Looks Like Ds Already Has His, "reward In Full!" Options

[Johann]

I was at a meeting years ago when he told they had one. He has always been honest about it.In fact, Linda was the biggest "pusher" for getting it.

Can you document this, Steffan?

[PeacefulBe]

Steffan,

Maybe you can help me on a few items.

I just heard that the number of underage victims from Virginia has gone from 1 to 3, and I've finally gotten a name of one of those and have some correspondence from him. Do Tommy and Danny have any plans for trying to make things right before the child molestation part of the scandal grows any bigger? Especially since, I believe, Virginia doesn't have a statute of limitations for things like this?

This will be interesting to watch unfold. Do you anticipate this alleged victim making a statement available?

Secondly, from what I can tell, back in 1998 Danny and Linda got a piece of property from 3ABN for $6,139 O.V.C., and then sold it one week later to Elora Ford for $135,000. A church official said that a non-profit that gave away property for less than fair market value could lose its tax exempt status retroactively, how far back wasn't known. Do you know anything about this transaction that would make it appear all right to the IRS?

Copies of the original documents can be seen at "Did Danny Shelton Really Turn $6,139 into $135,000 in Just 7 Days?" The transaction that is possibly really problematic is the following:

I have a feeling that if it all got reported correctly on W-2's, Form 990's, and Form 1040's, everything is fine.

Is this standard behavior for those associated with a ministry? Have you been able to check the associated W-2, Form 990's and Form 1040's? The chain of events along with the parties involved that you have documented over on www.save3abn.com about this matter is quite amazing!

[mikell]

He doesn't have the Clinton spin dance down; this kind of myopia can only come from Neo-Cons... this is the 3D two step, courtesy dubya, don and dick...

In His service,
Mr. J

what, Clinton never spinned? Btw, I am a pro-choice Democrat . and for sure Steppan tries to spins every ones facts here on BSDA that clearly indicts ds, but his efforts are fruitless,

This post has been edited by mikell: Jun 12 2007, 11:50 PM

[Pickle]

PB,

Don't know what these alleged victims are going to do or not do.

As far as standard behavior goes, my understanding is that a non-profit could lose its tax exempt status if they engage in private inurement.

For an interesting read, try http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m325..._v45/ai_9312436. The first two of the last three paragraphs at http://www.aicpa.org/PUBS/jofa/nov2001/kuhn.htm is also interesting, and suggests that 3ABN won't get into any trouble over this as long as they filed a 990 for 1998.

[princessdi]

Much as I love Bill, he had the spin of all spins...."I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Now that is sho nuf' spin! LOL!!!

what, Clinton never spinned? Btw, I am a pro-choice Democrat . and for sure Steppan tries to spins every ones facts here on BSDA away from ds, but never works,

[mikell]

Much as I love Bill, he had the spin of all spins...."I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Now that is sho nuf' spin! LOL!!!

That is a GOOD one! and SO true,

This post has been edited by mikell: Jun 13 2007, 10:36 AM

[lurker]

PB,

Don't know what these alleged victims are going to do or not do.

As far as standard behavior goes, my understanding is that a non-profit could lose its tax exempt status if they engage in private inurement.

For an interesting read, try http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m325..._v45/ai_9312436. The first two of the last three paragraphs at http://www.aicpa.org/PUBS/jofa/nov2001/kuhn.htm is also interesting, and suggests that 3ABN won't get into any trouble over this as long as they filed a 990 for 1998.

There is a 1998 990 on Guidestar but you would have to be a premium member to read it ($100 for a 1 month membership). You might be able to get it from the IRS. Just filing a 990 would not be enough if the correct information was not on it. 3ABN would have to correct the information and report any unreported self dealing and the tax would have to be paid (the whole amount of the excess benefit transaction might have to be paid back.).

This post has been edited by lurker: Jun 13 2007, 06:13 AM

[Pickle]

There is a 1998 990 on Guidestar but you would have to be a premium member to read it ($100 for a 1 month membership). You might be able to get it from the IRS. Just filing a 990 would not be enough if the correct information was not on it. 3ABN would have to correct the information and report any unreported self dealing and the tax would have to be paid (the whole amount of the excess benefit transaction might have to be paid back.).

If they filed a 990 without the correct info on it, then the statute of limitations would be up after 6 years. Does that get them off the hook with man? Does God expect them to make it right even if the statute of limitations has run out?

[lurker]

If they filed a 990 without the correct info on it, then the statute of limitations would be up after 6 years. Does that get them off the hook with man? Does God expect them to make it right even if the statute of limitations has run out?

That just doesn't seem fair. But 3ABN may be off the hook in that particular incident. That doesn't take care of further incidents of self dealing that took place later and for which the statute of limtations hasn't yet run out. Nor does it take care of the Shelton's personal income tax for that year if it wasn't recorded on their personal tax return would it, especially if the IRS thinks there was fraud?

In looking up the information on the statute of limitations, I found this which I thought might apply to Tommy's victims:Tolling the Statute

Statutes of limitations are designed to aid defendants. A plaintiff, however, can prevent the dismissal of his action for untimeliness by seeking to toll the statute. When the statute is tolled, the running of the time period is suspended until some event specified by law takes place. Tolling provisions benefit a plaintiff by extending the time within which he is permitted to bring suit.

Various events or circumstances will toll a statute of limitations. It is tolled when one of the parties is under a legal disability—the lack of legal capacity to do an act—at the time the cause of action accrues. A child or a person with a mental illness is regarded as being incapable of initiating a legal action on her own behalf. Therefore, the time limit will be tolled until some fixed time after the disability has been removed. For example, once a child reaches the age of majority, the counting of time will be resumed. A personal disability that postpones the operation of the statute against an individual may be asserted only by that individual. If a party is under more than one disability, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until all the disabilities are removed. Once the statute begins to run, it will not be suspended by the subsequent disability of any of the parties unless specified by statute.

[Pickle]

I think you are correct about his personal tax return. Wonder if he will clear the air by releasing it? It would be a smart PR move on his part if he proved that he has done nothing wrong and has nothing to hide by releasing that tax return.

Here's another question:

Danny's financial affidavit says that he got a $200,000 mortgage from Merlin Fharli, but I'm wondering if that is correct. Seems that there may be a legal document that says that he got a mortgage "At no time ... exceed $200,000" from the Fjarli Foundation.

Which is it? Merlin Fharli or the Fjarli Foundation (sp?)? (Anyone know if it makes any difference?) And was the mortgage for $200,000 or was it for a sum that was not to exceed $200,000?

[lurker]

The Fjarli Foundation lists notes and loans receivable on page two item 7 of their 2005 990 at Guidestar. Beginning of the year - $200,000 - Book value $150,000 - Fair Market value $150,000.

On the 2004 990, notes and loans receivable $200,000. I would think it is the same loan but if you have the document you spoke of, you would know for sure.

This post has been edited by lurker: Jun 13 2007, 10:20 AM

[Shiny Penny]

"Did Danny Shelton Really Turn $6,139 into $135,000 in Just 7 Days?"[/url] The transaction that is possibly really problematic is the following:

I have a feeling that if it all got reported correctly on W-2's, Form 990's, and Form 1040's, everything is fine.

Has anyone considered asking LInda to explain what this is about? Her name and signature are on the documents and there are some on bsda who are in contact with her...why wait for Danny? You know full well that he isn't going to be responding here - let's be real! As honest and forthright as Linda is there must be a perfectly good explanation for these transactions - or are we to believe that both Linda and Danny were crooked?

[LaurenceD]

Welcome out of the closet, SP. We haven't forgotten about the questions you never answered, but said you would (about the court case). That's was maybe what, two months ago?

[Pickle]

SP,

If you've ever talked to Linda about such things, you will get the idea pretty quickly that she isn't as informed as she ought to be.

At any rate, Danny's the one that still holds a position of trust within a supporting ministry of the Adventist church, and if he wants to safeguard his reputation, he will be immediately forthcoming with whatever documents are necessary to answer questions raised by publicly available documents.

Or do you think that he should consider suing the courthouse instead for making such documents publicly available? And if he does sue, should he try to get the suit impounded?

[sonshineonme]

Mikell, My statements were fact, yours were not.
Why did you keep referring to a "lear type jet" If you knew it wasn't. What could the motive be for you to do that?
You quoted A today which is the biggest joke of all. The reason A today is not conference supported in any way is their lack of credibiltiy in proving what they print and better yet, the "way out" beliefs of some in charge there. So, you not only quoted a source that is not credible you failed to mention how old this article was. You never said that several years ago you read an article yada yada.. You stated that 3abn had 2 planes. Why? What is your motive for leaving out the relevant facts that change the whole story?
On the other hand I left nothing out. I said they had a plane, got rid of it and someone leased another one for them. So they never owned 2 planes at once. Neither have they owned one since. Those are the facts. Why did you try to spin it any other way?
I said Linda Pushed for the Plane. You call that an attack? A piece of advice. Read back through the posts made here at bsda against Danny and you will have your definition of attack. What I said doesn't qualify.
Again just another example of how things have been twisted to paint a picture that is false and can be proven false.

Steffan, would you follow up your statements with proof please?

I was going to post my questions here, but have changed my mind and put them over under the "3abn has no plane" would you jump over there and read my questions for you...

Heres the link for you:

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...mp;#entry199799
post #23



This post has been edited by sonshineonme: Jun 13 2007, 01:19 PM