Rumors, Lies, & False Accusations Travel With Joy, Confronting AT and Gailon with Truth Options

[fallible humanbe...]

Ok, I'll bite------

Just a question.........who is Steve? Well, we have a Steve, that we all know and love, and I dont'believe you are referring to him....so...who is Steve?

No, no, no . . . it isn't our favorite, Corvette-lovin' admin . . .


- FHB

[princessdi]

Well....you still did not answer the question......Who is Steve?

[Richard Sherwin]

Just when you think same old same old a thread takes an interesting and unexpected turn

[Ian]

Steve, Steve, Steve . . . aren't you being a little harsh?

This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 23 2008, 05:12 PM

[Ian]

SP,

I am not sure the Mr. Pickle thinks Linda is "not wrong" . . . he just conveniently avoids including her when it is obvious that she was involved and then hides behind a "Maybe she didn't know" facade so he can instead attack Danny and 3ABN.

There has been much hyperbole from Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy in regards to a house/property that Danny and Linda, together, purchased (though this is not accurate as the did not purchase it, but rather paid the life estate value) and resold. Here is a different look at that situation.

This house/property situation revolves around the common law idea of "life estate." What does the phrase "life estate" mean in the area of real estate? To begin with, "life estate" is a tool used by many trust services in helping an individual plan for the future of their property interests.
The process of setting up a life estate is explained as:
Paraphrasing from a series of emails between Dr. Thompson and an individual identified as "J.J." in the exhibits filed by Mr. Pickle in response to the Protective Motion in the Mass. court (3ABN v Pickle/Joy), the story appears to have played out as follows:

A 3ABN benefactor made plans to leave the house and land in question to 3ABN upon her death. However, she also put into place a life estate situation identifying herself, Danny, and Linda as the "life tenants." This is perfectly legal, even within a 503© setting.

That means that the land would be used by those individuals until the last of them died and then the house/property would revert to 3ABN. Because the house/property in question had a life estate attached to it, the following rules apply to possible uses of the land:
The following paragraph provides an understanding of the process and it would seem, completely makes the claims by Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy about there being illegality in regards to the transactions that took place around said house/property to be null and void.
In a nutshell it would seem that what we have here is:

1. A donor using a typical estate planning and asset preservation tool to make plans for the future of their property. (legal activity) donated property to 3ABN, a piece of which she placed a life estate on. (legal activities)

2. The donor, Danny, and Linda being established as the life tenants of the house/property. (legal activity)

3. Danny and Linda purchasing their lifetime interest in the house/property paying the amount determined by "legal statistical tables calculated to determine the worth of the property at the" statistically appropriate "time of their death." (legal activity)

4. Then Danny and Linda selling the property in order to build a new home and establish equity in their new home/property. (legal activity)

What seems to be happening here is an attempt to establish a POV/perception that claims that no one in ministry can ever do anything financially advantageous. This POV/perception has played out in regards to the house in question here, as well as with Pastor Gilley's home and any other entrepreneurial activities he has undertaken while being a pastor. For Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy to attack both Danny and Linda in regards to this house/property seems to be nothing more than a belief that those in ministry should never achieve financial stability or exercise legal financially advantageous activities. Using this POV/perception it would appear that Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy have attempted to cast Danny and Linda as immoral, unethical, and financially conniving individuals, when according to the laws of the land they (and the 3ABN board) have approached these transactions legally and followed the letter of the law according to qualified legal counsel . . . the way any Christian would while following the admonition to "render to Caesar that which is duly his to request."

- FHB

Thank you for this clear explanation. From the research I have done into all this, this appears to me to be the correct version of events also. Nothing shady nor illegal...

[LaurenceD]

What do you get when two amature 3abners cross a search engine with an encyclopedia?

[sister]

Steve, Steve, Steve . . . aren't you being a little harsh?

- FHB

Greg, I will reply to your attempt to out me the same way I answered Appletree:

Go ahead, Appletree, keep suggesting that I am Linda, Sandra, Ms. Fiscalini, Dava, Steve Shelton or anyone else of your choosing, it just makes it easier for me to move unobserved, witnessing and writing about what goes on in Dannyland...

Di, the Steve that Greg is referring to is Steve Shelton. He is Danny Shelton's cousin and at one time Danny considered Steve his "best friend". Of course that is before Steve confronted Danny over misuse of 3ABN donations, while Steve was the CFO of 3ABN. It almost goes without saying that Danny fired Steve. Some of Steve's experiences with Danny are documented in the original installments of "An Unauthorized History of 3ABN".

Sister

This post has been edited by sister: Feb 23 2008, 06:12 PM

[Ian]

Greg, I will reply to your attempt to out me the same way I answered Appletree:
Di, the Steve that Greg is referring to is Steve Shelton. He is Danny Shelton's cousin and at one time Danny considered Steve his "best friend". Of course that is before Steve confronted Danny over misuse of 3ABN donations, while Steve was the CFO of 3ABN. It almost goes without saying that Danny fired Steve. Some of Steve's experiences with Danny are documented in the original installments of "An Unauthorized History of 3ABN".

Sister

I beg to differ. What you write is not "documented" ...


And..




You forgot to include your new signature from post 334 in your latest sensational installment of that unauthorized history, and reiterate your claims from there...












This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 23 2008, 06:39 PM

[princessdi]

Aaaaahhhhhh! So, they have you deep undercover.... a man posing as a woman. Wow, y'all really workin' hard at this outting stuff. Means something when your family know you are scandalous.

Proceed!

Greg, I will reply to your attempt to out me the same way I answered Appletree:
Di, the Steve that Greg is referring to is Steve Shelton. He is Danny Shelton's cousin and at one time Danny considered Steve his "best friend". Of course that is before Steve confronted Danny over misuse of 3ABN donations, while Steve was the CFO of 3ABN. It almost goes without saying that Danny fired Steve. Some of Steve's experiences with Danny are documented in the original installments of "An Unauthorized History of 3ABN".

Sister

[Ian]

Aaaaahhhhhh! So, they have you deep undercover.... a man posing as a woman. Wow! Proceed!

If we are going to be precise, then I believe Sister is actually the one who originally brought that possibility up in her jovial manner..

chapter?? In which Sister suggests she might be a man and strutting around the barnyard like a rooster.




edited after quite some time and after second thoughts... to delete joke (which no one has replied toyet ) and might not seem appropriate to all... sorry-- it was not meant offensively.

This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 24 2008, 03:49 PM

[Pickle]

There has been much hyperbole from Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy in regards to a house/property that Danny and Linda, together, purchased (though this is not accurate as the did not purchase it, but rather paid the life estate value) and resold.

Not so. There is no way that the value of living in a house for the rest of your life can be just $6139.

To begin with, "life estate" is a tool used by many trust services in helping an individual plan for the future of their property interests.

If this were true, how come the trustee normally deeds their property to 3ABN, and how come 3ABN instead deeded the property to Danny and Linda?

I've been told by more than one person that when you have a life estate, the property isn't deeded to you. Indeed, the web page you linked to from FindLaw (http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Sep/1/130818.html), makes it pretty clear that the one who gets the life estate is the one who transfers the property to another, not vice verse.

Paraphrasing from a series of emails between Dr. Thompson and an individual identified as "J.J." in the exhibits filed by Mr. Pickle in response to the Protective Motion in the Mass. court (3ABN v Pickle/Joy), the story appears to have played out as follows:

Why not post my entire opposition?

A 3ABN benefactor made plans to leave the house and land in question to 3ABN upon her death.

I could be wrong, but I think she never owned the property. I think she put up the money and 3ABN bought the property.

However, she also put into place a life estate situation identifying herself, Danny, and Linda as the "life tenants." This is perfectly legal, even within a 503© setting.

Is it perfectly legal for 3ABN to grant a life estate to disqualified persons?

The web page you linked to from FindLaw (http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Sep/1/130818.html) suggests that perhaps gifty tax was due. Was the gift tax ever paid if it indeed was due?

Perhaps the gift of property to May Chung would require payment of gift tax, according to that web page.

1. A donor using a typical estate planning and asset preservation tool to make plans for the future of their property. (legal activity) donated property to 3ABN, a piece of which she placed a life estate on. (legal activities)

Did May ever own the property?

2. The donor, Danny, and Linda being established as the life tenants of the house/property. (legal activity)

What are the tax implications of receiving a life estate in property you never owned?

3. Danny and Linda purchasing their lifetime interest in the house/property paying the amount determined by "legal statistical tables calculated to determine the worth of the property at the" statistically appropriate "time of their death." (legal activity)

How did they purchase their lifetime interest when they already owned their lifetime interest? Are you not instead referring to their purchasing 3ABN's interest, not their own? And what makes you think the property was only worth $6,139 to 3ABN when on their 990 Danny declared under penalty of perjury that it was worth far more?

Now Greg, are you willing to say that Danny signing that 990, which denied that a section 4958 excess benefit transaction had occurred, was a legal activity?

[Pickle]

Have you asked, or ever stated the same thing about Danny " But did he know he was doing wrong? I don't know that he did. He may have. He may not have." ?

That isn't applicable here. Danny said there was no section 4958 excess benefit transaction. If he indeed didn't know what that meant, he wasn't qualified to sign the 990, and in my opinion, wasn't qualified to be president of such a larghe ministry.

[Pickle]

Pickle claimed they bought the hoiuse for less than it's value, and than resold it and profited in a ilegal, or shady manner because of how it was done...

But that isn't true, and they didn't they already had a lifetime interest in the house they lived in according to what is legally called a Revocable or Living trust.

Can a disqualified person get a life interest from a 501(c ) 3 orgnaization in property they have never owned and for no consideration whatsoever?

[Shiny Penny]

SP,

I am not sure the Mr. Pickle thinks Linda is "not wrong" . . . he just conveniently avoids including her when it is obvious that she was involved and then hides behind a "Maybe she didn't know" facade so he can instead attack Danny and 3ABN.

There has been much hyperbole from Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy in regards to a house/property that Danny and Linda, together, purchased (though this is not accurate as the did not purchase it, but rather paid the life estate value) and resold. Here is a different look at that situation.

This house/property situation revolves around the common law idea of "life estate." What does the phrase "life estate" mean in the area of real estate? To begin with, "life estate" is a tool used by many trust services in helping an individual plan for the future of their property interests.
The process of setting up a life estate is explained as:
Paraphrasing from a series of emails between Dr. Thompson and an individual identified as "J.J." in the exhibits filed by Mr. Pickle in response to the Protective Motion in the Mass. court (3ABN v Pickle/Joy), the story appears to have played out as follows:

A 3ABN benefactor made plans to leave the house and land in question to 3ABN upon her death. However, she also put into place a life estate situation identifying herself, Danny, and Linda as the "life tenants." This is perfectly legal, even within a 503© setting.

That means that the land would be used by those individuals until the last of them died and then the house/property would revert to 3ABN. Because the house/property in question had a life estate attached to it, the following rules apply to possible uses of the land:
The following paragraph provides an understanding of the process and it would seem, completely makes the claims by Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy about there being illegality in regards to the transactions that took place around said house/property to be null and void.
In a nutshell it would seem that what we have here is:

1. A donor using a typical estate planning and asset preservation tool to make plans for the future of their property. (legal activity) donated property to 3ABN, a piece of which she placed a life estate on. (legal activities)

2. The donor, Danny, and Linda being established as the life tenants of the house/property. (legal activity)

3. Danny and Linda purchasing their lifetime interest in the house/property paying the amount determined by "legal statistical tables calculated to determine the worth of the property at the" statistically appropriate "time of their death." (legal activity)

4. Then Danny and Linda selling the property in order to build a new home and establish equity in their new home/property. (legal activity)

What seems to be happening here is an attempt to establish a POV/perception that claims that no one in ministry can ever do anything financially advantageous. This POV/perception has played out in regards to the house in question here, as well as with Pastor Gilley's home and any other entrepreneurial activities he has undertaken while being a pastor. For Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy to attack both Danny and Linda in regards to this house/property seems to be nothing more than a belief that those in ministry should never achieve financial stability or exercise legal financially advantageous activities. Using this POV/perception it would appear that Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy have attempted to cast Danny and Linda as immoral, unethical, and financially conniving individuals, when according to the laws of the land they (and the 3ABN board) have approached these transactions legally and followed the letter of the law according to qualified legal counsel . . . the way any Christian would while following the admonition to "render to Caesar that which is duly his to request."

- FHB

FHB

Thank you for taking the time to research and explain the transaction in a language that most people could understand.

It appears to be perfectly legal to me...it is unclear what Pickle and his sidekick expect to gain by trying to slosh the transaction around as if there was something illegal done. I guess he didn't bank on someone like you taking the time to decipher what happened and explain and show that it was perfectly legal. Makes me think that when Pickle says he's got all these other documents that he hasn't disclosed...of course he doesn't disclose them, because they will show that he is parsing the truth.

======

Johann hasn't been posting for a little while...I am hoping (!) that he is garnering his information regarding Linda and Arild's relationship and will be getting back to us soon.

[Shiny Penny]

Not so. There is no way that the value of living in a house for the rest of your life can be just $6139.

Go take a quick lesson on the time value of money.

And...they were not paying for the value of living the house for the rest of their lives.