Tommy Shelton Vindicated!, I hope. Options

[Aletheia]

I am NOT the one being referred to in Sherry Avery's letter. I know who it was, but it wasn't me.

Get your facts straight and stop trying to twist everything around.

I'm not trying to twist anything, I said that to Bob, because i believe he told me that on the phone sometime around the middle of january...

If that is wrong, I apologise.


And of course I have not confused you with your brother as he claims. You have made a statement and I was quoting it, your brother has not.


~ Aletheia

[Pickle]

And of course I have not confused you with your brother as he claims. You have made a statement and I was quoting it, your brother has not.
~ Aletheia

It is possible that I misunderstood what you were saying, and in that case I'm not sure what you were saying.

You had highlighted the part of Walt's statement that said there were no other accounts but Dryden's, and then went on about Duane. Of course, Duane's statement doesn't contradict Walt's denial of other accounts. But Roger's does, and Roger's was what I have always referred to when making that point.

You say that Roger has not made a statement. Do you mean that his letter is not a statement?

[Grace]

You are directing these questions to the wrong party. These questions need to be aksed of Tommy. These are things he should have conseidered before approaching young men for sex. You should also be asking Tommy was ALL he was doing to the Glory of God. There are consequences for each of our actions. The Bible also talks about what you do in the dark, coming to the light. You asking Duane that is like asking a victim of violent crime to feel badly becuase their attacker is sent to jail. You are as bad as the rest of them here. TS approached young men for sex, several of them have said so(and if there was only one, that is too many). He was wrong. Why would you attempt to make them feel guilty for reporting him? Yes, justice, IS to the Glory of God, since He is also a God of Justice. Why would you try to make the victim responsible for Tommy's transgressions? This is deplorable!

I keep saying this, and at some point one of you will listen. We would not be discussing the at all if Tommy, a married pastor, would have asked only his wife for sex. Period! But naw, we got you and the others over here, his wife over in the another thread with "stand by your man". If his wife and the rest of you want to overlook his behavior then so be it, but you must know that does not mean everyone else has to overlook it, too. In fact, it is like not raising your child properly, you do them a disservices by making them believe others will put up with the bad behovior.

Thanks, Princessdi! Totally true!!!

It is possible that I misunderstood what you were saying, and in that case I'm not sure what you were saying.

You had highlighted the part of Walt's statement that said there were no other accounts but Dryden's, and then went on about Duane. Of course, Duane's statement doesn't contradict Walt's denial of other accounts. But Roger's does, and Roger's was what I have always referred to when making that point.

You say that Roger has not made a statement. Do you mean that his letter is not a statement?

Waiting for the answer...

[awesumtenor]

It is possible that I misunderstood what you were saying, and in that case I'm not sure what you were saying.

You had highlighted the part of Walt's statement that said there were no other accounts but Dryden's, and then went on about Duane. Of course, Duane's statement doesn't contradict Walt's denial of other accounts. But Roger's does, and Roger's was what I have always referred to when making that point.

You say that Roger has not made a statement. Do you mean that his letter is not a statement?

Come now, Bob; you know Cindy would never let anything so minor as factual truth get in the way of her grandstanding...

In His service,
Mr. J

[awesumtenor]

Personally, I don't know whether he's guilty or not guilty. But 1 Corinthians 10:31 comes to mind: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." When and if he lands in prison, will you be able to say that you helped put a man in prison, guilty or not, to the glory of God?

Have you asked Tommy whether his molestings were done to the glory of God? Have you asked yourself whether the lies you continue to tell in your trying to help this latter day Achan conceal his sin by burying the evidence under his tent is to the glory of God? Does not the bible say that if any would offend one of these little ones that elieve in Christ it would be better if a great millstone were hung around their neck and they be drowned in the depths of the sea; by that standard if Tommy goes to prison for his misdeeds, he's getting off easy for crucifying Christ afresh and putting Him to an open shame and for being a deceitful worker posing as a minister of righteousness... as Paul states in 2Cor chapter 11... his end will be according to his works... so trying to make his victims feel guilty for his conscious sin is frankly a heinous act and makes you a partaker in Tommy's sins.

The text you should be taking to heart is this one: Eze 3:18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

In His service,
Mr. J

[erik]

Have you asked Tommy whether his molestings were done to the glory of God? Have you asked yourself whether the lies you continue to tell in your trying to help this latter day Achan conceal his sin by burying the evidence under his tent is to the glory of God? Does not the bible say that if any would offend one of these little ones that elieve in Christ it would be better if a great millstone were hung around their neck and they be drowned in the depths of the sea; by that standard if Tommy goes to prison for his misdeeds, he's getting off easy for crucifying Christ afresh and putting Him to an open shame and for being a deceitful worker posing as a minister of righteousness... as Paul states in 2Cor chapter 11... his end will be according to his works... so trying to make his victims feel guilty for his conscious sin is frankly a heinous act and makes you a partaker in Tommy's sins.

The text you should be taking to heart is this one: Eze 3:18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

In His service,
Mr. J

Mr. J


Many brilliant points.

thank you.

ERik

[Aletheia]

You say that Roger has not made a statement. Do you mean that his letter is not a statement?

Bob,

You don't know??

Well then I guess when you attempt to enter that letter as evidence in a court of law to justify your actions, then you will find out if it is considered a statement or not.

As I said, I think your so called investigation has been sloppy and one-sided from the get go.

For example you said you did not get this letter from Clem or Dryden, you said you got it from another because a group of people defending T.S. were circulating it.

Did you ever ask why they would be doing so if it was in fact true?, or even consider why it was those who were defending, rather then those who were accusing who were using it as evidence?

Yes, it is difficult for victims of sexual abuse to come forward, but as you stated yourself, Clem came forward years ago and has been making accusations in his community, He threatened to press charges, citing the law that allowed him to in that letter.

But has never done so, nor will he give you a written statement...

Even his brother who has made a statement and accused Tommy of sexual abuse, and supported W.T.'s findings as you agreed, answered you on Jan 2, 2007 as cited on your website:

Bob Pickle:
"Can you explicitly state that you do not know of a single instance where Tommy engaged in inappropriate behavior of a sexual nature with a minor?"

Duane Clem:
Obviously, with my brother sending the letter to Tommy and the letter's subsequent circulation on the boards, I cannot comment at all on this question. I'm sure you can understand that no matter what I would say, it could cause me major trouble on either side of the issue.

He doesn't say obviously with all the other victims.. he refers only to his brother and says he can't comment.

Ask him if he can comment on that now, for I know he won't receive that question well from me. Supporting his brother can't get him in major trouble with the Sheltons, as he's already taken his stance against not only Tommy his friend for all these years since the events he now speaks out against, but also against Danny, and 3ABN. How would answering that question get him in major trouble with his brother???

It seems to me, these are things you should consider, when other witnesses agree, and yet you are using the one witness who doesn't agree to justify yourself in your stout words against and accusations of sin in regards to W.T., D.S., and the 3ABN board.

I myself have serious doubts about Duane's brothers accusations. If other's disagree that's ok.

But regardless, that's all I am going to say about this, because I have nothing further to say to you regarding these issues..

~ Aletheia

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Feb 21 2007, 10:22 AM

[Pickle]

Bob,

...

As I said, I think your so called investigation has been sloppy and one-sided from the get go.

For example you said you did not get this letter from Clem or Dryden, you said you got it from another because a group of people defending T.S. were circulating it.

...

Pardon me for continuing to be confused, but the letter being circulated by defenders of Tommy in the mid-'80's was the suspension of ordination letter, not Roger's c. 2004 letter.

I would appreciate it if you left off the judgmental terms like "sloppy."

[Aletheia]

I would appreciate it if you left off the judgmental terms like "sloppy."

Ok, one last question, perhaps I don't understand what your point has been all along in finding fault with W.T. and D.S..

In regards to you writing:

"Of course, Duane's statement doesn't contradict Walt's denial of other accounts. But Roger's does, and Roger's was what I have always referred to when making that point."

walt wrote as already quoted:

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.[The letter of suspension] 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... Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront....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."


So what is in Roger's statement that contradicts this, and where was it to be found? Are you talking about the letter he wrote?

Please explain.

Thank you.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Feb 21 2007, 02:53 PM

[Noahswife]

Oprah is on and her show is about pedophiles.

Two quick points she just made. One is that in this country people tend to turn a blind eye until it happens to their family. Second, it is not about molestation. It is about seduction and that through friendship etc. the child is seduced. At that point the child feels a "part" of it.

Bill O'Reilly is on the show now and if any defender of TS thinks this group is hard on him in calling for justice......they should be listening to this show.

nw

[erik]

Oprah is on and her show is about pedophiles.

Two quick points she just made. One is that in this country people tend to turn a blind eye until it happens to their family. Second, it is not about molestation. It is about seduction and that through friendship etc. the child is seduced. At that point the child feels a "part" of it.

Bill O'Reilly is on the show now and if any defender of TS thinks this group is hard on him in calling for justice......they should be listening to this show.

nw

Noahswife,

My greatest fear in this whole thing is getting on people like bill's program.

Then the fur will really fly, let danny's lawyer write letters then.

ERik

[awesumtenor]

Ok, one last question, perhaps I don't understand what your point has been all along in finding fault with W.T. and D.S..

In regards to you writing:

"Of course, Duane's statement doesn't contradict Walt's denial of other accounts. But Roger's does, and Roger's was what I have always referred to when making that point."

walt wrote as already quoted:

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.[The letter of suspension] 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... Subsequently, after this issue has been brought back to the forefront....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."
So what is in Roger's statement that contradicts this, and where was it to be found? Are you talking about the letter he wrote?

Please explain.

Thank you.

It is typical of you to go to a statement that speaks of what happened in 2003 when bob is alluding to a letter written in 2004... and then, to add insult to injury, you question why you dont see anything about a 2004 letter in a 2003 statement...

and you claim his investigation is sloppy? As fast and loose you play with facts, innuendo and outright fabrications?

Wake up muttley; you're dreamin' again...



In His service,
Mr. J

But regardless, that's all I am going to say about this, because I have nothing further to say to you regarding these issues..

~ Aletheia

Ok, one last question, perhaps I don't understand what your point has been all along in finding fault with W.T. and D.S..

More lies of indignation from Cindy...

In His service,
Mr. J

[SoulEspresso]

Well, maybe it would clean 3ABN up ... say, who's got O'Reilly's number? He'd be on it like white on rice.

Danny, are you reading this? Do you want to be dragged onto Fox News?

How 'bout you step down and allow a free inquiry? What have you got to lose?

Noahswife,

My greatest fear in this whole thing is getting on people like bill's program.

Then the fur will really fly, let danny's lawyer write letters then.

ERik

[Noahswife]

Noahswife,

My greatest fear in this whole thing is getting on people like bill's program.

Then the fur will really fly, let danny's lawyer write letters then.

ERik

I think O'Reilly took a lot of flak for his totally uncalled for comments about the young man from Missouri. But, regardless, what could make this a possible subject of interest for O'Reilly is that he tries to maintain his position of "cultural warrior" without being totally in the wing of the moral majority and far right. And yep, he used the word "evil".......

Oprah ended her program calling for everyone to think of each child as our own child and we each having a responsibility for all our children. Anyone disagree with that premise?

She also has apparently set up a file on her web site with petitions to send to politicians. I have not looked at them yet but someone might want to.

nw

[Pickle]

Aletheia,

The letter Walt refers to as circulating is not the 1985 ordination suspension letter, but the 2003 Glenn Dryden letter.

The importance of Roger is that he nullifies Walt's statement about there not being other accounts. Danny certainly would have known about Roger in 2003 even though his letter was not written until a year or so later.

Danny certainly would have known because Roger came froward and started talking to people in Danny's own community. And Tommy found out quite quickly about it and called Roger.