really that detailed to me, but to others I guess it could be. I only hit some light points to start people asking questions. Thank you so much for your response. Since you say you are into details, we should have fun reviewing even more items in those afore mentioned details. It is exciting to get a response from someone that has an understanding of the form 990’s and non-profit accounting.

I feel as if I have died and gone to heaven. I sure hope the Lord has accounting in heaven. I want to count the stars and the sand of the sea. I want to know the number of the hairs on my head! Of course, once we get to heaven, God will have so much going on that accounting will fall by the wayside naturally.

More…

(Fran @ May 4 2007, 01:22 AM) [snapback]194087[/snapback]
http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf

This is link to the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax lawsuit. This comes from page 17. # 61.
Then read the footnotes #14 & #15 at the bottom of page 17.

http://www.save-3abn.com/3abn-form-990s.htm

Choose the 2001 Form 990. An Adobe document will appear (All Documents cited here are in PDF format. Save them to your hard drive for future reference) Go to page 17 of this document.

Read Statement #2 . This is where the $ 2,451,034 in Trust Fund information is found. It also includes the $14,282.00 of other ministries money being posted to 3ABN Income. Also they had not declared $13,862 in gains on certain Marketable Securities. Oops.

Open the 2002 Form 990 and go to page 13 and read statement #2 again.

Trust Funds not posted in the amount of $ 1,708,918.00

The other entries are relevant too, but I need further information.

How do I know these numbers deal with Trust Funds? The auditors told us! Refer back to footnote 15 page 17 of the Lawsuit.

The auditor's answer that by telling us the Split Interest Agreements deal with Trust Funds. Just by reading the IRS Form 990's you can't tell what Split Interest Agreements are! However, the auditors informed us as to what it was.

The other concern is that 3ABN is not following Generally Accepted Accounting Practices, GAAP. This raised the eyes of the auditors, as it should have. It certainly raised mine!

A Corporation should have copies of every major accounting publication. Many are provided. The Journal of Accountancy covers new Accounting practices that keeps up with all of the new technologies that will affect Accounts and Accounting. It will also let you know about important publications. It also has lots of FASB's.   (OK, so I am a sick woman!) An updated GAAP book is published every year.

Read these documents through different eyes. This Lawsuit is full of information that has NOTHING TO DO WITH PROPERTY TAX at all! Keep your eyes open. The auditors are probably talking about their findings!

Find how many times you read that the auditors were not provided information. Take note of those instances and ask yourself, "Why didn't they provide this requested information?"

Read the reports and ask your shelf, "Why?"

The information provided here comes from the IL vs. 3ABN Property Tax Lawsuit and the IRS Form 990's for 2001-2005.

The link to the lawsuit is at the beginning of this post.

The links to the Form 990's are at http://save3ABN.com

On the left column click the title Danny Shelton
Select Financial Allegations
Select Form 990's

This will get you to the IRS Form 990's. Remember, Documentation, Documentation, Documentation.
Shiny Penny:

[Fran]

Response Part #2
http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13308&st=135
Posted by Fran                                                                        May 10 2007, 01:49 AM    Post # 142

I hope this post does not attach itself to my previous post. I waited awhile before posting this. Sorry if it does.

Penny said...


I haven't had the chance to check all of what you sent me, but I did check the 2001 990. The auditor's concerns (as reported in the lawsuit documents) and what you had posted - gravely concerned, even alarmed, me. But, as I show below, there is no reason to be alarmed - at least not about the 990 in 2001.

More...

Fran said...

You said, “…there is no reason to be alarmed about the 990 in 2001.”

Are you sure? I was and am still shocked after three years of looking at it. However, that is OK! It would be quite a boring world if we all agreed on everything; Right?

I never meant I was “alarmed” at the 990’s alone. The 990’s reflect exactly what you stated; corrections to errors the auditors found.

It is the Lawsuit and the Auditor’s responses that cause/caused me to pause and contemplate exactly what they really trying to say. The 990’s are an accounting Statement of Historical Transactions. That is exactly what accounting is in actuality.

Do you feel these amounts are “material?”

Do you feel the “number of mistakes” listed are a reflection of grossly, incompetent management?

Or, do you see/feel these large errors were flukes?

Since I have read about so many corrected mistakes in the 990’s and in the audit reports, it gets harder for me trust the numbers in front of my eyes.

In all honesty, do these corrections reflect to you in some way that all mistakes were corrected?

Do you ask questions about what happened in all the previous years of 1984-1999?

Do you wonder what happened once the auditors left?

Was it back to business as usual?

Did 3ABN take strong actions to correct these policy/procedural black holes?

Or do you feel it just put a band aid over the hole as a temporary plug to massive seepage?

Did the same mistakes fall back into place once no one was looking?

What is it that makes you feel that all is well because they corrected a gross error?

Penny said:

The 990 states (and please correct me if I am wrong) - the information posted in Statement 2 (page 17):

So I went back to part 1, Line 20 and that line reads "Other changes in net assets or fund balances (attach explanation)"

More …

Fran said:

This is correct! The 900’s are similar to the 1040 where you must take a number that you have calculated and put it on another form, another line, in another place to add into the whole. This is the IRS’s clever way to double check figures and calculations. In fact, the IRS will ask different questions that should result in the same answer, or one that the IRS can do a calculation on. Very clever they are!

Of course, there would be a change in Net Assets / Fund Balances and/or Income and Expense, because changes cause the old figures to become the new improved figures! That is what accounting is all about. It is impossible to make such changes and the balances of something NOT change.

Penny said...

I interpret this to mean that this 990 is correcting prior mistakes/errors and sometime in 2001 3ABN had recorded the previously unrecorded split interest agreements and also recorded the unrealized gains on marketable securities.

More…

Fran said...

I agree wholeheartedly with your interpretation. The auditors audited in 2000 & 2001 respectively. The corrections made stem from these findings. Being familiar with audit procedures, I know there is no such thing as a 100% audit of accounts. These figures are numbers the auditors FOUND. However, I find, in the Property Tax Lawsuit, the auditors were not provided enough information to be able to perform a comprehensive audit. Repeatedly you will find that information was “not available” or “it was not provided.”

-------------------

The greatest want of the world is the want of men-- men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall. {Ed 57.3}
But such a character is not the result of accident; it is not due to special favors or endowments of Providence. A noble character is the result of self-discipline, of the subjection of the lower to the higher nature--the surrender of self for the service of love to God and man. {Ed 57.4}

[Ozzie]

Not working Junebug!!  Why don't YOU PEOPLE answer some questions honestly??
Where is that "exoneration letter" from the IRS?  Many here have asked to see it but the requests have been ignored.  Remember, avoiding that question IS answering it...

Not Working Johann! How about just answering the questions honestly.  Remember avoiding them IS answering them.

Did Johann drive back home that night?
Was that Johann's only visit the week Linda was there?
Did Nathan stay somewhere else?

Oh, and Sam was the first one to expose that Heal was no longer Linda's attorney. Sam was right in exposing this and he is right on everything else he said too. 

WHO said there was a problem with the subpoena? Was it Laird Heal, who Linda fired?   

Do you think that they're capable of answering truthfully Snoopy? I don't. 

I'm still waiting to see this great news letter about EXONERATION. I haven't seen anything to indicate that is the truth as yet.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.

Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.

Lovely little scenario,  but pure fiction.

You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...

So, why don't you just gives us the facts?

1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?

2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?

As far as your question?

"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"

 She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does.  She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.

Ian, you are so out of the loop. The subpoena was untimely served. Her attorney in fact made it clear to Hayes that it was untimely and they need to re-serve or work out an alternate date that was more convenient for his schedule.

Since distance and time is an issue, another Illinois based attorney has been approached and may be the counsel of record in both cases before the deposition. And by the way, I believe Heal filed a motion to quash, did he not? Or did you forget to mention this?

Rest assured, there will be a deposition in time, if it is appropriate.

Gailon Arthur Joy

[Sam]

I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.

Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.

Lovely little scenario,  but pure fiction.

You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...

So, why don't you just gives us the facts?

1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?

2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?

As far as your question?

"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"

 She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does.  She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.

Ian, you are so out of the loop. The subpoena was untimely served. Her attorney in fact made it clear to Hayes that it was untimely and they need to re-serve or work out an alternate date that was more convenient for his schedule.

Since distance and time is an issue, another Illinois based attorney has been approached and may be the counsel of record in both cases before the deposition. And by the way, I believe Heal filed a motion to quash, did he not? Or did you forget to mention this?

Rest assured, there will be a deposition in time, if it is appropriate.

Gailon Arthur Joy

I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way?  Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public?  The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially.  If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?

[Sam]

I see over at the other forum they are asking me if I am referring
to the "faulty" supeona that Linda received. I will then ask them,
who said it was "faulty"? Linda? Laird Heal? Sorry, not working.

Sorry Sam, not working. Linda and Laird Heal would be the primary principals in the case, not you. You appear to be full of wishful assumptions and hopes that Linda was fleeing the country in terror of 3ABN. Wrong. People such as yourself seem to take delight in seeing the terror of you and your blustery little chihuahua gang in others. Cute, but not scary. You and your type seem to thrive on striking terror and fear. If it doesn't exist, you and your type seem to gravitate toward imagining it. Go ahead and enjoy your smug yet silly little joy in the thought that your group brought terror to someone and made them run in fear from you. If that makes you and your type feel big and powerful, then good for you. Everyone should have something to make them feel good about themselves. Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition that 3ABN presumed to deal her without going through the processes required by law. Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with? That would be typical of how this case has been handled since it was first dreamed up by people who wanted to prevent her from having legal help in decisions made before she was fired. I'm sure your people could photoshop some pictures of Linda looking terrified. Why don't you try that? It might give you a sense of self worth. Therapy, you know.

Lovely little scenario,  but pure fiction.

You already once claimed to be in touch with Linda and said she never left, and then asked Donna to ask Linda herself about all of this after you and Johann told here how to contact her. Linda didn't answer...

So, why don't you just gives us the facts?

1.Who claimed the subpoena was faulty and what was faulty about it?

2. What reason did Linda or her attorney give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

3. Why do you claim " Linda had absolutely no obligation to abide by that subpoena and show up at the deposition"?

As far as your question?

"Do you think that she should simply go into another deposition without legal counsel that she is comfortable with?"

 She should have counsel, and did have counsel. It's neither 3ABN's fault nor ours that she no longer does.  She should work at getting an Attorney to replace Heal as quickly as possible considering that
3ABN obviously still has reason and cause and plans to depose her.

Ummm, Linda has counsel and yes, it has nothing to do with you. Yes, I was in touch with Linda and suggested Donna get in touch with her. It she did not get back with Donna I can understand. Does Danny personally speak with everyone who emails or mails 3ABN? I think not. Nor does Linda contact everyone who contacts her. There are thousands of them and no, she doesn't.

3ABN was obligated to make certain notifications of the depostion they did not make in a timely manner.

As to the "pure fiction" claim, no, not pure fiction except to the few people who determine that it must be pure fiction if their life framework is to survive. I wish you the best in the big context. I know that you have to believe what you must in order to survive as the person who you are. I really do feel for you. Love and hugs to you. We are all just people.

Linda has counsel now? Good, however in the Benton Court Case and website  she is still listed as having none after Heal's name was removed. I am sure that 3ABN's attorneys will be glad to hear that from her, if they haven't already, so they can move ahead with scheduling her deposition. There have been so many delays in this case already...

So, to clarify, now you are claiming it wasn't the subpoena which was faulty but that there was a problem with those who were supposed to be notified of the deposition not being notified in a timely manner? What is the basis of this claim, and who made it? Pickle and Joy?

And yes, we are all just people, but despite your love and hugs (TY) I noticed you did not really answer the questions caused by your own arguments here, although this one shouldn't be too difficult to answer, and would clear up a lot here imho.

So let me try once more.

What reason did Linda or her attorney, Heal,  give to the 3ABN attorneys for her not going to the deposition?

I believe Linda has hired a firm of 4 lawyers out of Decatur IL. They may only be representing her in the marital property case, I don't know.

[anyman]

I heard that the IRS notified you that the investigation was over and 3abn was not faulted in any way?  Is this true? Have they had contact with you? If so, why haven't you made it public?  The more you let "your people" question the findings, claim there isn't a letter and insinuate it is just propaganda, the more ridiculous you will all look when it is posted officially.  If you have inside information why let them stick their necks out, only to be chopped off?

It would appear that Mr. Joy doesn't like to admit when he is wrong. It has been speculated that he was one of those who might be in line for a cut of ANY monies recovered by the IRS, so of course it makes sense that they would contact him and make him aware of the results - Fran, too.

As far as letting those who have blindly supported him stick their necks out, he let's Mr. Pickle do all the leg work and filings in the suit with 3ABN, that should be enough to indicate that he attempts to insulate himself by doing as little as possible, letting others do his bidding. In other words, that is the way the Joy fiefdom is run.