Larry Romrell: Adventist Connections? Options

[LaurenceD]

Sorry. I should have know the truth might hurt. But, sometime the double mind requires two sharp edges.

[Johann]

Walt Thompson knew all this stuff was happening & he denies it... Besides, the question was addressed to Fallble Human Being...

Well, my good friend, I have now heard your voice. That was great. In this connection you and I must realize that when Dr. Walt Thompson is cornered by truth, then he utters words of "legal" truth which could be 180 degrees beyond truth as the Lord gave us to see it as our birthright. Mr. Appletree has explained this to us elsewhere, so that should be some kind of "truth"!

[Johann]

You seem to be getting tired, Aletheia!

[YogusBearus]

Here ya go mr/mrs "appletree"...and anyone else that may like to know.


1) The Contributions to the Joy Pickle Defense Fund deposit directly into the the IOLTA account of Attorney Laird Heal;

2) The Joy Pickle defense fund does not cover any expenses for Joy;

3) The Mass Board of Bar Overseers review all IOLTA accounts annually, therefore there is accountability to the Mass Board of Bar Overseers, probably more reliable than Danny's obviously deficient auditors;

4) When Danny wants to disclose his Legal Bills for the SIX (6) ATTORNEYS that 3ABN has been paying for and the money paid for the his divorce attorneys during the past two years, we will be happy to arrange a copy of the legal bill for Pickle...maybe 3ABN would like to pay that also, now rather than later, and I will bet it is comparably very affordable;

5) When Danny is prepared to account for every dime of royalties earned but undisclosed on the 990's or to his board of directors, we will be happy to provide Danny with an accounting of every dime in the defense fund, or he can make an early contribution and I will credit it to the award in 2009;

6) Joy is not paid to represent himself, unlike Danny's Royalty problems, but Joy does intend to get paid quite handsomely by 3ABN and Danny Lee Shelton, his board, et al, for the grotesque misuse of process that this action represents... and Joy intends to collect sometime in 2009.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

Whoa! Is item #6 something new or was I asleep at the switch? So these "handsome" payments will be coming out of 3ABN donor funds? Just how "handsome" are we talking here?

-bear

[Observer]

Whoa! Is item #6 something new or was I asleep at the switch? So these "handsome" payments will be coming out of 3ABN donor funds? Just how "handsome" are we talking here?

-bear

Bear:

Let us take it one at a time:

3-ABN Donor funds: That is of course speculative. There are other possibilities. I suppose that Danny could pay any judgements out of his personal funds. I suppose that he could be ordered to pay any personal judgement against him out of his personal funds.

Basis for a judgement: Every one of the 50 States has a legal process where the defendant, who prevails, may ask the judge to order the plailntiff to pay legal and other fees. I am not aware of the details that might apply to this lawsuit. Those details will differ in the differing States, and/or in the Federal courts where this lawsuit was filed. My point is simply that when 3-ABN and Danny filed the lawsuit they assumed the potential obligation to pay certain legal fees and other expenses if Mr. Joy and Mr. Pickle should succeed.


"Handsome fees:" Again, I do not know the details. Those fees could potentially include billable legal hours run up by the defendants, and punitive damages for misuse of process. To say more would simply be specuative, and I am not going to do that.

NOTE: Mr. Joy has been pointed out to be a convicted felon. What most people do not know is that Mr. Joy was awarded a five-figure sum against the agency that prosecuted him for misuse of process. His conviction resulted in his payment of a sum of less than $2,000. His award of damages was far more than that amount. He is well aware of what needs to be done to collect on this issue. He expects to file against 3-ABN and Danny, when the appropriate time comes.

[fallible humanbe...]

Mr. Matthews,

Is this than a declaration that Joy had always intended to try and get his hands on donor dollars? It is growing more evident what the true motivations of the save/not crowd really are. One need only go back to his published email to a high profile legal "friend" and the comment there that there was much monetary potential in a suit involving 3ABN.

I wonder how donors would feel "if" the save/not crowd were able to get their hands on 3ABN's money.

- FHB

Bear:

Let us take it one at a time:

3-ABN Donor funds: That is of course speculative. There are other possibilities. I suppose that Danny could pay any judgements out of his personal funds. I suppose that he could be ordered to pay any personal judgement against him out of his personal funds.

Basis for a judgement: Every one of the 50 States has a legal process where the defendant, who prevails, may ask the judge to order the plailntiff to pay legal and other fees. I am not aware of the details that might apply to this lawsuit. Those details will differ in the differing States, and/or in the Federal courts where this lawsuit was filed. My point is simply that when 3-ABN and Danny filed the lawsuit they assumed the potential obligation to pay certain legal fees and other expenses if Mr. Joy and Mr. Pickle should succeed.

"Handsome fees:" Again, I do not know the details. Those fees could potentially include billable legal hours run up by the defendants, and punitive damages for misuse of process. To say more would simply be specuative, and I am not going to do that.

NOTE: Mr. Joy has been pointed out to be a convicted felon. What most people do not know is that Mr. Joy was awarded a five-figure sum against the agency that prosecuted him for misuse of process. His conviction resulted in his payment of a sum of less than $2,000. His award of damages was far more than that amount. He is well aware of what needs to be done to collect on this issue. He expects to file against 3-ABN and Danny, when the appropriate time comes.

[PeacefulBe]

Yes you can and should be a good steward, and others are accountable to God also. I don't remember Jesus telling us to be good stewards of our neighbours money tho---
I'm just curious.
Do you have a problem with "God's money" being spent on the Pickle/Joy legal fund too?

Aletheia,

What did you mean? What you have said in your first paragraph seems to lead the reader to a certain impression.

So do I understand you to say the stewardship of "our neighbours money" is the loophole? If we get our hands on it somehow, we can use it with abandon or without accountability?

Or, is all this ongoing talk of the 3abn attorneys' legalese clouding my interpretation of the intent of your statement?

Please clarify so that both I and other readers may understand.

PB

[Observer]

Mr. Matthews,

Is this than a declaration that Joy had always intended to try and get his hands on donor dollars? It is growing more evident what the true motivations of the save/not crowd really are. One need only go back to his published email to a high profile legal "friend" and the comment there that there was much monetary potential in a suit involving 3ABN.

I wonder how donors would feel "if" the save/not crowd were able to get their hands on 3ABN's money.

- FHB

Thank you for asking the question. The answer is a resounding: No!

If Mr. Joy had wanted to "get his hands on donor dollars" he would have initiated another approach. I assume that you are well anough aquainted with the law to know that he could have initiated lawsuits himself if he had wanted to do so.

The laws, as I have stated, in every State provide for protection for people when the legal process is missused against them. What this means is that Mr. Joy will only be able to collect in the event that 3-ABN/Danny missuse the legal process. If they do not, there will be nothing that he can collect. So, the ability to collect on his part resides with 3-ABN/Danny and what they do in this litigation.

You will note that any judgement in this matter will have to be made in a court of law. I assume that 3-ABN/Danny trust the legal process as it is they who filed against Mr. Joy amd Mr. Pickle.

If Mr. Joy had really wanted to get his hands on donor money, this would have demonstrated a substantial lack of judgement to do that by causing a lawsuit to be filed against him. Surely you do not think that he is that stupid.

No, is he wanted to get his hands on donor funds, he would have gone about it in other ways.

Frankly, to use the terms of those who play an well known dice game, it is still a crap shoot.

As to how the donors might think about this: My guess is that they would have some strong thoughts in regard to those who placed their gifts in danger--those who first entered the civil realm and began the lawsuit.

By the way: The courts only award based upon what it reasonable, and according to the law. In regard to billibale legal hours, they will only award according to what is reasonable, and legal. Every time 3-ABN files a motion, and the court rules agaisnt that motion, it will consider any legal hours run up in regard to opposing that motion to be reasonable.

Folks, 3-ABN/Danny have a lot of control over the potential judgements against them based upon what 3-aBN/Danny do. If they only file motions that they win, they will clearly cut their potential loss. On the other hand, if they file motions that they do not expect to win, they increas their potential loss.

NOTE: A 3-ABN defender has informed us that 3-ABN did NOT expect to win the motions to impound the documents. O.K. They lost. They therefore increased their potential liabiality.





This post has been edited by Observer: Aug 27 2007, 08:19 AM

[Johann]

NOTE: Mr. Joy has been pointed out to be a convicted felon. What most people do not know is that Mr. Joy was awarded a five-figure sum against the agency that prosecuted him for misuse of process. His conviction resulted in his payment of a sum of less than $2,000. His award of damages was far more than that amount.

Do you expect Danny's friends to read this and consider such details? It might save them lots of trouble if they were inclined to read it.

This post has been edited by Johann: Aug 27 2007, 08:19 AM

[LaurenceD]

Look for the possibility that 3abn will find new legal counsel. That way, as the current legal team begins to hear more of the details of other side of the story, they can respectfully back out and still maintain they've never lost a case.

[ex3ABNemployee]

A prime example of how the save/not crowd just have not been "listening" . . . the legal fees are not being paid from the coffers of 3ABN, they are being handled by a group of supporters who have taken this responsibility on. But, to accept such wouldn't allow this group the opportunity to continue to rail on this issue, so of course they will not acknowledge it - or they just simply haven't been reading.
- FHB

You know, with all this talk of needing documentation from you, Aletheia, appletree, panther and other screen names, we sure haven't seen any documentation of this claim from you. How are we to know that this is true?

Aletheia keeps telling me that my word alone just isn't good enough. Well, neither is yours. Please furnish documentation that the legal expenses are being paid by a group of supporters or stop making this ridiculous allegation.

[Aletheia]

Aletheia,

What did you mean? What you have said in your first paragraph seems to lead the reader to a certain impression.

So do I understand you to say the stewardship of "our neighbours money" is the loophole? If we get our hands on it somehow, we can use it with abandon or without accountability?

Or, is all this ongoing talk of the 3abn attorneys' legalese clouding my interpretation of the intent of your statement?

Please clarify so that both I and other readers may understand.

PB

PB,

??

I was not talking about getting your hands on anybody's money.

I was saying each is accountable for the money in their own hands, and what they themselves do with it, or where they decide to give it. If Joe schmo donates to a worthy ccause or where he sees a need, that is between he and God and not between him and a critic.

God made us each stewards over what he gives us, not over what he has given our neighbour.

Is that better?

~ Cindy

[ex3ABNemployee]

I know about the jet thing. It's been addressed before, maybe you forgot.

Danny didn't comandere the jet for his own selfish reasons, he was in town already because of the ministry and while there was invited to the Jazz game, he went to part of it before he had to leave...

I know about the gymn too, but have no knowledge of what you mean by excesses in regards to it. Have you seen it?

Like Dr Thompson I also have no knowledge of excesses spent on a fleet of vehicles, and actually have no idea of what you even mean by "fleet"??

Also, I like Dr Thompson and consider him very conscientious and honest. That probably doesn't change your opinion about him though, huh?

~ Aletheia

Do you have documentation for all this?

[PeacefulBe]

PB,

??

I was not talking about getting your hands on anybody's money.

I was saying each is accountable for the money in their own hands, and what they themselves do with it, or where they decide to give it. If Joe schmo donates to a worthy ccause or where he sees a need, that is between he and God and not between him and a critic.

God made us each stewards over what he gives us, not over what he has given our neighbour.

Is that better?
~ Cindy

Yes, thank you. Much better and way more clear.

PB

[Aletheia]

Bear:

Let us take it one at a time:

3-ABN Donor funds: That is of course speculative. There are other possibilities. I suppose that Danny could pay any judgements out of his personal funds. I suppose that he could be ordered to pay any personal judgement against him out of his personal funds.

Basis for a judgement: Every one of the 50 States has a legal process where the defendant, who prevails, may ask the judge to order the plailntiff to pay legal and other fees. I am not aware of the details that might apply to this lawsuit. Those details will differ in the differing States, and/or in the Federal courts where this lawsuit was filed. My point is simply that when 3-ABN and Danny filed the lawsuit they assumed the potential obligation to pay certain legal fees and other expenses if Mr. Joy and Mr. Pickle should succeed.
"Handsome fees:" Again, I do not know the details. Those fees could potentially include billable legal hours run up by the defendants, and punitive damages for misuse of process. To say more would simply be specuative, and I am not going to do that.


NOTE: Mr. Joy has been pointed out to be a convicted felon. What most people do not know is that Mr. Joy was awarded a five-figure sum against the agency that prosecuted him for misuse of process. His conviction resulted in his payment of a sum of less than $2,000. His award of damages was far more than that amount. He is well aware of what needs to be done to collect on this issue. He expects to file against 3-ABN and Danny, when the appropriate time comes.

Observer,

IF indeed a judgment was ever issued in favor of Mr Joy as he claims it will., it is not possible that Danny Shelton will ever pay anything out of his own pocket, from his own personal funds. Their is no legal precident for such.

You have all from the beginning had a problem understanding the separation of roles in different issues. Danny Shelton as a private citizen is not suing Joy and Pickle, so a judgment can never be issued against the private individual in question.

It is the ministry of 3ABN and Danny Shelton as it's President and founder who are suing Pickle and Joy for their slander and character defamation. They are not putting anything at risk for the truth is on their side, and so Pickle and Joy will never be able to defend themselves by proving the things they have claimed and accused 3ABN of. .

If a judgment was issued against 3ABN and it's President, and given to Joy as he claims will happen, it would indeed be the donor funds he would get, because it is the ministry of 3ABN who the judgment would be issued against.

Don't try to pretend it could legally be otherwise, it doesn't wash.

And nobody here is stupid.


~ Aletheia

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Aug 27 2007, 09:38 AM