Things That Make You Go Hmmm..., --letters on save 3ABN not -- contradict earlier testimony here Options

[Seraphim7]

Excuse me?!?

You may be excused. Then again maybe not.

[Aletheia]

Cindy, you've raised some interesting questions about the furniture.

Now we need to put all of that along side of Danny's financial affidavit of July 2006, which states that he owns and received from Linda,

(Danny Shelton)
Bowflex exercise machine
Stove
2 Refrigerators
Dishwasher
2 Freezers
Master bedroom set
Downstairs bedroom set
Old outside lawn furniture

I think we can scrounge up a number of other documents along these lines if we try.

So how do we understand Danny's email to Linda about picking up all the furniture? In light of the above, I would think that would refer to the specific furniture she was to receive, which was spelled out in their house agreement of June 4, 2004. It would be all that furniture, not all the furniture in the entire house.

I don't know how to comment on your March 22 email. Perhaps you can get Danny to list everything he kept vs. everything she took, and we can see if it might match up with a similar list from Linda. It is possible that if we did that that the two lists would agree.

Bob, didn't you quote a letter from Linda saying:
"No, he did not give me "all of the things in the home..." He has all of the furniture"?

any comment?

Regarding the rest of what you posted, I received this by email also:

----- Original Message -----
From: ****
To: ~ Cindy...
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: New Thread

"Great thread Cindy. Your OP was great and illicted the expected response . . . stone throwing, character assassination, etc.

Nobody offered anything to refute your point, in fact they never addressed your point at all, instead trying to turn it into a personal attack on your integrity and character (guess the rules are out the window already!) "


"There is new material on Pickled's web site. It includes Danny's financial affidavit. Nothing for Linda is posted for comparison. More evidence of the unbalanced approach the man uses. I wonder how he would feel if his entire life were posted on the Internet for public review?"

Good question, How would you feel?

Mat 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

[awesumtenor]

I think we can scrounge up a number of other documents along these lines if we try.

So how do we understand Danny's email to Linda about picking up all the furniture? In light of the above, I would think that would refer to the specific furniture she was to receive, which was spelled out in their house agreement of June 4, 2004. It would be all that furniture, not all the furniture in the entire house.

I don't know how to comment on your March 22 email. Perhaps you can get Danny to list everything he kept vs. everything she took, and we can see if it might match up with a similar list from Linda. It is possible that if we did that that the two lists would agree.
Bob, didn't you quote a letter from Linda saying:
"No, he did not give me "all of the things in the home..." He has all of the furniture"?

any comment?

Regarding the rest of what you posted, I received this by email also:


Good question, How would you feel?

Mat 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

That's a door that swings both ways... I find it interesting you and your co-conspirator are contemplating 'exposing' someone who is hiding nothing... while your co-conspirator is desperately seeking to remain hidden...

Ponder that in light of Mat 7:12... no matter how you slice it, it comes up hypocrisy.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Aletheia]

You know, Cindy, it just might be possible that the discrepancy you've brought up will get featured on Save3ABN. On the one hand we have Walt saying that Linda got all the furniture. on the other hand we've got Danny saying in an official document that Linda didn't get all the furniture. Who's telling the truth?

Well Bob, it seems to me that both Walt Thompson, and my witness who visited a barren house and wrote:
"I was in the house some time after she moved out and she had taken almost everything including stripping the walls of everything. I asked DS why he had let her take practically everything when actually he had paid her his share for it, he said , well I know, but she wanted it.....And people say he didn't love her and just wanted to dump her!!!! Yes, I remember they got a truck, a Uhaul or something"

May indeed have percieved that all, or almost all the furniture was gone, they probably did not go poking into closets and bedrooms, so most likely missed the two bedroom sets, you listed that Danny allegedly retained.

But what you fail to mention is Linda's claim:
"No, he did not give me "all of the things in the home..." He has all of the furniture"

Even according to what you just cited and posted, that is false...

Shame on you.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 22 2007, 11:55 PM

[Aletheia]

(Aletheia)
I don't ever knowingly or willfully lie

Positing absolute negations you've already violated is not going to help your credibility, Cindy...

if I say somethiing false in error, or because of assuming, I try to correct it and apologise as soon as it's brought to my attention, so in this regard, yes, I believe it's ok for me to point out a lie.

Which means it's ok for your lies to be pointed out... nothing personal; it's strictly business.

My point is I have neither defended and condoned, nor criticised and condemned, for I lack the knowledge to do either.

You do realize this statement contradicts your initial statement quoted above, don't you? There are myriad posts from you full of your defending DS and criticizing/condemning LS... in spite of your professed lack of knowledge.

Which either means that you do, in fact, knowingly and willfully lie... or that you are confused in the extreme and you do not realize when you make contradictory or mutually exclusive statements...

Mr J,

You are taking my statement out of context and applying it to other issues, in order to justify your accusations. That is clearly not what I said or meant at all, I was only referring to the allegations that Danny trashed Linda in the beginning. Honest people on reading posts" #25, 29,and 36 and will be able to see that, and what you are doing also.


In context:

Clay:
It seems to me that those who support Danny have condoned his initial treatment of her

Aletheia:
I have never condoned the words which Danny may or may not have spoke out of hurt or whatever. I say whatever, because I keep reading people making claims about what he said, but never heard him myself, and haven't seen anyone quote him???

I am quite sure that they both spoke hastily however, because people say things in a divorce that they don't normally do , and later regret, or wish they had phrased differently. Those things are wrong, but surely we can afford to have a little compassion and understanding and not judge either of them who were in a very emotional time in their lives.


Clay:
so your point is what? Because you did not hear them, it must not have happened? Again, other people have indicated they some things Danny said to them, yet you have chosen not to believe them. Which supports my point that you will not believe anything negative about Danny because it does not agree with your perception of him.

Aletheia:
My point is I have neither defended and condoned, nor criticised and condemned, for I lack the knowledge to do either. I said I have not seen evidence of this early trashing, except third party reporting or vague references to the limited explanation offered by 3ABN for Linda's absence, and nothing else specific. Now if someone wants to present the "evidence of the trashing". then I'll look at it. I have asked previously what people were talking about and got nothing.

And I have better things to do then keep responding to your personal attacks and accusations, Mr J. so I'll be moving on here...and getting back on topic, if possible.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 22 2007, 11:59 PM

[sonshineonme]

Well Bob, it seems to me that both Walt Thompson, and my witness who visited a barren house and wrote:
"I was in the house some time after she moved out and she had taken almost everything including stripping the walls of everything. I asked DS why he had let her take practically everything when actually he had paid her his share for it, he said , well I know, but she wanted it.....And people say he didn't love her and just wanted to dump her!!!! Yes, I remember they got a truck, a Uhaul or something"

May indeed have percieved that all, or almost all the furniture was gone, they probably did not go poking into closets and bedrooms, so most likely missed the two bedroom sets, you listed that Danny allegedly retained.

But what you fail to mention is Linda's claim:
"No, he did not give me "all of the things in the home..." He has all of the furniture"

Even according to what you just cited and posted, that is false...

Shame on you.

Shame on you!!!
Just so there is clarification here on the FACTS, if you are interested in FACTS, I will give you a list here. Oh, and this is from "my witness" who was there for moving day. Things were moved in to late 2004, not all at once. But this is a list of the main items....


Dan kept these items:
All of the living room furniture
The dining room furniture
The master bedroom furniture,
One of the other bedroom's furniture
Along with all of the office furniture.



Linda took these items:
The piano
Alyssa's bedroom furniture
A few nicknack cases,
I think she took a couple of chairs.
She took her clothes
The nicknacks
Her books
Her pictures
Alyssa and Nathan's stuff from when they were kids... that kind of stuff.
All of her current living room, dining room, office and bedroom furniture (other than the one set she took) was purchased later.

Now, how could anyone walk into the house and see it empty? Hmmm....

more to come......

[awesumtenor]

Positing absolute negations you've already violated is not going to help your credibility, Cindy...

Which means it's ok for your lies to be pointed out... nothing personal; it's strictly business.

You do realize this statement contradicts your initial statement quoted above, don't you? There are myriad posts from you full of your defending DS and criticizing/condemning LS... in spite of your professed lack of knowledge.

Which either means that you do, in fact, knowingly and willfully lie... or that you are confused in the extreme and you do not realize when you make contradictory or mutually exclusive statements...
Mr J,

You are taking my statement out of context and applying it to other issues, in order to justify your accusations. That is clearly not what I said or meant at all, I was only referring to the allegations that Danny trashed Linda in the beginning. Honest people on reading posts" #25, 29,and 36 and will be able to see that, and what you are doing also.
In context:
And I have better things to do then keep responding to your personal attacks and accusations, Mr J. so I'll be moving on here...and getting back on topic, if possible.

Bottom line, Cindy... what can you say you have actually learned first hand... of all the things you claim to 'know'... what do you know because you were there and saw with your own eyes and heard with your own ears and what do you accept as true because someone told you "this is how it was".

Given your own admission that you have never met or spoken to Danny or Linda, I'd say the former is 0% and the latter is 100%. You have no first hand facts because you are not a witness... to *anything*.

You have based your entire argument on what someone told you... how have you verified what they told you? And what will you do if what you've been told is not true?

In His service,
Mr. J

[Clay]

Interesting twists this thread has taken.... one that I don't particularly care for..... maybe Thomas was correct.... this one is done, closed for now.....

[calvin]

Seraph|m,

Thankfully, Clay deleted your crass statement before most could read it. Your membership has been suspended for 48 hours.