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

[sister]

Gregory,

I am not 100% positive but I don't think Dr. Kuzma was ever a member of the board.

To add, her MA is in Child Development from Michigan State and her Ed.D. is in Early Childhood Education.

She was asked, because of her close connections to 3ABN, by the board to work with Linda in an effort to save the marriage. There was the thought that a trusted individual would be able to pray with and work with Linda before she went too far. You can couch this as Dr. Kuzma being a covert agent of the board, but that would not be fair or accurate. Her desire was to keep the family together - she cared for Linda as much as she did Danny and desired for them both a full and complete marriage.

You may very well be accurate that Linda resisted any efforts at reconciliation that may have been possible through working with Dr. Kuzma, but then that would be Linda's responsibility. It should also be noted that Linda also resisted the council of the marital counselors -she- selected as well.
- FHB

Greg, you are correct Dr. Kay Kuzma was never a member of the 3ABN board and also concerning her field of expertise.

She was asked, because of her close connections to 3ABN, by the board to work with Linda in an effort to save the marriage. There was the thought that a trusted individual would be able to pray with and work with Linda before she went too far.

Did Linda request her “help”? No, as you have stated she was chosen by the board “because of her close connections to 3ABN”. Did her educational qualifications make her the best, a logical choice, or even an acceptable for this situation. Again, no. She was asked, by the board, to approach Linda regarding a situation that was outside her field of expertise. As any thinking person in Linda situation would have realized, Dr. Kuzma had no greater qualifications for “counseling” her than any Joe Blow that happened to walk in off the street. If Dr. Kuzma had been a qualified marital counselor she would have met with both Danny and Linda together, not approach Linda alone. This action, as related by you, sanctioned by the 3ABN board, gives the distinct impression that Linda was solely at fault for any disharmony in her marriage with Danny Shelton. Which in turn brings us back to the same old, undocumented allegations of martial infidelity against Linda Shelton. Can you supply documentation for those allegations or are you merely parroting the unsubstantiated claims of a man who has divorced his wife and remarried without providing her with the opportunity of viewing his “evidence” and being able to publically defend her reputation?

It should also be noted that Linda also resisted the council of the marital counselors -she- selected as well.

I am assuming that you have the documentation to prove the above statement, since you have been asking for documentation from others. If so, provide it. Otherwise, it appears that you are merely making prejudicial statements in order to falsely represent the alleged events. Obviously, Greg, you were neither an eyewitness to what took place at the time or a member of the 3ABN board. According to the email that was posted here from your father, Dr. Walt Thompson, he admitted that you are FHB and that you did not receive your information from him, but searched it out for yourself. If that is truly the situation, you must have personally viewed the evidence against Linda since you state, that Dr. Kuzma was called in to intervene “before she went too far” . What is the meaning of “before she went too far” ? Too far in what way and what proof do you have to make that statement?

Greg, you and other Danny supporters, have been badgering Johann all weekend regarding his personal recollections of events that took place in the 1950's, where he was an eyewitness and a participant. Yet now you are providing information on a topic where
• you were not personally involved,
• you can not claim that you received information from your father as Chairman of the 3ABN board, according to his own testimony and
• where even one of the principals involved has not seen the alleged evidence against her.

Greg, where is the documentation to back up your allegations? Time to put up or admit that you are merely another supporter of Danny Shelton whose main objective here is evil surmising with no basis in fact.

Sister

[Shepherdswife]

SW,

Well, as far as I can tell you weren't there at the birth of Christ, yet I am going to bet that you believe the shepards showed up, as did the kings from the east and the angels. So then it is possible through research to discover the facts of a situation.

- FHB

The particulars of this current dispute aside--(from where I sit, you have both made some valid points) my point was that you are making my point. That those who have said that "unless you were there and saw it actually happen, you don't know anything" are setting up a standard that does not exist in the real world. This is just the first time I have heard someone who is "defending" 3ABN say it in so many words.

It is possible to convict someone for fraud even if no one was standing there and saw them do it. It is posible to convict someone of sexual abuse even if no one but the perpetrator and the victim were there when it happened. It is possible to follow the paper trail and find out that someone lied or that someone accused someone wrongfully of a crime they did not commit, even if the investigators were not there to watch it happen. Just because someone didn't see it happen didn't mean it did not happen, is my point.

It is also true that sometimes people are wrongfully accused, and sometimes people get away with things because the victims won't file, and sometimes bad things happen to good people. That is a sad fact of life.

Whether or not I agree with your conclusions, I appreciate your efforts to search out evidence of your assertions and not just say "You are wrong because I said so".

Shepherdswife

[princessdi]

I am so glad it is not just me! SW, they all do it, though, with Appletree telling us just to believe him and he refuses to qualify any of his statements with precious little more than, "because I siad so".

As a lurker and occasional poster who is trying to keep her scorecard up to date, I have asked the question several times of those who are defending DS “What constitutes proof to you?” Documents, interviews, records have all been dismissed with “You were not there, so you have no way of knowing anything”. I have pointed out that detectives, judge and jury were never “there” when the crime occurred, but that does not keep them from collecting and examining the evidence and rendering a verdict. No response.

But after your post here, FHB, I am really confused! You state that “One need not be born and live in a specific time to be able to gather accurate information about that time.” You mean that you can investigate and learn something factual and true about an event that you never even saw? Amazing! And you also said that “I have no way to substantiate that you would "remember him so clearly" after ten years, much less 50”, so even eyewitness testimony, unless corroborated, can be faulty? I will have to think about all this…

I actually agree with your “wind in the willows” statement. For someone to claim that someone else is wrong but that THEY are telling the truth and that we are just supposed to believe them because…because they know what they are talking about and the others don’t ….really bugs me. Lots of wind, lots of willows.

shepherdswife

[Observer]

Gregory,

I am not 100% positive but I don't think Dr. Kuzma was ever a member of the board.

To add, her MA is in Child Development from Michigan State and her Ed.D. is in Early Childhood Education.

She was asked, because of her close connections to 3ABN, by the board to work with Linda in an effort to save the marriage. There was the thought that a trusted individual would be able to pray with and work with Linda before she went too far. You can couch this as Dr. Kuzma being a covert agent of the board, but that would not be fair or accurate. Her desire was to keep the family together - she cared for Linda as much as she did Danny and desired for them both a full and complete marriage.

You may very well be accurate that Linda resisted any efforts at reconciliation that may have been possible through working with Dr. Kuzma, but then that would be Linda's responsibility. It should also be noted that Linda also resisted the council of the marital counselors -she- selected as well.

- FHB

Was Dr. Kuzma a member of the 3-ABN Board: I likely was wrong on that point. As I stated, I was going back in memory several years. Thanks for the correction. The central point was that Dr. K. was going to Linda as an agent of the 3-AGBN Board. That Board was her client. Was that wrong, immoral or unethical. No.

As to Dr. K's professional qualifications: I would never say that her professional education made her the best qualified candidate to provide marital counseling. What I would say is that in many States a doctorate in one of the fields of Educaiton qulaifies a person to solicit business as a professional counselor.

Supporters of 3-ABN have claimed that at the time of Linda's and Danny's marital problems 3-ABN attempted to provide Linda with professional counseling. As I believe that Dr. Kuzma acted as an agent for the 3-ABN Board and that the Board was her client, I do not believe that her services in any way amounted to an approprite attempt to provide Linda with professional counseling.

If that attempt was a sample of other attempts that are claimed to have been made, I will have to say that the other attempts were just as much a a failure to provide Linda wih counseling.

I could expand on this if I cared to do so.





This post has been edited by Observer: Mar 10 2008, 11:56 AM

[princessdi]

Pastor Greg, my concern was not her reporting to the 3ABN board, which does carry it's own set of issues, but that she actually came here, to BSDA, posting things she should not have neo matter who her client was. She was clearly biased. I am glad Linda at least did not fall into all the subsequent "traps" laid in her way in the form of counseling and board meetings......she still should have hired Gloria Allred and got that thing real straight!

So now, just so I am clear....they have a Dr. of education acting as a "marriage" counselor for Linda, the pastor of the church who in alla ctuality has his degree in electronics,and most of the pastorial staff are not pastors? I'm asking........?

In making this post, I am going back in my memory several years. As such it is possible that I will make some errors of fact. If so, I welcome any corrections.

The issue as to whether or not Dr. Kay Kuzma acted toward unprofessionally toward Linda Shelton and violated confidentiality is an important one, but it is not as clear cut as some would make it.

By the way, as I recall, Dr. Kuzma has a doctorate in Education. In may States this qualifies her to act as a professional counselor.

The major question, in my mind is: Who was Dr. Kuzma’s client. If Linda was her client one might come up with one set of answers. On the other had, if 3-ABN, or Danny, was her client, then one might come up with another set of answers.

I will suggest that the answer as to who was Dr. Kuzma’s client is fairly clear cut. Linda did not seek out Dr. Kuzma. Rather Dr. Kuzma was a member of the 3-ABN Board. That Board placed Dr. Kuzma on a special committee to investigate the situation. It gave Dr. Kuzma specific instructions as to her role in this investigation. Dr. Kuzma approached Linda from the standpoint of an agent of the 3-ABN Board. As such, her client was the 3-ABN Board. Her client was not Linda Shelton.

Dr. Kuzma was instructed to report back to the Board her contact with Linda, as Dr. Kuzma felt was appropriate. As she was the agent of the Board and it was her client, that was professionally appropriate. If Linda had been Dr. Kuzma’s client, it would have been a violation of confidentiality for her to report back to the Board that she had even spoken with Linda without Linda’s permission. Because she approached Linda as an agent of the Board, she did not need Linda’s permission to report back to the Board as she thought appropriate.

As an agent of the Board, Dr. Kuzma is free to make any public statements in regard to her role in this that is acceptable to the 3-ABN Board and she believes is appropriate. Any violation of confidentiality in her public statements would be that of the 3-ABN Board and not that of Linda.

It should be noted that Linda recognized that Dr. Kuzma came to her as an agent of the 3-ABN Board. As such she refused to enter into any extensive discussion. In other words, a professional counseling relationship was never established between Linda Shelton and Dr. Kuzma.

It is true that the 3-ABN Board sent Dr. Kuzma to Linda with directions to play a specific role and to give Linda specific advice. Lay people commonly might call the giving of such advice counseling. I believe that is what has happened. Some supporters of 3-ABN have claimed that the 3-ABN Board proved Linda with counseling in the person of Dr. Kuzma. The role that Dr. Kuzma played in this was not that of a professional counselor to Linda with Linda as Dr. Kuzma’s client.

I have some concerns regarding the role that Dr. Kuzma has played in this sad saga and I disagree with some of what she has said and done. But, I want to be clear: Dr. Kuzma did not have Linda as her client. She came to Linda as an agent of the 3-ABN Board. Linda recognized that. Therefore, I do not see Dr. Kuzma as violating Linda’s confidentiality. I do not see Dr. Kuzma as acting unprofessionally.

[Pickle]

Instead of being resentful, try to imitate Walt's character.

I'm not about to start doing what Walt has been doing. Sorry.

Wasn't there a post on ChristianForums in which Jim Larmore cited Walt as telling him that a mother of an alleged Tommy victim was trying to get money to put her son through college? And yet Walt still hadn't talked to the alleged victims as Pastor Dryden invited him to do? Not after about 4 years? And I've talked with 7 so far?

Now how ethical was Walt being in discussing the motives of a mother's bleeding heart when he had made no effort to contact that mother for himself, and was instead relying on hearsay, gossip, and rumor?

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=...p;postcount=314

You want me to imitate that?

[Pickle]

Fran,

If the IRS is so concerned that major misdeeds have been done, why is the "investigation" on hiatus? Interesting that the investigator is out on maternity leave and they haven't put anyone else in charge. Doesn't seem to be very high on their priority list now does it?

- FHB

Was it a boy or a girl?

I noticed that that Congressman from out west whose family business got raided by the FBI last April wasn't indicted until recently. Therefore, how much time would need to go by before we can breathe easier?

I forgot to ask you, FHB, why did Attorney Hayes tell Magistrate Judge Hillman on Friday during our hearing that there was no IRS criminal investigation going on if you know so much about it as to know that the investigator is out on maternity leave?

[sister]

Pastor Greg, my concern was not her reporting to the 3ABN board, which does carry it's own set of issues, but that she actually came here, to BSDA, posting things she should not have neo matter who her client was. She was clearly biased. I am glad Linda at least did not fall into all the subsequent "traps" laid in her way in the form of counseling and board meetings......she still should have hired Gloria Allred and got that thing real straight!

So now, just so I am clear....they have a Dr. of education acting as a "marriage" counselor for Linda, the pastor of the church who in alla ctuality has his degree in electronics,and most of the pastorial staff are not pastors? I'm asking........?

You are clear as glass, Di. In addition, the current head of the 3ABN pastoral department, who was also the head at that time, and the current assistant head of the pastoral have no pastoral training what so ever. Their qualifications? The head is a yes man who is very loyal to Danny and the assistant head is the wife of Ewing the current CFO of 3ABN.

Also, FHB/Greg, I am still waiting for your asnwers to my other post.

This post has been edited by sister: Mar 10 2008, 11:53 AM

[Observer]

Pastor Greg, my concern was not her reporting to the 3ABN board, which does carry it's own set of issues, but that she actually came here, to BSDA, posting things she should not have neo matter who her client was. She was clearly biased. I am glad Linda at least did not fall into all the subsequent "traps" laid in her way in the form of counseling and board meetings......she still should have hired Gloria Allred and got that thing real straight!

So now, just so I am clear....they have a Dr. of education acting as a "marriage" counselor for Linda, the pastor of the church who in alla ctuality has his degree in electronics,and most of the pastorial staff are not pastors? I'm asking........?

You ask some very valid questions. I do not challenge much of what you have posted.

I am responding on a very narrow issue: As I see that Dr. Kuzma was an agent of the 3-ABN Board and that the Board was her client, I think that we may not be fair in some of the comments that have been made in regard to her "unprofessional conduct" and in regard to confidentiality issues.

If she violated confidentiality issues, I see that as largely being those of the 3-ABN Board. But, it may be that the passing years have dimmed my menory.

As to Gloria Allred: Yes, things would be quite different now if Linda had persuaded Gloria Allred to take up her case. 3-ABN has much to be thankful in that Linda did not ask and Gloria agree, to take the case.

I, like many others, have a concern over a number of people who are (have been) placed in leadership at 3-ABN in regard to their qualifications for leadership. One of my areas of concern, along with others, relates to people who have given spiritual direction to 3-ABN.

This post has been edited by Observer: Mar 10 2008, 12:08 PM

[appletree]

Was Dr. Kuzma a member of the 3-ABN Board: I likely was wrong on that point. As I stated, I was going back in memory several years. Thanks for the correction. The central point was that Dr. K. was going to Linda as an agent of the 3-AGBN Board. That Board was her client. Was that wrong, immoral or unethical. No.

As to Dr. K's professional qualifications: I would never say that her professional education made her the best qualified candidate to provide marital counseling. What I would say is that in many States a doctorate in one of the fields of Educaiton qulaifies a person to solicit business as a professional counselor.

Supporters of 3-ABN have claimed that at the time of Linda's and Danny's marital problems 3-ABN attempted to provide Linda with professional counseling. As I believe that Dr. Kuzma acted as an agent for the 3-ABN Board and that the Board was her client, I do not believe that her services in any way amounted to an approprite attempt to provide Linda with professional counseling.

If that attempt was a sample of other attempts that are claimed to have been made, I will have to say that the other attempts were just as much a a failure to provide Linda wih counseling.

I could expand on this if I cared to do so.

As told to you by whom??? I'll give you 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.

How many counselors do you want?
We know her pastor counseled with her numerous hours.
We know Pastor Finley counseled with her via phone.
We know that she was given the option of choosing certified marital counselors which she did. (I believe she got the names from her sister) When counseled by her pastor and pastor Finley, she wasn't told what she wanted to here so made an accusation of bias. That is when she was told to pick her own counselors and Danny would agree to go with her wherever she chose. They went to the counselors who were total strangers and I believe the result of what they said was the same as what the pastor's had told her. She had the option to continue with those counselors or any others she chose but decided to forget it altogether when all the advice given was adding up to the same thing.

The Kay Kuzma thing is much ado about nothing as usual. Kay has not only counseled families for years but she was also a friend to Danny and Linda. That is why she was asked to talk with Linda. It was never considered "official" professional counseling in any form or fashion. Instead, it was simply someone experienced in family problems trying to help a friend.

Let's try to live in reality here. If you say your pastor or any other pastor isn't qualified enough to talk to , then say a friend and experienced counselor isn't good enough to talk to, and then you say qualified counselors of your own choosing aren't good enough to talk to.....That pretty much is the epitomy of someone who just doesn't want counseling.

[appletree]

I'm not about to start doing what Walt has been doing. Sorry.

Wasn't there a post on ChristianForums in which Jim Larmore cited Walt as telling him that a mother of an alleged Tommy victim was trying to get money to put her son through college? And yet Walt still hadn't talked to the alleged victims as Pastor Dryden invited him to do? Not after about 4 years? And I've talked with 7 so far?

Now how ethical was Walt being in discussing the motives of a mother's bleeding heart when he had made no effort to contact that mother for himself, and was instead relying on hearsay, gossip, and rumor?

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=...p;postcount=314

You want me to imitate that?

I believe Jim L was referring to a black mail attempt on something that never happened in the first place. How do we know this? The exact words of the woman herself incriminated her. We have the evidence. Also note that the reason she decided to do this was, out of her own mouth, because of what she had read on the internet. Now, knowing what we know, why would Dr. Walt even be ask to get involved? Not to mention these are things you are alleging happened years ago and have nothing whatsoever to do with Walt as the chairman of the 3abn board.

No, Bob the truth is when you have nowhere else to go with smearing Dr. Walt, you resort back to your "Tommy" thing because you just don't know what else to do. There are just too many people, lay people, conference people, asi members, etc that can and do refute your allegations against Dr. Walt and so you become desperate in your attempts to discredit him. And, shockingly, to discredit a man you don't even know. Actually that seems to be your MO though doesn't it? You don't know Danny, or the members of the board, or Mollie or the CFO or any other's of the upper management. The only person in this story that you do know and have spent time with is Linda. mmhhh

[inga]

I believe Jim L was referring to a black mail attempt on something that never happened in the first place. How do we know this? The exact words of the woman herself incriminated her. We have the evidence.

Ah, yes, you "have the evidence."

When did I last hear that from you? Ah, yes, I remember! You have "the evidence" that Linda committed adultery with "the doctor." You first claimed that four years ago and have come up with zilch. Linda herself challenged you to make "the evidence" public! So now the excuse that you are "protecting Linda" no longer works. You aren't producing "the evidence" because it either doesn't exist or is no evidence at all. The photos of Arild and Linda, with Johann left out hardly constitute "the evidence."

You may very well have "the evidence" for what you say above, but most of us aren't likely to take your word for it, given your record.

[inga]

You probably will be in court

Interesting that you should address Johann like this.

What do you intend to accomplish with hauling Johann into court with your team of high-priced lawyers?

[I fully realize you may be able to do this, because today's court system has little to do with justice but everything to do with who has the deepest pockets.]

This post has been edited by inga: Mar 10 2008, 06:36 PM

[fallible humanbe...]

Interesting that you should address Johann like this.

What do you intend to accomplish with hauling Johann into court with your team of high-priced lawyers?

[I fully realize you may be able to do this, because today's court system has little to do with justice but everything to do with who has the deepest pockets.]

Inga,

Seems as though you have fallen for the delusional belief that AppleTree is Danny . . . a simple, logical rumination will help you realize that you couldn't be more wrong in buying into this ridiculous assumption.

- FHB

[Fran]

Why is it your MO is to say, "Much ado about nothing." Every item brought forward is "trivial." It shows how unconcerned you are about your supporters and your fellow Christians.

[/color]

As told to you by whom??? I'll give you 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.

How many counselors do you want?

Fran...As many as it takes!

We know her pastor counseled with her numerous hours.

Fran... I do not consider a pastor a qualified counselor. Goodness, don't you have a couple that warns ladies about pastors seducing them? I remember Danny taking over the conversion and really pressing the point that doctors seduce their patients too. Danny said he knew this happened. Praise God there are non-Adventists that are available. I will NEVER counsel with a SDA Pastor. NEVER, EVER!

We know Pastor Finley counseled with her via phone.

Fran... Wow! No, I do not know this to be true!

Is it true because you say so?

Hum! Were you on the line listening to both sides of the conversation?

Surely you taped the conversation!

I have never heard Mark comment on this.

I have never heard Linda talk about it.

We only hear you and Danny talk about it.

Do you both feel that each time you talk about this "much ado about nothing, that it somehow makes you/Danny look good and Linda look bad? Who cares, pray tell! I surely don't. I am more concerned with how 3ABN was not, and may still not be in compliance with GAAP! The marriage is under the bridge, but for some reason, you and Danny just can't let her go. You have to win right? At all costs? Well, it isn't working as far as I am concerned

We know that she was given ...

Fran ... Wow! How privileged she was to be told she could CHOOSE her poison!

... the option of choosing certified marital counselors which she did. (I believe she got the names from her sister) When counseled by her pastor and pastor Finley, she wasn't told what she wanted to here so made an accusation of bias.

Fran ... What I am hearing is that, "She was told!" No wonder she wouldn't listen. Was she ever allowed to talk? Sounds to me she had Satan attacking on all sides. I would not have listened either, believe me. What I believe is that she was railroaded by her own husband of 20 years. I see a husband that wanted his wife destroyed because he made her choose between her husband and the health of her son, and she chose her son! More power to her for making the RIGHT choice!!

That is when she was told to pick her own counselors and Danny would agree to go with her wherever she chose. They went to the counselors who were total strangers and I believe the result of what they said was the same as what the pastor's had told her. She had the option to continue with those counselors or any others she chose but decided to forget it altogether when all the advice given was adding up to the same thing.

The Kay Kuzma thing is much ado about nothing as usual. Kay has not only counseled families for years but she was also a friend to Danny and Linda. That is why she was asked to talk with Linda. It was never considered "official" professional counseling in any form or fashion. Instead, it was simply someone experienced in family problems trying to help a friend.

Fran ... That last statement speaks volumes. She was Danny's friend! It has become crystal clear she was NOT Linda's friend, nor was she interested in her welfare! She was there at Danny's bidding. She is an accomplice to the slaughter of Linda Shelton's reputation!

Fran ... Kay Kuzma was there to get points for her knowing what others did not know! She had the bedside manner of a snake when she told Linda that the President did not want his vice president any more. Isn't this kind and caring? Shame on us for not bowing down to her for her callousness shown toward Linda! We all realize Linda should have bowed down to Danny and said, "Anything for you darling! I will go to hell and back for you my love! Can I kiss your holy feet tonight? I will never talk to another man as long as we both shall live. Please pat me on the head and say you are pleased with my servants duties toward you. I am your devoted slave forever darling!

Let's try to live in reality here. If you say your pastor or any other pastor isn't qualified enough to talk to , then say a friend and experienced counselor isn't good enough to talk to, and then you say qualified counselors of your own choosing aren't good enough to talk to.....That pretty much is the epitome of someone who just doesn't want counseling.

Fran...My, My! Finally it has dawned on you! It took long enough! It hurts not to get your own way, doesn't it? Linda is a person and does not have to answer to anyone but God and herself. Her silence and your squawking speaks volumes. Danny's side is the one squealing, but you all do it under the guise of, "Much Ado About Nothing"! Sure, and this is why you all are like a cats on a hot tin roof. That is why Danny is suing everyone under the sun! That speaks volumes about him and you also.

This is of course my opinion of the situation! I get my impressions directly from you all.